International Journal of Fracture 102: 2542, 2000. 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Size effects in concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

MOHSEN A. ISSA, MAHMOUD A. ISSA, MOHAMMAD S. ISLAM and ALEXANDER CHUDNOVSKY
Department of Civil and Materials Engineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607, U.S.A. Received 16 July 1998; accepted in revised form 25 June 1999 Abstract. This paper presents an analysis of the extensive experimental program aimed at assessing the inuence of maximum aggregate size and specimen size on the fracture properties of concrete. Concrete specimens used were prepared with varying aggregate sizes of 4.75, 9.5, 19, 38, and 76 mm. Approximately 250 specimens varying in dimension and maximum aggregate size were tested to accomplish the objectives of the study. Every specimen was subjected to the quasi-static cyclic loading at a rate of 0.125 mm/min (0.005 in./min) leading to a controlled crack growth. The test results were presented in the form of load-crack mouth opening displacement curves, compliance data, surface measured crack length and crack trajectories as well as calculated crack length, critical energy release rate, and fracture toughness (G1 ). There is a well pronounced general trend observed: G1 increases with crack length (R-curve behavior). For geometrically similar specimens, where the shape and all dimensionless parameters are the same, the R-curve for the larger specimens is noticeably higher than that for the smaller ones. For a xed specimen size, G1 increases with an increase in the aggregate size (fracture surface roughness). For the same maximum aggregate size specimens, the apparent toughness increases with specimen size. It was clear that the rate of increase in G1 , with respect to an increase of the dimensionless crack length (the crack length normalized by the specimen width), increases with both specimen size and maximum aggregate size increase. The crack trajectory deviates from the rectilinear path more in the specimens with larger aggregate sizes. Fracture surfaces in concrete with larger aggregate size exhibit higher roughness than that for smaller aggregate sizes. For completely similar specimens, the crack tortuosity is greater for the larger size specimens. The crack path is random, i.e., there are no two identical specimens that exhibit the same fracture path, however, there are distinct and well reproducible statistical features of crack trajectories in similar specimens. Bridging and other forms of crack face interactions that are the most probable causes of high toughness, were more pronounced in the specimens with larger maximum size aggregates.

Key words: Maximum aggregate size, specimen size, crack length, split tensile test, R-curve, stress intensity factor, strain energy release rate, CMOD, crack trajectory, fracture toughness, roughness.

1. Introduction In part I of this paper Issa et al. (2000, this issue) reported the experimental setup and observations for determining the effects of aggregate and specimen size on the fracture behavior of concrete, in the presence of compressive forces parallel to the fracture path. The existence of a trend in dimensionless critical load-CMOD envelopes despite the apparent geometrical and physical similarity of the test conditions was found to be a direct indication of a scale effect. The presence of hidden parameters not accounted for in the simple dimensional analysis was also suggested. Application of Fracture Mechanics formalism and further analysis of the experimental data are reported in this paper. Generally, structural designs are based on ultimate loading conditions. Slow crack growth starts long before the concrete reaches its ultimate state. To account for this phenomena in

26

M. A. Issa et al.

design, parameters such as K1c , G1c or GF provide an insight into how the materia behaves under normal service loads. The nations infrastructure system is constantly deteriorating due to cracking, corrosion, etc. Research on these problems is essential in order to determine the cause behind the damage of the structural materials. New materials such as ceramics and high performance cementitious materials are being developed to meet the demands of modern technology. These materials are remarkably strong and prohibitively brittle. As a result, it is necessary to develop dependable reliability models that provide the criteria for small scale testing of brittle materials. This research incorporates a special experimental design that is utilized in an effort to study the reliability of brittle materials as well as a development of a methodology for reliability assessment. The consistent scale effect analysis of concrete fracture in the presence of compressive forces parallel to the fracture plane is presented below. It is based on the three forms of comparison of test results. The rst corresponds to specimens of various sizes cast with the same maximum aggregate size. The second form of comparison deals with geometrically identical specimens cast with various maximum aggregate sizes. The third and nal form of comparison entails equally scaled both specimen dimension and maximum aggregate size, i.e., having identical t/dmax ratio. Figures 1, 2 and 3 display typical halves of fractured specimens employed in the three forms of comparison described above.

Figure 1. Specimens prepared by equally scaling geometry.

Figure 2. Specimens prepared by equally scaling max. aggregate size.

Concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

27

Figure 3. Specimens prepared by equally scaling both geometry and maximum aggregate size.

2. CMOD crack length dependence When the rising load-CMOD curve of a particular loading cycle crosses the unloading branch of the load-CMOD curve of the preceding cycle, a signicant increase in intensity of acoustic events was recorded. Consequently, within a very short period of time, load reduction was observed, indicating a crack reinitiation. At this stage, the active loading cycle was stopped, switched to an unloading and the crack length was measured. When the specimen was unloaded to nearly zero load, residual CMOD was observed and recorded. This type of residual CMOD appears to be typical in concrete and may be attributed to the fracture surface roughness, which creates an obstacle to crack closure. The size of the residual crack opening depends on several factors, such as aggregate size, specimen geometry and type of the test. An increase in the residual CMOD, r with increasing crack length is apparent in the Figures 7 to 9 of (Issa et al., 2000). The total CMOD, total at the onset of crack extension and residual CMOD dependence on the crack length is reconstructed from the data reported in Figures 7 to 9 (Issa et al., 2000) and presented in the Figures 4 to 6. For same size specimens, an increase in aggregate size resulted in an increase in CMOD as shown in Figure 7. 3. Estimation of crack length At the end of each cycle, when the loading was switched to unloading, the crack was arrested. At this point the crack length was measured (dened as measured surface crack length). From

28

M. A. Issa et al.

Figure 4. Total and residual CMOD dependence on crack length for typical S1A3 specimen.

Figure 5. Total and residual CMOD dependence on crack length for typical S3A32 specimen.

Concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

29

Figure 6. Total and residual CMOD dependence on crack length for typical S4A34 specimen.

the linear portion of the unloading compliance of a particular load cycle, the crack length was evaluated (dened as an estimated crack length). The crack length estimation is performed in a conventional way on the basis of variation of apparent compliance with crack length via linear elastic solution. Elastic CMOD, e due to a pair of forces P applied via rollers (Issa et al., 1999) is proportional to the force P
e

= C(a, H d) . P ,

total

k(a, d) .

total ,

(1)

where, k(a, d) is determined from data on Figures 4 to 6. Here the effective compliance, C depends on elastic modulus, crack length, a and specimen shape and dimension. It is evaluated following the numerical solution reported in Tada (1973). The results of the computation in dimensionless form are shown in Figure 8. The process of estimation is depicted by arrows on the Figure 8 that translates the measured slope of load displacement curve into corresponding crack length. The average of the two trajectories obtained from both faces of the specimen was considered as the nal crack trajectory of the plane strain problem. This trajectory was then used in the computation of various fracture parameters. The data pertaining to the cracktip location and maximum load at each cycle were also used as the input data for the nite element analysis. Surface measured crack lengths versus estimated crack lengths for different specimen sizes made with 9.5 mm maximum size aggregates are plotted in Figure 9 for illustration. Although scatter is signicant, a general trend is noticed. For all the specimens, the magnitude of calculated crack length for the initial few cycles are slightly higher than the measured length.

30

M. A. Issa et al.

Figure 7. Typical CMOD versus crack length curves for S3 specimens.

Figure 8. Estimation of crack length.

Concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

31

Figure 9. Surface measured vs estimated crack lengths for different specimen sizes made with 9.5 mm maximum size aggregates.

During the last few cycles, the measured crack lengths were higher than the calculated ones. Although the cracks on both sides of some specimens were found to be somewhat different, in most of the specimens, the magnitudes of the crack lengths were approximately the same. 4. Observation of crack trajectories There are two obvious mechanisms of crack path formation in concrete. First, the crack deects around the aggregates, and second, the crack penetrates through the aggregates. The possibility of either or both patterns occurrence depends on the strength of the cement paste, strength of aggregate and aggregate location with respect to the crack front. Since the cement paste was designed deliberately to be weaker than the aggregates, the crack pattern has a meandering path and tends to travel around the aggregates instead of penetrating through them (Issa and Hammad, 1993; Hammad and Issa, 1994a, b). This type of process tends to raise the energy consumption and affects the apparent toughness. The observed crack path is random, i.e., no two macroscopically identical specimens exhibit the same fracture path. Concrete fracture surfaces with the larger aggregate sizes appear to have a higher roughness than those with smaller aggregate sizes. The crack path is less tortuous for geometrically identical specimens with smaller size aggregates. Similarly, the crack path deviates from the centerline of the specimen to a lesser degree for the smaller size aggregates than that for the larger ones as illustrated in Figure 10. For geometrically identical specimens made with larger maximum aggregate sizes, the degree of tortuosity is signicantly higher. As a result, bridging is clearly noticed in specimens with large aggregate sizes (see

32

M. A. Issa et al.

Figure 10. Crack trajectories for geometrically identical S1 specimens.

Figure 11). For different size specimens made with the same maximum aggregate size, crack tortuosity followed the same trend, i.e., crack tortuosity increases with specimen size. In the third form of comparison of similar specimens with respect to maximum aggregate as well as specimen size, crack tortuosity is greater for the larger size specimens within the group.

5. Evaluation of the critical values of the energy release rate, G1c Two-dimensional nite element modeling of the above described test conguration was performed using the FRANC2D (Cornell Fracture Group, 1995). A standard, direct stiffness FEM approach, with quadratic order isoparametric elements was used. Eight-noded quadrilateral and six-noded triangular isoparametric elements were used. An appropriate singularity in these elements is achieved by placing the mid-side node near the crack-tip at the quarter point. Linear elastic material is assumed in the computation. An incremental solution is performed with the geometry of the specimen and crack trajectory, modied at each step to reect the evolving conguration of the crack. Fracture mechanics parameters, especially the stress intensity factors (KI and KII ), and the energy release rate (G1 ) are computed at each step of the analysis. The specimen conguration employed in the computation replicates that used in the experimental program. The experimental maximum load and crack-tip location at the end of each loading cycle resulting from the quasi-static splitting tensile test (wedge splitting test) were used as the input data to run the step by step analysis for each crack.

Concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

33

Figure 11. Bridging in large aggregate size specimen.

When a crack deviates from the specimen centerline, a mixed mode loading condition exists, where both KI and KII are nonzero. Material nonlinearity at the crack-tip may limit the applicability of linear elastic solution and the concept of SIFs. However, the energy release rate, G1 of LFM may still be applicable, since it is much less sensitive to nonlinear effects than SIF (Slepjan, 1990). Thus, the critical value of ERR G1c associated with the crack-tip extension is a natural candidate for the fracture parameter in the characterization of brittle fracture. Figure 12 shows the plot of the critical energy release rate G1c as a function of the crack tip coordinate for a typical specimen. Comparison of the results for G1c as a function of crack length for various specimen and aggregate size are presented in the next section. The minimal values of K1c and G1c observed at crack initiation are summarized in Table 1. As can be seen in Table 1 for the same specimen size, the value of critical stress intensity factor K1c , increases as the maximum aggregate size increases. The critical stress intensity factor, K1c also increases as the specimen size increases. However, the concept of critical SIF values K1c as a measure of toughness have obvious limitations due to (a) mixed mode fracture resulting from tortuous crack path and (b) possible material nonlinearity in the vicinity of the crack tip. Therefore, the authors concentrate on the analysis of G1c behavior since,

34

M. A. Issa et al.

Figure 12. Critical values of the energy release rate G1c vs crack projection length for a typical specimen and FEM mesh.

(a) it naturally accounts for mixed mode fracture and (b) is insensitive to nonlinearity (Slepjan, 1990). G1c values of crack initiation display the same trend as K1c . 6. Critical energy release rate (G1c ) analysis Critical energy release rate G1c values at the crack initiation from the notch tip for different size specimens with different aggregate sizes are presented in Table 1. From Table 1, it is observed that for the same specimen size, G1c increases as the maximum aggregate size increases. The energy release rate for geometrically identical specimens increases as the maximum aggregate size increases as shown in Figure 13. Fracture behavior has an apparent correlation with the different texture, angularity and size of the coarse aggregate in the concrete. The increase in fracture toughness with increasing maximum aggregate size is associated with the increasing resistance encountered by the propagating crack. Similarly, for different size specimens made with the same maximum aggregate size, G1c increases as the specimen size increases as shown in Figure 14. The propagating crack encounters resistance due to the presence of more coarse aggregate particles. For geometrically similar specimens (i.e., the shape and all dimensionless parameters are the same), the R-curve for larger specimens is noticeably higher than that for the smaller ones. G1c values for S1A38 specimens are higher than those for S3A316 specimens in group I of the similarity chart. For group II, G1c values for S1A34 specimens are the highest for the observed

Concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

35

Figure 13. Comparison of G1c for geometrically identical S3 specimens.

Figure 14. Comparison of G1c for 3/2 maximum aggregate size specimens.

36

M. A. Issa et al.

Table 1. Average values of K1c and G1c at crack initiation. Specimen size Maximum aggregate size mm 9.5 19.0 38.0 76.0 9.5 19.0 38.0 76.0 4.75 9.5 19.0 38.0 76.0 4.75 9.5 19.0 38.0 4.75 9.5 19.0 4.75 9.5 in.
3 8 3 4

Average K1c

Average G1c

MNm3/2 1.628 1.456 1.781 1.734 1.481 1.568 1.595 1.263 1.519 1.546 1.583 1.619 1.124 1.443 1.465 1.314 1.103 1.239 1.356 1.247 1.295

psi in.1/2 1481.4 1324.6 1620.3 1577.9 1347.6 1426.7 1451.4 1148.9 1382.6 1407.1 1440.1 1473.2 1023.1 1312.7 1333.1 1195.6 1004.1 1127.3 1233.8 1134.8 1178

J/m2 76.007 63.573 99.475 95.972 63.047 73.730 80.035 47.285 66.200 71.629 78.634 83.888 38.004 59.545 64.799 54.466 36.252 43.958 55.342 46.585 48.862

lb-in./in.2 0.434 0.363 0.568 0.548 0.360 0.421 0.457 0.270 0.378 0.409 0.449 0.479 0.217 0.340 0.370 0.311 0.207 0.251 0.316 0.266 0.279

S1 (1680 1680 200 mm)

11 2 3
3 8 3 4

S2 (1050 1050 125 mm)

11 2 3
3 16 3 8 3 4 11 2

S3 (840 840 100 mm)

3
3 16 3 8 3 4 11 2 3 16 3 8 3 4 3 16 3 8

S4 (420 420 50 mm)

S5 (210 210 25 mm) S6 (105 105 12.5 mm)

crack length to width ratios of 0.4 and greater. Values corresponding to S4A316 are the lowest for any ratio. For group III, the order of specimens in terms of G1c values from the highest to the lowest is S1A32, S3A34, S4A38, and S5A316 (Figure 15). For group IV, the order of specimens in terms of G1c values from the highest to the lowest is S1A3, S3A32, S4A34, S5A38, and S6A316 (Figure 16). For group V, the order of specimens in terms of G1c values from the highest to the lowest is S3A3, S4A32, S5A34, S6A38. The standard deviations at a crack length to width ratio of 0.5 for each specimen type are also shown in Figures 15 and 16. It is clearly noticed in Figures 15 to 16, that within the groups the rate of increase in G1c as an increase in a/w, increases as both the specimen size and the maximum aggregate size increase for the same t/dmax ratio. The fracture toughness (G1c ) exhibited scatter.

Concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

37

Figure 15. Comparison of G1c for group III.

7. Size effect in G1c The set of data presented in Figures 1316 indicate a strong size effect in values of apparent toughness G1c . Indeed, G1c increases with the crack length a/w, with the specimen size w, and with the maximum aggregate size dmax . To quantify the size dependence of G1c we consider G1c values of various specimen sizes for xed relative crack length a/w from Figures 1316. The computed values of G1c for specimen S3 with varying maximum aggregate size dmax = 76, 38, 19, 9.5 and 4.75 mm at xed values of a/w = 0.2; 0.3; 0.4; 0.5 and 0.6 are shown in log-log scales in Figure 17. The specimens made of dmax = 4.75 mm display a signicantly lower value of G1c . This may be attributed to the fact that the maximum coarse aggregate size used in these specimens is similar to the maximum grain size of sand, i.e., the specimens are made of a homogeneous mortar. The linear relationship in log-log scales suggests the size effect in form of power relation for maximum aggregate size larger or equal 9.5 mm G1c a a , dmax = G1c , dmax W W
(a/W . dmax ) .

|dmax 9.5 mm

(2)

The computed values of G1c for specimens S4, S3, and S1 with xed maximum aggregate size dmax = 38 mm at xed values of a/w=0.2; 0.3; 0.4, 0.5 and 0.6 are shown in log-log scales in Figure 18. The linear relationship in log-log scales suggests the size effect in form of power relation for specimens larger or equal to S4 (W = 420 mm) G1c a a , W = G1c W W
|W 420 mm

. W

(3)

38

M. A. Issa et al.

Figure 16. Comparison of G1c for group IV.

with a = 0.64. It should be noticed that the smaller specimens S5 and S6 do not follow the trend expressed by (3). The fractional power in Equations 2 and 3 and the fact that the size effect becomes pronounced for relatively large size specimens and maximum aggregate size call for a rational explanation. Comparing size effects expressed in (2) and (3) one notices the power in (2), i.e., the effect of aggregate size, varies with crack length whereas is practically constant.

8. Summary of the observations Toughness of six groups of similar concrete specimens with various dimensions and aggregate sizes were evaluated and compared. Similarity of the specimens was strictly maintained by scaling the specimen dimensions from one group to another by a factor of two starting from a specimen size of (width total depth thickness) 105 105 12.5 mm to 1680 1680 200 mm. These specimens were prepared with varying aggregate sizes of 4.75, 9.5, 19, 38, and 76 mm, and tested in the quasistatic loading and unloading at a rate of 0.125 mm/min (0.005 in./min). Approximately 250 specimens varying in size and maximum aggregate dimension were tested to accomplish the objectives of the study. Apparent toughness is found to be in direct relation with the texture, angularity and size of the coarse aggregate in the concrete, for maximum aggregate size larger or equal to 9.5 mm; and with the specimen size beginning with 420 mm. The experimental observations combined with the nite element analysis revealed the following trend in apparent fracture toughness G1c and crack trajectories:

Concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

39

Figure 17. Aggregate size dependency of G1c

There is a consistent trend in all groups of specimens tested: an apparent toughness (G1c ) increases with crack length (R-curve behavior, see Figures 1316). For same size specimen, the apparent toughness increases with an increase in the maximum aggregate size (see Figure 13). For the same maximum aggregate size specimens, the apparent toughness increases with specimen size (see Figure 14). For geometrically similar specimens, i.e., the shape and all dimensionless parameters including normalized maximum aggregate size are the same, the apparent toughness of the larger specimens is noticeably higher than that of the smaller ones (see Figures 15 16). In macroscopically identical specimens with smaller size aggregates, the crack path is less tortuous. The crack trajectory deviates more from the rectilinear path in the specimens with larger aggregate size. For completely similar specimens, the crack tortuosity is greater for the larger size specimens. 9. Discussion The burst of acoustic emission that correlates very well with the onset of nonlinearity in the loading part of Load-CMOD curves suggests that the nonlinearity is associated with the fracture process in the vicinity of crack front. Thus, the onset of nonlinearity can be considered

40

M. A. Issa et al.

Figure 18. Specimen size dependency of G1c .

to be the critical point of fracture initiation on the rst loading cycle and reinitiation in the consecutive ones. Moreover, practically linear load-CMOD relationship prior to this point justies an application of linear elastic analysis. Our monitoring of acoustic emission combined with the optical observations support widely discussed in literature proposition: the observed increase of apparent fracture toughness (G1c ) with crack length (R-curve behavior) in concrete is most likely associated with an interaction between crack faces (bridging, interlocking, friction). Thus, the observed cracks in concrete signicantly depart from an ideal traction free crack model of conventional fracture mechanics, that has been employed in computation of G1c in this work. Therefore, the observed trends in G1c reect the fracture surface traction characteristics rather than true material toughness. The surface traction, unlike invariant material parameters, are naturally dependent on particular test conditions and specimen size. Indeed, since surface traction acting over cross section t w, at least partially depend on compressive forces, e.g., weight, that varies as t w 2 , one may expect an increase in surface traction with the specimen size. However, different scale effect may be expected in simple tension (no compression) or bending etc. It may partially explain the controversial reports on scale effect in concrete and cementitious materials (Issa et al., 1999). The surface tractions naturally account for all the trends in tortuosity of fracture paths and G1c variations with the specimen and maximum aggregate sizes reported above, including the fractional power in the Equations 2 and 3. The challenge is to construct a predictive model

Concrete fracture Part II: Analysis of test results

41

of such traction, i.e., an apparent fracture toughness, that can be employed in the engineering design of large scale concrete structures. The equations 2 and 3 is a step in that direction. For the specimens made with larger maximum size aggregates, bridging was clearly noticed. This is evident since the aggregates are generally an order of magnitude stronger than the paste. When a growing crack reaches an aggregate, it either goes around or penetrates through it. Since the fracture energy of the interface is smaller than the fracture energy for the aggregate, a crack more often travels around the aggregate. Furthermore, bigger aggregates have a larger surface area and the overall bond strength between the aggregates and the mix is higher. Bridging and other forms of crack faces interactions, i.e., the most probable causes of higher toughness, are more pronounced in the specimens with larger maximum size aggregates. The apparent toughness G1c dependence on the maximum aggregate size has been found in a power form similar to specimen size dependence, but with a different power (see Figures 17 18). The similarity in specimen size and maximum aggregate size dependence of G1c suggests a likelihood of the same common origin for both, i.e., the fracture surface interaction associated with its tortuosity. The observed difference in the power ( < ) may be an indication that the specimen size (weight) or in a more general case, the presence of compressive forces, has an effect on the apparent toughness, not accounted for by the maximum aggregate size dependence only. The randomness of fracture path, i.e., there are no two identical specimens that exhibit the same fracture path, however there are distinct and well reproducible statistical features of crack trajectories in similar specimens, signicant scatter and fractional size effect in G1c call for statistical modeling concrete fracture. Statistical fracture mechanics developed in the last two decades provides an adequate framework for modeling of the observed phenomena (Chudnovsky and Kunin, 1987; Chudnovsky and Kunin, 1992 and Chudnovsky et al., 1997). 10. Conclusions Connections between the resistance to crack growth in concrete in the presence of compressive forces, i.e., an apparent fracture roughness G1c and the interactions of fracture surfaces is documented by means of direct optical observations and acoustic imaging of crack growth. Surface traction along the crack faces in concretes are called to account for: R-curve behavior, i.e., G1c dependence on crack length, G1c dependence on maximum aggregate size, G1c dependence on specimen size (size effect), fractional power form of size effect.

The surface traction, reecting the fracture surface interaction, apparently depends on crack path tortuosity, the fracture mechanisms, e.g., trans-aggregate vs inter-aggregate fracture and the stress state. The randomness of crack trajectories, a signicant scatter of the apparent toughness and fractional power form of G1c dependence on maximum aggregate and specimen sizes point to the statistical nature of the observed phenomena. A probabilistic model, based on statistical fracture mechanics, constitute the third part of the present work. It is presently being prepared for publication.

42

M. A. Issa et al.

Acknowledgements This study was funded by a contract awarded to the University of Illinois at Chicago by the National Science Foundation (Grant No. CMS 9522306). Their nancial support is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks are also due to Ahmad Hammad, Alfred Yousif and graduate students, Wassim Kmeid, and Mark Bendok. References
Chudnovsky, A. and Kunin, B. (1987). A probabilistic model for brittle crack formation. Journal of Applied Physics 62(10). 41244129. Chudnovsky, A. and Kunin, B. (1992). A Statistical Fracture Mechanics, Microscopic Simulation of Complex Hydrodynamic Phenomena (Edited by M. Mareschal and B.L. Holian) Plenum Press, New York. Chudnovsky, A., Kunin, B. and Gorelik, M. (1997). Modeling of brittle fracture based on the concept of crack trajectory ensemble. Engineering Fracture Mechanics 58 (5-6) 437457. Cornell Fracture Group, FRANC2D (a two-dimensional crack propagation simulator) Version 2.7, Tutorial and User Guide (1995). Hammad A. and Issa, M. (1994a). Fractal dimension as a measure of roughness of concrete fracture trajectories. Advanced Cement Based Materials Journal 1 169177. Hammad, A. and Issa, M. (1994b). A new nondestructive technique to investigate concrete surface topography. ACI Special Publication, SP-143, New Experimental Techniques for Evaluating Concrete Material and Structural Performance, Detroit, Michigan pp. 191205. Issa M. and Hammad, A. (1993). Fractal characterization of fracture surfaces in mortar. Cement and Concrete Research 23(1), 712. Issa, M.A., Issa, M.A., Islam, M.S. and Chudnovsky, A. (2000). Size effects in fracture of concretePart I: Experiment setup and observation, International Journal of Fracture (this issue). Slepjan, L.I. (1990). Mechanics of Cracks, 2nd edn., Leningrad, Ship Building. Tada, Hiroshi. (1973). The Stress Analysis of Cracks Handbook, Del Research Corporation, Hellertown, Pennsylvania.