A comparative study of the mechanical properties, fracture behavior, creep, and shrinkage of chemically based self-consolidating concrete

Abstract

This study presents the results of an experimental investigation that compares the mechanical properties, fracture behavior, creep, and shrinkage of a chemically-based self-consolidating concrete (SCC) mix with that of a corresponding conventional concrete (CC) mix. The CC and SCC mix designs followed conventional proportioning in terms of aggregate type and content, cement content, air content, water-cementitiuos materials (w/cm) ratio, and workability. Then, using only chemical admixtures, the authors converted the CC mix to an SCC mix with all of the necessary passing, filling, flowability, and stability requirements typically found in SCC. The high fluidity was achieved with a polycarboxylate-based high-range water-reducing admixture, while the enhanced stability was accomplished with an organic, polymer-based viscosity-modifying admixture. The comparison indicated that the SCC and CC mixes had virtually identical tensile splitting strengths, flexural strengths, creep, and shrinkage. However, the SCC mix showed higher compressive strengths and fracture energies than the corresponding CC mix.

Keywords

admixture / conventional concrete (CC) / creep / fracture mechanic / mechanical Properties / self-consolidating concrete (SCC) / shrinkage

References

[1] Ozawa K, Maekawa K, Kunishima M, Okamura H. Development of high performance concrete based on the durability design of concrete structures. In: Proceedings of the Second East-Asia and Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction (EASEC-2). 1989, 1: 445–450

[2] Daczko J, Vachon M. Self Consolidating Concrete (SCC). Significance of Tests and Properties of Concrete and Concrete-Making Materials STP 169D. ASTM International West Conshohocken, PA, 2006, 637–645

[3] Okamura H. Self-compacting high-performance concrete. Concrete International, 1997, 1(4): 50–54

[4] ACI Committee 237. Self –Consolidaing Concrete (ACI 237R–07). Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute, 2007

[5] Domone P L. A review of the hardened mechanical properties of self-compacting concrete. Cement and Concrete Composites Journal, 2007, 29(1): 1–12

[6] Fava C, Bergol L, Fornasia G, Giangrasso F, Rocco C. Fracture behaviour of self compacting concrete. In: Wallevik O, Nielsson I, eds. Proceedings of third RILEM International Symposium on Self Compacting Concrete Reykjavik Iceland. Bagneux, France: RILEM Publications, 2003, PRO 33: 628–36

[7] Arezoumandi M, Volz J. Shear strength of chemically-based self-consolidating concrete beams — fracture mechanics approach vs. modified compression field theory. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 2013 (in press)

[8] Aslani F, Nejadi S. Mechanical properties of conventional and self-compacting concrete: An analytical study. Construction and Building Material Journal, 2012, 36: 330–347

[9] Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. A three dimensional large deformation meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2007, 196(29–30): 2777–2799

[10] Rabczuk T, Eibl J. Modeling dynamic failure of concrete with meshfree particle methods. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2006, 32(11): 1878–1897

[11] Rabczuk T, Belytschko T. Application of particle methods to static fracture of reinforced concrete structures. International Journal of Fracture, 2006, 137(1–4): 19–49

[12] ASTM C 39/C 39M. Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012, 7

[13] ASTM C 496/C 496M. Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011, 5

[14] ASTM C 78/C 78M. Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple Beam with Third-Point Loading. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 2010, 4

[15] Hillerborg A. The theoretical basis of a method to determine the fracture energy G_F of concrete. Materials and Structures, 1985, 18(4): 291–296

[16] RILEM. TC 50-FMC, Fracture mechanics of concrete, determination of the fracture energy of mortar and concrete by means of three-point bend tests on notched beams, RILEM recommendation. Materials and Structures, 1985, 18(16): 287–290

[17] ASTM C 512/C 512M. Standard Test Method for Creep of Concrete in Compression. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 2010, 5

[18] ASTM C 157/C 157M. Standard Test Method for Length Change of Hardened Hydraulic-Cement Mortar and Concrete. ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 2008, 7

[19] ACI Committee 318. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary (ACI 318–08). American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2008

[20] Kosmatka S H, Wilson M L. Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures. 15th ed. Portlanld Cement Association, 2011

[21] Bažant Z P, Becq-Giraudon E. Statistical prediction of fracture parameters of concrete and implications for choice of testing standards. Cement and Concrete Research Journal, 2002, 32(4): 529–556

[22] Standard Specifications for Concrete Structures. Japan Society of Civil Engineers No. 15, Tokyo, 2007, 154–159

[23] CEB-FIP Model Code 2010-fib. 2012, 1: 120

[24] ACI Committee 209. Guide for Modeling and Calculating Shrinkage and Creep in Hardened Concrete (ACI 209.2R–08). Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute, 2008

[25] Base SAS 9.4 Procedures Guide: Statistical Procedures. SAS Institute, ISBN: 978–1612905587, August, 2013

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg