Simulation and Model Prediction of Interfacial Concrete-to-Concrete

Shear-Friction Behavior

Mohamad Ali

1,†

, Priyo Suprobo

1,* a

and Indra Komara

2,‡ b

Civil Engineering Department, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember,

Jl. Teknik Kimia, Keputih, Sukolilo, Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia

Civil Engineering Department, Institut Teknologi Adhi Tama Surabaya,

Jl. Arif Rahman Hakim No.100, Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia

Keywords: Concrete to Concrete, Shear Friction, Concrete Repair, Interface, Shear Strength, Bond Strength.

Abstract: Concrete-to-concrete composites are extensively used in a wide range of construction applications, including

the construction of buildings, bridges, pavements, dams, and tunnels. Characterizing the structural

performance of various approaches has been the subject of extensive study over the past several decades. The

purpose of this study's evaluation is to give a thorough review of the present state of the art as well as pertinent

information on the performance of concrete-to-concrete composites. Design and environmental issues are

specifically analyzed and discussed. These include the interface state and mismatch between the overlay and

substrate. Some experimental program also assessed the ability to forecast shear-friction under a variety of

load combinations. According to the findings, a suitable choice of overlay and bonding agent composition,

interface condition, casting and curing conditions, as well as assessment procedures, not only results in

improved structural performance and durability, but also in optimized material consumption and casting costs,

resulting in a more sustainable approach. This article will help engineers and practitioners optimize their own

composites by elucidating the characteristics that improve the performance of these composites. This is a

consideration for the application development of layered concretes.

1 INTRODUCTION

Concrete-concrete composites with several layers

have various current uses, some of which include

buildings, bridges, pavements, dams, and tunnels.

These are only a few of the many modern applications

for concrete-concrete composites. These composites

are utilized mostly for the purposes of either

reinforcing or repairing the structures that are already

in existence, as well as for the construction of new

structural parts, including precast to cast-in-place

elements (Du et al., 2022; Xia et al., 2021). Hardened

concrete pieces can be set against either fresh or

hardened concrete, depending on the application. The

installation of prefabricated concrete segments for

tunnel linings is an example of the placement of

hardened concrete against hardened components. On

the other hand, the use of fresh concrete against

hardened concrete sections is an example of the use

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2521-2280

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7260-0855

of fresh concrete for bridge deck overlay (Yang &

Lee, 2019). Over the past century, concrete overlays

have been used as a long-lasting, economical, and

environmentally friendly method of

rehabilitation/strengthening (X. Wang et al., 2022).

The America's Infrastructure 2021 Report Card

indicates that 46,154 (7.5%) of the nation's 617,000

bridges are structurally deficient and require

immediate and long-term rehabilitation (ASCE,

2021). Over fifty percent of Europe's bridges are more

than half a century old, and many of them are being

considered to support loads that are greater than what

they were originally intended for (M. G. Alexander et

al., 2008; Bhattacharyay, 2012). A concrete overlay

that has been carefully planned out and constructed

can give strength and stiffness while also shielding

the underlying layer and reinforcement from

chemical damage. This has the potential to increase

the lifespan of the concrete structure by at least thirty

Ali, M., Suprobo, P. and Komara, I.

Simulation and Model Prediction of Interfacial Concrete-to-Concrete Shear-Friction Behavior.

DOI: 10.5220/0012104100003680

In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Advanced Engineering and Technology (ICATECH 2023), pages 299-309

ISBN: 978-989-758-663-7; ISSN: 2975-948X

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

299

years, which is beneficial for both the economy and

the environment (Gagg, 2014; S. Wang & Li, 2007;

C. Wu & Li, 2017).

Not only for that, climate change as the increment

of pollutants to the atmosphere effect the environment

lately (M. Alexander & Beushausen, 2019; M. G.

Alexander et al., 2015; Suryanto et al., 2015), where

the corrosive environment become more common (M.

Alexander & Beushausen, 2019; Lindvall, 2003). It

has been documented that the amount of concrete

infrastructure that is severely corroded year after year

continues to drastically expand (Indra Komara et al.,

2019; Wright et al., 2019). In that case, strengthening

concrete structure led to the global attention (Al-

Majidi et al., 2018; Dehn et al., 2015). Meanwhile,

enhancing concrete construction quality, durability,

and service life can reduce carbon emissions per

cubic meter. This is due to the improved concrete's

capacity to withstand wear and tear (W. Zhang et al.,

2018). One alternative that attracted many users is

layering concrete method or concrete to concrete.

This not only substitute only apart of the concrete, but

also minimize the working parameters (Al-majidi et

al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2020). Reinforcing and

rehabilitating structures often uses concrete-to-

concrete contacts (Taklas, Leblouba, Barakat, & Al-

sadoon, 2022; Taklas, Leblouba, Barakat, Fageeri, et

al., 2022; Xia et al., 2021), as well as in the

construction of prefabricated concrete structures

(Andrew et al., 2019; Van Tittelboom & De Belie,

2013). Additionally, the differential contracting and

stiffening of concrete components close to the contact

(H. L. Wu et al., 2019), as well as the degree of

hydration, are distinct from one another. When the

concrete is loaded and then contracted, it is easy for

weak links to form at the interface between the two

types of concrete (Arezoumandi et al., 2015).

Interfaces made of concrete are required in order

to transfer loads from the concrete of the substrate to

the concrete of the superstructure (Quraishi et al.,

2017). Therefore, the shear performance of the

interface is of the utmost importance for ensuring

monolithic behavior and the safe service of concrete

composite components (Baghi & Barros, 2016; Liu et

al., 2019; Pimanmas & Maekawa, 2001; P. Z. Zhao et

al., 2017). There are three features associated with the

mechanism of load transfer of shear forces at

concrete-to-concrete surfaces (Walraven et al., 1987;

Xia et al., 2021). These properties are (a) cohesion,

(b) friction, and (c) dowel action. The remainder of

this section will focus on identifying and contrasting

three key moments in the measurement of the

ultimate shear strength of concrete-to-concrete

interfaces that have occurred over the course of the

past sixty years (Peng et al., 2019; Xia et al., 2021; D.

Zhang et al., 2012).

Concrete overlaying has established itself as the

method of choice for pavement rehabilitation, and it

has continued to see tremendous growth in the United

States: it accounted for 12% of the total concrete

paving in the country in 2017, up from 2% in the year

2000 (ASCE, 2021). This ever-increasing popularity

is directly correlated to recent leaps forward in testing

techniques, requirements, and other technical areas,

as well as to advancements in those areas. This

illustrates the significance of concrete-concrete

composites as an option for prolonging the service

life of aged infrastructure and ensuring the durability

of newly constructed structures (ASCE, 2021).

The application of a concrete overlay as a method

for the rehabilitation of structures is an intriguing

possibility; nevertheless, extensive research on the

material's early-age performance as well as its long-

term durability is required. This poor performance

can be attributed to the improper selection of

construction materials, an improper construction

procedure, or a combination of both (He et al., 2021;

Teo & Loosemore, 2010). In order to achieve

monolithic behavior, the interfacial bond strength of

multi-layered concrete composites needs to be strong

enough to transfer loads between individual concrete

layers (Dehn et al., 2015; Gagg, 2014). Even though

applying a concrete overlay is a potentially useful

method for the rehabilitation of structures, more

research on the material's early-age performance as

well as its long-term endurance is necessary (Shu et

al., 2021; S. Wang & Li, 2007).

The aim of this study is to review the contribution

and the important factor of the shear-friction concrete

to concrete. Some recommendation will also be

discussed such as cohesion, friction, bonded

parameter and dowel action.

2 SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE

REVIEW

The concept of analysis in this paper is implied using

systematic literature review, to measure the findings

based on the area of concrete-to-concrete method

(Baghi & Barros, 2016; Taklas, Leblouba, Barakat,

Fageeri, et al., 2022). The step approach was adopted

as illustrated in Figure 1. The parameter is closely

paired with the previous analysis that was identified

by other researchers. Recommendation then listed to

corroborate findings (Daneshvar et al., 2022).

ICATECH 2023 - International Conference on Advanced Engineering and Technology

300

Figure 1: Method illustration based on SLR (Daneshvar et

al., 2022).

Birkeland and Birkeland were the ones who first

proposed the "shear-friction theory" in 1966. This

theory is often referred to as the "linear formula to

estimate the ultimate shear stress of concrete

interfaces." (Walraven et al., 1987; Xia et al., 2021).

This theory accounts for the fact that various surface

preparations might result in vastly varied levels of

friction. This is demonstrated by the research that

follows, which also takes into consideration a term

that represents the contribution of cohesion. Cohesion

is being read in this context as adhesive bonding and

mechanical interlocking. While chemical and

physical bonding are responsible for the development

of adhesive connections, mechanical interlocking can

be achieved by providing the appropriate roughening

and allowing the resulting uneven surface contour to

take shape (Peng et al., 2019; Walraven et al., 1987;

Xia et al., 2021; Yang & Lee, 2019). After that,

another group of researchers investigated the dowel

action of interfaces, which refers to the resistance of

reinforcing bars to bending where they pass the

interface (Du et al., 2022).

When two different kinds of materials are used in

various layers of concrete, two different kinds of

conditions will take place; one of these conditions,

cohesion, will interact with the strength capacity of

both kinds of materials. Those cohesion primarily

considered by materials properties interface

conditions; roughness, mechanical and physical

behaviours and also the bonding agent if it is used as

the based of the connection to concrete to concrete

(Walraven et al., 1987). Not only for that, but

materials distribution also distributes on the bonding

of the cohesion parameter i.e., aggregate size and

type, supplementary cementitious materials and

additive (Jensen et al., 2016; Setina et al., 2013).

According to the findings of Alrefaei et al., the

ultimate shear strength at concrete-to-concrete

interfaces experienced a sizeable rise as a direct

consequence of an increase in the compressive

strength of the concrete (Alrefaei et al., 2018). When

studying how recycled coarse aggregate replacement

ratios affected shear strength. According to the results

of the study, there was a negative impact on the shear

strength of the material when the recycled coarse

aggregate replacement ratio was more than 30%. This

was the case in all of the scenarios that were analyzed

(Rao et al., 2007). In addition, the findings of another

investigation led the researchers to the conclusion that

the employment of a bonding agent has an effect, in

addition to having an impact on mechanical

interlocking. This conclusion was reached as a result

of the findings of the first study. In order to

accomplish the impact of enhanced shear strength that

is required, the development of a bonding bridge at

the interfaces should be considered the primary

purpose of a bonding agent (Lepech et al., 2008; C.

Wu & Li, 2017).

The friction parameter will be subject to further

evaluation in the future. The forces that were exerted

due to the clamping state under reinforcement and the

compression forces that were put perpendicular to the

contact are the normal causes of friction. This

condition corresponds to the sufficiency roughened

surface. In order to conduct direct shear tests, the

researchers constructed specimens with normal

pressures ranging from 0 to 9.8 MPa (Arezoumandi

et al., 2015; C. Wu & Li, 2017). As normal pressure

increased, the interface's ultimate shear strength

increased, and its growth rate decreased. Direct shear

testing on concrete specimens under different normal

loads were also conducted (Nuaklong et al., 2019;

Wong et al., 2010). These tests determined material

shearing behavior. Normal stress did not affect

concrete specimen shear stiffness. It delayed the final

shear strength, indicating friction mobilization at the

peak.

Dowel action for strengthening bending resistance

is also explored. Reinforcement and bar position

effect dowel parameter (Kamal et al., 2008). The

results showed that reinforcing increased interface

ultimate strength and residual strength. Besides

reinforcement quantity, (Arezoumandi et al., 2015;

Redwood, 2011) revealed that residual strength

depends on the shear reinforcement angle relative to

the applied force. The research also examined how

bar diameters, pre-tension, and concrete cover

affected dowel action and offered a model to predict

Simulation and Model Prediction of Interfacial Concrete-to-Concrete Shear-Friction Behavior

301

it (Arezoumandi et al., 2015). (Arezoumandi et al.,

2015). Shear-transfer behavior with different

reinforcing ratios and material properties and ACI

estimations of ultimate strengths (American concrete

Institute, 2014) and the AASHTO (AASHTO

Subcommittee on Materials, 2016) shear-friction

models. Cohesion, friction, and dowel action have not

yet been determined. Thus, more research is needed

to determine how shear transmission, cohesiveness,

friction, and dowels affect concrete-to-concrete

interface stress and slide.

2.1 Shear – Friction

When determining the shear strength between two

pieces of concrete, one of the methods that is utilized

the most frequently is the shear-friction hypothesis.

In 1966, Birkeland and Birkeland were the ones who

initially presented the design concept behind this

notion (Walraven et al., 1987; Xia et al., 2021). Since

then, the vast majority of the most important standard

codes, such as the ACI 318–1, have adopted it.

Figure 2: Shear – friction theory: three main components

contribute to load transfer mechanism (Lin & Erkut, 2013).

The development of this theory, which led to

considerable alterations of the design codes, is the

topic of the in-depth analyses have provided in their

outstanding reviews (Xia et al., 2021; Yang & Lee,

2019). These include the use of adhesive bonding and

mechanical interlocking, as well as dowel action and

shear friction. (See Figure 3). Atomic and molecular

bonding (primary and secondary bonding) and

correlation forces induce adhesion at the point of

contact, giving cured cement its high cohesive

strength. Along with adhesion, mechanical

interlocking is a micro-level activity that relates to the

behavior in which the major processes are sliding

friction at extremely small shear slip values and

irreversible deformation of the matrix. This behavior

is distinguished by the fact that the shear slip values

are significantly lower than expected. Adhesion is

also a micro-level activity (Li et al., 1995; Lin &

Erkut, 2013).

Figure 3: Load transfer mechanism of concrete to concrete

– contribution of adhesion vs. shear friction vs. shear

reinforcement (Lin & Erkut, 2013).

This behavior also includes adhesion as one of its

components. The adhesion and interlocking processes

are influenced by a number of factors, such as the

composition of the concrete, the type of adhesive

bonding agent used, the interfacial roughness at the

micro-scale, the characteristics of the interfacial

transition zone, micro-mechanical factors, and micro-

cracks (Husein et al., 2022; Japan Society of Civil

Engineers, 2007; Lim & Li, 1997; ZHANG et al.,

2014; P. Z. Zhao et al., 2017).

According to fib 2010, adhesive bonding and

mechanical interlocking shear transfer is efficient at

very small shear slip values (usually below 0.05 mm)

and is expected to decrease with increasing shear slip

at the contact. This is because the shear transfer is

proportional to the amount of shear stress that is

applied to the interface. This is due to the fact that

adhesive bonding and mechanical interlocking are

both effective ways of transferring shear pressures at

very low amounts of shear slip.

This is because the shear transfer is effective even

at extremely low shear slip values, which is the

primary reason for this observation. After

ICATECH 2023 - International Conference on Advanced Engineering and Technology

302

compressive normal forces deteriorate adhesion,

shear friction, which opposes the relative movement

of concrete layers parallel to their interface, becomes

the main load transmission mechanism at

intermediate slip values. Shear friction opposes

concrete layer displacement parallel to their interface.

This is because shear friction is a force that works

against the relative movement of concrete layers;

hence it causes this effect. Concrete layers do not

move in parallel because shear friction prohibits it.

The macroscale roughness of the contact and the

normal tension at the interface are the primary factors

that determine shear friction. Dowel action begins to

take place when the steel reinforcement resists

bending. Dowel action is triggered by the addition of

steel reinforcement across the junction (Du et al.,

2022; Walraven et al., 1987).

The relative shear slip that occurs between

concrete layers along the interface causes the upper

and lower ends of crossing steel reinforcing bars to be

moved laterally in an outward direction. The bending

stresses are caused by the axial tensile forces of the

reinforcement and the joint opening (Li et al., 1995;

Lin & Erkut, 2013). This bending resistance is

described as having a dowel action. The resistive

stress size is affected by the type of crossing

reinforcement, the percentage of that reinforcement,

and flexural resistance (Bastian et al., 2020; I.

Komara et al., 2018, 2020; Indra Komara et al., 2019;

Oktaviani et al., n.d.).

2.2 Design Expression

Birkeland and Birkeland 1966 proposed shear-

friction theory (Walraven et al., 1987; Xia et al.,

2021) in order to figure out the ultimate longitudinal

shear stress at concrete-to-concrete connections. The

design of this theory can be represented by an

equation. (1). The normal friction coefficients are

affected by surface preparation in the following ways:

1) Monolithic concrete has a value of 1.7; 2)

Construction joints that have been artificially

roughened have a value of 1.4; and 3) Regular

construction joints and concrete-to-steel interfaces

have a value between 0.8 and 1.0. The coefficient for

monolithic concrete is 1.7, the coefficient for

artificially roughened building joints is 1.4, and the

coefficient for ordinary construction ranges from 0.8

to 1.0.

𝑣



=𝜇𝜌

𝑓



(1)

𝑣



=1.38 + 0.8𝜌

𝑓



+𝜎





(2)

𝑣



=𝑘



𝑓



𝜌

𝑓



+𝜎





(3)

𝑣



=𝐶



𝜌

𝑓









(4)

𝐶



= 0.822

𝑓



.

(5)

𝐶



= 0.159

𝑓



.

(6)

𝑣



=𝐶



0.007𝜌

𝑓









(7)

𝑣



=𝑐

𝑓



/

≤𝛽𝜈

𝑓



(8)

𝑣



=𝜇𝜌𝑘

𝑓



+𝜎



≤𝛽𝜈

𝑓



(9)

𝑣



=𝛼𝜌



𝑓



𝑓



≤𝛽𝜈

𝑓



(10)

A number of investigations have shown that this

design expression could be enhanced by integrating

other aspects such as interface cohesion (which is

comparable to adhesion and aggregate interlock), the

lowest concrete strength, and deformation-induced

dowel action caused by shear, bending, and tension.

The most important contributions will be covered in

the paragraphs that follow. Equation (2) is what

people usually mean when they talk about the

"modified shear-friction theory." The first equation

depicts the cohesiveness of the contact, which is

assumed to remain unchanging and is equal to 1.38

MPa. The second term depicts the clamping stresses

that are being applied. The coefficient of friction is

considered to be constant if it stays at 0.8 during an

experiment. In Equation 3, the concrete's strength has

been explicitly integrated. It was assumed that k was

equal to 0.5 for initially uncracked interfaces at the

beginning of the study (Peng et al., 2019).

The research also used the "sphere model" to

describe the interaction between aggregates, binding

paste, and interface zone. A complete experimental

study using push-off specimens with fractured

interfaces calibrated the nonlinear design expression

(Equation (5) to (7)). The initial research was carried

out in order to discuss and investigate the effect that

the dowel action mechanism has on the total shear

strength of the contact. Later, a design expression was

proposed (Equation (8) – (10) that explicitly includes

the contribution of the following three load transfer

mechanisms: 1) cohesion, due to the contribution of

adhesion and aggregate interlocking; 2) friction, due

to the longitudinal relative slip between concrete

layers and therefore influenced by the surface

roughness and the normal stress at the shear interface;

and 3) dowel action, due to the contribution of

the flexural resistance of the shear residuum. Table 1

Simulation and Model Prediction of Interfacial Concrete-to-Concrete Shear-Friction Behavior

303

Figure 4: Shear test (a) – (f) and tensile test (g) – (i); (a) Mono surface shear, (b) Bi – surface shear, (c) push off (double L-

shaped), (d) Direct double shear under JSCE, (e) FIP standard shear, (f) Twist - off.

presents the parameters of the design expression

suggested by Randl also proposed that the Sand Patch

Test be used to evaluate surface roughness in

accordance with ASTM E965(2001)12.

𝑣



= 𝜌

𝑓





𝜇𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛼 + 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛼



(11)

Table 1: Surface preparation identfiying cohesion.

Surface

preparation

High –

pressure

water –

lastin

Sand –

blasting

Smooth

Surface

rou

hness, R, mm

≥ 3.0 ≥ 0.5 -

Coefficien of

cohesion c

0.4 0.0 0.0

Coefficient of friction

f’c ≥ 20 MPa 0.8 0.7 0.5

f’c ≥ 35 MPa 1.0 0.7 0.5

0.5 0.5 0.0

α 0.9 1.1 1.5

β 0.4 0.3 0.2

According to ACI 318 (American Concrete

Institute (ACI 318-99), 1999), a crack that already

exists or could potentially occur, an interface between

different materials, or an interface between two

concretes cast at distinct dates could all be potential

causes of a fracture that runs across a particular plane.

At the concrete-to-concrete interface, friction is a

factor that affects the ultimate longitudinal shear

stress (Equation 11). There is a lack of specific

exploration of cohesion and dowel action.

When analyzing surface conditions, the following

four factors are taken into account: 1) Concrete that is

placed against hardened concrete with the surface

being clean but not intentionally roughened (= 0.6);

2) Concrete that is placed against hardened concrete

with the surface being clean and intentionally

roughened to a full amplitude of 6.35 mm (0.25 in.)

(= 1.0); 3) Concrete that is placed monolithically (=

1.4); and 4) Concrete that is anchored to as-rolled

structural steel by headed studs or reinforcing bars. (

= A modification factor that is associated with the

concrete's density is denoted by the parameter known

as. For this parameter, it is anticipated that

normalweight concrete will have a value of 1.00,

while all lightweight concrete will have a value of

0.75. When employing aggregates of both the

normalweight and lightweight varieties, the

modification factor needs to be computed while

taking into consideration the volumetric proportions

of each aggregate type, and it can't be higher than

0.85.

ICATECH 2023 - International Conference on Advanced Engineering and Technology

304

3 CASE STUDY – SUPPORTED

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

In order to characterize concrete bonding under a

wide variety of different types and combinations of

loadings, a variety of testing methodologies have

been devised. The stress that is applied to the

interface and the concrete layers in each of these test

methods is the primary distinction between them.

This is because each of these test methods use a

unique specimen and loading setup. Because of this,

the value of the bond strength, which is normally

measured as the highest force required to physically

pull the two surfaces apart divided by the

(macroscopic) surface of contact, is greatly reliant on

the sort of testing method that was used. Because the

interfacial bond strength can change by a factor of 8

depending on the type of test procedure (Peng et al.,

2019).

Figure 5: Test methods – shear vs. tension; NC: normal

concrete, HSC: high steel concrete, HPC: high performance

concrete, UHPC: ultra-high-performance concrete, NSM:

normal strength mortar, UHPFRC: ultra-high-performance

fibre reinforced concrete, URH-APMC: ultra-rapid

hardening acrylic polymer modified concrete.

The past research also came to the conclusion that

the test method should be designed to be as similar to

the real or desired conditions as is practically

practicable. In addition, the modes of failure that are

detected using these test methods are dependent on

the loading conditions as well as the materials that are

utilized (Xia et al., 2021). In general, the failure

modes in concrete-to-concrete composites can be

categorized as either cohesive or adhesive failures, as

shown in Fig. 5, depending on the location of the

main observed crack paths (Walraven et al., 1987).

This is the case because cohesive failures are more

likely to occur when the two types of concrete are

mixed together.

In the case of cohesive failure, the cracks appear

within the bulk of the concrete itself, either in the

overlay or the substrate (Taklas, Leblouba, Barakat,

Fageeri, et al., 2022). When a bonding agent is

employed, the adhesive failure mode can follow one

of three distinct probable failure paths depending on

where the crack appears (Du et al., 2022; Peng et al.,

2019; Xia et al., 2021). Failure to cohere is typically

thought to be indicative of strong bonding since it

demonstrates that the strength of the interfacial bond

is greater than that of the bulk concrete (Walraven et

al., 1987; X. Wang et al., 2022; P. Zhao et al., 2017).

In this context, increasing the bond strength is

believed to have the effect of moving the place of

failure from the interface to the bulk concrete.

Increasing the interfacial roughness, making the

overlay binding matrix stronger, or introducing an

interfacial bonding agent are the standard methods for

accomplishing this (Walraven et al., 1987; Xia et al.,

2021; Yang & Lee, 2019). The pre-existing

substrate/overlay flaws, such as micro cracks and

specific stress state (induced by the sample

preparation, for example), should not be ignored and

may lead to the early crushing or rupture of the bulk

concrete. These defects should not be ignored. In this

particular scenario, the theory that higher bond

strength can be achieved is shown to be unreliable

(Daneshvar et al., 2022; Yang & Lee, 2019).

In some cases, the adhesive failure must be

artificially induced (for example, by creating a pre-

notch), so that an accurate measurement of the bond

strength may be obtained. It is helpful to do

systematic investigations of certain design

parameters and quantify their impact on the structural

integrity and bond performance of concrete-concrete

composites. This can be accomplished through the

use of this information.

Figure 6: Surface preparation consists of the following

steps: (a) casting; (b) wire brushing; (c) sand blasting; (d)

shot blasting; and (e) hand scrubbing.

Simulation and Model Prediction of Interfacial Concrete-to-Concrete Shear-Friction Behavior

305

The types of loads that are applied to the

interface serve to categorize the testing procedures

into one of three primary groups: the tensile, shear,

and mixed-mode groups (see Fig. 6). Shear is one of

the most common types of loadings that is applied to

the interface under real conditions. It can be caused

by differential time-dependent deformation between

concrete layers (shrinkage), the passage of traffic

loads on multi-layer concrete pavement and bridge

decks, the transfer of shear through the joints, etc.

Shear is one of the most common types of loadings

that is applied to the interface under real conditions.

In addition, preparation of the substrate surface also

one of the considerations to identify the shear friction

mechanism. The various surface preparation can be

seen in Figure 6.

According to the examples that are presented in

Figure 6, it is possible to deduce that surface

preparation also takes into account the shear friction

that is linked to the concrete components that interact

with the substrate.

4 SUMMARY AND

CONCLUSIONS

Concrete-to-concrete composites have seen

widespread use over the past three decades, and their

applications have grown increasingly diverse. The

enormous body of literature that was produced during

this time period provides evidence of the significance

of the repair approaches, but it may also give results

that are ambiguous or even contradictory. The goals

of this study are to (1) present a complete description

on the test procedures used for the evaluation of the

performances of concrete-to-concrete composites and

(2) conduct a systematic examination of the elements

that affect these characteristics. Both of these goals

will be accomplished by the end of this article. By

doing so, the authors seek to make it simpler for

interested parties to access an examination of the

pertinent literature. The most important findings can

be summed up as follows:

- Bi-surface shear tests, pull-off test, direct shear

test, direct double shear test, and indirect

splitting are mechanical tests used to analyze the

concrete-to-concrete composite's shear friction

behavior. Combination tests, such as four-point

bending and three-point bending, can produce

more accurate results in similar situations.

- The predominant failure mode in concrete-to-

concrete composites was either cohesive or

adhesive, depending on the position of the

largest fissures.

- In addition to moisture condition, type and

qualities of the adhesive agent, roughness,

reinforcement, and shrinkage, additional criteria

that affect the shear friction behavior are

roughness, reinforcement, and shrinkage.

- Certain forms of concrete have a high shear

friction capacity, including HPC and ECC

overlays in particular.

REFERENCES

AASHTO Subcommittee on Materials. (2016). AASHTO

Subcommittee on Materials (SOM) 2016 Fly Ash Task

Force Report. 1–22.

Al-Majidi, M. H., Lampropoulos, A. P., Cundy, A. B.,

Tsioulou, O. T., & Al-Rekabi, S. (2018). A novel

corrosion resistant repair technique for existing

reinforced concrete (RC) elements using polyvinyl

alcohol fibre reinforced geopolymer concrete

(PVAFRGC). Construction and Building Materials,

164, 603–619.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.213

Al-majidi, M. H., Lampropoulos, A. P., Cundy, A. B.,

Tsioulou, O. T., & Alrekabi, S. (2019). Flexural

performance of reinforced concrete beams strengthened

with fi bre reinforced geopolymer concrete under

accelerated corrosion. Structures, 19(January), 394–

410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2019.02.005

Alexander, M., & Beushausen, H. (2019). Durability,

service life prediction, and modelling for reinforced

concrete structures – review and critique. Cement and

Concrete Research, 122(April), 17–29.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.04.018

Alexander, M. G., Dehn, F., & Moyo, P. (2008). Concrete

Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting II. In Concrete

Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting II.

https://doi.org/10.1201/9781439828403

Alexander, M. G., Dehn, F., & Moyo, P. (2015). Concrete

Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting IV. In Concrete

Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting IV.

https://doi.org/10.1201/b18972

Alrefaei, Y., Rahal, K., & Maalej, M. (2018). Shear

Strength of Beams Made Using Hybrid Fiber-

Engineered Cementitious Composites. Journal of

Structural Engineering (United States), 144(1), 1–10.

https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-

541X.0001924

American concrete Institute. (2014). Building Code

Requirements for Structural Concrete. In American

Concrete Institute.

American Concrete Institute (ACI 318-99). (1999).

Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete.

ICATECH 2023 - International Conference on Advanced Engineering and Technology

306

In American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,

Mich (Vol. 2007).

Andrew, N., Poon, C., Shen, L., & Austin, S. A. (2019).

Designing out waste in high-rise residential buildings :

analysis of precasting and methods and traditional

construction.

Arezoumandi, M., Volz, J. S., Ortega, C. A., & Myers, J. J.

(2015). Shear behavior of high-volume fly ash concrete

versus conventional concrete: Experimental study.

Journal of Structural Engineering (United States),

141(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-

541X.0001003

ASCE. (2021). A Comprehensive Assessment of America’s

Infrastructure. In The American Society of Civil

Engineers (pp. 1–21).

Baghi, H., & Barros, J. A. O. (2016). Shear properties of the

strain hardening cementitious composite material.

Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 28(10).

https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-

5533.0001603

Bastian, M. A., Tambusay, A., Komara, I., Sutrisno, W.,

Irawan, D., & Suprobo, P. (2020). Enhancing the

Ductility of a Reinforced Concrete Beam using

Engineered Cementitious Composite. IOP Conference

Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 506, 012044.

https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/506/1/012044

Bhattacharyay, B. (2012). Estimating Demand for

Infrastructure in Energy, Transport,

Telecommunications, Water, and Sanitation in Asia and

the Pacific: 2010-2020. In SSRN Electronic Journal

(Issue January 2010).

https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1678417

Daneshvar, D., Behnood, A., & Robisson, A. (2022).

Interfacial bond in concrete-to-concrete composites : A

review. 359(July).

Dehn, F., M.G., B., P., A., & Moyo, P. (2015). Concrete

Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting IV. In Concrete

Repair, Rehabilitation and Retrofitting IV (pp. 3–984).

https://doi.org/10.1201/b18972

Du, W., Yang, C., De Backer, H., Li, C., Ming, K., Zhang,

H., Pan, Y., & 1. (2022). Experimental Investigation on

Shear Behavior of the Interface Ordinary Concrete

Substrate. Materials, 15(4939), 1–19.

Gagg, C. R. (2014). Cement and concrete as an engineering

material: An historic appraisal and case study analysis.

Engineering Failure Analysis, 40, 114–140.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.02.004

He, Z., Asce, A. M., Tang, M., Xu, T., Liu, Z., Ma, Z. J., &

Asce, F. (2021). Additional Shear Stresses in Webs of

Segmental Concrete Bridges Due to Additional Shear

Stresses in Webs of Segmental Concrete Bridges due to

Anchorage of Cantilever Tendons. June.

https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-

5592.0001750

Husein, S., Mardani-aghabaglou, A., & Ramyar, K. (2022).

Physical and mechanical properties of high volume fly

ash roller compacted concrete pavement ( A laboratory

and case study ). Construction and Building Materials,

314(PB), 125664.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125664

Japan Society of Civil Engineers. (2007). Standard

Specifications for Concrete Structures. In JSCE

Guidelines for Concrete (Issue 15, pp. 1–273).

http://conc.civil.okayama-

u.ac.jp/~tayano7/JSCE/publication.html

Jensen, O. M., Kovler, K., & Belie, N. De. (2016). Concrete

with Supplementary Cementitious Materials.

Kamal, A., Kunieda, M., Ueda, N., & Nakamura, H. (2008).

Evaluation of crack opening performance of a repair

material with strain hardening behavior. Cement and

Concrete Composites, 30(10), 863–871.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2008.08.003

Komara, I., Suprobo, P., Iranata, D., Tambusay, A., &

Sutrisno, W. (2020). Experimental investigations on the

durability performance of normal concrete and

engineered cementitious composite. IOP Conference

Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 930(1).

https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/930/1/012056

Komara, I., Wahyuni, E., Suprobo, P., & Taskin, K. (2018).

Assessing the tensile capacity of cold-formed steel

connections using self-drilling screws and adhesive

materials. International Journal on Advanced Science,

Engineering and Information Technology, 8(2).

https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.8.2.4314

Komara, Indra, Tambusay, A., Sutrisno, W., & Suprobo, P.

(2019). Engineered Cementitious Composite as an

innovative durable material: A review. ARPN Journal

of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 14(4), 822–833.

Lepech, M. D., Li, V. C., Robertson, R. E., & Keoleian, G.

A. (2008). Design of green engineered cementitious

composites for improved sustainability. ACI Materials

Journal, 105(6), 567–575.

Li, V. C., Lim, Y. M., & Foremsky, D. J. (1995). Interfacial

Fracture Toughness of Concrete Repair Materials.

Fracture Mechanics of Concrete Structures,

Proceedings, FRAMCOS-2, 1329–1344.

Lim, Y. M., & Li, V. C. (1997). Durable repair of aged

infrastructures using trapping mechanism of engineered

cementitious composites. Cement and Concrete

Composites, 19(4), 373–385.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-9465(97)00026-7

Lin, W., & Erkut, S. (2013). Interfacial evaluation of

endodontically treated teeth restored with selected

adhesive materials and glass fiber posts : An SEM

analysis. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2012.03.021

Lindvall, A. (2003). Environmental actions on concrete

exposed in marine and road environments and its

response.

Liu, Y., Zhang, Q., Bao, Y., & Bu, Y. (2019). Static and

fatigue push-out tests of short headed shear studs

embedded in Engineered Cementitious Composites

(ECC). Engineering Structures, 182(October 2018),

29–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.12.068

Nuaklong, P., Wongsa, A., Sata, V., Boonserm, K.,

Sanjayan, J., & Chindaprasirt, P. (2019). Properties of

high-calcium and low-calcium fly ash combination

geopolymer mortar containing recycled aggregate.

Heliyon, 5(9), e02513.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02513

Simulation and Model Prediction of Interfacial Concrete-to-Concrete Shear-Friction Behavior

307

Oktaviani, W. N., Tambusay, A., Sutrisno, W., Komara, I.,

& Suprobo, P. (n.d.). Flexural Behavior of Reinforced

Concrete Beam Blended with Fly ash as Supplementary

Material.

Peng, J., Zhao, P., Wang, S., Wee, S., & Kang, S. (2019).

Interface shear transfer in reinforced engineered

cementitious composites under push-off loads.

Engineering Structures, April, 110013.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.110013

Pimanmas, A., & Maekawa, K. (2001). Influence of Pre-

Cracking on Reinforced Concrete Behavior in Shear.

Jsce, 38(38), 207–223.

Quraishi, M., Nayak, D., Kumar, R., & Kumar, V. (2017).

Corrosion of Reinforced Steel in Concrete and Its

Control: An overview. Journal of Steel Structures &

Construction, 03(01), 1–6.

https://doi.org/10.4172/2472-0437.1000124

Rao, A., Jha, K. N., & Misra, S. (2007). Use of aggregates

from recycled construction and demolition waste in

concrete. 50, 71–81.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.05.010

Redwood, R. G. (2011). Design of Composite Beams With

Web Openings. (Issue April).

https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19276.62085

Setina, J., Gabrene, A., & Juhnevica, I. (2013). Effect of

pozzolanic additives on structure and chemical

durability of concrete. Procedia Engineering, 57,

1005–1012.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.04.127

Shu, A.-, Salman, M., Akinpelu, M. A., & Ahmed, G. A.

(2021). Evaluation of variations of coarse aggregate

types on hardened properties of concrete Evaluation of

variations of coarse aggregate types on hardened

properties of concrete. September.

Suryanto, B., McCarter, W. J., Starrs, G., Wilson, S. A., &

Traynor, R. M. (2015). Smart cement composites for

durable and intelligent infrastructure. Procedia

Engineering, 125, 796–803.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.11.139

Taklas, M., Leblouba, M., Barakat, S., & Al-sadoon, Z. A.

(2022). Concrete-to-concrete shear friction behavior

under cyclic loading. 01001.

Taklas, M., Leblouba, M., Barakat, S., Fageeri, A., &

Mohamad, F. (2022). Concrete ‑ to ‑ concrete shear

friction behavior under cyclic loading : experimental

investigation. Scientific Reports, 1–21.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13530-5

Teo, M. M. M., & Loosemore, M. (2010). A theory of waste

behaviour in the construction industry A theory of

waste behaviour in the construction industry.

September 2013

, 37–41.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190110067037

Van Tittelboom, K., & De Belie, N. (2013). Self-healing in

cementitious materials-a review. In Materials (Vol. 6,

Issue 6). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma6062182

Walraven, J., Frenay, J., & Pruijssers, A. (1987). Shear

Friction Capacity. PCI Journal, 1, 66–84.

Wang, S., & Li, V. C. (2007). High-Early-Strength

Engineered Cementitious Composites. 103, 97–105.

Wang, X., Sun, K., Shao, J., & Ma, J. (2022). Study on

Mechanical and Rheological Properties of Solid.

Buildings, 12(1690), 1–11.

Wong, H. S., Zhao, Y. X., Karimi, A. R., Buenfeld, N. R.,

& Jin, W. L. (2010). On the penetration of corrosion

products from reinforcing steel into concrete due to

chloride-induced corrosion. Corrosion Science, 52(7),

2469–2480.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2010.03.025

Wright, R. F., Lu, P., Devkota, J., Lu, F., Ziomek-Moroz,

M., & Ohodnicki, P. R. (2019). Corrosion sensors for

structural health monitoring of oil and natural gas

infrastructure: A review. Sensors (Switzerland), 19(18).

https://doi.org/10.3390/s19183964

Wu, C., & Li, V. C. (2017). CFRP-ECC hybrid for

strengthening of the concrete structures. Composite

Structures, 178(July), 372–382.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.07.034

Wu, H. L., Yu, J., Zhang, D., Zheng, J. X., & Li, V. C.

(2019). Effect of morphological parameters of natural

sand on mechanical properties of engineered

cementitious composites. Cement and Concrete

Composites, 100(November 2018), 108–119.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.04.007

Xia, J., Shan, K., Wu, X., Gan, R., & Jin, W. (2021). Shear-

friction behavior of concrete-to-concrete interface

under direct shear load. Engineering Structures,

238(April), 112211.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.112211

Yang, K. H., & Lee, K. H. (2019). Shear Friction

Characteristics and Modification Factor of Concrete

Prepared Using Expanded Bottom Ash and Dredged

Soil Granules. International Journal of Concrete

Structures and Materials.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40069-019-0364-x

Zhang, D., Gao, S., & Gong, J. (2012). Seismic behaviour

of steel beam to circular CFST column assemblies with

external diaphragms. Journal of Constructional Steel

Research, 76, 155–166.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2012.03.024

ZHANG, R., MATSUMOTO, K., HIRATA, T., ISHIZEKI,

Y., & NIWA, J. (2014). Shear Behavior of

Polypropylene Fiber Reinforced Ecc Beams With

Varying Shear Reinforcement Ratios. Journal of JSCE

2(1), 39–53.

https://doi.org/10.2208/journalofjsce.2.1_39

Zhang, W., Yin, C., Ma, F., & Huang, Z. (2018).

Mechanical properties and carbonation durability of

engineered cementitious composites reinforced by

polypropylene and hydrophilic polyvinyl alcohol

fibers. Materials, 11(7).

https://doi.org/10.3390/ma11071147

Zhao, P., Kang, S., & Yang, B. (2017). ScienceDirect Shear

Strength of Engineered Cementitious Composites under

Push- Off Loads. Procedia Engineering, 210, 53–60.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.11.048

Zhao, P. Z., Kang, S. B., & Yang, B. (2017). Shear Strength

of Engineered Cementitious Composites under Push-

Off Loads. Procedia Engineering, 210, 53–60.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.11.048

ICATECH 2023 - International Conference on Advanced Engineering and Technology

308

Zhou, S., Xie, L., Jia, Y., & Wang, C. (2020). Review

review of cementitious composites containing

polyethylene fibers as repairing materials. Polymers,

12(11), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12112624

Simulation and Model Prediction of Interfacial Concrete-to-Concrete Shear-Friction Behavior

309