Title:
Optimized Slant Shear Interface between Steel-Fiber Concretes
Author(s):
Aaron Nzambi, Victória Seixas, and Dênio Oliveira
Publication:
Structural Journal
Volume:
123
Issue:
3
Appears on pages(s):
225-238
Keywords:
geopolymer concrete; interface; shear strength; slant shear; steel fiber
DOI:
10.14359/51749306
Date:
5/1/2025
Abstract:
This study investigated the shear bond behavior, with and without optimized interfaces, between conventional and geopolymer steel fiber-reinforced concretes. Sixteen prismatic and eight cylindrical composite specimens were cast with interface inclination angles of 45 and 27 degrees, respectively. In prisms, the inclined interface area was varied: eight were optimized by 50% to balance compressive and shear stresses, allowing a more accurate determination of cohesion and friction coefficients under steel fiber effects. Fiber volume fractions of 0.0, 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5% were tested, and the influence of epoxy at the interface was also assessed. Optimized prisms exhibited adhesive failure along the interface, matching the internal friction angle, whereas non-optimized prisms showed cohesive failure with a friction angle deviating from the interface. Increasing fiber content improved performance, especially when combined with epoxy. A new bond shear strength model is proposed, incorporating friction, cohesion, and fiber effects.
Related References:
1. Davidovits, J., “Properties of Geopolymer Cements,” Proceedings of the First International Conference on Alkaline Cements and Concretes, Kiev, Ukraine, 1994, pp. 131-149.
2. Azevedo, E.; Oliveira, D.; and Nzambi, A., “Geopolymer Flat Slabs with Synthetic Coarse Aggregate under Punching,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 121, No. 4, July 2024, pp. 161-172. doi: 10.14359/51740573
3. Singh, B.; Ishwarya, G.; Gupta, M.; and Bhattacharyya, S. K., “Geopolymer Concrete: A Review of Some Recent Developments,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 85, 2015, pp. 78-90. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.03.036
4. Topark-Ngarm, P.; Chindaprasirt, P.; and Sata, V., “Setting Time, Strength, and Bond of High-Calcium Fly Ash Geopolymer Concrete,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, V. 27, No. 7, 2015, pp. 1-7. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001157
5. Nzambi, A. K. L. L.; dos Santos, M. C. M.; and de Oliveira, D. R. C., “Pull-Out Tests of Headed Studs Embedded in Steel Fiber–Reinforced Geopolymer Concrete,” Journal of Structural Design and Construction Practice, V. 30, No. 3, 2025, p. 05025006. doi: 10.1061/JSDCCC.SCENG-1794
6. Banthia, N., and Gupta, R., “Influence of Polypropylene Fiber Geometry on Plastic Shrinkage Cracking in Concrete,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 36, No. 7, 2006, pp. 1263-1267. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2006.01.010
7. Sorelli, L. G.; Meda, A.; and Plizzari, G. A., “Steel Fiber Concrete Slabs on Ground: A Structural Matter,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 103, No. 4, July-Aug. 2006, pp. 551-558. doi: 10.14359/16431
8. Zanotti, C.; Banthia, N.; and Plizzari, G., “Towards Sustainable Repairs: Substrate-Repair Interface Mode-I Fracture Analysis,” International Journal of Sustainable Materials and Structural Systems, V. 1, No. 3, 2014, pp. 265-281. doi: 10.1504/IJSMSS.2014.062768
9. Zanotti, C.; Banthia, N.; and Plizzari, G., “A Study of Some Factors Affecting Bond in Cementitious Fiber Reinforced Repairs,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 63, 2014, pp. 117-126. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2014.05.008
10. Ju, Y.; Shen, T.; and Wang, D., “Bonding Behavior between Reactive Powder Concrete and Normal Strength Concrete,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 242, 2020, p. 118024. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.118024
11. Alameri, I., and Oltulu, M., “Bond Strength Between Concrete Substrate and Reinforced Polyester Composites,” Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance, V. 30, No. 1, 2021, pp. 56-65. doi: 10.1007/s11665-020-05295-7
12. Youm, H.; Lim, W.; Hong, S.; and Joh, C., “Interface Shear Strength between Ultra-High-Performance Concrete and Normal-Strength Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 118, No. 2, Mar. 2021, pp. 287-298. doi: 10.14359/51729350
13. Santos, P. M. D., and Júlio, E. N. B. S., “Factors Affecting Bond between New and Old Concrete,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 108, No. 4, July-Aug. 2011, pp. 449-456. doi: 10.14359/51683118
14. Diab, A. M.; Abd-Elmoaty, A.-E. M.; and Tag Eldin, M. R., “Slant Shear Bond Strength between Self Compacting Concrete and Old Concrete,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 130, 2017, pp. 73-82. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.11.023
15. Ceia, F.; Raposo, J.; Guerra, M.; Júlio, E.; and de Brito, J., “Shear Strength of Recycled Aggregate Concrete to Natural Aggregate Concrete Interfaces,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 109, 2016, pp. 139-145. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.02.002
16. Beaupre, D., “Bond Strength of Shotcrete Repair,” Shotcrete Magazine, V. 1, No. 2, 1999, pp. 12-15.
17. Clímaco, J. C. T. S., and Regan, P. E., “Evaluation of Bond Strength between Old and New Concrete in Structural Repairs,” Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 53, No. 6, 2001, pp. 377-390. doi: 10.1680/macr.2001.53.6.377
18. Kriegh, J. D.; Nordby, G. M.; and Eubank, T. C., “Progress Report to the Arizona State Highway Department on the Use of Epoxy Resins in Reinforced Concrete,” Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 1961.
19. Kriegh, J. D.; Nordby, G. M.; and Endebrock, E. G., “The Use of Epoxy Resins in Reinforced Concrete—Static Load Tests - Part 1,” Final Report 1, Arizona Highway Department, Engineering Research Laboratories, Phoenix, AZ, Jan. 1962.
20. Kriegh, J. D., and Endebrock, E. G., “The Use of Epoxy Resins in Reinforced Concrete--Static Load Tests - Part IT,” Final Report No. 2, Arizona Highway Department, Engineering Research Laboratories, Phoenix, AZ, Jan. 1963.
21. Kreigh, J. D., “Arizona Slant Shear Test: A Method to Determine Epoxy Bond Strength,” ACI Journal Proceedings, V. 73, No. 7, July 1976, pp. 372-373.
22. ASTM C882/C882M-23, “Standard Test Method for Bond Strength of Bonding Systems Used with Concrete by Slant Shear,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2023, 6 pp. doi: 10.1520/C0882_C0882M-23
23. Diaz, B. E., “The Technique of Glueing Precast Elements of the Rio-Niteroi Bridge,” Materiales de Construcción, V. 8, No. 1, 1975, pp. 43-50. doi: 10.1007/BF02538956
24. BS EN 12615, “Products and Systems for the Protection and Repair of Concrete Structures – Test Methods – Determination of Slant Shear Strength,” British Standard Institution, London, UK, 1999.
25. Knab, L. I., and Spring, C. B., “Evaluation of Test Methods for Measuring the Bond Strength of Portland Cement Based Repair Materials to Concrete,” Cement, Concrete and Aggregates, V. 11, No. 1, 1989, pp. 3-14. doi: 10.1520/CCA10096J
26. Tabor, L. J., “Evaluation of Resin Systems for Concrete Repair,” Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 30, No. 105, 1978, pp. 221-225. doi: 10.1680/macr.1978.30.105.221
27. ASTM C882/C882M-20, “Standard Test Method for Bond Strength of Epoxy‐Resin Systems Used with Concrete by Slant Shear,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020, 4 pp.
28. Austin, S.; Robins, P.; and Pan, Y., “Shear Bond Testing of Concrete Repairs,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 29, No. 7, 1999, pp. 1067-1076. doi: 10.1016/S0008-8846(99)00088-5
29. Hu, B.; Li, Y.; and Liu, Y., “Dynamic Slant Shear Bond Behavior between New and Old Concrete,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 238, 2020, p. 117779. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117779
30. Momayez, A.; Ramezanianpour, A. A.; Rajaie, H.; and Ehsani, M. R., “Bi-Surface Shear Test for Evaluating Bond between Existing and New Concrete,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 101, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2004, pp. 99-106. doi: 10.14359/13045
31. Zanotti, C., and Randl, N., “Are Concrete-Concrete Bond Tests Comparable?” Cement and Concrete Composites, V. 99, 2019, pp. 80-88. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.02.012
32. Saldanha, R.; Júlio, E.; Dias-da-Costa, D.; and Santos, P., “A Modified Slant Shear Test Designed to Enforce Adhesive Failure,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 41, 2013, pp. 673-680. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.12.053
33. AASHTO-LRFD, “Bridge Design Specifications,” American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, 2012, 1661 pp.
34. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318M-19) and Commentary (ACI 318R-19) (Reapproved 2022),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2019, 628 pp.
35. CSA A23.3-04, “Design of Concrete Structures,” Canadian Standards Association, Mississauga, ON, Canada, 2004, 214 pp.
36. EN 1992-1-1, “Design of Concrete Structures: Part 1–1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings,” European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, March 2010, 259 pp.
37. fib, “fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010,” Fédération Internationale du Béton, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2013, 434 pp.
38. ABNT NBR 8522-1:2021, “Concreto endurecido - Determinação dos módulos de elasticidade e de deformação Parte 1: Módulos estáticos à compressão,” Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2021.
39. ABNT NBR 15894-1:2010, “Metacaulim para uso com cimento Portland em concreto, argamassa e pasta Parte 1: Requisitos,” Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2010.
40. ABNT NBR 17054:2022, “Agregados - Determinação da composição granulométrica - Método de ensaio,” Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2022.
41. ASTM A820/A820M-22, “Standard Specification for Steel Fibers for Fiber-Reinforced Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2022, 4 pp. doi: 10.1520/A0820_A0820M-22
42. ABNT NBR 15530:2019, “Fibras de aço para concreto — Requisitos e métodos de ensaio,” Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2019.
43. ABNT NBR 5739:2018, “Concreto – Ensaios de compressão de corpos de prova cilíndricos - Método de ensaio,” Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2018.
44. ABNT NBR 7222:2011, “Concreto e argamassa — Determinação da resistência à tração por compressão diametral de corpos de prova cilíndricos,” Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2011.
45. ABNT NBR 5738:2016, “Concreto-Procedimento para moldagem e cura de corpos de prova,” Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2016.
46. Tayeh, B. A.; Abu Bakar, B. H.; Megat Johari, M. A.; and Voo, Y. L., “Mechanical and Permeability Properties of the Interface between Normal Concrete Substrate and Ultra-High Performance Fiber Concrete Overlay,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 36, 2012, pp. 538-548. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.06.013
47. ASTM C496/C496M-17, “Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2017, 5 pp. doi: 10.1520/C0496_C0496M-17
48. ACI Committee 546, “Guide to Materials Selection for Concrete Repair (ACI 546.3R-14),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2014, 72 pp.
49. Ghamarpoor, R.; Jamshidi, M.; and Mohammadpour, M., “Achieving Outstanding Mechanical/Bonding Performances by Epoxy Nanocomposite as Concrete–Steel Rebar Adhesive Using Silane Modification of Nano SiO2,” Scientific Reports, V. 13, No. 1, 2023, p. 9157. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-36462-0