Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 927–933

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

The effects of silica fume and polypropylene fibers on the impact resistance
and mechanical properties of concrete
Mahmoud Nili *, V. Afroughsabet
Civil Eng. Dept., Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, I.R, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Impact resistance and strength performance of concrete mixtures with 0.36 and 0.46 water–cement
Received 21 August 2009 ratios made with polypropylene and silica fume are examined. Polypropylene fiber with 12-mm length
Received in revised form 21 November 2009 and four volume fractions of 0%, 0.2%, 0.3% and 0.5% are used. In pre-determined mixtures, silica fume
Accepted 21 November 2009
is used as cement replacement material at 8% weight of cement. The results show that incorporating
Available online 24 December 2009
polypropylene fibers improves mechanical properties. The addition of silica fume facilitates the disper-
sion of fibers and improves the strength properties, particularly the impact resistance of concretes. It
Keywords:
is shown that using 0.5% polypropylene fiber in the silica fume mixture increases compressive split ten-
Polypropylene fibers
Silica fume
sile, and flexural strength, and especially the performance of concrete under impact loading.
Mechanical properties Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Impact resistance

1. Introduction impact resistance of fiber-reinforced concrete. A 100  100 

400-mm specimen is supported in a Charpy test apparatus and
It is well known that concrete is a quasi brittle material. Brittle- completely fractured by one blow; the fracture energy is measured
ness increases with increasing strength. This may be due to low from the amplitude of the pendulum swing. The drop weight test
tensile strength and lack of bonding in the transition zone of the was also used to perform impact tests on plain and steel fiber-rein-
cement matrix which obviously restricts utilization of high forced concrete beams by Mohammadi et al. [19]. The Committee
strength concrete under static and, in particular dynamic loading 544 [20] ACI proposed a drop weight impact test to evaluate the
[1–3]. However, despite the defects in high strength concrete, de- impact resistance of fiber concrete. Disc specimens that were of
mand for this material continues to grow. It is well understood that 150 mm in diameter and 64 mm in thickness were cut from
silica fume, due to high pozzolanic activity, is inevitable material 150  300-mm cylinders. The number of blows required to cause
when producing high strength concrete; however, it causes the the first visible crack and to cause failure were recorded. Because
concrete to have a more brittle structure [4–5]. Therefore, ductility of the nature of the impact test, and especially because of the in
improvement is a vital matter in concrete science that must be ta- homogeneity of concrete, the data obtained from the impact test
ken into account by researchers. One possible solution to improve can be scattered noticeably, as reported by Schrader [21]. This test
the ductility and resistance of concrete structures [6–10] to dy- is widely used because of its simplicity and economy. The variation
namic loading, such as impact, fatigue and earthquakes, is incorpo- in the impact resistance determined from this test is reported in
rating fibers in the concrete. Adding fibers to concrete increases the the literature for some types of FRC, but less data can be found
energy absorption capacity of concrete and provides a more ductile for polypropylene fiber-reinforced concrete [22]. Thus, several im-
structure. The fibers are mainly made of steel, carbon or polymer pact test methods have been used to demonstrate the relative brit-
[11]. Among the polymer fibers, polypropylene (PP) has attracted tleness and impact resistance of concrete. However, none of these
the most attention among researchers because of its low cost, out- test methods have been standardized yet. In the present research,
standing toughness and enhanced shrinkage cracking resistance in the impact resistance and strength performance of fibrous and
concrete reinforced with this type of fiber [11–16]. Many studies non-fibrous specimens with and without silica fume are experi-
have evaluated the ductility of fibrous specimens; the impact test mentally examined.
is a well known method for assessment of concrete ductility [17].
Hibbert and Hannant [18] designed an instrument to control the
2. Test program and procedures

In this research, two series of concrete mixtures with 0.46 and 0.36 water–ce-
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 9181112615; fax: +98 8118224205. ment ratios, were prepared and labeled A1 and B1, respectively. Some specimens
E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Nili). were reinforced with 0.2%, 0.3% and 0.5% (by volume) polypropylene fibers. Silica

0950-0618/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.11.025
928 M. Nili, V. Afroughsabet / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 927–933

the specimens was determined as well in accordance with the ACI committee
544 proposal [20]. For this purpose, six 150  64-mm discs, which were cut from
150  300-mm cylindrical specimens using a diamond cutter were prepared and
placed on a base plate with four positioning lugs; they were then struck with re-
peated blows. The blows were introduced through a 4.45 kg hammer dropping fre-
quently from a 45.7-cm height onto a 6.35-cm steel ball, which was located at the
center of the top surface of the disc. Figs. 2 and 3 show the specimens and impact
base plate and the test procedure. The numbers of blows producing the first visible
crack and cause ultimate failure were recorded. In each test, the number of blows to
produce the initial visible crack was recorded as the first crack strength, and the
number of blows to cause complete failure of the disc was recorded as the failure
strength.

2.1. Materials and mixing procedure

Ordinary Portland cement (ASTM Type 1) produced by Hekmatan Factory and

silica fume, a by-product of the silicon and ferrosilicon Semnan factory, were used
in this work. The cement and silica fume properties are given in Table 1. Coarse
aggregate with a maximum size of 19 mm and fine aggregate with a 3.4 fineness
modulus were used in this experiment. The specific gravity and water absorption
of the coarse and fine aggregates were 2.69 and 0.56% and 2.61 and 1.92%, respec-
tively. A high range water reducer agent with a commercial name of Carboxylic
Fig. 1. Flexural test machine. 110 M (BASF) was used to adjust the workability of the concrete mixtures. The
mixing procedure for fresh concrete mixtures was as follows: the cement (or ce-
ment and silica fume) and fine aggregate were mixed initially for 1 min; and
superplasticizer with half mixing water were mixed for 2 min. Coarse aggregate
and the rest of water were added and mixed for 3 min. Finally fiber was added
to the mixtures and mixed for 5 min. The polypropylene fiber properties, as well
as the mix proportions of the mixtures, are provided in Tables 2 and 3,
respectively.

Table 1
Properties of cement and silica fume.

Composition (%) Cement Silica fume

Chemical compositions
Sio2 21.20 85–95
Al2O3 5.35 0.5–1.7
Fe2O3 3.40 0.4–2
MgO 1.44 0.1–0.9
Na2O – 0.15–0.2
K2O – 0.15–1.02
CaO 63.95 –
Fig. 2. Disc type specimens for the impact test. C3S 51.46 –
C2S 22.00 –
C3A 6.42 –
C4AF 10.35 –
fume as a cement replacement was also added (8% by weight) to some specimens.
Compressive strength tests were performed at the ages of 7, 28 and 91 days on Physical properties
100  100  100-mm cubic specimens and the flexural strength test was also per- Specific gravity 3.1 2.21
formed (see Fig. 1) on 80  100  400-mm specimens. The tensile strength test was Specific surface (cm2/gr) 3000 14,000
also performed on 100  200-mm cylindrical specimens. The Impact resistance of

Fig. 3. (a) Base plate within four positioning lugs and subjected to repeated blows and (b) procedure for the impact test.
 M. Nili, V. Afroughsabet / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 927–933 929

Table 2 can be generally seen that, for all specimens, as the fiber volume
Properties of polypropylene fiber. increases the compressive strength increases. As shown, for 0.46
Length (mm) Effective diameter (lm) Density (kg/m3) Shape water–cement ratio specimens, the increase in compressive
12 22 0.91 Straight strength are 3% at 0.2% fiber volume and 14% at 0.5% fiber volume.
Adding silica fume to non-fibrous specimens also improves com-
pressive strength. Increase in compressive strength up to 13%,
21% and 23% are observed in No. 5 at the ages of 7, 28 and 91 days
2.2. Specimen molding
compared to No. 1, respectively. Whereas in fibrous specimens, for
Each type of freshly mixed concrete was cast into cubic (100 mm), cylindrical instance No 8, when silica fume was added to a 0.5% fiber speci-
(100 mm  200 mm specimens), prismatic and cylindrical cutting specimens for men, an increase of 20% at 7 days, 27% at 28 days and 30% at the
compressive, splitting tensile, flexural and impact tests, respectively. All specimens, ages of 91 days are obtained. In series B1, the specimens with a
before de-molding, were stored at 23 °C and 100% relative humidity for about 24 h.
The concrete specimens were then cured in lime-saturated water until the day of
water–cement ratio of 0.36 demonstrated a similar trend in the, re-
testing. sults. In the case of specimen Nos. 10 and 12, increase of 1–6% in
compressive strength is observed as the fiber volume varies be-
tween 0.2% and 0.5%, respectively. On the other hand, introducing
3. Results and discussion silica fume to the specimens (No. 13) improves the compressive
strength by about 7–14% at the ages of 7 and 91 days, respectively.
The compressive, tensile and flexural strength results are sum- When silica fume and polypropylene fiber are simultaneously
marized in Table 4 and graphically illustrated in Figs. 4–6. incorporated into the specimens (Nos. 14 and 16) an improvement
in compressive strength between 9–18% and 11–20% at the ages of
3.1. Compressive strength 7–91 days, compare to reference specimen, No. 9, are observed.
This indicates that the pozzolanic properties of silica fume and also
The variations of the compressive strength versus fiber volume the crack restriction effect of fiber can promote the compressive
fractions, at the ages of 7, 28 and 91 days, are illustrated in Fig. 4. It strength of concrete.

Table 3
Mix proportions of the concrete mixtures.

Mix W/ Water (kg/ Cement (kg/ Silica fume (kg/ Fine agg. (kg/ Coarse agg. (kg/ Vf Weight (kg/ Sp Slump
no. (C + Sf) m3) m3) m3) m3) m3) (%) m3) (%) (Cm)
A1
1 0.46 177 385 – 920 884 – – 0.60 5.0
2 0.46 177 385 – 918 882 0.2 1.82 0.90 6.0
3 0.46 177 385 – 916 880 0.3 2.73 1.25 6.0
4 0.46 177 385 – 914 878 0.5 4.55 1.70 4.0
5 0.46 177 354.2 30.8 915 879 – – 0.70 7.0
6 0.46 177 354.2 30.8 912 876 0.2 1.82 1.10 7.0
7 0.46 177 354.2 30.8 911 875 0.3 2.73 1.35 7.0
8 0.46 177 354.2 30.8 908 873 0.5 4.55 1.75 5.0
B1
9 0.36 162 450 – 912 877 – – 1.10 6.5
10 0.36 162 450 – 910 874 0.2 1.82 1.50 6.5
11 0.36 162 450 – 908 873 0.3 2.73 1.60 8.0
12 0.36 162 450 – 906 870 0.5 4.55 1.90 6.0
13 0.36 162 414 36 906 871 – – 1.20 10.0
14 0.36 162 414 36 903 868 0.2 1.82 1.55 10.0
15 0.36 162 414 36 902 867 0.3 2.73 1.65 8.5
16 0.36 162 414 36 899 864 0.5 4.55 1.95 5.0

Table 4
Compressive, tensile and flexural strength of the specimens.

Mix no. Compressive strength (MPa) Tensile strength (MPa) Flexural strength (MPa) 28 days
7 days 28 days 91 days 7 days 28 days 91 days
1 32.95 41.30 46.65 2.67 3.22 3.89 4.45
2 33.88 42.32 48.96 2.81 3.49 3.97 4.48
3 36.15 44.05 50.21 2.85 3.66 4.03 5.17
4 37.56 46.09 53.56 3.01 3.68 4.16 5.58
5 37.28 49.88 57.44 2.95 3.52 3.97 5.09
6 37.51 50.29 58.71 2.97 3.69 4.01 5.46
7 38.12 50.88 59.43 3.13 3.87 4.06 5.68
8 39.41 52.61 60.49 3.24 4.09 4.39 6.14
9 47.58 55.58 61.01 3.56 4.39 4.74 6.30
10 48.12 55.97 62.27 3.63 4.41 4.93 6.58
11 49.01 56.46 63.43 3.73 4.49 5.04 6.63
12 49.64 58.24 64.54 3.90 4.68 5.22 6.36
13 51.19 63.34 69.48 3.98 4.71 5.52 6.97
14 51.88 65.93 72.28 4.04 5.05 5.36 7.06
15 52.30 66.16 72.41 4.15 5.09 5.71 7.56
16 52.68 66.33 73.26 4.27 5.43 5.86 7.83
930 M. Nili, V. Afroughsabet / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 927–933

3.2. Splitting tensile strength the flexural strength of fibrous specimens increases compared to
the reference specimen. However, the rate of increase is higher
Split tensile strength results versus fiber volume fractions are in A1 specimens. Silica fume, as in the tensile strength results, im-
shown in Fig. 5. The results show that for both water–cement ratios, proves flexural performance. The combined effect of fiber and silica
tensile strength rises as the fiber volume fractions increases. For fume is considerable, and typically, an improvement in flexural
example, the tensile strength of A1 mixture, at the age of 28 day in- strength of 22% in No. 6, 27% in No. 7 and 38% in No. 8 are observed.
creases 8%, 14% and 14% when the fiber volume fractions in the In B1, the increase in specimens flexural strength is the same as A1,
mixes are 0.2%, 0.3% and 0.5%, respectively. Adding silica fume to but at a lower rate. However, the highest flexural strength value of
the specimen (No. 5) the tensile strength increases by 9% compared 7.83 MPa is belongs to specimen No. 16 in series B1, which contain
to reference ones. However, when silica fume is introduced to fi- silica fume and 0.5% polypropylene fiber.
brous specimens, the rate of tensile strength increases by 15%,
20% and 27% in specimens Nos. 6–8, respectively. Although splitting
tensile strength is greatly affected due to a reduction in water–ce- 3.4. Impact test
ment ratio, in B1 mixtures, the same tendency as A1 specimens is
observed. In other words, introducing the fiber and silica fume to The impact resistance performance of the A1 and B1 series of
the mixtures improves tensile strength. Furthermore, the combined concrete are given in Table 5 and are also shown in Fig. 7. As it is
effect of fiber and silica fume leads to increases of 15%, 16% and 23% shown, the number of blows at the first crack (N1) and the number
in tensile strength in specimens’ Nos. 14–16, respectively. of blows for failure (N2) are provided in the results. The percentage
increase in the number of post first crack blows to failure (N2–N1/
N1) is labeled the termed as PINPB and is also given in Table 5. As
3.3. Flexural strength the results suggest, by incorporating PP fibers into the A1 mixtures,
N1 is increased by 31%, 100% and 360% by adding 0.2%, 0.3% and
The flexural strength results versus fiber volume fractions, at 0.5%, fiber, respectively. When silica fume is introduced to the mix-
the age of 28 days, carried out on sixteen different mixtures are ture (No. 5) N1 increases six times. However, in silica fume fibrous
presented in Fig. 6. As explained in the tensile strength results, specimens (Nos. 6–8), N1 increases about 6.6, 7.6 and 8.5 times,

(a) 80 (b) 80
W/C=0.46
W/C=0.36
70 W/C=0.46-Sf 70
Compressive Strength [MPa]

Compressive Strength [MPa]

W/C=0.36-Sf

60 60

50 50

40 40
W/C=0.46
30 W/C=0.36
30
W/C=0.46-Sf
W/C=0.36-Sf
20 20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Fiber Volume Fraction [%] Fiber Volume Fraction [%]

(c) 80

70
Compressive Strength [MPa]

60

50

40
W/C=0.46
W/C=0.36
30
W/C=0.46-Sf
W/C=0.36-Sf
20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Fiber Volume Fraction [%]
Fig. 4. Compressive strength versus fiber volume fractions at the ages of: (a) 7 days, (b) 28 days and (c) 91 days.
 M. Nili, V. Afroughsabet / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 927–933 931

(a) 8 (b) 8
W/C=0.46 W/C=0.46
W/C=0.36 W/C=0.36
7 W/C=0.46-Sf 7 W/C=0.46-Sf
W/C=0.36-Sf

Tensile Strength [MPa]

Tensile Strength [MPa] W/C=0.36-Sf
6 6

5 5

4 4

3 3

2 2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Fiber Volume Fraction [%] Fiber Volume Fraction [%]

(c) 8
W/C=0.46
W/C=0.36
7 W/C=0.46-Sf
W/C=0.36-Sf
Tensile Strength [MPa]

2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Fiber Volume Fraction [%]
Fig. 5. Splitting tensile strength versus fiber volume fractions at the ages of: (a) 7 days, (b) 28 days and (c) 91 days.

(a) 11 (b) 11
W/C=0.46 W/C=0.36
10 10
W/C=0.46-Sf W/C=0.36-Sf
Felxural Strength [MPa]

Felxural Strength [MPa]

9 9

8 8

7 7

6 6

5 5

4 4

3 3
0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0 0.2 0.3 0.5
Fiber Volume Fraction [%] Fiber Volume Fraction [%]
Fig. 6. Flexural strength and fiber volume fractions at the age of 28 days: (a) w/c = 0.46 and (b) w/c = 0.36.

respectively. This may be attributed to the fact that adding silica to absorb kinetic energy suggest that adding fiber delays failure
fume improves dispersion of the fibers in the specimens [7,22]. strength. On the other hand, the results also reveal that adding sil-
A similar trend to that specified for N1 is observed for N2 ica fume (No. 5) despite increment the strength, leads to higher
values. On the other hand, PINPB values that indicate the ability brittleness. However, initiation and cracks propagation under
932 M. Nili, V. Afroughsabet / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 927–933

Table 5
Test results for impact resistance of polypropylene fiber-reinforced concrete.

Mix no. Impact resistance (blows) Impact energy (kN mm) PINPB (blows)a
First crack (N1) Failure (N2) First crack Failure
1 35 38 712.1 773.1 8.6
2 46 54 935.9 1098.6 17.4
3 70 79 1424.2 1607.3 12.9
4 161 181 3275.5 3682.4 12.4
5 243 246 4943.8 5004.9 1.2
6 268 277 5452.5 5635.6 3.4
7 300 315 6103.5 6408.7 5.0
8 331 371 6734.2 7547.9 12.1
9 132 134 2685.5 2726.2 1.5
10 139 152 2827.9 3092.4 9.4
11 192 211 3906.2 4292.8 9.9
12 239 307 4862.5 6245.9 28.5
13 281 284 5716.9 5777.9 1.1
14 299 322 6083.2 6551.1 7.7
15 325 343 6612.1 6978.3 5.5
16 365 399 7425.9 8117.7 9.3
a
Percentage increase in number of post-first-crack blows to failure.

(a) 450
(b) 450
W/C=0.46 W/C=0.46
400 W/C=0.36 400 W/C=0.36
W/C=0.46-Sf
Number of Blows at First Crack

W/C=0.46-Sf
W/C=0.36-Sf W/C=0.36-Sf
Number of Blows at Failure

350 350

300 300

250 250

200 200

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Fiber Volume Fraction [%] Fiber Volume Fraction [%]
Fig. 7. Impact strength versus percentage of polypropylene fiber volume fractions at: (a) first crack and (b) failure strength.

impact loading are reduced in fibrous and nearly silica fume fi- 2. When silica fume is added into the non-fibrous and fibrous mix-
brous specimens. As the water–cement ratio decrease in the B1 tures, the compressive strength, at the age of 91 days, was
mixtures, lower ductility and increased strength of the paste can enhanced by 23% and 30%, respectively. On the other hand, add-
be attained. Adding of silica fume, despite increasing the strength, ing of silica fume into the fibrous specimens led to an increased
led to higher brittleness. Although N1 increases compare to A1 in compressive strength up to 30% at the age of 91 days. This
mixtures the rate of increase resulting from fiber or silica fume, may be due to pozzolanic effect of silica fume and crack restric-
in N1 and N2 decreases considerably. Adding fibers also increases tion effect if fiber.
the PINPB value seven times over the specimens made by silica 3. Splitting tensile and flexural strength of 0.5% fibrous silica fume
fume and without fiber specimens. This means that fibers effec- concretes was enhanced considerably.
tively reduced the brittleness of the specimens. In Fig. 8, a compar- 4. The number of blows at first cracks and failure, as impact indi-
ison of the failure pattern in the disc specimens with and without ces, increased considerably in fibrous specimens. Incorporating
fiber is shown. It can be concluded that, by adding fiber, the failure 0.2%, 0.3% and 0.5% polypropylene fiber into the 0.46 water-
crack pattern changed from a single large crack to a group narrow cement ratio specimens led to an increase in the number of
cracks, which demonstrates the beneficial effects of fiber-rein- blows by 31%, 100% and 360%, respectively at first crack and
forced concrete subjected to impact loading. 42%, 107% and 376%, respectively, at failure compared to those
of the reference. Likewise, a similar trend was observed, but at a
4. Conclusions lower rate, in 0.36 water-cement ratio specimens.
5. The results revealed that silica fume improved the fiber disper-
sion in the mixtures.
1. The increase of polypropylene fiber in the mixtures from 0.2% to 6. Adding silica fume to fibrous specimens improved the speci-
0.5%, generally increased the compressive strength. The com- mens strength more than adding silica fume by itself. These
pressive strength of fibrous specimens at the age of 91 days, results show that silica fume can strengthens the transition
with 0.5% fiber, increased by 15% compared with those of the zone and reduces crack initiation, and therefore, improves the
reference. failure strength of polypropylene fiber concretes.
 M. Nili, V. Afroughsabet / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 927–933 933

Fig. 8. Fracture pattern of concrete with different fiber volume fractions under the drop weight test: (a) plain concrete, (b) 0.2% fiber, (c) 0.3% fiber and (d) 0.5% fiber.

7. A ductile failure, under impact loading, was observed in fibrous [10] Aruntasß HY, Cemalgil S, Sß imsßek O, Durmusß G, Erdal M. Effects of super
plasticizer and curing conditions on properties of concrete with and without
specimens. When silica fume was used in non-fibrous con-
fiber. Mater Lett 2008;62:3441–3.
cretes, it led to an increase in brittleness. However, incorporat- [11] Ghavami K. Bamboo as reinforcement in structural concrete elements. J Cem
ing silica fume and polypropylene considerably improved the Concr Composit 2005;27:637–49.
ability of concrete to absorb kinetic energy. [12] Banthia N, Gupta R. Influence of polypropylene fiber geometry on plastic
shrinkage cracking in concrete. J Cem Concr Res 2006;36:1263–7.
[13] Qian CX, Stroeven P. Development of hybrid polypropylene–steel fiber
reinforced concrete. J Cem Concr Res 2000;30:63–9.
References [14] Alhozaimy AM, Soroushian P, Mirza F. Mechanical properties of polypropylene
fiber reinforced concrete and the effect of pozzolanic materials. J Cem Concr
[1] Yan H, Sun W, Chen H. The effect of silica fume and steel fiber on the dynamic Composit 1996;18:85–92.
mechanical performance of high-strength concrete. J Cem Concr Res [15] Toutanji HA. Properties of polypropylene fiber reinforced silica fume
1999;29:423–6. expansive–cement concrete. J Construct Build Mater 1999;13:171–7.
[2] Kayali O, Haque MN, Zho B. Some characteristics of high strength fiber [16] Yao W, Li J, Wu K. Mechanical properties of hybrid fiber-reinforced concrete at
reinforced lightweight aggregate concrete. J Cem Concr Composit low fiber volume fraction. J Cem Concr Res 2003;33:27–30.
2003;25:207–13. [17] Badr A, Ashour AF, Platten AK. Statistical variations in impact resistance of
[3] Brandt AM. Fiber reinforced cement-based (FRC) composites after over 40 polypropylene fiber-reinforced concrete. Int J Impact Eng 2006;32:1907–20.
years of development in building and civil engineering. Composit Struct [18] Hibbert AP, Hannant DJ. The design of an instrumented impact test machine
2008;86:3–9. for fiber concrete. In: RILEM symposium on testing and test methods of fiber
_ Sßahin Y. Combined effect of silica fume and steel fiber
[4] KÖksal F, Altun F, Yiğit I, cement composites. Lancaster: The construction Press; 1978. p. 107–20.
on the mechanical properties of high strength concretes. J Construct Build [19] Mohammadi Y, Carkon-Azad R, Singh SP, Kaushik SK. Impact resistance of steel
Mater 2008;22:1874–80. fibrous concrete containing fibers of mixed aspect ratio. J Construct Build
[5] Shannag MJ. High strength concrete containing natural pozzolan and silica Mater 2009;23:183–9.
fume. J Cem Concr Composit 2000;22:399–406. [20] ACI Committee 544. Measurement of properties of fiber-reinforced concrete.
[6] Banthia N, Yan C, Sakai K. Impact resistance of fiber reinforced concrete at ACI Mater J 1988;85(6):583–93.
subnormal temperatures. J Cem Concr Composit 1998;20:393–404. [21] Schrader EK. Impact resistance and test procedure for concrete. ACI J
[7] Toutanji H, McNeil S, Bayasi Z. Chloride permeability and impact resistance of 1981;78:141–6.
polypropylene-fiber-reinforced silica fume concrete. J Cem Concr Res [22] Löfgren I. Fiber-reinforced concrete for industrial construction—a fracture
1998;28(7):961–8. mechanics approach to material testing and structural analysis. Thesis for the
[8] Song PS, Hawang S, Sheu BC. Strength properties of nylon- and polypropylene- degree of doctor of philosophy, Göteborg, Sweden; 2005.
fiber-reinforced concrete. J Cem Concr Res 2005;35:1546–50.
[9] Nataraja MC, Dhang N, Gupta AP. Statistical variations in impact resistance of
steel fiber–reinforced concrete subjected to drop weight test. J Cem Concr Res
1999;29:989–95.