12.07.2015 Views

compatibility of ultra high performance concrete as repair material

compatibility of ultra high performance concrete as repair material

compatibility of ultra high performance concrete as repair material

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

5.1.1 Combination <strong>of</strong> Splitting Tensile Test with Freeze-Thaw CyclesFor the UHPC-NSC specimens exposed to 0, 300, 600 and 900 freeze-thaw cycles andsubjected to a splitting tensile load scenario, the following conclusions were derived:a. The moisture condition <strong>of</strong> the <strong>concrete</strong> substrate is a critical factor for attainingacceptable bond <strong>performance</strong>. A large number <strong>of</strong> composite specimens c<strong>as</strong>t withthe dry <strong>concrete</strong> substrate failed before applying the load. In contr<strong>as</strong>t, excellentbond <strong>performance</strong> w<strong>as</strong> obtained under saturated <strong>concrete</strong> substrate.b. The exposure to a lengthy freeze-thaw cycling process does not decre<strong>as</strong>e theindirect tensile strength <strong>of</strong> the bond. In all c<strong>as</strong>es, the specimens with 300 freezethawcycles have greater strength than those without cycles. While the strength <strong>of</strong>those samples subjected to 600 and 900 cycles had slightly greater or lower valuesthan those without cycles.c. The bond <strong>performance</strong> at old age (greater than 185 days) gives excellent resultsunder splitting tensile stress, regardless <strong>of</strong> the degree <strong>of</strong> roughness <strong>of</strong> the <strong>concrete</strong>substrate or the exposure to freeze-thaw cycles. The bond strength broadlyovercomes the minimum requirements specified by ACI 546.3R-06, even most <strong>of</strong>the specimens obtained more than the double.d. The predominant failure modes were tensile rupture <strong>of</strong> the substrate and a mixture<strong>of</strong> bond/<strong>concrete</strong> failure or shearing <strong>of</strong> the grooves (grooved surfaces only). Thisis a sign that the bond strength w<strong>as</strong> greater than that <strong>of</strong> the <strong>concrete</strong> substrate.Besides this, most <strong>of</strong> the composite specimens failed at tensile stress range similarto failure stress <strong>of</strong> <strong>concrete</strong> estimated by the relationship between compressivestrength and splitting tensile strength given by ACI 318-11.e. The evolution <strong>of</strong> the fundamental transversal frequency does not seem to be agood indicator <strong>of</strong> the bond strength evolution. All samples subjected to 300freeze-thaw cycles and c<strong>as</strong>t under surface saturated conditions showed an incre<strong>as</strong>ein bond strength <strong>as</strong> well <strong>as</strong> fundamental transverse frequency. However, somespecimens c<strong>as</strong>t under dry <strong>concrete</strong> substrate also experienced an incre<strong>as</strong>e infundamental transverse frequency after freeze-thaw cycling, but failed during the96

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!