DateLaboratory Testing of Portland Cement Concrete Patch Material ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Sealtight 2255-White (the poly-alphamethylstyrene-based concrete curingcompound) should also be incorporated into the same DBR project forcomparisons with Sealtight 1600-White (the water-based, wax-based curingcompound), to evaluate their performances and cost-effectiveness.• If the field performances of the modified concrete mixes are successful 15 , it willbe recommended that the WisDOT dowel bar retrofit warranty be changed to3,000 psi at 24 hours, to allow the use of a modified Mn/DOT 3U18 patchmaterial on DBR projects with at least 24-hour lane closures.• If the Sealtight 2255-White poly-alphamethylstyrene-based concrete curingcompound does not prove to be cost-effective, modifications to WisDOT’s DBRwarranty specification will be recommended.• Further experimentation using saturated LWFA to prevent shrinkage should beconducted. Although the sticky consistency of the concrete mixes made withLWFA would make it difficult to use in DBR projects, it might work well forother applications.8.0 IMPLEMENTATIONThe WisDOT Technology Advancement Unit will solicit the transportation districts for aDBR project scheduled for construction in 2005. Test sections evaluating the Mn/DOT3U18 patch material containing Denka CSA #20 (Sample 4 from this study) andTetraguard AS20 (Sample 10 from this study) will be installed on this site and theproprietary patch material used for the remainder of the project will be used as thecontrol. The Sealtight 2255-White concrete curing compound will also be tested on thisproject to further evaluate its performance, with the Sealtight 1600-White used as thecontrol. The combinations of patch materials and curing compounds will result in aminimum of three test sections, with the Sealtight 1600-White applied in one wheelpathand the Sealtight 2255-White applied in the other wheelpath of each test section. If15 It is a concern that, initially after construction, thermal conditions might cause the concrete slabs andsteel dowels to apply stresses to the patch material in the DBR slots. If the patch material cannot gainstrength rapidly enough to resist these stresses, it is likely to become damaged.39
feasible, all test sections will be replicated with the curing compounds in alternatewheelpaths.The proposed test sections are shown in Table 16 below.TEST SECTIONSSealtight 1600-White (LWP)Sealtight 2255-White (RWP)Denka CSA#20Test Section1ATetraguardAS20Test Section2AProprietaryControlTest Section3AREPLICATED TEST SECTIONSSealtight 2255-White (LWP)Sealtight 1600-White (RWP)Denka CSA#20Test Section1BTetraguardAS20Test Section2BProprietaryControlTest Section3BThe field investigation will be monitored for one year, at which time any materialshrinkage and resultant cracking or debonding will be observable. If applicable, changesto WisDOT’s DBR warranty specification will be made.If resources permit, additional laboratory testing of Solite and Hydrocure saturatedlightweight fine aggregates, at a 50% sand replacement rate, will be conducted inWisDOT’s Materials Laboratory. Testing should include, at a minimum, compressivestrength, length change, freeze-thaw durability, and permeability.40
Page 1 and 2: REPORT NUMBER: WI-01-04LABORATORY T
Page 3 and 4: LABORATORY TESTING OF PORTLAND CEME
Page 5 and 6: TABLE OF CONTENTSTechnical Report D
Page 7 and 8: Table 12. Concrete-to-Concrete Bond
Page 9 and 10: Table 1. Rapid Setting Concrete Pat
Page 11 and 12: addition to these techniques, which
Page 13 and 14: manufactured by Perstorp Polyols, I
Page 15 and 16: Performance results reported by the
Page 17 and 18: 4.4 Concrete Curing CompoundsTable
Page 19 and 20: - 5.1.3 Air Content -The concrete s
Page 21 and 22: Figure 5. Time of Set Test Results2
Page 23 and 24: The change in height test results a
Page 25 and 26: - 5.1.6 Compressive Strength -A set
Page 27 and 28: Mn/DOT 3U18 (CONTROL) Mn/DOT 3U18 w
Page 29 and 30: - 5.1.7 Phase I Test Results Summar
Page 31 and 32: - 5.2.2 Compressive Strength -Since
Page 33 and 34: 26Figure 12. Length Change Test Res
Page 35 and 36: The freeze/thaw test results, which
Page 37 and 38: any dirt or epoxy. Then, the specim
Page 39 and 40: - 5.2.6 Concrete-to-Concrete Bond S
Page 41 and 42: - 5.2.7 Phase II Test Results Summa
Page 43 and 44: Table 14. Cost ComparisonADDITIVE/A
Page 45: The patch material containing Denka
Page 49 and 50: Roberts, J. W. (April 23, 2002) Imp
Page 52 and 53: Mn/DOT 3U18 (Control)PHASE I: MIX D
Page 54 and 55: Mn/DOT 3U18 (Control) (Continued)PH
Page 56 and 57: Type K Cement (Continued)PHASE I: M
Page 58 and 59: KomponentPHASE I: MIX DESIGNS AND T
Page 60 and 61: Denka CSA #20 (42.14 lb/yd 3 or 25
Page 62 and 63: Denka CSA 100R (42.14 lb/yd 3 or 25
Page 64 and 65: Peramin SRA330 (Continued)PHASE I:
Page 66 and 67: Eclipse PlusPHASE I: MIX DESIGNS AN
Page 68 and 69: Eclipse Plus (Continued)PHASE I: MI
Page 70 and 71: SolitePHASE I: MIX DESIGNS AND TEST
Page 72: HydrocurePHASE I: MIX DESIGNS AND T
Page 76 and 77: Mn/DOT 3U18 (Control)PHASE II: MIX
Page 78 and 79: Type K CementPHASE II: MIX DESIGNS
Page 80 and 81: KomponentPHASE II: MIX DESIGNS AND
Page 82 and 83: Denka CSA #20 (50.56 lb/yd 3 or 30
Page 84 and 85: Tetraguard AS20PHASE II: MIX DESIGN
Page 86: APPENDIX C:ADDITIONAL TESTING OFSAT

DateLaboratory Testing of Portland Cement Concrete Patch Material ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?