You are on page 1of 60



In Accordance with the 2! C"C

Prepared by

SEAONC Construction Quality Assurance Committee
July 2013



Board of Directors, 2012201!

Grace Kang, President
Colin Blaney, Vice President
Darrick Hom, Treasurer
Ian Aiken, Director
Sarah Billington, Director
ichael Gemmill, Director
!alterio "o#e$, Director
Taryn !illiams, Director
Peter "ee, Past President


Documents #roduced %y the Structural &ngineers Association o' (orthern Cali'ornia )S&A*(C+ are
#u%lished as #art o' our association,s educational #rogram- !hile the in'ormation #resented in the
document is %elie.ed to %e correct, neither S&A*(C nor its Board, committees, /riters, editors, or
indi.iduals /ho ha.e contri%uted to this document make any /arranty, e0#ressed or im#lied, or assume
any legal lia%ility or res#onsi%ility 'or the use, a##lication o', and1or re'erence to o#inions, 'indings,
conclusions, or recommendations e0#ressed herein- The material #resented in this document should not %e
used or relied u#on 'or any s#eci'ic a##lication /ithout com#etent e0amination and .eri'ication o' its
accuracy, suita%ility, and a##lica%ility %y 2uali'ied #ro'essionals- 3sers o' in'ormation 'rom this document
assume all lia%ility arising 'rom such use-

Structural Engineers Association of Northern California
4 5678 S&A*(C

All rights reser.ed- This document or any #art thereo' may not %e re#roduced in any 'orm /ithout the
/ritten #ermission o' S&A*(C-



G$ide"i%es for Re&ie'i%( Co%crete )i* Desi(%s
I% Accorda%ce 'it+ t+e 2010 CBC

575 Market Street, Suite 2125
San Francisc, CA !"1#5$2%7#
&'ne( )"15* !7"$51"7 Fa+( )"15* 7,"$"!15
E-ai.( //ice0seanc1r2

T'ese 2ui6e.ines 5ere 5ritten 78 -e-7ers /
t'e SEAONC Cnstructin 9ua.it8 Assurance C--ittee1

Construction Quality Assurance Committee
Terr8 E2.an6, C$C'air 2#12$2#1:
Rss Es/an6iari, C$C'air 2#12$2#1:
Mark Gi..i2an, C'air 2#1#$2#11
Ti- Hart, C'air 2##5$2##%, 2##!$2#1#

;incent An6ra6a
<a-es Auser
=ruce Carter
Cru> Car.s
Art ?e..
Lucie Fu2ner
?a@i6 McCr-ick
Sa-ue. Tan
Airk Barnck


I% Accorda%ce 'it+ t+e 2010 CBC

Ta/"e of Co%te%ts

I1 Intr6uctin 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1
II1 &rcess 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1
III1 Li-itatins / Su7-itta. Re@ie5s 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 5

A33en6i+ A C Anntate6 Sa-3.e Su7-itta. ?cu-ents
?iscussins an6 Re/erences
A33en6i+ = C &er/r-ance an6 C6e Cnsi6eratins /r Mi+ ?esi2ns
A33en6i+ C C S3eci/icatins
A33en6i+ ? C Re@ie5 / Mi+ ?esi2n Stren2t's
A33en6i+ E C ?e/initins an6 Ter-in.28
A33en6i+ F C Re/erence ?cu-ents
A33en6i+ G C A22re2ate Re3rt

I% Accorda%ce 'it+ t+e 2010 CBC


T'is 6cu-ent 5as 6e@e.3e6 78 t'e Structura. En2ineers Assciatin / Nrt'ern Ca.i/rnia
)SEAONC* Cnstructin 9ua.it8 Assurance C--ittee1 T'e 3ur3se / t'is 6cu-ent is t ser@e as a
resurce t structura. en2ineers in t'e re@ie5 / cncrete -i+ 6esi2n su7-itta.s1

It s'u.6 7e e-3'asi>e6 t'at t'e su22estins, rec--en6atins, an6 c--entar8 6iscusse6 in t'is
6cu-ent are //ere6 in an a6@isr8 ca3acit8 n.8 an6 re/.ect t'e 3inin s.e.8 / t'e aut'rs1 T'is
6cu-ent 6es nt 6e/ine a stan6ar6 / 3ractice1

In Accordance with the !"! C#C

I. Introduction
Concrete mix designs are submitted for review so that the reviewer can verify the contractor is
interpreting the construction documents correctly. These guidelines were developed to assist the
engineer reviewing concrete mix designs. The main body of the guidelines focuses on the
process of reviewing the mix design. The appendices provide a discussion of performance issues
and code requirements for concrete as well as a discussion of what typically is considered when
writing the project specification sections for concrete, and examples of how these specifications
are typically organized.

The user is encouraged to review the performance and code considerations discussed in this
document during the development of construction documents. The discussion of specification
issues in ppendix C could then be utilized by the user to ensure that the construction documents
fully define the project requirements. Ta!ing these proactive steps is encouraged with the hope
that doing so will result in a smooth review process where the contractor is more li!ely to submit
compliant designs and the reviewer is more li!ely to spend less time verifying the adequacy of
the submitted mix designs.

These guidelines do not ma!e recommendations regarding specific project decisions but instead
provide information to assist in ma!ing the decisions.

"f questions are raised during the review process the reviewer will find the appendices a useful
source of bac!ground information that will either answer the questions or that will help him#her
to understand the issues. These guidelines ma!e no attempt to provide all the information that
the reviewer will possibly need but are intended to help identify issues that are li!ely to be
relevant for building projects. The merican Concrete "nstitute $C"% Manual of Concrete
Practice is often a good place to start when more information is needed. The &ortland Cement
ssociation $&C% publication Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures is also a useful

II. Process
t the start of the construction administration phase, it is a good idea to discuss the schedule for
submission of concrete mix designs with the contractor in order to convey to him or her the
importance of timely submittals so that there is adequate time for review and for the contractor to
provide supplemental information needed in response to the review. 'ometimes pre(construction
meetings can help communicate the need to submit more complete submittals early.

The reviewer should have the project plans and specifications available for review. "t is
recommended that the reviewer also have available a copy of C" )1* + Building Code
Requirements for Structural Concrete, which includes the building code requirements for

concrete mixes. "t is also helpful to have handy copies of the standards referenced in the project
specifications and in C" )1*.

"f mix designs are submitted for wor! specified by multiple design professionals $e.g., civil
wor!% each design professional specifying concrete mixes should ma!e it clear which mix
designs they have reviewed. -otifying the prime design professional that some of the mix
designs submitted are for wor! specified by other consultants can allow the other consultants to
perform their review in parallel. .here multiple consultants are reviewing the same mix designs
or are commenting on the same components coordination of comments can be beneficial.

'ome project construction documents require the general contractor to stamp and sign each
submittal to indicate that he#she has reviewed and coordinated the submittal with the other wor!.
.hen this is a requirement, verify if this has been done and if not notify the design professional
in responsible charge.

The first step of the review process is to verify that the submittal is complete and responsive.
This can be accomplished by answering the following questions/

re the submittal requirements listed in &art 1 of the specifications complied with0
1ave all of the mix designs specified for the project been submitted0
"s it clear which mix design applies to which concrete elements or class of concrete used
on the project0

"f the submittal is obviously incomplete the reviewer should consider returning it without further
review. lternately the reviewer could notify concerned parties so that the contractor can be
given the opportunity to provide the missing information before the submittal needs to be
returned, hopefully eliminating the need to require the resubmission of the submittal. .hen the
missing information cannot be promptly provided it may be necessary to return the submittal
with a request for the missing information in order to comply with the contract requirements for
prompt processing of submittals.

"f mix designs are not provided for all concrete that will be used on the project, the reviewer may
choose to identify the mix designs that still need to be submitted.

The focus of a mix design review is on whether the mix design conforms to the requirements in
the construction documents. This is because the building code states that the construction
documents are to be used as the basis of code compliance and because they are assumed to
reflect the owner2s performance objectives. This does not mean that the reviewer ignores
situations where the construction documents may conflict with the code or have other defects but
if such a situation were to occur this typically would require that a revision to the documents be

Traditionally the submittal would be reviewed in the following order/

3ix design4

1istorical test data or trial batch test data4
3ill reports for cementitious materials4
Certifications and test results for concrete components.

5uring the mix design review some of the basic requirements that should be verified include/

Concrete compressive strengths4
'lump or slump flow4
.ater cementitious material ratio $w#cm%4
Type of cement4
Coarse aggregate size and source if specified4
&roportions of supplementary cementitious materials4
Concrete density4
'pecified admixtures are used and prohibited admixtures are not used4
dditional properties and material requirements in the specifications such as entrained air
content, limitations on total chlorides, or other durability or exposure criteria.

.hen reviewing the historical data the reviewer should verify that enough tests have been
provided to establish a standard deviation and the required average compressive strength. "f a
satisfactory strength history is not provided then laboratory trial batch data will be needed to
substantiate the mix performance. 6efer to ppendix 5 for a discussion of the process of
verifying concrete strengths.

ppendix contains sample submittal documents with annotations that help identify some of
the items commonly addressed in the review along with information to help understand the
contents of the document and provide help in reviewing the submittal. ppendix not only
addresses the mix design and strength test results but also data on the components of the mix
design. &ertinent items are identified and discussed briefly with references to more in(depth
discussion in the ppendices. The annotations do not necessarily identify all of the items that
should be reviewed.

"t is generally not necessary to chec! the detailed calculations on the mix design summary sheet
or the historical test data. The data provided should be reviewed to see if anything appears
unusual or suspicious. "f specified parameters are not reported but can be easily computed the
reviewer may decide to calculate them, thus eliminating the need to request a resubmittal.
7xamples would include the water#cementitious material ratio and the percent of slag cement, fly
ash or other supplementary cementitious materials.

.hen test reports present the test data and then ma!e an affirmative statement that the material
complies with the specified standard as well as the appropriate supplemental properties it is
typically not necessary to verify that the individual test values conform to the standard. .hen
test data is provided but no statement is made regarding compliance with the specified standard
caution should be exercised since occasionally suppliers will just submit the data when they
!now that the material does not conform to some aspect of the standard. .hen in doubt it may

be appropriate for the reviewer to request an affirmative statement as to compliance from the

"f information is provided in the mix design submittal that is beyond what is required by the
construction documents then it is normally not reviewed, although the reviewer may want to
chec! with the prime design professional and the contractor prior to returning any submittals
with un(reviewed information. "n cases where alternative mix designs that were not specified are
provided, the engineer has the prerogative to not review these submittals. The reviewer should
note that the alternative mix designs were not reviewed.

"f problems are found during the review it is often desirable to tal! with the contractor or
concrete supplier to either resolve the problem or to develop a strategy to resolve the problem if
project protocols allow. ll such communications should be coordinated with the prime design

9pon completion of the mix design review the reviewer will typically affix the submittal stamp
to each submittal and return the submittal according to the project requirements.

:ocus of 6eview

The review of a concrete mix design should focus on three !ey issues/

1. 5oes the mix meet the performance requirements of the specifications with respect to
strength and other characteristics such as shrin!age, permeability, w#cm ratio, etc.0
,. "s the historical or trial batch test data adequate to justify the strength0
). 5o the materials used comply with the project requirements as evidenced by test results,
certifications, and product data0

:ollow up

fter the completion of the mix design review the accepted mix designs need to be provided to
the concrete special inspector to verify the use of the required design mix per "tem ; of C<C
Table 1=>8.8.

"t is expected that the special inspector will use the mix number and other information on the mix
design to verify that the concrete mix provided is the mix design that was reviewed.

6eviews to 3odified 3ixes

"f a concrete mix design is modified after it has been reviewed the engineer will need to decide
whether it needs to be re(reviewed and if so the extent of the review. "f a mix design is modified,
care should be exercised to verify exactly what was changed if an abbreviated review is


III. Limitations of Submittal Reviews
3ix design submittals and their reviews are limited in their ability to assure performance of the
in place concrete. 'ome of the limitations include/

"n the months between the times the material is tested and when the concrete is batched
there may be variations in the product.
There is great flexibility in selecting the concrete mixes whose historical test results are
used to establish the standard deviation.
The batching, delivery, and testing of concrete are subject to variation.
Curing and environmental conditions will impact rate of strength gain and ultimate
concrete strength.




The following sample documents are representative of what is often submitted and as a result
may not fully address all of the necessary information for a specific project. It should also be
noted that there is no one standard format for presenting the information requested, thus the
reviewer may have to study the document to understand what is and is not provided.

!"#!$%T% &I' (%)I*#

1. !hec, the project name to verify that the mi- design is intended for use on this project.
. It should be clear which elements in the project this mi- design will be used for. If it is
unclear where the mi- design will be used the reviewer can request clarification before
returning the submittal or return the submittal with a request for clarification.
.. /erify that the concrete compressive strength equals or e-ceeds the specified value. 0$ef.
Appendi- ! )ection 1.123
4. /erify that the design slump does not e-ceed the specified value. If tolerances are listed
in the submittal verify that they comply with the construction documents. 0$ef. Appendi-
! )ection 1.42
5. /erify the air content 0air content as a percentage of concrete volume2 if limits are
specified. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection 1.1123
6. /erify that the water cementitious materials ratio 0w7cm2 does not e-ceed specified value.
The w7cm in this e-ample equals 8.7 044691182, which is the weight of water divided
by weight of cementitious materials. The water cement ratio is no longer used. 0$ef.
Appendi- ! )ection 1.523
:. /erify that the types of cementitious materials comply with the specifications. 0$ef.
Appendi- ! )ections 1.6 and !.23 In this e-ample it is unclear what type of fly ash the
mi- design was based on so clarification should be requested.
8. /erify that the nominal ma-imum coarse aggregate si;e complies with the specified
limits and the values in the submitted aggregate test report. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection
<. /erify that the admi-tures used are consistent with the project specifications and matches
the submitted admi-ture data. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection 1.123
1=. /erify that the unit weight complies with the specifications. >or light weight mi-es
verify dry weight or equilibrium density. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection 1.2
11. /erify that the percentage of supplemental cementitious materials 0)!&s2 is consistent
with minimum and ma-imum percentages specified. This is calculated as the weight of
the )!&s divided by the weight of the cementitious materials+ 1187 011894462 ? =.<@.
0$ef. Appendi- ! )ections 1.6 and !.2
1. Aggregate weights are based on saturated surface dry condition 0))(2, which implies
that at batching the water added will depend on the actual moisture content of the

If limits on total chloride content are specified chec, chloride content against the limits. #ote
that chlorides are not reported for this mi- design. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection 1.<2

3If the contractor was given e-posure category classifications and then e-pected to sort out the
mi- properties it may be necessary to verify that the properties comply with the requirements in
!hapter 4 of A!I .18 in addition to the values specified in the construction documents.




>I%A( )T$%#*TB T%)T $%!"$(
1. A!I .18 !hapter 5 requires concrete to be proportioned on the basis of field e-perience
0often Chistorical test dataD or Cfield strength test recordD2, trial mi-tures 0often Ctrial
batchesD2 or both. The field strength test record can be used to determine a standard
deviation for a batch plant 0which is then used to determine the Crequired average
compressive strengthD E see below2, and to demonstrate that the mi- will produce
concrete with the required average compressive strength. The Crequired average
compressive strengthD fF
is always greater than the specified strength in order to limit
the probability that strength tests during construction will fall below the specified
strength. It is either a function of the standard deviation determined from a field strength
test record 0A!I .18, G5....12, or determined more conservatively on the basis of
specified compressive strength in accordance with A!I .18 Table 5.....
. This field strength test record shows .= test results for the actual mi- proposed. If results
from a similar mi- are submitted 0for e-ample, when data from the actual mi- are not
available2 the record should identify those mi-es. )ee Appendi- ( for a discussion of the
A!I procedures for documenting concrete mi- proportions on the basis of compressive
.. A!I .18, G5...1 now requires that the test record be no more than 1 months old.
4. .= consecutive tests or two groups of consecutive tests totaling at least .= tests are
always acceptable per A!I .18, G5...1.1 for determining the standard deviation. Test
records of no less than 15 tests can also be used, although the standard deviation must be
factored upward per A!I .18 Table 5...1., thus increasing the required average
compressive strength. >or documenting the actual mi- proportions, the test record may
include as few as 1= tests 0A!I .18, G5.....12.
5. A strength test is the average of two cylinder brea,s when 6 by 1 in. cylinders are used
and three when 4 by 8 in. cylinders are used. The test record submitted may not include
the results of the individual brea,s.
6. As there are .= tests in this record, the modification factor 0see #ote 4 above2 to be
applied to the standard deviation is 1.
:. The average compressive strength and the standard deviation are the ,ey pieces of data
derived from the test record.
8. The standard deviation, s
, calculated from the strength test record is then used in the two
formulae 0)ee #ote < below2 from A!I .18, Table 5....1 to determine fF
. The larger
value is used.
<. The formulae for concrete with a specified compressive strength less than or equal to
5,=== psi are shown and applied. The modification factor 0&>2 is ta,en as 1 as discussed
above. The average compressive strength of the test record is found to be greater than the
calculated required average strength fF
. Thus, the mi- has been appropriately qualified
and documented with respect to compressive strength.
1=. The data in these columns are of interest only with respect to documenting the strength
test data but are not required for the mi- design review. &any field strength test records
will not include this information.
11. The data in these columns present interesting information for the contractor or ready-mi-
supplier, but are not required for the mi- design review.

>I%A( )T$%#*TB T%)T $%!"$(

? 4=== psi

? fF
9 ...s
0&>2 E 5== psi ? 44.< psi H 486< psi ",

? fF
9 1..4s
0&>2 ? 454= psi H 486< psi ",
10 10 11 11 10 10


T$IAA &I'TI$% T%)TI#*

1. A!I .18 !hapter 5 requires concrete to be proportioned on the basis of field e-perience
0often Chistorical test dataD or Cfield strength test recordD2, trial mi-tures 0often Ctrial
batchesD2 or both. Trial mi-tures can be used alone or along with a field strength test
record to establish the standard deviation for a batch plant. Although not shown here, the
trial mi-ture test report should also include the mi-ture proportions and the test results for
each of the trial mi-tures.
. %arlier editions of A!I .18 required trial mi-tures to include three different water-
cementitious material ratios 0w7cm2 selected to encompass the required compressive
strength. In order to account for the more common use of supplemental cementitious
materials, A!I .18-=8 )ection 5..... no longer requires tests based solely on variations
in water-cementitious material ratio and no longer specifies three mi-tures. Trial
mi-tures are now required to simply include a Crange of proportions.D Bowever, the
three-point curves shown here are still commonly used as part of the justification for
qualifying a mi- based on trial mi-tures or, when accepted by the design professional, as
the justification for accepting a mi- based on A!I .18 )ection 5.4.
.. The 8-day curve is the curve used to qualify the mi- proportions with respect to
compressive strength. This curve shows the best fit for three data points from trial
mi-tures with w7cm ratios of =..8, =.46, and =.6=.
4. The Crequired average compressive strengthD fF
is either a function of the standard
deviation determined from a field strength test record 0A!I .18, G5....12 or determined
more conservatively on the basis of specified compressive strength in accordance with
A!I .18 Table 5..... Although the three point curve shown here is intended to
represent %-cellent $eady &i- !ompanyFs &i- 6=4===, for which we have already seen
a field strength test record including a calculation of the standard deviation, here it is
assumed that no such record is available and the required average strength is 5,== psi in
accordance with A!I .18 Table 5.....
5. The dotted lines show that in order to achieve 5,== psi, the w7cm should be no greater
than =.5.

$efer to Appendi- ( of these *uidelines for a more complete e-planation of the A!I procedures
for documenting concrete mi- proportions on the basis of compressive strength.



T$IAA &I'TI$% T%)TI#*



!"A$)% A**$%*AT% !%$TI>I!ATI"#7 T%)T $%J"$T

1. /erify that the test report is reasonably current and in conformance with any time limits
listed in the specifications. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection A.2
. /erify that the aggregate is same as the aggregate used in the mi- design.
.. /erify that there is an affirmative statement that the material conforms to the standard
listed in the specifications.
4. If the al,ali-silica reactivity is not innocuous then chec, the specifications to see if any
limits were placed on the A)$ classification. There are several different tests for
evaluating A)$ potential and some individuals prefer to require certain tests. /erify the
specified test0s2 is referenced. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection 1.8 and !.42
5. Aggregate gradation need only be verified when the project specifications require
specific gradation requirements.
6. If a cleanness requirement is included in the specifications, verify that the cleanness value
e-ceeds the minimum value specified for the test. !altrans Test &ethod : is the
standard used in this e-ample. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection !.42

/erify that evidence is provided of conformance of other aggregate properties listed in the
specifications besides what is noted above.




>I#% A**$%*AT% T%)T $%J"$T

1. /erify that the test report is reasonably current and in conformance with any time limits
listed in the specifications. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection A.2
. The sand source should agree with the sand listed in the mi- design.
.. /erify that there is an affirmative statement that the material conforms to the standard
listed in the specifications or verify that listed values comply with the allowed ranges for
the standard.
4. If the al,ali-silica reactivity is not innocuous chec, then the specifications to see if any
limits were placed on the A)$ classification. There are several different tests for
evaluating A)$ potential and some individuals prefer to require certain tests. /erify that
the specified test0s2 is referenced. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ections 1.8 and !..2
5. Aggregate gradation need only be verified when the project specifications require
specific gradation requirements.
6. If a sand equivalent requirement is included in the specifications, verify that the sand
equivalent value e-ceeds the minimum value specified for the test. !altrans Test &ethod
1: is the standard used in this e-ample. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection !..2

/erify that evidence is provided of conformance of other aggregate properties listed in the
specifications besides what is listed above.





!%&%#T &IAA !%$TI>I!ATI"#7T%)T $%!"$(

1. /erify that the test report is reasonably current so that it would be representative of
current product. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection A.2
. /erify that the listed standard matches the standard listed in the specifications.
.. /erify that the reported cement type conforms to the project specifications and agrees
with the type listed in the concrete mi- design. 0$ef. Appendi- ! )ection !.12
4. !omparison of the reported test values against the values defined in the A)T& standard
is not normally done unless there is reason for concern.
5. This list shows all of the standards for cement that this test record conforms to. The data
listed is only for A)T& !15=. If A)T& !115: cement was specified a different mill
certificate indicating those specification limits would be provided.


1234 Address Street
City, State Zip
Tel: (000) 123-4567
Fax: (000) !0-1234
Ce"e#t $de#ti%ied as: &ate: 01'01'2011
(la#t: Ce"e#t C)"pa#y
*)+ati)#: City, State
(r)d,+ti)# &ates: -e.i##i#. /)#t0 &ay, 1ear
2#di#. /)#t0 &ay, 1ear 3e%ere#+e 4)5 40702 /
AST/ C 150
Sili+)# &i)xide (Si62), 9 /i#i"," 5: 5: 5: 2051
Al,"i#," 6xide (Al263), 9 /axi"," :5 650 :5 357
Ferri+ 6xide (Fe263), 9 /axi"," :5 650 :5 356
Cal+i," 6xide (Ca6), 9 :5 :5 :5 625!
/a.#esi," 6xide (/.6), 9 /axi"," 650 650 650 457
S,l%,r Tri)xide (S63), 9;; /axi"," 350 350 253 257
*)ss )# $.#iti)# (*6$), 9 /axi"," 350 350 350 15!
$#s)l,<le 3esid,e, = /axi"," 0575 0575 0575 052
S)di," 6xide (4a26), 9 :5 :5 :5 0522
()tassi," 6xide (>26), 9 :5 :5 :5 0542
2?,i@ale#t AlAalis (4a26B565>26), 9 /axi"," 0560 0560 05!0 0550
C62 (9) :5 :5 :5 153
*i"est)#e (9) /axi"," 550 550 550 350
CaC63 i# *i"est)#e /i#i"," 7050 7050 7050 !7
$#)r.a#i+ (r)+ess Additi)# (9) /axi"," 550 550 550 050
Tri+al+i," Sili+ate (C3S), 9 :5 :5 :5 5!
&i+al+i," Sili+ate (C2S), 9 :5 :5 :5 13
Tri+al+i," Al,"i#ate (C3A), 9 /axi"," :5 5 4
Tetra+al+i," Al,"i#)%errite (C4AF), 9 :5 :5 :5 11
Ceat $#dex (C3S B 4575 C3A), 9 100 77
(C4AF B 2C3A) )r (C4AF B C3F), 9 /axi"," :5 :5 25 1
(C1S$CA* 32D8$32/24TS
Ceat )% Cydrati)# (AST/ C 16) $#%)r"ati)#al data )#ly
7 days, AE'A. (+al'.) /)st re+e#t @al,e 327(751)
(AST/ C 204) -lai#e Fi#e#ess, +"
'." /i#i"," 2600 2600 2600 3!00
(AST/ C 430) F325 /es0, 9 :5 :5 :5 !655
(AST/ C 1!1) Ti"e )% Setti#. (7i+at)
$#itial Set, "i#,tes /i#i"," 45 45 45 116
Fi#al Set, "i#,tes /axi"," 375 375 375 213
(AST/ C 451) False set, 9 /i#i"," 50 50 50 !
(AST/ C 15) Air C)#te#t, 9 /axi"," 12 12 12 555
(AST/ C 151) A,t)+la@e 2xpa#si)#, 9 /axi"," 050 050 050 0513
(AST/ C 17) 4)r"al C)#siste#+y, 9 :5 :5 :5 2553
(AST/ C 103) 2xpa#si)# i# Gater 9 /axi"," 05020 05020 05020 0500
(AST/ C 10!) C)"pressi@e Stre#.t0, psi (/(a)
1 &ay :5 :5 :5 2300(155!)
3 &ay /i#i"," 1740(1250) 1450(1050) 1160(50) 4000(2756)
7 &ay /i#i"," 2760(1!50) 2470(1750) 210(1550) 4!!0(3454)
2 day (stre#.t0 %r)" pre+edi#. ")#t0) /i#i"," :5 :5 3050(2150) 6310(4355)
** The performance of CEMENT COMPANY Type II/V has proven to be improved ith s!"f!r trio#ide "eve"s in e#cess of the $%&' "imit for
Type V% Note ( in A)TM C*+,- a""os for additiona" s!"fate. provided e#pansion as meas!red by A)TM C*+-&/ does not e#ceed -%-$-'%
C2/24T C6/(A41 0ere<y +erti%ies t0at t0is +e"e#t "eets )r ex+eeds t0e
+0e"i+al a#d p0ysi+al spe+i%i+ati)#s )%:

AST/ C-150-0! Type $, Type $$, a#d Type 7 *)H AlAali p)rtla#d +e"e#ts
AST/ C-1157-0a Type I8 Cydra,li+ Ce"e#t
Caltra#s, Se+ti)# !0-2501 Type $$ /)di%ied a#d Type 7

D,ality C)#tr)l /
C2/24T C6/(A41 F City Ce"e#t (la#t
1234 Address Street, City, STAT2 Z$(



1. Verif t!at t!e test re"ort is reasona#$ %&rrent so t!at it 'o&$( #e re"resentati)e of
%&rrent "ro(&%t. *Ref. A""en(i+ C Se%tion A.,-
,. Verif t!at t!e $iste( stan(ar( .at%!es t!e stan(ar( $iste( in t!e s"e%ifi%ations an( t!e
%on%rete .i+ (esi/n s&#.itte(. If t!e s"e%ifi%ations (efine %onstraints on t!e f$ as! t"e
)erif t!at t!e re"orte( f$ as! t"e is a%%e"ta#$e.
0. Co."arison of t!e re"orte( test )a$&es a/ainst t!e a%%e"ta#$e )a$&es $iste( in t!e
s"e%ifi%ation is not nor.a$$ (one &n$ess t!ere is reason for %on%ern.

If a((itiona$ .ateria$ re1&ire.ents for f$ as! are $iste( in t!e "ro2e%t s"e%ifi%ations3 s&%! as $oss
on i/nition3 t!e s&#.itta$ s!o&$( #e %!e%4e( to )erif t!at t!ese re1&ire.ents !a)e #een
%o."$ie( 'it!.


ASTM C618 Testing of
Jim Bridger Fly Ash
Sample Type: 3200-ton Report Date: 01/01/2011
Sample Date: MM/DD MM/DD/YY MTRF ID 647JB
Sample ID: BR!""##T
ASTM $imits ASTM Test
%hemi&al A'alysis %lass F %lass % Meth(d
Si$i%on Dio+i(e *SiO,- 67.489
A$&.in&. O+i(e *A$,O0- 18.859
Iron O+i(e *Fe,O0- 4.059
S&. of Constit&ents 80.689 :7.79 .in 57.79 .in D40,6
S&$f&r Trio+i(e *SO0- 7.6,9 5.79 .a+ 5.79 .a+ D40,6
Ca$%i&. O+i(e *CaO- 5.689 D40,6
;oist&re 7.759 0.79 .a+ 0.79 .a+ C011
Loss on I/nition 7.5:9 6.79 .a+ 6.79 .a+ C011
Tota$ A$4a$ies3 as Na,O 0.,<9 59 .a+ Ca$trans AASHTO T175
)hysi&al A'alysis

Fineness3 9 retaine( on =0,5 ,1.,79 049 .a+ 049 .a+ C0113 C407
Stren/t! A%ti)it In(e+ > : or ,8 (a re1&ire.ent C0113 C17<
: (a3 9 of %ontro$ 869 :59 .in :59 .in
,8 (a3 9 of %ontro$ 8<9 :59 .in :59 .in
?ater Re1&ire.ent3 9 %ontro$ <59 1759 .a+ 1759 .a+
A&to%$a)e So&n(ness 7.709 7.89 .a+ 7.89 .a+ C0113 C151
Tr&e @arti%$e Densit ,.06
FLY ASH CO;@ANY %ertifies t!at "&rs&ant to %&rrent AST; C618 "roto%o$ for testin/3 t!e test (ata $iste( !erein
'as /enerate( # a""$i%a#$e AST; .et!o(s an( .eets t!e re1&ire.ents of AST; C618 for C$ass F f$ as!.

First na.e Last na.e
;TRF ;ana/er

Materials Testi'g * Resear&h Fa&ility
#"+4 Address Street
%ity, State -I)
Tel: .!!!/ #"+4067
Fa1: .!!!/ 23!#"+4




1. Verif t!e a(.i+t&re %o."$ies 'it! t!e s"e%ifi%ation re1&ire.ents an( .at%!es t!e
a(.i+t&re $iste( in t!e %on%rete .i+ (esi/n. If t!e a(.i+t&re is s"e%ifie( # na.e in t!e
"ro2e%t s"e%ifi%ations )erif t!at a na.e( "ro(&%t is "ro)i(e(. If t!e a(.i+t&re is
s"e%ifie( on$ # t!e AST; stan(ar( in t!e "ro2e%t s"e%ifi%ations3 )erif t!at t!e
stan(ar( $iste( !ere .at%!es '!at is s"e%ifie(.

If t!e s"e%ifi%ations .a4e "ro)isions for a""ro)e( e1&a$s '!en t!e a(.i+t&re 'as
s"e%ifie( # na.e #&t a non-$iste( "ro(&%t 'as s&#.itte( t!e re)ie'er 'i$$ nee( to
%onsi(er '!et!er to a""ro)e t!e "ro(&%t. ?!en .a4in/ t!e (eter.ination '!et!er t!e
"ro(&%t is an a""ro)e( e1&a$ %onsi(eration s!o&$( #e /i)en to t!e stan(ar(s in t!e
s"e%ifi%ations as 'e$$ as to "ro"erties of t!e $iste( a(.i+t&res t!at .a not !a)e #een
e+"$i%it$ $iste(. *Ref. A""en(i+ C se%tion D.1,-

,. Verif t!at t!e %a$%i&. %!$ori(e $i.itations as s"e%ifie( are satisfie(. *Ref. A""en(i+ C
Se%tion D.<-

Stri%t$ s"ea4in/ t!e "ro(&%t $iterat&re is not a test re"ort #&t t!e &se of t!is $iterat&re in t!is for.
%onstit&tes a "ro.ise t!at t!e "ro(&%t &se( 'i$$ !a)e t!e $iste( "ro"erties.



ABC Concrete Products
WRA 521
ASTM C494 Type A and D
Water-reducing admixture

Product Description

WRA 521 is a poymer !ased a"ueous
soution o# compex organic compounds$
WRA 521 is a ready-to-use o% &iscosity i"uid
%'ic' is #actory pre-mixed in exact
proportion to minimi(e 'anding) eiminate
mista*es and guess%or*$ WRA 521 does not
contain cacium c'oride and %eig's
approximatey 11 !s$+ga$


WRA 521 produces a concrete %it' o%er
%ater content ,typicay 5 to 9- reduction.)
greater pasticity and 'ig'er strengt'$ /t is
used in ready-mix pants) !oc* and concrete
product pants) in ig't%eig't and prestressed
%or* %'ere&er concrete is produced$

WRA 521 aso per#orms especiay %e in
concrete containing #y as' and ot'er


T'e cement paste) or mortar) in WRA 521
admixtured concrete 'as impro&ed
tro%ea!iity$ T'e in#uence o# WRA 521 on
t'e #inis'a!iity o# ean mixes is particuary
noticea!e$ 0oating and tro%eing) !y
mac'ine or 'and imparts a smoot') cose
toerance sur#ace$

Addition Rates

T'e addition rate o# WRA 521 is 4 to
1 #$ o($+122 !s$ o# cement$ 3retesting is
re"uired to determine t'e appropriate
addition rate #or Type A and Type D
per#ormance$ 4ptimum addition depends
on t'e ot'er concrete mixture components)
5o! conditions and desired per#ormance

Compatibility with ther Admi!tures and
Batch "e#uencin$

WRA 521 is compati!e %it' most A6C
admixtures as ong as t'ey are added
separatey to t'e concrete mix) usuay
t'roug' t'e %ater 'oding tan* disc'arge
ine$ /n genera) it is recommended t'at WRA
521 !e added to t'e concrete mix near t'e
end o# t'e !atc' se"uence #or optimum

Product Ad%anta$es

/mpro&es per#ormance o# concrete
containing suppementary
cementitious materias
Consistent %ater reduction and set
3roduces concrete t'at is more
%or*a!e) easy to pace and #inis'
7ig' compressi&e and #exura


o o
n n
c c
r r
e e
t t
e e



The following appendices discuss issues to be considered when developing project specifications
as well as definitions and a list of documents referenced in these guidelines.



This appendix provides a summary of concrete performance and code issues that the engineer
may consider when developing the construction documents.

A. Appearance

The appearance of concrete is affected by finishing practices, form materials, cementitious
material types and amounts (i.e. such as white or grey cement, slag, fly ash and silica fume, the
incorporation of color pigments, and curing practices. Aggregate color and uniformity may be a
concern if the aggregate will be exposed.

!here appearance and uniformity of color is important the architect should be involved in
editing the concrete specifications and these issues should be discussed at a pre-placement
conference. The construction and approval of test panels may be re"uired when specific
appearances are desired. !hen consistency of finish is important consider re"uiring new test
panels when changes are made to the source of materials.

The need to provide uniformity in materials should be made explicitly clear to the contractor.

!hen a test panel is re"uired to verify appearance characteristics it supplements the mix design
review submittal.

B. !or#ability and $lacement

The concrete mix needs to be of a consistency such that it can be placed by the intended
methods, properly consolidated to prevent voids and segregation, and provided with the desired
finish. $lacement is influenced by the form geometry, the amount and location of reinforcing
steel, and the concrete properties such as aggregate si%e, aggregate gradation, and slump. The
common strategy is to give the contractor sufficient control over the details of the mix design to
ensure proper placement.

!hen the contractor is given the responsibility to proportion the concrete mix the engineer must
ma#e sure that he&she has not imposed constraints on the mix that create difficulties. 'ome
potential constraints that could cause problems are large maximum aggregate si%es, maximum
slumps that are too low, or not allowing the use of high range water-reducers (super plastici%ers
or self-consolidating concrete.

The need to control concrete temperature in mass concrete or during hot and cold weather will
often necessitate changes in the mix design. !hen temperature control is important the use of fly
ash, ice or chilled water, and the type of cementitious material are often ad(usted.


!hen the control of temperature is critical the contractor should be re"uired to submit a
placement and temperature control plan. 'uch plans may include provisions for heating or
cooling the concrete, the incorporation of suitable amounts of supplementary cementitious
materials, monitoring temperature differentials and protecting the concrete for extended periods
of time. !hile there is considerable overlap between the temperature control plan and concrete
mix designs, these guidelines do not offer additional guidance regarding the review of such

*ix design weights of aggregate and water are reported based on aggregates in saturated surface
dry condition (''+ and thus at time of batching the weights must be ad(usted for the actual
aggregate moisture condition.

,. +urability

The durability re"uirements of ,hapter - of A,. /10 may impose limitations on the types and
amounts of cementitious materials, water-cementitious material ratio (w&cm, free%e-thaw
resistance, and permeability or corrosion resistance.

+. 1conomic

,oncrete mix proportioning decisions, li#e all design decisions, are strongly influenced by
economic considerations. These economic concerns can include life cycle cost, initial cost and
schedule, and the impact on liability exposure. There may be no one right answer and the
appropriate decision will often be driven by pro(ect specific considerations.

A general strategy is to specify only what is needed, do not deviate from standard practice unless
there is a real need, specify generically when possible, and focus on specifying performance
ob(ectives as opposed to specifying prescriptively. This strategy promotes competition by
allowing the contractor to ma#e use of his special expertise to control pro(ect costs.

1. 'hrin#age

.f concrete shrin#age is a concern, two common strategies are to re"uire the concrete mix to meet
specific shrin#age limits or to indirectly control the shrin#age by placing limits on the mix
design and the materials used. 'etting specific shrin#age limits is attractive but because of
pro(ect time constraints and the lac# of historical shrin#age data for many mix designs this is
often not feasible. .t is recommended that the specifier adopt one of the strategies and not use
both approaches for the same concrete mix design.

!hen selecting the strategy to control drying shrin#age it is important to have realistic
expectations regarding the impact of the expected shrin#age, cost, and schedule impact.

At times concrete drying shrin#age may not be a ma(or concern depending on the building
configuration or the amount of reinforcing steel used in the sections. !ithout restraint, concrete

can shrin# without crac#ing and with enough reinforcing steel the crac#s may be small enough
that they will not create problems.

!hen evaluating the impact of drying shrin#age it is important to consider the se"uence of
construction and the rate of shrin#age. 'hrin#age is not linear with respect to time and little
shrin#age will occur in the first several wee#s. Thus pour (oints that cannot be left open for
several months may not have a significant impact on reducing shrin#age crac#ing.

The point is that it may not be necessary to pay a premium for low shrin#age concrete if the
building configuration does not provide restraint or if the reinforcing levels are high enough that
crac# si%es will be acceptably small.

!hen there are no shrin#age test results for the proposed concrete mix new tests would need to
be performed. The time needed to perform the necessary tests may not be compatible with the
pro(ect schedule. Thus this issue should be considered during design. This problem is
aggravated by the tendency of contractors to not worry about concrete submittals until shortly
before concrete is to be delivered to the (ob site, reducing the time available for testing.

!hen drying shrin#age limits are specified it is recommended to not also specify specific
aggregate sources and other material properties to try to limit shrin#age since this would limit the
supplier2s options. The specifications should re"uire that shrin#age test results be included with
the mix design submittal.

'hrin#age testing should be performed upon laboratory trial batches. 'pecifying field shrin#age
results are not appropriate because of the high variability of the initial curing conditions. .n
addition if higher than expected field shrin#age values are reported there are often no satisfactory
options to correct the field conditions. A'T* ,134 notes that the drying shrin#age test is
intended as a laboratory test and that specimens cast in the field may exhibit up to twice the
shrin#age of laboratory prepared specimens.

,oncrete shrin#age is influenced by many factors with the ma(or contributors being the volume
of cement paste and amount of water, followed by aggregate properties. 5or common structural
concrete mixes the contribution from the paste volume is relatively constant. The amount of
water needed is primarily driven by the aggregate si%e, particle shape, aggregate characteristics
and combined aggregate gradation. 6ther factors impacting the water demand for a mixture
include supplementary cementitious materials and admixtures. 6nce the amounts of water and
cementitious materials have been determined further reductions can be obtained by the use of
low shrin#age aggregate and shrin#age reducing admixtures.

The mineralogical character of the aggregates (i.e. stiffness and adsorption has a significant
impact upon the total drying shrin#age. .n a region where the aggregates have differing geologic
characteristics there can be significant differences between aggregate sources.

The cost of out of mar#et low shrin#age aggregates, specific aggregate sources, or the use of
shrin#age reducing admixtures can be substantial and can significantly affect the economics of a

pro(ect. .t is suggested that specifying a specific aggregate source be avoided unless the specifier
has intimate #nowledge of the materials, availability, and associated economics in the pro(ect
area. 'ome of the historically low shrin#age aggregate sources may no longer be available or
their characteristics may have changed because the aggregate from a specific pit may not have
the same properties as the aggregate tested years ago. The fact that a particular concrete plant
may not have access to specific aggregate sources may ma#e it impractical or difficult to utili%e a
specific aggregate source.

,oncrete shrin#age reducing admixtures reduce the effects of drying shrin#age by reducing the
surface tension of the water in the concrete pores. The surface tension of the water in the
concrete pores pulling the pores together is a significant factor in drying shrin#age.

5. Architectural ,onsiderations

.ncreasingly concrete mix properties are driven by architectural considerations in addition to the
physical properties discussed above. A common issue is the need to accommodate flooring or
roofing materials.

The focus on flooring materials applied to concrete is driven by a heightened awareness of
moisture transmission and the fact that currently available adhesives are not as effective as the
products used in the past. .n response to these concerns flooring manufacturers and others have
imposed criteria on the w&cm ratio of the concrete mix. Thus it is important to consult with the
architect to understand what these limits are. .n addition to controlling the w&cm ratio the use of
admixtures to reduce the flow of moisture through the concrete and the evaporation of moisture
from the concrete may be considered.

.n addition to structural or appearance considerations concrete admixtures have been developed
that improve the electrical conductivity of concrete and others that cause air pollutants to
precipitate out of the air.

7. 'ustainability

'ustainability considerations are becoming more prominent in concrete construction. 'ome of
the strategies that are used to reduce the environmental impacts and improve sustainability

The use of the thermal mass of concrete to minimi%e temperature variations and thus the
need to heat and cool the building.
The use of exposed concrete as the building finish, thus eliminating the need to add other
finish systems.
The use of slag or white cement to improve reflectivity and reduce lighting re"uirements.
.mproved solar reflectance reduces the heat load and can help to mitigate heat island

The use of photocatylitic cement on exterior surfaces to remove nitrogen oxides and other
atmospheric pollutants.
9educing the amount of cement to reduce the amount of carbon in the atmosphere
generated by cement production.
The use of slag, fly ash and other po%%olans to utili%e what would otherwise be
considered a waste product and to reduce the amount of cement re"uired.
9eusing crushed concrete or reclaimed aggregate as a portion of the aggregate in concrete

The ,alifornia 7reen Building 'tandards ,ode (:,A;7reen< includes provisions that re"uire
evidence of percentage reduction in concrete usage, the use of supplementary cementitious
materials, and the use of recycled concrete as aggregate. 9eference ,A;7reen 'ections
A-.-=/.), A-.-=3./, A3.-=3.-, and A3.-=3.3.

+ocumenting conformance with ,A;7reen 'ection A-.-=/.) can be difficult since it re"uires
)=> or )3> reduction in cement usage. The "uestion is how to measure this reduction in
cement usage. 6ne could show that )3> of the cementitious material was from fly ash or slag
but this could be achieved by adding fly ash to the mix without reducing the amount of cement.
The other option would be to compare the cement in the mix design to a comparable mix design
without fly ash or slag but that would re"uire the development of another mix design with
historical test data to (ustify the design.



Approaches to Specifying Concrete

The approach to specifying concrete has evolved over the years. In the 1970s concrete was
essentially coposed of coarse aggregate! sand! ceent! and water. In that era it was coon
for the engineer to specify the so"rces of aggregate! aggregate gradations! n"#er of sac$s of
ceent! and a%i" sl"p in addition to the concrete strength.

The prescriptive approach to specifying concrete in the 1970s wor$ed when the concrete
strength did not e%ceed & $si! the re#ar congestion was low! concerns a#o"t environental
e%pos"res were oderate! the car#on footprint of the concrete was not a concern! so"rces of
aterials were sta#le! and there was relatively little litigation when pro#les occ"rred.

In contrast to past practices is the c"rrent environent where concrete strength can e%ceed 10
$si! high re#ar congestion is coon! greater attention is paid to d"ra#ility and environental
e%pos"res! energy and environental concerns drive decisions! aterial so"rces are constantly
changing! and where litigation is coon. As a res"lt of these c"rrent practices concrete
specifications foc"s ore on the desired end res"lt! leaving it to the concrete s"pplier and
contractor to develop the i% design and to worry a#o"t wor$a#ility and placeent iss"es.

In response to these press"res and the need to $eep their prices down the 'ational (eady )i%ed
Concrete Association *'()CA+ la"nched the ,-, Initiative to proote a shift to perforance-
#ased concrete specifications. As a res"lt of this initiative the (eady )i%ed Concrete (esearch
and .d"cation /o"ndation has developed g"idelines for the perforance specification of
concrete. This initiative is a wor$ in progress.

,erforance-#ased specification of concrete is attractive to engineers #eca"se while they $now
the desired perforance characteristics ost engineers do not have e%pertise with concrete i%
design. In addition perforance-#ased specifications res"lt in the contractor #eing responsi#le
for the cost of resolving the pro#le if the concrete does not eet the perforance o#0ectives.
As a res"lt these g"idelines reflect a #ias in favor of perforance-#ased concrete specifications.

In an attept to inii1e the wor$ in specifying concrete i% designs individ"als will often
state that the i% design sho"ld coply with the #"ilding code. The introd"ction of ACI 213
states that this practice is not desira#le.

The intent of this appendi% is to help the specifier identify i% design iss"es that are coonly addressed in
concrete specifications. The specifier can then decide what iss"es are relevant for the c"rrent pro0ect. It is not the
intent of this appendi% to esta#lish technical criteria that is appropriate for partic"lar pro0ects.

In response to the growing tendency to specify perforance re4"ireents ACI has prod"ced
IT5-3(-10 Report on Performance Based Requirements for Concrete to help engineers
"nderstand the iss"es.

6rgani1ation of this Appendi%

This appendi% first disc"sses how constr"ction specifications are str"ct"red and where the
inforation will #e located. This is followed #y a disc"ssion of the technical content norally
addressed in the pro0ect specifications. This disc"ssion of the technical content first disc"sses
what is re4"ired to #e in the s"#ittal followed #y specification provisions related to i% design
properties and finally the specification provisions related to properties of the aterials incl"ded
in the i% design.

6rgani1ation of Inforation

Constr"ction doc"ents incl"de the drawings and the specifications. The drawings identify
eleents with respect to aterials and prod"cts! indicate relationships #etween eleents of the
pro0ect! provide inforation regarding location diensions and si1es! and provide details of
connections. Th"s the drawings will help define where the different i% designs will #e "sed.
The specifications define re4"ireents for aterials! wor$anship! and 4"ality ass"rance
proced"res! incl"ding s"#ittals for i% designs. It is iportant that the inforation shown in
the specifications and on the drawings #e coordinated so as not to create conflicts.

Any i% design re4"ireents that are intended to #e enforced need to #e stated on the
constr"ction doc"ents! either on the drawings or in the specifications. 7here there are 5eneral
'otes #"t no specifications special care sho"ld #e e%ercised to verify that the notes incl"de all of
the re4"ireents that will #e enforced. Siilarly the constr"ction doc"ents sho"ld not incl"de
provisions that the designers are not willing to enforce.

The separation #etween drawings and specifications is not a#sol"te. A coon e%aple of this
is when a ta#le is incl"ded in the drawings that correlates the type of concrete i% "sed for
different portions of the wor$ and indicates the i% design properties that are specific to each
i%. This approach can a$e it easier to coordinate the drawings and specifications #"t it is
iportant to a$e s"re that inforation incl"ded on the drawings does not conflict with the
inforation in the specifications. Inp"t fro a concrete s"pplier is that this approach "s"ally
res"lts in a ore coplete s"#ittal pac$age.

The technical specifications are divided into sections descri#ing different types of wor$. 6n
soe pro0ects there ay #e several specification sections that define concrete i%es. Soe
coon e%aples incl"de site concrete specified #y the pro0ect civil engineer and landscaping
concrete specified #y the landscape architect in addition to the #"ilding concrete specified #y the
str"ct"ral engineer. 7hen there are "ltiple specification sections specifying concrete it is
iportant that there is a coon "nderstanding of who is reviewing which i% design.


7hen there are "ltiple specification sections that specify concrete i%es consideration sho"ld
#e given d"ring design to coordinating these sections to allow the contractor to inii1e the
n"#er of i% designs. 7hen different specifications define concrete i% designs for concrete
that will #e visi#le in the copleted str"ct"re it ay #e appropriate to coordinate the
re4"ireents to ass"re that the different i%es will loo$ the sae.

In addition to the technical specification sections a"thored #y the engineer the prie design
professional will incl"de specification sections addressing topics s"ch as s"#ittal proced"res
and the handling of s"#stit"tions. The i% design reviewer sho"ld #e failiar with these
specification sections.

The individ"al specification sections are divided into 2 parts typically titled 5eneral! ,rod"cts!
and .%ec"tion.

,A(T 1 - 5eneral is where non-technical provisions s"ch as adinistrative! reg"latory!
and s"#ittal re4"ireents are listed. This is where any testing of so"rce aterials
wo"ld #e specified.

,A(T - - ,rod"cts is where the i% design re4"ireents and the aterial specifications
are defined.

,A(T 2 - .%ec"tion contains re4"ireents related to the #atching! transporting! and
placeent of the concrete. This part also contains testing and inspection activities
perfored d"ring constr"ction. Th"s the i% design review will not "s"ally "se the
inforation in this part.

Technical Content Coonly Addressed in Specifications

The foc"s of this section is on identifying inforation coonly provided in specifications
along with inforation to help the engineer deterine what to specify. 8ey iss"es are identified
and references to reso"rces are provided #"t it is not the intent to provide specific
recoendations on aterial properties or what sho"ld #e specified.

(eferences that the engineer ay find "sef"l incl"de9

ACI Manual of Concrete Practice
Guide to Improving Specifications for Ready Mixed Concrete! '()CA ,"#lication

A. S"#ittal (e4"ireents

The specifications need to spell o"t the contents of the s"#ittal in detail since there is no
code re4"ireent that the i% designs #e s"#itted for review nor that it #e reviewed #y
the engineer of record. Typically these re4"ireents are listed in ,A(T 1 of the


6nly re4"ire that inforation #e s"#itted that yo" intend to review. If inforation
needs to #e s"#itted to confir that soething was done #"t which yo" will not review
then it sho"ld designated as an inforational s"#ittal.

1. )i% :esign

The specifications sho"ld list all of the ites to #e incl"ded in the i% design
s"#ittal. The following are often re4"ired.
1. )i% identification #y eans of class or location where i% will #e "sed.
-. Strength of concrete.
2. Target sl"p or sl"p flow! w;c! density! and air content.
&. <ist of all aterials! adi%t"res! and additives along with their
=. 'oinal a%i" aggregate si1e and co#ined aggregate gradation
*percent passing on every sieve si1e+.
>. Calc"lations and test res"lts re4"ired #y ACI 213 Section =.2.
7. Shrin$age test res"lts when shrin$age liits are specified.
3. Test res"lts of total chloride content.
9. Inforation on concrete aterials as per Section &.1.-.2 of ACI 201.
10. /or lightweight aggregate s"#it test res"lts per AST) C220.
11. /or noral weight aggregate s"#it test res"lts per AST) C22! incl"ding
the cleanness val"e! sand e4"ivalent! and al$ali-silica reactivity *AS(+
potential and itigation! if re4"ired.
1-. )ill certificate for the ceent indicating the so"rce of the ceent and
copliance with the pro0ect specifications.
12. )ill analysis for s"ppleentary ceentitio"s aterials *incl"ding fly ash
and slag ceent+ and aggregates fro the an"fact"rer.
1&. Certification #y the an"fact"rers that the adi%t"res confor to
specified standards.
1=. 7hether i% is appropriate for p"ping.
1>. Theral control plan. 7hile this ay #e considered a separate s"#ittal
it sho"ld #e reviewed in con0"nction with the i% design s"#ittal.

-. )aterial Certificates and ,rod"ct :ata

<ist the aterial certificates and specific prod"ct data that yo" wish to see.
,rod"ct catalogs ay provide a lot of inforation #"t "nless they contain specific
inforation that will esta#lish that the prod"ct or aterial coplies with the

specification re4"ireents they need not #e provided for review. There is no need
for inforation that does not provide evidence of copliance with one of the
specification re4"ireents. If a prod"ct was specified #y #rand nae and or
prod"ct n"#er then re4"iring s"#ittal of a catalog sheet provides no #enefit or
added ass"rance.

It is not feasi#le for the aggregate and ceentitio"s aterial s"ppliers to provide
aterial certificates and test res"lts that are #ased on the act"al aterials that will
#e provided. Aggregate and ceentitio"s aterial test certificates "s"ally
represent the average res"lts for a partic"lar lot or period of prod"ction. It is not
"nreasona#le to re4"ire that the certificates and test res"lts are c"rrent and have
#een prod"ced within the last 1- onths. This will provide soe protection
against "nanticipated changes in the aterial so"rces.

Soeties concrete i% design s"#ittals will incl"de )aterial Safety :ata
Sheets *)S:S+ for the aterials in the i%. )S:S doc"ent the potential
environental and safety ha1ards associated with handling the aterials and the
preca"tions that wor$ers that are handling the aterials sho"ld ta$e to itigate
these ha1ards. 6S?A reg"lations re4"ire that an eployer! s"ch as a contractor!
#e infored a#o"t the ha1ards and $eep the on file on the 0o# site. Soe
owners ay re4"ire that the )S:S #e s"#itted to the. ?owever! #eca"se
)S:S sheets do not pertain to the perforance of the concrete and are o"tside of
the scope of the str"ct"ral engineers wor$ the engineer is not responsi#le for
reviewing these sheets. Instead! the engineer sho"ld note the as @not reviewedA
and ret"rn the witho"t a shop drawing stap or f"rther coent.

2. )an"fact"rers (ecoendations and Instr"ctions

In general an"fact"rers recoendations and instr"ctions are not reviewed #y
the design professionals #eca"se they are part of the contractors eans and
ethods and th"s are o"tside of the design teas scope. If they are s"#itted!
the reviewer sho"ld note that they were @not reviewedA and ret"rn the witho"t a
shop drawing stap or f"rther coent.

&. :SA;6S?,: Additional (e4"ireents

7hen the pro0ect is s"#0ect to the 0"risdiction of either :SA *8-1- schools+ or
6S?,: *hospitals+ the following re4"ireents sho"ld #e addressed in the

CBC Section 1902A.2 re4"ires the reporting of the percentage of total
ceentitio"s aterials for each type of ceentitio"s aterial "sed in the i%.

CBC Section 1902A.& prohi#its the "se of Class C fly ash. Also! if ore than
oderate ao"nts of slag ceent or fly ash are "sed! then the i% design

"st #e validated #ased on field e%perience or trial i%t"res. This liitation
does not appear to apply when the ceent is provided #y AST) C=9= and
AST) C11=7.

CBC Section 1902A.= re4"ires enforceent agency approval for deviations
fro aggregate si1e liitations. This section also re4"ires the testing for
reactivity "sing AST) C-39 if new aggregate so"rces are "sed or if pro#les
have #een reported. It is not clear how the engineer can deterine if this is a
new so"rce for the agency or if the agency #elieves pro#les have #een

CBC Section 190=A.1.1 re4"ires f
to #e greater than or e4"al to 2!000 psi.
This section also does not allow f
to #e greater than 3!000 psi witho"t special

CBC Section 190=A.- re4"ires a registered engineer to deterine the #asic
proportions of concrete i%t"re. 5iven that the acceptance criteria is
o#0ective it is not clear what additional constraints that the registered engineer
is e%pected to ipose.

=. <..: S"#ittals9

(e4"ire s"#ittals to incl"de doc"entation that verify copliance with <..:
re4"ireents! s"ch as the ceent and aggregates #e locally so"rced.

B. )i% design properties

The concrete i% properties need to #e specified for each class of concrete "sed on the
pro0ect. It is fairly coon practice to provide a ta#le of i% properties on the drawings
with the specifications providing ore detail on the individ"al properties.

1. Copressive Strength

Specify the copressive strength for each class of concrete. Indicate the age at
which the strength is re4"ired. /or e%aple! it ight #e 2 days for for reoval
or tendon stressing! => days for a i% with high vol"e fly ash *?C/A+ or -3! =>
or even 90 days for ass concrete applications. Be realistic in strength
e%pectations and avoid specifying high early strength for ?C/A applications.

A higher concrete copressive strength than re4"ired to carry the loads ay #e
re4"ired #y other criteria s"ch as w;c liitations! od"l"s of elasticity! and the
provisions of ACI 213 Section &.2 triggered #y the concrete e%pos"re.
(ecoendations in other ACI doc"ents and fro other so"rces ay also
ipact the ini" concrete strength specified.


Section 1.1.1 of ACI 213 sets a ini" copressive strength of -!=00 psi for
str"ct"ral concrete.

ACI 213-03 re4"ires that the strength tests records "sed to calc"late the standard
deviation and concrete strength #e no ore than 1- onths old. This creates
sit"ations where prod"cers are "na#le to esta#lish a standard deviation and "st
"se the higher overdesign val"es fro Ta#le =.2.-.1 to calc"late the re4"ired
average strength. This res"lts in higher ceentitio"s contents and higher cost
i%es. It is o"r "nderstanding that ACI 213 has reali1ed the pro#les with this
change and intends to revert #ac$ to the -& onth criteria.

Concrete prod"cers have a chronic pro#le in o#taining copies of the concrete
strength test res"lts fro past pro0ects and as a res"lt are at ties copelled to
design for higher target concrete strengths. The engineer is often liited in his or
her a#ility to copel that the res"lts fro the owners testing la#oratory #e
provided directly to the concrete s"pplier #eca"se all co"nication to the
contractor and his s"ppliers are typically thro"gh the contractor. 6ne approach to
this is to re4"ire evidence of copliance to AST) C9& which re4"ires that the
test res"lts #e provided to the concrete s"pplier.

-. Concrete :ensity

Concrete density is norally specified as either light weight! noral weight or
heavy weight concrete. 'oral weight concrete is ass"ed to #e appro%iately
1&= pcf. 7hen light weight or heavy weight concrete is specified it is necessary
to also specify a%i" or ini" density in po"nds per c"#ic foot. The test
ethod for air-dry or e4"ili#ri" density is AST) C=>7. The density of light
weight concrete ay #e reported as the calc"lated density! oven dry density or air
dried density. This allows the contractor to choose the ethod of copliance.

Specified concrete density is "s"ally significant when there is a concern a#o"t fire
rating *light weight+! radiation shielding *heavy weight+! str"ct"ral weight! or
capacity of e#ers. <ight weight concrete is often specified at 110 pcf to ta$e
advantage of fire rating for certain asse#lies and in s"ch cases higher densities
ay not #e appropriate. Soeties light weight fine aggregate ay #e needed to
eet this and lower densities.

2. )a%i" Aggregate Si1e

)a%i" aggregate si1e needs to #e coordinated with the specified concrete
cover and the re#ar congestion. The code liitations on a%i" aggregate si1e
are specified in ACI 213 Section 2.2.-. It needs to #e appreciated that soe
concrete s"ppliers will have different aggregate gradations and th"s ay not have
e%actly the a%i" si1e specified.


In general the larger the a%i" aggregate si1e is then the less ceent paste is
needed. This red"ces the cost of the concrete! red"ces the car#on footprint of the
concrete! and helps to liit shrin$age.

&. Sl"p;Sl"p /low

Specify the a%i" sl"p or re4"ire the contractor to specify a target sl"p for
each i% design with the "nderstanding that if the sl"p varies #y ore than that
the tolerance the #atch will #e re0ected. If the sl"p tolerance is not e%plicitly
stated in the specifications the tolerance will #e defined #y AST) C9& if it is

'()CA s"ggests that the engineer sho"ld stop specifying sl"p #eca"se the
sl"p liit ight res"lt in a i% design that will #e hard to place. This concern
is addressed when the contractor is re4"ired to specify a target sl"p which
wo"ld #e "sed to re0ect i%es when the field sl"p is not within tolerance of the
target val"e.

7hen concrete did not have adi%t"res s"ch as s"per-plastici1ers! sl"p was a
good indication of the ao"nt of water in the concrete i%. This is not the case
with odern day concrete i%es! #"t sl"p is still a good indicator of the
consistency of one #atch with respect to another.

It is s"ggested that a a%i" #e placed on the target sl"p of no ore than
eight inches "nless sl"p flow tests are "sed to verify the i% will not segregate.

7hen the sl"p is specified this is the target val"e and the allowed variation is
defined #y AST) C9& if it is referenced.

If the contractor is allowed to ad0"st the sl"p or if a low w;c is specified the
specifications sho"ld allow the "se of s"perplastici1ers.

If sl"ps in e%cess of 3 in. are allowed or if the "se of self-consolidating concrete
is conteplated the engineer sho"ld specify the test ethods and the liits to
control segregation.

=. 7ater Ceentitio"s )aterials (atio

The water-ceentitio"s aterials ratio *w;c+ sho"ld #e indicated. 7ater
ceentitio"s aterials ratio has replaced the "se of water ceent ratio *w;c+.
The w;c is the ratio of the weight of the water to the co#ined weight of all
ceentitio"s aterials. (efer to the definition in Appendi% ..


The water ceentitio"s aterials ratio is often driven #y code re4"ireents *e.g.!
ACI 213 Section &.2+! other ACI standards and g"ides! or #y the an"fact"rer of
the flooring aterial. The coentary to ACI 213 Section &.1.1 s"ggests that the
specified will #e reasona#ly consistent with the specified w;c. ACI 213
Section &.1.- notes that code w;c a%i"s do not apply to light weight
concrete! #"t #eca"se of the concerns a#o"t the drying of concrete with flooring
adhesives applied it is pro#a#ly still appropriate to specify a w;c for light weight

>. <iitations on "se of S"ppleentary Ceentitio"s )aterials

Specify applica#le liits on s"ppleentary ceentitio"s aterials *SC)s+ s"ch
as slag ceent! fly ash! eta$aolin! and silica f"e. 7hile the '()CA
recoends against specifying "pper and lower #o"nd liits on SC)s there are
a n"#er of coon sit"ations where this is necessary. Soe e%aples incl"de
"sing the concrete provisions in CA<5reen *Sections A&.&02.- and A=.&0=.=.-.1+
defining ini" ao"nts! liiting po11olans to inii1e concrete sla#
finishing pro#les! or the d"ra#ility provisions in Chapter & of ACI 213 which
ay re4"ire or liit the "se of SC)s.

Concrete i%es with high vol"es *percentages+ of fly ash and slag have #een
"sed with s"ccess. ?igh vol"e fly ash i%es have "sed >0D #y weight of Class
/ fly ash. Slag ceent has #een "sed at a replaceent of &0 to =0 percent #y
weight and ay #e "sed "p to 30 D for ass concrete. In severe free1e thaw
conditions ACI 213 liits the a%i" ao"nt of SC)s.

The ao"nt and type of SC)s "sed can significantly affect setting tie!
s"scepti#ility to plastic shrin$age crac$ing! rate of strength developent! heat of
hydration! and pro0ect s"staina#ility goals. In addition the "se of po11olans ay
ipact the concrete finish especially for trowelled sla#s.

,CAs Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures incl"des an e%cellent disc"ssion
of SC)s.

7. :"ra#ility (e4"ireents

ACI 213 Sections &.- and &.2 specifies d"ra#ility re4"ireents for several
e%pos"re classes. These re4"ireents can #e addressed in the specifications #y
either specifying the e%pos"re classes and re4"iring the contractor to develop i%
designs that satisfies the specific code re4"ireents or #y specifying the specific
paraeters applica#le for each concrete i%. Concrete s"ppliers prefer the
second approach. There are tradeoffs #"t whatever approach is selected it is
necessary to verify that all of the code iss"es have #een addressed in a anner so
that it is clear what the contractor sho"ld do.


7hen the engineer specifies the specific paraeters! as opposed to having the
contractor develop the i% design #ased on perforance criteria! the engineer
ay have to specify the ceent type! percentage of air entrainent! and the
percentage of fly ash or po11olan. In the case of .%pos"re Class S2 the need to
#ase the ao"nt of po11olan or slag ceent on service record or test data ay
effectively precl"de the engineer fro specifying the percentages of these

:eterination of whether there is a concern a#o"t cheical *"s"ally s"lfate+
attac$ fro soil or gro"ndwater will typically re4"ire inp"t fro the geotechnical

3. Aggregate (eactivity

(elated to d"ra#ility is the concern a#o"t Al$ali-Silica (eactivity *AS(+ which
has to do with the cheical interaction #etween the silica fro the aggregate and
the al$alis fro the ceent.

6ften the specifications will re4"ire that when aggregates are tested for AS( that
the res"lts #e innoc"o"s. 7hen the contractor is allowed to "se potentially
reactive aggregates the specifications sho"ld a$e it clear that the contractor has
the responsi#ility of providing a concrete i% that itigates the pro#le.

(eactivity #etween ceentitio"s aterial and aggregates can often #e itigated
#y providing a s"ita#le ao"nt of po11olan or slag ceent. .vidence of
innoc"o"s #ehavior ay #e provided with data fro AST) C-39! C1->0! C1-92!
and;or C-9=. .vidence of appropriate itigation of potential deleterio"s
aggregates ay #e provided with data fro AST) C1=>7! which is referenced
fro AST) C22. The appendi% to AST) C22 provides additional inforation.

7hen po11olans s"ch as fly ash are "sed considerations sho"ld #e given to the
previo"sly disc"ssed liitations on the "se of fly ash.

9. Chloride Content

Chloride content needs to #e controlled. This can #e done #y re4"iring
copliance with the appropriate e%pos"re class in ACI 213 Ta#le &.2.1.

ACI 213 Ta#le &.2.1 defines the allowa#le chloride content for vario"s
applications. The ao"nt of chloride ions can #e o#tained #y testing individ"al
concrete ingredients and #ased on the proportions of the ingredients calc"lating
total ion content. Alternately it is accepta#le to test saples of hardened concrete
to find the total ion content.


In 'orthern California sand dredged fro San /rancisco Bay is often "sed.
Concrete containing washed arine sands and sall ao"nts of arine @#lendA
sands can often eet the a%i" allowa#le ao"nt of chlorides for
conventionally reinforced concrete. )i%t"res containing these sands ay also
coply with re4"ireents for post-tensioned and prestressed concrete! altho"gh
coon practice is to e%cl"de these sands fro these applications.

(ecycled water and adi%t"res are other so"rces of chlorides. .ven when overall
chloride liits are specified it is coon practice to specify that accelerators not
contain calci" chloride.

10. Shrin$age <iits

7hen it is desired to forally control drying shrin$age the liits sho"ld #e
defined in the specifications. The specifications sho"ld also clearly address the
n"#er of days of drying! the si1e of the saples! the testing protocol and
odifications to the c"ring or drying proced"res. See the previo"s disc"ssion on
shrin$age control strategies.

7hile the priary shrin$age testing protocol is AST) C1=7 "ch of the e%isting
data for concrete shrin$age in California is #ased on a odified proced"re fro
the S.A6'C @S"ppleentary (ecoendations for Control of Shrin$age in
ConcreteA. This protocol recoends a 7-day oist c"re followed #y -3-days
drying. The initial or 1ero reading is ta$en at the end of the 7-day oist c"ring

Shrin$age testing sho"ld #e perfored "pon la#oratory trial #atches. AST)
C1=7 notes that the drying shrin$age test is intended as a la#oratory test and that
res"lts fro speciens cast in the field ay e%hi#it "p to twice the shrin$age of
la#oratory prepared speciens.

11. ,ercentage of Air .ntrainent

7hen air content is re4"ired #y ACI 213 the ao"nt is defined in Ta#le &.&.1.
Soeties contractors will prefer the "se of air entrainent to a$e the concrete
easier to place.

Indicate the percentage of air entrainent re4"ired at the point of deposit. The air
content at the point of deposit can differ significantly fro the air content at the
tr"c$. Indicate if the contractor is allowed to "se air entrainent when not
otherwise re4"ired. 7hen i%es "se fly ash it ay #e diffic"lt to prod"ce
consistent air content.

Air entrainent for sla#s that are to have a steel trowelled finish can res"lt in
#listering or delaination if not finished properly.


1-. Adi%t"res

The specifications need to #e clear what adi%t"res are andatory for specific
i%es and which can #e "sed at the contractors option. 7here possi#le the
generic adi%t"re specifications sho"ld #e referenced.

Specifying adi%t"res generically is preferred #eca"se9

Concrete s"ppliers do not typically have adi%t"res fro "ltiple
.ngineers typically do not have the e%pertise to deterine whether one
adi%t"re is s"perior to another if #oth coply with the specified standard or
if they are copati#le with the aggregate and ceentitio"s aterials "sed.
If for soe reason the adi%t"re listed #y nae did not coply with the
AST) standard or was incopati#le with other adi%t"re the contractor
wo"ld still #e in copliance with his contract if he "sed it! whereas if a
perforance specification is "sed the lia#ility reains with the contractor.
The consolidation of the concrete adi%t"re #"siness and technology
iproveents have created a sit"ation where soe of the adi%t"res
coonly listed in specifications are no longer availa#le.

In general the dosage rates will #e selected #y the individ"al designing the
concrete i%. The dosage rate for adi%t"res sho"ld #e in accordance with the
an"fact"rers recoended range. This will #e fo"nd in the data sheets
provided with the s"#ittal. /or soe specialty adi%t"res it ay #e appropriate
for the engineer to specify dosage rates altho"gh this is the e%ception.

The constraints iposed #y the lac$ of dedicated #atching tan$s do not apply to
specialty adi%t"res that are hand #atched.

C. )aterial ,roperties

1. Ceentitio"s aterials

Indicate accepta#le ceent standards and the ceent types. Alternately the
accepta#le ceent types co"ld #e defined as part of the i% design properties.
'ote that the type designations are "ni4"e for each of the ceent standards.

ACI 213 now tal$s in ters of ceentitio"s aterial and not 0"st ceent. 'o
distinction is ade #etween the several ceentitio"s aterials listed in Section
2.-.1 of ACI 213 altho"gh #y convention AST) C1=0! AST) C=9=! and AST)
C11=7 are specified as ceent with the others #eing referred to as s"ppleentary

ceentitio"s aterials. AST) C1=0 is no longer the only type of ceent

AST) C1=0 is the standard specification for portland ceent. There are = #asic
ceent types defined in this standard. Type I is the least restrictive! for "se when
the special properties specified for the other types are not re4"ired. Type II is
designed for general "se and has oderate s"lfate resistance properties. Type III
is siilar to Type I #"t is an"fact"red differently to prod"ce high early strength
concrete. Type IC is "sed for ass concrete where the rate and ao"nt of heat
generated #y hydration needs to #e inii1ed. Type C is siilar to Type II #"t
has a higher resistance to s"lfates. Ceents that are designated with "ltiple
types! s"ch as Type II;C! eet the specifications of #oth types and can #e "sed
when either type is specified. AST) C1=0 Type II;C is the ost coonly "sed
ceent in California. These ceents also eet the less restrictive re4"ireents
for Type I ceent.

AST) C=9= specifies hydra"lic ceent created #y #lending portland ceent with
one or ore SC)s to create a #lended hydra"lic ceent. AST) C11=7 is a
perforance oriented ceent specification that incl"des portland and #lended
ceents. AST) C=9= and C11=7! as well as C1=0! are the referenced standards
for #lended and portland ceent in the vol"ntary CA<5reen Section A=.&0=.=.

It is s"ggested that the specifications not liit which ceentitio"s aterials can
#e "sed "nless there are specific technical or other constraints. /or e%aple if
e%pansive ceent is needed AST) C3&= can #e specified.

-. S"ppleentary Ceentitio"s )aterials *SC)s+

The types of SC)s that will #e allowed and the corresponding standards sho"ld
#e listed. The norally availa#le SC)s incl"de Class / fly ash! slag ceent!
silica f"e! and eta$aolin *a type of Class ' fly ash+.

SC)s ay #e incorporated singly with ceent *a #inary #lend+! or in
co#ination with another SC)! a ternary #lend. Soe ceent an"fact"rers
prod"ce #lended ceent that incorporates the SC) in the ceent *i.e. Type I-,
ceent+. 7hen this is done the total ao"nt of SC) wo"ld incl"de #oth the
SC) added and the SC) incorporated in the ceent.

The type of fly ash */ or C+ is deterined #y the type of coal "sed and firing
conditions at a specific power plant. There are no plants prod"cing Class C fly
ash s"pplying the California ar$et. Th"s Class C fly ash is not coonly
availa#le in California.

2. /ine Aggregate *sand+


<ist the aterial specification! AST) C22! for fine aggregate as well as
s"ppleental re4"ireents. The priary s"ppleental re4"ireent for fine
aggregate is the liits on aggregate reactivity in AST) C22 Appendi% E1.
AST) C22 provides for several ethods to eval"ate an aggregate for potential
al$ali-silica reactivity *AS(+ incl"ding AST) C1->0 and AST) C1-92. AST)
C1->0 is a 1> day test whereas AST) C1-92 is a one year test. AST) C1->0 is
a severe test and any aggregates that have a satisfactory record of perforance
fail it. A odification of AST) C1->0! AST) C1=>7 is "sed to deterine the
appropriate itigation for potential AS(. The specifications sho"ld a$e it clear
what tests shall or can #e "sed to eval"ate reactivity.

Soe pro0ect specifications ay incl"de a re4"ireent for sand e4"ivalent of the
fine aggregate. This is a cleanliness test "sing Caltrans Test )ethod -17.
Caltrans re4"ires a ini" sand e4"ivalent val"e of 71. Caltrans Test )ethod
-17 provides the proced"re for eas"ring the relative proportions of detriental
fine d"st or clay-li$e aterial in soil or fine aggregates and is represented as a
"nitless n"#er. The higher the n"#er is the saller the proportion of fine d"st
or clay in the aggregates.

&. Coarse Aggregate

The specification for coarse aggregate sho"ld list the aggregate types that will #e
"sed! typically noral weight and light weight! the applica#le standard! either
AST) C22 or AST) C220! as well as s"ppleental re4"ireents.

The priary s"ppleental re4"ireent for coarse aggregate is the liits on
aggregate reactivity in AST) C22 Appendi% E1. AST) C22 provides for
several ethods to eval"ate an aggregate for potential al$ali-silica reactivity
incl"ding AST) C1->0 and AST) C1-92. AST) C1->0 is a 1> day test
whereas AST) C1-92 is a one year test. AST) C1->0 is a severe test and any
aggregates that have a satisfactory record of perforance fail it. A odification
of AST) C1->0! AST) C1=>7 is "sed to deterine the appropriate itigation
for potential AS(. The specifications sho"ld a$e it clear what tests shall or can
#e "sed to eval"ate reactivity.

Soe pro0ect specifications ay incl"de a re4"ireent for cleanness of the coarse
aggregate. This is eval"ated "sing Caltrans Test )ethod --7. Caltrans re4"ires a
ini" cleanness val"e of 71. Caltrans Test )ethod --7 provides an
indication of the relative proportions of clay-si1ed aterial clinging to coarse
aggregates or screenings and is represented as a "nitless n"#er. The higher the
n"#er is the saller the proportion of clay in the aggregate.

7hen light weight concrete is specified consideration sho"ld #e given to the types
of light weight aggregates provided. There is evidence that concrete ade with
soe types of p"ice aggregate can have lower shear strengths than acco"nted

for #y the red"ction factors in Section 3.>.1 of ACI 213.
This concern can #e
addressed #y either prohi#iting the "se of p"ice aggregate or #y specifying a
ini" splitting tensile strength.

<iitations on aggregate gradation have soeties #een provided #"t c"rrent
practice is not to specify these constraints! which is consistent with the approach
of a$ing the contractor responsi#le for iss"es related to wor$a#ility and
placea#ility of concrete.

7hen it is desira#le to "se cr"shed *recycled+ concrete as coarse aggregate in new
concrete the specifications will need to define any additional criteria for
acceptance of this aterial. Two so"rces of g"idance on the "se of recycled
concrete are /ederal ?ighway Association Technical Advisory T=0&0.27 and ACI
===! Removal and Reuse of Hardened Concrete.

=. 7ater

)i% water ay consist of "nicipal water! well water! recycled or reclaied
water! or a co#ination. It was once ass"ed that i% water sho"ld #e @pota#leA
tho"gh this is no longer the case and specifications sho"ld not re4"ire the "se of
pota#le water. ACI 213 Section 2.& defines the criterion for i% water to #e
AST) C1>0-. This criterion is also stated in AST) C9&.

AST) C1>0- has optional liits on s"lfates! chlorides! al$alis! and total solids
that can #e specified if appropriate. These optional liits are seldo specified.

>. Adi%t"res

Coonly "sed adi%t"res s"ch as water-red"cing *noral and id-range+!
accelerating! retarding! high range water-red"cing *s"per plastici1ers+! shrin$age
red"cing and viscosity odifying adi%t"res sho"ld #e specified generically
"sing the appropriate AST) Standards. (efer to the disc"ssion on adi%t"res in
Section B.1- a#ove.

In soe cases the dosage rates of the allowed i%t"res will need to #e specified.

The contractor sho"ld #e re4"ired to verify the copati#ility of the adi%t"res
when "sed in co#inations "sed for the specified i%es.

The recoendation to specify ini" splitting tensile stress val"es when p"ice aggregate is allowed is #ased
on a concern that the defa"lt shear stress red"ctions were #ased on stronger lightweight aggregates and ay not #e
appropriate for p"ice aggregates. This concern is s"pported #y low splitting tensile stress test val"es reported #y
@,roperties of <7AC ade with nat"ral lightweight aggregatesA #y ,ro0ect ,rograe of Brite;."(a pro0ect
B.9>-29&- and #y @?igh Strength 'at"ral <ightweight Aggregate Concrete with Silica /"eAF #y A. Gegino#ali!
8.5. So#olev! S.C. So#oleva and ). To$yayF ACI S, 173-23.

Special Considerations

<ean concrete and controlled low strength concrete *C<S)+9

6n soe pro0ects low strength *lean+ concrete is "sed for #ac$fill of "tility trenches or to
fill in areas where the soil has #een over e%cavated. By convention this lean concrete has
#een specified with an f
H -!000 psi! which is lower than the scope of ACI 213. If a
significant ao"nt of ceent is "sed this aterial can #e very diffic"lt to e%cavate in the

C<S) is a i%t"re of aggregate! fly ash and sall ao"nts of ceent that has #een
developed as a replaceent for low strength aterial "sed to #ac$fill soil. C<S) is
typically specified to have a a%i" copressive strength of not ore than 7=-1=0 psi.
*'ote that a coon soil #earing val"e of 2!000 psf is e4"ivalent to a copressive
strength of a#o"t -1 psi+. As a res"lt the aterial is less e%pensive than lean concrete!
"ses less ceent! ay incorporate recycled or non-specified aterials and is th"s ore
s"staina#le! and is easier to e%cavate with hand tools.

CBC Sections 130&.- and 130&.> give g"idance on the "se of C<S) and a$e the point
that the geotechnical engineer #e involved in esta#lishing the criteria for the "se of this
prod"ct. Based on the fact that C<S) is not str"ct"ral and th"s not s"#0ect to special
inspection it ay #e appropriate for this to #e specified in the grading or site wor$
concrete specification sections. This sho"ld #e coordinated d"ring preparation of
contract doc"ents.




A. Methods of Documenting Concrete Strengths

ACI 318 Section 5.3 requires that test data be used to vaidate the required concrete strength.
!his can be done either b" the use of fied strength test records or b" ma#ing and testing tria
batches. !his $rocess is summari%ed b" ACI 318 &igure '5.3. !he basic a$$roach is that the
o(er the standard deviation is the ess overdesign is required. !he use of aborator" tria batch
resuts requires an overdesign that is usua" significant" higher than that based u$on the
strength histor".

)hen the strength test records or tria batches required b" Section 5.3 are not avaiabe Section
5.* ao(s for the use of concrete $ro$ortioned based on other e+$erience or information if a
higher target strength is used. ,ecause the use of this o$tion (i be de$endent on the $articuar
circumstances of the $ro-ect and the information avaiabe these guideines are not in a $osition
to $rovide an" guidance on the use of this o$tion. ,ecause of the uncertaint" associated (ith this
a$$roach some $ro-ect s$ecifications do not ao( this o$tion.

ACI 318 Section 5.5 gives $ermission to reduce the amount b" (hich the test data must e+ceed
the s$ecified com$ression strength as a resut of data obtained during construction. thus ao(ing
the mi+ture $ro$ortions to be ad-usted.

,. /vauating the !est 'esuts

)hen starting to evauate the test resuts a basic question that must be ans(ered is (hether the
mi+ design can be quaified based on fied strength test resuts or (hether the resuts from a
series of tria mi+tures are required. &ied strength test resuts can be used if there are at east 10
consecutive tests for mi+tures using simiar materias under simiar conditions. If this condition
is not satisfied the mi+ must be quaified based on the resuts of a series of tria mi+tures.

At east 15 test resuts are required to estabish a standard deviation used to determine the
required average strength. f1
. A modification factor is a$$ied to the standard deviation (hen
ess than thirt" tests are used. Such tests sha be for concrete mi+es having strength (ithin
1.000 $si of the required com$ressive strength. f1
. )hen ess than 15 test records are avaiabe
!abe estabishes the required average strength.

!est records used to determine the average com$ressive strength must incude at east 10
consecutive tests. In order to quaif" as consecutive tests the fied strength test records must
have been $erformed over a $eriod of at east *5 da"s and have been based on simiar concrete
mi+es (ithin 1.000 $si of the s$ecified concrete strength.

A simiar mi+ is considered to be one incor$orating simiar materias and $ro$ortions and that is
not more restrictive than the mi+ under consideration. &or e+am$e. a mi+ having a (3cm ratio

of 0.55 coud be used to su$$ort a mi+ (ith a (3cm ratio of 0.50 if the materias and $ro$ortions
are simiar. Simiar". a 5 sac# mi+ can be used to su$$ort a 4.0 sac# mi+. as ong as their design
strength is (ithin 1.000 $si of each other. 5i#e(ise. a 206 f" ash mi+ coud be used to su$$ort a
156 f" ash mi+ as ong as the (3cm ratio is the same or higher since the 206 f" ash mi+ (oud
be e+$ected to $roduce a o(er strength than the $ro$osed mi+.

Simiar mi+es shoud have the same ma+imum aggregate si%e and simiar gradations.

!he conce$t of simiar materias is not cear" defined and is sub-ect to inter$retation. 7bvious"
the use of the same source of materias 8cement. f" ash. aggregates. and t"$es of admi+tures
8t"$es not brands99 com$ies but this is not a requirement.

:o( cose the materias and mi+ $ro$ortions of simiar mi+ designs have to be is a -udgment
ca. !he read" mi+ $roducer bears most of the ris# if the mi+ does not $erform. thus norma
$ractice is to give the su$$ier a ot of fe+ibiit". ,ecause of the $ossibiit" that simiar mi+
designs ma" be used to -ustif" the submitted mi+ design it ma" be a$$ro$riate to request
information on the simiar mi+es. !his (i ma#e it $ossibe to verif" (hether a mi+ design
quaifies as a simiar mi+.

If satisfactor" test records are not avaiabe then tria mi+tures are needed 8'eference Section of ACI 3189. !his requires muti$e aborator" tria batches (ith a range of $ro$ortions
that (oud $roduce a range of strengths that brac#et the required com$ressive strengths. !he
commentar" in ACI 318 ma#es it cear that (hen muti$e t"$es of cementitious materias are
used. more tria batches are needed to e+$ore the sensitivit" of com$ressive strength to
variations in mi+ture $ro$ortions. !he number of tria batches is not e+$icit" defined. !he
requirements for quaification b" tria batches have changed in ACI 318-08 and it is not cear that
a of the concrete su$$iers have ad-usted their $ractices to refect these $rovisions.

!he $ractice of submitting the resuts of a singe tria batch does not com$" (ith the
requirements for quaification b" tria batches.

ACI 318 Section 5.*.1 ao(s the design $rofessiona to ao( the use of the mi+ (hen strength
is -ustified based on other ;e+$erience or information< (hen f1
is not greater than 5.000 $si.
=nder this $rovision the design $rofessiona has the o$tion of acce$ting a mi+ design that is
submitted (ithout sufficient test records or tria batches. incuding mi+es that are based on a
singe tria batch. if in his or her -udgment the mi+ is other(ise adequate.




This is a compilation of general terminology related to hydraulic cement concrete, concrete
aggregates, and other material used in or with hydraulic cement concrete and is based on ASTM
C12-!"# $or other common definitions refer to Chapter 2 of AC% &1' and Section 2#2 of the

absorption, n - the process by which water is drawn into and tends to fill permeable pores in a
porous solid body) also, the increase in mass of a porous solid body resulting from the
penetration of a li*uid into its permeable pores#

admixtur, n - a material other than water, aggregates, hydraulic cementitious material, and
fiber reinforcement that is used as an ingredient of a cementitious mi+ture to modify its freshly
mi+ed, setting, or hardened properties and that is added to the batch before or during its mi+ing#

accelerating admixture, n - admi+ture that accelerates the setting and early strength
de,elopment of concrete#

retarding admixture, n - admi+ture that retards the setting of concrete#

water-reducing admixture, n - admi+ture that either increases the slump of freshly mi+ed
mortar or concrete without increasing the water content or that maintains the slump with a
reduced amount of water due to factors other than air entrainment#

water-reducing admixture, high-range, n - a water-reducing admi+ture capable of producing
at least 12 - reduction of water content when tested in accordance with ASTM C./. and
meeting the other rele,ant re*uirements of ASTM C./.#

a!!r!at, n - granular material, such as sand, gra,el, crushed stone, or iron blast-furnace slag,
used with a cementing medium to form hydraulic-cement concrete or mortar#

coarse aggregate, n - (1) aggregate predominantly retained on the 0o# . sie,e) or (2) that
portion of an aggregate retained on the 0o# . sie,e#

fine aggregate, n - (1) aggregate passing the &1'-in# sie,e and almost entirely passing the 0o#
. sie,e and predominantly retained on the 0o# 2!! sie,e) or (2) that portion of an aggregate
passing the 0o# . sie,e and retained on the 0o# 2!! sie,e#

high-density aggregate, n - aggregate with relati,e density greater than &#&#

light weight aggregate, n - aggregate with bul2 density less than "! lb#3ft#
, such as pumice,
scoria, ,olcanic cinders, tuff, and diatomite) e+panded or sintered clay, shale, slate,

diatomaceous shale, perlite, ,ermiculite, or slag) and end products of coal or co2e

normal-density aggregate, n - aggregate that is neither high nor low density with bul2 density
typically ranging between "! lb#3ft#
and 12! lb#3ft#

Normal weight aggregate, n - see normal-density aggregate#

air "ontnt, n - the ,olume of air ,oids in cement paste, mortar, or concrete, e+clusi,e of pore
space in aggregate particles, usually e+pressed as a percentage of total ,olume of the paste,
mortar, or concrete#

air void - see #oid, air$

b%ast&'urna" s%a!, n - the nonmetallic product, consisting essentially of silicates and
aluminosilicates of calcium and other bases, which is de,eloped in a molten condition
simultaneously with iron in a blast furnace#

bu%( dnsit), n - of aggregate, the mass of a unit ,olume of bul2 aggregate material 4the unit
,olume includes the ,olume of the indi,idual particles and the ,olume of the ,oids between the

"mnt, *)drau%i", n - a cement that sets and hardens by chemical reaction with water and is
capable of doing so under water#

past, "mnt, n - the binder in a cementitious mi+ture composed of hydraulic cementitious
material and water that may also contain admi+tures) when part of concrete or mortar, it includes
the material from aggregates finer than 0o# 2!! sie,e#

"mntitious matria% (hydraulic), n - an inorganic material or a mi+ture of inorganic materials
that sets and de,elops strength by chemical reaction with water by formation of hydrates and is
capable of doing so under water# Cementitious material includes supplementary cementitious

"%ass o' "on"rt 4A, (, C, etc#5, n - many pro6ects refer to the different mi+ designs as Concrete
Classes# This nomenclature and the concrete mi+es associated with the class will ,ary from
pro6ect to pro6ect#

"on"rt, n - a material that consists of a binder within which are embedded particles of
aggregate) often fine and coarse) a mi+ture of mortar and coarse aggregates#

"on"rt, 'rs*, n - concrete which possesses enough of its original wor2ability so that it can be
placed and consolidated by the intended methods#


"on"rt, *ardnd, n - concrete that has de,eloped sufficient strength to ser,e some defined
purpose or resist a stipulated loading without failure#

"on"rt, s%'&"onso%idatin!, n - concrete mi+tures that can be placed without the need for
mechanical consolidation#

"onsistn"), n - of fresh concrete, mortar, or grout, the relati,e mobility or ability to flow#

crushed stone - see ston, "rus*d$

dnsit), n - mass per unit ,olume 4preferred o,er deprecated term unit +i!*t5#

dr)in! s*rin(a!, n - a ,olume change that results in the reduction in the dimensions of a
section or specimen of concrete due to a loss of moisture#

entrained air - see #oid, air$

entrapped air - see #oid, air$

xpandd b%ast&'urna" s%a!, n - the light weight cellular material obtained by controlled
processing of molten blast furnace slag with water or water and other agents, such as steam or
compressed air or both#

'ibrs, n - slender filaments, which may be discrete or in the form of bundles, networ2s, or
strands of natural or manufactured materials, which can be distributed throughout a fresh
cementitious mi+ture#

'innss modu%us, n - of aggregate, a factor obtained by adding the percentages of material in
the sample that is coarser than each of the following sie,es 4cumulati,e percentages retained5,
and di,iding the sum by 1!!7 0o# 1!!, 0o# !, 0o# &!, 0o# 18, 0o# ', 0o# ., &1'-in#, &1.-in#, 1-
112-in#, &-in#, 8-in#

'%) as*, n - the finely di,ided residue that results from the combustion of ground or powdered
coal and that is transported by flue gases from the combustion 9one to the particle remo,al

hydraulic cement - see "mnt, *)drau%i"#

maximum si, (of aggregate), n - in specifications for, or description of aggregate, the smallest
sie,e opening through which the entire amount of aggregate is re*uired to pass#

mortar, n - a mi+ture of cement paste and fine aggregates) in concrete, the material 4e+clusi,e of
fibers5 occupying the space between coarse aggregate particles#


nomina% maximum si, (of aggregate), n - in specifications for, or description of aggregate, the
smallest sie,e opening through which the entire amount of the aggregate is permitted to pass#
po,,o%an, n - a siliceous or siliceous and aluminous material, which in itself possesses little or no
cementitious ,alue but will, in finely di,ided form and in the presence of moisture, chemically
react with calcium hydro+ide at ordinary temperatures to form compounds possessing
cementitious properties#

relative density, n - see sp"i'i" !ra#it)

s%a! "mnt, n - granulated blast furnace slag that is ground to cement fineness with or without
additions and meets ASTM C/'/#

sa"( o' "mnt, n - a sac2 of cement weighs /. pounds#

sand, n - fine aggregate resulting from natural disintegration and abrasion of roc2 or processing
of completely friable sandstone#

s!r!ation, n - the unintentional separation of the constituents of concrete or particles of an
aggregate, causing a lac2 of uniformity in their distribution#

self-consolidating concrete, SCC - see "on"rt, s%'&"onso%idatin!$

si%i"a 'um, n - ,ery fine po99olanic material, composed mostly of amorphous silica produced by
electric arc furnaces as a by-product of the production of elemental silicon or ferro-silicon alloys
4also 2nown as condensed silica fume and microsilica5#

s%ump, n - :eference AC% &1' Section #&#&#2 ;A measure of the consistency in the mi+# <rior
to the use of admi+tures slump was often considered a good indicator of concrete strength and

s%ump '%o+, n - the a,erage diameter of the spread concrete mass, obtained from two
measurements perpendicular to each other, after a self-consolidating concrete has ceased to flow
during a slump-flow test# Slump flow of self-consolidating concrete is measured using Test
Method ASTM C1811# :eference AC% &1' Section &#8#

sp"i'i" !ra#it), n - the ratio of mass of a ,olume of a material at a stated temperature to the
mass of the same ,olume of distilled water at a stated temperature#

ston, "rus*d, n - the product resulting from the artificial crushing of roc2s, boulders, or large
cobblestones, substantially all faces of which ha,e resulted from the crushing operation#

supp%mntar) "mntitious matria%, n - a slag cement or po99olan that contributes to the
properties of concrete or mortar through hydraulic of po99olanic acti,ity, or both#


unit +i!*t, n - of aggregate, mass per unit ,olume# 4=eprecated term>use preferred term bu%(

#oid, air , n - a space in cement paste, mortar, or concrete filled with air) an entrapped air ,oid is
characteristically 1 mm or more in width and irregular in shape) an entrained air ,oid is typically
between 1! and 1!!! m in diameter and spherical or nearly so#

+atr&"mnt ratio, n - the ratio of the mass of water, e+clusi,e only of that absorbed by the
aggregates, to the mass of portland cement in concrete, mortar, or grout, stated as a decimal#
This term is not used in AC% &1'-!' which refers to water cementitious materials ratio 4w3cm5#
This term, abbre,iated as w!c, is applicable only to cementitious mi+tures in which the only
cementitious material is portland cement#

+atr&"mntitious matria% ratio, n - the ratio of the mass of water, e+clusi,e only of that
absorbed by the aggregates, to the mass of cementitious material 4hydraulic5 in concrete, mortar,
or grout, stated as a decimal 4see also +atr&"mnt ratio5#

+or(abi%it), n - of concrete, that property determining the effort re*uired to manipulate a freshly
mi+ed *uantity of concrete with minimum loss of homogeneity#




C33, Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates: This specification defines the
requirements for coarse and fine aggregate used in normal weight concrete. Light weight
aggregate is not covered in C33; it is instead covered in AT! C33".
C94, Standard Specification for Ready-Mixed Concrete: This standard contains the
specification for read#-mi$ed concrete manufactured and in freshl# mi$ed and unhardened state.
C109, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using
-in! or "#$-mm% Cu&e Specimens'( This test method covers determination of the compressive
strength of h#draulic cement mortars% using &-in. or '("-mm) cu*e specimens.
C125, Standard Terminology Relating to Concrete and Concrete Aggregates: This standard is
a compilation of definitions of terms that are used in other AT! concrete standards under the
+urisdiction of Committee C",.
C150, Standard Specification for )ortland Cement: This standard contains the standard
specification for portland cement% including definition of each cement t#pe such as T#pe --% T#pe
.% etc.
C151, Standard Test Method for Autoclave *xpansion of Hydraulic Cement: This test method
covers determination of the autoclave e$pansion of h#draulic cement.
C157, Standard Test Method for +ength Change of Hardened Hydraulic-Cement Mortar and
Concrete: This test method covers the determination of the length changes in h#draulic cement
mortar that are produced *# causes other than e$ternall# applied forces and temperature changes.
C185, Standard Test Method for Air Content of Hydraulic Cement Mortar: This test method
covers the determination of the air content of h#draulic cement mortar.
C186, Standard Test Method for Heat of Hydration of Hydraulic Cement: This test method
covers the determination of the heat of h#dration of h#draulic cement.
C187, Standard Test Method for Amount of ,ater Re-uired for .ormal Consistency of
Hydraulic Cement )aste: This test method covers the determination of the normal consistenc#
of h#draulic cement.
C191, Standard Test Methods for Time of Setting of Hydraulic Cement &y /icat .eedle: These
test methods determine the time of setting of h#draulic cement *# means of the .icat needle.

C204, Standard Test Methods for 0ineness of Hydraulic Cement &y Air-)ermea&ility
Apparatus: This test method covers determination of the fineness of h#draulic cement using the
/laine air-permea*ilit# apparatus.
C289, Standard Test Method for )otential Al1ali-Silica Reactivity of Aggregates (Chemical
Method': This test method covers the determination of the potential for deleterious al0ali
reactivit# of aggregate *# testing the reaction of the aggregate to a chemical solution.
C295, Standard 2uide for )etrographic *xamination of Aggregates for Concrete: This guide
outlines procedures for the petrographic e$amination of materials used for concrete aggregates.
C330, Standard Specification for +ight3eight Aggregates for Structural Concrete: This
specification covers light weight aggregates intended for use in structural concrete.
C430, Standard Test Method for 0ineness of Hydraulic Cement &y the 4#-5m (.o! 6#' Sieve:
This test method covers the determination of the fineness of h#draulic cement.
C451, Standard Test Method for *arly Stiffening of Hydraulic Cement ()aste Method': This
test method covers the determination of earl# stiffening in h#draulic-cement paste.
C567, Standard Test Method for 7etermining 7ensity of Structural +ight3eight Concrete:
This test method provides procedures to determine the oven-dr# and equili*rium densities of
structural light weight concrete.
C595, Standard Specification for 8lended Hydraulic Cements: This specification pertains to
*lended h#draulic cements using slag% po11olan% limestone% or some com*ination of these% with
portland cement or portland cement clin0er or slag with lime.
C618, Standard Specification for Coal 0ly Ash and Ra3 or Calcined .atural )o99olan for Use
in Concrete: This specification covers the use of coal fl# ash and raw or calcined natural
po11olan in concrete.
C845, Standard Specification for *xpansive Hydraulic Cement: This specification covers
h#draulic cements that e$pand during the earl# hardening period after setting.
C989, Standard Specification for Slag Cement for Use in Concrete and Mortars: This
specification covers three strength grades of slag cement for use as a cementitious material in
concrete and mortar.
C1038, Standard Test Method for *xpansion of Hydraulic Cement Mortar 8ars Stored in
,ater: This test method covers the determination of the e$pansion of mortar *ars made using
h#draulic cement% of which sulfate is an integral part.
C1157, Standard )erformance Specification for Hydraulic Cement2 This standard contains the
performance specification for h#draulic cements. -t is related to h#draulic cement standards
C1(" and C(,(.

C1260, Standard Test Method for )otential Al1ali Reactivity of Aggregates (Mortar-8ar
Method': This test method covers the determination of the potential for deleterious al0ali-silica
reaction of aggregate using mortar *ars.
C1293, Standard Test Method for 7etermination of +ength Change of Concrete 7ue to
Al1ali-Silica Reaction2 This test method covers the determination of the suscepti*ilit# for
e$pansive al0ali-silica reaction of an aggregate or com*ination of an aggregate with po11olan or
slag. The determination is *# measurement of length change of concrete prisms.
C1567, Standard Test Method for 7etermining the )otential Al1ali-Silica Reactivity of
Com&inations of Cementitious Materials and Aggregate (Accelerated Mortar-8ar Method'(
This test method covers the determination of the potential for deleterious al0ali-silica reaction of
com*inations of cementitious materials and aggregate in mortar *ars. -t is a modification to the
test method outlined in C1&3" and is used to determine mitigation measures.
C1602, Standard Specification for Mixing ,ater Used in the )roduction of Hydraulic Cement
Concrete: This specification covers the compositional and performance requirements for water
used as mi$ing water in h#draulic cement concrete.
ACI 301, Specifications for Structural Concrete: This document covers general construction
requirements for cast-in-place structural concrete and sla*s-on-ground.
ACI 318, 8uilding Code Re-uirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary( The
/uilding Code 4equirements for tructural Concrete 56Code78 covers the materials% design% and
construction of structural concrete used in *uildings and where applica*le in non-*uilding
ACI 555, Removal and Reuse of Hardened Concrete: This report presents information on
removal and reuse of hardened concrete.
Calta!" T#"t M#t$%& 217, Method of Test for Sand *-uivalent: This test method provides the
procedure for measuring the relative proportions of detrimental fine dust or cla#-li0e material in
soil or fine aggregates.

Calta!" T#"t M#t$%& 227: Method of Test for *valuating Cleanness of Coarse Aggregate:
The cleanness test provides an indication of the relative proportions of cla#-si1ed material
clinging to coarse aggregates or screenings.



The SEAONC Construction Quality Assurance Committee produced The San Francisco Bay
Area Concrete Areate !eport "##$%& This report pro'ides more detailed eneral in(ormation
on concrete areates and in(ormation on the 'arious areates used in the Bay Area )hen the
report )as issued&

The (ull report can *e do)nloaded (rom+!-