Advertisement

Materials and Structures

, Volume 47, Issue 10, pp 1729–1743 | Cite as

Simulation of concrete flow in V-funnel test and the proper range of viscosity and yield stress for SCC

  • Hadi Lashkarbolouk
  • Amir M. Halabian
  • Mohammad R. Chamani
Original Article

Abstract

The present paper highlights the flow simulation of self consolidating concrete (SCC) in V-funnel test that is used to determine the concrete filling ability and its resistance against segregation. Simulations were performed using a two-dimensional smoothed particle hydrodynamic (SPH) method to determine the discharge time where SCC was considered as a homogeneous Bingham fluid. The numerical predictions are lower than experimental data because of the assumptions of two-dimensional and homogeneous flow. Having the SPH method employed, SCCs with different viscosities and yield stresses were simulated to compare the discharge time with the suggested criteria in EFNARC (2002) and (2005) guidelines. Based on simulations results, the appropriate range of viscosities and yield stresses as well as a relation between rheological properties and discharge time for SCC taking into account EFNARC (2002) and (2005) guidelines are suggested. Using the suggested relations, one can assess the proper SCC filling ability without conducting the V-funnel test.

Keywords

Self consolidating concrete V-funnel test Viscosity Yield stress Bingham fluid SPH method 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully would like to express their gratitude to H. JanfeshanAraghi, A. Kiya, and M. Abasi for their dedicated helps and supports.

References

  1. 1.
    Bagci E (2011) 3-D numerical analysis of orthogonal cutting process via mesh-free method. Int J Phys Sci 6(6):1267–1282MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Banfill PFG (2006) Rheology of fresh cement and concrete. Rheol Rev 61–130Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bui HH, Sako K, Fukagawa R (2007) Numerical simulation of soil–water interaction using smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) method. J Terrramech 44(5):339–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dufour F, Pijaudier-Cabot G (2005) Numerical modelling of concrete flow: homogenous approach. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 29(4):395–416MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    EFNARC (2002) Specification and Guidelines for self-compacting concrete. United Kingdom, European Federation of National Associations Representing producers and applicators of specialist building products for ConcreteGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    EFNARC (2005) The European guidelines for self-compacting concrete: Specification, production and use. United Kingdom, European Federation of National Associations Representing producers and applicators of specialist building products for ConcreteGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fang J, Owens RG, Tacher L, Parriaux A (2006) A numerical study of the SPH method for simulating transient viscoelastic free surface flows. J Nonnewton Fluid Mech 139:68–84MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gomez-Gesteria M, Rogers BD, Dalrymple RA, Crespo AJC (2010) State-of-the-art of classical SPH for free-surface flows. J Hydraul Res 48((EI)):6–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heirman G, Hendrickx R, Vandewalle L, Van Gemert D, Feys D, De Schutter G, Desmet B, Vantomme J (2009) Integration approach of the Couette inverse problem of powdertype self-compacting concrete in a wide-gap concentric cylinder rheometer Part II. Influence of mineral additions and chemical admixtures on the shear thickening flow behaviour. Cem Concr Res 39:171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hwang SD, Khayat KH, Bonneau O (2006) Performance-based specifications of self-consolidating concrete used in structural applications. ACI Mater J 103(2):121–129Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kulasegaram S, Karihaloo BL, Ghanbari A (2010) Modelling the flow of self-compacting concrete. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 35(6):713–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kumar P (2006) Self-compacting concrete: methods of testing and design. J Inst Eng (India) 86:145–150Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu JR, Liu MB (2003) Smoothed particle hydrodynamics: a meshfree particle method. World Scientific Publishing Co, SingaporeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lopez D, Marivela R, Garrote L (2010) Smoothed particle hydrodynamics model applied to hydraulic structures: a hydraulic jump test case. J Hydraul Res 48((EI)):142–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mehra V, Chaturvedi S (2006) High velocity impact of metal sphere on thin metallic plates: a comparative smooth particle hydrodynamics study. J Comput Phys 212:318–337MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Modigell M, Vasilic K, Brameshuber W, Uebachs S (2007) Modelling and simulation of flow behavior of self-compacting concrete. Fifth international RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete. Belgium, 3–5 Sep, pp 387–392Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nguyen TLH, Roussel N, Coussot P (2006) Correlation between L-box test and rheological parameters of a homogeneous yield stress fluid. Cem Concr Res 36(10):1789–1796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Noor MA, Uomoto T (2000) Numerical simulation of fresh concrete: three-dimensional discrete element simulation of U-box boxed and V-funnel test for self-compacting concrete. Mon J Inst Ind Sci 52(10):509–512Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Patzak B, Bittnar Z (2009) Modeling of fresh concrete flow. Comput Struct 87:962–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Peric D, Slijepcevic S (2001) Computational modelling of viscoplastic fluids based on a stabilised finite element method. Eng Comput 18(3/4):577–591MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Petit JY, Wirquin E, Vanhove Y, Khayat K (2007) Yield stress and viscosity equations for mortars and self-consolidating concrete. Cem Concr Res 37(5):655–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Quoc PHD, Uomoto T (2008) Review on simulation of fresh concrete using distinct element method. The 3rd ACF international conference. Vietnam, Nov 11–12, pp 585–591Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roussel N (2006) Correlation between yield stress and slump: comparison between numerical simulations and concrete rheometers results. Mater Struct 39(4):501–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Roussel N, Coussot P (2005) Fifty-cent rheometer for yield stress measurements: from slump to spreading flow. J Rheol 49(3):705–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roussel N, Geiker MR, Dufour F, Thrane LN, Szabo P (2007) Computational modeling of concrete flow: general overview. Cem Concr Res 37(9):1298–1307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Safawi MI, Iwaki I, Miura T (2004) The segregation tendency in the vibration of high fluidity concrete. Cem Concr Res 34(2):219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shao S, Lo EYM (2003) Incompressible SPH method for simulating Newtonian and non-Newtonian flows with a free surface. Adv Water Resour 26:787–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Smyrnaios DN, Tsamopoulos JA (2001) Squeeze flow of Bingham plastics. J Nonnewton Fluid Mech 100:165–190MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thrane LN (2007) Form filling with self-compacting concrete. Thesis (PhD), Technical University of DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Thrane LN, Szabo P, Geiker M, Glavind M, Stang H (2004) Simulation of the test method “L-box” for self-compacting concrete. Annu Trans Nordic Rheol Soc 12:47–54Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Waarde FV, Koenders EAB, Lycklama JA, Walraven JC (2007) Theoretical and practical investigations on SCC formwork. Fifth international RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete. Belgium, Sep 3–5, pp 417–422Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wallevik OH (2002) Practical description of rheology of SCC. SF Day at the Our World of Concrete. Singapore, p 42Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wallevik JE (2006) Relationship between the Bingham parameters and slump. Cem Concr Res 36:1214–1221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zerbino R, Barragan B, Garcia T, Agullo L, Gettu R (2009) Workability tests and rheological parameters in self-compacting concrete. Mater Struct 42:947–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hadi Lashkarbolouk
    • 1
  • Amir M. Halabian
    • 1
  • Mohammad R. Chamani
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations