See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229167392

Durability of glass fibre reinforced composites

experimental methods and results

Article in Composites Part A Applied Science and Manufacturing · February 2006

DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.03.027

CITATIONS READS

24 88

6 authors, including:

H. Cuypers Jan Wastiels

Vrije Universiteit Brussel Vrije Universiteit Brussel
25 PUBLICATIONS 202 CITATIONS 133 PUBLICATIONS 1,167 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Petra Van Itterbeeck Michael Raupach

Belgian Building Research Institute RWTH Aachen University
21 PUBLICATIONS 90 CITATIONS 201 PUBLICATIONS 1,354 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Chemical stabilisation of Jordanian soils View project

Development of a test Method for the Durability of Carbon Textiles under Anodic Polarisation View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jan Wastiels on 21 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215
www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesa

Durability of glass fibre reinforced composites experimental

methods and results
H. Cuypersa,*, J. Wastielsa, P. Van Itterbeecka, E. De Bolstera, J. Orlowskyb, M. Raupachb
a
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussel, Belgium
b
Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Schinkelstr. 3, D-52062 Aachen, Germany
Received 7 September 2004; revised 14 March 2005; accepted 23 March 2005

Abstract
Even today a main topic of consideration for glass–fibre reinforced cementitious composites is the durability. Several damage mechanisms
occur if glass fibres are inserted in a cementitious mixture. To diminish chemical attack of the fibres by hydroxyl ions, inorganic phosphate
cement (IPC) was developed at the ‘Vrije Universiteit Brussel’, providing a non-alkaline environment. Since chemical attack is diminished
by application of this non-alkaline matrix, IPC is an ideal reference material to study other damage mechanisms. In this paper typical damage
mechanisms, occurring in cementitious composites are studied: both the effects of constant environmental loading (typical accelerated ageing
tests) and variable environmental loading are studied. A new method to determine the matrix–fibre bundle efficiency is also introduced.
q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: A. Ceramic-matrix composites (CMCs); B. Environmental degradation; C. Micro-mechanics; D. Mechanical testing

1. Introduction
Several damage mechanisms occur when glass fibres and
cementitious matrix are combined: chemical attack of the
fibres by hydroxyl ions, precipitation of hydration products
at the matrix–fibre interface and delayed fracture under
mechanical load or due to thermal mismatch between fibres
and matrix. The relative importance of these damage
mechanisms is function of the environmental conditions,
selected materials and mechanical load. Since these
mechanisms usually occur together and even can influence
each other, it is usually difficult to identify their relative
importance. At the ‘Vrije Universiteit Brussel’ (VUB,
Belgium) a new cementitious matrix material for FRC and
TRC has been developed. This inorganic phosphate cement
(IPC) provides a non-alkaline environment during and after
hardening, increasing the lifetime of the composite
considerably [1,2]. This makes IPC a suitable material to
study damage mechanisms other than chemical attack of the
fibres by the high alkalinity of the environment, provided by
* Corresponding author. Tel.:C32 2 629 29 55; fax: C32 2 629 29 28.
E-mail address: heidi.cuypers@vub.ac.be (H. Cuypers).
1359-835X/$ - see front matter q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.03.027
the matrix. This paper contains two parts. In the first part a
more common matrix mixture with Portland cement and an
IPC matrix are combined with glass fibres. It will be shown
that the IPC (non-alkaline matrix) shows considerable better
durability than common cementitious matrices under
classical accelerated ageing (elevated humidity and tem-
perature). The second part of the paper is dedicated to the
effect of cyclic environmental loading. The effect of
subsequent mechanical and environmental loading is also
studied. In this second part, only the IPC is used as matrix
material. It is easier to distinguish other damage effects,
which are typically function of the cycling, if the effect of
chemical attack — which is mainly function of the average
humidity and temperature — is diminished.
Textile-reinforced cementitious composites are particu-
larly advantageous for lightweight constructions or con-
struction elements. Because lightweight building elements
have lower stiffness, larger deformations can occur than
with classical building elements. This effect is even more
pronounced in the post-cracking regime, where the stiffness
of the composite is further reduced. Therefore, the
importance of serviceability limit state (limiting deflections
and crack widths in building elements) in design increases
relative to ultimate limit state (strength). Therefore, the
‘durability’ of a material is not only considered as loss of
208 H. Cuypers et al. / Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215
strength, but also as loss of stiffness. Several techniques are
combined to make interpretation of the different damage
mechanisms possible in both parts of this paper. One new
technique is presented, which could be used in the future to
monitor the quality of the matrix–fibre bundle interface of
cementitious composites, used in existing structures.
Preliminary results from this technique are discussed.
2. Testing methods
2.1. Monotonic tensile loading
From simple tensile testing, conclusions can be
formulated concerning changes in the stress–strain beha-
viour, the development of matrix cracking pattern and the
reinforcement tensile strength after climatic loading. Fig. 1
shows a typical test curve, which is divided in three stages
([3–6]).
After an initial linear stage (pre-cracking stage), a first
crack in the matrix appears. The pre-cracking stiffness (EI,
subscript I indicates the composite stiffness in the first stage
of the stress–strain curve) is determined from the
experimental curves. Usually it is assumed that the bond
between matrix and fibre bundles is perfect in this stage.
Since stiffness EI is matrix dominated, evolution with
ageing of the pre-cracking stiffness usually represents
changes within the matrix. After the first crack appears,
the force grows more slowly and a fine crack pattern is
gradually built. This is the multiple cracking stage (stage 2).
In the vicinity of a matrix crack, the matrix–fibre bundle
stress transfer will become frictional. Since the distance
between cracks is function of the applied stress and can still
decrease when load is further increased, it will be denoted as
‘actual crack spacing (x)’. Once a certain stress level is
reached, no extra matrix cracking occurs with further
increase of the applied load. The average crack spacing
measured in this post-cracking stage (stage 3) will be
referred to as ‘saturation crack spacing (X)’. Extra load is
taken by the fibres only. Matrix–fibre bundle stress transfer
Fig. 1. Exemplary stress–strain curve, IPC with 2D-random reinforcement
(E-glass fibres).
is frictional along the whole composite and only the fibres
provide post-cracking stiffness (EIII, subscript III indicates
the composite stiffness in the third stage). Evolution with
ageing of this post-cracking stiffness means fibres are
degrading or matrix–fibre bundle interaction is lost. In the
studied composites, stresses are transferred by combined
matrix–fibre and fibre–fibre interactions: not all fibres in a
bundle show equal efficiency. Repeated loading (repeated
external loading or repeated environmental loading) could
lead to extra loss of efficiency of some fibres. If theories are
used, which consider matrix–fibre interaction (e.g. in [3]);
loss of matrix–fibre interaction cannot lead to decreasing
stiffness in the post-cracking stage. However, in this paper,
it is assumed that some fibres can lose efficiency in their
bundle, leading to loss of stiffness in the post-cracking
stage. The expression ‘matrix–fibre bundle interaction’ will
thus consequently be used instead of the more common
‘matrix–fibre interaction’. Testing speed for all simple
tensile tests was 1 mm/min.
2.2. Measurement of resonance frequency [7–9]
The resonance frequency of a beam is a function of
mass, stiffness, geometry and boundary conditions. If the
length to thickness ratio L/t of the specimens is large
(more than 50/1), the effect of shear deformations can be
neglected, so the first resonance frequency will depend
only on the bending stiffness. The specimens are
suspended with flexible thin wires. These are connected
to the beam at 0.224L from the edges in order to
simulate free boundary conditions. An accelerometer is
attached in the centre of the specimens, since the
amplitude of the first vibrational mode is largest here.
Once the first resonance frequency of a specimen is
measured, the stiffness can be calculated:
48p2 L3 M 2
EZ f C (1)
4:734 t3 w
where:
E Young’s modulus in longitudinal direction
M mass of the specimen
L length of beam
t thickness of beam
f resonance frequency of the beam
w width of the beam
C correction factor depending on L/t (Z1, when L/t is
larger than 50)
Since the resonance frequencies introduce only minor
deformations in the specimens, this measurement technique
is used to determine the experimental evolution of the
stiffness of the specimens at almost zero stress.
 H. Cuypers et al. / Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215 209

2.3. Determination of the saturation crack spacing

The number of matrix cracks can be determined visually

after a specimen is loaded up to failure. The saturation crack
spacing X — determined in the post-cracking stage; when
full matrix cracking is developed — can usually be easily
determined [10]. Matrix crack counting is therefore a widely
applied technique to obtain the matrix–fibre interface
frictional shear stress transfer, t. This relationship is
formulated by the well-known ACK (Aveston–Cooper–
Kelly) theory [3]:
Ksmu rVm
XZ (2)
2tVf
where:

X saturation crack spacing

smu matrix tensile failure stress
r fibre radius
Vm matrix volume fraction
Vf fibre volume fraction
t matrix–fibre interface frictional shear stress
K constant (Z1.337, determined from the car
parking problem, see [11,12])

Usually the matrix–fibre bundle interface shear stress is

determined by crack counting after simple tensile testing. It
should be noted that the value of t that is determined from
Eq. (2) is an average value of matrix–fibre and fibre–fibre
interactions, as was already mentioned.
It should be noted that the crack spacing measurement
technique, although simple, presents some inherent draw-
backs in some cases. Indeed, when t is decreasing with time
due to weathering, one needs to have a fresh sample for each
test. More important, the effect of weathering on a pre-
cracked sample cannot be measured, since a decrease of t
leads to an increase of the saturation crack spacing, which
can obviously not be measured anymore. Moreover, the
method is not suitable for monitoring real structures.
Limited cyclic loading gives on the contrary an image of
the actual condition of the sample and the matrix–fibre
interface frictional shear stress.
2.4. Interpretation of limited cyclic loading
Instead of loading specimens immediately up to failure, a
series of loading–unloading–reloading sequences can be
applied (see Fig. 2a). Each cycle is characterised by its
maximum cycle stress smax (subscript N means it is the
N
maximum stress of the Nth cycle) to which the specimen is
loaded and then reloaded, and the minimum cycle stress
smin to which the sample was unloaded (see for example
N
Fig. 2a for NZ3). For this study, each maximum cycle
stress is 5 MPa higher than the previous value, while the
minimum cycle stress is kept constant at a low value of
1 MPa. The limited cyclic loading was performed at a speed
Fig. 2. Limited cyclic loading (a) stress–strain behaviour and definitions of
stresses and stiffness, (b) cycle stiffness as function of maximum cycle
stress.
of 5 mm/min. As can be seen from Fig. 2a, unloading can be
performed when smax N is situated in either pre-cracking,
multiple cracking, or post-cracking stage. For each cycle, a
cycle stiffness (Ecycle,N where subscript N refers to the
number of the cycle) is determined on the experimentally
obtained curve. This cycle stiffness is defined as the slope of
the line connecting the two points representing the
maximum cycle stress smax N and minimum cycle stress
smin
N . Fig. 2b shows a plot of this cycle stiffness as function
of the maximum cycle stress, smax N .
Several authors [13–16] discussed the theoretical
formulation of Ecycle,N in terms of the actual crack spacing
x. According to these authors unloading of a brittle matrix
composite, showing multiple cracking (and thus loaded into
the multiple-cracking or post-cracking stage) will lead to
elastic unloading of the fibres and matrix, combined with
slipping back of the fibres into the matrix. If the fibres slip
back into the matrix along only part of their total length, the
value of Ecycle,N is:
Ec1
Ecycle;N Z adðsmax min (3)
N KsN Þ
1 C 2xs max
N
210 H. Cuypers et al. / Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215

with

Em V m Vm rEm smax
N
aZ and dZ
Ef V f 2Ec1 Vf t

where:

Ec1 is the theoretical pre-cracking stiffnessZEmVmCEfVf

Em and Ef are the Young’s modulus of matrix and fibre
respectively
x is the actual crack spacing, determined at smax
N

If the fibres slip back along their total length into the
matrix, the value of Ecycle,N is:
Fig. 3. Evolution of strength of AR-glass composites with Portland cement
Ef Vf and with IPC.
Ecycle;N Z smax
(4)
1 K 2dx Vm EEc1m ðsmax
N
min
N KsN Þ
in Table 1 represents the average of three different
specimens.
The strength of the Portland cement composites
decreases by nearly 50% over 90 days. In comparison,
3. Constant environmental loading: materials
IPC composites maintain 90% of their initial strength.
and testing program
Table 1 shows the stiffness properties in pre-cracking (EI)
and post-cracking (EIII) stage. The stiffness in pre-cracking
AR-Glass rovings with 2400 tex manufactured by the
state (EI) does not change significantly with climatic
company Vetrotex (CemFil) consisting of more than 2000
continuous filaments are used; the dimensions of the conditioning, both for Portland cement and IPC. The same
specimens are 500!60!6 mm3 and they contain a fibre can be concluded for the stiffness in the post-cracking zone
volume fraction of about 2 vol%. The Portland cement (EIII) of the specimens with IPC. This is only possible when
mixture (pH 13.5) was developed at the Institute for the fibre efficiency and matrix–fibre bundle interaction
Building Materials Research (RWTH-Aachen) as a micro- remain unchanged in post-cracking stage. After 28 days,
concrete [17]. IPC has been developed at the ‘Vrije specimens combining OPC matrix and AR-glass bundles
Universiteit Brussel’. IPC is a two-component system, fail before full multiple cracking can develop. Before the
consisting of a calcium silicate powder and a phosphoric specimens were loaded, their natural frequency was
acid based solution of metal oxides. After hardening, the
IPC material properties are similar to those of other cement- Table 1
based materials, but the pH value of hardened IPC is about Measured stiffness in pre-cracking stage and post-cracking stage
7. Because of the higher viscosity of IPC compared to other Matrix Reinforcement Storage EI (Gpa) EIII (Gpa)
cement pastes, no fillers are introduced in the IPC as matrix OPC AR-glass, Reference 30 1.1
material. After curing, the composite specimens are kept 2vol%-, uni-
under water at elevated temperature (50 8C) to accelerate the directional
degradation process. After 7, 14, 28 and 90 days three 14d, water 37 0.9
specimens of each plate are taken from the water, dried for 50 8C
28d, water 30 –a
at least 7 days at ambient conditions and tested. After 50 8C
determination of the natural frequencies of these specimens, 90d, water 35 –a
they were subjected to simple tensile testing. 50 8C
IPC AR-glass, Reference 14 1.2
2vol%-, uni-
directional
4. Constant environmental loading: results 14d, water 15 1.1
50 8C
28d, water 13 1.2
4.1. Monotonic tensile loading 50 8C
90d, water 12 1.2
From the obtained stress–strain curves, the failure load 50 8C
(see Fig. 3) and stiffness in pre-cracking and post-cracking a
No evaluation possible, specimens broken before post-cracking stage
stage (see Table 1) are determined. Each measurement point was reached.
 H. Cuypers et al. / Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215
Fig. 4. Saturation crack spacing as function of ageing.
determined. The stiffness values were calculated according
to Eq. (1) and were similar to EI, listed in Table 1.
4.2. Determination of the saturation crack spacing
The specimens, subjected to monotonic tensile loading,
are also used to determine the saturation crack spacing after
failure. Fig. 4 shows the evolution of the saturation crack
spacing of the specimens as a function of ageing.
For the specimens with Portland cement, the measured
average crack spacing becomes considerably larger (2.5
times initial value) after 90 days: fibre failure occurs before
full multiple matrix cracking is developed. In this case Eq.
(2) is not useful to obtain the average matrix–fibre bundle
frictional interaction, as was mentioned earlier. When IPC is
used as matrix, hardly any evolution with ageing is observed
in the matrix–fibre bundle interface interaction.
5. Cyclic environmental loading: materials
and testing program
Ageing of specimens might not only be due to
application of constant temperature and humidity; cycling
of the environmental conditions might lead to a consider-
ably increasing degradation speed:
† matrix cracks could appear due to the introduction of
internal stresses, produced by non-equal deformation of
fibres and matrix (matrix–fibre deformation mismatch)
under varying temperature or humidity, or due to
freezing of water in the pores. For the same reason,
flaws in the fibres could grow.
† the matrix–fibre bundle interface could also be degraded
due to friction between matrix and fibres or between
fibres under repeated non-equal deformation of fibres
211
and matrix. If water impregnates the matrix–fibre
interface and then freezes, this could also have disastrous
effects on the co-operation between matrix and fibres.
The aim of this study is to follow the degradation
mechanisms under repeated wetting–drying and freezing–
thawing. For this study, only IPC is used as matrix material
(without fillers), in order to limit the degradation of the
fibres due to alkaline attack, and concentrate only on
changes in matrix–fibre bundle interaction. The IPC matrix
is thus an interesting material to study damage mechanisms
in cement matrix composites, excluding chemical attack.
The fibre reinforcement is a quasi-unidirectional continuous
weave with 141 g/m2 in the weft direction and 17 g/m2 in
the warp direction (Syncoglas Roviglas R17/141). The
number of fibres per bundle is 1500 and the fibre diameter is
14 mm. The average fibre volume fraction is about 15%. The
reason for using a quasi-unidirectional weave is found in the
fact that matrix-cracking due to matrix–fibre deformation
mismatch will show parallel crack alignment, and make
interpretation of mechanical limited cyclic loading after
application of the environmental program easier.
The influence of existing micro-cracks in the matrix,
introduced under mechanical loading prior to environmental
loading, is also studied. Three test plates were thus made for
the wetting–drying experiments and three plates were made
to be subjected to freezing–thawing. The first plate is not
pre-loaded mechanically before it is subjected to cyclic
environmental loading. The second plate is loaded in
tension into the multiple-cracking stage and the third plate
is loaded into the post-cracking stage before the environ-
mental loading is applied.
The wetting–drying and freezing–thawing cycles were
applied according to the standard [EN 12467:2000], which
considers thin cementitious plates. Specimens are removed
from the series and tested after application of 1, 5, 10, 25, 40
and 60 wetting–drying or freezing–thawing cycles. For
freezing–thawing, fully saturated specimens are cycled
between K20 8C (4 h) and C20 8C (4 h). For wetting–
drying the specimens are sequentially dried at C60 8C (6 h)
and saturated at 20 8C (min. 18 h, max. 72 h). After
determination of the natural frequencies of three specimens
per measurement point, they were subjected to simple
tensile testing. For the cyclic loading, also three specimens
are used per averaged curve.
6. Cyclic environmental loading: results
6.1. Monotonic tensile loading
It can be concluded from monotonic tensile loading on
specimens after repeated wetting–drying, that neither the
stiffness in the post-cracking zone (EIII), nor the final
strength were influenced significantly, as can be seen in
Fig. 5a,b for wetting–drying, although there is considerable
212 H. Cuypers et al. / Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215
Fig. 5. (a) Evolution of strength of IPC composites under wetting–drying.
(b) Evolution of post-cracking stiffness of IPC composites under wetting–
drying.
scatter in the test results. Application of freezing–thawing
gave similar results, but is not represented. This indicates
that there is no measurable damage introduced to the fibres
by the cyclic environmental loading. The stiffness in the
pre-cracking stage (stage I) is discussed in the following
paragraph.
6.2. Measurement of the resonance frequencies
Fig. 6a shows the evolution of the loss of stiffness as
function of the number of applied wetting–drying cycles,
determined through measurement of the specimen natural
frequencies (see Eq. (1)). Since, however, preloading did of
course lead to preliminary loss of stiffness, the absolute
stiffness of the specimens before and after environmental
loading is also listed in Fig. 6a. It is clear that the loss of
stiffness due to environmental loading is much more
important for the specimens where no mechanical preload-
ing (and thus no prior multiple cracking) has been
introduced; mainly during the first ten cycles. This means
that matrix cracking is the main degradation mechanism in
the first ten wetting–drying cycles if this damage has not
been introduced mechanically yet. However, specimens
preloaded into the post-cracking stage still show some extra
loss of stiffness after 60 cycles (although full matrix
cracking has already been introduced mechanically),
indicating that there is another mechanism leading to extra
damage. The three curves show a similar slope after about
ten wetting–drying cycles, indicating it is probably this
other damage mechanism, which becomes relatively more
important once full matrix cracking occurred (mechanically
or environmentally).
Fig. 6b shows evolution of the loss of stiffness as
function of the number of applied freezing–thawing cycles.
In contrast with the wetting–drying cycles, the evolution of
the stiffness of specimens without prior preloading seems to
stabilise after a few cycles (five to ten). It can also be noticed
that the loss of stiffness is significantly lower under
freezing–thawing than for wetting–drying. The specimens,
who were preloaded mechanically into the post-cracking
zone, seem to show no evolution at all due to 60 freezing–
thawing cycles. This seems to indicate that the introduction
of micro-cracking in the matrix (by mechanical pre-loading
or in the first freezing–thawing cycles) provides sufficient
free space for the freezing water to expand, preventing as
such the introduction of extra internal damage.
6.3. Crack pattern
Fig. 7 shows the crack pattern after 60 environmental
(wetting–drying or freezing–thawing) cycles were applied.
As can be seen in Fig. 7a, where wetting–drying was
applied, all cracks are nicely aligned and perpendicular to
the fibre direction. This is an indication that it is the
presence of the fibres bundles, which is provoking extra
micro-cracking in the matrix. However, this is not the case
after freezing–thawing (Fig. 7b): the crack pattern shows no
preferred orientation, and the distance between the cracks is
larger than for wetting–drying.
Fig. 8 shows the evolution of the average actual crack
spacing as function of the number of applied wetting–drying
cycles. Although Fig. 6a shows that the stiffness of the
specimens did not stabilise yet after 10 wetting–drying
cycles, Fig. 8 shows that the distance between the matrix
cracks does. This is again an indication that there is
probably another mechanism creating further damage after
the first 10 cycles, as was stated before.
6.4. Limited cyclic loading
After being subjected to environmental loading, the
specimens were subjected to limited cyclic loading for
interpretation, since it was stated that crack counting could
lead to false interpretation of the matrix–fibre interface
evolution if mechanical and environmental loading are
combined. Fig. 9 shows the experimentally obtained cycle
stiffness as function of the maximum cycle stress for
specimens subjected to respectively 1 and 25 wetting–
drying cycles. This figure also includes the theoretical
 H. Cuypers et al. / Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215 213

Fig. 6. (a) Evolution of stiffness under wetting–drying, determined by measurement of resonance frequencies. (b) Evolution of stiffness under freezing–
thawing, determined by measurement of resonance frequencies.

curves, which are obtained through formulas (3) and (4). In
these equations t and r do not have real physical meaning
any more: not all fibres in a bundle contribute equally to
stiffness and strength and matrix–fibre interaction and fibre–
fibre interaction can vary along the cross-section of a
bundle. According to the authors determination of one
specific value of t or r becomes meaningless in case fibre
bundles are used in a cementitious matrix. Therefore, t and
the effective radius r were not determined apart from each
other: the ratio t/r that was determined on virgin specimens
by determination of the saturation crack spacing after
simple tensile testing. Eq. (2) in the paper was then used to
determine t/r. It is this ratio — presenting average matrix–
fibre bundle interaction — that is used further on for the
theoretical prediction of the cyclic E-modulus. As can be
seen in Eqs. (3) and (4), only this ratio is needed. The first
theoretical curve in Fig. 9 (‘no cracking theoretical’)
assumes that no damage is introduced due to environmental
or mechanical loading. The second curve (‘full cracking
theoretical’) assumes that full possible matrix cracking has
been developed due to environmental loading, but no other
damage mechanism occurred. The experimental curve after

Fig. 7. Typical surface cracking patterns after wetting–drying (a) and freezing–thawing (b).
214 H. Cuypers et al. / Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215
Fig. 8. Average actual crack spacing x as function of the number of applied
wetting–drying cycles.
Fig. 9. Cycle stiffness as function of maximum cycle stress, specimens
subjected to wetting–drying cycles.
1 wetting–drying cycle is situated between the two
theoretical curves, indicating that indeed matrix cracking
occurred, but is not fully developed yet (as was also
measured by the crack counting). The experimental curve
after 25 wetting–drying cycles is situated quite below the
theoretical predictions during the first cycles, indicating that
probably another extra damage mechanism occurred apart
from matrix cracking. Since monotonic tensile loading
revealed that the fibres were not degraded because the
composite strength and stiffness in stage III (post-cracking
stage) is retained, extra damage is introduced by mechanical
degradation of the matrix–fibre interface due to cycling. All
other factors in formulas (3) and (4) are proven to be
constant (volume fractions and stiffness) or measured by
another technique (actual matrix crack spacing) with
ageing.
7. Conclusions
Both the effects of classical accelerated ageing under
constant environment (specimens kept in water at 50 8C)
and cyclic environmental loading (wetting–drying and
freezing–thawing) have been studied in this paper on
glass–fibre reinforced cementitious composites.
From classical accelerated ageing under constant
environment, following conclusions can be drawn:
† Simple tensile testing shows that the strength of micro-
concrete with Portland Cement (pH 13.5) reinforced
with AR-glass decreases to 50% of the initial strength
after accelerated ageing for 90 days. In comparison, IPC
(pH z 7) reinforced with AR-glass rovings maintains
90–95% of its initial strength.
† For all tested material combinations, the stiffness in the
pre-cracking stage (measured from simple tensile testing
and determination of the natural frequencies) did not
change with ageing, indicating that the matrix does not
change considerably.
† Also, no change in the post-cracking stiffness is
measured when IPC matrix is used. The saturation
crack spacing X is measured after failure of the
specimens. In IPC combined with AR-glass X does not
change with ageing, indiating that there are no
considerable modifications in the matrix–fibre bundle
interface. After 90 days of accelerated ageing, the
combination AR-glass and Portland cement even fails
before multiple cracking can be fully developed: post-
cracking stiffness and saturation crack spacing cannot be
determined and another technique should be used for
further interpretation (limited cyclic loading)
For the tests under cyclic environment, only specimens
with IPC matrix (as cement paste, without any fillers) and
unidirectional fibre reinforcement were used. The combi-
nation of the presented measurement methods and limited
cyclic loading indicates that:
† The presence of fibres prevents serious damage due to
freezing–thawing. Under freezing–thawing, the speci-
mens show some damage in the first cycles, but they
stabilise easily once micro-cracking introduces enough
free space for the freezing water to expand.
† Unfortunately, the same fibres provoke extra damage in
the specimens, when they are subjected to wetting–
drying. Mismatch of the matrix and fibre deformations
introduce matrix micro-cracking in the first cycles,
followed by mechanical degradation of the matrix–fibre
bundle interface due to further cycling. Research to
decrease this mismatch in deformations by the use of
fillers is ongoing.
References
[1] Raupach M, Brockmann J. Untersuchungen zur dauerhaftigkeit von
textilbewehrtem beton: chemische und mechanische beanspruchung
von textilien aus glas. Beton 2002;52(2):72–9.
 H. Cuypers et al. / Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 207–215
[2] Cuypers H, Wastiels J, Orlowsky J, Raupach M. Investigations on the
durability of glass fibre reinforced concrete and influence of matrix
alkalinity. Proceedings of BMC7 Conference, Warsaw, October 2003
pp. 163–172.
[3] Aveston J, Cooper GA, Kelly A. Single and Multiple Fracture, the
Properties of Fibre Composites. London: IPC Science & Technology
Press Ltd.; 1971 pp. 15–24.
[4] Curtin WA, Ahn BK, Takeda N. Modeling brittle and tough stress–
strain behaviour in unidirectional ceramic composites. Acta Mater
1998;10:3409–20.
[5] Curtin WA. Stochastic damage evolution and failure in fibre-
reinforced composites. Adv Appl Mech 1999;36:163–253.
[6] Cuypers H, Wastiels J. Application of a stochastic matrix cracking
theory on E-glass fibre reinforced cementitious composites. Proceed-
ings of ECCM-10 Conference. Brugge, June, paper No. 305 (CD-
ROM) 2002.
[7] De Visscher J, Sol H, De Wilde WP, Vantomme J. Identification of the
complex moduli of thin fibre reinforced polymer plates using
measured modal parameters. Proceedings Of Euromech 357, Nether-
lands, April 1997 pp. 1–9.
[8] Sol H, De Visscher J, Hua H, Vantomme J, De Wilde WP. La
procédure résonalyser. La revue des laboratoires d’essaies 1996;46:
10–12.
[9] Sol H, Hua H, De Visscher J, Vantomme J, De Wilde WP. A mixed
numerical/experimental technique for the nondestructive
View publication stats
215
identification of the stiffness properties of fibre reinforced composite
materials. J NDT&E Int 1997;30(2):85–91.
[10] Purnell P, Short NR, Page CL, Majumdar AJ, Walton PL. Accelerated
ageing characteristics of glass-fibre reinforced cement made with new
cementitious matrices. Compos Part A 1999;30:1073–80.
[11] Widom B. Random sequential addition of hard spheres to a volume.
J Chem Phys 1966;44:3888–94.
[12] Rodgers GJ, Singh P. Generalised random sequential adsorption in
one dimension. J Phys A: Math Gen 1995;28:767–74.
[13] Pryce AW, Smith PA. Matrix cracking in unidirectional ceramic
composites under quasi-static and cyclic loading. Acta Metall Mater
1993;41:1269–81.
[14] Rouby D, Reynaud P. Fatigue behaviour related to interface
modification during load cycling in ceramic–matrix fibre composites.
Compos Sci Tech 1993;48:109–18.
[15] Ahn BK, Curtin WA. Strain and hysteresis by stochastic matrix
cracking in ceramic matrix composites. J Mech Phys Solids 1997;
45(2):177–209.
[16] Cuypers H. Analysis and design of sandwich panels with brittle matrix
composite faces for building applications. Doctoral Thesis Vrije
Universiteit Brussel (VUB), 2002.
[17] Brameshuber W, Brockmann T. Development and optimisation of
cementitious matrices for textile reinforced elements. Proceedings of
the 12th International Conference of the International Glassfibre
Reinforced Concrete Association, Dublin, May 2001 pp. 237–249.