Submitted:
13 June 2025
Posted:
16 June 2025
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Experiment
2.1. Materials
2.2. Test Beam Design
2.3. Loading and Testing
2.4. Analysis of Test Results
2.4.1. Load Result Analysis
2.4.2. Deflection Results and Analysis
2.4.3. Crack Results and Analysis
3. Quantification and Analysis of Fractal Characteristics
3.1. Types of Fractal Dimensions
3.2. Fractal Expansion Model of Stress-Induced Cracks
4. Fractal Analysis of the Mechanical Properties of Steel Fiber Alkali-Activated Slag Concrete Beams
4.1. Calculation Results of the Crack Fractal Dimension
4.2. Relationship Between Fracture Energy and Fractal Dimension
4.3. Relationship Between Mid-Span Deflection and Fractal Dimension
4.4. Relationship Between Maximum Crack Width and Fractal Dimension
5. Relationship Between the Fracture Toughness and Fractal Dimension of Steel Fiber Alkali-activated Slag Concrete Beam
5.1. The Relationship Between Critical Crack Stress and Fractal Dimension

5.2. The Relationship Between Fracture Toughness and Fractal Dimension

5.3. The Relationship Between the Maximum Energy Release Rate and the Fractal Dimension

5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zhang S, Duque-Redondo E, Kostiuchenko A, et al. Molecular dynamics and experimental study on the adhesion mechanism of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fiber in alkali-activated slag/fly ash[J]. Cement and Concrete Research, 2021, 145, 106452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luga E, Mustafaraj E, Corradi M, et al. Alkali-Activated Binders as Sustainable Alternatives to Portland Cement and Their Resistance to Saline Water[J]. Materials, 2024, 17, 4408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salami B A, Ibrahim M, Algaifi H A, et al. A review on the durability performance of alkali-activated binders subjected to chloride-bearing environment[J]. Construction and Building Materials, 2022, 317, 125947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Provis J L, Palomo A, Shi C. Advances in understanding alkali-activated materials[J]. Cement and Concrete Research, 2015, 78, 110–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mundra S, Criado M, Bernal S A, et al. Chloride-induced corrosion of steel rebars in simulated pore solutions of alkali-activated concretes[J]. Cement and Concrete Research, 2017, 100, 385–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu W, Chen Y, Miao H, et al. An experimental study on fracture characteristics of high-performance fiber-reinforced cement composites through combined acoustic emission and digital image correlation[J]. Journal of Building Engineering, 2025, 103, 112110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rossi L, Zappitelli M P, Patel R A, et al. Flexural tensile behaviour of alkali-activated slag-based concrete and Portland cement-based concrete incorporating single and multiple hooked-end steel fibres[J]. Journal of Building Engineering, 2024, 98, 111090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan P, Ren X, Xie Y. Experimental Study on the Flexural Properties of Steel-Fibre-Reinforced Concrete Specimens with Different Heights[J]. Sustainability, 2024, 16, 1900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hashmi M H, Koloor S S R, Abdul-Hamid M F, et al. Fractal Analysis for Fatigue Crack Growth Rate Response of Engineering Structures with Complex Geometry[J]. Fractal and Fractional, 2022, 6, 635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People's Republic of China. GB/T 50152-2012, Standard for Testing Methods of Concrete Structures [S]. Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press, 2012: 23-24.
- Zhang M, Jing J, Zhang S. Effect of steel fiber content on fatigue performance of high-strength concrete beams[J]. Scientific Reports, 2025, 15, 11815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chai H, Wu H, Zhang Y, et al. Research on the shear behavior of PBL connectors in steel fiber reinforced concrete composite beam[J]. Scientific Reports, 2025, 15, 5824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zheng Y, Lv X, Hu S, et al. Mechanical properties and durability of steel fiber reinforced concrete: A review[J]. Journal of Building Engineering 2024, 82, 108025. [CrossRef]
- Akbulut Z F, Tawfik T A, Smarzewski P, et al. Advancing Hybrid Fiber-Reinforced Concrete: Performance, Crack Resistance Mechanism, and Future Innovations[J]. Buildings, 2025, 15, 1247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rossi L, Patel R A, Dehn F. New analytical models to predict the mechanical performance of steel fiber-reinforced alkali-activated concrete[J]. Structural Concrete, 2025, 26, 236–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hentschel H G E, Procaccia I. The infinite number of generalized dimensions of fractals and strange attractors[J]. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 1983, 8, 435–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mandelbrot B B, Passoja D E, Paullay A J. Fractal character of fracture surfaces of metals[J]. Nature, 1984, 308, 721–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grassberger, P. , & Procaccia. Measuring the strangeness of strange attractors. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 1983, 9, 189–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halsey T C, Jensen M H, Kadanoff L P, et al. Fractal measures and their singularities: The characterization of strange sets[J]. Physical review A, 1986, 33, 1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song C, Havlin S, Makse H A. Self-similarity of complex networks[J]. Nature, 2005, 433, 392–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplan M, F. Crack propagation and the fracture of concrete[J]. Journal Proceedings. 1961, 58, 591–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wnuk M P, Yavari A. On estimating stress intensity factors and modulus of cohesion for fractal cracks[J]. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2003, 70, 1659–1674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Griffith A A., VI. The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids[J]. Philosophical transactions of the royal society of london. Series A, containing papers of a mathematical or physical character, 1921, 221(582-593): 163-198. http://www.jstor.org/stable/91192.
- Wang, T. , Yang, J. Fractal geometric analysis of crack state and its propagation in concrete structures[J]. Journal of Dalian University of Technology, 1997, 37, 79–83. [Google Scholar]
- Euro-International Concrete Committee. CEB-FIP Model Code 1990 [s]. [s.1]: [n.1], Lausanne, 1993.
- Ding Z Y, Zhou J H Su Q, et al. Influence of sodium silicate module on size effect of geopolymer recycled aggregate concrete[J]. Chinese journal of applied mechanics 2024, 41. [CrossRef]













| Water glass solution(%) | NaOH(%) | Water(%) | Moisture content (%) |
| 100 | 10.36 | 90.35 | 73.5 |
| Mix proportion of the concrete (kg/m3) | Solution to powder ratio |
Water to solid ratio |
Steel fiber content |
||||
| GGBS | Fly ash |
Fine aggregate |
Coarse aggregate |
Activator solution |
|||
| 280 | 120 | 615 | 1260 | 298.5 | 0.75 | 0.55 | 0.0% |
| Number | Steel fiber content (%) | Cracking load on the cross section Pcr(kN) | Cracking load of inclined section Vcr(kN) | Ultimate load Pu(kN) |
| SFRASC1 | 0.0 | 15.8 | 45.2 | 89.4 |
| SFRASC2 | 0.5 | 19.5 | 50.0 | 96.4 |
| SFRASC3 | 0.9 | 22.1 | 55.2 | 100.2 |
| SFRASC4 | 1.0 | 21.2 | 57.4 | 101.2 |
| SFRASC5 | 1.1 | 22.8 | 60.7 | 103.8 |
| SFRASC6 | 1.2 | 23.7 | 63.1 | 107.0 |
| SFRASC7 | 1.3 | 24.4 | 65.7 | 108.0 |
| SFRASC8 | 1.4 | 25.3 | 67.5 | 110.5 |
| Number | Steel fiber content (%) | Width of crack (mm) | Crack distribution characteristics |
| SFRASC1 | 0.0 | 0.50 | Concentration and vertical development |
| SFRASC2 | 0.5 | 0.34 | The main crack is clearly visible at mid-span, with only a few horizontal cracks observed. |
| SFRASC3 | 0.9 | 0.31 | Cracks are interconnected, but their width increases at a slow rate. |
| SFRASC4 | 1.0 | 0.29 | Diagonal cracks propagate in the bending-shear region. |
| SFRASC5 | 1.1 | 0.28 | Crack intersections are observed, exhibiting complex propagation directions. |
| SFRASC6 | 1.2 | 0.26 | The crack height is restricted, and the distribution is irregular. |
| SFRASC7 | 1.3 | 0.24 | Cracks are tortuous, accompanied by numerous fine secondary cracks. |
| SFRASC8 | 1.4 | 0.23 | Crack development remains limited, with relatively few secondary cracks. |
| Type | Calculation Method | Applicable Scenarios | Advantages | Limitations |
| Capacity Dimension (Dcap) | The box-counting method is used to compute the number of covering boxes, denoted as N(ε) | General fractals, such as cracks, surface roughness, or damage zones of beams | Strong versatility, straightforward calculation | Sensitive to image resolution; requires multi-scale fitting |
| Information Dimension (DI) | Based on probability distribution Pi | Non-uniform fractals, such as mass distribution or energy dissipation | Quantifies distribution heterogeneity | Complex to calculate; requires large datasets |
| Correlation Dimension (DC) | Correlation integral C(ε) to analyze point pair distance distribution | Dynamical system attractors, time series, such as vibration signals | Suitable for analyzing chaotic systems | Requires phase space reconstruction; parameter sensitive |
| Generalized Dimension (Dq) | Multifractal spectrum | Multi-scale complex systems, such as turbulence or financial fluctuations | Provides a comprehensive characterization of multi-scale features | High computational cost; complex interpretation |
| Self-similarity Dimension (DS) | Based on the number of subparts N and ratio r, derived from the generation rule | Strictly self-similar fractals, such as the Koch curve or Sierpinski carpet | Simple theoretical computation | Applicable only to ideal fractals, lacks universality |
| Different load Levels (kN) | Fractal dimensions of test beams in each group | |||||||
| SFRASC1 | SFRASC2 | SFRASC3 | SFRASC4 | SFRASC5 | SFRASC6 | SFRASC7 | SFRASC8 | |
| 30 | 1.050 | 1.048 | ||||||
| 40 | 1.116 | 1.075 | 1.066 | 1.034 | 1.046 | 1.057 | 1.030 | 1.028 |
| 50 | 1.147 | 1.116 | 1.092 | 1.074 | 1.061 | 1.067 | 1.053 | 1.047 |
| 60 | 1.176 | 1.156 | 1.119 | 1.099 | 1.075 | 1.077 | 1.067 | 1.055 |
| 70 | 1.217 | 1.174 | 1.140 | 1.119 | 1.096 | 1.100 | 1.077 | 1.065 |
| 80 | 1.247 | 1.203 | 1.159 | 1.134 | 1.116 | 1.124 | 1.097 | 1.079 |
| 90 | 1.287 | 1.225 | 1.199 | 1.173 | 1.139 | 1.154 | 1.120 | 1.105 |
| 100 | 1.280 | 1.245 | 1.215 | 1.184 | 1.183 | 1.148 | 1.121 | |
| 110 | 1.211 | 1.170 | 1.155 | |||||
| Value | SFRASC1 | SFRASC2 | SFRASC3 | SFRASC4 | SFRASC5 | SFRASC6 | SFRASC7 | SFRASC8 |
| fcm (N/mm2) | 30.5 | 38.5 | 46.6 | 47.5 | 53.8 | 55.1 | 59.2 | 67.6 |
| Gf (N/m) | 80.76 | 95.07 | 108.66 | 110.13 | 120.16 | 122.18 | 128.48 | 140.98 |
| D | 1.287 | 1.280 | 1.245 | 1.215 | 1.184 | 1.211 | 1.170 | 1.155 |
| Coefficient | SFRASC1 | SFRASC2 | SFRASC3 | SFRASC4 | SFRASC5 | SFRASC6 | SFRASC7 | SFRASC8 |
| a | 0.00857 | 0.00868 | 0.00862 | 0.00835 | 0.00864 | 0.00851 | 0.00869 | 0.00910 |
| b | 0.175 | 0.141 | 0.149 | 0.155 | 0.127 | 0.139 | 0.119 | 0.091 |
| Fit coefficient | SFRASC1 | SFRASC2 | SFRASC3 | SFRASC4 | SFRASC5 | SFRASC6 | SFRASC7 | SFRASC8 |
| g | 1.368 | 1.175 | 1.353 | 1.335 | 1.256 | 1.343 | 1.306 | 1.259 |
| h | 0.130 | 0.130 | 0.127 | 0.131 | 0.094 | 0.128 | 0.121 | 0.096 |
| Volume ratio of steel fiber ρf | Modulus of elasticity (MPa) | Load (kN) | Characteristic length of the crack a (mm) | Fractal Dimension D |
Critical cracking Stress σc(Mpa) |
Fracture toughness KfIC (Mpa⋅m1/2) |
Maximum energy release rate Gfmax (N/m) |
| 0.0 | 26000 | 89.40 | 158 | 1.287 | 5.396 | 10.939 | 52.163 |
| 0.005 | 26000 | 96.40 | 144 | 1.255 | 7.560 | 12.851 | 124.026 |
| 0.009 | 27000 | 100.20 | 155 | 1.245 | 8.735 | 14.991 | 182.764 |
| 0.01 | 28000 | 101.20 | 154 | 1.230 | 8.903 | 14.403 | 205.856 |
| 0.011 | 28000 | 103.80 | 136 | 1.225 | 9.542 | 14.044 | 223.677 |
| 0.012 | 29000 | 107.00 | 154 | 1.211 | 9.220 | 13.911 | 248.916 |
| 0.013 | 30000 | 108.00 | 143 | 1.170 | 8.985 | 11.168 | 300.481 |
| 0.014 | 31000 | 110.50 | 123 | 1.155 | 9.645 | 10.406 | 333.258 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).