Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Analysis of Some Basic Creep Tests On Concrete and Their Implications For Modeling
Analysis of Some Basic Creep Tests On Concrete and Their Implications For Modeling
DOI: 10.1002/suco.201600197
TECHNICAL PAPER
1
Materials and Structures Department, Université
Paris-Est, IFSTTAR, Paris, France The basic creep of concrete is the delayed deformation that occurs when concrete
2
Laboratoire GSA, UPE, Paris, France is subjected to loading without drying. This paper analyzes some findings from
3
Laboratoire Navier, UMR 8205, École des Ponts, the literature. The derivatives of the compliance function J of basic creep tests
IFSTTAR, CNRS, UPE, Champs-sur-Marne, with different loading ages t0 are compared. It has been observed that when dJ/dt
France
is considered as a function of time t, the long-term behavior is logarithmic with a
Correspondence
uniform slope. This indicates that basic creep could be expressed as a logarithmic
Jean-Michel Torrenti, Materials and Structures
Department, Université Paris-Est, IFSTTAR, function in which the age of loading does not affect the final slope. In the recent
Paris, France. fib Model Code 2010 (MC2010), basic creep is expressed exactly in this way.
Email: jean-michel.torrenti@ifsttar.fr Using experimental data, the parameters of the model are calculated for each test
and compared with the values proposed by MC2010. It is shown that MC2010
gives a fairly good set of values for the parameters whose accuracy could never-
theless be improved by adjusting these parameters to match experimental results.
KEYWORDS
ε = Jσ: ð1Þ
1 | I N T R O D U C T I O N— B A S IC C R E E P O F
2 3
C ON CR E T E—E X P E RI M E N T A L Acker and Ulm, analyzing Le Roy's tests, examined
OBS E R V A T I ON S the derivative of the compliance dJ/dt. Considering different
loading ages, they showed that this derivative tends to be
The ability to accurately predict the delayed deformation of 1/Ct when t is large, with the same value of C for a given
prestressed concrete is important for the correct design of concrete regardless of the age of loading, t0 (see Figure 1).
prestressing. In modern codes, delayed strains are broken Their conclusions were that two mechanisms are involved
down into four components: autogenous shrinkage, drying in basic creep: a short-term mechanism corresponding to the
shrinkage, basic creep, and drying creep—see, for instance, stress-induced movement of water toward the largest diame-
MC2010, the most recent fib model code.1 In this paper, ter pores and a long-term mechanism due to irreversible vis-
only basic creep will be considered. cous behavior, related to viscous flow in the hydrates
Basic creep is conventionally obtained by measuring the (slippage between layers of C-S-H).
deformation of a concrete specimen protected from desiccation The microprestress theory also offers an explanation for the
and loaded under a constant stress σ. In the laboratory, this is long-term creep: assuming that aging is due to a variation of the
achieved by protecting the concrete from drying. To obtain the viscosity at a microscopic level, a variation of the stresses at the
basic creep, simultaneous measurements are made of autoge- same level is induced.4,5 In the case of basic creep, Bažant has
nous shrinkage so that basic creep can be deduced from raw shown that the assumption of a flow growing as a logarithmic
creep measurements on the specimen. The compliance J is function of time is in accordance with this explanation of the
defined such that the mechanical deformation ε (which is the long-term creep and is introduced in the B3 and B4 models.6,7
deformation due to the applied load, i.e., the total strain minus If the derivative of the compliance of the experimental
the shrinkage) is equal to the product of J and the applied stress: results presented before (Figure 1) is expressed as a function
Structural Concrete. 2017;1–6. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/suco © 2017 fib. International Federation for Structural Concrete 1
2 TORRENTI AND LE ROY
FIGURE 7 Comparison between experimental results and Equation (2)— FIGURE 9 Comparison between experimental results and Equation (2)—
Hanson's tests.15 The corresponding files in the NU database are C_002_02 Browne's tests.17 The corresponding files in the NU database are C_110_01
to 06. The solid lines correspond to the use of Equation (2) with adjusted to 04. The solid lines correspond to the use of Equation (2) with adjusted
parameters, the dashed lines to the application of MC2010 relations (with parameters, the dashed lines to the application of MC2010 relations (with
β1 = β2 = 1), and the dots to experimental results. Loading ages are 2, 7, β1 = β2 = 1), and the dots to experimental results. Loading ages are 7, 60,
28, 90, and 365 days 400, and 4,560 days
Parameter fitting was performed on each concrete type 1, indicating that Equation (3) overestimates the value of
by the least squares method, considering a single value for parameter C in the tests used in this study. The values of
β1C for all the tests performed by each author with the same parameter β2 exhibit greater variation, especially when load-
concrete. The aim is not to find the best fit for the relation of ing is applied before 28 days. In this case, the value of τ(t0)
the parameters with the strength from a large database like is very low, and a small difference between experimental
the NU database. In this case, a more sophisticated approach fitting and MC2010 will result in a high β2 value. However,
is mandatory.19,20 Table 2 presents the parameters obtained this difference is very important because this parameter will
for the concrete types in question. result in greater creep strains.
This also shows that Equations (2)–(5), which are based
3 | C O M P A R I S O N WI T H M C 2 0 1 0 on a small number of mechanical parameters, are unable to
capture all the sources of variation in creep (e.g., the nature
We can then compare the values obtained by fitting of the aggregates or the binder).
Equation (2) to the experimental results with those proposed Figure 11a and b presents the comparisons for parameter
by the Model Code 2010. Table 3 presents the values of τ(t0) in the case of SL and R cements, respectively. Agree-
parameters β1 and β2. The values of parameter β1 are below ment is satisfactory, but some variability in these parameters
TORRENTI AND LE ROY 5
TABLE 2 Values obtained for the parameters β1C and β2τ(t0) for the tests presented in Figures 5–10
FIGURE 11 (a) Changes in τ(t0) predicted by MC2010 and obtained by fitting experimental results—cement type SL. (b) Changes in τ(t0) predicted by
MC2010 and obtained by fitting experimental results—cement type R
is observed between the different concrete types. For sensi- as a function of time since loading, in the long term, the
tive structures in which the prediction of creep is important, derivative of the compliance is linear in log–log space.
these parameters should be calibrated on the basis of prior This analysis also shows that basic creep compliance
laboratory experiments. may be expressed as a logarithmic function of time, invol-
ving two parameters, C and τ(t0). If we fix the parameter
C for a given concrete and τ(t0) for each loading age, the
4 | CON CLU SION comparison of this expression with a number of experiments
in the literature shows that the long-term temporal behavior
The analysis of experimental results for basic creep ordinary of basic creep at different loading ages can be satisfactorily
and high-performance concrete shows that when expressed predicted. A comparison of the expression proposed in
6 TORRENTI AND LE ROY
MC2010 for basic creep with experimental results shows 16. Nagamatsu S, Sato, Y, Takeda Y. Creep Function for Aging Con-
crete. In: Bazant ZP, ed. Fourth RILEM International Symposium on
that the accuracy of the model is improved when the two
Creep and Shrinkage of Concrete: Mathematical Modeling; 1986,
parameters, C and τ(t0), are adjusted to match creep experi- 743–754.
ments. This procedure is recommended for structures that 17. Browne R, Blundell R. The influence of loading age and temperature on
the long term creep behaviour of concrete in a sealed, moisture stable state.
are sensitive to creep.
Mater Struct. 1969;2:133-143.
18. Kommendant GJ, Polivka M, Pirtz D. Study of concrete properties for pre-
stressed concrete reactor vessels. Final Report No. UCSESM 76-3
REFERENC ES
(to General Atomic Company). Berkeley, CA: Department of Civil Engi-
1. Muller H, Anders I, Breiner R, Vogel M. Concrete: treatment of types and neering, University of California; 1976.
properties in fib Model Code 2010. Struct Concr. 2013;14(4):320–334. 19. Fédération internationale du béton (fib). Code-type models for structural
2. Acker P, Ulm F. Creep and shrinkage of concrete: physical origins and behaviour of concrete—background of the constitutive relations and mate-
practical measurements. Nucl Eng Des. 2001;203:143-158. rial models in fib MC2010, fib Bulletin No. 70, Lausanne; 2013.
3. Le Roy R. Déformations instantanées et différées des bétons à hautes 20. Wendner R, Hubler MH, Bažant ZP. Optimization method, choice of form
performances—Etude paramétrique en fonction de la formulation— and uncertainty quantification of model B4 using laboratory and 23 multi-
Proposition de modèles simplifiés [PhD thesis]. Ecole nationale des ponts et decade bridge databases. Mater Struct. 2015;48(4):771-756.
chaussées; 1995.
4. Bažant ZP, Hauggaard AB, Baweja S, Ulm F-J. Microprestress-
solidification theory for concrete creep. I. Aging and drying effects. J Eng
AUTHOR'S BIOGRAPHIES
Mech ASCE. 1997;123(11):1188-1194.
5. Bažant ZP, Hauggaard AB, Baweja S. Microprestress-solidification theory Jean-Michel Torrenti
for concrete creep. II. Algorithm and verification. J Eng Mech ASCE.
Deputy director of the department
1997;123(11):1195-1201.
6. Bažant ZP, Baweja S. Creep and shrinkage prediction model for analysis Materials and Structures at Ifsttar,
and design of concrete structures: Model B3. In: Al-Manaseer A, ed. Adam professor at Ecole nationale des
Neville Symposium: Creep and Shrinkage—Structural Design Effects, ACI ponts ParisTech.
SP-194. Farmington Hills, MI: Am. Concrete Institute; 2000:1-83.
7. RILEM Technical Committee TC-242-MDC (Z.P. Bažant, chair). Model
B4 for creep, drying shrinkage and autogenous shrinkage of normal and
high-strength concretes with multi-decade applicability (RILEM draft rec-
ommendation: TC-242-MDC multi-decade creep and shrinkage of concrete:
material model and structural analysis). Mater Struct. 2015;48(4):750-753. Robert Le Roy
8. Vandamme M, Ulm F. Nanoindentation investigation of creep properties of
Professor at école nationale supérieure
calcium silicate hydrates. Cem Concr Res. 2013;52:38-52.
9. Bažant ZP, Qiang Y, Guang-Hua L. Excessive long-time deflections of pre- d'architecture Paris Malaquais, director
stressed box girders: I. Record-span bridge in Palau and other paradigms. of the European Civil Engineering
ASCE J Struct Eng. 2012;138(6):676-686. advanced masters of Ecole nationale
10. Benboudjema F, Torrenti JM. On the very long term delayed behaviour of
biaxially prestressed structures: the case of the containments of nuclear des ponts ParisTech
power plants. In: Concreep10 Conference; 2015.
11. Jirasek M, Havlasek P. Accurate approximations of concrete creep compli-
ance functions based on continuous retardation spectra. Comput Concr.
2014;135:155-168.
12. Le Roy R, Le Maou F, Torrenti JM. Long term basic creep behavior of high
performance concrete. Data and modelling. Mater Struct. 2017;50:85.
13. Kawasumi M. Kasahara K, Kuriyama T. Creep of Concrete at Elevated
Temperatures, Part 3. The Influence of Ages at Loading and Water/Cement
Ratios. CRIEPI Report, No. 382008; 1982.
How to cite this article: Torrenti J-M, Le Roy R.
14. Shritharan S. Structural Effects of Creep and Shrinkage on Concrete Struc- Analysis of some basic creep tests on concrete and
tures [ME thesis]. University Auckland; 1989. their implications for modeling. Structural Concrete.
15. Hanson JA. A ten-year study of creep properties of concrete. Report No. -
2017;0:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201600197
SP-38. Denver, CO: Concrete Laboratory, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Reclamation; 1953.