EARLY AGE AND LONG TERM STRENGTH OF MIXES MADE WITH STALITE LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CAROLINA STALITE COMPANY RESEARCH LAB GOLD HILL, NORTH CAROLINA

Similar documents
OPTIMIZED 3/4" GRADATION LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE REPORT

Mr. Jody Wall Carolina Stalite P.O. Box 186 Phone: (704)

Mr. Jody Wall Carolina Stalite P.O. Box 186 Phone: (704)

Final Report of ASTM C Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete

Low 28 Day Compression Strength NOW WHAT?

TILT-UP DESIGN SOFTWARE VERIFICATION FOR LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE WALL BEHAVIOR DURING LIFTING

CHAPTER 5 FRESH AND HARDENED PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE WITH MANUFACTURED SAND

Properties of Concrete. Properties of Concrete. Properties of Concrete. Properties of Concrete. Properties of Concrete. Properties of Concrete

Comparison of Shrinkage Strains between HPC3 and HPC4 made with gravel and limestone coarse aggregates with high and low absorptions

GDOT RP Investigation of Recycled Tire Chips for Use in GDOT Concrete Used to Construct Barrier Walls and Other Applications Phase I

Relationship between Modulus of Elasticity and Strength of Brick Aggregate Concrete

Estimating Concrete Strength by the Maturity Method

Structural Lightweight Concrete for Accelerated Bridge Construction

APPENDIX I NASP TEST PROTOCOLS

COMPRESSIVE CREEP OF A LIGHTWEIGHT, HIGH STRENGTH CONCRETE MIXTURE. Edward C. Vincent. Thesis presented to the faculty of the

ATLANTIC TESTING LABORATORIES Hot Weather Concreting

PROJECT CONTRIBUTORS

Use of Dolomitic Micro Fines in Concrete. Dan Miller, MSCE, PE OMM Cement and Concrete Engineer Ohio Department of Transportation

SPECIFICATIONS - DETAILED PROVISIONS Section Controlled Low Strength Material C O N T E N T S

Final Report of ASTM C 331 Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Concrete Masonry Units

Concrete Paving in NOVA Conventional and Pervious Concrete & Streets and Local Roads. Rod Meyers, PE, BASF Construction Chemicals

Concrete Pavement Research Highlights. Mike Bergin State Structural Materials Engineer FDOT Construction Conference February 20, 2013

FLEXURAL STRENGTHENING OF R.C BEAMS HAVING PLASTIC AGGREGATE THROUGH REDUCED W/C

Use of Brick Masonry from Construction and Demolition Waste as Aggregates in Concrete

Determining the Bond-Dependent Coefficient of Glass Fiber- Reinforced Polymer (GFRP) Bars

ENGINEERED BRICK MASONRY STANDARDS

Scotchcast Polyolefin Fibers

COMPRESSIVE CREEP OF PRESTRESSED CONCRETE MIXTURES WITH AND WITHOUT MINERAL ADMIXTURES. Richard Meyerson. Thesis presented to the faculty of the

STUDY ON SILICA FUME REPLACED CONCRETE WITH SUPER PLASTICIZER

SUPERPLASTICIZED HIGH-VOLUME FLY ASH STRUCTURAL CONCRETE *

Available online at ScienceDirect. Procedia Engineering 145 (2016 ) 66 73

Comparative Study Between Externally Cured Concrete And Internally Cured Concrete

MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF HIGH-STRENGTH CONCRETE UP TO 18 KSI

CEMENT STABILIZED SAND

Mitigation of Alkali-Silica Reaction While Using Highly Reactive Aggregates with Class C fly ash and Reduction in Water to Cementitious Ratio

Evaluation of Processed Bottom Ash for Use as Lightweight Aggregate in the Production of Concrete Masonry Units

ITEM 421 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE

Effect of Aggregate Size and Gradation on Compressive Strength of Normal Strength Concrete for Rigid Pavement

Performance Engineered Mixtures So what

Evaluation of Processed Bottom Ash for Use as Lightweight Aggregate in the Production of Concrete Masonry Units

Mr. Gabriel Ojeda Fritz-Pak Corporation Phone: (214) Eastover Circle Fax: (214)

DEVELOPMENT OF A SPECIFICATION FOR LOW CRACKING BRIDGE DECK CONCRETE IN VIRGINIA

Schedule of Accreditation issued by United Kingdom Accreditation Service 2 Pine Trees, Chertsey Lane, Staines-upon-Thames, TW18 3HR, UK

Estimating Camber, Deflection, and Prestress Losses in Precast, Prestressed Bridge Girders, TRC 1606

Structural Behavior of Self-Compacting Concrete Elements

Comparison of Length Changes, Flexural Strengths and Compressive Strengths. Between Concrete Made with Rounded Gravel

Experimental Case Study Demonstrating Advantages of Performance Specifications Karthik Obla 1 Fernando Rodriguez 2 and Soliman Ben Barka 3

San Francisco State University School of Engineering ENGR 200, Materials of Engineering. Laboratory 3. Concrete Compression Test I.

NRMCA is working on. Experimental Case Study Demonstrates Advantages of Performance Specifications

CONCRETE MIX DESIGN. Weight Method Absolute Volume Method

Dimensional Stability of Concrete

Characterization of TX Active Cement

Section CEMENT STABILIZED SAND

CONCRETE MIX DESIGN WORKSHOP FOR NORMAL CONCRETE MIXTURES 3/21/2017 1

Mechanical Properties of Lightweight Concrete Incorporating Recycled Synthetic Wastes

The Mechanical Properties of High Strength Concrete for Box Girder Bridge Deck in Malaysia

METHOD OF TEST FOR EVALUATION OF SUPERPLASTICIZING ADMIXTURES FOR CONCRETE

Mr. Paul Falco Cellular Concrete Technologies, LLC 184 Technology Drive, Suite 200 Phone: (949)

ROAD COMMISSION FOR OAKLAND COUNTY SPECIAL PROVISION FOR QUALITY CONTROL AND ACCEPTANCE OF PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE

Mix Design Issues for. In-Place Recycling Products

32.02 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TESTING AGENCY

CTL Engineering of Indiana, Inc.

Seattle Public Utilities Materials Laboratory

Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.

TACAMP 2014 CONCRETE. Presented by Rick Wheeler

Pennoni Associates, Inc.

Statistical software to improve the accuracy of geopolymer concrete mix design and proportioning

Mix Design Basics CIVL

SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION TO ISO/IEC 17025:2005

Seismic Considerations and Design Methodology for Lightweight Cellular Concrete Embankments and Backfill

SECTION CONCRETE. B. ACI 318 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary

Internal Curing. Improving Concrete Durability and Sustainability Using Internal Curing. Using Prewetted Lightweight Aggregates

Investigations on Some Properties of no-fines Concrete

A. Section includes cast-in-place concrete, including reinforcement, concrete materials, mixture design, placement procedures, and finishes.

5 Concrete Placement

PROPERTIES AND EFFECTS OF COPPER SLAG IN CONCRETE

Advantages: Advantages include:

STATISTICAL MODELS TO PREDICT MECHANICAL AND VISCO-ELASTIC PROPERTIES OF SCC DESIGNATED FOR PRECAST/PRESTRESSED APPLICATIONS

What Is Concrete Mix Design?

AESCO, Inc. Huntington Beach, California, USA

Cellular Concrete LLC.

INFLUENCE OF INSUFFICIENT WATER CONTENT ON POROSITY, WATER PERMEABILITY AND CALCIUM CARBONATE EFFLORESCENCE FORMATION OF MASONRY MORTARS.

ENGINEERING MATERIALS Assignment #8: Concrete Mix Design

Truck Mixer, Agitator and Front Discharge Concrete Carrier. Standards. TMMB Printing

PAVETEX Engineering, LLC

Effects of Wash Water on the Compressive Strength of Concrete

A H M 531 C The Civil Engineering Center

The hardening is caused by chemical action between water and the cement due to which concrete grows stronger with age.

INVESTIGATION ON ASTM C882 TEST PROCEDURE OF SLANT SHEAR BOND STRENGTH OF CONCRETE REPAIR MATERIAL

Inverted Pavement VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY S EXPERIENCE

Maturity and Maturity Testing

Effect of Steam Curing on Shrinkage of Concrete Piles with Silica Fume

Executive Summary. Comparative Testing Volumetric versus Drum Truck

Predicted vs Measured Initial Camber in Precast Prestressed Concrete Girders

Experimental Investigation of Partially Replaced Fine Sandstone Powder in Concrete

Internal Curing of Concrete Using Prewetted Light Weight Aggregates

Optimizing Concrete Mixtures for Performance and Sustainability

An Experimental Study on Partial Replacement of Cement by Ggbs and Natural Sand by Quarry Sand in Concrete

International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 11, November ISSN

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF EFFECTS OF POTASSIUM CARBONATE ON STRENGTH PARAMETERS OF CONCRETE. 3 Mehvish, Insha Bashir. J&K, India

Transcription:

EARLY AGE AND LONG TERM STRENGTH OF MIXES MADE WITH STALITE LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CAROLINA STALITE COMPANY RESEARCH LAB GOLD HILL, NORTH CAROLINA RESEARCH BY: JODY R WALL, P.E. DIRECTOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT STEVEN MALOOF TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE

On May 28, 2003 three concrete mixes were produced at Carolina Stalite s laboratory in Gold Hill, North Carolina. The mixes were similar to those recommend by Stalite for 3000, 4000 and 5000-psi concrete production. The mixes were labeled, which is a standard 3000 psi mix design recommended by Stalite,, which is a standard 3000 psi mix design recommended by Stalite,, which is a standard 3000 psi mix design recommended by Stalite, and NW which is a typical 3500 to 4000 psi normal weight mix design. The materials used for the mixes were Lafarge Type I/II cement, Hedrick concrete sand from Lilesville North Carolina, normal weight #67 stone from Vulcan Materials Cabarrus Quarry, Stalite ¾ to #4 rotary kiln expanded slate lightweight aggregate and local water. The mix proportions and fresh properties are list below. Mix Design Material NW 1 Cement 564 658 752 564 Stalite ¾ 850 850 850 0 Lightweight Normal weight Stone 0 0 0 1775 Natural Sand 1425 1347 1247 1180 Water 296 296 304 304 WRDA 35 oz/cmt 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 AEA 1400 oz/cmt 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Fresh Properties Material NW 1 Slump (in.) 3.0 4.0 5.0 4.75 Air Content (%) 2.5 3.0 2.5 2.25 Temperature(º F) 77 79.7 76.2 76.2 Plastic Density (pcf) 121.8 119.8 120.3 151.3 The set time of the above concrete mixtures was determined in accordance with ASTM standards. Set Time Time (Hours) Penetrometer Reading (psi) NW 1 3 0 20 15 10 3.5 30 35 25 15 4 55 65 50 25 4.5 125 80 90 60 5 175 180 155 90 5.5 430 335 320 200 6 700 700 680 540

The results show a similar set time for the lightweight concrete mixtures and the normal weight comparison mixture. SET Time 800 700 Penetrometer Reading (PSI) 600 500 400 300 200 NW 1 100 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Time (Hrs) The compressive strength of the mixtures was determined in accordance with ASTM standards. Compressive Strength (psi) 12 hr 460 622 648 417 12 hr 477 670 636 452 18 hr 1115 1141 1152 1038 24 hr 1362 1810 2047 1264 24 hr 1518 1899 2112 1247 48 hr 2509 2981 3644 2296 48 hr 2521 3060 3268 2600 The lightweight mixtures show compressive strengths similar to the normal weight comparison mixture at 48 hours. For precast/prestress applications this is important in determining bed turnaround times. With the lightweight concrete mixes tested using expanded slate lightweight aggregate the bed turnaround time can be estimated the same as for similar normal weight concrete mixtures.

Compressive Strength fc' (PSI) 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Concrete Strength vs Time 0 to 2 days 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Time (days) NW 1 Log. () Log. () Log. () Log. (NW 1) Compressive Strength (psi) 7 DAYS 4715 5704 6055 5138 28 DAYS 6817 5362 5575 5445 28 DAYS 6276 6565 7699 6575 56 DAYS 6764 7268 7229 7118 90 DAYS 7066 7642 8986 6946 90 DAYS 6454 7980 8658 7143 180 DAYS 6783 7925 8426 7615 180DAYS 7294 8406 8905 7502 365 DAYS 7592 7896 8572 7440 365 DAYS 7522 8019 8756 7350

Concrete Strength vs Time 0 to 7 Days Compressive Strength fc' (PSI) 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time (days) NW 1 Log. () Log. () Log. () Log. (NW 1) Concrete Strength vs Time 0 to 90 days Compressive Strength fc' (PSI) 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 7 14 21 28 35 42 49 56 63 70 77 84 91 98 NW 4 Log. () Log. () Log. () Time (days) Log. (NW 4) The Modulus of elasticity of the concrete mixtures was determined in accordance with ASTM standards. The cylinders were moist cured until testing age. 4 x8 cylinders were tested at 7, 28, 56, 90, 180 and 365 days. The unit weight of the mixtures was determined in accordance with ASTM C567. The following tables show the concrete compressive strength, modulus of elasticity and density at ages of 7 to 365 days. The tables also show the calculated modulus of elasticity

based on the Georgia institute of technology document, the ACI 363 modified prediction model and the ACI 318 model referenced in ACI 213. Modulus of Elasticity (psi) 7 DAYS 2.81E+06 2.94E+06 3.10E+06 3.70E+06 28 DAYS 3.42E+06 2.87E+06 2.80E+06 3.99E+06 28 DAYS 3.18E+06 3.33E+06 3.58E+06 4.04E+06 56 DAYS 3.35E+06 3.60E+06 3.40E+06 3.95E+06 90 DAYS 3.53E+06 3.39E+06 3.46E+06 4.31E+06 90 DAYS 3.38E+06 3.50E+06 3.63E+06 4.49E+06 180 DAYS 3.74E+06 3.78E+06 3.70E+06 4.33E+06 180DAYS 3.70E+06 3.49E+06 3.87E+06 4.60E+06 365 DAYS 3.37E+06 3.61E+06 3.69E+06 4.73E+06 365 DAYS 3.47E+06 3.44E+06 3.71E+06 5.09E+06 The positive numbers in the variance charts below represent overestimation by the models and negative numbers represent underestimations by the models. The tables below show that the ACI 363 model is the most accurate prediction of modulus of elasticity for lightweight concrete with compressive strengths in the range tested. The testing showed that the ACI 318 model overestimated the modulus of elasticity for expanded slate lightweight aggregate concrete by about 10% on average. The testing showed the Georgia Institute of Technology model to be extremely accurate at strengths above 8000 psi. Modulus of Elasticity Predicted by ACI 318 7 DAYS 3.13E+06 3.42E+06 3.49E+06 4.42E+06 28 DAYS 3.71E+06 3.32E+06 3.35E+06 4.55E+06 28 DAYS 3.56E+06 3.63E+06 3.91E+06 4.96E+06 56 DAYS 3.65E+06 3.81E+06 3.79E+06 5.16E+06 90 DAYS 3.72E+06 3.89E+06 4.17E+06 5.07E+06 90 DAYS 3.56E+06 3.93E+06 4.08E+06 5.13E+06 180 DAYS 3.62E+06 3.92E+06 4.02E+06 5.30E+06 180DAYS 3.76E+06 4.00E+06 4.10E+06 5.21E+06 365 DAYS 3.82E+06 3.88E+06 4.02E+06 5.19E+06 365 DAYS 3.80E+06 3.90E+06 4.06E+06 5.16E+06

Modulus of Elasticity Variance from ACI 318 7 DAYS 10.09% 14.16% 11.17% 16.22% 28 DAYS 7.96% 13.63% 16.30% 12.16% 28 DAYS 10.63% 8.11% 8.38% 18.47% 56 DAYS 8.24% 5.66% 10.28% 23.49% 90 DAYS 5.23% 12.71% 17.12% 14.91% 90 DAYS 5.11% 10.95% 10.84% 12.39% 180 DAYS -3.33% 3.60% 8.03% 18.16% 180DAYS 1.40% 12.70% 5.55% 11.61% 365 DAYS 11.87% 6.82% 8.22% 8.90% 365 DAYS 8.70% 11.90% 8.51% 1.27% Modulus of Elasticity Predicted by ACI 363 modified 7 DAYS 2.96E+06 3.16E+06 3.20E+06 4.13E+06 28 DAYS 3.36E+06 3.09E+06 3.10E+06 4.22E+06 28 DAYS 3.25E+06 3.29E+06 3.48E+06 4.51E+06 56 DAYS 3.31E+06 3.42E+06 3.40E+06 4.64E+06 90 DAYS 3.35E+06 3.47E+06 3.66E+06 4.57E+06 90 DAYS 3.24E+06 3.49E+06 3.59E+06 4.61E+06 180 DAYS 3.28E+06 3.49E+06 3.55E+06 4.73E+06 180DAYS 3.37E+06 3.54E+06 3.60E+06 4.66E+06 365 DAYS 3.41E+06 3.45E+06 3.55E+06 4.65E+06 365 DAYS 3.40E+06 3.46E+06 3.57E+06 4.62E+06 Modulus of Elasticity Variance from ACI 363 7 DAYS 5.06% 7.10% 3.15% 10.52% 28 DAYS -1.77% 7.25% 9.67% 5.49% 28 DAYS 2.14% -1.15% -2.72% 10.24% 56 DAYS -1.37% -5.08% 0.13% 14.99% 90 DAYS -5.22% 2.22% 5.53% 5.71% 90 DAYS -4.25% -0.22% -1.23% 2.61% 180 DAYS -14.18% -8.42% -4.12% 8.36% 180DAYS -9.87% 1.18% -7.56% 1.19% 365 DAYS 1.35% -4.75% -4.10% -1.74% 365 DAYS -2.08% 0.79% -4.01% -10.11%

Modulus of Elasticity Predicted by Georgia Tech Model 7 DAYS 3.43E+06 3.55E+06 3.56E+06 3.56E+06 28 DAYS 3.65E+06 3.50E+06 3.51E+06 3.51E+06 28 DAYS 3.59E+06 3.62E+06 3.73E+06 3.73E+06 56 DAYS 3.62E+06 3.69E+06 3.68E+06 3.68E+06 90 DAYS 3.65E+06 3.72E+06 3.82E+06 3.82E+06 90 DAYS 3.58E+06 3.73E+06 3.78E+06 3.78E+06 180 DAYS 3.60E+06 3.72E+06 3.76E+06 3.76E+06 180DAYS 3.66E+06 3.75E+06 3.79E+06 3.79E+06 365 DAYS 3.68E+06 3.70E+06 3.76E+06 3.76E+06 365 DAYS 3.67E+06 3.71E+06 3.77E+06 3.77E+06 Modulus of Elasticity Variance from Georgia Tech Model 7 DAYS 18.05% 17.10% 13.01% 11.47% 28 DAYS 6.50% 18.18% 20.09% 5.49% 28 DAYS 11.44% 7.88% 3.92% 7.34% 56 DAYS 7.46% 2.53% 7.63% 10.97% 90 DAYS 3.27% 8.71% 9.62% 1.93% 90 DAYS 5.73% 6.07% 3.93% -1.73% 180 DAYS -3.88% -1.49% 1.66% 3.17% 180DAYS -1.27% 6.85% -2.23% -3.75% 365 DAYS 8.50% 2.35% 1.73% -6.67% 365 DAYS 5.47% 7.35% 1.49% -15.19% Variance from ACI 318 vs Compressive Strength Variance % 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% 10.09% 16.30% 14.16% 13.63% 11.17% 10.63% 8.11% 8.24% 7.96% 5.11% 10.28% 5.66% 5.23% 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 12.71% 8.38% 10.95% 3.60% Compressive Strength f'c 8.03% 10.84% 17.12% LW1

E-Modulus vs Concrete Strength Lightweight Mixes 4.10E+06 3.90E+06 E-Modulus (PSI) 3.70E+06 3.50E+06 3.30E+06 3.10E+06 2.90E+06 Log. () Log. () Log. () 2.70E+06 2.50E+06 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 Concrete Strength, fc' (PSI)