Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Experimental investigations on bond strength between coconut bre and concrete

Majid Ali , Xiaoyang Li, Nawawi Chouw
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Auckland, New Zealand

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Effect of bre embedment lengths, diameters, pretreatment conditions and concrete mix design ratios on
Received 2 May 2012 the bond strength between single coconut bre and concrete is investigated. Fibres are prepared and cat-
Accepted 14 August 2012 egorised manually. Fibre diameters are measured by a stereomicroscope. Fibre and concrete properties
Available online 25 August 2012
are also determined experimentally. The simplied equations are proposed for estimating the bre ten-
sile stress, elastic modulus and toughness. Single bre pull-out tests are carried out to determine load
Keywords: slippage curves with the help of an Instron tensile machine having load cell. Bond strength and energy
Coconut bre
required for bre pullout are calculated from the experimental data. The results show that bres have
Composite material
Bond strength
the maximum bond strength with concrete when (i) embedment length is 30 mm, (ii) bres are thick,
Fibre pretreatment and pull-out test (iii) treated with boiling water, and (iv) concrete mix design ratio is 1:3:3. Similar effects are observed
for energy required for bre pullout. With the obtained knowledge, empirical equations are also devel-
oped to determine the bond strength and energy required for bre pullout.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Plain concrete is a brittle material with low tensile strength.
There has been a steady increase in the use of short and randomly
distributed natural bres to reinforce the matrix (paste, mortar
and concrete). Fibres alter the behaviour of concrete when a crack
occurs by bridging across the cracks (Fig. 1), and thus can provide
some post-cracking toughness. Fibres crossing the crack guarantee
a certain level of stress transfer between both faces of crack, provid-
ing a residual strength to the composite, whose magnitude depends
on the bre, matrix and brematrix interface [1]. Therefore, the
strength properties of the bre, matrix and brematrix interface
should be well understood in order to predict the behaviour of the
resulting composite, particularly after cracking. The natural bres
are environment friendly as compared to the steel and synthetic
bres. Natural bres, are low cost, and the coconut bres are abun-
dantly available in tropical regions [2,3]. Coir/coconut bres are
derived from the husks of coconut fruit, they are classied as the
brown and white bres according to the peeled off time from the
husks [4]. Usually, the brown bres are used in engineering applica-
tions to reinforce different composites [5,6]. It has the potential to
be used as a concrete reinforcement material [7]. Coconut bres
have the highest toughness compared to that of other natural bres
as reported by Munawar et al. [8] for bre bundles and Satyanaraya-
na et al. [9] for single bre. They reported a strain of 24% and 39%,
Corresponding author. Address: Department of Civil and Environmental Engi-
neering, The University of Auckland, Auckland Mail Centre, Private Bag 9201,
Auckland 1142, New Zealand. Tel.: +64 93737599x84521; fax: +64 9 373 7462.
E-mail address: mali078@aucklanduni.ac.nz (M. Ali).
respectively for coconut bres specimens, while other natural bres
are in the range of 36%. Coconut bre reinforced concrete was
investigated in detail for their possible use in civil engineering con-
structions [6]. The current study is a step to have a deep insight by
investigating the bond strength between coconut bre and con-
crete, because the bond between reinforcing material and matrix
contributes towards the better behaviour of the ensuing composite.
The outcome of this work helps in selecting the optimum bre prop-
erties and pre-treatment for increasing the bre bond with con-
crete, ultimately resulting in increased strength of the composite.
The durability of natural bres remained a topic of interest for
many researchers. A detailed literature research is presented here
about the durability of coconut bres and its composites. Rama-
krishna and Sundararajan [10] investigated the variation in chemical
composition and tensile strength for four natural bres, i.e. coconut,
sisal, jute and hibiscus cannabinus bres, when subjected to alter-
nate wetting and drying, continuous immersion for 60 days in water,
saturated lime and sodium hydroxide. The chemical composition of
all bres changed because of immersion in the considered solutions.
Continuous immersion was found to be critical due to the loss of
their tensile strength. However, coconut bres were reported best
for retaining a good percentage of its original tensile strength in all
tested conditions. Toledo Filho et al. [11] studied the durability of
coconut bres as strength loss occurred over the time of 420 days
for three types of treatments: bres stored in tap water of pH 8.3; -
bres stored in a solution of calcium hydroxide of pH 12; and bres
stored in a solution of sodium hydroxide of pH 11. A signicant
reduction in strength was observed for calcium hydroxide solution.
It has been found that coconut bres retained 58.7% of their original
strength after 210 days. Coconut bres immersed in sodium hydrox-

0261-3069/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.08.038
 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605
Fig. 1. Coconut bres bridging crack.
ide retained 60.9% of their initial strength after 420 days. The higher
alkaline attack by calcium hydroxide is probably associated with
crystallisation of lime in the pores of the bres. The loss of strength
over time is least for the bres immersed in tap water. Toledo Filho
et al. [11] also found the reduction in strength of natural bre (sisal
and coconut) reinforced composites when subjected to ageing con-
ditions (stored in water with temperature of about 18 C, controlled
cycles of wetting and drying and London open air weathering).
Accordingly, Toledo Filho et al. [12] studied several approaches to
improve the durability of natural bre reinforced composites. These
included carbonation of the matrix in a CO2-rich environment; the
immersion of bres in slurried silica fume (SF) prior to incorporation
in the Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) matrix; and partial replace-
ment of OPC by undensied SF or blast furnace slag. The behaviour
was analysed in terms of effects of ageing in water, exposure to cy-
cles of wetting and drying and open air weathering on the exural
behaviour. The immersion of natural bres in a SF slurry before add-
ing them to the cement based composites was found to be an effec-
tive means of reducing embrittlement of the composite in the
considered conditions. The early cured composites in a CO2-rich
environment and the partial replacement of OPC by undensied sil-
ica fume were also efcient approaches in obtaining natural bres
with improved durability. John et al. [3] studied the coconut bre
reinforced blast-furnace slag cement mortar taken from the internal
and external walls of a 12 years old house. The panel of the house
was produced using 1:1.5:0.504 (binder: sand: water, by mass) mor-
tar reinforced with 2% of coconut bres by volume. The cement was
fully carbonated after the considered duration. Fibres removed from
the old samples were reported to be undamaged. No signicant dif-
ference was found in the lignin content of the bres removed from
external and internal walls, conrming the durability of coconut -
bres in cement composites. Li et al. [13] studied untreated and alkal-
ized coconut bres of lengths 40 mm as reinforcement in cement
composites for normal curing and accelerated ageing. Mortar was
mixed in a laboratory mixer at a constant speed of 30 rpm, with a ce-
ment:sand:water:super plasticizer ratio of 1:3:0.43:0.01 by weight,
and the bres were slowly put into the running mixer. For acceler-
ated ageing in the last two days of curing, the specimens were taken
out of the water tank, air dried, and then frozen at 10 C for 24 h,
followed by thawing the specimens at 24 C for 2 h and baking them
in a forced draft oven at 90 C for 22 h. The resulting mortar with
treated bres had lesser exural strength (0.8%) and ductility (4%)
but greater toughness (19%) than the mortar with untreated bres
for normal cured specimens. However, for accelerated ageing spec-
imens, the mortar with treated bres had lesser exural strength
(38%) but greater toughness (44%) and ductility (73%) than the mor-
tar with untreated bres. Sivaraja et al. [14] determined the static
strength properties of coconut bre reinforced concrete (CFRC) at
an interval of 3 months for a period of 2 years under alternate wet-
ting and drying conditions. The specimens were allowed for initial
597
curing of 28 days. The wetting was given by immersing the speci-
mens for three days under water and then allowed to dry in the open
air for four days. This was repeated until the testing time. The bre
dose was 1.5% volume fraction of concrete volume. It was found that
the compressive strength increased from 27.8 to 30.3 MPa, the split-
ting tensile strength increased from 3.28 to 3.58 MPa, and the mod-
ulus of rupture increased from 4.79 to 4.85 MPa at the age of 28 days
to 2 years, respectively. This clearly shows that the alternate wetting
and drying for a period up to 2 years has not affected the mechanical
properties of CFRC, elaborating signs of bre durability to some ex-
tent. The studies of John et al. [3] and Sivaraja et al. [14] showed the
durability of coconut bre reinforced composites with no encoun-
tered problems over a time of 12 and 2 years, respectively. Whereas,
the investigations of Toledo Filho et al. [11] and Li et al. [13] showed
concerns regarding the durability of coconut bre reinforced com-
posites when subjected to ageing conditions. This may have limita-
tions on using coconut bre reinforced composites in marine areas.
Toledo Filho et al. [12] also recommended some solutions for
increasing the durability of coconut bres.
As stated earlier, the bond strength plays an important role in
the overall strength of the composites. Its experimental investiga-
tions are very diverse. Single bre pullout tests, which measure the
load required to pull out a bre embedded in a matrix under uni-
axial tension, were commonly used to investigate the brematrix
bond behaviour. These tests were usually performed at room tem-
perature with the help of an Instron tensile machine having a load
cell. The pullout rate was kept constant; it was chosen in such a
way that the bres would not break during the test. Many
researchers used typical pullout rates between 1 and 5 mm/min
to pullout synthetic and natural bres, (e.g. coconut, sisal, banana
and betelnut bres from the matrix (cement paste, polyethylene or
polyester) [1521]. The higher the pullout rate, the higher the
probability that a bre may break during pullout. It was also found
that for a short bre embedded length, the bond strength was less
than the bre tensile strength and the bres could be pulled out
from the specimens; for a long bre embedded length, as expected,
the bond strength could exceed the bre tensile strength and the
bres were broken during pullout. A brief study on the bond
strength between coconut bres and the cement paste showed a
critical bre embedded length of about 30 mm [20]. The diameter
of a bre was usually measured by a microscope. Each bre was
measured in two perpendicular directions for improving the accu-
racy of the measurements. A minimum of eight measurements
were taken along the length of a bre, and the results were aver-
aged [4,22]. In an investigation on the bond strength between sisal
bres and polypropylene [22], Lc = rfud/(2sa) expresses the critical
bre embedded length Lc as a function of bre diameter d and ulti-
mate tensile strength. rfu and sa are the ultimate tensile strength of
a bre and the interfacial shear strength, respectively. The cross-
section of sisal bres are assumed to be circular with diameters d
ranging from 200 to 300 lm. Mani and Satyanarayana [17] found
that the combined use of sodium alginate and calcium chloride
effectively improved the interfacial bond strength between coco-
nut bres and polyester by 11%. When coconut bres were pre-
treated with 5% NaOH [17], the bond strength between bres
and polyester was improved by 6.6%.
In most practical situations, raw natural bres were not able to
provide the adequate interfacial bond strength. A considerable
amount of work has been done to improve bre surfaces for increasing
the bond strength with the surrounding matrix. These pre-treatments
can be achieved by physical and chemical modications of bre sur-
faces [5,7,1521,23,24]. An easy-to-use and cheap chemical adopted
by some researchers was sodium hydroxide for treating coconut -
bres [5,7,17,23]. Gu [5] treated brown coconut bres by NaOH solu-
tion with concentrations from 2% to 10% and found that the bre
tensile strength decreased with treatment of increasing NaOH con-
598 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605
centration. Coconut bres were soaked in sodium hydroxide solution
(pH = 11) for 28 days and then dried. It was found that the tensile
strength was reduced by 5% [7]. When coconut bres were pre-trea-
ted with 5% NaOH [17], there was a 10% decrease in the ultimate ten-
sile strength of bres. In another study [23], the bres were exposed to
alternate wetting in NaOH solution for 24 h and drying for 24 h. This
was repeated a total period of 60 days. Coconut bres retained 40
60% of their tensile strength. Mani and Satyanarayana [17] found that
the combined use of sodium alginate and calcium chloride effectively
improved the ultimate tensile strength of bres by 18%. Compared to
the sodium hydroxide application, the main advantage is that the -
bres do not loss their tensile strength. In addition, sodium alginate
is a weak acidic food gel and calcium chloride is almost neutral, so
both of them are safe to use and are environment friendly. The main
constituents of the surface of a coconut bre are lignin and cellulose.
Boiled and washed bres are stiffer and tougher compared to raw -
bres because they have high lignin and cellulose contents due to wash
out of extractives [15]. The chemical process could also remove a part
of the extraneous bre surface components which may resist the for-
mation of a bond between the bres and cement paste. Thus, washed
and boiled bres could effectively increase the brematrix bond
strength. Internal bond test was performed by applying a tension load
on coconut bre reinforced cement board. The load at fracture was di-
vided by thickness and width of the board to get the internal bond. It
was shown that, compared to bres without pre-treatment, the inter-
nal bond between washed and boiled bres and the cement paste can
be doubled. The cement content of the matrix inuences the bre
matrix interfacial bond strength signicantly. Asasutjarit et al. [15]
showed that the internal bond of boiled and washed coconut bre
reinforced cement boards was directly proportional to the cement
content. This is because, as the cement content increases, more ce-
ment crystals will form to interlock bres with the surrounding
matrix.
Investigations by other researchers so far focused on either the
effect of pretreatment on the internal bond of coconut bre rein-
forced boards consisting of cement paste and a number of bres
[15] or only the inuence of embedment length on the bond be-
tween a single coconut bre and polyester or cement paste
[17,20]. To the best of our knowledge, research on pullout of coconut
bres from concrete has not been conducted. And it is important to
understand how interfacial bonding behaves under different param-
eters pertaining to bre and matrix characteristics. This information
can help in the selection of optimised bre and matrix properties
for the resulting composite. Therefore, the pullout behaviour of
coconut bre from concrete is investigated in this paper.
2. Experimental work
The objective of this work is to determine the consequence of
the most signicant factors on the bond strength (s) between coco-
nut bre and concrete and the energy (E) required to pull out bre
from the concrete. The variables are:
 the mix design ratio of concrete (M),
 embedment length of bre in concrete (L),
 bre diameter (D) and
 pre-treatment of the bre (P).
Table 1 summarizes the scope of work. The bond strength of the
bre with the concrete is determined by bre pullout tests. Much
care has to be taken for this testing because some bres could
break during demoulding. Sixteen bres for a particular parameter
are cast in specimen. The average of successfully pulled out bres
is taken to represent the bond strength between the coconut bre
and concrete, and the energy required to pull out the bre from the
concrete.
2.1. Fibre preparation
The preparation of bres for the pullout test from bales
(hydraulically compressed bres) is a difcult and time consuming
task. Different approaches are tried to get relatively long and
straight bres quickly without much success. Finally, coconut
bres are loosed and soaked in tap water for 30 min to soften the
bres and to remove coir dust. Fibres are washed and soaked again
for 30 min. Washing and soaking are repeated three times. Fibres
are then straightened manually and combed with a steel comb.
To accelerate drying process, wet long bres are put in an oven
at 30 C for 1012 h where for the most part moisture is removed
and the chance of bre burning is avoided. The bres are then dried
in the open air. These prepared bres are, hereinafter, named as
soaked bres.
2.1.1. Fibre sampling
Because of the restriction of the bre pullout test apparatus,
lengths of selected bres need to be at least 250 mm. Initial selec-
tions of bres are based on the naked eye; special care is taken to
make sure that only those bres that have minimum variation
along the length are selected. The following observations are
important:
 There are few bres which are either very thin (diameter less
than 0.15 mm) or very thick (diameter more than 0.35 mm).
These extremely thin and thick bres cannot be used to repre-
sent the population of bre diameters, thus they are not
selected.
 A single bre has a variable diameter along its length (Fig. 2a).
The bre is generally thicker near one end and thinner near
other end. Care is taken to ensure that the diameter of the part
of the bre which will be embedded into the concrete is approx-
imately the same, and generally the diameter variance along the
length of the bre is minimal.
 About 30% of the bres split into several thinner bres near
their tips (Fig. 2b). These tips are cut.
Each coconut bre has a different property because of the vari-
ation in diameter among the bres and also along the bre length.
The selected sampling represents all coconut bres to be used.
Three samples of different diameters of bres are selected, namely
thin, medium and thick (Table 1). Diameters of selected bres are
measured with the help of an electronic microscope (Fig. 3). A min-
imum of eight measurements are taken along the length of a bre,
and the results are averaged. As expected bre diameter varies
along the length. However, the selected bre should not vary much
from its average value. The average properties of a single bre are
assumed constant along its length.
2.1.2. Fibre pre-treatment
Only soaked and medium bres are chosen for further pre-
treatments as follows:
2.1.2.1. Treatment with boiling water and washing. The soaked bres
are put in boiling water for 2 h. They are then washed with tap
water until the colour of the water is clear. The bres are then
dried in the same manner as the soaked bres. These treated bres
are named as boiled bres.
2.1.2.2. Treatment with chemicals. The soaked bres are dipped in
0.25% Sodium Alginate (NaC6H7O6) solution prepared by distilled
water for 30 min. Fibres are removed from the solution and then
soaked in 1% Calcium Chloride (CaCl2) solution for 90 min. Fibres
are nally dried at 70 C for 60 min. These chemically treated bres
are named as CaAl bres.
 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605 599

Table 1
Scope of work.

Considered factors Cases Number of specimens** Reference case

*
Mix design M (i) 1:2:2
(ii) 1:3:3* 2
(iii) 1:4:4*
Embedment length L (i) 10 mm M = 1:3:3
(ii) 20 mm 2 L = 20 mm
(iii) 30 mm D = Medium
(iv) 40 mm P = Soaked
Fibre diameter D (i) Thin, / 0.150.20 mm
(ii) Medium, / 0.200.30 mm 2
(iii) Thick, / 0.300.35 mm
Fibre pre-treatment P (i) Soaked bres
(ii) CaAl bres 2
(iii) Boiled bres

Note: Highlighted one is the reference specimen. For other variable magnitude, only that value will be altered and other parameters remain the same.
*
Cement: ne aggregates: course aggregates, with a watercement ratio of 0.48.
**
See Fig. 5 for a prepared specimen.

Fig. 2. Long coconut bre. (a) Fibre with variable diameter along its length and (b)
split of bre into smaller bres at one end.

Fig. 4. Single bre casting for pullout test (cross-section of Fig. 5).

Fig. 5. Specimen with bres.

manner. The advantage of this casting procedure is that bres will

remain leveled during the concrete pouring stages. The leveling of -
bres is necessary to ensure that the pullout load will be parallel to
the bre embedded length during tests. Specimens are demoulded
after 48 h. Fig. 5 shows a demoulded specimen.
For each concrete batch, six cylinders (100 mm diameter and
Fig. 3. Fibre diameter measurement, (a) the microscope; (b) a bre under
measuremnt; and (c) bre under microscope. 200 mm height) and three beamlets (100 mm  100 mm 
500 mm) are also cast in order to determine the concrete proper-
2.2. Specimens ties. All specimens are cured for 28 days.

Ordinary Portland cement, ne and course aggregates, and water
are put into a mixer pan, and it is rotated for 5 min. The maximum
size of course aggregates is 12 mm. The water cement ratio is taken
as 0.48. Specimens having 100 mm width, 100 mm depth and
500 mm length with two layers of bres are cast (Fig. 4). Thin plastic
sheets are wrapped on the sides of the moulds in order to avoid the
ow of concrete towards the outside. First, concrete is lled up to
30 mm depth and bres are inserted on both sides of the moulds
for a predened embedment length. Another layer of concrete is
lled up to 70 mm depth and the bres are inserted in a similar
2.3. Testing
All cylinders are tested in a compression testing machine to
determine the modulus of elasticity (E), compressive strength
(r), compressive toughness (Tc), and splitting tensile strength
(STS). Each cylinder is capped with plaster of Paris for uniform
distribution of load before the testing of E and r. NZS 3112: Part
2 [25] is followed for the testing of concrete. Stressstrain relation-
ship for each sample shows the average of readings taken by two
LVDTs (linear variable differential transformers) attached to the
600 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605
Fig. 6. Single bre pull-out test set up.
cylinders. All beamlets are tested in a universal testing machine of
capacity 100 kN using four-point loads to obtain the modulus of
rupture (MOR). With the help of a stand, linear variable differential
transducer (LVDT) is used to measure the midpoint deection in
the MOR testing. The bres are also tested to determine their ten-
sile strength, strain, modulus of elasticity and the toughness. ASTM
standard D3822-07 [26] is taken as a guide for the testing of coco-
nut bres. Single bre pullout tests are performed in a computer-
controlled Instron machine having 1 kN load cell with a pulley
diameter of 50 mm and a crosshead speed of 2.5 mm/min. Since
no standard method is available for single bre pullout test, previ-
ous studies [1521] are taken as a guide. The test set up is shown in
Fig. 6.
3. Results and analysis
3.1. Considered concrete properties
For interpretation of the results obtained from pullout tests, con-
crete properties are determined using the standard procedures. The
average of six readings is taken for plain concrete with 1:3:3 because
this mix is used in many specimens. The average of three readings is
taken for the other matrices. The modulus of elasticity (E) is calcu-
lated as the ratio of stress change to strain change in the elastic range
of the concrete cylinders. The maximum value of stress in
stressstrain curves is taken as the compressive strength (r) and
its corresponding strain (e) is also noted. The total area under the
stressstrain curve is taken as the compressive toughness (Tc) [27].
Table 2
Concrete properties.
Cylinder testing
r (MPa) e (%) E (GPa)
1:2:2 34.71 0.188 33.08
1:3:3 18.8 0.181 18.23
1:4:4 10.9 0.169 10.14
Note: The average of six readings is taken for the plain concrete with 1:3:3 because it is used in many specimens.
The average of three readings is taken for the other matrices.
Other researchers have taken it as the area after the maximum stress
up to 1% strain [28]. The maximum load from the load-time curve of
the splitting tensile strength (STS) test is taken for the calculation of
the STS. Four point load test of beamlet give typical loaddisplace-
ment curve. The maximum load from the loaddisplacement curve
of exure test is taken for the calculation of the modulus of rupture
(MOR) and the corresponding midpoint deection D is also noted.
The cylinders and beamlets broke into two halves at the maximum
load during the STS and MOR testing, respectively.
The effect of mix design ratio on concrete properties is pre-
sented in Table 2. As expected, all properties have a growing trend
with an increase in the cement content. The compressive strength,
toughness, splitting tensile strength and modulus of rupture is in-
creased by 218%, 85%, 153%, and 146%, respectively, when the mix
design ratio is changed from 1:4:4 to 1:2:2. It is well known that
greater the compressive strength, higher will be the bond strength,
but how much is the increase? This is what being investigated in
this paper.
3.2. Fibre properties
Table 3 shows the properties of tested coconut bres; only bre
diameter and pre-treatment is taken into account. The average of
10 readings is taken for the medium and soaked bres because it
is used in many specimens. The average of ve readings is taken
for the other bres. The elastic modulus of bres is calculated as
the ratio of stress change to strain change in the elastic range of
the bres. The stress at break (tensile strength) and its correspond-
ing strain are also noted. The total area under the stressstrain
curve is taken as the bre toughness [8]. It is important to mention
that the mean peak tensile load for the pre-dened thin (/
0.150.20 mm), medium (/ 0.200.30 mm) and thick bres (/
0.300.35 mm) are 1.14, 3.25 and 6.59 N, respectively, and their
standard deviations are 0.34, 1.1 and 1.4 N, respectively. The aver-
age maximum tensile loads of soaked, boiled and CaAl bres are
3.25, 4.01, and 2.72 N, respectively, and their standard deviations
are 1.1, 1.2, and 0.71 N, respectively. The large magnitude of stan-
dard deviation shows that there is a huge variation in the proper-
ties of bres within a particular category. The reason for such
discrepancy could be the variation of cross-section dimension
along the bre length and also among bres. Similar divergent re-
sults were also observed by [29]. The researcher investigated the
mechanical properties of inner and outer bres taken from a coco-
nut shell. It was found that the inner coconut bre had 44% higher
mechanical strength compared to the outer bre, but the outer
coconut bre had 107% higher elongation property which enabled
it to absorb or withstand higher stretching energy. In fact, there
was also a huge variation in the properties of inner and outer -
bres, e.g. average stress at failure for inner bre was 67 MPa with
a standard deviation of 34 MPa, and that for outer bre was
47 MPa with a standard deviation of 18 MPa.
In the current study, it can be observed from the Table 3 that the
tensile strength of bres increases from 47 to 82 MPa with an
increase in diameter. It may be noted that the tensile load of thick
Beamlet testing Density (kg/m3)
Tc (MPa) STS (MPa) MOR (MPa) D (mm)
0.265 3.82 4.31 1.4 2338
0.194 2.43 2.96 1.05 2318
0.143 1.51 1.75 0.90 2296
 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605 601

Table 3
Fibre tensile properties.

Fibre Peak load (N) Stress at break (MPa) Strain at break (%) Modulus of elasticity (GPa) Total toughness (MPa)
Diameter Pre-treatment
Thin Soaked 1.14 0.2 47.3 11.5 19.5 3.1 0.58 0.12 6.2 1.6
Medium Soaked 3.25 0.9 66.3 14.5 27.8 3.6 0.74 0.17 12.8 2.4
Thick Soaked 6.59 1.2 81.9 17.1 34.8 4.5 1.04 0.20 23.7 2.9
Medium Boiled 4.01 1.1 88.6 17.6 31.1 3.7 0.99 0.18 19.8 2.5
Medium CaAl 2.72 0.8 51.2 12.2 21.8 3.3 0.65 0.16 8.0 1.7

Note: The average of 10 readings is taken for the medium and soaked bres because it is used in many specimens.
The average of ve readings is taken for the other bres.

a Experimental b Experimental
80
1

Fibre elastic modulus (GPa)

Empirical (Eq. 1) Empirical (Eq. 2)
Fibre tensile stress (MPa)

Error < 3% Error < 5%

70 0.9

0.8
60
0.7
50
0.6

40 0.5
Thin Medium Thick Thin Medium Thick
Fibre diamter Fibre diamter

c Experimental d 24 Experimental
Fibre elastic modulus (GPa)

1 Empirical (Eq. 3)
20 Empirical (Eq. 4)
Fibre toughness (MPa)

Error < 7.5% Error < 3%

0.9
16
0.8
12

0.7 8

0.6 4

0.5 0
Thin Medium Thick Thin Medium Thick
Fibre diamter Fibre diamter

Fig. 7. Comparison of experimental and empirical results; a. Fibre tensile stress, b and c. Fibre elastic modulus and d. Fibre toughness.

bre is 478% higher than that of the thin bres, but the stress of the
former is only 73% more compared to that of the latter. The reason
is that the tensile load is not proportional to the bre diameter. The
strain at break and toughness also increase with an increase in -
bre diameter. There is a considerable decrease of about 23% in ten-
sile strength, 22% in strain and 38% in toughness with chemical
treatment when compared to the soaked treatment. However,
Mani and Satyanarayana [17] found a different result with the
same chemical treatment, i.e. an increase in the tensile strength
was observed. This might be because of the bres of different ori-
gins. However, boiled and washed bres have higher tensile load,
strength, strain and toughness (23%, 34%, 12%, and 57%, respec-
tively) compared to the soaked bres.
The following simple equations have been developed using the
experimental results for the estimation of the tensile strength
(rbre) in MPa, elastic modulus (Ebre) in GPa, and the total tough-
ness (Tbre) in MPa of the soaked bres:
rfibre 225Df 0:9
Efibre 2:82Df 0:93
1:02
Efibre 0:011rfibre
T fibre 263Df 2:16
where Df = bre diameter in mm. These equations are valid for the soaked
bres only. This is so because pre-treatment of bres has modied
properties differently; the boiling and washing treatment have increased
the tensile strength but decreased the elastic modulus. The comparison of
experimental and empirical results is presented in Fig. 7. The empirical
results are in good agreement with the experimental results.
3.3. Fibre pullout behaviour
Fig. 8 shows the typical loadslippage curves for some selected
bres. In the displayed case, two bres are broken during pullout
(which shows that the pull-out load was more than the tensile
load) and two are successfully pulled out (which shows that the
tensile load was more than the pullout load). The maximum load
required to pull out bre from the specimen is called the pullout
load. The maximum axial load required to break bres in tension
is called the tensile load. The reason for bre breaking during the
1 pullout test might be the variation in the cross-section dimensions
of the bre. The single breconcrete interfacial bond strength is
2 calculated by dividing the maximum pullout load by the surface
3 area of the embedded portion of a bre. Pullout energy is calcu-
lated as the area under the loadslippage curve. An average is ta-
4
ken for successfully pulled out bres.
602 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605

20 mm embedment length 0.2

Experimental
2.5 Medium fibres
Soaked fibres Empirical (Eq. 5)
Pulled out fibres

Bond strength (MPa)

1:3:3 Mix deign 0.15
2.0

0.1

1.5
Load (N)

0.05

1.0
0
Broken 10 20 30 40
fibres
Fibre length (mm)
0.5
Fig. 10. Comparison of empirical and experimental results of bond strength.

0.0
0 5 10
Slippage (mm)
Fig. 8. Typical loadslippage curves for selected bre.
The effect of considered parameters on the bond strength
between bre and concrete is presented in Fig. 9. It may be noted
that the scattered data is obtained for a particular permutation,
and the number of successfully pulled out bres is different for
different combinations. For example, the number of successfully
pulled out bres decreases with an increase in embedment length
(L). The reason is that the pullout load becomes higher than the
tensile load for most cases as the L increases, and also because
15 20 the miniature variations in the cross-section dimension of the
bres along the bre length means more bres are broken for high-
er L and fewer bres are broken for smaller L. Also, the data of bond
strength is strewn for a fussy embedment length. The reasons are
that (1) the average cross-section dimension of bres varies
slightly from bre to bre within a predened category, e.g. med-
ium bres have diameters of 0.20.3 mm; and (2) the slight varia-
tions in cross-section along the considered bre length. The pullout
load is not linearly proportional to the bre diameter, resulting in
speckled data of bond strength. Considering the effect of embedded
length on bond strength, the bond strength becomes higher as the
bre embedment length increases from 10 to 30 mm, and then

Diameter: 0.2 0.3 mm Embedment: 20 mm

Pre-treatment: Soaked Pre-treatment: Soaked
Mix ratio: 1:3:3 Mix ratio: 1:3:3
0.4 0.4
Bond strength (MPa)

Bond strength (MPa)

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1 Fibres

broken

0 0
10 20 30 40 0.15~0.2 0.2~0.3 0.3~0.35
Embedment length (mm) Fibre diameter (mm)

Embedment: 20 mm Embedment: 20 mm
Diameter: 0.2 0.3 mm Diameter: 0.2 0.3 mm
Mix ratio: 1:3:3 Pre-treatment: Soaked
0.4 0.4
Bond strength (MPa)

Bond strength (MPa)

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1 Fibres

broken

0 0
Soaked Boiled CaAl 1:4:4 1:3:3 1:2:2
Fibre pre-treatment Mix design ratio

Fig. 9. Dependency of bond strength between bre and concrete.

 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605 603

Table 4 tensile load and strain, although the pullout rate is reduced
Percentage difference between experimental and numerical values of bond strength piece-wise from 2.5 to 0.5 mm/min. The pre-treatment of bres
between single coconut bre and concrete.
has also altered the bond strength considerably. Boiled bres have
Matrix and Fibre Bond strength enhanced the bond strength by 184%, and CaAl bres have de-
reinforcement embedment creased the bond strength by 25% compared to the soaked bres
Experimental Eq. (5) Difference
parameters length (mm)
(A and B) (reference case) as can be seen in the bottom left graph of Fig. 9.
A (MPa) B C (%) Asasutjarit et al. [15] also found that the boiled and washed bres
(MPa)
increased the brematrix bond strength because of their in-
Medium and soaked 10 0.096 0.0954 0.63 creased lignin and cellulose content due to the boiling pre-treat-
bres in mix 20 0.128 0.1272 0.62
ment. Their investigation was done on coconut bre reinforced
design 1:3:3 30 0.184 0.1838 0.11
40 0.166 0.1656 0.24 boards with cement paste as the matrix. However, our study is
Medium and soaked 20 0.055 0.0547 0.55 based on concrete as the matrix. Both studies have same outcome,
bres in mix as cement is used as a binding agent. The bond strength of bre
design 1:4:4
with concrete is proportional to mix design ratio, i.e. the content
Thick and soaked 20 0.372 0.3625 2.55
bres in mix
of cement (bottom right graph in Fig 9). It is shown in Table 2 that
design 1:3:3 the strength of concrete is proportional to the mix design ratio.
Medium and boiled 20 0.363 0.3625 0.13 This indicates that as the concrete strength increases, the bond
bres in mix strength also increases. The study of Asasutjarit et al. [15] also con-
design 1:3:3
cluded that the internal bond increased with an increase in the ce-
ment content. It is important to mention that the primary purpose
of cement, in Asasutjarit et al. work, is to hold bres only and to
give strength to the resulting composite (coconut bre boards
there is a 10% drop as the length increases from 30 to 40 mm CFB). However, in our study, the function of cement in the bre
(upper left graph in Fig. 9). This indicates that the critical bre concrete is to hold bres, sand and aggregates and to give strength
embedded length is 30 mm and the concrete mix design ratio is to the resulting composite (coconut bre reinforced concrete
1:3:3. The work of Aggarwal [20] also ended with a critical bre CFRC). Therefore, a proportionate increase of bond in CFB and CFRC
length of 30 mm for cement paste as the matrix. And our result also would be different. The bres embedded in the concrete with high
concludes with the same output for concrete. On the other hand, as cement content (1:2:2) are all broken, because the bond strength is
the bre diameter increases from the medium to thick category, too high compared to the bre tensile strength. This means that the
the bond strength is more than double (upper right graph in selected concrete strength should not be too high in the design of
Fig. 9). This trend is expected because an increase of the interface CFRC if concrete members with higher toughness are intended. The
between larger diameter bre and surrounding concrete provides addition of bres to concrete can increase toughness drastically,
more friction, thus a larger debonding force is needed to overcome which can prevent brittle failures of protective concrete structures,
the bond strength. All thin bres are broken because of their low e.g. in the case of blast loading.

120
Mediumfibres 120
20 mm Embedment
Soaked fibres
Soaked fibres
90 1:3:3 mix design
90 1:3:3 mix design
E (Nmm)
E (Nmm)

60 60

30
Fibres
30 broken

0 0
10 20 30 40 0.15~0.2 0.2~0.3 0.3~0.35
Embedment length (mm) Fibre diameter (mm)

120 120
20 mm Embedment 20 mm Embedment
Medium fibres Medium fibres
90 1:3:3 mix design Soaked fibres
90
E (Nmm)

E (Nmm)

60 60

Fibres
30 30 broken

0 0
Soaked Boiled CaAl 1:4:4 1:3:3 1:2:2
Fibre pre-treatment Mix design ratio

Fig. 11. Effect of considered factors on energy E for bre pull-out.

604 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605

The following empirical equation has been developed, using
experimental data, to numerically determine the bond strength
s in MPa between the coconut bre and concrete:
s abaL3 bL2 cL  1
case of soaked bres, boiled bres have enhanced the pullout en-
ergy by 165% and CaAl bres have decreased it by 34%.
The following empirical equation has been developed, using
experimental data, to numerically determine the energy E in
5 N mm required to pull out bres from concrete:

where L is the embedment length (in cm) of coconut bre in con-
crete; a, b and c are its constants having values of 0.0166, 0.112
and 0.188, respectively; a and b are the reinforcement and matrix
factors, respectively. The reinforcement factor a is 1 for medium
and soaked bres, 2.85 for thick and soaked bres or medium
and boiled bres, and 7 for thick and boiled bres. The matrix bre
b is 0.43 for 1:4:4 and 1 for 1:3:3 mix design ratios. The comparison
of empirical and experimental results of bond strength for different
bre embedded lengths is shown in Fig. 10. The numerical values of
bond strength between a single coconut bre and the concrete are
in good agreement with that of experimental values (Table 4). The
error is less than 3%.
The effect of considered factors on the energy required to pull
out bres from concrete is presented in Fig. 11. Again, the scattered
data is observed as in the case of bond strength and the same rea-
sons apply here as well. Based on average values, it is concluded
that as the bre embedded length increases from 10 to 40 mm,
the pullout energy increases from 8.7 to 120.1 N mm. The pullout
energy is increased by 171% when the bre diameter increases
from the medium to thick category. Compared to the reference
125
Experimental
Empirical (Eq. 6)
100
Energy (N.mm)
E ckpL3 qL2 rL s 6
where L is the embedment length (in cm) of coconut bre in con-
crete; p, q, r and s are its constants having values of 10.4, 81,
150 and 88, respectively; c and k are the reinforcement and matrix
factors, respectively. The reinforcement factor c is 1 for medium
and soaked bres, 2.65 for thick and soaked bres or medium
and boiled bres, and 7 for thick and boiled bres. The matrix bre
k is 0.35 for 1:4:4 and 1 for 1:3:3 mix design ratios. The comparison
of empirical and experimental results of energy required to pull out
bre from concrete for different bre embedded lengths is shown in
Fig. 12. The numerical values of energy required to pull out bre
from concrete are in good agreement with that of experimental val-
ues (Table 5). The error is less than 3%.
4. Conclusions
The effect of embedment length, diameter, pre-treatment con-
dition and mix design ratio on bond strength between coconut -
bre and concrete is investigated experimentally. The energy
required to pull out bre from concrete is also taken into account.
Based on the conducted investigation, empirical equations are
developed to determine the bond strength and energy required
for bre pullout. The properties of concrete (compressive strength,
modulus of elasticity, compressive toughness, splitting tensile
strength and modulus of rupture) and bres (tensile load, stress

and strain at break, modulus of elasticity and toughness) are also

75
determined using the standard procedures. The simplied equa-
tions are also developed for estimating the bre tensile strength,
50 elastic modulus and toughness. All concrete properties improve,
as expected, by increasing the cement content. Single bre pullout
25 tests are performed to determine the bond strength and the energy
required for bre pullout. The experiment on bre tensile and -
0 breconcrete bond strength reveals that
10 20 30 40
Fibre length (mm)  Thick (0.300.35 mm diameter) and boiled bres have higher
tensile strength compared to the thin (0.150.20 mm diameter),
Fig. 12. Comparison of empirical and experimental results of energy required for medium (0.200.30 mm diameter), soaked and chemically trea-
bre pullout.
ted bres.
 The bond strength increases with embedment length and has
the highest value at 30 mm embedment.
Table 5  The pullout energy increases with an increase in embedment
Percentage difference between experimental and numerical values of energy required length.
to pull out bre from concrete.
 All thin bres in concrete with a 1:3:3 mix design ratio and
Matrix and Fibre Energy medium bres in concrete with a 1:2:2 mix design ratio are bro-
reinforcement embedment ken because the pullout load is higher than the bre tensile
Experimental Eq. (6) Difference
parameters length (mm)
(A and B) load.
A (N mm) B C (%)  The thick bres have bond strength and tensile strength of 0.37
(N mm)
and 82 MPa, respectively.
Medium and soaked 10 8.7 8.6 1.15  The bre tensile strength, bre toughness and breconcrete
bres in mix 20 29.1 28.8 1.03
bond strength can be increased by 34%, 55% and 184%, respec-
design 1:3:3 30 87.3 86.2 1.26
40 120.1 118.4 1.42
tively, when bres are boiled and washed.
Medium and soaked 20 10.1 10.08 0.20  Chemical pre-treatment has caused a decrease of bond strength
bres in mix and tensile strength by 25% and 23%, respectively.
design 1:4:4
Thick and soaked 20 78.9 77.12 2.26
bres in mix
design 1:3:3 Acknowledgments
Medium and boiled 20 77.2 77.12 0.11
bres in mix
The authors would like to thank all persons who helped them
design 1:3:3
throughout the research, particularly Dr Xioawen Yuan and Golden
 M. Ali et al. / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 596605
Bay Cement and Winstone Aggregates for support of this research.
The careful review and constructive suggestions by the anonymous
reviewers are gratefully acknowledged. The rst and last authors
also wish to thank Pakistan Higher Education Commission for sup-
porting the PhD study of the rst author at the University of
Auckland.
References
[1] Vitor MCFC, Joaquim AOBarros, Jose MS. Pullout behaviour of steel bers in
self-compacting concrete. ASCE J Mater Civil Eng 2010:19.
[2] Paramasivam P, Nathan GK, Das Gupta NC. Coconut bre reinforced corrugated
slabs. Int J Cem Compos Lightweight Conc 1984;6(1):1927.
[3] John VM, Cincotto C, Agopyan V, Oliveira CTA. Durability of slag mortar
reinforced with coconut bre. Cem Conc Compos 2005;27(5):56574.
[4] Wei W, Gu H. Characterisation and utilization of natural coconut bres
composites. Mater Des 2009;30:27414.
[5] Gu H. Tensile behaviours of the coir bre and related composites after NaOH
treatment. Mater Des 2009;30:39314.
[6] Ali M, Liu A, Sou H, Chouw N. Mechanical and dynamic properties of coconut
bre reinforced concrete. Construct Build Mater 2012;30:81425.
[7] Ramaswamy HS, Ahuja BM, Krishnamoorthy S. Behaviour of concrete
reinforced with jute, coir and bamboo bres. Int J Cem Compos Lightweight
Conc 1983;5(1):313.
[8] Munawar SS, Umemura K, Kawai S. Characterization of the morphological,
physical, and mechanical properties of seven non-wood plant bre bundles. J
Wood Sci 2007;53(2):10813.
[9] Satyanarayana KG, Sukumaran K, Mukherjee PS, Pavithran C, Pillai SGK.
Natural brepolymer composites. Cem Conc Compos 1990;12(2):11736.
[10] Ramakrishna G, Sundararajan T. Studies on the durability of natural bres and
the effect of corroded bres on the strength of mortar. Cem Conc Compos
2005;27(5):57582.
[11] Toledo Filho RD, Scrivener K, England GL, Ghavami K. Durability of alkali-
sensitive sisal and coconut bres in cement. Cem Conc Compos
2000;22:12743.
[12] Toledo Filho RD, Ghavami K, Scrivener K. Development of vegetable bre
mortar composites of improved durability. Cem Conc Res 2003;25:18596.
[13] Li Z, Wang L, Wang X. Flexural characteristics of coir ber reinforced
cementitious composites. Fibers Polym 2006;7(3):28694.
605
[14] Sivaraja M, Kandasamy, Velmani N, Pillai MS. Study on durability of natural
bre concrete composites using mechanical strength and microstructural
properties. Bullet Mater Sci 2010;33(6):71929.
[15] Asasutjarit C, Hirunlabh J, Khedari J, Charoenvai S, Zeghmati B, Shin UC.
Development of coconut coir-based lightweight cement board. Construct Build
Mater 2007;21(2):27788.
[16] Jianxin L. Analysis of the pull-out of single bres from low-density
polyethylene. Canada, M5S 1A4: Dept. of Chemical Engg and Applied
Chemistry, University of Toronto; 1994.
[17] Mani P, Satyanarayana KG. Effects of the surface treatments of lingo-cellulosic
bres on their debonding stress. J Adhes Sci Technol 1990;4(1):1724.
[18] Yan L, Mai YW, Te L. Effects of bres surface treatment on fracture-mechanical
properties of sisal bre composites. Compos Interfaces 2005;12(12):14163.
[19] Brahmakumar M, Pavithran C, Pillai RM. Coconut bre reinforced polyethylene
composites: effect of natural waxy surface layer of the bre on brematrix
interfacial bonding and strength of composites. Compos Sci Technol
2005;65:5639.
[20] Aggarwal LK. Studies on cement-bonded coir bre boards. Cem Conc Compos
1992;14(1):639.
[21] Nirmal U, Singh N, Hashim J, Lau STW, Jamil N. On the effect of different
polymer matrix and bre treatment on single bre pullout test using betelnut
bres. Mater Des 2011;32:271726.
[22] Yuan X, Jayaraman K, Bhattacharyya D. Plasma treatment of sisal bres and its
effects on tensile strength and interfacial bonding. In: 3rd Int. symposium on
polymer surface modication, New Jersey; May 2122, 2002.
[23] Ramakrishna G, Sundararajan T. Impact strength of a few natural bre
reinforced cement mortar slabs: a comparative study. Cem Conc Compos
2005;27(5):54753.
[24] Ray D, Sarkar BK, Rana AK, Bose NR. Effect of alkali treated jute bres on
composite properties. Bull Mater Sci 2001;24(2):12935.
[25] NZS 3112: Part 2. Tests relating to the determination of strength of concrete;
1986.
[26] ASTM D3822. Standard test method for tensile properties of single textile
bers; 2007.
[27] Mindess S, Zhang L. Impact resistance of bre-reinforced concrete. In:
Proceedings of the institution of civil engineers structures and buildings,
2009 SB1:6976 (Paper no. 700063).
[28] Chan R, Bindigana vile V. Toughness of bre reinforced hydraulic lime mortar.
Part 1, quasi-static response. Mater Struct 2010;43:143544.
[29] Abiola AWBOA. Mechanical property evaluation of coconut bre. Master
thesis, ISRN:BTH-AMT-EX-2008/D05-SE, Kariskrone (Sweden): Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology; 2008.