See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322557281

Enhancing Mechanical Properties of Pervious Concrete Using Carbon Fiber

Composite Reinforcement

Article  in  Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering · March 2018

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002207

CITATIONS READS
5 531

4 authors, including:

Milena Rangelov Somayeh Nassiri

Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology Washington State University
10 PUBLICATIONS   46 CITATIONS    60 PUBLICATIONS   186 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Permeable pavement in airport applications-ACRP 2-64-2016 View project

Portland Cement Concrete Material Characterization for Pavement ME Design Implementation in Idaho View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Somayeh Nassiri on 17 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Enhancing Mechanical Properties of Pervious Concrete using Carbon Fiber Composite Reinforcement

Authors:

Harry Rodin III

Milena Rangelov
Somayeh Nassiri
and
Karl Englund
Washington State University

Affiliation Statements:

Harry Rodin III: MS student, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Washington State

University

Milena Rangelov: PhD Candidate, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, Washington State

University

Somayeh Nassiri: PhD, Associate Research Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department,

Washington State University

Karl Englund: PhD, Associate Research Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering Department,

Washington State University

1
Abstract

Cured Carbon Fiber Composite Material (CCFCM) is available from manufacturing lines; however, excess

CCFCM has no reuse applications at present. Post-industrial CCFCM was mechanically refined and used

as reinforcement to improve the mechanical properties of pervious concrete (PC). Four PC mixtures were

included in the study, which contained zero (control), three, four, and five percent CCFCM by volume.

Infiltration rate of all CCFCM-mixtures were above the acceptable level of 1,200 cm/h. Paired t-tests

showed that all CCFCM mixtures significantly outperformed the control mixture in terms of split tensile

strength by 57-84% and flexural strength by 36-65% in 28-day testing. Load-displacement curves of

CCFCM-mixtures indicated increases of 41-54% in toughness indices. Mass loss due to Los Angeles

Machine abrasion (Cantabro) ranged 16-31% for CCFCM mixtures, while the control lost 50% of its

original mass. Overall, within the tested range, up to four percent CCFCM addition to PC presented the

optimal result across the entire experimental scope higher CCFCM contents may be possible if used as a

replacement of aggregate rather than an additive to the mixture.

2
Introduction

Pervious concrete pavements allow free draindown of rain and snowmelt through the slab, facilitating

stormwater management, especially in areas with high rain volume. Free draindown of runoff is made

possible by designing pervious concrete (PC) slabs to withhold 15-35 percent porosity. permeable pore

system is created by using narrow-graded coarse aggregate sized 9-19 mm, and by eliminating (minimizing)

the fine aggregate content (ACI, 2010). Pore volume fraction (porosity), pore size, and pore tortuosity

influence the hydraulic and mechanical properties of PC, causing decreases in strength compared to

conventional portland cement concrete (PCC) (Rehder et al. 2014, ACI, 2010). PC strength is also reduced

by the weak contact links between the coarse aggregate, cement, and fibers (if used) (Hesami et al. 2014),

which can result in excess abrasion and raveling under traffic loading (Dong et al. 2013). The combination

of these factors creates a popcorn-like mixture with reduced paste surface area to bind the aggregate, leaving

weak areas in the PC and lower compressive strengths (around 2,500 psi) compared to PCC (Tennis et al.

2004). The addition of reinforcing elements to PC can improve the mechanical properties, such as flexural

and tensile strength, by bridging the voids and holding the matrix together, while keeping the free drainage

ability of PC (Rangelov et al. 2016). Fibers also increase abrasion and raveling resistance in PC via the

“bird-nest” effect that helps mitigate over-compaction and clogging (Eisenberg et al. 2015).

Polypropylene fibers commonly used in PCC have been the most used in PC, as well. However, researchers

cautioned that polypropylene fibers may not bond well in PC due to the low paste content, and are therefore

likely to decrease strength (Wang et al. 2006 & Joung and Grasley 2008). Increasing the cement content

seems to alleviate this problem, as modified PC mixtures with polypropylene fiber reinforcement showed

improvement in split tensile strength and freeze-thaw durability (Wang et al. 2006 & Yang 2011). In

addition to improved strength and durability, the use of polypropylene fibers in PC may enhance resistance

to impact loading, and decrease brittle failure in PC that is caused by the porous matrix (Huang et al. 2010

and Wu et al. 2011). Researchers also alerted against poor dispersion of polypropylene fibers throughout

the mixture, which can lead to reduced strength (Wu et al. 2011). Negligible improvements in mechanical

3
properties of PC with latex and polypropylene fibers was attributed to a poor fiber dispersion (Huang et al.

2010). When incorporating fibers in PC, attention should be paid to maintaining the hydraulic performance,

as the infiltration rate (I) may decline with increased volume of fibers (Kevern et al. 2014).

In the present study, fiber-like reinforcing elements produced by mechanical refining of aerospace

industry’s cured carbon fiber composite materials (CCFCM) was used to improve PC’s mechanical

properties. Composite materials, such as CCFCM, have become economically competitive for

manufacturing of high-performance products (Das et al. 2016). Therefore, the global demand for composite

materials has accelerated, yielding an increased amount of excess high-valued materials from manufacturers

in aerospace, automotive, and sports industry that urgently need a viable reuse application (Ribeiro et al.

2016). This study examines a reuse option for the excess CCFCM from aerospace industry. The fiber-

shaped CCFCM reinforcing elements used in the present study are composite materials that include carbon

fibers embedded in the epoxy matrix, rather than individual strands of carbon, metal, synthetic, and natural

fibers commonly used in PCC or PC. However, due to their high modulus and flexibility, CCFCM

reinforcement is expected to behave closer to steel fibers than the other fiber types. The review of literature

on the performance of PC reinforced with steel fibers revealed that steel fibers incorporated in PC at 0.5

percent by volume resulted in increases in compressive, split tensile and flexural strengths for three different

water-to-cement ratios (Hesami et. al 2014). Hooked steel fibers are typically implemented in PCC slabs,

beams and columns (Sujivorakul 2012). The 2012-study showed that hooked steel fibers increase ductility

and tensile strength of PCC for fiber volume contents 0.25-1.5 percent. In all mixtures, the first-peak and

post-cracking tensile strength increased as the fiber content increased (Sujivorakul 2012). Concrete

reinforced with hooked steel fibers at one and two percent by volume was tested for tensile stress-strain

comparisons (Kim et al. 2012). The two-percent fiber content outperformed the one-percent by bearing

higher tensile stresses at the same strain values, as well as greater post-cracking strength. Steel fibers were

implemented in PCC mixtures designed for two different 𝑓𝑓′𝑐𝑐 containing 0.5-1.5 percent volume fiber

content. The addition of fibers introduced improvements in 28-day strengths for all fiber-reinforced

4
mixtures compared to the control except for 𝑓𝑓′𝑡𝑡 of 0.5 percent. The increase of fiber content introduced

enhanced post-peak behavior; however, reduced the workability of the fresh mixture (van Zijl and Zeranka

2012). An optimized content of fibers is beneficial for improving ductility and strength properties to a

desired extent, while not compromising the mixtures’ workability (Mihashi and Ishikawa 2012). Post-peak

performance of 0.5-3.0 percent by volume waste-metallic fibers in PCC was evaluated by comparing the

toughness indices estimated according to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) C1018

(Meddah and Bencheikh 2009). Smaller fibers at higher contents yielded higher toughness indices,

indicating a more ductile response; however prior to the first peak, the fibers had minor effect on the

performance.

Scope of Work

Based on the above literature review, it is hypothesized that the addition of a proper amount of CCFCM to

PC will result in improved split tensile and flexural strengths, with negligible improvements or even

possible reductions in compressive strengths and hydraulic performance compared to the plain PC. Post-

peak loading performance is also expected to increase along with improved ductility of the reinforced

specimens. To test this hypothesis, four CCFCM-reinforced PC (CrPC) were evaluated against a control

mixture for the following properties:

- Hydraulic performance in terms of infiltration rate and hardened porosity,

- Mechanical performance: 7- and 28-day indirect split tensile, modulus of rupture, compressive

strength, and Los Angeles abrasion (Cantabro test),

- Load-deflection curve analysis to investigate the post-peak behavior and toughness.

Materials & Testing Methodology

PC and CrPC Mixture Designs

The control mixture was designed to withhold a target porosity (Φ) of 25 percent, using crushed basalt

coarse aggregate with a 9.5-mm nominal maximum grain size (Fig. 2). CCFCM was mechanically ground

5
and screened to produce fiber-shaped particles that passed Screen 10 (2 mm) and retained on Screen 20

(0.841 mm) (Fig. 1). The particle size distribution for the refined CCFCM is presented in Fig. 2.

Mechanically refined CCFCM was incorporated in three CrPC mixtures at three, four, and five percent

volumetric fractions (Table 1).

Specimen Preparation and Testing

During mixing, CCFCM was added into the mixer in a dry state, simultaneously with the cement and water.

CCFCM particles uniformly distributed in the fresh mixture, especially when mixing CrPC3. At higher

CCFCM contents, CCFCM formed spherical clusters around the aggregate grains, which were

mechanically disintegrated during mixing. Upon discharge, the fresh density of PC (D) was experimentally

determined (ASTM C1688). The experimentally determined D was used to determine the exact mass of the

fresh PC needed to cast each specimen type. Three specimen types were cast: small cylinders (100 by 200

mm), large cylinders (150 by 300 mm) and 100 by 100 by 350-mm beams. Currently no standardized test

procedures are approved for casting and compaction of PC cylinders and beams; because of this, methods

were adopted to receive uniform compaction throughout the specimen, while reproducing experimental

fresh density. The pre-determined amount of fresh PC was divided into two equal lifts for the 100-mm

cylinders and prisms, and three lifts for the 150-mm cylinders. Each lift was compacted using the standard

Proctor Hammer, while the number of blows was adjusted so that the pre-determined amount of the fresh

PC fits in the mold. Moreover, a sufficient number of strikes of the mallet to the sides of the molds were

applied to prevent the formation of undesired air pockets in the interior of the specimens and to ease the

compaction and placement of the total pre-weighed material in the molds. Small cylinders were compacted

using solely strokes of the mallet on the sides of the molds to prevent the over compaction. The specimens

were finished by applying a float on the surface and were cured in the laboratory conditions while covered

by lids or plastic wrap. Fig. 3 shows a 100-mm cylinder from each mixture type for comparison after the

curing period.

6
Specimens were demolded at 7-day age and tested to obtain Φ, hardened density (ρ) and infiltration rate.

Porosity and ρ were determined on all specimens, by taking the specimens’ dimensions, as the average of

a minimum of two caliper measurements, to calculate the volume (V). The mass of dry specimens (Md),

and the mass of the submerged specimen (Mw) are then used to determine Φ per Eq. 1 (ASTM C1754):

(Md - Mw )
ϕ = [1- ] ( 1)
ρw * V

where, ρw is the density of water. Hardened density was estimated as the ratio of the specimen’s dry mass

to its volume. Infiltration tests were performed on cylindrical specimens per the modified respective ASTM

procedure (ASTM C1701). The specimens were enclosed on the sides by shrink wrap to prevent the lateral

loss of water. Infiltration tests were run with 1 and 2 liters of water for the 100- and 150-mm cylinders,

respectively. The time during which the designated volume of water (Vw) permeates through the specimen

(t) was recorded and used to calculate the infiltration per Eq. 2:

4Vw
I= ( 2)
R 2π t
where, R stands for the diameter of each specimen, determined as a part of the Φ characterization procedure

described previously.

Mechanical tests were performed on specimens on two test ages: 7- and 28-day age in accordance with the

respective ASTM procedure for conventional PCC. It is noteworthy that currently a standardized test

procedure for mechanical testing of PC is lacking. Hence, the loading rates recommended for PCC were

adjusted for PC to allow for a no-shock and gradual loading during a test period of about 4-5 minutes per

specimen. Split tensile strength tests were performed on 150-mm cylinders at a loading rate of 890-980

N/sec (ASTM C496). Flexural strengths were determined for simple beams in center loading test setup and

at loading rate 0.15 mm/min (ASTM C293). Compressive strength test was performed on 100-mm

cylinders, using loading rate 0.10-0.14 MPa/sec (ASTM C39). Abrasion resistance using a Los Angeles

7
Machine (Cantabro test) was conducted on the two halves of 100-mm cylinders on 30-day age (ASTM

C1747). The specimens were placed in the steel drum of the abrasion machine without the steel ball charges

and subjected to a total of 500 rotation cycles. The drum was discharged after every 50 cycles and the mass

loss due to impact and abrasion was evaluated.

Test Results and Discussions

Porosity & Fresh Density

Overall, the average Φ ranged from 23.6 to 27.1 percent for all specimens from all mixtures, which agrees

well with the target Φ at 25 percent. As seen in Fig. 4, the prisms are the specimen type with the highest Φ

for all mixtures, except CrPC3, which may be due to the difficulty of placing the PC in the corners of the

beam molds. The 150-mm cylinders demonstrated the lowest Φ for every mixture, except CrPC0, most

likely due to the three-lift, as opposed to the two-lift compaction used for 100-mm cylinders and beams.

Fig. 5 presents the Φ-ρ relationship for all cast specimens. Strong negative linear Φ-ρ relations are evident

for all four mixtures (R2 values ranging 0.92-0.99). Fig. 5 also indicates that for the same value of Φ, the

control mixture has the highest ρ (the heaviest mixture), followed by CrPC3, CrPC4 and CrPC5,

respectively. The trends in Fig. 5 indicate that the addition of CCFCM to PC has a weight lightening effect

on the mixture. As seen in Fig. 5, CrPC mixtures display a wider range of Φ among the specimens compared

to the control. Further, CrPC3 and CrPC5 resulted in several prisms and 100-mm cylinders with Φ beyond

28 percent implying that higher contents of CCFCM may hinder proper compaction. This problem may be

resolved by adjusting the aggregate content.

Infiltration Rate

Kevern et al. (2014) found that I decrease as higher volumes of fibers are implemented in PC. In the present

study too, CrPC mixtures generally demonstrate lower I comparing to the control mixture. Fig. 6 shows

that I for all specimens range 1,270-3,556 cm/h, which is within the typical range for PC reported in the

literature: 508-7,620 cm/h (Eisenberg et al. 2015). The addition of CCFCM decreases I of 150-mm

8
cylinders, with CrPC4 exhibiting the lowest infiltration rate. In terms of 100-mm cylinders, an increase in

I is seen for CrPC3, while CrPC4 and CrPC5 show decreases in infiltration. As seen earlier in Fig. 4, 100-

mm cylinders from CrPC3 had the highest Φ of all cylinders, which is likely the reason for the high I relative

to CrPC4 and CrPC5. Therefore, the effect of CCFCM addition on I can be best investigated in comparison

to porosity.

Fig. 7 presents the Φ-I relations for all the tested specimens. A distinct direct linear Φ-I relationship with

comparable slopes are established for CrPC0 and CrPC3. However, at higher CCFCM contents (CrPC4 and

CrPC5), the slope of the Φ-I line is more gradual, which indicates almost constant levels of I over the range

of porosity. This behavior points to the effect of the CCFCM additions in perhaps disturbing the

connectivity of the voids. Mixtures with lower values of I are typically more prone to clogging, which

results in reduced serviceability. To mitigate this problem, for PC mixture designs that yield low I rates, it

is suggested to use CCFCM as a replacement of coarse aggregate rather than an additive to achieve higher

hardened porosity and I for CrPC mixtures.

Indirect Split Tensile Strength

Indirect split tensile strength (f’t) was determined for five 150-mm cylinders per mixture, both on 7- and

28-days (Fig. 8). The addition of CCFCM to PC increased f’t of all CrPCs. Comparing to control, CrPC3,

4, and 5 increased in 7-day f’t by 65, 57 and 44 percent and 57, 84 and 57 percent on 28-day test. CrPC3

has the highest f’t among the CrPC mixtures at 7-day age. On 28-day test, CrPC4 outperforms all the

mixtures, which is most likely due to the CrPC4’s lower average porosity than the other mixtures. Limited

studies established f’t for PC; a 0.57-1.72 MPa range was found in the literature for plain PC on 28-day age

(Hesami et al. 2014, Ibrahim et al. 2014), depending on the mixture design and targeted porosity. Near-2.1

MPa 28-day average f’t obtained for CrPC in this study exceeds the upper bound reported in the literature.

9
Flexural Strength

Flexural strength indicated by the modulus of rupture (MR) is a critical property for pavement applications

because bending is the primary mode of loading in pavement structures. Any improvements to MR are

expected to directly result in an extended fatigue life for an in-service concrete pavement. MR was

characterized for three beams from each mixture at both 7 and 28-day age (Fig. 9). The addition of CCFCM

in 3, 4 and 5 percent volumetric contents increased the 7-day MR compared to the control by 84, 69, and

57 percent, respectively. For 28-day tests, MR increased by 36, 65 and 41 percent for CrPC3, 4 and 5,

respectively. CrPC3 and CrPC4 show the greatest increase in MR among all CrPC mixtures for 7- and 28-

day ages, respectively. CrPC mixtures also demonstrate lower variations in MR comparing to the CRPC0

(smaller error bars in Fig. 9). Flexural test results for PC are scarce in the literature; two studies reported

28-day MR of 0.95 and 2.21 MPa (Hesami et al. 2014, Ibrahim et al. 2014), which are outperformed by the

28-day average of 3.23 MPa of CrPC mixtures in this study.

The addition of fibers is generally expected to have the most positive influence on the toughness and post-

peak loading behavior of the PCC (Meddah and Bencheikh 2009). Post-cracking behavior of PCC has been

shown to increase due to the implementation of steel fibers (Kim et al. 2012). Load-displacement curves

were recorded during MR testing for all specimens. Fig. 10 (a) displays the curves for one representative

beam from each mixture during 28-day testing to compare their behavior to that of the control. Fig. 10 (a)

shows the control presents a brittle failure at the peak load, indicated by an abrupt drop in the load followed

by a slight residual load bearing. On the contrary, CrPC mixtures demonstrate a ductile behavior with a

more gradual decline past the post peak-load, presenting higher post-peak residual strength.

According to ASTM C1018, four incremental areas under the load-deflection curve bound between 1, 3,

5.5 and 10.5 times the first-crack deflection are calculated. These areas under the curve are used to calculate

toughness indices I5, I10 and I20, which provide indications of the post peak-load behavior, with higher

toughness index values corresponding to more residual loading capacity. The outlined procedure for PCC

needs to be modified to account for the PC’s less ductile failure comparing to PCC, typically occurring well

10
before 3δp is reached. Fig. 10 (b) illustrates the modified procedure for PC toughness index (I2) calculation

adopted in this study. In this procedure, the total area under the load-deflection curve (A+B) is defined as

the area up to two times the peak-load (2δp), instead of three times, as recommended for PCC. A respective

toughness index, I2 is then estimated as the ratio of the total area to the area under the curve limited to the

peak load (A). The specimens with more desirable residual loading capacity present more gradual drop of

post-peak loading, which manifests in higher values of I2.Note that for the control the curve was extended

with the dotted line to continue the data trend that would have brought the specimen to the zero-load point.

The average I2 values for each CrPC mixture is listed in Table 2. CrPC mixtures demonstrate higher values

of I2 comparing to CrPC0 at both test ages, which indicates their enhanced toughness and residual loading

capacity. The addition of steel fibers increased ductility of conventional PCC (Sujivorakul 2012), which

can be related to the post-peak behavior analyzed by comparing toughness index values in the current study.

Based on the obtained results, the addition of CCFCM yields improvement in post-peak loading, resulting

in greater areas under the curve and higher toughness. Experiments performed by van Zijl and Zeranka

(2012) also showed enhanced post-peak behavior when introducing steel fibers to PCC. Mixture CrPC5

shows the highest I2 on both test days. On 7-day test CrPC3 and CrPC4 demonstrate comparable values of

I2, while 28-day results suggest that higher CCFCM content results in higher toughness.

Compressive Strength

Addition of fibers is most influential on tensile and flexural strengths and is not expected to influence the

compressive strengths (f’c) of the PC (Rehder et al. 2014, Meddah and Bencheikh 2009). Five specimens

from each mixture were tested on 7- and 28-day f’c (Fig. 11). The f’c of CrPC3 and CrPC4 can be

characterized as comparable to that of CrPC0. CrPC5 demonstrates a decrease in f’c by 22.5 and 14.5 percent

comparing to CrPC0 on 7- and 28-day tests, respectively. Based on the literature, the average 28-day f’c of

plain PC was reported to range 3.45-12.4 MPa (Hesami et al. 2014, Ibrahim et al. 2014). The results from

Fig. 11 indicate that f’c of all the tested mixtures resides within this range, indicating that the addition of

CCFCM does not detrimentally affect f’c.

11
In order to evaluate the significance of the CCFCM additions on all mechanical properties, Pearson’s two-

sample t-test at 95 percent confidence interval was performed, aiming to compare the mechanical properties

of CrPC mixtures to that of the control mixture (Table 3). For 7- and 28-day f’t, p-values are lower than

0.05, which indicates that the improvements introduced by CCFCM are significant. Similarly, CrPCs show

a statistically significant enhancement in MR on both tests dates. The only exception is the 28-day MR of

CrPC5, however, the p-value of 0.078 indicates a significance at a lower confidence interval of 10 percent.

Conversely, relatively high p-values for f’c in Table 3 suggest that CrPC mixtures had comparable values

of f’c comparing to the control, with CrPC5 as an exception, which showed a significant drop in compressive

strength.

Cantabro Test

Cantabro tests were performed for a total of 500 cycles, while the specimens were weighed for the mass

loss after every 50 cycles. The tests were performed on four halves (two tops and two bottoms) of 100-mm

cylinders from each mixture. The average percent mass loss was calculated and is presented in Fig. 12 for

the tops (a) and bottoms (b) of 100-mm cylinders from each mixture. The bottom control specimens both

failed at 350 cycles. As seen in Fig. 12, CrPCs outperformed the control on Cantabro test. CrPC4

demonstrates a substantial improvement comparing to CrPC0, with the final mass loss of 16 and 25 percent

for the tops and bottoms, respectively. CrPC4 specimens had comparable Φ but showed substantially higher

resistance against impact loading compared to the control. The specimens from CrPC3 and CrPC5

outperformed the control despite their higher porosities.

Conclusions

The objective of this experimental study was to improve the physical, hydraulic and mechanical properties

of pervious concrete (PC) using Cured Carbon Fiber Composite Material (CCFCM) as a reinforcement

(CrPC). CCFCM fiber-like elements were implemented at zero, three, four, and five percent by volume

12
content in the PC (CrPC0, CrPC3, CrPC4, and CrPC5) to assess the impact of different CCFCM contents

on PC properties. Based on the experimental results, the following conclusions can be drawn:

• Dispersion of CCFCM particles was uniform in CrPC3. However, at higher CCFCM contents,

namely four and five percent, the CCFCM elements clustered into spheres around the aggregate

grains, which had to be deliberately disintegrated during the mixing process. Future work will look

into alternative mixing methods other than the rotary drum mixer, and the use of admixtures that

can help mitigate the formation of spherical clusters and maintain the workability and uniformity

of fresh PC mixture.

• CrPC mixtures presented comparable porosity to that of the control mixture, as well as the target

porosity. The combination of Proctor hammer and mallet strikes delivered relatively uniform

compaction for CrPC mixtures, resulting in consistent porosity values. At the same porosity level,

CrPC0 showed the highest density followed by CrPC3, 4 and 5, respectively. The results suggest

that the addition of CCFCM can lighten the PC’s weight.

• The addition of CCFCM generally reduced the infiltration rate (I), with the exception of 100-mm

cylinders from CrPC3, which may be due to the relatively high porosity of this specimen group.

CrPC4 and 5 showed lower I compared to the control, while also showing less correlation between

porosity and infiltration than CrPC3. For mixtures with low porosity and I, CCFCM added as a

replacement of coarse aggregate rather than an additional constituent can help maintain the

hydraulic performance even at high replacement contents.

• CrPC mixtures outperformed the control in terms of split tensile strength (f’t) on both 7- and 28-

day test dates and the enhancements were statistically significant. At 7-day age CrPC mixtures

demonstrated improvements ranged 44-65 percent and on 28-day test f’t increased by 57-84 percent.

CrPC3 and CrPC4 showed the highest f’t at 7-day and 28-day age, respectively.

13
 • The addition of CCFCM resulted in statistically significant improvements in modulus of rupture

(MR) on both 7- and 28-day tests, ranging 57-84 and 36-65 percent in comparison to the control.

CrPC3 and CrPC4 had the highest MR for 7- and 28-day, respectively.

• In addition to the improvements in MR, CCFCM enhanced the toughness of the PC and the post-

peak load bearing indicated by all CrPC mixtures’ higher toughness index values.

• The compressive strength (f’c) of CrPC mixtures were comparable to that of the control, except for

CrPC5, which demonstrated significantly lower f’c than the control. Based on literature, this type

of trend was expected.

• In Cantabro testing, the mass loss for CrPCs’ cylinder tops ranged 16-31 percent compared to the

50-percent of the control; with CrPC4 having the lowest mass loss of 16 percent. The CrPC bottom

specimens ranged 25-63 percent compared to the 66-percent mass loss of the control; and the

control specimens completely failed after 350 cycles. The results of Cantabro test suggests that all

CrPC mixtures showed higher resistance to impact and abrasion with lower mass losses than the

control, with CrPC4 performing the best of all CrPCs.

Based on the above test results and observations, CCFCM addition generally improves the mechanical

properties of pervious concrete. CrPC3 and CrPC4 yield the optimal results across the experimental scope,

with improved f’t and MR while maintaining comparable compressive strength. CrPC3 and CrPC4 also

show negligible changes in porosity and infiltration. CrPC5 showed lower I and compressive strength,

however did result in increased f’t, MR, and toughness compared to the control.

Acknowledgements

The Boeing Company is gratefully acknowledged for their financial and in-kind support of the project.

Donations of aggregate from Pre-Mix Inc. and portland cement from Ash Grove Cement Company is also

acknowledged.

14
References

ACI. 522R-10. (2010). Report on Pervious Concrete, ACI Committee. 522:38.

ASTM. C39/C39M-05, 2005, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete

Specimens, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2005, DOI: 10.1520/C0039_C0039M-05E01.

ASTM. C192/C192M-15, Standard Practice for Making and Curing Concrete Test Specimens in the

Laboratory, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015, DOI: 2 10.1520/C0192_C0192M-15.

ASTM. C293/C293-M, 2015, Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple Beam

with Center-Point Loading), ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015, DOI: 10.1520/C0293-

15.

ASTM. C496/C496M-11, 2011, Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical

Concrete Specimens, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011, DOI:

10.1520/C0496_C0496M-11.

ASTM C1018/C1018-M, 1997, Standard Test Method for Flexural Toughness and First-Crack Strength of

Fiber- Reinforced Concrete (Using Beam With Third-Point Loading), ASTM International, West

Conshohocken, PA, 1997, DOI: 10.1520/C01018-97.

ASTM. C1688/C1688-M, 2014, Standard Test Method for Density and Void Content of Freshly Mixed

Pervious Concrete, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014, DOI: 10.1520/C1688-14.

ASTM. C1701/C1701M-09, Standard Test Method for Infiltration Rate of In Place 1 Pervious Concrete,

ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2009, DOI: 2 10.1520/C1701_C1701M-09.

ASTM. C1747/C1747M-13, Standard Test Method for Determining Potential Resistance to Degradation of

Pervious concrete by Impact and Abrasion, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013, DOI:

10.1520/C1747_C1747M-13.

15
ASTM. C1754/C1754M-12, Standard Test Method for Density and Air Void Content of Pervious Concrete,

ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012, DOI: 10.1520/C1754_C1754M-12.

Das, S., Warren, J., West, D., and S. M., Schexnayder. (2016). "Global Carbon Fiber Composites Supply

Chain Competitiveness Analysis." Clean Energy Manufacturing Analysis Center, Technical Report

ORNL/SR-2016/100 | NREL/TP-6A50-66071, Golden, CO.

Dong, Q., Wu, H., Shu, X., and Wang, K. (2013). “Investigation into Laboratory Abrasion Test Methods

for Pervious Concrete.” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 10.1061.(ASCE)MT.1943-

5533.0000683.

Eisenberg, B., Lindow, K. C., and Smith, D. R. (2015). Permeable Pavements. ASCE.

Hesami, S., Ahmadi, S., and Nematzadeh, M. (2014). “Effects of Rice Husk Ash and Fiber on Mechanical

Properties of Pervious Concrete Pavement.” Construction and Building Materials, (53), 680-691.

Huang, B., Wu, H., Shu, X., and Burdette, E. G. (2010). “Laboratory evaluation of permeability and strength

of polymer-modified pervious concrete.” Construction and Building Materials, (24), 818-823.

Ibrahim, A., Mahmoud, E., Yamin, M., and Patibandla, VC. (2014). “Experimental study on Portland

cement pervious concrete mechanical and hydrological properties.” Construction and Building Materials,

(50), 524-529.

Joung, Y., and Grasley, Z. C. (2008). “Evaluation of Optimization of Durable Pervious Concrete for Use

in Urban Areas.” Southwest Region University Transportation Center, Research Report

SWUTC/08/167163-1.

Kevern, J. T., Biddle, D., and Cao, Q. (2014). “Effects of Macrosynthetic Fibers on Pervious Concrete

Properties.” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001213.

16
Kim, D. J., Wille, K., Naaman, A. E., and El-Tawil, S. (2012). “Strength Dependent Tensile Behavior of

Strain Hardening Fiber Reinforced Concrete.” High Performance Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites 6,

3-10.

Meddah, M. S., and Bencheikh, M. (2009). “Properties of concrete reinforced with different kinds of

industrial waste fibre materials.” Construction and Building Materials, 23(10), 3196-3205.

Mihashi, H., and Ishikawa, N. (2012). “Quantification of Fresh and Mechanical Properties of HFRCC by

Excess Paste Thickness.” High Performance Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites 6, 67-74.

Products GC. Grace Concrete Products, Recover, Hydration Stabilizer, 2013. Available from

https://gcpat.com/construction/en-us/Documents/Recover-5J_Recover.pdf.

Products GC. V- MAR VSC500, Rheology Modifying Admixture for Pervious Concrete, 2010. Available

from https://grace.com/construction/en-us/concrete-technology/V-MAR-VSC500.

Rangelov, M., Somayeh, N., Haselbach, L., and Englund, K. (2016). “Using carbon fiber composites for

reinforcing pervious concrete.” Construction and Building Materials, (126), 875-885.

Rehder, B., Banh, K., and Neithalath, N. (2014). “Fracture behavior of pervious concretes: The effects of

pore structure and fibers.” Engineering Fracture Mechanics, (118), 1-16.

Ribeiro, M. C. S., Fiúza, R., Ferreira, A., Dinis, M. L., Castro, A. C. M., Meixedo, J. P., and Alvin, M. R.

(2016). "Recycling Approach towards Sustainability Advance of Composite Materials’ Industry."

Recycling, (1), 178–193.

Sujivorakul, C. (2012). “Model of Hooked Steel Fibers Reinforced Concrete under Tension.” High

Performance Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites 6, 19-26.

Tennis, P. D., Leming, M. L., and Akers, D. J. (2004). Pervious concrete pavements. National Ready Mixed

Concrete Association, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL.

17
van Zijl, G. P. A. G., and Zeranka, S. (2012). “The Impact of Rheology on the Mechanical Performance of

Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete.” High Performance Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites 6, 59-66.

Wang, K., Schaefer, V. R., Kevern, J. T., and Suleiman, M. T. (2006). “Development of Mix Proportion

for Functional and Durable Pervious Concrete.” NRMCA Concrete Technology Forum: Focus on Pervious

Concrete, Nashville, TN.

Wu, H., Huang, B., Shu, X., and Dong, Q. (2011). “Laboratory Evaluation of Abrasion Resistance of

Portland Cement Pervious Concrete.” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 101061/(ASCE)MT.1943-

5533.0000210.

Yang, Z. (2011). “Freezing-and-Thawing Durability of Pervious Concrete under Simulated Field

Conditions.” ACI Materials Journal, (108), 187-195.

18
Fig. 1: Fiber particles that passed Screen 10 (2 mm) and retained on Screen 20 (0.841 mm).

Fig. 2. Particle size distribution for the CCFCM and coarse aggregate used in the experiment.

Fig. 3. Specimens from each mixture, from left to right: CrPC0, CrPC3, CrPC4 and CrPC5.

Fig. 4. Hardened porosity per specimen type and mixture design. Number of specimens per

mixture: 18 100-mm cylinders, 10 150-mm cylinders, 6 prisms.

Fig. 5. Porosity-hardened density relationship: addition of CCFCM results in lightweight PC

compared to control. Specimens include 18 100-mm cylinders, 10 150-mm cylinders and 6 prisms

from each mixture.

Fig. 6. Infiltration rates of CCFCM reinforced PC. Infiltration generally drops with the addition of

CCFCM.

Fig. 7. Porosity-infiltration relations: CrPC3 demonstrates a similar slope as the control, while

CrPC4 and CrPC5 show gradually sloped trend lines: I remains constant at higher Φ levels.

Modifications to the PC mixture design can increase the I levels, if required.

Fig. 8. Average 7- and 28-day split tensile strength for each mixture. CrPC mixtures demonstrate

notably higher f’t than the control on both test dates. For CrPC0, 3, 4 and 5, respectively, the avg.

Φ of specimens tested at 7-day age were 26, 25, 23 and 24 percent. The respective coefficients of

variation (COV) of Φ were 0.03, 0.04, 0.03 and 0.03. For specimens tested on 28-day age, avg. Φ

were 25, 25, 21 and 26 with respective COV of Φ of 0.03, 0.02, 0.05 and 0.03.

Fig. 9. Avg. 7- and 28-day MR for each mixture. CrPC mixtures outperform CrPC0 on both test

dates and supersede those reported in the literature for plain PC. For CrPC0, 3, 4 and 5,

respectively, avg. Φ of specimens tested on 7-day age were: 28, 28, 26 and 27 percent with the

19
corresponding COV of 0.01, 0.02, 0.08 and 0.03. For specimens tested on 28-day, the avg. Φ were

28, 28, 26 and 29 with the corresponding COV of 0.02, 0.03, 0.04 and 0.02.

Fig. 10. (a) Twenty-eight day load-deflection curves during MR testing for toughness evaluation;

(b) Representation of the areas and equation used to calculate the toughness-index, shown for a

beam from CrPC5 as an example based on a modified procedure for PC (ASTM C1018).

Fig. 11. Avg. 7-day f’c for each mixture. All CrPC mixtures present comparable values of f’c to

that of the control, except CrPC5, however f’c for all mixtures fall in the range reported in the

literature. For CrPC0, 3, 4 and 5, respectively. Avg. Φ of tested specimens at 7-day were 26, 25,

23 and 24 percent. Respective COV of Φ were 0.04, 0.04, 0.05 and 0.05. For specimens tested on

28-day, avg. Φ were 25, 25, 21 and 26 with respective COV of Φ of 0.03, 0.02, 0.02 and 0.04.

Fig. 12. Percent mass loss during Cantabro test for all four mixtures: (a) tops of 100-mm cylinders,

and (b) bottoms of 100-mm cylinders. Both bottom specimens from the control failed at 350 cycles.

Average Φ of tested specimens: 0.24, 0.28, 0.23, 0.26 for CrPC0, CrPC3, CrPC4, and CrPC5,

respectively.

20
Table 1. PC and CrPC mixture designs used in the study.
Portland Admixtures CCFCM
Coarse CCFCM
Cement Water weight
Mixture ID Aggregate VMAR Recover volume
Type I/II (kg/m3) (kg/m3)
(kg/m3) (g/m3) (g/m3) fraction (%)
(kg/m3)
CrPC0 (Control) 1,376 413 112 1,450 1,409 0 0
CrPC3 1,376 413 112 1,450 1,409 3 46.8
CrPC4 1,376 413 112 1,450 1,409 4 62.4
CrPC5 1,376 413 112 1,450 1,409 5 78.0

21
1
2 Table 2. Toughness index estimated at deflection corresponding to two-time the peak deflection.

Values of Toughness Indices

CCFCM Content (%)
Seven-day I2 Twenty-eight day I2
Control 1.03 1.19
CrPC3 1.59 1.68
CrPC4 1.54 1.79
CrPC5 1.81 1.83
3

22
4
5 Table 3. Statistical comparison of mechanical properties of CrPC mixtures to the control mixture.

p-value
Mechanical property Seven-day testing 28-day testing
CrPC3 CrPC4 CrPC5 CrPC3 CrPC4 CrPC5
f’t 0.000 0.003 0.010 0.001 0.000 0.000
MR 0.011 0.035 0.050 0.016 0.050 0.078
f’c 0.604 0.653 0.012 0.389 0.802 0.036
6

23
7

24
8

25
9

26
10

27
11

28
12

29
13

30
14

31
15

32
16

33
17

34
18

35
19
20
21

36
22

37

View publication stats