Advanced Evaluation of the Freeze–Thaw Damage of Concrete Based on the Fracture Tests

Abstract

This paper presents the results of an experimental program aimed at the assessment of the freeze–thaw (F–T) resistance of concrete based on the evaluation of fracture tests accompanied by acoustic emission measurements. Two concretes of similar mechanical characteristics were manufactured for the experiment. The main difference between the C1 and C2 concrete was in the total number of air voids and in the A300 parameter, where both parameters were higher for C1 by about 35% and 52%, respectively. The evaluation of the fracture characteristics was performed on the basis of experimentally recorded load–deflection and load–crack mouth opening displacement diagrams using two different approaches: linear fracture mechanics completed with the effective crack model and the double-K model. The results show that both approaches gave similar results, especially if the nonlinear behavior before the peak load was considered. According to the results, it can be stated that continuous AE measurement is beneficial for the assessment of the extent of concrete deterioration, and it suitably supplements the fracture test evaluation. A comparison of the results of fracture tests with the resonance method and splitting tensile strength test shows that all testing methods led to the same conclusion, i.e., the C1 concrete was more F–T-resistant than C2. However, the fracture test evaluation provided more detailed information about the internal structure deterioration due to the F–T exposure.This paper presents the results of an experimental program aimed at the assessment of the freeze–thaw (F–T) resistance of concrete based on the evaluation of fracture tests accompanied by acoustic emission measurements. Two concretes of similar mechanical characteristics were manufactured for the experiment. The main difference between the C1 and C2 concrete was in the total number of air voids and in the A300 parameter, where both parameters were higher for C1 by about 35% and 52%, respectively. The evaluation of the fracture characteristics was performed on the basis of experimentally recorded load–deflection and load–crack mouth opening displacement diagrams using two different approaches: linear fracture mechanics completed with the effective crack model and the double-K model. The results show that both approaches gave similar results, especially if the nonlinear behavior before the peak load was considered. According to the results, it can be stated that continuous AE measurement is beneficial for the assessment of the extent of concrete deterioration, and it suitably supplements the fracture test evaluation. A comparison of the results of fracture tests with the resonance method and splitting tensile strength test shows that all testing methods led to the same conclusion, i.e., the C1 concrete was more F–T-resistant than C2. However, the fracture test evaluation provided more detailed information about the internal structure deterioration due to the F–T exposure.