You are on page 1of 217

DURABILITY OF SHOTCRETE REHABILITATION TREATMENTS

OF B.C. HYDRO DAMS

by

ROLAND HEERE

Diploma, Technische Hochschule Leipzig, Germany, 1988

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF


THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTERS OF APPLIED SCIENCES

in

THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES


(Department of Civil Engineering)

We accept this thesis as conforming


to the required standard

THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

February 1995

© Roland Heere, 1995


In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced
degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it
freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive
copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my
department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or
publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written
permission.

Department of

The University of British Columbia


Vancouver, Canada

DE-6 (2/88)
A B S T R A C T

This thesis is about shotcrete as a repair material for concrete dams situated in the moderate

climate of south western British Columbia. Work on the thesis started in summer 1993. The

experimental part was finished by summer 1994. The project was done in cooperation with

British Columbia Hydro and Powertech Labs Inc.

A literature analysis focused on shotcrete materials and application techniques for repair

purposes. Some literature was found describing long-time performance of shotcrete repairs.

State of the art in shotcrete repairs includes mixes containing silica fume and steelfibers.Both

the wet-mix and the dry-mix processes are capable of producing durable shotcrete. Latex is

controversial as an admixture for shotcrete. Where shotcrete repairs have failed, that was

frequently due tofrostdamage in the substrate or insufficient substrate surface preparation.

BC Hydro has six dams repaired with shotcrete. Four of these dams (Stave Blind Slough,-

Ruskin, Buntzen and Jordan River Diversion Dams) were examined closely. The original

concrete of these dams was of marginal quality and susceptible tofreeze-thaw.Repair shotcrete

was resistant to local environmental situations, although shrinkage cracking and reflective

cracking were observed. Shotcrete on horizontal surfaces and in concave corners had

deteriorated. Most shotcrete did not achieve the specific surface and void spacings

recommended in the literature forfreeze-thawresistance.

Among the recommendations for repair work are:

• Use 100 mm thick silica fume shotcrete with steel fibers on vertical surfaces

• Use 250 mm steelfibershotcrete on substrate concrete that will remain water saturated

• Avoid shotcrete on horizontal surfaces.

ii
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

Abstract ii

Table of Contents iii

List of Tables xi

List of Figures xiv

Acknowledgments xv

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1

CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW 2

2.0 Introduction / Summary 2

2.1 Materials 2

2.1.1 Water 3

2.1.2 Aggregates : 4

2.1.3 Cement 5

2.1.4 Pozzolanic Admixtures 6

2.1.4.1 Silica Fume 7

2.1.4.2 Fly Ash 8

2.1.5 Latex 9

2.1.6 Chemical Admixtures 10

2.1.6.1 Air Entraining Agents 10

2.1.6.2 Water-reducing Admixtures 12

2.1.6.3 Superplasticizers (High Range Water Reducers) 13

2.1.6.4 Accelerators 14

iii
2.1.7 Fibers 16

2.1.7.1 Steel Fibers 16

2.1.7.2 Glass Fibers 19

2.1.7.3 Synthetic Fibers 20

2.2 Application Technology 21

2.2.1 General 21

2.2.1.1 Dry-Mix Shotcrete 21

2.2.1.2 Wet-Mix Shotcrete 22

2.2.2 Surface Preparation 24

2.2.3 Equipment / Crew 25

2.2.3.1 Dry-Mix Shotcrete 25

2.2.3.2 Wet-Mix Shotcrete 27

2.2.4 Mixture 28

2.2.4.1 General 28

2.2.4.2. Dry-Mix Process 28

2.2.4.3 Wet-Mix Process 28

2.2.5 Spraying 28

2.2.5.1 General 28

2.2.5.2 Dry-Mix Process 29

2.2.5.3 Wet-Mix Process 30

2.2.6. Reinforcement / Anchors 31

2.2.7 Finishing 32

2.2.8 Curing 33

2.2.9 Quality Control 33

2.2.10 Experience with Shotcrete Repairs 35


CHAPTER 3 - TESTING METHODS 37

3.0 Introduction / Summary 37

3.1 Description of Field Testing Methods 39

3.1.1 Visual Inspection 39

3.1.2 Sounding 39

3.1.3 Schmidt Hammer Tests 39

3.1.4 Coring 40

3.1.5 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) 41

3.1.6 Carbonation 43

3.2 Description of Laboratory Testing Methods 43

3.2.1 Visual Inspection 43

3.2.2 Stereo Microscope 44

3.2.3 ASTM C457 (Linear Traverse Method) 44

3.2.4 ASTM C642 (Boiled Absorption Test) 45

3.2.5 ASTM C597 (Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity) 46

3.2.6 Carbonation 46

3.2.7 Tensile Bond Strength 46

3.2.8 Tensile Strength Tests 47

3.2.9 ASTM C39 (Compressive Strength Test) 48

3.2.10 Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity (modified ASTM C215 Test) 48

3.2.10.1 Longitudinal Mode 49

3.2.10.2 Torsional Mode 50

3.2.11 Sorptivity Tests 52

3.2.11.1 Scope 52

3.2.11.2 Apparatus 52

3.2.11.3 Specimens 53

3.2.11.4 Procedure 53

3.2.11.5 Calculation 54

v
3.2.11.6 Limitation 54

3.2.12 Estimate of Frost Penetration History 54

3.2.12.1 Exposed Material 55

3.2.12.2 Shotcrete-Substrate Interface 55

CHAPTER 4 - INVESTIGATION 60

4.0 Introduction / Summary 60

4.1 Overview 60

4.2 Stave Blind Slough Dam 63

4.2.1 Site Description 63

4.2.2 Field Investigation 64

4.2.2.1 Scope of Work 64

4.2.2.2 Visual Inspection 65

4.2.2.3 Sounding 66

4.2.2.4 Coring 67

4.2.2.5 Test Results 68

4.2.3 Laboratory Testing 69

4.2.3.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection 69

4.2.3.2 Test Results 71

4.3 Buntzen Dam 72

4.3.1 Site Description 72

4.3.2 Field Investigation 73

4.3.2.1 Scope of Work 73

4.3.2.2 Visual Inspection 74

4.3.2.3 Sounding 76

4.3.2.4 Coring 76

4.3.2.5 Test Results 77

vi
4.3.3 Laboratory Testing 78

4.3.3.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples 78

4.3.3.2 Test Results 79

4.4 Ruskin Dam 80

4.4.1 Site Description 80

4.4.2 Field Investigation 82

4.4.2.1 Scope of Work 82

4.4.2.2 Visual Inspection 82

4.4.2.3 Sounding 84

4.4.2.4 Coring 84

4.4.2.5 Test Results 85

4.4.3 Laboratory Testing 86

4.4.3.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples 86

4.4.3.2 Test Results 87

4.5 Jordan Dam 88

4.5.1 Site Description 88

4.5.2 Field Investigation 91

4.5.2.1 Scope of Work 91

4.5.2.2 Visual Inspection 92

4.5.2.3 Sounding 93

4.5.2.4 Coring 94

4.5.2.5 Test Results 95

4.5.3 Laboratory Testing (Upstream Face, 1969 Shotcrete) 96

4.5.3.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples 96

4.5.3.2 Test Results 97

4.5.4 Laboratory Testing, 1989 ShotcretefromUpstream Face 97

4.5.4.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples 97

4.5.4.2 Test Results 97

vii
4.5.5 Laboratory Testing, 1970 Shotcrete from Downstream Face 98

4.5.5.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples 98

4.5.5.2 Test Results 98

4.5.6 Laboratory Testing, 1990 Shotcrete from Buttresses 99

4.5.6.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples 99

4.5.6.2 Test Results 100


4.6 La Joie Dam . 100

CHAPTER 5 - DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 102

5.0 Introduction / Summary 102

5.1 Substrate 102

5.2 Shotcrete 104

5.3 Substrate - Shotcrete Interface 109

5.4 Discussion of Some Frost Related Phenomena 110

5.5 Evaluation of Shotcrete Repairs 112

5.6 Conclusions 113

CHAPTER 6 - RECOMMENDATIONS 116

6.0 Introduction 116

6.1 Quoted Standards 116

6.2 Materials 117

6.2.1 Cement 117

6.2.2 Pozzolans 118

6.2.3 Water 119

6.2.4 Aggregates 119

6.2.5 Admixtures 122

6.2.5.1 Dry-Mix 122

6.2.5.2 Wet-Mix 122

viii
6.2.6 Reinforcement 123

6.3 Proportioning 124

6.3.1 Mixture Design 124

6.3.2 Performance Requirements 126

6.3.2.1 Dry-Mix 126

6.3.2.2 Wet-Mix 127

6.4 Supply and Equipment 127

6.4.1 Batching, Mixing and Supply 127

6.4.1.1 Dry-Mix 127

6.4.1.2 Wet-Mix J. 128

6.4.2 Shotcrete Placing Equipment 129

6.4.2.1 Dry-Mix .129

6.4.2.2 Wet-Mix 130

6.4.2.3 Comments 130

6.4.3 Auxiliary Shotcrete Equipment 131

6.5 Preparation for Shotcreting 132

6.5.1 Surface Preparation 132

6.5.2 Reinforcement 133

6.5.3 Anchors 134

6.5.4 Drainage 135

6.5.5 Alignment Control and Cover 135

6.6 Quality Control 136

6.6.1 Preconstruction Trials 136

6.6.2 Material Testing 137

6.6.3 Construction Testing 13 8

6.7 Shotcrete Application and Finishing 139

6.7.1 Shotcrete Application 139

6.7.2 Finishing 142

ix
6.8 Curing and Protection 143

6.8.1 Curing .'. 143

6.8.2 Protection 144

CHAPTER 7 - FUTURE RESEARCH 146

CHAPTER 8 - REFERENCES 148

8.1 Textbooks 148

8.1.1 Concrete '. 148

8.1.2 Shotcrete 148

8.1.3 Others 149

8.2 Papers, Proceedings 149

8.2.1 Concrete 149

8.2.2 Shotcrete 150

8.3 Codes, Standards 154

8.3.1 Canadian 154

8.3.2 U.S 154

8.3.3 Others 155

8.4 Company Records, Manuals 156

8.5 Unpublished References 157

Appendix A - Typical Frost Events 159

Appendix B - Test Results 166

Appendix C - Photographs 180


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Structure of the Thesis 1

Table 2: Composition and Tensile Strength of Several Glass Fiber Brands 19

Table 3: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity in Concrete 42

Table 4: Evaluation of Silica Fume Shotcrete 46

Table 5: Buntzen Dam, Frost Events inside the Dam 58

Table 6: Stave and Ruskin Dam, Frost Events inside the Dam 59

Table 7: Dam Descriptions 62

Table 8: Structure and Site, Stave Dam 63

Table 9: Substrate Materials, Stave Dam 64

Table 10: Shotcrete, Stave Dam 64

Table 11: Core Samples, Stave Dam 67

Table 12: Field Test Results, Substrate Concrete, Stave Dam 68

Table 13: Field Test Results, Shotcrete, Stave Dam 68

Table 14: Laboratory Test Results, Stave Dam 71

Table 15: Structure and Site, Buntzen Dam 72

Table 16: Substrate Materials, Buntzen Dam 73

Table 17: Shotcrete, Buntzen Dam 73

Table 18: Core Samples, Buntzen Dam 76

Table 19: Field Test Results, Substrate Concrete, Buntzen Dam 77

Table 20: Field Test Results, Shotcrete, Buntzen Dam 77

Table 21: Laboratory Test Results, Buntzen Dam 79

Table 22: Structure and Site, Ruskin Dam 80

Table 23: Substrate Materials, Ruskin Dam 81

Table 24: Shotcrete, Ruskin Dam 81

xi
Table 25: Core Samples, Ruskin Dam, Spillway Bay #2 84

Table 26: Core Samples, Ruskin Dam, Step Wall 85

Table 27: Field Test Results, Shotcrete, Ruskin Dam 85

Table 28: Laboratory Test Results, Ruskin Dam 87

Table 29: Structure and Site, Jordan Dam 89

Table 30: Substrate Materials, Jordan Dam ..89

Table 31: Shotcrete, Jordan Dam, Upstream Face, 1969 89

Table 32: Shotcrete, Jordan Dam, Upstream Face, 1989 90

Table 33: Shotcrete, Jordan Dam, Downstream Face, 1970 90

Table 34: Shotcrete, Jordan Dam, Buttresses, 1990 91

Table 35: Core Samples, Jordan Dam, Upstream Face 94

Table 36: Core Samples, Jordan Dam, Buttresses 95

Table 37: Field Test Results, Jordan Dam, Upstream Face 96

Table 38: Field Test Results, Jordan Dam, Buttresses 96

Table 39: Laboratory Test Results, Jordan Dam, Upstream Face, 1969 97

Table 40: Laboratory Test Results, Jordan Dam, Upstream Face, 1989 Shotcrete 98

Table 41: Laboratory Test Results, Jordan Dam, Downstream Face, 1970 Shotcrete 99

Table 42: Laboratory Test Results, Jordan Dam, Buttresses, 1990 Shotcrete ...100

Table 43: Structure and Site, La Joie Dam 100

Table 44: Substrate Materials, La Joie Dam 101

Table 45: Shotcrete, La Joie Dam 101

Table 46: Shotcrete Quality Assessment, using Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity 107

Table 47: Evaluation of Shotcrete Repairs 113

Table 48: Gradation Limits for 10 mm and 5 mm Aggregate Shotcretes 120

Table 49: Comparison 10 mm Aggregate vs. 5 mm Aggregate Shotcrete 121

Table 50: Typical Remedial Shotcrete Mix Designs, Proportions at the Nozzle in kg/m ..124
3

Table 51: Typical Wet-Mix Shotcrete Proportions 125

Table 52: Wet-Mix versus Dry-Mix 126

xii
Table 53: Dry-Mix Shotcrete Performance Requirements 126

Table 54: Wet-Mix Shotcrete Performance Requirements 127

Table 55: Material Hoses and Compressor Capacities 131

xiii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Superplasticizer Causing Steric Hindrance 13

Figure 2: Dry-Mix Process 22

Figure 3: Wet-Mix Process 23

Figure 4: Anchor for Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete ........32

Figure 5: Typical BC Hydro Shotcrete Anchor Plate 32

Figure 6: Transmission Modes for Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Measurements 41

Figure 7: Transducer Shoe 42

Figure 8: Scanning Path for Linear Traverse Method 45

Figure 9: Specimen for Tensile or Tensile Bond Strength Tests 47

Figure 10: Testing for Dynamic Modulus, Longitudinal Mode 50

Figure 11: Testing for Dynamic Modulus, Torsional Mode 52

Figure 12: Sorptivity Test 53

Figure 13: One-Dimensional Heat Flux Model 56

Figure 14: Stave Dam 63

Figure 15: Buntzen Dam 72

Figure 16: Buntzen Dam, Cracking and Delamination near Intake Structure 75

Figure 17: Ruskin Dam ;..80

Figure 18: Ruskin Dam, Step Wall, Surface Defects 83

Figure 19: Jordan Dam 88

Figure 20: Evaluation of Boiled Absorption Test Results 108

xiv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I want to thank all those persons who dedicated time and effort to this project. Special thanks to

Nemi Banthia, Dick Brighton, Johann Eilau, Carl Gung, Brian Hirst, Sidney Mindess, Rusty

Morgan, Dave Perry and Yoga Yogendran. Their suggestions and support during experimental

work and while editing these thesis have been of great value.

xv
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

This thesis is on shotcrete as a repair material for dams in south-western British Columbia.

One objective was to review the literature treating shotcrete as a repair material, its composition,

properties and durability. Site investigations and laboratory tests were planned and carried out to

evaluate shotcrete repairs at BC Hydro dams. The evaluated dams were: La Joie Dam, Stave

Blind Slough Dam (hereafter referred to as Stave Dam), Buntzen Dam, Ruskin Dam, and Jordan

River Diversion Dam (hereafter referred to as Jordan Dam). Recommendations for shotcrete

repairs at dams in south western British Columbia were prepared. They were based on the

literature review and the testing program.

The thesis is composed of 9 chapters. Table 1 summarizes their objectives:

Table 1: Structure of the Thesis


Chapter Objective
1 - Introduction Introduce the objective of the thesis.
2 - Literature Review Review literature regarding:
• shotcrete composition,
• shotcrete application,
• experience with shotcrete repairs.
3 - Testing Methods Describe the tests used on site and in the laboratory
4 - Investigation Provide background information about investigated
dam sites, Summarize test results.
5 - Discussion Discussfindingsfrom Chapter 4.
6 - Conclusions Draw conclusions regarding durability and
performance of shotcrete repairs at the dams
investigated.
7 - Recommendations Adapt the C-SHRP recommendations for shotcrete
repair of highway bridges to shotcrete repair of
dams in south western British Columbia.
8 - Future Research Suggest improvements to testing methods,
additional investigations of deterioration
mechanisms and durability of shotcrete.
9 - Reference List List references.

1
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction / Summary

This chapter describes the state of the art in shotcrete as a repair material for large concrete

structures. It relies mainly on English language literature available in North America. The

chapter focuses on materials and application techniques. Reports describing problems with

shotcrete repairs have been reviewed and important conclusions reported.

2.1 Materials

Chapter 2 describes the basic materials, additives and admixtures used for shotcrete. Each

section will try to answer the following questions:

• What is the purpose of using the substance?

• What is the substance chemically or physically?

• How does the substance react chemically?

• How does one add the substance to the mix?

• What are the risks involved?

2
2.1.1 Water

Water is necessary for hydraulic setting and hardening of cement in a shotcrete mix.

Water reacts with the components of cement clinker minerals (C S, C S , C A , C A F , see


3 2 3 4

chapter 2.1.3) and forms hydrates such as calcium silicate hydrate, calcium aluminate hydrate and

calcium hydroxide.

Most often the desired water/cement ratio is about 0.3 to 0.4 by mass for dry-mix shotcrete and

0.4 to 0.5 for wet-mix shotcrete. Water is added at the concrete mixer in the wet-mix process or

at the spraying nozzle for the dry-mix process. Potable water is recommended. Local water

quality may be tested as follows: produce concrete cubes with water from a local source and

reference cubes with distilled water. Test all cubes for compressive strength. If the cubes made

with local water reach 90 % or more of the reference cubes' strength, the local water is

acceptable. [Ref. 13]

A mixture with too low a water content may be hard to pump (wet-mix process), develop

excessive dust during shooting (dry-mix process), or compact poorly upon impact. Too high a

water content may cause segregation during mixing and pumping (wet-mix process), or

sloughing of placed material. Inappropriately high water/cement ratio will result in shotcrete of

low strength, reduced durability and high porosity.

3
2.1.2 Aggregates

Aggregates are thefillersin the composite material, concrete.

Concrete aggregates are also used for shotcrete. Typical aggregate minerals are andesite, basalt,

chert, diorite, dolerite, dolomite,flint,gabbro, granite, gritstone, hornfels, limestone, quarzite,

sandstone and syenite [Ref. 4]. The bond between aggregates and cement paste is predominantly

physical in nature. Friction, surface forces, and interlocking contribute to the bond.

Compact aggregate is recommended to minimize cement content. Aggregates conforming to

ACI 506 gradation #1 (concrete sand) are appropriate for shotcrete layers less then 50 mm deep.

Gradation #2 (maximum 10 mm grain size) is recommended for use in repair work with depths

greater then 50 mm. Gradation #3 aggregates (maximum 20 mm grain size) may be the most

economical choice for downward shooting of thick sections in new construction. [Ref. 94]

Aggregates should conform to ASTM C33 or CAN3-A23.1-M94 [Ref. 88]. Aggregate for

dry-mix material batched on-site should have a moisture content of 4 to 6 % [Ref. 99].

Aggregates may be mixed with cement in batching plants, in transport trucks or on site. A

typical shotcrete mix prior to shooting contains about 80 % aggregate and 20 % cement by mass.

Extremely high or low aggregate content or poor aggregate gradation may cause low strength

shotcrete with poor durability. Aggregate which reacts with the alkaline cement paste or which

has a high potential to shrink or swell may crack and eventually destroy the shotcrete.

4
2.1.3 Cement

Cement serves as a binding material providing the matrix for the composite material concrete.

Cement consists mainly of the following chemically reactive components:

C3S - Tricalcium Silicate, Alite, chemically 3CaOSi0 , 2

, C2S - Dicalcium Silicate, Belite, chemically 2CaOSi0 , 2

C3A - Tricalcium Aluminate, Celite, chemically 3CaOAl 0 Fe 0 , 2 3 2 3

C4AF - Tetracalcium Alumino-ferrite, chemically 4CaOAl 0 *Fe 0 , and 2 3 2 3

CSH2, C S - gypsum (CaSO^FLO) and anhydrite (CaS0 ). 4

Cement reacts with water. The reaction products harden over a period of several days to weeks

frequently accompanied by small gains in strength over months and even years. The major

reactions are approximately:

2C3S + 6H -> C3S2H3 + 3[Ca(OH) ] 2

6 C S + 12H
2 -> C S H + 7[Ca(OH) ]
5 6 5 2

C3A + 6 H -> C3AH6

C4AF + 2[Ca(OH) ] + 10 H ->


2 C3AH6 + C3FH6

C A+26H+3CS
3 -> C ASH
6 3 2

2C3A + C6ASH32+4H 3C4ASH-12

Ca(OH) denotes calcium hydroxide. [Refs. 5, 11]


2

Portland cements, and high alumina cements for applications requiring rapid setting, are

commonly used for shotcrete. Most shotcrete work has been done with CSA type 10, 20 or 30

cements. CSA type 10 cement is appropriate for most dry-mix and wet-mix applications.

Typical mixtures contain 400 to 500 kg/m of cementitious material. In-place* shotcrete tends to
3

5
have higher cement contents, since mainly aggregates rebound during the shooting process.

Usually wet-mix shotcrete has a low rebound (about 5%) and its cement contents remain

relatively constant. Dry-mix shotcrete, on the other hand, has 30 to 40% rebound which leaves

enriched in-place material. This is particularly true for shotcrete close to the substrate. [Ref. 53]

In construction and repair applications, water/cement ratios range between 0.45 and 0.35 [Refs.

53, 70]. Possible results of inappropriate water/cement ratios or aggregate/cement ratios are

mentioned in Chapter 1.1 and 1.2 respectively [Ref. 8].

High early compressive strengths are possible with a blended cements [Ref. 52]. Good freeze-

thaw durability was found for rapid-set shotcrete (containing calcium sulfoaluminate cement) in

trial mixes according to [Ref. 59].

Some high early-strength cements need to be in contact with water for about 10 minutes before

the superplasticizing and water-reducing ingredients become fully active. Advantages of these

cements, hence, can be fully utilized only in the wet-mix process. In the draft Norwegian

shotcrete guidelines sulfate resistant cement is not advised for locations with a risk of chloride

attack [Ref. 44].

2.1.4 Pozzolanic Admixtures

Pozzolans are materials which react with the calcium hydroxide produced during hydration of

cement. The pozzolanic reaction may further density the hydration products resulting in a harder

and more durable product.

6
2.1.4.1 Silica Fume

Silica fume is a widely used pozzolanic admixture. Potential advantages of adding it to shotcrete

include:

• increased adhesion and cohesion of freshly sprayed material,

• possible buildup of greater thickness (reports describe shotcrete layers 400 mm deep

applied overhead in a single pass; 3 m deep horizontal holes filled in one pass, 0.6 m

layers in one pass in northern B.C. tidal waters, [Ref. 30])

• use of accelerators reduced or avoided,

• reduced rebound especially in dry-mix shotcrete,

• "wash-out" offreshshotcrete in running or tidal waters reduced,

• reduced leaching of sodium-, potassium-, and calcium-compounds,

• increased compressive and flexural strengths,

• improved resistance to chemical attack, chloride penetration andfreeze-thawdamage,

• increased resistance against alkali-aggregate reactions, and

• improved erosion resistance.

Silica fume also increases electrical resistance, reduces permeability and slows corrosion of

reinforcement in shotcrete [Refs. 2, 38, 78].

Silica fume is a by-product of the ferro-silicon industry. It consists of mostly amorphous and

hence reactive silicon dioxide (Si0 ). The particles are spherical with an average diameter of
2

about 0.1 micrometer. Silica fume has a specific surface of about 20,000 nrVkg measured by the

nitrogen adsorption method. This is about two orders of magnitude higher than the specific

surface of ordinary Portland cement. Silica fume is available as dry powder or slurry. It can be

added to the mix in the batch plant, in an on-site mixer or at the nozzle.

7
Silica fume admixtures for construction are often designed to be neutral. This means that they do

not significantly change slump or air content of the concrete mixture they are added to. In other

words, when silica fume is used in the wet-mix process, water reducing admixtures and/or

superplasticizer are recommended in order to reduce the water demand of the mixture. [Refs. 2,

6, 53].

Silica fume reacts with the calcium hydroxide produced during cement hydration. The resulting

CSH densities the cement paste, especially in the aggregate-paste transition zone. This improves

the bond between aggregates and paste.

Silica fume was first used in the wet-mix process. In recent years, silica fume has been utilized in

dry-mix shotcrete as well [Refs. 2, 6, 53]. The silica fume content in the shotcrete mix should be

about 8 % to 15 % of the cement mass.

Silica fume appears to increase the drying shrinkage slightly. This was shown for wet-mix

shotcrete [Ref. 78]. The same reference did not find a significant increase in drying shrinkage for

silica fume dry-mix shotcrete compared to control mixes. Silicon dioxide dust (especially in

crystalline form, to a lesser degree as amorphous silica) appears to be a carcinogenic poison. The

current US industrial threshold limit value is set at 10 mg/m for dust in the air [Ref. 26].
3

International recommendations for maximum allowable concentration of respirable silica particles

in the air rangefrom0.05 to 0.15 mg/m [Ref. 17].


3

2.1.4.2 Fly Ash

Fly ash in the shotcrete mixture may result in:

• improved pumpability of wet-mix materials,

• reduced heat of hydration,

8
• improved sulfate resistance,

• controlled alkali-aggregate reaction, and

• reduced cost.

Fly ash shotcrete of low shrinkage, low chloride permeability and high freeze-thaw resistance

may be produced. It requires the addition of water reducers and superplasticizers.

Fly ash is an incombustible residue filtered out of the exhaust gases of coal-burning thermal

power stations. The main constituents in fly ash are SiC>2, AI2O3, Fe203 and CaO. The specific

surface of fly ash varies between 250 m /kg and 1200 m /kg [Ref. 27].
2 2
Typical fly ash particles

are spherical. Their diameters vary between 1 and 150 um. There are two distinct classes of fly

ash. Class F fly ash originates from burning anthracite or bituminous coal. It is low in calcium

and reacts with calcium hydroxide. Class C fly ash is a residue of burning lignite or sub-

bituminous coal. It reacts chemically with water due to its high content of calcium oxide [Ref.

26]. Fly ashes exhibit hydraulic and pozzolanic properties to varying extents.

Fly ash has been successfully used in wet-mix shotcrete. The cementitious part of the mix may

consist of 20 to 60 % fly ash [Rets. 39, 46, 53].

Fly ash may cause slightly retarded strength development in concrete less than 28 days old.

Strength gains at later times superior to plain mixes may offset the earlier retardation. [Ref. 22]

2.1.5 Latex

Latex improves cohesion in freshly applied shotcrete and adhesion of shotcrete to its substrate.

Further, hardened latex-modified shotcrete has reduced water permeability, improved durability

and impact resistance before cracking [Ref. 31].

9
Latexes are polymers constituted from an emulsion of water soluble monomers. By producing

polymer chains, latex provides a matrix for the freshly applied shotcrete. It also blocks capillaries

and densities the shotcrete. [Ref. 2]

Typical latex dosages are in the order of 10 % by weight of cement. A comparative test [Ref.

42] found the most uniform mix was achieved when an emulsion of about 15 % latex in water

was added at the nozzle of a dry-mix setup. Mixing was inferior with styrene butadiene, but

acceptable with acrylic latex. Latex entrains some air and therefore a defoaming agent was

necessary especially for acrylic latex.

Dried latex may act as a bond breaker. Bond between shotcrete and substrate or between

shotcrete layers may be inferior if, for example, latex overspray on the substrate dries before it is

covered with afreshlayer of shotcrete. Delamination of latex-modified shotcrete due to spraying

mistakes and entrapped water has occurred [Refs. 45, 53, 106]. Thus latex should be avoided for

general shotcrete applications. Fiber reinforced silica-fume shotcrete may substitute for latex-

modified mixes and avoids their disadvantages.

2.1.6 Chemical Admixtures

2.1.6.1 Air Entraining Agents

Shotcrete with an in-place air content of 4 to 6 % is recommended to achieve good freeze-thaw

durability (see Chapter 2.2.4). The air content of non air entrained placed wet-mix shotcretes is

usually about 1 to 2 %. Hence the production offreeze-thawresistant wet-mix shotcrete

requires air entraining admixtures. Further, highly air-entrained wet-mix material is relatively

easy to pump. Initial air contents between 9 and 12 % in the mixture drop to 5 to 6 % after

placing [Ref. 53]. There is a potential to replace some of the superplasticizing agents by air-

10
entraining agents. While highly air-entrained material could result in good pumpability (low

viscosity) it would exhibit high cohesion (a high yield limit) after placing. Beaupre [Ref. 34]

conducted extensive research on the rheology offreshwet-mix material. He modelled the fresh

mixture as a Bingham fluid. Characteristics of a Bingham fluid are shear strength (yield limit)

resisting static forces and finite viscosity when moved (pumped). For good pumpability the

viscosity should be low. In order to stick to the substrate a high yield limit is beneficial.

Common active ingredients in air-entraining admixtures are anionic materials such as sodium salts

of wood resins, lignosulfonic acid, sulfonated hydrocarbons, proteinaceous materials, and fatty

acids. Most of these agents are by-products of the paper, petroleum or fat rendering industries.

More recently a cocoamide diethanolamine has been developed for entraining air bubbles into

concrete mixtures. Air-entraining admixtures are usually delivered in liquid form.

Air-entrainers stabilize the air infreshconcrete mix by creating spherical bubbles of about 0.01 to

1 mm in diameter. This improvesfreeze-thawresistance of the hardened concrete.

Air-entrainer dosages in the order of 0.1 £/\00 kg cement achieve 8 to 12 % entrained air in

freshly prepared wet-mix material. This results in about 4 to 6 % air content in applied shotcrete.

Air entrainers are usually added to the mixer on site.

In dry-mix shotcrete, air contents of 5 to 6% are frequently achieved without air entraining

admixtures. However air entrainers may be of advantage for dry-mix shotcrete that will be

exposed to severefreeze-thawcycles and deicing chemicals. Typical doses for dry-mix shotcrete

would be similar to those for wet-mix. [Ref. 48]

Campbell-Allen and Roper [Ref. 2] describe reducedfreeze-thawresistance where increased air

content renders the hardened shotcrete more water permeable.

11
2.1.6.2 Water-reducing Admixtures

Water-reducing agents maintain pumpability and workability of wet-mix materials with low

water/cement ratio and reasonably low cement contents. Water-reducing admixtures are

essential for silica fume wet-mix mixtures since they would otherwise develop prohibitively high

water demand.

Water reducing agents usually consist of lignosulfonate, hydroxycarboxylic acid, or hydroxylated

polymer. Most water reducers come as liquids.

Water reducers disperse cement particles in water, thereby keeping the viscosity of the fresh

cement paste low. The dispersing effect probably results from like electrical charges imparted to

the cement particles by water-reducing agents. These charges cause the particles to repel each

other, aiding the process of dispersion. [Ref. 5]

Typical dosages for water reducers are 0.1 to 0.5 £/l00 kg cement. Water reducers allow the

water content in the mixture to be reduced by 5 to 10 %. This improves compressive strength,

watertightness andfreeze-thawresistance of the hardened shotcrete. Drawbacks may include

increased drying shrinkage.

Water reducers can not be used in dry-mix shotcrete since the contact time between water and

the dry mixture before shooting is very short. Water reducers could activate the water in already

placed shotcrete causing sloughing. Water reducers may also retard the setting of shotcrete.

[Refs. 5, 54, 146]

12
2.1.6.3 Superplasticizers (High Range Water Reducers)

Like ordinary water reducers, superplasticizers maintain pumpability and workability of wet-mix

material with low water/cement ratio and reasonably low cement content. Superplasticizers are

essential for silica fume wet-mix material since silica fume would otherwise develop a

prohibitively high water demand.

Typical superplasticizers are condensates of sulfonated melamine-formaldehyde or sulfonated

naphthalene formaldehyde. They act as dispersants for the cement particles in the mix water,

coating the cement particles. This probably results in steric hindrance preventing cement

particles from clinging together thus achieving deflocculation. [Ref. 5]

Cement Particles in Water Cement Particles in Water


without Superplasticizer with Superplasticizer

Figure 1: Superplasticizer Causing Steric Hindrance

Typical superplasticizer dosages are 0.2 to 2 £/100 kg cement. Where superplastizicers are used

to reduce the water/cement ratio, compressive strength, watertightness and freeze-thaw

resistance of the hardened shotcrete may improve substantially.

Superplasticizers can reduce the yield limit (see chapter 2.2.4.3) of fresh mixtures. Thus in-place

cohesion of shotcrete may be reduced. Further drawbacks may include increased drying

13
shrinkage if superplasticizers are used to increase the slump of the mixture without reducing its

water content.

Due to the short contact time between water and dry mixture prior to shooting, superplasticizers

can not be used in dry-mix shotcrete. They would mobilize the fluid in the in-place shotcrete,

which might result in sloughing. [Refs. 5, 11, 34, 78]

2.1.6.4 Accelerators

With the use of accelerating agents, the initial set of a concrete mix may be hastened and/or early

strengths may be increased.

Accelerators are either organic or inorganic. Currently most of the accelerators applied in

construction are inorganic. There are four major types of inorganic accelerators:

• Aluminates. These combine with gypsum and form tricalcium aluminate causing flash set

and early stiffening.

• Silicates. These induce quick-setting by precipitating as calcium silicate. They can

reduce the ultimate strengths of concrete/shotcrete significantly.

• Carbonates. These accelerate early strength gain but tend to retard the effect of the

aluminates in the cement and its initial set.

• Calcium salts CaCl , CaBr are assumed to act as catalysts for the hydration of the
2 2

C3S-phase in the cement.

Organic accelerators may contain calcium formate and triethanolamine as active ingredients.

They accelerate the hydration of C3A and the formation of ettringite. Organic accelerators are

assumed to support the dissolution of lime and ettringite which would otherwise precipitate on

the cement clinker particles during hydration. Thus water has better access to the clinker

14
minerals and the cement-water reaction can progress unabated. This mechanism seems not to

significantly reduce the concrete strength at later dates. Organic accelerators may have a

promising future pending reduced prices and more experience with their long term behavior.

Accelerators come as liquids or powders. Liquid agents are usually soluble aluminates (mostly

potassium aluminate) or soluble silicates (waterglass). They can be used in wet-mix and dry-mix

processes. They may be added to the water at about 2 to 3 % of the cement mass. Higher

dosages in the dry-mix process are possible (4.5 to 5 %) if extremely early set and high early

strengths are essential. Powder accelerators are usually carbonates or carbonate-aluminate

combinations. Such accelerators can be added to dry-mix mixtures at a rate of about 3 to 5 % of

the cement mass. [Ref. 137]

Trade-offs, especially for high dosages of calcium chloride accelerators, are dramatic decreases in

the ultimate compressive strength after 28 days (35% reduction compared to non-accelerated

control mix), increased drying shrinkage, discoloration (darkening), or elevated potential for

scaling and corrosion of reinforcement. [Refs. 31, 137]

Accelerators should not be used unless they are essential to the construction process.

Accelerators have been utilized in some dry-mix shotcretes especially in tunneling. [Refs. 2, 5,

11, 39, 53, 54]. Chloride and Bromide accelerators are moderately toxic and strong irritants to

skin and mucous membranes [Refs. 15, 17].

15
2.1.7 Fibers

2.1.7.1 Steel Fibers

Plain shotcrete fails at less than 0.1 % tensile strain. Steel-fiber reinforced shotcrete may endure

tensile strains up to 2 % before failing. Thus, adding steel makes the shotcrete less brittle. Steel

fibers in shotcrete may result in:

• Increased modulus of rupture, shear strength, torsional strength, and fatigue endurance,

• increased resistance to abrasion and erosion,

• increased resistance to restrained drying shrinkage cracking,

• avoiding spraying shadows as occurring behind rebars in conventionally reinforced

shotcrete, and

• increased impact resistance. [Refs. 31, 53, 144]

Steel fibers are fabricated by cutting and cold drawing wires, by slitting steel sheets or by a

melt-extraction process. The latter process appears to be superior for producing easy-to-handle

fibers [Ref. 2]. According to other sources deformed cold drawnfibersare the best choice for

high-quality shotcrete [Refs. 100, 144].

Optimalfibershave aspect ratios (that is, length/diameter ratio) of about 60 and lengths in the

order of 30 mm. According to Banthia [Ref. 32] a low specific projected area (that is, ratio of

fiber surface to fiber mass, about 200 to 300 mm/g) may reduce fiber rebound. Fiber shape
2

influences the amount of rebound during shooting and the properties of hardened shotcrete.

Banthia et al described a direct correlation between "specific projected area" (ratio of fiber

projected area to fiber mass) and fiber rebound. The authors conducted tests with 5 different

fiber types in dry-mix shotcrete. Between 35 % (fibers with 224 mm/g specific projected area)
2

and 78 % (fibers with 581 mm/g specific projected area) of the fibers reboundedfromthe
2

substrate. Other tests involving wet-mix shotcrete could not establish a correlation between fiber

16
geometry andfiberrebound [Ref. 33]. In the wet-mix process thefiberrebound was 12 to 18 %. -

This was significantly lower than in the dry-mix process. Fiber rebound in dry-mix shotcrete can

be reduced by premoisturizing the mix. Morgan [Ref. 57] mentions about 25 to 45 % fiber

rebound for wet-mix shotcrete, and 30 to 70 % for dry-mix shotcrete. Hooked fiber ends

enhance the bond between fibers and concrete. Good results have been achieved using cold

drawnfiberswith hooked ends [Ref. 141].

Steelfibersappear to increase the bond between shotcrete and substrate. This is assumed to be

due to a more controlled shrinkage cracking in fiber reinforced shotcrete compared to plain

shotcrete. Crack control, ductility and load bearing capacity tend to improve with increasing

fiber content, and with reducedfiberlength but higher aspect ratios. [Refs. 41,71].

Fiber reinforcement is increasingly used in lieu of mesh reinforcement. Comparative tests

between wire mesh and steelfiberreinforced shotcrete in Scandinavia [Ref 60] favor steel fiber

reinforcement. Shotcrete plates were reinforced with either 75 kg/m steelfibers(25 mm long)
3

or with K131 wire mesh (probably 131 mm 2


wire per 1 m length cross section - remark by the

author). All samples exhibited similar ultimate bending strength. However, thefiberreinforced

samples had greater toughness and higher load-bearing capacity under large deflections.

Furthermore fiber reinforced samples showed more uniform crack distribution.

Concrete reinforced with steel fibers has similar modulus of elasticity, Poisson's ratio,

compressive strength, creep and electrical conductivity to plain concrete [Ref. 77]. Modulus of

rupture, shear strength, torsional strength and fatigue endurance can double however; resistance

to abrasion and erosion can increase by a factor of 1.4. Impact energies can risefive-foldbefore

damaging the concrete. These results were drawn from specimens made of concrete mixtures

with 10 to 60 kg/m fibersand slumps of 0 to 250 mm.


3
Similar tendencies probably apply to

shotcrete.

17
Corrosion of steelfibersappears to be insignificant for crack widths less than 0.08 mm and seems

to be limited to shotcrete with reduced alkalinity [Refs. 53, 57].

Armelin [Ref. 136] recommended a 1 % by volume content of hooked steelfibersin shotcrete.

This proved to result in high energy absorption and good load-bearing capacity after cracking.

Banthia et al [Ref. 33] achieved 5 to 23 % increases in the flexural and compressive strength of

wet-mix shotcrete by adding 60 kg/m steelfibers.Fiber reinforced shotcrete retained cohesion


3

for crack widths less than 0.3 mm [Ref. 67]. Generally steelfibersare added at about 50 to 80

kg/m of shotcrete mix. Fiber-reinforced wet-mix shotcrete should have a slump between 40 and
3

80 mm for optimal pumpability. [Refs. 8, 13, 24, 36, 39, 40, 48, 53, 54, 57].

Morgan studied steelfiber-reinforcedshotcrete [Ref. 57]. Typicalfibersfor shotcrete in Canada

are 30 to 38 mm long and have aspect ratios of 40 to 60. They are added at rates of 50 to 80

kg/m. Good post-peak load-carrying capacity were found for a mix with 98 kg/m fibercontent.
3 3

Premoisturizing dry-mix material to 3 to 6 % reduced thefiberrebound.

Steelfiberspreferentially align parallel to the shotcreted surface, thereby causing the shotcrete to

be somewhat anisotropic [Ref. 136]. However, Skarendahl [Ref. 71] describes a Swedish gun

where steelfibersare cut from a reel of 0.5 mm wire and fed continuously to the nozzle. Fiber

lengths of 200 mm could be handled. These fibers tended to align perpendicular to the

shotcreted plane thereby reducing rebound. Earlier problems with balling offibershave been

overcome by usingfiberswith aspect ratios of,60 to 75. Fibers are delivered in glued bundles.

The glue dissolves in the concrete mixer setting free thefibers.Steelfibersincrease wear on

shotcrete equipment, especially the hoses and the nozzle.

18
2.1.7.2 Glass Fibers

Glass fibers may be used to reinforce shotcrete. They behave much like steel fibers, increasing

the shotcrete's strain to failure and its tensile strength.

Schradef reported the use of glass fibers in shotcrete repairs at the freeze-thaw damaged Lower

Monumental Navigation Lock Wall [Ref. 64]. Several authors [Refs. 43, 61] discussed the use

of fiberglass for shotcrete in tunnels. Uchida [Ref. 75] characterized glass fiber reinforced

shotcrete as an excellent repair material for railway structures in Japan.

Glass fiber reinforcements for shotcrete are usually made of chopped alkali-resistant glass fiber

strands. Chopped strands are 30 to 50 mm long and contain several hundred microfibers. These

individual glass fibers have 0.5 to 15 urn diameter and are about 25 mm long. Special glass is

required to resist the high alkalinity of the cement paste, typically AR-glass or Cemfil. Table 2

compares the chemical composition of common E-glass and C-glass to AR-glass and Cemfil.

[Ref. 18]. Strand dimensions are similar to steel fibers.

Table 2: Composition and Tensile Strength of Several G ass Fiber Brands


Glass Fibers for Int ustrial Applications Glass Fibers for Shotcrete
Content [%] E-glass C-glass Cemfil AR-glass
SiO? 55 65 71 61
AL Ch 9 15 4 1 0
B Oi
9
7 5 0 0
ZrO? 0 0 16 22
MgO 3 3 0 0
CaO 19 14 0 0
Na 0 2 <1 8 11 14
K 0 2 <1 0 0 2
Li 0 9
0 0 0 1
Others Balance Balance Balance Balance
Tensile Strength of 3700 3370 2920 N/A
Single Fiber [MPa]

The modulus of elasticity offiberglassis about 70 GPa, strain to rupture varies between 1.5 and

3.5 %.

19
Glassfibersare added to the shotcrete mixture at a rate of 3 to 5 % by mass.

Shotcrete with glass fiber reinforcement becomes more brittle with increasing compressive

strength. Glassfibersdeteriorate slowly when exposed to water. Fibers with low resistance to

alkalinity may also deteriorate within the concrete, eventually rendering it quasi-unreinforced.

This problem can be overcome by using low alkaline type cements. [Refs. 18, 19]

2.1.7.3 Synthetic Fibers

Synthetic fibers may enhance the cohesion of freshly applied shotcrete and control shrinkage

cracking; Syntheticfibersmay improve impact resistance and toughness of hardened shotcrete.

Most syntheticfibersin construction use are polypropylenefibers.Nylon and polyethylene fibers

are also available.

Synthetic fibers are usually 10 to 30 mm long. They provide the cement paste with a

reinforcement of relatively low modulus of elasticity and high strain to rupture.

Mixes with about 1 kg/m polypropylenefibersprovide some "green-strength" for freshly applied
3

shotcrete. They also reduce plastic shrinkage cracking. Shotcrete with fiber contents of 4 to 7

kg/m develops a pseudo-ductile behavior with reduced cracking potential. [Refs. 46, 53, 146].
3

Zellers [Ref. 79] reported tests with 38 mm and 57 mm long collatedfibrillatedpolypropylene

fibers in wet-mix shotcrete. 38 mm longfiberscould easily be mixed at a rate of 6 kg/m in the


3

back of a ready-mix concrete truck and sprayed without changes to the wet-mix equipment. No

more than 4 kg/m of the longerfiberscould be handled with the same ease. Polypropylene
3

fibers seemed to have no significant influence on rebound. Due to increased water demand, the

fiber-reinforced shotcrete had slightly reduced compressive and tensile strengths and increased

20
porosity according to ASTM C642. Increased dosages of fibers provided post-cracking residual

strength of specimens subjected to bending. Under large deflections specimens with 38 mm

fibers failed due tofiberpull-out. Specimens with 57-mm-fibers failed due tofiberrupture.

Metcalf and Lattin [Ref. 46] tested three polypropylene fiber brands and one polyester fiber

brand as reinforcement for shotcrete in a channel lining over a period of 2 years. The fiber

content of the shotcrete mix was about 1 kg/m The reference states that thefibershad no great
3

influence on toughness and crack control. However, the longest fibers (40 mm) tended to

improve shotcrete quality slightly.

2.2 Application Technology

2.2.1 General

Shotcrete is a concrete mixture sprayed against a surface by means of a high-pressure, high-

volume air flow. The velocity of the mixture during spraying is 50 to 100 m/s [Ref. 40]. The

mixture is usually produced with conventional batching equipment and applied from a hand-held

nozzle. There is a trend towards automated or remote-controlled spraying equipment. Robot

applicators have been designed for high volume applications or at dangerous locations. [Ref. 31]

2.2.1.1 Dry-Mix Shotcrete

Dry-mix shotcrete is produced by pneumatically conveying a dry concrete mix through a hose

towards a spraying nozzle. There the mix water is added and the shotcrete mixture is projected

onto the substrate.

21
Compressor

Figure 2: Dry-Mix Process

Advantages of the dry-mix process are:

• High flexibility,

• dry mixture may be stored for extended period,

• potential for high early strength, and

• potential for high ultimate strength.

Disadvantages are:

• Need for an experienced crew,

• dust generation during shooting,

• high rebound, and

• prone to inadequate mixing. [Ref. 31]

Dry-mix shotcrete is preferred over wet-mix in North America and the UK [Refs. 54, 69]. Dry-

mix shotcretes can be durable. Poston et al mentions 40 years old shotcrete still in good

condition [Ref. 62].

2.2.1.2 Wet-Mix Shotcrete

Wet-mix shotcrete is produced by pumping a wet concrete mixture through a hose into the

spraying nozzle. There high pressure air is added which accelerates the material toward the

substrate.

22
Pump
Compressor

Figure 3: Wet-Mix Process

Advantages of the wet-mix process are:

• Accurate batching,

• thorough mixing,

• reduced rebound,

• reduced duties of nozzleman, and

• high overall production.

Disadvantages are:

• Lower delivery velocities at the nozzle exit,

• lower flexibility,

• low early strengths, and

• may be prone to mechanical problems. [Ref 31]

Shaw [Ref. 69] claims wet-mix shotcrete is advantageous where less experienced operators apply

high-quality material. The wet-mix process appears to give a more uniform, denser in-place

shotcrete than the dry-mix process. Wet-mix shotcrete also exhibits slightly higher drying

shrinkage than dry-mix shotcrete. That is probably due to the generally higher water/cement

ratio in wet-mix than in dry-mix shotcrete. [Refs. 78, 138]

23
2.2.2 Surface Preparation

Careful surface preparation is essential for a good bond between shotcrete and the substrate

concrete.

Underlying concrete must be free of "... spalled, severely cracked, deteriorated, loose, and

unsound ... material and ... dirt, grease, oil, or other substances that could interfere with the

bond of the newly placed shotcrete" [Ref 3]. Hydrodemolition (high pressure water blasting) or

jackhammering with subsequent sandblasting are preferred methods for initial surface

preparation. Large aggregate in the surface should be exposed but not undercut by the

preparation process. A rough substrate surface is essential for good bond with the shotcrete.

Prior to shooting, the substrate should be moistened. Very porous material should be soaked for

an extended period. Immediately before shooting the substrate surface should be in a saturated-

surface-dry (SSD) condition. Free moisture on the substrate surface at the time of the shotcrete

application may destroy bond. [Refs. 65, 73, 94, 144]

[Ref. 2] describes the influence of surface preparation on freeze-thaw susceptibility.

Insufficiently treated surfaces of the substrate may result in a weak interface. Under freeze-thaw

action delamination may occur at such an interface. Thin shotcrete layers exposed to frequent

water penetration are more easily damaged byfreeze-thawcycles than thick layers with the same

exposure.

A large number of water tanks in the US have been successfully repaired with shotcrete. The

surface preparation consisted of mechanical removal of scaled material, sandblasting and saw

cutting of all edges to avoid featheredging. [Ref 62]

Different surface preparation techniques have been compared by Schrader in [Ref 65]. Best

shotcrete bond to the substrate was achieved by water-jetting the old concrete surface. Sand

24
blasting achieved similar results. Bush hammering and subsequent washing resulted in inferior

surface preparation, probably due to microcracking of the substrate as a result of the violent

hammer impacts. Talbot [Ref. 73] describes similar results for her comparative study of surface

preparation techniques. However, mechanical removal of deeply deteriorated concrete needs to

precede the sandblasting, while hydrodemolition does not require complementary chipping.

Schrader also suggests wetting the surface, then letting it dry prior to shotcreting. Applying

shotcrete to an air-dried concrete surface may yield higher bond strengths than applying shotcrete

to moist surfaces. Air-dry substrate would attract water from the freshly applied shotcrete, thus

reducing its water/cement ratio near the interface. Shotcrete with reduced water/cement ratio

has higher strength and less shrinkage cracking. [Ref. 65]

2.2.3 Equipment / Crew

2.2.3.1 Dry-Mix Shotcrete

Delivery: Pre-mixed and pre-bagged or site-mixed material is delivered to the shotcrete gun.

Premixed materials usually come in 1100 kg or 1700 kg bulkbin bags. The material is discharged

into a hopper on top of the gun [Ref. 53]. The hopper may be equipped with a vibrating sieve to

protect the spraying machinefromclogging by oversized particles.

Premoisturizer: Dry-mix material may be premoisturized in mix augers to about 3 to 6 % water

content. The premoisturizer delivers the mix to the gun. Premoisturizers are widely used to

produce uniform mixtures and reduce dust in the environment.

Gun: Two types of guns are in use: single chamber guns and double chamber guns (with

rotating agitator, feed wheel, rotary barrel or rotary-feed bowl). In a single chamber gun the

25
concrete mix is carried into the chamber, then the chamber is closed and pressurized before the

mixture can be discharged into the delivery hose. The double chamber gun allows for continuous

material delivery to the nozzle since at all times one or both chambers can be kept pressurized

and material can be discharged into the delivery hose. [Ref 31]

Hoses: The shotcrete mix is conveyed through a delivery hose to the nozzle. In dry-mix

applications the hose diameter should be chosen to suit the application rate:

1 to 2 mVh = 38 mm diameter hose (1.5 in.)

2to5m7h = 51 mm (2.0 in.)

5 to 9 nrYh = 64 mm (2.5 in.)

Dry-mix material can be conveyed horizontally for more than 200 m through hoses. Delivery

heights of about 70 m can be achieved easily. These numbers should be reduced for wet-mix

material.

Nozzles: Common nozzle diameters are 38 to 64 mm. Using a small nozzle diameter seems to

enhance the compressive strength of shotcrete [Ref. 40]. Standard nozzle lengths are about 600

mm. In the dry-mix process longer nozzles ("hydromix" nozzles, about 600 to 900 mm long) and

special extensions to improve wetting ("long" nozzle with about 2 to 6 m mixing extension) are

sometimes used. Dispensing units for adding silica fume slurry with or without accelerator at the

nozzle are available. Polymer latex can be added through the waterringat the nozzle. [Refs. 31,

94, 144]

Compressor: The compressor capacity for dry-mix application should be about 21 m /min at 0.7
3

MPa for spraying with a 51 mm hose. Spraying with 64 mm hose requires about 28 m /min at3

0.7 MPa [Refs. 8, 31, 94].

Crew: Reference [Ref. 8] describes shotcreting crews and recommends qualification levels for

crew members.

26
2.2.3.2 Wet-Mix Shotcrete

Mixing/Delivery: Material may either be plant, transit, or site-mixed. Water and admixtures

(except accelerators) are added in the desired amount prior to discharge into the shotcrete pump.

The hopper on top of the pump is filled with the mix [Ref. 53]. Several authors describe a trend

towards using pre-bagged mixes which require only water addition at the construction site.

Pump: Mechanical pumps convey the mix from the reservoir through a hose to the nozzle.

Squeeze pumps with a set of rotating rollers induce a peristaltic-like effect on a flexible hose

forcing the mixture inside the hose to move towards the nozzle. Positive displacement pumps

(usually piston pumps) work as reciprocating pumps, la pneumatic guns the mix is pushed to the

material feed valve by paddles. Alternating slugs of concrete mix and compressed air in the

delivery hose supply the nozzle with material.

Hoses: One hose is required to connect the pump with the nozzle. A second hose delivers

pressurized airfroma compressor to the nozzle.

Nozzles: Wet-mix nozzles are usually made of rubber or plastic. They have an air ring through

which pressurized air is added to the concrete mix. The compressed air propels the concrete

towards the substrate. Liquid accelerator may be added to the mixture at the nozzle.

Compressor: The required air flow for wet-mix shooting is lower than for the dry-mix process.

Air pressure of at least 0.7 MPa should be maintained at the nozzle during operation. [Refs. 8,

31,94]

Crew: Reference [Ref. 11] describes shotcreting crews and specifies recommended qualification

levels for the crew numbers.

27
2.2.4 Mixture

2.2.4.1 General

All material should be screened for oversized particles before its discharge into the gun. If the

shotcrete mix is prepared on site, materials should be preferably batched by weight. Batching by

volume is frequently easier and may be accepted.

2.2.4.2 Dry-Mix Process

Aggregates for dry-mix shotcrete (site-mixing) should have a moisture content of about 4 to 6 %.

The complete mix should have a moisture content of 3 to 6 % before gunning. Premoisturizing

may be required [Ref. 57]. For more details see chapters 6.2 to 6.4.

2.2.4.3 Wet-Mix Process

Wet-mix material should have a slump of 40 to 75 mm [Ref. 94]. When air-entraining is required

an air content of 9 to 12 % before pumping is recommended. For more details see chapters 6.2

to 6.4.

2.2.5 Spraying

2.2.5.1 General

Before applying shotcrete, the material flow from the nozzle should be steady, at the desired

consistency.

28
Shotcrete should be sprayed perpendicular to the application surface. An appropriate distance

between nozzle and substrate is 0.6 to 1.8 m. A circular motion of the nozzle during spraying

produces more uniform in-place shotcrete. When spraying on vertical faces, the work should

start at the bottom then move upwards.

The distance between the nozzle and substrate influences the shotcrete quality. Too great a

distance may cause shadowing behind reinforcement and inferior consolidation. Incorrect impact

angle between shotcrete jet and substrate may cause excessive voids and increased rebound.

Rebound contains less cementitious material and more aggregate than the initial mix. Therefore

rebound should not be reused for shotcreting. Further, the substrate should be cleaned of all

accumulated rebound before shotcrete is applied.

Overspray is shotcrete built up unintentionally away from the planned area. Overspray may be

left in place and covered in another pass as long as it remains plastic. Hardened overspray must

be removed. [Ref. 53]

The temperature offreshin-place shotcrete should be kept above 5°C, otherwise setting and

strength development may be retarded [Ref. 94].

2.2.5.2 Dry-Mix Process

Dry-mix shotcrete should be applied at the "wettest stable consistency", meaning any increased

water content would lead to sagging. Too low a water content leads to excessive rebound and
1

inclusion of sand lenses in the shotcrete. Up to 80 mm of plain dry-mix shotcrete can be built up

in a single pass. [Refs. 70, 94, 99]

29
In the dry-mix process, the nozzleman can control the amount of water added to the mixture, the

distance and the angle between nozzle and substrate and the amount of material conveyed

through the hose.

Extensive work has been done at the University of Bochum [Ref. 12] to study the influence of

nozzle position and aiming on shotcrete quality. Tests were conducted for dry-mix shotcrete

with a hydro-nozzle guided by a computer-controlled robot arm. Important observations were:

• Nozzle distance: Highest compressive strengths were achieved when the nozzle was 1.5

to 2.0 m from the substrate. Rebound was minimum at this distance. Dust development

was excessive at 1 m distance and dropped steadily through 2.5 m distance.

• Spraying Angle: Highest compressive strengths were achieved with a nozzle

perpendicular to the substrate. Even small deviations resulted in substantial reductions

in compressive strength (20 % at 15 degrees deviation). Rebound increased with any

deviation from a 90 degree impact angle.

• Nozzle movement: Faster nozzle movement parallel to the substrate improved shotcrete

uniformity and reduced rebound and dust development. The influence on compressive

strength, however, was small. Optimal results were achieved with the nozzle moving

across the surface at about 0.25 m/s. A superimposed circular rotation of the nozzle

(with the nozzle axis still perpendicular to the substrate surface) at 50 to 200 mm radius

and with repetition frequency from 6 to 3 Hz respectively further improved the results.

2.2.5.3 Wet-Mix Process

In the wet-mix process the nozzleman, can control the amount of air added at the nozzle, and

distance and angle between the nozzle and substrate. The nozzleman indirectly controls the

amount of material conveyed through the hose by the gun operator.

30
The consistency of wet-mix shotcrete is largely influenced by its water content. Maximum

acceptable water content is exceeded when the shotcrete starts to sag and slough. If the mixture

is too dry, problems conveying the material through the hose may occur. Too dry a mix may also

consolidate poorly.

Wet-mix shotcretes with slumps between 20 and 150 mm have been sprayed. The preferred

slump range is 40 to 80 mm. For overhead application, low slumps are advised.

2.2.6 Reinforcement/Anchors

Shotcrete has been successfully reinforced with both conventional rebar and welded wire mesh

fabric. Chicken wire mesh and chain link mesh are not recommended. [Ref. 53] These meshes

may deform under the impact of shotcrete or have too small a grid causing excessive shadowing.

Fibers are gradually replacing conventional reinforcement. Reinforcement should be anchored to

the substrate. For vertical applications [Ref. 2] recommends a maximum anchor spacing of 600

mm. Anchors may be connected directly to reinforcing mesh. In fiber reinforced shotcrete the

anchor head may hold a small grid of heavy reinforcement or an anchor plate to be embedded in

shotcrete. Alternatively, fiber reinforced shotcrete may be clamped between the substrate and an

exposed head plate. [Refs. 2, 39, 41]. Figure 4 shows how to embed a typical shotcrete anchor.

Figure 5 sketches a bow-tie anchor as used by BC Hydro.

31
1 - Set Anchor Bar 2 - Apply Shotcrete 3 - Attach Anchor Head 4 - Embed Head in Shotcrete
Into Substrate

Figure 4: Anchor for Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete

Figure 5: Typical BC Hydro Shotcrete Anchor Plate

2.2.7 Finishing

Shotcrete may be left without mechanical finishing. If afinishis required, a flash coat (thin layer

of shotcrete with 5 mm maximum grain size sand, applied fairly wet from 2.4 to 3.6 m distance)

is appropriate. Such a layer may be mechanically treated. Flash layers are desirable, for example,

to cover the surface of steel-fiber reinforced shotcrete. However, afreshshotcrete surface can

be trimmed, sliced, scraped, broomed, floated or trowelled. In general, wet-mix shotcrete is

easier tofinishthan dry-mix shotcrete. [Ref 94]

32
2.2.8 Curing

Young shotcrete should be kept moist, and above 5 °C, for 7 days. Curing compounds may be

applied. Shotcrete should be protected from freezing until it reaches about 3.5 MPa compressive

strength. [Ref. 2]

2.2.9 Quality Control

A reliable control of shotcrete thickness can be achieved by placing regularly-spaced depth-

measuring pins or shooting wires on the substrate surface prior to shooting. [Ref. 41]

Ryan [Ref. 13] suggests a minimum bond strength of 1 MPa between substrate and shotcrete.

He suggests limiting water absorption to less then 10 %. No water percolation would be

acceptable. Water percolation may be tested by exposing one side of a 50 mm thick shotcrete

layer to 700 kPa of water pressure and observing the opposite side of the specimen.

Testing in-situ shotcrete with the Schmidt hammer is considered acceptable. However the

shotcrete surface must be smooth over the areas to be tested. [Ref. 13]

The compressive strength of shotcrete cores should be tested in accordance with ASTM C39 or

CAN/CSA A23.2-94. Results obtained from cores with different slenderness, may be

compared if the following formula [Ref. 2] is applied to calculate the corrected strength f2

f
2 = 2 - X, - f, / (1 +1.5-X,) (2-1)

where: f
2 = strength of standard core with X = 2

X; = actual sample slenderness = height / diameter of core

33
fi = strength measured at a sample with X > 1.

Correction charts as in CAN/CSA A23.2-94 [Ref. 90] may be used in lieu of formula (2-1).

According to Lewandowski [Ref. 2], a slight reduction in strength occurs when test cores have

steel reinforcement perpendicular to the loading direction. Lewandowski distinguishes between

strength tests for wet and dry specimens. Specimens are considered wet when stored under

water for 3 days. Specimens are defined as dry when stored for 7 days in air with a relative

humidity between 40 and 60 %. All specimens should be tested dry unless the in-situ concrete

will be more than superficially wet in service. Placed shotcrete should be tested for compressive

strength at 7 days and 28 days. Non-destructive test methods may supply additional information.

[Refs. 54, 94]

In an AO-publication [Ref. 70], shotcrete failures were placed in three categories.

1) Most common reasons:

• insufficient surface preparation,

• sagging of shotcrete during application,

• inclusion of rebound.

2) Less common reasons:

• applied layer too thin (less than 20 mm),

• poor reinforcement design, poor placing,

• insufficient curing.

3) Uncommon reasons:

• poor materials,

• mix too rich or lean,

• nonuniform feed to nozzle (dry-mix process),

• water not intimately mixed (dry-mix process),

• too much finishing,

• inadequate equipment (particularly weak compressors).

34
Durand et al [Ref. 37] suggest dry-mix shotcrete of more than 69 MPa compressive strength is

freeze-thaw resistant regardless of its air-content.

At the start of large projects, test panels may be shot. Samples can be cored from these panels

and tested.

During construction, the surface preparation, mix proportioning, shooting equipment, shooting

process and the curing should be inspected frequently.

2.2.10 Experience with Shotcrete Repairs

Only limited information was found in the literature on long-term durability of shotcrete repairs.

However, an extensive study on shotcrete repairs to 61 bridges was performed by Morgan et al.

[Ref. 113]. The findings are documented in the report of the Canadian Strategic Highway

Research Program - C-SHRP, 1991/92. The scope of this study was to evaluate the performance

of shotcrete repairs on highway bridges across Canada, based on field testing. These tests

included visual examination, sounding, and limited coring. The study concluded that the

shotcrete repairs on highway bridges generally performed well. Shotcrete failed in only 2 of 61

bridges studied. In one case very poorly consolidated wet-mix shotcrete was placed on top of a

bridge abutment in Nova Scotia. The shotcrete was probably projected from the wrong angle. A

defective joint behind the repair kept the substrate water saturated, and the shotcrete acted as a

moisture trap. During winter,frostaction turned the shotcrete into rubble. In the other case, a

30-year-old dry-mix shotcrete spalled off bridge piers in Alberta. Shotcrete had been applied to

the vertical faces of the piers without anchoring. Failure occurred in the substrate concrete due

tofrostaction.

35
Morgan [Ref. 144] reported a latex-modified shotcrete failure at a US marine structure. This

failure was attributed to the presence of dried overspray containing latex on the substrate surface

before the shotcrete was applied. The overspray acted as a bond breaker, resulting in extensive

delamination of shotcretefromthe substrate. Substantial repairs had to be done.

Poston et al [Ref. 62] describes long-term experience with shotcrete construction. High-quality

dry-mix shotcrete walls and domes of concrete tanks performed well over 40 years and hundreds

offreeze-thawcycles. However, some problems commonly encountered include layering due to

poor shooting practices, oversanded mixes and entrapped rebound, especially in horizontal

planes.

McDonald of the US Corps of Engineers analyzed shotcrete repairs of concrete lock walls.

About one third of these structures were more than 40 years old, andfreeze-thawsusceptible.

[Ref 106] evaluated shotcrete as a structurally adequate and durable material, ... capable of

excellent bond with concrete and other construction material. Even shotcrete with low air

content wasfreeze-thawresistant due to its low water permeability. Shotcrete could rarely

become critically saturated (i.e. about 90 %) which greatly reduced frost damage. Shotcrete

could protect the underlying concrete by keeping it below critical water saturation. Where the

substrate became saturated and shotcrete slowed drying while frost penetrated the substrate,

freeze-thaw damage occurred.

36
CHAPTER 3
TESTING METHODS

3.0 Introduction / Summary

Field testing was carried out at Stave, Buntzen, Ruskin and Jordan Dams from September 1993

until January 1994. The tests included:

• Visually inspecting the shotcreted dam surface,

• sounding shotcrete with a hammer to detect delamination,

• marking cracks and delamination,

• sketching and photographing shotcreted surfaces,

• Schmidt hammer rebound tests,

• ultrasonic pulse velocity measurements,

• taking core samples (about 94 mm in diameter, usually 250 mm to 300 mm long), and

• testing core samples for carbonation.

The test program had to be varied, depending upon accessibility and other constraints at the

different dam sites.

Laboratory tests were conducted on core samples from Stave, Buntzen, Ruskin and Jordan

Dams. The laboratory tests comprised of:

• Visually inspecting the samples,

• inspecting samples under a stereo microscope (8 to 63 times magnification),

• measuring cement paste content, air content, and spacing factor of shotcrete samples

37
according to ASTM C457 (linear traverse method),

measuring permeability according to ASTM C642,

measuring ultrasonic pulse velocity according to ASTM C 597,

measuring carbonation depth,

measuring tensile bond strength between shotcrete and substrate,

estimating dynamic modulus of elasticity,

measuring sorptivity (rate of water absorption over square root of time),

testing compressive strength according to ASTM C39, and

testing tensile strength.


3.1 Description of Field Testing Methods

3.1.1 Visual Inspection

Dam surfaces were inspected visually depending upon accessibility. The inspection was based on

ACI recommendations [Ref. 97].

During the visual inspection, surface quality, cracking, efflorescence, discolouration, scaling,

erosion and other signs of attack or deterioration were observed. Visual inspection revealed

surface damage and indicated hidden causes for defects, if any.

3.1.2 Sounding

Shotcrete was tapped with 500 g and 1000 g hammers to detect delamination. The tapping

pattern was a grid of about 300 mm by 300 mm. Delaminations ring with a pitch different from

well bonded shotcrete.

Sites without major delamination indicate repair work was successful. Large delaminations may

indicate bond between shotcrete and substrate was inferior. The shape and location of

delaminated areas may indicate what caused them to occur.

3.1.3 Schmidt Hammer Tests

The Schmidt hammer is a rebound hammer. To conduct a test the hammer tip is pressed against

the surface to be probed. Inside the hammer case a spring loaded mass strikes a steel bar. The

impact energy is transmitted via the hammer tip to the test surface. A mechanical sled measures

39
the rebound energy and displays a rebound number. The rebound number is correlated to the

compressive strength of the test material.

Schmidt hammer tests were conducted with a calibrated PROCEQ type N-34 hammer. Nine to

twelve readings were taken from each testing area but the highest and the lowest readings were

discarded. An average value was calculated from the remaining data and then transformed into

an apparent compressive strength, using calibration charts. [Ref. 135]

Schmidt hammer tests are of limited accuracy because they measure elastic behavior of the tested

material rather than its compressive strength. Thin or delaminated sections, local anomalies in

the material and surface effects may introduce substantial bias to the results. Schmidt hammer

tests may serve reliably to test concrete for uniformity, however.

The Schmidt hammer used in the field had been calibrated before tests started. A recalibration

was done during the testing program. At the time of recalibration the hammer readings were

10 % low.

3.1.4 Coring

Six to thirteen core samples were taken at each site. In each case diamond coring with water

lubrication was applied to extract the samples. The drill bits were 100 mm external diameter and

about 360 mm long. Core samples were about 94 mm diameter and usually 250 to 300 mm long.

The samples from Jordan Dam upstream face were about 200 mm long.

After extracting the core samples andfinishingultrasonic pulse velocity measurements (chapter

3.1.5) the holes werefilledwith Flowcrete repair mortar.

40
3.1.5 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV)

The UPV test depends on the different sound propagation velocities of materials with different

acoustic impedance (approximately the square root of the product of modulus of elasticity and

specific gravity). Concretes of different densities and elastic moduli therefore have different

sound velocities. The characteristic sound velocity of a concrete is determined by sending short

pulses of ultrasound across a specimen. Dividing the path length by the pulse travel time yields

the pulse velocity.

UPV tests are a reliable measure of the uniformity of concrete since the pulse velocity is

dependent on pore, aggregate and paste composition, their distribution, concrete density and

elastic behavior.

The testing was conducted in accordance with the equipment manufacturer's instructions [Ref.

134] and ASTM 597 [Ref. 104]. UPV measurements were conducted using a PUNDIT and two

cylindrical transducers (50 kHz) of 50 mm outside diameter. The equipment was properly

calibrated. A water-based gel was used for effective acoustic coupling. Two tests were executed

for each location . The lower measurement of each test pair was used for calculating the UPV.

Tests were conducted in direct and semi-direct modes. These modes are shown in Figure 6

Direct Transmission Mode Semi-Direct Transmission Mode

1 I ~
. ' .„ concrete \ L _ " N sound path,
transmitter I

receiver transmitter c o n c r e t e

Figure 6: Transmission Modes for Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Measurements

41
The tests at Stave and Buntzen Dam were conducted in semi-direct mode. The transmitter was

inserted into a core hole and the receiver was positioned on the dam surface. The transmitter

was fitted with a convex aluminum shoe to improve contact. The convex part of the shoe had a

radius equal to the concave radius of the core hole (i.e. 50 mm, see Figure 7).

Transducer Transducer Shoe


Plan View .

Figure 7: Transducer Shoe

Tests at Ruskin and Jordan Dam were conducted in semi-direct and direct transmission modes.

For direct transmission both transducers were fitted with shoes and inserted into adjacent core

holes.

Table 3 correlates the velocity of longitudinal ultrasound waves to concrete quality [Ref 16].

The correlation was used for evaluating concrete and shotcrete in chapter 5.

Table 3: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity in Concrete


Longitudinal Velocity (km/s) Quality of Concrete
>4.6 very good
3.6-4.6 good
3.0-3.6 moderate to questionable
2.1-3.0 bad
<2.1 very bad

42
3.1.6 Carbonation

Carbonation tests were conducted with a solution of about 5 g phenolphthalein in 100 g methanol

sprayed on the core samples. The cement paste was considered carbonated where no colour

reaction occurred. Purple indicated high alkalinity (pH > 9).

The carbonation depth depends on the pore structure of the shotcrete, its exposure to air,

moisture, climate, and other factors. Deep carbonation (10's of mm) may indicate a porous

shotcrete. Other variables held constant, carbonation progresses most rapidly in concrete at 40

to 70 % relative humidity [Ref. 23].

Carbonation does not adversely influence shotcrete strength. However, steel embedded in

carbonated concrete is not adequately protected against corrosion.

Concrete and shotcrete core samples at Buntzen, Ruskin and Jordan Dam were tested for

carbonation. Carbonated concrete in the samples from Jordan Dam was stained yellow and

thereby easily distinguishable from non-carbonated concrete even without using the test solution.

3.2 Description of Laboratory Testing Methods

3.2.1 Visual Inspection

All core samples were visually inspected in the laboratory. The inspection focused on the quality

of the cement paste (voids, cracks), shape and gradation of the aggregates, transition zone

between shotcrete and substrate, deposits, and evidence of errors during shotcreting. Calcium

carbonate deposits were identified by etching with 10 % hydrochloric acid.

43
3.2.2 Stereo Microscope

Selected samples were inspected under a Zeiss stereo microscope at 8 to 63 times magnification.

To aid in detecting microcracking, some samples were dyed with blue epoxy resin and polished,

to ASTM C457 [Ref. 103].

Microscopic examination supplements visual inspection. Microscopic examination may detect

microcracking of the paste due to frost attack.

3.2.3 ASTM C457 (Linear Traverse Method)

Sample preparation and testing was done to ASTM C457 [Ref. 103].

This test determines the proportion of air pores, cement paste and aggregates in concrete. The

method involves scanning a polished shotcrete surface with a microscope cross hair (see Figure

8). The cumulative lengths of air voids, cement paste and aggregates traversed by the cross hair

are noted. The traversed air voids are counted. Values characterizing air, paste and aggregate

content as well as pore size and pore distribution can be calculated from the test results.

The results may indicate whether the concrete or shotcrete tested isfrost-resistantand durable.

According to [Ref. 51] shotcrete may be consideredfreeze-thawresistant when its specific

surface varies between 16 and 32 mm" 1


and its spacing factor is below 0.25 mm. However,

Morgan [Ref. 54] reported dry-mix shotcrete with a spacing factor of 0.31 mm being freeze-thaw

durable according to ASTM C666. Recommended air content forfrostresistance is 4 to 6 %.

44
Crosshair Path for Linear Traverse Method

Figure 8: Scanning Path for Linear Traverse Method

3.2.4 ASTM C642 (Boiled Absorption Test)

Sample preparation and testing was done to ASTM C642 [Ref. 105].

This test determines the fraction of permeable voids in concrete. Sound specimens weighing at

least 800 g each are dried in an oven at 105 °C until the mass change is less than 0.5 % per 24

hours. The specimens are then cooled in a desiccator. After weighing they are stored submerged

in water until mass once again becomes constant (mass change less than 0.5 % per 24 hours).

Subsequently, the samples are weighed and boiled for at least 5 hours. After cooling, the samples

are weighed again. Permeable voids and boiled absorption numbers can be calculated from the

test results.

The results are related to the porosity of the material and indicate if a given shotcrete is frost

resistant and durable. Morgan suggested using boiled absorption numbers for the evaluation of

silica fume shotcrete [Ref. 51]. Table 4 shows the suggested correlation.

45
Table 4: Evaluation of Silica Fume Shotcrete
Boiled Absorption [%] Permeable Voids [%] Evaluation
<6 <14 excellent
6-8 14-17 good
8-9 17-19 fair
>9 >19 marginal

3.2.5 ASTM C597 (Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity)

Sample preparation and testing were done according to A S T M C597 [Ref. 104]. The testing

equipment consisted of a calibrated PUNDIT and two cylindrical 50 kHz transducers 50 mm in

outside diameter. A water-based gel was used to accomplish acoustic coupling between the

concrete surface and transducers.

Description and significance of this test are explained in chapter 3.1.5.

3.2.6 Carbonation

Sawn and broken samples were tested for carbonation as described in chapter 3.1.6.

3.2.7 Tensile Bond Strength

The tensile bond strength between shotcrete and substrate concrete should be high to prevent

separation in service. The bond is dependent on substrate and shotcrete quality and on surface

preparation.

46
Tensile Bond Test

Tensile Force

Steel End Plate

Glued
Connection

Original Concrete

Glued
Connection

Steel End Plate

Tensile Force

Figure 9: Specimen for Tensile Strength


or Tensile Bond Strength Tests

The tensile bond strength developed between shotcrete and substrate was tested on core samples.

Both end faces of the specimen were ground parallel and glued to end caps with Sikadur 32 high

modulus epoxy resin (see Figure 9). The end caps were cylindrical steel plates 100 mm in

diameter and 20 mm deep. A nut was welded to the center of each end cap to connect the

sample to the adapter rods of the testing machine. Tests were conducted on a Tinius-Olsen 400

Super L testing machine. Typical loading rates were about 1 MPa/min.

3.2.8 Tensile Strength Tests

Tensile strength of the substrate or the shotcrete may be a limiting factor for the bond strength

developed between the two. Tensile bond stresses transmissible between shotcrete and substrate

may locally exceed the tensile strength of either one.

Tensile strength tests were conducted on selected shotcrete or substrate samples. The tests were

47
similar in principle to those described in chapter 3.2.7.

3.2.9 ASTM C39 (Compressive Strength Test)

The compressive strength is used to characterize concrete and shotcrete. It is reasonable to

specify a repair material with strength equal to or greater than the original material to fully

rehabilitate a section or structure.

Generally, compressive strength tests on concrete and shotcrete are conducted on cylinders or

cubes. A specimen is prepared with opposite faces smooth and parallel. The specimen is then

placed in a hydraulic press with the parallel faces in contact with the press end-plates. Pressure is

applied at a denned rate until the sample breaks. Ultimate load and shape of the fracture are

recorded. Then a corrected ultimate compressive strength is calculated using the specimen's

original geometry, its ultimate load and correction charts.

Compressive strength tests were conducted according to ASTM C39 [Ref. 101], using a Forney

450 kN testing machine. Typical load rates were about 20 MPa/min.

3.2.10Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity (modified ASTM C215 Test)

Dynamic modulus of shotcrete is closely related to its static modulus of elasticity and

characterizes the quality of the material. Different concretes or shotcretes may be compared

using their dynamic moduli. It is reasonable to specify that a repair material have a similar

modulus to the original material. This helps avoid attracting major stresses toward or away from

a repaired section.

48
Selected samples were tested for dynamic modulus of elasticity following a modified ASTM

C215 test [Ref. 102]. A Geotest Sonometer model 2622 [Ref. 127] testing machine with

piezoelectric pickup was used for the tests. The geometry of the samples required a reduction of

their natural frequencies in order to measure them reliably with the equipment available. The

tuning was done by attaching additional masses to the samples' ends, thereby reducing the

systems' natural frequencies.

3.2.10.1 Longitudinal Mode

Steel cylinders of 100 mm diameter and 10.15 kg mass were glued with Sikadur 32 high modulus

epoxy resin to each end face of a sample to reduce the natural frequency. After 24 hours the

samples were excited in the longitudinal direction. The natural frequency of the system was

recorded.

The vibrating system is symmetrical about a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the

concrete sample (see Figure 10). For such a half system the longitudinal oscillation is described

by [Ref. 21]:

( ^ ) = ( ^ . t a n ( | ^ ) 0 . 5 ( 3. 1 }

W Eg Eg

where A = cross section of concrete sample [m ]

W = specific weight of concrete sample [N/m ]

/ = half of the length of the concrete sample [m]

E = modulus of elasticity of concrete sample [Pa]

g = 9.81 m/s 2

p = circular frequency of system = 27tf [rad/s]

f = naturalfrequencyof system [Ffz]

49
- Control Unit

Steel Cylinders

Figure 10: Testing for Dynamic Modulus. Longitudinal Mode

3.2.10.2 Torsional Mode

The samples were prepared as described in Chapter 3.2.10.1. Additionally, two 15 g aluminum

extrusions about 70 mm long were glued tangent to the steel cylinders at their mid points. The

exciter was aligned with one of the aluminum extrusions inducing a torsional vibration in the

steel-concrete-steel system.

The vibrating system is symmetrical about a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the

concrete sample (see Figure 11). For such a half system the torsional oscillation is approximately

described by [Ref. 21]:

f - i l i (3
- 2)

where f = natural torsional frequency of the system [Hz]

k = torsional stiffness of concrete sample [Nm]

I = moment of inertia of one attached steel cylinder [kgm ]. 2

50
, %d G
A
, T WD 2

ing k .and / =
* 32/ ' 8g

with d = diameter of concrete sample [m]


E
G, = shear modulus [Pa] =
2(1+ v)

/ = half of the length of the concrete sample [m]

W = weight of one attached steel cylinder [N]

D = diameter of steel cylinder [m]

g = 9.81 m/s 2

E = modulus of elasticity of concrete sample [Pa]

v = Poison's ratio.

yields E (3-3)

The model neglects the mass of the concrete sample in the system. Therefore the actual dynamic

modulus of elasticity is somewhat underestimated. Since the mass of a neglected concrete

specimen is usually less than 10 % of the combined mass of the two steel cylinders attached, the

bias is less than 10 %.

51
3.2.11 Sorptivity Tests

3.2.11.1 Scope

The method determines the rate of water absorption across a plane concrete surface. This rate

may indicate differences in the structure of interconnected pores in samples madefromthe same

batch of concrete or shotcrete and prepared identically for the test. A high sorptivity rate may

indicate high porosity in the sample. Porosity increases in concrete affected by freeze-thaw

attack.

3.2.11.2 Apparatus

The equipment for the test consisted of a scale (maximum load 3 kg, resolution 0.01 g), a

Plexiglas container (internal dimensions: 145 mm x 145 mm x 400 mm height) with removable lid

and 2 mm diameter hole in the center of the lid, stop watch, high strength steel wire, hose

clamps and electrical tape. A rigid test stand was essential for accurate measurements.
52
3.2.11.3 Specimens

Test samples were ground on both ends and subsequently dried at about 105 °C until further

drying yielded a mass change less than 0.5 % per day. Subsequently the samples were cooled to

room temperature in a desiccator. The cylinder walls of the samples were wrapped in electrical

tape. Steel wire was clamped to each sample using a hose clamp so it could be suspended in an

upright position.

3.2.11.4 Procedure

The Plexiglas container was placed on the scale and filled with about 500 g distilled Water at

room temperature. The specimen was suspended from a stiffframeso that its lower face was

submerged about 3 mm (see Figure 12). A stop watch was started and scale readings were taken

at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 9, 12, 16, and 25 minutes.

Support

Figure 12: Sorptivity Test

53
3.2.11.5 Calculation

The sorptivity rate is the slope of the plot of absorbed water mass per area of submerged

concrete versus square root of time. The absorbed water mass can be calculated as:

™w - r — : (3-4)
I+ A s

where: m w = change in mass of absorbed water [g]

AW = change in scale reading [g]

Ag = plane area of submerged specimen face [cm ]

Ag = plane area of container [21025 cm ].

The density of water is 1 g/cm .

3.2.11.6 Limitation

The drying procedure influences the sorptivity rate. In order to avoid errors resulting from

differences between drying batches (differing temperatures or time of heat exposure), no

comparisons between different specimens should be made.

The sorptivity rate at the two ends of a given sample may be compared as long as both faces are

tested within a few hours of one another.

3.2.12 Estimate of Frost Penetration History

In order to evaluate thefieldperformance of shotcrete and substrate concrete under freeze-thaw

conditions, the history offrostexposure was estimated.

54
3.2.12.1 Exposed Material

The number offreeze-thawcycles of shotcrete or concrete at an exposed surface was estimated

on the basis of records from local weather stations.

Weather data were provided by BC Hydro's Burnaby Mountain Weather Office. The following

records were available:

• for Stave Dam: Stave Station 1988 - 1993,

• for Buntzen Dam: Buntzen Station 1970 -1983,

• for Ruskin Dam: Stave Station 1988 - 1993, «

• for Jordan Dam: Bear Creek Station 1983 - 1992. [Ref. 139]

The total number offrostevents experienced by each shotcrete repair or substrate concrete was

calculated by multiplying its age (in years) by the estimated annual number offrostevents.

3.2.12.2 Shotcrete-Substrate Interface

Scope

No qualified guess was possible to estimate how manyfreeze-thawcycles had reached the

shotcrete-substrate interface. The number was important to evaluate the influence of the

shotcrete cover on thefreeze-thawdurability of the interface and the underlying original concrete

under field conditions. Therefore a model was developed to estimate this number.

Model

A one-dimensional model was devised to calculate the temperature distribution in a dam. The

model is based on the method of finite differences described in [Ref. 20]. A concrete body of

infinite length and height and two meters thickness was assumed. The body was divided into 40

55
parallel slices of 50 mm width each. A node number was assigned to each interior slice center.

The left and right boundary slices (#0 and #40 respectively) are only half of the width of interior

slices. These boundary slices have their nodes on the boundary of the body. Mass and heat

capacity of each slice was lumped along the center line between adjacent nodes. The thermal

conductivity of concrete was assigned to the space between the nodes. For simplicity the

temperature of a dam surface (Node 0) was defined to be equal to the air temperature T . The a

temperature at the node right of the innermost slice (Node 40) has a constant temperature which

can be chosen freely and should be about the average seasonal air temperature Tj,.

The thermal energy in node m at time t' is calculated from the initial thermal energy in the node at

the time t and the net heat exchange with the nodes m-l and m+1 in the time interval t' -1.

j
Ax
j | j
Node: 0 m 40

(J) External Boundary Slice, Has Air Temperature Ta

(2) Regular Slice, Has Temperature Ti

(3) Endslice, Has Constant Temperature Tb

Figure 13: One-Dimensional Heat Flux Model

The rate of heat transfer per unit areafromnode m-l and m+1 into node m is:

(T -\ — Tm) (T +1 — T„)
m m
q =k- (3-5)
Ax Ax

No significant changes in the temperature of the nodes occur during sufficiently short time

56
intervals At. Hence the thermal energy transferred into node m is:

(Tm - 1 T ) (T + l — Tm)

m m
E = k-
th
•At (3-6)
Ax Ax

The change of thermal energy in a node due to a temperature changefromT m toT is:
m

Eth = p-C -Ax-(T -T )


p m m (3-7)

Setting equations (3-6) and (3-7) equal arid solving for the new node temperature T m yields:

Tm= *' ! A
2[Tm-\-2-T m + Tm + l]+T m (3-8)
p-Cp-Axr

The physical properties of concrete and shotcrete were assumed as follows:

p = density = 2500 kg/m 3

k = thermal conductivity = 2 W/m/K

C p = specific heat = lOOOWs/kg/K

The time resolution of the model was 12 minutes. The model was implemented in an EXCEL

worksheet and could cover a maximum period of 14 days.

The daily minimum and maximum temperatures were provided by Burnaby Mountain Weather

Office [Ref. 139]. They were given without reference to time of day. For simplicity it was

assumed maximum and minimum temperatures were always 12 hours apart and the temperature

between extrema followed a sine function.

Effects offreezingpore water on thefrostpenetration depth were neglected. The heat of fusion

of water is about 334 kWs/kg. The formation of ice in moist concrete would generate a

57
significant amount of heat, rendering the assumptions for the computer model conservative.

Climate Data

The estimation offrostevents in the shotcrete-substrate interface was based on the climatic data

referred to in chapter 3.2.12.1. The climate data received from the weather station were used to

model typicalfrostevents. These events are listed in Appendix A. They were used to calculate

thefrostpenetration depth.

Results

About 465freeze-thawcycles occur at Buntzen during 10 years. At about 150 mm depth

(typical depth of the shotcrete-substrate interface) this number drops to about 70 cycles per 10

years.

Table 5: Buntzen Dam. Frost Events inside the Dam


Number of Freeze-Thaw Cycles per 10 years
Frost Event @ Surface (8} 10 cm Depth @ 15 cm Depth 20 cm Depth (SJ 30 cm Depth
Bl 27 27 9 0 0
B2 18 12 12 0 0
B3 21 21 14 0 0
B4 96 80 64 48 0
B5 18 18 18 12 6
B6 15 9 0 0 0
B7 18 6 6 6 6
B8 165 0 0 0 0
B9 87 0 0 0 0
Total 465 173 123 66 12

About 383freeze-thawcycles occur at Stave and Ruskin during 10 years. At about 200 mm

depth (typical depth of the shotcrete-substrate interface) this number drops to about 90 cycles

per 10 years.

58
Table 6: Stave and Ruskin Dam. Frost Events inside the Dam
Number of Freeze-Thaw Cycles per 10 years
Frost Event @ Surface @ 10 cm Depth @ 15 cm Depth @ 20 cm Depth @ 30 cm Depth
SR2 6 6 4 0 0
SR3 15 15 10 0 0
SR5 39 39 0 0 0
SR6 80 80 48 32 16
SR7 4 4 0 0 0
SR8 21 21 7 7 7
SR9 65 65 0 0 0
SR10 18 18 18 18 6
SR11 32 32 32 32 24
SR12 103 0 0 0 0
Total 383 143 119 89 53

About 400freeze-thawcycles per 10 years occur at the surface of unprotected concrete at

Jordan River dam. The climate data available were insufficient for further calculations.

59
CHAPTER 4
INVESTIGATION

4.0 Introduction / Summary

This chapter provides an overview of the dam sites chosen for examination and summarizes field

and laboratory investigations.

Of the five dam sites with extensive shotcrete repairs, four were selected for inspection. These

dams were between 60 and 80 years old. The seven distinguishable shotcrete repairs at the 4

sites range in age from 3 to 30 years. The field inspections revealed that shotcrete was typically

sound and in good condition. However, large delaminated areas were found at some sites.

Exposed original concrete was deteriorated in some cases. The laboratory tests showed

significant differences in composition and durability between shotcrete and substrate. Most

shotcrete was strong and only superficially attacked by the environment. Substrate concrete was

generally weaker and deteriorated to a greater extent than the shotcrete.

4.1 Overview

The five dam sites investigated range in age from 60 to 80 years. Concrete used for their

construction was generally of low quality by current standards. Their average compressive

strengths are below 30 MPa. The concretes have porous cement pastes and poor aggregate

gradation. All sites are in areas with an average annual precipitation of about 3000 mm and 40 to

50freeze-thawcycles.

60
Information on shotcrete repairs at BC Hydro dams was retrieved from the BC Hydro
Information Center and the Civil and Transmission Group archives. It was found that five dams
had extensive shotcrete repairs:

• La Joie Dam,

• Stave Dam,
• Buntzen Dam,
• Ruskin Dam,
• Jordan Dam.

The last four of these dams were selected for evaluating the performance of shotcrete repairs,
based primarily on accessibility. La Joie Dam was omitted from the list because of its distance
from Vancouver.

Major reasons for shotcrete repairs on the dams were:


• freeze-thaw damage to the substrate,
• leakage,
• unacceptable aesthetics, and
• to extend the service life.

All but one shotcrete repair was made using the dry-mix process. Silica fume modified shotcrete

was used at two sites on three occasions. Steelfiberswere added to two silica fume dry-mix

shotcretes. Surface preparation prior to the shotcreting ranged from poor to sufficient.

Table 7 represents a summary of data related to the dams and shotcrete repairs.

61
Table 7: Dam Descriptions
Site Stave v Buntzen Ruskin Jordan

Dam Type concrete gravity concrete gravity concrete overflow Ambursen type
gravity buttress

Height [m] 20 16.5 58 39.9

Length [m] 195 110 125' 232

Location Lower Mainland Indian Arm Lower Mainland Southwest


Vancouver Island

Substrate placed 1922-1923 1911-1914 1929-1930 1912-1913

Shotcrete Repair 1985 1965 1973 four repairs

1969 - 1990

Reasons for freeze-thaw leakage, freeze- severe spalling of freeze-thaw


Repair damaged thaw damage old gunite damage, seismic
upgrading

Shotcrete Type dry-mix, silica conventional dry- conventional dry- dry-mix / dry-mix
fume, steel fiber mix mix with silica fume
and steel fibers /
wet-mix with
silica fume
4.2 Stave Blind Slough Dam

4.2.1 Site Description

Stave Dam. Plan View

Upstream Side

Stave Dam. Upstream Elevation


, Parapet
1
1—^ —J
5. \ Retaining Wall

^ Pier 3 Pier 1
Water Level, Upstream Face

Figure 14: Stave Dam

Stave Blind Slough Dam is a concrete gravity dam situated in the Lower Fraser Valley. The dam

is about 70 years old. More details are given in the following tables.

Table 8: Structure and Site. Stave Dam


Dam Type concrete gravity
Year Built 1922 - 1923
Height [ml 20
Width [ml 7.4
Length [ml 195
Dam Location northern rim of Lower Fraser Valley,
downstream surface facing south-west,
about 85 m above sea level
Local Climate annual precipitation: 3000 mm
average temperature: January 1°C
July 18°C
about 38 annual freeze-thaw cycles

63
Table 9: Substrate Materials. Stave Dam
Mix aggregates from nearby quarry
sand and gravel washed and screened
mass concrete mixture =1:2.5:5
(cement:sand:gravel)
reinforced concrete mixture for beams, parapet,
deck = 1:2.5:4
Concrete Properties estimated water-cement ratio = 0.7 - 0.9
average compressive strength about 28 MPa
Concrete Placing about 150 m per shift
3

Table 10: Shotcrete. Stave Dam


Year Applied 1985
Preparation chipping, pressure washing
Shotcrete Type dry-mix
Mix maximum aggregate size 10 mm
steel fibers (30 mm x 0.5 mm), 60 kg/m 3

silica fume, 7% by weight of cement


Anchors, Reinforcement none
Shooting Reed pot machines
premoisturizing
Finish gun finish
Curing none
Properties see following chapters

Data were takenfroma 1924 construction report [Ref. 126] and a 1985 test report [Ref. 118].

4.2.2 Field Investigation

4.2.2.1 Scope of Work

Accessible shotcreted areas on the upstream face of the dam were inspected. These areas include

the dam between Piers 1 to 3 and the parapet wall west of Pier 1. There are about 200 m 2

shotcrete in these areas. Site visits were conducted on 6 days in September and October 1993.

64
4.2.2.2 Visual Inspection

Exposed Original Concrete

Exposed original concrete at Stave Dam varied in quality. Most of the original concrete had a

smooth surface showing the texture of formwork. Concrete was damaged to a depth of 20 to 40

mm near seeping cracks and in areas frequently soaked by water. Concrete in other areas seemed

to be sound. Piers were sound in areas protected from rain. Sand particles and white

efflorescence could be brushed from surfaces which were exposed to rain or runoff water.

Severe cracking was found in the parapet and in piers. Concrete adjacent to these cracks had

deteriorated. Some efflorescence leached out of small cracks in the piers. Efflorescence also

accumulated below cracks in the parapet wall.

Shotcrete

The gun finished shotcrete between piers 1 to 3 was of grey color and uneven. The exposed

surface was pock-marked. Such surface patterns are typical of aggregate rebound during

shooting or aggregate pop-outs due tofrostattack. The shotcrete surfaces were dusting. Steel

fibers on the surface were either corroded or had disappeared. Moss was growing on the surface

of the retaining wall's western part. About 5 % of the shotcrete was severely damaged as a result

offrostaction in the horizontal areas on top of the retaining wall (Appendix C, Photograph 2).

Shotcrete did not spall from vertical areas between Piers 1 to 3. Spalling of thin shotcrete

sections, however, occurred near the parapet. There a total of about one square meter had

spalled off.

Cracks wider than 0.1 mm occurred at a rate of about 1 m crack length per 10 m 2
shotcrete.

Isolated cracks with widths between 0 and 0.3 mm were found in the shotcrete between Piers 1

and 3. More cracking had occurred west of Pier 1 in the retaining wall. About half of this wall

65
had cracked at some place. The wall's northern top corner was cracked horizontally. Horizontal

cracks also were found along the lower edges of delaminated shotcrete sections. Cracking

occurred also in shotcreted areas which were delaminated and visibly bulged. White and yellow

efflorescence was deposited along the horizontal cracks below the delaminated areas (Appendix

C, Photograph 2).

No contraction joints had been installed. Pier 1 was equipped with about 20 drain pipes.

4.2.2.3 Sounding

Exposed Original Concrete

Original concrete was sounded for delamination at the parapet wall. Delaminated sections were

found around cracks.

Shotcrete

All shotcreted areas between Pier 3 and the west end of the retaining wall above water level were

sounded with a hammer. The delaminated areas were marked with white chalk and

photographed (Appendix C, Photograph 1). About 40 % of the shotcrete was delaminated.

Substantial delamination occurred in the shotcrete above cracked old concrete, along the upper

corner of the retaining wall, and at Pier 1. The thin horizontal shotcrete layer on top of the

retaining wall was completely delaminated. Delaminated areas seemed to have experienced

frequent water saturation of the substrate. This was indicated by their geometry, efflorescence

around wide deep cracks and the drain pipes inserted into Pier 1 (Appendix C, Photograph 1).

Construction drawings from 1985 [Ref. 116] showed 2 to 4 mm wide cracks had traversed the

retaining wall in areas which are now delaminated. Parts of these cracks were visible in and

below the parapet. No indications were found that these cracks were properly sealed before

66
shotcreting.

Coring revealed deteriorated substrate concrete with minimal cohesion near the interface with the

shotcrete (Appendix C, Photograph 3). Shotcrete could not bond to the parapet wall across such

deteriorated material. Shotcrete also delaminated at featheredged zones of large and deep

shotcrete layers. However, about half of the thin shotcrete layers had bonded well.

4.2.2.4 Coring

Ten cores were taken from the parapet wall, Pier 1, Pier 2 and from the wall between Pier 2 and

3. The core samples were 110 to 270 mm long and 93 to 94 mm in diameter. Sample SI was

taken from exposed substrate (ordinary concrete). It consisted of one piece. Shotcrete samples

Bl, B3, and B4 emerged bonded to their substrate. Samples D1A, D2, D3, D4, and B4A were

fractured approximately perpendicular to the core axis.

After extracting the core samples andfinishingthe ultrasonic pulse velocity-measurements, the

remaining holes werefilledwith Flowcrete and some large local aggregate.

Table 11: Core Samples. Stave Dam


Specimen Material Core Fragments Shotcrete-Substrate Interface
SI original concrete 1 N/A
Bl original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded
D1A original concrete + shotcrete several delaminated
D2 original concrete + shotcrete 2 partly bonded
B3 original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded
D3 original concrete + shotcrete 2 partly bonded
B4 original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded
D4 original concrete + shotcrete 2 delaminated

67
4.2.2.5 Test Results

Substrate

Ultrasonic pulse velocities were measured on exposed and shotcrete covered substrate concrete.

Variations in pulse velocity correlated with frost attack to the concrete rather than with

application of shotcrete. Schmidt hammer tests were conducted on sound exposed concrete

only.

Table 12: Field Test Results. Substrate Concrete. Stave Dam


Property [Unit] Value Comment
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 3.0-4.4 low values in frost damaged
concrete
Schmidt Hammer Reading 35 - 37.4
Compressive Strength from 27-31
Schmidt Hammer [MPa]

Shotcrete

No reproducible ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement could be conducted due to the rather thin

shotcrete layer (< 60 mm deep). Shotcrete was tested with the Schmidt hammer at 9 locations.

The mean value of the apparent compressive strength was about 32 MPa. One test was

conducted on delaminated shotcrete. There the apparent compressive strength was 16 MPa.

This low value was probably an artifact. Delamination may have caused the erroneous reading.

A thin delaminated shotcrete shell would have responded "softer" to the impact of the rebound

hammer than a shotcrete layer of comparable quality and depth well bonded to the substrate

concrete (see Chapter 3.1.3).

Table 13: Field Test Results. Shotcrete. Stave Dam


Property [Unit] Value Comment
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] N/A too thin
Schmidt Hammer Reading 33.7-42.8 26.9 from delaminated shotcrete
Compressive Strength from 29-39
Schmidt Hammer [MPa]

More detailed data are given in Appendix B.

68
4.2.3 Laboratory Testing

4.2.3.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection

Original Concrete

The substrate concrete from Stave Dam consisted of light grey paste and compact aggregates

with rounded edges. Densely packed aggregates smaller then 10 mm were observed. The large

aggregates were usually less than 40 mm diameter. However, isolated aggregates of about 50

mm diameter were also observed. The fraction of mid-sized aggregates between 10 and 20 mm

diameter seemed low.

The substrate concrete was generally sound except forfreeze-thawdamaged layers in samples

from the parapet wall. The deterioration affected the concrete underlying the interface with

shotcrete to a depth of 30 mm. The cement paste contained elongated compaction voids up to

10 mm long and spherical air voids of 1 to 3 mm diameter. Cracking and microcracking in the

cement paste was also observed.

White deposits of calcium hydroxide and, where in contact with air, calcium carbonate had

precipitated on the surface offractures.The deposit accumulated predominantly in the interface

between cement paste and larger aggregate and resembled plate shaped crystals. Deposits were

also found in cracks and around debonded large aggregate. Original concrete close to well-

bonded shotcrete was carbonated.

The cement paste of the substrate in core D4 near the shotcrete was pale grey. A delamination

zone close to the shotcrete layer ran solely through the paste and the paste-aggregate interfaces.

No aggregate wasfractured.The face where the core sample D4 was taken out of the dam was

inspected for comparison. Here thefractureoccurred through about 15 % aggregates, 70 %

paste-aggregate interface and 15 % paste. In other samplesfractureoccurredfrequentlyin or

69
close to the shotcrete-substrate interface.

Interfaces with the shotcrete were usually rough, indicating good surface preparation prior to

shooting.

Shotcrete

The shotcrete from Stave Dam was sound. The shotcrete layers were 10 to 80 mm thick except

in samples B l (1 to 5 mm) and B3 (3 to 10 mm). /•

Maximum observed aggregate size was less than 10 mm. The aggregates were compact and

rounded. The cement paste was medium grey. Shotcrete on exposed surfaces was somewhat

darker than subsurface shotcrete. The top face of the shotcrete was firm and very rough due to

its gunfinish.Some pits were up to 20 mm deep, probably caused by aggregate rebound or pop-

out. The paste contained air voids typical of dry-mix shotcrete, and isolated zones of inferior

consolidation. The shotcrete contained Dramix steel fibers. Steelfiberscorroded only where

exposed to air. Fully embeddedfiberswerefreeof corrosion. Thefibersgenerally bonded well

to the shotcrete.

Heavy white deposits were found in delaminated zones at the interface between shotcrete and

substrate. These deposits were calcium carbonate resulting from the carbonation of calcium

hydroxide leached out of the substrate. No indications were found that these deposits had

leached out from the shotcrete.

70
4.2.3.2 Test Results

Table 14 lists concrete and shotcrete data. Appendix B contains more detailed data.

Table 14: Laboratory Test Results. Stave Dam


Test Substrate Shotcrete
Paste Content - ASTM C457 [%] - 32.5
Air Content - ASTM C457 [%] - 6.2
Specific Surface - ASTM C457 [mm" ]
1
- 10.6
Spacing - ASTM C457 [mm] - 0.45
Permeable Voids - ASTM C642 [%1 16.7 18.0
Absorption - ASTM C642 \%\ 7.2 8.1
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 3.3-4.0 4.2
Carbonation Depth [mm] - 0-3
Tensile Bond Strength [MPa] 0.1-0.2
Compressive Strength - ASTM C39 [MPa] 28 [Ref. 140]

71
4.3 Buntzen Dam

4.3.1 Site Description

Buntzen Dam. Plan View

llll TUTfl
| llll
: 1

llllllllll — Penstock Spillway /

Buntzen Dam. Downstream Elevation

Figure 15: Buntzen Dam

Buntzen Dam is a concrete gravity dam situated east of Indian Arm. The dam is about 80 years

old. More details are given in the following tables (see also Appendix C, Photograph 4).

Table 15: Structure and Site, Buntzen Dam


Dam Type concrete gravity dam
Year Built 1911 to 1914
Height [m] 16.5
Width [ml 12.2
Length [m] 110
Dam Location east of Indian Arm
downstream faces west
crest 124 m above sea level
Local Climate annual precipitation: 2900 mm,
average temperature: 9°C,
about 46 freeze-thaw cycles annually

72
Table 16: Substrate Materials. Buntzen Dam
Mix aggregates: Fraser river sand, crushed granite
mixture 1:2.5:5.5 (cement:sandxoarse aggregate)
poor gradation of aggregates
Concrete Properties compressive strength 25 to 28 MPa (3 cores)
specific gravity 2320 kg/m3

Concrete Placing no information available

[Ref. 132]

Table 17: Shotcrete. Buntzen Dam


Year Applied 1965
Preparation poor surface preparation, dirt pockets were found
in substrate concrete during coring in October
1993
Shotcrete Type 1
dry-mix
Mix no information available
Anchors, Reinforcement steel wire mesh
wire diameter 4 mm
installed about 30 to 50 mm above substrate
Shooting no expansion joints
minimum thickness about 75 mm (1993 core
samples showed 60 to 130 mm on down-
stream-face)
Finish gun finish
Curing no information available
Properties see following chapters

[Ref. 132].

4.3.2 Field Investigation

4.3.2.1 Scope of Work

The complete downstream face and the walkway atop the dam were inspected. These areas were

completely shotcreted and covered about 400 m . Site visits were conducted on five days in
2

October and November 1993.

73
4.3.2.2 Visual Inspection

Earlier Inspections

The upstream face was inspected in 1985 [Ref. 115]. Shotcrete was in fair to satisfactory

condition. A crack was found between the gravity section and the parapet.

Exposed Original Concrete

Small areas of original concrete were accessible only in the upper northern corner of the

downstream face and in some locations close to the ground. There concrete had a light grey

color and a firm, solid surface.

Shotcrete

The upstream face of the dam could not be inspected due to a high water level.

The shotcrete on the downstream face of the dam was sound. All shotcrete on the walkway and

the downstream face was gun finished and dark colored. Moss grew on about 5 % of the

downstream face. The shotcrete beneath the moss showed some discoloration. Fine aggregates

could be brushed off the surface in these areas. The horizontal surfaces of walkways were in fair

condition showing surface scaling on about 50 % of their area. The walkway had no side-slope.

Puddles of water remained on the walkway after rains.

Several isolated spalls occurred on the surface of the shotcrete layer. Their development was

associated with ice pressure built up in a leaking crack. Corroding reinforcement was found

under one spall. The shotcrete surface in spalled areas looked leached and unstable. The total

affected area was about 1 m. 2

Cracks wider than 0.1 mm occurred at a rate of about 1 m crack length per 10 m shotcrete.
2

Several cracks, mostly less than 1 mm wide and in the order of meters long, were distributed over

74
the downstream face (Appendix C, Photograph 5). About 5 cracks were slightly moist due to
seepage. White and yellow efflorescence was found on these cracks. One seepage zone in the
southern part of the dam had formed a substantial calcium carbonate deposit. There the
shotcrete surface had deteriorated.

The shotcrete layer south of the intake structure beneath the flight of stairs had delaminated over
a length of about 2.5 m (Appendix C, Photograph 7).

Buntzen Dam. Cracks and Gaps

Elevation Section A-A

© -
__<8)

®
• -A )
c

A<

(T) intake structure (?) shotcrete


(2) penstock (6) original concrete
(3) dam - downstream face @ ® gaps
(?) cracks in shotcrete (9) stairs

Figure 16: Buntzen Dam. Cracking and Delamination near Intake Structure

Cracks occurred predominantly in delaminated shotcrete. Two vertical cracks opened beside the

intake structure (see Figure 16, item 4, and also Appendix C, Photograph 6). These cracks had

probably started at the corners of the intake structure and developed downwards. One crack

showed no sign of leakage water or efflorescence. The other crack had a small amount of white

7.5
deposit along parts of its edges. A gap had opened at the corner between shotcrete and concrete

of the stairs (see Figure 16, item 7). There were also vertical gaps between the shotcrete and the

adjacent walls of the intake structure (see Figure 16, item 8). No expansion joints had been

installed.

4.3.2.3 Sounding

The complete downstream face of the dam was sounded with a hammer. Delaminated areas were

marked with white chalk and photographed. About 30 % of the downstream face was

delaminated. Large delaminations often contained cracks (Appendix C, Photograph 5). There

was a delaminated strip about 100 to 300 mm wide along the upper edge of the downstream face.

Shotcrete on the walkway was mostly delaminated.

4.3.2.4 Coring

Six cores were taken from the shotcreted areas of the downstream face. The core samples were

270 to 330 mm long and 93 to 94 mm in diameter. Sample B7 consisted of 1 piece, B5 consisted

of a shotcrete part, several parts of substrate, debris and entrapped soil. All other samples

consisted of two pieces.

Table 18: Core Samples. Buntzen Dam


Specimen Material Core Fragments Shotcrete-Substrate Interface
B5 original concrete + shotcrete several + soil delaminated
D5 original concrete + shotcrete 2 bonded
B6 original concrete + shotcrete 2 delaminated
D6 original concrete + shotcrete 2 delaminated
B7 original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded
D7 original concrete + shotcrete 2 delaminated

76
4.3.2.5 Test Results

Substrate

In all tests the ultrasound signal traversed some shotcrete and the poor interface between

shotcrete and substrate. Therefore consider the values in Table 19 as estimates only. No

Schmidt hammer tests were conducted since no exposed concrete was accessible.

Table 19: Field Test Results. Substrate Concrete. Buntzen Dam


Property [Unit] Value Comment
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 1.9-3.7 underestimates bulk value due to
delamination

Shotcrete

All ultrasonic pulse velocity tests were conducted in the semi-direct mode with the transmitter

positioned in the core hole just below the shotcrete-substrate interface. The ultrasound pulse

velocity in sound shotcrete was about 4.2 km/s. The velocity dropped by about 25 % in a

delaminated area nearby. Only two Schmidt hammer tests were conducted due to difficult

surface preparation.

Table 20: Field Test Results. Shotcrete. Buntzen Dam


Property [Unit] Value Comment
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 3.5-4.3 low value near delamination
Schmidt Hammer Reading 37.3 - 37.6
Compressive Strength from 31
Schmidt Hammer [MPa]

77
4.3.3 Laboratory Testing

4.3.3.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples

Old Concrete

Substrate concrete at Buntzen Dam was of poor quality. The cement paste contained air voids

several millimeter in diameter. The gradation of the aggregates seemed to be poor. Two samples

consisted of distinctly better concrete, presumably a more recent conventional repair material. A

150 mm thick pocket of soil was buried behind the shotcrete of one sample. The substrate-

shotcrete interface of another sample was stained with organic material. Obviously the surface

preparation was poor or sporadic.

Shotcrete:

Shotcrete layers were 80 to 130 mm deep and were generally sound. Shotcrete was reinforced

with 4 mm steel wire mesh. The mesh was arranged 20 to 40 mm below the outer surface.

The cement paste was light grey. Exposed shotcrete was darker than sub-surface shotcrete. The

exposed shotcrete surface was sound and of natural finish. The largest aggregate size observed

was 7 mm. The aggregates were compact and rounded. Air voids characteristic of dry-mix

shotcrete were enclosed in the cement paste as well as isolated zones of inferior consolidation.

Lines of porous, poorly bonded material were located immediately above and below the

reinforcing wire mesh. Zones of poorly bonded, porous paste with interconnected air voids were

found in several samples, especially behind larger aggregate. Most delamination occurred in or

close to the interface between shotcrete and substrate.

78
4.3.3.2 Test Results

Table 21 presents concrete and shotcrete data. Appendix B contains more detailed data.

Table 21: Laboratory Test Results. Buntzen Dam


Test Substrate Shotcrete
Paste Content - ASTM C457 [%] - 32.4
Air Content - ASTM C457 [%1 - 5.6
Specific Surface - ASTM C457 [mm- ] 1
- 5.3
Spacing - ASTM C457 [mm] - 0.93
Permeable Voids - ASTM C642 [%1 - 17.2 - 19.5
Absorption - ASTM C642 [%1 - 7.8 - 9.0
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 3.7-4.5 3.4-3.5 (disturbed
samples)
Carbonation Depth [mm] 10 0-2
Tensile Bond Strength [MPa] 1.4
Compressive Strength - ASTM C39 [MPa] 26 [Ref. 1151 50 [Ref. 1151
Dynamic Modulus - modified ASTM C215 24 (original concrete), -
IGPal 34 - 38 (repair concrete)
Sorptivity Outside / Sorptivity Inside \%\ 100

79
4.4 Ruskin Dam

4.4.1 Site Description

Ruskin Dam. Plan View

h
-
^ F3J

StepWal Spillway

Tallwater Level

Ruskin Dam. Downstream Elevation

Spillway
Bay#1 Bay #3 Bay m Bay #5 Bay #6 Bay #7

StepWal

Figure 17: Ruskin Dam

Ruskin Dam is an overflow gravity dam situated at the northern rim of the Fraser Valley

(Appendix C, Photograph 8). The dam is about 65 years old. More details are given in the

following tables.

Table 22: Structure and Site. Ruskin Dam


Dam Type overflow gravity,
upstream face vertical
downstream slope = 3:2
Year Built 1929 - 1930
Height [ml 58
Width [ml 4.5 at top
Length [ml 125
Dam Location northern rim of Fraser Valley
about 50 m above sea level
Local Climate annual precipitation: 3000 mm
average temperature: January 1°C, July 18°C
about 38 annual freeze-thaw cycles,
downstream-face south-west

80
Table 23: Substrate Materials. Ruskin Dam
Mix aggregate from a bar in the river,
mixture 1:3:2.7:2.3:1.8
(cement : sand : agg. 6 to 37 mm : agg. 37 to 75
mm : agg. 75 to 150 mm)
Concrete Properties compressive strength about 14 MPa at 28 days
Concrete Placing poured

[Ref. 119]

Table 24: Shotcrete. Ruskin Dam


Year Applied 1973
Preparation old surface ground with rotating cutheads
mounted on trolley, loose material was removed
by scrubbing, water and air jets, dry sandblasting
followed, finally surface washed down with water
jet immediately before shooting
Shotcrete Type dry-mix
Mix type 1 Portland cement
blended aggregates, sieve retainer
3/8" - 0%
#4 - 2 to 5%
#8 - 5 to 15%
#16 - 10 to 25%
#30 - 10 to 30%
#50 - 15 to 35%
#100 - 12 to 20%
pan - 3 to 7%
mixture 1:3.5 (cement:aggregate)
Anchors, Reinforcement galvanized 100 mm x 100 mm welded wire fabric
wire diameter 5 mm, installed on average 40 mm
above substrate (effectively 20 to 100 mm above
substrate, occasionally 2 layers), anchored with
"Phillips Red Head" stud anchors set into drilled
holes
Shooting Airplaco "Super Cretor" machines, 2-inch-nozzles
shooting upwards,
shooting sequence: shooting every other spillway
starting at the bottom moving upwards, then
shooting remaining spillways and finally shooting
below gates,
minimum thickness 75 mm (core samples 1993
showed 150 to 200 mm on downstream-face, 75 to
150 mm in step wall, no expansion joints
Finish mostly gun finish
3-m wide strip downstream below and parallel to
gates wood trowelled
Curing kept moist with punctured water hose
Properties see following chapters
4.4.2 Field Investigation

4.4.2.1 Scope of Work

The complete step wall and Spillway Bay #2 were closely inspected. Other parts of the

downstream face of the dam were visually inspected from the tailwater bridge only. Shotcrete

covered about 5000 m of the spillways and the step wall. The upstream face could not be
2

inspected due to the high water level. Site investigations were conducted on two days in

December 1993 (spillway) and one day in January 1994 (step wall).

4.4.2.2 Visual Inspection

Exposed Original Concrete

Original concrete was exposed at the top of the piers between the spillways and at the training

wall. There, the concrete seemed to be in good condition. Isolated cracks and efflorescence

appeared in the piers between the spillway gates. Some of these cracks were filled with white

deposits.

Shotcrete

Shotcrete was pale grey color with an uneven, very rough gun finish. The shotcrete in the ogee-

section of the spillway was trowel finished. Limited spalling and cracking was found in the

spillways. The shotcrete surface was rough and appeared eroded in Spillway Bay #3 at about

tailwater level. This was probably caused byfrostattacking a local flaw in the shotcrete.

The shotcrete in the step walls had surface scaling on about 20 % of its horizontal area. Erosion

and spalling due to the impact of water and trash was found in the step wall. Spalling was

probably worsened byfreeze-thaweffects taking place on the impacted shotcrete surfaces.

82
Shotcrete was superficially eroded in corners between horizontal and vertical parts of the steps

(see Figure 18, and Appendix C, Photograph 9).

Ruskin Step Wall. Surface Defects

Section
(7) original concrete

(T) shotcrete

© j (?) surface scaling


I
(7) erosion

(T) spalling due to impact

\
J
Figure 18: Ruskin Dam. Step Wall. Surface Defects

Shotcrete had spalled off in isolated areas of Spillway Bay #2. At a corner of Pier #2, some

featheredged shotcrete had spalled off. Below Pier #2 was minor surface spalling. Isolated

spalling was found at edges along a horizontal crack in Spillway Bay #2. All surface damage in

the spillways was limited to small areas in the order of a square meter or less. There were several

spalled areas in the step wall.

Visible cracks occurred at a rate of about 1 m crack length per 10 m shotcrete in the spillway
2

and at a rate of about 1 m per 1 m in the step wall. The featheredged zones around Pier #2 were
2

cracked. There was also a vertical crack below Pier #2 and one horizontal crack below this

vertical crack. Another horizontal crack was found in Spillway Bay #2 at a higher elevation.

Vertical cracks had developed over the length of the spillways in line with the edges of two piers.

83
The cracks generally followed a plumb line extended from the pier corners. Reflective cracks

were reported by Kemp [Ref 145]. They had opened over vertical construction joints in the dam

structure. No expansion joints were installed. Irregular cracking occurred in the step wall. Most

cracks occurred in the horizontal areas and the corners of the step wall. Deposits in and at these

cracks in the step wall ranged in colorfromwhite to yellow to pale red to brown.

4.4.2.3 Sounding

Parts of Spillway Bay #2 were sounded with a hammer. No delamination was detected. The

shotcrete in the step wall was almost completely delaminated.

4.4.2.4 Coring

Eight cores were taken from the step wall at different elevations. In all, 3 cores were taken from

Spillway Bay #2. They were taken from Pier #2 from areas near cracks. Core samples were 240

to 360 mm long and 93 to 94 mm in diameter. Sample RD3 consisted of one piece, and all other

samples consisted of at least two parts each. Severed samples were delaminated at or close to

the shotcrete - substrate interface (Appendix C, Photograph 10).

Table 25: Core Samples. Ruskin Dam. Spillway Bay #2


Specimen Material Core Fragments Shotcrete-Substrate Interface
RD2 original concrete + shotcrete 3 delaminated
RB2 original concrete + shotcrete 2 partly bonded
RD3 original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded

84
Table 26: Core Samples. Ruskin Dam. Step Wall
Specimen Material Core Fragments Shotcrete-Substrate Interface
RD1 original concrete + shotcrete 2 delaminated
RW1 original concrete + shotcrete 2 delaminated
RBI original concrete + shotcrete 2 bonded
R4 original concrete + shotcrete 2 delaminated
R5 original concrete + shotcrete 2 partly bonded
R6 original concrete + shotcrete 2 partly bonded
R7 original concrete + shotcrete 3 delaminated
R8 original concrete + shotcrete 3 delaminated

4.4.2.5 Test Results

Substrate

No exposed substrate concrete was accessible for testing.

Shotcrete

Ultrasound testing was done in both the semi-direct transmission mode and the direct

transmission mode. Average pulse velocity of shotcrete in the step wall was 3.9 km/s. Some

tests yielded significantly lower values, probably due to the semi-direct test method used in the

step wall. These low results could not be reproduced on samples in the laboratory. Shotcrete

was tested with the Schmidt hammer in the step wall close to core holes. The test results varied

over a wide range, probably due to the rough surface and delaminations. Twenty locations were

tested. The apparent average compressive strength of the shotcrete was 42 MPa, the sample

standard deviation was 11 MPa.

Table 27: Field Test Results. Shotcrete. Ruskin Dam


Property [Unit] Value Comment
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 3.0-4.6
Schmidt Hammer Reading 32.0-53.1
Compressive Strength from 23-56 low values from delaminated
Schmidt Hammer [MPa] shotcrete in step wall

85
4.4.3 Laboratory Testing .

4.4.3.1. Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples

Original Concrete

Generally sound substrate concrete was encountered at Ruskin Dam.

The concrete consisted of pale grey paste and aggregates of maximum 80 mm diameter.

Aggregates appeared to be loosely packed in the concrete of the step wall. The paste had some

air voids, most less than 2 mm, but in isolated cases up to 4 mm diameter. Air voids occurred

most frequently close to large aggregate.

Freeze-thaw damage was found in the old concrete beneath the shotcrete in the step walls. Frost

damage was concentrated in a 20 mm thick layer immediately behind the shotcrete interface.

Cracking and microcracking was observed in the cement paste. Fractures occurred within 30 mm

below the shotcrete layer in substrate damaged byfrostattack and leaching.

Calcium carbonate deposits collected on delaminated faces, around large aggregates and in

cracks (Appendix C, Photograph 11). Some cracks had partly skirted large aggregate. Cracks

completely filled with white deposit were located close to the substrate-shotcrete interface. Such

deposits were most extensive between cement paste and loosened large aggregate.

Shotcrete

Shotcrete from the downstream face of the dam was 160 to 260 mm thick. Shotcrete thickness

in the step wall was 100 to 150 mm.

The shotcrete was reinforced with 5 mm diameter steel wire mesh. At the downstream dam face

the mesh was spaced 20 to 110 mm above the substrate, and 110 to 190 mm beneath the

86
shotcrete surface. Spacings in the wing wall were 30 to 70 mm, and 45 to 90 mm, respectively.

Two layers of wire mesh overlapped in some areas. Embedded wire mesh did not corrode.

The cement paste was medium grey. Shotcrete on exposed surfaces was darker than sub-surface

shotcrete, rarely showed dusting and had a natural finish. Horizontal surfaces in the step wall

appeared to have eroded. The paste seemed to have a moderate air void content with a 3 mm

maximum air void diameter. Most spraying shadows and layering were located close to

reinforcing wire mesh (Appendix C, Photograph 12). Occurring in small areas, sand pockets,

shadows and layering had a limited influence on the overall durability of the shotcrete repair.

Aggregate size was less than 8 mm. The aggregates were compact and blunt. There was

evidence of some aggregate pop-outs in the surface of samples from the wing wall.

Delamination occurred generally close to the shotcrete-substrate interface. In sample RD2 the

shotcrete broke perpendicular to the core sample axis about 35 mm beneath the surface.

4.4.3.2 Test Results

Table 28 presents concrete and shotcrete data . Appendix B contains more detailed data.

Table 28: Laboratory Test Results. Ruskin 1


3am
Test Substrate Shotcrete
Paste Content - ASTM C457 [%] - 40.6
Air Content - ASTM C457 \%] - 4.8
Specific Surface - ASTM C457 [mm- ]
1
- 7.5
Spacing - ASTM C457 [mm] - 0.79
Permeable Voids - ASTM C642 \%] - 11.2-15.1
Absorption - ASTM C642 [%] - • 4.9-6.8
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 4.2-5.5 4.0 - 4.7
Carbonation Depth [mm] - 0-3
Tensile Bond Strength [MPa] 0.4 -1.5 (0.4 - 2.4, [Ref. 1321)
Tensile Strength [MPa] - 1.8
Compressive Strength - ASTM C39 [MPa] 14 @ 28 days, [Ref. 132] >60
Dynamic Modulus - modified ASTM C215 [GPa] - 22-28
Sorptivity Outside / Sorptivity Inside [%] 75

87
4.5 Jordan Dam

4.5.1 Site Description

Jordan Dam. Upstream Elevation

LL»L_cm Typical WaterJ.eye[


\ ""Spillway
\Cores extracted here

Jordan Dam. Plan View

T — D — a — I T
-°—ir-=iF=D—n—D—ia—D r

Spillway

Jordan Dam. Downstream Elevation

Walkway ^^Deck
11

Buttress #28

-Buttress #39

Figure 19: Jordan Dam

Jordan Dam is an Ambursen type buttress dam situated in the southern part of Vancouver Island.

The dam is about 80 years old. More details are given in the following tables (see also Appendix

C, Photographs 13, 14, 17, and 18).

88
Table 29: Structure and Site. Jordan Dam
Dam Type Ambursen type buttress dam
dam slab inclined
downstream faces south
spillway section at east
Year Built 1912-1913
Height [m] 40
Width [ml slab 0.4 (top) -1.4 (bottom) thick
Length [m] 232
Dam Location southern Vancouver Island
dam crest approximately 390 m above sea level
Local Climate annual precipitation- 3500 mm
about 40 annual freeze-thaw cycles

Table 30: Substrate Materials. Jordan Dam


Mix slab: 1:2:4 (cement:sand:crushed rock)
foundation, buttresses: 1:3:6
(cement:sand:crushed rock)
general: aggregates poorlv graded, deficient in
fines, water/cement ratio about 0.65 (test 1986)
Concrete Properties average compressive strength:
buttresses: average 18 MPa (6 MPa to 39 MPa)
slab: average 26 MPa (19 MPa to 33 MPa)
Concrete Placing poured, puddled by shovel, not tamped
construction continued in winter (frost, 1.8 m of
snow)
Tables 29 and 30 are based on test results from 1959 and 1986, presented in [Ref. 122]
and [Ref. 123]

Table 31: Shotcrete. Jordan Dam. Upstream Face. 1969


Year Applied 1969-1971
Preparation chipping and wet sandblasting or water blasting
Shotcrete Type dry-mix
Mix mortar-type mix
Anchors, Reinforcement galvanized wire mesh, 75 mm x 75 mm grid
4 mm wire diameter
mesh placed effectively 20 to 40 mm above
substrate
Shooting shooting progressed upwards
shotcrete layer 75-100 mm thick
Finish gun finish
Curing shotcrete kept moist with punctured water hose
Properties see following chapters
Table 32: Shotcrete. Jordan Dam. Upstream Face. 1989
Year Applied 1989
Preparation chipping old surface with 7-kg-hammers
subsequently water blasted (55 MPa pressure)
Shotcrete Type dry-mix, silica fume, steel fiber reinforced
shotcrete, factory mixed, dry pre-bagged
Mix cement type 10 - 416 kg
silica fume - 50 kg
coarse aggregate (10 mm) - 459 kg
sand - 1293 kg
water- 170 kg
Ferrofiber - 60 kg
air content - 4 %
water/(cement + silica fume) ratio = 0.36
Anchors, Reinforcement none
Shooting Aliva 248 premoisturizer machines
maximum hose length 400 m
shotcrete layer 75 to 100 mm thick
Finish gun-finish
Curing covered with wet burlap, kept moist for 7 days
Properties see following chapters

Table 33: Shotcrete. Jordan Dam. Downstream Face. 1970


Year Applied 1970
Preparation chipping, dry and wet sand blasting
Shotcrete Type dry-mix (gunite)
Mix max. aggregate size 3 mm in core sample
Anchors, Reinforcement none
Shooting 20 mm layer (2 core samples inspected)
Finish no information available
Curing no information available
Properties see following chapters
Table 34: Shotcrete. Jordan Dam. Buttresses. 1990
Year Applied 1990
Preparation chipping, water blasting
Shotcrete Type wet-mix, silica fume
Mix cement type 10 - 400 kg
silica fume - 50 kg
coarse aggregate (10 mm) - 500 kg
sand - 1180 kg
water- 172 kg
air as shot - 5 %
water/(cement + silica fume) ratio = 0.38
aggregate gradation #2
Anchors, Reinforcement wire mesh 150 mm x 150 mm
15 M hook dowels at 0.5 m spacing
4 - 10 M stirrups at buttress curve
4 - 15 M bars in front faces, 1500 mm splice
length, 20 mm clearance above concrete
Shooting shotcrete layer minimum 65 mm thick (according
to specifications)
Finish gun-finish
Curing 7 days water curing (according to specifications)
Properties see following chapters

This table is based on 1990 construction documents [Ref. 131].

4.5.2 Field Investigation

4.5.2.1 Scope of Work

The upstream face near the southern end of the spillway and the downstream areas accessible

from the ground or from the walkway were closely inspected. Other parts of the upstream and

downstream face of the dam were visually inspected from reservoir and river banks only.

Shotcrete covered the upstream face of the slab, about half of the downstream face of the slab

and about half of the buttresses. Site visits were conducted on five days in December 1993.

91
4.5.2.2 Visual Inspection

Exposed Original Concrete

Exposed original concrete was found on top of the dam and at parts of the buttresses. No

original concrete was exposed at the upstream face of the slab. The old concrete was sound

where protected from moisture saturation. Frost attack was visible where the original concrete

wasfrequentlyexposed to moisture andfreezingconditions. A typical example of frost-attacked

concrete was found under the discharge end of a rainwater pipe. Three metres long cracks were

found in Buttress #40 about 3 to 5 m above the outlet pipe. The cracks were surrounded by

white efflorescence.

An extensive seismic upgrade was completed about 5 years ago. Concrete placed during that

upgrading was generally sound and in good condition.

Shotcrete

All shotcrete was gun finished. The shotcrete at the upstream face (1969 and 1989 repairs) was

sound and medium grey. Fiber reinforced shotcrete coincided with strips around contraction

joints and at the position of the buttresses. Exposed steel fibers were corroded. The shotcrete at

the downstream face of the slab (1970 repair) appeared to be a sprayed mortar. It was dark grey

and smooth. The shotcrete at the flanks of the spillway buttresses was similar to the shotcrete at

the downstream face of the slab. The shotcrete at the heads of the buttresses (1990 repair) was

sound and medium grey.

No spalling of shotcrete was observed on the upstream and downstream faces of the slab.

Featheredged shotcrete spalled in isolated areas of Buttresses #35 and #36, however.

One vertical crack was found at the upstream face near the joint between two slab plates in the

1989 shotcrete. There, a contraction joint in the shotcrete had been omitted. Apparently,

92
movement in the structure beneath the crack exceeded the strain limits of the shotcrete. The

crack was 0.3 to 0.5 mm wide and stretchedfromthe top of the spillway to below the water line.

Similar cracking in the 1969 shotcrete had caused local delamination and required the 1989 repair

[Ref 144].

The downstream face of the slab and the spillway showed extensive pattern cracking between

Buttresses #14 and #27 (Appendix C, Photographs 19, 20). Visible cracks occurred at a rate of

about 1 m crack length per 1 m shotcrete on the downstream face of the slab. The pattern
2

cracking in the shotcrete was typical of shrinkage cracking. Moisture fringes around some of the

cracks indicated seepage and frost action could have been a cause for crack growth. About half

of the cracks had efflorescence deposited along their edges. Deposits were associated with the

movement of reservoir water through the slab and the joints. The dark coloration of some

deposits may indicate corrosion of steel in the path of the seepage water.

The 1990 shotcrete at the buttresses was virtually crack-free except for isolated cracking in

featheredged areas.

Conventional Patching

Conventional patch repairs done at some buttresses were cracked and delaminated. One piece of

patchworkfroma buttress (sample J9) was closely inspected (Appendix C, Photograph 22). The

patching mortar was brittle and disintegrated during coring.

4.5.2.3 Sounding

The southern part of the upstream face of the spillway was sounded with a hammer. No

delaminations were detected. Delaminated shotcrete was found in isolated areas between

Buttresses #24 and #25 and between Buttresses #26 and #27 on the downstream slab side.

93
Sounding revealed delaminated shotcrete in areas near the walkway at Buttresses #16, #19, #20,

#21, #23, #29 (featheredged shotcrete) and #36.

Almost all of the shotcrete delamination on the downstream face including that on the buttresses

occurred in the dark, mortar-like material from 1970. Delamination was usually accompanied by

pattern cracking and efflorescence. Delamination in uncracked shotcrete occurred along some of

the openings in the buttresses where the walkway penetrated them.

4.5.2.4 Coring

In total 13 core holes were drilled and 12 samples could be extracted. Four 1969 shotcrete

samples were taken from the upstream face of the dam (see Figure 19, Upstream Elevation).

Four core samples were taken from the 1990 shotcrete at Buttress #39 and 1 sample from each

of Buttresses #35 and #31. One core sample of 1970 shotcrete was extracted from each of

Buttresses #19 and #17. The core samples were 110 to 300 mm long and had diameters of 93 to

94 mm. While attempting to extract a core (J9) from conventional patchwork at Buttress #27,

the already-cracked repair material turned to rubble. No core samples were taken from the 1989

shotcrete. This material was placed where coring could have interfered with the main slab

reinforcement. For the same reason no samples were taken from the downstream face of the

slab.

Table 35: Core Samples. Jordan Dam. Upstream Face


Specimen Material Parts Shotcrete-Substrate Interface
J5 original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded
J6 original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded
J7 original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded
J8 original concrete + shotcrete 1 bonded

94
Table 36: Core Samples. Jordan Dam, Buttresses
Specimen Material Parts Shotcrete-Substrate Interface
Jl original concrete + 1990 shotcrete 1 bonded
J2 original concrete + 1990 shotcrete 1 bonded
J3 original concrete + 1990 shotcrete 1 bonded
J4 original concrete 1 N/A
JIO original concrete + 1990 shotcrete 1 bonded
Jll original concrete + 1990 shotcrete 1 bonded
J12 original concrete + 1970 shotcrete 2 delaminated
J13 original concrete + 1970 shotcrete 1 bonded
(J9) original concrete + conventional many fractions delaminated
patching mortar

4.5.2.5 Test Results

Substrate

No exposed original concrete was tested for ultrasonic pulse velocity or with the Schmidt

hammer.

Shotcrete

Ultrasonic pulse velocity measurements were conducted in direct transmission mode.

On the upstream face the shotcrete was tested between core holes in direct transmission mode.

The mean value of the pulse velocity from 5 test paths was 4.4 km/s with a standard deviation of

0.3 km/s. Schmidt hammer testing at the upstream face was abandoned due to the difficult

surface condition.

The shotcrete in the buttresses was also tested in direct transmission mode. There the average

pulse velocity was 4.5 km/s and the standard deviation was 0.2 km/s. The Schmidt hammer

readings in Table 38 have been adjusted based on an instrument calibration.

95
Table 37: Field Test Results. Jordan Dam. Upstream Face
Property [Unif| Value Comment
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity fkm/s] 3.8-4.6 1969 shotcrete

Table 38: Field Test Results. Jordan Dam. Buttresses


Property [Unitl Value Comment
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 4.3-4.7 1990 shotcrete
Schmidt Hammer Reading 47-48 1970 shotcrete
43-49 1990 shotcrete
Compressive Strength from 46 - 48 1970 shotcrete
Schmidt Hammer [MPa] 39-49 1990 shotcrete

4.5.3 Laboratory Testing (Upstream Face, 1969 Shotcrete)

4.5.3.1. Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples

Original Concrete

The substrate concrete at Jordan was sound but contained large air voids up to 4 mm in diameter.

Elongated compaction voids were observed in some samples (Appendix C, Photograph 15).

Aggregates were poorly graded. Substrate concrete at the perimeter of cores consisted of light

grey paste and sharp-edged, irregularly shaped aggregates. The largest aggregate observed was

about 30 mm in diameter.

Shotcrete

The shotcrete layers were 95 to 100 mm deep. Intact steel wire mesh of 4 mm diameter was

located 60 to 80 mm beneath the shotcrete surface. The cement paste was medium grey. All

observed aggregate was smaller than 9 mm. The shotcrete contained sand pockets and isolated

air voids smaller than 2 mm. Microcracking was found in isolated regions of one sample close to

the surface only (Appendix C, Photograph 16). This cracking was probably caused by freeze-

thaw damage. There were no other signs offrostaction in the shotcrete itself. Shotcrete seemed

to have bonded well to the substrate.

96
4.5.3.2 Test Results

Table 39 presents results of numerical tests. Appendix B contains more detailed data.

Table 39: Laboratory Test Results. Jordan Dam. Upstream Face. 1969
Test Substrate Shotcrete
Paste Content - ASTM C457 [%] - 37.6
Air Content - ASTM C457 [%1 - 1.9
Specific Surface - ASTM C457 [mm-'l - 8.5
Spacing - ASTM C457 [mm] - 1.0
Permeable Voids - ASTM C642 [%] 20.5 to 22 15.8
Absorption - ASTM C642 [%1 8.9 to 9.8 6.8
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 3.8 to 4.6 3.9 to 4.3
Carbonation Depth [mm] 30 Oto.l
Tensile Bond Strength [MPa] 0.4 to 1.3
Tensile Strength [MPa] 1.8 [Ref. 123] 0.7 to 1.3
Compressive Strength - ASTM C39 [MPa] 6 to 39 [Ref. 1421 33 [Ref. 1421
Static Modulus [GPa] 11 to 30 [Ref. 1231
Sorptivity Outside / Sorptivity Inside [%\ 70

4.5.4 Laboratory Testing, 1989 ShotcretefromUpstream Face

4.5.4.1 Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples

No core samples were available for inspection.

4.5.4.2 Test Results

The construction documentation provided some information. Table 40 presents data for the

shotcrete. The substrate is the same as described in Chapter 4.5.3. For it refer to Table 39.

Appendix B contains more detailed data.

97
Table 40: Laboratory Test Results. Jordan Dam. Upstream Face. 1989 Shotcrete
Test Shotcrete
Air Voids - ASTM C642 \%] 15.2 [Ref. 121]
Absorption - ASTM C642 [%1 6.7 [Ref. 121]
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 3.8 to 5 [Ref. 1231
Tensile Bond Strength [MPa] 1.8 [Ref. 1211
Compressive Strength - ASTM C39 [MPa] 48 [Ref. 121]

4.5.5 Laboratory Testing, 1970 ShotcretefromDownstream Face

4.5.5.1. Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples

Original Concrete

The substrate concrete was similar to that described in chapter 4.5.3. It was remarkable for the

large number of air voids. Often the space between large aggregate particles lacked cement

paste. The substrate concrete was carbonated to about 20 mm depth (Appendix C, Photograph

21).

Shotcrete

The shotcrete layers were 20 to 30 mm thick, and had a rough gunfinish.The cement paste was

dark grey and contained isolated air voids. Observed aggregate was smaller than 5 mm. One

sample fractured through about 20 % substrate - shotcrete interface and 80 % substrate close to

the interface.

4.5.5.2 Test Results

Table 41 presents test results for the shotcrete. For the substrate concrete refer to Table 39.

Appendix B contains more detailed data.

98
Test Shotcrete
Paste Content - ASTM C457 [%1 39.0
Air Content - ASTM C457 [%1 2.6
Specific Surface - ASTM C457 [mm" ]
1
29.5
Spacing - ASTM C457 [mm] 0.26
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 4.6
Carbonation Depth [mm] Otol
Tensile Bond Strength [MPa] 0.5 to 1.3 [Ref. 1291
Tensile Strength [MPal 1.3 [Ref. 1291
Compressive Strength - ASTM C39 [MPa] 21 to 64 [Ref. 1291

4.5.6 Laboratory Testing, 1990 ShotcretefromButtresses

4.5.6.1. Visual and Microscopic Inspection of Core Samples

Original Concrete

The original concrete was sound and similar to that described in chapter 4.5.3. There were a

remarkably large number of air voids

Shotcrete

The shotcrete was 10 to 100 mm deep, sound, and with a very rough gun finish. The cement

paste was dark grey. Maximum observed aggregate size was 7 mm. Most air voids were smaller

than 1 mm. Voids of elongated shape with diameters less than 4 mm were limited to isolated

areas. The shotcrete seemed to have bonded well to the substrate. One sample contained steel

wire mesh with 5 mm diameter. The mesh was situated about 30 mm below the exposed

shotcrete surface. A 15M rebar was exposed in the perimeter of one sample.

99
4.5.6.2 Test Results

Table 42 presents test results for the shotcrete. For the substrate concrete refer to Table 39.

Appendix B contains more detailed data.

Table 42: Laboratory Test Results. Jordan Dam. Buttresses. 1990 Shotcrete
Test Shotcrete
Paste Content - ASTM C457 [%1 35
Air Content - ASTM C457 [%1 4.0
Specific Surface - ASTM C457 [mm" ] 1
35.7
Spacing - ASTM C457 [mml 0.17
Permeable Voids - ASTM C642 \%\ 13.4
Absorption - ASTM C642 \%] 5.6
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity [km/s] 4.1 to 4.5
Carbonation Depth [mm] Oto 1
Tensile Bond Strength [MPa] 0.5 to 1.1
Compressive Strength - ASTM C39 [MPa] 51 [Ref. 1331
Sorptivity Outside / Sorptivity Inside [%] 70

4.6 La Joie Dam

La Joie Dam is a sluiced rockfill dam lined with concrete, in the central interior of British

Columbia. It is about 40 years old. More details are given in the following tables.

Table 43: Structure and Site. La Joie Dam


Dam Type, built in sluiced rockfill dam, upstream face shotcreted
slope upstream face = 1:1 to 3:4
slope downstream face = 3:4
Year Built first stage completed 1951
Height [m] 87
Width [m] 6.1 at crest
about 200 at base
Length [m] 1036
Dam Location westofLillooet
753 m above sea level

100
Table 44: Substrate Materials. La Joie Dam
Mix concrete, no information available
Concrete Properties severely honeycombed
Concrete Placing poured

Table 45: Shotcrete. La Joie Dam


Year Applied 1971 - 1972
Preparation local chipping,
water pressure washing (about 1 MPa)
deep holes and cavities filled with "All-crete"
(premixed concrete repair material) or low slump
concrete
pressure washing immediately before shooting
Shotcrete Type dry-mix
Mix aggregates: from pits at Bridge River near Gold
Bridge, 85% local coarse sand (max. 10 mm)
blended with 15% local fine sand, average
moisture content 4%
cement: type 10
mixture: cement:aggregates = 1:4,
processed in batch plant
delivered in ready-mix trucks to the site
Anchors, Reinforcement wire mesh 150 mm x 150 mm grid
placed 40 mm above substrate
fixed to stud anchors
Shooting Airplaco machines
minimum thickness 75 mm
shot in about 10 m wide stripes with 400 mm
overlap
Finish gun finish
Curing kept moist with punctured water hoses for 1 week,
then wetted sporadically
Properties average compressive strength: 33 MPa @ 28 d,
37 MPa @ 49 d,
permeability test with 0.55 MPa water pressure
led to no leakage after 48 hours
density: 2380 kg/m 3

The table is based on data from 1971/72 construction testing [Refs. 124, 143].

No field investigation was conducted. No core samples were obtained. Some spalling, lifting,

and cracking is mentioned in BC Hydro inspection reports. Most damage occurred at about

elevation 730. This coincides approximately with the average water level. Slightly increased

seepage was reported between 1971 and 1987.

101
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

5.0 Introduction / Summary

This chapter discusses the performance of shotcrete repairs on Hydro dams. The discussion is

mainly based onfindingsfromfieldvisits and laboratory tests. The literature review and site

information also contribute to the discussion. This chapter provides an overview of the lessons

learned at the four sites investigated.

Shotcrete proved to be a durable repair material for dams. Well-designed shotcrete repairs may

protect the underlying concrete. Shotcrete does not stop deterioration of substrate when it is

water saturated and subject to freezing.

5.1 Substrate

Old substrate concrete was generally of marginal to fair quality, as indicated by its compressive

strength. The high standard deviation of the ultrasonic pulse velocities suggests a rather non-

uniform concrete. Ultrasonic pulse velocities of concrete samples tested in the laboratory were

often very high. The length of these sound paths were usually in the order of 100 mm while the

maximum aggregate size was most often 50 to 80 mm. Therefore the test results probably reflect

the acoustic properties of the large aggregate particles rather than those of bulk concrete.

Ultrasonic pulse velocities for many aggregates are higher than for cement paste or concrete.

A lack of mid-sized aggregates was probably another reason for the marginal quality of some

102
substrate concretes. Shape and gradation of aggregate often resulted in less than optimum

compaction, causing inferior concrete strength. Large voids also indicate insufficient compaction

and high water/cement ratios.

Frost attack on moist concrete surfaces was the probable reason for dusting and scaling.

However, exposed concrete in vertical sections was generally sound. Concrete of unprotected

sloped or horizontal surfaces wasfrost-damaged.Frost had also attacked the substrate concrete

beneath the shotcrete layer at two sites. There the cement paste was visibly damaged for a 30

mm thickness beyond the substrate-shotcrete interface. The damage was clearly related to

frequent moisture saturation of the substrate.

Deep penetrating cracks were probably caused by thermal stresses aggravated by ice pressure.

Deposits in and around cracks appear to be of calcium hydroxide. Where calcium hydroxide

deposits were exposed to air they carbonated and turned into calcium carbonate. Carbonated

layers of original concrete beneath shotcrete indicate there is no migration of alkalinityfromthe

shotcrete into the substrate.

Surface preparation before shotcreting had been good at all but one site. Exposed concrete

aggregates in delaminated interfaces indicate substrate surfaces were prepared using abrasive

techniques (except Buntzen Dam).

Data from the boiled absorption tests indicate good quality concrete at Stave Dam. The data

from other sites indicate lower quality porous concrete.

The estimate of temperature distribution showed substrate concrete had been exposed to a

significant number offreeze-thawcycles at all sites. However,frostdid not destroy the substrate

because it was probably not completely water saturated and because leachates in the voids

103
probably lowered thefreezingpoint. This mechanism is discussed in Chapter 5.4.

5.2 Shotcrete

Shotcrete was generally sound and strong.

Shotcrete surfaces were sound. The surface at Stave Dam was dusting, however. This indicates

the cement paste was damaged by frost attack. However, since the surface still showed the

original gun finish, thefreeze-thawdamage was apparently confined to the surface.

Moss attacked the vertical shotcrete surface at Buntzen Dam. The depth of deterioration was

minimal. The moss was no threat to the shotcrete's function as a protective cover for original

concrete.

<

Erosion marks in the corners of the Ruskin step wall (see Figure 18) indicate that shotcrete in

corners was of inferior quality compared to shotcrete on vertical faces.

Featheredged concrete at Stave and Ruskin Dam delaminated and cracked. Featheredged

sections do not seem to be durable.

Dry-mix shotcrete was rather non-uniform. Sand lenses indicate insufficient mixing and wetting

of the shotcrete material. Porosity and layering were due to a variable water/cement ratio and/or

inconsistent shooting distances and spraying angles deviatingfrom90 degrees. Layering did not

unduly reduce the overall strength of shotcrete. However, it caused local spalling. Spraying

shadows behind wire mesh occurred probably due to inappropriate nozzle distance and/or air

pressure. This would influence velocity and turbulence of the material jet, both essential for good

104
encasing of reinforcement during spraying.

Corrosion did not affect steel fibers embedded in shotcrete. Even exposed steel fibers corrode

relatively slowly. Due to their small size they rarely provide sufficient electric potential

difference for rapid corrosion. Isolated corrosion of reinforcement was a result of cracks

exposing the steel to moisture and air.

The shotcrete on the upstream face of Jordan Dam was slightly water permeable, as indicated by

moisture marks on the downstream face of the slab.

The downstream face of the slab at Jordan Dam had cracked extensively. The shotcrete there

was probably prone to extreme shrinkage strains due to its mortar-like composition and high

cement content. The shotcrete was applied as a thin layer to an overhanging surface. Because

the substrate probably could not be saturated before shooting and the shotcrete moistened during

curing due to the slab inclination, it dried rapidly and cracked.

Thermal stresses probably caused vertical gaps and cracks in the shotcrete beside the intake

structure of Buntzen Dam. The scarcity or absence of signs of leakage and the position of the

cracks and gaps made frost action less likely cause. Under extreme ambient temperatures the

large shotcrete surfaces beside the intake structure would have come under significant thermal

stresses. Pre-existing delamination in the substrate would have reduced heat exchange with the

interior of the dam resulting in more extreme peak temperatures in the shotcrete layer.

Further shear forces could not be transmitted across a delamination and into the substrate

concrete. Thus, all thermal strains had to be restrained at the edges of the delaminated zones.

The necessary restraining stresses probably exceeded the bond between the shotcrete and the

walls of the intake structure causing a gap to open. The cracks likely started at the top of the

dam and grew downwards. Expansion joints between shotcrete and the Buntzen intake structure

105
might have prevented this cracking. Lack of an expansion joint at the upstream face of Jordan

Dam caused thatfiber-reinforcedshotcrete layer to crack. The lack of expansion joints in the

shotcrete at the Ruskin spillway caused reflective cracking there.

Ice pressure and thermal stresses were probably the reasons for some of the cracks in shotcrete at

Buntzen and at Jordan before the 1989 repair. Expansion of corroding reinforcement would have

aggravated this damage.

Long horizontal cracks with efflorescence indicate that moisture played an important role in the

cracking process at Stave and Buntzen Dam. Moisture probably saturated the substrate which

subsequently deteriorated during frost periods. The resulting porous material allowed the

accumulation of even larger amounts of water. Formation of ice could have overstressed the

shotcrete in subsequent frost episodes. This could have resulted in shotcrete cracking and

heaving awayfromthe substrate.

Local spalling in the Ruskin spillway was probably due to frost attacking layering in the

shotcrete. Sand lenses and layering also caused local delamination inside the shotcrete

Horizontal shotcrete surfaces such as walkways were deteriorating because rainwater could

collect there in puddles. Shotcrete under these puddles would be completely water saturated and

thereby susceptible tofrostattack. Further, it is established that shotcrete applied to horizontal

surfaces is more likely to entrap rebound. Rebound increases permeability and freeze-thaw

susceptibility. The shallow scaled zones indicate that horizontal shotcrete was deteriorating

slowly.

Ultrasonic pulse velocity measurements indicate shotcrete was generally good quality (Table 46).

106
Table 46: Shotcrete Quality Assessment, using Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity
Site, Shotcrete Repair Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Correlated Quality
[km/s] [after Ref. 16]
Field Laboratory
Stave Dam, 1985 N/A 4,2 good
Buntzen Dam, 1965 3.5-4.3 3.4-3.5 fair to good
Ruskin Dam, Spillway, 1973 N/A 4.4 - 4.7 good to excellent
Ruskin Dam, Step Wall, 1973 3.0-4.6 4.0 - 4.7 questionable to excellent
Jordan Dam, u/s-side, 1969 3.8-4.6 3.9-4.6 good
Jordan Dam, d/s-side, 1970 N/A 4.6 good
Jordan Dam, Buttresses, 1990 4.3-4.7 3.8-4.6 good to excellent

Schmidt hammer tests and ultrasonic pulse velocity measurements indicate shotcrete was

generally of moderate to high strength but rather non-uniform.

Visible large air voids, layering and porous zones indicate most of the dry-mix shotcretes were of

varying quality, mainly due to the dry-mix techniques of the 1960's.

The cement paste content of shotcrete was high but acceptable. Air contents were satisfactory

except for two older dry-mix shotcretes. The spacing factors of the air voids were frequently

several times higher than recommended by Morgan [Ref 51] forfreeze-thawresistant shotcrete.

The specific surface of most shotcretes was significantly lower than the 16 to 32 mm' suggested
1

in that reference. This indicates most shotcrete had too few air voids. Moreover, the existing

voids were rather large, and were spaced too widely. The wet-mix shotcrete and to a lesser

degree the 1970 dry mix shotcrete from Jordan Dam matched the recommendations for freeze-

thaw durable shotcrete.

The boiled absorption tests show that shotcretes rangefromexcellent (Ruskin Dam, Jordan Dam,

wet-mix) to fair (Stave Dam). Figure 20 provides an overview of shotcrete quality in terms of its

boiled absorption numbers.

107
Evaluation of Shotcrete with Respect to its Boiled Absorption and Permeable
Voids Numbers [after Ref. 49], Tested Accordingly ASTM C642

A
Stave

° Buntzen

* Ruskin

* Jordan u/s 1969

* Jordan Buttr.

° Jordan u/s 1989

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Volume of Permeable Voids [%)

Figure 20: Evaluation of Boiled Absorption Test Results

The compressive and tensile strengths of shotcrete were generally acceptable.

The dynamic modulus of the shotcrete from Ruskin was rather low but within acceptable limits.

A low modulus of elasticity appears to be of advantage for shotcrete resurfacing. It would result

in only moderate stresses being induced in the shotcrete repairs due to deformations or thermal

loads.

Based on its relative sorptivity the porosity of exposed shotcrete was marginally lower than the

porosity of shotcrete close to the interface with the substrate. It is not clear whether this

difference was significant. Test results indicate the shotcrete is not severely affected by the

environment.

Shotcrete has been exposed to a large number offreeze-thawcycles at all sites. The shotcrete

has not been significantly frost damaged. No core sample from any site showed signs of

deterioration in the sub-surface shotcrete.

108
Conventional patching mortar at Jordan Dam is susceptible to the local climate conditions and

has deteriorated.

5.3 Substrate - Shotcrete Interface

Sounding indicates that significant areas of shotcrete have delaminated at Stave Dam, Buntzen

Dam and in the step wall at Ruskin Dam. Core samples from Stave and Ruskin Dams reveal

separation usually took place due to frost attack on substrate concrete rather than in the

substrate-shotcrete interface. There the bond between shotcrete and sound substrate appeared to

be good.

Thermal stresses, ice pressure or mechanical impacts could have caused delamination.

One sample from Stave Dam delaminated at the interface between substrate and shotcrete. The

delamination was apparently due to isolated sand lenses and high porosity shotcrete. The

shotcrete was probably applied too dry or rebound had been trapped. That prevented

compaction and good interlock with the substrate.

The high incidence of delamination at Stave Dam warns of more delamination to come.

The visual inspection and tensile bond strength tests indicate satisfactory to good bond at all sites

except for Buntzen Dam. Large delaminated zones exist on the downstream face of Buntzen

Dam. Coring indicates the substrate surface preparation was poor or non-existent. This results

in a weak bond between shotcrete and original concrete. Delamination was probably initiated by

freezing seepage water entrapped between shotcrete and original concrete. Ice pressure would

have expanded the delamination zone. Thermal strains in delaminated shotcrete could have

109
caused the bonded perimeter of a delamination to fail in shear. This would have resulted in a

growth of the delamination. However, in spite of the poor surface preparation the shotcrete had

adhered to its substrate for 30 years and will probably remain in place for the foreseeable future.

The ultrasonic pulse velocity slowed significantly when the sound crossed the shotcrete-substrate

boundary in tests at Buntzen Dam. This also suggests the bond between shotcrete and substrate

there is disturbed.

Intact samples from Ruskin Dam have good bond between shotcrete and substrate concrete.

Delamination occurred generally due tofreeze-thawdeterioration of the original concrete near

the interface with the shotcrete. Frequently substrate aggregates adhered to the shotcrete and

separated from the cement paste of the original concrete.

Delamination of shotcrete on the downstream face of Jordan Dam was probably related to

shrinkage. The underlying substrate was undamaged. Shrinking of the mortar-like shotcrete

probably caused high shear stresses in the interface with the substrate.

Some featheredged layers of shotcrete spalled off at all sites.

5.4 Discussion of Some Frost Related Phenomena

Freeze-thaw susceptible concrete often remained intact after exposure to significant numbers of

freeze-thaw cycles. Sincefrostdamage to concrete is related to its moisture content, this section

will discuss effects of moisture saturation on concrete.

110
Moisture Saturation and Self-Desiccation: The vapor pressure over ice at 0°C is lower than the

vapor pressure over liquid water at the same temperature. Hence liquid water in concrete will

migrate towards a zone containingfrozenwater. Such a zone may be the exposed (shotcreted)

outside of a dam. Concrete inside the dam may self-desiccate towards the (frozen) outside, if

water infiltration through cracks and large pores is prevented.

Influence of Moisture Saturation on Freeze-Thaw Damage: If the moisture content of concrete

drops below 100 %, its frost susceptibility decreases dramatically. Concrete with about 85 %

moisture saturation will only experience mildfrostattacks. Further, water in partially saturated

concrete seems tofreezeat temperatures below 0°C. Litvan has shown that significant ice build-

up in cement paste with 84 % moisture saturation occurs at about -8°C [Ref. 25]. Adsorption

effects probably prevent most of the waterfromfreezingat higher temperatures.

Freezing Point and Solvents: Where water migrates through a massive concrete structure, it may

dissolve metal hydroxides, metal oxides and salts. Sodium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide in

particular are sufficiently soluble to depress thefreezingpoint of a solution by several degrees.

Slow migration of reservoir water with low carbon dioxide content over several meters might

allow the water to dissolve significant ion concentrations. Only negligible concentrations of

metal ions dissolve where water traverses concrete along a short path at relatively high velocity.

A high content of dissolved carbon dioxide, as in rain water, may also reduce the rate of solution

rate of metal salts and hydroxides. Low ion concentrations in the water result in minimal

depression of thefreezingpoint.

Ill
5.5 Evaluation of Shotcrete Repairs

Surface preparation of the original concrete varied from poor, at Buntzen Dam, to excellent, at

Jordan River Dam, Upstream face 1969 and Buttresses 1990.

By and large shotcrete repairs were durable at all sites. Boiled absorption results showed that

shotcrete varied from excellent to marginal quality. Most shotcretes tested had air contents

appropriate for good frost resistance. The 1969 and 1970 shotcretes from Jordan had

significantly lower air contents. Only two shotcretes had specific surfaces and spacing factors

within the limits forfreeze-thawresistance according to the literature. Ultrasonic pulse velocity

measurements indicated shotcrete has good or better quality except for samples from Buntzen

Dam and from the Ruskin step wall. No significant carbonation was found in the sound shotcrete

of any sample. All shotcrete has sufficient compressive strength. Sorptivity tests showed that

shotcrete was notfrostdamaged.

Shotcretes on vertical surfaces were at least marginallyfrostresistant to local climate conditions.

Shotcrete was deteriorating at a moderate pace on horizontal surfaces at Stave and Buntzen

Dams.

Tensile bond strength varied from poor to high. The main cause of delamination was freeze-thaw

damage to the substrate concrete. Poor surface treatment of the original concrete prior to

shooting, unstable shotcrete mix, spraying mistakes and incomplete repair work also caused

debonding. The initially weak shotcrete-substrate interface in samples from Buntzen probably

failed due to thermal stresses and ice pressure.

Table 47 presents a summary of the shotcrete evaluation.

112
Table 47: Evaluation of Shotcrete Repairs
Site Shotcrete Repair Durability of Protection of Value of Overall
Shotcrete under Substrate Repair
local conditions
Stave Dam dry-mix, 1985 fair failed locally questionable
Buntzen Dam dry-mix, 1965 fair good good
Ruskin Dam, dry-mix, 1973 good fair good
Spillway
Ruskin Dam, Step dry-mix 1973 fair failed locally marginal
Wall
Jordan Dam, u/s dry-mix, 1969 good good very good
Jordan Dam, u/s dry-mix, 1989 good N/A very good*
Jordan Dam, d/s dry-mix, 1970 fair good * fair
Jordan Dam, wet-mix, 1990 good good very good**
Buttresses
* = limited data available
** = repair too new for final evaluation

5.6 Conclusions

Shotcrete appears to be a very strong and durable repair material.

Sand pockets, layering and spraying shadows may reduce the bond between shotcrete and its

substrate and accelerate local damage. Since such flaws are local, they may be tolerable. They

do not necessarily cause widespread failure of the repairs. If water and frost access these flaws

the bond between shotcrete and substrate may be jeopardized over a wide and propagating area.

Even where air void spacing factors often exceed the upper limit suggested in [Ref. 54], this does

not necessarily result in extensive microcracking and deterioration of the shotcrete. Shotcrete on

vertical faces which escapes moisture saturation due to standing water is sufficiently frost

resistant even where it significantly exceeds recommended ranges for air void spacing and

specific surface. Such shotcrete deteriorates at the surface and at a low rate. Shotcrete with

more than 0.45 mm air void spacing and less than 20 mm" 1
specific surface is not durable on

113
exposed horizontal surfaces.

Delamination occurs where large deep shotcreted areas are featheredged. Thermal or shrinkage

stresses may crack large, deep shotcrete layers in the absence of control joints. Shotcrete may

also crack where shot over construction joints or slab joints.

Steel fiber reinforced shotcrete has improved toughness and strain-to-failure. However, fiber

reinforced shotcrete can not reliably bridge substructure expansion joints.

Wire mesh or steel fibers embedded in shotcrete do generally not corrode.

Good surface preparation is essential for good bond between shotcrete and substrate. However,

shotcrete exhibits some bond even to poorly-prepared substrate.

Cracks in shotcrete layers may occur where the repair failed to fill leaking cracks in the substrate.

Such a failure to prevent moisture saturation of substrate concrete may result infrostdamage.

Subsequently, the deterioration of the substrate may damage the shotcrete.

Thermal stresses may cause delamination. Thermal shear stresses may arise at the shotcrete-

substrate interface. These stresses may exceed the bond strength between shotcrete and

substrate concrete and propagate delaminations.

A combination of high-strength shotcrete on low strength substrate concrete may be acceptable.

Apparently shotcrete has a relatively low modulus of elasticity resulting from its high paste

content. Leaner substrate concrete may have a high modulus in relation to its lower compressive

strength. If the moduli of shotcrete and substrate concrete match, stresses due to loading will be

similar in both materials. Excessive stress peaks near the interface between shotcrete and

substrate or in either material may not occur.

114
Shotcrete may protect the underlying concrete where:

• it reduces moisture penetration intofrost-susceptibleconcrete,

• it significantly reduces the number offreeze-thaw cycles the substrate experiences,

• it permits self-desiccation of the substrate.

Shotcrete may not protect the substrate, and may accelerate deterioration where:

• shotcrete traps moisture in the underlying concrete yet permits the substrate to freeze,

• shotcrete cracks due to shrinkage, omitted expansion joints etc.


CHAPTER 6
RECOMMENDATIONS

6.0 Introduction

This chapter summarizes recommendations for shotcrete repair of dam structures situated in the

temperate climate zones of south-western British Columbia. The chapter is based on the

"Recommended Practice for Shotcrete Repair of Highway Bridges" published by the Canadian

Strategic Highway Research Program [Ref. 114]. However, these guidelines are adapted for

shotcrete repair of BC Hydro dams. Italic font characterizes unchanged or minimally modified

quotationsfromthe above reference. Normal font symbolizes changes or additions.

6.1 Quoted Standards

• CAN/CSA A5-M88 (6.2.1)

. CAN/CSA A362-M88 (6.2.1)

. CAN/CSA A23.5-M86 (6.2.2)

.. CAN/CSA A23.1-M90 (6.2.3) , (6.2.4), (6.5)

• CAN3 A266.1 -M78 (6.2.5)

• CAN3 A266.2 - M78 (6.2.5)

• CAN3 A266.6 - M85 (6.2.5)

• CSA G30.5 - M1983 (6.2.6) , (6.5.2)

. CSAG164-M1981 (6.2.6)

• CSAG30.18-M1992 (6.2.6)

116
• ASTM CI 116-89 (6.2.6)

• ASTM 387 (6.2.6)

• AASHTO-T277-89 (6.3.2)

• CAN3 A23.1 -M90 (6.4.1)

• ASTM C685-86 (6.4.1)

• ACI 506R-90 (6.4.2), (6.7.1)

• OPSS 929 (6.5.1), (6.5.2)

• CAN3-A23.3-M84 (6.5.2)

• ASTM CI 140-89 (6.6.3)

• CAN/CSA A23.2 (6.6.3)

• ASTM C642 (6.6.3)

• ASTM 457 (6.6.3)

6.2 Materials

6.2.1 Cement

General

Cement should conform to the requirements of CAN/CSA-A5-M88, Portland Cement, Type 1

20, 30 or 50, CAN/CSA-A362-M88, Blended Hydraulic Cement, Type 10, 10S, 10F, 10FM,

20SF.

Comments

The engineer selects an appropriate cement type. For most applications cement type 10 is

satisfactory. Cement type 50 may be required where the shotcrete will be exposed to water or

soil containing sulfates. Chloride ions penetrate shotcrete with type 50 cement with relative ease.

117
6.2.2 Pozzolans

General

• Fly ash should conform to the requirements of CAN/CSA A23.5-M86, Type F or Type C.

• Granulated slag should conform to the requirements of CAN/CSA A23.5-M86, Type G,

ground granulated blast furnace slag.

• Silica fume should conform to the requirements of CAN/CSA A23.5-M86, Type U and

resultfromthe production of silicon or ferro-silicon alloys containing at least 75 %

silicon.

Comments

The engineer should specify which pozzolans to use, if any. Fly ash may enhance pumpability,

adhesion and cohesion of wet-mix material, or reduce heat of hydration and permeability of the

cement paste.

Silica fume may be used for both dry-mix and wet-mix shotcrete. Silica fume improves adhesion

of the shotcrete to the substrate and cohesion within the shotcrete, allowing build-up of thick

shotcrete layers in one pass. Silica fume in the mixture substantially reduces rebound. Hardened

silica fume shotcrete increases compressive and flexural strength, reduces permeability and

improves resistance to chemical attack and erosion. Typical addition rates are 8 to 15 % of the

cement mass.

Silica fume reduces water permeability substantially, and thus may trap moisture in an underlying

substrate.

The dry-mix process may cause high silica fume concentrations in the air. This may pose a health

hazard (see Section 2.1.4.1).

118
6.2.3 Water

General

• In shotcrete production, use only drinking water. The water should be free of oil,

chemical or organic impurities, and should comply with CAN/CSA A23.1-M90, Section 4,

• Water used for water blasting, cleaning, predampening of the substrate, and for curin

should be of the same quality as that used in shotcrete production.

6.2.4 Aggregates

General

• Aggregates should be normal weight conforming to the requirements of CAN/CSA A23.1-

M90. Use only hard, dense, and durable aggregates. They should conform to limits f

allowable quantities of deleterious substances as given in CAN/CSA A23.1-M90, Table 3.

• Use aggregates which do not react with alkalis in the cement to an extent that results

excessive expansion of shotcrete. Follow the recommendations in CAN/CSA A23.1-M90

Appendix B.

• The engineer should specify either a nominal 10 mm or 5 mm maximum aggregate size

The as-batched gradation of the specified aggregate should conform to the gradation

envelope given in Table 48, according to A C I 506R-90, Table 2.1.

119
Table 48: Gradation Limits for 10 mm and 5 mm Aggregate Shotcretes
Metric Sieve Size Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size,
Total Passing Each Sieve, [%] by Mass
5 mm 10 mm
14 mm 100 100
10 mm 100 90 to 100
5 mm 95 to 100 70 to 85
2.5 mm 80 to 100 50 to 70
1.25 mm 50 to 85 35 to 55
630 |xm 25 to 60 20 to 35
315 ^m 10 to 30 8 to 20
160 u.m 2 to 10 2 to 10

Comments

Use 10 mm maximum size aggregates for thick shotcrete repairs (>75 mm). Table 49 presents a

comparison between 5 mm and 10 mm maximum size aggregate shotcrete.

120
Table 49: Comparison 10 mm Aggregate vs. 5 mm Aggregate Shotcrete
10 mm Nominal Maximum Size Aggregate
Advantages Disadvantages
• More "concrete-like'' mixture, with • Greater rebound of coarse aggregate,
coarse aggregate component, lower particularly during encapsulation of
water demand and hence, reduced reinforcing steel using the dry-mix
shrinkage and cracking potential process.
compared to 5 mm MSA shotcrete.
• Leaves a rough "pock-marked" as-shot
• Larger maximum size aggregate finish, which may be less aesthetically
provides better "cleaning" of the acceptable than a 5 mm MSA as-shot
shotcrete lines and nozzle in the dry-mixfinish.
shotcrete process.
• Requires more finishing effort compared
• Greater momentum of larger aggregate to 5 mm MSA shotcrete.
particles helps to keep the front face of
reinforcing steel "clean" during • May require application of a 5 mm
shooting and facilitates the shotcrete MSA shotcrete finish coat.
compaction process.
5 mm Nominal Maximum Size Aggregate
Advantages Disadvantages
• Lower rebound than 10 mm MSA • Being a mortar, rather than a more
shotcrete, particularly when encasing concrete-like mixture, has a higher
reinforcing steel or mesh. water demand than 10 mm MSA
shotcrete.
• More easily finished than 10 mm MSA
shotcrete; usually does not require• a Requires higher cementitious content
finish coat. than 10 mm MSA shotcrete to produce a
given strength.

• Has a higher shrinkage capacity and


hence, greater cracking potential than
10 mm MSA shotcrete.

• More prone to the formation of sand


lenses when encapsulating reinforcing
steel or mesh, using the dry-mix
process.

Note: MSA = maximum size aggregate

121
6.2.5 Admixtures

6.2.5.1 Dry-Mix

General

Add air entraining admixtures to the mix water if th


entraining admixtures should conform to the require

Comments

Dry-mix shotcrete may be produced without admixtures to satisfy most applications. Air

entraining admixtures are recommended where shotcrete is exposed to chloride attack or severe

freeze-thaw cycling. This may occur where nearby roads are treated with de-icing salts.

6.2.5.2 Wet-Mix

General

• Add air entraining admixtures if specified by the


should conform to the requirements of CAN3-A26
• Admixtures such as water reducing and set-retar
requirements of CAN3-A266.2-M78.
• Superplasticizing admixtures should conform to th

Comments

Do not use admixtures without approval of the Engineer. Air entraining admixtures should be

added to achieve air contents of 8 to 12 % in the mix prior to shooting. The use of

superplasticizers is highly recommended to achieve a pumpable mix with a low water/cement

ratio and reasonable cement content.

122
6.2.6 Reinforcement

General

• Welded wire mesh fabric should be welded galvan


It should conform to CSA G30.5-M1983.
• Use inserts for attaching welded wire mesh fabric
be galvanized in accordance with CSA G164-M198
1 kNpull-out force.
• Reinforcing bars should conform to CSA G30.18-M1992.

• Steel fibers should conform to the requirements


specifies fiber type, length and addition rate.

Comments

Install wire mesh on average 40 mm (minimum 20 mm) above the substrate and 40 mm below the

final shotcrete surface. Use small bar sizes for reinforcement, preferably not larger than 15M.

The engineer may specify steel fibers in lieu of wire mesh. Steelfibersare typically added at a

rate of 50 to 80 kg/m. They should be deformed and have an aspect ratio of about 60 to 80.
3

Steel fiber reinforced shotcrete tends to have less visible shrinkage cracking, better bond and

much improved toughness compared to conventionally reinforced shotcrete. Corrosion of steel

fibers embedded in shotcrete has not been observed.

123

1
6.3 Proportioning

6.3.1 Mixture Design

General
• Proportion shotcrete to meet the performance requirements of the project and in chapter

6.3.2. Experience from previous projects and trial mixes should influence the mixture

design.

Comments
Shotcrete with silica fume and steel fibers is recommended for most repairs. Steel fiber

reinforced shotcrete without silica fume may be appropriate for downstream faces of seeping

structures in order to allow the substrate to dry out more easily. Do not use shotcrete for

horizontal surfaces unless great care is taken to spray perpendicular to the substrate surface and

all rebound is removed immediately.

Table 50 lists typical mix designs.

Table 50: Typical Remedial Shotcrete Mix Designs. Proportions at the Nozzle in kg/m
Mix Description
Material
Wet-Mix Dry-Mix
Plain Silica Fume Plain Silica Fume
Portland Cement 400 400 425 375
Silica Fume 50 50
10 mm Coarse Aggregate* 460 500 495 490
Concrete Sand* 7260 1180 1215 1205
Water 170 111 165 165
Water Reducing Admixture Yes Yes
Superplasticizer Yes
Air Entraining Admixture Yes Yes
TOTAL 2290 2302 2300 2285

* Proportions based on saturated surface dry aggregates.

124
Table 51 lists typical wet-mix proportions

Table 51: Typical Wet-Mix Shotcrete Proportions


Material Mass (kg)
Cement (Type 10) 400
Silica Fume 50
Coarse Aggregate (SSD) 10 x 2.5 mm 500
Sand(SSD) 1180
Water (estimate) 172
Water Reducing Admixture 26
Superplasticizer 56
Steel Fiber 60
Air Entraining Admixture as required for specified air content
Air Content (as shot) 5 ± 1.5%
TOTALS 2369
Slump = 60 mm ± 20 mm
Approximate W/(C + Silica Fume) ratio = 0.38

The rebound from a vertical surface is usually less than 5 % in the wet-mix process. In the dry-

mix process the rebound from a vertical surface may be greater than 30 %. For silica fume dry-

mix, rebound constitutes about 20 %. Rebound contains more aggregate and less cementitious

material than the as-batched mix. Thus, placed shotcrete has a higher cement content than the

initial mix. This is especially true for dry-mix shotcrete.

A lean mix may partly compensate for the enrichment of the shotcrete during shooting.

However, too lean a mix causes increasing rebound.


batchedfor dry-mix shotcrete.

Table 52 describes some general differences between dry-mix and wet-mix shotcrete. Dry-mix

shotcrete is the more efficient process for start-stop type repairs. Wet-mix shotcrete appears to

be superior for large repairs such as shotcreting a complete dam face.

125
Table 52: Wet-Mix versus Dry-Mix
Problem Wet-Mix Dry-Mix
High volume + 0
Start-stop type repair - +
Cost of equipment - +
Equipment cleaning - +
Prone to mistakes in application 0 -
Rebound + -
Undesired overspray 0 -
Sand pockets + -
Rebound entrapment 0
Site cleaning 0 -
+ = advantageous
0 = satisfactory
- = disadvantageous

6.3.2 Performance Requirements

6.3.2.1 Dry-Mix

Dry-mix shotcrete should conform to the requirement

Table 53: Dry-Mix Shotcrete Performance Requirements


Test Description Test Method Age [days] Specified
Requirement
Maximum Water/Cementitious - 0.45
Materials Ratio
CAN/CSA A23.2-14C
Minimum Compressive Strength, [MPa] 7 30
28 40
Maximum Boiled Absorption, [%] ASTM C642 7 8
Maximum Volume of Permeable Voids,ASTM C642 7 17
f%l
AASHTO-T277-89
Maximum Rapid Chloride Permeability, 7 1000
[Coulombs/test]
(for silica-fume shotcrete only)

126
6.3.2.2 Wet-Mix

Wet-mix shotcrete should conform to the requiremen

Table 54: Wet-Mix Shotcrete Performance Requirements


Test Description Test Method Age (days) Specified
Requirement
Maximum Water/Cementitious - 0.45
Materials Ratio
Air Content - as shot, [%] CAN/CSA A23.2-4C - 5 ± 1.5
CAN/CSA A23.2-5C
Slump at Discharge into Pump, [mm] - 60 ±20
Minimum Compressive Strength, [MPa]
CAN/CSA A23.2-14C 7 30
28 40
Maximum Boiled Absorption, [%] ASTMC642 7 8
Maximum Volume of Permeable Voids,ASTM C642 7 17
f%l
Maximum Rapid Chloride Permeability,
AASHTO-T277-89 7 1000
[Coulombs/test]
(for silica-fume shotcrete only)

6.4 Supply and Equipment

6.4.1 Batching, Mixing and Supply

6.4.1.1 Dry-Mix

Dry-mix shotcrete should be either:

- delivered as dry-bagged premix material conforming to the ASTM C387, or

- batched on site.

Shoot all dry-mix shotcrete within 30 minutesfrom


aggregates, or the premoisturizer) comes into con
Protect dry bagged premix shotcretefrommoistur
storage.

127
Do not use dry baggedpremix material containing
Store and apply dry-bagged premix shotcrete at te

6.4.1.2 Wet-Mix

• Batch, mix and supply wet mix shotcrete by using


- central mixing with transit mix delivery,
- transit mixing and delivery,
- volumetric batching, using a mobile mixer unit,
- dry-bagged premix materials mixed with water o

Central Mixing and Supply

• Batch aggregate, cement and silica fume by mass


mix in a transit mixer in accordance with CAN3-A
admixtures volumetrically. Weighing equipment
accuracy defined in CAN3-A23.1-M90.
• Add shotcrete materials in any sequence which pr
However, all water reducing admixtures and sup
before adding silica fume powder.
• Transit mixer drums and blades should befreeof e
mix. Do not use equipment with excessively worn
to the requirements of CAN3-A23.1-M90, Secti
• Permit one retempering with superplasticizer add
discharge to maintain the specified slump. Conti
adding superplasticizer to the transit mixer.
• Shoot all shotcrete within 90 minutes of adding mi

128
Transit Mixing and Supply

• Apply the same requirements as for central mixin


transit mixer.

Volumetric Site Batching

• The mobile mixer unit for volumetric batching sh


ASTMC685-86.
• Proportion materials to the tolerances specified
thoroughly and in sufficient quantity to maintain s
• Interconnect feed systems for all materials, such t
• Clean the equipment thoroughly at least once per
material

• Apply all shotcrete within 90 minutes of mixing.

Dry-Bagged Premix Supply

• Permit the use of dry-bagged premix supply with


contractor can demonstrate uniform mixing of the
with all project performance requirements.

6.4.2 Shotcrete Placing Equipment

6.4.2.1 Dry-Mix

Shotcrete batching, mixing and supply equipment


mix shotcrete materials into a uniform mixture an
Ensure a moisture content of 3 to 5 % for dry mix material prior to discharge into the

shotcrete gun. Use a predampener, if necessary.

129
Keep the moisture content in the mix prior to discharge into the gun constant during

shooting, so that the nozzleman need not repeatedly adjust the water content at the noz

water ring.

The gun should be capable of discharging a continuous, smooth stream of uniformly-

mixed material into the delivery hose at a velocity suitable for the discharge nozzle.

Use a discharge nozzle equipped with a manually-operated water injection system f

directing an even distribution of water through the mixture. The nozzleman should be
s

able to readily and conveniently adjust the water valve.

Ensure the water pressure at the discharge nozzle exceeds the operating air pressure s

that the water may be thoroughly mixed with predampened shotcrete materials.

6.4.2.2 Wet-Mix

The shotcrete delivery equipment should conform to the requirements of ACI 506R-9

Use equipment that is capable of delivering a steady stream of uniformly mixed mater

to the discharge nozzle at the proper velocity and rate of discharge.

Preferably use positive displacement pumps equipped with hydraulic or mechanicall

powered pistons and surge reduction devices. Add compressed air at the discharge

nozzle.

6.4.2.3 Comments

ACI 506R-90 "Guide to Shotcrete" provides details of different types of equipment available.

Nozzlemen can safely operate wet-mix equipment with 64 mm internal hose diameters. Hourly

application rates of 5 m shotcrete are easily achievable. Use remotely controlled spraying booms
3

130
where a significantly higher application rate is desired or where accessibility is a problem. Keep

the nozzle, the air-ring in the wet-mix process and the water-ring in the dry-mix process free of

obstructions. This is essential to produce shotcrete of uniform quality.

6.4.3 Auxiliary Shotcrete Equipment

The air supply should deliver clean, dry air. Pro


combined demand of nozzle, blow pipe and any oth
Ensure the following minimum compressor ratings for the dry-mix process:

Table 55: Material Hoses and Compressor Capacities


Compressor Capacity [mVmin]
Material Hose Diameter [mm]
@ 700 kPa
32 12.5
38 17
51 21
64 28

Use an air supply system with a moisture- and oil-


All auxiliary shotcrete equipment should conform
90.

131
6.5 Preparation for Shotcreting

6.5.1 Surface Preparation

General

• Sound the whole concrete area to be repaired with a hammer to outline delamination.

• Remove all loose, spalled, deteriorated and delaminated concrete by chipping with light

duty hammers (not to exceed 7 kg mass) and high pressure water jets (100-275 MPa).

• When corroded reinforcing steel is exposed, remove concrete until there is a minimum 20

mm clearance around the exposed, corroded reinforcing bar. Take care not to damage

bond with adjacent non-exposed reinforcing steel during concrete removal.

• Taper the perimeter of all areas where concrete is removed at approximately 45 °. Cut

outer edges of all chipped areas at about 90° angle to a minimum depth of 20 mm, to

preventfeatheredging.

• Clean the surface to receive shotcrete using high pressure water jetting in accordance

with OPSS 929.

• Shotcrete the cleaned surfaces within 48 hours, or reblast them.

Comments

It may be efficient to remove delaminated concrete by chipping. Subsequently use water jetting

to thoroughly clean chipped areas. The preparation process should leave a rough substrate

surface with coarse aggregate exposed but not undercut.

Diamond saw cutting tends to polish the substrate. This may weaken the bond when shotcrete is

applied. Thus, water-blast saw-cut surfaces before shotcreting just like chipped or previously

untreated surfaces.

Water jetting is the recommended abrasive surface preparation method. If properly applied, it

132
results in minimal damage to sound concrete adjacent to the removed material. Sand blasting

may yield similarly good surface preparation if preceded by jackhammering.

6.5.2 Reinforcement

General

• Grit blast all exposed reinforcing steel to remove


should conform OPSS 929.
• Remove and replace reinforcing steel displaying d
of its original cross-sectioning area, as directed b
• The minimum lap splice length for all replacement and new reinforcing steel should be in

accordance with CAN3-A23.3-M84, Section 12. Place bars in accordan

recommendations ofACI 506R-90, Sections 5.4


in lap splices. Place them so that the minimum sp
maximum aggregate size, to allow for proper emb
• Tie intersecting reinforcing bars to one another us
them adequately to minimize vibration during shot
• Welded wire mesh should conform to CSA G30.5-
least one and one-half spaces at all intersection
securely.
• Ensure 20 mm minimum clearance between newly
existing concrete.
• Fiber reinforced shotcrete may be a proper altern
fiber reinforced shotcrete only in conjunction wi
systems.

133
Comments

Avoid welding existing reinforcement, it may not be weldable. Ensure 20 mm minimum

clearance behind rebars or mesh. Design for a clearance of 40 mm wherever feasible. The use of

steel fiber reinforced shotcrete is highly recommended. Always anchor steelfiberreinforced

shotcretefirmlyto the substrate, especially around the perimeter of large repair areas.

6.5.3 Anchors

General

• Specify anchor types and spacing on the drawings.

• Space anchors on vertical surfaces on a 600 mm grid pattern over the entire area.

• Anchors should be either mechanically set or grouted into sound substrate.

• Ensure anchors develop pull-out forces of no less than 10 kN. The engineer may specify

higher pull-out forces.

Comments

Shotcrete jackets tied to sound concrete across concrete of low quality require anchors. Such

anchors may be specified for pull-out forces greater than 10 kN.

Ensure anchors forfiberreinforced shotcrete have sufficient pull-out resistance in shotcrete as

well as in substrate. These anchors should not vibrate visibly when exposed to projected

shotcrete. Anchors should be shaped and placed to reduce spraying shadows and entrapment of

overspray.

134
6.5.4 Drainage

General

• Check all drainage systems upstream of the planned shotcrete layer. Repair them as

required prior to shotcreting. Protect the drainage systems from blockage.

• Fill all leaking cracks prior to shotcreting.

• Where seepage through a structure cannot be stopped completely, construct a drainage

path on the downstream face of the structure before applying shotcrete.

Comments

Shotcrete typically has lower permeability than most concrete used in dam construction. Thus,

seeping water may be trapped in the original concrete when shotcrete is on the air-facing side of

a structure. Under freezing conditions the original concrete and the concrete-shotcrete interface

may deteriorate severely. Draining seepage zones may reduce the water saturation of concrete

behind the shotcrete and thereby, the potential for frost damage.

6.5.5 Alignment Control and Cover

Use shooting wires, guide strips, depth gauges or forms for alignment control.

Shooting wires should consist of minimum 0.8 mm diameter high strength steel wire

combined with a turnbuckle and spring coil, which maintains the wire under tension

during shooting. Remove shooting wires after completing shotcreting and screening

operations.

Use guide strips andforms of such dimensions and installation configuration that they do

not impede the nozzleman's ability to produce uniform dense properly-consolidated

shotcrete.

Install depth gauges at a maximum spacing of 1200 mm in a grid pattern. Avoid metal

135
depth gauges.
Cover reinforcing steel and bars as detailed in CAN/CSA A23.1-M90, Section 12.12.

Minimum cover is 40 mm for dry mix shotcrete and 30 mm for wet-mix shotcrete.

6.6 Quality Control

6.6.1 Preconstruction Trials

Implement preconstruction trials to evaluate conformance of the proposed materia

shotcrete mixture, equipment and crew with the project specifications.

Use the preconstruction trial to qualify nozzlemen for the project. Nozzlemen who h

not been prequalified should not apply shotcrete on the project.

Each nozzleman should shoot preconstruction test panels. Produce the test panels to

ASTM CI140-89 with minimum dimensions of 750 x 750 x 100 mm deep. Make te

panels from wood and sealed plywood. The panels should have 45 degree sloped edge

permit rebound to escape.

Half of the panels should contain reinforcement and anchors representative of the proje

Each proposed nozzleman should shoot one test panel for each proposed shotcret

mixture from every anticipated shooting orientation.

Extract three unreinforced test specimens at each test age, and test for the perform

parameters specified in Chapter 6.3.2.

Where applicable extract a minimum of three 100 mm diameter cores where reinfo

steel and mesh intersect, and check for adequate shotcrete consolidation aroun

reinforcement. Take at least one core at an anchor location.

Field cure test panels in their wooden frames in the same manner as the propose

shotcrete work, for a minimum of one day, prior to transport to the test laborato

136
Transport the test panels in their wooden forms. Take care not to crack or damage

shotcrete.

Place the test panels in a moist room in the laboratory. Maintain a temperature of 2

2 °C and a relative humidity of 98 ± 2 %. Remove the test panels from their woode

forms at an age of three days. Return the test panels to the moist room until the t

testing.

At appropriate test ages, extract test specimens from the panels by diamond sawin

coring. Store test specimens moist. Test them dry unless the in-place shotcrete wil

predominantly water saturated.

6.6.2 Material Testing

Establish a quality control program for the shotcrete. The program should include

least the following items:

Maintain test records for all quality control operations.

For site-batched material, regularly monitor aggregate gradation and moisture cont

Make one moisture content check at the start of each shotcreting operation and whe

it is possible aggregate moisture content has changed

For dry-bagged premix materials, conduct wash-out tests at a specifiedfrequency to c

cementitious content, aggregate gradation, andfiber content where applicable.

For volume-batched shotcrete, check moisture content and mixture proportions a

specifiedfrequency.

Test the physical performance of hardened shotcrete.

137
6.63 Construction Testing

General

• Shoot one construction test panel for each nozzle orientation for each day of shotcre

production.

• Produce test panels in accordance with the requirements of ASTM CI140-89. Howeve

the test panels should have minimum dimensions of 450 x 450 x 100 mm. Construct tes

forms of wood and sealed plywood, with 45 ° sloped edges, to permit escape of reboun

Construction test panels should contain no reinforcement or embedments (other than f

reinforcement).

• Store, handle and cure construction test panels the same way as preconstruction te

specimens (Chapter 6.6.1).

• Compressive strength test specimens should be either:

a) 75 mm diameter cores between 75 mm and 150 mm (preferred) long, or

b) 75 mm cubes (typically cutfromthe end of broken flexural test prisms).

• Conduct compressive strength tests in accordance with CAN/CSA A23.2 - 14C. Correc

measured compressive strengths for a length:diameter ratio of two, using the core

correction factors given in CAN/CSA A23.2-14C, Table 1.

• The mean compressive strength for a set of three cores should equal or exceed 0.85 ft (f

= specified compressive strength). No individual core should fail at less than 0.75 ft

The mean of a set of three cubes should equal or exceed ft with no individual cube less

than 0.88 ft.

• Test three specimens at age seven days for boiled absorption and permeable voi

according to ASTM C642. Use 75 mm cubes cut from the broken ends of flexural test

prisms, or extract 75 mm diameter cores at least 100 mm long.

• Test two specimens for rapid chloride permeability according to AASHTO T277-831 at

age 7 days. Use extracted cores with 100 mm diameter, 50 mm deep.

138
Comments

Tensile bond strength tests may be performed on site. Equipment is available to drill shotcrete

cores and hydraulically pull them off the substrate. The ultimate tensile force is recorded and a /

bond strength can be calculated. Such tests are recommended when the shotcrete is at least

seven days old.

ASTM C457 tests on polished shotcrete samples indicate durable shotcrete if:

air content = 4 to 6 %

spacing factor < 0.3 mm

specific surface = 16 to 32 mm". 1

6.7 Shotcrete Application and Finishing

6.7.1 Shotcrete Application

General

• The engineer should review and approve all areas


application of any shotcrete.
• Apply shotcrete to its full thickness in a single lay
fume modified shotcrete may be applied to its full
needfor multiple layer construction.
• Flush all surfaces to be shotcreted with clean wat
one hour prior to shotcreting. Allow wetted surfa
dry condition before shotcreting. If necessary, u
Use only oil-free compressed air in the blow-pipe
saturate the concrete the day before shotcreting

139
above.

• Exercise care to protect adjacent surfacesfrombuild-up of rebound and overspray. Do

not permit rebound in the completed work. Remove rebound from surfaces to receive

shotcrete. This is best accomplished while the material is still plastic, using blow pipes

scrapers, wire brushes or other suitable tools. Remove hardened rebound and overspr

prior to application of additional shotcrete, using abrasive blast cleaning, chipping

hammers, high pressure water jetting or other suitable techniques.

• Shotcreting requires a clear, unhindered view of the shooting area for the nozzlemen and

the helpers. This requires good lighting and ventilation.

• Hollow good shotcreting practice, as detailed in ACI 506R-90. In particular:

a) Orient the nozzle at right angles to the receiving surface, except as required to fill

corners, cove edges and to encase large diameter reinforcing steel.

b) Adjust the combination of air pressure at the nozzle, moisture content of the shotcrete

and distance of the nozzle from the receiving surface to achieve maximum

consolidation of the shotcrete.

c) Keep the front face of the reinforcement clean during shooting operations so that

shotcrete builds upfrombehind This will encase the reinforcement and prevent voids

and sand pocketsfromforming.

d) Employ a blow pipe operator who continuously removes rebound and overspray in

advance of the deposition of new shotcrete.

• Do not apply shotcrete during rain or high wind which could interfere with the shotcre

stream, unless suitable protective covers, enclosures or wind breaks are installed.

• Apply shotcrete to the required line and grade and tolerance detailed in the drawings,

using shotcrete wires, depth gauges, guide strips, forms or other suitable devices. Pro

at least the cover to reinforcing detailed in the drawings.

Comments

Shotcrete on vertical walls should normally be builtfrombottom to top.

140
During shotcreting a helper should always be present to remove rebound and oversprayfromthe

working area. Rebound should not be entrapped in shotcrete. Remove all set oversprayfromthe

substrate prior to shotcreting. Thin layers of overspray worked into the shotcrete while still

plastic are acceptable. However, do not incorporate hardened overspray in the shotcrete.

Spray shotcrete at the "wettest stable consistency" with nozzle distances to the substrate in the

range of 0.6 to 1.8 m depending on equipment and air pressure. Good encasing of reinforcement

requires a short nozzle distance.

Static and dynamic structural demands (for example for earthquake upgrading, spillways, plunge

pools) may determine the depth of the shotcrete applied.

Freeze-thaw durability of a shotcrete repair is significantly enhanced when the frost line can not

penetrate past the shotcrete layer to the substrate concrete, or the substrate is protected from

moisture saturation. Suggested minimum depths of steel fiber reinforced shotcrete are given

below.

> 75 mm: on vertical surfaces of structural members such as piers, beams, buttresses which are

exposed to rain, but are notfrequentlysoaked by seeping or standing water;

> 100 mm: upstream faces of dams without significant ice pressure from reservoir (Lower

Mainland climate), downstream faces of dams without seepage problems;

> 150 mm: horizontal areas. Avoid shotcreting horizontal surfaces when possible;

> 250 mm: large spillways, areas where the substrate may remain moisture saturated even after
the shotcrete repair. For these cases consider using steel fiber shotcrete without
141
silica fume so that the substrate may dry.

These suggested depths do not take into account structural static requirements. They have been

derived empirically from case studies.

A final layer of 5 mm maximum size aggregate shotcrete may be desirable on top of 10 mm

maximum size aggregate or steelfiberreinforced shotcrete. Such a layer should be 5 to 20 mm

thick. Apply the final layer preferably before the underlying shotcrete attains initial set or at least

24 hours after set and on a surface cleaned by high pressure water jet. A proper preparation of

the underlying shotcrete according to ACI 506R-90, section 6.5.8 and 6.6.2 is essential to

achieve good bond.

Large shotcrete repairs require contraction joints. Construct contraction joints to coincide with

all existing joints in the structure. Additional joints may be required to deal with thermal stress.

The spacing of these joints depends among other things on the local climate and thickness and

type of shotcrete. Joint spacing of 10 m or more may be sufficient for deep layers of fiber

reinforced shotcrete exposed to moderate temperature changes. In other cases use joint spacing

of 6 to 8 m.

Where no sound substrate exists shotcrete jacketing may be required. This involves uVback of a

reinforced shotcrete jacket deep into the structure.

6.7.2 Finishing

General

• Leave shotcrete in its natural gunfinishunless the contract documents or the en


require otherwise.
142
• Wherefinishingis required, cut shotcrete back to line and grade using cutting
screeds or other suitable devices. Allow the shotcrete to stiffen before cutt
trimming to prevent tears, cracks and delamination. Remove shooting -wires wh
and trimming are complete.

• Apply one or more of the followingfinishesif specified:


a) Wood floatfinish- either as a preliminaryfinishfor other surface treatments, or
granular texture finish.
b) Rubber floatfinish,applied to a flash coat or woodfloatfinish.This produces a fin
textured granular finish.
c) Brushfinish;afinehairbrushfloatfinish,which leaves afinetextured, sandy finish
d) Steel trowelfinish;leaves a dense, smooth, hardfinish.

Comments

Natural gun finish seems appropriate for most applications.

Trim all shotcrete and overspray back from adjacent unprepared concrete surfaces. Edges of all

shotcrete repairs should have a minimum square saw-cut edge 20 mm deep. Finish the shotcrete

up to this edge. Avoid featheredging of shotcrete.

6.8 Curing and Protection

6.8.1 Curing

Oncefinishingis completed, prevent shotcrete from drying by fogging, wetting, or

permitted by the engineer, by application of a curing compound.


If shotcrete is left as a natural gun finish, apply curing compounds at twice

143
application rate normally specified for smooth concrete finishes. Completely remov

curing compounds prior to shooting additional layers of shotcrete.

Once shotcrete has attainedfinalset, keep it continuously moist for a rninimum period of
seven days, unless the Engineer permits the use of a curing compound. Moist curing may

be accomplished using one or more of the following procedures:

a) Covering the shotcrete with wet burlap presoaked in water for 24 hours. Plastic sheet

over the burlap can retard its rate of drying.

b) Installing soaker hoses to keep the shotcrete repairs continuously wet for the curing

period.

6.8.2 Protection

Protect shotcretefromimpact, static loads other than self-weight, and dynamic loads as
specified by the engineer.
Apply the general requirements for hot and cold weather concreting detailed in CAN/CSA

A23.1-M90, Section 21.

If the prevailing ambient conditions (relative humidity, wind speed, air temperature a

direct exposure to sunlight) are such that the shotcrete develops plastic shrinkage and

early drying shrinkage cracking, stop shotcrete application. The contractor should:

a) Delay the work until the weather improves; and/or

b) Install sun-screens, wind breaks, fogging devices or take other protective

measures.

Do not apply shotcrete if the rate of evaporation at the repair surface exceeds 1.0 kg/m /h2

as detailed in CAN/CSA A23.1-M90, Appendix D.

Stop applying shotcrete if the ambient temperature rises above 30 XJ. The engineer m

permit special hot-weather shotcreting procedures.

Do not apply shotcrete if the temperature of the concrete substrate is less than 5 XJ

144
the air in contact with the repair surfaces is below 10°C.

Maintain air temperature over the repaired surfaces at 10 °C or greater for at least four

days after shotcreting. The engineer must approve the means of maintaining the air

temperature.

The preferred temperature range of applied shotcrete is 10°C to 20XJ. The limits for

shotcrete temperature are a minimum of 5X1 and a maximum of 30 XJ. Cool mix

temperatures are preferred during hot weather shotcreting and warm mix temperatures

during cold weather shotcreting.

145
CHAPTER 7
FUTURE RESEARCH

The following topics are suggested for investigation:

A) Test the durability of shotcrete repairs at additional sites. Findings may augment this

report.

B) Develop a two-dimensional model to estimate moisture migration and frost penetration in

concrete dams as a function of geometry, materials, local climate, and reservoir water level.

Record temperature and humidity profiles on dams simultaneously to verify the model. The

model could help engineers select dam repair materials, and detail the dimensions of shotcrete

repairs.

C) Study the stability of partly delaminated shotcrete layers. Produce test panels by spraying

shotcrete on top of aged concrete substrate. Introduce controlled delaminations (use bond

breaking materials like adheasive tape or styrofoam plates). Expose these panels to mechanical

and thermal load cycles. Monitor the bond between shotcrete and substrate and the growth of

the introduced flaws, if any.

Supplementary site studies should be conducted. Monitor the growth of delaminations on dam

faces over the course of several years. Test for delamination by tapping or pulse echo methods

e.g. once a year. Document the exact size and location of delaminations and compare records.

146
D) There is a demand for a reliable and fast method to detect delamination. Thermographic

imaging seems to be a promising technique to satisfy such a demand. Therefore it should be

investigated how thermographic imaging can be utilized to scan hydro dams for delamination.

Other techniques to be studied include ground radar and spectral analysis of surface waves.

E) Conduct a thorough literature review regarding the toxidity of concrete admixtures.

Summarize the current knowledge about possible health hazards of admixtures and pozzolans.

147
CHAPTER 8
R E F E R E N C E LIST

8.1 Textbooks

8.1.1 Concrete

[I] Bungey, J.H.: The Testing of Concrete in Structures. Blackie and Son Ltd., UK, 1989.

[2] Campbell-Allen, Roper: Concrete Structures: Materials Maintenance and Repair.


Longman Scientific&Technical, Harlow, UK, 1991.

[3] Carpinteri, Alberto: Mechanical Damage and Crack Growth in Concrete. Martinus
Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1986.

[4] Dewar, J.D., Andersen, R.: Manual of Ready-Mixed Concrete. Blackie and Son Ltd.,
Glasgow, UK, 1988.

[5] Dodson, Vance H.: Concrete Admixtures. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1990.

[6] Kosmatka, S.H., et al: Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures. 5th Canadian Metric
Edition, Canadian Portland Cement Association, Ottawa, 1991.

[7] Malhotra, V . M . : Advances in Concrete Technology. CCG, Ottawa, 1992.

[8] Malhotra, V . M . : In Situ / Nondestructive Testing of Concrete. ACI, Detroit, 1984.

[9] Malhotra, V . M . : Testing Hardened Concrete - Nondestructive Methods. ACI, Detroit,


1976.

[10] Neville, A . M . : Properties of Concrete. Pitman Publishing Ltd., London, UK, 1977.

[II] Ramachandran, V.S.: Concrete Admixtures Handbook. Noyes Publications, Park Ridge,
N.J., 1984.

8.1.2 Shotcrete

[12] Guthoff, K.: Einflusse automatischer Dusenfuhrung auf die Herstellung von Spritzbeton.
Institut fur Konstruktiven Ingenieurbau, Ruhr-Universitat Bochum, Mitteilungen Nr. 91-7,
Feb. 1991.

148
[13] Ryan, T.F.: Gunite. Cement and Concrete Association, London, UK, 1973.

[14] Teichert, P.: Spritzbeton. E. Laich SA, Avegno, Switzerland, 1991.

8.1.3 Others

[15] Chemical Hazard Response Information System. Department of Transportation, United


States Coast Guard, Washington, D.C, 1984.

[16] Krautkramer, K.: Ultrasonic Testing of Materials. 4th edition, Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1990.

[17] Lewis, R.J.: Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials. Eighth Edition, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1992.

[18] Loewenstein, K . L . : The Manufacturing Technology of Continuous Glass Fibres. 3rd


Edition, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Neatherlands, 1993.

[19] Mohr, J.G., Rowe, W.P.: Fibre Glass. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1978.

[20] Sukhatme, S.P.: A Textbook on Heat Transfer. Third Edition, Si-Units, Orient Longman
Ltd., Bombay, India, 1989.

[21] Timoshenko, S.: Vibration Problems in Engineering. D. Van Nostrand Company, New
York, 1937.

8.2 Papers, Proceedings

8.2.1 Concrete

[22] Berry, E.: Fly Ash in Concrete, CANMET SP85-3. Canadian Centre for Min
Energy Technology, 1986.

[23] Bickley, J.A.: Potential for Carbonation of Concrete in C


Klieger Symposium on Performance of Concrete, ACI, Detroit, Michigan, USA, 1990.

[24] Hooton, R.D.: Sorptivity Testing of Concrete as an Indica


Curing Efficiency, in: Proceedings of the Third Canadian Symposium on Ceme
Concrete. Ottawa, August 3-4 1993.

[25] Litvan: Frost Action in the Presence of De-icers, in: Ce


Volume 6, pp. 351-356, 1979.

149
[26] Malhotra,V.M.: Fly Ash, Slag, Silica Fume, and Rice-Hu
Concrete International. Vol. 15, No. 4, April 1993.

[27] RILEM - Report of Technical Committee 67-FAB: Fly Ash in Concrete. Chapman&Hall,
London, UK, 1991.

8.2.2 Shotcrete

[28] ACI Committee 544: Measurement of Properties of Fiber


Committee Report, in: ACI Materials Journal. November-December 1988.

[29] Andalen, A.: Determination of Frost Resistance of Shot


Building Materials. Proceedings from a Nordic Seminar in Boras, Sweden, Oct. 24-30,
1991.

[30] Anderson, B.C.: Shotcrete Repairs to the Skeena Rive


Foundations, paper presented to a Joint Meeting of Transmission Section and Equipm
Section of the Canadian Electrical Association. Vancouver, BC, March 25, 1987.

[31] Anderson, M . : Shotcrete for Expedient Structural Repair. Report. Applied Research
Associates, Panama City, FL, 1991.

[32] Banthia, N., et al: Influence of Fiber Geometry in Steel F


Shotcrete, in: Concrete International. May 1992.

[33] Banthia, N., et al: Influence of Fiber Geometry in Steel F


Shotcrete, in: Concrete International. Vol. 16, No. 6, June 1994.

[34] Beaupre, D., Mindess, S., Morgan, D.R.: Development of High Perfor
in: Shotcrete for Underground Support VI. Proceedings of the Foundation Conference,
Niagara-on-the-Lake, Canada, May 2-6 1993, published by the American Society of Civil
Engineers, New York.

[35] Surge, Theodor A.: Fiber Reinforced High-Strength Shotcr


Fume, in: ACI-SP-91: Proceedings - Second International Conference, Madrid, Spain
1986, Vol. 2, Published by American Concrete Institute, Detroit, ML USA.

[36] Dhingra, A.K.: Rehabilitation of Linden Reservoir, in: Concrete


1990.

[37] Durand, B., Mirza, J., Nguyen, P.: ASTM C666 (A) Freeze-Thaw Dur
Entrained Wet- and Dry-Mix Shotcrete, in: Shotcrete
Proceedings of the Foundation Conference, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Canada, May 2-6 1993,
published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.

150
[38] Fidjestol, P.: Applied Silica Fume Concrete, in: Concrete Internation
November 1993.

[39] Gebler, S.H.: Durability of Dry-Mix Shotcrete Containin


Concrete International. October 1989.

[40] Glassgold, L L . : Shotcrete, in: Concrete International. August 1989.

[41] Humphries, R.W., Funkhouser, M.R.: Use of Shotcrete in Recent Tu


South and East USA, in: Shotcrete for Underground Support VI. Proceedi
Foundation Conference, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Canada, May 2-6 1993, published by the
American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.

[42] Husbands, T.B., Causey, F.E.: Surface Treatment to Minimize Concrete Deterioration:
Laboratory Evaluation of Surface Treatment Materials. US Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Ms., Technical Report REMR-CS-17, 1990.

[43] Lock, Jim: Beefing up the Mix, in: Tunnels and Tunneling. Vol. 21, No. 7, Ju

[44] Malmberg, Bo: Shotcrete for Rock Support: a Summary R


15 Countries, in: Tunneling and Underground Space Technology. Vol. 8, Numb
October 1993, Pergamon Press, Oxford.

[45] Marusin, Stella: Failure of Latex-Modified Shotcrete, in: Conc


1990.

[46] Metcalf, D., Lattin, D.J.: Channel Lining With Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete. Final Report,
Arizona Transportation Research Center, Phoenix, Arizona, Report-Number FHWA-AZ-
8902, Arizona Department of Transportation, 1992.

[47] Michols, K.A., Vincent, J.F.: Reinforced Overlay and Shotcrete


Multistory Parking Structure, in: Concrete International. September 19

[48] Morgan, D.R.: Dry-Mix Silica Fume Shotcrete in West


International. January 1988.

[49] Morgan, D.R., Neill, J.: Durability of Shotcrete Rehabilitation


Canada, Transportation Association of Canada Annual Conference. Winnipeg, Manitoba,
September 17, 1991.

[50] Morgan, D.R.: Freeze-Thaw Durability of Shotcrete, in: Con


1989.

[51] Morgan, D.R.: Freeze-Thaw Durability of Wet Mix and Dry Mix Shotcretes with Silica
Fume and Steel Fibers. American Society for Testing and Materials, 1988.

151
[52] Morgan, D.R.: High Early Strength Blended-Cement Wet
International. Vol. 13, No. 5, May 1991.

[53] Morgan, D.R., Pigeon, M . : High Performance Shotcrete. paper presented at the Network
of Centers of Excellence on High Performance Concrete Half Day Seminar, Toronto,
1992/10/6.

[54] Morgan, D.R.: Recent Developments in Shotcrete Technology - A Materials Engineering


Perspective, presented at "The World of Concrete '88", February 7 - 11, 1988, Las Vegas,
Nevada, USA.

[55] Morgan, D.R.: Shotcrete Repair of Infrastructure. Institute for Research in Construction
and Science Council of B.C. SPARK, Seminar on Repair and Restoration of Concrete
Structures, Vancouver, B.C., March 2, 1990.

[56] Morgan, D.R.: Steel Fiber Shotcrete for Rehabilitation


Transportation Research Record 1003, Transportation Research Board, National Research
Council, Washington D.C., 1984.

[57] Morgan, D.R.: Steel Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete for Suppor


Canada, in: Concrete International. Nov. 1991.

[58] Murray, M.A.: Reclamation of a Failing Parking Garage,


Vol. 14, No. 9, September 1992.

[59] Muszynski, L.C.: Durability of Expedient Repair Materials. Report, Applied Research
Associates, Panama City, FL, 1993.

[60] March, A.: Large Scale Testing of Shotcrete, in: Shotcrete for Un
Proceedings of the Foundation Conference, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Canada, May 2-6 1993,
published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.

[61] Pink, Allan: Concrete in Tunnels, in: Civ. Eng. (London). Sept. 1987.

[62] Poston, R.W., McCarthy, D.J., Schupack, M . : Repair of Wire-Wound


Concrete Tanks, in: Concrete International. Vol. 14, No. 3, March 1992.

[63] Saucier, K . L . : Placing Specialized Concretes, in: Concrete Internation

[64] Schrader, E. K.: Deterioration and Repair of Concrete in the Lower Monumental
Navigation Lock Wall: Final Report, June 1981, NTIS-No. AD-A101 635/1/HDM.

[65] Schrader, E.K.: Mistakes, Misconceptions and Controv


Concrete and Concrete Repair, in: Concrete International. Vol. 14
1992.

152
[66] Schupack, M . , Randall, W.P.: Durability of Prestressed Concret
International. October 1989.

[67] Seabrook, P.T.: Durability of Shotcrete, in: Concrete International. August

[68] Seegebrecht, G.W., and others: Durability of Dry-Mix Shotcre


International. October 1989.

[69] Shaw, J.D.N.: Concrete Decay, Causes and Remedies,


No. 1, Jan/Feb 1993.

[70] Shotcreting. ACI-SP-14.1966.

[71] Skarendahl, Ake: Improving Performance of Steel Fiber Shotcrete. Swedish Cement and
Concrete Research Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, 1991.

[72] Spritzbeton-Technologie. Berichtsband der 3.Internationalen Fachtagung Innsbruck-Igls.


18. + 19. Januar 1990. Institut fur Baustofflehre und Materialprufung der Universitat
Innsbruck, Austria, 1990.

[73] Talbot, Caroline, et al: Influence of Surface Preparation on Long-Term Bonding of


Shotcrete. in: ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 91, No. 6, Nov./Dec. 1994.

[74] Tork, Andres: Rehabilitation of Prestressed Concrete Bo


Expressway, in: Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering. February 1989.

[75] Uchida, Y., Minematsu, T.: Application for Repair Work of Fibe
Using Jet Cement, in: Advanced Cements and Chemically Bonded Ceramics. To
1988, Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, USA, 1989.

[76] Vanderwalle, M . : What does bring ductility to Steel Fibe


Shotcrete for Underground Support VI. Proceedings of the Foundation Conference,
Niagara-on-the-Lake, Canada, May 2-6 1993, published by the American Society of Civil
Engineers, New York.

[77] Vondran: Applications of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concr


Nov. 1991.

[78] Wolsiefer, J., Morgan, D.R.: Silica Fume in Shotcrete, in: Concrete Int
15, No. 4, April 1993.

[79] Zellers, R.C.: High Volume Applications of Collated Fibril


R.N.Swamy, B.Barr: Fibre Reinforced Cements and Concretes: Recent Developments.
Cardiff, U.K., Elsevier Applied Science, Crown House, Barking, Essex, UK, 1989.

153
8.3 Codes, Standards, Recommendations

8.3.1 Canadian

[80] CAN3 - A266.1 - M78: Air Entraining Mixtures for Concrete.

[81] CAN3 - A266.2 - M78: Chemical Admixtures for Concrete.

[82] CAN3 - A266.3 - M78: Pozzolanic Mineral Admixtures for Use in Portland Cement
Concrete.

[83] CAN3 - A266.4 - M78: Guidelines for the Use of Admixtures in Concrete.

[84] CAN3 - A266.5 - M81: Guidelines for the Use of Superplasticizing Admixtures in
Concrete. Preliminary Standard.

[85] CAN3 - A266.6 - M85: Superplasticizing Admixtures for Concrete.

[86] CAN3 - A5 - M83: Portland Cements.

[87] CAN/CSA - 23.1 - M90: Concrete Material and Methods of Concrete Construction.

[88] CAN/CSA - 23.1 - M94: Concrete Material and Methods of Concrete Construction.

[89] CAN/CSA - 23.2 - M90: Methods of Test for Concrete.

[90] CAN/CSA - 23.2 - M94: Methods of Test for Concrete.

8.3.2 U.S.

[91] ACI Committee 201: Guide for Making a Condition Survey of Concrete in Service. ACI
201.1R-68, in: ACI Manual of Concrete Practice 1991, Part 1, Detroit, Michigan, 1991.

[92] ACI: Guide to Certification of Shotcrete Nozzlemen. 506.3R-82, Detroit, 1982.

[93] ACI Committee 201: Guide to Durable Concrete. ACI 201.2R-77, in: ACI Manual of
Concrete Practice 1991, Part 1, Detroit, Michigan, 1991.

[94] ACI Committee 506: Guide to Shotcrete. ACI 506 R-90.

[95] ACI Committee 506: Recommended Practice for Shotcreting. ACI 506-66.

[96] ACI Committee 506: State-of-the-Art Report on Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete. ACI 506.1
R-84; Detroit, 1984.

154
97] ACI Committee 311: ACI Manual of Concrete Inspection. 8th edition, ACI, Detroit 1992.

98] ACI: Specification for Materials. Proportioning, and Application of Shotcrete, ACI
506.2-77(83); Detroit, 1983.

99] ACI: Specification for Shotcrete. ACI 506R-90; Detroit, 1990.

100] ACI: State-of-the-Art Report on Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete. ACI 506. lR-84(89); Detroit,
1989.

101] A S T M C39-86: Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete
Specimens.

102] A S T M C215-91: Standard Test Method for Fundamental Transverse. Longitudinal, and
Torsional Frequencies of Concrete Specimens.

103] A S T M C457-90: Standard Test Method for Microscopical Determination of Parameters of


the Air-Void System in Hardened Concrete.

104] A S T M C597-83: Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity Through Concrete.

105] A S T M C642-90: Standard Test Method for Specific Gravity. Absorption, and Voids in
Hardened Concrete.

106] US Army Corps of Engineers: Evaluation and Repair of Concrete Structures.


Engineering Manual No. 1110-2-2002, Washington, D.C, 1986.

107] US Army Corps of Engineers: Standard Practice for Shotcrete Structures. Engineering
Manual No. 1110-2-2005, Washington, D.C, 1993.

8.3.3 Others

108] Deutscher AusschuC fur Stahlbeton: Richtlinie fur Schutz und Instandsetzung von
Betonbauteilen; August 1990, Berlin, Germany.

109] Deutscher Beton-Verein: Merkblatt Stahlfaserspritzbeton; Februar 1984, Wiesbaden,


Germany.

110] Deutscher Beton-Verein: Sicherheitsregeln fur Betonspritzmaschinen; 1979, Bonn,


Germany.

lll]Deutsches Institut Fur Normung: DIN 18314. Spritzbetonarbeiten; VOB, September


1988, Berlin, Germany.

112]Deutsches Institut Fur Normung: DIN 18551. Spritzbeton. Herstellung und


Giiteuberwachung; Marz 1992, Berlin, Germany.

155
[113] Durability of Shotcrete Rehabilitation Treatments of Bridges in Canada, published by the
Canadian Strategic Highway Research Program, Ottawa, 1991.

[114] Recommended Practice for Shotcrete Repair of Highway Bridges, published by the
Canadian Strategic Highway Research Program, Ottawa, 1991.

8.4 Company Records, Manuals

[115] BCHydro: File 419.1506.0.7 - Buntzen Lake Dam. Comprehensive Inspection and
Review. Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1985, 1991.

[116] BCHydro: Drawing 422-C02-U8 - Stave Blind Slough Dam. Concrete Repair Areas.
Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1985.

[117] BCHydro: File 422.1506.0.7 - Stave Falls Dam. Comprehensive Inspection and Review.
Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1993.

[118] BCHydro: File 422.1506.1 - Stave Blind Slough Dam. Construction Report on Dam
Rehabilitation. Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1986.

[119]BCHydro: File 423.1506.0.7 - Ruskin Dam. Comprehensive Inspection and Review.


Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1986.

[120] BCHydro: File 544.1506.0.7 - Jordan River Diversion Dam. Comprehensive Inspection
and Review. Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1985.

[121] BCHydro: File 544.1506.0.9 - Jordan River Diversion. 1989/91 Rehabilitation Project
Completion Report. Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1991.

[122] BCHydro: File 544.1506.010.1 - Concrete Cores from Jordan River Dam Site.
Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1959.

[123] BCHydro: File 544; 1506.010.1 - Concrete Testing and Evaluation. Report.
Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1986.

[124] BCHydro: File 544.1506.010.1 - Report on Deck Slab Treatment Test Program.
Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1970.

[125] BC Hydro: File 620.1506.1.3 - 1969-1972 Resurfacing of La Joie Dam.


Civil&Transmission Archive Edmonds, 1972.

[126] B C Hydro: File A3 524 - Stave Falls Power Developments. Edmonds Library A02, 1924.

[127]C2622 Geotest Sonometer with Oscilloscope. Manual, Geotest Instrument Corp.


Evanston, Illinois, 1991.
156
[128] HBT AGRA: File VA-00722, Concrete Test Protocols 1970. Jordan River Dam. Burnaby,
1970.

[129] HBT AGRA: File VA-00722, Memo from International Power and Engineering
Consultants Ltd.. Burnaby.

[130] HBT AGRA: Project VX-00119-001, Inspection Report. Burnaby, 1989.

[131] HBT AGRA: Project VX-00119-001. Test Protocols. Burnaby. 1990.10.9., 1990.10.15.

[132]Powertech Labs.: Project No. 4810-34-00, Buntzen Lake Concrete Investigation. Surrey,
July 1993.

[133] Powertech Labs.: Project No. 5362-34, Evaluation of Shotcrete Repairs at BC Hydro
Dams. Surrey, 1994.

[134] Pundit Manual. C.N.S. Instruments Ltd., London, U.K.

[135] Schmidt Hammer Manual. Proceq Co., Switzerland.

8.5 Unpublished References

[136] Armelin, H.S., Helene, P.: Physical and Mechanical Properties of Steel-Fiber Reinforced
Dry-Mix Shotcrete. Sao Paulo, Brazil, 1993.

[137] Armelin, H.S.: Private Communication. University of British Columbia, Department of


Civil Engineering, Materials Group, 1994.

[138]Banthia, N., et al: Steel Fiber Reinforced Shotcrete: Comparisons with Cast Concrete.
University of British Columbia, 1993. Recently published in: Journal of Materials In Civil
Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 6, No. 3, August 1994.

[139] B C Hydro: Burnaby Mountain Weather Office, Weather Recordings. Private


Communication, 1993.

[140] B.C. Hydro: Inter-office Memo from "Surrey Research", Project 4898.1-84, C170-M7,
1985.

[141] Duke, Neil: Private Communication. Target Products, Vancouver, 1994.

[142] Eilau, J.: BC Hydro Shotcrete Projects. Personal File Collection. Burnaby, 1994.

[143] Eilau, J.: Private Communication. Burnaby, 1993.08.24.

157
[144] Morgan D.R.: Private Communication. HBT AGRA, Burnaby, April 1994.

[145] Kemp, B.: Private Communication. BC Hydro, Burnaby, 1994.

[146] Warner, James: All about shotcrete: paper, Mariaposa, California, 1993.
Appendix A - Typical Frost Events

Typical Frost Events for Buntzen Dam

Nine distinguishablefrostevents were modelled for the climate at Buntzen Dam.

Table 1: Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B l


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
[°C] ra per 10 years
0 2 2
1 2 -2
2 3 -3 9
3 2 -2
4 2 0

Table 2: Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B2


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events

0
r°ci 5
rci 5
per 10 years

1 5 2
2 0 -4
3 5 -3 6
4 10 -6
5 5 3

Table 3: Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B3


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
[°C] [°C] per 10 years
0 2 2
1 3 -2
2 3 -2 7
3 3 -2
4 2 2

159
Table 4 : Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B4
Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra ra per 10 years
0 3 3
1 1 -1
2 1 -2
3 1 -3 16
4 1 -3
5 1 -2
6 1 -1
7 3 3

Table 5: Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B5


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra ra per 10 years
0 2 2
1 5 0
2 -5 -10
3 -5 -10 6
4 -5 -10
5 5 -5
6 5 -5
7 2 2

Table 6: Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B6


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra PC] per 10 years
0 3 3
1 1 -1
2 1 -1
3 1 -1 3
4 1 -1
5 1 -1
6 0 0

160
Table 7: Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B7
Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
r°ci ra per 10 years
0 3 3
1 -2 -6
2 -3 -8
3 -3 -8
4 -3 -8
5 -3 -8 6
6 -2 -6
7 -2 -6
8 0 -6
9 1 -4
10 0 0

Table 8: Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B8


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra ra per 10 years
0 3 3
1 5 ' -1
2 5 -1 55
3 5 -1
4 3 3

Table 9: Buntzen Dam, Frost Event B9, Isolated Night Frost, Temperature > -3 °C:
87 events per 10 years.

161
Typical Frost Events for Stave Dam and Ruskin Dam

Ten distinguishable frost events were modelled for the climate at Stave and Ruskin Dam.

Table 11: Stave Dam, Ruskin Dam, Frost Event SR2


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra ra per 10 years
0 5 5
1 5 2
2 0 -4 2
3 5 -3
4 10 -6
5 5 3

Table 12: Stave Dam, luskin Dam, Frost Event SR3


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra ra per 10 years
0 2 2
1 3 -2
2 3 -2 5
3 3 -2
4 2 2

Table 13: Stave Dam, Ruskin Dam, Frost Event SR5


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra ra per 10 years
0 3 3
1 5 -1
2 5 -1 13
3 5 -1
4 3 3

162
Table 14: Stave Dam, Ruskin Dam, Frost Event SR6
Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra [°C] per 10 years
0 5 5
1 0 -5
2 -10 -15
3 -10 -15
4 -5 -15
5 0 -7
6 5 -7
7 5 -7 8
8 5 -7
9 5 -7
10 10 -5
11 10 -5
12 10 -5
13 5 -2
14 5 -2
15 2 • 2

Table 15: Stave Dam, luskin Dam, Frost Event SR7


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
[°C] per 10 years
0 r°ci 5 5
1 10 -5
2 10 -5 2
3 5 5

163
Table 16: Stave Dam, Luskin Dam, Frost Event SR8
Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra r°ci per 10 years
0 2 2
1 3 0
2 2 -3
3 -1 -4
4 0 -4
5 0 -5
6 -1 -6
7 -1 -6 7
8 -2 -6
9 -2 -8
10 -2 -8
11 -2 -8
12 -2 -8
13 2 -4
14 1 0
15 3 3

Table 17: Stave Dam, luskin Dam, Frost Event SR9


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra [°C] per 10 years
0 5 5
1 10 -1
2 10 -2
3 10 -3 13
4 10 -2
5 10 -1
6 5 5

Table 18: Stave Dam, Luskin Dam, Frost Event SR10


Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra ra per 10 years
0 3 3
T 0 -3
2 0 -3 6
3 0 -3
4 3 3

164
Table 19: Stave Dam, Ruskin Dam, Frost Event SR11
Day Max Temperature Min. Temperature Events
ra ra p e r 10 y e a r s

0 2 2
1 2 -4
2 2 -4 8
3 2 -4
4 2 -4
5 2 2

Table20: Stave Dam, Ruskin Dam, Frost Event SR12, Isolated Night Frost,
Temperature > -3 °C: 103 events per 10 years.

165
Appendix B - Test Results

Field Testing
Table 1: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests. Stave Dam

Location Material Pulse Velocity [km/s]

SI mainly original concrete 3.0-4.4

Bl mainly original concrete 3.7-4.4

B4 mainly original concrete 4.1

B4A mainly original concrete 4.1

Table 2: Schmidt Hammer Tests. Stave Dam


Correlated Compressive
Location, Material Schmidt Hammer Reading
Strength [MPa]

SI, Original Concrete 35 -37.4 27 -31

B l , Shotcrete 35.3 -42.8 28-39

B3, Shotcrete 33.7 26

B4, Shotcrete 41.6 37

D4, Delaminated Shotcrete 26.9 16

Table 3: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests. Buntzen Dam

Location Material Pulse Velocity [km/s]

B5 ordinary concrete + shotcrete 3.1-3.7

B6 ordinary concrete + shotcrete 1.9-3.0

B7 mostly shotcrete 3.5-4.3

Table 4: Schmidt Hammer Tests, Buntzen Dam

Location Schmidt Hammer Reading Correlated Compressive


Strength [MPa]

B6 37.3 31

37.6 31

166
Table 5: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocirsr Tests, Ruskin Dam, Step Wall

Location Material Pulse Velocity [km/s]

R4 shotcrete max. 4.6

R6 shotcrete max. 3.1

R7 shotcrete max. 3.0

R8 shotcrete max. 4.9

Table 6: Schmidt Hammer Tests. Ruskin Dam, Step Wall


Location Schmidt Hammer Reading Correlated Compressive
Strength [MPa]

R4 44.6-50.1 41-51

R5 40.1 -53.1 34-56

R6 32.0-51.5 23-53

R7 40.9 - 50.5 36-52

R8 32.1 -43.6 23-41

Table 7: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocityl Tests, Jordan Dam, Upstream Side

Location Material Pulse Velocity [km/s]

J5-J6 shotcrete 4.6

J5-J7 shotcrete 4.6

J6-J7 shotcrete 4.5

J6-J8 shotcrete 3.8

J7-J8 shotcrete 4.3

Table 8: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests. Jordan Dam, Buttresses

Location Material Pulse Velocity [km/s]

J1-J2 shotcrete 4.3

J1-J3 shotcrete 4.7

J2-J3 shotcrete 4.5


4.5-4.7
' Jll shotcrete

167
Table 9: Schmidt Hammer Tests. Jordan Dam

Location Schmidt Hammer Reading Correlated Compressive


Strength [MPa]

JIO 43.0 - 48.0 39-48

Jll 45.0 43

J12 48.0 48

J13 47.0 46

Buttress 15 45.0 43

Buttress 13 46.0 - 47.0 44-46

Buttress 16 49.0 49

Buttress 24 48.0 48

The Schmidt hammer readings given in Table 9 were already multiplied by a correction factor of 1.1.
The correction factor was introduced after an instrument calibration succeeded the field tests at Jordan
Dam.
Laboratory Testing
Table 10: Core Specimens. Stave Dam

Sample Material Fracture through

SI oc oc, 0-15 mm beneath sc

Bl oc + sc none

D1A oc + sc deteriorated oc

D2 oc + sc oc near sc

B3 oc + sc none

D3 oc + sc oc, 5-20 mm beneath sc

B4 oc + sc none

D4 oc + sc oc-sc interface

oc = ordinary concrete, substrate, sc = shotcrete

Table 11: Air Content Determination of Sample B4. Stave Dam

Property Unit Value

Cement Paste Content 1%] 32.5

Air Content [%1 6.2

Void Frequency [1/mm] = [mm ] -1


0.16
7 3 i
Specific Surface [mm /mm ] = [mm ] 10.6

Spacing Factor [mm] 0.45

Table 12: Boiled Absorption TeststASTM C642). Stave Samples (ASTM C642)

Sample Material Air Voids Absorption


[%] [%]

Dl shotcrete 18.0 8.1

B4A ordinary concrete 16.7 7.2


Table 13: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. Stave Dam. Original Concrete

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Dam Face [km/s]

SI perpendicular 4.0

Bl perpendicular 3.3

D2 perpendicular 3.9

B4 perpendicular 3.6

Table 14: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. Stave Dam. Shotcrete

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Dam Face [km/s]

Dl parallel 4.2

B4A parallel 4.2

Table 15: Tensile Bond Strength. Stave Dam

Sample Bond Strength Fracture through


[MPa]

B4 0.2 80 % oc, 20 % oc-sc interface

B4A 0.1
oc = original concrete
sc = shotcrete

Table 16: Air Content Determination of Shotcrete Sample B6. Buntzen Dam

Property Unit Value

Cement Paste Content [%] 32.4

Air Content [%] 5.6

Void Frequency [1/mm] = [mm''' 0.07


7 3 i
Specific Surface [mm /mm ] = [mm ] 5.3

Spacing Factor [mm] 0.93


Table 17: Boiled Absorption TestsfASTM C642), Buntzen Samples (ASTM C642)

Sample Material Air Voids Absorption


[%] ro,a

B6 shotcrete 19.5 9.0

D6 shotcrete 17.2 7.8

D7 shotcrete 18.4 8.5

Table 18: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. Buntzen Dam. Shotcrete

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Dam Face [km/s]

D5 parallel 3.4

B7 parallel 3.5

Table 19: Tensile Bond Strength. Buntzen Dam

Sample Bond Strength Fracture through


[MPa]

B7 1.4 30 % oc-sc interface, 70 % sc


oc = original concrete, sc = shotcrete

Table 20: Dynamic Modulus. Ruskin Dam

Sample Vibration Mode Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity


[GPa]

D5, original concrete longitudinal 24

D7, original concrete longitudinal 38

D7, original concrete torsional 34

Table 21: Sorptivity Tests of Shotcrete Samples. Stave Dam

Sample Sorptivity Coefficient

Inside Face Outside Face


[g/min - ]0 5
[g/min - ]
0 5

D7 2.13 2.22
Table 22: Fractures in Core Specimens. Ruskin Dam

Sample Material Fracture through

RBI oc + sc oc, 5-50 mm beneath sc

RD1 oc + sc oc, close to sc

RW1 oc + sc oc, close to sc

RB2 oc + sc, from spillway oc, 10 - 30 mm beneath sc

RD2 oc + sc, from spillway 50 % oc paste, 50 % oc-sc


interface, broken deliberately
during coring

RD3 oc + sc, from spillway oc, about 50 mm beneath sc,


broken deliberately during
coring operation

R4 oc + sc 50 % oc, 50 % oc-sc interface

R5 oc + sc 80 % oc, 20 % oc-sc interface

R6 oc + sc 80 % oc, 20 % oc-sc interface

R7 oc + sc 90 % oc, aggreg.-paste
interface,
10 % oc and 1 small aggreg.

R8 oc + sc 90 % sc-oc interface,
10 % oc, around aggreg.
oc = ordinary concrete, substrate
sc = shotcrete
aggreg. = aggregate

Table 23: Air Content Determination of Sample RD2. Ruskin Dam. Spillway

Property Unit Value

Cement Paste Content [%] 40.6

Air Content [%1 4.8

Void Frequency [1/mm] = [mm'l] 0.09

Specific Surface [mm /mm ] = [mm ] 7.5

Spacing Factor [mm] 0.79


Table 24: Boiled Absorption Tests(ASTM C642). Ruskin Samples (ASTM C642)

Sample Material Air Voids Absorption


[%]

RD1 shotcrete 14.8 6.6

RBI shotcrete 13.0 5.7

RW1 shotcrete 14.3 6.3

RD2-II shotcrete 12.8 5.6

RB2 shotcrete 14.6 6.5

RD3 shotcrete 11.2 4.9

R5 shotcrete 15.5 6.8

R6 shotcrete 13.6 6.0

R7 shotcrete 15.1 6.7

Table 25: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. Ruskin Dam. Original Concrete

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Dam Face [km/s]

RD1 perpendicular 5.1

RW1 perpendicular 5.5

R4 parallel 4.2

R4 perpendicular 5.1

R5 parallel 4.7

R5 perpendicular 5.1

R6 parallel 4.7

R6 perpendicular 4.8

R7 parallel 4.7-4.8

R8 parallel 4.2
Table 26: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity, Ruskin Dam. Shotcrete

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Vertical Dam Face [km/s]

RBI perpendicular 4.7

RD1 parallel 4.5

RD1 perpendicular 4.4

RW1 perpendicular 4.2

RB2 parallel 4.4 - 4.6

RB2 perpendicular 4.4

RD2 parallel 4.6

RD3 perpendicular 4.7

R4 parallel 4.0-4.2

R5 parallel 4.4

R5 perpendicular 4.4

R6 parallel 4.4

R7 parallel 4.4

R7 perpendicular 4.6

R8 parallel 4.3

Table 27: Tensile Bond Strength, Ruskin Dam

Sample Bond Strength Fracture through


[MPa]

RB2 0.4 90 % oc, 10 % oc-sc interface

RD3 1.5 40 % oc, 40 % oc-sc interface,


20 % sc

(RD2) (1.8) (sc - tensile strength test)

oc = original concrete
sc = shotcrete

Table 28: Compressive Strength Tests, Ruskin Dam, Spillway

Sample Compressive Strength [MPa] Fracture Mode

RD2, shotcrete 59 X

RB2, shotcrete >60 none, machine limit exceeded


Table 29: Dynamic Modulus. Ruskin Dam

Sample Vibration Mode Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity


[GPa]

RB2, shotcrete 22

RD3, shotcrete 28

Table 30: Sorptivity Tests of Shotcrete Samples. Ruskin Dam

Sample Sorptivity Coefficient

Inside Face Outside Face


[g/min - ] 0 5
[g/min ] 05

RW1 0.67 0.56

RB2 0.58 0.37

RD3 0.66 0.42

R6 0.90 0.55

R7 0.57 0.54

Table 31: Core Specimens. Jordan Dam. Upstream Face

Sample Material Fracture through

J5 oc + sc none

J6 oc + sc none

J7 oc + sc none

J8 oc + sc none
oc = ordinary concrete, substrate
sc = shotcrete

Table 32: Air Content Determination of Sample J5 . Jordan Dam. Upstream Side. Shotcrete 1969

Property Unit Value

Cement Paste Content [%] 37.6

Air Content [%] 1.9

Void Frequency [1/mm] = [mm"'! 0.04


9 3 1
Specific Surface [mm /mm ] = [mm ] 8.5

Spacing Factor [mm] 1.00


Table 33: Boiled Absorption TestsCASTM C642). Jordan Upstream Samples 1969

Sample Material Air Voids Absorption


[%] [%]

J8 shotcrete 15.8 6.8

J8 ordinary concrete 20.5 . 8.9

Table 34: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. Jordan Dam. Upstream Face. Original Concrete

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Vertical Dam Face [km/s]

J5 parallel 4.2

J6 parallel 3.9

J7 parallel 4.5

J8 parallel 4.3

J8 perpendicular 4.6

Table 35: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. Jordan Dam, Upstream Side. Shotcrete

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Vertical Dam Face [km/s]

J5 perpendicular 4.1-4.2

J6 perpendicular 3.9

J7 perpendicular 4.1

J8 perpendicular 4.3

Table 36: Tensile Bond Strength, Jordan Dam, Upstream Side

Sample Bond Strength Fracture through


[MPa]

J5 0.7 sc

J6 1.3 sc

J7 0.4 85 % oc-sc interface, 15 % sc


oc = original concrete
sc = shotcrete

176
Table 37: Sorptivity Tests. Jordan Dam, Upstream Side. Shotcrete 1969

Sample Sorptivity Coefficient

Inside Face Outside Face


[g/min ] 05
[g/min ] 05

J5 1.25 0.86

Table 38: Core Specimen. Jordan Dam, Buttresses. Shotcrete 1970

Sample Material Fracture through

J12 oc + sc 80 % oc, 20 % oc-sc interface

J13 oc + sc none
oc = ordinary concrete, substrate
sc = shotcrete

Table 39: Air Content Determina tion of Sample J12 , Jordan Dam, Buttresses. Shotcrete 1970

Property Unit Value

Cement Paste Content [%] 39.0

Air Content [%] 2.6

Void Frequency [1/mm] = [mm"*] 0.19


9 3 i
Specific Surface [mm /mm ] = [mm ] 29.5

Spacing Factor [mm] 0.26

Table 40: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. Jordan Dam. Buttresses. Shotcrete 1970

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Vertical Dam Face [km/s]

J12 parallel 4.6

177
i
Table 41: Core Specimens. Jordan Dam, Buttresses, Shotcrete 1990

Sample Material Fracture through

Jl oc + sc none

J2 oc + sc none

J3 oc + sc none

J4 oc none

JIO oc + sc none

Jll oc + sc none

(Patchwork) oc + conventional patching patching material deteriorated


mortar
oc = ordinary concrete, substrate
sc = shotcrete

Table 42: Air Content Determination of Sample JIO, Jordan Dam, Buttresses. Shotcrete 1990

Property Unit Value

Cement Paste Content [%] 35.0

Air Content [%] 4.0

Void Frequency [1/mm] = [mm"'' 0.35


9 -J i
Specific Surface [mm /mm ] = [mm ] 35.7

Spacing Factor [mm] 0.17

Table 43: Boiled Absorption Tests(ASTM C642), Jordan Downstream Samples 1990

Sample Material Air Voids Absorption


ro/.i [%]

J3 original concrete 22.0 9.8

Jll shotcrete 13.4 5.6


Table 44: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity. Jordan Dam, Buttresses, Original Concrete

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Dam Face [km/s]

Jl perpendicular 3.8

J2 perpendicular 4.6

J3 perpendicular 4.4

J4 perpendicular 4.1

J10 perpendicular 4.4

Table 45: Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity, Jordan Dam. Buttresses. Shotcrete 1990

Sample Direction of Sound Path with Pulse Velocity (50 kHz)


Respect to Dam Face [km/s]

J2 parallel 4.1

J3 parallel 4.4

J10 parallel 4.4

Jll parallel 4.5

Table 46: Tensile Bond Strength. Jordan Dam. Buttresses. Shotcrete 1990

Sample Bond Strength Fracture through


[MPa]

Jl 0.7 90 % oc, 10 % oc-sc interface

J2 0.5 oc, 1.5 mm from oc-sc interface

J3 0.5 95 % oc, 5 % oc-sc interface

J10 1.1 oc
oc = original concrete
sc = shotcrete

Table 47: Sorptivity Tests. Jordan Dam. Buttresses. Shotcrete 1990

Sample Sorptivity Coefficient

Inside Face Outside Face


[g/min ] 05
[g/min - ]
0 5

Jll 0.99 0.71


Appendix C - Photographs

Stave Dam

Photo 1: Stave Dam, Pier 1, Shotcrete.


Hatched area delaminated.
Note: Drain pipes in delaminated areas,
vertical crack below right fence post.

180
Photo 2: Stave Dam, Retaining Wall, Shotcrete.
Delaminated area hatched.
Note: Horizontal crack along lower edge of shotcrete,
deteriorating shotcrete on horizontal edge below parapet.
Photo 3: Stave Dam, Retaining Wall, Shotcrete.
Typical Core Hole.
Note: Freeze-thaw deteriorated substrate concrete behind (dark) shotcrete.

182
Buntzen Dam

Photo 4: Buntzen Dam, Downstream Face, Intake Structure in Center.

183
Photo 5: Buntzen Dam, Downstream Face, Shotcrete.
Delaminated areas hatched, cracks outlined yellow.
Photo 6: Buntzen Dam, Downstream Face, Shotcrete.
Part of intake structure in upper right corner, delaminated areas hatched, cracks outlined yellow.
Note: Crack in shotcrete extending downward from the intake structure's lower left corner.
Photo 7: Buntzen Dam, Downstream Face.
Delaminated shotcrete hatched.
Note: Gap between shotcrete layer and stairs.

186
Ruskin Dam

Photo 8: Ruskin Dam, Downstream Face.


Spillways shotcreted, piers original concrete.

187
188
Photo 10: Ruskin Dam, Step Wall, Typical Core Sample.
Units of ruler: Inches (top), millimeters (bottom).
Note: Deteriorated substrate concrete (left) below shotcrete (right).

189
Photo 11: Ruskin Dam, Detail of Core Sample from Step Wall, Substrate Concrete.
Note: White calcium carbonate deposits, chemical reaction between deposit and hydrochloric acid
center right.

190
Photo 12: Ruskin Dam, Saw Cut across Shotcrete Core Sample from Step Wall.
Note: Spraying shadow caused by wire mesh.

191
Jordan River Diversion Dam, Upstream Face

192
Photo 14: Jordan Dam, Upstream Face.
Coring operation in progress.

193
Photo 15: Jordan Dam, Upstream Face, Typical Core Sample.
Substrate concrete left, shotcrete right.
Meter rod units are centimeters.
Note: Porous substrate concrete, dense shotcrete, shotcrete bonds well to substrate.
Photo 16: Jordan Dam, Upstream Face, Detail of Polished Shotcrete Sample.
Magnification about 60 times.
Note: Cement paste attacked by freeze-thaw cycles, micro-cracks made visible by blue dye,
depicted deterioration not typical for shotcrete.
Jordan River Diversion Dam, Downstream Face / Buttresses

Photo 17: Jordan Dam, Downstream Face.


Spillway in foreground, main dam in background.

196
197
198
Photo 20: Jordan Dam, Buttresses, Shotcrete from 1970.
Note: Shrinkage cracking, marking for coring (sample J13).
Photo 21: Jordan Dam, Buttresses, Typical Core Samples.
Top: substrate concrete, bottom: wet-mix shotcrete from 1990; scale units are inches.
Note: Purple colour from carbonation test, purple concrete = alkaline cement paste,
weak or no colour reaction = carbonated cement paste.
Photo 22: Jordan Dam, Buttresses, Conventional Patching Mortar.
Note: Patching mortar delaminated, marking for coring sample.

201

You might also like