Abrasion Behavior of Steel-Fiber-Reinforced Concrete in Hydraulic Structures

Abstract

This study investigated two types of abrasion resistance of steel–fiber-reinforced concrete in hydraulic structures, friction abrasion and impact abrasion using the ASTM C1138 underwater test and the water-borne sand test, respectively. Three water-to-cementitious-material ratios (0.50, 0.36, and 0.28), two impact angles (45° and 90°), plain concrete, and steel–fiber-reinforced concrete were employed. Test results showed that the abrasive action and principal resistance varied between the two test methods. The average impact abrasion rates (IARs) of concrete were approximately 8–17 times greater than the average friction abrasion rate (FARs). In general, the impact abrasion loss of the concrete surface impacted at a vertical angle was higher than that of impacted at a 45 degree angle. Moreover, the average FAR and IAR decreased when the concrete was reinforced with steel fibers. The steel fibers acted as shields to prevent the concrete material behind the fibers from abrasion, thus improving abrasion resistance. In both the underwater and waterborne sand flow methods, the resistance to abrasion of concrete without steel fibers increased as the water/cementitious material ratio (w/cm) decreased, and the concrete compressive strength also increased.

A Spider‐Silk‐Inspired Wet Adhesive with Supercold Tolerance

“…In comparison, there was no clear change in color when the PU stripe met the wet solid substrate (Figure 2c‐i,ii). But its peeling force per‐unit width of 0.007 ± 0.001 N cm −1 was much lower than that of the above stripes, similar to reported hydrophobic fiber networks, [ 26 ] indicating that the hydrophobic PU stripe was not wetted or dissolved (white arrow in Figure 2c‐iv; Movie S3, Supporting Information). Furthermore, the mechanical performance of the SA (PU@PVP), PVP fiber network, and PU fiber network was tested in wet conditions (Figure S3, Supporting Information).…”

Abrasive Wear Resistance of Concrete in Connection with the Use of Crushed and Mined Aggregate, Active and Non-Active Mineral Additives, and the Use of Fibers in Concrete

“…Other research groups point to the fact that if the fiber is exposed, it is then further stressed by abrasion until it is torn out of the composite and thus a defect in the surface of the structure is formed. This site is then less resistant to abrasion than the compact composite, and thus the degradation of the composite progresses [49]. However, many studies state that this mainly affects solid and inflexible steel fibers or other fibers with significant stiffness, such as glass fibers.…”

“…However, many studies state that this mainly affects solid and inflexible steel fibers or other fibers with significant stiffness, such as glass fibers. [50] Following the approach of previous studies discussed in this article, only flexible polymeric and basalt fibers were selected for this experiment [46][47][48][49].…”

Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete: A Systematic Review of the Research Progress and Knowledge Mapping

“…SFRC is helpful in roadway pavement and precast members because of its high flexural strength, reduced total pavement thickness, and increased resilience to impact and repetitive loads [ 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 ]. When utilized in hydraulic constructions, SFRC has a strong resistance to eroding induced by the rapid passage of water [ 97 , 98 , 99 ]. Fiber shotcretes are particularly effective for rock slope stability, tunnel lining, and bridge rehabilitation [ 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 ].…”