materials

Article
Investigation of the Match Relation between Steel
Fiber and High-Strength Concrete Matrix in Reactive
Powder Concrete
Guangyao Yang, Jiangxiong Wei *, Qijun Yu, Haoliang Huang and Fangxian Li
School of Materials Science and Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China;
yangguangyao1988@outlook.com (G.Y.); concyuq@scut.edu.cn (Q.Y.); h.l.huang@msn.com (H.H.);
msfxli@scut.edu.cn (F.L.)
* Correspondence: jxwei@scut.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-020-87114137




Received: 6 May 2019; Accepted: 28 May 2019; Published: 29 May 2019


Abstract: This study investigated the strength and toughness of reactive powder concrete (RPC)
made with various steel fiber lengths and concrete strengths. The results indicated that among RPC
samples with strength of 150 MPa, RPC reinforced with long steel fibers had the highest compressive
strength, peak strength, and toughness. Among the RPC samples with strength of 270 MPa, RPC
reinforced with short steel fibers had the highest compressive strength, and peak strength, while RPC
reinforced with medium-length steel fibers had the highest toughness. As a result of the higher bond
adhesion between fibers and ultra-high-strength RPC matrix, long steel fibers were more effective for
the reinforcement of RPC with strength of 150 MPa, while short steel fibers were more effective for
the reinforcement of RPC with strength of 270 MPa.

Keywords: match; steel fiber; reactive powder concrete; strength; flexural toughness

1. Introduction
Reactive powder concrete (RPC) is an advanced cement-based material [1–4]. It has been
reported to have remarkable mechanical performance, such as compressive strength between 200
and 800 MPa, flexural strength between 30 and 60 MPa, fracture energy between 1200 and 40,000
J/m2 , Young’s modulus between 50,000 and 60,000 MPa, and ultimate tensile strain in the order of
1% [5]. Its low permeability, dense microstructure, and superior mechanical properties make RPC a
high-performance concrete. This is generally achieved by a microstructural engineering approach,
including the utilization of admixtures, reduction of the water-to-cementitious material ratio, very fine
particle size, and reduction of the CaO-to-SiO2 ratio by introducing silica components and excluding
coarse aggregates [6–8]. Due to its outstanding performance, RPC has shown great potential in a
wide variety of applications, such as civil engineering structures, impact-resistant structures, nuclear
engineering structures, and corrosion-resistant structures [9,10].
However, RPC is still a quasi-brittle material. The inclusion of steel fiber can significantly enhance
the toughness of RPC and overcome its disadvantage of high brittleness. Steel fibers play a key role in
decreasing crack initiation, controlling crack propagation, and effectively increasing the compressive,
tensile, and flexural strength [11–15].
The mechanical performance of steel fiber-reinforced RPC is affected by many factors.
Al-Tikrite [16] investigated the effects of steel fiber type, content, and geometry on the mechanical
properties of RPC. It was found that the addition of 4% industrial micro-steel fiber achieved the highest
increase in compressive strength and tensile strength. The toughness was increased by increasing
the volume content of steel fibers. The addition of 4% industrial micro-steel fiber and 3% waste

Materials 2019, 12, 1751; doi:10.3390/ma12111751 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2019, 12, 1751 2 of 12

steel fiber individually achieved an increase in the typical toughness of the RPC by 249.8% and
158.8%, respectively. Wu [17] reported that steel fiber content and shape had significant effects on
the compressive and flexural behavior of RPC. Steel fiber content had limited effect on first-crack
strength and first-crack deflection but showed considerable effects on the peak load of the flexural
load–deflection curve. Tomasz [18] observed that both the volume of steel fibers and the curing
conditions influence the flexural behavior of RPC. Mostofinejad [19] studied the effects of different
mixtures and cure treatments to determine the optimum parameters for the enhancement of RPC
compressive strength.
Among all the aforementioned factors influencing RPC, steel fiber length has also received
attention from many researchers. Olivito [20] reported that the length of steel fibers influences the
post-cracking behavior and the tensile strength, while it has a little effect on the compressive strength.
Ipek [21] stated that steel fiber size and pre-setting pressure influence the flexural strength and fracture
toughness of RPC. Abbas [22] investigated the influence of steel fiber length and content on RPC
mechanical and durability performance. The results showed that RPC mixtures incorporating short
steel fibers exhibited enhanced flexural properties compared to mixtures with a similar volume of
longer steel fibers. Sovjak [23,24] found that the effective fracture energy of ultra-high-performance
fiber-reinforced concrete was dependent on both the fiber volume fraction and the fiber aspect ratio,
and the fracture energy increased as the aspect ratio increased. Xia [25] studied the effects of steel fiber
length on the mechanical properties of RPC and found that steel fiber length had a small impact on the
compressive strength, but that the fracture energy sharply decreased by about 50% when the steel fiber
length was reduced from 12 to 3 mm. Kim [26] reported that the mechanical properties of a concrete
mixture using a single steel fiber length of 13 mm were better than those of mixtures with fiber lengths
of 16.5 or 19.5 mm.
The previous studies discussed above gave contradictory conclusions about the relationship
between steel fiber length and reinforcement effect on RPC. This could be caused by differences in
the properties of concrete, which would obscure the relation between steel fiber and RPC matrix.
Currently, little information is available about the relation between steel fibers of different lengths
and mechanical properties of RPC matrices. Accordingly, this study experimentally investigated the
mechanical properties, including compressive strength and flexural toughness, of three RPC reinforced
with different lengths of steel fibers and exhibiting different strengths. Then, the match relation between
fiber length and reinforcement effect on the various RPCs was analyzed on the basis of the bond
adhesion between the fibers and the matrix.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Raw Materials

Ordinary Type II, 52.5-grade Portland cement (Zhujiang Cement Co. Ltd., Guangzhou, China)
and silica fume (Elkem Co.Ltd., Shanghai, China) with the chemical composition examined by x-ray
fluorescence shown in Table 1 were used in this work. The sand used was sieved local natural sand
with maximum particle size of 315 µm. The mean particle size of fine quartz powder used was 10 µm.
A polycarboxylate-based superplasticizer with water-reducing efficiency greater than 30% was chosen
for the preparation of RPC. The properties of the steel fibers used in the experiment are shown in
Table 2.

Table 1. Chemical composition of raw materials (wt.%).

Chemical
SiO2 Al2 O3 Fe2 O3 CaO MgO K2 O Na2 O SO3 TiO2
Composition
Cement 19.66 4.29 3.37 62.52 0.85 0.62 0.08 2.61 0.24
Silica fume 95.74 0.50 / 1.25 0.63 1.07 0.33 0.15 /
Materials 2019, 12, 1751 3 of 12

Table 2. Properties of steel fibers. S: short, M: medium, L: long.

Equivalent Tensile Elastic

Length Aspect Density Elongation
Abbreviation Diameter Strength Module
(mm) Ratio (g/cm3 ) (%)
(mm) (MPa) (GPa)
S 6 0.16 37.5 7.8 >3000 >210 <4
M 12 0.16 75 7.8 >3000 >210 <4
L 20 0.16 125 7.8 >3000 >210 <4

2.2. Mixture of Concrete Matrix and Its Compressive Strength

Table 3 summarizes the control mixture proportions of RPC with different components used
in the testing program. We used RPCs with steel fiber contents of 0.5% (S-RPC: 0.5% short steel
fiber-reinforced RPC, M-RPC: 0.5% medium-length steel fiber-reinforced RPC, and L-RPC: 0.5% long
steel fiber-reinforced RPC) and 2.0% (SS-RPC: 2.0% short steel fiber-reinforced RPC, MM-RPC: 2.0%
medium-length steel fiber-reinforced RPC, and LL-RPC: 2.0% long steel fiber-reinforced RPC) by
volume. The superplasticizer dosage was fixed at 3.0% by mass of the cementitious materials.

Table 3. Mix proportions of reactive powder concrete (RPC) matrix and its compressive strength.

Quartz Compressive
Silica Fume
Batch no. Cement (C) Sand (S/C) Powder Water (W/C) Strength
(SF/C)
(Qu/C) (MPa)
RPC150 1 0.2 1.3 / 0.19 159.24
RPC200 1 0.2 1.3 / 0.15 205.46
RPC270 1 0.25 0.5 0.4 0.17 277.64

2.3. Sample Preparation and Experiments

Dry powders, including cement, silica fume, natural sand, and quartz powder, were first mixed
for 3 min. This was followed by the addition of water and superplasticizer and mixing for 6 min.
Afterwards, fibers were gradually added by hand and mixed for a minimum of 6 min until the
ingredients were uniformly distributed. When the mixtures were ready, they were cast into oiled molds
and vibrated for consolidation. The specimens were demolded after 1 day and then placed in 90 ◦ C
water for 7 days of curing. For 24 h prior to the tests, the specimens were allowed to air-dry in the
laboratory. For each mixture, three cubes measuring 70.7 × 70.7 × 70.7 mm3 and six beams measuring
40 × 40 × 160 mm3 were prepared. After drying, the beams were slotted as described below, and all
specimens were wiped to remove debris.
Compressive strength tests were carried out on the cube specimens. Three-point flexural testing
with displacement control was conducted on the beam specimens (universal material testing machine,
Suns Co. Ltd., Shenzhen, China, 0.05 mm/min control speed, 150 mm span). Before testing, the beam
specimens were cut with a slot 12 mm deep. Each value presented in the results is the average of three
specimens. A total of 144 specimens were tested in this study.
During the flexural tests, the load and the mid-span deflection were recorded by a computer,
which generated and printed load–displacement curves. The first-crack strength and flexural toughness
of the load–displacement curves were evaluated according to ASTM C78 and C1018 [27,28]. The
toughness index I20 is the value determined by dividing the area up to a deflection of 10.5 times the
first crack deflection by the area up to the first crack. It reflects the ability of concrete to absorb energy
after cracking. In general, the higher the toughness index is, the greater the energy absorption, which
means greater toughness.
In addition, single-fiber pull-out tests [29,30] were conducted to measure the interfacial adhesion
property between steel fibers and the RPC matrix. The fibers were embedded to depths of 5.0, 7.5, or
10.0 mm in the middle of RPC beams during their preparation. The final dimension of a single-fiber
pull-out sample is shown in Figure 1. Pull-out tests were conducted on specimens with a universal
Materials 2019, 12, 1751 4 of 12

Materials
Materials 2019,
2019, 12,
12, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 44 of
of 12
12
material testing machine at a speed of 0.1 mm/min. Three tests were conducted on each sample to
samplethe
obtain to average
obtain the averageload.
maximum maximum
A totalload.
of 27 A total of 27
specimens specimens
were subjectedwere subjected
to pull-out to pull-out
tests.
tests.

(a) (b)
1. Single-fiber pull-out
Figure 1.
Figure test: (a) schematic and (b) photo.
pull-out test:

The average bond strength of the fiber–matrix

fiber–matrix interface
interface was
was computed
computed by
by dividing
dividing the
the average
average
maximum pull-out load by the bonding area
maximum pull-out load by the bonding area cross
cross section:
section:

FF
ττ== , (1)
(1)
πds
π ds
where
where ττ is
is the
the bond
bond strength
strength of
of the
the fiber–matrix
fiber–matrix interface,
interface, F
F is
is the
the maximum
maximum pull-out
pull-out load, d is
load, d is the
the
fiber
fiber diameter,
diameter, and
and ss is
is the
the embedded
embedded length
length of
of the
the fiber.
fiber.

3. Mechanical Property Test Results

3. Mechanical Property Test Results
3.1. Compressive Strength
3.1. Compressive Strength
As can be seen from Figure 2, all steel fibers generally greatly increased the compressive strength
As can be seen from Figure 2, all steel fibers generally greatly increased the compressive
of all RPC batches, and the strength increased with increasing fiber content. Steel fiber length had
strength of all RPC batches, and the strength increased with increasing fiber content. Steel fiber
a small effect on the compressive strength of RPC. To be specific, long steel fibers showed slightly
length had a small effect on the compressive strength of RPC. To be specific, long steel fibers showed
better strength improvement for RPC150, while short steel fibers showed slightly better strength
slightly better strength improvement for RPC150, while short steel fibers showed slightly better
improvement for RPC200 and RPC270.
strength improvement for RPC200 and RPC270.

(a) (b)
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Effect
Effect of
of steel
steel fiber length on
fiber length on the
the compressive
compressive strength
strength of RPCs: (a)
of RPCs: (a) 0.5%
0.5% fiber
fiber content
content and
and
(b) 2.0%
(b) 2.0% fiber
fiber content.
content.

3.2. Flexural Load–Deflection

3.2. Flexural Load–Deflection Curves
Curves
Figures
Figures 3–5
3–5 compare
compare the the flexural
flexural load–deflection curves of
load–deflection curves of RPC
RPC beams
beams of of various
various strengths
strengths
reinforced
reinforced with
withsteel fibers
steel of different
fibers lengths.lengths.
of different It was found
It wasthatfound
the unreinforced RPC demonstrated
that the unreinforced RPC
relatively brittle behavior. The behavior of the samples during the flexural test was
demonstrated relatively brittle behavior. The behavior of the samples during the flexural test was almost linear
elastic
almostup to the
linear peak-load
elastic up tovalues, but then the
the peak-load curves
values, butsloped
then downward
the curves until
slopedthedownward
complete separation
until the
of the samples
complete into two
separation parts.
of the However,
samples when
into two steel
parts. fibers were
However, when incorporated, the samples
steel fibers were could
incorporated,
the samples could sustain further load after cracking. The decreasing deflection trends were flatter,
and the flexural curves depended on the properties of the added fibers and their combinations. In
Materials 2019, 12, 1751 5 of 12

Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 12

sustain further
Materials 2019, 12,load
x FORafter
PEERcracking.
REVIEW The decreasing deflection trends were flatter, and the flexural 5 of 12
addition,
curves with
2019, 12, xincreased
Materials depended FOR
onPEER steel
the REVIEWfiber content,
properties the areas
of the added under
fibers and the curve
their increased, with
combinations. greater5 peak
In addition, of 12
with
load. Moreover,
addition,
increased with
steel with
fiber increased
increased
content, thesteel
steel fiberfiber
areas length,
content,
under the
the the curves
areas
curve became
under more
thewith
increased, curve voluminous
increased,
greater in all
with
peak load. batches,
greater
Moreover, peak
addition,
with higher
load. with
peak
Moreover, increased
load
with in steel
RPC150fiber
increased content,
but
steellower
fiber the
peak areas
length,load under
in
the the
RPC270.
curves curve
became increased,
more with
voluminous
with increased steel fiber length, the curves became more voluminous in all batches, with higher peak greater
in all peak
batches,
load.
with
load Moreover,
in higher peak
RPC150 with
but increased
load
lower inpeak steelbut
RPC150
load fiber
in length,
lower
RPC270. peaktheload
curves became more voluminous in all batches,
in RPC270.
with higher peak load in RPC150 but lower peak load in RPC270.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 3. Flexural load–deflection curves for RPC150: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b) 2.0% fiber
(a) (b)
content.
Figure 3. Flexural load–deflection curves for RPC150: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b) 2.0% fiber
Figure 3.3. Flexural
content.
Figure Flexuralload–deflection
load–deflection curves
curves for for RPC150:
RPC150: (a) 0.5%
(a) 0.5% fiber content
fiber content and (b)and
2.0%(b) 2.0%
fiber fiber
content.
content.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 4. Flexural load–deflection curves for RPC200: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b) 2.0% fiber
(a) (b)
content.
Figure
Figure 4. Flexural
4. Flexural load–deflection
load–deflection curves
curves for RPC200:
for RPC200: (a) 0.5%(a) 0.5%
fiber fiber and
content content andfiber
(b) 2.0% (b) content.
2.0% fiber
Figure 4. Flexural load–deflection curves for RPC200: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b) 2.0% fiber
content.
content.

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
Figure 5.5. Flexural
Figure Flexuralload–deflection
load–deflection curves
curves for for RPC270:
RPC270: (a) 0.5%
(a) 0.5% fiber content
fiber content and (b)and
2.0%(b) 2.0%
fiber fiber
content.
(a) (b)
content.
Figure 5. Flexural load–deflection curves for RPC270: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b) 2.0% fiber
The
Figureeffects of steelload–deflection
5. Flexural
content. fiber length oncurves
first-crack strength,
for RPC270: (a)peak
0.5%strength, and peak
fiber content deflection
and (b) 2.0% fiberof RPC
The
samples effects
with
content. of steel
different fiber length
strengths on first-crack
are illustrated strength,
in Figures 6–8. Itpeak strength,
is obvious that,and
withpeak deflection of
the reinforcement
RPC
of samples
steel fibers,
The withfirst-crack
the
effects ofdifferent strengths
strength,
steel fiber are first-crack
lengthpeak
on illustratedand
strength, in peak
Figures
strength, 6–8.strength,
deflection
peak It all
is obvious
increasedthat,
and peak with the of
significantly,
deflection
RPCThesamples
effects
reinforcement of of
withsteel
steel fiberthe
fibers,
different length on first-crack
first-crack
strengths strength,
are strength, peak strength,
peak strength,
illustrated in Figures and peak
6–8. and peak deflection
deflection
It is obvious all withofthe
increased
that,
RPC samplesand
significantly,
reinforcement with different
ofthey
steel fibers,strengths
increased the with are illustrated
increasing
first-crack in Figures
fiber content.
strength, peak From6–8.
strength, the
andIt figures,
is obvious
peak that,all
RPC150
deflection with
with the
long
increased
reinforcement
steel fibers had
significantly, ofand
steelthey
the fibers,
highest the first-crack
first-crack
increased strength,
withstrength,
increasing peakpeak
fiber strength,
strength,
content. andandpeak
From peak deflection
the deflection.
figures, all increased
RPC200
RPC150 with and
long
significantly, and they increased with increasing fiber content. From the figures,
steel fibers had the highest first-crack strength, peak strength, and peak deflection. RPC200 and RPC150 with long
steel fibers had the highest first-crack strength, peak strength, and peak deflection. RPC200 and
steel fibers had the highest peak deflection at 2% fiber content), but RPC200 with medium-length
steel fibers had the highest first-crack strength and peak strength, while RPC270 with short steel
fibers had the highest first-crack strength and peak strength.
For RPC150, the first-crack strength increased by 1.1% and 5.3% with 0.5% and 2.0% short steel
Materials 2019, 12, 1751
fiber and increased by 4.7% and 9.1% with 0.5% and 2.0% long steel fiber, respectively. The 6peak of 12

strength increased by 36.3% and 211.1% with 0.5% and 2.0% short steel fiber and increased by
174.2%
and theyand 489.1% with
increased with increasing
0.5% and 2.0% long steelFrom
fiber content. fiber,the
respectively. For RPC270,
figures, RPC150 with longthesteel
first-crack
fibers
strength increased by 8.7% and 10.0% with 0.5% and 2.0% short steel fiber
had the highest first-crack strength, peak strength, and peak deflection. RPC200 and RPC270and increased by 6.0%with
and
7.7% steel
long with fibers
0.5% and
also 2.0% long
had the steel fiber,
highest peak respectively. The peak
deflection (RPC200 withstrength increasedsteel
medium-length by 409.1% and
fibers had
884.8% with 0.5% and 2% short steel fiber and increased by 253.4% and 687.6% with
the highest peak deflection at 2% fiber content), but RPC200 with medium-length steel fibers had the 0.5% and 2.0%
long steel
highest fiber, respectively.
first-crack strength andIn general,
peak the while
strength, first-crack
RPC270 strength and steel
with short peakfibers
strength of RPC150
had the highest
increased with increasing fiber
first-crack strength and peak strength.length. In comparison, these two strengths of RPC270 decreased with
increasing fiber length.

(a) (b)
Figure 6.
Figure 6. Effects
Effectsofofsteel
steelfiber
fiberlength
length
onon first-crack
first-crack strength
strength of RPC:
of RPC: (a) 0.5%
(a) 0.5% fiberfiber content
content and2.0%
and (b) (b)
2.0% content.
fiber fiber content.

(a) (b)
Figure 7.
Figure 7. Effects
Effectsofofsteel
steelfiber
fiberlength onon
length peak strength
peak of RPC:
strength (a) 0.5%
of RPC: fiberfiber
(a) 0.5% content and (b)
content and2.0% fiber
(b) 2.0%
content.
Materials
fiber2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
content. 7 of 12

(a) (b)

Figure 8. Effects of steel fiber length on peak deflection of RPC: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b) 2.0%
fiber content.

3.3. Flexural Toughness Index

The effects of steel fiber length on the flexural toughness index I20 of RPCs with different
strengths are summarized in Figure 9. The data indicated that the toughness index of all RPC batches
was increased greatly with all steel fibers, and the index increased with increasing fiber content. As
Materials 2019, 12, 1751 (a) (b) 7 of 12

Figure 8. Effects of steel fiber length on peak deflection of RPC: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b) 2.0%
fiber content.
For RPC150, the first-crack strength increased by 1.1% and 5.3% with 0.5% and 2.0% short steel
fiber and increased by 4.7% and 9.1% with 0.5% and 2.0% long steel fiber, respectively. The peak
3.3. Flexural Toughness Index
strength increased by 36.3% and 211.1% with 0.5% and 2.0% short steel fiber and increased by 174.2%
The effects
and 489.1% withof0.5% steel fiber
and 2.0%length
long onsteelthe flexural
fiber, toughness
respectively. Forindex
RPC270,I20 oftheRPCs with different
first-crack strength
strengths
increased are summarized
by 8.7% and 10.0% in with
Figure 9. The
0.5% anddata
2.0%indicated
short steelthat theand
fiber toughness
increased index of alland
by 6.0% RPC batches
7.7% with
was
0.5%increased
and 2.0% greatly with
long steel all steel
fiber, fibers, and
respectively. Thethe index
peak increased
strength with increasing
increased by 409.1% fiber content.with
and 884.8% As
shown
0.5% and in 2%
RPC150 and RPC200,
short steel fiber and short steelby
increased fibers gave
253.4% andthe lowest
687.6% toughness
with 0.5% andindex, and long
2.0% long steel
steel fiber,
fibers gave the
respectively. highestthetoughness
In general, first-crack index.
strengthForandRPC270, short ofsteel
peak strength fibers
RPC150 still gave
increased withthe lowest
increasing
toughness
fiber length.index, and medium-length
In comparison, these twosteel fibersofgave
strengths the highest
RPC270 toughness
decreased index. fiber length.
with increasing
From the figure, the toughness index increased with increasing fiber length in RPC150. The
3.3. Flexural
toughness Toughness
index Indexcontent of short, medium, and long steel fibers was 8.17, 10.02, and 18.82
with 0.5%
timesThehigher,
effectsrespectively, at the on
of steel fiber length first
thecrack.
flexuralThe toughness
toughness indexindex
I20 ofwith
RPCs2.0% content strengths
with different of short,
medium, and long steel fibers was 17.51, 21.48, and 37.35 times higher,
are summarized in Figure 9. The data indicated that the toughness index of all RPC batches respectively, at the first crack.
was
However, for RPC270,
increased greatly thesteel
with all toughness index
fibers, and theincreased in the order
index increased of short, long,
with increasing and medium
fiber content. steel
As shown
fibers. The and
in RPC150 increase
RPC200,wasshort
18.7, steel
30.2, fibers
and 31.0,
gaveand 56.06, 61.99,
the lowest and 63.31
toughness index,times withsteel
and long 0.5%fibers
and 2.0%
gave
fiber content, respectively. To summarize, RPC150 and RPC200 reinforced
the highest toughness index. For RPC270, short steel fibers still gave the lowest toughness index, with long steel fibers
and
showed better flexural toughness, while RPC270
medium-length steel fibers gave the highest toughness index. reinforced with medium-length steel fibers showed
better flexural toughness.

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 9.
9. Effects
Effects of
of steel
steel fiber
fiber length
length on
on the
the toughness
toughness index
index II20 of RPC: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b)
20 of RPC: (a) 0.5% fiber content and (b)
2.0% fiber content.
2.0% fiber content.

4. Discussion
From the figure, the toughness index increased with increasing fiber length in RPC150. The
toughness index with 0.5% content of short, medium, and long steel fibers was 8.17, 10.02, and
4.1.
18.82Mechanism of Fiber
times higher, Reinforcement
respectively, at the first crack. The toughness index with 2.0% content of short,
medium, and long steel fibers was 17.51,structures
The destruction process of concrete 21.48, andcomprises
37.35 times higher,
the respectively,
initiation, growth, at the
and first crack.
coalesces of
However, for until
microcracks, RPC270, the toughness
macrocracks index
appear andincreased in the order
finally produce of short,
failure. The long,
main and medium
function steel
of fiber
fibers. The increase was 18.7, 30.2, and 31.0, and 56.06, 61.99, and 63.31 times with 0.5% and 2.0% fiber
content, respectively. To summarize, RPC150 and RPC200 reinforced with long steel fibers showed
better flexural toughness, while RPC270 reinforced with medium-length steel fibers showed better
flexural toughness.

4. Discussion

4.1. Mechanism of Fiber Reinforcement

The destruction process of concrete structures comprises the initiation, growth, and coalesces
of microcracks, until macrocracks appear and finally produce failure. The main function of
fiber reinforcement is to control the cracking and prevent catastrophic failures in fiber-reinforced
cement-based material.
Materials
Materials 2019,
2019, 12,
12, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 88 of
of 12
12
Materials 2019, 12, 1751 8 of 12
reinforcement
reinforcement is is to
to control
control thethe cracking
cracking and and prevent
prevent catastrophic
catastrophic failures
failures in in fiber-reinforced
fiber-reinforced
cement-based material.
cement-based material.
In
In steel
steel fiber-reinforced
fiber-reinforced RPC, RPC, at at the
the pre-cracking
pre-cracking stage, stage, the
the RPC
RPC matrix
matrix transfers
transfers aa load
transfers load to to the
the
steel fibers
fibers through
through interfacial
interfacial adhesion
adhesion under
under external
external force.
force. Both Both
steel
steel fibers through interfacial adhesion under external force. Both steel fibers and RPC matrix steel
fibers fibers
and RPCand RPC
matrix matrix
sustain
sustain
the loadthe
sustain the load
load together.
together. together. The
The load-carrying
The load-carrying capacity was
load-carrying capacity
improved,
capacity was improved,
was and cracking
improved, and
wascracking
and delayedwas
cracking delayed
compared
was delayed to
compared
unreinforced to unreinforced
RPC. After RPC.
cracking, After
only cracking,
the steel only
fibers the steel
sustained thefibers
load
compared to unreinforced RPC. After cracking, only the steel fibers sustained the load through sustained
through the
mechanicalload through
interlock
mechanical
and friction at
mechanical interlock and
and friction
the fiber–matrix
interlock at
at the
interface.
friction theAsfiber–matrix
the fibers were
fiber–matrix interface.
pulledAs
interface. out,the
As thefibers
the crack were
fibers energy
were pulled out,
out, the
was absorbed,
pulled the
crack
crack energy
and theenergy
deflection was
wasand absorbed, and
load increased.
absorbed, the
and theThus,deflection and
the interfacial
deflection load
and load increased.
bond Thus,
adhesionThus,
increased. the
property interfacial
the between
interfacialthebond
steel
bond
adhesion
fibers and property
adhesion the RPC matrix
property between
betweenplaysthe
the ansteel fibers
important
steel fibersroleand
andthat the RPC
RPC matrix
theinfluences plays
plays an
the enhancement
matrix an important role
role that
effect of fibers
important and
that
influences the
final mechanical
influences enhancement
properties of
the enhancement effect of
modified
effect fibers
RPCs.
of fibers and final mechanical properties of modified
and final mechanical properties of modified RPCs. RPCs.
Generally,
Generally, the
Generally, the RPC
the RPC samples
RPC sampleswith
samples withsteel
with steelfibers
steel fibersexhibited
fibers exhibitedaa amuch
exhibited muchmore
much more
more ductile
ductile
ductile behavior.
behavior.
behavior. It
It can be
It can
can be
seen
be from
seen fromthe test
the results
test that
results all
that lengths
all of
lengths steel
of fibers
steel greatly
fibers increased
greatly the
increased strength,
the
seen from the test results that all lengths of steel fibers greatly increased the strength, deflection, and deflection,
strength, and
deflection,
toughness.
and toughness.
toughness.

4.2. Single-Fiber Pull-Out

4.2. Single-Fiber
Single-Fiber Pull-Out Test
Pull-Out Test
Test
To obtain
To obtainmore
obtain moredetailed
more detailedinformation
detailed information
information about
about
aboutthethe
reinforcement
the reinforcement
reinforcementof RPCs
of by steel
of RPCs
RPCs by fibers,
by steel
steel pull-out
fibers,
fibers, tests
pull-out
pull-out
of steel
tests
tests of fibers
of steel of different
steel fibers
fibers of lengthslengths
of different
different embedded
lengths in threein
embedded
embedded indifferent
three RPC matrices
three different
different RPC were conducted.
RPC matrices
matrices were The test
were conducted.
conducted.
results
The are presented in Figures 10 and 11. The results indicated that maximum pull-out
The test results are presented in Figures 10 and 11. The results indicated that maximum pull-out load
test results are presented in Figures 10 and 11. The results indicated that maximum load increased
pull-out load
with increasing
increased with embedded
increasing fiber length
embedded or matrix
fiber lengthstrength,
or while
matrix bond
strength,strength
while
increased with increasing embedded fiber length or matrix strength, while bond strength only only
bond increased
strength with
only
increasingwith
increased
increased matrix
with strength.
increasing
increasing This strength.
matrix
matrix is becauseThis
strength. with
This is increased
is because
because withRPCincreased
with matrix strength,
increased RPC
RPC matrixthe RPC
matrix became
strength,
strength, the
the
denser
RPC and
became more
densercompact.
and moreThus, the
compact. bond adhesion
Thus, the bond between
adhesionsteel fibers
between and
RPC became denser and more compact. Thus, the bond adhesion between steel fibers and the RPC the
steel RPC
fibers matrix
and the was
RPC
also enhanced.
matrix
matrix was
was also
also enhanced.
enhanced.

Figure
Figure 10.
10. Effects
Effects of
Effects of embedded
embedded fiber
fiber length
length on
on maximum
maximum load.
load.

Effects of embedded
Figure 11. Effects
Figure embedded
Figure 11.
11. Effects of
of embedded fiber
fiber length
length on
on bond
bond strength.
strength.

The pull-out test

The test results are
are similar to
to those of previous researches. Beglarigale [31]
[31] found that
that
The pull-out
pull-out test results
results are similar
similar to those
those of
of previous
previous researches.
researches. Beglarigale
Beglarigale [31] found
found that
the
the fiber–matrix bond characteristics (pull-out peak load and debonding toughness) improved as the
the fiber–matrix
fiber–matrix bond
bond characteristics
characteristics (pull-out
(pull-out peak
peak load
load and
and debonding
debonding toughness)
toughness) improved
improved as
as the
the
embedment
embedment length of the fiber increased, and dense microstructure led to better bond characteristics
embedment length
length of
of the
the fiber
fiber increased,
increased, and
and dense
dense microstructure
microstructure led
led to
to better
better bond
bond characteristics
characteristics
between steel fiber and RPC matrix. Lebdeh [32] stated that the maximum pull-out load and total
4.3. Match Relation between Steel Fibers and RPC Matrix
As can be seen from the test results, RPC150 reinforced with long steel fibers had the highest
compressive strength, first-crack strength, peak strength, peak deflection, and toughness index. In
comparison,
Materials 2019, 12,RPC270
1751 reinforced with short steel fibers had the highest compressive strength, 9 of 12
first-crack strength, and peak strength, and RPC270 reinforced with medium-length steel fibers
showed the highest toughness index, while RPC270 reinforced with long steel fibers only showed
pull-out
the highestenergy peak increased as matrix
deflection. strengththe
In summary, increased
use offor longthesteel
fibersfibers
that did not rupture,
is more effective andfor some
the
fibers ruptured when pulled out from very high strength concrete matrix.
reinforcement of RPC150, while short steel fibers are more effective for the reinforcement of RPC270. Alberti [33] reported that
the critical fiber length,
Long fibers showed as awell as the
better overall pull-out
improvement effectbehavior,
for RPC150 wereduestrongly influenced
to increased by theoftype
slowing the
of matrix in which the fiber was embedded, and embedded length
propagation of macrocracks because of an enhanced bridge effect for large cracks by long fibers, longer than critical length led toas
fiber rupture.
illustrated in Figure 12. Hence, the flexural load–deflection curves showed a flatter descent and
larger deflection at the post-cracking stage. In addition, in the descending part of the curves, a
4.3. Match Relation between Steel Fibers and RPC Matrix
jagged shape was more evident in the samples with longer fibers, which indicated that steel fibers
wereAs can be seen
gradually pulled from
outthefrom test
theresults,
matrix.RPC150 reinforced
Additionally, with longfrom
as illustrated steelthe
fibers had the pull-out
single-fiber highest
compressive
test, althoughstrength,
increased first-crack
fiber length strength,
produced peaksmall
strength,
changespeakindeflection, and toughness
bond strength between fibers index.and In
comparison,
RPC matrix, RPC270the maximum reinforced with load
pull-out shortand
steeltotal
fibers had theenergy
pull-out highestclearly
compressive strength,
increased, whichfirst-crack
was also
strength, and peak
more conducive strength,
to abate and RPC270
or inhibit the growth reinforced
of cracks. with medium-length steel fibers showed the
highest toughness
However, index, while RPC270RPC,
in ultra-high-strength reinforced with long
for example steel fibers
RPC270, only showed
as shown in Figure the13,highest
because peakof
deflection.
the use of aInlow summary, the use of long steel
water-to-cementitious fibersratio,
material is morevery effective for the reinforcement
fine powder, of RPC150,
compact mix proportion,
while short
internal steel fibers
interface, are more
porosity, and effective
flaws becamefor themuchreinforcement
smaller but of RPC270.
increased in number. Therefore, at
Longvolume
the same fibers showed
fraction,amorebetterwidely
improvement
dispersedeffect shortfor RPC150
fibers coulddue to increased
reduce the stressslowing of the
concentration
propagation
at these flaws, ofwhich
macrocracks
delayedbecause of an enhanced
the initiation and growth bridge effect for large
of microcracks at thecracks by long stage
pre-cracking fibers,and
as
illustrated in Figure
produced higher 12. Hence,
first-crack the flexural
strength load–deflection
and peak curves showed
strength. Moreover, a flatter descent
the interfacial and larger
zone brought by
deflection
fibers [34]atbetween
the post-cracking
short fibers stage.
andInthe addition,
RPC matrix in the was
descending
shorter partthanofthat
the for
curves,
longa fibers,
jagged which
shape
was
wouldmore evident
produce in the flaws
smaller samples thanwith longer
those fibers, by
produced which
longindicated
fibers. More thatimportantly,
steel fibers were gradually
increasing the
pulled
strength out
of from
the RPCthe enhanced
matrix. Additionally,
the bond adhesionas illustrated
between fromfiberstheand
single-fiber pull-out
matrix. Thus, the test, although
improvement
increased fiberfibers
effect of short lengthalso produced
increased,small changes
while long in bond
fibers strength
were more between
likely to fibers
rupture.andThisRPCcaused
matrix, the
short
maximum pull-out load and total pull-out energy clearly increased,
fibers to effectively arrest cracks at both the pre-cracking and the post-cracking stage. For thesewhich was also more conducive to
abate or inhibit
reasons, the growth
short fibers produced of cracks.
better improvements in RPC270.

(a) (b)
12. Mechanism
Figure 12. Mechanism of long-fiber
long-fiber reinforcement:
reinforcement: (a)
(a) concrete
concrete with
with macrocracks and (b) concrete
concrete
with microcracks.
with microcracks.

However, in ultra-high-strength RPC, for example RPC270, as shown in Figure 13, because of the
use of a low water-to-cementitious material ratio, very fine powder, compact mix proportion, internal
interface, porosity, and flaws became much smaller but increased in number. Therefore, at the same
volume fraction, more widely dispersed short fibers could reduce the stress concentration at these
flaws, which delayed the initiation and growth of microcracks at the pre-cracking stage and produced
higher first-crack strength and peak strength. Moreover, the interfacial zone brought by fibers [34]
between short fibers and the RPC matrix was shorter than that for long fibers, which would produce
smaller flaws than those produced by long fibers. More importantly, increasing the strength of the RPC
enhanced the bond adhesion between fibers and matrix. Thus, the improvement effect of short fibers
also increased, while long fibers were more likely to rupture. This caused short fibers to effectively
arrest cracks at both the pre-cracking and the post-cracking stage. For these reasons, short fibers
produced better improvements in RPC270.
Materials 2019, 12, 1751 10 of 12
Materials 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 12

(a) (b)
Figure 13.
Figure 13. Mechanism
Mechanism of
of short-fiber
short-fiber reinforcement:
reinforcement: (a)
(a) concrete
concrete with
with macrocracks
macrocracks and (b) concrete
and (b) concrete
with microcracks.
with microcracks.

5. Conclusions
5. Conclusions
In
In this
thisstudy,
study,thethe
compressive
compressivestrength and flexural
strength toughness
and flexural of RPCsofreinforced
toughness with different
RPCs reinforced with
lengths of steel fibers, exhibiting three different strengths, were experimentally
different lengths of steel fibers, exhibiting three different strengths, were experimentallyinvestigated. Then,
the relation between
investigated. Then, thetherelation
fiber length and the
between the reinforcement
fiber length andeffect
theon RPC of various
reinforcement strengths
effect on RPC was
of
analyzed on the basis
various strengths wasofanalyzed
the bondonadhesion between
the basis of the fibers
bond and matrix.between
adhesion The following conclusions
fibers and can
matrix. The
be drawn, conclusions
following based on thecan results and discussion:
be drawn, based on the results and discussion:
(1) For RPC150,
(1) For RPC150, thethe samples
samples reinforced with long steel fibers had the highest compressivecompressive strength,
strength,
first-crack strength, peak strength, and toughness index.
first-crack
(2) For RPC270,
(2) For RPC270, thethesamples
samplesreinforced withwith
reinforced shortshort
steel fibers had thehad
steel fibers highest
the compressive strength,
highest compressive
first-crackfirst-crack
strength, strength, and peak strength,
strength, and peak while the toughness
strength, while theindex of RPC270
toughness reinforced
index with
of RPC270
medium-length
reinforced steel fibers was the
with medium-length steelhighest.
fibers was the highest.
(3) Consequently,
(3) Consequently, we foundfound aa match
matchrelation
relationbetween
betweenthethelength
lengthofofthe
thesteel
steel fibers
fibers and
and thethe strength
strength of
of
the the
RPC RPC
matrix. matrix. As of
As a result a the
result
higherof bond
the adhesion
higher bondbetween adhesion
fibers and between fibers and
ultra-high-strength
ultra-high-strength
RPC matrix, long steel RPC matrix,
fibers werelong
more steel fibersfor
effective were more effective
reinforcing RPC150,for reinforcing
while short steelRPC150,
fibers
while shorteffective
were more steel fibers
forwere more effective
reinforcing RPC270.for reinforcing RPC270.

Author Contributions: Investigation, G.Y.; Writing—original draft, G.Y.; Writing—review & editing, J.W., Q.Y.,
Author Contributions: Investigation, G.Y.; Writing—original draft, G.Y.; Writing—review & editing, J.W., Q.Y.,
H.H. and
H.H. and F.L.
F.L.

Funding: This work was funded by The National Key Research and Development Program of China (Project
No.2017YFB0310001) and National
National Natural
Natural Science
Science Foundation
Foundation of
of China
China (Project
(Project No.51772013).
No.51772013).
Conflicts
Conflicts of Interest: The
of Interest: The authors
authors declare
declare no
no conflict
conflict of
of interest.
interest.

References
1.
1. Richard, P.;
Richard, P.; Cheyrezy,
Cheyrezy. M. M. Composition
Composition of of reactive
reactive powder concretes. Cem.
powder concretes. Concr. Res.
Cem. Concr. Res. 1995, 25, 1501–1511.
1995, 25, 1501–1511.
2. [CrossRef]
Vernet, C.P. Ultra-durable concretes: structure at the micro- and nano-scale. Mater. Res. Soc. 2004, 29,
2. 324–327.C.P. Ultra-durable concretes: structure at the micro- and nano-scale. Mater. Res. Soc. 2004, 29,
Vernet,
3. 324–327.
Roux, N.;[CrossRef]
Andrade, C.; Sanjuan, M.A. Experimental study of durability of reactive powder concretes. J.
3. Roux, N.; Andrade,
Mater. Civil C.; 8,
Eng. 1996, 1–6. M.A. Experimental study of durability of reactive powder concretes. J. Mater.
Sanjuan,
4. Civil Eng. O.;
Bonneau, 1996, 8, 1–6. [CrossRef]
Lachemi, M.; Dallaire, E; Dugat, J.; Aitcin, P.C. Mechanical properties and durability of two
4. Bonneau,
industrial O.; Lachemi,
reactive M.; concretes.
powder Dallaire, E.; Dugat,
ACI Mater.J.; J.Aitcin, P.C.286–289.
1997, 94, Mechanical properties and durability of two
5. industrial reactive powder concretes. ACI Mater. J. 1997, 94, 286–289.
Richard, P.; Cheyrezy, M. Reactive powder concretes with high ductility and 200–800 MPa compressive
5. Richard,
strength. P.;
ACICheyrezy, M.1994,
Spec. Publ. Reactive powder concretes with high ductility and 200–800 MPa compressive
144, 507–518.
6. strength. ACI Spec. Publ. 1994, 144, 507–518.
Collepardi, S.; Coppola, L.; Troli, R.; Collepardi, M. Mechanical properties of modified reactive powder
6. Collepardi,
concrete. ACI S.;Spec.
Coppola, L.; Troli,
Publ. 1997, 173,R.; Collepardi, M. Mechanical properties of modified reactive powder
1–22.
7. concrete. ACI Spec. Publ. 1997, 173, 1–22.
Matte, V.; Moranville, M. Durability of reactive powder composites: influence of silica fume on the
leaching properties of very low water/binder pastes. Cem. Concr. Compos. 1999, 21, 1–9.
Materials 2019, 12, 1751 11 of 12

7. Matte, V.; Moranville, M. Durability of reactive powder composites: influence of silica fume on the leaching
properties of very low water/binder pastes. Cem. Concr. Compos. 1999, 21, 1–9. [CrossRef]
8. Chan, Y.; Chu, S. Effect of silica fume on steel fiber bond characteristics in reactive powder concrete.
Cem. Concr. Res. 2004, 34, 1167–1172. [CrossRef]
9. Canbaz, M. The effect of high temperature on reactive powder concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 70,
508–513. [CrossRef]
10. Bonneau, O.; Poulin, C.; Dugat, M.; Tcin, P.C.A. Reactive powder concretes: from theory to practice. Concr.
Int. 1996, 18, 47–49.
11. Shafigh, P.; Mahmud, H.; Jumaat, M.Z. Effect of steel fiber on the mechanical properties of oil palm shell
lightweight concrete. Mater. Des. 2011, 32, 3926–3932. [CrossRef]
12. Zhang, Y.; Sun, W.; Liu, S.; Jiao, C.; Lai, J. Preparation of C200 green reactive powder concrete and its
static-dynamic behaviors. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2008, 30, 831–838.
13. Dong, J.K.; Seung, H.P.; Ryu, G.S.; Koh, K.T. Comparative flexural behavior of Hybrid Ultra High Performance
Fiber Reinforced Concrete with different macro fibers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 4144–4155.
14. Gao, J.; Sun, W.; Morino, K. Mechanical properties of steel fiber-reinforced, high-strength, lightweight
concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 1997, 19, 307–313. [CrossRef]
15. Bayard, O.; Ple, O. Fracture mechanics of reactive powder concrete: material modelling and experimental
investigations. Eng. Fract. Mech. 2003, 70, 839–851. [CrossRef]
16. Al-Tikrite, A.; Hadi, M. Mechanical properties of reactive powder concrete containing industrial and waste
steel fibres at different ratios under compression. Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 154, 1024–1034. [CrossRef]
17. Wu, Z.; Shi, C.; He, W.; Wu, L. Effects of steel fiber content and shape on mechanical properties of ultra high
performance concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 103, 8–14. [CrossRef]
18. Tomasz, Z.; Jacek, S. The influence of steel fiber content and curing conditions on mechanical properties and
deformability of reactive powder concrete at bending. In Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on
Brittle Matrix Composites, Warsaw, Poland, 25–28 October 2009; pp. 33–42.
19. Mostofinejad, D.; Nikoo, M.R.; Hosseini, S.A. Determination of optimized mix design and curing conditions
of reactive powder concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 123, 754–767. [CrossRef]
20. Olivito, R.; Zuccarello, F. An experimental study on the tensile strength of steel fiber reinforced concrete.
Compos. Part B Eng. 2010, 41, 246–255. [CrossRef]
21. Ipek, M. The flexural strength and fracture toughness of reactive powder concrete in response to changing
fibre size and pre-setting pressure. Fatigue Frat. Eng. Mater. Stuct. 2012, 35, 412–424. [CrossRef]
22. Abbas, S.; Soliman, A.M.; Nehdi, M.L. Exploring mechanical and durability properties of ultra-high
performance concrete incorporating various steel fiber lengths and dosages. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 75,
429–441. [CrossRef]
23. Sovjak, R.; Maca, P.; Imlauf, T. Effect of fibre length on the fracture energy of UHPFRC. Procedia Eng. 2017,
193, 74–79. [CrossRef]
24. Sovjak, R.; Maca, P.; Imlauf, T. Effect of fibre aspect ratio and fibre volume fraction on the effective fracture
energy of ultra-high-performance fibre-reinforced concrete. Acta Polytech. 2016, 56, 319–327. [CrossRef]
25. Xia, H.; Wang, W.; Shi, Z. Mechanical properties of reactive powder concrete with ultra-short brass-coated
steel fibres. Mag. Concr. Res. 2015, 67, 308–316. [CrossRef]
26. Kim, K.; Yang, I.; Joh, C. Effects of single and hybrid steel fiber lengths and fiber contents on the mechanical
properties of high-strength fiber-reinforced concrete. Adv. Civil Eng. 2018, 1–14. [CrossRef]
27. Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple Beam with Third-Point Loading); ASTM
C78-2008; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2008.
28. Standard Test Method for Flexural Toughness and First-Crack Strength of Fiber-reniforced Concrete (Using Beam with
Third-point Loading); ASTM C1018-1997; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 1997.
29. De Santis, R.; Prisco, D.; Apicella, A.; Ambrosio, L.; Rengo, S.; Nicolais, L. Carbon fiber post adhesion to
resin luting cement in the restoration of endodontically treated teeth. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 2000, 11,
201–206. [CrossRef]
30. Pakravan, H.R.; Jamshidi, M.; Latifi, M.; Pacheco-Torgal, F. Evaluation of adhesion in polymeric fibre
reinforced cementitious composites. Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 2012, 32, 53–60. [CrossRef]
31. Beglarigale, A.; Yazıcı, H. Pull-out behavior of steel fiber embedded in flowable RPC and ordinary mortar.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 75, 255–265. [CrossRef]
Materials 2019, 12, 1751 12 of 12

32. Lebdeh, T.A.; Hamoush, S.; Heard, W.; Zornig, B. Effect of matrix strength on pullout behavior of steel fiber
reinforced very-high strength concrete composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 39–46. [CrossRef]
33. Alberti, M.G.; Enfedaque, A.; Gálvez, J.C.; Ferreras, A. Pull-out behaviour and interface critical parameters
of polyolefin fibres embedded in mortar and self-compacting concrete matrixes. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016,
112, 607–622. [CrossRef]
34. Foon, L.S.; Stefan, J. Study of interfacial microstructure, fracture energy, compressive energy and debonding
load of steel fiber-reinforced mortar. Mater. Stuct. 2011, 44, 1451–1465.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).