Advertisement

Materials and Structures

, 52:4 | Cite as

Effect of dynamic segregation of self-consolidating concrete on homogeneity of long pre-cast beams

  • Aida Margarita Ley-Hernandez
  • Dimitri FeysEmail author
  • Julie Ann Hartell
Original Article
  • 73 Downloads

Abstract

Self-consolidating concrete (SCC) is a highly flowable concrete mixture which does not need any external source of vibration. Due to its high fluidity, it can flow for considerable distances solely due to gravity, but it is also susceptible to segregation at rest (static) and during flow (dynamic). Extended flow distances for SCC could lead to increased non-homogeneous distribution of constituent elements, which could affect key properties of the concrete once hardened. This paper describes a project where SCC was allowed to flow in beams with 9 m or 18 m length, for which the homogeneity was assessed by means of the ultrasonic through-transmission method, and by evaluating the compressive strength on drilled cores. The largest variability, assessed by both methods, was systematically observed at the bottom of the beams in horizontal direction and at the casting point (at one end of each beam) in vertical directions. Changes in compressive strength in vertical direction related well to the dynamic segregation potential from the tilting box test, while the changes at the bottom of each beam in horizontal direction related well to the plastic viscosity of the concrete, which is a parameter affecting the drag (or lack of it) executed by the mortar on the coarse aggregates.

Keywords

Compressive strength Dynamic segregation Homogeneity Rheology Self-consolidating concrete Ultrasonic pulse velocity 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the RE-CAST Tier-1 University Transportation Center for the financial support (Grant DTRT13-G-UTC45), Coreslab Structures in Marshall, MO, United States, and in particular Jim Myers and the field crew for the design, preparation and casting of the prestressed beams. The authors would also like to thank John Bullock and Jason Cox for the technical assistance during the casting and coring of the specimens, as well as Sarah Vanhooser, Wassay Gulrez and Abhishek Reguri for their help during the production of the beams or the assessment of its properties.

Funding

Funding was received from the US Department of Transportation through the RE-CAST Tier-1 University Transportation Center (Grant DTRT13-G-UTC45). Materials and time to produce the beams were donated by Coreslab Structures.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11527_2018_1303_MOESM1_ESM.mpg (1.7 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (MPG 1786 kb)
11527_2018_1303_MOESM2_ESM.mpg (14.6 mb)
Supplementary material 2 (MPG 14964 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Okamura H, Ouchi M (2003) Self-compacting concrete. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology 1(1):5–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Schutter G, Bartos PJ, Domone P, Gibbs J (2008) Self-compacting concrete. Whittles Publishing, DunbeathGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Daczko JA (2012) Self-consolidating concrete: applying what we know. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Schutter G (2011) Self-compacting concrete after two decades of research and practice. In: 9th international symposium on high performance concrete: design, verification and utilization (HPC-2011), New Zealand Concrete Society, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beris AN, Tsamopoulos JA, Armstrong RC, Brown RA (1985) Creeping motion of a sphere through a Bingham plastic. J Fluid Mech 158:219–244MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Petrou MF, Wan B, Gadala-Maria F, Kolli VG, Harries KA (2000) Influence of mortar rheology on aggregate settlement. ACI Mater J 97(4):479–485Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roussel N (2006) A theoretical frame to study stability of fresh concrete. Mater Struct 39(1):81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shen L, Struble L, Lange D (2009) Modeling dynamic segregation of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mater J 106(4):375Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tregger N, Gregori A, Ferrara L, Shah S (2012) Correlating dynamic segregation of self-consolidating concrete to the slump-flow test. Constr Build Mater 28(1):499–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bethmont S (2005) Self-compacting concretes segregation mechanisms—experimental study of granular interactions, Doctoral dissertation, Ecole des Ponts ParisTechGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brouwers HJH, Radix HJ (2005) Self-compacting concrete: theoretical and experimental study. Cem Concr Res 35(11):2116–2136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bethmont S, Schwartzentruber LA, Stefani C, Tailhan JL, Rossi P (2009) Contribution of granular interactions to self compacting concrete stability: development of a new device. Cem Concr Res 39(1):30–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ramge P, Proske T, Kühne HC (2010) Segregation of coarse aggregates in self-compacting concrete. In: Design, production and placement of self-consolidating concrete, Springer, Dordrecht, pp 113–125Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hunger M (2010) An integral design concept for ecological self-compacting concrete, Doctoral dissertation, Eindhoven University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mueller FV, Wallevik OH, Khayat KH (2014) Linking solid particle packing of Eco-SCC to material performance. Cem Concr Compos 54:117–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Esmaeilkhanian B, Diederich P, Khayat KH, Yahia A, Wallevik OH (2017) Influence of particle lattice effect on stability of suspensions: application to self-consolidating concrete. Mater Struct 50(1):39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Spangenberg J, Roussel N, Hattel JH, Stang H, Skocek J, Geiker MR (2012) Flow induced particle migration in fresh concrete: theoretical frame, numerical simulations and experimental results on model fluids. Cem Concr Res 42(4):633–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bagnold RA (1954) Experiments on a gravity-free dispersion of large solid spheres in a Newtonian fluid under shear. Proc R Soc Lond A 225(1160):49–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Batchelor GK (1970) The stress system in a suspension of force-free particles. J Fluid Mech 41(3):545–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Coussot P (1997) Mudflow rheology and dynamics. Balkema, RotterdamzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Feys D, Verhoeven R, De Schutter G (2009) Why is fresh self-compacting concrete shear thickening? Cem Concr Res 39(6):510–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Coussot P (1994) Steady, laminar, flow of concentrated mud suspensions in open channel. J Hydraul Res 32(4):535–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ovarlez G, Bertrand F, Coussot P, Chateau X (2012) Shear-induced sedimentation in yield stress fluids. J Nonnewton Fluid Mech 177:19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Spangenberg J, Roussel N, Hattel JH, Sarmiento EV, Zirgulis G, Geiker MR (2012) Patterns of gravity induced aggregate migration during casting of fluid concretes. Cem Concr Res 42(12):1571–1578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Phillips RJ, Armstrong RC, Brown RA, Graham AL, Abbott JR (1992) A constitutive equation for concentrated suspensions that accounts for shear-induced particle migration. Phys Fluids A 4(1):30–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Feys D, Khayat KH, Perez-Schell A, Khatib R (2014) Development of a tribometer to characterize lubrication layer properties of self-consolidating concrete. Cem Concr Compos 54:40–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Feys D, Khayat KH, Perez-Schell A, Khatib R (2015) Prediction of pumping pressure by means of new tribometer for highly-workable concrete. Cem Concr Compos 57:102–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stock AF, Hannant DJ, Williams RIT (1979) Effect of aggregate concentration upon the strength and modulus of elasticity of concrete. Mag Concr Res 31(109):225–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Khayat KH, Manai K, Trudel A (1997) In situ mechanical properties of wall elements cast using self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mater J 94:491–500Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Panesar DK, Shindman B (2012) The effect of segregation on transport and durability properties of self consolidating concrete. Cem Concr Res 42(2):252–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pickett G (1956) Effect of aggregate on shrinkage of concrete and hypothesis concerning shrinkage. Portland Cem Assoc Res Dep Bull 66(5):581–590Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Khayat KH, Petrov N, Attiogbe EK, See HT (2003) Uniformity of bond strength of prestressing strands in conventional flowable and self-consolidating concrete mixtures. In: Self-compacting concrete: proceedings of the third international RILEM symposium, pp 703–709Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Long WJ, Khayat KH, Lemieux G, Hwang SD, Xing F (2014) Pull-out strength and bond behavior of prestressing strands in prestressed self-consolidating concrete. Materials 7(10):6930–6946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bungey JH, Millard SG, Grantham MG (2006) Testing of concrete in structures, 4th edn. Abingdon, Francis and Taylor, p 339Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    EFNARC (2002) Specification and guidelines for self-consolidating concrete. http://www.efnarc.org/pdf/SandGforSCC.PDF
  36. 36.
    Esmaeilkhanian B, Feys D, Khayat KH, Yahia A (2014) New test method to evaluate dynamic stability of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mater J 111(3):299Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Esmaeilkhanian B, Khayat KH, Yahia A, Feys D (2014) Effects of mix design parameters and rheological properties on dynamic stability of self-consolidating concrete. Cem Concr Compos 54:21–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Reiner M (1949) Deformation and flow. An elementary introduction to theoretical rheology. H.K. Lewis & Co, Limited, Great BritainzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wallevik OH, Feys D, Wallevik JE, Khayat KH (2015) Avoiding inaccurate interpretations of rheological measurements for cement-based materials. Cem Concr Res 78:100–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Roussel N, Coussot P (2005) “Fifty-cent rheometer” for yield stress measurements: from slump to spreading flow. J Rheol 49(3):705–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Carino NJ (1997) Nondestructive test methods. In: Nawy EG (ed) Concrete construction engineering handbook. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 1–68Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Naik TR, Malhotra VM, Popovics JS (2004) The ultrasonic pulse velocity method. In: Carino NJ, Malhotra VM (eds) Handbook on nondestructive testing of concrete, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Leslie JR, Cheesman WJ (1949) An ultrasonic method of studying deterioration and cracking in concrete structures. ACI J 46(1):17–36Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Jones R (1949) The non-destructive testing of concrete. Mag Concr Res 2(June):67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    ASTM C 597 (2009) Standard test method for pulse velocity through concrete. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hartell J, Boyd, AJ, Rivard P (2017). Efficacy of ultrasonic pulse velocity testing to assess sulfate-degraded concrete, sulfate attack on concrete: a holistic perspective. In: Bassuoni MT, Hooton RD, Drimalas T (eds), ACI SP 317-8Google Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aida Margarita Ley-Hernandez
    • 1
  • Dimitri Feys
    • 1
    Email author
  • Julie Ann Hartell
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental EngineeringMissouri University of Science and TechnologyRollaUSA
  2. 2.School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringOklahoma State UniversityStillwaterUSA

Personalised recommendations