See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/278022867

Relation between Splitting Tensile and Flexural Strengths of Steel Fiber-

Reinforced Concrete

Conference Paper · June 2015

CITATIONS READS

3 6,170

3 authors, including:

Merve Açıkgenç Ulaş Kürşat Esat Alyamaç

Firat University Firat University
29 PUBLICATIONS 163 CITATIONS 84 PUBLICATIONS 1,279 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Merve Açıkgenç Ulaş on 11 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Relation between Splitting Tensile and Flexural Strengths
of Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete
Merve AÇIKGENÇ1, Kürşat Esat ALYAMAÇ2, Zülfü Çınar ULUCAN3
1
Fırat University, Engineering Faculty, Civil Engineering Department, 23119, Elazığ,
TURKEY, merveacikgenc@firat.edu.tr, Doctor of Philosophy.
2
Fırat University, Engineering Faculty, Civil Engineering Department, 23119, Elazığ,
TURKEY, kealyamac@firat.edu.tr, Assistant Professor.
3
Fırat University, Engineering Faculty, Civil Engineering Department, 23119, Elazığ,
TURKEY, zculucan@firat.edu.tr, Professor.

ABSTRACT
Concrete brittleness has been a problem since the first civil engineering applications. With
improvements in the technology of concrete materials, this problem has been eliminated by
adding dispersed steel fibers. Essentially, steel fibres are added to concrete to enhance the
ductility of concrete by delaying the onset of tension cracks or blocking the propagation of
cracks such that in terms of tensile strength, steel fiber reinforced concrete (SFRC) shows
better performance than conventional concrete. In practice and literature, splitting tensile
strength and flexural strength tests are preferred to determine the tensile performance of
SFRC. Splitting tensile strength test requires standard cube or cylinder specimen while
flexural strength test requires heavy beam specimen with larger dimensions given by most
standard. Thus, it is obvious that splitting tensile strength test with relatively small
specimens is more practical and economic than flexural strength test. Hence, in this study,
the relation between splitting tensile strength and flexural strength of SFRC with different
cement dosage and water/cement ratios has been investigated, firstly. In conclusion, it has
observed that there is a relation between these strength values and using splitting tensile
strength, flexural tensile strength of SFRC can be detected.

INTRODUCTION
In civil engineering applications, it has been a disadvantage and limiting aspect for building
design that conventional concrete is a brittle material with low resistance to cracking and low
tensile strength. Adding fibers to concrete provides improved tensile strength, toughness,
impact resistance, durability etc. by enhancing ductility. In both literature and practice, steel
fibers are the most using fiber type because of high technical properties (ACI 544.1R, 2002;
Acikgenc, 2015; Brant, 2008; Metha and Monteiro, 2006).

Steel fiber reinforced concrete (SFRC) has many superior mechanical properties compared
with the conventional concrete especially in terms of tensile strength. Many studies in the
literature have been conducted with experimental and analytical methods for evaluating these
mechanical properties of SFRC, with the consideration of concrete mixture proportions,
concrete types, age of curing, steel fiber type, geometry, aspect ratio and volume fraction,
etc. (Acikgenc et al., 2015; Bentur and Mindess, 2005; Kang et al., 2010; Soulioti et al.,
2011). As a result of these studies, it is well-known that steel fibers can remarkably enhance
tensile strength of SFRC while barely can affect compressive strength. Thus tensile strength
of SFRC is very important mechanical property. In the literature, splitting tensile strength
test or flexural strength test is generally performed to determine tensile behaviour of SFRC
(Acikgenc et al., 2015; Bentur and Mindess, 2005; Metha and Monteiro, 2006; Nataraja et
al., 1999).

It is known that there are relations between mechanical properties of concrete. Relationships
between mechanical properties have been investigated for mostly conventional concrete and
fiber reinforced concrete (Xu and Shi, 2009). Choi and Yuan (2005) proposed two relations
between compressive and splitting tensile strengths through regression analysis on
experimental data for both polypropylene fiber reinforced concrete (PFRC) and glass fiber
reinforced concrete (GFRC). There are a few studies about SFRC in this respect. Slater et al.
(2012) statistically analysed the relation between compressive strength, steel fiber geometry,
span-depth ratio of the beam specimens and shear strength. Gesoglu et al. (2013) also
investigated the relation between compressive strength, flexural strength and rebar bonding
strength through the regression analysis with power relations. Trough regression analyses,
Xu and Shi (2009) investigated the relationships between mechanical properties of collected
data from the literature. Researchers proposed empirical relations between splitting tensile
and compressive, between flexural and compressive, and between flexural and splitting
tensile strength data points. But these data points were consisted of SFRC mixtures with
variable fiber volume fractions (Vf) and fiber geometries. Kotsovos et al. (2011) in their
studies carried on the relationship between tensile strength and moment-curvature response
of SFRC, investigated tensile and flexural behaviour relations.

To determine tensile behaviour of SFRC, it is generally preferred to test splitting tensile

strength or flexural strength. Thus, there are a few studies conducted on the relation between
flexural strength and splitting tensile strength. Ramadoss and Nagamani (2006) investigated
that splitting tensile strength of high strength SFRC is nonlinearly correlated to its flexural
strength using statistical methods. However, correlation between splitting tensile strength
and flexural strength of SFRC is suggested linear by Nataraja et al. (2001). Considering,
these aspects of relations among mechanical properties of SFRC, it is seen that studies in this
regard are still few and unclearly reported. Thus, in this study, mechanical properties of
SFRC were experimentally determined, and then the relations between compressive strength
and splitting tensile strength, and between compressive strength and flexural strength were
investigated for different Vf values. Eventually, highly correlated empirical relations
proposed for the relation between flexural strength and splitting tensile strength. At the end
of the study, an additional relation between flexural and splitting tensile strengths was
revealed including Vf values. It is considered as a beneficial result for the preliminary design
and analysis of SFRC.

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
Mixture Proportions and Material Properties
In all mixtures, CEM I 42.5 N type Portland cement (PC) was used. 28 days compressive
strength of the cement was 51 MPa. Specific gravity and specific surface of the cement were
respectively 3.1g/cm3 and 3749 cm3/g.

Crushed calcareous aggregates were used in all mixtures with 16 mm maximum aggregate
size. The specific gravity of coarse (16~8mm), medium (8~2mm) and fine (1mm~filler)
aggregates were respectively 2.68, 2.60 and 2.58 g/cm3 and the water absorption rate of
aggregates were also respectively 0.3, 2.2 and 3%.

With the addition of steel fibers, the workability of a concrete reduces. However, with the
use of chemical admixtures, it is possible to maintain the workability without adding extra
water (ACI 544.1R, 2005). For all mixtures, a polycarboxylate-based super plasticizer (SP)
admixture was used. The specific gravity of the admixture was 1.1 g/cm3.

Hooked-end steel fibers were used to produce the SFRC mixtures. The tensile strength of the
steel fibers was 1250 MPa and the modulus of elasticity was 200 GPa. The fiber length (l)
was 30 mm and the fiber diameter (d) was 0.75 mm; therefore, the aspect ratio (l/d) was 40.

Table 1 gives the mixture proportions. As seen in the table, three different mixtures were
considered in this study in terms of cement dosage and water/cement (w/c) ratio. The
mixtures were also produced with 0% (Reference), 0.1%, 0.3%, 0.5% and 1% volume
fractions of steel fibers (Vf). Then, mechanical properties were investigated for all mixtures.

Table 1. Mixture Proportions

Mix PC Aggregate SP
w/c
Code (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (%)
M1 500 0.40 1644 0.75
M2 400 0.50 1728 0.75
M3 300 0.60 1865 1.00

Testing Procedure
Hardened concrete tests were performed on 28 days cured concrete specimens in water. To
investigate mechanical properties, compressive and splitting tensile strength tests were
evaluated with 150×150×150 mm cube specimens according to respectively the TS EN
12390-3 (2010) and the TS EN 12390-6 (2010) standards. In addition, 4-point flexural
strength test was performed using 150×150×500 mm beam specimens, according to the TS
10515 (1992) standard. During flexural strength tests, load-deflection data of SFRC
specimens were collected. Using the peak load, maximum flexural strength of SFRC
specimens were calculated. Toughness values were taken into account as the area under the
load-deflection curves for maximum 5 mm midpoint displacement value of the beam
specimens. Typical load-deflection curves of SFRC specimens can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Load-deflection curves of SFRC specimens.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
In this section, three hardened properties of SFRC were discussed. Table 2 gives these
mechanical properties below. Each given properties are average values of at least three
specimens. As seen in the table, mixtures are expressed with codes which consist of mix
code and Vf. The mixture codes with R letter means reference mixtures which do not have
any steel fibers. Table 2 also gives the toughness values of SFRC specimens. Since the
toughness of SFRC is significantly higher than normal concrete without fibers (ACI 544.1R,
2002), toughness of reference concretes were ignored in this study.

The relationships between mechanical properties were also investigated using regression
analysis.

Table 2. Mechanical Properties of Specimens and Toughness of SFRC Specimens

Strength (MPa) Toughness,
Mix
Vf Compressive, Splitting Flexural, T
Code
fc Tensile, fst fft (Joule)
R-M1 56.5 5.46 6.64 -
0% R-M2 42.7 4.75 5.79 -
R-M3 32.8 3.92 5.25 -
M1-0.1 56.5 5.48 6.75 151
0.1% M2-0.1 43.2 4.78 6.08 130
M3-0.1 33.0 3.95 5.52 115
M1-0.3 56.9 5.52 6.98 154
0.3% M2-0.3 43.5 4.83 6.16 132
M3-0.3 33.3 3.97 5.66 118
M1-0.5 57.3 5.73 7.71 177
0.5% M2-0.5 44.0 4.92 6.67 158
M3-0.5 34.0 4.00 5.88 139
M1-1 58.4 6.33 9.13 227
1% M2-1 44.6 5.51 8.42 204
M3-1 35.7 4.44 7.39 167

Compressive Strength
It is well known that increasing w/c ratio causes to decreasing strength values of concretes.
This is also known as Abrams’ Law, and is expressed as following equation (1) (Abrams,
1918).
𝐾1
𝑓𝑐 = 𝑤/𝑐 (1)
𝐾2

Where, fc is compressive strength, w/c is water to cement ratio by weight. K1, K2 are
empirical constants (Abrams, 1918; Acikgenc, 2015; Alyamac and Ince, 2009).

Figure 2 shows changes in compressive strength values of SFRC and reference to w/c ratio.
As seen in the graphic, steel fibers slightly increased the compressive strength. Moreover,
non-linear formulas are given in the graphic for each Vf ratio. Using Abrams’ Law, empirical
constants were also calculated for the mixtures. Here, fc values are given with superscripts
such as R, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 and 1, fc values with these superscripts mean respectively
compressive strength of SFRC with Vf=0, Vf=0.1%, Vf=0.3%, Vf=0.5% and Vf=1%.

Figure 2. Compressive strength of the specimens.

Splitting Tensile Strength
In Figure 3, splitting tensile strengths of the specimens can be seen. Comparing the slight
increase of the compressive strength with steel fibers, improvement of splitting tensile
strength by adding steel fibers are remarkable.

Figure 3. Splitting tensile strength of the specimens.

It was also performed that Abram’s equations were written for splitting tensile strength of
concretes can be seen in Figure 3. Here, fst values are given with superscripts such as R, 0.1,
0.3, 0.5 and 1, fst values with these superscripts mean respectively splitting tensile strength of
SFRC with Vf=0, Vf=0.1%, Vf=0.3%, Vf=0.5% and Vf=1%.

Flexural Strength and Toughness

Changing in maximum flexural strengths of the specimens are given in Figure 4a. As seen in
the graphic, adding steel fibers to concrete magnificently increased the flexural strength of
SFRC. Furthermore increased Vf ratio affected more positively flexural strengths of the
SFRC specimens.

Toughness is the most important aspect of SFRC. In this study, flexural toughness values of
SFRC specimens were calculated as the area under the load-deflection curves. Figure 4b
gives the toughness changing to w/c ratio. This changing in toughness is similar to changing
in mechanical strength values (Acikgenc, 2015). In addition, increasing Vf ratio caused to a
remarkable increase in toughness. Moreover, Figure 4 gives the Abrams’ equations for
flexural strengths and toughness values concretes. Here, fft and T values are given with
superscripts such as R, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 and 1, fft and T values with these superscripts mean
respectively flexural strength and toughness of SFRC with Vf=0, Vf=0.1%, Vf=0.3%, Vf=0.5%
and Vf=1%.

(a) (b)

Figure 4. (a) Flexural strength and (b) Toughness of specimens.

Correlations for all given Abrams’ equations are higher than 95% for all Vf ratios. Thus, it
can be said that equations can predict all mechanical strength and toughness values of SFRC
accurately for a certain Vf ratio.

Relationship of Mechanical Properties of SFRC

(a) (b)

Figure 5. Relationship between (a) compressive and splitting tensile, (b) compressive
and flexural strengths.
Figure 5a provides graphics of compressive strength (fc) to splitting tensile strength (fst) of
concrete specimens. Correlation between compressive strength (fc) and flexural strength (fft)
of concrete specimens were also analysed by linear regression analysis, which is shown in
Figure 5b. Linear regression analysis was carried out on these two groups of experimental
data points. Through regression analysis, obtained empirical relations are demonstrated in
Table 3. There are strong correlations above 95% for proposed relations in this study.

Table 3. Equations for the Relationship between Compressive-Splitting Tensile and

Compressive-Flexural Strength
Vf (%) Equations for fc-fst Equations for fc-fft
0 (Ref.) 𝑓𝑐 = 15.34𝑓𝑠𝑡 − 28.26 2
(R =0.98) 𝑓𝑐 = 16.92𝑓𝑓𝑡 − 55.70 (R2=0.99)
0.1 𝑓𝑐 = 15.38𝑓𝑠𝑡 − 28.60 2
(R =0.98) 𝑓𝑐 = 19.13𝑓𝑓𝑡 − 72.70 (R2=0.99)
0.3 𝑓𝑐 = 15.01𝑓𝑠𝑡 − 27.05 (R2=0.98) 𝑓𝑐 = 17.63𝑓𝑓𝑡 − 65.96 (R2=0.99)
0.5 𝑓𝑐 = 13.37𝑓𝑠𝑡 − 20.18 2
(R =0.99) 𝑓𝑐 = 12.74𝑓𝑓𝑡 − 40.92 (R2=0.99)
1 𝑓𝑐 = 11.81𝑓𝑠𝑡 − 17.81 (R2=0.96) 𝑓𝑐 = 12.71𝑓𝑓𝑡 − 59.46 (R2=0.95)

Graphical Relationship between Flexural and Splitting Tensile Strengths

As main object of this study, relations between splitting tensile strength (fst) and flexural
strength (fft) of concrete specimens were also investigated, and regression analysis was
carried out. Figure 6 gives this experimental data points and the linear relations between data
points.

Figure 6. Relationship between splitting tensile and flexural strengths.

Moreover given the empirical equations of these relations are shown in Table 4. Correlations
of the equations are above 96% for proposed relations in Figure 6. With these equations, it
can be possible to eliminate heavy beam specimens by estimating flexural strength from
splitting tensile strength.
Table 4. Equations for the Relationship between Splitting Tensile and Flexural
Strength

Vf (%) Equations for fft-fst

0 (Ref.) 𝑓𝑓𝑡 = 0.901𝑓𝑠𝑡 + 1.650 (R2=0.97)
0.1 𝑓𝑓𝑡 = 0.806𝑓𝑠𝑡 + 2.296 (R2=0.99)
0.3 𝑓𝑓𝑡 = 0.841𝑓𝑠𝑡 + 2.253 (R2=0.96)
0.5 𝑓𝑓𝑡 = 1.051𝑓𝑠𝑡 + 1.623 (R2=0.99)
1 𝑓𝑓𝑡 = 0.922𝑓𝑠𝑡 + 3.311 (R2=0.99)

Analytical Relationship between Flexural and Splitting Tensile Strengths

For SFRC mixtures in this study, Vf values vary from 0.1% to 1% which described as low
volume fraction by Mehta and Monteiro (2006). As explained before, there is a relation
between mechanical properties for each Vf value. In addition, it is well-known that increasing
Vf value has an increasing effect on flexural strength of SFRC (Bentur and Mindess, 2005).
Thus, for low volume fraction of steel fibers in this study, another relation can be revealed
between flexural strength, splitting tensile strength and Vf. In this study, this analytical
relation was written as equation (2) considering SFRC mixtures.

𝑓𝑓𝑡 = 0.840 ∗ 𝑓𝑠𝑡 + 0.136 ∗ 𝑉𝑓 ∗ 𝑓𝑠𝑡 + 1.17 ∗ 𝑉𝑓 + 1.815 (MPa) (2)

Here fft and fst values are in MPa, and Vf is steel fiber volume fraction (%). With this relation,
not only flexural strength can be predicted with splitting tensile strength, but also flexural
strength values for different Vf values can be predicted. Considering a preliminary design and
analysis of SFRC, this relation is very important. Because, in addition to the fact that using
Abrams’ equations strength values can be estimated for a w/c ratio, determining splitting
tensile strength using cube specimens which is produced economically compared to beam
specimens can provide flexural tensile strength of SFRC for a constant Vf by four relations
given in Table 4. But, one revealed equation (2) in this study can estimate flexural tensile
strength of SFRC for Vf values between 0.1~1%. Thus, in addition to reducing numbers of
produced specimens, numbers of trial mixtures can be reduced to obtain the SFRC mixture
with desired strength value in terms of preliminary design and analysis of SFRC mixtures
and an economic design process can be prolonged.

Figure 7. Relationship between experimental and analytical flexural strengths.

In Figure 7, experimental results of flexural strength of SFRC with Vf=0.1~1% were
compared with the analytical results calculated by equation (2). Since this linear relation
between experimental and analytical data are very close to y=x line and highly correlated
with 98%, it can be pointed out that the accuracy of the equation (2) is remarkable in view of
conformity of the relation between experimental and analytical data of flexural strength
values.

In equation (3), a similar analytical relation to equation (2) was revealed for compressive
strength. Thus, it can be said that using only splitting tensile strength values, both flexural
and compressive strength values can be estimated for different Vf values. This also an
important relation in terms of an economic design of producing desired SFRC mixtures.

𝑓𝑐 = 15.867 ∗ 𝑓𝑠𝑡 − 4.156 ∗ 𝑉𝑓 ∗ 𝑓𝑠𝑡 + 12.523 ∗ 𝑉𝑓 − 29.358 (MPa) (3)

CONCLUSIONS
Splitting tensile strength or flexural strength test is used generally for determining tensile
strength of SFRC. Thus, there are some studies conducted compressive-splitting tensile or
compressive-flexural strength relations. In this study, it is also investigated the relations
between compressive-splitting tensile, and compressive-flexural strengths. With a linear
regression analysis, empirical relations were obtained and there are strong correlations above
95%. The relation between flexural and splitting tensile strength which is the main object of
this study was also introduced with a linear regression analysis. Correlations of this proposed
relation were above 96%. Thus, it can be said that it is possible to determine flexural strength
value using splitting tensile strength of SFRC for a constant Vf.

At the end of the study, considering the fact that increasing Vf provides higher flexural
strength of SFRC, another relation was revealed between flexural strength, splitting tensile
strength and Vf value changing between 0.1% and 1%. This relation is considered as an
important conclusion of the study in terms of preliminary design and analysis of SFRC
correctly. Moreover, a similar relation was also revealed for compressive strength, splitting
tensile strength and Vf. Thus, it can be said that it is not necessary to produce beam
specimens to detect flexural strength of SFRC. Using cube specimens, splitting tensile
strengths of SFRC specimens can be detected and then flexural strength values can be
estimated by revealed relations. Furthermore, this flexural strength values can be estimated
for different Vf values by using one equation. In fact, it can be also possible to predict
compressive strength of SFRC specimens by using the relation between compressive
strength, splitting tensile strength and Vf in the same way. Thus, both cube specimens for
compressive strength and beam specimens for flexural strength test could be eliminated. As
reducing number of specimens and tests, an economic and practical design process can be
conducted for SFRC mixtures with low volume fraction of steel fibers.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was supported by Fırat University Scientific Research Projects Unit (Grant No.
MF.13.02 and MF.13.29). Authors acknowledge to Kemerli Firm (Turkey) for their fiber
material supports.

REFERENCES
Abrams, D. A. (1918). “Design of concrete mixtures.” Lewis Institute Bulletin 1918:1.
ACI 544.1R-96. (2002). State-of-the-art report on fiber reinforced concrete, American
 Concrete Institute, Michigan.
Acikgenc, M. (2015). A Graphic Based Approach for the Mix Design of Steel Fiber
Reinforced Concrete, PhD Thesis, Fırat University, Elazig, Turkey.
Acikgenc, M., Ulas, M., and Alyamac, K.E. (2015). “Using an Artificial Neural Network to
Predict Mix Compositions of Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete.” Arabian Journal for
Science and Engineering, 40,407–419.
Alyamac, K. E., and Ince, R. (2009). “A preliminary concrete mix design for SCC with
marble powders.” Construction and Building Materials, 23(3),1201–1210.
Bentur, A., and Mindess, S. (2005) Fibre Reinforced Cementitious Composites, Elsevier
Science Publishing, New York.
Brandt, A. M. (2008). “Fibre reinforced cement-based (FRC) composites after over 40 years
of development in building and civil engineering.” Composite Structures, 86(1-3),3–
9.
Choi, Y., and Yuan, R. L. (2005). “Experimental relationship between splitting tensile
strength and compressive strength of GFRC and PFRC.” Cement and Concrete
Research, 35(8),1587– 1591.
Gesoglu, M., Guneyisi, E., Alzeebaree, R., and Mermerdas, K. (2013). “Effect of silica fume
and steel fiber on the mechanical properties of the concretes produced with cold
bonded fly ash aggregates.” Construction and Building Materials, 40,982–990.
Kang, S. T., Lee, Y., Park, Y. D., and Kim, J. K. (2010). “Tensile fracture properties of an
Ultra High Performance Fiber Reinforced Concrete (UHPFRC) with steel fiber.”
Composite Structures, 92(1),61–71.
Kotsovos, G. M., Cotsovos, D. M., Kotsovos, M. D., and Kounadis, A. N. (2011). “Tensile
behaviour and moment–curvature relationship of steel fibre reinforced concrete.”
Magazine of Concrete Research, 63(4),235 –246.
Mehta, P. K., and Monteiro, P. J. M. (2006) Concrete: Microstructure, Properties and
Materials, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Nataraja, M. C., Dhang, N., and Gupta, A. P. (1999). “Stress-strain curves for steel-fiber
reinforced concrete under compression.” Cement and Concrete Composites, 21(5-
6),383-390.
Nataraja, M. C., Dhang, N., and Gupta, A. P. (2001). “Splitting tensile strength of SFRC.”
Indian Concrete Journal, 75(4),287–90.
Ramadoss, P., and Nagamani, K. (2006). “Investigation on the tensile strength of high
performance fiber reinforced concrete using statistical methods.” Computers and
Concrete, 3(6),389–400.
Slater, E., Moni, M., and Alam, M. S. (2012). “Predicting the shear strength of steel fiber
reinforced concrete beams.” Construction and Building Materials, 26(1),423–436.
Soulioti, D. V., Barkoula, N. M., Paipetis, A., and Matikas, T. E. (2011). “Effects of fibre
geometry and volume fraction on the flexural behaviour of steel-fibre reinforced
concrete.” Strain, 47(1),535–541.
TS 10515. (1992). Concrete–steel fibre reinforced-test method for flexural toughness,
Turkish Standards Institutions, Ankara.
TS EN 12390-3. (2010). Testing hardened concrete - Part 3 : Compressive strength of test
specimens, Turkish Standards Institutions, Ankara.
TS EN 12390-6. (2010). Testing hardened concrete - Part 6: Tensile splitting strength of test
specimens, Turkish Standards Institutions, Ankara.
Xu, B. W., and Shi, H. S. (2009). “Correlations among mechanical properties of steel fiber
reinforced concrete.” Construction and Building Materials, 23(12),3468–3474.

View publication stats