Professional Documents
Culture Documents
30 - 45% Concrete
Coarse aggregate (mortar + coarse aggregate)
Theoretical vs. Laboratory vs.
Field
Mixture designs can be generated “on
paper” as a starting point
Laboratory trial batches are required to
verify and optimize mixture proportions
There is no substitute for trial batches and
testing to determine incompatibility of
materials and numerous other potential
problems
Field trials and a test strip using regular
batching and mixing techniques are the
final verification of the mixture
Laboratory Testing Plan
A suggested laboratory testing plan should
consider the following characteristics
Workability
Strength
Air content
Density
Permeability
Shrinkage
The relative size and importance of a project
determine which of these parameters are
evaluated and to what degree
Aggregate Grading Optimization
Aggregates are the most dimensionally
stable and least expensive constituents in
concrete
Also the least energy intensive to produce
It is desirable to minimize the amount of
paste required to achieve workability by
optimizing aggregate gradation
Can reduce well below 340 kg/m3
Optimized gradation simply means
combining available aggregates in the
proper proportions to minimize void space
Aggregate Gradation
CONTROLS workability!!
Well-graded combined aggregate
gradation will:
Reduce water demand
Lower drying shrinkage
Increase workability
Improve strength
Minimize Paste Content
Source: Portland Cement Association
Consolidated Bulk Density in Two
Aggregate System
156
155
154
CBD, pcf
153
152
151
150
149
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent Sand
Shilstone Method of Optimized
Gradation
The Shilstone method uses three separate
evaluation tools to determine optimal
gradation:
Workability/Coarseness Factor chart
○ Workability Factor increased 2.5 points for each
50 kg cement above 340 kg/m3
0.45 power chart
Percent aggregate retained chart
Use of these three charts greatly simplifies
combined aggregate grading and checks
for potential problems
Not “foolproof”…requires knowledge
Combined Grading
100
FA 1
80 CA 1
Percent Passing
Combined
60
40
20
0
# 200 # 100 # 50 # 30 # 16 #8 #4 3/8" 1/2" 3/4" 1" 1 2"
1/2"
Sieve
Shilstone Coarseness Chart
Gradation on previous slide
45
IV III
Percent passing the No. 8 sieve
40
Workability Factor
II
35
I
30
V
25
20
100 80 60 40 20 0
Coarseness Factor
Percent retained on No. 8 sieve that was retained on the 3/8 in sieve
0.45 Power Chart
100
80
% Retained
60
40
Mixture
Max Density
20
Limits
Sieve (^0.45)
Percent Retained
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
Sieve #8
# 16
Percent Retained Chart
# 30
# 50
# 100
# 200
Percent Retained
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4
Sieve #8
# 16
Percent Retained Chart
# 30
# 50
# 100
# 200
1 2 4
3 5