ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 103-S60

Crack Width in Partially Prestressed T-Beams

Having Steel Fibers
by Job Thomas and Ananth Ramaswamy

This paper presents the experimental and analytical results of (PC) beams have been carried out in this work to validate and
crack width and crack spacing at various loading stages of 12 extend the knowledge to high-strength concrete.
partially prestressed T-beams, with and without hooked end steel
fibers, placed over the partial or full depth of the cross sections.
Beams were cast and tested using three grades of concrete having
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
compressive strengths of 35, 65, and 85 MPa (5.07, 9.42, and This paper reports the experimental results of crack width
12.32 ksi). An analytical model has been proposed to predict the and spacing measurements at various loading stages for
crack width and spacing in partially prestressed beams having steel partially prestressed T-beams with fiber reinforcement in
fibers. The influence of bond slip of longitudinal reinforcement and partial or full depth. An analytical model to estimate the crack
the pullout of fibers aligned across the crack has been incorporated width and crack spacing is proposed for partially PC members
in the proposed model. The analytical results were found to be in containing fibers over partial- or full-depth section for
close agreement with corresponding experimental results. different concrete strengths. This is expected to be useful to
the design engineer in verifying serviceability limit states for
Keywords: beam; crack; fiber-reinforced concrete; high-strength concrete, steel fiber reinforced concrete members in flexure. Moreover,
steel. useful insights on the suitability of locating fibers over partial
zones of the cross section can be obtained from this study.
INTRODUCTION
The presence of cracks in reinforced concrete (RC) structures EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
affects the aesthetics of those structures and causes the Specimen details
corrosion of exposed steels. This is a major concern for the The test program consisted of casting and testing 12 flexure
long-term maintenance of concrete structures. The laboratory critical T-beams of 3.85 m (151.4 in.) in length. All of the
tests based on short-term loading cannot give an a priori beams were tested over a simply-supported span of 3.6 m
answer to the impact of cracking on the serviceability (141.6 in.). The details of reinforcements in test beam have
behavior of reinforced concrete structures. To avoid possible been given in Fig. 1. The partial prestressing ratio (= Aps fpy /
detrimental effects due to cracking, generally the design (As fsy + Aps fps)) for the test beams was maintained at 0.528.
codes (for example, ACI 318,1 BS 8110,2 and IS 13433) The design parameters varied in the test were concrete
specify a limiting width of the crack and/or a value of strength and the zone of placement of fiber-reinforced
permissible tensile stress in concrete. Hence, the estimation
of crack widths is an inevitable module in the design of RC
members. A review on the early models employed for
predicting the maximum crack widths in reinforced concrete
members was reported by Desayi in 1976.4 Investigations on
the effect of fibers on the behavior of reinforced concrete
beams indicated that the bridging of steel fibers across the
crack interface results in narrower cracks allowing loading
of beams to a higher value of strain in the longitudinal steel
without exceeding serviceability limits.5-8 Earlier models for
predicting the width and spacing of the cracks in RC structures
with fiber reinforcement, however, have been derived based
on the test results of normal-strength concrete (30 MPa [4.35 ksi])
or moderately high-strength concrete (60 MPa [8.70 ksi]).8-11
The matrix strength and its interaction with the fiber pullout
mechanism were not addressed in these earlier studies.9 This
aspect is important while modeling the participation of the
steel fibers in controlling the crack width in reinforced Fig. 1—Details of test beam.
concrete structures. In addition, the bond-slip of the longitudinal
bar has not been accounted for in most of these earlier
studies.8-9,11 The present study addresses these lacunae in ACI Structural Journal, V. 103, No. 4, July-August 2006.
addition to presenting the test results of beams having fibers MS No. 05-090 received August 30, 2005, and reviewed under Institute publication
policies. Copyright © 2006, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including
over partial depth. An experimental and analytical investigation the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent
discussion including author’s closure, if any, will be published in the May-June 2007
on the crack width and crack spacing in prestressed concrete ACI Structural Journal if the discussion is received by January 1, 2007.

568 ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006

Job Thomas is a PhD Candidate at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India.
He received his BS and MS in civil engineering from the University of Kerala, India,
in 1995 and 1997, respectively. His research interests include performance studies of
high-strength, partially prestressed concrete beams with and without fibers.

Ananth Ramaswamy is an Associate Professor at the Indian Institute of Science. He

received his BS in civil engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras,
India, in 1985; his MS in civil engineering from the University of California, Davis,
Calif., in 1986; and his PhD from Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, La., in
1992. His research interests include computational mechanics, fiber-reinforced concrete
composites, bridge engineering, structural optimization, and vibration control. Fig. 2—Designation of test beams.

Table 1—Mixture proportions of various

grades of concrete
Mixture High-range
proportion water-reducing Silica Fiber
*
(W:C:FA:CA) admixture fumes content fcu′ ,
Mixture % by weight % by volume MPa
designation by weight of cement content of concrete (ksi)

M35 0.48:1:1.43:2.15 — — 0.00, 1.50 40.03

(5.81)

M65 0.35:1:1.24:1.85 1.00 — 74.48

0.00, 1.50 (10.80)

M85 0.28:1:1.20:2.00 1.50 10 0.00, 1.50 97.28

(14.10)
*
W = water; C = cement; FA = fine aggregate; and CA = coarse aggregate.
concrete. Beams were cast using three different grades of
concrete: normal strength, moderately high strength, and
high strength (35, 65, 85 MPa [5.07, 9.42, and 12.32 ksi]),
respectively. For each grade, four beam specimens were cast:
a control beam without fiber reinforcement, a beam with fiber-
reinforced concrete over the full section, a beam with fiber-
reinforced concrete only in the web portion, and a beam with
fiber-reinforced concrete only in the flange portion. The desig-
nation of the test beams is presented in Fig. 2.
Materials and methods
The mixture proportion of various grades of concrete was
finalized based on the laboratory trials and are presented in
Table 1. Fibers used were of hooked end type having an
aspect ratio of 55 at volume fraction of fibers of 1.5%. The
stress-strain response of reinforcing and prestressing bars
used in the present study is presented in Fig. 3.
Reinforcement cages were fabricated and prestressing
wires were drawn through the cages across the bulkheads of
the prestressing bed. Prestressing steel (PS) wires were then
jacked to a load of 34.33 kN (7.7 kips) (0.62fpy) each, one at
a time. The fresh concrete was poured into the molds and
compacted. The prestressing force was transferred to the
beam by cutting the prestressing wires after 7 to 10 days of
casting. The strain in the PS wires at the time of testing was
measured and this value was used as the effective
prestressing strain for the analysis of the beams. The strain in
the bar at the time of initial tensioning and testing was
measured to compute the losses in the prestress. The channel
of the strain indicator was locked during the whole period,
from initial tensioning to completion of testing of the beam.
This was to ascertain the strain data based on a common
datum. The magnitude of average effective prestress fpe across
all the specimens studied was found to be equal to 0.51fpy.
All the beams were cured using moist burlaps for 28 days.
The beam was loaded under four-point bending with
displacement as the master control in the loading process. At
every stage of loading, applied load, midspan deflection,
concrete surface strain, steel strains, development and
Fig. 3—Stress-strain behavior of steel reinforcements—
experimental.
propagation of cracks, and width of the cracks were monitored.
The crack width was measured using an optical microscope.
ANALYTICAL MODEL
An analytical model is proposed for predicting the crack
width and crack spacing at various stages of loading in the
partially prestressed beams. The stress-strain behavior of the
fiber-reinforced concrete and reinforcement were modeled
based on the test results. The details of the proposed analytical
model for predicting the crack properties are discussed below.
Width and spacing of cracks
A model is proposed for predicting the width and spacing
of the cracks in partially prestressed fiber-reinforced
concrete beams based on the force equilibrium of the equivalent
axially loaded reinforced tension member, as shown in Fig. 4. In
the present study, the prediction model proposed by
Padmarajaiah and Ramaswamy9 was suitably modified to
account for the interaction of matrix strength with the fiber
pullout mechanism.
For a given steel stress, the stress in the steel fiber-reinforced
concrete will be more when compared with the stress in the
plain concrete (Fig. 4(b)). A new crack will form when the
stress in concrete between two cracks builds up to the
cracking stress of concrete (Fig. 4(b)). The new crack
widens, resulting in a decrease in propagation and widening
of older cracks. Thus, the presence of fibers in the concrete
matrix improves the redistribution of stresses in the beam.
The formation of additional cracks continues in this manner
until the stress build-up in concrete between the cracks
cannot induce cracking. This cracked state, where additional
cracks cannot form, corresponds to “critical crack spacing,”
as no additional redistribution of forces is possible. The
variability of material properties along the beam leads to any
one of these cracks to control the failure eventually. In the
present work, the stabilized state in the beam that corresponds
to critical crack spacing has been analyzed to predict the width
of the crack.

ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006 569


Fig. 4—Details of equivalent axially-loaded reinforced
member used for crack analysis.
12
The test results of Kankam indicated that the variation of
the bond stress along the longitudinal steel is nonlinear, as
shown in Fig. 4(c). The linear variation proposed by
Padmarajaiah and Ramaswamy,9 as shown in Fig. 4(c),
however, was adopted for the computation of crack spacing
in the present study. The net force transferred to the concrete
from the longitudinal reinforcement through the bond was
computed from the force equilibrium in the bars and is given
by Eq. (1)
( F ps1 + F ps2 + F ds3 ) – ( Fps1
′ + F ps2
′ + F ds3
′ )
1 (1)
= --- S 0
4 ∑i kb fbi πdi
where F and F′ are the force in longitudinal steel, as shown
in Fig. 4(b); S0 is the critical spacing of cracks; fbi is the ultimate
bond strength of the bar with a diameter di located at i-th
layer; and kb accounts for the variation of bond stress
distribution along the reinforcing bar from the idealized linear
plot (Fig. 4(c)) and is equal to 0.859, the average value
proposed by Padmarajaiah and Ramaswamy9 for moderately
high-strength, partially PC beams.
The bond stress at the reinforcing bar interface fbi depends
on the axial stress in the reinforcing bar, which in turn
570
Fig. 5—Proposed model of stress-strain response of fiber-
reinforced concrete.
depends on the applied moment (M) in the beam and is given
by fbi = fbui (M/Mu)ϕ,originally proposed by Desayi.4 The
value Mu is the ultimate moment capacity of the beam and ϕ
is a power factor that correlates the applied moment and the
bond stress in the reinforcing bar, being equal to 0.257 as the
average value proposed by Padamarajaiah and Ramaswamy.9
In the present study, the ultimate bond shear strength fbi of
deformed bars was taken as 12.8 MPa (1.85 ksi) and 14.0 MPa
(2.03 ksi) for plain and fiber-reinforced concrete (Vf = 1.5%)
as reported by Rostasy and Hartwich.13 As no test data is
available, the bond strength of smooth prestressing steel was
assumed to be equal to 6.30 MPa, the value originally reported
by Edwards and Yannopoulos14 for plain mild steel bars.
The model for crack width prediction was developed
considering an equivalent axially-loaded tension member, as
shown in Fig. 4(b). The stresses acting on the concrete
matrix include the average stress due to the fiber pullout σFp
at the crack interface, the tensile stress in the uncracked fiber-
reinforced concrete σtF, and the bond stress at the reinforcing
bar interface.10 Thus, the force equilibrium of the concrete
matrix shown in Fig. 4(b) can be expressed by Eq. (2)
1
k t ( σ tF – σ Fp )A ce = --- S 0
4 ∑i kb fbi πdi (2)
where kt accounts for the variation in the distribution of
stresses σFp and σtF from the assumed uniform distribution,
as shown in Fig. 4(b), and is equal to 0.665, the value
proposed by Padamarajaiah and Ramaswamy.9 To compute
the spacing of the stabilized cracks in the beam, the values of
σtF and σFp have been assumed to be equal to the uniaxial
tensile strength of the fiber-reinforced matrix (f0tf in Fig. 5)
and matrix stress corresponding to an average fiber pullout
length of Lf /4 (f1tf in Fig. 5), respectively. Substitution and
rearranging of terms in Eq. (2) gives the expression for S0
(Eq. (3))
4k t ( σ tF – σ Fp )A ce
S 0 = --------------------------------------------
- (3)
M ϕ
∑k b fbui  ------- πd i
 M u
i
The value Ace in Eq. (2) and (3) is the effective area of
concrete in the equivalent axially-loaded tension member
and is given by Eq. (4)
A ce = 0.8  2 ( h – d )b w – ∑i Asi (4)

ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006
where Asi is the area of the steel in the i-th layer within the
equivalent axially-loaded tension member shown in Fig. 4(b).
The maximum width of the flexural crack wm in the beam
was computed using Eq. (5), the model originally proposed
by Desayi4
h –xu
w m = S 0 ε si ----------------
- (5)
d si – x u
where εsi is the strain in the reinforcing steel bar near to the
tension face (16 mm φ [0.63 in.] deformed steel bar in this
study) located at an effective depth of dsi in the beam section
corresponding to the loading stage at which the crack width
is evaluated and xu is the depth of neural axis of the beam
section corresponding to the loading stage. A layer-based
analysis was carried out for determining the strain in the
reinforcing bar εsi and the depth of neutral axis xu.
Constitutive model for concrete in flexure
Figure 5 shows the proposed model of the stress-strain
behavior of fiber-reinforced concrete. The model originally
proposed by Carreria and Chu15 was assumed in the present
study for developing the stress-strain relationship of the
fiber-reinforced concrete in compression. The compressive
stress in the concrete at i-th layer is calculated from Eq. (6).
β c ( ε ci ⁄ ε 0cF )
′ -------------------------------------------------
f ci = f cyF
βc
β c – 1 + ( ε ci ⁄ ε 0cF )
The cylinder compressive strength of the fiber-reinforced
′ and strain at peak compressive stress ε0cF have
concrete f cyF
been estimated using Eq. (7) and (8), respectively. The
concrete parameter defining the compressive stress-strain
response βc in Eq. (6) was computed from Eq. (9). The
parameter n in Eq. (6) governs the post-peak softening of
stress-train response of steel fiber concrete in compression.
The value n given by Eq. (10) accounts for the presence of
fibers. The details of the development of empirical expressions
given by Eq. (7), (8), (9), and (11) are presented in Thomas
and Ramaswamy.16,17
′
f cyF ′ + 0.046f cu
= 0.8382f cu ′ RI + 1.0211RI
0.3943
ε 0cF = (493.87f ′cu – 3.7588f ′cu RI + 684.95RI ) ×10 (8)
0.1943
β c = n ( 1.0557f cu
′ ′ RI + 0.3993RI ) ≥ 1.0 (9)
– 0.0158f cu
 1.0 for ε ci ≤ ε 0cF
n = 
 3 – RI for ε ci > ε 0cF
′
f cuF ′ + 0.0138f cu
= f cu ′ RI + 1.0925RI (MPa)
The total force offered by the compression concrete block
Cc was computed using Eq. (12). The values bi and xu in
Eq. (12) is the width of the beam at i-th layer and the depth
of neutral axis, respectively.
ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006
xu
∫
C c = – f ci bi dx (12)
0
The addition of steel fiber increases the tensile strength
and the post cracking tensile stiffness of the concrete.18 The
increase in post-cracking tensile stiffness is mainly due to
the bridging action of the steel fibers across the crack. The
proposed tensile stress-strain relationship of steel fiber-
reinforced concrete was developed from the model proposed
by Lok and Pei.19 This model has three regimes: a linear
precracking stage, a region in the post-cracking stage
representing the residual stresses offered by the matrix and
fibers as described by Worner and Muller,20 and a region
offering residual strength due to pullout of fibers across the
crack. The direct tensile strength of fiber-reinforced concrete
f0tF, the stress in the concrete owing to the commencement
of the fiber pullout mechanism f1tF, strain in the concrete ε0tF
corresponding to the stress f0tF, strain in the concrete ε1tF
corresponding to the stress f1tF and strain in concrete at
which the fiber pullout mechanism assumed to cease its
contribution ε2tF in Eq. (13) are the key stress and strain
values used to define the shape of the tensile stress-strain
curve of fiber-reinforced concrete (Fig. 5)
 f 0tF ( ε ti ⁄ ε 0tF ), if 0 ≤ ε ti ≤ ε 0tF

 ( f 1tF – f 0tF ) ( ε ti – ε 0tF ) ⁄ ( ε 1tF – ε 0tF ) + f 0tF if ε 0tF ≤ ε ti ≤ ε 1tF
- (6) f ti =  (13)
 f 1tF ( ε ti – ε 2tF ) ⁄ ( ε 1tF – ε 2tF ) if ε 1tF ≤ ε ti ≤ ε 2tF

 0.0 if ε ti ≥ ε 2tF
The direct tensile strength of fiber-reinforced concrete
f0tF was computed using Eq. (14) proposed by Lok and Pei.19
The strain ε0tF was computed using Eq. (16), where the
initial tangent modulus of fiber-reinforced concrete in
tension EtF was computed using Eq. (17), the model originally
proposed by Zhuang et al.21 for plain concrete. The initial
tangent modulus in compression of fiber-reinforced concrete
EcF in Eq. (17) was computed using Eq. (18). The details
leading to the developments of Eq. (15) and (18) are reported
in Thomas and Ramaswamy.17,18
f0tF = ffcrF /1.42 (MPa) (14)
(7)
′ + 0.2945 f cu
ffcrF = 0.8707 f cu ′ RI + 1.1170RI (MPa)(15)
–6
ε0tF = f0tF /EtF (16)
E tF = E cF ⁄ 2 (MPa) (17)
(10) ′ + 425.34 f cu
EcF = 4583.4 f cu ′ RI + 397.75RI (MPa) (18)
The first portion of the post-cracking regime of tensile
stress-strain curve of fiber-reinforced concrete is assumed to
(11)
be varying linearly from (ε0tF, f0tF) to (ε1tF, f1tF), where the
starting point depends on the matrix characteristics and the
latter point solely depends on the fiber pullout characteristics.
Hence, the intermediate points in this (Phase I) regime represent
the interaction of matrix sustaining pressure and fiber pullout
mechanism offering resistance to the crack propagation near
571

Fig. 6—Fiber pullout strain softening models of cracked
fiber-reinforced concrete.
Fig. 7—Axial stress-slip relationship of HYSD bars and PS wire.
the tip of the crack. Considering the effects of boundary and
vibration during compaction, the probability factor for the
distribution of fibers along the beam across a critical plane
was assumed to be 0.64, the mean value proposed by
Souroushian and Lee22 to represent random fiber orientation.
As proposed by Lok and Pei,19 assuming an average fiber
pullout length of Lf /4, the residual stress offered by pulling
out of fibers from the matrix f1tF was computed from Eq. (19).
The pullout bond shear strength τbF of hooked end fibers
used in the present study was estimated from Eq. (20), which
was adopted from the model proposed by Marti et al.23 The
bond efficiency factor τ1bF of 0.75 proposed by Narayanan
and Darwish24 for crimped fibers was adopted in the present
study. The strain was computed using Eq. (21), the model
proposed by Henager.25
f 1tF = 0.64τ bF RIη bF (MPa) (19)
2
---
3
τ bF = 0.6 ( f cy
′ ) (MPa) (20)
ε 1tF = τ bF ( L f ⁄ φ f )η bF ⁄ E F (21)
The tension-softening model of fiber-reinforced concrete
in Phase II (Fig. 5) incorporating the pullout of fibers
proposed by Marti et al.23 and Lok and Pei19 is presented in
the Fig. 6. The simplified linear variation with limiting strain
ε2tF equal to 0.0219 proposed by Lok and Pei19 was used in
the present study. This limiting strain ε2tF corresponds to a
crack width equal to half the fiber length19,23 which is
approximately four times more than the yielding strain of
high yield strength deformed (HYSD) bar (0.00429). Hence,
in the practical range of loading stages (crack width ≤ 0.33 mm,
ACI 3181), the fiber effectiveness is well accounted for. The
total tensile force offered by the concrete Tc is calculated
using Eq. (22)
572
h
Tc =
∫ fti bi dx (22)
xu
Constitutive model for longitudinal reinforcement
A multi-linear elastic stress-strain models derived based
on the test data (Fig. 3) was assumed for the HYSD bars and
PS wires. The strain in the surrounding concrete at the j-th
layer of steel, εcsj was computed using Eq. (23). In Eq. (23),
εcc is the strain at extreme compression fiber, xu is the depth
of the neutral axis, and dsj is the distance of steel at j-th layer
from the extreme compression fiber
ε cc
ε csj = ------d (23)
x u sj
The test program indicated that the strain in the reinforcing
bar level is slightly lower than the strain in the concrete at the
reinforcing bar level (the results are discussed in the later
section), indicating that bond-slip is present between the
reinforcing bar and the surrounding concrete. The bond slip
between steel and surrounding concrete is accounted for in
the present model. The test data of Mirza and Houde26 is
used to determine the slip of the deformed bars. As no test
data is available on the bond behavior of the PS bar, the slip
characteristics of PS bars are assumed to be the same as that
of smooth mild steel bar reported by Edward and
Yannopoulous.14 Figure 7 presents the axial stress-slip
relationship of HYSD bars and PS bars. The average value
of the axial stress in reinforcing bar was used to compute the
slip LSLIP–j over the shear span length, while the slip of
reinforcing bar in constant moment region was calculated
based on the uniform axial stresses in the reinforcing bar.
The perfect bond, however, was assumed between the bars in
compression and the surrounding concrete. The actual strain
in the longitudinal bars at j-th layer εsj was computed using
Eq. (24)
L SLIP – j
ε sj = ε csj – -----------------------
- + ε isj (24)
L original – j
where εisj is the initial effective strain in the steel bar. As
LSLIP is a function of the axial stress in the reinforcing bar,
the computation of using Eq. (24) involves iterative procedure.
The stress in the steel bar fsj corresponding to the steel strain
εsj was obtained from the test data (Fig. 3). The total force
offered by the longitudinal steel reinforcements is computed
using Eq. (25). The value Asj in Eq. (25) is the area of steel
in j-th layer
Fs = ∑j fsj Asj (25)
Analytical procedure
The following step-by-step procedure was used for the
computation of crack width and crack spacing of the
partially prestressed beam specimens. The proposed model
uses the force equilibrium and strain compatibility conditions.
1. Computation of the curvature and midspan deflection of
the prestressed beam at initial stage (no external load condition);
ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006

Fig. 8—Tensile response of 85 MPa grade concrete—
analytical predictions of: (a) plain concrete having no
fiber; (b) SFRC (Vf = 1.5%) assuming τbF = 4.15 MPa
(after Narayanan and Darwish24); and (c) SFRC (Vf =
1.5%) based on present model (τbF given by Eq. (20)).
2. Assuming the strain in the extreme compression fiber
(top), the neutral axis depth xu was located by iterative
converging technique as given by Eq. (26);
C c + T c + F s ≤ 0.01 kN (26)
3. Computation of the moment M using Eq. (27). The
value xi and dsj in Eq. (27) are the depth of i-th layer of
concrete and depth of j-th layer of steel from extreme
compression fiber; and
xu h For all the beams, flexural cracks first appeared in the
∫ ∫
M = – f ci x i bi dx + f ti x i bi dx + ∑j fsj Asj dsj (27)
0 xu
4. Estimation of spacing and width of the cracks using Eq. (3)
and (5), respectively.
The force sustained by the concrete layers was computed
assuming an initial layer thickness of 2 mm along the depth
of the cross section. In the consequent iterations, the layer
thickness was reduced to half of that used in the previous
iteration to locate the neutral axis, which led to a force
equilibrium with an accuracy of 0.01 kN.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The experimental data of crack width and crack spacing of
12 partially prestressed beams have been compared with the
corresponding prediction using the proposed models. The
cubes cast along with the beam specimens were tested for the
compressive strength and the results are given in Table 1.
Other properties of concrete were computed based on the
cube strength fcu ′ and the fiber-reinforcing index (RI). The
prediction of tensile stress-strain response of high-strength
concrete (85 MPa) with and with out fiber is presented in
Fig. 8. The plot corresponding to τbF equal to 4.15 MPa for
all grades of concrete reported by Narayanan and Darwish24
and one based on τbF given by Eq. (20) is shown in Fig. 8. The
plot (Fig. 8) indicates that the interaction of matrix strength to
fiber influences the post-peak tensile response of steel fiber-
reinforced concrete significantly. This difference in post-
peak response is found to be significant for high-strength and
moderately high-strength (85 and 65 MPa) steel fiber-reinforced
concrete, respectively. The difference in post-peak tensile
response, however, is less pronounced for normal-strength
(35 MPa) steel fiber-reinforced concrete.
ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006
Fig. 9—Experimentally observed crack/crush pattern in
test beam.
Fig. 10—Strain in HYSD reinforcing bar and strain in concrete
at level of HYSD reinforcing bar in Beam F85FOCWOC.
General behavior of test beams
constant moment zone at early stages of loading. With
further increase in load, existing cracks extended, additional
flexural cracks formed in the midspan region and new cracks
developed in the shear span of the beam. As the load
increased further, one of the flexural cracks in the midspan
of the beam opened up and reached deep into the compression
zone. Thus, the available area of concrete to resist the
compressive force became too small and finally the beam
failed in crushing. The beams with fiber reinforcement only
in the web portion (F35FOCWFC, F65FOCWFC, and
F85FOCWFC) showed improved resistance to crack growth
similar to the corresponding beams with fiber reinforcement
in the full depth (F35FFCWFC, F65FFCWFC, and
F85FFCWFC). The experimentally observed crack pattern in
the test beams at the end of the testing is presented in Fig. 9.
Figure 10 presents the strain in the 16 mm (0.63 in.) diameter
HYSD reinforcing bar and the strain in the concrete at the
level of 16 mm (0.63 in.) diameter HYSD reinforcing bar in
Beam F85FOCWOC. The plot (Fig. 10) indicates that at a
given load stage, the strain in the reinforcing bar was lower
than the strain in the surrounding concrete. The variation in
strain between the reinforcement and the surrounding
concrete is the result of the bond-slip between the reinforcing
bar and the surrounding concrete. Similar differences in
strain levels were also noticed in SFRC beam specimens.
Table 2 presents the load values at different stages, such as
the formation of first cracking, yielding of 16 mm (0.63 in.)
diameter HYSD reinforcing bar, and at the collapse stage.
The test results indicated that the presence of fibers improves
the load-carrying capacity at various stages.
Table 3 presents the spacing of the cracks at various stages
of loading. More cracks were observed in beams with fiber
reinforcement in the tension zone (web) and is shown in
Fig. 9. The bond shear strength of the reinforcing bar is
573
Table 2—Comparison of experimental and predicted load data
At first crack At yielding of HYSD At ultimate
Beam Pcr-expt, Pcr-model, Py-expt, Py-model, Pu-expt , Pu-model,
designation kN (kips) kN (kips) Pcr-model /Pcr-expt kN (kips) kN (kips) Py-model /Py-expt kN (kips) kN (kips) Pu-model /Pu-expt
F35FOCWOC 71.37 (16.0) 70.02 (15.7) 0.98 185.87 (41.7) 168.77 (37.9) 0.91 203.29 (45.7) 210.10 (47.2) 1.03
F65FOCWOC 81.45 (18.3) 78.38 (17.6) 0.96 202.05 (45.4) 170.31 (38.2) 0.84 234.40 (52.6) 232.74 (52.3) 0.99
F85FOCWOC 86.84 (19.5) 82.86 (18.6) 0.95 210.70 (47.3) 173.95 (39.1) 0.83 245.36 (55.1) 236.49 (53.1) 0.96
F35FFCWFC 83.84 (18.8) 80.60 (18.12) 0.96 200.36 (45.0) 190.10 (42.7) 0.95 228.10 (51.2) 224.20 (50.4) 0.98
F65FFCWFC 96.77 (21.7) 92.53 (20.80) 0.96 213.73 (48.0) 211.21 (47.8) 0.99 254.06 (57.1) 245.35 (55.1) 0.97
F85FFCWFC 103.69 (23.3) 100.37 (22.57) 0.97 230.19 (51.7) 222.39 (49.9) 0.97 268.12 (60.2) 252.25 (56.7) 0.94
F35FOCWFC 84.28 (18.9) 82.36 (18.5) 0.98 196.21 (44.1) 191.83 (43.1) 0.98 220.40 (49.5) 217.12 (48.8) 0.99
F65FOCWFC 96.97 (21.8) 91.79 (20.6) 0.95 207.65 (46.6) 207.90 (46.7) 1.00 249.20 (56.0) 240.45 (54.0) 0.96
F85FOCWFC 99.36 (22.3) 96.58 (21.7) 0.97 217.13 (48.8) 216.21 (48.6) 1.00 261.50 (58.7) 245.32 (55.1) 0.94
F35FFCWOC 69.94 (15.7) 69.48 (15.6) 0.99 191.71 (42.9) 169.84 (38.1) 0.89 215.30 (48.4) 221.34 (49.7) 1.03
F65FFCWOC 79.57 (17.9) 79.40 (17.9) 1.00 205.27 (46.1) 174.00 (39.1) 0.85 246.50 (55.4) 239.72 (53.8) 0.97
F85FFCWOC 83.62 (18.8) 85.43 (19.2) 1.02 212.87 (47.8) 180.46 (40.5) 0.85 254.50 (57.2) 243.33 (54.7) 0.96
Average — — 0.97 — — 0.92 — — 0.98
Standard — — 0.02 — — 0.07 — — 0.03
deviation

Table 3—Comparison of experimental and predicted crack spacing data

Spacing of flexural cracks, mm (in.)
At first crack* At yielding of HYSD* At ultimate*
Beam
designation S0/cr-expt S0/cr-model S0/y-expt S0/y-model S0/u-expt S0/u-model
F35FOCWOC 67 to 206 (2.63 to 8.11) 88.05 (3.46) 49 to 98 (1.92 to 3.85) 70.43 (2.77) 49 to 98 (1.92 to 3.85) 66.28 (2.60)
F65FOCWOC 63 to 226 (2.48 to 8.89)11 119.55 (4.70) 46 to 110 (1.81 to 4.33) 97.57 (3.84) 46 to 110 (1.81 to 4.33) 90.17 (3.55)
F85FOCWOC 63 to 233 (2.48 to 9.17)13 135.35 (5.32) 46 to 120 (1.81 to 4.72) 111.69 (4.39) 42 to 120 (1.65 to 4.72) 103.09 (1.93)
F35FFCWFC 53 to 258 (2.08 to 10.15) 63.69 (2.50) 43 to 90 (1.69 to 3.54) 51.39 (2.02) 34 to 90 (1.33 to 3.54) 49.19 (1.93)
F65FFCWFC 54 to 241 (2.12 to 9.48) 73.62 (2.89) 38 to 98 (1.49 to 3.85) 59.41 (2.33) 32 to 92 (1.25 to 3.62) 57.21 (2.25)
F85FFCWFC 52 to 252 (2.04 to 9.92) 77.56 (3.05) 34 to 94 (1.33 to 3.70) 62.79 (2.47) 30 to 86 (1.18 to 3.38) 60.74 (2.39)
F35FOCWFC 50 to 221 (1.97 to 8.70) 63.36 (2.49) 38 to 110 (1.49 to 4.33) 50.84 (2.00) 30 to 98 (1.49 to 3.85) 49.13 (1.93)
F65FOCWFC 58 to 227 (2.28 to 8.93) 73.65 (2.89) 41 to 102 (1.61 to 4.02) 59.53 (2.34) 36 to 91 (1.41 to 3.58) 57.35 (2.25)
F85FOCWFC 58 to 234 (2.28 to 9.21) 77.28 (3.04) 40 to 106 (1.57 to 4.17) 62.62 (2.46) 33 to 96 (1.29 to 3.77) 60.73 (2.39)
F35FFCWOC 61 to 212 (2.40 to 8.34) 90.92 (3.57) 48 to 98 (1.88 to 3.85) 72.78 (2.86) 45 to 88 (1.77 to 3.46) 67.92 (2.67)
F65FFCWOC 65 to 247 (2.56 to 9.72)12 120.68 (4.75) 47 to 96 (1.85 to 3.77) 98.62 (3.88) 47 to 96 (1.85 to 3.77) 90.70 (3.57)
F85FFCWOC 62 to 254 (2.44 to 10.0)13 135.83 (5.34) 45 to 110 (1.77 to 4.33) 111.67 (4.39) 45 to 110 (1.77 to 4.33) 103.90 (4.09)
*For load values, refer to Table 2.

higher in steel fiber-reinforced concrete when compared to COMPARISONS OF PREDICTIONS AND

the plain matrix having no fibers.13 This results in a better
stress transfer between concrete and the reinforcement.
The width of the cracks at the tension face of the beam at
various stages of loading is presented in Table 4. In initial stages
of crack formation, not much variation was observed in the
measured crack width for the beams with fiber reinforcement
when compared with the corresponding control beams
having no fiber reinforcement. The effect of the addition of
fiber was found to be significant at stages corresponding to
yielding of HYSD bars and ultimate. The addition of steel
fibers over only the web portion (tension zone) of the T-beams
reduced the width of the cracks significantly. However, the
crack width in beams having no fiber reinforcement and
beams having fiber reinforcement only in the flange were
found to be of the same order. The test results indicated that
the addition of the fibers in the web portion of the partially
prestressed T-beam is an appropriate solution for the
economical usage of the fibers. Though it is difficult to use
two types of concrete in general site work, this will be an
attractive option for the precast rectangular prestressed
beam construction with a cast-in-place slab.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The load at various stages was computed using the
proposed model and is presented in Table 2. As observed in
the experiment, the proposed model predicts a higher load
value for beams with higher grades of concrete when
compared with the corresponding beams of lower grades of
concrete at all stages of loading. The average values of the
ratio of the predicted load to the experimental load across the
entire test specimens was computed and presented in Table 2.
These ratios were found to be 0.97, 0.92, and 0.98 with a
standard deviation of 0.02, 0.07, and 0.03, respectively,
corresponding to the various loading stages, namely first
cracking stage, yielding of HYSD bars, and ultimate stage. This
indicates that the present model is able to predict the load in
the partially prestressed beams of concrete strength grades
35, 54, and 85 MPa (5.07, 9.42, and 12.32 ksi) quite accurately.
The predicted values of critical crack spacing in the
prestressed beam specimens at different loading stages are
presented in Table 3. The predicted spacing of the cracks in
beams of higher grade concrete was found to be greater than
that of the corresponding beams of lower strength grade at

574 ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006

Table 4—Comparison of experimental and predicted crack width data
Width of flexural cracks at extreme tensile fiber of beam, mm (in.)
At first crack* At yielding of HYSD* At ultimate*
Beam
designation wm/cr-expt wm/cr-model wm/y-expt wm/y-model wm/u-expt wm/u-model

F35FOCWOC 0.02 to 0.03 0.023 (0.0009) 0.35 to 0.41 0.335 (0.013) 1.00 to 1.30 1.25 (0.049)
(0.00078 to 0.00118) (0.013 to 0.016) (0.039 to 0.051)
F65FOCWOC 0.02 to 0.04 0.032 (0.0012) 0.43 to 0.48 0.462 (0.018) 2.10 to 2.50 2.32 (0.091)
(0.00078 to 0.00157) (0.016 to 0.018) (0.082 to 0.098)

F85FOCWOC 0.02 to 0.04 0.036 (0.0014) 0.50 to 0.56 0.529 (0.020) 2.50 to 2.80 2.78 (0.109)
(0.00078 to 0.00157) (0.019 to 0.022) (0.098 to 0.110)

F35FFCWFC 0.02 to 0.03 0.022 (0.0008) 0.20 to 0.23 0.245 (0.0096) 0.98 to 1.10 1.03 (0.040)
(0.00078 to 0.00118) (0.0078 to 0.0090) (0.038 to 0.043)
0.02 to 0.03 0.23 to 0.27 1.30 to 1.50
F65FFCWFC (0.00078 to 0.00157) 0.025 (0.0009) (0.0090 to 0.010) 0.282 (0.011) (0.051 to 0.059) 1.55 (0.061)

F85FFCWFC 0.02 to 0.04 0.027 (0.0010) 0.26 to 0.31 0.299 (0.011) 1.40 to 1.50 1.53 (0.060)
(0.00078 to 0.00157) (0.010 to 0.012) (0.055 to 0.059)

F35FOCWFC 0.02 to 0.04 0.022 (0.0008) 0.21 to 0.26 0.243 (0.0095) 0.95 to 1.20 0.84 (0.033)
(0.00078 to 0.00157) (0.0082 to 0.010) (0.037 to 0.047)

F65FOCWFC 0.02 to 0.03 0.025 (0.0009) 0.22 to 0.32 0.283 (0.011) 1.20 to 1.40 1.39 (0.054)
(0.00078 to 0.00118) (0.0086 to 0.012) (0.047 to 0.055)

F85FOCWFC 0.02 to 0.03 0.026 (0.0010) 0.25 to 0.31 0.297 (0.011) 1.40 to 1.55 1.53 (0.060)
(0.00078 to 0.00118) (0.0098 to 0.012) (0.55 to 0.061)

F35FFCWOC 0.02 to 0.04 0.024 (0.0009) 0.32 to 0.37 0.346 (0.013) 1.50 to 1.70 1.57 (0.061)
(0.00078 to 0.00157) (0.012 to 0.014) (0.059 to 0.066)
0.03 to 0.04 0.41 to 0.49 2.30 to 2.60
F65FFCWOC (0.00118 to 0.00157) 0.032 (0.0012) (0.016 to 0.019) 0.467 (0.018) (0.090 to 0.102) 2.61 (0.102)

F85FFCWOC 0.03 to 0.05 0.036 (0.0014) 0.50 to 0.59 0.529 (0.020) 2.40 to 2.70 2.78 (0.109)
(0.00118 to 0.00196) (0.019 to 0.023) (0.094 to 0.106)
*For load values, refer to Table 2.

the various load stages. This may be due to the fact that the
spacing of the critical cracks in partially prestressed beams is
derived as a function of two concrete strength parameters
(Eq. (3)), namely the tensile strength of the uncracked
concrete σtF and the pullout strength of fiber σFp. The tensile
strength of the concrete also increases with an increase in its
compressive strength (Eq. (15)). In general, the spacing of
the cracks predicted using the proposed model seems to be
comparable with the range of values obtained in the experiment,
particularly at yielding and at ultimate load stages.
The width of the cracks in the test beams was computed
using Eq. (5) and presented in Table 4. The present model
given by Eq. (5) computes the width of the stabilized crack as a
function of the spacing of the cracks S0, strain in the
deformed bar εsi, beam geometry such as the over all height Fig. 11—Comparison of maximum width of crack in beams
of the beam h, the effective depth of the deformed bar dsi, (85 MPa) observed with predicted results.
and the neutral axis depth. As seen in the experiment, a lower
value was predicted for the width of the cracks in beams width of the cracks predicted using the proposed model,
having fiber reinforcement in the tension zone (web) when however, was found to be in the range of values observed in the
compared with the corresponding beams having no fiber experiment (Table 4). Figure 11 compares the maximum
reinforcement in the tension zone. The beams of higher value of the crack width observed in the experiment with the
strength grades have higher load carrying capacity at various predicted crack width. For plain concrete having no fibers, the
stages when compared with the corresponding beams of post-cracking stiffness is assumed to be void in the present
lower strength grades (Table 2). Thus, at each load stage analysis. Hence, the predicted value of the crack widths was
reported in Table 4, the reinforcing bar strain in the high found to be higher than the experimental results for the beams
strength concrete beam is relatively higher than that in the with plain concrete having no fibers in the tension zone
beams of lower strength grades. Hence, the width of the (Fig. 11). Figure 11 indicates that the proposed model
crack predicted for a given load stage using the proposed predicted the crack width of fiber-reinforced concrete T-beams
model for the beams of higher strength grades was found to quite accurately.
be greater than that in the corresponding beams of lower
grades. The variation between the predicted values of crack CONCLUSIONS
width and spacing when compared with the range of values Based on the observations of the present analytical and
observed in the experiment can be attributed to the variation in experimental investigation on the partially prestressed T-beam
the bond-slip of reinforcement assumed in the model when without and with fiber reinforcement in partial and full
compared with what may be present in beam specimens. The depth, the following conclusions were derived.

ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006 575

 1. Prestressed beams of concrete grades 35, 54, and 85 MPa 4. Desayi, P., “Determination of Maximum Crack Width in Reinforced
(5.07, 9.42, and 12.32 ksi) tested in this study, by addition of Concrete Member,” ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 73, No. 8, Aug. 1976,
pp. 473-477.
fibers, were found to be an effective way of controlling the 5. Swamy, R. N.; Al-Taan, S. A.; and Ali, S. A. R., “Steel Fibers for
width of the cracks; Controlling Cracking and Deflection,” Concrete International, V. 1, No. 8,
2. The width of the cracks developed in beams having Aug. 1979, pp. 41-49.
fiber reinforcement only in the web portion was observed to 6. Swamy, R. N., and Al-Taan, S. A., “Deformation and Ultimate Strength in
be close to that in beams having fiber reinforcement in the Flexure of Reinforced Concrete Beams Made with Steel Fiber Concrete,” ACI
JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 78, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1981, pp. 395-405.
full section. This indicates that the presence of fibers in the 7. Tan, K. H., and Paramasivam, P., “Cracking Characteristics of
tension zone (web portion) is an effective and economical Reinforced Steel Fiber Concrete Beams under Short- and Long-Term
way of controlling the crack width. Although the use of two Loading,” Advanced Cement Based Materials, V. 2, 1995, pp. 127-137.
types of concrete such as the one with fiber reinforcement in 8. Vandewalle, L., “Cracking Behavior of Concrete Beams Reinforced
the web and the other without fiber reinforcement in the with a Combination of Ordinary Reinforcement and Steel Fibers,” Materials
and Structures, RILEM, V. 33, Apr. 2000, pp. 164-170.
flange is difficult in the site construction, the present 9. Padmarajaiah, S. K., and Ramaswamy, A., “Crack Width Prediction
approach would be an attractive option for the precast for High Strength Concrete Fully and Partially Prestressed Beams Containing
rectangular beam with cast-in-place slab-type construction; and Steel Fibers,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 98, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2001,
3. The predicted value of crack spacing and crack width of the pp. 852-861.
10. Al-Taan, S. A., and Al-Feel, J. R., “Prediction of Crack Widths in
partially prestressed concrete beams at various stages of loading Fibrous Reinforced Concrete Members,” Fiber Reinforced Cements and
fall within the range of values observed in the experiment. Concrete: Recent Developments, Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd., 1989,
pp. 209-218.
NOTATION 11. Beeby, A. W., “The Influence of the Parameter φ/ρeff on Crack
Aps, As = area of prestressing steel, deformed bars in longitudinal direction Widths,” Structural Concrete, V. 5, No. 2, pp. 71-83.
a = shear span length of beam 12. Kankam, C. K., “Relationship of Bond Stress, Steel Stress and Slip
bf = width of flange of T-beam section of Reinforced Concrete,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, V. 123,
bw = width of web of the T-beam section No. 1, 1997, pp. 79-85.
d = effective depth of beam section 13. Rotasy, F. S., and Hartwich, K., “Bond of Deformed Reinforced Bar
EcF = initial tangent modulus of fiber-reinforced concrete in compression Embedded Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete,” International Journal of
EF = modulus of elasticity of fiber Cement and Light Weight Concrete, V. 10, No. 3, Aug. 1988, pp. 151-158.
EtF = initial tangent modulus of fiber-reinforced concrete in tension 14. Edwards, A. D., and Yannopoulos, P. J., “Local Bond Stress to Slip
fcu′ = cube compressive strength of concrete Relationships for Hot Rolled Deformed and Mild Steel Plain Bars,” ACI
′
fcyF = cylinder compressive strength of fiber-reinforced concrete JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 76, No. 3, Mar. 1979, pp. 405-420.
f0tF = direct tensile strength of fiber-reinforced concrete 15. Carreria, D. J., and Chu, K. H., “Stress-Strain Relationship for Plain
f1tF = stress in concrete owing to commencement of fiber pullout Concrete in Compression,” ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 82, No. 6, Nov.-
mechanism Dec. 1985, pp. 797-804.
fcrF = cracking strength of fiber-reinforced concrete 16. Thomas, J., and Ramaswamy, A., “A Comparative Study on the
fpy, fsy = yield strength of prestressing steel (1440 MPa), deformed bar Properties of Fiber Reinforced High Strength Concrete,” Proceedings of the
(435 MPa) ICFRC International Conference on Fiber Composites, High-Performance
h = overall height of beam section Concrete, and Smart Materials, India, Jan. 2004, pp. 315-325.
Lf = length of fiber 17. Thomas, J., and Ramaswamy, A., “Stress-Strain Behavior of Steel
Mu = ultimate moment of resistance of beam Fiber Reinforced High Strength Concrete,” First CUSAT National Conference
RI = fiber reinforcing index (equal to Vf [Lf /φf]) on Recent Advances in Civil Engineering, India, Mar. 2004, pp. 121-128.
S0 = spacing of successive stabilized flexural crack in beam (Fig. 4(a)) 18. Balaguru, P. N., and Shah, S. P., Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites,
Vf = volume fraction of fibers with respect to volume of concrete McGraw Hill Inc., New York, 1992, 532 pp.
xu = depth of neutral axis 19. Lok, T. S., and Pei, J. S., “Flexural Behavior of Steel Fiber-Reinforced
βc = concrete parameter for compressive stress-strain response Concrete,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, V. 10, No. 2,
ε0cF = strain at peak compressive stress of fiber-reinforced concrete 1998, pp. 86-97.
ε0tF = strain in concrete corresponding to stress f0tF 20. Worner, J. D., and Muller, M., “Procedure for the Calculation of
ε1tF = strain in concrete corresponding to stress f1tF Fiber-Reinforced Concrete for Moments and Normal Forces,” Thin
ε2tF = strain in concrete at which fiber pullout mechanism stops Reinforced Concrete Products and Systems, SP-146, P. Balaguru, ed.,
contributing American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 1994, pp. 139-156.
εcc = strain at extreme compression fiber 21. Zhuang, Y. P.; Jiang, J. J.; Jing, S. Y.; and Ye, Z. M., Basic Element
φf = diameter of fiber Design for Steel Reinforced Concrete Structures, Earthquake Press,
ηbF = bond efficiency factor for fiber Beijing, China, 1990, 576 pp.
ϕ = factor correlating moment M with corresponding reinforcing bar 22. Souroushian, P., and Lee, C. D., “Distribution and Orientation of
bond stress of fbi Fibers in Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 87,
σFp = average stress in cracked fiber-reinforced concrete (Fig. 4(c)) No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1990, pp. 433-440.
σtF = average stress in uncracked fiber-reinforced concrete (Fig. 4(c)) 23. Marti, P.; Pfyl, T.; Sigrist, V.; and Ulaga, T., “Harmonized Test
τbF = pullout bond shear strength of fiber Procedure for Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete Beams,” ACI Materials
Journal, V. 96, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 1999, pp. 676-685.
REFERENCES 24. Narayanan, R., and Darwish, I. Y. S., “Use of Steel Fibers as Shear
1. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Reinforcement,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 84, No. 3, May-June 1987,
Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary (318R-02),” American Concrete pp. 216-227.
Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 2002, 443 pp. 25. Hanager, C. H., “Ultimate Strength of Reinforced Steel Fibrous
2. BS 8110-1:1997, “Structural Use of Concrete Part 1—Code of Practice Concrete Beams, Fiber Reinforced Materials: Design and Engineering
for Design and Construction (R),” British Standard Institution, London, Applications,” Institution of Civil Engineers, London, 1977, pp. 165-173.
1997, 168 pp. 26. Mirza, S. M., and Houde, J., “Study of Bond Stress-Slip Relationship
3. IS 1343, “Code of Practices for Prestressed Concrete,” Bureau of in Reinforced Concrete,” ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 76, No. 1, Jan.
Indian Standards, New Delhi, India, 1980, 62 pp. 1979, pp. 19-45.

576 ACI Structural Journal/July-August 2006