2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigating the impact resistance of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete using an improved strain energy impact test machine

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
1
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
17
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The trend is different from what many authors have reported for UHPFRC in the dynamic domain [23,24,31,32,35,36], wherein an increase in ε Utu is reported with an increase in the strain rate of loading. The increase in ε Utu was attributed mainly to the increase in the number of cracks within the gauge length as the strain rate increased [23,31]. However, [33] reported a decrease in the ε Utu with an increase in the strain rate, similar to the findings in the present study.…”
Section: Strain At Tensile Strengthcontrasting
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The trend is different from what many authors have reported for UHPFRC in the dynamic domain [23,24,31,32,35,36], wherein an increase in ε Utu is reported with an increase in the strain rate of loading. The increase in ε Utu was attributed mainly to the increase in the number of cracks within the gauge length as the strain rate increased [23,31]. However, [33] reported a decrease in the ε Utu with an increase in the strain rate, similar to the findings in the present study.…”
Section: Strain At Tensile Strengthcontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…A third trend was shown by Mix I at 5°C and Mix II at on the strain rate is reported with the tensile strength increasing with increase in the strain rate. On the other hand, as noted in [23,35], the increase in the DIF is quite steep in the dynamic domain (> 1/s), whereas it was much milder in the quasi-static domain. However, the lack of test data for strain rates lower than 1 × 10 −6 s −1 for UHPFRC Fig.…”
Section: Elastic Modulusmentioning
confidence: 57%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…It can be seen from Table 7 and Figure 12 that the fitting results of PFR-UHSC are much closer to CEB-FIP 21 formula than the counterparts of SFR-UHSC, indicating a more brittle behavior of PFR-UHSC. 31 In fact, with a 1.0% fiber amount, DIFs for the compressive strength of PFR-UHSC at strain rates larger than 60 s −1 are approximately 26.3% higher than those of SFR-UHSC. Noting that the fitting results for PFR-UHSC with different PVA fiber dosages are quite similar, a unified equation without considering fiber amount was proposed as.…”
Section: Dynamic Compressive Strengthmentioning
confidence: 93%