compatibility of ultra high performance concrete as repair material

More documents

Recommendations

Info

f sp = 2 ∗ PA ∗ π in psi Equation 3.1where f sp is the splitting tensile strength, P is the maximum applied load and A is the areaof the bonding plane.3.1.2 Slant Shear TestClimaco and Regan (2001) stated that the slant shear method is widely accepted to assessthe bond strength between concrete substrate and the overlay material due to its realisticrepresentation of the stress states in the real structures and its simplicity. This methodconsists in applying a compressive force to a composite sample which is composed oftwo different materials bonded together along an interface arranged at some inclination tothe direction of the applied load (Eyre and Campos 1996). Therefore, the interfacebetween both materials is subjected to compression and shear stresses during the loading.This bond test method gives consistent results for both cementitious and noncementitiousoverlays (Abu-Tair et al. 1996).There are various configurations used for the test, such as the sample sizes and the angleof the bond plane. BS EN 12615:1999 (British Standard 1999) utilizes prisms of3.9x3.9x15.7 in (100x100x400 mm) or 1.6x1.6x6.3 in (40x40x160 mm) with a bondsurface inclined at an angle of 30° from vertical while ASTM C 882 (Bond Strength ofEpoxy-Resin Systems With Concrete By Slant Shear) recommends the use of cylinderswith 3 in diameter and 5.6 in height with a bond interface inclined at an angle of 30° fromvertical. The French standard NFP 18-872 uses prisms measuring 3.9x3.9x11.8 in(100x100x300 mm) at an angle of 30° from vertical while the Italian standard adoptsprisms of 2.8x2.8x7.9in (70x70x200 mm) with a joint angle of 17° from vertical(Climaco and Regan 2001; Pacheco-Torgal et al. 2008). Robins and Austin (1995) castprisms of 2x2.2x5.9 in (50x55x150 mm) with a bond interface forming an angle of 30°,45°, 60° with the vertical. Naderi (2009) utilized prims of 3.9x3.9x9.8 in (100x100x250mm) with a bond surface angle of 30°. Sooriyaarachchi et al. (2002) cast cylinders of 3 in40
(75 mm) diameter and 5.9 in (150 mm) long with a bond interface inclined 30° to thelongitudinal direction.Climaco and Regan (2001) obtained similar results between prisms of 5.9x5.9x39.4 in(150x150x1000 mm) and 4x4x12 in (102x102x305 mm) showing that there is not anysignificant effect due to the variation of the sample dimensions. However, the inclinationof the bond interface does; Austin et al. (1999) emphasized that this bond strengthmethod has a serious shortcoming in its dependency on the angle of the interface.Namely, the standard tests, such as BS EN 1265:1999 and ASTM C882 fix the jointangle with an inclination of 30° from the vertical excluding the likelihood of attaining abond failure on a different plane.The slant shear test is sensitive to the degree of roughness of the substrate (Abu-Tair etal. 1996). In contrast, Robins and Austin (1995) showed that the pull off is more sensitiveto the roughness of the substrate than the slant shear test. According to Robins and Austin(1995), this might be explained due the fact that the tensile bond strength is sensitive tothe existence of surface defects which cause the reduction in the effective bond area andstress concentration at the tips of microcracks, which accelerate their extension.Robins and Austin (1995), and Santos and Julio (2011), developed finite element modelsto study how the stiffness mismatch between the overlay and subtract materials affect thedistribution of stresses along the interface. Both showed that there is an increase in bothnormal and shear at the ends of the bond plane, with the maximum stresses taking placeat the side with least overlay material depth.3.1.3 Pull Off TestThe pull off tests consists of applying a direct tensile force to a core advanced through theoverlay material and into the underlying concrete until failure takes place (Issa et al.2008). Sprinkel (1997) stated that the pull off test, as well called direct tensile method, isthe best technique to assess the bond strength in the field. The pull off has been widelyused in research applications due to its potential correlation to in situ results and the fact41
Page 1 and 2: COMPATIBILITY OF ULTRA HIGH PERFORM
Page 3 and 4: Table of ContentsList of Figures ..
Page 5 and 6: 4.3.2 Discussion ..................
Page 7 and 8: Figure 3.14 CSP index .............
Page 9 and 10: Table 4.7 Summary of indirect tensi
Page 11 and 12: List of AbbreviationsACI.AFtASTM.CO
Page 13 and 14: 1 Introduction and MotivationCurren
Page 15: 2 Background and Literature ReviewT
Page 18 and 19: spaces and to decrease the amount o
Page 20 and 21: water/binder=constantChoose steel f
Page 22 and 23: UHPC formulations and provides a se
Page 24 and 25: Table 2.3Comparison of UHPC materia
Page 26 and 27: esults obtained in this project wer
Page 28 and 29: 2.1.3.4 Environmental Impact of UHP
Page 30 and 31: 1997). Emmons and Vaysburd (1996) d
Page 32 and 33: e) ConstructabilityIt is recommenda
Page 34 and 35: Table 2.5, continuedCementitious ma
Page 36 and 37: • Rehabilitation of a bridge pier
Page 38 and 39: UHPC is a cost-effective solution i
Page 40 and 41: apparatus will measure the shear st
Page 42 and 43: substrate while the scarifying meth
Page 44 and 45: such test configuration, this upper
Page 46 and 47: From the equilibrium of forces of F
Page 48 and 49: The first layer, also called penetr
Page 50 and 51: 3 MethodologyThis report aims to st
Page 54 and 55: that the bond interface, in this lo
Page 56 and 57: Ductal® premix is typically compri
Page 58 and 59: associated test results (temperatur
Page 60 and 61: Figure 3.2 Detail of splitting tens
Page 62 and 63: 3.3.3 Pull-off testPull off test wa
Page 64 and 65: (a) Chipped surface, slightlybrushe
Page 66 and 67: (a) Molds to cast slant shearspecim
Page 68 and 69: Timber moulds were used to cast the
Page 70 and 71: macrotexture depth was measured in
Page 72 and 73: As shown in the above tables, the m
Page 74 and 75: (a) Concrete substrate under water
Page 76 and 77: used, as shown in Figure 3.17. A fa
Page 78 and 79: Equation 2.2 and Equation 2.3 were
Page 80 and 81: (a) Steel disks glued to the UHPC s
Page 82 and 83: value to the lowest one in the foll
Page 84 and 85: Transversal frequency (Hz)255025002
Page 86 and 87: 115113Relative Dynamic Modulus (%)1
Page 88 and 89: Only those specimens with a grooved
Page 90 and 91: Table 4.6, continued.MeanMeanCOV,st
Page 92 and 93: concrete or bond/concrete while for
Page 94 and 95: surface treatment applied. In contr
Page 96 and 97: Table 4.8Summary of slant-shear tes
Page 98 and 99: (a) B(C): Bond due to concrete fail
Page 100 and 101: 3143Bond Capacity, (psi)30002500200
Page 102 and 103:
The different failure modes obtaine
Page 104 and 105:
failures occurred in the concrete s
Page 106 and 107:
property of the concrete has higher
Page 108 and 109:
5.1.1 Combination of Splitting Tens
Page 110 and 111:
5.1.4 Overall performancea. For thi
Page 112 and 113:
mismatch and load eccentricity. Tho
Page 114 and 115:
6 ReferenceAbu-Tair, A. I., Rigden,
Page 116 and 117:
Climaco, J. C. T. S., and Regan, P.
Page 118 and 119:
Graybeal, B., and Tanesi, J. (2007)
Page 120 and 121:
Misson, D. (2008). "Influence of Cu
Page 122 and 123:
Silfwerbrand, J. (1990). "Improving
Page 124 and 125:
7 Appendix: NSC mix designsTable 7.
Page 126 and 127:
Table 7.33rd mix for the splitting
Page 128 and 129:
Table 7.51st mix for the splitting
Page 130 and 131:
Table 7.73rd mix for the splitting
Page 132 and 133:
Figure 8.2 Concrete retarder inform
Page 134 and 135:
Table 9.1, continued.BrBr w/oBr 300
Page 136 and 137:
Table 9.2, continued.TrialBrushed 6
Page 138 and 139:
10 Appendix: Splitting tensile pris
Page 140 and 141:
Table 10.1, continued.128
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Table 10.2Splitting monolithic NSC
Page 150 and 151:
11 Appendix: Slant-shear specimens
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
PortionNumberof 1figures/tables/ill
Page 158 and 159:
Figure 2.5Miguel Angel Carbonell Mu
Page 160 and 161:
Miguel Angel Carbonell Munoz Mon, M
Page 162 and 163:
Miguel - not sure what you need fro
Page 164 and 165:
End Page 1235Type of UsePortionNumb
Page 166 and 167:
Type of UseIntended publisher of ot
show all

compatibility of ultra high performance concrete as repair material

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

Delete template?

Save as template?