Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Effect of steel fibres in combination with different reinforcing ratios on

the performance of continuous beams
Frank Küsel ⇑, Elsabe Kearsley
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

h i g h l i g h t s

Significant moment redistribution occurs before plastic behaviour.

Steel fibres minimise deflections at lower loads.

The shape of the moment curvature relationship relates to moment redistribution.

Fibre effectiveness can increase with increasing reinforcing bar ratios.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The ability of statically indeterminate structures to redistribute moments, thus fully utilising the capacity
Received 20 December 2018 of non-critical sections, leads to improved structural efficiency. The effect of steel fibres on moment redis-
Received in revised form 13 July 2019 tribution in reinforced concrete beams was investigated to determine whether the addition of fibres
Accepted 23 July 2019
affects the ability of beams to redistribute moments. The results of fifteen two-span continuous beams,
each containing a unique combination of steel fibres and reinforcing bars, indicated significant moment
redistribution before plastic behaviour. An optimum 1.5% fibre content in terms of moment redistribution
Keywords:
corresponded with a flatter post-peak moment-curvature relationship. The addition of fibres led to
Fibre reinforced concrete
Moment redistribution
reduced deflections, with fibre effectiveness increasing with increasing reinforcing ratios.
Deflections Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Continuous beams

1. Introduction load-deflection curves in statically indeterminate structures rein-

The danger of brittle failure in concrete structures is averted by
suitable design with steel reinforcing ensuring ductile behaviour.
Steel fibres are used in concrete to prevent brittle failure, particu-
larly in higher strength concretes. The ductility provided by steel
bar reinforcing allows possible redistribution of forces in statically
indeterminate structures. Moment redistribution results in a
change in the distribution of moments in a structure which differ
from the moments obtained from an elastic analysis [1–7]. This
behaviour allows for the utilisation of the full capacity of non-
critical sections, leading to a simplification in reinforcement
requirements at critical sections.
An incentive for using steel fibres is to reduce the reinforcing
ratio, while minimising cracks and deflections. Flexural perfor-
mance may be improved with the addition of steel fibres, where
the flexural stiffness after cracking is improved [8], although the
increase in flexural strength may not be as significant [9]. Typical
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Elsabe.kearsley@up.ac.za (E. Kearsley).
forced with ductile steel exhibit three behavioural stages. The first
stage is mostly linear before cracking, followed by a change in
slope as the number of cracks increases. The final stage occurs
when the yield point of the steel has been reached [10–13]. Once
the yield point at the critical section has been reached, a large
increase in deflections and rotations occur. This behaviour, where
rotations occur at the plastic hinge whilst maintaining the moment
capacity, is what permits additional loads to be applied to the
structure and to be redistributed towards non-critical sections,
which is the concept of moment redistribution.
Redistribution of moments occurs at all limit states [5,6,14] as a
result of changes in the stiffness along the length of the beam due
to crack formation and variations in the reinforcing layout [15]. As
a result, moment redistribution can occur in brittle structures such
as GFRP and CFRP concrete beams [11,16,17], where the redistribu-
tion of loads is achieved by the difference in flexural stiffness
between the hogging and sagging regions created by the different
reinforcing ratios. Moment redistribution therefore occurs at the
onset of cracking and may be similar for brittle and ductile rein-
forcing materials. The degree of moment redistribution however

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.07.279
0950-0618/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553

remains constant with increasing loads, up to brittle failure, where Reinforcing Ratio
a secondary increase in moment redistribution is only possible Variable
during plastic behaviour in concrete reinforced with ductile mate- 0.0 % 0.7 % 1.4 % 2.2 %
rials [6,18]. A moment curvature relationship in which a plateaux
is reached after the peak moment is ideal for moment redistribu- 0,0 %
tion. The ability of steel fibres to contribute towards moment redis-

Fibre Content
tribution therefore depends on the post-peak moment curvature 1,0 %
behaviour of the fibres, where a flatter slope, tending towards
deflection hardening behaviour, is optimal [4]. 1,5 %
Literature reviewed on the effect of steel fibres in combination
with reinforcing bars provides seemingly contradictory results, a 2,0 %
contradiction which stems from the changes in ductility caused
by the addition of steel fibres. The addition of steel fibres has been Fig. 1. Beam samples with steel fibre and steel reinforcing bar contents.
shown to significantly reduce crack widths and increase the num-
ber of cracks [19,20]. This behaviour improves ductility, and hence
means that the minimum reinforcing ratio can be reduced. In con- Table 1
trast, the fibres may also lead to reduced ductility through a crack Properties of the steel fibres and reinforcing bars used.
localisation phenomenon, and hence possibly less moment redis- Steel Fibres Reinforcing bars*
tribution [21–23]. In this case, an increase in the reinforcing ratio 2
Typical strength >1100 N/mm Diameter 12 mm
will reduce crack localisation as the behaviour tends to strain hard- Diameter 0.5 mm Elastic modulus 215 GPa
ening [22]. The reduced ductility of lightly reinforced beams with Length 30 mm ± 1.5 mm Yield stress 537 MPa
added fibres is evidence of the detrimental effect of fibres if the Hook length 1.5–4 mm Ultimate stress 626 MPa
deflection softening shape caused by the fibres becomes dominant Hook depth 2.0 ± 1 mm Yield strain 0.022
Aspect ratio (L/d) 55 Ultimate strain 0.15
[23]. However, certain fibre contents may lead to an increased
*
number of cracks even if they exhibited deflection softening beha- Properties of reinforcing bars were experimentally determined.
viour [9,24].
Ultimately, the crack bridging ability of steel fibres results in
reduced deflections because of the inhibited crack growth. As a ing bars). The beams were identified in an XBY format, where X
result, the neutral axis depth of the beam cross-section is reduced represents the fibre percentage, B stands for beam, and Y repre-
with the addition of fibres, particularly at lower loads [25–27]. The sents the reinforcing ratio.
effectiveness of the fibres varies with different reinforcing ratios As the purpose of the study was to asses moment redistribution,
and deflections [28]. The effect of steel fibres in combination with a shallow section was adopted to prevent shear failure. Beam
reinforcing bars may therefore lead to contradictory results, where dimensions and reinforcing layout are shown in Fig. 2. For each
for instance a deflection softening fibre behaviour may or may not beam the reinforcing ratios were identical for the hogging and sag-
lead to crack localisation, depending on the relative reinforcing bar ging regions. This reinforcement arrangement was chosen to min-
ratio [23]. imise the changes in flexural stiffness throughout the length of the
The aim of this study was therefore to investigate the effect of beam, and thus simplify the analysis of moment redistribution. The
different steel fibre and reinforcing bar ratio combinations on redistribution of moments was expected to occur from the hogging
moment redistribution, as well as changes in the structural perfor- to the sagging regions due to the elastic moment ratios created by
mance. The changes in behaviour were discussed in light of the the locations of the load points in the test setup. A sketch of this
material properties, thus providing a greater understanding of five point bending configuration is shown in Fig. 3.
the expected outcome when adding fibres to high strength con-
crete (80 MPa) reinforced with steel bars. 2.2. Instrumentation and testing

To measure the distribution of loads a total of six load cells were

2. Experimental programme
The experimental programme was set up to investigate the
changes in structural behaviour of statically indeterminate rein-
forced concrete beams caused by steel fibre and reinforcing bar
combinations. In addition to the continuous beam tests, material
tests were performed to quantify the compressive and tensile
properties of the beam constituents. An inverse analysis was used
to calculate simplified tensile stress–strain responses based on the
results of flexural tests.
2.1. Beam specimens and test setup
To investigate the influence of varying steel fibre and steel rein-
forcing combinations, fifteen 5.0 m beams with a rectangular
cross-section were tested. The combination of steel fibres and rein-
forcing bars for each beam is shown in Fig. 1, with properties of the
fibres and reinforcing bars given in Table 1. Nine of the fifteen
beams contained combinations of steel fibres and reinforcing bars,
with six beams containing only one of three steel fibres contents,
or one of three different reinforcing bar contents (1, 2 or 3 reinforc-
used as shown in Fig. 3, three to measure all support reactions, two
measuring the forces at the point loads, and an additional load cell
to monitor the total applied load. The height of each support could
be adjusted to ensure a correct load distribution over the supports
before loading to resemble the forces one would expect in an ideal
indeterminate beam setup. Hence, moments induced in the beam
as a result of an imperfect test setup, instead of the applied load,
were minimised. Two Linear Variable Transistors (LVDTs) were
placed at the load points in the sagging regions to measure the ver-
tical deflections relative to the centreline of the beam at the sup-
ports. The beams were tested in deflection control at a rate of
0.833 mm/min using a close-loop Materials System Testing (MTS)
with a load capacity of 250 kN.
3. Materials
Four batches of high performance concrete with fibre contents
of 0 kg/m3, 60 kg/m3, 120 kg/m3, and 180 kg/m3 were prepared
for the beams. The mix designs of each batch can be seen in Table 2.
The volume of sand and superplasticisers had to be varied to
ensure adequate workability with an increase in the fibre content.
 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553 3

Fig. 2. Beam dimensions and reinforcing layout.

Fig. 3. Indeterminate beam test setup.

Table 2 3.1. Compression behaviour

Mix design.
The compressive behaviour was determined from three
Material RD 0% Fibres 1.0% Fibres 1.5% Fibres 2.0% Fibres
(kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) 150 mm  150 mm cubes for each concrete batch. Testing was
done at a loading rate of 0.3 MPa/s. Elastic moduli were obtained
Cement 3.14 700 700 700 700
Dolomite Stone 2.85 790 790 790 790 from two 150 mm  300 mm cylinders which were loaded to 40%
Dolomite Sand 2.85 808 776 761 744 of the characteristic compressive strength before being unloaded.
Water 1 210 210 210 210 This process was repeated three times per cylinder. Table 3 lists
Superplasticiser 1.06 7.0 7.7 10.5 11.2 the main compressive properties of each batch, with the water
Steel Fibres 7.9 0 80 120 160
Total 2515 2563 2591 2615
cured samples included as reference.

3.2. Flexural behaviour

To describe the stress-strain behaviour of the beams, three mate-
rial property tests were conducted on each concrete batch, namely
compression tests, elastic modulus tests, and Four Point bending
Tests (FPBTs). The large sizes of the 5.0 m beams meant that water
curing was not possible. Beams were therefore wrapped in plastic
after casting and stored under a thermal blanket to ensure consis-
tency in the concrete strength. The samples used to obtain the
material properties were cast from the same batch as that of the
continuous beams, with half of the material samples kept in the
same environment to reflect the actual properties of the beams,
and the other half cured in water at 25 °C as a control. Material
tests were conducted when the beams were tested no less than
28 days after casting.
The tensile properties of the concrete were determined from
flexural FPBTs on account of the simplicity of the setup. Although
indirect tensile tests do not provide tensile stress-strain results,
load deflection (P-d) and moment curvatures (M-u) were measured
which were valuable when considering the expected structural
performance of the fibre reinforced concrete. Vertical deflections
were recorded with LVDTs on either side of the beam, and curva-
tures were measured using Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV). FPBTs
were conducted on three air cured 100 mm  100 mm  450 mm
beams for each concrete batch in deflection control at a rate of
0.3 mm/min.
The P-d and M-u results for all beams are shown in Fig. 4 to indi-
cate the changes in the post-peak behaviour due to the inclusion of
4 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553

Table 3
Compressive material properties.

Concrete Batch 0.0% Fibres 1.0% Fibres 1.5% Fibres 2.0% Fibres
* * *
Cube 1 Stress (MPa) 74.5 (77.7) 84.1 (93.9) 85.8 (102.0) 84.1 (101.4)*
Cube 2 Stress (MPa) 76.8 (85.9)* 81.5 (90.4)* 83.0 (103.1)* 77.4 (104.1)*
Cube 3 Stress (MPa) 78.5 (87.1)* 80.5 (90.5)* 86.5 (97.9)* 82.4
Average max stress (MPa) 76.8 (83.6)* 82.0 (91.6)* 85.1 (101.0)* 81.3 (102.8)*
Average strain at max stress (e) 0.00323 (0.00327)* 0.00412 (0.00384)* 0.00402 (0.00380)* 0.00444 (0.00365)*
Cylinder 1 Elastic modulus (GPa) 36.3 (44.6)* 36.4 (41.8)* 37.4 (45.5)* 37.5 (44.7)*
Cylinder 2 Elastic modulus (GPa) 36.2 (44.0)* 37.8 (41.8)* 38.2 (45.0)* 36.8 (38.1)*
Average Elastic modulus (GPa) 36.3 (44.3)* 37.1 (41.8)* 37.8 (45.2)* 37.2 (41.4)*
*
Water cured samples.

2,5 50
1.0 % Fibre 2.0 % Fibres
2,0 1.5 % Fibre 40 1,5 % Fibres
Moment (kNm)

2.0 % Fibre 1.0 % Fibres

Load (kN)
1,5 30 0.0 % Fibres

1,0 20

0,5 10

0,0 0
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 0 1 2 3 4 5

Curvature (1/m) Deflection (mm)

Fig. 4. Average (a) moment curvature and (b) load deflection responses from FPBTs.

the steel fibres. Only the load-deflection behaviour of the beam
without fibres is shown since almost no curvature could be mea-
sured before the peak load, after which sudden brittle failure
occurred. A deflection softening shape was observed for all fibre
contents. These load deflection and moment curvature responses
were used to back-calculated a simplified tensile stress-strain
response. An increase in the fibre content resulted in higher
moment capacities. The descending slope after the peak moment
becomes steeper in the beam containing 2.0% fibres, indicating that
an optimum fibre content exists near 1.5%, beyond which a further
increase in fibres content results in relatively smaller improve-
ments in behaviour.

Fig. 5. Calculated M-u and P-d responses compared against experimental results.
 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553 5

3.3. Inverse analysis error process is followed by adjusting the assumed tensile stress-
strain response until the analytical M-u or P-d results closely
A generalised analytical method of inverse analysis, similar to match the experimental results. Owing to the high strength of
the one proposed by Elsaigh [29] was used. An iterative trial and the concrete, a simplified bilinear compressive stress-strain rela-
tionship was assumed using the elastic modulus and compressive
stress obtained from the material tests.
700 7 In calculating a theoretical M-u relation, plane sections are
Reinforcing Bar Tensile Stress (MPa)

(0) assumed to remain plane during bending, and equilibrium is

SFRC Tensile Stress (MPa)

600 6
assumed to exist between the internal stresses and externally
500 5 applied loads. These assumptions allow solutions to be obtained
Steel bar 1 by varying the neutral axis so that equilibrium of the cross-
400 (2) Steel bar 2 4 section is achieved at each loading stage. Moment curvature
1.0 % Fibres responses were converted to load deflection responses taking
300 1.5 % Fibres 3 deformations caused by moments and shear distortions into
2.0 % Fibres account.
200 (3) 2
(1) A comparison of the calculated M-u and P-d responses against
100 1 the experimentally obtained responses is shown in Fig. 5. For all
(4) cases, a close match was obtained, indicating that the simplified
0 0 stress-strain relationships used were adequate in describing the
0,00 0,02 0,04 0,06 0,08 0,10 different behavioural states of the fibre reinforced concrete. The
Strain (ε)
Fig. 6. Simplified stress-strain responses for the fibre reinforced concrete. Table 5
Summary of load and deflection results.

Ultimate load (kN) Deflections at ultimate

Table 4
load (mm)
Stress and strain values for all three fibre contents.
Reinforcing ratio (%) Fibre Content (%) Fibre Content (%)
Parameter 1.0% Fibres 1.5% Fibres 2.0% Fibres
0.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 1.0 1.5 2.0
rt0 (MPa); et0 6.44 1.74e4 6.44 1.74e4 6.44 1.74e4
rt1 (MPa); et1 2.80 1.74e4 3.00 1.74e4 3.20 1.74e4 0.0 9.2 14.8 17.2 1.0 5.9 6.3
rt2 (MPa); et2 3.40 9.00e3 4.20 3.00e3 5.05 2.00e3 0.7 27.4 32.5 36.1 36.2 31.9 28.6 27.4 32.9
rt3 (MPa); et3 1.35 2.50e2 1.70 3.00e2 1.35 3.50e2 1.4 50.2 59.8 61.7 60.7 38.6 43.8 35.6 40.6
rt4 (MPa); et4 0.00 1.00e1 0.00 0.83e1 0.00 0.80e1 2.2 46.9 79.9 79.9 83.6 17.8 37.8 35.9 34.5

100
100
31B2.2 L
Bars Left
80
30B2.2
Bars Left
L 80 31B2.2
Bars Right
R
30B2.2
Bars Right
R 21B1.4 L
Bars Left
Load (kN)

60
Load (kN)

20B1.4
Bars Left
L 60 21B1.4
Bars Right
R
20B1.4
Bars Right
R 11B0.7
Bar Left
L
40 10B0.7
Bar Left
L 40 11B0.7
Bar Right
R
10B0.7
Bar Right
R
20 01B0.0
Bar Left
L
Max
MaxLoad
Load 20
01B0.0
Bar Right
R
0 Max
MaxLoad
Load
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Deflection (mm) Deflection (mm)

100 100
31.5B2.2 L
Bars Left 32B2.2
Bars Left
L
80 31.5B2.2 R
Bars Right 80 32B2.2
Bars Right
R
21.5B1.4 L
Bars Left 22B1.4
Bars Left
L
Load (kN)

Load (kN)

60 21.5B1.4 R
Bars Right 60 22B1.4
Bars Right
R
11.5B0.7
Bar LeftL 12B0.7
Bar Left
L
40 11.5B0.7
Bar Right
R 40 12B0.7
Bar Right
R
01.5B0.0
Bar LeftL 02B0.0
Bars Left
L
20 20
01.5B0.0 R
Bar Right 02B0.0
Bars Right
R
Max
MaxLoad
Load Max
MaxLoad
Load
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Deflection (mm) Deflection (mm)
Fig. 7. Load-deflection responses of the beams.
6 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553

1,4 output stress-strain responses from the inverse analysis are shown
No Fibres in Fig. 6, with the stress and strain values listed in Table 4 in order
Deflection/Load (mm/kN)

1,2 of increasing strains. The stress-strain results for the reinforcing

1.0% Fibres
bars are plotted on the same strain axis to highlight the difference
1,0 1.5% Fibres in tensile behaviour for the two reinforcing materials. The stress-
2.0% Fibres strain shapes indicate a high cracking stress, followed by a sudden
0,8 drop when the concrete cracks. Further strains result in a residual
stress of varying magnitude depending on the amount of steel
0,6 fibres used. All fibre contents exhibited a strain softening shape,
clearly indicating the residual tensile strength provided to the con-
0,4 crete due to the crack bridging ability of the steel fibres.

0,2
4. Indeterminate beam test results
0,0
0 0.7
1 1.4
2 2.2
3 To study the effects of different combinations of fibres and rein-
Reinforcing Ratio forcing bars on the performance of the structure, results will be
discussed in three parts: loads and deflections, moment redistribu-
Fig. 8. Deflections at the ultimate load. tion, and energy related results.

4.1. Loads and deflections

100 0,25
The load-deflection responses of all beams are shown in Fig. 7,
80 Steel yields 0,20 with the maximum loads and deflections at the peak loads listed
Microstrain (με)

in Table 5. Deflections normalised with respect to the ultimate

Load (kN)

60 0,15 loads are shown in Fig. 8 to illustrate the change in load-

deflection behaviour caused by a varying fibre and steel reinforcing
40 0,10 ratio. In general, three stages can be identified in the shape of the
load-deflection responses: (1) linear elastic before cracking, (2) a
20 0,05 change in slope when the concrete cracks, and (3) a change in slope
when the steel yields at the critical section. Each of these stages
can be clearly determined from the measured horizontal tensile
0 0,00
0 10 20 30 40 50 strains across each critical section as shown in Fig. 9. Beam 0B2.2
failed at a lower load than expected due to concrete compaction
Deflection (mm)
issues. Similar issues, although very minor occurred in beam
Load Tension Sag (R) 0B0.7 and 0B1.4. These beams will therefore be excluded in the dis-
Tension Sag (L) Tensions Hog cussion of certain results.
Average increases in strength when adding a reinforcing bar for
Fig. 9. Load-deflection and strain results of beam 2B2.2.
beams with 1.0%, 1.5% and 2.0% fibres were 22.3 kN, 21.7 kN and
22.1 kN respectively. These values were slightly lower than the
27.4 kN strength of beam 0B0.7 representing the strength of a

4
Moment (kNm)

-2
1B1
-4
0 1 2 3 4
Position (m)
20
Moment (kNm)

10

0 M Elastic
Max Load
-10
75 % Max Load
2B3 50 % Max Load
-20
0 1 2 3 4
Position (m)
Fig. 10. Examples of bending moment diagrams.
 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553 7

beam with only one reinforcing bar. The addition of fibres there- recommended by EC2 [30] for the appearance and efficiency of a
fore did not lead to any significant changes in the ultimate load structure.
capacities. The addition of steel fibres in combination with rein-
forcing bars did however reduce the deflections at lower loads, 4.2. Moment redistribution
which can be seen from the increase in the slope of the load deflec-
tion graph during the second stage of deformation. According to EN 1992-1-1 [30], ‘‘moment redistribution is the
For instance, the deflection in beams 1B0.7, 1.5B0.7 and 2B0.7 at ratio of the redistributed moment to the elastic bending moment”.
a load of 15 kN (roughly 50% of the ultimate load) were reduced by The moment redistribution of each beam can therefore be calcu-
1.6, 2.2, and 2.8 times in comparison to the beam containing only lated using Eq. (1):
one reinforcing bar (0B0.7). Even in beams with a reinforcing ratio
of 2.2%, deflections were reduced by 1.3, 1.6 and 1.8 times, at a load Mel  Mexp
K MR ¼ ð1Þ
of 30 kN (about 37% of the ultimate load), in beams 1B2.2, 1.5B2.2 Mel
and 2B2.2 when compared to the beam without any fibres (0B2.2). where Mel is the theoretical elastic moment, and Mexp is the exper-
The loads of 15 kN and 30 kN were chosen as examples as they cor- imental moment calculated from the reaction forces of the load
responded to deflections of about 9 mm in beams 0B0.7 and 0B2.2 cells. The redistribution of moments is expressed visually in terms
respectively, which represents the span/250 deflection limit of the bending moment diagrams shown in Fig. 10. These diagrams

16 16
14 0B0.7 14 0B1.4 Sagging M Left
12 12

Moment (kNm)
Moment (kNm)

Hogging M Middle
10 10
8 8 Sagging M Right
6 6
Elastic Sagging M
4 4
2 2 Elastic Hogging M
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Load (kN) Load (kN)
16 16 16 16
14 1B0 14 1B0.7 14 1B1.4 14 1B2.2
12 12 12 12
Moment (kNm)

Moment (kNm)
Moment (kNm)

Moment (kNm)

10 10 10 10
8 8 8 8
6 6 6 6
4 4 4 4
2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Load (kN) Load (kN) Load (kN) Load (kN)
16 16 16 16
14 1.5B0 14 1.5B0.7 14 1.5B1.4 14 1.5B2.2
12 12 12 12
Moment (kNm)
Moment (kNm)

Moment (kNm)

Moment (kNm)

10 10 10 10
8 8 8 8
6 6 6 6
4 4 4 4
2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Load (kN) Load (kN) Load (kN) Load (kN)
16 16 16 16
14 2B0 14 2B0.7 14 2B1.4 14 2B2.2
12 12 12 12
Moment (kNm)
Moment (kNm)
Moment (kNm)
Moment (kNm)

10 10 10 10
8 8 8 8
6 6 6 6
4 4 4 4
2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Load (kN) Load (kN) Load (kN) Load (kN)

Fig. 11. Hogging and sagging moment evolutions.

8 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553

indicate the change in the moment ratios as the load increases. The
difference between the ultimate bending moment diagram and the
elastic bending moment diagram indicates the degree to which
moment redistribution has occurred between the hogging and sag-
ging regions.
The moment distribution in beam 1B0.7 is in contrast to the
common expectation where a larger experimental moment is
expected at both critical sagging regions in comparison to the elas-
tic moment at the maximum load. In this case, the ductility intro-
duced into the beam by the steel fibres was insufficient to form a
plastic hinge in which the moment capacity was maintained upon
further rotation. Therefore, as soon as the first plastic hinge formed
in beam 1B0.7, almost no further increase in external load was pos-
sible due to the reduction in moment capacity upon further rota-
tion. The critical moments in beam 1B0.7 were therefore not
reached in the left sagging and central hogging regions since the
first hinge occurred in the right sagging region.
To fully describe the moment redistribution process, the
moment evolutions of all beams in terms of the total applied load
were compared against the elastic bending moments in Fig. 11. The
hogging moments were expected to increase at a faster rate than
the sagging moments until moment redistribution occurred,
whereafter the rate of increase in hogging moments should
decrease causing the sagging moments to increase at a faster rate.
This behaviour was observed in almost all beams.
Beam 1B0 was an exception to this behaviour, since the fibres
did not allow a hinge to form with sufficient rotational capacity
owing to the short length of the fibres. As shown by the load
deflection results of beams 1.5B0 and 2B0 in Fig. 7, a small amount
of redistribution was possible in beams with 1.5% and 2.0% as there
was small increase in load capacity after a crack had formed at the
central support. For beams with reinforcing bars, there was a much
clearer indication of this change in moment ratios when the steel
yielded.
Generally, the greatest redistribution of moments occurred dur-
ing plastic behaviour after the steel yielded. However, since the
redistribution of moments is based on the ratio of the ultimate
moment to the elastic moments, one cannot ignore the redistribu-
tion of moments during elastic behaviour. For instance, an ideal
case of the moment evolution similar to what one could expect

Sagging Moment Left

Moment
Redistribution
Hogging Moment
(%)
Load (kN)
Sagging Moment Right

30 30 30
20 20 20
10 10 10
0 0 0
-10 -10 -10
-20 -20 -20
1B0.7 1B1.4 1B2.2
-30 -30 -30
0 10 20 30 40 0 20 40 60 80

30 30 30
20 20 20
10
10 10
0
0 0
-10
-10 -10
-20
-20 -20 -30
1.5B0.7 1.5B1.4 1.5B2.2
-30 -30 -40
0 10 20 30 40 0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80 100

30
20
10
0
-10
-20
2B0.7 2B1.4 2B2.2
-30
0 10 20 30 40

Fig. 12. Examples of moment redistribution for each critical section.

 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553 9

from the bilinear design curves is shown by the results of beam reinforcing bars stabilised where an increase in moment was
2B1.4. The moment curves followed the elastic moment curves possible.
until the concrete cracked at about 2 kNm, followed by a slight Once the moment was reached that caused the steel to yield, a
deviation from the elastic moments as the concrete continued to second sudden change in the neutral axis is observed, which repre-
crack, with some minor redistribution of moments, and finally a sents the point at which a hinge is formed, and rotations occur to
clear change in the moment ratios when the steel yields. In con- allow for moment redistribution to take place. A third increase in
trast, the moment evolutions of 1.5B2.2 showed much greater
deviations from the elastic moments before the steel yielded. The
point at which plastic moment redistribution begins is therefore
not as clear, however the ultimate moment in beam 1.5B2.2 was
significantly less than the elastic moment relative to the results
shown for beam 2B1.4.
Moment redistribution can be plotted against the applied load,
for which the results of all beams containing a combination of
both fibres and bars are shown in Fig. 12. Beams with only fibres
are excluded as the fibres alone were not capable of handling
large rotations. It must be noted that although Eq. (1) was used
to calculate the percentage moment redistribution, the sign con-
vention was changed so that a redistribution of moments away
from the hogging region was visually represented by negative
moment redistribution. In the same way positive moment redis-
tribution values indicate increasing moments in the sagging
regions so that the results can be interpreted easily following
the moment-load evolutions shown in Fig. 11. Ultimately, the
aim of the results shown in Fig. 12 was to highlight the moment
redistribution evolution throughout loading. It can be observed
that moment redistribution already occurred at low loads. This
behaviour can be attributed to the change in flexural stiffness
throughout the beam. After cracking, the neutral axis stabilised,
and hence moment redistribution remained fairly constant until
another sudden change in the neutral axis depth occurred when
the steel yielded.
Using the material properties of the steel fibre reinforced con-
crete and reinforcing bars, the neutral axis depth at the ultimate
moment can be calculated. Since the stress-strain relationships of
both the reinforcing bars and the SFRC were determined sepa-
rately, an assumption was made that the tensile strengths of both
reinforcing materials could be added. This assumption led to the
calculated M-u response shown in Fig. 13 with key stresses and
strains indicated. The shape of the M-u curves for beams with only
fibres are similar to the curves obtained from the FPBTs. The curves
of the reinforcing bars reflect the strain hardening properties of the
steel. The assumption stated previously resulted in combined fibre Fig. 13. Calculated moment curvature response.
and reinforcing M-u responses in which the fibres resulted in not
only a significant increase in the moment capacity, but also a
change in the slope of the M-u response after the peak moment. 60
Depending on the relative strength and efficiency of the rein-
Neutral Axis Depth (mm)

forcing materials, a balance is reached between the respective 50

behavioural characteristics. If moment redistribution is required,
the ideal behaviour would be a bilinear curve where a plateaux 40
is reached after the peak moment. Theoretically, the fibres cause
this in beams with higher reinforcing contents. For low reinforcing 30
contents the addition of fibres may lead to a reduction in possible
moment redistribution due to the softening behaviour. However, 20
in reality the contribution of fibres in beams containing reinforcing
bars will change due to the change in the number and spacing of 10
cracks caused by the strain hardening property of the reinforcing
bars. 0
The evolution of the neutral axis depth of the critical section as 0 5 10 15 20
shown in Fig. 14 was calculated using the same material properties Moment (kNm)
and assumptions made in the inverse analysis method. Once the
concrete cracked, the neutral axis depth suddenly changed, corre-
lating with the change in slope of the load deflection and moment
evolution relationships discussed previously. In beams with only
fibres, there is not much strength gain as the neutral axis depth
is reduced. In contrast, the neutral axis depth of beams with only Fig. 14. Calculated neutral axis depths.
10 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553

moments is shown in beams with only reinforcing bars when the
strains resulting in strain hardening are reached. Adding fibres to
the beams containing reinforcing bars resulted in an increase in
moment capacity, with a reduction in the neutral axis depth with
more fibres added. Additionally, the behaviour after cracking is
improved where the fibres limit the change in neutral axis depth
due to their crack bridging ability.
The percentage moment redistribution of the beams as calcu-
lated using Eq. (1), is shown in Fig. 15. An optimum fibre content
of 1.5% was observed, which correlates with the optimum fibre
content of 1.5% discussed in the results of the FPBTs. Another gen-
eral trend of increasing moment redistribution was observed with
an increase in the reinforcing ratio. The exception to this trend was
beam 2B2.2, which may represent the point at which the beam
becomes over reinforced and hence tend towards compressive fail-
ure and thereby limit the moment redistribution potential.
Beams 1B0, 1.5B0 and 2B0 showed much less moment redistri-
bution due to the short length of the fibres. The strain softening
behaviour of the fibres did not allow the formation of multiple
cracks, and coupled with their short lengths, resulted in failure of
the beam occurring once single cracks formed at the centre support
and in one span. In general, the addition of fibres led to additional
the highest amount of moment redistribution, and beam 1B0.7
showed the least.
The measured degree of moment redistribution, expressed in
terms of a neutral axis depth (x) over effective depth ratio (d) com-
pared against the limits suggested by EC2 [30], can be seen in
Fig. 16. Darker markers indicate an increase in the reinforcing ratio.
As expected, the x/d ratio increased as the steel percentage
increased. Beam 1B0 displayed less moment redistribution capac-
ity compared to the code. The small x/d ratio was the result of
the high concrete compressive strength in comparison to the low
tensile resistance provided by the low reinforcement ratio. The
code was conservative in all beams containing a combination of
fibres and reinforcing bars apart from beams 1B0.7 and 1.5B1.4.
The effects of over-reinforcing can be observed in the reduced
moment redistribution capacity of beam 2B2.2.
300
250

Energy (J)
200
moment redistribution when compared to beam 0B0.7. Exceptions
to this trend were observed in beams 1B0.7 and 1B1.4. For the
150
beams with both fibres and reinforcing bars, beam 1.5B2.2 showed

100
29,5
25,6 Moment 50
24,8
20,0 Redistribution
18,3 18,3 (%) 0
20,3 2 4 6 8 10
Deflection (mm)

10,1 14,4 0B32.2 0B2

1.4
3,4
7,9 0B10.7 2B0
2,1 2,00
3,7 1.5B0 1B0
1,50
1,00 Fig. 17. Energy absorption vs deflection for beams with only fibres and reinforcing
0,00 Steel Fibre bars.
2.2 1.4 0.7 0 Content (%)
Reinforcing Ratio
300
Fig. 15. Moment redistribution.

250
35
Moment redistribution (%)

200
30
Energy (J)

25 150
20
100
15

10 50
5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4
Deflection (mm)
x/d
1.0% Fibres 1.5% Fibres 2B32.2 2B2
1.4 2B10.7
1.5B32.2 1.5B21.4 1.5B10.7
2.0% Fibres EC2
1B32.2 1B21.4 1B10.7
No bars 1B0
Fig. 16. Moment redistribution compared against code predictions. Fig. 18. Energy absorption vs deflections for beams with fibres and reinforcing bars.
 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553 11

The degree to which the fibres alter the behaviour of beams
containing reinforcing bars depends on the efficiency of the fibres.
If the fibres are unable to contribute fully, due to for instance a less
optimal fibre distribution and orientation caused by the presence
of the reinforcing bars or concrete cover less than the length of
the fibre, the optimum fibre content will differ for each reinforcing
content since the tensile material properties can no longer simply
be added to predict the combined behaviour. Changes in the num-
ber of cracks and plastic hinge lengths will affect the ability of the
fibres to contribute towards the strength of the structure. One can
look at the energy absorbed by the beams throughout the loading
stages as a method of describing the combined effect of all factors
affecting the performance of the structure.
4.3. Energy
The energy absorbed for all beams were calculated and the
results of beams containing only fibres or only reinforcing bars
are shown in Fig. 17. The energy was calculated as the area under
the load-deflection curves, where the deflections used were the
average of the two spans. Beams 1.5B0 and 2B0 absorbed more
energy than the beam with a reinforcing ratio of 2.2% up to about
5.2 mm and 6.0 mm respectively. Thereafter, the energy absorption
capacity of the fibres was limited by their short length, hence the
peak load capacities were reached at much lower deflections in
beams with only fibres. Beam 1B0 was unable to absorb much
energy since the softening behaviour of concrete reinforced with

Fig. 19. Energy absorptions for experimental results and the sum of fibres and reinforcing bars.
12 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553
1.0% fibres caused the beam to fail soon after the first crack had
formed at the centre support. As the deflections increased beyond
6 mm, the reinforcing bars absorbed energy at an increasing rate, a
behaviour opposite to that of the fibres.
The energy deflection curves for all beams containing a combi-
nation of fibres and reinforcing bars are shown in Fig. 18. As
expected, an increase in the reinforcing ratio resulted in more
energy being absorbed. The effect of different fibre contents was
most evident in beams with a reinforcing ratio of 0.7%, as the rel-
atively higher strength of a reinforcing ratio of 1.4% and 2.2% over-
shadowed the contribution of the fibres. The results of these beams
can be compared to the sum of the energy results of beams with
only fibres or only reinforcing bars.
The energy deflection curves for beams with a combination of
fibres and reinforcing bars were compared to the sum of the ener-
gies from the beams with only fibres and only reinforcing bars in
Fig. 19. If the strength of the fibres and reinforcing bars were fully
utilised, the sum of the energies would be comparable to the actual
results. In general, the sum of energies was greater than the actual
energy absorbed at lower deflections. The exception was for beams
containing 1.0% fibres. This can be explained by the fact that only
one crack had formed at the centre support and one span in beam
1B0 before failure. The energy absorption of the fibres was there-
fore limited since the fibres only bridged across two major cracks.
However, when combined with a reinforcing bar, the strain hard-
ening behaviour of the reinforcing led to the formation of multiple
smaller cracks, which allowed the fibres to bridge those additional
cracks and absorb more energy. Hence, the actual energy absorbed
for beams with 1% fibre and two or three reinforcing bars actually
increased beyond the sum of the energies since the increase in
reinforcing ratio led to the formation of more smaller cracks.
The effect of fibre content was more pronounced when com-
bined with a reinforcing ratio of 0.7%, since the tensile resistance
was more dependent on the fibres due to the small number of
cracks. With an increase in the reinforcing ratio, a change in the
fibre content had a lesser effect, although the overall efficiency of
the fibres improved, due to the increased number of cracks. This
behaviour was confirmed by the average crack spacing in beams
with different reinforcing ratios. The fibre content was found to
have no noticeable effect on the crack spacing, leading to an aver-
age crack spacing of 96 mm for a reinforcing ratio of 0.7%, 67 mm
for a reinforcing ratio of 1.4%, and 43 mm for a 2.2% reinforcing
ratio, regardless of fibre content.
The effect of adding steel fibres to concrete reinforced with steel
bars was to reduce the deflections at lower loads. The energy
related results indicated that although the fibres did improve the
initial energy absorption at lower deflections, they become more
effective even at higher deflections with more reinforcing bars
due to the increased number of cracks. However, this behaviour
would have changed if the strain softening characteristic of the
fibres had been dominant, in which case the addition of the fibres
would have led to crack localisation, and hence a possible reduc-
tion in the moment redistribution capacity. The improved com-
pressive ductility as a result of the residual strength of fibres
should be considered since the delaying of concrete crushing
would also allow greater moment redistribution.
5. Conclusions
The aim of this research was to investigate the effects of differ-
ent percentages and combinations of steel fibres and reinforcing
bars on moment redistribution and general changes in the perfor-
mance of a statically indeterminate structure. Standard material
tests were conducted to relate the material properties to the
mechanical behaviour. The experimental results indicate that:

The addition of steel fibres did not lead to significant increases
in load bearing capacity but caused a reduction in deflections at
lower loads.

Significant moment redistribution occurred during elastic beha-
viour before any plastic moment redistribution occurred.

An optimum fibre content of 1.5% was found for moment redis-
tribution, which corresponded to the shape of the moment cur-
vature relationship of the FPBTs in which a balance was reached
between an increased moment capacity and a less steep post-
peak moment-curvature slope.

The effect of fibre content reduced with an increase in reinforc-
ing ratio, however fibres became more effective in beams with
more reinforcing bars due to the increase in the number of
cracks.
Ultimately, a balance between the strain softening and strain
hardening behaviour of the fibres and reinforcing must be reached
to ensure moment redistribution capacities are not reduced
through crack localisation caused by the addition of deflection soft-
ening fibres. For these tests, the deflection hardening behaviour of
the reinforcing bars was dominant, and hence the fibres acted as
additional tensile resistance across the cracks instead of com-
pletely changing the crack distribution.
Declaration of Competing Interest
None.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge The Concrete Institute
which funded this project.
References
[1] D.A. Nethercot, T.Q. Li, B.S. Choo, Required rotations and moment
redistribution for composite frames and continuous beams, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 35 (1995) 121–163.
[2] D.J. Oehlers, M. Haskett, M.S. Mohamed Ali, M.C. Griffith, Moment
redistribution in reinforced concrete beams, Struct. Build. 163 (3) (2010)
165–176.
[3] D.J. Oehlers, G. Ju, I.S.T. Liu, R. Seracino, Moment redistribution in continuous
plated RC flexural members. Part 1: neutral axis depth approach and tests, Eng.
Struct. 26 (14) (2004) 2197–2207.
[4] D.J. Oehlers, I.S.T. Liu, G. Ju, R. Seracino, Moment redistribution in continuous
plated RC flexural members. Part 2: flexural rigidity approach, Eng. Struct. 26
(14) (2004) 2209–2218.
[5] R.N.F. do Carmo, S.M.R. Lopes, Ductility and linear analysis with moment
redistribution in reinforced high-strength concrete beams, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 32
(1) (2005) 194–203.
[6] P. Visintin, M.S. Mohamad Ali, T. Xie, A.B. Sturm, Experimental investigation of
moment redistribution in ultra-high performance fibre reinforced concrete
beams, Constr. Build. Mater. 166 (2018) 433–444.
[7] T. Lou, S.M.R. Lopes, A.V. Lopes, Composites : Part B Neutral axis depth and
moment redistribution in FRP and steel reinforced concrete continuous beams,
Compos. Part B 70 (2015) 44–52.
[8] F.P. Ackermann, J. Schnell, Steel fibre reinforced continuous composite slabs,
Compos. Constr. Steel Concr. VI (2011) 125–137.
[9] H. Aoude, M. Belghiti, W.D. Cook, D. Mitchell, Response of steel fiber-reinforced
concrete beams with and without stirrups, ACI Struct. J. 109 (3) (2012) 359–
367.
[10] C.H. Lin, Y.M. Chien, Effect of section ductility on moment redistribution of
continuous concrete beams, J. Chin. Inst. Eng. 23 (2) (2000) 131–141.
[11] R.J. Gravina, S.T. Smith, Flexural behaviour of indeterminate concrete beams
reinforced with FRP bars, Eng. Struct. 30 (2008) 2370–2380.
[12] M.A. Aiello, L. Ombres, Moment redistribution in continuous fiber-reinforced
polymer-strengthened reinforced concrete beams, ACI Struct. J. 108 (16)
(2011) 158–166.
[13] A.F. Ashour, M.N. Habeeb, Continuous concrete beams reinforced with CFRP
bars, Struct. Build. 161 (6) (2008) 349–357.
[14] P. Schumacher, Rotation Capacity of Self-Compacting Steel Fiber Reinforced
Concrete PhD Thesis, Darmstadt University of Technology, Germany, 2006.
[15] R.H. Scott, R.T. Whittle, Moment redistribution effects in beams, Mag. Concr.
Res. 57 (1) (2008) 9–20.
 F. Küsel, E. Kearsley / Construction and Building Materials 227 (2019) 116553
[16] P. Santos, G. Laranja, P.M. França, J.R. Correia, Ductility and moment
redistribution capacity of multi-span T-section concrete beams reinforced
with GFRP bars, Constr. Build. Mater. 49 (2013) 949–961.
[17] I. Fatih, A.F. Ashour, Moment redistribution in continuous FRP reinforced
concrete beams, Constr. Build. Mater. 49 (2013) 939–948.
[18] T. Lou, S.M.R. Lopes, A.V. Lopes, Evaluation of moment redistribution in
normal-strength and high-strength reinforced concrete beams, J. Struct. Eng.
140 (10) (2014).
[19] B. Chiaia, A.P. Fantilli, P. Vallini, Combining fiber-reinforced concrete with
traditional reinforcement in tunnel linings, Eng. Struct. 31 (3) (2009) 1600–
1606.
[20] P. Pujadas, A. Blanco, Cracking behavior of FRC slabs with traditional
reinforcement, Mater. Struct. 45 (5) (2012) 707–725.
[21] A.N. Dancygier, E. Berkover, Cracking localization and reduced ductility of
fiber-reinforced concrete beams with low reinforcement ratios, Eng. Struct.
111 (2016) 411–424.
[22] A.N. Dancygier, Y.S. Karinski, Z. Navon, Cracking localization in tensile
conventionally reinforced fibrous concrete bars, Constr. Build. Mater. 149
(2017) 53–61.
13
[23] D. Yoo, D. Moon, Effect of steel fibers on the flexural behavior of RC beams with
very low reinforcement ratios, Constr. Build. Mater. 188 (2018) 237–254.
[24] D.R. Sahoo, K. Maran, A. Kumar, Effect of steel and synthetic fibers on shear
strength of RC beams without shear stirrups, Constr. Build. Mater. 83 (2015)
150–158.
[25] A.N. Dancygier, Z. Savir, Flexural behavior of HSFRC with low reinforcement
ratios, Eng. Struct. 28 (11) (2006) 1503–1512.
[26] D.Y. Yoo, T. Yuan, J.M. Yang, Y.S. Yoon, Feasibility of replacing minimum shear
reinforcement with steel fibers for sustainable high-strength concrete beams,
Eng. Struct. 147 (2017) 207–222.
[27] F. Altun, T. Haktanir, K. Ari, Effects of steel fiber addition on mechanical
properties of concrete and RC beams, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (3) (2007) 654–
661.
[28] K. Holschemacher, T. Mueller, Y. Ribakov, Effect of steel fibres on mechanical
properties of high-strength concrete, Mater. Des. 31 (5) (2010) 2604–2615.
[29] W.A. Elsaigh, Modelling the Behaviour of Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete
Pavements PhD Thesis, University of Pretoria, 2007.
[30] EN1992-1-1, Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures – Part 1 - 1:
Generalrules and rules for buildings, CEN, 2010.