Advertisement

Materials and Structures

, Volume 48, Issue 8, pp 2697–2711 | Cite as

Probabilistic damage modeling and service-life prediction of concrete under freeze–thaw action

  • Fangliang Chen
  • Pizhong Qiao
Original Article

Abstract

The long-term performance of concrete subjected to freezing and thawing damage is experimentally studied. The ASTM procedures for rapid freezing and thawing are followed to condition all the test samples. Dynamic modulus of elasticity and fracture energy for different numbers of freeze/thaw (F/T) cycles are measured through nondestructive modal and cohesive fracture tests, respectively. Nonlinear regression analysis is adopted to analyze the test data, and the relationship between the relative dynamic modulus and the number of F/T cycles is established. Based on the three-parameter Weibull distribution model, the probabilistic damage analysis is performed, from which the relationships between the number of F/T cycles and damage parameter for different probabilities of reliability are established. Based on the correlations between the available field environment and the indoor laboratory experiment, the field service-life of the considered structural concrete is predicted and validated with the fracture energy test data.

Keywords

Aging Degradation Durability Freezing and thawing Long-term performance Service life prediction 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was financially supported by the Alaska University Transportation Center (AUTC), State of Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, and US Department of Transportation (Proposal Number: 410029; Contract/Grant No.: DTRT06-G-0011) and Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (Contract No.: 13A-3815-5188).

References

  1. 1.
    Powers T (1945) A working hypothesis for further studies of frost resistance of concrete. J Am Concr Inst 16:172–245Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Powers T, Helmuth R (1953) Theory of volume changes in hardened Portland cement paste during freezing Highway. Highw Res Board Proc 32:285–297Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Powers T (1955) Basic considerations pertaining to freezing and thawing tests. Am Soc Test Mater Proc 55:1132–1155Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cho T (2007) Prediction of cyclic freeze–thaw damage in concrete structures based on response surface method. Constr Build Mater 21:2031–2040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jacobsen S, Sellevold EJ, Matala S (1996) Frost durability of high strength concrete: effect of internal cracking on ice formation. Cem Concr Res 26:919–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mazars J (1987) Comportement et endommagement du béton sous charges monotones et cycliques. “ Journées E.D.F., “Calcul dynamique des barrages, Aixles-BainsGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bogdanoff JL, Kozin F (1980) A new cumulative damage model. J Appl Mech 47(1):40–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Breysse D (1990) Probabilistic formulation of damage-evolution law of cementitious composites. J Eng Mech 116(7):1489–1510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shen H, Lin J, Mu E (2000) Probabilistic model on stochastic fatigue damage. Int J Fatigue 22(7):569–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li H, Zhang M, Ou J (2007) Flexural fatigue performance of concrete containing nano-particles for pavement. Int J Fatigue 29:1292–1301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sain T, Chandra Kishen J (2008) Probabilistic assessment of fatigue crack growth in concrete. Int J Fatigue 30:2156–2164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rutherford J, Langan B, Ward M (1994) Use of control specimens in freezing and thawing testing of concrete. Cem Concr Aggreg 16:78–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    ASTM C231/C231 M—10 (2010) Standard test method for air content of freshly mixed concrete by the pressure method. In: American society for testing and materials, vol 04.02. ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    ASTM C143/C143 M—10a (2010) Standard test method for slump of hydraulic cement concrete. In: American society for testing and materials, vol 04.02. ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    ASTM C39/C39 M—10 (2010) Standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. In: American society for testing and materials, vol 04.02. ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    ASTM C78/C78 M—10 (2010) Standard test method for flexural strength of concrete (using simple beam with third-point loading). In: American society for testing and materials, vol 04.02. ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ASTM C496/C496 M—11 (2010) Standard test method for splitting tensile strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. In: American society for testing and materials, vol 04.02. ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    ASTM C666 (1992) Standard test method for resistance of concrete to rapid freezing and thawing. In: Annual book of ASTM standards. vol. 04.02, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, p 347–352Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    ASTM C672 (1992) Standard test method for scaling resistance of concrete surfaces exposed to deicing chemicals. In: Annual book of ASTM standards, vol 04.02, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, p 341–343Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    RILEM TC-50 FMC (1985) Détermination de l’énergie de rupture des mortiers et bétons par flexion « trois points » de poutres encochées. Mater Struct 18, 285Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Qiao PZ, Xu YW (2004) Evaluation of fracture energy of composite-concrete bonded interfaces using three-point bend tests. J Compos Constr, ASCE 8(4):352–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Qiao PZ, Xu YW (2005) Thermal effects on the fracture of adhesively bonded composite-concrete interface. J Adv Mater 37(2):56–62Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Qiao PZ, Xu YW (2008) Mode-I fracture and durability of FRP-concrete bonded interfaces. Water Sci Eng 1(4):47–60. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3882/j.issn.1674-2370.2008.04.005
  24. 24.
    Lemaitre J, Desmorat R (2005) Engineering damage mechanics: ductile, creep, fatigue and brittle failures. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Masad E, James L (2001) Implementation of high performance concrete in Washington state. Research final Report, Washington State Department of Transportation. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Research/Reports/500/530.1.htm
  26. 26.
    Liu X, Tang G (2007) Research on prediction method of concrete freeze-thaw durability under field environments. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 26(12):2412–2419Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li J, Xu W, Cao J, Lin L, Guan Y (1999) “Study on the mechanism of concrete destruction under frost action”. J Hydraul Eng, 1, 412–419Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Russell RJ (1943) Freeze-and-thaw-frequencies in the United States. Trans Am Geophys Union, Part I 24:125–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fagerlund G (1977) The international cooperative test of the critical degree of saturation method of assessing the freeze/thaw resistance of concrete. Matériaux et Constr 10(4):231–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li W, Pour-Ghaz M, Castro J, Weiss J (2012) Water absorption and critical degree of saturation relating to freeze–thaw damage in concrete pavement joints. J Mater Civ Eng 24(3):299–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Weiss J, Snyder K, Bullard J, Bentz D (2013) Using a saturation function to interpret the electrical properties of partially saturated concrete. J Mater Civ Eng 25(8):1097–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Qiao PZ, Chen FL (2013) Cohesive fracture and probabilistic damage analysis of freezing–thawing degradation of concrete. Constr Build Mater 47:879–887. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.05.046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering and School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil EngineeringShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiP.R. China

Personalised recommendations