Introducing a New Quantitative Evaluation Method for Segregation of Normal Concrete
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The aim of this research is to provide a quantitative method for evaluating concrete segregation. Because of various conditions of concrete materials, mix proportions, and delivery, concrete can be segregated. The acquisition inspection executed in construction field for supplied ready-mixed concrete is an important quality control process for concrete. Among the inspections conducted at the project site, segregation of concrete mixture should be evaluated before placing the concrete mixture, currently a qualitative inspection on concrete segregation was conducted. For a normal concrete mixture with slumping behavior, shear slump or collapse slump often occur as an indication of segregation. The suggested evaluation index of segregation for normal concrete (EISN) was induced from the shape of the concrete slumping: relation between the maximum distance of flow and the minimum distance of flow. To evaluate the feasibility of EISN, two different concrete mixture conditions were tested. The recommended EISN parameter of segregation is 1.09 using the three grades of concrete quality. This new quantitative method of evaluating segregation of the concrete mixture is expected to contribute to a more efficient quality control in concrete construction.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Innovations in Concrete and Construction Materials · Concrete and Cement Materials Research · Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (28)
Show source-provided references
1. ACI Committee 211. (2002). ACI 211.1–91, standard practice for selecting proportions for normal, heavyweight, and mass concrete. . ACI Committee 211.
2. ACI Committee 311. (2004). ACI 3115–04, guide for concrete plant inspection and field testing of ready-mixed concrete. . ACI Committee 311.
3. Aïssoun, B. M., Hwang, S.-D., & Khayat, K. H. (2016). Influence of aggregate characteristics on workability of superworkable concrete. Materials and Structures, 49(1–2), 597–609. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-015-0522-9.10.1617/s11527-015-0522-9 ↗
4. Architectural Institute of Japan. (2009). Japanese Architectural Standard Specification for Reinforced Concrete Work, JASS5. . Architectural Institute of Japan.
5. ASTM International. (2010a). ASTM C231, standard test method for air content of freshly mixed concrete by the pressure method. . ASTM International.
6. ASTM International. (2010b). ASTM C1611, standard test method for slump flow of self-consolidating concrete. . ASTM International.
7. ASTM International. (2012a). ASTM C150, standard specification for Portland cement. . ASTM International.
8. ASTM International. (2012b). ASTM C143, standard test method for slump of hydraulic-cement concrete. . ASTM International.
9. ASTM International. (2012c). ASTM C39, standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. . ASTM International.
10. ASTM International. (2013a). ASTM C192, standard practice for making and curing concrete test specimens in the laboratory. . ASTM International.
11. ASTM International. (2013b). ASTM C138, standard test method for density (unit weight), yield, and air content (gravimetric) of concrete. . ASTM International. https://doi.org/10.1520/C0138.10.1520/C0138 ↗
12. ASTM International. (2014). ASTM C1610, standard test method for static segregation of self-consolidating concrete using column technique. . ASTM International.
13. Bassuoni, M. T., & Nehdi, M. L. (2009). Durability of self-consolidating concrete to different exposure regimes of sodium sulfate attack. Materials and Structures, 42(8), 1039–1057. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-008-9442-2.10.1617/s11527-008-9442-2 ↗
14. British Standard Institution. (2010). BS EN 12350–11:2010, testing fresh concrete, PArt 11: Self-compacting concrete-Sieve segregation test. . British Standards Institution.
15. de Larrard, F. (1999). Concrete mixture proportioning. . E & FN SPON.10.1201/9781482272055 ↗
16. Erdem, K., Khayat, K. H., & Yahia, A. (2010). Correlating rheology of self-consolidating concrete to corresponding concrete-equivalent mortar. ACI Materials Journal, 106, 154–160.
17. Han, D. (2014). Flow behavior and microstructure of cement-based materials. . The University of Texas at Austin.
18. Khayat, K. H., Sonebi, M., Yahia, A., & Skaggs, C. B. (1996). Statistical models to predict flowability, washout resistance, and strength of underwater concrete. In Proceedings of RILEM Conference on Production methods and workability of concrete (pp. 463–481). Paisley, Scotland.
19. Koehler, E., & Fowler, D. (2004). Development of a Portable rheometer for fresh Portland cement concrete (No. ICAR 105-3F). . University of Texas at Austin.
20. Korea Standards Association. (2011). KS F 4009, Ready-Mixed Concrete. . Korea Standards Information Center.
21. Maruya, T., Liang, J., Sakamoto, J., & Uji, K. (2013). Evaluation of quality and construction performance of fresh concrete from viewpoint of compaction energy. Concrete Journal, 51(4), 319–326.10.3151/coj.51.319 ↗
22. Mindess, S., Young, J., & Darwin, D. (2002). Concrete. . Prentice Hall.
23. Neville, A. (2012). Properties of concrete. . Pearson Education Limited.
24. Papanastasiou, T. C. (1987). Flows of materials with yield. Journal of Rheology, 31(5), 385. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.549926.10.1122/1.549926 ↗
25. Popovics, S. (1973). A review of the concrete consolidation by vibration. Matériaux et Constructions, 6(6), 453–463.10.1007/BF02473784 ↗
26. Tattersall, G., & Banfill, P. (1983). The rheology of fresh concrete. . Pitman Books Limited.
27. Toutou, Z., & Roussel, N. (2007). Multi scale experimental study of concrete rheology: from water scale to gravel scale. Materials and Structures, 39(2), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-005-9047-y.10.1617/s11527-005-9047-y ↗
28. Tregger, N., Gregori, A., Ferrara, L., & Shah, S. (2012). Correlating dynamic segregation of self-consolidating concrete to the slump-flow test. Construction and Building Materials, 28(1), 499–505.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.052 ↗