ISSN 20299990

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ARCHITECTURE AND CIVIL ENGINEERING

DARNIOJI ARCHITEKTRA IR STATYBA

2014. No. 1(6)

Analysis of Crack Width Calculation of Steel Fibre and Ordinary

Reinforced Concrete Flexural Members
arnas Kelpa*, Mindaugas Augonis, Mindaugas Daukys, Algirdas Augonis
Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Studentu st. 48, LT-51367 Kaunas, Lithuania.
*Corresponding author: sarunas.kelpsa@gmail.com
http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.6.1.6336
It is known that steel fibre can reduce the crack width of reinforced concrete flexural members however generally
accepted crack width calculation method does not exist yet. The residual tensile strength which is used for crack width
calculations should be obtained from tests. Three crack width calculation methods of steel fibre and ordinary reinforced
concrete flexural members are discussed in this paper. All these methods have been derived using Eurocode 2 provisions,
which are intended to the members without the fibre. Experimental cracking results of small cross section flexural members
reinforced with steel fibre and ordinary reinforcement are also discussed. A scatter of the residual tensile strength which is
obtained from three point bending test and its influence to the crack width is also reviewed briefly. Calculated crack widths
are compared to the experimental results. It is determined that due to lack of the specimens the large deviations of residual
flexural tensile strength can be obtained and it can cause the significant errors of calculated crack widths.
Keywords: Steel fibre, residual tensile strength, crack width, CMOD, SFRC.
1. Introduction
The application of steel fibre has been investigated
over the past few decades. Today the steel fibre is commonly
used in slabs on grade and sprayed concrete although other
application areas exist. The wider practice of the fibre is
still restricted because there is no generally accepted design
method. Also, the application of the steel fibre in structural
design is limited due to the efficiency of steel fibre which
has to be established from tests every time (Jansson 2007;
Ulbinas, 2012).
Depending on fibre content and its parameters the steel
fibre can change properties of concrete slightly: compressive,
tensile strength and modulus of elasticity. However, the
steel fibre changes a nature of concrete collapse most
highly: steel fibres enhance the post-cracking properties
of concrete and the collapse becomes more ductile. Steel
fibre reinforced concrete (SFRC) has load bearing capacity
even after cracking. Depending on the fibre parameters and
the fibre content the post cracking strength can be higher or
lower than the tensile (peak) strength of SFRC (Naaman,
2003; Ulbinas, 2012; Vandewalle, 2007).
After the cracking of steel fibre and ordinary reinforced
concrete members, the steel fibre can transfer tensile
stresses across the cracks and so it leads to a reduction of the
crack widths. When the residual tensile strength of SFRC
is higher than the tensile strength, then strain/deflection
hardening post cracking behaviour is achieved. In this case,

more cracks will open if the load is still increasing after

the cracking.. Whereas when the residual tensile strength
is lower than the tensile strength of SFRC, then strain/
deflection softening behaviour is achieved and no more
cracks will open. Depending on stress-strain distribution
in the section, the strain hardening is achieved using larger
amount of the fibre than for the case of deflection hardening
behaviour (Jansson, 2007; Jansson et. al., 2008; Naaman,
2003).
In order to determine material properties of the SFRC
some different tests methods were proposed: three and four
point bending tests, round and square panel tests, wedge
splitting tests and uniaxial tension tests. It is established,
that the size of specimens determines a scatter of results
as the cracked area is bigger as the scatter of the results
is lower. Although the residual tensile stress (axial postcracking strength) of SFRC is determined indirectly and
with the large scatter of the results, however the three point
bending test method is common, because of simplicity of
it (Jansson, 2007; Jansson et. al., 2008; Parmentier et. al.,
2008; Vandewalle et. al., 2008).
The composite reinforcement (steel fibre and ordinary
reinforcement) allows us to reduce the width of the cracks
and to enhance stiffness of the flexural members. (Ulbinas,
et. al. 2009). RILEM TC 162-TDF (hereafter RILEM) has
published the recommendations in 2003 (RILEM TC 16250

TDF 2003) and there is offered the crack width calculation

method of steel fibre and ordinary reinforced concrete
flexural members. In order to get a better agreement between
tests and calculation results other scientists have analysed
this method and made their corrections then (Jansson et. al.,
2010; Lfgren, 2007).
The estimation of cracking moment and three crack
width calculation methods of steel fibre and ordinary
reinforced concrete flexural members are discussed in
this article. In order to examine calculation results the
experimental program was performed. The residual flexural
tensile strength (fR,1) of SFRC, compressive and tensile
strengths of concrete and the SFRC as well as modulus
of elasticity of the concrete were measured during these
reinforcement
were
also measured.
The
experimental
crack
tests. The crack
widths
of the small
cross
section flexural
widths
of members
full scale reinforced
beams reinforced
with
steel
fibre
and
concrete
with
steel
fibre
and
ordinary
reinforcement were also measured. The experimental crack
ordinary
reinforcement
were
takenThefrom
the reference
reinforcement
were
also
measured.
experimental
crack
widths of fullwere
scalealso
beams
reinforced
with steel fibre
and
reinforcement
measured.
Theanalysis
experimental
crack
(Ulbinas
2012).
Comprehensive
and
the
widthsofoffull
fullscale
scalebeams
beams
reinforced
with
steel
fibre
and
ordinary
reinforcement
were
taken with
fromsteel
the fibre
reference
widths
reinforced
and
comparison
ofwere
calculatedmeasured.
crack
widths
thethe
experimental
reinforcement
Theand
experimental
ordinary reinforcement
reinforcement
were taken
taken
from
reference
(Ulbinas
2012). also
Comprehensive
analysis
andcrack
the
ordinary
were
from
the reference
results
are
also
executed
in
this
paper.
widths
of
full
scale
beams
reinforced
with
steel
fibre
(Ulbinas
2012).
Comprehensive
analysis
and
the
comparison
comparison
of
calculated
crack
widths
and
the
experimental
(Ulbinas 2012). Comprehensive analysis and and
the
ordinary
reinforcement
were
taken
fromthethe
reference
results
are
also
executed
in and
thiswidths
paper.
of calculated
widths
the
experimental
results
are
comparison
of crack
calculated
crack
and
experimental
2. Methods2012).
(Ulbinas
Comprehensive
analysis
and
the
also
executed
in
this
paper.
results are also executed in this paper.
comparison
of calculated crack widths and the experimental
2. Methods
2.1.
Verification
of crackinopening
2. Methods
results
are also executed
this paper.
2. Methods
cross section
of SFRC
member is uncracked until
2.1. A
Verification
of crack
opening
tensile
stress
does
not
exceed
the
critical value. Theretofore
2.1.
Verification
of
crack
opening
2.
Methods
2.1. Verification
of crackofopening
A cross section
SFRC member is uncracked until
by provisions
of
EC2
the
full
section
is uncracked
assumed tountil
be
crosssection
section
SFRCthe
member
tensile
stress
does
notofofexceed
criticalisisvalue.
Theretofore
AA
cross
SFRC
member
uncracked
until
elastic
(Fig.
1). Steel
fibreopening
can change
the tensile
strength
of
2.1.
Verification
of
crack
tensile
stressdoes
does
not
exceed
thecritical
critical
value.
Theretofore
by
provisions
ofnot
EC2
the full
sectionvalue.
is assumed
to be
tensile
stress
exceed
the
Theretofore
concrete
depending
on
fibre
parameters.
However
inuntil
the
A
cross
section
of
SFRC
member
is
uncracked
elastic
(Fig. 1).ofof
Steel
fibre
theisistensile
strength
byprovisions
provisions
EC2
thecan
fullchange
section
assumed
to be
beof
by
EC2
the
full
section
assumed
to
calculations
of
the not
crack
width
opening
ofvalue.
SFRC
members
it
tensile
stress
does
exceed
the
critical
Theretofore
concrete
depending
on
fibre
parameters.
However
in of
the
elastic(Fig.
(Fig.
1).Steel
Steel
fibre
can
change
the
tensile
strength
elastic
1).
fibre
can
change
the
tensile
strength
can
be
assumed
approximately
that
the
tensile
strength
of
by
fullparameters.
section of
is However
assumed
to
be it
calculations
ofoftheEC2
crack
width
opening
SFRC
members
ofprovisions
concrete
depending
on
fibre
parameters.
However
in the
the
concrete
on the
fibre
in
SFRC
is depending
equal
to tensile
strength
of concrete
(Jansson
elastic
(Fig.
1).
Steel
fibre
can
change
the
tensile
strength
ofitof
can
be
assumed
approximately
that
the
tensile
strength
calculations
ofofthe
crack
opening
ofof
SFRC
calculations
the
crackwidth
width
opening
SFRC
members
2007).
Independing
more
details,
the
tensile
strength
ofmembers
SFRC
is
concrete
on
fibre
parameters.
However
in
the
SFRC
is
equal
to
tensile
strength
of
concrete
(Jansson
can
be be
assumed
approximately
that
the
strength
of
it can
assumed
approximately
that
thetensile
tensile
strength
of
studied
in
the
other
publications

Naaman
2003,
etc.
In
this
calculations
of
the
crack
width
opening
SFRC
members
itis
2007).
more
details,
the
tensile
strength
of (Jansson
SFRC
SFRC
isisInequal
equal
totensile
tensile
strength
ofof
concrete
SFRC
to
strength
of concrete
(Jansson
2007).
case
a cracking
moment
is
calculated
according
to
a formula
can
be
assumed
approximately
that
the
tensile
strength
of
studied
in
the
other
publications

Naaman
2003,
etc.
In
this
2007).
In
more
details,
the
tensile
strength
of
SFRC
is
In more details, the tensile strength of SFRC is studied in
(1):
SFRC
equal
to publications
tensileis calculated
strength
ofaccording
concrete
(Jansson
case
aisin
cracking
moment
a formula
studied
the
other
Naaman
2003,
etc.
In
thisa
the other
publications
Naaman
2003,
etc.
In to
this
case
2007).
In moremoment
details,isthe
tensile according
strength of
SFRC
is
(1):
case
a
cracking
calculated
to
a
formula
cracking
moment
is, calculated according to a formula (1):
Min
= f other
crc the
ctm W elpublications
studied

Naaman
2003,
etc.
In
this
(1):
case a cracking
moment
calculated according to a formula
(1)
M crc = f ctm
Wel , is
(1): M = f W ,
where:crcf (fctm ) el mean value of axial (flexural) tensile

The stress and strain distribution is analogical in

doubly reinforced section, but the top reinforcement should
be considered in that case.
2.2. Crack width calculation method proposed by RILEM
TC 162-TDF
For the crack width calculation of steel fibre and
ordinary reinforced concrete members RILEM has
proposed an application of crack width calculation method
given in old ENV 1992-1-1:1991. The calculation method
of ENV 1992-1-1:1991 was supplemented marginally.
The coefficient which reduces average crack spacing was
involved. This coefficient depends on parameters of the
steel fibre. Furthermore, the stress in tensile reinforcement
ins Fig.
this case,
residualconsidering
tensile stressthat
is taken
over
(
and 2.
srIn
) should
be the
calculated
the steel
in a part
of the
crack
height.
Suchover
stress
distribution
could
fibres,
which
cross
the
crack,
take
the
residual
tensile
in Fig. 2. In this case, the residual tensile stress is taken over
be obtained
the flexural
member
a notch.
Here
afb
stresses
( )when
uniformly
through
the stress
allhas
crack
height.
The
inFig.
a part
thecase,
cracktheheight.
Such
distribution
could
in
2. Infbofthis
residual
tensile
stress
is taken
over
is
the
section
height
where
the
steel
fibre
does
not
take
over
stress
andofstrain
distribution
in the
cracked
section
is given
bea obtained
when
theheight.
flexural
member
has
a notch.
Here
a
in
part
the
crack
stress
distribution
could
theFig.
residual
tensile
stress.
In Such
other
cases,
when
there
is
nofb
in
Fig.
2.
In
this
case,
the
residual
tensile
stress
is
taken
over
in
2.
In
this
case,
the
residual
tensile
stress
is
taken
over
isobtained
the section
height
where
the
steel fibre
does
not Here
take
over
be
when
the
flexural
member
has
a
notch.
a
fb
factors,
which
can
the
area
of the
residual could
tensile
in
part
of
crack
height.
stress
distribution
in
aa part
of the
the
crackreduce
height.
Such
stress
distribution
the
residual
tensile
stress.
InSuch
other
cases,
when
is no
is
the
section
height
where
the
steel
fibre
does
not there
takecould
over
stress,
then
a
=
0.
fb
be
obtained
when
the
flexural
member
has
a
notch.
Here
be
obtained
when
the
flexural
member
has
a
notch.
Here
fb
factors,
which
can
reduce
the
area
of
the
residual
tensile
the residual tensile stress. In other cases, when there is ano
is
the
section
height
where
the
steel
fibre
does
not
take
over
a
is
the
section
height
where
the
steel
fibre
does
not
take
stress,
then
a
=
0.
fb
factors, whichfb can reduce the area of the residual tensile
the
stress.
In other
cases,
when
there
is is
no
overresidual
the
residual
tensile
stress.
In other
cases,
when
there
stress,
then
atensile
fb = 0.
factors,
which
cancan
reduce
the residual
residualtensile
tensile
no factors,
which
reducethe
thearea
area of
of the
stress,
stress, then
then aafbfb =
= 0.
0.

Fig. 2. Stress and strain distribution in cracked section of SFRC

flexural member
Fig. 2. Stress and strain distribution in cracked section of SFRC
flexural
member
Fig.
2.The
Stress
and strain
distribution
in cracked
section of
SFRC
method
proposed
by RILEM
indicates
that
the
flexural
member
residual tensile stress should be calculated according to the
The
method
proposed
by RILEM
the
Fig.
2.
and
strain
distribution
in cracked
crackedindicates
sectionofofthat
SFRC
Fig.
2. Stress
Stress
and strain
distribution
section
SFRC
formula
(2) (RILEM
TC
162-TDFin
2003):
flexural
member
residual
tensile
stress
should
be
calculated
according
to
the
The
method proposed by RILEM indicates that the
flexural
member

formulatensile
(2) (RILEM
TC 162-TDF
2003): according to the
residual
stress
be calculated
, should by
fb =method
0.45 f Rm,1proposed
The
RILEM
indicates that
that the
the
The
proposed
by RILEM
formula
(2)method
(RILEM
TC 162-TDF
2003): indicates
(2)
residual
tensile
stress
should
be
calculated
according
to
the
f Rm,1 , should be calculated according to the
residual tensile
fb = 0.45stress
ctm
ctm,fl
formula
(2)
(RILEM
TC 162-TDF 2003):

=
0
.
45
f
formula
(2)
(RILEM
(2) fb
strength
of concrete (SFRC); Wel elastic resisting moment
Rm,1 , TC 162-TDF 2003):
M crc = f ctm Wel ,
where: fRm,1 the mean value of the flexural residual tensile
of reinforced concrete member.
(2) =obtained
strength,
threepoint bending test method.
(2)In
0.45 f Rm,1 ,by
where:fb fRm,1 the
mean value of the flexural residual tensile
details
this
test
are
discussed
in
section
2.4.
In analysis of the crack width which is given in section more
(2) ffRm,1
strength,
obtained
by value
threepoint
bending
test method.
where:
mean
of the
residual
tensile In
where:
the
theto
mean
theflexural
flexural
residual
Rm,1
According
the value
aboveofdiscussed
method
thetensile
crack
3, the cracking moment is calculated according to a stress
more
details
this
test
are
discussed
in
section
2.4.
strength,
obtained
by
threepoint
bending
test
method.
obtained by
threepoint
bending test method.InIn
and
reinforced strength,
width
is
calculated
by
the
formula
(3):
andstrain
strain distribution
distribution given
given in
in Fig.
Fig. 11 (singly
(singly reinforced
where:
fRm,1 this
thetest
mean
of discussed
thein
residualthe
tensile
According
to are
thevalue
above
crack
more
discussed
section
2.4.
more details
details
this
test
are
discussed
inflexural
sectionmethod
2.4.
section).
section).
and
strain distribution given in Fig. 1 (singly reinforced strength,
by
bending
test method.
In
width
is obtained
calculated
bythreepoint
the
formula
(3): method
According
to
the
above
discussed
the
crack
w
=

,
According
to
the
above
discussed
method
the
crack
k
rm
sm
section).
more
details
this
test
are
discussed
in
section
2.4.
and strain distribution given in Fig. 1 (singly reinforced width is calculated by the formula (3):
width
iswcalculated
formula
(3):
(3)According
to by
thethe
above
discussed
method the crack
section).
k = s rm sm ,
and strain distribution given in Fig. 1 (singly reinforced width is calculated
by
the
formula
(3):
(3)
(3)w = s rm sm ,
section).
where: kwk the
final crack width, srm the average final
(3) w
where:
final
width,
srm the
average
final tension
crack
k=the
crack
sm,crack
the
mean
strain
in the
wkspacing,
sm
rm
where:
wk sthe
the
final strain
crack in
width,
srm the
average final
spacing,

mean
the
tension
reinforcement,
sm
reinforcement,
coefficient relating the average crack
(3) wspacing,
crack
sm crack
the
theaverage
mean scrack
strain
inaverage
the
where:
thedesign
final
width,
the
final
k the
width
coefficient
relating
width
withtension
the
with
value
(for
loadrminduced
cracking
=
reinforcement,

coefficient
relating
the
average
crack
crack
spacing,

the
mean
strain
in
the
tension
sm induced cracking = 1.7).
design
value (for load
1.7).
where:
w

the
final
crack
width,
s

the
average
final
k
rm induced
width with
value (for
load
cracking
=
reinforcement,
design
coefficient
relating
the average
crack
The
mean
in
tension
reinforcement
is
crack
spacing,
sm strain
value
mean
strain
in cracking
the tension
mean
strain
inthe
thethe
tension
reinforcement
smsm
is=
1.7).The
width
with
the
design
(for
load
induced

calculated according
to
the
formula
(4):
Fig. 1. Stress and strain distribution in uncracked section of SFRC reinforcement,
coefficient
average crack
calculated The
according
to the formula
(4): the
mean
strain
in therelating
tension
reinforcement
sm is
1.7).
flexural member
width
with
the
design
value
(for
load
induced
crackingsm is
=
calculated
according
to
the
formula
(4):
Fig. 1.1.Stress
Stressand
andstrain
strain
distribution
in uncracked
section
of
Fig.
distribution
in uncracked
section
of SFRC
The mean strain in the
tension reinforcement
2

1.7).

SFRC
flexural
member
flexural
member
to thesrformula
s
Fig. 1.The
Stressstress
and strain
in uncracked
of SFRC
and distribution
strain distribution
is section
analogical
in calculated
1 strain
, (4):
smThe
=according
(4)
1 2 in the
flexural
Esmean
s 2 tension reinforcement sm is

doubly member
reinforced section, but the top reinforcement should

s
sr
The stress
anddistribution
strain distribution
analogical
the
(4):
formula
Fig. 1. Stress
and strain
in uncrackedissection
of SFRCin calculated
2 ,
sm according
= 1 to
1 2
be considered
in that case.

(4) = E
s s
sr s
flexural
member
doubly
reinforced
section,
the top reinforcement
should

The
stress and
strainbut
distribution
is analogical
in
,

sm
1 2
E s
2
be considered
that
case.but
2.2.Crack
widthincalculation
method
proposed
by RILEM
TC 51
doubly
reinforced
section,
the top
reinforcement
should
(4)
srs

s
The stress
andcase.
strain distribution is analogical in
reinforcement calculated
where:
,
the tensile
sms= the1stress
1 2in
162-TDF
be
considered
in that

2.2.Crack
width
calculation
by RILEM
TC on(4)
doubly
reinforced
section, butmethod
the topproposed
reinforcement
should
the basisE sof a cracked
(Fig. 2), sr the stress in

ssection
where: s the stress in the tensile reinforcement calculated
For width
the crack
width calculation of steel fibre and
162-TDF
2.2.Crack
be
considered
in calculation
that case. method proposed by RILEM TC
the(4)tensile
reinforcement calculated on the basis of a
on
the basis
a cracked
section
(Fig.
2), sr the
stress in
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
members
RILEM
has
proposed
theofstress
in the
tensile conditions
reinforcement
calculated
where:
162-TDF
For the crack width calculation of steel fibre and crackeds section
under
loading
causing
first

where: s the stress in the tensile reinforcement calculated where: s the stress in the tension reinforcement assuming
on the basis of a cracked section (Fig. 2), sr the stress the cracked section. Determination of s was discused
in the tensile reinforcement calculated on the basis of a above (Fig. 2). kt a factor dependent on the duration of
cracked section under loading conditions causing first the load, fct,eff the mean value of the tensile strength of the
cracking (Fig. 2), 1 coefficient which takes account of concrete effective at the time when the cracks may first be
the bond properties of the bars, 2 coefficient which takes expected to occur, p,eff reinforcement ratio for longitudinal
account of the duration of the loading or of repeated loading. reinforcement (p,eff = r), e ratio Es/Ecm, where Ecm and Es
2
expression
maximum
crack
spacing
also
s1bxin
The stresses
the tension reinforcement s1 and sr1 can be is the The
secant
modulusofofthe
elasticity
of the
concrete
andisthe
2
s1 As1 fb b(h x ) = 0
The
expression
of the
maximum
crack
spacing
is also
sfrom
bx
supplemented
with
the
coefficient
which
was
suggested
by
1
obtained
the
system
of
equilibrium
equations
of
forces
steel
bars.
,
2 e (d 2 x ) s1 As1 fb b(h x ) = 0
supplemented
with
the coefficient
which
was suggested by
RILEM.
Then
the
maximum
crack
spacing:
2e (dbx x ) This
The
expression
of
the
maximum
crack
spacing
is
also
and moments.
system
for
singly
reinforced
SFRC
,
x
bs1(h 2x2 )h+ Ax +
The
expression
of thethe
maximum
crack spacing
is also
RILEM.
Then
the maximum
crack
spacing:
The
expression
maximum
is also
0
s=
(s1hisd given
b0)
x)x=0 inMthe
1A
Ek =
s1 x
s1
fb
ss11bx
2 h(when
with theof
coefficient
whichcrack
was spacing
suggested
by
flexural
a
equation
(5): supplemented
The expression
of
the maximum
crack
spacing
isbyalso
2fbmembers
fb
bx
2
6
3
(
)

=
0

b
h
x
(
)

d
x
M Ek = 0 ,

supplemented
with
the
coefficient
which
was
suggested
s11 s1 A
fbs1 d
e hs1 x + ss11 +
fb b
s
fb
supplemented
with
the
coefficient
which
was
suggested

RILEM.
Then
the
maximum
crack
spacing:
2 ee (d x )2h 6sx1As1 fb b(h x3x)= 0

50
supplemented
with
the coefficientwhich ,was suggested by
by
.4the
0.425k1 k 2crack
= 3the
+maximum
s r , max
c maximum
(5) 2b(eh(d 2x )x) + + A d M = 0 ,,
RILEM.
Then
RILEM.
Then
crack

spacing:
50/
spacing:
3.4the
The Then
expression
of kthe
maximum
crack
spacing is also
h x s1 s1
Ek
RILEM.
maximum
crack
spacing:

L
,

0
.
425
=
+
s
c
k
(5) fb fbbs1(bx

p
,
eff

r
,
max
1
2
6 xs1
++ ssfb11bA
(ssh11ddx)3=3x 0 M
Ek = 0
with the coefficient
fbfb b(hh xx))2h2 ++
Ek
s1 A
p,eff which
/ was suggested by
L50
supplemented
6 spacing
s1 As1

2average
M Ek = 0according

(9)
(9)
is
calculated
crack
s
e (d x )

,
2
6
3
rm

3
.
4
0
.
425
=
+
s
c
k
k
(5) The

50 ,
.
(5)

r , maxThen
1 2 crack
RILEM.
maximum
spacing:
3the
L
(9)
is
calculated
according
The
average
crack
spacing
s

50
h
x
x
,

rm

.
4
0
.
425
=
+
s
c
k
k
(5)

to the
formula
(6):
p
,
eff
r
,
max
1
2
b(h x ) + + A d M = 0

1 2
,
srr,,max
(5)formula
max = 3.4c + 0.425k 1 k 2 p , eff
Ek
to the
(6): 2 6 s1 s1
L /
cover to the longitudinal
fbaverage
pp,,eff
where:
p,eff

eff L / reinforcement,
(9) cc the
according where:
The
crack spacing srm is3calculated
the
coverto to
the
longitudinal
reinforcement,
cover
the
50reinforcement,
where:
c

the
the
longitudinal

p,eff
(9)
rm
is
calculated
according
The
average
crack
spacing
s

the
effective
reinforcement
ratio,
reinforcement
,
rm
average
spacing
the
reinforcement
= 3.4creinforcement
+ 0.425k1 k 2 ratio,
s r , max
to the
(6): crack
(5)formula
(9)
The= average
b 50 srm is calculated according
the
effective
L /
reinforcement
p,eff
,is calculated according bar
sThe
k1 k 2 spacing
0.25crack
thediameter,
effective
ratio,
the
reinforcement

50 +(6):
50 srm
rm
to
the
formula

p
,
eff

the
coefficient
which
takes
account
of
the
k

b
1
where:
c thekcover
the longitudinal
reinforcement,
of
to the
the
formula
(6):
p,eff
s rmformula
= 50 + (6):
0.25k1 k 2 r L / ,
bar
diameter,
theto
coefficient
whichtakes
takesaccount
account
to
1 the
coefficient
which
of
the
bar
diameter,
k
1
p,eff
where:
c

the
cover
to
the
longitudinal
reinforcement,

bond
properties
of
the
bonded
reinforcement,
k

the
L

2
(9)
The average crack spacing s is calculated according the
where:
the
effective
ratio,reinforcement,
reinforcement,
the reinforcement
cproperties
thereinforcement
cover
to
longitudinal
p,eff
p,eff
bond
ofthe
thethe
bonded
the
(6)s = 50 + 0.25k k br 50 rm,
bond
properties
of
bonded
reinforcement,
kkof
the

the
effective
reinforcement
ratio,

the
reinforcement
22
coefficient
which
takes
account
of
the
distribution
strain.

1
2

50
b
to(6)
the rm
formula
(6):

the
coefficient
which
takes
account
of
the
bar
diameter,
k
50 + 0.25k k b L
1

the
effective
reinforcement
ratio,

the
reinforcement
,

50
srm
=
/

coefficient
which
account
of
ofofstrain.

which11 takes
takes
account
ofthe
thedistribution
distribution
strain.
k1the
coefficient
which
takesasaccount
the
bar diameter,
11 22 r b
(6) coefficient
The
coefficients
and
k2longitudinal
are
the
same
in
/ ,
s rm
bond
properties
the
bonded
reinforcement,
k2RILEM
of
where:
c thekkcover
to
the
reinforcement,
rm = 50 + 0.25k 1 k 2 r
p,eff
kand
the
coefficient
which
takes
account
ofthe
the
barcoefficients
diameter,
1 of
L
The
k
k
are
the
same
as
in
RILEM
method.
where:
k1 a coefficient The
Ldiameter,
rrbar
/
b reinforcement
coefficients
and
k
are
the
same
as
in
RILEM
1
2
(6)
bond
properties
of
the
bonded
reinforcement,
k

the
1
2
method.
coefficient
whichreinforcement
takes
account
of the
distribution
ofk222strain.
bond
the effective
ratio,
the reinforcement
the
bbar
properties
of
the
bonded
reinforcement,

the
diameter,

50bond
where:
k
b reinforcement
1 a coefficient
(6)
which
takes
account
of
properties
of
the
method.

,
s rm = 50 + 0.25k1 k 2
(6)
coefficient
which
takes
account
of
the
distribution
of
strain.
However,
the RILEM
RILEM
proposed
coefficient
))
However,
coefficient
(50/(L/
))the
The
coefficients
and
k2proposed
are of
thethe
same
in(50/(L/
RILEM
coefficient
which
takesasaccount
of
bar
diameter,
kthe
1takes
coefficient
which
account
distribution
of
strain.
1 kthe
which
takes
account
of
the
bond
properties
of
the
where:

reinforcement
bar
diameter,
k

a
coefficient
L

b
1
reinforcement,
k

a
coefficient
which
takes
account
of
the

r bar
diameter,
2
However,
the
RILEM
proposed
coefficient
(50/(L/
))
where: b reinforcement
k1 a coefficient does
1 the
2 influence
The
coefficients
k
and
k
are
the
same
as
in
RILEM
does
not
reflect
accurately
the
influence
of
the
fibre
content
1
2
not
reflect
accurately
the
of
the
fibre
content
method.
bond
properties
of
bonded
reinforcement,
k

the
The
coefficients
k
and
k
are
the
same
as
in
RILEM
2
reinforcement,
kdistribution,
a coefficient
takes
which
takes
of the
the
bond
properties
ofof the
the
1
2
2account
where:
reinforcement
diameter,
kk11account
a coefficient
which
the
effective
reinforcement
form
strain
bb
not distance
reflect accurately
the
influence
of the fibrethecontent
rbar
which
account
of
bond
properties
of
the does
(6)oftakes
where:
bar
diameter,
method.
on
the
between
the
cracks.
Whereas
crack
b reinforcement
1 a coefficient
However,
the
RILEM
proposed
(50/(L/
))
coefficient
which
takes
account
of thecoefficient
distribution
ofcrack
strain.
on
the
distance
between
the
cracks.
Whereas
the
method.

the
effective
reinforcement
form
of
strain
distribution,

reinforcement,
k

a
coefficient
which
takes
account
of
the
r
which
takes
account
of
the
bond
properties
of
the
2
/A
),
L

steel
fibre
length,

steel
fibre
ratio
(A
theHowever,
distance
between
thethe
cracks.
Whereas
the
crack))
c,eff k2account
reinforcement,
a coefficient
account of the
which s1takes
of thewhich
bondtakes
properties
the on
the
RILEM
proposed
coefficient
(50/(L/
spacing
differs
together
with
change
of
the
fibre
content,
does
not
reflect
accurately
the
influence
of
the
fibre
content
The
coefficients
k
and
k
are
the
same
as
in
RILEM
spacing
differs
together
with
the
change
of
the
fibre
content,
However,
the
RILEM
proposed
coefficient
(50/(L/
))
1
2
reinforcement,
k

a
coefficient
which
takes
account
of
the
/A
),
L

steel
fibre
length,

steel
fibre
ratio
(A
formofofs1strain
strain
the
effective
c,eff distribution,
diameter.
50/(L/

abar
proposed
rRILEM
differs
together
withand
thethe
change
ofof
thethe
fibre
content,
where:
diameter,
k1 reinforcement
acoefficient,
coefficient
effective
reinforcement
form
distribution,
reinforcement,
k222)a 1coefficient
which
takes
account
of the spacing
b reinforcement
does
not
reflect
accurately
the
influence
fibre
content
therefore
Lfgren,
Jansson
others
have
proposed
the
r the
on
the
distance
between
the
cracks.
Whereas
the
crack
method.
therefore
Lfgren,
Jansson
and
the
others
have
proposed
does
not
reflect
accurately
the
influence
of
the
fibre
content
diameter.
50/(L/
)

a
RILEM
proposed
coefficient,
ratio (A
(Aconsiders
/A
LLthe
steel
fibre
length,
effective
steel
fibre
diameter.
the
reinforcement
form
strain
distribution,
the
which
of
the
steel
on
the
Lfgren,
Jansson
and(10)
thecracks.
others
have
proposed
the
c,eff),
rr
on the
distance
between
Whereas
the
crack
which
of fibre
bond
properties
offibre
the therefore
/A
),account
influence
steel
length,
fibre
steel
ratio
slightly
different
of coefficient
the
maximum
crack
c,eff
effective
reinforcement
form of
ofs1s1takes
strain
distribution,
r the
spacing
differs
together
with the
change
of
the
content,
However,
theexpression
RILEM
proposed
(50/(L/
))
on slightly
the
distance
between
the
cracks.
the
crack
the
different
expression
(10)
ofWhereas
thefibre
maximum
which
the
ofwhich
the
steel
fibre
on
the
/Ac,eff
),spacing.
L
influence
steel
fibre
length,
coefficient,
steel
fibre
ratio considers
(A) s1
50/(L/

1
a
RILEM
proposed
coefficient,
which
s1
c,eff
average
crack
However,
this
coefficient
only
slightly
different
expression
(10)
of
the
maximum
crack
spacing
differs
together
with
the
change
of
the
fibre
content,
reinforcement,
k

a
coefficient
takes
account
of
the
diameter.
50/(L/
)

a
RILEM
proposed
spacing
inLfgren,
their
publications
et.of
al.the
2010,
Lfgren
steelonly
fibre crack
ratio (Acrack
s1/Ac,eff),2 L steel fibre length,
therefore
Jansson
and
the
others
have
proposed
the
does
not
reflect
accurately
the(Jansson
influence
fibre
content
spacing
differs
together
with
the
change
of
content,
spacing
in
their
publications
(Jansson
et.
al.,
2010;
average
spacing.
However,
this
coefficient
diameter.
50/(L/
)

a
RILEM
proposed
coefficient,
considers
theinfluence
influence
steel
fibre
the
average
considers
the
length
and
diameter
ofcoefficient,
the
in their
(Jansson
et. coefficient
al.have
2010,
Lfgren
therefore
Lfgren,
Jansson
and
theofothers
proposed
the
which
the
the
steelonreinforcement
fibre
on steel
the spacing
of
the
effective
form
ofconsiders
strain
distribution,
athe
2007).
ispublications
no
RILEM
proposed
this
r RILEM
diameter.
) influence
1ofof
length
proposed
slightly
different
expression
(10)
theWhereas
maximum
on
the There
distance
between
the
cracks.
theincrack
crack
therefore
Lfgren,
Jansson
and
theproposed
others
have
proposed
Lfgren,
2007).
There
is no RILEM
coefficient
inthe
considers
the50/(L/
influence
of
and
diameter
of
the on
steel
which
considers
the
influence
oflength,
the
steel
fibre
the 2007).
fibre,
but
it
does
not
consider
the
fibre
content.
crack
spacing.
However,
this
coefficient
only
considers
the
There
is
no
RILEM
proposed
coefficient
in
this
average
crack
spacing.
However,
this
coefficient
only
/A
),
L

steel
fibre

steel
fibre
ratio
(A
slightly
different
expression
(10)
of
the
maximum
crack
expression,
however
thewith
coefficient
is
used
toLfgren
reduce
which
the
influence
of the
steel fibre on the spacing
s1 c,eff
in
their
publications
(Jansson
al.the
2010,
spacing
differs
together
the(10)
change
of
fibre
content,
slightly
different
expression
ofkket.
maximum
crack
fibre,
butisconsiders
itcrack
does
not
consider
the fibre
this
expression,
however
coefficient
k5the
is
used
to
average
spacing.
However,
this
coefficient
only
It
also
important
the
fact fibre,
for
the
flexural
5is
influence
of
length
ofand
thecontent.
steel
but
it does
expression,
however
thethe
coefficient
used
to reduce
reduce
considers
the
influence
ofto
length
diameter
ofcoefficient,
the
steel
diameter.
50/(L/
)and
1diameter
a note
RILEM
proposed
spacing
in
their
publications
(Jansson
al.
2010,
Lfgren
maximum
crack
spacing
depending
on5 et.
the
residual
tensile
average
crack
spacing.
However,
this
coefficient
only
2007).
There
is
no
RILEM
proposed
coefficient
in
this
therefore
Lfgren,
Jansson
and
the
others
have
proposed
the
spacing
in
their
publications
(Jansson
et.
al.
2010,
Lfgren
It
is
also
important
to
note
the
fact
for
the
flexural
maximum
crack
spacing
depending
on
the
residual
tensile
considers
the
influence
of
length
and
diameter
of
the
steel
members
the
effective
tension
area
(A
)
should
be
lesser
crackisspacing
depending
on
thecoefficient
residual tensile
not
consider
the
fibre
content.
c,eff
fibre,
butconsiders
it does
not
consider
the fibre
content.
which
the
influence
ofand
the
steel fibre
on steel
the maximum
2007).
There
RILEM
proposed
in
this
stress.
Whereas
theno
residual
tensile
stress
depends
on
the
considers
the
influence
of
length
diameter
of
the
expression,
however
the
coefficient
k
is
used
to
reduce
slightly
different
expression
(10)
of
the
maximum
crack
5
2007).
There
is
no
RILEM
proposed
coefficient
in
this
members
the
effective
tension
area
(Ac,eff
) should
betension
lesser stress.
Whereas
the
residual
tensile
depends
on
the
fibre,
but
itit does
not
the
fibre
content.
value
spacing.
d)
orconsider
b(hto
However,
x)/3.
When
the
depth
of
Whereas
thefibre
residual
tensile
stress
depends
onreduce
the
Itof
is2.5b(h
also
important
note
the
fact
for
the
flexural
average
crack
this
coefficient
only stress.
expression,
however
the
coefficient
is
to
parameters
of
steel
(aspect
ratiostress
ket.
lkfbthe
),used
therefore
this
fibre,
but
does
not
consider
theWhen
fibre
content.
55 /d
fbresidual
maximum
crack
spacing
depending
on
tensile
spacing
in
their
publications
(Jansson
al.
2010,
Lfgren
It
is
also
important
to
note
the
fact
for
the
flexural
expression,
however
the
coefficient
is
used
to
reduce
value
of
2.5b(h

d)
or
b(h

x)/3.
the
depth
of
tension
5 ), therefore this
parameters
of
steel
fibre
ratio
lfblfb/d
is
also
important
note
the
fact
for
the
flexural
zone
isIt small
enough,
then
the
second
expression
isbethe
used
to parameters
of
steel
fibre (aspect
(aspect
ratio
/dfbfb), residual
thereforetensile
this
members
effective
tension
area
(Ac,eff
) should
lesser
considers
the
influence
of to
length
and
diameter
steel
maximum
crack
spacing
depending
on
coefficient
also
considers
aspect
ratio.stress
isthe
also
important
to
note
the
fact
for of
the
flexural
stress.
Whereas
the
residual
tensile
the
2007).
There
is
no
RILEM
proposed
coefficient
intensile
this
maximum
crack
spacing
depending
on the
thedepends
residualon
members
the
effective
tension
area
(A
) )should
lesser
zone
isItsmall
enough,
then
the
second
expression
isbebe
used
to coefficient
the
effective
c,eff
c,eff
members
area
(A
coefficient
also
considers
aspect
ratio.
should
lesser
determine
the
effective
tension
of
the
concrete
(ENV
also
considers
aspect
ratio.
c,eff
stress.
Whereas
the
residual
tensile
stress
depends
on
the
value
of
d)
b(h
x)/3.
When
the
of be
tension
fibre,
but2.5b(h
itthe
does
notorconsider
thearea
fibre(Acontent.
members
effective
tension
)depth
should
lesser parameters
c,eff
ofhowever
steelthe
fibre
(aspect
ratio stress
therefore
this
expression,
the
coefficient
klfb5 /disfb),used
to reduce
stress.
Whereas
residual
tensile
depends
on
the
value
of
2.5b(h

d)
or
b(h

x)/3.
When
the
depth
of
tension
determine
the
effective
tension
area
of
the
concrete
(ENV
value
of
2.5b(h

d)
or
b(h

x)/3.
When
the
depth
of
tension
1992-1-1:1991,
EN
1992-1-1:2004).
parameters
of
steel
fibre
(aspect
ratio

l
/d
),
therefore
this
zone
isItof
small
enough,
the
second
isofused
to
is2.5b(h
also
important
note
the expression
fact
the
flexural
fb fb
fbresidual tensile
ratioon
value
d)
orthen
b(hto
x)/3.
When
thefor
depth
tension
fb
also
considers
aspect
ratio.
maximum
crack
spacing
depending
the
parameters
of
steel
fibre
(aspect

l
/d
),
therefore
this
,
(10)
zone
is
small
enough,
then
the
second
expression
isisused
toto coefficient
1992-1-1:1991,
EN
1992-1-1:2004).
fb
fb
s
=
3
.
4
c
+
0
.
425
k
k
k
zone
is
small
enough,
then
the
second
expression
used
r , max
1 aspect
2 5 ratio.
also
considers
determine
of c,eff
the) should
concrete
(ENV
members
the effective
tension
(A
be
lesser
zone
is small
enough,
then
the area
second
expression
is
used
to coefficient
p ,ratio.
2.3.
Supplemented
and corrected
EN
1992-1-1:2004
crack
Whereas
the
residual
on(10)
the
s r , max
= 3also
.4c +considers
0.425
k1 k 2aspect
k 5 tensile
coefficient
eff , stress depends (10)
determine
the
tension
area
ofofthe
concrete
(ENV
determine
the effective
effective
tension
area
thedepth
concrete
(ENV stress.
1992-1-1:1991,
EN
1992-1-1:2004).
value
of
2.5b(h

d)
or
b(h

x)/3.
When
the
of
tension
p,ratio
2.3.
Supplemented
and corrected
1992-1-1:2004
crack
determine
the effective
tensionEN
area
of the concrete
(ENV parameters of steel fibre (aspect
eff
width
calculation
methods

l
/d
),
therefore
this
fb fb
1992-1-1:1991,
EN
1992-1-1:2004).
(10)
1992-1-1:1991,
EN
1992-1-1:2004).
s r , max = 3.4c + 0.425k1 k 2 k 5
zone
is small enough,
then the second expression is used to coefficient
, ,
width
calculation
methods
1992-1-1:1991,
EN
1992-1-1:2004).
also
ratio.
(10)
= 3.4considers
c + 0coefficient
.425kaspect
2.3.
Supplemented
corrected
1992-1-1:2004
crack
It is possible and
to calculate
theEN
crack
width of steel
fibre where: ssthe
according
to
r,,max
maxdiscussed
1 k22 k55 k
p ,5effis calculated
r
1
,
(10)
= 3.4c + 0coefficient
.425k1 k 2 k 5 k5p ,effis calculated
determine
the effective
tension
area
of
the concrete
(ENV
where:
the
according
2.3.
Supplemented
and
corrected
EN
1992-1-1:2004
crack
r , maxdiscussed
2.3.
Supplemented
and
corrected
EN
1992-1-1:2004
crack
It
is
possible
to
calculate
the
crack
width
of
steel
fibre
where:
the
discussed
coefficient
k
is
calculated
according
to
p
,
eff
width
calculation
methods
5
and
ordinary reinforced
concrete
flexural members

the
formula
(11).
The
other
coefficients
were
discussed
2.3.
Supplemented
and
corrected
EN
1992-1-1:2004
crack
p
,
eff
1992-1-1:1991,
ENmethods
1992-1-1:2004).
to the
formula(11).
(11).The
The other
other coefficients
coefficients
were
widthordinary
calculation
methods
width
calculation

and
concrete flexural
members the
formula
were discussed
discussed
according
to a reinforced
new
EN 1992-1-1:2004
(hereafter
above.
width
calculation
methods
,
It is
possible
to
calculate
the crack width
of steel EC2)
fibre above.
sthe
= 3.4c + 0.coefficient
425k1 k 2 k 5 k5 is calculated
where:
according(10)
to
r , maxdiscussed
according
to
a
new
EN
1992-1-1:2004
(hereafter
EC2)
above.
where:
the
discussed
coefficient
k
is
calculated
according
to

2.3.
Supplemented
and
corrected
EN
1992-1-1:2004
crack
It
is
possible
to
calculate
the
crack
width
of
steel
fibre
method.
However
it
should
be
done
some
modifications,
5
It
is possible
possible
tocalculate
calculate
the
crack
width
of steel
p , eff
5
and ordinary
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members
the
formula
(11).
The
other
coefficients
were
discussed
It
is
to
the
crack
width
of
steel
fibre
where: the discussed coefficient k5 is calculated according to
method.
However
it
should
be
done
some
modifications,
width
calculation
methods
and
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members
analogical
as
in
RILEM
method.
Here
the
crack
width
is
the
formula
(11).
The
other
coefficients
were
discussed
fibre
ordinary
reinforced
concrete flexural
flexural
members
f ft .res The other coefficients were discussed
according
to
a new
EN 1992-1-1:2004
(hereafter
EC2) above.

and and
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
members
the formula
(11)
,
(11)
analogical
asaccording
inaa RILEM
method.
Here the
crack
width
is
k5 =1 f(11).
according
to
new
EN
1992-1-1:2004
(hereafter
EC2)
calculated
to
the
(7)
(supplemented
above.
according
to
new
EN
1992-1-1:2004
(hereafter
.res coefficient k5 is calculated according to
method.
it
beformula
done
some
modifications,
It isHowever
possible
to should
calculate
the
crack
width
of steelEC2)
fibre
where:
the
discussed
according
to
a
new
EN
1992-1-1:2004
(hereafter
EC2)
above.
1 ftf ctm
,
(11)
=
k
calculated
according
to
the
formula
(7)
(supplemented
5

The other coefficients were discussed

method.
However
should
be
done
some
modifications,
method
ofHowever
EC2).
method.
ititit should
be
modifications,
analogical
as in RILEM
method.
Heresome
the
crack
width
is
and
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members
the formula
method.
However
should
be done
done
some
modifications,
ffftctm
(11).
.res
method
of EC2).
analogical
as
in
RILEM
method.
Here
the
crack
width
is

,
where:
f

the
residual
stress of SFRC (fft.res =(11)
fb).
1
=

k
f

calculated
to
formula
(supplemented
res
according
to
ain new
ENthe
1992-1-1:2004
EC2)
analogical
as
RILEM
method.
Here
the
crack
isis above.5 ft.res
analogicalaccording
as in
RILEM
method.
Here(7)
the(hereafter
crackwidth
width
ftft..res
tensile
f fctm
.res ,
ft
where:kkf55ft.res
the
residual
tensile stress of SFRC (fft.res =(11)
fb).
== 11
calculated
according
to
the
formula
(7)
(supplemented
(
)
,
(7)
w
=
s

,
(11)

method
of
EC2).
method.
However
it
should
be
done
some
modifications,
calculated
to
k
r,according
max
sm
cm
calculated
according
to the
the formula
formula (7)
(7) (supplemented
(supplemented where: fft.res
5
ctm
tensile stress of SFRC (fft.res = fb).
the fresidual
ctm
2.4.
Experimental
program
f
(
)
,
(7)
w
=
s

method
of
EC2).
ctm
k
r,
maxin sm
cm method. Here the crack width is
analogical
as
RILEM
2.4. Experimental
program
method
of
method
of EC2).
EC2).
f ft .res

1 the residual
, program
where:
f
tensile was
stressperformed
of SFRC (f
=(11)
fb).
=
k
2.4.
Experimental
program
ft.res
ft.res
The
experimental
Kaunas
calculated
according
to
the
formula
(7)
(supplemented
5
(
)
,
(7)
w
=
s

program
where: ksr,maxr,maxthesmmaximum
crack spacing; sm the mean
cm
where:
f

the
residual
tensile was
stressperformed
of SFRCin(f
= fbfb).
The
experimental
inft.res
Kaunas
f
ft.res
ft.res
ctm
ft.res
(
)
,
(7)
w
=
s

(7)

k EC2).
r,max
max maximum
sm
cm
where:
f

the
residual
tensile
stress
of
SFRC
(f
=
fb).
where:
s

the
crack
spacing;

the
mean
University
of
Technology
in
order
to
determine
the
method
of
k
r,
sm
cm
ft.res
ft.res
r,max
sm
strain in
the 2.4.
wk the
= s r,reinforcement;
The experimental
program
performed
in Kaunas
Experimental
program
max ( sm cm ) , cm the mean strain in (7)
University
of Technology
in was
order
to determine
the
strain
in between
the reinforcement;
cm the mean strain in the University
influence
of
the
steel
fibre
for
the
cracking
of
steel
fibre
and
2.4.
Experimental
program
concrete
the
cracks.
Technology
order
to ofdetermine
the
where:
sr,max
the
maximum
crack spacing;
the
mean
influence
ofof
steel
fibre
forinthewas
cracking
steel
fibre
2.4.The
Experimental
program
experimental
program
performed
Kaunas
where:
sr,max
the
maximum
spacing; sm
the mean
where:
fft.res
the
the
residual
tensile
of SFRC
(finft.res
=the
and
fb).
concrete
between
cracks.
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members.
During
(the
, crack
(7)
w
=
s r,max
sm
the
r,max
sm the
where:
the
maximum
crack
spacing;
strain
mean
The
difference
of
(smthe
and
cm): sm
influence
of
the
steel
fibreprogram
for
the stress
cracking
of steel
fibre
and
ks
cm )strain
r,max
sm
strain
in
the
reinforcement;
mean
in
the
The
experimental
was
performed
in
Kaunas
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members.
During
the
cm
where:
s
the
maximum
crack
spacing;

the
mean
University
of
Technology
in
order
to
determine
the
r,max
sm
strain
in
the
reinforcement;

the
mean
strain
in
the
The
experimental
program
was
performed
in
Kaunas
The difference
of the straincm
(sm and
): strain in the ordinary
experiments
the
of FCMOD
(Load
crack
cm
strain
the
the cm
mean
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members.
During
the
University
of
Technology
inFCMOD
order
to
determine
the
2.4.
Experimental
program
concrete
the
cracks.
experiments
theinfluence
influence
of
mouth
crack
strain in
inbetween
the reinforcement;
reinforcement;
cm
of the
steel
fibre
for
the
cracking
of(Load
steel
fibre
and
cm the mean strain in the influence
University
of
Technology
inFCMOD
order
to
determine
the
concrete
between
the
cracks.
opening
displacement)
was
obtained
and
then
the
residual
concrete
between
the
cracks.
f
experiments
the
influence
of
(Load

crack
influence
of
the
steel
fibre
for
the
cracking
of
steel
fibre
and
Thesr,max
difference
of cracks.
thectstrain
(sm spacing;
and cm): sm the mean ordinary
,eff crack
where:
the the
maximum
mouth
opening
displacement)
was
obtained
and
then
the
concrete
between
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members.
During
the
The
experimental
program
was
performed
in
Kaunas
influence
of
the
steel
fibre
for
the
cracking
of
steel
fibre
and
(
)
s of
k t the
1

+
f
The
difference
strain
(
and

):
p , eff
flexural
tensile
strength
(fR,1)strength
and
of) proportionality
cm): strain in the
mouth
opening
displacement)
waslimit
obtained
and During
then
the
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
flexural
the
cm
difference
the
strain
and
cm
strain The
in the
reinforcement;
residual
flexural
tensile
(fmembers.
and
limit
of
ctp,eff
The
difference
of
the
strain
andmean
R,1to
(1+cm((eesmsmsmsmthe
kof
experiments
the Technology
influence
ofin
FCMOD
(Load
crack
University
of
order
determine
the
cm):
, eff
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members.
During
the
t
p , eff )
(LOP)
were
estimated.
These
tests
were
performed
sm between
cm = sthe cracks.
0.6 s ,
residual
flexural
tensile
strength
(f
)
and
limit
of
f ctp ,,eff
experiments
the
influence
of
FCMOD
(Load

crack
R,1
concrete
proportionality
(LOP)
were
estimated.
These
tests
were
mouth
opening
displacement)
was
obtained
and
then
the
influence
of the
steel
fibre
forof
the
cracking
of(Load
steel
fibre
and
Ess ,
experiments
the
influence
FCMOD

crack
sm cm = s k t f cteffE
0
.
6

s(1 +
)
according
to
requirements
of
the
EN
14651:2005+A1:2007
proportionality
(LOP)
were
estimated.
These
tests
were
eff
, eff ):
The difference of
(esm pand
mouth
displacement)
was
then
the
performed
according
to strength
requirements
ofand
the
EN
cm
E,,,eff
Es
residual
flexural
tensile
(fmembers.
limit
of
ordinary
reinforced
concrete
flexural
During
the
kthe
fctctstrain
s (1 +
eff
R,1) andand
mouth opening
opening
displacement)
was obtained
obtained
then
the
eff )
s
(8) =
ss ktt p , eff
ee pp,,eff
standard,
which
is
analogical
as
given
in
RILEM
TC
162(
)

+
performed
according
to
requirements
of
the
EN
,
0
.
6

s
t
,
e
p
eff
R,1

residual
flexural
tensile
strength
(f
)
and
limit
of
14651:2005+A1:2007
standard,
which
is
analogical
as
given

eff
R,1
s
proportionality
(LOP)
were
estimated.
These
tests
were
experiments
the
influence
of
FCMOD
(Load

crack
,,eff
s

(8)
(8) smsm cmcm =
residual
flexural
tensile
strength
(f
)
and
limit
pppE
R,1 under CMOD of
, effs
00..66Es s ,,
TDF
(2002).
The
tests
were
performed
14651:2005+A1:2007
standard,
which
is
analogical
as
given
cm =
f
proportionality
(LOP)
were
estimated.
These
tests
were
in
RILEM
TC
162-TDF
(2002).
The
tests
were
performed
sm

ct ,effE s
performed
according
to requirements
ofandtests
the
EN
mouth
opening
displacement)
was obtained
then were
the
sm
cm
E
proportionality
(LOP) is(2002).
were
estimated.
These
s in
k t the tension
p ,eff )
where:
E(ss1 + ereinforcement
Esss assuming in
control.
TheTC
test
scheme
inThe
Fig.tests
3.given
RILEM
162-TDF
wereof
(8) s the stress
performed
according
to
requirements
the
under
CMOD
control.
The given
test
scheme
is
inperformed
Fig.
3. EN
14651:2005+A1:2007
standard,
which
is
analogical
as
given
residual
flexural
tensile
strength
(f
)
and
limit
of

performed
according
to
requirements
of
the
EN
R,1

where:

the
stress
in
the
tension
reinforcement
assuming
(8)
,
p
eff
the (8)
cracked
Determination of s was
CMOD control. The
test scheme
isisgiven
in Fig.as
3.given
14651:2005+A1:2007
standard,
which
analogical
sms section.
.6 s , above under
0discused
cm =
in
RILEM
TC
162-TDF
(2002).
The
tests
were
performed
proportionality
(LOP)
were
estimated.
These
tests
were
14651:2005+A1:2007
standard,
which
is
analogical
as
given
was
discused
above
the
cracked
section.
Determination
of

E s on the
s duration Eof
a factor
the load, 52 in RILEM TC 162-TDF (2002). The tests were performed
(Fig. 2).skt the
s assuming
where:
stress dependent
in the tension
reinforcement
under
CMODTC
control.
The to
test
scheme
given
in Fig.
performed
according
requirements
of
the3. EN
in RILEM
162-TDF
(2002).
Theistests
were
performed
where:
stress
in the
the tensile
tension
reinforcement
assuming
athe
factor
dependent
on the
duration
of the
load,
(Fig.
2).thektssmean
fct,eff

value
of
strength
of
the
concrete
(8)
under CMOD control.standard,
The test scheme
isanalogical
given in Fig.
3.
was
discused
above
the
cracked
section.
Determination
of

where: s the stress in the tension reinforcement

assuming
s
14651:2005+A1:2007
which
is
as given
3.
feffective
the at
mean
valuewhen
of thethe
tensile
strength
ofdiscused
the
concrete
above under CMOD control. The test scheme is given in Fig.
thecracked
section.
Determination
ofmay
duration
ct,eff
s was
the
time
cracks
first
be
expected
s

a
factor
dependent
on
the
of
the
load,
(Fig.
2).
k
t
discused
above in RILEM TC 162-TDF (2002). The tests were performed
the cracked
section.
Determination
ofmay
s was
effective
at
the
time
when
the
cracks
first
be
expected

a
factor
dependent
on
the
duration
of
the
load,
(Fig.
2).
k
t
occur,
reinforcement
ratio
for
longitudinal
where:
smean
stress
in
tension
reinforcement
p,eff
fto
the
of
the tensile
of the
concrete
ct,eff
a value
factor
dependent
onstrength
the duration
ofassuming
the load, under CMOD control. The test scheme is given in Fig. 3.
(Fig.
2).
ktt the

Fig. 3.
3. Three
Three point
point bending
bending test
test scheme
scheme according
according to
to the
the EN
EN
Fig.
Fig.
3. Three point standard
bending test
scheme according to the EN
14651:2005+A1:2007
method
14651:2005+A1:2007
standard method
14651:2005+A1:2007 standard method

The residual
residual flexural
flexural tensile
tensile strength
strength (f
(fR,1)) of
of SFRC
SFRC is
is
The
The
residual
flexural
tensile
strength
(fR,1R,1) CMOD
of SFRC
is
estimated
according
to
the
formula
(12),
when
=
0.5
estimated according to the formula (12), when CMOD = 0.5
estimated
according to the formula (12), when CMOD = 0.5
mm (j=1,
(j=1, i=1).
i=1).
mm
mm (j=1, i=1).
=
ff RR,,ii =

FRR,,ii L
L
33F
,,
2
bhspsp2
22bh

(12)
(12)
(12)

where: FR,i load corresponding with CMOD = CMODj

where:
FR,i
load
corresponding
with
CMOD
= CMOD
CMOD
(j =
R,i
where:
F
load
CMOD
=
jj (j =
(j
= 1, 2,
3, 4),
L corresponding
span length, bwith
width
of the
specimen,
1,
2,
3,
4),
L

span
length,
b

width
of
the
specimen,
h

sp
1,
2,
3,
4),
L

span
length,
b

width
of
the
specimen,
h
sp
hsp distance between the tip of the notch and the top of the
distance between
between the
the tip
tip of
of the
the notch
notch and
and the
the top
top of
of the
the
distance
specimen.
specimen.
specimen.
The
The determination
determination of
ofthe
thelimit
limitofof
ofproportionality
proportionality(LOP)
(LOP)
The
determination
of
the
limit
proportionality
(LOP)
is
given
in
detail
in
EN
14651:2005+A1:2007.
This
limit
is
given
in
detail
in
EN
14651:2005+A1:2007.
This
is given in detail in EN 14651:2005+A1:2007. Thislimit
limit
indicates
the
tensile
strength
of
SFRC
(flexural
members
indicates
the
tensile
strength
of
SFRC
(flexural
members
indicates the tensile strength of SFRC (flexural members
with the
the notch).
notch).
with
with
the
notch).
In order
ordertoto
todetermine
determine
the
tensile
strength
of concrete
concrete
In
thethe
tensile
strength
of concrete
the
In
order
determine
tensile
strength
of
the bending
bending
testsperformed.
were performed.
performed.
The ofgeometry
geometry
of
the
tests
were
The
bending
tests were
The geometry
specimensof
specimens
was analogical
analogical
to the
thetests
bending
tests
given
inbut
Fig.
specimens
was
to
bending
tests
Fig.
was
analogical
to the bending
given
in given
Fig. 3,in
3, but
but
thisprisms
time prisms
prisms
were without
without
the The
notch.
Theaxial
mean
3,
this
time
were
the
notch.
The
mean
this
time
were without
the notch.
mean
axial
tensile
strength
of
concrete
(SFRC)
was
estimated
axial tensile
of concrete
(SFRC)
was from
estimated
tensile
strengthstrength
of concrete
(SFRC) was
estimated
the
from the
the flexural
measured
flexural
tensile
strength
using
the
from
measured
flexural
strength
using
the
measured
tensile
strengthtensile
using the
expression
(13).
expression
(13).
It
was
done
because
the
estimated
mean
expression
It was
done because
estimated
mean
It
was done(13).
because
the estimated
meanthe
value
of the axial
value of
of the
the axial
axial tensile
tensile strength was
was used
used for
for calculations
value
tensile
strength
was used strength
for calculations
of thecalculations
cracking
of the
the cracking
cracking moment
moment and
and the
the crack
crack width.
width.
of
moment
and the crack width.

InIn
to to
thethe
Inorder
ordertoto
tocompare
comparecalculated
calculatedcrack
crackwidth
width
to
the
order
compare
calculated
crack
width
measured
values
the
experimental
program
was
performed
measured
values
the
experimental
program
was
performed
measured values the experimental program was performed
with
small
dimension
withsteel
steelfibre
fibreand
andordinary
ordinaryreinforced
reinforced
small
dimension
with
steel
fibre
and
ordinary
reinforced
small
dimension
concrete
flexural
members.
The
crack
width
was
measured
concrete
flexural
members.
The
crack
width
was
measured
concrete flexural members. The crack width was measured
during
these
experiments.
The
analogical
experimental
during
these
experiments.
The
analogical
experimental
during these experiments. The analogical experimental
programwas
wasalso
alsoperformed
performed
using
only
ordinary
and
only
program
using
only
ordinary
andand
only
program
was
also
performed
using
only
ordinary
only
steelfibre
fibre
reinforced
small
dimension
concrete
beams.
steel
reinforced
smallsmall
dimension
concreteconcrete
beams. Some
steel
fibre
reinforced
dimension
beams.
Some
tests
were performed
performed
under deformation
deformation
control (a
(a
tests
were
performed
under deformation
control (a constant
Some
tests
were
under
control
constant
rate of
of midspan
increasedeflection
of midspan
midspan
deflection
0.2
rate
of increase
0.2deflection
mm/min) and
constant
rate
of
increase
of
0.2
mm/min)
and
some
of them
them
under
loadingrate
control
(the
some
of themand
under
loading
controlunder
(the constant
of load(the
mm/min)
some
of
loading
control
constant
rate
of
load
increase

156
N/s).
In
order
to
make
increase
156 N/s).
In order
to make
to
constant rate
of load
increase
156only
N/s).one
In crack
order and
to make
only one
one
crack and
and
to the
control
its location
location
(where
the
control
its location
(where
maximum
bending (where
momentthe
only
crack
to
control
its
maximum
bending
moment
occurs)
the
specimens
had
the
occurs)
the specimens
had the occurs)
notch. The
geometry ofhad
thethe
maximum
bending moment
the specimens
notch. The
The
geometry
ofin
theFig.
specimens
is the
the
same as
ascover
in Fig.
Fig.
specimens
is geometry
the same as
3. The clear
concrete
notch.
of
the
specimens
is
same
in
3.specimens
The clear
clearwas
concrete
cover
of specimens
specimens
was 25
25
mm
(the
The
concrete
of
was
of3.
25 mmcover
(the concrete
cover above
themm
notch(the
concrete
cover
above the
the of
notch
was is00 given
mm). in
The
equipment
concrete
above
notch
was
mm).
The
was
0 mm).cover
The equipment
the tests
Fig.equipment
4. The
of the
the
tests of
is these
givenbeams
in Fig.
Fig.
4. The
The
crack atwidths
widths
of these
these
of
tests
is
given
in
4.
crack
of
crack
widths
were
measured
the level
of
beams were
were measured
measured
at the
the level
level
of reinforcement
reinforcement
using aa
beams
at
of
using
reinforcement
using
a deformation
gauge
(Fig. 5).
deformation gauge
gauge (Fig.
(Fig. 5).
5).
deformation

Fig. 5. Crack width measurement of steel fibre and ordinary

reinforced
concretewidth
flexural
members 2 of
Fig. 5.
5. Crack
Crack
width
measurement
of steel
steel fibre
fibre and
and ordinary
ordinary
Fig.
measurement
reinforced
concrete
flexural
members 22
reinforced concrete flexural members

The specimens with the notch were also used to get the
tensile The
strength
of the concrete.
The main
these
The
specimens
with the
the notch
notch
wereaim
alsoofused
used
to tests
get the
the
specimens
with
were
also
to
get
was
to
establish
approximately
the
difference
of
the
tensile
tensile
strength
of
the
concrete.
The
main
aim
of
these
tests
tensile strength of the concrete. The main aim of these tests
strength
the concrete
and SFRCthe
(LOP
and fctm,fl,notch
). tensile
was to
to of
establish
approximately
the
difference
of the
the
tensile
was
establish
approximately
difference
of
The
cube
compressive
strength
of
the
concrete
strength
of
the
concrete
and
SFRC
(LOP
and
f
).
ctm,fl,notch
strength of the concrete and SFRC (LOP and fctm,fl,notch).and
SFRC The
was also
The tests
wereof
underand
The
cubeobserved.
compressive
strength
ofperformed
the concrete
concrete
and

cube
compressive
strength
the

ff ctm , fl
SFRC
was
also
observed.
The
tests
were
performed
under
the
requirements
of
the
EN
12390-3:2009
standard.
,
(13)
ctm
,
fl

SFRC
was
also
observed.
The
tests
were
performed
under
(13)
min
= min
; f ctm,, flfl ,
(13)
ff ctm
ctm =
150 ; f ctm
the requirements
requirements
ofelasticity
the EN
EN 12390-3:2009
12390-3:2009
standard.
Modulus of of
of the concrete
was also

1.6 150
the
the
standard.

1.6
1000
Modulus
of this
elasticity
of the
theprogram.
concreteThe
was
also
measured
lastly in
experimental
testsalso
1000
Modulus
of
elasticity
of
concrete
was

measured
lastlyunder
in this
this
experimental
program.
The
tests
were
performed
the experimental
requirements of
the ISOThe
6784measured
lastly
in
program.
tests
where: fctm,fl the mean flexural tensile strength of the
werestandard.
performed under
under the
the requirements
requirements of
of the
the ISO
ISO 67846784where: ffctm,fl
the
the mean
mean flexural
flexural tensile
tensile strength
strength of
of the
the 1982
were
performed
ctm,fl
where:
concrete.
1982
standard.
The
grade
of
the
steel
rebars
which
were
used
in
these
concrete.
1982 standard.
concrete.
The
grade
of the
the steel
steel of
rebars
whichEswere
were
used
inThe
these
tests is The
S400grade
and its
modulus
elasticity
=200 used
MPa.in
of
rebars
which
these
tests
is
S400
and
its
modulus
of
elasticity
E
=200
MPa.
The
tensile
strength
of
hooked
end
steel
fibre
which
was
used
in
this
tests is S400 and its modulus of elasticity Ess=200 MPa. The
tensile
strength
of
hooked
end
steel
fibre
which
was
used
in
tests
is
f
=1150
MPa
and
the
aspect
ratio/fibre
length

67/50.
tensiley strength of hooked end steel fibre which was used in
thiscomposition
tests is
is ffyy=1150
=1150
MPa
andand
theSFRC
aspectisratio/fibre
ratio/fibre
length
The
of the MPa
concrete
given in Table
1.
this
tests
and
the
aspect
length
67/50. The
The composition
composition of
of the concrete and SFRC is given
67/50.
Table
1. Concrete
composition the concrete and SFRC is given
in Table
Table 1.
1.
in
Composition
Table 1.
1.CEM
Concrete
composition
Table
Concrete
Cement
I 42.5composition
R
Composition
Water
Composition
Cement
CEM II 4/16
42.5 R
R
Coarse
aggregate
Cement
CEM
42.5
Water
Water
Fine aggregate 0/4
Coarse
aggregate 4/16
4/16
Coarse
aggregate
Fibre
content
Fine
aggregate
0/4
Fine aggregate 0/4
Fibre content
content
Fibre

Dosage (kg/m3)
318
Dosage (kg/m
(kg/m33))
168 Dosage
318
960318
168
168
945
960
0 or960
30
945
945
or 30
30
00 or

Fig. 4. Crack width measurement of steel fibre and ordinary

Additional information about all these tests is given
reinforced concrete flexural members 1
Fig. 4.
4. Crack
Crack width
width measurement
measurement of
of steel
steel fibre
fibre and
and ordinary
ordinary in Table 2.
Fig.
Additional information
information about
about all
all these
these tests
tests is
is given
given in
in
Additional
reinforced concrete
concrete flexural
flexural members
members 11
reinforced

53

Table 2.
2.
Table

Table 2. Information of tests (45 specimens)

Test
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Fibre
Geometry of Number of
content,
specimens, mm specimens
kg/m3
Prisms with notch
600x150x150
12
30
Prisms without notch 600x150x150
3

Beams with notch

600x150x150
3

Beams with notch

600x150x150
3
30
Prisms with notch
600x150x150
2

Beams with notch

600x150x150
2
30
Beams with notch
600x150x150
2

Beams with notch

600x150x150
2
30
Cubes
100x100x100
4

Cubes
100x100x100
9
30
Prisms
300x100x100
3

Description of
specimens

3. Results

Tests results are presented in Table 3 and in Fig. 6

Fig. 8.
Table 3. Estimated properties of concrete and SFRC

1
1
2
5
9
10
11

Fibre content,
kg/m3
30
30

30
30

Parameter
notation
fRm,1
LOP
fctm,fl
fctm,fl,notch
fcm.cub
fcm,fb.cub
Ecm

Loading

16 S400
16 S400

16 S400
16 S400

under deformation control

under deformation control
under deformation control
under deformation control
under force control
under force control
under force control
under force control
under force control
under force control
under force control

Measured
parameter or
relation
FCMOD, fRm,1, LOP
fctm,fl
F-w (relation)
F-w (relation)
fctm,fl,notch
F-w (relation)
F-w (relation)
F-w (relation)
fcm.cub
fcm,fb.cub
Ecm

The residual tensile strength fR,1 is determined when

CMOD=0.5 mm. The stress CMOD curves of SFRC is
obtained experimentally and is presented in Fig 6. Here we
can see that the distribution of the fibres influences strongly
on the residual flexural tensile strength and the scatter of the
results is very high. The difference between minimum and
maximum values of fR,1 almost reaches the average value
(fR,1 = 2.61 MPa < fRm,1 = 3.07 MPa), and the coefficient
of variation is equal to 0.234. The analogically high scatter
of the results has been observed by other researchers who
have performed the experimental research by the same
method (Parmentier et. al., 2008; Vandewalle et. al., 2008).

3.1 Experimental results

Test No.

Rebars

Value, MPa
3.07
4.24
4.46
3.65
47.04
49.66
32988

It can be seen from the Table 3 that the case of the

deflection softening is obtained when the fibre content is
30kg/m3, because the mean residual tensile strength (fRm,1) is
less than the limit of the proportionality (LOP). In comparison
of the results of the tests No. 2 and No. 5 it is observed that
the mean flexural tensile strength (fctm,fl) of the specimens
with the notch is less. The earlier fracture of the specimens
with the notch was obtained due to stress concentrations. The
difference of the results could be influenced slightly because
of the different loading control. Considering to this fact we
can state that flexural tensile strength of SFRC is higher than
the limit of proportionality (LOP).
In analogical comparison of the results of the tests No.
1 and No. 5 (LOP with fctm,fl,notch), it can be seen that the steel
fibre increased significantly the average flexural fracture
stress. The number of the specimens with the steel fibre
was 12 and the minimum value of LOP was obtained 3.82
MPa. However, only 3 specimens without the steel fibre
were tested and the minimum fracture stress value reached
3.59 MPa. Therefore, it can be seen from Table 3 and from
above mentioned results that the flexural tensile strength is
influenced strongly of the distribution of the steel fibre.
Due to the small content of the steel fibre and the
sufficiently long fibres the compressive strength of the
concrete was changed marginally. The similar results have
been obtained by L. Vandewalle (Vandewalle, 2007).

Fig. 6. Residual flexural tensile strength CMOD curves (Test

No.1)

Fig. 7 presents F-w curves of 6 specimens from

No. 3 and No. 4 tests. It can be seen, that the 30 kg/m3
content of steel fibre not only increased the strength of the
member, but also reduced significantly the crack width at
the same loading level. For example, when bending moment
was equal to 17 kNm, then the crack width of the members
without the steel fibre reached 4.8 mm, and the crack of the
members with the steel fibre 0.065 mm. However, the load
difference from the moment when the crack opens until the
fracture of the member is not high for the small cross section
members and for the members with the small reinforcement
ratio. Whereas when the steel fibre was used this difference
was higher more than two times.
54

from the experimental results. In most cases, the calculated

crack widths more than twice exceed the experimental
values. When the experimentally obtained crack widths
are wide and calculations are performed according to
the supplemented and the corrected EC2 methods then
the calculated crack widths can be unreliable. However,
when the crack widths are narrower than 0.3 mm, then the
calculated crack widths according to these two methods
satisfy the experimental crack widths more accurately.

Fig. 7. F-w curves when loading is performed under deformation

control

Fig. 9. The comparison of the calculated and the determinate

crack width

It is known that the distribution of the steel fibre

influence strongly on the residual flexural tensile strength
and for the larger cross sections the scatter of the results
between separate specimens decreases (Jansson, 2007;
Parmentier et. al., 2008; Vandewalle et. al., 2008). Due
to this reason the scatter of the experimental crack width
values of the larger cross section members should also be
less and the calculated crack width values should be more
accurate. In order to prove this statement the additional
research was performed using larger cross section concrete
flexural members reinforced with steel fibre and ordinary
reinforcement. The experimental data is obtained from
D. Ulbinas PhD thesis (Ulbinas, 2012). The main data
which was used for the calculations is given in Table 4.

Fig. 8. F-w curves when loading is performed under force control

Fig. 8 presents the F-w curves of 6 specimens from

No. 6, No. 7 and No. 8 tests. The consistent pattern of the
test No. 1 and No. 6, No. 3 and No. 7, No. 4 and No. 8 are
the same although the loading control was different. It can
be seen from the comparison of tests No. 3 and No. 7 results
that the loading control has no significant influence on the
F-w relationship. Comparing the results from the tests No.
1 and No. 6 it is also can be seen that curves of the test No.
6 pass between the top and the bottom curves of the test No.
1 (F1,MIN = 5.75 kN (fR,1,MIN=1.84 MPa), F1,MAX = 13.91 kN
(fR,1,MAX=4.45 MPa). However, it is observed that at the same
crack width value, the load of the test No. 8 was higher than
the load of the test No. 4. Considering to the large scatter of
the residual flexural tensile strength observed in Fig. 6 such
increase of the strength could be obtained not due to the
loading control, but due to the distribution of the steel fibre.

Table 4. The main parameters of materials

Description

3.2. Comparison of experimental and calculated crack

width
The crack widths calculated according to the methods
presented in section 2 were compared with the experimental
results from the tests No. 4 and No. 8. All parameters which
are used in the calculations are given in section 3. The
comparison of the results is given in Fig. 9.
It can be seen from Fig. 9 that crack widths which are
calculated according to the RILEM method strongly differ

Parameter

Concrete class

C35/45

Ecm (from experiments, ref. Table 2.1)

fctm (by class, from EC2 Table 3.1)
Fibre aspect ratio (lfb/dfb)
Fibre content
fRm,1 (from exp., ref. Fig. 2.11 and Fig. 2.12)
Bottom reinforcement (rebars)
Top reinforcement (rebars)
Es (from experiments, ref. Table 2.1)

34984 MPa
3.2 MPa
55
79.24 kg/m3
5.36 MPa
310
26
20300 MPa

The loading scheme of the tests and the cross section

which were used for the calculations are given in Fig. 10.
All additional information is presented in D. Ulbinas PhD
thesis (Ulbinas, 2012).
55

calculated crack widths, while for the for the members

without steel fibre these results could be similar. As it was
mentioned above, the scatter of the results decreases together
with the increase of the cross section dimensions. Therefore,
the average value of residual flexural tensile strength (fRm,1)
in some cases can be unreliable for members with the small
cross section.
It can be seen from the experimental data that the steel
fibre can increase the tensile strength of concrete. The more
accurate evaluation of the tensile strength of the SFRC
could help to carry out calculations of crack width more
accurately.
It should be noted that in the case of the crack width
calculation according to the RILEM method, the stress
in the tensile reinforcement calculated under loading
conditions causing first cracking is considered, while
neither the supplemented nor the corrected EC2 method
do not take this into account. It could be a reason why
the experimentally obtained crack width was less than the
calculated value according to the mentioned method for the
members with the notch. In this case the calculated crack
widths exceed the experimental values when it is more than
0.2 mm level, while such consistent pattern is not observed
for the members without the notch.

Fig. 10. Loading scheme and cross section of specimens (Ulbinas

2012)

It should be noted that more than twice larger

reinforcement ratio was used in the described tests (Ulbinas,
2012) than in the tests which are presented in section 2. The
comparison of the experimental and the calculated crack
widths is given in Fig. 11.

5. Conclusions
1. A review of three crack width calculation methods
which is adapted for the flexural members reinforced with
the fibre and the ordinary reinforcement was performed.
It is observed that in all the cases the stress in the tensile
reinforcement is calculated making the assumption that the
concrete and the reinforcement behave elastically, and the
steel fibre which crosses the cracks takes over the residual
tensile stress uniformly. The residual tensile stress should be
obtained from the experiments.
2. The number of the specimens has the significant
influence on the estimation of the average residual flexural
tensile strength (fRm,1). The small number of the specimens
can affect the significant errors of fRm,1 due to the large
scatter of the experimental results.
3. From the performed experimental research, it
was determined that 30 kg/m3 steel fibre content was quite
effective to restrain the crack development and to increase
the member strength. Here the fibre distribution has decisive
influence on the crack width, while the loading control is not
significant.
4. It is observed that in the calculations of the crack
widths of the small and larger cross section members none
of the mentioned methods was absolutely precise. The
most significant errors were obtained using the RILEM
method. Depending on the case the more accurate results
are obtained using the supplemented and corrected EC2
methods. However, also depending on the case the results
obtained using these methods can be unreliable.

Fig. 11. Comparison of experimental and calculated crack widths

It can be seen from Fig. 11 that quite significant errors

are obtained when the crack widths are calculated according
to the RILEM method. When the crack widths increase then
the errors also increase. When the calculations according to
this method are performed using 30 kNm bending moment
the twice larger values of the crack width are obtained
comparing to the experimental results. The crack width
values calculated according to the supplemented EC2 method
quite well coincide with experimental results at the low
level of the crack width. However, at the crack width level
higher than 0.1 mm the crack widths calculated according
to this method vary strongly from the experimental results.
The values of the crack widths were obtained slightly less,
when the calculations were performed according to the
corrected EC2 method. Despite of that, this method reflects
the consistent pattern of the crack width development the
most accurately.
4. Discussion
Analysing the experimental research data it is observed
that the scatter of the residual flexural tensile strength is
quite significant. Because of such variability of the residual
flexural tensile strength the measured crack widths of the
separate concrete members reinforced with steel fibre and
ordinary reinforcement can disagree strongly with the

Acknowledgment
A part of the experimental research data were used
from D. Ulbinas PhD thesis. (Ulbinas, 2012).

56

References

Parmentier B, Vandewalle L, Rickstal F. 2008. Evaluation of the

scatter of the postpeak behaviour of fibre reinforced concrete
in bending: A step towards reliability. In: Proceedings of the
7th RILEM International Symposium on Fibre Reinforced
Concrete: Design and Applications - BEFIB 2008, Chennai,
India, 133143.
RILEM TC 162-TDF. 2002. Recommendations of RILEM TC
162-TDF: Test and design methods for steel fibre reinforced
concrete: Bending test. Mater Struct, 35(253), 579582.
RILEM TC 162-TDF. 2003. Final recommendation of RILEM TC
162-TDF: Test and design methods for steel fibre reinforced
concrete. Mater Struct, 36(262), 560567.
Ulbinas D., Kaklauskas G. 2009. Plieno pluotu armuot
gelbetonini element pleitumo analiz [Crack Width
Analysis of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete Elements].
Science Future of Lithuania, 1(5), 5662.
Ulbinas, D. 2012. Plieno plauu armuot gelbetonini element
pleitumo ir standumo analyze [Cracking and Stiffness
Analysis of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete Members],
daktaro disertacija. Vilnius, Technika, 98 p.
Vandewalle L. 2007. Postcracking behaviour of hybrid steel fiber
reinforced concrete. In: Fracture Mechanics of Concrete
and Concrete Structures FraMCoS, Proceedings of the 6th
International Conference, Catania, Italy, 1722, 13671375.
Vandewalle L., Rickstal F., Heirman G., Parmentier B. 2008. On the
round panel and 3-point bending tests. In: Fibre Reinforced
Concrete: Design and Applications BEFIB 2008,
Proceedings of the 7th RILEM International Symposium,
Chennai, India. 173182.

EN 14651:2005+A1:2007. Test Method for Metallic Fibre

Concrete Measuring the flexural tensile strength (Limit
Proportionality (LOP), Residual). 16 p.
EN 1992-1-1:2004. Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures
Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. 225 p.
ENV 1992-1-1:1991. Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures
Part 1: General rules and rules for buildings. 176 p.
EN 12390-3:2009. Testing hardened concrete - Part 3: Compressive
strength of test specimens. 18 p.
ISO 6784-1982. Concrete - Determination of static modulus of
elasticity in compression. 24 p.
Jansson A. 2007. Analysis and design methods for fibre reinforced
concrete: a state-of-the-art report, Gteborg, Dep. of
Civil and Environmental Engineering, Div. of Structural
Engineering/Concrete structures, Chalmers University of
Technology, 178 p.
Jansson A., Lfgren I., Gylltoft K. 2008. Design methods for
fibre reinforced concrete: a stateofthe art review. Nordic
Concrete Research, 2(38), 3146.
Jansson A., Lfgren I., Gylltoft K. 2010. Flexural behaviour of
members with a combination of steel fibres and conventional
reinforcement. Nordic Concrete Research, 2(42), 155171.
Lfgren I. 2007. Calculation of crack width and crack spacing. In:
Nordic Mini Seminar: Fibre reinforced concrete, Trondheim,
Norway, 112.
Naaman A. E. 2003. Strain hardening and deflection hardening
fiber reinforced cement composites. In: High Performance
Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites (HPFRCC4),
Proceedings of the 4th International RILEM Workshop, Ann
Arbor, USA, 95113.

Received 2014 01 31
Accepted after revision 2014 02 16

arnas KELPA PhD student at Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture.
Main research area: Strength, Stability and Serviceability of Reinforced Concrete Structures.
Address: Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Studentu st. 48, LT-51367,
Kaunas, Lithuania.
Tel.:
+370 37 300473
E-mail: sarunas.kelpsa@gmail.com
Mindaugas AUGONIS Associated professor at Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and
Architecture, Department of Building Structures.
Main research area: Durability of Engineering Structures, Strength and Stability of Reinforced Concrete Structures.
Address: Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Department of Building
Structures, Studentu st. 48, LT-51367, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Tel.:
+370 37 300473
E-mail: mindaugas.augonis@ktu.lt
Mindaugas DAUKYS Associated Professor at Kaunas University of Technology, Department of Civil Engineering
Technologies.
Main research area: Concrete mixture rheological properties, formed concrete surface quality.
Address: Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Department of Civil Engineering
Technologies, Studentu st. 48, LT-51367, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Tel.:
+370 37 300479
E-mail: Mindaugas.Dauksys@ktu.lt
Algirdas AUGONIS Lecturer at Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
Department of Building Materials.
Main research area: Mechanical Properties of Building Materials.
Address: Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Department of Building
Materials, Studentu st. 48, LT-51367, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Tel.:
+370 37 300465
E-mail: algirdas.augonis@ktu.lt
57