This paper focuses on two experimental methods that give indicators linked to the impregnation level of the yarn / matrix interface, in the case of Textile Reinforced Concrete (TRC). These methods have been tested on three different glass yarns laid in a cementitious matrix, with three different impregnation levels resulting from the manufacturing process. The first method (comparative mercury intrusion porosity test) is based on the evaluation by mercury intrusion porosity of the pores volume associated to the porosity inside and near the yarn. The second method (flow test) consists in measuring the flow rate of water along the yarn, with imposed flow conditions. The physical parameters measured by these two methods are both related to the pore size and to the porosity of the yarn / matrix interface. The results of the two methods are discussed and drawn in parallel to a qualitative characterization of the yarn matrix interface made by scanning electron microscopy. As a result, the connection between the results of the two methods and the SEM characterization is studied. It is shown how these methods can participate to characterize the yarn impregnation. Limitations of the methods are also discussed.

This paper focuses on two experimental methods that give indicators linked to the impregnation level of the yarn / matrix interface, in the case of Textile Reinforced Concrete (TRC). These methods have been tested on three different glass yarns laid in a cementitious matrix, with three different impregnation levels resulting from the manufacturing process. The first method (comparative mercury intrusion porosity test) is based on the evaluation by mercury intrusion porosity of the pores volume associated to the porosity inside and near the yarn. The second method (flow test) consists in measuring the flow rate of water along the yarn, with imposed flow conditions. The physical parameters measured by these two methods are both related to the pore size and to the porosity of the yarn / matrix interface. The results of the two methods are discussed and drawn in parallel to a qualitative characterization of the yarn matrix interface made by scanning electron microscopy. As a result, the connection between the results of the two methods and the SEM characterization is studied. It is shown how these methods can participate to characterize the yarn impregnation. Limitations of the methods are also discussed.