High performance concrete
A review
I. Introduction
II. Formulation
III. Workability
IV. Mechanical properties
V. Durability
VI. Development
VII. Conclusions and prospects
2
Introduction
A definition of the High Performance Concrete
Concrete with compressive strength ranging between
50 MPa and 100 MPa
Type of concrete
•< 50 MPa : Ordinary concrete
•50 - 100 MPa High performance concrete
•100- 150 MPa Very High Performance Concrete
• > 150 MPa Ultra High Performance Concrete
• > 200 MPa Ductal
3
HP concrete
4
Slag cement for bridges
Successful utilization of slag blended cements in Mediterranean TGV
(High speed train): Lafarge delivered 200 ktons of CEM III/B 42,5 PMES
(65 % of slag) for very high performances and durable concrete
5
Ductal
6
Development of HP concrete
Early research : year 70 ’s
Research boom : 80 ’s to mid 90 ’s
First applications (limited) : 70 ’ - 80 ’s
Applications boom : 90 ’s
7
Advantage of high performance concrete
Enhancement of the following:
Ease of placement and compaction without
segregation
Long-term mechanical properties
Early-age strength
Toughness (elasticity)
Volume stability
Service life in severe environment
8
Formulation: raw materials
Composition of a HP concrete
•Aggregates (gravels and sands)
• Cement (replaced partially by fly ash, slag, filler, etc...)
• Silica fume
origin : by-product from silicium alloys industry
structure : amorphous shape : spherical
Average size : 0,2 µm specific gravity: 2.20
surface BET : 15 to 25 m2/g
color : white to black as a function of carbon content
• Superplasticizer (PNS/PMS, PCP…)
• Water
9
Silica fume morphology (SEM)
10
Formulation: selection of the raw
materials
Gravels and sand
The better the mechanical properties of aggregates (especially the coarse),
the higher the targeted compressive strength
Cement
Fly ash, slag, filler
Silica fume
• The lower the carbon and alkalies, the better the silica fume
•
Superplasticizer
• Moderate effciency in term of slump retention : PNS, PMS
• High efficiency in term of slump retention : some PCP…
11
Formulation: compressive strength prediction
Sj j
Feret law : 2
1 W A
L I
Sj: strength at day j; j: coefficient related to cement at j days; : specific gravity of
cement; W: water volume; A: air volume; L : binder content;
l: filler content in binder.
To increase concrete compressive strength, volume
fraction of water and air must be reduced.
In other words: increase the packing of the concrete
12
Formulation: proportioning
Optimisation of the granular skeleton for maximum
packing
Optimum size aggregate by trial batches
Usually small size aggregates (10-14 mm)
Low content of coarse sand (fineness modulus of 3)
Optimisation of the system “binder - SP”
Minimum cost for targeted specifications
Workability (initial and retention), strength
Optimum by trial batches
13
Recipes of different types of concrete (indicative)
C25 C40 C60 C80 C100 UHP
3
A kg/m 1100 1050 1050 1050 1050 -
3
S kg/m 800 750 750 700 700 1200
3
C kg/m 280 400 420 450 500 700
3
SF kg/m - - 30 40 50 230
3
SP kg/m 1 4 8 12 16 45
3
W l/m 170 180 160 145 130 200
3
Fibres kg/m - - - - - 200
W/C 0.6 0.45 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.21
14
Workability
• Slump test: good tool
for concrete production control
• However, not sufficient
to characterize
workability HP concrete
HPC with same slump
but different workability
behaviours
15
Rheology of suspension: a reminder
Concrete behave like Bingham fluids which are characterized
by 2 rheological parameters: a yield value and a plastic viscosity.
Shear stress (Pa)
Bingham fluid
Plastic viscosity (Pa.s)
Yield Newtonien fluid
stress
(Pa) viscosity (Pa.s)
=
f (1/slump) Shear rate (s-1)
16
Rheological behaviour of HPC and OC
Shear stress (Pa)
HPC
• Low yield stress (High slump)
• High plastic viscosity
O.C.
• Higher yield stress(Lower slump)
• Lower plastic viscosity
Shear rate (s-1)
17
Some HPC workability specifications
• Initial slump value usually higher than 20 cm.
• The plastic viscosity is usually limited to
values below 200 Pa.s, especially for long distance
pumping
• Slump retention must be ensured
18
Mechanical properties
Compressive strength comparison over time
100
95
80
75
C.S. (MPa)
70 C25
60
C60
50
40 40 C80
30
20 20 25
6
0
0 10 20 30
Age (days)
19
Compressive strength: failure mode comparison
OC HPC
Aggregate Aggregate
Cracks after Cracks after crushing
crushing test test: more cohesion
matrix/aggregate
20
Tensile / flexural strength comparison
St Sfl
(MPa) (MPa)
C25 3 5
C60 4,5 8
C80 5 10
UHP C 10 50
21
Compression behaviour: stress comparison
100
80 C25
Stress (MPa)
60 C60
C80
40 E28d (GPa)
20 C25 35
C60 45
0
0 1 2 3 4
C80 50
Strain (10-3)
22
Shrinkage comparison
Hydraulic shrinkage
Values higher than OC
Drying shrinkage
Values lower than OC
Total shrinkage
Similar to OC (0.1%)
23
Durability
Microstructure comparison of OC and HPC
OC HPC
• More compact binder matrix
• The CSH are dense and poorly crystallised
• Porosity very low
24
Durability
Resistance to aggressive environments
Enhanced when compared to OC
Sulphates water, sea water
Example: chloride diffusion 2.5 time lower in HPC
Low W/C = low diffusion coefficient
25
Durability
Resistance to alkali-aggregates
Enhanced when compared to OC
Low diffusion of alkalies
26
Durability
Carbonation resistance
HPC without silica fume
Less carbonation than OC
HPC with silica fume (and SP)
Less carbonation than OC
Higher resistivity (20-25 times) than OC
Immune to carbonation to a depth that would cause
corrosion of reinforcement
27
Durability
Freezing-thawing
W/C below 0.35: air-entrainment agents not
necessary
W/C above 0.40: AEA compulsory
W/C between 0.35 and 0.4: AEA recommended
28
Durability
Fire resistance
Fragile behaviour in case of fire: bursts
Solution: fibers
Metallic to avoid bursts
Polypropylene: creation of internal porosity that
reduces vapor pressure in case of fire
29
