Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446
DOI 10.1617/s11527-011-9775-0
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Influence of experimental setups on the apparent uniaxial
tensile load-bearing capacity of Textile Reinforced Concrete
specimens
J. Hartig • F. Jesse • K. Schicktanz •
U. Häußler-Combe
Received: 21 December 2010 / Accepted: 29 August 2011 / Published online: 11 September 2011
Ó RILEM 2011
Abstract An important parameter for dimensioning
of Textile Reinforced Concrete (TRC) structures and
structural elements is the tensile load-bearing capacity
of the composite. Respective values are usually
derived from uniaxial tensile tests with overcritically
reinforced TRC specimens. In this paper, influences
from specimen geometry, e.g. plane and waisted
specimens, and load application design, e.g. stiff glued
steel plates or soft clamping constructions are inves-
tigated. Therefore, experimental results regarding the
load-bearing capacity of the composite are statistically
evaluated. The experimental observations are sup-
ported by results of numerical simulations with a one-
dimensional model based on the Finite Element
Method. These simulations provide stress distributions
in concrete and reinforcing fibres as well as the tensile
load-bearing capacity. Based on these results existing
test setups for the derivation of the load-bearing
capacity of the composite for dimensioning are
assessed. As a result, plane plate specimens with a
load application by means of friction is recommended
for experimental determination.
J. Hartig (&)  F. Jesse  K. Schicktanz 
U. Häußler-Combe
Institute of Concrete Structures, Faculty of Civil
Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden,
01062 Dresden, Germany
e-mail: jens.hartig@tu-dresden.de
Keywords Textile Reinforced Concrete 
Tensile behaviour  Testing  Load-bearing capacity 
Simulation
1 Introduction
For the design and dimensioning of structures or
structural elements, values of the mechanical proper-
ties of the applied materials have to be provided to
design engineers. These values are usually determined
by means of appropriate laboratory tests. The tests
should be designed such that they can be accurately
reproduced with low effort and preferably low
expense. New materials or material combinations
often have mechanical and structural properties devi-
ating from existing materials, which often necessitates
modification of existing or development of new test
setups.
The objective of this paper is to assess the most
suitable methodology for determining the load-bear-
ing capacity of the novel cement-based composite
Textile Reinforced Concrete (TRC) out of a number of
existing experimental setups. These investigations
support and provide background data to the recom-
mendation of ‘‘RILEM Technical Committee
232-TDT’’ [24] for performing uniaxial tensile tests
on TRC.
TRC is a composite consisting of a fine-grained
concrete matrix and continuous reinforcement fibres,
434
which are applied as fibre bundles, see Fig. 1. The
bundles are called roving or multi-filament yarn and
consist of several hundred or even thousand elemen-
tary fibres called filaments, which possess diameters of
a few microns. The designation ‘‘textile’’ in TRC
means that the reinforcement is applied as 2D or 3D
structure of suitable reinforcement material produced
by means of textile technology. The choice of the
material and the properties of the textile depend on the
expected loading. For structural applications such as
bridges [9] and beams [22] or as strengthening
overlays for existing RC structures [2, 5, 6, 28] fibres
of alkali-resistant (AR) glass and carbon are preferred,
because they provide high tensile strength and a
sufficient Young’s modulus in case of AR-glass and a
superior Young’s modulus in case of carbon.
If the concrete cracks under tensile loading due to
an exceeding of the concrete tensile strength, the fibres
need the ability to resist the loading; otherwise the
composite fails. The amount of fibres that is required
to resist the cracking load is called critical fibre
volume or critical fibre reinforcement ratio Vcrit. If the
applied fibre volume Vf is higher than the critical fibre
volume, TRC shows multiple cracking under tensile
loading and strain-hardening behaviour after stabilised
cracking. The described load-bearing behaviour is
shown schematically in Fig. 2 where also an estima-
tion for the ultimate loads depending on Vf according
to Jesse [18] is given.
The mechanical properties of the reinforcement
fibres have a significant influence on the failure
behaviour of the composite. Single fibres of both
AR-glass and carbon show an almost perfect linear
multi-filament
yarn
filament
matrix
Fig. 1 Multi-filament yarns embedded in matrix
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446
multiple
cracking post-cracking state
uncracked
state
Vf >> 1.3 V crit
mean stress
Vf 1.3 V crit
Vf < V crit
mean strain
Fig. 2 Schematic mean tensile stress–strain behaviour of TRC
elastic behaviour until brittle failure. Bundles of brittle
fibres exhibit different and more complex failure
mechanisms, e.g. due to varying strength along each
fibre. If one filament reaches its tensile strength at a
weak position, it fails. The released load of the
filament has to be redistributed to other filaments. This
behaviour can be modelled with so-called fibre bundle
models (FBM) based on the initial work of Daniels
[10]. Although FBM’s neglect the interaction of the
filaments with matrix, the effect that a small number of
failed filaments might lead to the collapse of the entire
yarn can be transferred to the composite behaviour [7,
8, 26].
Failure prefers to start at the filaments with highest
utilisation. In TRC, reinforcement yarns are usually
not entirely penetrated with concrete matrix due to
filtering effects caused by small distances between the
filaments. Thus, essentially two bond zones exist
inside a yarn. In an outer ring zone, also referred to as
fill-in zone or sleeve zone, matrix intrudes facilitating
relatively strong adhesive bond between matrix and
filaments. However, in the yarn core primarily weak
frictional load transfer at the contact areas of the
filaments is possible. The inner bond can be increased
applying additional coating or impregnation penetrat-
ing the core of the yarns.
In cracked TRC where the reinforcement yarns
bridge the concrete cracks, the highest loaded fila-
ments are usually situated in the fill-in zone at the
cracks because of the strong adhesive bond with the
concrete. The differences in the bond quality lead also
to differences in the stress transfer length necessary for
complete activation of the filaments in the fill-in and
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446 435

core zones of the yarns. As the stress-transfer length is

10
limited by crack spacing also differences between glued steel sheets
single and stabilised cracking states occur. Investiga-
tions by Hegger [17] and Bruckermann [4] showed

100
that local stress elevation in single-type cracks lead to
a reduction of the load-bearing capacity of the 100 300 mm 100
500 mm
composite compared to the case where a regular
multiple crack pattern develops. (a)
Another failure mechanism can occur associated

8
with carbon reinforcement, which has a very high
rubber interlayers
Young’s modulus. In case of wavy textiles, this can steel sheets
lead to considerable transverse stresses in the concrete

100
exceeding the concrete tensile strength, which finally
results in splitting failure of the composite [16, 21]. In 100 300 mm 100
the following, sufficiently straight yarns are assumed 500 mm
such that splitting failure due to yarn waviness can be (b)
neglected.
Besides the bond conditions and the crack devel-

7
opment local concentrations of fibre stress might be glued steel sheets

also induced by the test setup, e.g., the way the load is

105
applied to the specimen during testing or the shape of

60
the specimen. This is investigated in the present 6 5 75 220 mm 75 6 5
500 mm
contribution. The importance of this issue arises from
(c)
the fact that for dimensioning of structural elements,
the load-bearing capacity of the composite is a crucial

6
property, which ideally should only depend on the
material but not on the test setup used for determina- 60

105
tion. Various strategies exist to reduce these stress
concentrations at the clamping, which will be briefly
summarised in the next section. Besides the reduction 125 250 mm 125
of artificial stress concentrations, it is also desirable to 500 mm
have a test setup, which is easy to use and where the (d)
specimen production as well as the preparation can be
performed with minimum effort. This might facilitate 30
10

the testing of a larger number of specimens necessary steel sheets

for statistical significance of the results.

100

200 50 400 mm 50 200

2 Existing experimental setups
Various test setups for the experimental determination
of the load-bearing properties of TRC have been
developed by different researchers [3, 11, 18, 22, 23],
see Fig. 3. These methods vary, e.g., in concrete
technology for specimen production, dimensions and
shape of the specimen as well as design of the load
application by the testing machine. All these factors
influence the measured tensile load-bearing capacity
of the composite. The present investigations focus on
900 mm
(e)
Fig. 3 Selection of available setups for the determination of the
uniaxial tensile behaviour of TRC. a Setup by Dugas et al. [11],
b setup by Jesse [18], c setup by Brockmann and Raupach [3],
d setup by Orlowsky and Raupach [23], e setup by Molter [22]
the influence of the specimen shape and the load
application design.
The most basic specimens are the plate specimens
in Fig. 3a, b, which cause also the lowest effort in
436 Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446

specimen production. More effort has to be spent for is realised by gluing steel plates with epoxy resin
the dumbbell specimens as shown in Fig. 3c, d, which to the specimen (Fig. 3a, c) or by placing a steel
have offsets in the reinforcement plane. The most sheet inside the specimen (Fig. 3e). The main
complicated specimen with regard to production is the transfer mechanism between specimen and clamp-
specimen in Fig. 3e where offsets out of the rein- ing is adhesive tension and shear. No slip occurs
forcement plane are applied. These offsets or wais- between the steel sheets and the specimen.
tings are usually intended to reduce stress – Type B—Soft clamping: Load transfer between
concentrations at the transitions between the sup- specimen and clamping is based on Coulomb
ported and the free testing lengths of the specimen. A friction (Fig. 3b). Concrete cracks are facilitated
drawback of waisted specimens is that often concrete in the supported parts of the specimen. Slip occurs
cracks occur in the waisted zones when concrete between specimen and clamping if static friction is
cracking has already finished in the zone of constant exceeded.
thickness. Thus, an influence of the specimen geom-
The setups shown in Fig. 3b, d with soft clamping and
etry arises in the experimentally determined tensile
frictional load transfer allowing for gradual load
response of the material, which is not desired.
application and significant deformations of the spec-
Also for the load application to the specimen
imen in the load transfer zones are recommended by
different techniques were developed. A common
‘‘RILEM Technical Committee 232-TDT’’ for uniax-
technique is to attach steel sheets by means of
ial tensile tests on TRC.
adhesives to the specimen as, e.g., performed in the
setups shown in Fig. 3a, c. This leads to consider-
ably reduced deformations in the supported parts of
3 Experimental investigations
the specimen compared to the free testing length and
is associated with a suppression of concrete cracking.
3.1 Concept
A different technique is used in the setup shown in
Fig.3e where the load is applied by means of a bolt.
Experimental investigations were carried out to quan-
Therefore, perforated steel sheets are embedded in
tify differences in the apparent load-bearing capacity
the specimen to distribute the concentrated load. The
of the composite determined with a stiff type A load
steel sheets also prevent concrete cracking in these
application and a soft type B clamping corresponding
parts of the specimen. A setup, which allows
to Fig. 3a, b, respectively. Moreover, two specimen
cracking within the supported part of the specimen,
series with different types of textile reinforcement
is given with the setup shown in Fig. 3b where the
were tested: one series in which fabrics were uncoated
load is applied by means of a clamping construction.
and a second series where a polymer-coated fabric was
Rubber interlayers are placed between specimen and
applied. For a statistical analysis of the results, a
steel plates to prevent local stress concentrations
sufficient number of specimens is needed. Each series
caused by the uneven concrete surface. Thus, the
comprised of a total of 44 specimens. In the test setup
load is primarily applied by friction. Another
representing stiff type A load application, steel plates
clamping technique is used in the setup shown in
were glued to the clamping area. The increased
Fig. 3d where steel flanges fitting to the waisted
stiffness in the parts of the specimens with the steel
shape of the specimen are used for load application.
sheets prevented reaching the tensile strength of the
This technique supposedly leads to multi-axial stress
concrete matrix and, therefore, the development of
states in the specimen, at least in the vicinity of load
cracks in the clamping area. Half of the specimens
application, which might be undesirable. Summaris-
from each series was tested using this configuration.
ing, two major types of load application can be
The other specimens were attached to the testing
classified:
machine by means of clamping at both ends such that
– Type A—Rigid load application: Interface as well forces are transferred to the specimens by means of
as load application is stiff compared to TRC under Coulomb friction corresponding to type B load
tension. Hence, concrete cracking is prevented application. This facilitated cracking of the concrete
within the supported range. In most cases, this type in the clamping zone.
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446
3.2 Materials
A special fine-grained concrete with a maximum
aggregate size of 1 mm and CEM III cement as binder
was used for the cementitious matrix. For more
information regarding the composition of the concrete,
the mixing sequence and hardened concrete properties
(see [18]).
The reinforcement textiles, see Fig. 4, were pro-
duced of commercial AR-glass filament yarns by
Saint-Gobain Vetrotex. The geometrical specifica-
tions of the textile are given in Table 1. The test series
1 was reinforced with this structure without additional
coating, while additional coating was applied to the
textiles of series 2 specimens. An aqueous suspension
containing styrol-butadien-co-polymers was used as
coating [12], which was thermally cured using infrared
radiation after application in textile processing [19].
In all specimens, the warp threads were aligned in
loading direction.
3.3 Specimen production and test setup
A hand lamination process was utilised to produce the
specimens. Thin concrete layers and textile reinforce-
ment were applied in an alternating manner on a
stainless steel formwork, which had a size of 1.20 m 9
0.70 m. The formwork had adjustable guides for
varying height levels to ensure accurate thickness of
each concrete layer. Two reinforcement layers were
applied resulting with a plate thickness of approxi-
mately 7 mm in a reinforcement ratio Vf of
warp
direction
weft
direction
Fig. 4 Applied textile reinforcement
437
Table 1 Properties of textile reinforcement
Parameter Value
Warp thread, 0°-direction
Material Alkali-resistant glass
Yarn count 1200 tex (nominal), 1274 tex (actual)
Spacing 7.2 mm
Weft thread, 90°-direction
Material Alkali-resistant glass
Yarn count 640 tex (nominal), 665 tex (actual)
Spacing 10.2 mm
Textile
Weight per unit area 242 g/m2 (253 g/m2 with coating)
Type of binding Double tricot
Needle thread Poly-propylene textured (15 dtex)
Stitch length 2.0 mm
approximately 1.9% in loading direction. After the
concrete matrix had set, the plates were covered with
wet cloths and foil and allowed to harden for 3 days. The
plates were then removed from their moulds and cured
in a water bath at room temperature until an age of
7 days. Afterwards, the plates were cured/stored in a
climate chamber at 20°C with 65% RH until testing at an
age of 28 days.
Before testing, the plates were cut into specimens of
dimensions of 400 mm 9 30 mm using a water-
cooled diamond saw. It was ensured that reinforce-
ment aligned in the loading (longitudinal) direction
was not truncated. Specimens for types A and B were
then systematically tiled (like black and white squares
on a chessboard) into two groups of 22 specimens each
to minimise systematic error. The specimens intended
for type B setup were immediately ready for testing
after being sawed. The load application areas of the
type A specimens were modified by gluing steel plates
with dimensions of 120 mm 9 30 mm 9 1 mm on
both sides of the specimens. A commercially available
silica-filled epoxy resin adhesive was used for gluing.
The tests were performed force-controlled in a
standard servo hydraulic testing machine with a
loading capacity of 25 kN. For both, the type A and
B setups, the specimens were clamped between
scored/roughened steel grips on a length of 120 mm
from their respective ends. A 0.5 mm rubber layer was
inserted between specimen and steel grips to prevent
local stress concentrations and to compensate the
roughness of the specimen surfaces. Two M16 screws
438 Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446

on each clamp, with a specified torque of 5 Nm per The tensile load-bearing capacity can be described
screw, ensured uniform contact pressure between steel by stress values rur or ruc, which might be defined as
grips and specimens. The connection between clamps Fu Fu
and testing machine was designed as a hinge to avoid rur ¼ and ruc ¼ ; ð1Þ
Ar Ac
bending and transverse loading of the specimens. The
following data was measured during testing: tensile respectively. While rur is the ultimate force Fu related
load via load cell; cylinder displacement via linear to the cross-sectional area of the reinforcement Ar in
variable displacement transducer (LVDT); specimen loading direction, ruc is related to the cross-sectional
deformation using a 100 mm clip-on extensometer. area of the concrete Ac, respectively. As these stress
values correspond to the ultimate state of the com-
3.4 Results and discussion posite they might by also referred to as composite
strength. For the evaluation of the utilisation level of
3.4.1 Material and failure behaviour the reinforcement, rur might be more useful. For
dimensioning of TRC structural elements considering
Typical results of the experiments described in the
previous section are mean stress-mean strain relations,
see Fig. 5. The mean stress is the measured force (load
20
cell) related to the cross-sectional area of the concrete type A
and the mean strain is the measured deformation (clip-
mean stress [N/mm2]
on extensometer) related to the measurement length. 15
type B

These relations show three distinctive states: the

uncracked state with high stiffness, the state of
multiple concrete cracking with low stiffness and the 10

post-cracking state with an intermediate stiffness, see

also Fig. 2. This so-called strain-hardening behaviour 5
is described in more detail in Jesse [18]. type A
During testing, cracks developed in the specimens, type B
as expected, in the clamping zones in type B load 0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
application. With type A load application, no cracks mean strain [%]
were visible in the clamping zones. In all specimens, (a)
numerous cracks with crack spacing of approximately
15–20 mm developed in the free length of the 20
type A
specimens. Furthermore, failure of the specimen most
often occurred right at the transition from the
mean stress [N/mm2]

type B
15
supported to the unsupported part of the specimen
when type A load application was used. In contrast,
type B specimens tended to fail less often at the 10
transitions to the supported parts and more often in the
central region of the free specimen length.
Failure of the composite occurs as a result of the 5
type A
tensile failure of the reinforcement fibres. It is worth to type B
note that in the case of uncoated reinforcement, the 0
core fibres where often entirely pulled-out of the 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

concrete in the supported range of the specimen mean strain [%]

indicating quite poor inner bond. In contrast, the
length of fibres pulled out in case of coated textiles
were considerably shorter than the available anchor-
age length indicating an effective improvement of
inner bond.
(b)
Fig. 5 Experimental mean stress–means strain relations and
photographs of typical examples of failed specimens. a Series 1
with uncoated AR-glass fibres. b Series 2 with polymer-coated
AR-glass fibres
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446 439

only the integral load-bearing behaviour of the com-
posite, ruc is supposedly more suitable. The relation
between both values is given with ruc = (Ar/Ac)rur
where the conversion factor (Ar/Ac) = Vf is the
reinforcement ratio.
3.4.2 Statistical evaluation
A comprehensive assessment of the effects of the type
of load application and the influence of additional
coating on the reinforcement is facilitated by means of
a statistical evaluation of the experimental results. For
the failure analysis of tension members often an
analysis applying the Weibull distribution [27] is
performed. The Weibull distribution is based on the
assumption that failure of a specimen occurs when its
weakest link fails. The cumulative distribution func-
tion (CDF) of the two-parametric Weibull distribution
is given with
  m 
r σur; σ [N/mm²]
FðrÞ ¼ PðS  rÞ ¼ 1  exp 
r0 ð2Þ
0  r  1:
corresponding to the samples provided by the exper-
iments. Due to linearised representation of the Weibull
distribution this can be performed by a linear regres-
sion (LR). Alternatively, a maximum likelihood (ML)
estimation can be performed. The values provided by
means of both methods are given in Fig. 6 as well as
the respective linear functions. Significant differences
between both estimates appear in all cases for m while
the values of r0 differ not significantly. Presumably,
the values based on ML estimation have higher
significance as this method takes the underlying
distribution function into account. Still, it has to be
considered that the Weibull distribution, though
useful, is only an assumption. Theoretical investiga-
tions [e.g. 25] indicate that strength distributions for
composites usually consist of a combination of several
distribution functions. For the following evaluations,
the ML values are, however, used.
2
300 400 500 600
F F type A type B
0.99
0.95
1 400 mm 30 mm
0.90
ln ln (1/(1-F))

where m is the so-called Weibull modulus and r0 is a 0

LR: m = 11.2; 0.50
characteristic strength corresponding to a failure
-1 σ0 = 455.7 N/mm²

F
probability of 63.2% (corresponding to the case ML: m = 12.1;
r = r0). The CDF specifies the probability P that a -2 σ0 = 454.7 N/mm² LR: m = 11.9; 0.10
σ0 = 518.8 N/mm²
random variable S representing all possible strength -3 ML: m = 13.2;
0.05
values takes a value less than r. Equation 2 can be σ0 = 518.0 N/mm²
-4
linearised by means of some logarithm operations 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5

yielding ln σur; ln σ
  (a)
1
ln ln ¼ m lnðrÞ  m lnðr0 Þ: ð3Þ σur; σ [N/mm²]
1  FðrÞ
500 600 700 800 900
2
Thus, m can be also interpreted as the slope while r0 F F type A type B 0.99
1 0.95
corresponds to the root of the Weibull distribution 400 mm 30 mm
0.90
ln ln (1/(1-F))

function in its linearised form. Diagrams correspond- 0

0.50
ing to Eq. 3 are given with Fig. 6a, b. In these
-1
F

diagrams, the samples rur,i with 1 B i B n correspond- LR: m = 15.9;

σ0 = 712.6 N/mm²
ing to the n experimentally determined ultimate forces -2
ML: m = 18.2; LR: m = 15.3; 0.10
are plotted. Therefore, the rur,i values are sorted in σ0 = 711.2 N/mm² σ0 = 760.3 N/mm²
-3 0.05
ML: m = 17.3;
ascending order. The position of the sample on the -4 σ0 = 759.3 N/mm²
ordinate is determined as 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9

  ! ln σur ; ln σ
1 1 (b)
ln ln ¼ ln ln i : ð4Þ
1  Fðrur;i Þ 1  nþ1
Fig. 6 Weibull-plot for failure stresses rur (failure position:
open circle near the clamping, open square at the clamping).
It is now possible to estimate parameters m and r0 of a Series 1 with uncoated AR-glass fibres. b Series 2 with
the assumed continuous Weibull distribution function polymer-coated AR-glass fibres
440
Figure 6a shows Weibull-plots of the rur values
of series 1 specimens comprised of uncoated AR-
glass fabric and Fig. 6b of series 2 specimens with
polymer-coated AR-glass fabric. In both specimen
series, the characteristic strength values r0, which
are a measure for the expected value, were signif-
icantly higher for type B than for type A load
application. Moreover, the differences in r0 are
smaller for the coated (subscript c) reinforcement
(r0,A,c/r0,B,c = 0.937) compared to the uncoated
(subscript u) reinforcement (r0,A,u/r0,B,u = 0.878).
Furthermore, r0 values are larger for the coated
reinforcement compared to the uncoated reinforce-
ment (r0,A,u/r0,A,c = 0.639; r0,B,u/r0,B,c = 0.682).
The shape parameters m, which are a measure for
the variance, differ only insignificantly with regard
to the loading types A and B. Nevertheless, between
coated and uncoated reinforcement considerable
differences appear. The variance is smaller for
coated reinforcement corresponding to a larger
value of m compared to the uncoated reinforcement,
compare Fig. 6.
The elevation of expected strength and the reduc-
tion of variance due to coating of the reinforcement
can be explained by improved inner bond. This leads
to a homogenised stress distribution in the yarn,
which, in turn, results in higher applicable stresses
(larger r0) with relatively low scatter (larger m). Vice
versa, the larger stress concentrations in the sleeve
filaments lead in case of uncoated yarns associated
with poor inner bond to an earlier failure of these
fibres. Nevertheless, this results due to the lower load
level also in a higher probability that load can be
redistributed to less utilised filaments without failure
of the entire reinforcement.
Figure 6 contains also information about the
failure position of each specimen. The majority of
specimens fail at the transitions between clamping
and free length. Only for specimens with coated
reinforcement and type B clamping a significant
number failed distant to the load application in the
free length of the specimens, see Fig. 6b. However,
a direct correlation of the failure position right at
the transitions between clampings and free length of
the specimen to low strength can not be drawn.
Furthermore, outliers could neither be explained by
the location of the failure section nor the resulting
Weibull plots.
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446
4 Numerical investigations
4.1 Model
For theoretical analysis of the influence of different
load application types and specimen shapes on the
load-bearing capacity of the composite, an essentially
one-dimensional finite element model is used, which is
described in detail in Hartig et al. [14]. The model
consists of bar element chains representing the axial
stiffness of the constituents of the test setup, i.e.
concrete, AR-glass and steel, and bond elements
representing the load transfer in between, see Fig. 7.
The bond elements act like shear springs. Linear
elastic material behaviour with limited tensile strength
is assumed for reasons of simplicity for all materials.
Consideration of concrete tension softening has espe-
cially in the ultimate state of the composite negligible
influence on the results and remains unconsidered. The
applied material properties are summarised in Table 2.
In addition to Hartig et al. [14], the model is
enhanced concerning the representation of the load
application to the specimen, which was performed in
Hartig et al. [14] simply by prescribed displacements
at the end nodes of the concrete bar element chain. For
a more realistic representation of the load transfer by
means of glued steel sheets (type A) or friction-based
clamping (type B), additional bar elements are used
representing steel sheets, see Fig. 7. At corresponding
element nodes, bond elements link these bar elements
to the concrete elements. In a first approach, linear
elastic bond laws hcs are applied to these bond
elements. The different stiffness of the interfaces in
type A and B load application is taken into account
with different bond moduli G. While for the case of
rubber interlayers in the clamping constructions (type
B) G = 100 MN/m3 is chosen, for the case of glued
steel sheets (type A) G = 1 9 1010 MN/m3 is used.
The reinforcement is modelled with a ring model
consisting of five layers. The outermost layer, referred
to as sleeve layer in the following, represents the
filaments in the fill-in zone, which is assumed to
contain 20% of the total cross-sectional area of
the reinforcement. The four inner layers represent
the filaments in the yarn core. The determination of the
geometrical properties of the layers is described in
Hartig et al. [14]. Between concrete and sleeve layer
the bond law hcr is applied representing initially
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446 441

Yarn representation Discretization

Transverse Longitudinal direction:
direction: Δu
plain specimen waisted specimen
steel plate
hcs
matrix
hcr
sleeve layer
(20% Ar) hrr
core layers hrr
(80% Ar) ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
hrr

reinforcement element matrix element node

bond element steel element
Constitutive relations
σ-ε relations for steel, concrete and Bond law hcr : Bond law hrr :
reinforcement; τ−s relation hcs:
10 10
stress σ; bond stress τ

bond stress τ [N/mm²]

bond stress τ [N/mm²]

ft
8 bond 8
degradation
6 6
G
E
4 friction 4 unloading friction
1
1
good inner bond
2 2
unloading
poor inner bond
εt 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
strain ε; slip s slip s [10-5 m] slip s [10-5 m]

Fig. 7 Mechanical model and constitutive relations

adhesive bond between the concrete and the filaments the filaments of 10 lm results in the linear-elastic
merging to friction due to bond degradation. At the bond stress–slip relation to a slope of G = 3 9
inner interfaces the bond law hrr is used based on the 108 MN/m3. The parameters of the other bond
assumption of primarily frictional load transfer laws were estimated based on investigations in Hartig
between the filaments, see Fig. 7. et al. [14].
For the inner bond, modelled with bond law For the parametric studies, a geometrical configu-
hrr, three cases are considered. The first case repre- ration corresponding to Fig. 3b was chosen. The
sents poor inner bond, e.g. no matrix penetration and reduction of specimen size as in the experiments
no impregnation, with a low frictional bond stress, the presented in Sect. 3 is not performed. The material
second case represents good inner bond, e.g. some parameters of concrete and reinforcement as well as
matrix or coating penetration, with increased frictional the reinforcement ratio of approximately 1.9% as
bond stress and the third case represents perfect inner summarised in Table 2 correspond to the experiments
bond assuming perfect adhesion between the fila- described in Sect. 3. For the bar elements, a length of
ments, e.g. due to polymeric coating or impregnation, 0.2 mm was chosen to represent multiple cracking of
with a linear-elastic bond law similar to hcs, see Fig. 7. the concrete and the load transfer between the
For the latter case, the bond stiffness was estimated constituents of the setup appropriately. Besides plane
based on investigations on a nano-clay polymeric specimens also waisted specimens are taken into
coating by Gao et al. [13], which revealed a Young’s account. If considered, waisting was applied on
modulus of about 6000 N/mm2. Assuming a Poisson’s lengths of 50 mm before the clampings with ele-
ratio equal to zero yields a shear modulus of 3000 N/ ment-wise linearly increasing element thickness from
mm2. Assuming further an effective distance between 8 to 24 mm, see Fig. 7.
442
Table 2 Material and geometrical properties of bar elements
Steel Concrete AR glass
Cross-sectional 1000 800 (free 15.34
area A (mm2) length)
Young’s modulus Et 210,000 28,500a 74,450b
(N/mm2)
Tensile strength ft 500 (not 5a 1231b
(N/mm2) reached)
a
According to Jesse [18]
b
According to Abdkader [1]
The boundary conditions are given with prescribed
displacements at the nodes in the centre of the two bar
element chains representing the steel plates. While the
displacement of one of these nodes is prescribed equal
to zero, the displacement is incrementally increased at
the other node, see Fig. 7. The nonlinearities intro-
duced by the material laws necessitate the application
of an incremental-iterative solution procedure; see
[14] for details.
4.2 Results and discussion
The model is able to provide the stress distributions in
concrete and reinforcement, which can not be deter-
mined in the experiments. Thus, the results of the
simulation might shed some light on the mechanisms
of the failure behaviour of the composite. In Fig. 8,
stress distributions in the concrete and the reinforce-
ment on a length of 200 mm consisting of 100 mm for
each a clamped end and a part of the free length of the
specimen are shown. The stress distributions corre-
spond to load levels right before ultimate failure of the
composite reaching the tensile strength in one of the
reinforcement elements. Figure 8 contains different
cases of specimen shape, load application type and
inner bond quality of the reinforcement.
Concrete crack positions are indicated in Fig. 8 in
the illustrations of the specimens and can be also
identified in the stress distributions by concrete
stresses equal to zero in most cases. As the reinforce-
ment bridges the cracks, the stresses in the reinforce-
ment layers have, in general, maximum values at the
cracks. Due to stress transfer by means of bond, the
stresses in the concrete increase in the uncracked parts
starting at the crack and decrease in the reinforcement,
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446
Fig. 8 Stress distribution for different types of load applica- c
tion, specimen shape and inner bond laws (left: poor inner bond,
centre: good inner bond, right: perfect inner bond). Plane
specimens with a glued steel plates and b soft interlayer.
c Waisted specimens with glued steel plates. d Comparative
simulations of single cracks
respectively. The stress amplitudes are the largest in
the outermost reinforcement layer directly connected
to the concrete and decrease towards the innermost
core layer. Nevertheless, it is observable in Fig. 8 that
differences in the stress amplitudes decrease with
improving inner bond. For the cases referred to as
perfect inner bond (right column in Fig. 8), stress
differences between the reinforcement layers vanish.
Figure 8a shows stress distributions for type A load
application and a plane specimen with different
qualities of bond in the reinforcement core. In case
of poor inner bond (Fig. 8a, left), the overall maxi-
mum value of reinforcement stress develops in the
sleeve layer in the cracked cross section at the
transition between the supported and the free range
at x = 0.1 m. It results from the much slower activa-
tion of the core layers compared to the sleeve layer
associated with large stress transfer lengths in the
reinforcement core. Thus, the core layers participate
less on crack bridging compared to the regular stress
distribution in the centre of the free specimen length
leading to an increased loading of the sleeve layer.
Towards the centre of the specimen the local stress
maxima of the reinforcement decrease and are almost
constant starting from the third crack distant to the
clamping zone. In case of good inner bond (Fig. 8a,
centre), this stress elevation at the transition to the
supported range is considerably reduced due to
improved compatibility of deformation between the
yarn layers associated with shorter stress transfer
lengths in the core layers and vanishes for the case of
perfect inner bond (Fig. 8a, right).
For a plane specimen with soft type B clamping, see
Fig. 8b, it turns out that the stress elevation in the
sleeve layer at the clamping is slightly reduced for the
case of poor inner bond compared to type A clamping.
This results from an additional crack of the concrete in
the supported range of the specimen, which leads to
larger exploitation of available stress transfer length in
the sleeve layer (from crack position to end of the
specimen). In turn, this means that stress elevation in
the sleeve layer will always occur when the available
anchorage length is shorter than the stress transfer
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446 443

15 1500
stress in concrete [N/mm²]

stress in reinforcement
12.5 negligible no stress 1250
stress stress elevation

layers [N/mm²]
elevation elevation
10 1000

7.5 750

5 500

2.5 250

0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
x[m] x[m] x[m]
(a)
15 1500
stress in concrete [N/mm²]

stress in reinforcement
12.5 negligible no stress 1250
stress stress elevation

layers [N/mm²]
elevation elevation
10 1000

7.5 750

5 500

2.5 250

0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
x[m] x[m] x[m]
(b)
15 1500
stress in concrete [N/mm²]

stress in reinforcement
12.5 stress no stress 1250
elevation elevation

layers [N/mm²]
stress
10 elevation 1000

7.5 750

5 500

2.5 250

0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
x[m] x[m] x[m]
(c)
15 1500
stress in concrete [N/mm²]

stress in reinforcement

12.5 1250
layers [N/mm²]

10 1000

7.5 750

5 500

2.5 250

0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
x[m] x[m] x[m]
(d)
444
length necessary for complete activation of the sleeve
fibres. The additional cracks in the supported parts of
the specimen lead to a better exploitation of available
anchorage length and can result in an almost complete
disappearance of stress elevation as shown in Hartig
et al. [15]. Correspondingly, the stress elevation in the
sleeve layer diminish for the case of good inner bond
(Fig. 8b, centre) and vanish again for the case of
perfect inner bond (Fig. 8b, right).
In Fig. 8c, the results for waisted specimens with
type A load application are shown. In case of poor
inner bond, the stress elevation in the sleeve layer at
the crack close to load application has a similar extent
as in the previous cases. However, the position of the
respective crack is situated at the transition of the
waisted part of the specimen to the part with constant
thickness. In the waisted parts of the specimen
concrete cracks do not develop because the concrete
tensile strength is not reached in the respective
elements before the reinforcement fails. Nevertheless,
also if cracks in the waisted part of the specimen would
develop, stress elevations in the sleeve layer at the
respective cracks would occur as corresponding
simulations revealed [15]. The reason is again the
large difference in stress transfer lengths between
sleeve layer and core layers. For the cases with
improved inner bond, a crack in the waisted specimen
part developed. For the case of good and perfect inner
bond, the stress elevation in the sleeve layer in
particular cracks diminishes.
The stress distributions in the reinforcement in the
vicinity of the first cracks adjacent to or in the load
application regions of the specimens show signifi-
cantly different courses than the cracks in the centre of
the free length. While the reinforcement stress distri-
bution in the regular multiple crack pattern in x-
direction is symmetric to the cracks, it is not for the
cracks adjacent or in the load application region. It is
rather observable that towards the load application
region the stress distribution is similar to the case of a
single crack. Corresponding results of simulations
where only one concrete element is allowed to crack
and the load is applied to end nodes of the concrete are
shown in Fig. 8d. Especially for the case of poor inner
bond, a large difference in the reinforcement stresses
between the sleeve layer and the core layers is
observable, which results from different load transfer
length in the sleeve layer and the core layers. This
leads in the case of multiple cracking to a certain pull-
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446
through of the core layers in the first crack. Full
activation of the core layers is only reached after a
certain number of further cracks. For the cases of
improved inner bond, the core layers are already at the
first crack almost completely activated.
Finally, the load bearing-capacity is quantified by
means of respective stress values. For the determina-
tion of these values, the failure mechanism is simpli-
fied and it is assumed that failure occurs when the first
element in the sleeve layer reaches its predefined
tensile strength. The respective stress values are
determined corresponding to Eq. 1 as the integral
force over a cross section divided by either the cross-
sectional area of the concrete resulting in ruc or the
cross-sectional area of the reinforcement resulting in
rur. These values are compiled in Table 3. As
reference values, the ultimate stresses are determined
based on exceeding of the tensile strength of the
reinforcement elements on a range of 0.2 m in the
centre of the model where stress concentrations due to
the load application are assumed to be diminished.
Thus, the earlier failure of the reinforcement due to
boundary effects is neglected in the reference ultimate
stresses.
Table 3 reveals that in general the load-bearing
capacity of the composite increases with the improve-
ment of inner bond. This coincides with investigations
presented in Hartig et al. [14] and Konrad and
Chudoba [20]. The case of a single crack (e.g.
double-sided yarn pull-out in undercritically rein-
forced specimens) is probably the lower limit case
regarding the influence of stress distribution in the
reinforcement on the load-bearing capacity of the
composite. The reference case of a perfect strain
specimen is the upper limit for the composite strength
for each conducted bond quality.
The general tendencies regarding the influence of
test setup on the apparent load-bearing capacity
composite observed in the experimental study pre-
sented in Sect. 3 coincide with the simulations. Thus,
the model seems to be valid and can serve for
explanation of the effects observed in experiments.
Nevertheless, differences between experiment and
simulation exist—not only because of different geo-
metrical properties. The simulated results overesti-
mate experimental results. This is caused supposedly
by an overestimation of the actual strength of the
reinforcement yarns after textile processing and spec-
imen production, which lead to additional flaws in the
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446
Table 3 Load-bearing capacity of the composite due to different load application types and specimen shapes expressed as ruc and
rur values (N/mm2)
Bond quality Reference Single crack
Poor inner bond 20.7; 1078 (100%) 15.1; 788 (72.9%)
Good inner bond 22.3; 1163 (100%) 22.0; 1147 (98.6%)
Perfect inner bond 23.5; 1226 (100%) 23.4; 1222 (99.6%)
filaments reducing strength. Moreover, also the
assumed bond properties are only estimates, which
were not specially calibrated. Statistical effects
remained also unconsidered in the simulations, but
will influence the simulated results.
5 Summary and conclusions
In the present contribution, experimental and theoret-
ical investigations regarding the influence of the
experimental setup on the apparent tensile load-
bearing capacity of TRC as determined in experiments
are presented. The knowledge of the load-bearing
capacity is important for a reliable design of structures
and structural elements.
The experimental results revealed a strong depen-
dency of the load application type to the specimen on
the measured ultimate load and failure position of the
specimen. Tests with rigid load application (type A),
e.g. by means of stiff glued steel sheets, showed lower
ultimate loads and frequent failure of the specimens
adjacent to the transition between the supported and
the free parts of the specimens. In contrast, soft load
application by means of friction (type B) led to higher
ultimate loads and less frequent failure of the speci-
men at the transition between the supported and the
free parts of the specimen. The experimental results
confirmed also the expectation that the improvement
of inner bond in the reinforcement increases the load-
bearing capacity of the reinforcement. These charac-
teristics can be explained by means of the stress
distribution in the specimen, which are, in general, not
accessible with experimental methods.
Therefore, theoretical investigations using a numer-
ical model were carried out. The simulations showed
how rigid (type A) and soft (type B) load application
influence the stress distribution in the composite and
the apparent load-bearing capacity. Especially rigid
type A clamping can lead to stress elevations in the
445
Type A/plane Type B/plane Type A/waisted
16.0; 835 (77.3%) 16.5; 859 (79.7%) 15.7; 819 (75.8%)
22.3; 1163 (100%) 22.3; 1163 (100%) 21.9; 1144 (98.2%)
23.5; 1226 (100%) 23.5; 1226 (100%) 23.5; 1226 (100%)
reinforcement fibres adhesively connected with the
concrete. This effect is only pronounced in case of
poor inner bond in the reinforcement, which results in
large differences in the stress transfer length between
sleeve and core fibres. The soft type B clamping
facilitates concrete cracking in the load application
zones leading to a better exploitation of available
anchorage length for the reinforcement and a reduc-
tion of stress elevation in the sleeve fibres. The
simulated and experimental results show that the
influence of the load application on the apparent load-
bearing capacity of the composite decreases with
increasing inner bond. Since the application of textile
reinforcement without secondary coating for control-
ling and improving inner bond, structural stability and
handling on site is not recommended for practical
applications, the problems that arise with poor inner
bond at the clampings should not be overrated.
Besides the advantage of lower sensitivity to stress
concentrations, test setups of type B have some
advantages that make them favourable for testing.
The specimens are straight and of constant thickness.
Thus, the specimens can be easily produced and also
cut from larger plates, which reduces the effort for
production. This enables these specimens also for
quality testing on construction site or from serial
production in precast plants as they can be removed
with low effort from existing structural elements, at
least as long as they have sufficiently large areas with
planar geometry. Another aspect is the preparation and
fixation of the specimen in the testing machine, which
can be executed with type B clamping with small
effort as gluing, curing and removing of epoxy resin
from the steel plates after testing is not necessary.
Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge the
financial support of this research from Deutsche Forschungs-
gemeinschaft DFG (German Research Foundation) within the
Sonderforschungsbereich 528 (Collaborative Research Center)
‘‘Textile Reinforcement for Structural Strengthening and
Retrofitting’’ at Technische Universität Dresden, Germany.
446
References
1. Abdkader A (2004) Charakterisierung und Modellierung
der Eigenschaften von AR-Glasfilamentgarnen für die
Betonbewehrung. Dissertation, TU Dresden
2. Bösche A, Jesse F, Ortlepp R, Weiland S, Curbach M (2008)
Textile Reinforced Concrete for flexural strengthening of
RC-structures—Part 1: Structural behavior and design
model. In: Aldea CM (ed) ACI SP-251 Design & applica-
tions of textile-reinforced concrete. ACI, Farmington Hills,
pp 19–40
3. Brockmann T, Raupach M (2002) Durability investigations
on Textile Reinforced Concrete. In: Proceedings of the 9th
international conference on durability of building materials
and components (CSIRO2002), Brisbane, Australia, paper
no. 111
4. Bruckermann O (2007) Zur Modellierung des Zugtragver-
haltens von textilbewehrtem Beton. Dissertation, RWTH
Aachen
5. Brückner A, Ortlepp R, Curbach M (2006) Textile Rein-
forced Concrete for strengthening in bending and shear.
Mater Struct 39(8):741–748. doi:10.1617/s11527-005-
9027-2
6. Brückner A, Ortlepp R, Curbach M (2008) Anchoring of
shear strengthening for T-beams made of Textile Rein-
forced Concrete (TRC). Mater Struct 41(2):407–418. doi:
10.1617/s11527-007-9254-9
7. Chudoba R, Vořechovský M, Konrad M (2006) Stochastic
modeling of multi-filament yarns. I. Random properties
within the cross-section and size effect. Int J Solids Struct
43(3–4):413–434. doi:10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2005.06.063
8. Curbach M, Schicktanz K, Jesse F, Hartig J (2006) Sto-
chastische Eigenschaften der Zugfestigkeit freier und
zementös eingebetteter Filamentbündel aus AR-Glas. In:
Ruge P, Graf W (eds) 10. Dresdner Baustatik-Seminar,
Neue Bauweisen—Trends in Statik und Dynamik. TU
Dresden, Dresden, pp 91–100
9. Curbach M, Weiland S, Michler H (2008) Textile Rein-
forced Concrete—the bridge between the textile industry
and the construction sector. Text J 125(4):58–69
10. Daniels HE (1945) The statistical theory of the strength of
bundles of threads. I. Proc R Soc Lond A183:405–435
11. Dugas M, Weise S, Curbach M, Hempel R, Offermann P,
Franzke G (1998) Force-deformation behaviour of tensile-
loaded specimens made of Textile Reinforced Concrete. In:
Techtextil symposium 1998, Lyon, pp 143–152
12. Gao SL, Mäder E, Plonka R (2004) Coatings for glass fibers
in a cementitious matrix. Acta Mater 52(16):4745–4755.
doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2004.06.028
13. Gao SL, Mäder E, Plonka R (2007) Nanostructured coatings
of glass fibers: improvement of alkali resistance and
mechanical properties. Acta Mater 55(3):1043–1052. doi:
10.1016/j.actamat.2006.09.020
14. Hartig J, Häußler-Combe U, Schicktanz K (2008) Influence
of bond properties on the tensile behaviour of Textile
Reinforced Concrete. Cem Concr Compos 30(10):898–906.
doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2008.08.004
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:433–446
15. Hartig J, Jesse F, Häußler-Combe U (2010) Evaluation of
experimental setups for determining the tensile strength of
Textile Reinforced Concrete. In: Brameshuber W (ed) 2nd
ICTRC—Textile Reinforced Concrete: proceedings of the
international RILEM conference on material science
(MatSci), vol 1. RILEM Publications S.A.R.L., Bagneux,
pp 117–127
16. Hausding J, Lorenz E, Ortlepp R, Lundahl A, Cherif C
(2011) Application of stitch-bonded multi-plies made by
using the extended warp knitting process: reinforcements
with symmetrical layer arrangement for concrete. J Text
Inst. doi:10.1080/00405000.2010.515729
17. Hegger J, Will N, Bruckermann O, Voss S (2006) Load-
bearing behaviour and simulation of Textile Reinforced
Concrete. Mater Struct 39:765–776. doi:10.1617/s11527-
005-9039-y
18. Jesse F (2004) Load bearing behaviour of filament yarns in a
cementitious matrix. Dissertation, TU Dresden (in German)
19. Köckritz U (2007) In-situ Polymerbeschichtung zur Struk-
turstabilisierung offener nähgewirkter Gelege. Dissertation,
TU Dresden
20. Konrad M, Chudoba R (2009) Tensile behavior of cemen-
titious composite reinforced with epoxy impregnated mul-
tifilament yarns. Int J Multiscale Comput Eng
7(2):115–133. doi:10.1615/IntJMultCompEng.v7.i2.40
21. Lorenz E, Ortlepp R, Hausding J, Cherif C (2011) Effi-
zienzsteigerung von Textilbeton durch Einsatz textiler Be-
wehrungen nach dem erweiterten Nähwirkverfahren. Beton
Stahlbetonbau 106(1):21–30. doi:10.1002/best.201000072
22. Molter M (2005) Zum Tragverhalten von textilbewehrtem
Beton. Dissertation, RWTH Aachen
23. Orlowsky J, Raupach M (2006) Modelling the loss in
strength of AR-glass fibres in textile-reinforced concrete.
Mater Struct 39:635–643
24. Brameshuber W et al (2010) Uniaxial tensile test—test
method to determine the load bearing behavior of tensile
specimens made of textile reinforced concrete (Proposal for
a recommendation by RILEM TC 232-TDT to be published
in Materials and Structures)
25. Vořechovský M (2010) Incorporation of statistical length
scale into Weibull strength theory for composites. Compos
Struct 92(9):2027–2034. doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.
11.025
26. Vořechovský M, Chudoba R (2006) Stochastic modeling of
multi-filament yarns. II. Random properties over the length
and size effect. Int J Solids Struct 43(3–4):435–458. doi:
10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2005.06.062
27. Weibull W (1951) A statistical distribution function of wide
applicability. J Appl Mech 18:293–297
28. Weiland S, Ortlepp R, Hauptenbuchner B, Curbach M
(2008) Textile Reinforced Concrete for flexural strength-
ening of RC-structures—Part 2: Application on a concrete
shell. In: Aldea CM (eds) ACI SP-251 Design & applica-
tions of textile-reinforced concrete. ACI, Farmington Hills,
pp 41–58