Construction and Building

Construction and Building Materials 21 (2007) 654661

MATERIALS
www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Eects of steel ber addition on mechanical properties of concrete and RC beams

Fatih Altun *, Tefaruk Haktanir, Kamura Ari
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Erciyes University, 38039 Kayseri, Turkey Received 4 March 2005; received in revised form 22 November 2005; accepted 10 December 2005 Available online 7 February 2006

Abstract C20 and C30 classes of concrete are produced each with addition of Dramix RC-80/0.60-BN type of steel bers (SFs) at dosages of 0 kg/m3, 30 kg/m3, 60 kg/m3, and their compressive strengths, split tensile strength, moduli of elasticity and toughnesses are measured. Nine reinforced concrete (RC) beams of 300 300 2000 mm outer dimensions, designed as tension failure and all having the same steel reinforcement, having SFs at dosages of 0 kg/m3, 30 kg/m3, 60 kg/m3 with C20 class concrete, and nine other RC beams of the same peculiarities with C30 class concrete again designed as tension failure and all having the same reinforcement are produced and tested under simple bending. The load versus mid-span deection relationships of all these RC and steel-ber-added RC (SFARC) beams under simple bending are recorded. First, the mechanical properties of C20 and C30 classes of concrete with no SFs and with SFs at dosages of 30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3 are determined in a comparative way. The exural behaviours and toughnesses of RC and SFARC beams for C20 and C30 classes of concrete are also determined in a comparative way. The experimentally determined (mid-section load)(SFs dosage) and (toughness)(SFs dosage) relationships are given to reveal the quantitative eects of concrete class and SFs dosage on these crucial properties. 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Steel-ber-added concrete; Steel-ber-added reinforced-concrete beams; Simple bending; Toughness; Flexural behaviour

1. Introduction The structural concrete is still the most widely used construction material because it has the lowest (cost)/ (strength) property as compared to all other available materials. Yet, in order to improve some structurally undesirable properties of concrete, addition of: (1) either chemical or mineral admixtures to the Portland cement and (2) steel or carbon bers as another ingredient directly to the concrete batch has long been practiced. Concrete is a brittle material, and usage of steel bers considerably increases its toughness, the energy absorption capacity, among other contributions, like more duc-

Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 352 437 0080; fax: +90 352 437 5784. E-mail address: faltun@erciyes.edu.tr (F. Altun).

tile behaviour prior to the ultimate failure, reduced cracking, and improved durability. Steel-ber-added concrete (SFAC) has been used at an increasing rate in various applications like: mine and tunnel linings, slabs and oors (especially those large slabs of factories on which there are great moving loads), rock slope stabilization, repair mortars, shell domes, refractory linings, dam constructions, composite metal decks, aqueduct rehabilitations, seismic retrottings, repairs and rehabilitations of marine structures, re protection coatings, concrete pipes, and even conventional RC frames because of improved toughnesses against dynamic loads (e.g. as reported by Ocean Heidelberg Cement Group [1]). In a research study, the eect of SFs on cracks in RC beams was investigated, and it was concluded that a SF dosage of 3040 kg/m3 was appropriate to have an appreciable improvement on cracks Dupont and Vandewalle

0950-0618/$ - see front matter 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.12.006

F. Altun et al. / Construction and Building Materials 21 (2007) 654661

655

2. Experimental studies Nomenclature List of symbols Mu : ultimate bending moment, kN m d : deection, mm C20 and C30 were the concrete classes used in all of the experiments, which were of 3 stages: (1) tests on cylindrical concrete samples of 150 300 mm dimensions for compressive strengths, split tensile strengths and moduli of elasticity of plain and SFA concretes, (2) tests on standard 150 150 750 mm prisms for exural strengths and toughnesses of plain and SFA concretes, and (3) simple bending experiments on the beams for ultimate bending moments, crack formations and exural behaviours, ductilities, and toughnesses of prototype RC and SFARC beams. 2.1. Tests on concrete samples C20 and C30 classes of concrete were produced using the veried materials of a well-established ready-mix concrete plant. The saturated surface-dry specic gravities of the sand, medium crushed gravel, and coarse crushed gravel used were 2.60, 2.65, 2.72, respectively. The slump of the fresh concrete was about 150 mm 20 mm, and a super-plasticizer admixture was used in fresh concrete. Table 1 presents the mix recipes of the concrete batches used in the study. The second and third groups of each class of concrete had SFs with dosages of 30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3, while the quantities of the rest of the ingredients were exactly the same for all the 3 groups of concrete. The SFs used in the study were of Dramix RC-80/0.60BN type, each having a diameter of 0.75 mm and a length of 60 mm as shown in Fig. 1, and their tensile strength is 1050 N/mm2. These SFs were added into the drum of the trans-mixer truck at a rate of 20 kg/min, and the drum rotated at high speed for 5 min afterwards as recommended by the pertinent RILEM publications [8,9]. Appearance of one such SFAC batch is shown by the photograph in Fig. 2. Six cylindrical samples of 150 300 mm ( = 6 12 in.) dimensions were taken from each of the 6 batches of concrete used in producing the beams during placement of the fresh concrete in the moulds of the beams. One day later, the moulds of the cylindrical samples were stripped o. All of the 18 RC and SFARC beams and all the 36 cylindrical samples were kept side by side on the oor of the materials laboratory, and all of them were kept

[2]. Paine et al. [3] studied the contribution of SFs of RC beams and determined that a SF dosage of 12% by absolute volume was ideal from that aspect. Ganesan and Shivananda [4] after having performed experiments on SFRC beams with SF dosages of 0.5%, 1%, 1.5% by absolute volume, developed expressions relating the exural crack width to the SF dosage. AlavizadehFarhang [5] performed an experimental study in accordance with the Swedish Standards to determine the eect of SFAC using SFs 30 mm in length and 0.5 mm in diameter with a SF dosage of 60 kg/m3 on the performance of SFRC beams under: (1) static loads and (2) loads incurred because of temperature gradients on SFRC beams. Hartman [6] experimented with 12 dierent SFRC beams produced by SFs of Dramix RC-65/35-BN type with two dierent SF dosages of 60 kg/m3 and 100 kg/m3, and concluded that the ratio of the measured ultimate load to the theoretical ultimate load turned out to be greater with those SFRC beams having a 60 kg/m3 SF dosage. Gopalaratnam et al. [7] studied the eects of dosage, and texture as to whether dented or smooth, of SFs, as well as the eects of rate of loading, and conguration of the setup on toughness of SFARC beams. Browsing through the relevant literature, it can be observed that the optimum SF dosage for SFARC beams should be within the range of 12.5% by absolute volume. A SF dosage smaller than 1% becomes ineective and dosages beyond 2.5% become also ineective mainly due to the physical diculties in providing a homogeneous distribution of the bers within the concrete causing an appreciable drop in the compressive strength as compared to the plain concrete of the same class. Presently, a tangible guide for a best SF dosage for SFARC beams does not exist, and a comprehensive economic study for usage of SFs in the concrete of RC beams is not available, either. All the previous studies are performed with a single class of concrete, and the eects of SFs on dierent classes have not been reported. The objectives of this study have been: (1) to determine the stressstrain behaviour of C20 and C30 classes of concrete with three dierent SF dosages of 0, 30, 60 kg/m3, and (2) to determine the exural behaviour of tension-failure RC beams produced by these three dierent SFA concretes along with their ultimate loads and toughnesses, and hence to shed some light as to the eectiveness of SFA concrete both in plain form and in conventional RC beams.

Table 1 Mix recipes for the 1 m3 batches of the C20 and C30 classes of concrete used in the study Ingredient Amount (kg) C20 Mix water Portland cement (%ASTM Type I) Filler (saturated surface-dry, SSD) Natural sand (SSD) Crushed medium aggregate (SSD) Crushed coarse aggregate (SSD) 162 300 386 472 467 559 C30 170 385 357 448 455 530

656

F. Altun et al. / Construction and Building Materials 21 (2007) 654661

40 35

Compressive Stress (MPa)

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008

C30 No SFs C30 with 30 kg/m3 of SFs C30 with 60 kg/m3 of SFs C20 No SFs C20 with 30 kg/m3 of SFs C20 with 60 kg/m3 of SFs

Fig. 1. Shape and dimensions of one of the steel bers used in the study.

Compressive Strain
Fig. 3. The average stressstrain relationships determined experimentally for plain concrete, SFAC with a SF dosage of 30 kg/m3, and SFAC with a SF dosage of 60 kg/m3, with both the C20 and C30 classes of concrete used in the study.

Fig. 2. Appearance of one of the batches of SFAC while fresh.

thoroughly covered by burlap. Periodically all the beams and samples were splashed with plenty of water while covered up under burlap, and they stayed exactly for a period of 28 days under these conditions. At the end of 28 days, a standard compressometer ring with a precise strain-gauge was mounted to each one of three cylindrical samples, which was next crushed in a compression machine at the load rate of about 0.25 N/mm2 per second. The loads and the deformations of the sample were accurately recorded at 20 kN load increments up to the maximum load and at smaller decrements beyond the peak down until full failure. After having computed the recorded stress and strain values from the measured loads and deformations data by dividing the loads and deformations by the cross-sectional area of the cylindrical sample and by the initial length between the screws of the compressometer embedded into the sample, respectively, the resultant stressstrain relationship of each sample was hence determined. The slope of the tangent drawn to the stressstrain curve of each concrete at the point of 40% of the ultimate strength was recorded as the tangent modulus of elasticity of the concrete. A total of 6 stressstrain curves of all concrete combinations, each of which is the average of three curves of 150 300 mm cylindrical samples, are shown in Fig. 3. The other three cylindrical samples were subjected to the standard split loading experiment in the same compression machine in accordance with ASTM C 496 [10]. The exural strengths and toughnesses of a total of 6 combinations of plain and SFA concretes were measured in the standard test setup on 150 150 750 mm prisms [11]. Each such prism was subjected to the four-point-loading experiment at a rate of 1 mm/min of mid-span deection in a displacement-controlled prism-loading frame in

accordance with ASTM C-1018-92 [11]. An instant of one of these tests is shown in Fig. 4. As will be reported in Section 3 below, the results of these tests turned out to be within acceptable ranges, and the study proceeded to the nal stage. The measured compressive strengths, tangent moduli of elasticity, split tensile strengths, toughnesses and exural strengths are summarized in Table 2. 2.2. Tests on RC beams and SFARC beams Altogether 18 beams of square prism shapes with dimensions of 300 300 2000 mm were designed and produced as distinctly tension failure. Out of the total 18, 3 beams belonged to the same combination group. The stirrups were rather dense so as to provide strong shear resistance and to assure a clear-cut exural failure. The dimensions, concrete used, and the steel reinforcement were all exactly the same except for dierences in SF dosages, which were

Fig. 4. Setup for the displacement-controlled exural loading of 150 150 750 mm prisms.

F. Altun et al. / Construction and Building Materials 21 (2007) 654661

657

Table 2 Average mechanical properties of dierent combinations of concrete measured on 150 300 mm cylindrical samples and 150 150 750 mm prisms Type of concrete No SFs C20-30 C20-60 No SFs C30-30 C30-60 Concrete class C20 Average compressive strength (N/mm2) 24.4 22.5 22.6 34.8 30.8 30.2 Modulus of elasticity (N/mm2) 29,500 27,500 26,000 32,950 32,200 32,050 Split tensile strength (N/mm2) 1.59 2.30 2.55 1.95 2.71 3.01 Toughness (kN mm) 202 446 474 306 415 462 Flexural strength (N/mm2) 5.4 8.3 9.8 7.8 9.4 11.4

C30

Fig. 5. Appearance of the RC beams during and just at the completion of concreting.

0 kg/m3, 30 kg/m3, 60 kg/m3, respectively. Six RC beams with no SFs are denoted as C20-1-0, C20-2-0, C20-3-0, C30-1-0, C30-2-0, C30-3-0, and the other 12 SFARC beams are symbolized as C20-4-30, . . ., C20-9-60, C30-430, . . ., C30-9-60. Photographs in Fig. 5 show the reinforcement cages during concreting and the beams upon completion of concreting. The theoretical ultimate bending moment before plastic yielding of the tensile steel, denoted by Mu, was computed by the conventional ultimate-strength approach, and the single load before branching into two equal loads applied on the beam was computed to be 126.0 kN for C20 class and 148.6 kN for C30 class, by its known relationship to Mu acting on that middle portion of the beam between the two loading units. And in this computation, the characteristic strengths and moduli of elasticity given in the pertinent standards for C20 and C30 classes of concrete were used [8,9]. All of the 2 3 3 = 18 beams were subjected to simple bending experiment in a 4-point beam-loading setup as shown in Fig. 6. The mid-span deection (d) were accurately read in hundredths of a mm at every 5 kN load increments using a precise gauge including the plastic yield of the tensile steel until full rupture of these tensile reinforcement bars. The experimental results for all the RC and SFARC beams are given in Table 3. 3. Results and discussion Because of micro-cracks and other interstices in concrete, the transfer of shear stresses is irregular. The steel

bers, when homogeneously dispersed, act like small bridges and help for a better distribution of tensile and shear stresses. Therefore, the cracks in SFA concrete are smaller in size and they are spread more evenly. For example, the cylindrical samples of SFA concretes of our study did not break into pieces at the ultimate load, and the terminal stresses seemed to be distributed all over. The average values of compressive and tensile strengths, moduli of elasticity, and the toughnesses measured by the standard tests are given in Table 2. Both the compressive strength and modulus of elasticity decrease just a little with increasing dosage of SFs as revealed by the numbers in Table 2. The drop in elasticity modulus is smaller than that in strength. The strengths of both SFA C20 and C30 are still acceptable for both 30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3 SFs dosages. The toughnesses of both SFA C20 and C30 with the 60 kg/m3 SFs dosage are not appreciably higher than those with the 30 kg/m3 SFs dosages. Comparison of these 3 properties suggests that the choice of steel bers addition of 30 kg/m3 should be better along with economic considerations. The average of modulus of elasticities of 6 cylindrical samples with plain C20 turned out to be 29,500 N/mm2, whereas the same values for SFA C20s with 30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3 SF dosages were 27,500 N/mm2 and 26,000 N/mm2, respectively. Similar values for plain and SFA C30s were determined to be 32,950 N/mm2, 32,200 N/mm2, and 32,050 N/mm2, respectively. The energy absorption capacities (toughnesses) of SFA C20s increased 121% and 135% with SFs dosages of

658

F. Altun et al. / Construction and Building Materials 21 (2007) 654661

Fig. 6. Appearances of some of the bending experiments on the 4-point beam-loading setup. (a) RC beam with no SFs in the beam-loading setup; (b) SFARC beam with 30 kg/m3 of SFs in the beam-loading setup and (c) SFARC beam with 60 kg/m3 of SFs in the beam-loading setup. Table 3 Results of the bending experiments on RC and SFARC beams Beam sample C20-1-0 C20-2-0 C20-3-0 C20-4-30 C20-5-30 C20-6-30 C20-7-60 C20-8-60 C20-9-60 C30-1-0 C30-2-0 C30-3-0 C30-4-30 C30-5-30 C30-6-30 C30-7-60 C30-8-60 C30-9-60 Concrete class C20 SF dosage (kg/m3) 0 Tensile steel (mm) 2U16 Theoretical ultimate load (kN) 126.0 Measured ultimate load (kN) 184.50 202.00 201.60 201.90 202.30 210.00 210.30 211.00 209.00 262.30 260.15 250.90 320.25 330.00 357.20 370.45 368.75 352.95 (Experimental ultimate load)/ (theoretical ultimate load) 1.46 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.61 1.67 1.67 1.67 1.66 1.77 1.75 1.69 2.16 2.22 2.40 2.49 2.48 2.38 Average of (experimental ultimate load)/(theoretical ultimate load) ratios 1.55 Toughness (kN mm) 5495 5970 5830 27,835 27,550 29,501 29,830 30,800 29,800 10,782 9925 10,965 26,382 27,989 29,856 29,979 30,045 29,460

30

2U16

126.0

1.63

60

2U16

126.0

1.67

C30

2U16

148.6

1.74

30

2U16

148.6

2.26

60

2U16

148.6

2.45

30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3, as compared to plain C20. Similarly, the toughnesses of SFA C30s increased 36% and 51% with SFs dosages of 30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3, as compared to plain C30. Straightforward evaluation of these

results point out to the fact that whereas there occurs a signicant increase in toughness with addition of SFs to plain concrete at a dosage of 30 kg/m3, a twofold increase in mass of the SFs from 30 kg/m3 up to 60 kg/m3 in both

F. Altun et al. / Construction and Building Materials 21 (2007) 654661

659

C20 and C30 classes of concrete renders only negligible increases in toughnesses, and therefore the SFs dosage of 30 kg/m3 should be clearly better than that of 60 kg/m3. According to ASTM C-1018-92, both the elastic and the ensuing plastic behaviour of SFAC are depicted concisely by the toughness indices of I5, I10, and I20, which are equal to the ratios of the areas under the load-mid section deection curve up to 3 times, 5.5 times, and 10.5 times of the deection to the rst crack to the area up to the rst crack. The acceptable ranges for these indices particularly for the SFAC are given in ASTM C-1018 as: 1 < I5 < 6, 1 < I10 < 12 and 1 < I20 < 25. The average values for the toughness indices of I5, I10 and I20, we obtained from the standard experiments are summarized in the following: For C20 class of concrete: C20-NoSFs : I 5 1:0; I 10 1:0; I 20 1:0 C20-30 kg=m3 : I 5 5:9; I 10 9:3; I 20 10:7 C20-60 kg=m3 : I 5 5:4; I 10 9:4; I 20 11:6 For C30 class of concrete: C30-NoSFs : I 5 1:0; I 10 1:0; I 20 1:0 C30-30 kg=m3 : I 5 5:6; I 10 9:7; I 20 11:2 C30-60 kg=m : I 5 5:7; I 10 11:1; I 20 12:3 which are all within the acceptable ranges ASTM C-101892 [11]. The summary of the relevant values obtained as a result of the beam-loading experiments are presented in Table 3. The ratio of (the experimentally measured ultimate load)/ (theoretical ultimate load) turned out be 1.55 for RC beams (having no SFs) with C20 class of concrete, and the same ratio was 1.63 and 1.67 with SFARC beams having SFs dosages of 30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3, respectively. The increase in actual ultimate load with addition of SFs at a dosage of 30 kg/m3 was 8% with respect to that of RC beams with no SFs, whereas the further increase was only a small 3% for a twofold increase in the mass of SFs. The same ratios with the RC and SFARC beams produced with C30 class of concrete turned out to be 1.74, 2.26, 2.45, for RC beams, for SFARC beams with the SFs dosage of 30 kg/m3, and for SFARC beams with the SFs dosage of 60 kg/m3, respectively, as seen in Table 3. Hence, the increase in the actual ultimate load with addition of SFs at a dosage of 30 kg/m3 was 30% with respect to that of RC beams with no SFs, and the further increase was only 11% for a twofold increase in the mass of SFs. These comparative ndings seem to be in parallel to the initial impression based on pure compression tests on cylindrical samples that the SFARC with a SFs dosage of 30 kg/m3 may be more eective and more benecial than that with SFs dosage of 60 kg/m3, from the standpoint of exural behaviour of SFARC beams, also. The experimentally obtained (ultimate load) versus (mid-span deection) relationships for the RC and SFARC beams produced with C20 class of concrete are given in
3

Fig. 7. The energy absorption capacities (toughnesses) of the prototype beams computed based on these measurements turned out to be 5765, 28,295, and 30,143 kN mm, for RC beams, SFARC beams with 30 kg/m3 of SFs, and SFARC beams with 60 kg/m3 of SFs, respectively, as given in the last column of Table 3. The toughness of SFARC beams with 30 kg/m3 of SFs increased 391% relative to that of RC beams (with no SFs), and yet the toughness of SFARC beams with 60 kg/m3 of SFs was only 32% greater than that of SFARC beams with 30 kg/m3 of SFs, namely, a small increase only for a twofold increase in mass of SFs used. Similarly, the experimentally obtained (ultimate load) versus (mid-span deection) relationships for the RC and SFARC beams produced with C30 class of concrete are given in Fig. 8. The toughnesses were computed to be 10,557 kN mm, 28,076 kN mm, and 29,828 kN mm, for RC beams, SFARC beams with 30 kg/m3 of SFs, and SFARC beams with 60 kg/m3 of SFs, respectively, as given
250

200

Ultimate Load (kN)

150

100

50

RC with No SFs SFARC with 30 kg/m3 of SFs SFARC with 60 kg/m3 of SFs

0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Mid-span Deflection (0.01 mm)

Fig. 7. The average (ultimate load)(mid-span deection) relationships determined experimentally for the 3 groups SFARC beams with C20 class of concrete.

400 350

Ultimate Load (kN)

300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
RC with No SFs SFARC with 30 kg/m3 of SFs SFARC with 60 kg/m3 of SFs

Mid-span Deflection (0.01 mm)

Fig. 8. The average (ultimate load)(mid-span deection) relationships determined experimentally for the three groups SFARC beams with C30 class of concrete.

660
700

F. Altun et al. / Construction and Building Materials 21 (2007) 654661

375 350

Ultimate Load (kN)

Ultimate Load (kN)

600

325 300 275 250 225

C30

C30

500
C20

400

C20

200 175
0 30 60
3

90

300 0 30 60 90

Steel Fibre Dosage (kg/m )

Steel Fibre Dosage (kg/m3)

Fig. 9a. Steel ber dosage versus experimental ultimate load relationships for C20 and C30 classes of concrete.

Fig. 10a. Steel ber dosage versus experimental ultimate load relationships for C20 and C30 classes of SFARC beams.

500
30000

450

Toughness (kN.mm)

Toughness (kN.mm)

C20 C30

25000
C30

400 350 300 250 200 0 30

20000 15000 10000 5000

C20

60

90

30

60
3

90

Steel Fibre Dosage (kg/m3)

Fig. 9b. Steel Fiber dosage versus toughness relationships for cylindrical samples.

Steel Fibre Dosage (kg/m )

Fig. 10b. Steel ber dosage versus exural toughness relationships for SFARC beams.

in the last column of Table 3. The toughness of SFARC beams with 30 kg/m3 of SFs increased 166% relative to that of RC beams (with no SFs), and yet the toughness of SFARC beams with 60 kg/m3 of SFs was only 17% greater than that of SFARC beams with 30 kg/m3 of SFs, namely, a small increase only for a twofold increase in mass of SFs used. Hence, objective assessment of these toughnesses measured on beams with both C20 and C30 classes of concrete indicates that the SFs dosage of 30 kg/m3 is better than that of 60 kg/m3 from toughness standpoint, also. The experimentally determined (ultimate load)(SFs dosage) and (toughness)(SFs dosage) relationships are drawn to scale as given in Figs. 9a,b and 10a,b for concrete classes of C20 and C30, respectively. Direct measurements on cylindrical samples revealed that as compressive strength drops slightly, the toughness increases with increasing SFs dosage. As the exural behaviour of RC and SFARC beams are concerned however, both the ultimate load and the exural toughness increase with increasing SFs dosage. But, a relatively small increase occurs for a twofold increase in mass of SFs, and therefore a SFs dosage of 30 kg/m3 seems to be better than that of 60 kg/m3 from the ultimate load and toughness standpoints.

The quantitative values obtained as a result of the experiments performed herein could be taken into consideration in design of exural elements produced with SFARC. 4. Conclusions As a result of experiments on cylindrical samples in a compression machine, the toughnesses of steel-ber-added concretes of C20 and C30 classes with a SFs dosage of 30 kg/m3 increase appreciably as negligible losses in ultimate strength and modulus of elasticity are incurred. Because doubling the mass of SFs to a dosage of 60 kg/ m3 causes only small improvements in toughness, clearly the SFs dosage of 30 kg/m3 is better than that of 60 kg/m3. As a result of bending experiments on so many beams in a beam-loading machine, it is concluded that both the ultimate loads and the exural toughnesses of reinforced-concrete beams produced with concrete classes of C20 and C30 with SFs at a dosage of 30 kg/m3 increase appreciably as compared to those RC beams without steel bers. Because doubling the mass of SFs to a dosage of 60 kg/m3 renders only small improvements in both the ultimate load and toughness, clearly the SFs dosage of 30 kg/m3 is better than that of 60 kg/m3 for the SFARC beams, also.

F. Altun et al. / Construction and Building Materials 21 (2007) 654661

661

It is believed herein that SFARC beams having SFs at a dosage about 30 kg/m3 should be favoured or even should be common practice, because rstly the crack formation, crack size, and crack propagation in beams against bending moments are appreciably better, secondly the ultimate bending-moment-carrying capacity is a little better, and thirdly and most importantly the toughness is much higher than those of the RC beams having the same conventional reinforcement but no SFs. The quantitative values in improved properties of RC beams of dimensions other than those of this study should be parallel in magnitude to those determined in this study. References
[1] Ocean concrete products, Ocean Heidelberg Cement Group. Steel Fibre Reinforcement Working Together to Build Our Communities Report; 1999. [2] Dupont D, Vandewalle L. Bending capacity of steel bre reinforced concrete (SFRC) beams. In: Proceedings of the International congress on challenges of concrete construction, Dundee; 2002. p. 8190. [3] Paine KA, Elliott KS, Peaston CH. Flexural toughness as a measure of shear strength and ductility of prestressed bre reinforced concrete

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8] [9]

[10] [11]

beams. In: Proceedings of the International congress on challenges of concrete construction, Dundee; 2002. p. 20012. Ganesan N, Shivananda KP. Spacing and width of cracks in polymer modied steel bre reinforced concrete exural members, In: Proceedings of the International congress on challenges of concrete construction, Dundee; 2002. p. 24453. Alavizadeh-Farhang A. Plain and steel bre reinforced concrete beams subjected to combined mechanical and thermal loading. Thesis, Department of Structural Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Bulletin No. 38, Stockholm, Sweden; 1998. Hartman T. Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete. Thesis, Department of Structural Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden; 1999. Gopalaratnam VS, Shah SP, Batson GB, Criswell ME, Ramaksishran V, Wecharatara M. Fracture toughness of ber reinforced concrete. ACI Mater J 1991;88(4):33953. RILEM TC162-TDF. Test and design methods for steel bre reinforced concrete: re design method. Mater Struct 2000;33(March):7581. RILEM TC162-TDF. Test and design methods for steel bre reinforced concrete: bending test. Mater Struct 2000;33(January February):35. ASTM C 496. Standard test method for split tensile strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. Annual book of ASTM standards; 1994. ASTM C1018-92. Standard test method for exural toughness and rst-crack strength of bre-reinforced concrete. American Society for Testing and Materials; 1992.