Shear bond strength in repaired concrete structures

J. Silfwerbrand
Royal Institute of Technology and Swedish Cement and Concrcte Research Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

ABSTRACT
A good bond hetwecn old and new concrete is necessary
for a successful repair o f concrete structures. The bond is
itsually determined tliroogh pure tensioii tests. e.g.. the
coninion pull o f f test. However, in most applications, the
shear bond strengtli is more interested. A test apparatus for
torsion tests has been developed. Laboratory and field tests
have hecn carried out on cast in place concrete and
sbotcrete repairs. For waterjetted surfaces, the obtained
shear bond strength exceeds 3 MPa. ;.e.. considerably more
thaii the iensilc bond strength which usually vanes between
I aiid 2 MPa. The shear bond strength is also markedly
higher than design strength values found in international
codes.
RÉSUMÉ
Une hoiine odhbreiice entre I 'uncien héiim rt /e nouveau
mi nécessaiiv 6 lu r&s.site de la riporaiion des structures
en béron. L údhérence esi habituellemeni déierminee a
portii, dessais en traction pure, comme par exemple un
ecsai chsiqiie d'adherenre. Cependunt. pour la plupari
de.s applications. la résistance au cisaillement de
I 'udhérence est un problime plus pertineni. Un iquipement
puur des essais de tor.vion a éié ddvelappé. Des iesis e17
luhoraroire ei sur site. concernanf du hiton coulé sur place
P I du héran projeié, onf éii rnenés. Pour les surfaces
iruities por hwirodém«liiion. la risisiance au cisaillement
de Iádhérenre dépasse 3 MPa, ce qui est largement
.supL:rieur a la résistance a la traction. qui varie
hobiiuellemerit enire I ei 2 MPa. Ainsi, la résisiance au
ri.vaillement de I 'adhérence est sensiblemeni plus éle>:ée
que le,?iwleuri preconisies par les code,?iniernaiionaux.

1. INTRODUCTION

Many concrete bridges show extensive damages due to

repeated freeze-thaw cycles. exposure to de-icing salt or
salt water. alkali-silica reactions. and intensive and
incrcasing trariic (Fig. I ) . I f t h c damage does not demand
replacement of the entire bridge, remnving deteriorated
concrete aiid replacing it with new concrete can repair the
bridge.
Repaired concrete structures usually contain interfaces
between old and new concrete. A good bond between the
remaining concrete (the substrate) and the repair material is
niiindatory for a successful repair. A good bond enables the
desigiicr to consider monolithic behaviour and it prevents
water and de-icing salts to transmit along the interface. The Fig. I - Damaged concrete bridge pier due to chloride initiated
qiiality of the bond is especially important if neither dowels reinforcement corrosion. (Photographer: M.Hassanzadeh, Lund
nor other iypcs of reinforcement are crossing the interface. University o f Technology, Sweden).
In Sweden niid several other coun@ies, the Water-jet used successfully for removal of deteriorated
technique (also Called hydrodemolition, Fig. 2) has been
[I-
31, The water+t technique deteriorated
 Fig. 4 - Old concrete beam bridge with new concrete overla)
and edge beams.

Fig. 2 -The water-jet technique consists of an electro- h

hydraulic robot provided with an oscillating high pressure
water lance and an insulated power unit (not shown in the Fig. 5 -Rectangular beam bxh subjected to shear force V .
figure)containing a high pressure pump, a water tank, and The maximum interface shear arises for a cross section with
WatR filtess. coinciding neutral plane and interface.

2. SHEAR STRESSES
In repaired concrete bridges (Fig. 4). there are two
loading types producing shear stresses in the interface
between old and new concrete. First. the shear force causes
shear stresses. The magnitude of the shear stress at the
interface is dependent on the geometrical relationship
between the neutral plane and the interface (Fig. 5). The
shear stress at the interface reaches a maximum if the
neutral plane coincides with the interfacc. Second, shear
stresses are caused hy differential shrinkage. I.<,.. shrinkage
Fig. 3 -The water-jet technique and subsequent water difference between the new cast overlay or replaccmcnt
cleaning leave a rough and sound concrete surface with high
potential for bonding the replacement concrete. concrete and the old substrate concrctc. This slicar slrcss
has a maximum at the edge o f t h c strticturc (Fig. 6 ) . Al the
edges. these two types ot' shear stresses might occur
efficiently leaving a rough and sound concrete surfaci simultaneously. It is outside the scope of this papcr to
without microcracks (Fig. 3). In the Swedish bridge code describe how these stresses cm bc siipcrposed. Solely the
[4], no doweis are needed between old and new concrete in stress state due to differential shrinkage is very complicatcd
areas with secondary load-canying behdviour if the
deteriorated concrete has been
removed by the water-jet
technique. (Secondary load-
carrying behaviour occurs, e.g., in
bridge deck parts that are not
located directly above girders.)
This beneficial rule is based on
thorough measurements on bond
between old and new concrete
giving very good results [I, 51.
The bond is usually determined
by puU off Fests or other methods
causing pure tension in the
interface. However, the interface in -2 ~ ~ ~

repaired concrete síructurcs is only -05 -04 - 0 3 - 0 2 - 0 1 o 0 1 o2 o 7 o4 o5

locally (at small zones close to the dL
edges [ 6 ] )subjected to pure tension
perpendicular to the interface
plane. ln many practical cases, it 1 L/2 I LQ 1
might be more interesting to n n II

meawre the shear strength of the Fig. 6 Computed shear siresses in the interface in an 8 in1 lung comp>siteconcreie heam according to
~

bond. [R, 91. 'ksolid line is based on a simple theory (pnmsed in ihl and also u\ed i i i FIP Il(i11. tlic dahcd
line on a inure accurate method (proposed in [8. Y])
to aiialyse. A recent and comprehensive investigation
has been conducted 171.
Shrinkage develops slowly in concrete. Hence, it is
important to consider the henelicial effect of the new
1
concrete's creep that considerably will reduce the
stresses due to differential shrinkage [XI. Still, the shear d)
stresses inight he quite high. Consequently, the
interface must have sufficient shear strength in order to
prevent cracking.

3. TEST METHODS I

Several test methods have beeii developed to determine

bond strength hetwccn an »Id concrete substrate and new-
t concrete (Fig. 7 ) . The most widespread method is the
pull o f ftest that either can bc camcd 01.11 in the laboratory
or in-situ (Figs. 7a and b). A core is drilled through new
and old concrete (Fig. 8). lfthe pull on'tnt is carried out in
the laboratory (Fig. ?a). the core is carefully broken at the
bottom. Top aiid hottoin sutiaces are made even and
tensile forces applied along the cylindrical axis either by
gluing steel plates to the core (as shown in the figure) or by
íiiction grips clamping around the core. In-situ pull off Fig. 7 Various test methods to determine bond strength: a) pull off
~

tests (Fig. 7b) are carried out by placing a loading hipod lest carried out in the lab, b) pull off test in-situ, c ) torsion tesf in
above the core and applying a load either to a glued steel situ. d) slant shear test, e & 0 shear tests, g ) wedge splitting lest,
plate or a clanipd friction grip attaching the core. If the and h) guillotine test.
load does not liave any eccentricity, the failure load
divided hy the cross section area gives a pure tensilc strength.
This tensile strength equals the bond strength irthe failure runs
through the iiiterface. If the failure occurs in old or new
concrete, the measured strength value is a lower bound of the
bond strength.
Shear strength i m y be determined by applying shear forces Fig. 8 - Core
drilling on a
parallel to the interface (Figs. 7e and 0. If the test SPLC
3 imen repaired concrete
consists of two parts, the problem is that a bending moment bridge deck.
also arises as soon as you apply the load. A method to solve
tliis prohlcrn is to LISCa test specimen consisting of three pans
(Fig. 7t). However, this test has another disadvantage since it
has two interfaces instead of one. Such an interior repair does
hardly exist in realiiy. Siniilar to the sliear specimen with two
parts is the guillotine method letting a weight fall on a
protruding pan of the new concrete (Fig. 7h). This method has
successfiilly been used [ I l l . Tschegg et O/. [I21 have
dcvcloped a wedge splitting test method enabling the
determination of frdcture mechanics properties of the bond
(Fig. 7%). A test niethod that is frequently used to determine
bond between a substrate and a repair material is the slant
shear test (Fig. 7d). In this case. the interface is subjected to
combined shear aiid compression.
All shear lest inelhods described above have one
disadvantage in c«minon: the test specimens have to be
prepared in the laboratory. In some cases, the specimen has
even to be cast in the laboratory. Consequently, a test
niethod that can he conducted in-situ is desired. The
Depaninent of Structural Engincering, KTH, has developed
such a iniethod. The test specimen is the same as the in-situ
pull off test. The difference is that a torsional moment is
applied to the core instead of a tensile force (Fig. 7c).
The apparatus for determining the shear bond strength
consists of a stud, three steel bars, a moment converter (25
times amplificatioii), a torsion gauge, rotational and spherical
bearings. a cylindrical stcel plate, and a data acquisition unit Fig. 9 -Torsion test apparatus [SI,
holding the maximum value (Fig. 9). The stand is fixed to the
concrete surface with three expander bolts, The steel plate is
glued to the top surface of the drilled core that is still unbroken
fmm the old concrete. The íhree bars are fwed in three holes in
the steel plate. A torsional moment is applied to the top ofthe
bars by using the moment converter. The bearings prevent the
development of normal forces, shear forces, and bending
moments. At the torsion tfft, the torsional mnment T is
successively increased to failure. Assuming linear elastic
behaviour, the relationship between shear stress rand torsional
moment can be computed by the following equation:
where, 4 is the core diameter. For purely plastic materials,
the relationship between shear stress and torsional moment
has the following expression:
12 T were carried out in order to compare the interface type on the
i.e,, for a constant torsional moment the shear stress for a
piastic material is 25 percent less than corresponding value for
an eiastic value. Materials having other constitutive laws ought
to have shear stress - torsional moment relationships somewhere
between these two extremes. Thus, the error using either of the
two expressionsought to give limited errors. concrete is a brittle
material and, consequently, the linear elastic relationship
(Equation (1)) has been used. Anyway, numerical analyses of
the stresses and strains within the test specimen would be
desirable, but have not been included in this investigation.
The shear stress requals the shear strength 7- when the
torsional moment T reaches the failure moment T-. Only in
cases with complete interface failures, the shear st~ngthis
equal to the shear bond strength. For other failure modes, the
shear strength constitutes a lower bound of the shear bond
strength At KTH, the core diameter has been 100 mm and the
stress velocity approximately 0.1 MPais.
Possible sources of error in addition to the one due to
simplifications when hansfening torsional moment to shear
suength are normai forces that may occur simultaneously
when applying the torsional moment and calibration errors
when transfkng the gauge signal to a moment value. As
I Table 1 -Results of puU off tests and torsion tests
Pull off tests
umber o
nterface
siress failures
KTH Lab (hammer)
KTH Lab (sandbl.) 2.38
TrollhKttan (waterjet) I .46
Shotcrete
KTH Lab (waterjet) 16 1.72
0.38
mentioned above, the bearings have been designed to
minimize the influence of normal forces. A rough estimation
limits the sum of these latter errors to ten percent of tile
measured value. This is of about the same magnitude as for
pull-off tests measured in-situ. We remember that shear and
tensile strengths of concrete both have a rather large inherited
scam. in order tn use this test method for standardised
laboratory tests, further studies and further development of the
test appataius are needed. That is, however, not the primaiy
goal of this paper. The aim is to compare the magnitude of the
shear bond Seength and the pure tensile bond strength
4. TESTS TO DETERMINE SHEAR BOND
STRENGTH
Tests to determine shear bond strength have been carried
out both on cast-in-place concrete and on shotcrete. In a
comprehensive study at KTH,pull off tests and torsion tests
bond strength [5, 131. Five test slabs were cast in two lifts.
Befoie placing the overlay, some part of the base slab was
removed. kdifferent removal techniques were compared
waterjetthg, pneumatic hammers, and sandblasting (Table 1 ).
Waterjetting is today the predominant removal technique in
many counbies [3] due to its efficiency, selectivity (removing
deteriorated concrete and leaving sound concrete), and result
(rough surface without microcracks), but was at that time
bright new.
In Sweden, waterjetting has been used to remove
deteriorated concrete hbridge decks since the middle of the
1980s. Pull off tests were carried out on many repaired bridge
decks for quality assurance, hut torsion tests were rare.
However, both pull off tests and torsion tests were carried out
on a bridge between Güteborg and TrollhMan in the west of
Sweden. Deteriorated concrete had been removed by
w a t e r j h g and replaced with a new concrete overlay. The
tesis werecaniedout inOctober 1987 (Table I).
Cast-in-place concrete is difficult to use when vertical and
overhead surfacff have to be repaired due to need of
complicated formwork On such surfaces, shotcrete is an
interesting alternative, Concrete repair with shotcrete has been
investigated at KTH [14. 151. Test slabs were waterjetted and
repayed with @-mix shotcrete. The slabs were subsequently
cut into beam specimens and loaded with either static or fatigue
Torsion tests
Average (umber of Average
failure CQIeS failure
stress stress
m (MPa)
2.23 9 3.97
0.96 9 3.42
1.73 5 4.51 1 3.93
1.50 10 3.50 O -
- 16 3.35 O __
- 9 2.85 7 -
loading. After these load tests, the bond strength was &ermined
by pull off tests and torsion test (Table 1). These laboratory tests
may also be compared with in-situ tests üom a bridge above the
railway in Gnosjo. This bridge was repaired with waterjetting
and dry-mix shotcrete in autumn 1987 (Table 1).
Analysing the test results, it is obvious that the shear bond
strength is considerably higher than the tensile bond strength.
Since the number of interface failures was very low in the
torsion tests, we have to compare average failure stresses. On
cast-in-place objects. the ratio between average shear e s s
and average tensile stress varies hetween 1.9 and 3.1. On
shotcrete object, corresponding ratio varies between 2 and 7.
Sandblasting gives a rather smooth surface compared to
waterjetting and pneumatic hammers. However, it promotes
very high average failure stress values. Caution not to jump to
conclusions since the ratio of interface failures was the highest
in the investigation. The table shows clearly that waterjetting is
bener than pneumatic h e m since both tensile and shear
stresses are higher and the number of interface failures is lower.
Finally, it can he stated that the shotcrete repair in
Gnosjo was not successful if you consider the pull off tests
(average tensile stress at failure = 0.38MPa). A tensile
strength exceeding I MPa is often required. It is, however,
interesting that the average shear stress at failure was
2.85 MPa, k..7 times higher than the tensile stress.
5. SHEAR RESISTANCE AT THE
INTERFACE
Shear resistance at the interface between two concretes is
dealt with in several codes. Usually, the design shear resistance
consists ofthree parts (i) the strength ofthe interface itself, (ii)
a term dependent on extemal compression forces across the
interface, and (iii) a term dependent on the reinforcement
crossing the interface. In the following comparison, oniy the
first parí has been included.
According to the Swedish handbook for concrete
structures [16], the design shear resistance at a watejmed,
properly cleaned interface is equal to 0.4 MPa.
The American code ACI 3 18-99 [ 171 deals with composite
shuchires in Chapter 17. Waterjetted surfaces are not dealt
with. For clean surfaces, free of laitance, and intentionally
roughened, the design shear resistance is limited to 0.55 MPa.
According to CEB-FIP MC 90 [18], the design shear
resistance at the interface is proportional to the compressive
strength &, if the surface is rough or indented. The
coefficient of proportionality is equal to 0.06. Hence, if&
= 20 MPa, e.g.,the design shear resistance is 1.2 MPa. The
code does not cover waterjetted surfaces.
The draft of Eumcode 2 [I91 states that the design shear
resistance at the interface is proportional to the design tensile
strength & of the weakest concrete. The coefficient of
proportionality is 0.45 for rough surfaces and 0.5 for indented
surfaces. If.& = 1.5 MPa, e.g., the design shear strength is
0.68 MPa at a rough interface. The draft does not deal with
waterjetted surfaces.
Comparisons between the design strength and the shear
strength obtained for waterjetted surfaces show a very large
discrepancy. The code writers ought to discem between
waterjetted and other mugh surfaces and enhance the design
shear strength for waterjetted interfaces considerably. Another,
maybe easier, way to deal with the problem is that the designer
only considers shear stresses due to shear forces and ignotes
shear stresses due to differential shrinkage. Most of the latter
stresses will disappear with time due to creep and the
likelihood that maximum shear force and maximum
differential shrinkage stress occur simultaneously is very low.
By comparing stresses caused by only one type of loading with
a considerably reduced strength, he will still be far on the
conservative side.
6. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Shear stresses arise in a repaired concrete shucture due to
both shear forces and differential shrinkage. In order to prevent
failure in the interface between old and new concrete, there
must he sufficient shear bond strength. Usually, the bond
seength is determined as a pure tensile strength measured
through pull off tests. A torsion test apparatus has been
developed to determine shear strength between old and new
concrete. At present, the shear strength is set to the maximum
shear stress computed with simple elastic relationships
between torsional moment and shear stress, hut a numerical
study of the stress state within the test specimen are desirable.
Measurements show that the shear bond strength is
considerably higher than the tensile bond strength, For
waterjetted surfaces, the obtained shear bond sfxength exceeds
3 MPa. This value is markedly higher than the existing design
strength values found in international codes. These results may
have the following impact on the practical design of composite
structures composed by old and new concrete:
In approximate design, the design shear stress may
solely contaiii mechanical stresses due to, e.g., traffic and
dead load. Stresses due to differential shrinkage are neglected
since the real shear bond strength is several times larger than
the design shear strength in available design codes.
In a more accurate design, the design shear stress ought
to contain both mechanical stresses and stresses due to
differential shrinkage. The design shear strength ought to he
based on bond strength measurements on similar objects
repaired with identical removal technique, similar concrete,
and similar casting and curing procedures. The used design
strength ought to he verified by bond strength tests on the
completed repaired structure.
For shotcrete repair, general design recommendations
are dificult to give since the repair result is very sensitive to
the quality of the old, remaining concrete, removal technique,
cleaning procedures, shotcreting, and curing procedures. A
preliminary design has to he refined once or several times
depending on the outcome of the repair and test results.
REFERENCES
[I] Silfwwbrand. J.. ‘Irnpror,ing concrete bond in repaired
bridge decks’, Concrea Iniemufional12 (9)(1990) 61-66.
[2] Silfwcrbrand, J. and Paulsson. J.. ‘The Swedish experience:
better bonding of bridge deck overlays’, Concreie
/niwnu/kwwa 20 ( IO ) (I998) 56-61.
[3] Stromdahl. C., ‘The histoy of hydrodemolition’, Concrete
Engineering lnlevnorionol4 ( 8 ) (2000) 32-36.
[4] Swedish National Road Administration, ‘BRO 94.Regularions
for Bridges’. Pan 7, ‘Bridge Maintenance’, (Borlünge. Sweden.
1994)47 pp. (Only available in Swedish).
[SI Silfwaorand, I., ‘Effenr of dü€erentiai shrinkage, creep, and
pmpaties of the contact sur$ce on the strength of coBposite
concrete slabs of old and new concm’. Bulletin No. 147. @ept
of Stnrtural Mechanics and En- Royal Institute of
Technology,Stockholm, Sweden, 1987). 131 pp. (Only available
in Swedish).
[6] Jonasson, J.-E., ’Computer programs for non-linear analyses
of concrete in the view of shrinkage, creep and temperature‘.
Research report No. 7:77. (Swedish Cement and Concrete
Research Institute, Stockholm. Sweden, 1977) 161p. (Only
available in Swedish).
[7] Bernard, O., ‘Comportement i long terme des éléments de
slructure formes de bétons d’iges différents’, Thesis No.
2283 (Depamnent of Civil Engineering, EPFL, Lausanne,
Switzerland, 2000) 189p.
[SI Silfwerbrand, J., ’Stresses and strains in composite concrete
beams subjected to differential shrinkage’, ACI Slruciurul
Journul94 ( 4 )(1997) 347-353.
191 Silfwetnívid J., ‘Concrete overlays’. Repm No. 10, 3“ Edition
10. (Chair of Sbuctlnal Mechanics and Engneenng, Dept. of
Sltmtmil Engin&& Royal Institute ofTecbmlogy, StwMiolm,
Sw+ 1997)65p. (Only aMilable in Swedish).
[lo] Fédération Internationale de la Préconhainte, ‘Shear at the
interface of precast and in-situ concrete’. Guide to good
practice. (Wexham Springs, Slough, 1982). 31 pp.
[Ill Delatte, N.J., Wade, D.M. and Fowler, D.W., ‘Laboratory and
field testing of concrete bond for expedited bonded concrete
overlays’, AClMuieriais Joumul97 (3) (2000) 272-280.
[I21 Tschegg, E.K., Ingruber. M., Surberg. C.H. and Münger, F.,
’Factors influencing fracture behavior of old-new concrete
bonds’, ACI Muterids Journal 97 (4) (2000) 447-453.
[I31 Silfwerbrand, J., ‘Theoretical and experimental sNdy of
strength and behaviour of repaired concrete bridge decks
summary’. Bulletin No. 149. (Dept. of Structural Mechanics
and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm,
Sweden, 1987) 16p.
[I41 Silfwerbrand, J., ‘Concrete repair with shotcrete. Tests on
beams under static and fatigue load’. Bulletin No. 153.
(Dept. of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal
institute of Technology, Stwkholm, Sweden, 1988) 77p.
(Only available in Swedish).
[U] Silfwerbrand, J., ’Concrete repair with shotcrete’ in
‘Durability of Strucmes’. Proceedings of the IABSE
Symposium Lisbon, September 1989,785-790.
[I61 Swedish National Board ofHoushg, Building and Planning and
AB Svensk Byggtjjlrnss ‘BBK 94. Concrete srmcium, part I -
smctural design’. H a n b k . (Karl~laona and Stockholm,
Sweden, 1994) 1 8 5 ~(Only
. available in Swedish).
1171 American Concrete Institute, ‘ACI 318 (1999). Building
code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-99) and
commentary (ACI 31 8R-99)’ (Farmington Hills, Michigan,
USA, 1990) 391p.
[I81 Comité Euro-International du Béton et Féderation
Internationale de la Préconhainte, ‘CEB-FIP Model Code
1990‘ (Thomas Telford Services Ltd, London, 1993). 437 p,
[I91 European Committee for Standardization, ‘Eurocode 2.
Design of Concrete Structures‘, 2nd drafi. (BNssels.
Belgium. January 2001).
P a p r received: December 14, 2001; Paper rrccrpred June 27, 2002