Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction

Tensile Strength Improvement of Concrete Slabs using Polyurea Spray

--Manuscript Draft--
Manuscript Number: SCENG-818
Full Title: Tensile Strength Improvement of Concrete Slabs using Polyurea Spray
Manuscript Region of Origin: PAKISTAN
Article Type: Technical Paper
Section/Category: Structural
Manuscript Classifications: 17.05: Structural behavior; 17.06: Structural design; 17.09: Structural
systems
Funding Information:
Abstract: Ductility is a desirable trait in an otherwise brittle concrete which is
conventionally achieved via methods like introduction of steel
reinforcement. While Thin Spray-on Liner (TSL) is a material used in
underground support systems to enhance strength and ductility of rock
and shotcrete, its application in concrete is a promising prospect. The
study in this paper was conducted to observe the effect of application of
Polyurea TSL on the flexural properties of unreinforced and lightly
reinforced concrete slabs of varying strengths applied with varying
thicknesses of Polyurea. Comparative analysis indicated increase in
Stiffness, Peak Load, Yield Load, Ductility and Energy Dissipation with
the application of Polyurea. Similar trend was observed for increasing
thickness of Polyurea.
Corresponding Author: Uzair Khaleeq uz Zaman
National University of Sciences and Technology
Islamabad, Pakistan PAKISTAN
Corresponding Author E-Mail: uzair.khaleeq@ceme.nust.edu.pk
Order of Authors: Dr. Muhammad Rizwan
Shaheer Khaleequzzaman
Uzair Khaleeq uz Zaman
Syed Aqib Fida
Amjed Shahzad
Muneeb Rehman
Muhammad Oneeb Sulaiman
Suggested Reviewers: Mustafa Gul
University of Alberta
Dr. Gül’s research interests lie in the area of sustainability with a focus
on improving the performance of Civil Infrastructure Systems. He has
numerous works on Structural Dynamics, Structural System Identification
and Damage Detection. Keeping this in view, he is a good candidate for
being suggested reviewer.
Opposed Reviewers:
Additional Information:
Question Response

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
The flat fee for including color figures in print is $800,
regardless of the number of color figures. There is no fee for
online only color figures. If you decide to not print figures in
color, please ensure that the color figures will also make
sense when printed in black-and-white, and remove any No
reference to color in the text. Only one file is accepted for
each figure. Do you intend to pay to include color figures in
print? If yes, please indicate which figures in the comments
box.
Authors are required to attain permission to re-use content,
figures, tables, charts, maps, and photographs for which the
authors do not hold copyright. Figures created by the
authors but previously published under copyright elsewhere
may require permission. For more information see No
http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/9780784479018.ch03.
All permissions must be uploaded as a permission file in PDF
format. Are there any required permissions that have not yet
been secured? If yes, please explain in the comment box.
ASCE does not review manuscripts that are being
considered elsewhere to include other ASCE Journals and
all conference proceedings. Is the article or parts of it being No
considered for any other publication? If your answer is yes,
please explain in the comments box below.
Is this article or parts of it already published in print or online
in any language? ASCE does not review content already
published (see next questions for conference papers and No
posted theses/dissertations). If your answer is yes, please
explain in the comments box below.
Has this paper or parts of it been published as a conference
proceeding? A conference proceeding may be reviewed for
publication only if it has been significantly revised and
contains 50% new content. Any content overlap should be No
reworded and/or properly referenced. If your answer is yes,
please explain in the comments box below and be prepared
to provide the conference paper.
ASCE allows submissions of papers that are based on
theses and dissertations so long as the paper has been
modified to fit the journal page limits, format, and tailored for
the audience. ASCE will consider such papers even if the
thesis or dissertation has been posted online provided that
the degree-granting institution requires that the thesis or
dissertation be posted. No

Is this paper a derivative of a thesis or dissertation posted or

about to be posted on the Internet? If yes, please provide
the URL or DOI permalink in the comment box below.

Each submission to ASCE must stand on its own and

represent significant new information, which may include
disproving the work of others. While it is acceptable to build
upon one’s own work or replicate other’s work, it is not
appropriate to fragment the research to maximize the
number of manuscripts or to submit papers that represent No
very small incremental changes. ASCE may use tools such
as CrossCheck, Duplicate Submission Checks, and Google
Scholar to verify that submissions are novel. Does the
manuscript constitute incremental work (i.e. restating raw
data, models, or conclusions from a previously published
study)?

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Authors are expected to present their papers within the
page limitations described in <u><i><a
href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/9780784479018"
target="_blank">Publishing in ASCE Journals: A Guide for
Authors</a></u></i>. Technical papers and Case Studies
must not exceed 30 double-spaced manuscript pages, No
including all figures and tables. Technical notes must not
exceed 7 double-spaced manuscript pages. Papers that
exceed the limits must be justified. Grossly over-length
papers may be returned without review. Does this paper
exceed the ASCE length limitations? If yes, please provide
justification in the comments box below.
All authors listed on the manuscript must have contributed to
the study and must approve the current version of the
manuscript. Are there any authors on the paper that do not No
meet these criteria? If the answer is yes, please explain in
the comments.
Was this paper previously declined or withdrawn from this or
another ASCE journal? If so, please provide the previous
manuscript number and explain what you have changed in No
this current version in the comments box below. You may
upload a separate response to reviewers if your comments
are extensive.
Companion manuscripts are discouraged as all papers
published must be able to stand on their own. Justification
must be provided to the editor if an author feels as though
the work must be presented in two parts and published
simultaneously. There is no guarantee that companions will
be reviewed by the same reviewers, which complicates the
review process, increases the risk for rejection and
potentially lengthens the review time. If this is a companion
paper, please indicate the part number and provide the title,
authors and manuscript number (if available) for the
companion papers along with your detailed justification for
the editor in the comments box below. If there is no
justification provided, or if there is insufficient justification,
the papers will be returned without review.
If this manuscript is intended as part of a Special Issue or
Collection, please provide the Special Collection title and
name of the guest editor in the comments box below.
Recognizing that science and engineering are best served
when data are made available during the review and
discussion of manuscripts and journal articles, and to allow
others to replicate and build on work published in ASCE
journals, all reasonable requests by reviewers for materials,
data, and associated protocols must be fulfilled. If you are
restricted from sharing your data and materials, please
explain below.
Papers published in ASCE Journals must make a The paper aims to explore alternative techniques for rapid construction
contribution to the core body of knowledge and to the and retrofit. In that, it attempts to find effects of Polyurea application,
advancement of the field. Authors must consider how their specifically, on structural elements which primarily act in flexure. These
new knowledge and/or innovations add value to the state of elements, being integral components of most structures, when equipped
the art and/or state of the practice. Please outline the with added strength and ductility, which this paper assesses, can be
specific contributions of this research in the comments box. effectively used to cater for load-inducing phenomena such as ponding
in roofs and cyclic loading in bridge and foundation slabs.

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
When submitting a new and revised manuscript, authors are
asked to include a Data Availability Statement containing
one or more of the following statements, with specific items
listed as appropriate. Please select any of the statements
below that apply to your manuscript. Also, please include the e. All data, models, and code generated or used during the study appear
selected statements in a separate "Data Availability in the submitted article.
Statement" section in your manuscript, directly before the
acknowledgements or references. The statement(s) listed in
your manuscript should match those you select in your
response to this question.
If there is anything else you wish to communicate to the
editor of the journal, please do so in this box.

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Manuscript Click here to access/download;Manuscript;Manuscript_v6_ACSE.docx

1 Tensile Strength Improvement of Concrete Slabs

2 using Polyurea Spray
3
4 Dr. Muhammad Rizwan, Assistant Professor, Structural Engineering Department, Military
5 College of Engineering, National University of Sciences and Technology, Risalpur, 23200,
6 Pakistan, riz_cheema2003@yahoo.com
7 Engr. Shaheer Khaleequzzaman, Graduate Engineer, Structural Engineering Department,
8 Military College of Engineering, National University of Sciences and Technology, Risalpur,
9 23200, Pakistan, shaheer_khaleeq@hotmail.com
10 Dr. Uzair Khaleeq uz Zaman*, Assistant Professor, Department of Mechatronics
11 Engineering, College of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering, National University of
12 Sciences and Technology, Islamabad, 44000, Pakistan, uzair.khaleeq@ceme.nust.edu.pk
13 Engr. Syed Aqib Fida, Graduate Engineer, Structural Engineering Department, Military
14 College of Engineering, National University of Sciences and Technology, Risalpur, 23200,
15 Pakistan, aqibfida1@gmail.com
16 Engr. Amjed Shahzad, Graduate Engineer, Structural Engineering Department, Military
17 College of Engineering, National University of Sciences and Technology, Risalpur, 23200,
18 Pakistan, amjadsb09@gmail.com
19 Engr. Muneeb Rehman, Graduate Engineer, Structural Engineering Department, Military
20 College of Engineering, National University of Sciences and Technology, Risalpur, 23200,
21 Pakistan, muneebr54@yahoo.com
22 Engr. Muhammad Oneeb Sulaiman, Graduate Engineer, Structural Engineering
23 Department, Military College of Engineering, National University of Sciences and
24 Technology, Risalpur, 23200, Pakistan, oneeb96@yahoo.com

25 * Corresponding author

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35
36 Abstract
37 Ductility is a desirable trait in an otherwise brittle concrete which is conventionally achieved via
38 methods like introduction of steel reinforcement. While Thin Spray-on Liner (TSL) is a material
39 used in underground support systems to enhance strength and ductility of rock and shotcrete, its
40 application in concrete is a promising prospect. The study in this paper was conducted to observe
41 the effect of application of Polyurea TSL on the flexural properties of unreinforced and lightly
42 reinforced concrete slabs of varying strengths applied with varying thicknesses of Polyurea.
43 Comparative analysis indicated increase in Stiffness, Peak Load, Yield Load, Ductility and Energy
44 Dissipation with the application of Polyurea. Similar trend was observed for increasing thickness
45 of Polyurea.

46 Keywords: Concrete Slabs, Flexural Strength, Polyurea, Tensile Strength, TSL

47 1 Introduction

48 Concrete, being increasingly used as a favored construction material, does not fully
49 acquire its effective usage unless its brittle nature is accounted for. In steel reinforcement,
50 concrete’s weakness in tension is countered with steel bars which are better suited to tensile
51 forces. When analyzing plain concrete beams for the loads and strains at which cracks occur in
52 different concrete mixes, it was concluded that cracking is not a sudden but a gradual process
53 where the critical stage that represents the limiting tensile strength of the concrete and is the
54 beginning of failure, occurs at between 70% and 90% of the ultimate load (Olapado, 1964).
55 Flexural tensile strength (Collins and Mitchell, 1987), Modulus of Rupture (MR) (NRMCA, 2016)
56 and Secant Elastic Modulus as the slope of the line from origin to the point corresponding to
57 40% of ultimate strength (Meng and Song, 2007), can accordingly be ascertained.

58 With respect to attainment of strength and ductility, synthetic polymer-based compounds

59 are making a huge impact in the tunneling and mining sectors where they act as effective roof
60 support systems that are easily applicable, elastic, and create a bond in voids between rocks
61 (Yilmaz et al., 2003). Thin Spray-on Liners (TSLs) are such compounds that have enjoyed
62 increased acceptance in the said sectors in countries such as Canada and South Africa (Mpunzi
63 et al., 2015).

64 Reactive polymer-based TSLs are made from isocyanates and acrylates. These are
65 normally converted into liner material via physical combination of two liquid chemicals or a
66 liquid and a powder phase. Some important TSL properties include tensile strength, adhesive
67 strength and elongation capacity (Yilmaz et al., 2003). Moreover, in TSLs, cure rate was found
68 to be closely related with rate of strength development over time (Esplay et al., 2001) while
69 timing of epoxy application was found to be an important aspect since it interfered with the
70 curing process being in contact with the TSL surface (Yilmaz, 2012). A comparison between
71 tensile strengths of 20 TSL products over 28 days of curing period was used to categorize them
72 into four groups where it was observed that tensile strength increased in a logarithmic trend
73 with increasing curing period (Yilmaz, 2010).

74 When tested with thin coatings of TSL, it was found that tensile strength of rock improved
75 by up to 30% while that of shotcrete by more than 40% with increased ductility, flexibility and
76 energy absorption capacity associated with failure (Mpunzi et al., 2015).

77 With respect to effects of TSL on concrete, TSL application was found to help in reduced
78 fire effects on properties of concrete slabs and their reinforcements while also demonstrating
79 a better flexural behavior of slabs when applied on the tension side as opposed to application
80 on the compression side which had no effect on the flexural behavior. TSL application on the
81 tension side resulted in increase in the capacity of slabs by about 50% (Youssef et al., 2008).

82 Polyurea is a type of TSL that is currently being used for hydro-isolation (Szafran and
83 Matusiak, 2017), fire-resistance (Arunkumar et al., 2015) and has high durability, chemical
84 resistance and high tensile strength1. Obtained from the reaction of isocyanate and synthetic
85 resin blend which are combined at high temperature and pressure in an appropriate ratio, it
86 forms the chain structure as shown in Fig. 1:

87 {Please insert Fig. 1 about here}

88 The three-stage process of surface preparation, mixing of the components and subsequent
89 application require special conditions of high temperature and pressure which is provided by
90 a special plural-component sprayer. Polyurea’s retrofit application and subsequent impact
91 resistance based on testing upon masonry walls (Tanizawa et al., 2009) and reinforced concrete
92 panels (Tinsley and Myers, 2007) were also investigated. Furthermore, use of discrete fiber
93 reinforced polyurea system showed increase in flexure and shear capacity (Greene and Myers,
94 2013).

1
VersaFlex Polyurea FSS 45DC Datasheet. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://sweets.construction.com/swts_content_files/152198/451903.pdf.
 95 Polyurea was found to be effective in reducing the vulnerability of structures by
96 controlling panel displacements and exhibiting energy dissipation. A comparison of
97 displacements for Bare (non-Polyurea coated) and Polyurea coated slabs showed improved
98 rebound ability of the Polyurea coating (Raman et al., 2012).

99 VersaFlex Polyurea (TSL used in the current study) had the following physical properties
100 as per its Product Data Sheet:

101 {Please insert Tab. 1 about here}

102 Consequently, the purpose of this study was to assess the effect of retrofit application of
103 Polyurea on tensile strength and ductility of concrete slabs with the said material being easy to
104 apply and capable of adding aesthetic value to structures. The paper is divided into four
105 Sections. Section 2 provides the experimental program specifying project methodology, details
106 of specimens and the test setup. Section 3 discusses the obtained results and specimen cross-
107 comparisons, while Section 4 gives the conclusions and recommendations.

108 2 Experimental Program

109 2.1 Methodology
110 The methodology adopted for the study is shown in Fig. 2:

111 {Please insert Fig. 2 about here}

112 2.2 Selection of Parameters and Variables

113 To analyze the tensile strength and ductility of concrete slabs, following parameters were
114 selected to be studied:

115  Peak Load

116  Yield Load
117  Ductility Index
118  Yield Secant Stiffness
119  Energy Dissipation

120 The said parameters could be studied via Load-Displacement graphs of the concrete slabs.
121 Furthermore, in order to quantify these parameters, the following variables were chosen to be
122 studied:
123  Polyurea Coating Thickness (2 mm, 4 mm and 6 mm against no coating for control
124 slabs)
125  Concrete Strength (1:1.5:3 and 1:2:4 Ratios)
126  Presence/Absence of Light Reinforcement (0.21% reinforcement ratio in case of
127 reinforced slabs).

128 2.3 Design of Test Slabs

129 2.3.1 Slab Size

130 To standardize the test, slab dimensions were chosen to be kept uniform. The selected
131 dimensions were 3' x 3' x 2'' as shown in Fig. 3. These dimensions were also selected to ensure
132 two-way action in the slabs as well as flexure as the dominant failure mechanism. The thickness
133 chosen was also selected to be greater than the specific code minimum.

134 {Please insert Fig. 3 about here}

135 2.3.2 Number of Specimens

136 A total of 32 slabs were cast in the divisional hierarchy as shown in Fig. 4:

137 {Please insert Fig. 4 about here}

138 2.3.3 Reinforcement Details

139 # 1 reinforcing bars (5/32 in diameter) of Grade 40 steel were provided at maximum
140 allowed spacing as per ACI Code (ACI 318-14) in the arrangement shown in Fig. 5:

141 {Please insert Fig. 5 about here}

142 2.3.4 Nomenclature

143 The following nomenclature was adopted to identify the different slab specimens:
144  A = 1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio
145  B = 1:2:4 Mix Ratio
146  R = Reinforced Slab
147  U = Unreinforced Slab
148  P = Polyurea Coated Slab
149  C = Control Slab
150  2,4,6 = Thickness of Polyurea Coating
151 For example, “ARP 6” stood to identify “1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio, Reinforced, Polyurea-coated slab with
152 6 mm Coating Thickness” while “BUC” identified “1:2:4 Mix Ratio, Unreinforced, Control Slab”.

153 2.4 Material

154 2.4.1 Aggregate

155 Fine Aggregate used for slab casting had a Fineness Modulus (FM) of 2.01. Slump achieved
156 during pouring was 50.8 mm. Impact Value, Apparent Specific Gravity, Bulk Specific Gravity and
157 Absorption of Coarse (1/2 in Down) and Fine (Pan) Aggregate are summarized in Table 2:

158 {Please insert Tab. 2 about here}

159 2.4.2 Polyurea Application

160 Thickness of applied Polyurea was controlled by ascertaining number of passes required
161 to obtain specified thicknesses. The slabs were allowed to cure for 28 days before testing.

162 {Please insert Fig. 6 about here}

163 2.5 Testing Setup and Procedure

164 2.5.1 Testing Setup

165 Following test setup was devised to carry out the testing:

166 {Please insert Fig. 7 about here}

167 A masonry wall was built to provide a two-way support to the slab. A steel pipe was
168 further added atop the wall to provide roller support. The steel pipe was at 2 in from the edge
169 of the slab, hence, making a clear span of 32 in both ways. A Linear Displacement Sensor (LDS)
170 was placed at the mid-point of the masonry wall to measure the center-point displacement of
171 the slab. To protect the LDS from debris damage, a welded frame was placed exposing only the
172 movable component of the LDS exposed.

173 The test specimen was placed above the steel pipe. A Distribution Plate was placed above
174 the specimen followed by a Load Cell to measure the load being applied by the Jack which was
175 in turn held suspended from the Reaction Frame with the help of steel chains.

176 {Please insert Fig. 8 about here}

177
178 2.5.2 Instrumentation

179 The equipment used in testing had the following specification:

180  Hydraulic Jack and 10,000 psi Hydraulic Pump
181  100 mm Linear Displacement Sensor
182  Data Logger
183  60 Ton Load Cell
184  Compatible Computer System
185  14 in x 14 in Steel Distribution Plate
186  # 4 Bar Welded Frame
187  Reaction Frame

188 2.5.3 Testing Procedure

189 Prior to testing, slabs were levelled and centered with respect to both the Jack and the
190 LDS. A 14” x 14” Steel Distribution Plate was placed at the center of the slab upon which the
191 Load Cell was placed. The Jack was allowed to come in contact with the Load Cell after which it
192 was gradually pumped, and data acquisition commenced.

193 Data was transmitted via Data Logger to the Computer System which employed a task
194 specific specialized software to monitor constant readings of Load against Displacement. Slabs
195 were loaded until failure or upon reaching maximum measurable displacement (LDS used
196 measured to a maximum of 100 mm). The specialized software used was StrainSmart and the
197 acquired data was transferred into Microsoft Excel to retrieve required graphs.

198 3 Experimental Results and Discussion

199 3.1 Results

200 Since each slab type had two specimens, the results obtained were averaged out which
201 were further analyzed by comparison between variables. Yield and Ultimate Loads and Energy
202 Dissipation were calculated from the Load-Displacement Graphs obtained.

203
204
205
206 3.1.1 Ultimate and Yield Loads
207 Comparison of Yield and Ultimate Loads between slabs coated with differing thicknesses
208 of Polyurea produced the following results:

209 {Please insert Fig. 9 about here}

210 {Please insert Fig. 10 about here}
211 {Please insert Fig. 11 about here}
212 {Please insert Fig. 12 about here}

213 3.1.2 Deflection and Ductility

214 Comparison of maximum deflection between slabs coated with differing thicknesses of
215 Polyurea produced the following results. It should however be noted that due to experimental
216 limitations, maximum deflection was limited to around 90 mm while complete failure of some
217 specimens did not occur at the said deflection.

218 {Please insert Fig. 13 about here}

219 {Please insert Fig. 14 about here}
220 {Please insert Fig. 15 about here}
221 {Please insert Fig. 16 about here}

222 3.1.3 Energy Dissipation

223 Comparison of Energy Dissipation (Ordinate Axis) and Total Energy (Upper Abscissa Axis)
224 between slabs coated with differing thicknesses of Polyurea produced the following results. The
225 lines and bars in the graphs correspond to energy dissipation and total energy, respectively.
226 {Please insert Fig. 17 about here}
227 {Please insert Fig. 18 about here}
228 {Please insert Fig. 19 about here}
229 {Please insert Fig. 20 about here}

230 3.2 Discussion and Analysis

231 The results clearly indicated that Polyurea application (and subsequent increase in
232 Polyurea thickness) did result in increase in slab strength in terms of both Yield and Ultimate
233 Loads. This trend also generally mapped onto the variables of ductility, energy dissipation and
234 total energy.
235 Comparison between concrete strengths however (such as between ARP-2 and BRP-2)
236 did not give significant deviations in the results. Hence, it was inferred that Polyurea was the
237 dominant factor in determining slab strengths when applied instead of concrete mix ratio. A
238 further comparison to analyze the advantage that unreinforced, polyurea-coated slabs
239 exhibited over same strength, reinforced control slabs gave the following results:

240 {Please insert Fig. 21 about here}

241 {Please insert Fig. 22 about here}

242 The results indicated that Polyurea application resulted in substantial increase in ductility
243 of the slabs. It should be noted here that for a number of samples, the obtained displacements
244 did not coincide with displacements at failure (all slabs coated with 6 mm thickness polyurea
245 coating and most steel-reinforced slabs with polyurea coating) given the test setup limitation
246 of measuring beyond 100 mm (practical setup and test constraints further limited this value to
247 around 90 mm). Hence, ductility was substantially improved for slabs coated with Polyurea.

248 4 Conclusions and Recommendations

249 4.1 Assessment of Parameters and Conclusions

250 All parameters previously determined (stiffness, peak load, yield, ductility and energy
251 dissipation) were found to have improved with the application of polyurea on the slabs. More
252 energy was dissipated due to application of polyurea while at the same time, collapse occurred
253 at a greater displacement for these slabs. This goes on to show that control of effective energy
254 dissipation in critical or sensitive areas is possible with the application of polyurea.
255 Furthermore, polyurea application can result in aesthetically pleasing structures.

256 4.2 Recommendations

257 Given the results obtained in this study as well as those discussed in the introductory
258 review, use of polyurea may be recommended for strengthening/enhancing ductile
259 performance of flexural members in flexural components of a structure. Also due to higher
260 ductility, it may also be recommended to enhance seismic performance of structural
261 components. However, the following variables need to be studied for more in-depth knowledge
262 into polyurea performance and to improve the reliability of results over a wide spectrum of
263 applications:
264  Behavior of slabs for large spans when treated with TSL
265  Effect of confinement on compression members treated with TSL
266  Effect of differing steel reinforcement ratios on TSL-coated slabs
267  Effect of change in dimensions on TSL-coated slabs

268 Acknowledgement
269 The researchers would like to extend acknowledgement of invaluable support and input
270 for this study by the following:
271  Banu Mukhtar Contracting and Products (Pvt.) Ltd., Pakistan
272  Kansai Paint, Pakistan
273  Building Research Station Lahore – Government of the Punjab, Pakistan.

274 References
275 Arunkumar, T., Ramchandran, S., Sebastian, P. and Raj, C. 2015. “Thermal and Fire Retardant
276 Behaviour of Polyurea”, International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 10(11):
277 10159-10162, ISSN 0973-4562.
278 Chemie-Schule, D. 2019. “Polyharnstoffe (Polyureas)”. Retrieved from Die Chemie-Schule (The
279 Chemistry School): https://www.chemie-schule.de/KnowHow/Polyharnstoff.
280 Collins, M. and Mitchell, D. 1987. “Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Structures”, 2nd edn,
281 London: Spon Press: 784.
282 Esplay, S., Gustas, R., Heilig, J. and Morean, L. 2001. “Thin Spray-on Liner Research and Field
283 Trials at INCO”, Surface Support Liners: Membranes, Shotcrete and Mesh, Australian Centre for
284 Geomechanics, Perth - Australia, Sect. 25.
285 Greene, C. E. and Myers, J. J. 2013. “Flexural and Shear Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
286 Members Strengthened with a Discrete Fiber-Reinforced Polyurea System”. Journal of
287 Composites for Construction, 17(1):108-116. http://doi.org/ 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-
288 5614.0000308
289 Meng, X. and Song, Y. 2007. “Residual Tensile Strength of Plain Concrete Under Tensile Fatigue
290 Loading”, Journal of Wuhan University of Technology-Mater. Sci. Ed.: 564-568.
291 Mpunzi, P., Masethe, R., Rizwan, M. and Stacey, T.R. 2015. “Enhancement of the Tensile Strength
292 of Rock and Shotcrete by Thin Spray-on Liners”, Tunnelling and Underground Space
293 Technology: 369-375. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.05.013
294 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association. 2016. “Concrete in Practice: What, why & how?”,
295 Silver Spring, MD: NRMCA, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11595-006-3564-6
296 Olapado, I. O. 1964. “Cracking and Failure in Plain Concrete Beams”, Magazine of Concrete
297 Research, 16(47): 103-110, https://doi.org/10.1680/macr.1964.16.47.103
298 Raman, S., Ngo, T., Mendis, P., and Pham, T. 2012. “Elastomeric Polymers for Retrofitting of
299 Reinforced Concrete Structures against the Explosive Effects of Blast”. Advances in Materials
300 Science and Engineering: 2012, https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/754142
301 Szafran, J., and Matusiak, A. 2017. “Modern Spray Insulations in Construction on the example of
302 PUR Foam And Polyurea (Nowoczesne Natryskowe W Budownictwie Na Przykladzie Pianki
303 PUR I Polimocznika)”. Scientific and Technical Conference on Modern Materials, Techniques
304 and Technologies in Contemporary Construction.
305 Tanizawa, Y., Myers, J. and Sinclair, R. 2009. “In-plane Response of an Altenative URM Infill Wall
306 System with and without a Polyurea Retrofit”. FRPRCS-9 Proceedings July 2009. Sydney,
307 Australia.
308 Tinsley, M. and Myers, J. 2007. “Investigation of a High-Volume Fly Ash-Wood Fiber Material
309 Subjected to Low-Velocity Impact and Blast Loads”. Missouri: Center for Infrastructure
310 Engineering studies Report, University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla.
311 Yilmaz, H., Saydam, S., and Toper, A. Z. 2003. “Emerging Support Concept: Thin Spray-on
312 Liners”. International Mining Congress & Exhibition ot Turkey-IMCET: 65-72, 2003, ISBN: 975-
313 395-605-3.
314 Yilmaz, H. 2012. “Comparison of Tensile-Bond Strength of Thin Spray-on Liners”. International
315 Journal of Mining Reclamation and Environment. 27(1): 56-71, http://doi.org/
316 10.1080/17480930.2012.665219
317 Yilmaz, H. 2010. “Tensile Strength Testing of Thin Spray-on Liner Products (TSLs) and
318 Shotcrete”. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. 110(10): 559-
319 569.
320 Youssef, M., El-Fitiany, S., and Elfeki, M. 2008. “Flexural Behavior of Protected Concrete Slabs
321 after Fire Exposure”, In book: ACI SP-255: Designing Concrete Structures for Fire Safety,
322 Chapter: 3, Publisher: American Concrete Institute, http://doi.org/ 10.14359/20093
323
324
325
326
327 Tab. 1 Polyurea product properties (VersaFlex Polyurea FSS 45DC Datasheet)
Properties Test Method Typical Value
Tensile Strength ASTM D638 1800 – 2400 psi
Tensile elongation ASTM D638 450 – 520 %
100 % Modulus ASTM D638 960 psi
300 % Modulus ASTM D638 1450 psi
Gel Time ASTM D1640 15 – 30 sec
Curing Time ASTM D1640 60 – 120 min
328

329 Tab. 2 Aggregate Properties

Impact Apparent Bulk Sp. Absorption
Value Sp. Gravity Gravity
½ in Down Aggregate 10.62 2.55 2.49 0.86 %
Pan Aggregate 24.39 2.44 2.38 0.84 %
330

331
Figure Click here to access/download;Figure;Figures_v2.docx

5 Fig. 1 Polyurea chain structure (Chemie-Schule, 2019)

6

10

11

12

13

14

15 Fig. 2 Proposed Methodology

16

17

18 Fig. 3 Slab dimensions

19

20

21
22
Total
Specimens
32 Slabs

(1:1.5:3 Mix (1:2:4 Mix

Ratio) Ratio)
16 Slabs 16 Slabs

Reinforced Unreinforced Reinforced Unreinforced

8 Slabs 8 Slabs 8 Slabs 8 Slabs

Control Control Control Control

2 Slabs 2 Slabs 2 Slabs 2 Slabs

2 mm Polyurea 2 mm Polyurea 2 mm Polyurea 2 mm Polyurea

Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness
2 Slabs 2 Slabs 2 Slabs 2 Slabs

4 mm Polyurea 4 mm Polyurea 4 mm Polyurea 4 mm Polyurea

Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness
2 Slabs 2 Slabs 2 Slabs 2 Slabs

6 mm Polyurea 6 mm Polyurea 6 mm Polyurea 6 mm Polyurea

Thickness Thickness Thickness Thickness
2 Slabs 2 Slabs 2 Slabs 2 Slabs

23

24 Fig. 4 Specimens’ Distribution

25

26

27 Fig. 5 Reinforcement Details

28

29

30

31
32

33 Fig. 6 Polyurea application procedure

34

35 (a)
36

37 (b)
38 Fig. 7 Test setup (a) without test specimen and (b) with test specimen

39

40

41

42

43
44

45 Fig. 8 Actual test setup

46

47
48 Fig. 9 Comparison of 1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio, Unreinforced Slabs [Y = Load at Yield, U =
49 Ultimate Load]

50

51
52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60 Fig. 10 Comparison of 1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio, Reinforced Slabs [Y = Load at Yield, U =

61 Ultimate Load]

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69
70 Fig. 11 Comparison of 1:2:4 Mix Ratio, Unreinforced Slabs [Y = Load at Yield, U =
71 Ultimate Load]

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79 Fig. 12 Comparison of 1:2:4 Mix Ratio, Reinforced Slabs [Y = Load at Yield, U = Ultimate
80 Load]

81
 82

83

84

85

86

87

88
89 Fig. 13 Comparison of 1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio, Unreinforced Slabs

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97 Fig. 14 Comparison of 1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio, Reinforced Slabs (*Slab Attained Maximum
98 Measurable Displacement Prior to Complete Failure)

99

100

101

102

103

104

105 Fig. 15 Comparison of 1:2:4 Mix Ratio, Unreinforced Slabs (*Slab Attained Maximum
106 Measurable Displacement Prior to Complete Failure)

107

108

109
110

111

112

113

114

115

116 Fig. 16 Comparison of 1:2:4 Mix Ratio, Reinforced Slabs (*Slabs Attained Maximum
117 Measurable Displacement Prior to Complete Failure)

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125 Fig. 17 Comparison of 1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio, Unreinforced Slabs [Lines and Bars Correspond
126 to Energy Dissipation and Total Energy Respectively]

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134 Fig. 18 Comparison of 1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio, Reinforced Slabs [Lines and Bars Correspond to
135 Energy Dissipation and Total Energy Respectively]

136

137
138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145 Fig. 19 Comparison of 1:2:4 Mix Ratio, Unreinforced Slabs [Lines and Bars Correspond
146 to Energy Dissipation and Total Energy Respectively]

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155 Fig. 20 Comparison of 1:2:4 Mix Ratio, Reinforced Slabs [Lines and Bars Correspond to
156 Energy Dissipation and Total Energy Respectively]

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164 Fig. 21 Comparison of Unreinforced, Polyurea-Coated Slabs with Steel Reinforced Slabs
165 for 1:1.5:3 Mix Ratio
166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173 Fig. 22 Comparison of Unreinforced, Polyurea-Coated Slabs with Steel Reinforced Slabs
174 for 1:2:4 Mix Ratio