Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

Shear bond strength in repaired concrete structures

J. Silfwerbrand
Royal Institute of Technology and Swedish Cement and Concrcte Research Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

A good bond hetwecn old and new concrete is necessary Une hoiine odhbreiice entre I 'uncien héiim rt /e nouveau
for a successful repair o f concrete structures. The bond is mi nécessaiiv 6 lu r&s.site de la riporaiion des structures
itsually determined tliroogh pure tensioii tests. e.g.. the en béron. L údhérence esi habituellemeni déierminee a
coninion pull o f f test. However, in most applications, the portii, dessais en traction pure, comme par exemple un
shear bond strengtli is more interested. A test apparatus for ecsai chsiqiie d'adherenre. Cependunt. pour la plupari
torsion tests has been developed. Laboratory and field tests de.s applications. la résistance au cisaillement de
have hecn carried out on cast in place concrete and I 'udhérence est un problime plus pertineni. Un iquipement
sbotcrete repairs. For waterjetted surfaces, the obtained puur des essais de tor.vion a éié ddvelappé. Des iesis e17
shear bond strength exceeds 3 MPa. ;.e.. considerably more luhoraroire ei sur site. concernanf du hiton coulé sur place
thaii the iensilc bond strength which usually vanes between P I du héran projeié, onf éii rnenés. Pour les surfaces
I aiid 2 MPa. The shear bond strength is also markedly iruities por hwirodém«liiion. la risisiance au cisaillement
higher than design strength values found in international de Iádhérenre dépasse 3 MPa, ce qui est largement
codes. .supL:rieur a la résistance a la traction. qui varie
hobiiuellemerit enire I ei 2 MPa. Ainsi, la résisiance au
ri.vaillement de I 'adhérence est sensiblemeni plus éle>:ée
que le,?iwleuri preconisies par les code,?iniernaiionaux.


Many concrete bridges show extensive damages due to

repeated freeze-thaw cycles. exposure to de-icing salt or
salt water. alkali-silica reactions. and intensive and
incrcasing trariic (Fig. I ) . I f t h c damage does not demand
replacement of the entire bridge, remnving deteriorated
concrete aiid replacing it with new concrete can repair the
Repaired concrete structures usually contain interfaces
between old and new concrete. A good bond between the
remaining concrete (the substrate) and the repair material is
niiindatory for a successful repair. A good bond enables the
desigiicr to consider monolithic behaviour and it prevents
water and de-icing salts to transmit along the interface. The Fig. I - Damaged concrete bridge pier due to chloride initiated
qiiality of the bond is especially important if neither dowels reinforcement corrosion. (Photographer: M.Hassanzadeh, Lund
nor other iypcs of reinforcement are crossing the interface. University o f Technology, Sweden).
In Sweden niid several other coun@ies, the Water-jet used successfully for removal of deteriorated
technique (also Called hydrodemolition, Fig. 2) has been
31, The water+t technique deteriorated
Fig. 4 - Old concrete beam bridge with new concrete overla)
and edge beams.

Fig. 2 -The water-jet technique consists of an electro- h

hydraulic robot provided with an oscillating high pressure
water lance and an insulated power unit (not shown in the Fig. 5 -Rectangular beam bxh subjected to shear force V .
figure)containing a high pressure pump, a water tank, and The maximum interface shear arises for a cross section with
WatR filtess. coinciding neutral plane and interface.

In repaired concrete bridges (Fig. 4). there are two
loading types producing shear stresses in the interface
between old and new concrete. First. the shear force causes
shear stresses. The magnitude of the shear stress at the
interface is dependent on the geometrical relationship
between the neutral plane and the interface (Fig. 5). The
shear stress at the interface reaches a maximum if the
neutral plane coincides with the interfacc. Second, shear
stresses are caused hy differential shrinkage. I.<,.. shrinkage
Fig. 3 -The water-jet technique and subsequent water difference between the new cast overlay or replaccmcnt
cleaning leave a rough and sound concrete surface with high
potential for bonding the replacement concrete. concrete and the old substrate concrctc. This slicar slrcss
has a maximum at the edge o f t h c strticturc (Fig. 6 ) . Al the
edges. these two types ot' shear stresses might occur
efficiently leaving a rough and sound concrete surfaci simultaneously. It is outside the scope of this papcr to
without microcracks (Fig. 3). In the Swedish bridge code describe how these stresses cm bc siipcrposed. Solely the
[4], no doweis are needed between old and new concrete in stress state due to differential shrinkage is very complicatcd
areas with secondary load-canying behdviour if the
deteriorated concrete has been
removed by the water-jet
technique. (Secondary load-
carrying behaviour occurs, e.g., in
bridge deck parts that are not
located directly above girders.)
This beneficial rule is based on
thorough measurements on bond
between old and new concrete
giving very good results [I, 51.
The bond is usually determined
by puU off Fests or other methods
causing pure tension in the
interface. However, the interface in -2 ~ ~ ~

repaired concrete síructurcs is only -05 -04 - 0 3 - 0 2 - 0 1 o 0 1 o2 o 7 o4 o5

locally (at small zones close to the dL
edges [ 6 ] )subjected to pure tension
perpendicular to the interface
plane. ln many practical cases, it 1 L/2 I LQ 1
might be more interesting to n n II

meawre the shear strength of the Fig. 6 Computed shear siresses in the interface in an 8 in1 lung comp>siteconcreie heam according to

bond. [R, 91. 'ksolid line is based on a simple theory (pnmsed in ihl and also u\ed i i i FIP Il(i11. tlic dahcd
line on a inure accurate method (proposed in [8. Y])
to aiialyse. A recent and comprehensive investigation
has been conducted 171.
Shrinkage develops slowly in concrete. Hence, it is
important to consider the henelicial effect of the new
concrete's creep that considerably will reduce the
stresses due to differential shrinkage [XI. Still, the shear d)
stresses inight he quite high. Consequently, the
interface must have sufficient shear strength in order to
prevent cracking.


Several test methods have beeii developed to determine

bond strength hetwccn an »Id concrete substrate and new-
t concrete (Fig. 7 ) . The most widespread method is the
pull o f ftest that either can bc camcd 01.11 in the laboratory
or in-situ (Figs. 7a and b). A core is drilled through new
and old concrete (Fig. 8). lfthe pull on'tnt is carried out in
the laboratory (Fig. ?a). the core is carefully broken at the
bottom. Top aiid hottoin sutiaces are made even and
tensile forces applied along the cylindrical axis either by
gluing steel plates to the core (as shown in the figure) or by
íiiction grips clamping around the core. In-situ pull off Fig. 7 Various test methods to determine bond strength: a) pull off

tests (Fig. 7b) are carried out by placing a loading hipod lest carried out in the lab, b) pull off test in-situ, c ) torsion tesf in
above the core and applying a load either to a glued steel situ. d) slant shear test, e & 0 shear tests, g ) wedge splitting lest,
plate or a clanipd friction grip attaching the core. If the and h) guillotine test.
load does not liave any eccentricity, the failure load
divided hy the cross section area gives a pure tensilc strength.
This tensile strength equals the bond strength irthe failure runs
through the iiiterface. If the failure occurs in old or new
concrete, the measured strength value is a lower bound of the
bond strength.
Shear strength i m y be determined by applying shear forces Fig. 8 - Core
drilling on a
parallel to the interface (Figs. 7e and 0. If the test SPLC
3 imen repaired concrete
consists of two parts, the problem is that a bending moment bridge deck.
also arises as soon as you apply the load. A method to solve
tliis prohlcrn is to LISCa test specimen consisting of three pans
(Fig. 7t). However, this test has another disadvantage since it
has two interfaces instead of one. Such an interior repair does
hardly exist in realiiy. Siniilar to the sliear specimen with two
parts is the guillotine method letting a weight fall on a
protruding pan of the new concrete (Fig. 7h). This method has
successfiilly been used [ I l l . Tschegg et O/. [I21 have
dcvcloped a wedge splitting test method enabling the
determination of frdcture mechanics properties of the bond
(Fig. 7%). A test niethod that is frequently used to determine
bond between a substrate and a repair material is the slant
shear test (Fig. 7d). In this case. the interface is subjected to
combined shear aiid compression.
All shear lest inelhods described above have one
disadvantage in c«minon: the test specimens have to be
prepared in the laboratory. In some cases, the specimen has
even to be cast in the laboratory. Consequently, a test
niethod that can he conducted in-situ is desired. The
Depaninent of Structural Engincering, KTH, has developed
such a iniethod. The test specimen is the same as the in-situ
pull off test. The difference is that a torsional moment is
applied to the core instead of a tensile force (Fig. 7c).
The apparatus for determining the shear bond strength
consists of a stud, three steel bars, a moment converter (25
times amplificatioii), a torsion gauge, rotational and spherical
bearings. a cylindrical stcel plate, and a data acquisition unit Fig. 9 -Torsion test apparatus [SI,
holding the maximum value (Fig. 9). The stand is fixed to the mentioned above, the bearings have been designed to
concrete surface with three expander bolts, The steel plate is minimize the influence of normal forces. A rough estimation
glued to the top surface of the drilled core that is still unbroken limits the sum of these latter errors to ten percent of tile
fmm the old concrete. The íhree bars are fwed in three holes in measured value. This is of about the same magnitude as for
the steel plate. A torsional moment is applied to the top ofthe pull-off tests measured in-situ. We remember that shear and
bars by using the moment converter. The bearings prevent the tensile strengths of concrete both have a rather large inherited
development of normal forces, shear forces, and bending scam. in order tn use this test method for standardised
moments. At the torsion tfft, the torsional mnment T is laboratory tests, further studies and further development of the
successively increased to failure. Assuming linear elastic test appataius are needed. That is, however, not the primaiy
behaviour, the relationship between shear stress rand torsional goal of this paper. The aim is to compare the magnitude of the
moment can be computed by the following equation: shear bond Seength and the pure tensile bond strength


where, 4 is the core diameter. For purely plastic materials,
the relationship between shear stress and torsional moment Tests to determine shear bond strength have been carried
has the following expression: out both on cast-in-place concrete and on shotcrete. In a
comprehensive study at KTH,pull off tests and torsion tests
12 T were carried out in order to compare the interface type on the
bond strength [5, 131. Five test slabs were cast in two lifts.
Befoie placing the overlay, some part of the base slab was
removed. kdifferent removal techniques were compared
i.e,, for a constant torsional moment the shear stress for a waterjetthg, pneumatic hammers, and sandblasting (Table 1 ).
piastic material is 25 percent less than corresponding value for Waterjetting is today the predominant removal technique in
an eiastic value. Materials having other constitutive laws ought many counbies [3] due to its efficiency, selectivity (removing
to have shear stress - torsional moment relationships somewhere deteriorated concrete and leaving sound concrete), and result
between these two extremes. Thus, the error using either of the (rough surface without microcracks), but was at that time
two expressionsought to give limited errors. concrete is a brittle bright new.
material and, consequently, the linear elastic relationship In Sweden, waterjetting has been used to remove
(Equation (1)) has been used. Anyway, numerical analyses of deteriorated concrete hbridge decks since the middle of the
the stresses and strains within the test specimen would be 1980s. Pull off tests were carried out on many repaired bridge
desirable, but have not been included in this investigation. decks for quality assurance, hut torsion tests were rare.
The shear stress requals the shear strength 7- when the However, both pull off tests and torsion tests were carried out
torsional moment T reaches the failure moment T-. Only in on a bridge between Güteborg and TrollhMan in the west of
cases with complete interface failures, the shear st~ngthis Sweden. Deteriorated concrete had been removed by
equal to the shear bond strength. For other failure modes, the w a t e r j h g and replaced with a new concrete overlay. The
shear strength constitutes a lower bound of the shear bond tesis werecaniedout inOctober 1987 (Table I).
strength At KTH, the core diameter has been 100 mm and the Cast-in-place concrete is difficult to use when vertical and
stress velocity approximately 0.1 MPais. overhead surfacff have to be repaired due to need of
Possible sources of error in addition to the one due to complicated formwork On such surfaces, shotcrete is an
simplifications when hansfening torsional moment to shear interesting alternative, Concrete repair with shotcrete has been
suength are normai forces that may occur simultaneously investigated at KTH [14. 151. Test slabs were waterjetted and
when applying the torsional moment and calibration errors repayed with @-mix shotcrete. The slabs were subsequently
when transfkng the gauge signal to a moment value. As cut into beam specimens and loaded with either static or fatigue

I Table 1 -Results of puU off tests and torsion tests

Pull off tests Torsion tests
umber o Average (umber of Average
nterface failure CQIeS failure
siress failures stress stress
m (MPa)

2.23 9 3.97
KTH Lab (hammer) 0.96 9 3.42
KTH Lab (sandbl.) 2.38 1.73 5 4.51 1 3.93
TrollhKttan (waterjet) I .46 1.50 10 3.50 O -

KTH Lab (waterjet) 16 1.72 - 16 3.35 O __
0.38 - 9 2.85 7 -
loading. After these load tests, the bond strength was &ermined maybe easier, way to deal with the problem is that the designer
by pull off tests and torsion test (Table 1). These laboratory tests only considers shear stresses due to shear forces and ignotes
may also be compared with in-situ tests üom a bridge above the shear stresses due to differential shrinkage. Most of the latter
railway in Gnosjo. This bridge was repaired with waterjetting stresses will disappear with time due to creep and the
and dry-mix shotcrete in autumn 1987 (Table 1). likelihood that maximum shear force and maximum
Analysing the test results, it is obvious that the shear bond differential shrinkage stress occur simultaneously is very low.
strength is considerably higher than the tensile bond strength. By comparing stresses caused by only one type of loading with
Since the number of interface failures was very low in the a considerably reduced strength, he will still be far on the
torsion tests, we have to compare average failure stresses. On conservative side.
cast-in-place objects. the ratio between average shear e s s
and average tensile stress varies hetween 1.9 and 3.1. On
shotcrete object, corresponding ratio varies between 2 and 7. 6. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Sandblasting gives a rather smooth surface compared to
waterjetting and pneumatic hammers. However, it promotes Shear stresses arise in a repaired concrete shucture due to
very high average failure stress values. Caution not to jump to both shear forces and differential shrinkage. In order to prevent
conclusions since the ratio of interface failures was the highest failure in the interface between old and new concrete, there
in the investigation. The table shows clearly that waterjetting is must he sufficient shear bond strength. Usually, the bond
bener than pneumatic h e m since both tensile and shear seength is determined as a pure tensile strength measured
stresses are higher and the number of interface failures is lower. through pull off tests. A torsion test apparatus has been
Finally, it can he stated that the shotcrete repair in developed to determine shear strength between old and new
Gnosjo was not successful if you consider the pull off tests concrete. At present, the shear strength is set to the maximum
(average tensile stress at failure = 0.38MPa). A tensile shear stress computed with simple elastic relationships
strength exceeding I MPa is often required. It is, however, between torsional moment and shear stress, hut a numerical
interesting that the average shear stress at failure was study of the stress state within the test specimen are desirable.
2.85 MPa, k..7 times higher than the tensile stress. Measurements show that the shear bond strength is
considerably higher than the tensile bond strength, For
waterjetted surfaces, the obtained shear bond sfxength exceeds
5. SHEAR RESISTANCE AT THE 3 MPa. This value is markedly higher than the existing design
INTERFACE strength values found in international codes. These results may
have the following impact on the practical design of composite
Shear resistance at the interface between two concretes is structures composed by old and new concrete:
dealt with in several codes. Usually, the design shear resistance In approximate design, the design shear stress may
consists ofthree parts (i) the strength ofthe interface itself, (ii) solely contaiii mechanical stresses due to, e.g., traffic and
a term dependent on extemal compression forces across the dead load. Stresses due to differential shrinkage are neglected
interface, and (iii) a term dependent on the reinforcement since the real shear bond strength is several times larger than
crossing the interface. In the following comparison, oniy the the design shear strength in available design codes.
first parí has been included. In a more accurate design, the design shear stress ought
According to the Swedish handbook for concrete to contain both mechanical stresses and stresses due to
structures [16], the design shear resistance at a watejmed, differential shrinkage. The design shear strength ought to he
properly cleaned interface is equal to 0.4 MPa. based on bond strength measurements on similar objects
The American code ACI 3 18-99 [ 171 deals with composite repaired with identical removal technique, similar concrete,
shuchires in Chapter 17. Waterjetted surfaces are not dealt and similar casting and curing procedures. The used design
with. For clean surfaces, free of laitance, and intentionally strength ought to he verified by bond strength tests on the
roughened, the design shear resistance is limited to 0.55 MPa. completed repaired structure.
According to CEB-FIP MC 90 [18], the design shear For shotcrete repair, general design recommendations
resistance at the interface is proportional to the compressive are dificult to give since the repair result is very sensitive to
strength &, if the surface is rough or indented. The the quality of the old, remaining concrete, removal technique,
coefficient of proportionality is equal to 0.06. Hence, if& cleaning procedures, shotcreting, and curing procedures. A
= 20 MPa, e.g.,the design shear resistance is 1.2 MPa. The preliminary design has to he refined once or several times
code does not cover waterjetted surfaces. depending on the outcome of the repair and test results.
The draft of Eumcode 2 [I91 states that the design shear
resistance at the interface is proportional to the design tensile
strength & of the weakest concrete. The coefficient of REFERENCES
proportionality is 0.45 for rough surfaces and 0.5 for indented
surfaces. If.& = 1.5 MPa, e.g., the design shear strength is [I] Silfwwbrand. J.. ‘Irnpror,ing concrete bond in repaired
0.68 MPa at a rough interface. The draft does not deal with bridge decks’, Concrea Iniemufional12 (9)(1990) 61-66.
waterjetted surfaces. [2] Silfwcrbrand, J. and Paulsson. J.. ‘The Swedish experience:
better bonding of bridge deck overlays’, Concreie
Comparisons between the design strength and the shear /niwnu/kwwa 20 ( IO ) (I998) 56-61.
strength obtained for waterjetted surfaces show a very large [3] Stromdahl. C., ‘The histoy of hydrodemolition’, Concrete
discrepancy. The code writers ought to discem between Engineering lnlevnorionol4 ( 8 ) (2000) 32-36.
waterjetted and other mugh surfaces and enhance the design [4] Swedish National Road Administration, ‘BRO 94.Regularions
shear strength for waterjetted interfaces considerably. Another, for Bridges’. Pan 7, ‘Bridge Maintenance’, (Borlünge. Sweden.
1994)47 pp. (Only available in Swedish).
[SI Silfwaorand, I., ‘Effenr of dü€erentiai shrinkage, creep, and [I31 Silfwerbrand, J., ‘Theoretical and experimental sNdy of
pmpaties of the contact sur$ce on the strength of coBposite strength and behaviour of repaired concrete bridge decks
concrete slabs of old and new concm’. Bulletin No. 147. @ept summary’. Bulletin No. 149. (Dept. of Structural Mechanics
of Stnrtural Mechanics and En- Royal Institute of and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm,
Technology,Stockholm, Sweden, 1987). 131 pp. (Only available Sweden, 1987) 16p.
in Swedish). [I41 Silfwerbrand, J., ‘Concrete repair with shotcrete. Tests on
[6] Jonasson, J.-E., ’Computer programs for non-linear analyses beams under static and fatigue load’. Bulletin No. 153.
of concrete in the view of shrinkage, creep and temperature‘. (Dept. of Structural Mechanics and Engineering, Royal
Research report No. 7:77. (Swedish Cement and Concrete institute of Technology, Stwkholm, Sweden, 1988) 77p.
Research Institute, Stockholm. Sweden, 1977) 161p. (Only (Only available in Swedish).
available in Swedish). [U] Silfwerbrand, J., ’Concrete repair with shotcrete’ in
[7] Bernard, O., ‘Comportement i long terme des éléments de ‘Durability of Strucmes’. Proceedings of the IABSE
slructure formes de bétons d’iges différents’, Thesis No. Symposium Lisbon, September 1989,785-790.
2283 (Depamnent of Civil Engineering, EPFL, Lausanne, [I61 Swedish National Board ofHoushg, Building and Planning and
Switzerland, 2000) 189p. AB Svensk Byggtjjlrnss ‘BBK 94. Concrete srmcium, part I -
[SI Silfwerbrand, J., ’Stresses and strains in composite concrete smctural design’. H a n b k . (Karl~laona and Stockholm,
beams subjected to differential shrinkage’, ACI Slruciurul Sweden, 1994) 1 8 5 ~(Only
. available in Swedish).
Journul94 ( 4 )(1997) 347-353. 1171 American Concrete Institute, ‘ACI 318 (1999). Building
191 Silfwetnívid J., ‘Concrete overlays’. Repm No. 10, 3“ Edition code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-99) and
10. (Chair of Sbuctlnal Mechanics and Engneenng, Dept. of commentary (ACI 31 8R-99)’ (Farmington Hills, Michigan,
Sltmtmil Engin&& Royal Institute ofTecbmlogy, StwMiolm, USA, 1990) 391p.
Sw+ 1997)65p. (Only aMilable in Swedish). [I81 Comité Euro-International du Béton et Féderation
[lo] Fédération Internationale de la Préconhainte, ‘Shear at the Internationale de la Préconhainte, ‘CEB-FIP Model Code
interface of precast and in-situ concrete’. Guide to good 1990‘ (Thomas Telford Services Ltd, London, 1993). 437 p,
practice. (Wexham Springs, Slough, 1982). 31 pp. [I91 European Committee for Standardization, ‘Eurocode 2.
[Ill Delatte, N.J., Wade, D.M. and Fowler, D.W., ‘Laboratory and Design of Concrete Structures‘, 2nd drafi. (BNssels.
field testing of concrete bond for expedited bonded concrete Belgium. January 2001).
overlays’, AClMuieriais Joumul97 (3) (2000) 272-280.
[I21 Tschegg, E.K., Ingruber. M., Surberg. C.H. and Münger, F., P a p r received: December 14, 2001; Paper rrccrpred June 27, 2002
’Factors influencing fracture behavior of old-new concrete
bonds’, ACI Muterids Journal 97 (4) (2000) 447-453.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi