Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400
DOI 10.1617/s11527-016-0795-7
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Testing and modelling the creep of cracked macro-synthetic
fibre reinforced concrete (MSFRC) under flexural loading
Adewumi John Babafemi . William Peter Boshoff
Received: 13 July 2015 / Accepted: 4 January 2016 / Published online: 14 January 2016
 RILEM 2016
Abstract An investigation of the delayed crack
opening of cracked concrete containing short discrete
macro-synthetic fibres under sustained flexural load-
ing at service conditions (30–50 % of the average
residual strength of cracked specimens) over a period
of 8 months is reported. The time-dependent crack
opening in flexure is simulated by implementing both
the material model parameters obtained from a tension
softening model and a rheological model for vis-
coelastic behaviour in the Total Strain Crack Model
using the finite element method. Prisms measuring
100 mm 9 100 mm 9 500 mm and 150 mm 9
150 mm 9 700 mm were cracked under uniaxial
tensile and three point flexural tests respectively and
then subjected to sustained loadings in their respec-
tively creep frames. In all cases, specimens were
produced from the same concrete mix and fibre
content. All specimens were tested in a climate
controlled room at a temperature of 23 ± 1 C and
relative humidity of 65 ± 5 %. Experimental results
have indicated that significant lesser creep occurred in
specimens subjected to flexural creep compared to the
uniaxial tensile creep specimens. The result of the
finite element analyses at both stress levels shows
good agreement with the experimental time-depen-
dent crack opening results in flexure.
A. J. Babafemi  W. P. Boshoff (&)
Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
e-mail: bboshoff@sun.ac.za
Keywords Creep  Fibre reinforced concrete 
Macro synthetic fibre  Finite element analysis 
Viscoelastic materials parameters
1 Introduction
Materials are generally known to instantaneously
undergo increased deformation as soon as they are
subjected to stress. Over time, the deformation con-
tinues to increase but at a lower rate. This phenomenon
is known as creep or delayed deformation. The
delayed deformation of concrete has been reported to
become several times as large as the initial instanta-
neous elastic deformation [1]; hence, creep becomes
an important factor in the medium to long term of any
concrete structure. Structures are generally known to
be designed for strength and serviceability. For
concrete elements under tensile stresses, creep can
lead to serviceability issues such crack formation,
increase in crack width, deflection and curvature [2].
When creep becomes excessive, it could lead to
collapse even though in some structures, it has the
advantage of stress redistribution [3, 4].
Recently, studies into the creep of cracked fibre
reinforced concrete (FRC) have seen some level of
increase [5–7]. Whereas a host of these articles have
been focussed on steel FRC, much less have investi-
gated macro synthetic fibre reinforced concrete
(MSFRC). The use of macro synthetic fibres in
reinforcing concrete has seen marked increase over
4390
the last two decades. Its use covers a range of
application including shotcrete tunnel lining, slab on
grade, airport runway and non-structural applications
[8–10]. Macro synthetic fibre is seen to possess some
advantages over steel fibre: better economy, easy to
work in concrete, does not corrode in concrete, light in
weight and resistant to aggressive chemicals [10–14].
It has also been noted that macro synthetic fibre exhibit
greater effectiveness in concrete in the post crack state
(increased toughness and energy absorption capacity)
compared to that achieved by steel fibres [6, 15, 16].
However, the fibre is known to have a significant lower
elastic modulus compared to steel fibre [17]. This
could lead to significant deformation of concrete
elements reinforced with macro synthetic fibres.
Babafemi and Boshoff [18] recently reported on the
creep behaviour of cracked MSFRC under varying
uniaxial tensile stress levels (30–70 % of the average
residual strength). The study showed that cracked
MSFRC exhibit significant crack widening under
sustained uniaxial tensile loadings. They also reported
time-dependent fibre pullout and fibre creep as mech-
anisms responsible for the time-dependent crack
opening of cracked MSFRC.
Though some form of relationship has been
reported between the compressive and tensile creep
of conventional concrete [18–20], there seems to be no
reported work for cracked FRC. When dealing with
flexural creep, a complex creep mechanism involving
both tension and compression is involved, hence, such
a study needs to be carefully evaluated [21].
In this study, an attempt has been carried out to
relate the time-dependent crack opening response of
specimens tested under sustained uniaxial tensile
loading to those under flexural loadings. Due to the
different loading mechanisms in tension and flexure,
the relationship has been implemented in the Total
Strain Crack Model [22] using a finite element method
Table 1 Experimental test design for investigation
Test conducted Specimen condition
Compressive strength – 10
Flexural strength Notched
Flexural creep Notched
Uniaxial tensile strength Notched
Uniaxial tensile creep Notched
Drying shrinkage Un-notched and unloaded
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400
(FEM). The model describes the tensile and compres-
sive behaviour of a material with one stress–strain
relationship and allows combination with direct input
of Kelvin chain parameters for creep when imple-
mented in Diana version 9.5.
The tensile and Kelvin chain (viscoelastic) param-
eters engaged in the model were obtained from
experimental uniaxial tensile strength and uniaxial
tensile creep test performed. Results of the finite
element analyses were then validated with the exper-
imental flexural creep results. It is acknowledged that
an initial attempt has been reported by Mouton and
Boshoff [23] for flexural creep of steel FRC. However,
the results of finite element analyses were not exper-
imentally verified.
2 Experimental design and materials
To achieve the goal of this investigation, carefully
defined experimental design shown in Table 1 was
executed. The macro synthetic fibre used in this
investigation was polypropylene fibres supplied by
Fibre Reinforcing Solutions (FIBSOL), South Africa,
with a trade name Rocstay CXO 50/40 SS. The fibres
have an ‘‘X’’ profile and it is slightly crimped to
increase the frictional and mechanical bond over the
full length (40 mm) of the fibre as described in
Babafemi and Boshoff [18]. Fibre nominal and effec-
tive diameters are 0.8 and 0.794 mm respectively.
For the purpose of verification of finite element
modelling results, flexural strength and flexural creep
tests were performed and reported in this paper. The
same materials, concrete mix design and climate
conditions (temperature of 23 ± 1 C and relative
humidity of 65 ± 5 %) have been used for the flexural
creep test. The concrete mix design is also reported in
Babafemi and Boshoff [18]. Flexural creep loads (30
No. of specimen % ARS Specimen size (mm3)
– 100 9 100 9 100
3 – 150 9 150 9 700
6 30 and 50
3 – 100 9 100 9 500
8 30 and 50
2 –
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400
and 50 %) were based on the average residual flexural
strength (ARS) of specimens.
2.1 Flexural strength test
To investigate the delayed crack opening of cracked
MSFRC under sustained flexural loading, firstly, a
flexural strength test on three-point loading was
performed according to EN14561 [24] over a span of
450 mm (Fig. 1).
Three specimens were tested in a Zwick Z250
universal materials testing machine to investigate the
flexural response particularly in the post cracking
region. The ARS upon which the flexural creep test
was based was obtained from the result of the three
flexural tests after conversion to four-point load [25].
Specimens were notched at mid-span to 25 mm deep
and tested using displacement control with a LVDT to
measure the CMOD as indicated in Fig. 1. Since the
LVDT was place at a distance of y = 20 mm below
the bottom of the test specimens, the actual CMOD
was determined using the relation in EN 14651 [24].
Similarly, the first crack stress, fl and the residual
strengths fR1, fR2, fR3 and fR4 at 0.5, 1.5, 2.5 and 3.5 mm
CMOD were all determined according to EN 14651
[24] from the load-CMOD curves.
The machine was then controlled in sequence using
the LVDT at a constant displacement rate of 0.05 mm/
min up to a CMOD = 0.1 mm. When CMOD =
0.1 mm, the loading rate of 0.2 mm/min was triggered
until the test was stopped, according to the recom-
mendation of EN 14651 [24].
Fig. 1 Three point flexural test setup
4391
2.2 Flexural creep test
Using the Zwick Z250 machine, six specimens were
pre-cracked on a three point bending test to a CMOD
of 0.2 mm and then unloaded before being taken to the
creep frame were they were tested. The creep loads (30
and 50 %) were based on the residual load obtained at
a CMOD of 0.2 mm. The development of the flexural
creep test setup was based on the works of Mackay and
Trottier [5], Zerbino and Barragán [25], Barragán and
Zerbino [26] and Arango et al. [27]. Before the
cracked specimens were taken to the creep frame,
the frame had been calibrated. An I-steel section was
placed in the position of the specimens under four
point loading (span = 450 mm) with a load cell of 50
kN placed on the setup (see Fig. 2a).
A spirit level instrument was placed on the steel
plate which connected the screwed bars to ensure a
levelled horizontal placement of the plate. The loads
were applied through a lever arm pivoted about a
bearing, thereby transferring the load to the specimens
through the two threaded bars connected to the lever
arm. The pivot lever arm was designed to give a
loading ratio of 1:10. The constant load was placed
before the gradual application of the load using an
Enerpac hydraulic cylinder (Fig. 2b) that was con-
nected to a hand-operated hydraulic pump. Actual
specimens were tested in column of three specimens as
shown in Fig. 2c. In the actual test, the load cell was
not left in the frames during the tests as the total weight
needed for the two stress levels had been determined.
Dial gauges were used to measure the crack tip
opening displacement (CTOD) of specimens for
8 months. The dial gauges were bolted to small angle
steel plates, which in turn were glued to the specimens
using epoxy glue on one surface of each specimen by the
notch as shown in Fig. 2c. Another angle plate was also
placed on the opposite side of the notch ensuring that the
dial gauge spans across the notch at the tip, hence, a
gauge length of 50 mm was set for all specimens.
3 Experimental results and discussion
As previously mentioned, the results for the uniaxial
tensile strength and uniaxial tensile creep tests have
been fully discussed elsewhere [18]. However, the
uniaxial tensile tests results are shown in Fig. 3 for
reference purposes.
4392 Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400

Fig. 2 Calibration of flexural creep frame and specimens under creep load

3.5 3.1 Flexural strength tests result

3
The result of the specimens tested in flexure under
2.5
Stress, σ (MPa)

three-point loading is shown in Fig. 4.

2 The average ultimate flexural strength (limit of
1.5 proportionality) of tested specimens is 3.60 MPa. The
1 post-peak behaviour reflects a deflection softening
response at a fibre volume of 1 %. The mean first crack
0.5
stress and residual flexural tensile strength parameters
0 of specimens corresponding to the CMOD at 0.5, 1.5,
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Crack opening, w (mm)
2.5 and 3.5 mm are shown in Table 2.
Insignificant scatter of the first crack stress, fL can
Fig. 3 Response of MSFRC under uniaxial tensile load [8] be observed which indicates that this parameter is not
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400 4393

4 4.5
Specimen 1
3.5 Specimen 2 4
Flexural strength (MPa)

Specimen 3

Flexural stress (MPa)

3.5
3
3
2.5
2.5
2
2
1.5 1.5
1 50 %
1
30 %
0.5 0.5

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3

CMOD (mm) CMOD (mm)

Fig. 4 Flexural response of MSFRC Fig. 5 Unloading response at crack width of 0.2 mm and the
sustained load levels

Table 2 Residual flexural tensile strength parameters for
3-point test
Residual strength fr,max fL
Mean 3.60 3.37
CoV (%) 4.31 4.75
influenced by the distribution of the fibres. The mean
residual stresses, fR,j at different CMOD however
showed more scatter beyond the first crack stress but
was highest at fR4 (CMOD = 3.5 mm) having a
coefficient of variation (CoV) of 12 %. Though this
study did not compare the performance of steel fibre
reinforced concrete (SFRC) to MSFRC, it has been
reported that the results of SFRC tested in flexure
showed more scatter than MSFRC [6]. This has been
attributed to increase in the number of macro synthetic
fibres and homogenous distribution of fibres crossing
the cracked plane [6].
Even though the behaviour of the specimen at 1 %
fibre content is deflection softening, at CMOD of
3.5 mm, high residual flexural tensile stress of
2.4 MPa was still obtained indicating high energy
absorption of MSFRC in the post-peak region.
As previously mentioned, the specimens for the
flexural tensile creep were cracked in a three-point
bending test before been transferred to the frame
where they were subjected to sustained loading in a
four-point test setup. The equivalent stress versus
CMOD when specimens were unloaded, reloaded and
the respective sustained load levels represented by the
solid horizontal lines is shown in Fig. 5.
fR1 fR2 fR3 fR4
3.2 Flexural tensile creep test results
2.24 2.27 2.36 2.40
10.97 8.57 11.42 12.09 The results of the flexural creep of the cracked
specimens subjected to sustained flexural loads for a
period of 8 months are shown in Fig. 6. It should be
mentioned that since the beams are stacked in column
of three, the results are discussed based on the position
of each beam; top, middle and bottom.
At first glance, the effect of specimen’s position can
be noticed at both stress levels, though it is more
pronounced at 50 % stress level. This effect has also
been reported by Garcı́a-Taengua et al. [7]. They
attributed this to the support and loading conditions of
the bottom specimens compared to the top and middle
specimens. The behaviour of the top and middle
specimens does not significantly differ in both cases.
The bottom specimen supports a slightly higher load,
hence the higher crack opening.
Figure 6 also shows the effect of applied stress
levels: the higher the applied creep load, the higher the
deferred CMOD. After 8 months under sustained
creep load, specimens tested at 30 % stress level
show average total CMOD of 0.2 mm while those
tested at 50 % stress levels show an average of 0.5 mm
(including irrecoverable CMOD from the pre-crack-
ing). The result shows significant creep of cracked
MSFRC under sustained flexural loading. However,
the time-dependent CMOD did not attain an asymp-
tote during the test period.
4394 Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400

(a) 0.2 in the principal direction unlike the Fixed Model

0.18 where the relationship is evaluated in a fixed coordi-
0.16
nate system which is fixed upon cracking. The
CMOD (mm)

0.14
0.12
advantage of this approach is that, it can be directly
0.1 combined with input of Kelvin chain viscoelastic
0.08 30% stress level properties in Diana version 9.5 used in this study [22].
0.06 Top specimen
For the result obtained in Fig. 3, the multi-linear
0.04 Middle specimen
Bottom specimen tension softening model applies more appropriately.
0.02
Average
0 Defined points on the r-w curve were obtained and
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 presented in Table 3. The crack width, w, has been
Time (days) related to strain using the element size (3 mm) of the
notch, the only place where cracking will occur. This
(b) 1
Top specimen 50% stress level approach is strongly element size dependent, but this
Middle specimen
0.8 Bottom specimen is solved by using the element size to transform the
Average
crack opening to strain [23].
CMOD (mm)

0.6 The multi-linear isotropic r-e curve does not

require the use of the tensile strength of the material,
0.4
rather the first point define by users must satisfy
0.2 Hooke’s law [28]. It should however be remarked that
the input for the Total Strain Crack Model in finite
0 element analysis software (Diana, version 9.5)
0 40 80 120 160 200 240
requires basic material properties such as the Young’s
Age (days)
modulus and Poisson’s ratio. The Poisson’s ratio was
Fig. 6 Flexural creep of cracked MSFRC assumed as 0.15 while the Young’s modulus was
based on the Fib Model Code 2010:
 13
fcm
Eci ¼ Ec0  aE ð1Þ
4 Modelling approach 10
where aE is a factor dependent on type of aggregates
4.1 Tension softening model
(taken as 1.0 for quartzite aggregates), Ec0 is the
modulus of elasticity at concrete age of 28 days, given
The continuum damage mechanics approach of
as 21.5 9 103 in MPa while fcm is the compressive
numerical modelling has been chosen for this study.
strength, 40.19 MPa in this case. This results in a
This was then implemented as a smeared cracking
calculated Eci of 34 GPa.
approach which requires that the deformations gener-
ated during the crack opening be added to the total
strains at a material point as against the discrete
approach. The discrete approach requires that the
position of crack propagation be known beforehand Table 3 Actual tensile parameters obtained from test and
related to strain using an element size of 3 mm
and specific interface elements are added at those
positions to accommodate the cracks. Stress (r) (MPa) Crack width (w) (mm) Strain (e)
Since the constitutive property from the uniaxial
0 0 0
tensile test is obtained in the form of r-w curve, it can
2.90 0.01 1.007e-04
be approximated using the Total Strain Crack Model
0.78 0.61 0.203
which describes the tensile and compressive behaviour
0.85 1.00 0.333
of a material with one r-e relationship. This could
0.91 1.50 0.500
either be a Total Strain Rotating crack model or Total
0.94 2.00 0.667
Strain Fixed Crack Model. The Rotating Model is used
0.94 3.00 1.000
in this study because the r-e relationship is evaluated
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400
4.2 Rheological creep model
To predict the time-dependent crack opening of
specimens subjected to flexural sustained loading,
material model parameters were obtained for imple-
mentation using a FEM. While a host of rheological
model exists, the Kelvin model is favoured for the
description of the viscoelastic behaviour of materials
undergoing creep while the Maxwell model is used for
relaxation. The model uses simple mechanical ele-
ments such as the springs and the dashpots/dampers.
The Kelvin element is designed to have a spring,
characterised by linear stress–strain relation and a
dashpot connected in parallel while elements con-
nected in series gives the Kelvin chain. Element 1
(spring only) models the instantaneous deformation of
the material while other elements simulate the time-
dependent deformation. The total stress in the Kelvin
element can be represented as:
r ¼ rs þ rD ð2Þ
where rs and rD are the stresses in the spring and
dashpot respectively and they are defined as:
rs ¼ Ees ð3Þ
de
rD ¼ g ð4Þ
dt
where E is the elastic modulus (analogous to the spring
constant, k), es the strain, is the analogous to the
displacement in the spring and g is the viscosity of the
material. It should be noted that the displacement in
the spring is equal to that in the dashpot, hence,
e ¼ es ¼ eD ð5Þ
de
e_ ¼ ¼ e_s ¼ e_D ð6Þ
dt
The coefficient of viscosity can be written as:
rD
g ¼ sE ¼ ) rD ¼ sEe_ ð7Þ
e_
Note that the change in stress, dr = r - r0 = 0,
change in strain, de = e - e0 and change in time
dt = t - t0. t = s is the relaxation time.
From the above equations, the change in strain in
the Kelvin element can be written as:
r0  Ee0
de ¼ sE ð8Þ
dt  E
4395
For the Kelvin chain,
r ¼ r1 ¼ r2 ¼    rn ð9Þ
and the time-dependent strain, e is given as
et;m ¼ e1;m þ e2;m þ    þ en;m ð10Þ
et;m ¼ et;m1 þ de1;m þ de2;m þ    þ dn ð11Þ
where n is the time step and m is the element number.
At time Step 0 (instantaneous deformation), the
strain in the spring becomes:
dr
et;0 ¼ ð12Þ
E
Since only the spring (Element 1) is active, the
change in Elements 2 and 3 will be zero.
At time Step 1, strain becomes:
r  E2 e2;0 r  En en;0
et;1 ¼ et;0 þ 0 þ sE2 þ    þ sEn ð13Þ
dt þ E dt þ E
while at time Step 2, the strain is:
r  E2 e2;1 r  En en;1
et;2 ¼ et;1 þ 0 þ sE2 þ    þ sEn
dt þ E dt þ E
In this study, four component elements have been
used in the determination of the Young’s moduli of
elements two to four in the chain and their respective
relaxation time by curve fitting to the experimental
data of the uniaxial tensile creep.
It should however be mentioned that due to some
scatter in the uniaxial tensile creep results (discussed
in [18]); modelling has been done for each specimen
and not the average behaviour. Whereas Specimens
1–4 were modelled at 30 % stress level, only Spec-
imens 2 and 3 were modelled at 50 % stress level.
After curve fitting, the viscoelastic material properties
obtained at both stress levels is shown in Table 4.
4.3 Finite element modelling
The nonlinear constitutive behaviour of concrete has
been simulated severally by the finite element
approach even though it poses a number of difficulties
compared to the linear elastic analysis [28, 29]. To
perform the finite element analysis for the prediction
of the time-dependent crack opening of MSFRC
beams subject to sustained flexural loadings, a beam
model was first developed. A beam of the same size as
4396
Table 4 Viscoelastic material model parameters
Specimen no. E1 [MPa] (s1 [/day]) E2 [MPa] (s2 [/day])
At 30 % stress level
1 28802.83 (0) 20.887 (0.261)
2 28802.83 (0) 14.483 (0.517)
3 28802.83 (0) 23.966 (0.869)
4 28802.83 (0) 25.616 (0.400)
At 50 % stress level
2 28802.83 (0) 31.206 (0.033)
3 28802.83 (0) 7.713 (1.279)
those subjected to creep under four point loading and
having the same boundary conditions was used for the
simulation (Fig. 7). Since the actual test specimens
were notched, the beam for the analysis was also
notched at mid-span to a depth of 25 mm and notch
width of 3 mm which is the thickness of the saw cut
blade.
The finite element mesh size was chosen as
5 mm 9 5 mm for satisfactory results to be obtained
except at the middle of the beam where they were
made 3 mm 9 5 mm to conform to the width of the
notch. The focus of the analysis is to investigate the
time-dependent CMOD over the vertical column of
elements at the notched area, hence two material
properties were chosen. It should be remarked that
only elements under tension were assigned viscoelas-
tic materials properties. These elements were deter-
mined by using a static analysis at the specific load
level.
Fig. 7 The finite element mesh of the beam subjected to four-point bending
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400
E3 [MPa] (s3 [/day]) E4 [MPa] (s4 [/day])
12.066 (222.683) 3.410 (152.778)
12.090 (21.116) 03.839 (134.234)
30.181 (41.816) 18.503 (252.149)
41.336 (15.365) 13.559 (104.419)
20.924 (22.540) 5.721 (167.731)
5.898 (30.178) 2.221 (634.201)
Other elements were assigned linear elastic mate-
rial properties. The beam was modelled using linearly
interpolated, four node plane stress elements (quadri-
laterals) having a plane stress thickness of 150 mm
which is equivalent to the actual specimen tested.
4.3.1 Prediction of four-point flexural response
Prior to modelling the time-dependent crack opening
under flexure, the tensile parameters obtained from the
uniaxial tensile test were implemented in the Total
Strain Crack Model to predict the four-point bending
test experimental results. Figure 8 shows the analysis
and the experimental results.
The result of the analysis using the direct input
shows to overestimate the flexural response: the
maximum flexural strength of the analysis indicates
an increase of 83 % above the experimental average
(Fig. 8). Beyond the peak stress, the analysis also
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400 4397

40 3.5
Exp. Result 1
35 TRUE
Exp. Result 2
Analysis result (measured parameters) 3 Case 1
30 Case 2
Load (kN)

2.5 Case 3

Stress, σ (MPa)
25
20 2
15
1.5
10
5 1
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 0.5
CMOD (mm)
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Fig. 8 The analysis of result compared to the experimental strain, ε
flexural results
Fig. 9 Stress-strain graph showing measured and adjusted
overestimated the average experimental results by tensile parameters
164, 46, 34 and 28 % at CMOD of 0.5, 1.5, 2.5 and
3.5 mm respectively. It can be observed that the 4
difference is particularly more significant up to 3.5
1.5 mm. 3
The extensive and immediate crack opening after
Stress (MPa)
2.5
first crack in the uniaxial tensile tests (Fig. 3) resulted 2
in a significant overestimation of the post-peak
1.5 Analysis result (case 1)
behaviour up to 0.6 mm. This is due to the relative Analysis result (case 2)
1 Analysis result (case 3)
low stiffness of the machine and lack of a fast acting
0.5 Experiment (specimen 1)
closed-loop control. Using these tensile results would Experiment (specimen 2)
result in an overestimation of the flexural response. 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Overestimation from finite element analysis (FEA) CMOD (mm)
results for similar kind of analysis using different
approaches has been reported by Carnovale [30] and Fig. 10 Parametric analysis result compared to the experimen-
Löfgren [31]. It is supposed that with a stiffer machine tal flexural results
test setup and servo-controlled closed loop control, the
sudden jump after first crack could be avoided and a curve after the peak load does have an influence on the
steeper descending slope after first crack would be analysis output. The analysis predicts the ultimate
obtained. The importance of a proper slope represen- strength well and the shape is similar to the experi-
tation in the descending branch of the stress-crack mental response. Significant deviation (about 20 %) is
width relation for successful analysis has also been still observed in the post cracking region from the two
stressed by Löfgren [31]. experimental results (see Fig. 10). Significant scatter
The measured tensile model parameters in Table 3 in the post cracking response of FRC in flexure than in
were then adjusted to reflect a steeper slope with two tension has been reported [31]. The high variability in
new points introduced. See Fig. 9 for the adjusted the post cracking behaviour of specimens tested under
graph in relation to the actual. flexure is connected to high variability of the numbers
While two additional points have been introduced, of fibres crossing the cracked plane and the orientation
the post cracking residual strength obtained from the of the fibres [32].
actual experiment has not being altered. The FEA
result of the three adjusted cases in comparison to the 4.3.2 Prediction of time-dependent crack opening
experimental results is presented in Fig. 10.
The results of the three cases analysed show In the prediction of the time-dependent crack opening,
similarity with the experiment results. This confirms the tensile and viscoelastic materials properties have
that the incorrect slope of descending branch of the been implemented in the Total Strain Crack Model as
4398 Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400

previously mentioned. It should be reiterated that
unloading was initiated at a crack opening of 0.2 mm
and stress levels based on the retained load.
The result of the prediction of the time-dependent
CMOD in comparison to the experimental results for a
period of 8 months at 30 and 50 % stress levels are
presented in Figs. 11 and 12 respectively. It has been
mentioned that rather than modelling the average
behaviour of the tensile creep results, each specimen’s
response was used for individual analyses, this giving
a range of possible flexural results.
Results of analyses labelled 1 and 2 show an
overestimation of the time-dependent CMOD at 30 %
stress levels with an average crack opening of 0.3 mm
after 8 months. Conversely, analysis results labelled 3
and 4 show good correlations with all the experimental
0.4
Analysis result 1
Analysis result 2
0.35
Analysis result 3
0.3
Analysis result 4
Experimental
CMOD (mm)
results. However, within the range of the four analy-
ses, good prediction is observed.
At 50 % stress level, using material properties from
the two tensile specimens simulated, the analyses
results fall within the bounds of experimental variation
showing a good prediction (Fig. 12). Overall, it can be
said that the implementation of material model
parameters, tensile and viscoelastic, from uniaxial
tensile and tensile creep test in the Total Strain Crack
Model could predict reasonably the time-dependent
crack opening of specimens subjected to sustained
flexural loading. This however is still a subject of
further research. The use of test setup with higher
stiffness and improved closed-loop control could
improve the immediate post peak response in the
uniaxial tensile test. It is also suggested that, where
enough space is available for the placement of flexural
creep frames, one specimen should be placed on a
frame rather than the column of three specimens. This
will eliminate the possible discrepancies in results due
to specimen’s position.

0.25

0.2
5 Conclusion and Recommendations
0.15

0.1
The creep behaviour of cracked MSFRC under
0.05 sustained flexural loads equivalent to service loading
0 conditions has been simulated. Tensile parameters
0 40 80 120 160 200 240
obtained from uniaxial tensile test and viscoelastic
Time (days)
material model parameters from uniaxial tensile creep
Fig. 11 The analysis result compared to experimental creep test have been implemented in the Total Strain Crack
result at 30 % stress level Model using FEM. The following conclusions can be
drawn from this study.
• At service conditions (30 and 50 % ARS), cracked
1
Analysis result 1 specimens subjected to flexural creep loads did
Analysis result 2 show some crack widening due to creep. The crack
0.8 Experimental
widths are however significantly less when com-
CMOD (mm)

0.6
pared to uniaxial tensile creep tests.
• Simulation of the crack opening under four-point
0.4 bending from the material model tensile parame-
ters shows significant overestimation of the exper-
0.2 imental results. However, modification of the
tensile parameters implemented in the strain crack
0 model to compensate for an incorrect softening
0 40 80 120 160 200 240
branch, shows a good correlation to the experi-
Time (days)
mental results.
Fig. 12 The analysis result compared to experimental creep • Implementations of the viscoelastic material
result at 50 % stress level model parameters at 30 and 50 % in the Total
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400
Strain Crack Model predicted with some degree of
accuracy the experimental time-dependent crack
opening under sustained loadings.
• Crack width increase due to creep of cracked
MSFRC at the same load level, normalised to total
resistance was found to be significantly more in
cracked uniaxial conditions compared to cracked
notched flexural beam tests. This effect was
however captured in the FEM analyses.
From the findings of this research work, the
following recommendations are made:
• The effect of specimen’s position on the flexural
creep result was identified particularly at higher
stress level. Where possible, single specimen
should be placed on the creep frame to eliminate
this effect.
• Since the stress distribution in the cracked plane of
flexural creep samples are not uniform, it will be a
worthwhile study to group and model the stresses
for comparison with uniaxial tensile test speci-
mens subjected to sustained loading.
• Test machines with higher stiffness and a servo-
controlled closed loop control should be used for
uniaxial tensile test to obtain true tensile material
parameters without modification.
References
1. Acker P, Ulm F (2001) Creep and shrinkage of concrete:
physical origins and practical measurements. Nucl Eng Des
203:143–158
2. Boshoff WP, Mechtcherine V, van Zijl GPAC (2009)
Characterising the time-dependent behaviour on the single
level of SHCC: Part 1: Mechanism of fibre pull-out creep.
Cem Concr Res 39:779–786
3. Bernard E (2004) Creep of cracked fibre reinforced shot-
crete panels. Shotcrete: more engineering developments.
Taylor and Francis Group, London, pp 47–57
4. Fanourakis GC, Ballim Y (2003) Predicting creep defor-
mation of concrete: A comparison of results from different
investigations. In: Proceedings, 11th FIG symposium on
deformation measurements, Santorini
5. MacKay J, Trottier J (2004) Post-crack creep behavior of
steel and synthetic FRC under flexural loading. Shotcrete:
more engineering developments. Taylor and Francis, Lon-
don, pp 183–192
6. Buratti N, Mazzotti C, Savoia M (2011) Post-cracking
behaviour of steel and macro-synthetic fibre-reinforced
concretes. Constr Build Mater 25(5):2713–2722
7. Garcı́a-Taengua E, Arango S, Martı́-Vargas JR, Serna P
(2014) Flexural creep of steel fiber reinforced concrete in
the cracked state. Constr Build Mater 65:321–329
4399
8. Brandt AM (2008) Fibre reinforced cement-based (FRC)
composites after over 40 years of development in building
and civil engineering. Compos Struct 86(1):3–9
9. Soutsos MN, Le TT, Lampropoulos AP (2012) Flexural
performance of fibre reinforced concrete made with steel
and synthetic fibres. Constr Build Mater 36:704–710
10. Wang Y, Backer S, Li VC (1987) An experimental study of
synthetic fibre reinforced cementitious composites. J Mater
Sci 22(12):4281–4291
11. Mu B, Meyer C, Shimanovich S (2002) Improving the
interface bond between fiber mesh and cementitious matrix.
Cem Concr Res 32(5):783–787
12. Richardson AE (2005) Bond characteristics of structural
polypropylene fibres in concrete with regards to post-crack
strength and durable design. Struct Surv 23(3):210–230
13. Richardson AE (2004) Electrical properties of portland
cement, with the addition of polypropylene fibres-regarding
durability. Struct Surv 22(3):156–163
14. Hannant D (1998) Durability of polypropylene fibers in
Portland cement-based composites: eighteen years of data.
Cem Concr Res 28(12):1809–1817
15. Cifuentes H, Garcı́a F, Maeso O, Medina F (2013) Influence
of the properties of polypropylene fibres on the fracture
behaviour of low-, normal-and high-strength FRC. Constr
Build Mater 45:130–137
16. Buratti N, Mazzotti C (2015) Experimental tests on the
effect of temperature on the long-term behaviour of
macrosynthetic Fibre Reinforced Concretes. Constr Build
Mater 95:133–142
17. Hollaway L (1990) Polymers and polymer composites in
construction. Thomas Telford, London
18. Babafemi AJ, Boshoff WP (2014) Tensile creep of macro-
synthetic fibre reinforced concrete (MSFRC) under uni-
axial tensile loading. Cem Concr Compos 55:62–69
19. Østergaard L, Lange DA, Altoubat SA, Stang H (2001)
Tensile basic creep of early-age concrete under constant
load. Cem Concr Res 31(12):1895–1899
20. Altoubat SA, Lange DA (2001) Tensile basic creep: mea-
surements and behavior at early age. ACI Mater J
98(5):386–393
21. Zhao G, di Prisco M, Vandewalle L (2014) Experimental
investigation on uniaxial tensile creep behavior of cracked
steel fiber reinforced concrete. Mater Struct. doi:10.1617/
s11527-014-0389-1
22. TNO DIANA (2009) tnodiana.com. Retrieved from https://
support.tnodiana.com/manuals/d93/Diana.html
23. Mouton CJ, Boshoff WP (2012) Initial study on the tensile
creep of cracked steel fibre reinforced concrete. In: Pro-
ceedings of the 8th RILEM international symposium on
fibre reinforced concrete: challenges and opportunities,
Guimarães, 19–21 September, pp 326–337
24. BS EN 14651 (2007) Test method for metallic fibre con-
crete—measuring the flexural tensile strength (limit of
proportionality (LOP), residual). British Standard Institu-
tion, London
25. Zerbino RL, Barragan BE (2012) Long-term behaviour of
cracked steel fibre reinforced concrete beams under sus-
tained loading. ACI Mater J 109(2):215–224
26. Barragan BE, Zerbino RL (2008) Creep behaviour of
cracked steel fibre reinforced concrete beams. In: 7th
International RILEM symposium on fibre reinforced
4400
concrete: design and application, Chennai, 17–19th
September, pp 577–586
27. Arango SE, Serna P, Martı́-Vargas JR, Gracı́a-Taengua E
(2011) A test method to characterize flexural creep beha-
viour of pre-cracked FRC specimens. Exp Mech
52(8):1067–1078
28. Özcan DM, Bayraktar A, Şahin A, Haktanir T, T} urker T
(2009) Experimental and finite element analysis on the steel
fiber-reinforced concrete (SFRC) beams ultimate beha-
viour. Constr Build Mater 23:1064–1077
29. Palacio K (2013) Practical recommendations for nonlinear
structural analysis in DIANA. TNO DIANA BV, Delft
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4389–4400
30. Carnovale DJ (2013) Behaviour and analysis of steel and
macro-synthetic fibre reinforced concrete subjected to
reverse cyclic loading: A pilot investigation. Unpublished
Master’s Thesis. University of Toronto, Canada
31. Löfgren I (2005) Fibre-reinforced concrete for industrial
construction–a fracture mechanics approach to material
testing and structural analysis. Unpublished Doctoral dis-
sertation. Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg,
Sweden
32. di Prisco M, Plizzari G, Vandewalle L (2009) Fibre rein-
forced concrete: new design perspectives. Mater Struct
42(9):1261–1281