Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1R-98
*Subcommittee members who prepared this report.
**Subcommittee chairman who prepared this report.
This report describes the technology and uses of fiber reinforced shotcretes described. These include rock slope stabilization work, construction and
using steel and polypropylene fibers. Mechanical properties, particularly duc- repair of mine and tunnel linings, bridge arch strengthening, and
tility, toughness, impact strength, and flexural strength are improved by the dome-shaped structures. Available design information is briefly discussed and
fiber addition, and these improvements are described along with other typical design references are listed.
properties and proportions of typical mixes. Batching, mixing, and application
procedures are described, including methods of reducing rebound and equip- Keywords: fiber reinforced concretes; fibers; linings; metal fibers; mines;
ment used to apply fiber reinforced shotcrete. Applications of fiber reinforced mixture proportioning; placing; polypropylene fibers; shotcrete; slope pro-
shotcrete in North America, Europe, and Scandinavian countries are tection; stabilization; steel strength; toughness; tunnel linings.
506.1R-1
506.1R-2 ACI COMMITTEE REPORT
Chapter 2Steel fiber reinforced shotcrete, size, strength and configuration, and the amount of fiber. Of
p. 506.1R-3 the two types, steel fiber reinforced shotcrete accounts for
2.1General the largest usage, having applications in mine and tunnel
2.2Fiber types linings, rock slope stabilization, thin shell dome construc-
2.3Typical material properties tion, refractory linings, dam construction, repair of surfaces,
2.4Mix compositions and fire protection coatings.1,2
2.5Batching and mixing
Polypropylene fiber shotcrete has also been used.3 Its use
2.6Installation
has been reported in thin shell domes, repair of surfaces, and
2.7Applications
as a component in stucco-type overlayment systems.
2.8Available design information
Polypropylene fiber shotcretes use has grown significantly
over the last decade.
Chapter 3Synthetic fiber reinforced shotcrete,
p. 506.1R-10 A report by the U.S. Bureau of Mines4 presents a compre-
3.1Polypropylene fiber reinforced shotcrete hensive comparison of glass, steel, and fibrillated polypro-
3.2Shotcrete using other synthetic fibers pylene fiber reinforced shotcrete properties used in under-
ground applications. It states:
Chapter 4References, p. 506.1R-10 Results indicate that all of the commercially available fiber gunite
4.1Specified and/or recommended references materials tested can provide a beneficial sealant, spall prevention, or
4.2Cited references roof stability control attributes for underground mining environments
4.3General references when applied by an experienced crew using a well-maintained gun, in
accordance with product manufacturers recommendations and when
used for the designated purpose.
CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTION
1.1Definition of fiber reinforced shotcrete A compilation of international experience on shotcrete,
Fiber reinforced shotcrete is mortar or concrete containing particularly for rock support, was prepared by the Internation-
discontinuous discrete fibers that is pneumatically projected al Tunnelling Association.5 It compares fiber reinforced and
at high velocity onto a surface. Continuous meshes, woven plain shotcrete; the report dwells primarily on steel fiber but
fabrics, and long rods are not considered to be discrete fi- has some data on synthetic fibers.
ber-type reinforcing elements in this report.
1.4Historical background
1.2Fiber types Fiber reinforced shotcrete using steel fibers was first placed
Fibers for shotcrete can be made of steel, glass, synthetic in North America early in 1971 in experimental work under
and natural materials. For purposes here, only steel and the direction of D. R. Lankard of Battelle Memorial Institutes
polypropylene will be considered since they represent by far Columbus Laboratories.6 Steel fiber reinforced shotcrete was
the most commonly used types. proposed for underground support under the direction of H.
One parameter used to characterize a fiber is its aspect ra- W. Parker at the University of Illinois in 1971.7 Additional tri-
tio, defined as the fiber length divided by its diameter or an als were made under the direction of M. E. Poad for the U.S.
equivalent fiber diameter.* Bureau of Mines in an investigation of new and improved
Typical aspect ratios range from about 30 to 150 for length methods of using shotcrete for underground support.8 Subse-
dimensions of 0.25 to 3 in. (6 to 75 mm). For shotcrete, com- quently, R. A. Kaden of the U.S. Corps of Engineers super-
mon lengths are 0.75 to 1.5 in. (20 to 40 mm). vised the first practical application of steel fiber reinforced
Typical fiber diameters are: shotcrete in a tunnel adit at Ririe Dam, Idaho, in 1973.9 Since
Steel0.010 to 0.030 in. (0.25 to 0.76 mm) that time, steel fiber reinforced shotcrete has been placed in
Synthetic0.0008 to 0.02 in. (0.02 to 0.5 mm) Germany (Stahlfaserspritzbeton), Sweden (Stalfiberarmerad
Additional information on fibers may be found in ACI Sprubeton), England, Norway, Finland, Switzerland, Poland,
544.1R. South Africa, Australia, Canada, and Japan.
ASTM A 820 is a specification defining the required prop- Shotcrete using polypropylene fibers was first placed in
erties of steel fibers. Europe in 1968.10
1.3General
The inclusion of fibers in concrete and shotcrete generally 1.5Tests for fiber reinforced concrete and
shotcrete
improves material properties including ductility, toughness, Properties of fiber reinforced concrete are generally mea-
flexural strength, impact resistance, fatigue resistance, and, sured by tests advocated in ACI 544.2R; these are equally
to a small degree, compressive strength. The type and applicable to shotcrete. ASTM tests directly applicable to fi-
amount of improvement is dependent upon the fiber type, ber reinforced concrete and shotcrete are mentioned in ACI
544.2R. One of these, ASTM C 1018, is the most important
because it evaluates the post-cracking performance of fiber
* The equivalent diameter is the diameter of a circle having an area equal to the
cross-sectional area of a fiber. reinforced concrete and shotcrete.
COMMITTEE REPORT ON FIBER REINFORCED SHOTCRETE 506.1R-3
2.3.3 ToughnessThe amount of energy required to Table 2.3.4Fourteen day pullout strengths15
cause failure of fiber reinforced concrete by complete sepa- Pullout strength,
ration varies with the type and amount of fiber. Typical val- Mix psi (MPa)
ues of flexural toughness for small beams 4 x 4 x 14 in. (100 Plain shotcrete* 1000 (6.9)
x 100 x 350 mm) are in the range of 10 to 20 times that ob- Fibrous shotcrete 1800 (12.4)
tained for plain concrete. This is reported as toughness or as *750 lb (341 kg) cement, 1825 lb (830 kg) 3/8-in. (9.5-mm) stone, 1175 lb (534 kg)
a toughness index. sand, 5 lb (2.3 kg) Barra Gunit 2 accelerator.
750 lb (341 kg) cement, 1475 lb (670 kg) 3/8-in. (9.5-mm) stone, 1300 lb (591 kg)
The test procedure for flexural toughness is ASTM C
sand, 250 lb (114 kg) fibers 0.010 1/2 in. (0.25 13 mm), 5 lb (2.3 kg) Barra Gunit
1018. There is currently considerable discussion on the 2 accelerator.
methods of interpreting results from ASTM C 1018 for fiber
reinforced shotcrete. The discussion in the Appendix of containing 3/8 and 3/4-in. (9 and 19-mm) aggregate and less
ASTM C 1018 assists. However, there is agreement that the cement have been used more recently, and this has helped to
addition of steel fibers, and to a lesser degree polypropylene, reduce shrinkage. The amount of fiber has varied from about
greatly increases toughness values.19 0.5 percent by volume to about 2 percent by volume (66 to
2.3.4 Pullout strengthTests have been made using pull- 265 lb/yd3; 39 to 157 kg/m). The proportions of typical mixes
out anchors that are embedded in the shotcrete as it is are shown in Table 2.3.1. The fiber amounts shown in Table
gunned. The pullout anchors, similar to those described in 2.3.1 are before gunning. Since the fiber rebound is generally
ASTM C 900, were discs about 1 in. (25 mm) in diameter, greater than the aggregate rebound, there is usually a smaller
embedded about 11/4 in. (30 mm) deep. In plain shotcrete, percentage of fiber in the applied shotcrete.11
pullout test results show a linear relationship to compressive 2.4.2 Fiber size considerationsMost fibers used in
strength. For steel fiber reinforced shotcrete, a similarity in shotcrete mixes are about 3/4 to 11/4-in. long (19 to 32-mm).
the magnitude and shape of strength-time curves for pullout While both shorter, 1/2 in. (13 mm) and longer fibers, up to
and flexural strength (ASTM C 78) has been reported.12 11/2 to 2 in. (38 to 50 mm), have been used; the midrange of
Tests on fibrous concrete placed on an open pit mine slope in about 1 in. (25 mm) has become the preferred length from
Canada gave results shown in Table 2.3.4. the standpoint of in-place shotcrete strength and ease of mix-
2.3.5 Tensile strain at 90 percent ultimate load ing and placing. Shorter fibers are easier to mix and shoot
(strain-to-failure)Kaden9 made rapid load flexural tests and they rebound less, but the shotcrete properties, particu-
of shotcrete specimens (4 x 4 x 12 in.; 100 x 100 x 305 mm) larly toughness and post-crack resistance, are lower. Longer
and found significantly increased strain-to-failure in the steel fibers, although superior in producing strength and tough-
fibrous material. Tensile strain in the outer beam fibers at 90 ness properties, usually result in more plugging and have a
percent of ultimate load ranged from 320 to 440 microstrain higher fiber rebound rate. Some of these disadvantages with
for steel fibrous shotcrete at 28 days versus 192 microstrain shorter fibers have been overcome with the introduction of
for plain shotcrete. fibers having deformations or end anchorage provisions.
2.3.6 Bond strengthBESAB reports bond strengths of
about 145 psi (1 MPa) to granite for steel fiber reinforced 2.5Batching and mixing
shotcrete placed by the wet process.20 A bond strength of 2.5.1 GeneralBatching and mixing for the dry process
about 0.04 fc* (540 psi, 3.7 MPa) was reported for in situ is often done by mixing the dry ingredients, complete with fi-
tests at the Peachtree Center Station, Atlanta, subway on a bers, in a transit mixer. This is then delivered to the hopper
rough-surfaced granitic gneiss. These values were obtained (gun) of the shotcrete machine. The material has also been
by pulling off a 2 x 2-ft (610 x 610-mm) steel plate embed- mixed the same as normal shotcrete with the fibers being
ded in a flat (not arched) shotcrete layer and calculating the added to a mixing hopper by a screw auger or in a separate
bond strength.21 This is compared to 0.1 fc (135 psi, 0.9 air stream. Fiber feeders, nozzles with the provision for fiber
MPa) for similar laboratory tests.21 In other tests, a core drill addition, and special mixers are also available (Section
was used to isolate a cylindrical specimen that was then 2.6.2). Prebagging has been found to be very useful, par-
pulled from the rock. Here, tensile bond strengths of 0.02 fc ticularly in mines where a mixer and bulk materials would
(130 psi, 0.9 MPa) were obtained for fiber reinforced shot- aggravate space problems. Batching and mixing of steel fi-
crete compared to 0.03 to 0.05 fc (220 to 375 psi, 1.5 to 2.6 ber reinforced mixes with loose, bulk fibers need some care
MPa) for plain shotcrete.21 to avoid the formation of fiber balls.
2.5.2 Dry-mixGood results were obtained in a turbine
2.4Mix compositions mixer (a stationary, cylindrical, flat-bottomed pan with re-
2.4.1 GeneralMost steel fiber reinforced shotcrete volving mixing arms) for U.S. Bureau of Mines tests. The
placed to date has used the dry process. Early applications sand was placed in the mixer first, and the fibers were added
used a fine aggregate mix having a sand:cement ratio of 2.4:1 through a 21/2-in. (63-mm) mesh screen to break up any fiber
by weight or about 940 lb of cement per yd3 (560 kg/m). Mixes clumps. After transfer to a transit mixer and transport to a re-
mote job site, the cement was added from sacks. A screen
over the machine hopper, already a part of the equipment,
* fc here is the compressive strength of the concrete as tested. was used to intercept any fiber balls that were formed.
COMMITTEE REPORT ON FIBER REINFORCED SHOTCRETE 506.1R-5
For a larger project, the Snake River rock slope stabiliza- mixer. A good method is to introduce the fibers to the fine ag-
tion, the contractor charged the materials in 5 yd3 (3.8 m3) gregate on a conveyor belt during the addition of aggregate.
batches into a large hopper using a front-end loader and from Where fibers are added directly to a transit mixer, the fi-
there into transit mixers via a conveyor. The ingredients bers should land on the mix, not on the mixing vanes where
were added in the following order: all the sand; one-half of they can form clumps. The drum must rotate fast enough to
the fibers; all the cement plus the accelerator; and one-half of carry away the fibers as they enter the mix.
the fibers. This technique, where 500 lb (225 kg) of loose Collated fibers, fibers with a very low aspect ratio (usually
bulk fibers were added at one time, would normally work less than about 40) and some large diameter fibers may be
only for short fibers with a low aspect ratio such as those added directly into a completed mix without causing a
used on this project1/2 x 0.010-in. (13 x 0.25-mm) fibers with clumping problem. Over-mixing should be avoided, in any
an aspect ratio of 50. Fibers were added through a 4 x 4- in. event, as too much mixing of these or any fiber may result in
(100 x 100-mm) crusher screen. fiber ball formation. Worn mixing blades or harsh mixes
The important parts of the batching and mixing procedure may also result in fiber balls. Therefore, a screen should be
that differ from mixing plain shotcrete are: put over the pump hopper to intercept fiber balls.
1) Fibers that show a tendency to clump should be added
through a screen or by a shaker or apparatus that separates
2.6Installation
them and adds them so that they do not reclump. This means
2.6.1 GeneralApplying steel fiber reinforced shotcrete
adding them to a rotating mixer, a conveyor belt, or a screw
is basically the same as applying plain shotcrete. Information
conveyor that is carrying the fibers away fast enough so that
on good application techniques is included in ACI 506.R.
the fibers do not stack up on each other.
Specification requirements suitable for use in contracts are
2) Mixing should avoid bending the fibers. Badly bent fi-
included in ACI 506.2.
bers cause poor compaction and reduced strengths. A paddle
(pugmill) mixer with small counter-rotating paddle wheels 2.6.2 EquipmentExisting shotcrete equipment has been
has caused severe bending and subsequent formation of fiber used to apply steel fiber reinforced shotcrete with little or no
balls.12 modifications. The modifications, when made, are generally
3) A screen should be put over the shotcrete hopper to di- to reduce plugging by eliminating restrictions such as 90-deg
vert any fiber clumps. elbows or abrupt changes in hose size. If line size is reduced,
a long, tapered reducer should be used. When plugging oc-
Williamson22 reported that a screw-type mixer-conveyor
curs, it is usually at the outlet from the gun where a sudden
was used along with a metering fiber feeder to mix shotcrete
size reduction or change in direction is a common feature.
for spraying experimental domes at Champaign, Ill., by the
Larger hose sizes, 2 in. (50 mm) in diameter and up, work
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The fibers were mixed in the
better. Generally, the hose diameter should be a minimum of
screw conveyor and the mix discharged directly into the gun
two times the fiber length. However, 1-in. (25-mm) fiber has
hopper. The U.S. Bureau of Mines has also added the fibers
been gunned through 1- in. (25-mm) hose, and fiber rein-
to a screw conveyor prior to discharging into the gun hopper
forced refractories using 1-in. (25-mm) fiber are shot regu-
on a rotating barrel-type shotcrete machine.
larly through 11/2-in. (38-mm) hose.
It has been found that a good electrical ground to the gun
and nozzle dramatically reduces the fiber clumping and Other modifications have included: removing elastomer-
plugging that might otherwise occur. ic wear linings at elbows, adding vibrators or revolving
Collated fibers, bundled together with a quick-dissolving wiper arms to the hopper screen, and adding vanes in the
glue, are available for the dry-mix process. They are added hopper or changing the wheel size on segmented rotor gun
directly to the mixer after the aggregate has been added. types to speed up material delivery. Sometimes a stronger
They come apart after addition of the water at or near the rotor motor is needed. If no hopper screen is present, one
nozzle. should be added to divert fiber clumps that would other-
2.5.3 Wet-mixWet-mix shotcrete uses a wet mix simi- wise plug the gun. Fig. 2.6.2.1 shows modifications made
lar to that used for cast-in-place concrete applications. The to a gun hopper for the Snake River rock slope stabilization
experience gained from mixing steel fiber reinforced con- project.15,23
crete for cast-in-place applications may be used to help batch Fiber reinforced shotcrete has been successfully applied
and mix fiber reinforced mixes for wet shotcreting. (See ACI with every kind of delivery equipment, from the original sin-
544.1RChapter 3, Preparation of Fiber Reinforced Con- gle or dual chamber feed wheel type to the more recent re-
crete.) volving barrel and segmented rotor types now in common
There are some precautions that should be taken to prevent use. It has been placed by wet-mix using a pressurized cham-
the formation of fiber balls when adding loose bulk fibers to ber-type machine, squeeze-pump-type pumps, and positive
the wet-mix. The fibers should not be added too quickly. displacement pumps.
They should be added clump-free and should be carried away Some special equipment has been devised to separate and
before they pile up on one another. It may be necessary to meter steel fibers in a separate air stream and add them at the
pass them through a screen or shaker screen. They should not nozzle for both wet- and dry-mix. This equipment enables
be allowed to hang up or pile up on their way to or inside the the use of high aspect ratio fibers (up to about 125), avoids
506.1R-6 ACI COMMITTEE REPORT
Fig. 2.6.2.2Integrated fiber feeder, mixer, and gun for Fig. 2.6.2.3Predampening and mixing unit with fiber
steel fiber reinforced shotcrete. feeder for refractory shotcrete.
COMMITTEE REPORT ON FIBER REINFORCED SHOTCRETE 506.1R-7
of sandwich wall construction at Rainworth, England; light- 2.8.3 Empirical design, plain shotcreteSeveral differ-
house and chimney repairs in Sweden; resurfacing of a rocket ent empirical rules for estimating shotcrete thicknesses for
flame deflector at Cape Canaveral, Fla.; coal mine strength- tunnel support are presented in a publication by Mahar.11
ening and sealing of stoppings by National Coal Board, En- These rules include tables of thicknesses based on case
gland; stabilization of the Tuve landslide in Sweden; and histories in which shotcrete did or did not fail. Various thick-
forming boat hulls similar to ferrocement, using fibers and nesses, depending on conditions, were formulated by Al-
fibers plus mesh. berts,33 Kobler,34 Cecil,35 and Heuer.36 Other researchers
who used rock quality designation (RQD) and rock structure
2.8Available design information rating (RSR) to refine empirical rules include Deere37 and
2.8.1 GeneralDesign of steel fiber reinforced shotcrete Wickham.38
for structural uses is similar to design of plain shotcrete. Al- 2.8.4 Design based on analytical models, plain shot-
though design with fiber reinforced shotcrete and conven- creteA second method of estimating shotcrete thickness
tional shotcrete is basically the same, the material properties for initial support involves use of analytical models of shot-
can be significantly different, thereby allowing considerable crete behavior.
difference in shotcrete thickness and amount of reinforce- A suggested method of determination of shotcrete thick-
ment. At present, limited data are available for the design of ness for a flat-roof tunnel by using models and analyses is
fiber reinforced shotcrete structures. Most design data that shown in Mahar11 and Cecil.35 A thickness of not less than 2
are available are for ground support such as tunnel linings. in. (50 mm) is used because of possible deterioration of thin-
Shotcrete in ground support has been most successful in ner layers from shrinkage, cracking, construction activity, or
treating problems associated with loosening ground and air water seepage.
slaking. Design of shotcrete as a circular ring following the ulti-
At present, the design of thin shotcrete linings is based on mate strength concepts of reinforced concrete design is illus-
empirical rules and/or analytical models of shotcrete-rock trated by Peng.39 Rabcewitzs methods, widely used in the
behavior. Empirical design is based on actual tunnel experi- New Austrian Tunnelling Method, are illustrated in a series
ence. The analytical models have been developed from ob- of articles.40,41
servation of shotcrete performance under service conditions 2.8.5 Analytical models based on laboratory and field
and from large scale testing in the laboratory and in the field. tests, fiber reinforced shotcreteAnalytical models for
2.8.2 PrecautionsThe scope of this report prevents a steel fiber reinforced shotcrete based on large scale laborato-
detailed treatment of the design of shotcrete for ground sup- ry tests were formulated by Fernandez-Delgado of the Uni-
port. However, it is appropriate to list some available refer- versity of Illinois and published in ACI SP-54.42 Additional
ences relating to design and engineering properties of data on the same general subject (i.e., adhesion, flexure, and
shotcrete and to list some general precautions. punch loads in arched and flat configurations for steel fiber
reinforced shotcrete) also appear in ACI SP-54.43
Shotcrete may be used as sole support of underground ex-
cavations but only in cases where a good shotcrete-rock The work was continued in large scale field tests in the At-
bond can be obtained, when the shotcrete is thick enough to lanta Research Chamber, and the results were applied to the
act as a structurally continuous lining, or when air slaking is design of liners for underground openings.44 The models in-
the only ground problem. In any other cases, shotcrete clude analysis for wedges displacing through the liner and
should be employed together with some other support ele- thrust coefficients for analysis of thicker, continuous arch
ments (i.e., rock bolts, steel ribs, etc.). configurations.
The prevention or reduction of water flow from the ground 2.8.6 Additional data, fiber shotcreteData on the per-
because of the sealing action of the shotcrete may lead to a formance and design of steel fiber reinforced shotcrete com-
buildup of hydraulic forces and possibly to stability prob- pared to mesh reinforced shotcrete anchored on 4-ft (1.2-m)
lems in the ground. Therefore, it is advisable to provide for centers is given in a report by Morgan.45 The report indicates
drainage of such water. that the two cases are equivalent and that fiber reinforced
shotcrete provided good residual load capacity with large de-
A thin shotcrete lining applied over irregular rock surfaces
formations, i.e., 2 in. (50 mm). Additionally, tests made
has been found to be inadequate as the sole support of under-
by British Columbia Hydro on the proposed Site C project
ground excavations in the following cases:11
on the Peace River confirm that in similar tests on mesh
1. Drill and blast openings 20 ft (6.1 m) or more in and fiber reinforced panels, first and second cracks gener-
diameter. ally occur at higher loads in the steel fiber reinforced shot-
2. Zones where blocks are bounded by smooth to slick crete than in the mesh reinforced shotcrete. After cracking,
joint surfaces, the overbreak is prominent, and block both types exhibited similar load-carrying capabilities.26
sizes are typically 4 ft (1.2 m) or more in width. Additional data on engineering properties were generated
3. Vertical side walls more than 10 ft (3 m) in height. by Poad, Serbousek, and Goris.8
506.1R-10 ACI COMMITTEE REPORT
CHAPTER 3SYNTHETIC FIBER REINFORCED C 1018 Test Method for Flexural Toughness and First
SHOTCRETE Crack Strength of Fiber Reinforced Concrete
C 1116 Specification for Fiber Reinforced Concrete and
3.1Polypropylene fiber reinforced shotcrete Shotcrete
3.1.1 Types of fibersPolypropylene fibers that have
been used in shotcrete range typically from 1/2 to 2 in. (12 to
The above publications may be obtained from the follow-
50 mm) and may be straight or of a fibrillated configuration.
ing organizations:
3.1.2 Production aspectsThe methods of adding
polypropylene fibers to a mix are similar to those for steel
American Concrete Institute
fibers described in Section 2.5. Generally, they do not have
P.O. Box 9094
the same susceptibility to clumping as steel fibers. Howev-
Farmington Hills, MI
er, balling may be experienced at larger addition rates such
48333-9094
as 10 to 12 lb/yd3 (6 to 7 kg/m3).
In terms of addition rates, typical values have about 1.5
American Society for Testing and Materials
lb/yd3 (0.9 kg/m 3), which is approximately 0.1 percent by
100 Barr Harbor Drive
volume. However, some applications have used up to
West Conshohocken, PA
10 lb/yd3 (6 kg/m3) to achieve improved performance.
19428
3.1.3 PropertiesIt is generally recognized that polypro-
pylene fibers will affect shotcrete properties in a manner
4.2Cited references
similar to steel fiberssee Section 2.3but not to the same 1. Forrest, M. P.; Morgan, D. R.; Obermeyer, J. R.; Parker, P.; and La
degree. Moreaux, D. D., Seismic Retrofit Little Rock Dam, Concrete Interna-
Reference 19 states that, at normal addition rates of 1 to 2 tional, V. 17, No. 11, Nov. 1995, pp. 30-36.
2. Zollo, R. F., Collated Fibrillated Polypropylene Fibers in FRC, SP-
kg/m3 (1.7 to 3.4 lb/yd3):
81, Fiber Reinforced ConcreteInternational Symposium, American Con-
Synthetic fibers contribute to the stability of shotcrete material hav- crete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 1984, pp. 397-409.
ing excessively low mechanical properties by modifying rheological 3. Malhotra, V. M.; Carette, G. G.; and Bilodeau, A., Mechanical Prop-
behavior of the fresh concrete and of the concrete during hardening erties and Durability of Polypropylene Fiber Reinforced High-Volume Fly
(improved cohesion and shearing resistance). Contributions to im- Ash Concrete for Shotcrete Application, ACI Materials Journal, V. 91,
prove the hardened properties are negligible. No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1994.
4. Krentz, G. W., Selected Pneumatic Gunites for Use in Underground
However, tests at higher addition rates show improved Mining: A Comparative Engineering Analysis, Bureau of Mines Circular
properties. 1C 8984, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1984.
5. International Tunnelling Association, Shotcrete for Rock Support;
Guidelines and Recommendations, Swedish Rock Engineering Research
3.2Shotcrete using other synthetic fibers
Foundation (Be Fo), Stockholm, 1992.
There are limited data available on the use of other syn- 6. Lankard, D. R., Field Experiences with Steel Fibrous Concrete, pre-
thetic fibers in shotcrete. sented at American Ceramic Society Meeting, Chicago, Apr. 26, 1971.
7. Parker, H. W., Current Field Research Program on Shotcrete, Pro-
CHAPTER 4REFERENCES ceedings, Use of Shotcrete for Underground Support, Eng. Fnd., ASCE SP-
45, 1974, pp. 330-350.
8. Poad, M. E.; Serbousek, M. O.; and Goris, J., Engineering Proper-
4.1Specified and/or recommended references ties of Fiber-Reinforced and Polymer-Impregnated Shotcrete, Report of
The documents of the various standards-producing organi- Investigations No. 8001, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C., 1975,
zations referred to in this document are listed below with 25 pp.
their serial designation. 9. Kaden, R. A., Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete: Ririe Dam and Little
Goose (CPRR) Relocation, SP-54, Shotcrete for Ground Support, Ameri-
American Concrete Institute (ACI) can Concrete Institute/American Society of Civil Engineers, Farmington
544.1R State-of-the-Art Report on Fiber Reinforced Hills, Mich., 1977, pp. 66-88.
Concrete 10. Hannant, D. J., Fiber Cements and Fiber Concretes, John Wiley &
Sons, New York, 1978, 219 pp.
544.2R Measurement of Properties of Fiber Reinforced
11. Mahar, J. W.; Parker, H. W.; and Wuellner, W. W., Shotcrete Prac-
Concrete tice in Underground Construction, Report No. FRA-OR&D 75-90, Fed-
506.R Guide for Shotcreting eral Railroad Administration, Washington, D.C., Aug. 1975, 482 pp.
506.2 Specification for Materials, Proportioning, and 12. Parker, H. W.; Fernandez, G.; and Lorig, L. J., Field-Oriented Inves-
tigation of Conventional and Experimental Shotcrete for Tunnels, Report
Application of Shotcrete No. FRA-OR&D 76-06, Federal Railroad Administration, Washington,
547R State-of-the-Art Report on Refractory Concrete D.C., Aug. 1975, 628 pp.
13. Lankard, D. R., Steel Fiber Reinforced Refractory Concrete, SP-
57, Refractory Concrete, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Mich., 1978, pp. 241-263.
A 820 Steel Fiber for Fiber Reinforced Concrete 14. Glassgold, I. L., Refractory ShotcreteCurrent State of the Art,
C 78 Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple Beam Concrete International: Design & Construction, V. 3, No. 1, Jan. 1981, pp.
with Third-Point Loading) 41-49.
15. Henager, C. H., The Technology and Uses of Steel Fibrous Shotcrete:
C 900 Test Method for Pullout Strength of Hardened A State-of-the-Art Report, Battelle-Northwest, Richland, Sept. 1977, 60 pp.
Concrete 16. Henager, C. H., A New WrinkleShotcrete Containing Steel
COMMITTEE REPORT ON FIBER REINFORCED SHOTCRETE 506.1R-11
Fibers, Concrete Construction, V. 20, No. 8, Aug. 1975, pp. 345-347. 38. Wickham, G. E.; Tiedemann, H. R.; and Skinner, E. H., Ground
17. Morgan, D. R., Steel Fiber ShotcreteA Laboratory Study, Con- Support Prediction Model RSR Concept, Proceedings, North American
crete International: Design & Construction, V. 3, No. 1, Jan. 1981, pp. Rapid Excavation and Tunnelling Conference, American Institute of Min-
70-74. ing, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, New York, V. 1, 1974, pp.
18. Ramakrishnan, V.; Coyle, W. V.; Dahl, L. F.; and Schrader, E. K., A 691-707.
Comparative Evaluation of Fiber Shotcretes, Concrete International: 39. Peng, S. S., Coal Mine Ground Control, John Wiley & Sons, New
Design & Construction, V. 3, No. 1, Jan. 1981, pp. 59-69. York, 1978, pp. 415-416.
19. Banthier, N.; Trottier, J.-F.; Beaupre, D.; and Wood, D., Steel Fiber
40. Rabcewicz, L., The New Austrian Tunnelling Method, Parts I, II,
Reinforced Shotcrete: Influence of Fiber Geometry, Third Canadian Sym-
III, Water Power (London), Nov.-Dec. 1964, and Jan. 1965.
posium on Cement and Concrete, Ottawa, 1993.
20. Sandell, B., Steel Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete (Stalfiberarmerad 41. Rabcewicz, L., Stability of Tunnels under Rock Loads, Parts I, II,
Sprutbeton), Proceedings, Informations-Dagen 1977, Cement-Och Beton- III, Water Power (London), June 1969, pp. 225-234, July 1969, pp.
ginstitutet, Stockholm, 1977, pp. 50-75. 266-273, and Aug. 1969, pp. 297-302.
21. Rose, D. C., et al., The Atlanta Research Chamber, Applied 42. Fernandez-Delgado, G.; Mahar, J. W.; and Parker, H. W., Structural
Research for Tunnels, Report No. UMTA-GA-06-0007-81-1, U.S. Depart- Behavior of Thin Shotcrete Liners Obtained from Large Scale Tests, SP-
ment of Transportation, Washington, D.C., Mar. 1981. 54, Shotcrete for Ground Support, American Concrete Institute/American
22. Williamson, G. R., et. al., Inflation/Foam/Shotcrete System for Society of Civil Engineers, Farmington Hills, Mich., 1977, pp. 399-442.
Rapid Shelter Construction, CERL Technical Report No. M-215, U.S. 43. Holmgren, J., Thin Shotcrete Layers Subjected to Punch Loads,
Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Champaign, Ill., SP-54, Shotcrete for Ground Support, American Concrete Institute/Ameri-
May 1977. can Society of Civil Engineers, Farmington Hills, Mich., 1977, pp.
23. Kaden, R. A., Slope Stabilized with Steel Fibrous Shotcrete, West- 443-459.
ern Construction, Apr. 1974, pp. 30-33.
44. Fernandez-Delgado, G., et al., Thin Shotcrete Linings in Loosening
24. Ryan, T. F., Steel Fibers in Gunite, An Appraisal, Tunnels and
Tunnelling (London), July 1975, pp. 74-75. Rock, The Atlanta Research Chamber, Report No. UMTA-GA-06-0007-81-1,
25. Malmberg, B., and Ostfjord, S., Field Test of Steel Fiber Reinforced U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., Mar. 1981.
Shotcrete at Scan-Raff, Brofjorden, Fiberbetong, Norforsks Projekt Com- 45. Morgan, D. R., Report on Steel Fiber Shotcrete for Tunnel Support
mittee for FRC-Material Delvapporter, Cement-Och Betonginstitutet, Lining, Hardy Associates Ltd., Vancouver, Mar. 1981.
Stockholm, 1977, pp. Y1-Y16.
26. Peace River Development Site C Project, Shotcrete Testing, 4.3General references
Hydroelectric Generation Projects Division, Geotechnical Department,
Armelin, H. S., and Paula, H., 1995. Physical and Mechanical Proper-
British Columbia Hydro, Jan. 1983.
ties of Steel Fiber Reinforced Dry-Mix Shotcrete, ACI Materials Journal,
27. Chronis, N. P., Three Innovations in Mine Expansion Tested at Bru-
V. 92, No. 3, May-June.
ceton Experimental Mine, Coal Age, V. 80, No. 4, Apr. 1975.
28. Murphy, E. M., Steel Fiber Shotcrete in Mines, Concrete Con- Banthia, N.; Trottier, J.-F.; and Beaupre, D., 1994. Steel-Fiber Rein-
struction, V. 20, No. 10, Oct. 1975, pp. 443-445. forced Wet-Mix Shotcrete: Comparison with Cast Concrete, Journal of
29. Warner, B. L., Evaluation of Materials for Protecting Existing Ure- Materials in Civil Engineering, V. 6, No. 3.
thane Foam in Mines, Report No. ORF 75-76 (NTIS PB 254 682), U.S. Banthia, N.; Trottier, J.-F.; Beaupre, D.; and Wood, D., 1994. Properties
Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C., Sept. 1974. of Steel Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete, CSCE Journal, V. 21, No. 4.
30. Wilkinson, B. M., Foam Domes, High Performance Environmental Banthia, N.; Trottier, J.-F.; Wood, D.F.; and Beaupre, D., 1992. Influ-
Enclosures, Concrete Construction, V. 23, No. 7, July 1978, pp. 405-406. ence of Fiber Geometry in Steel Fiber Reinforced Dry-Mix Shotcrete,
31. Shotcrete and Foam Insulation Shaped Over Inflated Balloon Concrete International, V. 14, No. 5, May.
Form, Concrete Construction, V. 27, No. 6, June 1982, pp. 511-513.
Frazen T., 1992. Shotcrete for Underground Support: State-of-the-Art
32. Nelson, K. O., and Henager, C. H., Analysis of Shotcrete Domes
Report with Focus on Steel-Fiber Reinforcement, Tunnelling and Space
Loaded by Deadweight, Preprint No. 81-512, ASCE Convention (St.
Age Technology, V. 7, No. 4.
Louis, Oct. 1981), American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, 1981.
33. Alberts, C., Bergforstarkning genom Beton sprutning och Injecter- Henager, C. H., 1981. Steel Fibrous Shotcrete: A Summary of the State
ing, Proceedings, 1965 Rock Mechanics Symposium, Publication No. of the Art, Concrete International: Design & Construction, V. 3, No. 1,
142, Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, 1965. Jan., pp. 50-58.
34. Kobler, H. G., Dry-Mix Coarse-Aggregate Shotcrete as Under- Kirsten, H. A. D., 1993. Equivalence of Mesh and Fiber Reinforced Shot-
ground Support, SP-14, Shotcreting, T. J. Reading, ed., American Con- crete at Large Deflections, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, V. 30, No. 3.
crete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 1966, pp. 33-58. Morgan, D. R., 1991. Steel Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete for Support of
35. Cecil, O. S., Correlations of Rock Bolt-Shotcrete Support and Rock Underground Openings in Canada, Concrete International, V. 13, No. 11,
Quality Parameters in Scandinavian Tunnels, PhD thesis, University of Nov.
Illinois, Urbana, 1970.
Morgan, D. R.; McAshill, N.; Carette, G. C.; and Malhotra, V. M., 1992.
36. Heuer, R. E., Selection/Design of Shotcrete for Temporary Sup-
Evaluation of Polypropylene Fiber Reinforced High-Volume Fly Ash
port, SP-45, Use of Shotcrete for Underground Structural Support, Amer-
Shotcrete, ACI Materials Journal, V. 89, No. 2, Mar.-Apr.
ican Concrete Institute/American Society of Civil Engineers, Farmington
Hills, Mich. 1974, pp. 160-174. Smith, R. E.; Peerlmon, S. L. J.; and Wolosick, J. R., 1993. Shotcrete
37. Deere, E. U.; Peck, R. B.; Monsees, N. E.; and Schmidt, B., Design for Underground Support, Engineering Foundation, Niagara-on-the-Lake,
of Tunnel Liners and Support Systems, Contract No. 3-0152 (NTIS PB Ontario, Canada, May.
183 799), Office of High Speed Ground Transportation, U.S. Department Wallis, S., 1992. Fibercrete at Cumberband Gap Advances NATM in
of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 1969, pp. 387-391. the U.S., Tunnels and Tunnelling, June.