protection system, in which case the costs are comparable.

As the field experience with sulfur

concrete continues to accumulate, and its suppliers increase in number, the popularity of this
intriguing material will probably increase.
Another material not included in the table is concrete with high-alumina cement. It is
relatively expensive, but it offers much better chemical resistance to acids and sulfates than
regular portland cement concrete. Also, it sets faster and gains strength earlier. It can be used at
high temperatures—up to 572°F (300°C), or, with special refractory aggregate, up to 3272°F
(1800°C).36 On the flip side, concrete with high-alumina cement requires careful proportioning, a
low water–cement ratio, and careful curing. According to Beckmann,53 this material was used in
England in the period between the two world wars to improve the sulfate resistance of concrete,
but the resulting problems with strength loss have eclipsed the benefits. Neville67 details the
durability problems of high-alumina cement concrete and recommends caution in specifying it.

5.8.8 Choosing the Best Repair Material

Space constraints preclude an expanded discussion of each repair material. A good source of
additional information is ACI 546R, Guide to Concrete Repair.68 Another useful publication is
Selecting and Specifying Materials for Repair of Concrete Surfaces by the International Concrete
Repair Institute (ICRI).69 It lists many important properties of various repair materials, including
the modulus of elasticity, creep, and rate of drying shrinkage of each.
A concise tabulation of the physical properties of various prepackaged rapid-set cementitious
repair materials available on the market can be found in McGovern’s article “A Guide to Rapid-
Hardening Concrete.”62 The article lists the trade names and the manufacturers of various
prepackaged rapid-set products, along with each material’s working life, compressive strength,
and rate of drying shrinkage at 28 days. The commentary emphasizes, as we did, the importance
of selecting repair products with minimal rates of drying shrinkage.
So is there one “best” material for all concrete repairs? Unfortunately, no—at least, not yet.
Various materials can be used with success in various applications, but no single property,
formula, or test result will provide the magic bullet. A major 5-year study sponsored by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers compared the results of laboratory testing with actual field
performance of 12 various repair materials. The materials included 11 commercial prepackaged
repair mortars and a regular 4000-psi concrete mix.70 The trade names of the materials and a
summary of the rankings are given in Ref. 71.
The conclusions of the study? The researchers did not find a significant correlation between
the material properties and field performance. However, they identified some properties, which
we have already discussed, as important for good performance of repairs. Among them is tensile
strength—the materials with higher tensile strength performed better. Other critical properties
included modulus of elasticity, thermal expansion coefficient, and unrestrained drying shrinkage;
the lower all of these were, the better the performance observed. It is these observations of the
properties influencing the crack resistance of various materials, rather than the inconclusive
rankings, that make the study important.

5.9 Durability of Repairs
Perhaps the most important factor in making a successful concrete repair is an accurate