Effects on M Industr · (a) To study the mechanical properties of SFRC i.e. compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, and flexural strength and Modulus of Elasticity of grade

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

The Twel

Effe

U

Abstract

Five groups percentages: aspect ratio, lSFs in concrestrength (fct), cubes of 100 500 mm werewithout SFs wsteel fibres. Tconcrete for t

© 2011 Pub Keywords: S

1. Introdu

Concrete advantages. temperatureeconomical associated

a Correspondinb Presenter: E-m

lfth East As

ects on MFibres

UTM Faculty of C

of concrete gra0% (as control/d = 80 with 0ete on its mechflexural tensil 100 100 m

e prepared and were determine

These relationshthese measured

lished by Else

Steel fibres, m

uction

is one of theThe ability o

, required lessmaterial as cwith creep

g author: E-mail mail address: izni

sia-Pacific C

Mechanis AdditioIBRAHIM

Civil Engineering,

ade C25 were l specimen), 0.75 mm diamet

hanical propertie strength (ft) a

mm, four cylindtested at 7, 14

ed in a comparahips were experproperties.

evier Ltd.

mechanical pro

e most importof concrete itss maintenance

compared to aand drying

address: [email protected]

Conference

cal Propon to No

M I.S.a and C

Universiti Tekno

produced with.50%, 0.75%, ter and hooked es were measurand also the Mders of 150 mm4 and 28 days. Tative way by derimentally deter

operties, concr

ant materials self can be cae are among thall other availa

shrinkage w

[email protected]

on Structur

perties oformal WCHE BAK

ologi Malaysia, 8

h the addition o1.00% and 1.2at both ends wred for the cub

Modulus of Elasm diameter 30The mechanicaeveloping relatrmined to revea

rete strength,

in the construast in any shapthe obvious adable materials

which induce

com

ral Engineer

f IndustrWeight Co

KAR, M. B

81310 UTM Skud

of steel fibres 25% by absolu

were used in thibe compressive sticity in compr00 mm long anal properties of ionships betweal the quantitati

normal weigh

uctions nowadpe, excellent rdvantages. Cos. Yet, concre

to cracking

ring and Co

rialised Soncrete .b

ai, Johor, Malays

(SFs) at differte concrete wes study. The efstrength (fcu), sression. For ea

nd four prisms ograde C25 conen fcu, ft, fct andve effects of ad

ht concrete.

days that promresistant to w

oncrete is alsoete is a brittleg problems a

onstruction

Steel

sia.

rent volumetriceight. SFs withffects of addingsplitting tensileach group, nineof 100 100 ncrete with andd percentage ofdditional SFs to

mises a lot ofwater and higho known as ane material andand concrete

c h g e e

d f o

f h n d e

1877–7058 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.07.329

Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2616–2626

Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

I.S. IBRAHIM and M.B CHE BAKAR/ Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2616–2626 2617

deteriorations. Adding steel fibres (SFs) in the concrete mix produces new kind of concrete known as steel fibre reinforced concrete (SFRC). The endeavour looked as a better idea to prevent shrinkage cracking and control of early thermal contraction right after placing the fresh concrete in the formwork. Among other advantages, SFRC increases in concrete toughness, energy absorption capacity, tensile strength and improves concrete durability.

SFRC had been applied with an increasing rates in the constructions nowadays i.e. ground bearing floor slabs (by enhancing load bearing capacity especially for those large slabs of factories and warehouse), heavy duty pavements for airports, docks and harbours, tunnel linings and prestressed fiber reinforced concrete (e.g. hollow core slabs). The main point concerned in SFRC mixes is the mechanical properties which consist of compressive, tensile, flexural and shear strength. Also, creep and shrinkage together with Modulus of Elasticity might also be included. Theoretically, there are three (3) parameters which influence the mechanical properties of SFRC (Xu and Shi 2009); (i) SFs itself by considering type, geometry, aspect ratio, volume fraction, orientation and distribution of SFs in concrete, (ii) matrix by considering strength and maximum aggregate size used, water/cement ratio, type of cement and supplementary cementitious material, and (iii) specimen by considering the size, geometry and method of preparation of the specimen.

Therefore, this study is conducted to achieve several objectives: (a) To study the mechanical properties of SFRC i.e. compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, and

flexural strength and Modulus of Elasticity of grade C25 concrete with five (5) different SFs volumetric percentages of 0%, 0.5%, 0.75%, 1.0% and 1.25% by absolute concrete weight.

(b) To determine the mechanical properties of SFRC and the relationship between them.

2. Related works

In 2004, Roesler et al. studied the fracture behaviour of plain and fibre reinforced concrete slab under monotonic loading. The primary objective of the study was to compare the various cracking strengths i.e. tensile, flexure and ultimate strength of concrete slab and small scale test beam. A total of five (5) slabs were cast where (a) two slabs contained discrete steel fibre (crimped and hooked end) with two different fibre content, (b) two slabs contained synthetic macrofibre also at two different fibre content, and (c) control specimen of plain concrete slab with 0% fibres. They found that the discrete fibres improved the load-deformation characteristics compared with plain concrete slab. The monotonic fracture test demonstrates that the type of fibres and content did not affect the tensile cracking load of the concrete slab. Discrete fibres contribute to the increase of between 1.8 and 2.2 times in flexural strength compared with either the synthetic macrofibre or the plain ones. Other than that, discrete fibres contribute 1.4 times greater flexural strength compared with plain concrete, and therefore increase the flexural cracking load between 25 to 55%. The study also found that the type of fibre (material, aspect ratio and geometry) and content were the main factors which increase the ultimate load-carrying capacity of the concrete slabs. Further comparison with synthetic macrofibres found that steel fibres has better bridging effect, thus, increased the ultimate load-carrying capacity of the concrete slab.

A year later in 2005, Khaloo and Afshari carry out experimental works on small SFRC slabs to study the flexural behaviour with varied fibre length (25 mm and 35 mm length), volumetric percentages of fibres (ratio of the volume of fibres to the volume of matrix between 0% and 1.5%) and concrete strength (cylindrical concrete strength of 30 MPa and 45 MPa at 28 days). They found that the rate of improvement in energy absorption reduced with the increased in fibre content ranging from 1.0% to 1.5%. Also, longer steel fibre with higher aspect ratio provides higher energy absorption of SFRC. They recommended that the addition of steel fibres in concrete must be within the volumetric percentages of

2618 I.S. IBRAHIM and M.B CHE BAKAR/ Procedia Engineering 14 (2011) 2616–2626

between 0.7properties owith three (3where SFs dcrack forma

The correconcluded thand also betaspect ratio also recommnecessary dupolypropyle

It was alsbetween 0.7physical diffwell as decrfor SFs dosstrength. Yeconcrete wit

3. Researc

Normal wmechanical samples of 1mm diameteand (3) testsprepared wi0.50%, 0.75shown in Fig

75% and 1.75%f reinforced c3) different SFdosages of 30 ation, crack siz

elation amonghat strong cortween splittinand volume f

mended that inue to inapplic

ene fibre reinfo

so observed th75% and 2.0%fficulties in prrease in the cosage less thanet, there are noth less than 1.2

ch methodolo

weight concreproperties of

100 100 1er 300 mm ls on 100 10th five differe

5%, 1.00% ang. 2 with diam

%. Later in 20concrete (RC) F dosages of kg/m3 is bett

ze and crack p

g mechanical prrelations wereng tensile strenfraction in the nvestigations cability of preorced concrete

hat the optimu%. Obviously,

oviding a homompressive strn 1.0%, it alsoo particular st25% dosage o

ogy

ete with gradef SFRC. The 00 mm for coong for splitti

00 500 mm pent volumetricnd 1.25% by meter of 0.75 m

(a)

007, Altun et abeams. RC b

0, 30 and 60 kter than 60 kgpropagation fo

properties of e found betwength and flexurange of 0.25on potential cevious publishe (PFRC) and

um volumetricSFs dosage h

mogenous distrength as como becomes intudies that conof SFs.

e C25 was prtests conductmpressive streing tensile streprisms for flec percentages absolute con

mm and 60 m

al. studied thebeams of gradkg/m3. They c

g/m3 in terms or both concre

SFRC was ineen compressiural strength

5 – 0.5, 55 – 8correlations amhed empirical

d glass fibre re

c percentageshigher than 2.0tribution of SF

mpared with thneffective duencentrate into

repared in thited includes (ength, (2) testength and statexural strength

of SFs i.e. 0%ncrete weight.

mm long hooke

(b

e effects of adde C20 and C3came out withof concrete to

ete strengths.

nvestigated byive strength anfor SFRC wi

80 and 0.5% mong mechanl relations proeinforced conc

s of SFs dosag0% become inFs throughouthe plain concre to the decreo the effects o

is study in ord(see Fig. 1); ts on cylindrictic Modulus ofh. Altogether % (plain conc The type of

ed ends, giving

)

dding SF on th30 concretes wh some concluoughness, flex

Xu and Shi ind splitting teth water-ceme 2.0%, respec

nical propertieoposed to normcrete (GFRC).

ges must be inneffectively bt the structurarete (Altun et ase in tensilen mechanical

der to determ(1) tests on c

cal concrete saf Elasticity in five concrete rete as contro

f SFs used in g an aspect ra

he mechanicalwere prepareduding remarksxural strength,

in 2009. Theyensile strength

ment ratio, SFsctively. It wases of SFRC isrmal concrete,.

n the range ofbecause of theal members as

al. 2007). Ase and flexurall properties of

mine the staticcube concreteamples of 150compression,batches were

ol specimens),this study is

atio (l/d) of 80

l d s ,

y h s s s ,

f e s s l f

c e 0 , e , s 0.


Figure 1: Type compression, an

Figure 2: Type of steel f

The methin designingin the range to increase tthe same forof SFs dosagwere added minutes as rthe mixing p

Nine cubvibrator. Allday i.e. 7, 1flexural stre5 2009.

For the Mcylindrical s(as basic str

of tests conducteand (d) flexural str

fibres used: (a) steel fibres g

hod of concretg normal conc

of 30 – 60 mthe workabilitr all five concges. Table 1 glast to the frerecommendedprocess. bes, four cylinl samples wer

14 and 28 dayngth were in a

Modulus of Especimens. Thress). The stre

(c

ed; (a) cube comprength test

(a)

glued together in packing, a

te mix design crete mixes (T

mm and super-pty of the fresh crete batches igives the mix psh concrete in

d by RILEM (

nders and thrre cured in ways. The methoaccordance w

Elasticity, a phe specimens ess was then in

)

pressive strength t

and (b) detail dimension of

for plain concTeychenné et aplasticizer admconcrete. All

including the proportions fo

n the drum mix(RILEM TC1

ee beams werater at controlod of testing iith BS EN 12

pair of strainwere placed i

ncreased at a

test, (b) splitting

f the steel fibre

crete with no al. 1988). Themixture was al proportions oone with the

or the concretexer at a rate o62-TDF 2000

re cast from l temperature in compressiv390-3 2009, B

n gauges was in a compressconstant rate

(d)

tensile strength t

SFs dosage we controlled sladded during tof concrete miadded 0.50%e mixes. Duri

of 20 kg/min, r0). Fig. 3 show

each batch anof between 1

ve strength, spBS EN 12390-

installed on sion machine of 1.0 N/(mm

est, (c) Modulus

(b)

was according tlump of fresh the mixing proixes were rem, 0.75%, 1.00ng the mixingrotating at higws the SFRC

nd compacted9oC and 21oC

plitting tensile-6 2009 and B

the opposite under stress o

m2s) until the s

of Elasticity in

to the methodconcrete was

ocess in ordermained exactly0% and 1.25%g process, SFsgh speed for 5

at the end of

d using pokerC until the teste strength andBS EN 12390-

e sides of theof 0.5 N/mm2

stress is equal

d s r y

% s 5 f

r t d -

e 2 l


to one-third decreasing irate before t1881-121 19

Figure 3: Physi

Table 1: Mix pr

Con

cret

e B

atch

Batch 1 (Plain concreBatch 2 (0.50Batch 3 (0.75Batch 4 (1.00Batch 5 (1.25

4. Result

The micrcracking effspecimens, occurred in up at ultimacompletely d

of the comprt back to the bthe specimens983.

ical appearance o

roportions for con

Des

ign

Con

cret

e C

ompr

essi

ve

ete)

250%)5%)0%)5%)

and discussio

romechanical ffects, ductilityacting as a reSFRC specimate load). Fordifferent with

ressive strengtbasic stress. Ts were compre

of fresh SFRC in t

ncrete mixes

Cub

e St

reng

th a

t 28

-day

s (N

/mm

2 )

Tot

al V

olum

e 3

5 0.0

on

advantages foy and energyeinforcement

mens are smallr example, th

h the plain con

th of the concrTwo additionalessed until fai

the drum mixer

(m3 )

Ord

inar

y P

ortl

and

Cem

ent

(kg)

65 22.0

or adding SFsy absorption. and help for

ler in size comhe type of faincrete. Plain co

rete. The stresl preloading cilure. The test

(kg)

Fin

e A

ggre

gate

(k

g)

Coa

rse

Agg

rega

te

68.2 4

s in plain conThe SFs whbetter distrib

mpared with pilure in componcrete cube

ss was maintaycles were repprocedures w

ggg

(max

. si

ze 1

0 m

m)

(kg)

Wat

er (

kg)

49.4 15.0

ncrete obvioushen uniformlybution of stresplain concrete pression for Ssamples fails

ained for 60 sepeated at the s

were in accord

Stee

l fib

res

(kg)

0.00

0.78 1.17 1.56 1.95

ly can be seey dispersed thsses. Therefor(and even moFRC cube sp(see Fig. 4a) a

econds beforesame constant

dance with BS

Wat

er-c

emen

t R

atio

Supe

r-pl

asti

cize

r (

l)0.68 45.

en by its post-hroughout there, the cracksore will breakpecimens wasas satisfied in

e t

S

(ml)

0

-e s k s n


BS EN 1239top and bott(see Fig. 4bobserved twtest. For plathere was oloading platstrength testbending at uSFRC beamthe failure wthe additioninterfacial sbrittle mater

The resuElasticity arvaried SFs dspecimens w0.75% and compressivestrength of induce lowecrack controsplitting tensplitting tenincreased bpercentages SFRC is beabsorbing thbetween convolumetric p

Figure 4: Failur

90-3 2009 whtom faces whib) with all fouwo types of failain concrete, only a single te. The crackt also resultedultimate load

ms failed, apprwas sudden ann of SFs to coshear strengthrial which comults for compre summariseddosages werewith 0.50% SF1.25%) it sho

e strength with25 N/mm2 at

er compressiveol and energy nsile and beamnsile strengthy 10.94% 14of 0.5%, 0.75

etter than plaihe applied loancrete cube copercentages.

re of cubes in com

here all four ech was in con

ur exposed faclure for the cythe cylindricacrack line oc

k line also cod in two typefor SFRC bearoximately at nd breaks into ncrete will di

h. Apart frommmonly breakpressive strengd in Table 2. e lower than pFs dosages asows constant h various SFs28-days. Bes

e strength but absorption (Wm flexural str

h increased b4.06%, 21.885%, 1.00% anin concrete ead. Fig. 7 anompressive str

(a)

mpression: (a) Pla

exposed faces ntact with the lces bulges andylindrical specal specimens ccurred on thontinued alones of failure aam specimensbeam mid-spatwo parts nea

istribute stressthat, SFs red

k or explode ungth, splitting The cube com

plain concretes compared wi

increased in s dosages is stsides that, it pincrease in to

Wang et al. 20rength, wherey 1.52%, 1.1% and 23.44nd 1.25%, resspecially undd 8 onwards rength, cylind

ain concrete, and

breaks approloading platesd still in contcimens (see Fiwere comple

he cross-sectiong the lengthas shown in

s i.e. only a cran. This was

ar to mid-spanses better thanduce the risknder ultimate tensile stren

mpressive stree. The lowest ith plain conc the cube comtill acceptableproof that the

oughness and p010). Differente both tests r14%, 4.18% 4% at 28-dayspectively. Thder tensile and

were then deder splitting te

d (b) SFRC with 0

ximately equas. Meanwhile,act. The expeig. 5) during t

etely split intoon starting fr

h of the cylinFig. 6. Thererack line deveopposite to p

n at ultimate lon plain concre

ks of catastropload.

ngth, flexural engths at 28-d

compressive crete. As SFs mpressive str

e since they are higher aspecpeak strain of t results were resulted in an

and 6.08% ys for specimhe experimentd flexural loaeveloped to densile strength

(b)

0.75% volumetric

al with little dSFRC cube s

erimental invehe splitting teo two parts, brom the top tndrical specime was no suddloped at the mlain concrete oad. Hence, thete with goodphic failure o

strength anddays for all sp

strength was dosage increa

rength. Howevre higher thanct ratio (i.e. l/f SFRC which obtained from increase in and, the flex

mens with SFal investigatioad where SFsdetermine the h, flexural stre

c percentage

damage to thesamples failedestigation alsoensile strengthbut for SFRCto the bottommen. Flexuralden failure inmoment whenbeams where

his shows thatd bonding andof concrete as

d Modulus ofpecimens with observed forases (betweenver, the cube

n the designedl/d = 80) mayh lead to betterm the cylinderstrength. The

xural strengthFs volumetricon shows thats take part in

relationshipsength and SFs

e d o h C m l n n e t d s

f h r n e d y r r e h c t n s s


Figure 5: Cylin

Figure 6: Flexu

Table 2: Avera

Concrete B

Batch 1(Plain concBatch 2 (0.5Batch 3 (0.7Batch 4 (1.0Batch 5 (1.2

* S

ndrical splitting te

ural failure of bea

age mechanical pr

C

S

Batch 7-

days

1 rete) 19.7

50%) 18.675%) 21.300%) 24.725%) 25.5

Strains gauges

ensile failure: (a)

(a)

ams: (a) Plain con

roperties for conc

Concrete CubCompressiveStrength Test

(N/mm2)

s14-

days 2

d

25.9 3

23.0 3 25.0 3 28.3 3 30.3 3

s were not in g

(a)

Plain concrete, an

ncrete, and (b) SF

crete with differen

beet

CSplitt

St(N

28-days

2

35.1

31.9 32.8 34.2 34.6

good working

and (b) SFRC with

FRC with 0.75% v

nt SF volumetric

Cylinder ting Tensile trengthN/mm2)

28-days

2.63

2.67 2.66 2.74 2.79

condition res

(b)

h 1.0% volumetri

(b

volumetric percen

percentages

FlexuralStrength

7-days

14day

5.3 5.5

5.3 6.34.4 6.64.9 6.55.4 6.9

ulted in lower

ic percentage

b)

ntage

l Tensile (N/mm2)

-ys

28-days

5 6.4

3 7.1 6 7.3 5 7.8 9 7.9

r Modulus of E

Modulus ofElasticity(kN/mm2)

28-days

16.20*

28.90 28.75 32.30 33.65

Elasticity

f


Figure 7: Relat

Figure 8: Relat

Figure 9: Relat

tionship between

tionship between

tionship between

concrete cube co

concrete splitting

concrete flexural

mpressive streng

g tensile strength

l strength (ft) and

gth (fcu) and steel

(fct) and steel fibr

steel fibre percen

fibre percentage

re percentage (%

ntage (%)

(%)

) at 28-days


Figure 10: Rela

Figure 11: Rela

Figure 12: Rela

ationship between

ationship between

ationship between

n concrete splittin

n concrete flexura

n concrete splittin

ng tensile strength

al strength (ft) and

ng tensile strength

h (fct) and cube co

d cube compressi

h (fct) and flexura

ompressive streng

ive strength (fcu)

al strength (ft)

gth (fcu)


The Modulus of Elasticity for SFRC in compression as given in the Table 2 shows an increase in strength as SFs dosages increases. The increasing Modulus of Elasticity in SFRC shows that SFs dosages can absorb higher stress, thus, support the finding by the previous researchers (Khaloo and Afshari 2005) in improving the energy absorptions.

From Fig. 7, it can be observed that all SFRC (except for 0.50% SFs) gained early cube compressive strength at 7-days and even higher than plain concrete. However, the growth rates decreases at 14 and 28 days. For flexural strength (see Fig. 9), plain concrete gained higher early strength but the growth rates decreases at later age. Meanwhile, SFRC specimens show an increase in strength at 28-days and much better than plain concrete. The study also found that both the cube compressive and splitting tensile strengths indicated that there is not much effect for SFRC volumetric percentage less than 1% due to the slow growth strength rates at 28-days. Comparing the results of the cube compressive strength, splitting tensile strength and flexural strength for SFRC with 1.00% and 1.25% of SFs volumetric percentages, the strengths at 28-days are not much differ from each other. Therefore, it can be concluded that SFRC with 1.00% volumetric percentage should be a better choice along with the economical considerations.

As shown in Fig. 10, relationship between concrete splitting tensile strength (fct) and compressive cube strength (fcu) was found. The empirical relation obtained can be expressed as:

fct = 0.40(fcu)0.55 (1)

The coefficient of determination (R2) for this proposed relation is 0.84 which indicates a strong correlation for both parameters involved. Meanwhile in Fig. 11 shows the relationship between concrete flexural strength (ft) and compressive cube strength (fcu). The empirical relationship obtained can be expressed as:

ft = 0.07(fcu)1.33 (2)

The coefficient of determination (R2) for this proposed relation is 1.00 indicating very strong correlation for flexural strength and concrete cube compressive strength. Also, in Fig. 12 shows the relationship between concrete splitting tensile strength (fct) and flexural strength (ft) which can be expressed as:

fct = 1.20(ft)0.41 (3)

The corresponding coefficient of determination (R2) for this proposed relation is 0.82 also suggesting a strong correlation between the splitting tensile strength and flexural strength.

5. Conclusion

The results from the experimental works on the properties of compression, splitting tensile and flexural strengths show SFRC with SFs dosages of 0.50% and 0.75% are merely ineffective because there is not much improvement on the mechanical properties and even for the Modulus of Elasticity as compared with plain concrete. Meanwhile, SFRC with 1.00% and 1.25% SFs resulted in the increase of the splitting tensile strength and flexural strength. However, there is not much improvement in strength for SFs dosage between 1.00% and 1.25%. Clearly, the study shows that SFs dosages with 1.00% are better than 1.25% for SFRC considering the economical factor and ease of work. At 1.25% dosage and for this particular type of SFs used in the study, there was difficulty in casting which can lead to segregation between the concrete matrix and SFs.

This study also found strong correlations between concrete splitting tensile strength (fct), compressive cube strength (fcu) and flexural strength (ft) where R2 were between 0.82 and 1.00 for steel fibres with an aspect ratio of l/d = 80 and volumetric percentage ranging from 0.5% to 1.25%. The quantitative values


for this study can be improved by conducting a study with various types of SFs available in the market i.e. aspect ratios, SFs shapes and different concrete classes i.e. normal concrete or even high strength concrete.

Acknowledgments

The writers wish to acknowledge all technicians at the Department of Structures & Materials, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia for their invaluable help and support while conducting this study and also to Timuran Engineering Sdn. Bhd. for supplying the steel fibres.

References

[1] Altun F, Haktanir T, and Ari K. Effects of Steel Fiber Addition on Mechanical Properties of Concrete and RC Beams. Construction and Building Materials. 21 (3); 2007, pp. 654-661.

[2] British Standard Institution. Testing Hardened Concrete, Part 3: Compressive Strength of Test Specimens. London, BS EN 12390; 2009.

[3] British Standard Institution. Testing Hardened Concrete, Part 5: Flexural Strength of Test Specimens. London, BS EN 12390; 2009.

[4] British Standard Institution. Testing Hardened Concrete, Part 6: Tensile Splitting Strength of Test Specimens. London, BS EN 12390; 2009.

[5] British Standard Institution. Testing Concrete, Part 121: Method for Determination of Static Modulus of Elasticity in Compression. London, BS 1881; 1983.

[6] Khaloo AR and Afshari M. Flexural Behaviour of Small Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete Slabs. Cement and Concrete Composites. 27 (1); 2005, pp. 141-149.

[7] RILEM TC162-TDF. Test and Design Methods for Steel Fibre Reinforced Conrete: Bending Test. Mater Struct: 33 (January-February); 2000, pp. 3-5.

[8] RILEM TC162-TDF. Test and Design Methods for Steel Fibre Reinforced Conrete: - Design Method. Mater Struct: 33 (March); 2000, pp. 75-81.

[9] Roesler JR, Lange DA, Altoubat SA, Rieder KA, and Ulreich GR. Fracture of Plain and Fibre-Reinforced Concrete Slabs Under Monotonic Loading. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. 16 (5);2004, pp. 452-460.

[10] Teychenné DC, Franklin RE, and Erntroy HC. Design of Normal Concrete Mixes. Department of the Environment. HMSO, 1988

[11] Wang ZL, Wu J, and Wang JG. Experimental and Numerical Analysis on Effect of Fibre Aspect Ratio on Mechanical Properties of SFRC. Construction and Building Materials. 24 (4); 2010, pp. 559-565

[12] Xu BW and Shi HS. Correlations among Mechanical Properties of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete. Construction and Building Materials. 23 (12); 2009, pp. 3468-3474.

Effects on M Industr · (a) To study the mechanical properties of SFRC i.e. compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, and flexural strength and Modulus of Elasticity of grade

Documents