Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Experimental study of compressive behavior of polypropylene-fiber-

reinforced and polypropylene-fiber-fabric-reinforced concrete
Yuan Qin ⇑, Xianwei Zhang, Junrui Chai, Zengguang Xu, Shouyi Li
State Key Laboratory of Eco-hydraulics in Northwest Arid Region of China (Xi’an University of Technology), China

h i g h l i g h t s

Waste polypropylene fiber fabric added to concrete is considered.

The compressive behavior and destruction characteristics of polypropylene-fiber-fabric-reinforced concrete are studied.

Results are compared with those of plain concrete and polypropylene-fiber-reinforced concrete.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Waste fiber fabric has already become an important pollutant source of the world’s environmental prob-
Received 26 January 2018 lems. If this waste was added into concrete, could the resulting composite concrete material be good
Received in revised form 17 October 2018 enough for engineering use? This study is focused a feasibility study of the addition of polypropylene
Accepted 3 November 2018
fiber fabric into concrete, as well as analysis of its compression property, damage evolution rule, and
Available online 10 November 2018
damage performance in macroscopic and microscopic fields. Concrete specimens were made from
polypropylene spun-bonded materials produced from used clothes. Their compressive behavior, energy
Keywords:
absorption characteristics, and destruction characteristics were compared with plain concrete (PC) and
Cement
Fiber fabric
polypropylene-fiber-reinforced concrete (PPFRC). The result indicate that the addition of waste fiber fab-
Polypropylene fiber ric can improve the compression performance of concrete. The addition of waste fiber fabric materials to
Compressive behavior concrete is a technology that can be constantly improved, considering changes in both technical and envi-
Fiber-reinforced concrete ronmental conditions.
Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In industrial and life waste, there are many fiber-based fabrics
that occupy a considerable volume in landfills, such as the Jiang-
cungou Landfill in Xi’an, China (Fig. 1). Waste fiber fabric is accu-
mulating, forming approximately 30% of the total quantity of
garbage. Some organizations have introduced use of used clothes
collection bins to reduce the quantity of life waste fiber fabric
entering landfills, but the effect of such collection remains mini-
mal, because of the surprising amount of this kind of waste. There-
fore, its recycling and the development of technologies for
minimizing the problems caused by its accumulation of interest
to researchers.
Some of the abandoned textiles naturally decompose, while
others do not. Some decomposition will produce harmful sub-
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: qinyuan@xaut.edu.cn (Y. Qin), jrchai@xaut.edu.cn (J. Chai),
xuzengguang@xaut.edu.cn (Z. Xu).
stances, while others will not. If these abandoned fiber fabrics
can be rationally used in engineering services instead of increasing
environmental pressure, they will contribute to the enhancement
of environmental quality and sustainable development.
Commonly, fiber fabrics in industry and life are made of varied
types of fibers, like cotton fiber, wool fiber, nylon fiber, polypropy-
lene fiber, polyester fiber, etc. Owing to its light weight, poor water
absorption, good thermal insulation and chemical resistance, and
retention of same strength regardless of the dryness or wetness
of the environment, polypropylene fiber (PPF) is one of the most
widely used fibers in industrial or common life, in geotextiles, fish-
ing nets, packing bags, raincoats, overcoats, protective suits, cur-
tains, tablecloths, etc. For this reason, waste polypropylene fiber
fabrics (PPFF) constitute a large quantity of waste fiber fabric.
Polypropylene-fiber-reinforced concrete (PPFRC) is well known
at present. Concrete with the addition of PPF has seen a wide-
spread increase in its application, including tunnel [1–4], ground
slab [5], bridge decks [6], canal [7], concrete pipe [8], pavement
construction [9–12] and repair and rehabilitation work [13]. It is

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.11.042
0950-0618/Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225 217

Nomenclature

PC plain concrete CPE area under compressive load-time curve up to Pfc,i is ta-
PPF and PPFRC polypropylene-fiber- and polypropylene-fiber- ken as compressive first crack energy absorption capac-
reinforced concrete ity
PPFF and PPFFRC polypropylene-fiber-fabric- and CCE area under compressive load-time curve from Pfc,i to
polypropylene-fiber-fabric-reinforced concrete PMax,i is taken as compressive cracked energy absorption
L length of PPF or PPFF capacity
W width of PPFF ECEC CPE + CCE is used as compressive effective energy
T average thickness of PPFF absorption capacity
Ds diameter of single fiber of PPF or PPFF CEMax compressive energy absorption capacity
SG specific gravity of PPF or PPFF FCEC CEMax  (CPE + CCE) is used as compressive failure en-
TS tensile strength of PPF or breaking force of PPFF ergy absorption capacity
D denier of PPF or the single fiber of PPFF CTI CEMax/CPE is used as the compressive toughness index
EB elongation when break ki slope of descending branch of curve, i = PC, PPFRC, or
E elastic modulus PPFFRC
MP melting point of PPF or PPFF Ssj standard values of PPFRC and PPFFRC relative to PC,
Ds,PPF diameter of single PPF j = PPFRC and PPFFRC
Ds,PPFF diameter of single PPFF Sii value of CS, CPE, CCE, ECEC, FCEC, CEMax, and CTI of
Pfc,i first crack loads of PC, PPFRC, or PPFFRC, i = PC, PPFRC, or PPFRC and PPFFRC (i), j = PPFRC and PPFFRC
PPFFRC SPCi value of PC, and take the every SPCi to be the maximum
PMax,i maximum load of PC, PPFRC, or PPFFRC, i = PC, PPFRC, or value of 100, i = CS, CPE, CCE, ECEC, FCEC, CEMax, and CTI.
PPFFRC W/C water-cement ratio
A value of pressed area of specimen, bs sand ratio
A = 100 mm  100 mm
CS the compressive strength

Fig. 1. Jiangcungou Landfill, Xi’an, Shaanxi, China.

used in hydraulic engineering in China. An appreciable improve-
ment of performance related to its mechanical properties was ben-
eficial to some important applications, such as tunnel linings,
spillways, flood discharging tunnel exits, stilling pools, sluice gate
baseplates, and ship lock floors. PPFRC is a kind of concrete that has
good tensile strength, flexural strength, toughness, and energy
absorption [14–18]; moreover, it guarantees better control of spal-
ling cracks for high load levels [4]. Its compressive strength [19],
flexural strength [20–21], splitting tensile strength [17], durability
[22–24], Impact resistance [25–26], slump [27], and
218 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225
fracture-energy-absorbing ability [28], etc. under static, dynamic
loads, different temperature and freeze–thaw effects has been inves-
tigated [29–32]. The mixture proportions of PPFRC, the fiber lengths,
fiber types, and fiber shapes added to PPFRC has also been analyzed
in the work of Ehsan [33], Guoming [1] and Aiman [34], respectively.
The main material in PPFF is polypropylene fiber (PPF). While
they may have similar chemical and physical properties, PPF can
decompose in the natural environment, but PPFF can barely
decompose in the natural environment, due to the fact that PPFF
usually contains a light stabilizer. How do we deal with this kind
of waste? If waste PPFF is added into the concrete, is the resulting
polypropylene-fiber-fabric-reinforced concrete (PPFFRC) good
enough to work in engineering applications? Similar work has
been carried out by Peled [35–39], Magdi [40], and Jens [41]. Peled
[35,36] indicated that fabrics provide benefits like excellent
anchorage and bond development, and improve composite behav-
ior. The correlation between fabric strength and cement composite
properties is not necessarily straightforward. The properties of the
composite are influenced by the geometry of the fabric and the
bond that develops between the fabric and the cement matrix,
and less by fabric strength [37–39]. Magdi [40] reported that when
the cement was reinforced by just one fabric layer, its bending
strength was enhanced. The value of tensile and bending strength
depends on the fabric’s tensile properties and its structure, specif-
ically its tightness. The higher the fabric specific tightness, the
lower the tensile strength of fabric-cement composite. This sug-
gests that one fabric layer for the formation of fabric-cement com-
posite will result in the composite having higher tensile properties.
Jens [41] investigated the influence of several bond properties on
the tensile behavior of textile reinforced concrete by means of
parametric studies, and proved the relationship between bond
properties and stress distribution, as well as ultimate mean stres-
ses and mean strains under uniaxial tensile stress.
The addition of waste polypropylene fiber fabric to concrete is a
new perspective in the aforementioned research activities. The
present work focuses on a feasibility study of the addition of PPFF
to concrete, its compression property, damage performance, and
the reduction of environmental problems caused by the amount
of fiber fabric in landfills and in the environment in general.
2. Experimental procedures
2.1. Raw materials
The tensile strength of PPF used in the experiment was 562 MPa. The breaking
force of polypropylene fiber fabric was measured using a fabric breaking force tester
(see Fig. 2). The warp direction breaking force of polypropylene fiber fabric was
2484.54 N, the weft direction breaking force of polypropylene fiber fabric
2405.92 N, and the other parameters are shown in Table 1.
Fig. 2. (A) Breaking force tester of fabrics; (B) damaged PPFF.
The length L of the PPF was 19 mm, and from electron microscope (EM) obser-
vation, the diameter of the PPF, Ds,PPF, was 31.2 lm; see second row of Table 2. This
raw material was used to make PPFRC. We then cut a fabric sheet from waste PPFF;
the dimensions of the sheet were L = 30 mm and W = 3 mm, and its average thick-
ness was T = 0.42 mm. The single fiber diameter in the PPFF, Ds,PPFF, was 17.4 lm.
From EM observation, we found that there were some spaces between fibers in
the PPFF, the space size is from several microns to tens of microns long; see third
row of Table 2. It should be noted that, if the length of the PPFF is too long, some
PPFF sheets will agglomerate or knot when stirring; however, if the length of the
PPFF is too short, the sheet will be easy pull out from the hardened cement-based.
2.2. Mix design, casting procedures, and specimen-making
The mix design ratio of PC is 1: 3.12: 4.92: 0.71 (C: S: A: W). The aggregates
were detritus and the particle size ranged from 5 mm to 20 mm. The sand was river
sand whose maximum size was 3 mm after sieving According to China National
Standard GB 175-2009, the 32.5 Portland cement was used as cementitious mate-
rial. The PPF is added in the cement with 19 mm fiber length and 0.9 kg/m3, and
PPFF is added in the cement with 30 mm length, 3 mm width and 0.9 kg/m3 for
the preparation of PPFRC and PPFFRC, respectively. The mix designs of PC, PPFRC,
and PPFFRC are shown in Table 3. In this paper, we use only one volume fraction
(0.1%) in the experiment, because some researchers considered low fiber content
is good for the effect of reinforcement [43,44], some researchers considered the
reinforcement effect is weakened when fiber content exceeds a certain percentage
[42,45]. On the other hand, the Baixi concrete-face rockfill dam in Ningbo City,
China, is a fiber-concrete-face-slab dam, 11,000 m3 PPFRC with 0.9 kg/m3 PPF
(0.1% volume fraction) was used to build this hydraulic structure. It is a subject
worth studying whether PPF can be replaced by PPFF in real projects. When making
specimens, first, the aggregate, sand, and cement (in PPFRC is PPF and cement, and
in PPFFRC is PPFF and cement) were put into an agitator and stirred for 2 min, and
then water was poured into the mixture three different times. After this step, the
mixture was stirred for 3 min, and then put into a mold and vibrated for 15–20 s.
Next, the mold filled with unset concrete was placed in a curing box for 24 h, fol-
lowed by removal of the mold. Curing of the concrete specimen continued in the
curing box for 28 d, with the curing temperature kept constant at 20 °C ± 2 °C and
the humidity no lower than 95%.
In this paper, we only investigate the compressive behavior of PC, PPFRC, and
PPFFRC, and the tensile strength and fracture toughness analysis is deferred to a
later work. The geometry of the specimen in the compressive behavior experiment
is shown in Fig. 3(A), and the ready-made PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC specimens are
shown in Fig. 3(B). These specimens are divided into three groups depending on
the different components, and every group has three specimens; the designed com-
pressive strength is 15 MPa.
2.3. Testing procedure
The concrete material compression test used a concrete specimen, ultra-high-
speed camera (UHSC), computers, connection system (line system), light source,
loading system, etc. The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 4(A), and the experi-
mental scene is shown in Fig. 4(B). This experiment required two computers: one
to control the UHSC and the other the loading system. The light source was a
light-emitting-diode (LED) light, because LED light is low-voltage, direct-current
light. An alternating-current light would result in flickering video. All cube speci-
mens were tested in a compression testing machine to studying the compressive
behavior and to determine the compressive strength, compressive first crack energy
absorption, compressive toughness index etc.
3. Test results and analysis
3.1. Compressive properties
The compressive load-time curves of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are
shown in Fig. 5(A). The first crack in PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC speci-
mens appear at Pfc,i = 130.36, 134.09, and 142.37 kN, respectively,
(i is the concrete type, i.e., i = PC, PPFRC, or PPFFRC), corresponding
to 88.52%, 87.47%, and 87.88% of their respective maximum loads.
The difference in maximum loads and first crack loads leads to the
different ratios. Obviously, Pfc,PPFRC and Pfc,PPFFRC of PPFRC and
PPFFRC are increased by 3.73 and 12.01 kN, respectively, compared
to those of PC, proving that the polypropylene fibers and
polypropylene fiber fabric pieces can improve the bearing capacity
of concrete.
The compressive load-time curves of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC and
the area between the curves and horizontal axis were divided into
 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225 219

Table 1
Parameters of raw materials.

Fiber type L Ds SG TS Tex D EB E MP

(mm) (lm) (g/1000 m) (g/9000 m) (%) (MPa) (°C)
Warp Weft Axial Warp Weft Axial
(N) (N) (MPa)
PPF 19 31.2 0.91 – – 562 0.89 8 – – 27 5900 165
PPFF 30 17.4 – 2484 2405 – 186.67 1680 37.39 33.05 – – 165

Ps: The definition of L, Ds, SG, TS, EB, E and MP is listed in Nomenclature.

Table 2
Macroscopic and microscopic geometry of PPF and PPFF.
Fiber Raw material Macroscopic Microscopic
type geometry geometry
PPF
PPFF
CPE, CCE, ECEC, CEMax, FCEC, and CTI, as defined in the Nomencla-
ture. The sketch maps of these definitions are shown in Fig. 5(B).
Based on the definitions, the values of CS, CPE, CEE, ECEC, CEMax,
FCEC, and CTI are calculated, and the results shown in Table 4. In
Table 4, the CS values of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 15.11, 15.30,
and 16.04 MPa, respectively. The CS values of PPFRC and PPFFRC
are increased by 0.19 and 0.93 MPa, respectively, compared to
those of PC. This represents a 1.26% and 6.15% increase in the com-
pressive strengths of PPFRC and PPFFRC, respectively, compared to
that of PC. Owing to the proper compaction of PC compared to that
of PPFRC and PPFFRC, the CS values of PPFRC and PPFFRC may be
higher. However, the reason for the increased PPFRC and PPFFRC
strength may be the proper quantity of polypropylene fibers and
polypropylene fiber fabric pieces, which can resist and apply force
inside of concrete, since the polypropylene fibers and polypropy-
lene fiber fabric pieces were added in the same mix design ratio
as PC. Thus, another reason could be the effect of stirrups or
anchoring effects (Fig. 6), in which the sideways force that leads
to cracks is reduced by these fibers or by the fiber fabric. However,
we surmise that the fiber fabrics are likely to be more efficient than
the fibers because of the stress characteristics working inside the
concrete.
The same effects have also been reported in similar works. Asad
and Majid [7] considered adding a great deal of PPF fibers have lit-
tle influence on the compressive strength (50 mm long PPF fibers
with 5% volume fraction), or even reduce the compressive strength
[44] (more than 1% volume fraction), but if lowering the content of
fibers, it may enhance the compressive strength of concrete [7,42].
Majid [42] reported there are 11.7% increase in the compressive
strength of wave polypropylene fiber reinforced concrete (WPFRC,
50 mm long WPF with 0.8% volume fraction). Song [43] investi-
gated the compressive strength of PPFRC at a fiber content of
0.6 kg/m3 (0.067% volume fraction), and find there is 5.8% higher
than that of PC. Zhang [45] reported the compressive strength of
PPFRC with various polypropylene fiber contents of 0, 0.8, 1.2,
1.6, 2.0, 5.0 kg/m3 (0%, 0.089%, 0.13%, 0.17%, 0.22%, 0.56% volume
fraction). The result shows that the PPF can significantly affect
the CS of concrete, that is, the CS of concrete is enhanced when
cooperating with polypropylene fiber but it gets weakened as the
PPF content increases. The maximum compressive strength can
be improved by 11%, 7% and 3%, with corresponding fiber contents
of 0.8, 1.2 and 0.8 kg/m3 (water-cement ratio is 0.4, 0.5, 0.6),
respectively. And the reinforcement effect of polypropylene fiber
is weakened along with fiber content and when it exceeds a certain
percentage, the compressive strength of PPFRC becomes lower
than that of PC.
The main reason for the this increasing is due to proper mix-
ing of PPF and PPFF in concrete, the CS of PPFRC and PPFFRC
might have increased. On the other hand, when load is applied
to the specimen in compression, fracture occurred parallel to
the direction of applied loading. The bridging effect of PPF and
PPFF provided resistance against cracking which may results in
improvement of CS of PPFRC and PPFFRC [42]. Some researchers
think when polypropylene fiber is distributed inside of the con-
crete, it plays the role of bridging and reinforcing. The great
adhesion between the fiber and concrete has abilities to transfer
the stress of the crack tip to the upper and lower concrete sur-
face in the crack areas. The degree of stress concentration will be
alleviated and the stress inside concrete tends to become more
uniform. However, too much PPFs in concrete has poor disper-
sion and tends to conglobate. This results in creating weak inter-
facial transition areas and internal flaws. And will cause the loss
of polypropylene fiber reinforcement on concrete eventually
[45].
The CPE values of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 8362.8, 8418.6, and
9826.5 kNs, respectively. The CPE values of PC and PPFRC are
approximately equal, but those of PPFFRC are increased by
17.50% and 16.72% compared to those of PC and PPFRC. The reason
may be that, when micro-cracks appeared in the PPFRC and
PPFFRC, the polypropylene fibers and polypropylene fiber fabric
pieces can prevent their development, but fiber fabrics are more

Table 3
Mix design of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC.

Type Water (W) Cement (C) Sand (S) Gravel (G) PPF PPFF
3
Unit (kg/m )
PC 175 246 767 1211 – –
PPFRC 175 246 767 1211 0.9 –
PPFFRC 175 246 767 1211 – 0.9
220 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225

Fig. 3. Geometry and photograph of specimens: (A) geometry of each specimen; (B) photograph of specimens.

Fig. 4. Experimental setup: (A) connection diagram; (B) photograph of scene.

Fig. 5. (A) Compressive load-time curves of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC; (B) definition of CPE, CCE, ECEC, FCEC, and CEMax.

efficient due to their space structure and binding power with
cement; this will be discussed in Section 3.3.
The CCE values of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 3192.7, 3330.4, and
4472.7 kNs, respectively. The CCE value of PC is the lowest, while
the CCE values of PPFRC and PPFFRC are 4.31% and 40.09% higher
that of PC, respectively. The reason could be that the bridging effect
is present in PPFRC and PPFFRC, and the polypropylene fibers and
polypropylene fiber fabric pieces absorb the cracked energy of
the compression; the absorption capacity is related to the quantity
of the fibers or of the fiber fabric pieces.
 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225 221

Table 4
CS, CPE, CEE, ECEC, CEMax, FCEC, and CTI of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC.

Parameters Descriptive Concrete type

statistics
PC PPFRC PPFFRC
CS (MPa) Mean 15.11 15.30 16.04
Standard deviation 0.41 0.11 0.28
CPE (kNs) Mean 8362.8 8418.6 9826.5
Standard deviation 74.09 44.20 49.57
CCE (kNs) Mean 3192.7 3330.4 4472.7
Standard deviation 22.18 52.40 49.98
ECEC (kNs) Mean 11555.5 11749.2 14299.2
Standard deviation 58.11 52.37 17.51
FCEC (kNs) Mean 1961.3 3047.9 2749.7
Standard deviation 14.50 33.34 31.29
CEMax (kNs) Mean 13516.8 14797.1 17048.9
Standard deviation 64.13 79.95 22.77
CTI Mean 1.62 1.76 1.73
Standard deviation 0.053 0.046 0.035

respectively. This is the direct reason leading to the FCEC value

of PPFRC and PPFFRC larger than the PC, and this characteristic
demonstrates that PPFRC and PPFFRC both have an inhibiting abil-
ity with respect to the final damage to concrete, and can lengthen
the damage time.
A comprehensive comparison of CS, CPE, CCE, ECEC, FCEC, CEMax,
and CTI values of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC is shown in Fig. 7. The
computation method of Fig. 7 is

(A) PPF (B) PPFF Ssj ¼

Sij
 100: ð1Þ
SPCi
Fig. 6. Force analysis of (A) PPF and (B) PPFF in PPFRC and PPFFRC.
The definition of the standard values Ssj, Sii, and SPCi can be found
in Nomenclature. Taking every value of SPCi to be the maximum
value of 100, the result graphed in Fig. 7 are obtained.
The ECEC values of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 11555.5, 11749.2, From Fig. 7, it can be concluded that, regarding the compressive
and 14299.2 kNs, respectively. The ECEC values of PC and PPFRC results of PPFRC and PPFFRC, the CS, CPE, CCE, ECEC, and CEMax
are approximately equal. The ECEC values of PPFFRC are 23.74% values of PPFFRC are increased by 4.84%, 16.72%, 34.30%, 21.70%,
and 21.70% higher than those of PC and PPFRC, respectively. The and 15.22%, respectively, compared to that of PPFRC. However,
FCEC values of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 1961.3, 3047.9, and the FCEC and CTI values exhibit a certain gap. The FCEC and CTI
2749.7 kNs, respectively. The FCEC value of PC is the lowest, while value of PPFFRC are decreased by 9.78% and 1.71%, respectively,
those of PPFRC and PPFFRC are 55.40% and 40.20% higher that of as compared to that of PPFRC. The reason could be the following:
PC, respectively. During the experiment, at the moment at which From the appearance of the first crack in the concrete until the
the specimen has already been partially destroyed, but not totally concrete is finally destroyed [yellow and green area in Fig. 5(B)],
destroyed, the polypropylene fibers and polypropylene fiber fabric the bridging effect may be stronger in the polypropylene fibers,
pieces’ bridging effect is present, and it can still absorb some of the but less in the polypropylene fiber fabric, due to the content of
energy, and we can hear a clearing sound of fibers crashing. How- fibers in the being greater in unit volume than in the fiber fabric.
ever, because of the quantity of the polypropylene fibers is greater
than that of the polypropylene fiber fabric in unit volume, the
bridging effects in PPFRC are more obvious than those of PPFFRC,
and the FCEC value of PPFRC is 9.78% higher than that of PPFFRC.
The CEMax values of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 13516.8,
14797.1, and 17048.9 kNs, respectively. The CEMax value of PPFFRC
is the highest, while the CEMax values of PC and PPFRC are 24.13%
and 15.22% lower than that of PPFFRC, respectively. The CTI values
of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 1.62, 1.76, and 1.73, respectively. The
CTI values of PPFRC and PPFFRC are increased by 8.64% and 6.79%,
respectively, compared to that of PC. The addition of polypropylene
fiber and polypropylene fiber fabric may have limited the spread-
ing of cracks by bridging cracks. These fibers provide significant
resistance against stresses after the cracks appear. This ability
may be the cause of the increased CTI values of PPFRC and PPFFRC.
Moreover, three different trend lines are drawn in the descending
branch of each curve are shown in Fig. 5(A), and it can be seen that
the slope of PPFRC, kPPFRC = 7.24, is the largest, and the kPPFFRC and
kPC values are 14.36% and 37.98% lower than those of PPFRC, Fig. 7. Comprehensive comparison of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC.
222 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225

Table 5
Water-cement ratio, sand ratio, slump, and density of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC.

Type Water-cement ratio Sand ratio Slump Density

W/C bs (%) (mm) (kg/m3)
PC 0.711 38.78 34 2327.64
PPFRC 0.711 38.76 13 2285.18
PPFFRC 0.711 38.76 16 2297.30

Fig. 8. Cracks in PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC at their maximum load: Row (A) is the graph achieved from UHSC, row (B) is the sketch map of cracks, row (C) shows the final
damaged specimens, and row (D) shows the pieces of each specimen.

3.2. Physical parameters
The water-cement ratio (W/C), sand ratio (bs), slump, and den-
sity of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are shown in Table 5. We can see that
the water-cement ratios of the three types of concrete are equal,
and there is little difference between the sand ratios. For the same
water-cement ratio (W/C), the slumps exhibit a large difference.
The slumps of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 34, 13, and 16 mm,
respectively. The slump of PC is the largest, and the slumps of
PPFRC and PPFFRC are 61.76% and 52.94% lower, respectively, than
that of PC. As expected, the slump decreases due to the confine-
ment and retention effect of the polypropylene fibers and
polypropylene fiber fabric. The slump of PPFRC is lower than that
of PPFFRC, 18.75%, and the reason could be that in the fresh con-
crete the confinement and retention effect is more prominent in
polypropylene fibers than in polypropylene fiber fabric. The densi-
ties of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC are 2327.64, 2285.18, 2297.30 kg/m3,
respectively. The densities of PPFRC and PPFFRC are less than that
of PC, by 42.46 and 30.34 Kg/m3, respectively, decreases of 1.82%
and 1.30%, respectively. The inclusion of a low density of
polypropylene fibers or polypropylene fiber fabric in concrete
resulted in a lower density compared to that of PC.
3.3. Damage performance
Cracks in PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC at their own maximum loads
are shown in Fig. 8. The concrete pieces are chipped off in the PC
specimen at the maximum load, while in the PPFRC and PPFFRC
specimens the pieces of concrete are not chipped off. The reason
for the bridging effect is the presence of polypropylene fibers and
polypropylene fiber fabric in the concrete. The broken PC specimen
shows a main crack parallel to the load direction (Fig. 8, first row).
This main crack is approximately straight and developed from the
top to the bottom of the PC specimen. The main straight-through
crack divides the PC specimen into two parts, and either of these
two parts are integrated. In PPFRC and PPFFRC, the main crack at
their own maximum loads shows a different law compared to
the PC; that is, the main cracks in PPFRC and PPFFRC are sinuate,
 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225
Table 6
SEM graphs of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC.
Type Scan position 1
PC
PPFRC
PPFFRC
and no straight-through crack exists. However, the quantity of
cracks is greater than that of PC. The polypropylene fibers and
polypropylene fiber fabric can absorb more energy from the first
crack to maximum load than that of PC, and this could be the rea-
son (i.e., the CCE values in Table 4). From the graph of the frag-
ments of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC, we can see the macroscopically
bridging effect in PPFRC and PPFFRC, that the polypropylene fibers
and polypropylene fiber fabric connect the hardened cement mor-
tar, and that even when the specimen is broken down, the fibers
and fiber fabric can still connect the broken parts (second and third
rows in Fig. 8). These phenomena cannot be seen in the broken PC
pieces. In addition, the single pieces of polypropylene fiber fabric
show a better adhesive property than that of a single polypropy-
lene fiber, because polypropylene fiber fabric can connect the large
pieces of concrete, but a single polypropylene fiber cannot.
The micrographs of the broken pieces of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC
shown in Table 6 was obtained with a scanning electron micro-
scope (SEM). In PC, the main break occurred between the cement
and gravel; thus, there are many craters in the cement (PC-1 in
Table 6), and some gravel was cut by the compression load (PC-2
in Table 6). As expected, the weakest area in PC is the interfacial
transition zone (ITZ) of the cement and gravel, and this could be
the reason for the main crack developing approximately along a
223
Scan position 2
straight line (Fig. 8). In PPFRC, rebar-like fibers are visible in the
microscopic domain, and this effect can reduce crack development
in the cement; these fibers also enhance the combining capacity of
cement and gravel. When the load acts on this microscopic struc-
ture, some of the fibers slip off from the cement (PPFRC-1 in
Table 6), and some are broken down (PPFRC-2 in Table 6), proving
that the combining capacity of fibers and cement is not as strong as
expected. In PPFFRC, we find that the fiber fabric has numerous
small spaces (PPFFRC-1 in Table 6), measuring approximately sev-
eral micrometers to tens of micrometers. Cement particles can
easily enter these small spaces, fill the spaces between the fila-
ments of the multifilament yarns, and, after hardening, the fiber
fabric can clench the cement (PPFFRC-2 in Table 6). All of the fibers
in fiber fabric share the load, an effect that can also reduce crack
development in the cement, after the experiment. In addition, we
find that the fiber fabric is rarely broken down. The combining
capacity of fiber fabric and cement seems to be stronger than that
of PPFRC, as found in similar research by Peled [35,37].
4. Conclusions
The addition of waste fiber fabric can improve the compression
performance of concrete. In this study, the compression behavior
224 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225
of PPFRC and PPFFRC is compared to that of PC. The following con-
clusions are drawn:
1. The addition of PPFF to the concrete can increase the compres-
sive strength of concrete by 6.15%, while the addition of PPF
hardly increases its compressive behavior. The CS, CPE, CCE,
ECEC, and CEMax values of PPFFRC are increased compared to
those of PPFRC, but the FCEC and CTI values exhibit a certain
gap of 9.78% and 1.70% decreased to those of PPFRC.
2. The breaking velocities of PC, PPFRC, and PPFFRC under maxi-
mum load exhibit a large difference. The breaking velocity of
PPFRC is lowest because the bridging effect is more obvious in
PPFRC; that is, the bridging effect is more sensitive to the quan-
tity of fibers. Because of the unit volume of PPFF is less than that
of PPF, the breaking velocity of PPFFRC is not as slow as PPFRC.
This improvement in PPFFRC is an object of future research.
Regarding the compressive toughness index (CTI) of PPFRC
and PPFFRC, that of PPFFRC is still not as high as that of PPFRC.
3. For the same water-cement ratio, the slumps of PPFRC and
PPFFRC decreased by 21 and 18 mm, respectively. The densities
of PPFRC and PPFFRC decreased by 1.8% and 1.3%, respectively,
compared to that of PC. The sand ratios were nearly the same.
The use of wasted fiber fabric materials in concrete is a technol-
ogy that can constantly be improved, in terms of technical process
and meeting the requirements posed by varying environmental
conditions. Therefore, studies in this area are promising. Since we
only investigated the compressive behavior of PPFFRC in this
paper, the tensile, bending, and durability behavior of PPFFRC is a
subject of future work.
Conflict of interest
None of authors have the conflict of interest.
Acknowledgements
This study was financially supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Grants Nos. 51409208 and
51679197), and by the National Science Foundation for Post-
doctoral Scientists of China (Grant No. 2014M562524XB). We
thank LetPub for its linguistic assistance during the preparation
of this manuscript, and Specialised Imaging Limited for its UHSC.
References
[1] Guoming Liu, Weimin Cheng, Lianjun Chen, Investigating and optimizing the
mix proportion of pumping wet-mix shotcrete with polypropylene fiber,
Constr. Build. Mater. 150 (2017) 14–23.
[2] Kiachehr Behfarnia, Amir Behravan, Application of high performance
polypropylene fibers in concrete lining of water tunnels, Mater. Des. 55 (6)
(2014) 274–279.
[3] Vojkan Jovičić, Jakob Šušteršič, Željko Vukelič, The application of fibre
reinforced shotcrete as primary support for a tunnel in flysch, Tunn.
Undergr. Space Technol. 24 (6) (2009) 723–730.
[4] Antonio Conforti, Giuseppe Tiberti, Giovanni A. Plizzari, Angelo Caratelli,
Alberto Meda, Precast tunnel segments reinforced by macro-synthetic fibers,
Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 63 (2017) 1–11.
[5] Amir M. Alani, Derrick Beckett, Mechanical properties of a large scale synthetic
fibre reinforced concrete ground slab, Constr. Build. Mater. 41 (2) (2013) 335–
344.
[6] Mehran Khan, Majid Ali, Use of glass and nylon fibers in concrete for
controlling early age micro cracking in bridge decks, Constr. Build. Mater.
125 (2016) 800–808.
[7] Asad Zia, Majid Ali, Behavior of fiber reinforced concrete for controlling the
rate of cracking in canal-lining, Constr. Build. Mater. 155 (2017) 726–739.
[8] Ashley Wilson, Ali Abolmaali, Performance of Synthetic Fiber-Reinforced
Concrete Pipes, J, Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract. 5 (3) (2015) 2–7. 04014002.
[9] Sayyed Mahdi Abtahi, Mohammad Sheikhzadeh, Sayyed Mahdi Hejazi, Fiber-
reinforced asphalt-concrete-a review, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (6) (2010) 871–
877.
[10] H.R. Pakravan, M. Latifi, M. Jamshidi, Hybrid short fiber reinforcement system
in concrete: a review, Constr. Build. Mater. 142 (2017) 280–294.
[11] Saeid Hesami, Iman Salehi Hikouei, Seyed Amir Ali Emadi, Mechanical
behavior of self-compacting concrete pavements incorporating recycled tire
rubber crumb and reinforced with polypropylene fiber, J. Cleaner Prod. 133
(2016) 228–234.
[12] A.I. Al-Hadidy, Tan Yi-qiu, Mechanistic approach for polypropylene-modified
flexible pavements, Mater. Des. 30 (4) (2009) 1133–1140.
[13] Fodhil Kassimi, Ahmed K. El-Sayed, Kamal H. Khayat, Performance of fiber-
reinforced self-consolidating concrete for repair of reinforced concrete beams,
ACI Struct. J. 111 (6) (2014) 1277–1286.
[14] Okan Karahan, Cengiz Duran Atisß, The durability properties of polypropylene
fiber reinforced fly ash concrete, Mater. Des. 32 (2) (2011) 1044–1049.
[15] Soon Poh Yap, U. Johnson Alengaram, Mohd Zamin Jumaat, Enhancement of
mechanical properties in polypropylene- and nylon-fibre reinforced oil palm
shell concrete, Mater. Des. 49 (2013) 1034–1041.
[16] Pantea Rashiddadash, Ali Akbar Ramezanianpour, Mahdi Mahdikhani,
Experimental investigation on flexural toughness of hybrid fiber reinforced
concrete (HFRC) containing metakaolin and pumice, Constr. Build. Mater. 51
(1) (2014) 313–320.
[17] Jing Jun Li, Jian Gang Niu, Chao Jun Wan, Biao Jin, Ya Liu Yin, Investigation on
mechanical properties and microstructure of high performance polypropylene
fiber reinforced lightweight aggregate concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 118
(2016) 27–35.
_
[18] Kutalmısß RecepÖzgür Akça, Metin Çakır, Ipek Properties of polypropylene fiber
reinforced concrete using recycled aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 98 (2015)
620–630.
[19] G. Srikar, G. Anand, S. Suriya Prakash, A study on residual compression
behavior of structural fiber reinforced concrete exposed to moderate
temperature using digital image correlation, Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 10
(1) (2016) 75–85.
[20] V. Dey, A. Bonakdar, B. Mobasher, Low-velocity flexural impact response of
fiber-reinforced aerated concrete, Cem. Concr. Compos. 49 (5) (2014) 100–110.
[21] Barzin Mobasher, Mehdi Bakhshi, Christopher Barsby, Backcalculation of
residual tensile strength of regular and high performance fiber reinforced
concrete from flexural tests, Constr. Build. Mater. 70 (2014) 243–253.
[22] T.A. Söylev, T. Özturan, Durability, physical and mechanical properties of fiber-
reinforced concretes at low-volume fraction, Constr. Build. Mater. 73 (2014)
67–75.
[23] N. Flores Medina, G.B. Barluenga, F. Hernández-Olivares, Enhancement of
durability of concrete composites containing natural pozzolans blended
cement through the use of Polypropylene fibers, Compos. B Eng. 61 (3)
(2014) 214–221.
[24] Saber Fallah, Mahdi Nematzadeh, Mechanical properties and durability of
high-strength concrete containing macro-polymeric and polypropylene
fibers with nano-silica and silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 132 (2017)
170–187.
[25] Hu.a. Zhang, Yang Liu, Hao Sun, Wu. Shoufeng, Transient dynamic behavior of
polypropylene fiber reinforced mortar under compressive impact loading,
Constr. Build. Mater. 111 (2016) 30–42.
[26] Kim Hung Mo, Soon Poh Yap, U. Johnson Alengaram, Mohd Zamin Jumaat,
Chun Hooi Bu, Impact resistance of hybrid fibre-reinforced oil palm shell
concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 50 (2) (2014) 499–507.
[27] A.S.M. Abdul Awal, Hossein Mohammadhosseini, Green concrete production
incorporating waste carpet fiber and palm oil fuel ash, J. Cleaner Prod. 137
(2016) 157–166.
[28] Mostafa Fakharifar, Ahmad Dalvand, Mahdi Arezoumandi, Mohammad K.
Sharbatdar, Genda Chen, Ali Kheyroddin, Mechanical properties of high
performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites, Constr. Build. Mater.
71 (2014) 510–520.
[29] I. Merta, E.K. Tschegg, Fracture energy of natural fiber reinforced concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 40 (7) (2013) 991–997.
[30] Ahmet Çavdar, Investigation of freeze–thaw effects on mechanical
properties of fiber reinforced cement mortars, Compos. B Eng. 58 (3)
(2014) 463–472.
[31] S.K. Al-Oraimi, A.C. Seibi, Mechanical characterisation and impact behaviour of
concrete reinforced with natural fibers, Compos. Struct. 32 (1) (1995) 165–
171.
[32] Vahid Afroughsabet, Luigi Biolzi, Togay Ozbakkaloglu, High-performance fiber-
reinforced concrete: a review, J. Mater. Sci. 51 (14) (2016) 6517–6551.
[33] Ehsan Mohseni, Mojdeh Mehrinejad Khotbehsara, Farzad Naseri, Maryam
Monazami, Prabir Sarker, Polypropylene fiber reinforced cement mortars
containing rice husk ash and nano-alumina, Constr. Build. Mater. 111 (2016)
429–439.
[34] Aiman Hasan Hamood Al-Masoodi, Ahmed Kawan, R. Mudiono Kasmuri, M.N.
N. Khan Hamid, Static and dynamic properties of concrete with different types
and shapes of fibrous reinforcement, Constr. Build. Mater. 104 (11) (2016)
247–262.
[35] A. Peled, B. Mobasher, Pultruded fabric–cement composites, ACI Mater. J. 102
(1) (2005) 15–23.
[36] Alva Peled, Einat Zaguri, Ga.d. Marom, Bonding characteristics of multifilament
polymer yarns and cement matrices, Compos. A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 39 (6) (2008)
930–939.
[37] A. Peled, A. Bentur, Yankelevsky, Flexural performance of cementitious
composites reinforced with woven fabrics, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 11 (4) (1999)
325–330.
 Y. Qin et al. / Construction and Building Materials 194 (2019) 216–225
[38] A. Peled, A. Bentur, Yankelevsky, Effects of woven fabric geometry on the
bonding performance of cementitious composites: mechanical performance,
Adv. Cem. Based Mater. 7 (1) (1998) 20–27.
[39] A. Peled, A. Bentur, Geometrical characteristics and efficiency of textile fabrics
for reinforcing cement composites, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (5) (2000) 781–790.
[40] Magdi El Messiry, Abou-Bakr Mito, Affaf Al-Oufy, Eman El-Tahan, Effect of
fabric material and tightness on the mechanical properties of fabric-cement
composite, Alexandria Eng. J. 53 (4) (2014) 795–801.
[41] Jens Hartig, Ulrich Häußler-Combe, Kai Schicktanz, Influence of bond
properties on the tensile behaviour of Textile Reinforced Concrete, Cem.
Concr. Compos. 30 (10) (2008) 898–906.
225
[42] M. Khan, M. Ali, Effectiveness of hair and wave polypropylene fibers for
concrete roads, Constr. Build. Mater. 166 (2018) 581–591.
[43] P.S. Song, S. Hwang, B.C. Sheu, Strength properties of nylon- and
polypropylene-fiber-reinforced concretes, Cem. Concr. Res. 35 (8) (2005)
1546–1550.
[44] M.A. Ismail, Compressive and tensile strength of natural fiber-reinforced
cement base composites, Al-Rafidain Eng 15 (2) (2006) 42–51.
[45] H. Zhang, L. Wang, K. Zheng, et al., Research on compressive impact dynamic
behavior and constitutive model of polypropylene fiber reinforced concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 187 (2018) 584–595.