Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Combined effects of steel fiber and coarse aggregate size on the compressive T
and flexural toughness of high-strength concrete
⁎
Seok-Joon Jang, Hyun-Do Yun
Department of Architectural Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 305-764, Republic of Korea

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper investigates the effects of steel fiber content and coarse aggregate size on the mechanical properties of
Steel fiber high-strength concrete with a specified compressive strength value of 60 MPa. The paper also explores the
Toughness correlation between the compressive and flexural toughness of high-strength steel fiber-reinforced concrete
Flexural testing (SFRC). For this purpose, twelve high-strength SFRC mixtures with four fiber volume fraction of steel fiber
High-strength concrete
(Vf = 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5%, and 2.0%) and different aggregate sizes were designed and fabricated. Compressive and
flexural tests for each concrete mixture were conducted, and the test results were used to investigate the effects
of steel fiber volume fraction and aggregate size on the compressive and flexural toughness of high-strength
SFRC prims. The results indicate that the mechanical properties of SFRC are related more closely to volume
fraction than to aggregate size. The compressive and flexural toughness ratios of the SFRC significantly improved
with an increase in fiber content. Also, equations that are suggested to determine the compressive toughness
ratio based on the equivalent flexural strength ratio were used to predict the mechanical properties of the SFRC
in this study.

1. Introduction hooked-single, and hooked-collated fibers. They found that hooked-end

Recently, demands for taller buildings and longer bridges have in-
creased, thus accelerating the use of high-strength concrete in con-
struction to reduce cross-sections and the self-weight of concrete
structures. High-strength concrete offers several benefits in terms of
structural performance and durability compared to normal-strength
concrete. However, high-strength concrete is characterized by its brit-
tleness. Therefore, one of the main concerns with regard to high-
strength concrete is the need to develop ways to convert its brittle
behavior to ductile behavior.
It is generally known that the addition of short synthetic or metallic
fibers can improve the post-cracking behavior of concrete by bridging
cracks and increasing the ductility and energy dissipation capacity of
concrete members and structures [1–3]. Fiber reinforced concrete
(FRC) to enhance the mechanical properties of concrete are manu-
factured with various types of metallic [4–7], polymeric [8–10], and
hybrid fibers [11–13].
Various types of steel fiber that differ in tensile strength as well as
shape and size have been developed and used for SFRC. Soroushian and
Bayasi [4] investigated the relative effectiveness of different types of
steel fiber in normal-strength concrete. The types of steel fiber used in
their study are straight-round, crimped-round, crimped-rectangular,
fiber is more effective than straight or crimped fiber in improving both
the flexural and compressive behavior of concrete. However, Yakoub
[14] concluded from analyzing 281 SFRC beams that hooked steel fiber
is not as efficient as crimped fiber in terms of providing a capacity for
shear resistance for reinforced concrete (RC) beams. Through statistical
analysis of fibers produced all over the world, Katzer [15] reported that
67.1% are the hooked type and the other most popular fibers are
straight fiber (9.1%), mechanically deformed fiber (9.1%), crimped
fiber (7.9%), and other fiber types with different ends (6.6%). The
Katzer study [15] clearly indicates that hooked-end steel fiber is the
most popular and effective type of reinforcing fiber for concrete.
Over the last four decades, extensive studies on SFRC have con-
firmed the effectiveness of deformed steel fibers as additional re-
inforcement in structural elements such as beam [16–22], wall [23,24],
column [25–27], coupling and joint members [28,29].
The utilization of deformed steel fiber instead of vertical stirrups in
RC beams was first investigated by Batson et al. [16] in the early 1970s.
To determine the effectiveness of steel fiber as web reinforcement, they
carried out shear tests on 72 RC beam specimens with different shear
span ratios, fiber volume fractions, and fiber shapes. Batson et al. [16]
concluded that the replacement of vertical stirrups by round, flat, or
crimped steel fiber provides effective reinforcement against shear

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wiseroad@cnu.ac.kr (H.-D. Yun).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.009
Received 4 September 2017; Received in revised form 29 October 2017; Accepted 6 November 2017
Available online 07 November 2017
0263-8223/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S.-J. Jang, H.-D. Yun
failure. Based on Parra-Montesinos’ (2006) database [19] that contains
information about the shear strength of beams fabricated with de-
formed steel fiber, the American Concrete Institute (ACI) building code,
ACI 318–08 [30], introduced the use of deformed steel fiber as
minimum shear reinforcement for normal-strength concrete beams. Yoo
et al. [22] investigated the feasibility of eliminating the minimum shear
reinforcement in reinforced high-strength concrete beams that have a
compressive strength value of 67 MPa by adding 0.75% hooked steel
fiber. They concluded that the minimum shear reinforcement for re-
inforced high-strength concrete beams indeed could be eliminated by
the inclusion of 0.75% hooked steel fiber. However, only limited data
are available regarding high-strength concrete in test results for SFRC
beams.
To mitigate damage in RC columns during severe earthquakes, the
traditional method is to set closely-spaced transverse hoops to improve
the confinement of the concrete at plastic hinge regions. However, a
relatively large number of transverse hoops may result in a congestion
of the reinforcement as well as an increase in the cost and time for
construction [26]. Recently, the use of SFRC has been regarded as an
alternative reinforcement solution to the use of transverse hoops. Ger-
mano et al. [27] conducted an experimental study of the structural
performance of SFRC columns subjected to uniaxial and biaxial cyclic
loads. Their test results indicate that the using steel fiber has a positive
effect on mitigation of columns damage and energy dissipation. Bayasi
and Gebman [29] conducted a literature review and reported an ex-
perimental study of the effects of steel fiber on seismic beam-column
connections. Their results show that the confining effect of steel fibers
results in a reduction of the lateral reinforcement in seismic beam-
column joints.
Thus, major efforts have been made in recent years to eliminate the
shear or confinement reinforcement in RC members by adding steel
fiber to save costs and time that are needed for cutting and placing
rebar. The effects of fiber on the mechanical properties of concrete are
governed by the fiber volume fraction, fiber type, and cementitious
matrix properties. As specified in ACI 318–08 [30] for the use of steel
fiber as an alternative to minimum shear reinforcement, the flexural
toughness of SFRC can be a significant index to determine the number
of transverse hoops that can be eliminated when steel fiber is included
in the concrete. The compressive toughness also can be used as index to
determine the confinement ability of SFRC. However, special equip-
ment and loading methods are required to measure the descending
curve of SFRC in compression. Furthermore, obtaining data about the
descending curve for high-strength concrete in compression compared
to in flexure is difficult. Although numerous studies have investigated
the effects of hooked-end steel fiber on the mechanical properties of
normal-strength concrete, test data for high-strength concrete are lim-
ited.
Therefore, this paper first aims to examine the effects of hooked-end
steel fiber volume fraction and coarse aggregate size on the compressive
and flexural behavior of high-strength concrete. Then, this paper ex-
plores the relationship between compressive toughness and flexural
toughness of high-strength concrete with hooked-end steel fiber based
on this study’s flexural and compressive test results.
2. Experimental program
2.1. Mixture proportions and materials
An experimental program was designed for this study to examine
the effects of fiber volume fraction and coarse aggregate size, also re-
ferred to as nominal maximum aggregate size (NMAS), on the me-
chanical properties of high-strength concrete. Table 1 presents the
twelve series of SFRC mixtures used in the study. The mixture codes
reflect the NMAS ranges and volume fractions, as follows. The crushed
coarse aggregate was divided into three NMAS categories: small coarse
aggregate ranging from 5 mm to 8 mm NMAS, medium coarse
204
Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211
aggregate ranging from 5 mm to 13 mm NMAS, and large coarse ag-
gregate ranging from 13 mm to 19 mm NMAS. The four volume frac-
tions of the added hooked-end steel fiber were 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5%, and
2.0%. Also, the specified compressive strength of all the SFRC mixtures
was 60 MPa. The SFRC mixtures with a 0.3 water-to-cement ratio were
used to cast specimens for compressive and flexural testing.
For the fabrication of the SFRC specimens, the cement used in all the
mixtures was ordinary Portland cement (ASTM Type 1) with a specific
gravity of 3.14 g/cm3. The fine aggregate was local natural sand with
specific gravity and water absorption values of 2.62 and 1.91%, re-
spectively. The coarse aggregate was crushed limestone. Figs. 1 and 2
show the size distribution and size ranges of the coarse aggregate used
in this study, respectively. A superplasticizer was used to improve the
workability of the SFRC mixtures and distribute the fibers uniformly in
the fresh concrete. Hooked-end steel fiber with a 30 mm length and an
aspect ratio of 60 was used for reinforcing the concrete. Table 2 pro-
vides a summary of the mechanical properties of the hooked-end steel
fibers used in this study.
2.2. Specimen manufacture and test procedure
Each SFRC mixture was mixed using a double axial mixer. First, the
cement, fine aggregate, and coarse aggregate were dry-mixed for one
minute, followed by the addition of water with a superplasticizer. Then,
mixing was continued for three minutes. After the steel fiber was added,
mixing was continued for an additional two minutes to dissolve the glue
in the steel fiber bundles.
Cylindrical and prismatic specimens were cast in steel molds and
then compacted via vibration. The specimens were demolded after 24 h
and then cured in 20 °C water for 28 days. The specimens were air-dried
in the laboratory 12 h before testing.
The slump and air content of all the study mixtures were measured
using fresh SFRC mixtures according to ASTM C143 [31] and ASTM
C231 [32], respectively. To investigate the effects of steel fiber volume
fraction and NMAS on the compressive behavior of high-strength con-
crete, three cylindrical specimens were cast, each with a diameter of
100 mm and height of 200 mm. The cylinders were tested to measure
the compressive strength and elastic modulus according to ASTM C39
[33]. Fig. 3(a) shows a specimen in the compressive test setup. The load
was applied using a universal testing machine (UTM) with the capacity
of 3000 kN. The tests were carried out with a displacement ratio of
10 µm/s to obtain the post-peak behavior of the SFRC. During the test,
two linear variable differential transformers (LVDTs) were installed to
measure the axial strain.
Three prismatic specimens with a 100 × 100 mm cross-section and
300 mm span were fabricated using each SFRC mixture according to
ASTM C1609 [34]. Fig. 3(b) shows the flexural test setup. Third-point
bending loading was used for the flexural tests in conjunction with a
200 kN UTM. The mid-span deflection measurement of the prism was
obtained using two LVDTs placed on a steel yoke. A yoke can measure
the relative deflections of the support and central part of a prismatic
specimen, thereby improving the precision of first-crack deflection
measurements.
3. Test results and discussion
3.1. Fresh properties
The SFRC slump and air content tests were conducted immediately
after mixing. As clearly noted from Table 3, the SFRC mixtures with
fiber volume fractions of 1.5% and 2.0% have less workability than
those with 0.5% and 1.0% fiber. In contrast, the size of the coarse ag-
gregate does not significantly affect the workability of SFRC. Due to the
blocked pores created by the distributed steel fiber, the air content in
fresh mixtures increases with an increase in the steel fiber content. The
SFRC8-0.5 mixture, on the other hand, has the highest air content of
S.-J. Jang, H.-D. Yun Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211

Table 1
Mix proportions of SFRC.

Mixture code Coarse aggregate (mm) Fiber volume fraction (%) Unit weight (kg/m3)

Water Cement Fine aggregate Coarse aggregate Steel fiber

SFRC8-0.5 5-8 0.5 200 666 900 540 39.2

SFRC8-1.0 5-8 1.0 200 666 900 540 78.5
SFRC8-1.5 5-8 1.5 200 666 900 540 117.7
SFRC8-2.0 5-8 2.0 200 666 900 540 157.0
SFRC13-0.5 5-13 0.5 200 666 900 540 39.2
SFRC13-1.0 5-13 1.0 200 666 900 540 78.5
SFRC13-1.5 5-13 1.5 200 666 900 540 117.7
SFRC13-2.0 5-13 2.0 200 666 900 540 157.0
SFRC19-0.5 13-19 0.5 200 666 900 540 39.2
SFRC19-1.0 13-19 1.0 200 666 900 540 78.5
SFRC19-1.5 13-19 1.5 200 666 900 540 117.7
SFRC19-2.0 13-19 2.0 200 666 900 540 157.0

Table 2
Mechanical properties of hooked-end steel fiber.

Hooked-end steel fiber Tensile Length Diameter Aspect ratio

strength (mm) (mm) (length/
(MPa) diameter)

1100 30 0.5 60

compressive strength, strain at peak stress, and the modulus of elasti-

Fig. 1. Grading curves of aggregate.
6.4% due to the mixing condition.
3.2. Compressive strength
The experimental results for the cylindrical specimens under com-
pression indicate no significant changes in compressive strength for
SFRC with various coarse aggregate sizes and fiber volume fractions.
For the SFRC with an NMAS of 8 mm and volume fraction of 0.5%,
however, the compressive strength decreased compared to that of other
mixtures due to its higher air content, as noted in Table 3. Table 4
presents the compressive properties of the SFRC specimens, i.e.,
city, as obtained from compression testing. The peak strain is shown to
increase in accordance with an increase in the confined effect caused by
the hooked-end steel fiber.
Fig. 4 shows typical compressive stress-strain relationships for the
SFRC in terms of fiber volume fraction. The compressive stress and
strain were normalized by compressive strength and strain at peak
stress, respectively. The effects of the steel fiber volume fraction on the
initial behavior appear to be insignificant, whereas the post-peak duc-
tility of the SFRC increases with an increase in fiber content. The use of
steel fiber as transverse reinforcement for compression RC members is
shown to improve the confinement and ductility.
3.3. Compressive toughness
The empirical equations used for the compressive behavior of SFRC
found in the literature employ the expression proposed by Carreira and
Chu [35] for plain concrete, as given by Eq. (1).
fc β (εc / ε0)
=
f ′c β−1 + (εc / ε0) β (1)
where εc is the uniaxial strain; fc is the compressive stress; f′c is the
compressive strength; β is the material parameter; and ε0 is the strain at

Fig. 2. NMAS ranges of coarse aggregate particles.

205
S.-J. Jang, H.-D. Yun Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211

Fig. 3. Test set-ups to measure SFRC mechanical properties.

Table 3 the compressive strength. Ezdeldin and Balaguru [36] and Nataraja
Fresh properties of SFRC. et al. [37] employed the same expression to suggest strain-stress curves
for SFRC using crimped steel fiber; they obtained the value of β from the
Mixture code Slump (mm) Air content (%)
fiber volume fraction, aspect ratio, and reinforcing index. Lee et al. [38]
SFRC8-0.5 265 6.4 reported compressive behavior of SFRC that contained hooked-end steel
SFRC8-1.0 210 3.9 fiber and suggested a modified expression, presented here as Eqs. (2.1)
SFRC8-1.5 130 4.5
through (2.4).
SFRC8-2.0 105 2.0
SFRC13-0.5 240 2.7 fc A (εc / ε0)
SFRC13-1.0 243 3.5 =
SFRC13-1.5 185 3.8
fc′ A−1 + (εc / ε0) B (2.1)
SFRC13-2.0 105 5.5
SFRC19-0.5 245 1.9 1
A=B= fc′
, εc / ε0 ⩽ 1.0
SFRC19-1.0 245 2.6
1− ε (2.2)
SFRC19-1.5 175 3.5 0 Ec
SFRC19-2.0 85 2.4
−0.957
lf
A = 1 + 0.723 ⎛⎜Vf ⎞⎟ , εc / ε0 > 1.0
⎝ d f⎠ (2.3)

Table 4 0.064
f ′c
B=⎛ ⎞ ⎡1 + 0.882(V lf )−0.882⎤, ε / ε > 1.0
Compressive properties of SFRC. ⎢ f ⎥ c 0
⎝ 50 ⎠ ⎣ df ⎦ (2.4)
Mixture code f ′c (MPa) ε0 (10−6) Ec (GPa)
where A and B are the material parameters; Vf is the fiber volume
SFRC8-0.5 58.2( ± 1.0) 3300( ± 95) 25.5( ± 0.5) fraction; and lf and df represent the fiber length and diameter, respec-
SFRC8-1.0 68.6( ± 0.7) 3432( ± 297) 28.7( ± 0.8) tively.
SFRC8-1.5 63.6( ± 0.6) 3463( ± 85) 27.9( ± 0.5)
Fig. 5 presents comparisons of typical actual behavior under com-
SFRC8-2.0 68.2( ± 0.5) 3591( ± 158) 29.7( ± 0.7)
SFRC13-0.5 64.5( ± 0.5) 3227( ± 303) 30.6( ± 2.1) pression and behavior obtained from prediction models using Eqs. (2.1)
SFRC13-1.0 63.2( ± 0.8) 3320( ± 78) 28.7( ± 1.6) through (2.4) for SFRC with 13 mm NMAS. As shown in the figures, the
SFRC13-1.5 64.3( ± 0.2) 3424( ± 64) 28.5( ± 0.8) model suggested by Lee et al. [39] can represent the compressive be-
SFRC13-2.0 65.4( ± 1.1) 3394( ± 66) 29.2( ± 0.3) havior of SFRC with fiber volume fractions of 1.0%, 1.5%, and 2.0%.
SFRC19-0.5 66.6( ± 2.0) 3244( ± 234) 30.0( ± 0.3)
The post-peak behavior of the SFRC specimen with 0.5% fiber could not
SFRC19-1.0 67.1( ± 0.6) 3148( ± 84) 30.2( ± 0.9)
SFRC19-1.5 67.6( ± 1.7) 3278( ± 276) 30.9( ± 0.3) be measured due to the rapid decrease in loading after the peak stress
SFRC19-2.0 65.5( ± 1.5) 3322( ± 344) 29.0( ± 0.8) was reached. Thus, the model was used to predict that specimen’s post-
peak behavior.
The compressive toughness ratio can be calculated from the strain-
stress curves of cylindrical specimens. In this study, the compressive

Fig. 4. Effects of fiber volume fraction on normalized stress-strain curves of SFRC.

206
S.-J. Jang, H.-D. Yun
(a) Fiber volume fractions of 0.5% and 1.0%
Fig. 5. Test and analytical stress-strain curves of SFRC under compression.
toughness ratio was calculated as the ratio of the area of square made
by compressive strength and specified strain to that of the compressive
stress-strain curve up to the specified strain, as proposed by Nataraja
et al. [37]. As noted from Eqs. (3.1) and (3.2), the specified strain va-
lues are set at 0.009 and 0.015, which are three and five times, re-
spectively, the concrete ultimate strain of 0.003 provided in the ACI
318–14 building code [39].
TF3
TR3 =
0.009fc′
TF5
TR5 =
0.015fc′
where TR3 and TR5 are the compressive toughness ratios up to the strain
values of 0.009 and 0.015, respectively. Also, TF3 and TF5 are the areas
under the stress-strain curve up to those strain levels. Fig. 6 presents the
compressive toughness ratios calculated via the measured data and via
the prediction model using Eqs. (2.1) through (2.4). As shown, the
compressive toughness ratios using these two methods are similar to
each other. Therefore, the equation can be used to calculate the
toughness ratio instead of incomplete post-peak behavior of SFRC based
on the experimental results. Table 4 also shows the required parameters
based on the compressive test results.
Fig. 7 shows the effects of both volume fraction and aggregate size
on the compressive toughness ratios of the SFRC mixtures. As shown,
the compressive toughness ratios increase with an increase in fiber
content of the SFRC mixtures for all the study aggregate sizes. The SFRC
(a) Up to strain of 0.009
Fig. 6. Comparisons of compressive toughness ratios based on measured data and analytical results.
Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211
(b) Fiber volume fractions of 1.5% and 2.0%
specimens with 8 mm NMAS show greater compressive toughness than
those of other aggregate sizes. However, compared to steel fiber volume
fraction, aggregate size has an insignificant effect on the post-peak
compressive behavior and toughness of the SFRC mixtures.
3.4. Flexural strength of SFRC
Fig. 8 illustrates the method used to define the first crack and ul-
(3.1) timate load stage of SFRC under flexural loading. Benthia and Trottir
[40] distinguished the initial ascending parts of the SFRC curve as three
stages: first nonlinearity, significant nonlinearity, and the end of the
(3.2)
matrix contribution. They also suggested that the end of the matrix
contribution is the first crack stage of SFRC. In this study, the initial
point was set based on the initial stiffness of the specimen, as found in
ASTM C1018 [41] and shown in Fig. 8. This method can compensate for
the error that occurs at the initial state of a prismatic specimen under
small loads. The addition of steel fiber has more of an effect on the
behavior after the first crack than on the initial behavior. The post-
cracking behavior of SFRC can be divided into deflection-softening and
deflection-hardening behavior. Table 5 lists the flexural test results
based on these definitions.
Fig. 9 illustrates the effects of fiber volume fraction and aggregate
size on typical flexural responses for the three SFRC mixture series. As
expected, the initial behavior of all the specimens is similar until the
cracking stage, because all the mixtures have similar compressive
strength and modulus of elasticity values. On the other hand, the effects
(b) Up to strain of 0.0015
207
S.-J. Jang, H.-D. Yun Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211

Fig. 7. Effects of fiber volume fraction and aggregate size on compressive toughness ratios of SFRC.

correspondingly. For the SFRC19-2.0 mixture, however, the ultimate

strength decreased more than that of the SFRC19-1.5 mixture due to the
fiber ball that was caused by the higher content of steel fiber and larger
aggregate particles in the SFRC19-2.0 mixture.
In this study, the ultimate strength of the SFRC increased with an
increase in fiber volume fraction, which is closely related to the number
of steel fibers that provide a bridging action. The fiber distribution in
terms of the casting direction is also an important factor for de-
termining the flexural performance of SFRC [42]. Fig. 10 illustrates the
typical failure mode after flexural testing of the SFRC with the bridging
action of the hooked-end steel fibers. The surface indicates that failure
was attributable mostly to pull-out rather than rupture of the steel fi-
bers. Fig. 11 shows the effect of the number of steel fibers for the tensile
zone (shown in Fig. 10) on the ultimate load of the SFRC prismatic
specimens. As shown in Fig. 11, the SFRC specimens with 8 mm and
Fig. 8. Characteristics of load-deflection curve of SFRC [34,40,41]. 13 mm NMAS have more bridging steel fibers compared to specimens
with the NMAS of 20 mm. It is concluded that the ultimate strength of
Table 5 SFRC tends to increase in accordance with the number of steel fibers
Flexural properties of SFRC. with bridging action.

Mixture code Pc (kN) δc (mm) Pu (kN) δu (mm)

3.5. Equivalent flexural strength ratio
SFRC8-0.5 35.0( ± 0.4) 0.066( ± 0.003) 35.0( ± 0.4) 0.066( ± 0.003)
SFRC8-1.0 36.4( ± 5.6) 0.063( ± 0.003) 41.1( ± 7.5) 0.233( ± 0.148) The equivalent flexural strength ratio was characterized in this
SFRC8-1.5 36.1( ± 7.6) 0.067( ± 0.004) 48.0( ± 2.0) 0.406( ± 0.004) study as per ASTM C1609 [26] to investigate the flexural toughness of
SFRC8-2.0 37.3( ± 3.0) 0.061( ± 0.010) 53.9( ± 2.3) 0.321( ± 0.090)
SFRC13-0.5 36.5( ± 2.9) 0.066( ± 0.003) 36.5( ± 2.9) 0.066( ± 0.003)
SFRC. Eqs. (4.1) and (4.2) were used to calculate the equivalent flexural
SFRC13-1.0 36.2( ± 0.9) 0.066( ± 0.004) 37.3( ± 1.0) 0.151( ± 0.146) strength ratios up to deflections of 1/300 and l/150 of the span length,
SFRC13-1.5 35.9( ± 2.8) 0.059( ± 0.006) 45.7( ± 6.6) 0.314( ± 0.015) respectively.
SFRC13-2.0 39.7( ± 2.2) 0.069( ± 0.008) 51.4( ± 7.3) 0.536( ± 0.190)
SFRC19-0.5 37.3( ± 4.8) 0.065( ± 0.004) 37.3( ± 4.8) 0.065( ± 0.004) 300T300
RT,300 =
SFRC19-1.0 41.7( ± 1.4) 0.073( ± 0.006) 42.7( ± 3.0) 0.107( ± 0.054) f1 bh2 (4.1)
SFRC19-1.5 40.3( ± 4.9) 0.068( ± 0.008) 52.5( ± 1.5) 0.452( ± 0.116)
SFRC19-2.0 37.3( ± 4.9) 0.062( ± 0.003) 48.0( ± 4.7) 0.876( ± 0.608) 150T150
RT,150 =
f1 bh2 (4.2)
of steel fiber volume fraction and NMAS on the behavior after cracking where RT,300 and RT,150 are equivalent flexural strength ratios up to the
are significant. The SFRC specimens with a fiber volume fraction of deflections of L/300 and L/150, respectively; T300 and T150 are the
0.5% exhibit deflection-softening behavior after the initial crack for all areas under load-net deflection curves 0 to L/300 and L/150, respec-
aggregate sizes. In the case of the SFRC specimens with 1.0% fiber, both tively; f1 is the first-peak strength; b is the width of the specimen; h is
deflection-softening and deflection-hardening are evident. The hard- the height of the specimen; and L is the span length.
ening behavior led to an increase in peak strength, as shown in Table 5. Fig. 12 shows the effects of both fiber volume fraction and aggregate
The SFRC8-1.0 mixture shows the highest average increasing ratio be- size on the equivalent flexural strength ratios of the SFRC. ACI building
tween the first crack and ultimate load of 13% compared with the SFRC code [39] allows the use of at least 60 kg of deformed steel fiber per
mixtures with the same steel fiber volume fraction with 13 mm and cubic meter of concrete (fiber volume fraction of approximately 0.75%)
19 mm NMAS. SFRC specimens that contained 1.5% and 2.0% fiber also as a design alternative to the minimum shear reinforcement for
exhibited deflection-hardening behavior with an increase in the ulti- 0.5ϕVc < Vu ⩽ ϕVc in normal-strength concrete beams with compressive
mate load and deflection values. With an increase in the steel fiber strength values less than or equal to 40 MPa. In addition to the specified
volume fraction, the ultimate load value of the SFRC increased minimum content of deformed steel fiber, ACI building code also

208
S.-J. Jang, H.-D. Yun
Fig. 9. Typical flexural behavior of SFRC.
Fig. 11. Effect of number of fibers on ultimate load of SFRC.
specifies that the SFRC used for shear resistance must satisfy three re-
quirements: (1) the compressive strength acceptance criteria for stan-
dard-cured specimens, (2) the residual strength obtained from flexural
testing in accordance with ASTM C1609 [34] at a midspan deflection of
1/300 of the span length that is at least the greater of 90% of the
measured first-peak strength obtained from a flexural test or 90% of the
strength that corresponds to 0.62√f′c (MPa), and (3) the residual
strength obtained from flexural testing in accordance with ASTM C1609
at a midspan deflection of 1/150 of the span length that is at least the
greater of 75% of the measured first-peak strength obtained from a
flexural test or 75% of the strength that corresponds to 0.62√f′c (MPa).
Fig. 12 also shows the acceptance criteria for SFRC as the minimum
shear transverse reinforcement provided in ACI 318–14 [39]. As
209
Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211
Fig. 10. Fiber distribution at failure face.
expected, an increase in flexural toughness that corresponds to an in-
crease in steel fiber content was observed; flexural toughness increased
linearly to 1.5% fiber volume fraction. On the other hand, for SFRC
specimens with over 2% fiber, similar flexural toughness was observed.
According to the flexural test results, excessive amounts of steel fiber
contribute to a reduction in the effectiveness of the steel fiber due to the
inhomogeneous distribution of the fibers. In other words, SFRC speci-
mens with a small NMAS exhibit greater toughness than those with a
large NMAS.
Fig. 13 shows the correlation between the number of steel fibers and
the equivalent flexural strength ratio. The flexural toughness ratio in-
creases with an increase in the number of steel fibers for both cases of
deflections to L/300 and L/150.
3.6. Correlation between compressive and flexural toughness ratios
The toughness ratio represents the energy absorbance capacity and
ductility of a material. In this study, the toughness ratio of SFRC was
investigated under compression and bending loads. Fig. 14 shows the
relationship between the compressive toughness ratio and the equiva-
lent flexural strength ratio of the SFRC. The test results suggest that the
proposal to use Eqs. (5.1) and (5.2) for the calculation of the com-
pressive toughness ratio based on the equivalent flexural strength.
Fig. 14 shows that the suggested models provide a good estimation
compared to the test results. The models also can be used effectively to
better understand the mechanical properties of SFRC.
TR3 = 0.717(RT ,300)0.358 (5.1)
TR5 = 0.6431(RT ,150)0.5725 (5.2)
4. Conclusions
The compressive, flexural, and toughness ratios of SFRC were
S.-J. Jang, H.-D. Yun Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211

Fig. 12. Effects of fiber volume fraction and aggregate size on equivalent flexural strength ratio of SFRC.

Fig. 13. Effects of number of fibers on equivalent flexural strength ratio of SFRC.

(a) Up to strain of 0.009 and deflection of L/300 (b) Up to strain of 0.015 and deflection of L/150
Fig. 14. Correlations between compressive toughness ratio and equivalent flexural strength ratio of SFRC.

210
S.-J. Jang, H.-D. Yun
investigated through experimental research in this study. The test re-
sults have led to the following main findings.
(1) Both steel fiber volume fraction and aggregate size do not have a
significant effect on the compressive strength and modulus of
elasticity of SFRC. However, the peak strain, post-peak behavior,
and toughness of SFRC under compression improve with an in-
crease in fiber volume fraction.
(2) Flexural strength, toughness and the equivalent flexural strength
ratio significantly increase with an increase in fiber content. The
improvement of the flexural performance of SFRC is related mainly
to the number of steel fibers in the tensile zone of a prismatic
specimen. The limited hooked-end steel fiber volume fraction of
1.5% is suggested for the economical and efficient use of steel fiber
based on this study’s flexural test results.
(3) The NMAS has less effect on the mechanical properties of SFRC than
the fiber volume fraction. For SFRC specimens with a higher per-
centage of fiber, on the other hand, using small aggregate can aid
the homogeneous dispersion of steel fiber. Mathematical expres-
sions are suggested in this paper for the compressive toughness
ratio with regard to the equivalent flexural strength ratio of SFRC.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program
through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by
the Ministry of Education (NRF-2016R1D1A3B02008179).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the
online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.
009.
References
[1] ACI Committee 544, Design Considerations for Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete (ACI
544.4R-88 (Reapproved 2009)), American Concrete Institute; 1988.
[2] Zollo RF. Fiber-reinforced concrete: an overview after 30 years of development.
Cem Concr Compos 1997;19(2):107–22.
[3] Di Prisco M, Plizzari G, Vandewalle L. Fibre reinforced concrete: new design per-
spectives. Mater Struct 2009;42(9):1261–81.
[4] Soroushian P, Bayasi Z. Fiber type effects on the performance of steel fiber re-
inforced concrete. Mater J 1991;88(2):129–34.
[5] Song PS, Hwang S. Mechanical properties of high-strength steel fiber-reinforced
concrete. Constr Build Mater 2004;18(9):669–73.
[6] Olivito RS, Zuccarello FA. An experimental study on the tensile strength of steel
fiber reinforced concrete. Compos B Eng 2010;41(3):246–55.
[7] Orbe A, Rojí E, Losada R, Cuadrado J. Calibration patterns for predicting residual
strengths of steel fibre reinforced concrete (SFRC). Compos B Eng 2014;58:408–17.
[8] Li VC, Wang S, Wu C. Tensile strain-hardening behavior of polyvinyl alcohol en-
gineered cementitious composite (PVA-ECC). ACI Mater J 2001;98(6):483–92.
[9] Torigoe SI, Horikoshi T, Ogawa A, Saito T, Hamada T. Study on evaluation method
for PVA fiber distribution in engineered cementitious composite. J Adv Concr
Technol 2003;1(3):265–8.
[10] Yun HD. Effect of accelerated freeze–thaw cycling on mechanical properties of
hybrid PVA and PE fiber-reinforced strain-hardening cement-based composites
(SHCCs). Compos B Eng 2013;52:11–20.
[11] Ahmed SFU, Maalej M, Paramasivam P. Flexural responses of hybrid steel–po-
lyethylene fiber reinforced cement composites containing high volume fly ash.
Constr Build Mater 2007;21(5):1088–97.
[12] Banthia N, Majdzadeh F, Wu J, Bindiganavile V. Fiber synergy in Hybrid Fiber
211
Composite Structures 185 (2018) 203–211
Reinforced Concrete (HyFRC) in flexure and direct shear. Cem Concr Compos
2014;48:91–7.
[13] Shu X, Graham RK, Huang B, Burdette EG. Hybrid effects of carbon fibers on me-
chanical properties of Portland cement mortar. Mater Des (1980–2015)
2015;65:1222–8.
[14] Yakoub HE. Shear stress prediction: Steel fiber-reinforced concrete beams without
stirrups. ACI Struct J 2011;108(3):304–14.
[15] Katzer J. Steel fibers and steel fiber reinforced concrete in civil engineering. Pac J
Sci Technol 2006;7(1):53–8.
[16] Batson G, Jenkins E, Spatney R. Steel fibers as shear reinforcement in beams. Am
Concr Inst J Proc 1972;69(10):640–4.
[17] Swamy RN, Bahia HM. The effectiveness of steel fibers as shear reinforcement.
Concr Int 1985;7(3):35–40.
[18] Narayanan R, Darwish IYS. Use of steel fibers as shear reinforcement. ACI Struct J
1987;84(3):216–27.
[19] Parra-Montesinos GJ. Shear strength of beams with deformed steel fibers. Concr Int
2006;28(11):57–66.
[20] Kim KS, Lee DH, Hwang JH, Kuchma DA. Shear behavior model for steel fiber-
reinforced concrete members without transverse reinforcements. Compos B Eng
2012;43(5):2324–34.
[21] Cuenca E, Echegaray-Oviedo J, Serna P. Influence of concrete matrix and type of
fiber on the shear behavior of self-compacting fiber reinforced concrete beams.
Compos B Eng 2015;75:135–47.
[22] Yoo DY, Yuan T, Yang JM, Yoon YS. Feasibility of replacing minimum shear re-
inforcement with steel fibers for sustainable high-strength concrete beams. Eng
Struct 2017;147:207–22.
[23] Lim WG, Kang SW, Yun HD. Shear behavior of squat steel fiber reinforced concrete
(SFRC) shear walls with vertical slits. Appl Mech Mater 2013;372:207–10.
[24] Carrillo J, Pincheira JA, Alcocer SM. Behavior of low-rise, steel fiber-reinforced
concrete thin walls under shake table excitations. Eng Struct 2017;138:146–58.
[25] Ganesan N. M0urthy JR. Strength and behavior of confined steel fiber reinforced
concrete columns. ACI Mater J 1990;87(3):221–7.
[26] Huang L, Xu L, Chi Y, Xu H. Experimental investigation on the seismic performance
of steel–polypropylene hybrid fiber reinforced concrete columns. Constr Build
Mater 2015;87:16–27.
[27] Germano F, Tiberti G, Plizzari G. Experimental behavior of SFRC columns under
uniaxial and biaxial cyclic loads. Compos B Eng 2016;85:76–92.
[28] Khalifa ES. Analytical model for steel fiber concrete composite short-coupling beam.
Compos B Eng 2014;56:318–29.
[29] Bayasi Z, Gebman M. Reduction of lateral reinforcement in seismic beam-column
connection via application of steel fibers. ACI Struct J 2002;99(6):772–80.
[30] ACI Committee 318. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI
318–08): An ACI Standard: Commentary on Building Code Requirements for
Structural Concrete (ACI 318R–08). American Concrete Institute; 2008.
[31] ASTM C143/C143M-15. Standard test method for slump of hydraulic-cement con-
crete. American Society of Testing and Materials; 2015:1–4.
[32] ASTM C 231/C231M-17. Standard test method for air content of freshly mixed
concrete by the pressure method. American Society of Testing and Materials;
2017:1–10.
[33] ASTM C39/C39M-17. Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of
Cylindrical Concrete Specimens. American Society of Testing and Materials;
2017: 1–8.
[34] ASTM C1609/C1609M-12, Standard test method for flexural performance of fiber-
reinforced concrete (using beam with third-point loading). American Society of
Testing and Materials; 2012:1–8.
[35] Carreira DJ, Chu KH. Stress-strain relationship for plain concrete in compression. J
Proc 1985;82(6):797–804.
[36] Ezeldin AS, Balaguru PN. Normal-and high-strength fiber-reinforced concrete under
compression. J Mater Civ Eng 1992;4(4):415–29.
[37] Nataraja MC, Dhang N, Gupta AP. Stress–strain curves for steel-fiber reinforced
concrete under compression. Cem Concr Compos 1999;21(5):383–90.
[38] Lee SC, Oh JH, Cho JY. Compressive behavior of fiber-reinforced concrete with end-
hooked steel fibers. Materials 2015;8(4):1442–58.
[39] ACI Committee 318. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI
318–14): An ACI Standard: Commentary on Building Code Requirements for
Structural Concrete (ACI 318R–14). American Concrete Institute; 2015.
[40] Banthia N, Trottier JF. Test methods for flexural toughness characterization of fiber
reinforced concrete: some concerns and a proposition. ACI Mater J 1995;92:48–57.
[41] ASTM C1018–97, Standard test method for flexural toughness and first-crack
strength of fiber-reinforced concrete (using beam with third-point loading).
American Society of Testing and Materials; 2012:1–8.
[42] Holschemacher K, Mueller T, Ribakov Y. Effect of steel fibres on mechanical
properties of high-strength concrete. Mater Des (1980–2015) 2010;31(5):2604–15.