Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T02:54:16.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fracture Behavior of Cement-Based Materials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

S.P. Shah ,
C. Ouyang  and
D.A. Lange
Get access

Extract

The characterization of fracture behavior is a continuing challenge to the cement and concrete community. The performance of a material can be evaluated by its stress-strain response. For an ideally brittle material, elastic response is terminated when stress suddenly drops to zero, as shown in Figure 1a. However, cement-based materials are considered quasi-brittle because they respond nonlinearly prior to peak stress, and their stress gradually decreases after reaching a peak, as indicated in Figure 1b.

To make cement-based materials stronger and tougher, one needs to understand the fracture mechanisms associated with nonlinear stress-strain behavior and to characterize material fracture properties based on these fracture mechanisms. Three novel techniques are being used at the Center for Advanced Cement-Based Materials (ACBM) to detect the quasi-brittle nature of cement-based materials. These three techniques are laser holographic interferometry, acoustic emission, and microscopic surface analysis. This article summarizes both the fracture mechanisms in cement-based materials and the application of the three techniques to characterize and measure fracture properties.

Type
Advanced Cement-Based Materials
Information
MRS Bulletin , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , March 1993 , pp. 55 - 59
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Shah, S.P. and Ouyang, C., J. Mater. Tcchnol., ASME (1993), in press.Google Scholar
2.Castro-Montero, A., Shah, S.P., and Miller, R.A., J. Eng. Much., ASCE 116 (1990) p. 2463.Google Scholar
3.Ouyang, C., Landis, E., and Shah, S.P., J. Eng. Mech., ASCE 117 (1991) p. 2681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Lange, D.A., Jennings, H.M., and Shah, S.P., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. (1993), in press.Google Scholar
5.Hillerborg, A., Modeer, M., and Pertersson, P-E., Cent. Conor. Res. 6 (1976) p.773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Jenq, Y.S. and Shah, S.P., J. Eng. Mech., ASCE 111 (1985) p. 1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Bazant, Z.P. and Kazemi, M.T., Intern. J. Fracture 44 (1990) p. 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Swartz, S.E. and Refai, T.M.E., in Fracture of Concrete and Rock, edited by Shah, S.P. and Swartz, S.E. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989) p. 242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.RILEM Committee on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete-Test Methods, Mat. Struct. 23 (1990) p. 457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar