Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Repeatability, responsiveness and relative cost analysis of SCC workability test methods

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Materials and Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There are several workability test methods proposed to evaluate workability of self-consolidating concrete (SCC). Most of these methods are not standard, and their reliability is still under question. In this study, a comprehensive experimental program and statistical analysis were performed to evaluate the repeatability, responsiveness and relative cost of commonly used SCC workability test methods. Ten different tests including the slump flow, V-funnel, J-ring, L-box, U-box, column segregation, segregation probe, flow trough, sieve stability and surface bleeding tests were considered herein. For evaluating the suitability of these tests, each test was repeated several times on SCC mixtures with different workability levels. The obtained results show that the slump flow and the J-ring tests are well suited for evaluating the flowability, and the segregation probe, column segregation and surface bleeding tests are appropriate tests for assessing the stability of SCC. Furthermore, when SCC is planned for use in congestly reinforced members, it is recommended to use the U-box and the V-funnel tests in addition to the former ones to ensure the passing ability of SCC mixture and avoid any blockage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. EFNARC (2002) Specifications and guidelines for self-compacting concrete. http://www.efnarc.org/pdf/SandGfor SCC.PDF

  2. Concrete society (2005) Self-compacting concrete: a review. Technical Report No. 62, CCIP-001, Camberley

  3. El-Chabib H, Nehdi M (2006) Effect of mix design parameters on segregation of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mat J 103:374–383

    Google Scholar 

  4. Zerbino R, Barragan B, Garcia T, Agullo L, Gettu R (2009) Workability tests an rheological parameters in self-compacting concrete. Mater Struct 42:947–960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ozawa K, Sakata N, Okamura H (1995) Evaluation of self-compactibility of fresh concrete using the funnel test. Concrete Library of JSCE 25:59–75

    Google Scholar 

  6. ASTM C1621/C1621 M-09b (2009) Standard test method for passing ability of self-consolidating concrete by J-Ring. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

  7. Petersson Ö, Billberg P, Van B K (1986) A model for self-compacting concrete. In: Bartos PJM et al. (eds) Proceedings of International RILEM Conference on Production Methods and Workability of Concrete. Chapman & Hall/E & FN Spon, pp 483–490

  8. Haykawa M (1993) Development and application of super workable concrete. In: Bartos PJM et al. (eds) Proceedings of International RILEM Workshop on Special Concretes: Workability and Mixing, pp 183–190

  9. Daczko JA (2003) A comparison of passing ability test methods for self-consolidating concrete. In: Proceedings of 3rd International Symposium on Self-Compacting Concrete. Reykjavik, Iceland, pp 335–344

  10. Mouret M, Escadeillas G, Bascoul A (2008) Metrological significance of the column test in the assessment of the static segregation of self-compacting concrete in the fresh state. Mater Struct 41:663–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. EN 12350-9:2010 (2010) Testing fresh concrete Part 9: self-compacting concrete: V-funnel test. BSI Standards Publication

  12. EN 12350-10:2010 (2010) Testing fresh concrete Part 10: self-compacting concrete: L box test. BSI Standards Publication

  13. EN 12350-12:2010 (2010) Testing fresh concrete Part 12: self-compacting concrete: J-ring test. BSI Standards Publication

  14. ASTM C1611/C 1611 M-09b. (2009) Standard test method for slump-flow of self-consolidating concrete. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

  15. ASTM C1610/C 1610 M-10 (2010) Standard test method for static segregation of self-consolidating concrete using column technique. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

  16. Rooney MJ, Bartos PJM (2001) Development of the settlement column segregation test for fresh self-compacting concrete. In: Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Self-Compacting Concrete, Coms Engineering Corp, Tokyo, pp 109–116

  17. Bui VK, Montgomery D, Hinczak I, Turner K (2002) Rapid testing method for segregation resistance of self-compacting concrete. Cem Concr Res 32(9):1489–1496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Illinois Test Procedure SCC-7 (2008) Standard test method for static segregation of fresh self-consolidating concrete cylinders using the static segregation probe. FHWA-ICT-08-020

  19. Illinois Test Procedure SCC-8 (2008) Standard test method for assessment of dynamic segregation of self-consolidating concrete during placement. FHWA-ICT-08-020

  20. Cussigh F et al (2003) Project testing SCC-segregation test methods. In: Wallevik O, Nielsson I (eds) Self-compacting concrete. Third international RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete, Reykjavik. RILEM Publications SARL, Bagneux, p 311

  21. EN 12350-11:2010. Testing fresh concrete Part 11: Self-compacting concretel: Sieve segregation test. BSI Standards Publication

  22. ASTM C232 (1999) Test methods for bleeding of concrete. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

  23. Powers TC (1939) The bleeding of Portland cement paste, mortar, and concrete. Portland Cement Assoc Bull 2, Chicago

  24. Libre NA, Khoshnazar R, Shekarchi M (2010) Relationship between fluidity and stability of self-consolidating mortar incorporating chemical and mineral admixtures. Constr Build Mater 24:1262–1271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. D’Aloia Schwartzentruber L et al. (2005) Quantifying the segregation risk of self-compacting concrete (SCC) by gammadensitometry. In: Shah SP (ed) SCC 2005. Second North American conference on the design and use of self-consolidating concrete and 4th international RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete, vol 2, Chicago. Hanley Wood Publication, Addison

  26. Schwendenmann G et al. (2005) Study of segregation in self-compacting concrete wall using gammadensitometry. In: Shah SP (ed) SCC 2005 Second North American conference on the design and use of self-consolidating concrete and 4th international RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete, vol 2, Chicago. Hanley Wood Publication, Addison, p 793

  27. Picka JD, Jaiswal SS, Igusa T et al (2000) Quantitative description of coarse aggregate volume fraction gradients. Cem Concr Aggr 22(2):133–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Khayat KH, Guizani Z (1997) Use of viscosity-modifying admixture to enhance stability of fluid concrete. ACI Mat J 94(4):332–340

    Google Scholar 

  29. Petrou MF, Harries KA, Gadala-Maria F et al (2000) A unique experimental method for monitoring aggregate settlement in concrete. Cem Concr Res 30(5):809–816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Shen et al. (2005) Testing static segregation of SCC. In: Shah SP (ed) SCC 2005. Second North American conference on the design and use of self-consolidating concrete and 4th international RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete, vol 2, Chicago. HanleyWood Publication, Addison, p 729

  31. ACI 238.1R-08 (2008) Report on Measurements of Workability and Rheology of Fresh Concrete. American concrete institute, Farmington Hills

  32. Ross AA, Nandakumar K, Jain AK (2006) Handbook of Multibiometrics. Springer, New York. ISBN 0-387-22296-0

  33. Pai TY, Hanaki K, Ho HH, Hsieh CM (2007) Using grey system theory to evaluate transportation effects on air quality trends in Japan. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 12:158–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Montgomery DC, Runger GC (2003) Applied statistics and probability for engineers. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  35. Assaad J, Khayat KH, Daczko J (2004) Evaluation of static stability of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mater J 101(3):207–215

    Google Scholar 

  36. ACI 237R-07 (2007) Self-consolidating concrete. ACI Manual of Concrete Practice, Part 1, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills

  37. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD (2000) Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 53:459–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Jaglal S, Lakhani Z, Schatzker J (2000) Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the lower extremity measure for patients with a hip fracture? JBJS 82:955–962

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lowe B, Schenkel I, Carney-Doebbeling C, Gobel C (2006) Responsiveness of the PHQ-9 to psychopharmacological depression treatment. Psychosomatics 47:62–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Liang MH, Fossel AH, Larson MG (1990) Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation. Med Care 28:632–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. FORNEY LLC, One Adams place, 310 seven fields boulevard, Seven Fields www.FORNEYonline.com

  42. Azmoon testing equipment, 17 Sindokht North Street, Fatemi West Avenue, Tehran. http://azmoontest.com

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by Islamic Azad University, Qazvin branch. The authors would like to express their gratitude to Dr. Zahraei, Miss Abbasi and Miss khani for their advice with this study. The authors would also like to acknowledge Construction Materials Institute, university of Tehran for providing the lab equipment, the essentials materials, advice and help whenever required.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin Branch, Qazvin, Iran

    Nicolas Ali Libre

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

    Rahil Khoshnazar

  3. Construction Materials Institute (CMI), School of Civil Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Rahil Khoshnazar & Mohammad Shekarchi

Authors
  1. Nicolas Ali Libre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rahil Khoshnazar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammad Shekarchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Ali Libre.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Libre, N.A., Khoshnazar, R. & Shekarchi, M. Repeatability, responsiveness and relative cost analysis of SCC workability test methods. Mater Struct 45, 1087–1100 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-011-9818-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-011-9818-6

Keywords

Mathematical Subject Classification (2000)

Search

Navigation