You are on page 1of 16

ACI Spring Convention 2012 - Dallas

Committee 237 Self-Consolidating Concrete


March 19, 2012

High-Temperature Behavior of SCC


Self-Compacting/Self-Consolidating
Concrete
Patrick Bamonte and Pietro G. Gambarova
Dept. of Structural Engineering
Politecnico di Milano, Milan - Italy

Introduction

1. Question : Why should SCC behave differently from ordinary


vibrated concrete VC at high temperature and in fire ?

2. Answer : Because of the somewhat different microstructure:


the amounts of cement, water and fine aggregates are similar to
those in VC (70-80% by mass), but SCC typically contains:

less medium and coarse aggregates (30% vs. 50% in VC).

ultrafines (up to 10-15% by mass).

relatively large amounts of chemical admixtures (superplasticizers,


viscosity agents, ).

3. Hence, the cementitious matrix is more compact, with less


interconnected pores, higher vapor-pressure build-ups in the pores at
high temperature, higher tensile stresses around the pores and more
microstructural damage
ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

VC mechanical behavior (1)


Uniaxial compression and tension
Elastic modulus

fc20 = 40 MPa (Takeuchi et al.)


ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

VC mechanical behavior (2)


Hot tests on stressed/unstressed specimens
Residual tests on unstressed specimens

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

ACI and FIB provisions for the mechanical


decay of vibrated concrete:
High temperature - Past cooling
Calcareous-siliceous aggregates
Stressed-unstressed specimens

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

Different thermal ramps and specimens


geometry

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

Test results examined in this study (1)

9 experimental campaigns (2004-2011); only SCC mixes; fc20 = 40-90


MPa, vf 0.2% (pp fibers); unstressed specimens

Milan (2008-2011): , hot and residual tests, T = 20, 200, 400,


600C; cylindrical specimens ( = 100 mm, h = 200 mm); fc = 52, 82,
90 MPa; 3 mixes; no fibers; limestone powder and mixed aggregates.
Persson (2004): hot and residual tests; T = 20, 200, 400, 600,
800C; cylindrical specimens ( = 100 mm, h = 200 mm); fc = 4088 MPa; number of the mixes examined here 10 with/without pp.
fibers; limestone powder and siliceous aggregates.
Sideris (2006): residual tests; T = 20, 100, 300, 500, 700C; cubic
specimens (side = 100 mm); Rc = 42-75 MPa; number of the mixes
examined here 2 (fc = 43 and 54 MPa) without fibers; siliceous
aggregates.

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

Test results examined in this study (2)

Noumow, Carr, Daoud and Toutanji (2006): residual tests; T =


20, 400C; cylindrical specimens ( = 160 mm, h = 320 mm); fc = 7581 MPa with/without pp fibers; one mix examined here (fc = 76 MPa, vf
= 0.2%); silica fume and calcareous aggregates.
Reinhardt and Stegmaier (2006): residual tests T = 20-650C;
short cylindrical cores ( = 100 mm; h = 100 mm); fc = 33-76 MPa;
number of the mixes examined here 5 (fc = 50-76 MPa); siliceous
aggregates, fly ash and calcareous powder.
Fares, Noumow and Remond + (2009): residual tests; T = 20,
150, 300, 450 and 600C; cylindrical (160 320 mm) and prismatic
specimens (100 100 400 mm); number of the mixes examined
here 2 (fc = 37 and 54 MPa); limestone filler and 70-75% siliceous
aggregates.

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

Test results examined in this study (3)

Annerel and Taerwe (2010): residual tests; T = 20, 200, 300,


550C; cylindrical specimens ( = 106 mm, h = 320 mm); fc =
63,46 MPa; one mix examined here (fc = 63 MPa); siliceous
aggregates and limestone powder; no fibers.
Tao, Yuan and Taerwe (2010): hot tests; T = 20, 200, 400, 600,
800C; cylindrical specimens ( = 150 mm, h = 300 mm); fc = 2270 MPa; number of the mixes examined here 2 (fc = 70 and 53 MPa,
the latter with fibers); calcareous aggregates and limestone powder.
Khaliq and Kodur (2011): hot tests; T = 20-800C with T = 100
or 50C; cylindrical specimens ( = 75 mm; h = 150 mm); fc = 70 MPa
(average value); number of the mixes examined here 2 (one with pp
fibers); calcareous aggregates, slag and fly ash.

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

SCC mechanical properties (1)


Compressive strength

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

10

SCC mechanical properties (2)


Elastic modulus

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

11

SCC mechanical behavior (3)


Compressive strength

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

12

SCC mechanical behavior (4)


Compressive strength

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

13

SCC vs. VC thermal behavior

14

Thermal diffusivity

fc20 = 50, 80, 90 MPa


ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

D = vhd2 / (16T)

Conclusions

15

No systematic differences between VC and SCC (no fibers or minimal


amounts of pp fibers), in terms of uniaxial compressive/tensile
strength, elastic modulus, fracture energy.

Minor differences in the stress-strain curves in compression (in SCC


more linear loading branches and steeper softening branches below
400C).

No differences in terms of thernal diffusivity (which controls heat


transfer by conduction).

ACI provisions for the hot/residual properties of VC (no pre-loading in


the heating phase) seem to apply also to SCC.

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

Open questions

Effect of the confinement on SCC behavior in compression: some


data are already available.
Effect of fiber reinforcement: pp fibers against spalling
steel fibers for toughness
Some data are already available.
Spalling sensitivity (typical of highly-unsteady thermal conditions):
some data are available, but there are no normalized methods to
assess concrete sensitivity to spalling.

ACI Committee 237 Dallas (TX), March 19, 2012

You might also like