Standard test methods for determining the mechanical properties of Fiber Reinforced Concrete (FRC) are properly defined if they reproduce the actual structural behavior. Among many proposals, the round panel test seems to have all potentials to become an easy-to-use tool…
Standard test methods for determining the mechanical properties of Fiber Reinforced Concrete (FRC) are properly defined if they reproduce the actual structural behavior. Among many proposals, the round panel test seems to have all potentials to become an easy-to-use tool and, at the same time, a reliable procedure for the characterization of FRC, in terms of toughness and post-cracking constitutive cohesive law. A compari- son between different test typologies for characterizing FRC is reported and discussed in the present paper, whit special emphasis on the different scatter that each tests produces. Tests are performed on beams as well as on panels. All specimens herein compared have the same concrete mechanical properties and fiber content. Aim of the experimental investigation is to critically discuss advantages and disadvantages of each testing proce- dure, focusing on the applicability of the method and on the reliability of results toward a consistent characteri- zation of the structural behavior. A new geometry for the panel test is herein proposed and discussed in order to make the panel easier to place, handle and test, therefore avoiding one of the major drawbacks which limit an extensive utilization of the panel tests. Suitable correlations among the different fracture and energy parame- ters defined in the assumed standards are finally reported, resulting very useful for a harmonization of the available standards.