Materials and Structures/Mat6riaux et Constructions,Vol.
35, November2002, pp528-535
Experimental and theoretical investigation of the shear
resistance of steel fibre reinforced prestressed concrete
X-beams - Part I1: Theoretical analysis and comparison
with experiments
K. S. Elliott 1, C. H. Peaston 2 and K. A. Painea
(I) University of Nottingham, UK - (2) Arup Research, Formerly at University of Nottingham, U K - (3) University of Dundee, Formerly at
University of Nottingham, UK
Paper received:July 30, 2001; Paper accepted: October31, 2001
A B S T R A C T
This is the second part of two papers on the experi-
mental (Part I) and theoretical (Part II) resistance of steel
fibre reinforced precast concrete beams.
High strength steel wire, and thin amorphous metal
fibres have been introduced into prestressed concrete X
beams in order to study their behaviour under shear loads.
Experimental tests have determined shear strengths at the
ultimate and cracking loads, and shown increased ductility
with up to 2 % fibre content. From these tests two differ-
ent methods are proposed for predicting the ultimate
shear capacity - these are the fibre supplement additive
method, and the modified FlkC principal tensile stress
method. The principal tensile strength of the fibre rein-
forced concrete is given as a function of compressive
strength and fibre volume. The mean value of the ratio of
the calculated to the test strength is 0.89 without partial
safety factors, and, being conservative, is proposed for use
in design. A calculation modal is presented.
1. REVIEW OF EARLIER STUDIES
1.1 Shear tests on prestressed fibre reinforced
concrete (PFRC) beams
The main purpose of these tests has been to deter-
mine the enhancement in shear resistance due to the
presence of fibres, given by the fibre volume ratio Vf, the
shear span-to-effective depth ratio a/d, and the amount
of prestress. Results are expressed in terms of the per-
centage increase 11 in shear load at ultimate failure Vutt to
that at first crack Vc~.
Narayanan and Darwish [1] tested prestressed beams
(PFRC) using crimped steel fibres of Vf = 0.3% to 3.0%,
a/cl = 2.0 and 3.0, with partial and full pr~estress. Partly pre-
1359-5997/02 ORILEM
R I~ S U M I~
Cette pattie est la deuxi~me de deux articles sur les exp&iences
(partie I) et la th&rie (partie II) sur la r&istance des poutres en
bdton pr~fabriquO renforcOdefibres d'ac#r.
Des aciers a haute adh&ence et de minces fibres m(talliques
amorphes ont ~t~ introduits dans des poutres X en b~tonpr&ontraint
pour ~tudier leur comportement sous Faction des efforts tranchants.
t 9 I . I I .
Des essais expenmentaux ont d~termtne la reststance ultime au
cisaillement et les charges defissuration, et ont montr~ une hausse de
la ductilit( avec un volume allant jusqu'a 2% defibres. Sur la base
de ces essais, deux mOthodes diff&entes sont propos&s pour la prOdic-
tion de la r&gtance ultime au cgaillement - la m(thade des fibres
supplOmentaires additionnelles et la m(thode de la contrainte de ten-
sion principale du b&n defibres d'acier. La r&istanceprincipale en
tension du b(ton renforc( de fibres est donn& comme fonction de la
r&istance a la compression et du volume &fibres. La valeur moyenne
du rapport entre la r&istance calcul& et cdle donne'epar les essais est
de 0,89 sans facteur de majoration, et, (tant conservatrice, rile est
propos& comme mOthodede calcul. Le modhle de calcul est pr&ent~.
stressed beams (with additional rebars) failed at higher
loads than their counterparts such that r I reduced with
increasing prestress. For beams failing in web shear ten-
sion at aid = 2.0, the plain concrete beams collapsed
immediately after first cracking, while fibre reinforced
beams cracked at similar loads but were able to sustain
considerable loads beyond the first crack giving r I = 40% for
i_~fS=1%. Abdul-Wahab [2] recorded rl = 18% for Vf = 1%
fibres at a/d = 2.25. Flexural shear failure~were
observed at aid = 3.0 by both these researchers. Lorentsen
[3] recorded r1 = 50% using Vf = 1.5% HS fibres on fully
prestressed I-beams tested at aid = 3.7. Balaguru [4]
recorded rl = 6% using V( = 1.5% HS fibres on PFILC T-
beams with minimum shear finks. There was an optimum
value of/~= 0.75 %, beyond which there was an insignif-
528
Elliott, Peaston, Paine
icant increase in strength. It is likely that this low value of
r1is due to the effect of the shear links.
Tests by Shin [5] have shown that reinforced beams
containing shear links attain lower values of r1 with
increasing Vfas those that do not contain links. Links are
much moral effective at providing shear reinforcement
than fibres, since even 50% of the required shear links
renders fibre reinforcement ineffective. Similar behav-
iour has been observed by FurlanJr. [6] on PFRC beams
with various amounts of shear reinforcement. In addi-
tion, fibres perform better than shear links in limiting
crack widths by binding the cracks. Little advantage is to
be gained from the combined use of links and fibres, or
the use of fibres where shear links could be used.
Balaguru [4] and Rajagopal [7] tested partially-pre-
stressed beams using straight round steel fibres with 1~ =
0.75%, and found significant increases in both Vult and
Vcr These tests showed q = 71%, attributed to the crack
arrest mechanism of fibres. Tan [8] tested partially pre-
stressed T-beams using Vf-- 1% HS fibres and found
23% increases in web cracking strength. The behaviour
of these beams differed from all the other tests in that the
plain concrete beams had a considerable load-carrying
capacity after web cracking.
In conclusion, fibres increased the ultimate shear
strength of beams without shear reinforcement up to 1.8
times their cracking strength.
1.2 Ultimate shear capacity predictive methods
From the various shear tests on prestressed FRC
beams, two different methods have been suggested for
predicting the ultimate shear capacity:
(a) the fibre supplement additive method
(b) the BS8 110 modified method.
1.2.1 Fibre supplement additive method
A shear supplement Vb due to the fibres is added to
conventional equations for plain reinforced concrete
beams, such that the ultimate shear capacity of RFRC
beams is given as:
V. = Vc + Vb (1)
where V~is the concrete contribution to shear capacity, a
combination of concrete compressive resistance Vcc, pre-
stressing V..
p and dowel resistance V~ u" Given that after
cracking, web shear tension in PFRC acts similarly to
shear tension in RFRC [1] it may be suitable to adopt
measures of V b previously defined for use in RFRC.
These methods have largely concentrated on the tensile
stress provided by fibres crossing a shear crack.
Vd, which, depends on the tensile splitting and bond
strength of concrete is little affected by fibres. However,
it has been suggested by Swamy [9] that fibres increase
the stiffness of the dowel zone helping to contain dowel
crack growth, resulting in more efficient dowel contri-
bution as follows:
V d = Pwb,2(O.156fL,lt - 0.25) (Units offfl, ult are in N/mm 2) (2)
529
where Pwis the percentage of tension steel based on bwd,b,
is the net concrete width at the level of the steel centroid
andS, u/t is the ultimate tensile flexural strength of FRC.
However, in general, fibres have little affect on V c
and therefore it can be assumed to be equal for nomi-
nally identical PFRC and plain prestressed beams. The
approach taken in the ACI Building Code [10] given by
the following equation, where a safety factor of 1.5 has
been removed, is therefore applicable:
V~= Vcc + V p = [0.4 ~-fs +O.45%p~]bwd (3)
where 0.4~f~ is a design approximation to the tensile
strength, and % x is the prestress at the critical section.
The term ~b is usually the sole measure of the
improved shear resistance due to fibres. In measuring Vb,
the additional post-cracking shear resistance of RFRC is
assumed to be due to the fibres transferring tensile stress
across a crack and not due to any additional shearing
effect. Casanova [11] suggested calculating the post-
cracking fibre tensile stressfu directly from uniaxial ten-
sion tests at a critical crack width of 1% of the inner
lever arm 0.9d. For diagonal cracks inclined at 45 ~ Vb is
given as:
Vb =f. b J (4)
ftu can be calculated theoretically as ~10 V[ z[)V accord-
ing to Lira [12], where V[is the fibre volume ffa&ion, ~s
the fibre matrix interfa~ial bond, )V is the fibre aspect
ratio, and 110 is fibre orientation fac2or. It is recognised
that a crack crossed by the fibres running diagonally at 45 ~
from the longitudinal reinforcement to the top of the
beam never actually reaches the top of the beam. For this
reason the term 0.9d is used in preference to d.
The 'Dramix' guidelines [13] suggest the fibre sup-
plement is due to a constant tensile stress acting along a
diagonal crack of height 0.%. Vb is calculated by assum-
ing the bending moment carried by the fibres is to equal
the bending moment due to an equivalent post-cracking
flexural strength, fa e 30o Using empirical relationships
9 . 7t, q, 9 . .
correlating thxs flexural strength to the direct areal ten-
sile strengthft, ox, the shear supplement is given as:
V b =0.54fct,,,xRtbd (5)
where R t is the ratio of the tensile strength before and
after cracking and is given by Nemegeer [14] as:
Rt : (180C + WIEI) (6)
where Wfis the fibre content (in kg/m 3) and C is a func-
tion of the anchorage effect of the fibres (given as 20 for
HS fibres, and 35 for straight round fibres). A compari-
son between Equations (4) and (5) is given in Fig. 1.
The result agrees with Balaguru [4] where there is little
improvement in strength beyond a Vf of 0.75%. Other
tests on RFRC beams [15-17] showed reduced improve-
ment beyond 1%. The appearance of an optimum Vfis
partially due to reduced concrete workability with
Materials and Structures/Mat6riaux et Constructions, Vol.35, November2002

2
/
The purpose of this paper is t o examine these theoreti-
1.8
Dramix Guideline curves
compressive cube xE~
.
_-uatl~ (4) 2
r.
/
/ cal approaches in a scientific manner, and to propose a
1.6 strength of concrete (N/ram2) f= 4,2 N/mm suitable semi-empirical theory based on the evidence
"at obtained from shear tests carried out on X section beams.

!
1.4 .... 25
...... 37
1.2 --- 50 ....

0.8

0.6

0.4
ii!i: 2. THEORETICAL METHOD

The test results show that the inclusion of fibres sig-

0.2 ..(.>5-"
0 I I I I I I I
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Fibre volume fraction(%)
Fig. 1 - Comparison of the effect volume of fibre has on shear
supplement Vb.
increasing fibre content.
Tan [81 derived Vb based on the following principal
tensile stress-strain relationships, where the principal
stress trajectory is inclined at ct to the horizontal, as:
Vb = [CYr(FRc) COt R - ~r(plain)COt Ot]bd
where % is the post-peak principal tensile stress. If
c~= 45 ~ then V b = [%(FRC) - CYr,qain)]bd-Furthermore,
Tan [8] proposed % = <r + ~/ft~i(1 + "42). Taking the
cracking principal tensile stressfr as equal for plain con-
crete and FRC gives:
V b = O.6 s bd
i.e. 0.6 times the term in Equation (4).
1.2.2 BS 8110 modified method
Although the additive method has proven suitable for
estimating the shear capacity of P,.FRC and P F R C
beams, it is inconsistent in its approach to shear when
compared with design codes for prestressed concrete.
Narayanan [1] suggested a modification of the present
BS 8110 [181 equation for shear capacity uncracked in
flexure Vco as:
Vco = 0 .67bh~]I..
/ w 2+ f.,spCYcp
where h is the.overall dept.h,ft,: p is the tensile strength of
FRC at cracking and ~cp IS the effective prestress at the
centroid of the section.
This equation can be used in calculation of both the
cracking and ultimate capacity. It is based on the same
principles as the present code design equations, which
makes it more acceptable as a design formula.
Furthermore, it was shown to give very good correlation
over a wide range of shear strengths [2]. However, a
problem with this equation is that the use of f .Ct,Sp is
purely empirical because the behaviour of FRC beyond
cracking is not clearly understood, and is certainly not
related purely to tension. On these grounds it is difficult
to justify
9
the
.
use o f f -cresp" None of the present approaches
for estxmatlng the ultxmate shear capacity of RFRC and
PFRC beams are therefore entirely satisfactory.
nificantly increases the capacity and ductility of pre-
I I stressed concrete X-beams failing in shear. This increase
1.6 1.8
is due to one, or more, of the following contributions to
strength and ductility:
- rebars dowel action,
- concrete aggregate interlock,
- fibre bridging,
- concrete shear friction due to compressive resistance.
A semi-empirical equation for predicting the shear
strength based on these effects is developed in two forms:
1. Modification of equations in BS 8110 [18], Eurocode
EC2 [19] and the FIP Recommendations for Hollow
Core Floors [20];
(7) 2. Modified PCI [21] approach for the design of hollow
core floor slabs. This is also consistent with the
approach in the 'Dramix' guidelines [13].
2.1 Contributions to shear strength
2.1.1 Plain concrete contribution
(8) The failure of plain prestressed concrete beams in
web shear tension causes a complete loss of prestress in
the wire immediately on cracking, resulting in no effec-
tive compressive stress across the crack. Aggregate inter-
lock is rendered ineffective since it is only effective in
tension up to crack widths of about 0.3 man [22]. Post-
cracking resistance is therefore provided by dowel action
and shear friction due to compression in the top of the
beam9 With increasing deflection shear friction dimin-
ishes as the shear crack propagates into this zone, until at
a large deflection the shear is carried entirely by the
dowel forces. Further detailed are given by Paine [23].
(9) Equation (10) is based on the tension softening curve
of concrete and may be used to describe the loss in the
plain prestressed concrete shear capacity V(w) with
increasing crack width w:
vIw)- Vcr
1 +(w/wo) p (10)
where Wo is the maximum crack width at the neutral axis
at V = V~r/2, and p describes the shape of the curves
shown in Fig. 2. From the X-beam tests reported in this
paper the following values have been found to approxi-
mate to the average shear force-crack width curves:
X-beams a/d = 2.0 Wo : 1.3 m m p = 1.2
X-beams aid = 2.8 wo : 2.7 m m p = 1.2
The different values for w o show that the failures at
the higher aid ratio are less brittle than those at lower aid
ratios. Also shown in Fig. 2 is the aggregate contribution

5 3 0
Elliott, Peaston, Paine
Fig. 2 - Shear force vs crack width.
Fig. 3 - Definition of the subtraction method.
to shear strength by tensile bridging as derived from Li
[24] where the contribution to shear strength is negligi-
ble. At w > 4 mm, the crack has extended through the
compressive zone and only kinking of the reinforcement
offers shear resistance.
2.1.2 Fibre bridging
Fibres contribute to shear strength by the fibres
bridging across a crack formed by principal tensile
stresses. Increased ductility of the FRC beams cannot be
explained by the fibre bridging mechanism alone,
although the theoretical ultimate strength is similar to the
value observed in the tests. Therefore, although fibres
may increase the shear strength, there is a further action
resulting in the ability of the beams to carry shear forces
over large deflections and at large diagonal crack widths.
The shear crack never fully develops through the full
depth into the compressive zone as there is a crack arrest
mechanism due to fibre pinching forces at the crack tip.
The compressive resistance of FRC is therefore retained
at greater deformations than in the plain concrete. It is
this ability of the fibres to arrest the shear crack, and
maintain a compressive resistance that provides the
531
Fig. 4 - Equilibrium of tensile and compressive forces in a
cracked section.
PFRC beams with a significantly improved ductility.
Calculation of this compressive resistance is as follows.
2.1.3 Shear force due to compressive resistance
The additional shear force V.~ c3
carried by shear fric-
tion in the compression zone is due to fibre crack arrest.
This varies from zero at cracking to a maximum value at
a crack width of about 5 m m where many of the fibres
have pulled out and the only other resistance to shear is
by dowel action. Referring to Fig. 3, this is calculated by
first subtracting the total area under the shear load -
deflection curve (refer to Part I of this paper) of a plain
beam from that ofa FRC beam, for specified deflections
of//200,//300,//400 and 1/500, where 1is the span. This
area is dMded by the deflection to give the average addi-
tional shear force due to fibres. The average V(is com-
puted by subtracting the average fibre bridging contri-
bution Vb, given in Equation (4), from the above. The
constant tensile bridging stressf = qo Vf'~f)~f in Equation
(4) was used.
At large deflections the beam tends to hinge about the
compression zone enabling a couple of forces to be con-
sidered in the equilibrium of the vertical shear load versus
the horizontal compression in the concretef M and reac-
tive tension in the fibres f M- Referring to' Fig. 4, the
value of 0.1h for the heigh~ of the compression block is
consistent with that observed in these X-beam tests, and
with that observed by Casanova [11]. The reactive tensile
stress is assumed constant. The total fibre contribution is
therefore the combination of a fibre bridging stress and
the reactive tensile stress. Referring to the equilibrium of
forces in Fig. 4,f, M and f, M are given as:
Vci,,
f~,M -- 0.026hZbl (11)
where bfis the width of the flange, a is the shear span; and:
Vcra
s -- 0.468hZbd (12)
where bf is the average width of the beam in the tension
zone.
The values o f f M andf, M are shown in Table 1. The
deflection at whi'ch the ultimate load occurs varies
between//450 and//350. Average values calculated at
twice these deflections approximate to the values off, M
Materials and Structures/Mat6riaux et Constructions, Vol. 35, November2002

Table 1 - Average results for fc,M and ft,M from analysis of compressive fibre bridging, then the AVf term can be
resistance related to the average bridging stressft u = ri0
Vf'tf)vf [12] to give:
Deflection: 1/500 1/400 1/300 1/200
Tensileand compressivestresses(N/mm 2) A = 1"10.7., .zy (14)
Vf(%) a/d f~,M ft,M t,:,u ft, M fc,M ft,M fc,M Since q0 and ~,f are constants for any fibre,
ft,M a relationship bet4~veenfc, and zf can be pro-
0.5 2.0 17.13 2.68 20,81 3.26 25.17 3.94 30.6
4.79 duced by curve fitting as shown in Fig. 5.
1.0 2.0 11.95 1.87 19.14 3.10 25.75 4.03 29.6 4.64 Two additional data points are by Mansur
1.5 2.0 10.25 1.61 19.57 3.07 22.75 3.56 30.51 4.78 [25] and Fattuhi [26]. This relationship
average 13.37 2.09 19.87 3.11 24.72 3.87 30.21 4.73 between AVf and the fibre bridging stress is
0.5 2.8 17.42 2.74 18.43 2.90 24.74 3.89 24.60 3.87 substantiatedby the splitting tests performed
1.0 2.8 11.77 1.85 20.23 3.18 25.64 4.03 31.76 4.99 on the AM fibres in which the fibres rup-
1.5 2.8 2.75 0.43 13.53 1.34 18.21 2.86 25.10 3.94 tured at ultimate as opposed to pulling out.
average 12.22 1.92 17.17 2.70 23.79 3.74 27.56
The value of zf at ultimate for AM fibres is
4.33 therefore relfited to the ultimate tensile
N.B. Each value is averageoffour results. strength of the fibre rather than the strength
of the matrix. The value of A is therefore
given as:
............................................... /
/fl / "~f = 9.2 N / m m 2
8 Critical fibre-matrix interfaeial / ( 2r.fy, "~
bond strength A= (15)
7 / xf = 1.69e 0"024fcu

5 M a n s u r [251 where, r is the ratio of fibre cross-sectional area to fibre

perimeter,/f is fibre length, and 2r.~, / / f is the critical
fibre matri:~-interfacial bond strength eqfial to the value
~, * Test results of zf at rupture of the fibres. This equals 2.5 N/mm 2,
I
Fattuhi [26] 30 x 0.5 m m H S fibres
assuming thatJ}, = 1900 N/mm 2 as given by the fibre
i . i ~ ; i i P f manufacturers [27]. Thus A = 321 taking rl0 = 0.41. The
I0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
value of A obtained experimentally from the AM fibre
fcu (N/mm2)
splitting tests equals 335, and shows that A is a measure
of the fibre bridging component.
Fig. 5 - Fibre matrix b o n d stress x f v s c o n c r e t e s t r e n g t h f c u.
For the HS fibres, the critical fibre-matrix interfacial
bond strength can be calculated in a similar manner and
equals 9.2 N/mm 2 when)), = 1100 N/ram 2. This value
andfM at ultimate. Here f, M = 4.66 and 3.97 N/mm 2 at is shown in Fig. 5, and suggests that fibres in concrete
a/d ='2.0 and 2.8, respectively, which is 0.55"~f, and with a compressive cube strength greater than
0.47~1f~u, i.e. approximately equal to the cracking tensile 70 N/mm 2 will fail by rupture rather than by pulling-out
stress observed in the splitting tests. Assuming a shear of the matrix. Using Equations (13) and (14) (rounding
crack angle of 45 ~ these values can be directly described offfrom 0.48 to 0.5)fct,5p is given as:
as the additional tensile stress carried across the crack as a
consequence of the fibres preventing propagation of the + no Z,, v,, (16)
crack into the compressive zone. The tensile stress where from Fig. 5:
across the crack is therefore a combination of this stress
and the fibre bridging stress. ,ci=f(fcu)=l.7e ~176176 (17)
The following section discusses the fibre contribu- The maximum fibre bridging stress in tension may
tion to the splitting tensile strength and a basis on which be approximated as9 0 "37fa:/l, eq, 300 [13]. Equation (16) may
the fibre reinforcing mechanism in splitting may be therefore be re-written as:
utilised in the design of prestressed F1LC beams in shear.
fc,,,p =0.5 f ~ , + 0.37ffl,eq,300 (18)
Equation (18) is compared with the experimental
2.2 Theoretical equations data obtained forft , ,fae 3oo andf~u in Fig 6 The good
9 p jt . " "

correlation suggests that~ e 300 ~s a good measure of the

9 . q , . .
The splitting tensile strengthfct, s of FRC comprising fibre bridging stress. T ~ sphttmg tensile strength of
HS fibres is given in Part I of this paper as: plain concrete can also be estimated from the flexural
cracking strength of plain concrete prisms as 0.6f/[13]
f~,.~p=O.48~u~u+ AVf (13)
to give the ultimate splitting tensile strength purely in
where A = 237 for MS fibres and 335 for AM fibres. terms offlexural properties as:
If the matrix contribution to post-cracking strength
is constant, and the increase in splitting strength is due to fct,sp = 0.6f~ + 0.37fyt,eq,30o (19)

532
Elliott,Peaston,Paine

8 mended by Girhammar [28] and used by PCI [21] as:

#
7 * HS fibres #O
Vco u = 0 . 5 f ~ c u + 0.37fft,eq,300 + 0.3(0.67Ocpx) (21)
[]AM fibres
6
Best fit-line for da~ with the shear strength of plain prestressed concrete
j' (through origin) y " given as:
4
Vco = 0-5 f ~ c u + 0 . 3 ~ c p x (22)
3

2
0,5 fcu~ + 0.37feteq.300= fet,~ The shear stress supplement v b due to adding fibres is
R 2 = 0.87
given as:
0 I
P b = Vcou -- P co
I I J I
1 3 4 5 6 7 = 0.37f~,eq,3O o - 0.1%p~ ~ q0 "Ky "~i "Vl - 0"l~ (23)
0 . 5 fcu 05 + 0.37fct.eq.300
The shear strength of prestressed FP,.C beams can
Fig. 6 - Ultimate cylinder splitting strengthfct, sp: test values vs therefore be given by two equations. One is consistent
Equation (18). with the design of prestressed beams and hollow core
slabs in the European codes, and a second equation con-
sistent with the approaches currently advocated for
197 mm ] design of reinforced FRC beams in shear.

3. CALCULATION MODEL

To determine the shear capacity of F R C X-beams

having a cross section and prestressing arrangement used
in this paper, the following methods may be used:
1. the addition method given in Equations (1) to (8);
2. BS 8110 modified equations.
~ ' ] - - - ~__ - 7 " 25.4mm
Consider the X-beam shown in Fig. 7 reinforced
F t Tt -- 7 I 25.4 mm using 1% HS fibres 30 mm long x 0.5 mm diameter, and
e-h f , = 79.5 N / m m 2, with a/d = 2.89 The analysis is to be
25.4 25.4 turn compared with beam PB7A (see Part I) where %px = 3.5
N / r a m 2.
A s = 22249 mm 2 Technical data: rio = 0.41, )~f= 60, zf. = 1.7e 0 9024 x 79 5
Z t = Z b = 1.22 x lO 6ram 3 = 11.4 > 9.2 N / m m 2. I ~ = 78.5"kg/m 3. C = 20.
I-- 678.5 x 10 6 m m 4

Fig. 7 - Cross section of x-beam used in calculation model. Method 1

2.3 Semi-empirical equations
In BS 8110 and most European codes of practice the
method of calculating the shear resistance of a prestressed
concrete beam is to restrict the maximum principal ten-
sile stress at the geometric axis of the section to the ten-
sile strength of the concrete. For PFP,.C beams, a similar
For shear due to compression resistance:
Equation (3) V~ = 0.4 "]79.5 x 181 x 37 x 10-3 = 23.9 kN
Vp = 0.45 x 3.5 x 181 x 37 x 10-3 ~ 10.5 k N
For fibre bridging, four equations are compared:
(a) Equation (4) V b = 2.26 x 37 x 181 x 10 -3 = 15.1 k N
whereft . = 0.41 x 0.01 x 9.2 x 60 = 2.26 N/ram 2
(b) Equation (5) V b = 0.54 x 0.4 ~]79.5 x 0.623 x 37 x
181 x 10 -3 = 8.0 k N
where from Equation (6) R t 0.623 =

approach can be used but for these beams the maximum
tensile stress that can be carried across the shear crack at
the geometric axis is equal to the sum of the fibre bridg-
ing stress and the reactive tensile stress due to compres-
sive forces at the top of the beam. The maximum prin-
cipal tensile stress may therefore be equated to f<sp to
give the ultimate shear stress % , as:
Vcou = "]fi~,sp + 0.67 fc,,,p Ocp,
. ftsp, = 0.5"4fu + 0 9 37 fzj~, e.q, 30o 9 Where flexural prop-
where
ertms are not knownJ~,e 71 q,
3oo is taken as tl0 ")~,.~ V~ The
T'J" ) "
value of o cpx at ultimate was found to be approximately
0 9670 cp x o f that at cracking, i n d e p e n d e n t o f V~
Equation (20) could also be rewritten in the form recofia-
(c) Equation (8) V b = 0.6 x 15.1 = 9.1 k N
(d) Equation (23) V b = [(0.41 x 60 x 9.2 x 0.01) - (0.1 x
3.5)] x 37 x 181 x 10-3 = 12.5 kN
Then Equation (1) gives:
Maximum V u = 23.9 + 10.5 + 15.1 = 49.5 k N
Minimum V u = 23.9 + 10.5 + 8.0 = 42.4 kN.
Method2
(20) Equation (16)fct w = 0.5"479.5 + (0.41x 0.01 x 9.2 x 60)
= 6.72 N/ram2 compared with 7.45 N/ram2 in the test.
Equation (20)
Vcou = ~22+0.67x6.72x3.5 = 7.8 N / m m 2
Vcou = 7.8 x 181 x 37 x 10 -3 = 5 2 . 2 k N

533
Materials and Structures/Mat6riaux et Constructions, Vol. 35, November 2002

Table 2[a] - Comparison of theoretical and experimental using Equation (20), designers should include appropri-
ultimate shear strengths of plain beams ate factors of safety forft9 s--.
P
The 0.67 factor in Equation
(20) takes care of two things, (a) the reduced value o c1~~" of
a/d <Xcpx rutt Vco Vult/ Vco s.d.of at cracking, and (b) the large influence that the pr&iuct
(N/mm 2) (N/mm2) (N/mm 2) Vutt/Vcou
fccts,p o cpxhasonvc,..o .
2.0 3.5 7.23 5.27 1.37 0.20 The calculanon model is in good agreement with test
2.8 3.2 5.53 5.18 1.07 0.10 results for aid = 2.8 (< 7 % differences) but not for aid =
Average 1.22 0.21 2.0 (< 37% differences). This may be explained by the
v .r calculated flora average of all tests, vco calculated as average theoretical
arching effect due to shear compression for the smaller
value of atl tests. shear span. However, as most shear failures occur by
shear tension the proposed calculation model is suitable
for use in design.
Table 2[b] - Comparison of theoretical and experimental
ultimate shear strength of FRC beams
a/d Fibres Vf rutt Vcou Vult/Vcou s,d. of 5. CONCLUSIONS
(%) (N/ram 2) (N/ram 2) Vun/Vcou
2.0 HS 0.5 8.73 7.01 1.25 0.11 The objectives were to develop empirical design
1.0 9.60 7.58 1.27 0.09
equations to predict ultimate shear strength using the
fibre supplement additive method, and the modified
1.5 10.71 8.40 1.28 0.06
FP,.C principal tensile stress method. For the former, a
Average 1.27 0.09
shear supplement V b due to the fibres is added to con-
2.8 HS 0.5 6.97 7.01 0.99 0.11 ventional equations for plain reinforced concrete beams.
1.0 7.78 7.68 1.01 0.16 In the latter the splitting strength of concreteft is modi-
1.5 7.91 8.06 0.98 0.11 fied tOfct, =_ to take account of fibres.
ff .
AM 0.28 6.53 6.10 1.07 0.05 The main conclusions are:
0.56 6.77 6.77 1.00 0.07 1. The fibre bridging stress, which best matches
Average 1,01 0.10
experimental results, is given asfu = q0 Vr "9 5vr where
the orientation . factor
. . 110 =. 0.41,. fibre
. matrix lnterfac i al
V.lt calculatedfrom average of all tests. V~o. calculated as average theoretical bond stress is the lesser of'or = 1.7e~176 or 9.2 N/ram 2,
value of alI tests.
and Vr and kr are the known volume fractions and aspect
ratio for the "fibres.
12.0 2. Semi-empirical theoretical equations were devel-
oped using the modified FRC principal tensile stress
10.0
method to predict the ultimate shear strength Vcou as:
" 8.0 t All . ~ -'*"
Vco. _ I b ~/ fct,=p: +0.67Cycpxf~t,= p
~ 6.0 Ay
J Vult= Vcou ~
where
4.0

2.0 ~ d e n c e limit Aa/d= 2.0 fc,,sp = 0"5"~c~ + 0.37ffl,eq,300

j - * a / d = 2.8
in which ffl,~q,300 is obtained from a standard 4-point
0.0 ! i t ~ !
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 bend test.
Voo~CR/mm2) 3. The mean value of the ratio of Vco,, / V,t t for the 34
tests carried out on FRC beams is 0.89 without partial
Fig. 8 - Comparison of the calculated shear resistance Vcou with safety factors, and being conservative is proposed for use
test values Yul t. in design.

Compared with Vult of Test PB7A = 57.7 kN and

48.3 kN = 53.0 kN average for two tests. REFERENCES
[1] Narayanan, lq.. and Darwish, I. Y. S., 'Shear in prestressed con-
crete beams containing steel fibres', International Journal of Cement
4. COMPARISON OF THEORETICAL AND Composites and Lightweight Concrete 9 (1987) 81-90.
EXPERIMENTAL SHEAR STRENGTHS [2] Abdul-Wahab, H. M. S. and A1-Kadhimi, S. G., 'Effect of SFRC
on shear strength of prestressed concrete beams', Magazine of
The calculation model 'Method 2' was used to calcu- Concrete Research 52 (1) (2000) 43-51.
[3] Lorentsen, M., 'Steel fibre concrete for structural elements', in
late the ultimate shear capacity Vcou for all of the test Steel Fiber Concrete, US - Sweden Joint Seminar, 3-5 June
beams. No partial safety factors were used. The results 1985, Stockholm, Sweden (1985) 421-442.
given in Table 2 and Fig. 8 suggest that ifa factor of 0.89 [4] Balaguru, P. N. and Ezeldin, A. S., 'Behaviour of partially pre-
is applied to Vcou 90% of the results are conservative. In stressed beams made with high strength fiber reinforced con-

534
Elliott, Peaston, Paine
crete', in ACI SP105 - Fiber Reinforced Concrete Properties and
Applications, (1987) 419-434.
[5] Shin, S. W., Oh, J. G. and Ghosh, S. K., 'Shear behaviour of lab-
oratory-sized high strength concrete beams reinforced with bars
and steel fibers', ACI SP142 - Fiber Reinforced Concrete -
Developments and Innovations, (1994) 187-200.
[6] Furlan, Jr, S. and de Hanai, J. B., 'Prestressed fibre reinforced
concrete beams with reduced ratios of shear reinforcement',
Cement and Concrete Composites 21 (1999) 213-221.
[7] Rajagopal, R. S. and Siddappa, S., 'Experimental investigation on
fiber reinforced prestressed concrete beams under shear', in
'Fibre Reinforced Cement and Concrete', Proceedings of the 4th
International Symposium, Sheffield, July 1992 (RILEM 1992)
554-570.
[8] Tan, K., Paramasivam, P. and Murugappan, K., 'Steel fibers as
shear reinforcement in partially prestressed beams', A CI Structural
_Journal 92 (6) (1995) 643-652.
[9] Swamy, R. N. and Bahia, H. M., 'Influence of fiber reinforce-
ment on the dowel resistance to shear', ACIJourna176 (2) (1979)
327-355.
[10] ACI Committee 318, 'Building Code requirements for
Reinforced Concrete' ACI 318-89, American Concrete
Institute, Michigan, USA (1989).
[11] Casanova, P., Rossi, P. and Schaller, I., 'Can steel fibers replace
transverse reinforcements in reinforced concrete beams', ACI
MaterialsJournal 94 (5) (1997) 341-354.
[12] Lira, T. Y., Paramasivam, P. and Lee, S. L., 'Analytical model
for tensile behaviour of steel-fiber concrete', A CI MaterialsJournal
84 (4) (1987) 286-298.
[13] Dramix Guidelines, 'Design of Concrete Structures. Steel Wire
Fibre Reinforced Concrete Structures with or without Ordinary
Reinforcement', Final Draft, (1995).
[14] Nemegeer, D. and Tatnall, P. C., 'Measuring Toughness
Characteristics of SFRC - A Critical View of ASTM C1018,
ACI SP- 155', Testing of Fibre Reinforced Concrete, (1995).
535
[15] Swamy, R. N. and Bahia, H. M., 'The effective of steel fibres as
shear reinforcement', ConcreteInternational 7 (3) (1985) 35-40.
[16] Narayanan, R. and Darwish, I. Y. S., 'Use of steel fibres as shear
reinforcement', A CI StructuralJournal 84 (3) (1987) 216-227.
[17] Ashour, S. A., Hasanain, G. S. and Wafa, F. F., 'Shear behaviour
of high-strength fiber reinforced concrete beams', A CI Structural
Journal 89 (2) (1992) 176-184.
[18] BS 8110, 'Structural Use of Concrete, Part 1, Code of Practice
for Design and Construction', British Standards Institution,
London (1985).
[19] Eurocode 2: 'Design of Concrete Structures -Part 1: General
Rules and Rules for Buildings,' EN 1992-1-1 (2001).
[20] Fdd&ation Internationale de la Pr&ontrainte, 'Precast
Prestressed Hollow Core Floors', Thomas Telford, London
(1988).
[21J PCI 'Manual for the Design of Hollow Cored Slabs.' Prestressed
Concrete Institute, Illinois, USA, (1991).
[22] Stang, H. and Aarre, T., 'Evaluation of crack width in FRC with
conventional reinforcement', Cement and Concrete Composites 14
(1992) 143-154.
[23] Paine, K., 'Steel fibre reinforced concrete for prestressed hollow
core slabs', PhD Thesis, University of Nottingham, UK, (1998).
[24] Li, V. C., Stang, H. and Krenchel, H., 'Micromechanics of crack
bridging in fibre-reinforced concrete', Mater. Struct. 26 (1993)
486-494.
[25] Mansur, M. A., Ong, K. C. G. and Paramasivam, P., 'Shear
strength of fibrous concrete beams without stirrups', Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE 112 (9) (1986) 2066-2079.
[26] Fattuhi, N., 'Reinforced corbels made with plain and fibrous
concrete', A CI StructuralJournal 91 (5) (1994) 530-536.
[27] Boucharet, J.-M., Personal Communication (1997).
[28] Girhammar, U.-A., 'Design principles for simply-supported pre-
stressed hollow core slabs', Structural Engineering Review 4 (4)
(1992) 301-316.