Abstract

Existing beam-based ASTM test methods for the assessment of post-crack performance of Fiber Reinforced Concrete (FRC) and Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete (FRS) contain detailed specifications for many components of the test apparatus including the yoke assembly for measuring specimen deflection and the control system required for the test machine. However, there is limited attention paid to the design of the supporting rollers with the result that laboratories have been left to develop their own designs for this component of the test apparatus. Simple free-body force calculations for a cracked FRC beam indicate that friction in the supporting rollers can significantly influence the apparent post-crack performance of a beam. The present investigation has confirmed experimentally that the apparent post-crack performance of a third-point loaded FRC beam will be biased as a result of friction in the supporting rollers. Rollers that fail to roll during a test will lead to over-estimated post-crack performance. Due to the potentially serious consequences of unconservative FRC performance estimation a “standard” design for a supporting roller has been proposed for use in all ASTM beam tests. Use of this supporting roller design will lead to a reduction in performance variability between laboratories and improve the confidence users can have in the post-crack properties of FRC.

References

1.
ASTM C1399/C1399M
:
Standard Test Method for Obtaining Average Residual-Strength of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete
,
Annual Book of ASTM Standards
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
2012
.
2.
ASTM C1609/C1609M
:
Standard Test Method for Flexural Toughness of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (Using Beam with Third-point Loading)
,
Annual Book of ASTM Standards
,
ASTM International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
2010
.
3.
BS-EN 14488
:
Testing Sprayed Concrete
,
British Standards
,
London
,
2005
.
4.
BS-EN 14651
:
Test Method for Metallic Fibre Concrete—Measuring the Flexural Tensile Strength (Limit of Proportionality (LOP), Residual)
,
British Standards
,
London
,
2006
.
5.
Zollo
,
R. F.
, “
Analysis of Support Apparatus for Flexural Load-deflection Testing: Minimizing Bias
,”
ASTM J. Test. Eval.
, Vol.
41
, No.
1
,
2013
, 104251. https://doi.org/10.1520/JTE104251
6.
Barros
,
J. A. O.
and
Figueiras
,
J. A.
, “
Flexural Behavior of SFRC: Testing and Modeling
,”
ASCE J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
, Vol.
11
, No.
4
,
1999
, pp.
331
339
. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(1999)11:4(331)
7.
Bakhshi
,
M.
,
Barsby
,
C.
and
Mobasher
,
B.
, “
Back-Calculation of Tensile Properties of Strain Softening and Hardening Cement Composites
,”
High Performance Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites 6
,
G. J.
Parra-Monesinos
,
H. W.
Reinhardt
, and
A. E.
Naaman
, Eds,
RILEM
,
Bagneux, France
,
2012
, pp.
83
90
.
8.
van Mier
,
J. G. M.
,
Concrete Fracture: A Multiscale Approach
,
CRC Press
,
Boca Raton, FL
,
2013
.
9.
Bernard
,
E. S.
and
Xu
,
G. G.
, “
A Comparison of Flexural Performance for Third-point Loaded and Centrally-loaded Fiber Reinforced Concrete Beams
,”
J. ASTM Int.
, Vol.
4
, No.
3
,
2007
, pp.
1
12
.
10.
Stahli
,
P.
and
van Mier
,
J. G. M.
, “
Three-Fibre-Type Hybrid Fibre Concrete
,”
Proceedings of FRAMCOS 5
,
V. C.
Li
,
C. K. Y.
Leung
,
K. J.
Willam
, and
S. L.
Billington
, Eds.,
2004
, pp.
1105
1112
.
11.
Wille
,
K.
and
Parra-Montesinos
,
G. J.
, “
Effect of Beam Size, Casting Method, and Support Conditions on Flexural Behavior of Ultra-High-Performance Fiber-Reinforced Concrete
,”
ACI Mater. J.
, Vol.
109
, No.
3
,
2012
, pp.
379
388
.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.