International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.

167-179
ISSN: 2186-2982 (P), 2186-2990 (O), Japan, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21660/2021.86.j2263
Geotechnique, Construction Materials and Environment

SHEAR BEHAVIOR OF FIBER-REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS:

AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
*
Ahid Zuhair Hamoodi1, Mustafa Shareef Zewair2, and Mohammed Farhan Ojaimi3

1
Engineering College, Basrah University, Iraq; 2Engineering College, Basrah University, Iraq; 3Engineering
College, Basrah University, Iraq

*Corresponding Author, Received: 07 July. 2021, Revised: 31 Aug. 2021, Accepted: 03 Oct. 2021

Abstract: Eight steel fiber-reinforced normal strength concrete beams (200 mm wide, 250 mm deep and 1500
mm long) were tested in bending under two concentrated loads, without and with stirrups. The concrete beams
were designed to have marked shear behavior. Three types of steel fibers (SFs), straight, hooked and corrugated,
were investigated as a possible replacement for standard transverse reinforcement. The fiber volume content, the
aspect ratio of fibers, and the existence of stirrups were the major testing parameters in this regard. Four fiber
volume proportions (R f of 0%, 0.5%, 1.0% and 1.5%) and three aspect ratios (l/d of 50, 55 and 60) were utilized.
According to the experimental data, the shear behavior of steel fiber-reinforced normal strength concrete beams
(SFRCBs) without stirrups was similar, if not superior, to that of normal strength concrete beams (RCBs) with
stirrup reinforcement. The SFRCBs displayed extremely thin diagonal cracks and higher shear strengths,
especially for fiber fractions of 1% and 1.5%. The experimental results were compared to major universal codes
and existing models from the literature. The major codes undervalue the concrete contribution to shear strength
while exaggerating the contribution of the stirrups. Furthermore, some of the existing models overestimate the
fibers’ contribution to the shear strength, while others underestimate it when compared to the present
experimental findings.

Keywords: Steel fiber-reinforced concrete, Transverse reinforcement, Steel fiber volume content, Diagonal
cracking, Shear strength, Span depth ratio.

1. INTRODUCTION stress in SFRCBs [5]. Previous investigations have

been conducted to provide a good database for the
Structural concrete is extensively utilized in shear behavior of SFRCBs.
engineering projects. Many factors influence the In 2000, Noghabai [6] experimentally studied
shear behavior of reinforced concrete beams (RCBs), the behavior of SFRCBs. The variables were the
making them hard to address. Among these factors beam dimensions, shear spans, and types of fibers.
are the combined effect of shear, axial, bending or According to the results, the inclusion of SFs was
torsion loads that many RCBs are subjected to, the necessary, especially for the occurrence of flange
quantity and diameter of stirrups, the bond between tension failure. On the other hand, beams with mixed
steel bars and surrounding concrete, aggregate SFs (different length to diameter ratios and shapes)
interlock, dowel action, or cement type [1]. had better behavior than those with a single fiber
Recently, RC with steel fibers (SFs) has been type.
broadly used in civil engineering projects [2]. SFs Kim et al. 2008 [7] studied the influence of the
can enhance the shear strength of RCBs, change the types and content of fibers on the behavior of high-
brittle shear behavior to ductile behavior, restrict strength SFRCBs. The findings revealed that the
crack width, spacing and propagation and increase structural behavior of beams with high-strength
the energy dissipation [3, 4]. twisted fibers outperformed that of beams with other
When the RCB is subjected to tensile stresses fiber types.
higher than its tensile strength, cracks develop. As in Gregori et al. 2016 [1] performed experimental
RCBs, the greatest shear stress of steel fiber- and numerical work to investigate the role of SFs in
reinforced concrete beams (SFRCBs) is related to the shear strength of concrete. Uncracked push-off
the effective depth (d), span to depth ratio (a/d) and RC and SFRC specimens were tested. Accurate
main steel reinforcement ratio (ρ). The shear photogrammetry was used to measure normal and
strength of RCB can be enhanced by increasing the transverse strain close to the shear plane. The
effective depth (i.e., delaying the initiation of experimental tests showed that the shear strength of
diagonal shear cracks) or increasing the value of a/d, SFRC specimens is greater than that of RC
while shear failure can be guaranteed with an specimens. On the other hand, the reinforcement
adequate quantity of main steel reinforcement. passing the shear plane extensively controls the
Additionally, the number of fibers per volume, shear enhancement of SFs following diagonal
aspect ratio (l/d), and fiber shape control the shear cracking. At the same time, good agreement with the

167
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

experimental results was attained by numerically in the same way in all the beams. Table 1 depicts the
modeling the RC and SFRC push-off specimens. results of the direct tension test of the deformed bars.
Yoo and Yang 2017 [8] investigated the shear
behavior of SF high-strength RCBs (SFHRCBs). 3.3 Steel Fibers
This work discussed the influence of transverse
reinforcement, SF, and beam size on the shear Straight, 3 cm hooked, 5 cm hooked and
performance of the beams. The experimental results corrugated SFs (Fig. 2) were used in the RCBs. The
showed that the shear strength of the SFHRCB details of these SFs are presented in Table 2. Straight
without stirrups decreased with increasing beam size. SFs were included in the concrete mix at four ratios
On the other hand, the spread of cracks can be by volume: 0%, 0.5%, 1% and 1.5%. On the other
restricted with the presence of SFs. The beams with hand, hooked and corrugated SFs were included in
minimum stirrups exhibited improved shear cracking the concrete at a ratio of 1% by volume.
behavior compared with those reinforced with SFs.

100 mm C/C
In 2018, the shear strength of reinforced concrete, 300 mm

250 2 Ø 12 mm
Ø 8 mm @

4 Ø 16 mm
industrial SFRC and recycled SFRC was studied

25 mm
experimentally and theoretically by Leone et al. [9].
The results showed acceptable toughness and shear I-Beam
performance of recycled SFRC relative to industrial

mm
SFRC.

2. RESEARCH IMPORTANCE LDS 200 mm

I-Beam
1400 mm 50 mm
The importance of steel fiber-reinforced
concrete (SFRC) lies in the need to enhance the
tensile strength of concrete under large applied loads, (a)
vibration loads and impact loads [10]. The shear
300 mm

250 2 Ø 12 mm
4 Ø 16 mm
strength of RCBs is a complicated issue due to the

Ø 10 mm

25 mm
interference of several factors related to loading,
beam geometry, and main and transverse I-Beam
reinforcement; therefore, the present work evaluated
the role of steel fibers in the improvement of

mm
concrete mechanical characteristics and upgrading
the shear behavior of RCBs. LDS 200 mm
I-Beam
3. DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS AND 1400 mm 50 mm
SPECIMENS
(b)
3.1 Geometric Details of the Specimens
Fig. 1 Specifics of the beam and the test device
Fig. 1 depicts the specifics of the stirrups and
Table 1 Results of the direct tension test
the main reinforcement of the tested beams. In this
work, a total of 8 RCBs, 200 mm wide, 250 mm Bar diameter
deep and 1500 mm long, were strengthened with (mm) 8 12 16
different volumetric ratios and types of SF. One fy (MPa) 370 474 525
beam reinforced transversely with vertical stirrups fu (MPa) 495 564 674
εy (%) 12.76 12.79 12.88
(containing no SFs), as shown in Fig. 1a, was εu (%) 25.31 25.33 25.64
denoted as SS. The other tested beams without Es (GPa) 209.23 209.28 210.14
stirrups and containing SFs of different R f and l/d
values and types were identified as S1, S2, S3, S4, Table 2 Details of the steel fibers (by supplier)
S5, S6 and S7, as shown in Fig. 1b.
Fiber Hooked* Hooked*
Straight Corrugated
3.2 Reinforcement Bars type (3 cm) (5 cm)
3
D kg/m 7860 7860 7860 7860
f t MPa 2850 ≥ 1000 ≥ 1000 ≥ 700
Rebars of 8 mm diameter were employed for L mm 12 30 50 30
the stirrups, while 12 mm and 16 mm diameter d mm 0.25 0.5 0.9 0.55**
rebars were used for the top and bottom main l/d 50 60 55 55
reinforcement, respectively. Moreover, the bottom E SF 2×105 2×105 2×105 2×105
* Hooked ends and straight middle, ** Equivalent diameter,
and top of the steel bar areas were 804.25 mm2 and
P P

D=density, f t = tensile strength, L=length, d= diameter, l/d =

226.2 mm2, respectively, and the bars were arranged
P P
aspect ratio, E SF = modulus of elasticity of SF.

168
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

1.2 cm 3 cm C496/C496M-17 [13] and ASTM C78/C78M [14],

straight hooked the compressive strength, tensile strength and
modulus of rupture of concrete were found,
respectively, as presented in Table 5.

3.6 Loading and test setup of beams

5 cm 3 cm
hooked corrug. Eight simply supported beams were produced
with a constant a/d of 2.657 to study the shear
behavior. A four-point bending test was performed
by two concentrated line loads 300 mm apart and
two round bars to support the 1500 mm span beams,
as shown in Fig. 3. The test was conducted using a
Fig. 2 Types of steel fibers 2000 kN hydraulic Torsee universal testing machine
under displacement control conditions. The failure of
3.4 Coarse and fine aggregates the beam was the end of the test. The midspan
deflection was recorded at every loading stage using
Natural sand and (20–5 mm) crushed gravel a laser displacement sensor, as shown in Figs. 1 and
from the Al-Zubair region, Basrah, Iraq, were used 3. Additionally, the crack width was gauged by
in this study. Based on ASTM C33/C33M-18 [11], adopting an HFBTE CK-102 digital concrete crack
both types of aggregates were tested. The fineness width gauge tester meter, as presented in Fig. 3.
modulus of the used sand was 2.78. Table 3 shows
the grading of both types of aggregates. 4. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Table 3 The grading of fine and coarse aggregates 4.1. Strength of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete

Coarse aggregates Fine aggregates 4.1.1 Compressive strength

ASTM ASTM The 28-day average cube compressive
Sieve C33/ Sieve C33/ strengths corresponding to different straight SF
Pass- Pass-
size C33M- size C33M- amounts are presented in Table 5. Fig. 4 shows the
ing % ing %
mm 18 mm 18
effect of the straight SF volume content on various
25 100 100 9.5 100 100 relative strengths of concrete. The compressive
19 100 90–100 4.75 99 95–100 strength was enhanced by approximately 32.30%
12.5 80 --- 2.36 90 80–100 when straight SFs up to 1.5% by volume were used
9.5 37 20–55 1.18 75 50–85
4.75 2 0–10 0.60 53 25–60 in the concrete.
2.36 1 0–5 0.30 17 5–30
1.18 0 --- 0.15 2 0–10 4.1.2 Flexural strength
0.3 0 --- 0.075 0 0–3 The flexural strength of fiber-reinforced
concrete was measured by calculating the modulus
3.5 Concrete Mix of rupture. Table 5 and Fig. 4 show the 28-day
average modulus of rupture for various straight SF
Cement, sand, gravel, SFs, water and contents. The increase in the content of straight SFs
ViscoCrete F-180G superplasticizer were mixed to from 0% to 1.5% by volume caused a great increase
produce the required concrete composition. In in flexural strength of approximately 82.6%, with
addition, the superplasticizer was added to the remarkable ductile failure.
solution until the SFs were entirely discrete. The
concrete mix details are given in Table 4. It should 4.1.3 Splitting tensile strength
be noted that the use of SFs caused an important Table 5 and Fig. 4 depict a 90.8% increase in
reduction in the workability of concrete since the splitting tensile strength when a 1.5% straight SF
relative movements of all concrete components were volume content was introduced. This is the largest
hindered by SFs. The same effect was observed in increase in contrast to compressive and flexural
previous studies [4]. strength, so the inclusion of SFs considerably
A constant water/cement (w/c) ratio of 0.49 improves the tensile characteristics and crack
was employed. For each SF volume ratio, three resistance of concrete. This finding is consistent with
concrete cubes (150×150×150 mm), three concrete the results obtained in the literature [2, 4, 15].
cylinders (150×300 mm) and three concrete prisms
(100×100 × 350 mm) were cast and tested in a 4.2 Cracking Behavior and Nature of the Failure
hydraulic testing machine to evaluate the concrete
strength. Based on BS EN 12390:1-3 [12], ASTM When the beams are loaded, flexural cracks are

169
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

Table 4 Concrete mix details

Gravel Sand Cement Water Superplasticizer SF (kg/m3)

(kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) (kg/m3) 0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5%
1110 740 370 181.3 2.22 0.0 12 24 36

Table 5 Beam details and concrete strength test results

Beam details Concrete strength test results

f cu, ave. f t, ave . f r, ave .
Notation a/d Shape of SF l/d ρ (%) ρ s (%) R f (%)
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
SS 2.657 ------ ------ 1.942 0.50 0 35.6 2.29 4.19
S1 2.657 ------ ------ 1.942 0.0 0 35.6 2.29 4.19
S2 2.657 Straight 50 1.942 0.0 0.5 39.3 2.85 5.49
S3 2.657 Straight 50 1.942 0.0 1.0 44.8 3.75 7.0
S4 2.657 Straight 50 1.942 0.0 1.5 47.1 4.37 7.65
S5 2.657 3 cm Hooked 60 1.942 0.0 1.0 43.1 4.57 8.20
S6 2.657 5 cm Hooked 55 1.942 0.0 1.0 43.5 4.30 8.14
S7 2.657 Corrugated 55 1.942 0.0 1.0 44.0 4.16 7.78
ρ = main reinforcement ratio, ρ s = transverse reinforcement ratio, R f = steel fiber volume fraction, f cu,ave. = 28-day average cube compressive
strength, f t, ave. = 28-day average splitting tensile strength, f r, ave. = 28-day average modulus of rupture.

2.5 hooked SFs as in beams S5 and S6 of Fig. 6(f), and

corrugated SFs as in beam S7 of Fig. 6(g).
2 SFs successfully minimize crack opening by
Relative strength

absorbing tensile stress after cracking [2]. The bent

1.5 forms of fibers (especially the hooked type), which
appear straightened in Fig. 7, demonstrate their
effectiveness after cracking. Table 6 shows that the
1 volume fraction of fibers has no direct relationship
Compressive strength with the improvement in shear contribution. The
0.5 Flexural strength load capacity increased by 34% when a straight SF
volume fraction of 0.5% was used; however, it was
Splitting tensile strength
0 only enhanced by approximately 29% when the
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 straight SF volume content was multiplied by 3,
increasing from 0.5% to 1.5%. On the other hand,
Fibres volume fraction (Rf ) %
the use of a 3 cm hooked SF volume fraction of 1%
Fig. 4 Influence of the volume content of straight showed an improvement of 21.4% in load capacity
SFs on different relative strengths of compared to that with the straight SFs. This finding
concrete is consistent with the results that appeared in the
literature [2,16,17]. Table 6 shows the experimental
the first to appear vertically in the tension zone at the findings for diagonal cracking and ultimate loads for
region of the maximum bending moment. With all beams tested. The replacement of the transverse
additional loading (42% to 64% of F u ), diagonal reinforcement with a straight SF volume content of
cracks develop in the shear span along the direction 0.5% has a reverse effect on the ultimate loads, as
of the support and the loading point. In comparison illustrated in Table 6. On the other hand, the ultimate
to those in beams without SFs or with an inadequate load may even rise when enough and effective SFs
SF content, diagonal cracks developed at are employed. The usage of 1.0% and 1.5% straight
comparatively greater loads than those when an SFs resulted in ultimate load increases of
adequate amount of SFs was present (Table 6), and approximately 2.0% and 4.0%, respectively.
as the load increased, the cracks were efficiently Similarly, the employment of 1.0% 3 cm and 5 cm
restricted and remained narrower. Fig. 5 shows that hooked SFs and corrugated SFs increased the
the diagonal crack pierced into the compression zone ultimate loads by approximately 8.0%, 5.0% and
at the loading point, crushing the concrete there, and 3.0%, respectively. Additionally, compared to beams
depicts the effective bridging of the diagonal crack without stirrups or with inadequate SFs, adequate
by the SFs spanning it. and effective SFs postpone the growth of diagonal
For beams without SFs, brittle shear failure cracking in the same way as stirrups. In this regard,
occurred by diagonal splitting at a relatively lower 1.0% SFs appears to be the minimum for enhancing
load, as in the S1 beam of Fig. 6(b). Ductile shear the behavior of conventional concrete in shear. As a
failure occurred at relatively higher loads with the result, substituting sufficient SFs for transverse steel
introduction of straight SFs as in beams S2, S3, and appears to enhance both diagonal cracking and
S4 of Fig. 6(c), Fig. 6(d) and Fig. 6(e) respectively, ultimate loads.

170
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

Table 6 Experimental loads and mode of failure of all tested beams

Difference Difference
Beam ρ ρs Rf Failure
a/d l/d F d (kN) F u (kN) F u (%) F u (%)
symbol (%) (%) (%) Mode
S/SS S/S1
SS 0.5 0.0 ---- 146.52 243.26 ----- ----- F-S
S1 0.0 0.0 ---- 94.50 175 ----- ----- S
S2 0.0 0.5 50 98.23 235 -3.39 +34.29 S
S3 0.0 1.0 50 152.71 247.5 +1.74 +41.43 S
2.657 1.942
S4 0.0 1.5 50 157.81 252.5 +3.79 +44.29 S
S5 0.0 1.0 60 169.37 263 +8.11 +50.3 F-S
S6 0.0 1.0 55 163.46 255 +4.83 +45.71 S
S7 0.0 1.0 55 153.88 250 +2.77 +42.86 S
F d = diagonal cracking load, F u = ultimate load, F-S = flexural-shear, S= shear

Diagonal crack Crushing of

compression zone
Crushing of
compression zone

Fig. 5 Diagonal crack in an SF-reinforced concrete beam

SS

(a) Beam SS (with stirrups and without SFs)

Straight SFs
Rf = 0.5%

(b) Beam S1 (without stirrups and without SFs)

Straight SFs
Rf = 1.0%

(c) Beams S2 (with 0.5% straight SFs)

Fig. 6 Failure of the tested beams

171
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

Straight SFs
Rf = 1.0%

(d) Beams S3 (with 1.0% straight SFs)

Straight SFs
Rf = 1.5%

(e) Beams S4 (with 1.5% straight SFs)

3 cm hooked
SFs
Rf = 1.0%

5 cm hooked
SFs
Rf = 1.0%

(f) Beams S5 and S6 (with 1.0% 3 cm and 5 cm hooked SFs, respectively)

Corrugated SF
Rf = 1.0%

(g) Beam S7 (with 1.0% corrugated SFs)

Fig. 6 Continued

Fig. 6 Continued

S5, Rf =1.0% S6, Rf =1.0% S7, Rf =1.0%

Fig. 7 Deformation of fibers after failure

172
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

4.3 Load-Deflection Characteristics the cracks, in comparison to those with stirrups (SS)
or with SF reinforcement. Therefore, SFs serve the
Fig. 7 illustrates the load-deflection curves of the same purpose in restraining cracks as stirrups and
tested beams. From the initial loading to the consequently maintain a considerably higher
formation of the first crack, all of the beams stiffness that is less impacted by the smaller cracks.
displayed linear behavior. After cracks formed, all of The final stage refers to the concrete beam’s plastic
the beams showed nonlinear behavior. At this stage, flow or behavior, which causes significant plastic
the deflection rises in tandem with load but at a deflections prior to failure. Lim and Oh [15],
faster rate. The beam without transverse Tahenni, Chemrouk and Lecompte [16], Narayanan
reinforcement and SFs (S1) lost its stiffness and and Darwish [18], and Furlan and Hanai [19] all
failed without undergoing further significant obtained the same results.
deformation after complete cracking and growth of

300 300
S1 S1
SS 250 SS
250
S2 S3
200 S3 200 S5

Load (kN)
Load (kN)

S4 S6
150 150 S7

100 100
50 50
0 0
0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Mid-span deflection (mm) Mid-span deflection (mm)

(a) (b)
Fig. 7 Load-deflection relationships: (a) effect of straight SF volume content, (b) effect of SF types

4.4 Ductility cracks. This behavior is consistent with the results

obtained in the literature [2, 15, 16, 22, 23].
The displacement ductility ratio (DR) suggested A vision-based technique for damage progress
by Cohn and Bartlett [20, 21] was used to determine monitoring of the structure under the loading regime
the ductility of SFRC beams. According to this was used. As shown in Fig. 11, successive images
method, the ductility index (DR) is the ratio of the for a diagonal crack at constant travel time were
displacement at 85% of the ultimate load (Δ 0.85 ) to captured using a camera and stored automatically on
the first yield displacement of the specimen (Fig. 8): a PC for posttest analysis. SFs appear to be
DR = Δ 0.85 / Δ y . extremely effective in enhancing the serviceability
Fig. 9 below depicts the ductility index of all of concrete in real-world constructions. Because
tested beams. The ductility of the SFRCB rises as cracking that is too wide is responsible for several
the volume fraction and aspect ratio of fibers problems that require retrofitting and repair in the
increase, as seen in Fig. 9. This result demonstrates building sector and may even cause failure if not
that replacing transverse reinforcement with SFs at properly cared for, serviceability will be an
an optimal dose (R f ≥ 1.0%) improves the ductility important design requirement [16].
of RC beams.
4.6 Analysis of Shear Strength of Concrete Beams
4.5 Diagonal Crack Widths
It is widely accepted that in an RC beam, the
The crack widths at the diagonal cracking load ultimate shear force Vu is resisted by the uncracked
R

and ultimate load are shown in Fig. 10. This figure portion of the concrete Vcz , across the interlocking of
indicates that the cracks were well restricted when the surface roughnesses Viy , across the longitudinal
SFs were utilized, and their width did not exceed the steel Vd acting as a dowel, and by the influence of
serviceability limit of 0.3 mm until immediately stirrups Vs [24], as shown in Fig. 12 below. The
before failure. The cracks in SF-reinforced beams ultimate shear force can be expressed as:
remained very narrow in comparison to cracks in
beams without SFs (S1). As indicated in Table 6, the Vu = Vcz + Viy + Vd + Vs (1)
SFs helped to delay the emergence of diagonal

173
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

Load

Line from regression analysis

Pmax
0.85Pmax i=Δ0.85/Δy

Δy Δ0.85 Displacement
Fig. 8 Displacement ductility index according At 25% of ultimate load (no diagonal cracking)
to Cohn and Bartlett [19, 20]

3.5 S1
3 SS
S2
2.5 S3
Ductility index

S5
2 S6
S7
1.5 S4
l/d = 60

l/d = 50
l/d = 55
l/d = 55
l/d = 50
l/d = 50

1
S1
SS

0.5 At 50% of ultimate load

0
0 0 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5
Fibre volume fraction (%)
Fig. 9 Ductility ratio of the tested beams

0.35
Fd Fu
0.3
Crack width (mm)

0.25
0.2 S1
3.5cm Hooked

5cm Hooked

0.15
Straight

Straight

At 65% of ultimate load (diagonal cracking at

Corrugated
Straight

0.1 right support)

0.05
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 1 1 1
Fibre volume fraction (%)
Fig. 10 Crack widths at diagonal cracking and
ultimate loads
The concrete contribution to shear resistance Vc
is defined as (Vcz + Viy + Vd ). It has been described
[25, 26] that Vcz = 20 − 40% of Vu , Viy = 35 −
50% of Vu , and Viy = 15 − 25% of Vu are the
three components of the involvement of concrete in
shear resistance. It should be noted that these three Just before failure
components and their interactions have yet to be
fully characterized, and no analytical approach for Fig. 11 Development of diagonal cracking in an
rationally combining these parameters exists. The SFRCB

174
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

application of various empirical formulas in design the yielding of the stirrups may not be safe, as failure
around the world warrants the topic’s ongoing will happen before the yielding of the stirrups [16].
investigation [16]. Eurocode 2 appears to give the best
expectations for Vu of the three code models when
P1 P2 the shear resistance of normal concrete beams
X1
includes the concrete and steel contributions,
y C although it is still impractical due to undervaluing
Vcz the concrete contribution Vc and highly
Vi Viy Z
Vix overestimating the transverse reinforcement
T contribution Vs .
Vd
R1 ρ 4.6.2 Influence of steel fibers on the shear strength
Xa
Straight SFs enhanced the shear and ultimate
Fig. 12 Shear forces in an RC beam with web load capacities of normal concrete beams, with
reinforcement [24] increases ranging from 34% for an R f of 0.5% to
44% for an R f of 1.5%. For an R f of 1%, this
4.6.1 Theoretic prediction of the shear strength increase was 50.3%, 45.7%, and 42.86% when 3 cm
Table 7 summarizes the main methods for hooked, 5 cm hooked and corrugated steel fibers
determining the Vu of RC beams as specified in were used, respectively.
various design codes, namely, ACI318-19, BS8110 Various investigations and analytical models
and EC2. These theoretical shear estimations are for have been proposed regarding the influence of SFs
maximum compressive strengths of 60 MPa in on the shear resistance of RCBs [15, 17, 18, 23].
concrete. Cucchiara et al. [29] calculated the total ultimate
Where stirrups are included, the shear strength of shear force in SFRCBs by summing Vc , Vs , and Vf ,
RCB is the sum of Vc and Vs , as given by Eq. (1) as in Eq. (2) below.
above. Because the S1 beam is not strengthened
transversally, its ultimate shear strength is calculated Vu = Vc + Vs + Vf (2)
by the concrete Vc . The value of the ultimate shear
strength of the S1 beam is presented in Table 8 and For SFRCBs without stirrups, such as beams S2,
Fig. 13. The suggested universal codes also forecast S3, S4, S5, S6 and S7 in this work, the ultimate
the ultimate shear strength of the S1 beam. The shear force is presented in Eq. (3), and the
findings reveal that all models of the codes components of the shear resistance through the
undervalue the shear contribution of conventional diagonal crack are presented in Fig. 14 below.
concrete. EC2 is the most accurate of the three
models, although it still underestimates the shear Vu = Vc + Vf (3)
capacity of concrete by approximately 45%. On the
other hand, V u is considerably underestimated by Therefore,
55% below the test value when the ACI code iss
applied. Vf = Vu + Vc (4)
Table 8 and Fig. 13 demonstrate the
involvement of Vs in the shear strength of the SS 140
beam. Vc accounts for 72% of the total shear S1 SS
120
Shear strength (kN)

capacity, whereas Vs accounts for 28%. Hereafter,

the addition of stirrups increased the ultimate shear 100
strength of the normal RCB by approximately 30%. 80
The shear strength influence of the stirrups of the SS
60
beam is calculated by the three main codes is and
shown in Table 8 and Fig. 13 for comparison. It is 40
obvious that these codes considerably overestimate 20
the contribution of transverse reinforcement to the
0
shear strength of normal RCB. The reason is that the ACI 318 BS 8110 EC2 Exp.
equations of the three models are built on the
yielding of this reinforcement, as indicated by the Fig. 13 Experimental and predicted ultimate shear
formulations of codes in Table 7. These models do strengths
not account for concrete crushing in the inclined
strut or at the compression zone immediately at the In Eq. (4), the ultimate shear force Vu is the
end of a diagonal crack. Therefore, for beams with experimental value Vu exp. , and the involvement of
smaller a/d values, any shear design method built on concrete Vc is the shear strength of the S1 beam

175
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

Table 7 Ultimate shear strength based on the main worldwide codes

Codes Equation Definition

𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐′ = cylinder compressive strength
N u = axial load
𝑉𝑉𝑢𝑢 = 𝑉𝑉𝑐𝑐 + 𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠 A g = gross area of concrete section
b w = width of beam
𝑁𝑁𝑢𝑢 𝑁𝑁𝑢𝑢 d= effective depth
𝑉𝑉𝑐𝑐 = �0.17 𝜆𝜆 �𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐′ + � 𝑏𝑏𝑤𝑤 𝑑𝑑 or �0.17 𝜆𝜆 (𝜌𝜌𝑤𝑤 )1/3 �𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐′ + � 𝑏𝑏𝑤𝑤 𝑑𝑑 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 ≥ 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 λ= 1.0 for normal concrete
6 𝐴𝐴𝑔𝑔 6 𝐴𝐴𝑔𝑔
ρ w = ratio of A s to b w .d
λ s = size effect modification factor
𝑁𝑁𝑢𝑢
ACI 318-19 𝑉𝑉𝑐𝑐 = �0.66 𝜆𝜆𝑠𝑠 𝜆𝜆 (𝜌𝜌𝑤𝑤 )1/3 �𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐′ + � 𝑏𝑏𝑤𝑤 𝑑𝑑 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 < 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 2
= �(1+0.004𝑑𝑑) ≤ 1.0
6 𝐴𝐴𝑔𝑔
[27 ]
A v = area of shear reinforcement within
𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 . 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 . 𝑑𝑑 spacing s
𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠 = 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
𝑆𝑆 A v,min = minimum area of shear
reinforcement within spacing s
𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 . 𝑓𝑓𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 . (sin 𝛼𝛼 + sin 𝛼𝛼). 𝑑𝑑 S= center-to-center spacing of stirrups
𝑉𝑉𝑠𝑠 = 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠
𝑆𝑆 α = angle between the inclined stirrups
and the longitudinal axis of the member
f yt = yield strength of transverse
reinforcement
1 1 f sv = yield strength of stirrups
0.79 1 400 4 𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 3 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑑𝑑 ρ = As / bw d
𝑉𝑉𝑢𝑢 = (100𝜌𝜌)3 � � � � 𝑏𝑏𝑤𝑤 𝑑𝑑 + 0.875 for 𝑎𝑎�𝑑𝑑 ≥ 2
𝛾𝛾𝑚𝑚 𝑑𝑑 25 𝑆𝑆 f cu = compressive strength of a cube
BS 8110 [28] 1 1
𝛾𝛾𝑚𝑚 = 1.25, partial shear safety factor of
𝑑𝑑 0.79 1 400 4 𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 3
𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑑𝑑
𝑉𝑉𝑢𝑢 = �2 � (100𝜌𝜌)3 � � � � 𝑏𝑏𝑤𝑤 𝑑𝑑 + 0.875 for 𝑎𝑎�𝑑𝑑 < 2 material
𝑎𝑎 𝛾𝛾𝑚𝑚 𝑑𝑑 25 𝑆𝑆 α = inclination of stirrups (α = 90° )
θ = 45°, the angle between inclined
concrete struts and the main tension
1 𝐴𝐴𝑣𝑣 𝑓𝑓𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑧𝑧 (cot 𝜃𝜃 + cot 𝛼𝛼) chord
EC2 [29] 𝑉𝑉𝑢𝑢 = 0.18 � 𝑘𝑘 . (100 . 𝜌𝜌 . 𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐 )3 � 𝑏𝑏𝑤𝑤 𝑑𝑑 + sin 𝛼𝛼
𝑆𝑆 𝑘𝑘 = 1 + �
200
, 𝑑𝑑 (𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚)
𝑑𝑑
z = lever arm = 0.9d

Table 8 Experimental and predicted shear strengths

Beam V u, exp. V s, exp. V u, theo (kN) V s, theo. (kN) V u,exp. / V u, theo

No. (kN) (kN) ACI BS EC2 ACI BS EC2 ACI BS EC2
318 8110 318 8110 318 8110
S1 87.5 ---- 39.20 43.31 48.13 ------ ------ ------ 2.23 2.02 1.82
SS 121.63 34.13 114.56 110.68 117.39 77 67.37 69.26 1.06 1.09 1.04

(without stirrups and SFs) in the present study. If fibers from slipping and pulling of the concrete
there are no test results, Vc can be estimated using across a crack. The steel fiber appears anchored on
the theoretical models of various codes that were both sides of the crack when it develops; therefore,
previously provided. any influence of these fibers on shear capacity is
Eq. (4) can be expressed in terms of stresses by highly reliant on the fineness of this anchorage and
dividing both sides by the effective concrete section hereafter on the anchoring bond capacity [16].
bd as: Prevailing models available in the literature
(Table 9) to calculate the influence of the fibers on
𝑣𝑣f = 𝑣𝑣u + 𝑣𝑣c (5) the shear capacity were investigated for comparison.
Table 10 lists the projected values, which are
Eq. (5) depicts the experimental shear strength depicted in Fig. 15 with the current test findings. The
conveyed by fibers (𝑣𝑣f ). The present results revealed findings of the current study depict that the
out that the shear strength contribution of fibers is contribution of SFs to shear strength increases with
dependent on the quantity of fibers utilized R f and increasing R f and l/d values of the fibers. Increasing
their aspect ratio l/d. Therefore, the longer the fiber the volume content of straight SFs from 0.5% to
is, the better it is at bridging the two sides of a crack. 1.5% increases this contribution from 0.73 MPa to
At a specified fiber content, the smaller the diameter 0.94 MPa, respectively, while for 3 cm hooked SFs
of a fiber is, the greater the number of fibers, and the (l/d = 60, R f = 1.0%), the involvement of SFs in the
more bridging activities occurring through a crack, shear capacity is 1.07 MPa. Table 10 and Fig. 15
causing a greater fiber involvement in the shear clearly show that the involvement of fibers in the
capacity. These effects are in line with the findings shear capacity is overestimated in some of the
of earlier studies [2, 15, 16]. Furthermore, the bond existing models, as seen in Fig. 15, and should be
between SFs and concrete is critical in preventing considered with caution since they may lead to

176
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

insecure design. Additionally, the model suggested models, and they underestimate the SF contribution
by Tahenni, Chemrou and Lecompte [16] and the 𝑣𝑣f to shear strength.
model suggested by Swamy, Jones and Chiam [23]
appear to give the best prospects for 𝑣𝑣f of the five

2
l/d 1: [15]
= 50 l / d 2: [14]
Vcz Vi 1.5
l/d = 60 l / d l / d 3: [17]
= 50 = 55 = 55 4: [22]

vf (MPa)
1
l/d 5: [16]
= 50 6: Exp.
Vf 0.5
T
0
0.5 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.0
Vd SF volume content (%)
Vu
Fig. 14 Shear forces in an SFRCB without stirrups Fig. 15 Experimental and theoretical shear strength of
fibers

Table 9 Available models for the involvement of the fibers in the shear capacity

Research Model Definitions

𝑙𝑙 ρ f = fiber volume fraction
Tahenni et al. [16] v f =0.28�𝑓𝑓𝑐𝑐 �1 − 20𝜌𝜌𝑓𝑓 �𝜌𝜌𝑓𝑓 𝑓𝑓�𝑑𝑑
𝑓𝑓
l f /d f = aspect ratio of fibers
𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑓
τ = the average fiber–matrix bond stress assumed by [10
Lim and Oh [15] v f =0.5𝜏𝜏𝑉𝑉𝑓𝑓 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 in 2] as 4.15 MPa
𝑑𝑑𝑓𝑓

v f =0.41𝜏𝜏𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑓𝑓
𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑓 α = 45°, the inclination between the longitudinal
Narayana and Darwish [18] 𝑑𝑑𝑓𝑓 reinforcement and the shear crack
𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑓
Swamy et al. [23] v f =0.37𝜏𝜏𝑉𝑉𝑓𝑓
𝑑𝑑𝑓𝑓
8.5 𝑙𝑙𝑓𝑓
Al-ta’an and Al-Feel [17] vf = 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑓𝑓 k = 1.2, the bond factor that accounts for differing
99 𝑑𝑑𝑓𝑓

Table 10 Comparison of the experimental results with the available models

v u exp. v f exp. v f theoretical (MPa)

Beam No. R f (%) l/d
(MPa) (MPa) [15] [14] [17] [22] [16]
S2 0.5 50 2.84 0.73 0.35 0.52 0.51 0.38 0.28
S3 1.0 50 2.99 0.88 0.67 1.04 1.02 0.77 0.57
S4 1.5 50 3.05 0.94 0.90 1.56 1.53 1.15 0.85
S5 1.0 60 3.18 1.07 0.79 1.25 1.23 0.92 0.68
S6 1.0 55 3.08 0.97 0.73 1.14 1.12 0.84 0.62
S7 1.0 55 3.02 0.91 0.73 1.14 1.12 0.84 0.62

5. Conclusions Crack creation is delayed, and their width is tightly

controlled; even at failure, they did not exceed the
The following conclusions can be drawn from serviceability limit of 0.3 mm. In the presence of
the current experimental study on the influence of efficient fibers (with higher l/d values), the failure of
fibers on the behavior of normal strength concrete, the beams transitioned from shear to flexure-shear.
mainly on shear: By modifying the failure mode, SFs increased the
- Steel fibers improve the compressive strength, ultimate load capacity of the RCBs.
splitting tensile strength and flexural strength. - The inclusion of SFs significantly improves the
The gain in strength is highest in splitting tensile ductility of normal strength concrete beams. When
strength. Steel fibers can considerably improve the sufficient and effective SFs were employed, ductility
tensile strength and concrete characteristics and indices as high as 3.19 were attained. This ductile
increase the resistance to fracturing. behavior is very important in seismic areas to
- The SFs effectively restrict cracks and absorb prevent brittle and disastrous failures, as seen in
residual forces beyond cracking. Furthermore, SFs numerous earthquake-prone areas across the world
spanning diagonal fissures effectively bridge them. [31,32].

177
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

- The concrete involvement in the shear capacity 917–928.

of normal strength concrete beams is undervalued by [8] Doo Y. Y., and Jun M. Y., Effects of Stirrup,
the main worldwide codes, whereas the transverse Steel fiber, and Beam Size on Shear Behavior of
steel contribution is overvalued. The analogy used to High-Strength Concrete Beams, Cement and
estimate the transverse steel contribution is built on Concrete Composites, 2018, doi:
the yielding of stirrups and does not include the 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.12.010.
crushing failure of concrete before such yielding at [9] Leone M., Centonze G., Colonna D., Micelli F.,
the critical shear regions, as is common in beams and Aiello M.A., Fiber-Reinforced Concrete
with smaller a/d values. The current study With Low Content of Recycled Steel Fiber:
demonstrated that sufficient steel fibers could Shear behaviour, Construction and Building
definitely replace such transverse reinforcement. Materials, Vol. 161, 2018, pp. 141–155.
- The inclusion of straight SFs increases the [10] Zewair M. S., Hamoodi A. Z., and Ojaimi M. F.,
shear strength by 35% for a quantity of fibers R f of Effect of Types of Fibres on the Shear Behaviour
0.5% to 44.5% for an R f value of 1.5%, exceeding of Deep Beam with opening, Periodicals of
the upgrading observed with transverse Engineering and Natural Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 2,
reinforcement when higher amounts of fibers are 2021, pp. 1086-1095.
utilized. Furthermore, the inclusion of effective SFs [11] ASTM Standard C33/C33M – 18, Standard
at a 1% volume content increases the shear strength Specification for Concrete Aggregate, ASTM
by 50.7% for 3 cm hooked SFs, 46% for 5 cm International, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-
hooked SFs and 43% for corrugated SFs. However, 2959, United States, 2019.
the rate of increase is not proportional to the amount [12] BSEN 12390-3, Method for Determination of
of fiber used. The fibers' aspect ratio and the quality Compressive Strength of Concrete Cubes,
of their bond with the cement paste appear to be published by BSI, 2009.
major factors in the contribution of fibers to shear [13] ASTM Standard C496/C496M – 17, Standard
strength. Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of
Cylindrical Concrete Specimens, ASTM
6. References International, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-
2959, United States, 2018.
[1] Juan N. G., Eduardo J. M. A., Pedro S. R., and [14] ASTM Standard C78/C78 – 18, Standard Test
Javier E. O., Experimental Study on The Steel- Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using
Fibre Contribution to Concrete Shear Behaviour, Simple Beam with Third-Point Loading), ASTM
Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 112, International, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-
2016, pp. 100-111. 2959, United States, 2019.
[2] Meda A., Minelli F., Plizzari G. A., and Riva P., [15] Lim D. H., Oh B. H., Experimental and
Shear Behaviour of Steel Fibre Reinforced Theoretical Investigation on The Shear of Steel
Concrete Beams, Material and Structures, Vol. Fiber Reinforced Concrete Beams, Eng. Struct.,
38, 2005, pp. 343-351. Vol. 21, 1999, pp. 37–44.
[3] Yining D., Zhiguo Y., and Said J., The [16] Tahenni T., Chemrouk M., and Lecompte T.,
Composite Effect of Steel Fibres and Stirrups on Effect of Steel Fibers on The Shear Behavior of
The Shear Behaviour of Beams Using Self- High Strength Concrete Beams, Construction and
Consolidating Concrete, Engineering Structures, Building Materials, Vol. 105, 2016, pp. 14–28.
Vol. 33, 2011, pp. 107–117. [17] Al-Ta’an S. A., and Al-Feel J. R., Evaluation of
[4] Hamid R. C., Mansour G., Arash K., Jorge de B., Shear Strength of Fiber Reinforced Concrete
and Mohsen K., Shear Behaviour of Concrete Beams”, Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol.
Beams With Recycled Aggregate and Steel 12, Issue 2, 1990, pp. 87–94.
Fibres, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. [18] Narayanan R., and Darwish I. Y. S., Use of
204, 2019, pp. 809–827. Steel Fibers as Shear Reinforcement, ACI Struct.
[5] Masoud A., Ali K., Ahmad D., Mahdi K., New J., Vol. 84, Issue 3, 1987, pp. 216–227.
Empirical Approach for Determining Nominal [19] Furlan S. Jr., and de Hanai J. B., Shear
Shear Capacity of Steel Fiber Reinforced Behaviour of Fiber Reinforced Concrete Beams,
Concrete Beams, Construction and Building Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 19, 1997,
Materials, Vol. 234, 2020, pp. 117293. pp. 359–366.
[6] Nogababi K., Beams of Fibrous Concrete in [20] Mansour G., Arash K., and Jorge de B.,
Shear and Bending, Journal of Structural Influence of Steel Fibres on The Flexural
Engineering, Vol. 126, 2000, pp. 243-251. Performance of Reinforced Concrete Beams
[7] Kim D. J., Naaman A. E., and El-Tawil S., With Lap-Spliced Bars”, Construction and
Comparative Flexural Behaviour of Four Fibre Building Materials, Vol. 229, 2019, pp. 116853.
Reinforced Cementitious Composites, Cement [21] Cohn M. Z., and Bartlett M., Computer-
and Concrete Composites, Vol. 30, 2008, pp. Simulated Flexural Test of The Partially

178
 International Journal of GEOMATE, Oct., 2021, Vol.21, Issue 86, pp.167-179

Prestressed Concrete Section, ASCE J. Struct. [28] BS 8110, Structural Use of Concrete-Part1,
Div., Vol. 5, 1982, pp. 2747–2765.
[22] Li V. C., and Leun G. C. K. Y., Steady-State Code of Practice for Design and Construction,
and Multiple Cracking of Short Random Fiber British Standards Institution, London, 1997, p.
Composites, J. Eng. Mech.-ASCE, Vol. 118, 173.
Issue 11, 1992, pp. 2246–2264. [29] Eurocode 2, Design of Concrete Structures-Part
[23] Swamy R. N., Jones R., and Chiam A. T. P., 1–1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings,
Influence of Steel Fibers on The Shear EN1992-1-1, R, 2004, p. 100.
Resistance of Lightweight Concrete T-Beams, [30] Cuchiara C., Mendola L., and Papia M.,
ACI Struct. J., Vol. 90, Issue 1, 1993, pp. 103– Effectiveness of Stirrups and Steel Fibers as
114. Shear Reinforcement, Cement and Concrete
[24] Arthur H. N., David D., Charles W. D., Design Composites, Vol. 26, Issue 7, 2004, pp. 777–786.
of Concrete Structures, Fourteenth Edition in SI [31] Ashour SA., Effect of Compressive Strength
Units, McMraw-Hill Companies Inc., 2010, pp. and Tensile Reinforcement Ratio on Flexural
1-742. Behavior of High-Strength Concrete Beams, Eng
[25] Taylor H. P. J., The Shear Strength of Large Struct., Vol. 22, 2000, pp. 413–23.
beams, Proc. ASCE, Vol. 98, 1972, pp. 2473– [32] Gunasekaran K., Annadurai R.,
2490. Kumar PS., Study on Reinforced Lightweight
[26] Fenwick R. C., Paulay T., Mechanisms of Shear Coconut Shell Concrete Beam Behavior Under
Resistance of Concrete Beams, J. Struct. Div.- Flexure, Mater. Des., Vol. 46, 2013, pp. 157–67.
ASCE, Vol. 94, 1968, pp. 2325–2350. Copyright © Int. J. of GEOMATE All rights reserved,
[27] ACI Committee 318, Building Code including making copies unless permission is obtained
from the copyright proprietors.
Requirements for Structural Concrete, ACI 318-
19, Farmington Hills, Mich, 2019.

179