www.SeminarSlide.

com

ABSTRACT
Visit to www.SeminarSlide.com To get Free Seminar Topics

High Performance Concrete is that concrete which meets special performance and
uniformity requirements that cannot always be achieved by conventional material,
normal mixing, placing and curing practices.

Architects, engineers and constructors all over the world are finding that using HPC
allows them to build more durable structures at comparable cost. HPC is being used
for building in aggressive environments, marine structures, highway bridges and
pavements, nuclear structures, tunnels, precast units.

This reports aims to discuss the application of HPC particularly for bridge structures.
The use of HPC was found to have added advantages compared with normal concrete
in areas of strengths, service life, construction time, economy, etc.

An experimental study on “Behavior of instrumented prestressed high performance

concrete bridge girders” by Hazim M. Dwairi, Mathew C. Wagner, Mervyn
J.Kowalsky, Paul Zia is also discussed as case study.

www.SeminarSlide.com
www.SeminarSlide.com

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL

Concrete is considered as durable and strong material. Reinforced concrete is one of

the most popular material used for construction around the world. Reinforced concrete
is exposed to deterioration in some regions especially in costal regions. There for
researchers around the world are directing their efforts towards developing a new
material to over come this problem. Invention of large construction plants and
equipments around the world added to the increased use of material. This scenario led
to the use of additive materials to improve the quality of concrete. As an out come of
the experiments and researches cement based concrete which meets special
performance with respect to workability, strength and durability known as” High
Performance Concrete” was developed.

1.2 HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE

High performance concrete (HPC) is that which is designed to give optimised

performance characteristics for the given set of materials, usage and exposure
conditions, consistent with requirement of cost, service life and durability.

The American Concrete Institute (ACI) defines HPC ‘‘as concrete which meets
special performance and uniformity requirements that cannot always be achieved
routinely by using only conventional materials and normal mixing, placing, and
curing practices.”

High performance in a broad manner can be related to any property of concrete. It can
mean excellent workability in the fresh state like self-levelling concrete or low heat of
hydration in case of mass concrete, or very rigid setting and hardening of concrete in
case of sprayed concrete or quick repair of roads and airfields, or very low
imperviousness of storage vessels, or very low leakage rates of encapsulation
containments for contaminating material.
www.SeminarSlide.com

HPC is composed of the same material as normal concrete, but it has been engineered
to achieve enhanced durability or strength characteristics, or both, to meet the
specified demands of a construction project. The main ingredients of high
performance concrete are cement, fine aggregate, coarse aggregate, water, mineral
admixtures and chemical admixtures.

If the structure of normal strength concrete (NSC) is compared with high performance
concrete (HPC) one notes several differences: The matrix stiffness of HPC is larger
than NSC and approaches the stiffness of the aggregate, the bond strength between
matrix and aggregate is higher for HPC, matrix tensile strength is higher, Reduced
internal cracking in terms of number of cracks and size of intrinsic cracks before
loading. These aspects show that HPC is more elastic and more brittle than NSC.

Figure.1 Schematic representation of the stress-strain curve from a uniaxial test

along with the simplified crack pattern. (C.S Suryawanshi)

HPC has a greater Young’s modulus than NSC and the post-peak softening branch is
steeper. High Performance Concrete (HPC) is more homogeneous than normal
strength concrete (NSC).

HPC does not simply mean high strength concrete (HSC), but also includes other
enhanced material properties such as early-age strength, increased flow ability, high
modulus of elasticity (MOE), low permeability, and resistance to chemical and
www.SeminarSlide.com

physical attack (increased durability). HPC is usually high strength concrete (HSC),
but HSC may not always be of high performance.

1.2.1 HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE CHARACTERISTICS

High-performance concrete characteristics are developed for particular applications

and environments; some of the properties that may be required include:
• High strength
• High early strength
• High modulus of elasticity
• High abrasion resistance
• High durability and long life in severe environments
• Low permeability and diffusion
• Resistance to chemical attack
• High resistance to frost and deicer scaling damage
• Toughness and impact resistance
• Volume stability
• Ease of placement
• Compaction without segregation
• Inhibition of bacterial and mold growth

1.2.2 PREPERATION OF HPC

High-performance concretes are made with carefully selected high-quality ingredients

and optimized mixture designs; these are batched, mixed, placed, compacted and
cured to the highest industry standards. Typically, such concretes will have a low
water-cementing materials ratio of 0.20 to 0.45. Plasticizers are usually used to make
these concretes fluid and workable. Table 1 lists materials often used in high-
performance concrete and why they are selected.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Table.1 Materials used in High Performance Concrete

Material Primary contribution/Desired
property

Portland cement Cementing material/durability

Blended cement Cementing material/durability/high

strength
Fly ash Cementing material/durability/high
strength

Slag Cementing material/durability/high

strength
Silica fume Cementing material/durability/high
strength

Calcined clay Cementing material/durability/high

strength

Metakaolin Cementing material/durability/high

strength

Calcined shale Cementing material/durability/high

strength
Super plasticizers Flowability

High-range water reducers Reduce water to cement ratio

Hydration control admixtures Control setting

Retarders Control setting

Accelerators Accelerate setting

Corrosion inhibitors Control steel corrosion

Water reducers Reduce cement and water content

Shrinkage reducers Reduce shrinkage

ASR inhibitors Control alkali-silica reactivity

Polymer/latex modifiers Durability

Optimally graded aggregate Improve workability and reduce

paste demand
www.SeminarSlide.com

1.3 HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE BRIDGES

High performance concrete bridges include two key elements: total precast bridge
systems that can dramatically improve construction speed and high performance
concrete that can improve durability and structural efficiency. In HPC bridges, these
improvements are achieved at no cost premium and often at a reduced initial cost.

Designing with HPC components can drastically reduce construction time because
various precast components can be combined to allow a truck-to-structure systems
approach without waiting for site forming and curing. Full depth precast decks are
being used on both new and rehabilitated bridges. The cost for this approach can
result in overall savings due to more efficient designs that permit longer spans or
fewer girders and/or piers. HPC can be used effectively in virtually all bridge
components to aid in minimizing construction and future maintenance. HPC
components can include piles and pile caps, piers and column bents, abutments,
decks, and rails and barriers. HPC uses the same materials as typical concrete but is
engineered to provide higher strength and better durability. These attributes can be
varied to align with the design’s needs. They will be affected by environmental and
geographic conditions and the specific bridge components (that is, substructure,
beams or deck).
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.2 Cross section of the pier elevation shows the main components of a
bridge system.

1.3.1 ADVANTAGES OF HPC BRIDGES

Overall, the advantages accruing from higher durability and/or additional strength
include a variety of benefits:
• Longer service life thanks to higher durability and lower chloride penetration. When
needed, bridge life can extend to 100 years or even more.
• Lower maintenance and inspection requirements, especially since the bridge requires
no painting or rust protection. This savings grows with the bridge’s longer service life.
• Longer spans, which can reduce costs by eliminating piers or allowing the use of
concrete beams instead of steel beams.
• Wider beam spacing, reducing the number and cost of beams.
• Shallower beams due to higher concrete strength.
• Improved mechanical properties such as greater tensile strength.
• Rapid construction due to the ability to factory-cast components while site work is
underway and the ability to erect pieces upon delivery. These benefits cut the time
necessary for disruptions to local traffic.
www.SeminarSlide.com

• Predictable performance and close tolerances for precast members due to the high
quality achieved through PCI certification and casting under controlled conditions in
the plant.
In general, HPC components can produce lighter, longer precast pieces and smaller-
diameter columns that creep less. This means span lengths can be lengthened and
under clearances can be maximized.
www.SeminarSlide.com

2. CASE STUDY

2.1 GENERAL

In this study work done by Hazim M. Dwairi, Matthew C. Wagner, Mervyn J.

Kowalsky, Paul Zia on the “Behaviour of instrumented high performance concrete
bridge girders” is discussed

A comprehensive monitoring of the behavior of four prestressed high performance

concrete (HPC) bridge girders, with higher compressive strength, during construction
and while in-service, is presented. The monitoring program covered instrumentation
and monitoring of a series of four girders during the casting operation, after
construction, under the effects of traffic and thermal loads, as well as under controlled
load conditions.

Figure.3 shows the bridge for three southbound lanes under construction, which forms
the basis for the work described in this paper. Figures.4 and 5 show the plan of the
bridge and a typical cross section respectively.

Figure.3 US 401 Southbound Bridge over the Neuse River, Raleigh, NC.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.4 US 401 Southbound Bridge over the Neuse River plan view.

Figure.5 Typical cross-section of Southbound Bridge.

2.2 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

The objective of the research presented in this paper is to develop an understanding of

the behavior of HPC in bridge structures. This objective was achieved through a
comprehensive monitoring program including: (1) characterization of the actual HPC
utilized in the construction of the bridge, (2) extensive instrumentation and
monitoring of a series of four girders in the bridge during the casting operation, and
(3) monitoring of the bridge structure after construction under the effects of traffic and
thermal loads, as well as controlled load conditions.
www.SeminarSlide.com

2.3 PROPERTIES OF HPC

For the HPC used in the US 401 Bridge, selected performance criteria are shown in
Table.1. Tests were conducted on the material to evaluate its compressive strength,
flexural strength, modulus of elasticity (MOE), modulus of rupture (MOR), creep,
shrinkage, thermal properties, and chloride permeability. In all cases, the concrete
samples were taken from batches of material used in four instrumented bridge girders.
Two were AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials) Type IV girders (designated as A4 and B4) and two were AASHTO Type III
girders (designated as C4 and D4) as shown in Figure.4.

Table.2 HPC target performance criteria. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

Material characteristic Target value

Compressive strength at 28 days 69 < x< 76 MPa

Modulus of elasticity 41 < x <52 GPa
Shrinkage x < 400 micro strain
Target slump before/after addition of plasticizer 0/203 mm
Air content (range) %3–5
Creep 45 < x > 30/MPa
Freeze–thaw durability (x = relative x< 80%
dynamic modulus of elasticity after 300 cycles)
Chloride permeability (x = coulombs) 800 < x <2000
Scaling resistance (x = visual rating of surface after 50 cycles) x = 2.3
Abrasion resistance (x = average depth of wear in inches) x < 0.02
Resistance to internal chemical attack (x = alkali in cement) x < 0.4%

2.3.1 MATERIAL TESTING

www.SeminarSlide.com

Numerous 102 * 203 mm cylinders, six 76 * 76 *286 mm prisms, and six 152 * 152
*508 mm prisms were cast for the material testing. The specimens were cured along
side with the girders to keep the curing temperatures for the specimens as close as
possible to those of the actual girders. Table.3 shows the mix proportion of the
concrete that was used for the girders. The test results of compressive strength,
modulus of elasticity, shrinkage, creep, etc. met the performance criteria.

Table.3 HPC mix proportion. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

Materials used to produce the mix

Water/cementitious materials 0.305
Cement, Type I/II (kg/m3) 518
Coarse aggregate78 m (kg/m3) 892
Coarse aggregate 67 m (kg/m3) 259
Fine aggregate (kg/m3) 521
Water (kg/m3) 1000/1
AEA, micro-Air (kg/m3) 0.223
HRWR (kg/m3) 3.0
Retarder (kg/m3) 1.334

2.4 GIRDER BEHAVIOR DURING CASTING

www.SeminarSlide.com

2.4.1 OVERVIEW OF INSTRUMENTATION PLAN

A single line of girders was instrumented in order to monitor temperature and strains
within the girders, as shown in Figure.4. There are five girder lines, each with four
spans: 28.0, 28.0, 17.5, and 17.5 m. The longer spans use AASHTO Type IV girders
and the shorter spans use AASHTO Type III girders. The instrumented girders are
designated A4, B4, C4, and D4.

The use of the HPC mix eliminated one line of girders and increased transverse girder
spacing from the original design using the conventional concrete. The strength
requirement for the girders was 69.0 MPa to 76.0 MPa at 28 days, and the average
strength of the tested cylinders met the requirements as shown in Table.2.

In order to monitor the temperature gradients within the girders both during the curing
period and the long-term testing, a total of 22 thermocouples (Omega FF-K-24) were
placed at five cross sections of each of the four girders. Ten thermocouples were
placed at mid-span, three at 1/4 L, three at 3/4 L, and three at a distance of L/ 50 from
either end (where L is the girder span. To measure strains in the concrete, a series of
Vibrating Wire ages (VWGs) (Roctest EM-5) were placed at the center of gravity of
the prestressing strands at mid-span and 1.524 m for girders C and D, and 1.219 m for
girders A and B, in either side from mid-span to measure long-term strains.
Prestressing force was measured with load cells and transfer length was determined
from strains measured by using an embedded steel bar with attached strain gages.

2.4.2. PRESTRESS FORCE

Load cells (Strainsert model PC-50 with 220 kN capacity) were placed at the dead end
of the casting bed to measure the prestressing force after tensioning, as well as after
curing, and immediately prior to detensioning of the strands. The load cells were
placed on four strands on each of the casting beds (Type III and Type IV). Tables 4
and 5 summarize the load cell readings at various times after tensioning.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Table.4 Load cell reading for Type III girders, kN. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)
Time Temp Strand ID
1 2 3 4 Average
Initial 16.7 190.4 189.9 189.0 190.8 189.9
24h 15.6 182.4 183.7 181.9 187.3 183.7
48h 15.6 176.1 177.0 175.3 178.8 177.0
55h 21.1 189.5 192.2 189.0 192.6 190.8

Table.5 Load cell rading for Type IV girders, kN. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)
Time Temp Strand ID
1 2 3 4 Average
Initial 29.4 187.7 189.5 183.3 185.5 186.4
17h 15.6 195.3 194.4 188.6 192.2 192.6
40h 15.6 194.4 194.4 188.6 192.2 192.6
64h 15.6 188.2 188.2 181.9 185.9 185.9

2.4.3. TRANSFER LENGTH

The transfer length of prestressing strands at the ends of the girders was determined
by measuring the strains in a ‘‘strain gage bar” (SGB) embedded in each girder. Bars
used in girders C4, D4, and B4 had eight strain gages, while the bar used in girder A4
had nine strain gages. The gages were read with a standard strain gage indicator after
the concrete had cured and just before detensioning, in order to obtain the initial
readings. The gages were then read immediately after detensioning. The change in
strain for each gage is plotted in relation to its distance from the end of the girder in
Figs. 10 and 11. The average strain is also plotted in these figures. To determine the
transfer length from the measured strains, a method similar to that proposed by Oh
and Kim was followed to establish the strain plateau, which was obtained by drawing
a horizontal line at 95% of the maximum value of the plotted average strains. The
transfer length is taken as the horizontal distance from the origin (i.e. the end of the
girder) to where the horizontal line intersects the plotted average strain profile (see
Figs. 10 and 11). For the Type III girder, a transfer length of 0.711 m was estimated,
while 0.660 m was estimated for the Type IV girder.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.6 Transfer length for Type III girder. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

Figure.7 Transfer length for Type IV girder. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

2.4.4. THERMAL GRADIENTS DURING CASTING

www.SeminarSlide.com

Figures.8 and 9 represent a sample of the girder curing temperatures along with the
ambient temperature.

Figure.8 Thermocouples 1–5 for girder C4 at mid-span. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

Figure.9 Thermocouples 6–10 for girder C4 at mid-span. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et

al.)

2.4.5. CONCRETE STRAINS DURING CASTING

www.SeminarSlide.com

Concrete strains were recorded by using embedded VWGs. A typical result is shown
in Figure.10 for a series of vibrating wire gages. It is noticed that the strain values
change as the heat of hydration develops.

Figure.10 VWG strains for girder D4. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

2.4.6. PRESTRESS LOSSES

Table.6 shows that the prestress loss due to elastic shortening based on the strain
measurement is less than predicted, especially for the Type III Girder. It is suspected
that the gages failed to record the entire compressive strain during detensioning; this
could be due to some reasons such as inadequate consolidation of concrete around the
embedded gages or failure of the gage itself. By using the predicted loss due to elastic
shortening, it appears that the total prestress loss for the Type IV Girder given in
Table.7 is slightly overestimated.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Table.6 Measured vs predicted prestress loss due to elastic shortening. ( Hazim

M. Dwairi et al.)
Loss in prestress
Girder A4 Girder B4 Girder C4 Girder D4
Measured 88.3 98.6 4.1 2.8
Predicted 124.8 124.8 82.7 82.7
% Difference 29% 21% 95% 97%

Table.7 Prestress loss, MPa. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

Cause of loss Type
Elastic shortening 82.7 124.8
Crep 87.6 120.7
Shrinkage 9.0 16.5
Total loss 179.3 262
www.SeminarSlide.com
www.SeminarSlide.com

2.5 IN-SERVICE BRIDGE BEHAVIOUR

As previously noted, only girder-line 4 shown in Figure.11 was instrumented.

Figure.11 Bridge over the Neuse River plan view.

In this phase of research three types of instruments were utilized in this phase, twelve
previously installed thermocouples were retained and an additional two
thermocouples were placed in the deck at a distance of L/4 from the supports in spans
A and D, as shown in Figure.13. Twelve of the previously installed EM-5 Vibrating
Wire Gauges (VWGs), were retained and additional VWG’s were placed in the deck
at supports. Finally, one additional LVDT was used at each abutment and two extra
LVDT’s were used at the expansion joint to measure the longitudinal movement of the
girder. All instruments were connected to CR23X Campbell scientific data-loggers,
placed at bent diaphragms under the bridge and powered by solar panels. Two data-
loggers were used one for spans A and B, and the other for spans C and D. The data
was recorded every 4 h over a period of four month under normal traffic loading, at
each period the data-logger recorded the instruments readings for five minutes. The
data-logger records up to 1500 readings per second. The monitoring of the bridge
started two months after it was opened for traffic. Figure. 12 shows span C and D end
displacements due to thermal effects in addition to differential displacements
measured by LVDTs during the four month period.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.12 End displacements due to thermal effect and traffic loading (a) Girder
C, and (b) Girder D. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

Thermal effects were calculated in reference to the lowest temperature, these thermal
effects were calculated based upon the temperature gradients obtained from
thermocouples number 3, 4, and 5 for Girder D4 and thermocouples number 6, 7, and
8 for Girder C4 as shown in Figure. 13
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.13 Retained thermocouples of girder cross-sections along girder-line 4

and locations in each girder cross-section. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

The differential displacements represent the difference between the LVDT’s reading at
anytime and its reading when the lowest temperature was recorded. The
displacements measured by the LVDTs placed at the end of the girders show
additional end displacements due to traffic loading; however, maximum girder end
than 0.0064 m. End displacement of girders caused by end rotations due to
temperature gradient along the depth of the girder cross-section was found to be
minimal and it has insignificant effect on total end displacements. displacement due to
thermal effects and traffic loading was less.

2.6. CONTROLLED LOAD TESTING

Two static live load tests were conducted on this bridge, the first test took place before
the bridge was opened for traffic and the second test was eight months after the bridge
was put in-service. In both tests, a five-axle truck was used (Type 3S2 AASHTO
designation), loaded roughly to full capacity in one run and to half capacity in the
second; the truck and it is total weight are shown in Figure. 14.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.14 Configuration and weights of the truck used in live load tests.
( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

The truck was positioned on 10 different locations as shown in Figure.15 to maximize

moment at mid-spans and supports, and to estimate load distribution factors by
positioning the driver’s wheel on Girder-4 in one run and the passenger’s wheel on the
adjacent girder in another.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.15 Truck loading positions. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

In addition to the internal gages already embedded in the girder (VWG’s and
LVDT’s), two temporary string potentiometers were placed under the bridge at mid-
span D and mid-span A to record maximum deflections. The live load tests were
performed by placing the loaded five-axle truck on the desired location, when the
truck and trailer came to rest at the designated loading position, instruments readings
were recorded for a period of 30 s. The truck was then moved to next position without
unloading the bridge, and then readings were recorded in the previous manner.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.16 Strain distribution versus cross-section depth, for girder Type-IV at

the support between span A and B due to different loading positions.
( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

Figure. 16 represent the strain distribution at the support between span A and B due to
the different loading positions. It is clear that strains due to half-loaded truck are
approximately half of the strains due to the fully loaded truck, which indicates that the
girder behaved elastically as expected. Load versus strain for both tests is shown in
Figure.17. Strain is measured at mid-span D due to loading position 1 and at the mid-
depth of deck-slab at support between spans C and D due to loading position 2. The
strains recorded in the second live load test are larger than those recorded in the first
live load test, possibly indicating some minor softening of the system due to micro
cracking in the tension zone.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.17 Load versus strain for both live load tests; (a) strain measured at mid-
span D. (b) strain measured at support between span C and D.
( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

A comparison between experimental and calculated strains is shown in Figs.18 and

19. A simplified model was used for strain calculations; every two spans were
assumed to be a continuous beam, although, joints constructed between spans do not
guarantee full rigidity. Load distribution factors were obtained according to AASHTO
provisions and axle loads were distributed accordingly.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.18 Experimental and calculated strain values due to half-full and full
trucks. ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure. 18a and b show measured and calculated strains at mid-spans D and A,
respectively. Calculated strains were higher than measured strains for both spans and
for different loading values and positions. As a result, one can conclude that the load
distribution factors given by AASHTO are higher than the actual load distributions.

Figure.19 Experimental and calculated strain distribution along girder Type IV

at middle support between spans A and B due to loading position 5.
( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)
Figure. 19 shows the strain distribution along the cross-section depth at the middle
support between spans A and B. Note that the calculated neutral axis depth was found
to be smaller than the actual one. The slight drop in the neutral axis depth between
live load test one and two could be attributed to minor cracking in the bridge deck and
diaphragm. Another comparison can be made in terms of middle span deflection. Fig.
20a and b shows measured and calculated deflections at middle spans D and A,
respectively. Again, the calculated deflections were found to be higher than the actual
recorded values.
www.SeminarSlide.com

Figure.20 Experimental and calculated deflections due to half-full truck (250

kN). ( Hazim M. Dwairi et al.)

www.SeminarSlide.com
www.SeminarSlide.com

3. DISCUSSION

This research examined the material properties and behavior of four prestressed HPC
girders during casting and initial curing as well as during service. Based on this
research, the following conclusions can be drawn:
. 1. During concrete curing, the temperature measured by the embedded
thermocouples showed that peak temperatures occurring 7–8 h after casting never

reached more than Therefore, there was no danger of thermal cracking.

2. Based upon the load cell readings, practically there were no changes of the initial
prestressing force up to the time of detensioning. Therefore the measurement
suggested that there was no loss of prestress due to strand relaxation prior to
detensioning.
3. Upon detensioning, the transfer lengths for the 0.015 m strand were found to be
0.711 m and 0.660 m respectively, for Type III and Type IV girders. These values are
slightly less than the standard design value of 50 times the strand diameter or 0.762
m.
4. The calculated prestress loss due to elastic shortening was 82.7 MPa for the Type
III girders and 124.8 MPa for the Type IV girders. Total prestress loss was 179.3
MPa), i.e. 12.9%, for the Type III girders and 262.7 MPa, i.e. 19.1%, for the Type IV
girders.
5. The predicted camber compared closely with the measured camber. The close
prediction was possible because the use of load cells at the anchoring end of the
prestressing bed provided a more accurate value of the prestressing force at
transfer than the normally assumed prestressing force based on estimated loss of
prestress.
www.SeminarSlide.com

6. Girder end displacements were caused mainly by thermal effects with small effect
due to traffic loading, while displacements due to end rotations could be neglected,
however, maximum total girder end displacement was less than a quarter an inch.
7. The calculated strains and deflections based on AASHTO load distribution factors
were found to be higher than actual recorded data.

REFERENCES

1. B.H. Bharatkumar, R. Narayanan, B.K. Raghuprasad, D.S.

Ramachandramurthy(2000) “Mix proportioning of high performance concrete”
Cement & Concrete Composites 23 (2001) 71-80
2. D. Cusson, Z. Lounis, L. Daigle(2010) “Benefits of internal curing on service life
and life-cycle cost of high-performance concrete bridge decks – A case study” Cement
& Concrete Composites 32 (2010) 339–350
3. Hazim M. Dwairi, Matthew C. Wagner, Mervyn J. Kowalsky, Paul Zia(2010)
“Behavior of instrumented prestressed high performance concrete bridge girders”
Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 2294–2311
4.C.S. Suryawanshi (March 2007) “Structural significance of high performance
concrete” THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL
5. Design and Controll of Concrete Mixtures*EB001 “CHAPTER 17 High-
Performance Concrete”
6. Guest Article “Group Promotes Benefits Of High Performance Concrete Bridges”
ASCENT,WINTER 2001 by Basile G. Rabbat

Visit to www.SeminarSlide.com To get Free Seminar Topics

www.SeminarSlide.com