Acta Polytechnica CTU Proceedings 7:69–71, 2017 © Czech Technical University in Prague, 2017

doi:10.14311/APP.2017.7.0069 available online at http://ojs.cvut.cz/ojs/index.php/app

PERFORMANCE OF STEEL FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE –

COMPARABILITY OF TESTS ACCORDING TO
DAFSTB-GUIDELINE "STAHLFASERBETON" AND EN 14651

Steffen Anders∗ , Melanie Schovenberg

Institute of Structural Engineering, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Pauluskirchstr. 11, 42285, Wuppertal,
Germany
∗
corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract. For the determination of the performance of steel-fiber reinforced concrete (SFRC),
the post-peak flexural strengths are used. In different national and European standards, different
test-setups are defined, resulting in double efforts for testing for the manufacturers. In addition, the
German national guideline "Stahlfaserbeton (DAfStb)" on SFRC is well established European-wide, but
the test standard is specifically national, demanding a four-point-bending tests using unnotched beams.
Contrarily, the European standard EN 14651 as well as the Model Code 2010 [1] demand three-point
bending tests using notched specimens. Applying the national guideline is obligatory in Germany
for structural use of SFRC. Therefore, it is essential to standardize the performance evaluation of
SFRC based on commonly applied international guidelines. In the following, an approach is presented
especially dealing with the problem of random occurrence of cracks in the four-point-bending tests.
It is shown, that neglecting the point of crack can systematically under-estimate the performance of
SFRC especially at deformations.
Keywords: steel-fiber reinforced concrete, performance classes, post-peak flexural strength.

1. Introduction Guideline "Stahlfaserbeton". This aspect will be dealt

with in the following.
In order to get permission to distribute and sell steel-
fibers in Europe, a CE-certificate is obligatory. There-
fore, it is necessary to determine the performance of
2. Test methods and evaluation
the steel-fibers in concrete, depending on the type of of post-peak flexural
steel fibers as well as the fiber contents. In this case, strengths
the EN 14651 [2] is the relevant standard, demanding The most important difference between the national
a test using third-point loading on notched specimens. guideline "Stahlfaserbeton (DAfStb)" and the Euro-
In order to get the permission to sell steel-fiber re- pean standard EN 14651 is the test set-up as shown
inforced concrete e.g. as ready mixed concrete the in Fig. 1. In the four-point loading test, which is de-
performance of SFRC has to be evaluated according manded by the guideline "Stahlfaserbeton (DAfStb)",
to the German national guideline "Stahlfaserbeton the crack should occur randomly in the mid third
(DAfStb)" [3]. This guideline demands tests on un- between the two loads due to lacking of a notch. The
notched specimens in a 4-point bending set-up. In deflection of the beam is measured using transducers
both guidelines, performance of SFRC is measured in at mid-span. As described, due to this distance the
terms of post-peak flexural strengths. testing method is not consistent from a fracture me-
Seen from the mechanical point of view the eval- chanical point of view. The method given in EN 14651
uation of post-peak flexural strengths is a fracture uses a notched beam and just one load exactly above
mechanical problem, demanding determination of the notch at mid-span. Thus, deflection and cracking
strengths and load bearing capacities directly in the are in-line.
crack. This precondition is fulfilled only by EN 14651 The evaluation of the post-peak flexural strength
but not by the German guideline, because the crack in the guideline "Stahlfaserbeton (DAfStb)" uses the
can occur anywhere in the mid third of the beam due mid-span deflection δ. In this guideline, the post-peak
to the four-point-loading scheme. flexural strength is calculated from the load at two
In order to overcome the problem of mechanical defined deflections of δ = 0.5 mm and δ = 3.5 mm at
incorrectness as well as achieving international stan- mid-span (see Fig. 2-up). Seen from point of view
dardization, establishing a connection between the of fracture mechanics, the deflection at the point of
two test methods would be advantageous to facilitate crack is always higher than the deflection at mid-span,
the conversion of results from one method to another. resulting in a systematic underestimation of the post-
One important aspect in this context is to include the peak flexural strength, provided a strain softening
behavior of the steel-fiber reinforced concrete.
point of crack into the evaluation according to the

69
Steffen Anders, Melanie Schovenberg Acta Polytechnica CTU Proceedings

Figure 1. Comparison of test set-ups

Figure 2. Evaluation of post-peak flexural strengths
at different points. Up DAfStb-Guideline "Stahlfaser-
On the other hand, the EN 14651 standard uses beton", down EN 14651
the Crack Mouth Opening Displacement (CMOD)
being directly correlated to the mid-span deflection [4].
To specify the post-peak flexural behavior, strength
values at four different points are defined in terms
of CMOD (see Fig. 2-down). The deflection at δ =
0.47 mm at CMOD1 correlates well to the German
guideline. CMOD4 at a deflection of δ = 3.02 mm
shows a difference of about 0.5 mm for the evaluation
point. Additionally, the cross-sections differs either,
for the notch reduces the height of the cross section
(both beams are produced with a cross-section of
150 × 150 mm). The approach of the EN 14651 is Figure 3. Calculation approach for taking the point
consistent with respect to fracture mechanics, because of crack into account using the theorem of intersecting
the deflection is measured directly in the cracked cross- lines
section.
The shown differences in testing and calculating
creasing distance of the crack from the middle of the
make it nearly impossible to compare the results of
beam. In Fig. 4, the increased stretching can be easily
the guidelines. A special problem being the random
seen especially at higher deflections.
cracking with German test set-up.

3. Calculation approach
To adjust the results taken during the tests according
to the guideline "Stahlfaserbeton (DAfStb)" the point
of the first crack has to be measured. If this is done
the deformations measured at mid-span, can be trans-
ferred to the cracked cross-section by simply using
theorem of intersecting lines applied on the larger part
of the beam, assuming both parts of beam are not
deformed themselves. Fig. 3 shows that the deflec-
tion in the cracked cross-section is always larger than
deflection at mid-span.
The consideration of the point of the crack results
in an increased stretching of the force-deflection curve. Figure 4. Change of mid-span deflection in case of
The correction of the curve increases with an increas- strain hardening material at low deflections and strain
ing deflection during the test as well as with an in- softening at high deflections

70
vol. 7/2017 Performance of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete

Depending on the effectiveness of the fibers (and

on the fiber content), generally two different material
behaviors are distinguished. Either the material is
strain hardening, meaning that the transferred load
increases with an increasing deflection or the material
is strain softening, showing decreasing transferable
loads with increasing deflections. In Fig. 4 the post-
peak flexural strength for low deflections of about
δ = 0.5 mm shows strain hardening. In case of strain
softening, as can be seen at a deflection higher than
about 1 mm a correction of the load-deflection curve
leads to increasing post-peak flexural strengths.

4. Results and discussion

After measuring the point of crack of about 360 four-
point bending tests, the resulting distribution of the Figure 6. Effect of correction of post-peak flexu-
point of crack is given in Fig. 5. The displayed distance ral strength due to random cracking of beams tested
of the crack from mid-span does not differ whether according to DAfStb Guideline "Stahlfaserbeton"
the crack occurred left or right from the mid of the
beam. Assuming a perfectly homogeneous concrete,
the crack should theoretically occur between the loads. 5. Conclusions
An analysis of the point of the first crack shows, that For the determination of performance of SFRC, dif-
only 50 % of all cracks occur in a distance less than ferent testing and evaluation approaches are used in
4 cm around the mid of the beam. At distances of less Germany and in Europe. From a point of view of frac-
than 2 cm from mid-span, less than 25 % of all cracks ture mechanics, the German approach is incorrect, due
occur. to a random occurrence of the cracks predominantly
in the mid-third. This leads to a systematic underes-
timation of the deflection in the cracked cross-section.
Therefore, it is essential to take the point of the first
crack into account, leading to a stretching of the force-
deflection curve. Two different modes of behavior can
occur. For strain hardening, which is often found at
low deflections and at higher fiber contents, the post-
peak flexural strength can decrease, and for strain
softening behavior, usually found for concrete having
lower fiber contents as well as at higher deflections,
the post peak flexural strength increases.
Taking the point of crack into account leads to
Figure 5. Distance of point of crack from mid-span
an increase of about half a performance class on an
average. In further steps, the results should directly
Applying the correction approach for the point of be related to results from tests according to EN 14651.
crack on several beams, the post-peak flexural strength Additionally, the different geometries caused by the
values are affected as well. The larger the distance notches have to be taken into account.
of the crack from mid-span the higher the correction,
strain softening assumed. Most of the beams have References
shown force-deflection curves comparable to Fig. 4. [1] DIN EN 14651: Prüfverfahren für Beton mit
As mentioned, these beams often show little strain metallischen Fasern - Bestimmung der
Biegezuggfestigkeit (Proportionalitätsgrenze, Residuelle
hardening at low deflections. Because the correction
Biegezugfestigkeit) 2004.
at δ = 0.5 mm is small, the post-peak flexural strength
values are unaffected for a large number of beams. Due [2] Deutscher Ausschuss für Stahlbeton (DAfStb):
DAfStb-Richtlinie Stahlfaserbeton 2012.
to the slight strain hardening, the post-peak flexural
strength values decrease for a number of beams. At [3] Fédération international du béton (fib): Modelcode for
larger deflections of δ = 3.5 mm the correction is concrete structures 2010.
higher, because of the higher deflection in combination [4] B. Barr, et al. Round-robin analysis of the RILEM
with the strain softening. The mean increase ranges TC 162-TDF beam-bending test: Part 2 - application of
at about 0.15 N · mm−2 , which is half a performance delta from the CMOD response. Materials and
class. Structures 36(263):621–630, 2003. doi:10.1617/13954.

71