CONICET Digital Nro. A
CONICET Digital Nro. A
CONICET Digital Nro. A
h i g h l i g h t s
RC beams strengthened and repaired with SFRC jacketing were tested under shear.
Fibers help preventing debonding of the jacketing.
Shear strength of RC beams with stirrups can be improved with SFRC jacketing.
Damaged RC beams repaired with SFRC jacketing recover/increase initial shear strength.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: With the objective of evaluating the performance of steel fiber reinforced concrete (SFRC) as a retrofitting
Received 1 October 2013 material for reinforced concrete beams the experimental study of reinforced concrete beams repaired and
Received in revised form 20 December 2013 strengthened with a SFRC jacketing and tested under shear is presented in this paper.
Accepted 24 December 2013
The reinforced concrete beams were designed with high amount of longitudinal steel and minimum
transverse reinforcement so that they present shear failure. Some of the beams were strengthened with
very fluid high strength SFRC jacketing and some of them were first tested under shear to produce some
Keywords:
damage and then they were repaired with the same technique. Plain concrete and SFRC with two differ-
Strengthening
Repairing
ent fiber dosages, 30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3, were used for the reinforcement.
Reinforced concrete beams The experimental program showed the possibility of performing the retrofitting at work place. The
Shear repaired beams showed excellent strength and deformation capacity restitution. The strengthened beams
Steel fiber reinforced concrete exhibited increase of load bearing capacity. The addition of fibers to the concrete played an important
role in the prevention of the jacketing debonding from the beams.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0950-0618/$ - see front matter Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.12.092
G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658 647
yielding [7], steel fibers generally can deform plastically. The most The flexure behavior of beams repaired in the bottom concrete
important geometric fibers characteristics are their aspect ratio cover with self compacting concrete and self compacting FRC was
(length/diameter) that define the slenderness and the shape of experimentally studied by Mesbah et al. [13]. The beams repaired
the fibers axis that can be straight or including some type of with FRC presented thinner cracks. The use of self compacting con-
anchorage, smooth or wavy, etc. Sometimes a combination of crete has shown to be a good option to facilitate the pouring. The
different types of fibers is also used. Short fibers are responsible behavior of the repaired beams seemed to be not influenced by
of bridging thin cracks (0.2–0.3 mm), improving durability, while the placing and the length of the repaired zone.
ductility development requires greater deformations and wider A system for the stiffening of frame structures with precast
cracks that are sewn by the longer fibers [9]. engineering cement composites (ECC) plates was proposed by Li
The main effect of fibers is controlling cracking processes. This et al. [14]. They studied the performance of the system numeri-
effect leads to important increases of material toughness as well cally. The plates contributed to energy dissipation of the structure
as additional benefits related to strength mainly under tension through the early cracking of ECC. Although the ECC has strength
loads. FRC presents more distributed cracking pattern, evidencing not very different from the FRC or mortar used, structural strength
thinner cracks. As a result, the durability of the retrofitting layers and structural ductility was all much higher when ECC was used,
is increased preventing the entrance of aggressive agents that favor especially when ECC composition (fiber, matrix and interface)
the layers debonding. All these improvements are connected to the was adequately tailored taking into account the influence of mate-
load transfer process from the matrix to the fibers. The main mech- rial micromechanics on composite macromechanics and structural
anism contributing to this process is fibers pull out that is strongly behavior. The use of this material in a bridge deck patch repair was
dependent on fibers shape. FRC is normally designed in a way that presented later [15]. A very high performance fiber-reinforced con-
the fibers are pulled out before breaking [10]. crete composite combining macro and microfibers of steel was
Although any concrete can be reinforced with fibers the ten- developed and applied to repair a parking garage by Banthia and
dency nowadays is the use of fibers to improve ductility of high Bindiganavile [16].
or ultrahigh strength concrete. In this way a material with the re- A repair method consisting of the replacement of damaged
quired strength and ductility to be used in reduced thicknesses is materials in aged structures due to the lack of maintenance was
obtained. The use of self compacting concrete has also became proposed by Kim et al. [17]. They used ductile fiber reinforced
popular since it requires less hand work and it has more dense cementitious composite (DFRCC) as repair material for over rein-
internal structure, better strength and less permeability. This con- forced concrete beams under flexure. Neither the strength nor
crete is easy to be poured in small thicknesses and this property the deformation capacity were significantly changed with this type
makes it suitable for retrofitting works. of repair and the importance of the interface between the old and
All these properties make FRC an attractive material for retrofit- the new material and the debonding prevention were showed.
ting concrete structures. The effectiveness of the FRC retrofitting is The use of ultra-high strength steel fiber-reinforced concrete
strongly influenced by the adherence between fibers and concrete (UFC) jacketing for the strengthening of internal nodes of rein-
matrix and between matrix and the concrete substrate [6]. It has forced concrete frames was proposed by Wang and Lee [18]. They
been proved both in experimental tests and field experience that showed that the use of UFC leaded to an increase of ductility and
the incorporation of fibers helps controlling cracking and delaying the formation of plastic hinges in the beams.
debonding initiation and its propagation [11]. A new material called ultra-high performance cement-based fi-
ber composite (CARDIFRC) was presented by Farhat et al. [19]. It is
an ultra high performance composite reinforced with 8% in volume
2. Repairing/strengthening of reinforced concrete structures of short fibers. They used this material for the reinforcement of un-
with fiber reinforced cement matrix. Brief review der reinforced concrete beams under flexure and over reinforced
concrete beams under shear. The reinforcement consisted of thin
Much research has been done to assess effectiveness of FRC ret- plates made of CARDIFRC that were glued with epoxy cement to
rofitting technique during the last years. This section presents a previously damaged beams. In all strengthening setups the
brief review of research done related to the use of fiber reinforced strength of the beams was increased with the reinforcement.
composites with cement like matrix for repairing or strengthening Experimental results of two actual scale bridge piles repaired
purposes. The research done concerning retrofitting with this type with high performance fiber reinforced concrete (HPFRC) were pre-
of materials has two main motivations. By one side, it is aimed at sented by Massicotte and Boucher-Proulx [20]. The concrete cover
solving durability or aging problems or prolonging service life of of one of the piles was removed and replaced by HPFRC. The piles
the structure and by the other side, it is aimed at solving strength were tested under quasistatic cyclic load. The strengthened pile
or structural problems. presented greater load bearing capacity, increasing with load
The use of fiber reinforced both for the strengthening and cycles, and also greater ductility.
repairing of different types concrete and reinforced concrete ele- An ultra high performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHPFRC)
ments like beams, columns, panels, joints, slabs and pavements was used by Brühwiler and Denarié [21] to restore reinforced
has been extensively investigated during the last years. Different concrete structures that have suffered environment attacks and
types of cement based materials for the matrix like normal surface mechanical actions. Taking advantage of the low perme-
strength, high strength concrete or self consolidating concrete, ability, high mechanical strength combined with the self compact-
were used and compared. Moreover different types, sizes and ing property, they proposed the use of thin layers of this material
shapes of fibers were used. that can be combined with steel bars or in precast elements. They
Independently of the motivation and materials used, improve- showed some applications already done in bridge decks, highways
ment of the mechanical behavior of the retrofitted element or protection barriers, bridge piles and industrial floors.
structure and cracking process was usually investigated. Marini et al. [22] numerically studied the behavior of a FRC
The use of slurry infiltrated mat concrete (SIMCOM) for repair diaphragm as vertical load transferring element to perimeter
and rehabilitation of reinforced concrete beams and columns was structure. They concluded that the use of FRC would allow the
studied by Naaman et al. [12]. They concluded that SIMCOM can use of lower thicknesses than in the case of reinforced concrete
successfully interact with reinforced concrete elements substan- and that the thickness could be reduced if the fiber content was
tially increasing flexural strength and energy absorption capacity. increased.
648 G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658
2 Ø 8mm
Ø 6mm/125mm
3 Ø 16mm
150mm 125mm
1600mm
Table 2
Plain concrete. Mixture proportion and properties.
Table 4
Steel properties.
Steel Yield stress, mean; Stand dev Young Mod., mean; Stand dev First yielding strain ey Final step yielding strain eyf Rupture strain erupture
ry; s (MPa) E; s (GPa)
1 484.6; 2.4 201.1; 6.8 0.00241 0.00873 0.153
2 489.9; 4.4 191.2; 10.0 0.00257 0.02231 0.200
30mm 30mm
280mm
Bonding
Product
FRC 210mm FRC
30mm
1600mm
RC Beam
Framework
Separators
250mm
1200mm
RC Beam
Steel Beam
250mm 250mm
400mm 800mm
Bottom Press Plate
Load Cell
Reactiv Slab
For this purpose, reinforced concrete beams that would present shear failure of notched beams (150 150 600 mm) [38]. The jacketing concrete in Table 2 re-
were designed. In a previous step two beams were casted, tested, repaired with nor- fers to the concrete base of FRC jacketing whose properties are presented in Table 3.
mal strength FRC and retested to prove their failure and the retrofitting technique. The flexure test results of these concretes are presented in Fig. 2.
Then, the complete experimental program was developed. Although the same mixtures were used for concrete matrix in Steps I and II,
The program consisted of a total of 18 reinforced concrete beams, with and the resulting concrete presents slightly different mechanical properties. The
without stirrups casted together. Some of the beams with stirrups were damaged, differences could be attributed to ambient temperature. It is well known that high
repaired with FRC and retested. One beam without stirrups was tested as control temperature during concrete mixing and curing affects mechanical properties [39].
beam. The rest, including beams with and without stirrups, were strengthened with In fact, Step I concrete was molded in summer while Step II concrete was molded in
FRC and tested. To study the effect of fibers addition, three types of high perfor- winter. In correspondence higher compressive strength was obtained for Step II
mance concrete with self compacting matrix were used as repairing/strengthening concrete.
material, plain concrete (without fibers), FRC with 30 kg/m3 of steel fibers and FRC
with 60 kg/m3 of steel fibers. Plain concrete and FRC with 30 kg/m3 of steel fibers
reinforcement were performed simultaneously in Step I while FRC with 60 kg/m3
of steel fibers reinforcement was performed later (Step II). The main characteristics LVDT LVDT
Roller Metal Ruler
of the beams tested are presented in Table 1. Diagonal Crack Slider
207,5mm
The dimensions and reinforcement of the reinforced concrete beams tested are
LVDT Base Potentiometric
shown in Fig. 1. They were designed so that they present shear failure and not a Transducer Support
flexure one. 296.5mm
The mixture proportion and the main properties of the different types of 400mm 1200mm
concrete used in experimental program are presented in Table 2. They were ob-
tained from compression tests of cylindrical specimens [36,37] and flexure tests Fig. 6. Instrumentation.
G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658 651
Fig. 7. Beam 5 (reinforced concrete beam with stirrups) left side crack pattern.
Fig. 8. Beam 11 (reinforced concrete beam with stirrups) left side crack pattern.
ers while Steel 2 was used for longitudinal reinforcement. The properties of both
types of steel are presented in Table 4.
150
Fig. 10. Beam 18 (reinforced concrete beam without stirrups) crack pattern.
(a)
Fig. 11. Crack pattern obtained for Beam 5. (a) First test; (b) Second test, beam repaired with plain concrete.
652 G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658
300 300
250 250
200 200
Load P [kN]
Load P [kN]
150 150
10 10 Rep
11 11 Rep
100 100 12 12 Rep
4 4 Rep
5 5 Rep 50
50 6 6 Rep
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Displacement δ [mm] Displacement δ [mm]
Fig. 12. Load–displacement curves for the beams repaired with plain concrete. Fig. 14. Load–displacement curves for the beams repaired with FRC with 30 kg/m3
of fibers.
displacements were measured up to the longitudinal axis of the beam. The trans-
ducers were mounted on a metal ruler with one end that can rotate and the other behaviors were observed. Beams 4, 16 and 17 presented a marked
end with a slider. Additionally, systems of lineal variable differential transformers softening after the maximum load and they were unloaded when
(LVDT) in the form of isosceles triangle on both sides were used to measure the the load reached 70% of the peak load. The rest of the beams
displacement perpendicular to the direction where the majority of shear cracks
presented more load capacity and the tests could be continued
form (LVDT Crack), the displacement in the direction of the longitudinal reinforce-
ment (LVDT Base) and the displacement in the remaining direction closing the up to greater displacements.
triangle (LVDT Diagonal), see Fig. 6. Similarly, vertical displacements and load were The crack pattern obtained for the reinforced concrete beam
measured by the press internal LVDT and load cell respectively. without stirrups is shown in Fig. 10. Cracking was localized in
The beams were first tested under load control and then, with displacement
the shorter side of the beam. Cracks were markedly diagonal
control going through the peak load and getting part of the descending branch of
the load–deflection curve. Finally, they were unloaded in a controlled way. An
except for the bottom of the beam where cracks were horizontal
increasing load at a rate of 0.167 kN/s was first applied up to a load of 30 kN; then, following the bottom longitudinal reinforcement.
the test was continued with displacement rate of 0.5 mm/min. The load–displacement curve obtained for a reinforced concrete
Data acquisition was performed automatically by taking two measurements per beam without stirrups (Beam 18) is included in Fig. 9. The maxi-
second.
mum load was 116 kN, lower than for the beams with stirrups
Most of the unreinforced beams with stirrups were tested up to a displacement
of 12 mm, which is greater than the standard limit value for flexion [44]. However, and the response was very brittle. The beam showed an abrupt
not all of these beams were tested to that shift. Some of them showed a very load decay after the peak load and finally maintain the load
pronounced softening after the maximum load and the tests were stopped when through a mechanism constituted by two concrete blocks sepa-
the load decreased to 70% of the maximum load. The strengthened/repaired beams rated by a diagonal crack and linked though the bottom longitudi-
were tested up to a deflection of 14 mm.
nal reinforcement.
4. Experimental results
4.2. Repaired beams
4.1. Reinforced concrete beams
The beams whose responses were shown in Section 4.1 were re-
paired with plain concrete and FRC with different fibers contents
Two typical crack patterns corresponding to beams with stir-
and retested.
rups are shown in Figs. 7 and 8. The cracks were more marked in
the shorter side. In general, all the beams presented concrete spall-
ing in the surrounding of the load transmission point or near the 4.2.1. Plain concrete jacketing
support. Some of the beams (beams 5, 6 and 11) exhibited buckling The debonding of the concrete encasement from the beams
of the top longitudinal reinforcement. with the consequent loss of the reinforcement collaboration was
The load–displacement curves registered for the reinforced frequently observed in these tests. Horizontal cracks separating
concrete beams with stirrups are shown in Fig. 9. The eight beams the laterals from the bottom part of the concrete jacketing was also
were similar but they presented different responses. The observed in some cases. A typical crack pattern and its comparison
maximum load varied from 181.7 kN to 257.9 kN. Two typical with that of the same beam in the first test are presented in Fig. 11.
(a)
Fig. 13. Crack pattern obtained for Beam 11. (a) First test; (b) Second test, beam repaired with FRC with 30 kg/m3of fibers.
G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658 653
(a)
Fig. 15. Crack pattern obtained for Beam 16. (a) First test; (b) Second test, beam repaired with FRC with 60 kg/m3 of fibers.
300
300
250
250
200
Load P [kN]
200
Load P [kN]
150
150
1 Str
100 2 Str
100
16 Rep
16
50 17 Rep
17 50
0
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Displacement δ [mm]
Displacement δ [mm]
Fig. 16. Load–displacement curves for the beams repaired with FRC with 60 kg/m3
of fibers. Fig. 18. Load–displacement curves for the beams with stirrups strengthened with
plain concrete.
The vertical dashed lines in the first test diagram indicate the stir-
in Fig. 14. All the beams presented very good stiffness restitution
rups position.
and initial strength was surpassed in all cases.
The load–displacement response registered for the beams
repaired with plain concrete and their comparison with those
corresponding to the same beams in their first tests are presented
4.2.3. FRC with 60 kg/m3 of fibers jacketing
in Fig. 12. In general the curves corresponding to the repaired
In this case only one of the beams exhibited a slight debonding
beams presented load drops due to the jacketing debonding. In
of the FRC jacketing from the beam. In general, cracking was
spite of these load drops, the repaired beams, especially Beam 6,
predominantly diagonal. A typical crack pattern and the compari-
presented a good stiffness and load bearing restitution when
son with that corresponding to the first test of the same beam
compared with the first tests.
are presented in Fig. 15.
The comparison of the load–displacement curves registered for
the beams repaired with FRC with 60 kg/m3 of fibers and those cor-
4.2.2. FRC with 30 kg/m3 of fibers jacketing responding to the same beams in their first tests is presented in
Some of the beams repaired with FRC with 30 kg/m3 of fibers Fig. 16. Stiffness and load bearing capacity were substantially
exhibited a slight debonding of the FRC jacketing from the beams recovered and increased with this FRC jacketing.
and horizontal cracks separating the laterals from the bottom part
of the FRC jacketing were formed in some cases. Nevertheless,
cracking of the FRC was predominantly diagonal. A typical crack 4.3. Strengthened beams
pattern and its comparison with that of the same beam in the first
test are presented in Fig. 13. Nine beams were strengthened with different types of jacket-
The load–displacement response registered for the beams ing: plain concrete, FRC with 30 kg/m3 and FRC with 60 kg/m3 of
repaired with FRC 30 kg/m3 and their comparison with those fibers. Some of the strengthened beams had stirrups and some of
corresponding to the same beams in their first tests are presented them did not.
Fig. 17. Crack pattern obtained for Beam 2 (with stirrups) strengthened with plain concrete.
654 G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658
Fig. 19. Crack pattern obtained for Beam 7 (with stirrups) strengthened with FRC with 30 kg/m3 of fibers.
300
300
250
250
200
200
Load P [kN]
Load P [kN]
150
150 13 Str
14 Str
100
100
7 Str
8 Str
50
50
0
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Displacement δ [mm]
Displacement δ [mm]
Fig. 20. Load–displacement curves for the beams with stirrups strengthened with
Fig. 22. Load–displacement curves for the beams with stirrups strengthened with
FRC with 30 kg/m3 of fibers.
FRC with 60 kg/m3 of fibers.
4.3.1. Beams with stirrups
4.3.1.1. Plain concrete jacketing. Two beams with stirrups were
characterized for the cracking of the longer side of the beams.
strengthened with plain concrete. One of them (Beam 1) exhibited
Although the first cracks appeared in the shorter side of the beam,
debonding previous to the test and the other (Beam 2) not. As a
suddenly the failure pattern changed and a shear failure in the
consequence, the cracks patterns and behaviors of both beams
longer side appeared as dominant. This result indicates that in
were markedly different. The crack pattern of Beam 2 is presented
the case of reinforced concrete beams without stirrups, the
in Fig. 17. The load–displacement responses of both beams are
strengthening jacketing changed the structural behavior of the
presented in Fig. 18 where the different behaviors are evident.
resulting system.
A typical crack pattern is presented in Fig. 23. The load–dis-
4.3.2. FRC with 30 kg/m3 of fibers jacketing placement curves obtained for strengthened beams without stir-
Some of the beams strengthened with FRC with 30 kg/m3 of fi- rups are presented in Fig. 24 where a brittle response is observed
bers presented slight debonding of the jacketing and some of them in all cases.
showed horizontal cracks separating the bottom part of the jacket-
ing from the laterals. The main cracks were diagonal. A typical
crack pattern obtained for a strengthened beam with stirrups 5. Results analysis
(Beam 7) is shown in Fig. 19. Concrete spalling can be observed
in the zone surrounding the applied load. 5.1. Reinforced concrete beams
The load–displacement curves obtained for the beams with stir-
rups strengthened with FRC with 30 kg/m3 of fibers are presented The load–displacement mean response and the standard devia-
in Fig. 20. tion obtained for the set of reinforced concrete beams with stirrups
without reinforcement tested are shown in Fig. 25. The box dia-
4.3.3. FRC with 60 kg/m3 of fibers jacketing grams are also plotted in Fig. 25.
In this case only one of the beams presented debonding of the The dispersion is very low for the first part of the tests but in-
jacketing and it was very slight. The main cracks were predomi- creases for displacements greater than 4 mm. The maximum coef-
nantly diagonal. A typical crack pattern for a beam with stirrups ficient of variation is 0.23 and it is comparable with those obtained
strengthened with FRC with 60 kg/m3 of fibers is presented in by other authors for shear tests of reinforced concrete beams [45].
Fig. 21. The load–displacement curves are presented in Fig. 22.
5.2. Repaired beams
4.3.4. Beams without stirrups
Independently of the type of material used for the strengthen- The maximum load obtained in the tests of reinforced concrete
ing jacketing, failure of strengthened beams without stirrups was beams with stirrups without reinforcement (subindex 1: first test)
Fig. 21. Crack pattern obtained for Beam 13 (with stirrups) strengthened with FRC with 60 kg/m3 of fibers.
G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658 655
Fig. 23. Crack pattern obtained for Beam 3 (without stirrups) strengthened with plain concrete.
and F 2max are also presented in Table 5. F 1max represents the mean
300
value of F 1max . Most of the repaired beams reached greater loads
than in their first test excluding beams 4 and 10. Beam 4 was
250
repaired with plain concrete and it exhibited debonding of the
jacketing from the beam. Beam 10 was tested to a greater displace-
200 ment than the others in the first test. The beams repaired with FRC
Load P [kN]
sult means that for this case the strength was increased while for
150 lower fibers content and plain concrete it was recovered.
100
Std. Dev.
Inner Fence 5.3. Strengthened beams with stirrups
Upper Hinge
Mean Median
50 The maximum loads reached by the beams with stirrups
Std. Dev. Lower Hinge strengthened with plain concrete and FRC with different fibers
Inner Fence
0 contents are presented in Table 6. The mean maximum load values
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 F max are included in Table 6. The direct comparison of maximum
Displacement δ [mm] loads reached shows that the strengthened beams presented great-
er load bearing capacity than the unstrengthened beams (Table 5)
Fig. 25. Descriptive statistic for the reinforced concrete beams with stirrups. and that the strength slightly increased with the fibers content of
the reinforcement.
The comparison of the mean responses obtained for the beams
and those reached by the same beams repaired with plain concrete with stirrups strengthened with FRC with that of the unreinforced
and FRC with different fibers contents (subindex 2: second test) are
beams is presented in Fig. 27. Mean and standard deviation values
presented in Table 5. The mean load values for each group, F 1max of load for different displacements are plotted. In all cases the
Table 5
Beams without reinforcement and repaired with plain concrete and FRC.
350
300
250
150
100
Fig. 26. Comparison of beams without reinforcement and repaired with plain concrete and FRC with different fibers contained. (a) Plain concrete; (b) FRC with 30 kg/m3 and
(c) FRC with 60 kg/m3 of fibers.
Beam Jacketing Fmax (kN) F max (kN) The maximum load reached by the beams without stirrups
strengthened with plain concrete and FRC and their comparison
1 Plain concrete 245.4 265.2
2 Plain concrete 284.9 with the maximum load obtained for the unreinforced beam with-
7 FRC 30 kg/m3 278.5 277.3 out stirrups tested as control are presented in Table 7. Although the
8 FRC 30 kg/m3 276.2 strengthened beams exhibited greater load bearing capacity than
13 FRC 60 kg/m3 262.4 280.2 the unreinforced beam, the strengthened beams presented a brittle
14 FRC 60 kg/m3 298.0
failure characterized by the cracking of the longer side of the
beams. This type of failure differs from the failure obtained for
strengthened beams presented greater load bearing capacity than the unreinforced beam without stirrups and also from the re-
the unreinforced beams. The beams strengthened with FRC with sponses obtained for all the unreinforced beams tested, including
30 kg/m3 of fibers presented the lowest dispersion. the beams with stirrups. This fact indicates that in this case (beams
A one-way ANOVA test was done to compare the responses of without stirrup) the addition of the FRC jacketing changes the way
the strengthened beams with those without strengthening. The in which the beams resist the applied load.
statistic conclusion was that there was significant difference be- The comparison of the responses of the beams without stirrups
tween the responses of beams strengthened with plain concrete strengthened with plain concrete and FRC with different fibers
and FRC with different fibers contents (p-value = 0.046). Taking contents with the response of the unreinforced beam without stir-
as control group the unreinforced beams, the Dunnett test showed rups and the mean response of the unreinforced beam with stir-
that there is no difference between the beams strengthened with rups is shown in Fig. 28. The beam strengthened with FRC with
plain concrete and the unreinforced beams but there are differ- 60 kg/m3 of fibers reached the greater load. Although the reinforce-
ences between the responses of the strengthened and unreinforced ment increased the strength, a brittle behavior was exhibited by all
beams when fibers are added to the jacketing (30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/ the strengthened beams. Moreover, if the responses of the
m3 of fibers). strengthened beams without stirrups are compared with the mean
350
300
250
Load P [kN]
200
150
100
Fig. 27. Comparison of beams with stirrups retrofitted with plain concrete and FRC with different fibers contents. (a) Plain concrete; (b) FRC 30 kg/m3 and (c) FRC 60 kg/m3.
G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658 657
0 Acknowledgements
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
The authors wish to thank the financial support of National
Displacement δ [mm]
Agency for Scientific and Technological Promotion, National Scien-
Fig. 28. Comparison of beams without stirrups strengthened with plain concrete tific and Technological Research Council (CONICET) and National
and FRC with unreinforced beams with and without stirrups. University of Tucumán research Council (CIUNT) and Ms. Amelia
Campos for the English revision. The companies, Tensolite S.A. that
response of the unreinforced beam with stirrups it can be observed
casted and cured the beams and Cemento Avellaneda S.A. and
that the ductility obtained with the addition of stirrups is not
Maccaferri Argentina S.A. that provided the cement and the fibers
obtained with FRC jacketing.
for the experimental program, respectively, are also greatly
acknowledged.
6. Conclusions
References
The strengthen/repair technique using a self compacting con-
crete matrix with steel fiber reinforcement is feasible to apply in [1] Shah AA, Ribakov Y. Recent trends in steel fibered high-strength concrete.
building site. Fiber reinforced concrete with these characteristics Mater Des 2011;32:4122–51.
[2] Altun F, Haktanir T, Ari K. Effects of steel fiber addition on mechanical
is suitable to be poured in reduced thicknesses jacketing. On the properties of concrete and RC beams. Constr Build Mater 2007;21:654–61.
other side, it provides a good surface finish so that the plaster [3] Obaidat YT, Heyden S, Dahlblom O, Abu-Farsakh G, Abdel-Jawad Y. Retrofitting
layers can be avoided partly compensating the mass added to the of reinforced concrete beams using composite laminates. Constr Build Mater
2011;25:591–7.
structure. [4] Ferreira D, Bairán J, Marí A. Numerical simulation of shear-strengthened RC
Fiber reinforced concrete improves structural properties. beams. Eng Struct 2013;46:359–74.
Moreover, the compatibility between the base and the retrofitting [5] Iskhakov I, Ribakov Y, Holschemacher K, Mueller T. High performance
repairing of reinforced concrete structures. Mater Des 2013;44:216–22.
materials and the extended but thinner cracking pattern, prevents
[6] Nanni A. A new tool for concrete and masonry repair: strengthening with fiber-
the income of aggressive agents increasing the durability of the reinforced cementitious matrix composites. Concr Int 2012;34(4):43–9.
reinforcement. These conditions are very important taking into [7] Landa Avilés G. Estudio experimental sobre el refuerzo a cortante de
account that one of the main goals of repairing works is that estructuras de hormigón mediante materiales compuestos; 2002.
[8] ACI 544.1R. Report on fiber reinforced concrete; 1996–2002.
structure exhibits integrity and provides a sense of security. [9] Vandewalle L. Hybrid fiber reinforced concrete. Meas Monit Model Concr Prop
The shear tests of the reinforced concrete beams presented a 2006:77–82.
high dispersion of results. This dispersion can be attributed to [10] Caverzan A, Cadoni E, di Prisco M. Tensile behaviour of high performance fibre-
reinforced cementitious composites at high strain rates. Int J Impact Eng
the brittleness of shear failure and is similar to that found by other 2012;45:28–38.
authors for this type of tests. [11] Nguyen TH, Toumi A, Turatsinze A. Mechanical properties of steel fibre
The beams strengthened or repaired with plain concrete jacket- reinforced and rubberized cement-based mortars. Mater Des 2010;31:641–7.
[12] Naaman AE, Paramasivam P, Balazs GL, Eibl J, Erdelyi L, Hassoun NM, et al.
ing presented debonding and spalling of the reinforcement. The Reinforced and prestressed concrete using HPFRCC matrices. High
addition of fibers to the jacketing prevented the debonding, pre- performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites. RILEM Proc 1996;31:
serving the integrity of the beams. This fact not only results in 291–348.
[13] Mesbah HA, Kassimi F, Yahia A, Khayat H. Flexural performance of reinforced
durability increase but it is also very important from the structural concrete beams repaired with fiber-reinforced SCC. In: Fifth Intnl. RILEM
point of view because if the reinforcement debonds its contribu- Symp. On Self Compacting Concrete; 2000.
tion is lost. [14] Li VC, Horii H, Kabele P, Kanda T, Lim YM. Repair and retrofit with engineered
cementitious composites. Eng Fract Mech 2000;65:317–34.
Generally, strengthened and repaired beams presented stiffness
[15] Li VC. High performance fiber reinforced cementitious composites as durable
increase due to the transverse section enlargement. Statistically, material for concrete structure repair. Int J Restor Internationale Zeitschrift für
the beams with stirrups strengthened with fiber reinforced con- Bauinstandsetzen 2004;10(2):163–80.
crete with 30 kg/m3 and 60 kg/m3 of fibers increased their shear [16] Banthia N, Bindiganavile V. Repairing with hybrid-fiber-reinforced concrete.
Concr Int 2001;23(06):29–32.
strength while for the case of beams strengthened with plain [17] Kim JHJ, Lim YM, Won JP, Park HG, Lee KM. Shear capacity and failure behavior
concrete no strength increase was found. In conclusion, the fiber of DFRCC repaired RC beams at tensile region. Eng Struct 2007;29:121–31.
658 G. Ruano et al. / Construction and Building Materials 54 (2014) 646–658
[18] Wang YC, Lee MG. Ultra-high strength steel fiber reinforced concrete for [32] Li M, Li VC. High-early-strength engineered cementitious composites for fast,
strengthening of RC frames. J Mar Sci Technol 2007;15(3):210–8. durable concrete repair-material properties. ACI Mater J 2011;1:3–12.
[19] Farhat FA, Nicolaides D, Kanellopoulos A, Karihaloo KL. High performance [33] Luković M, Ye G, Van Breugel K. Reliable concrete repair: a critical review. In:
fibre-reinforced cementitious composite (CARDIFRC) – performance and International Conference Structural Faults and Repair; 2012. <http://
application to retrofitting. Eng Fract Mech 2007;74:151–67. repository.tudelft.nl/view/ir/uuid%3A0bb2bee0-027c-4384-a1fc-
[20] Massicotte B, Boucher-Proulx G. Seismic retrofitting of rectangular bridge piers c995c9bba1c0/>.
with UHPFRC jackets. BEFIB; 2008. [34] Tayeh BA, Abu Bakar BH, Megat Johari MA, Ratnam MM. The relationship
[21] Brühwiler E, Denarié E. Rehabilitation of concrete structures using ultra-high between substrate roughness parameters and bond strength of ultra high-
performance fiber reinforced concrete. In: The second International performance fiber concrete. J Adhes Sci Technol 2013;27(16):1790–810.
Symposium on Ultra High Performance Concrete; 2008. [35] Huang X, Ranade R, Li VC. On the use of recycled tire rubber to develop low E-
[22] Marini A, Zanotti C, Plizzari G. Seismic strengthening of existing structures by modulus ECC for durable concrete repairs. Constr Build Mater 2013;46:134–41.
means of fibre reinforced concret floor diaphragms. BEFIB 2008. [36] ASTM C 39. Test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete
[23] Skazlic M, Bjegovic D, Serdar M. Utilization of high performance fiber- specimens. Annual book of ASTM standards; 1986. 04.02.
reinforced micro-concrete as a repair material. Concr Repair Rehab Retrofitt [37] ASTM C 469. Standard test method for static modulus of elasticity and
2009;II:859–62. Poisson‘s ratio of concrete in compression. Annual book of ASTM standards;
[24] Boscato G, Russo S. Experimental investigation on repair of RC pavements with 1987. 04.02.
SFRC. Concr Repair Rehab Retrofitt 2009;II:1285–9. [38] Rilem TC 162-TDF. Test and design methods for steel fibre reinforced concrete.
[25] Martinola G, Meda A, Plizzari GA, Rinaldi Z. Strengthening and repair OS RC Mater Struct 2002;35:579–82.
beams with fiber reinforced concrete. Cem Concr Compos 2010. [39] Ortiz J, Aguado A, Agulló L, García T. Influence of environmental temperatures
[26] Rosignoli D, Simonelli F, Meda A, Rosignoli R. High-performance fiber- on the concrete compressive strength: simulation of hot and cold weather
reinforced concrete jacketing in a seismic retrofitting application. Concr conditions. Cem Concr Res 2005;35:1970–9.
Repair Bull 2012:26–31. [40] Ruano GJ. Refuerzo de elementos estructurales de hormigón con hormigón
[27] Radik M, Erdogmus E, Schafer T. Strengthening two-way reinforced concrete reforzado con fibras. PhD thesis, National University of Tucumán, Argentina;
floor slabs using polypropylene fiber reinforcement. J Mater Civil Eng 2013.
2011;23(5):562–71. [41] Parmentier B, De Grove E, Vandewalle L, Van Rickstal F. Dispersion of the
[28] Maringoni S, Meda A, Mostosi S, Riva P. Strengthening of RC members by mechanical properties of FRC investigated by different bending tests. Tailor
means of high performance concrete. American Concrete Institute, ACI Special, Made Concr Struct 2008:507–12.
Publication; 2012. 289SP:201–13. [42] IRAM. IRAM 50000. Cement. Common cement. Composition, specifications,
[29] Kamada T, Li VC. Effects of surface preparation on the fracture behavior of ECC/ conformity evaluation and reception conditions. IRAM 2010.
concrete repair system. Cem Concr Compos 2000;22(6):423–31. [43] EN 14651. Test method for metallic fibered concrete – measuring the flexural
[30] Lepech MD, Li VC. Sustainable pavement overlays using engineered tensile strength (limit of proportionality (LOP), residual). European Standard;
cementitious composites. Int J Pavement Res Technol 2010;3(5):241–50. 2005. p. 1–17.
[31] Li M, Li VC. Influence of material ductility on performance of concrete repair. [44] CIRSOC 201. Reglamento argentino para estructuras de hormigón; 2005.
ACI Mater J 2009;106(5):419–28. [45] Claderas A. Shear design of reinforced high-strength concrete beams; 2002.