See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301566869

Mass Concrete Thermal Control Case Study: I-80 over the Missouri River Bridge
Construction

Presentation · August 2009

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1495.0800

CITATIONS READS

0 1,308

3 authors, including:

James S. Nelson Ahmad Abu-Hawash

Iowa Department of Transportation Iowa Department of Transportation
17 PUBLICATIONS 17 CITATIONS 14 PUBLICATIONS 196 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by James S. Nelson on 22 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Mass Concrete Thermal Control
Case Study: I-80 over the Missouri River Bridge Construction

2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium

Ahmad Abu-Hawash, Iowa DOT

James Nelson, Iowa DOT
John Gajda, CTL Group

August 20, 2009

What is Mass Concrete?
• ACI: “any volume of concrete with
dimensions large enough to require that
measures be taken to cope with
generation of heat from hydration of the
cement and attendant volume change to
minimize cracking”

Page 2 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Factors Affecting Mass Concrete
• Concrete mix design: components
• Environmental condition:
– Ambient temperature
– Concrete mix temperature
– Differential temperature
• Structural design: steel reinforcement
• Application: bridge elements
• Least dimension: 3’, 4’, or 5’?

Page 3 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Mass Concrete Hydration
• Significant heat is generated in the first few
days after placement
• Expected to reach maximum temperature
within 1 to 3 days after placement
• Heat is trapped and can not escape quickly
resulting in:
– Significant temperature difference: interior of
concrete is much hotter than its surface (>35°F)
• Thermal Cracking
– Concrete mix getting too hot (>160°F)
• Delayed Ettringite Formation (DEF)

Page 4 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Thermal Cracking
• Thermal cracking develops when the tensile stress
exceeds the tensile strength of concrete:
– Random map cracks in large foundation
– A series of vertical cracks in walls (widest near the base)
– Uniformly spaced cracks in beams (perpendicular to the
longest dimension)
• Mostly, a durability issue: easy pathways for air and
water
• In some severe cases, it may affect the structural
capacity

Page 5 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Delayed Ettringite Formation (DEF)

• Development of unstable hydration

• Long-term effect that may not show for
months or years after construction
• Can cause significant cracking

Page 6 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Thermal Control
• Objective: Eliminate thermal cracking
by controlling temperature differential
and mix temperature (prior to, during
and after concrete placement)
• Control measures should be evaluated
for costs vs. benefits

Page 7 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Thermal Control Measures
• Optimal concrete mix design
• Insulation
• Concrete cooling before placement
• Concrete cooling after placement
• Use of smaller placements

Page 8 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Optimal Concrete Mix Design
• Use low-heat cement such as Type II
• Use Class F fly ash and/or slag as a substitute
for a portion of the cement
• Use low water-to-cementitious materials ratio
• Minimize the amount of cementitious
materials in the mix
• Use Larger and better graded aggregates
• Limestone aggregates are better suited for
mass concrete

Page 9 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Insulation
• To control temperature differential: core
vs. surface
• Has no significant effect on maximum
concrete temperature for placements of
5’ or greater
• Typical R-value recommended: 2 to 4
hr.ft².°F/Btu

Page 10 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Concrete Cooling before Placement
• Each 1°F of precooling is expected to reduce
the concrete temperature (after placement)
by about the same amount
• Chilled water: about 5°F (100% subs.)
temperature reduction
• Chipped or shaved ice: about 15°F to 20°F
(75% subs.) temperature reduction
• Liquid nitrogen (LN2): as low as 35°F
reduction. Very effective but the most
expensive option

Page 11 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Concrete Cooling after Placement

• Cooling pipes:
– Non-corrosive piping embedded prior to
concrete placement
РUniformly distributed: typically 1ӯ pipes
@ 2’ to 4’ on center
– Removes heat from placed concrete by
circulating cool water from a nearby source

Page 12 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Smaller Placements
• Multiple lifts
• Result in schedule delays and increased
cost due to additional effort for multiple
thermal control, and horizontal joint
preparation

Page 13 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Case Study: I-80 over Missouri River

Page 14 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Iowa Mass Concrete Specifications
• Special Provision for Mass Concrete – Control of
Heat of Hydration
– Mix design
• Cement: Type II, IP, or IS – min. 560 lbs
• Slag and Class F fly ash substitution
• Maximum water to cementitious ratio = 0.45
– Thermal Control Plan (per 207.4R-05 ACI)
• Concrete temperature at placement: 40°F-70°F
• Max. Concrete temperature after placement: 160°F
• Temperature differential: 35°F
• Temperature sensing and recording

Page 15 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

I-80 over Missouri River
Thermal Control Plan

• Value engineering proposal by Jensen

Construction to modify project
specifications
• Proposed a thermal control plan based
on thermal modeling by CTL

Page 16 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Thermal Control Plan
• Concrete Mix
• Maximum Concrete Temperature
• Temperature Difference Limit
• Cooling System
• Insulation
• Temperature Monitoring & Reporting

Page 17 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Concrete Mix
• As developed by the supplier per
project specifications
– Type IP-F Cement: 420 lbs
– Slag: 207 lbs
– W/C ratio: 0.42
– Class V sand-gravel: 1586 lbs
– Limestone: 1322 lbs
– Air content: 6.5%

Page 18 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Maximum Concrete Temperature

• Initial concrete temperature based on

several-truck rolling average: maximum
of 85°F instead of 70°F
• Concrete temperature after placement:
maximum of 160°F as per specifications

Page 19 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Temperature Difference Limit
• A compromise between the constant
limit and the performance-based limit
• Included a variable factor of safety
• More conservative in the early age but
less conservative at the design strength
• Calculated specifically for the project
mix design

Page 20 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Temperature Difference Graph
100

90 50

Temperature Difference Limit*, °C

80
Temperature Difference Limit*, °F

70 40

60
30
50

40
20
30
* Maximum allowable temperature difference between the
20 temperature sensor locations shown on Drawing Nos. 3 and 4. 10
** Actual compressive strength of the in-place concrete at the
10 surface, not the design strength.

0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Compressive Strength**, psi

Page 21 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Cooling System
• Cooling piping system layout was developed
for each component (footing, stem, cap,…)
• River water was continuously circulated
through the cooling pipes until the insulation
is removed
• Flow rate must be sufficiently high so that the
water does not heat by more than 2°F to 3°F

Page 22 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Typical Cooling System - Footing

Page 23 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Typical Cooling
System - Stem

Page 24 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Insulation
• Used on top surfaces, over side forms and to
cover protruding reinforcing steel
• R-values in accordance with the Thermal
Control Plan
• To remain in place throughout the monitoring
period but may be temporarily removed to
prepare for additional placements

Page 25 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Typical Insulation Blanket

Page 26 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Temperature Monitoring & Reporting
• To measure and report concrete
temperatures at critical locations
(center, surface,…)
• Two temperature sensors (a primary
and backup) at each location
• Data is recorded on an hourly basis
• Report of temperature data (max. and
differential) is issued

Page 27 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

 Typical Temperature Sensors

Page 28 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Typical Thermal Control Graph
TCP1b Footing #: Pier 7 Column final temps Air Temperature,
Center Temperature,
Top Surface Temperature,
Time/Date of Hour 0 : Corner Temperature,
170 Side Surface Temperature,
Measured Temperature Difference, °F
160 TCP1b Temperature Difference Limit, °F

150
Temperature or Temperature Difference, °F

140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Hours

Page 29 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

 Thermal Control Plan Elements

Footing Stem Columns Cap

Cooling Cooling Least Cooling Least Cooling
Pier Size Date Cast Pipes Size Date Cast Pipes Dim. Date Cast Pipes Dim. Date Cast Pipes
1 43' x 12' x 4'-6 10/20/2008 No 39' x 4' x 7' 12/4/2008 No 4' 12/4/2008 No 4' 1/23/2009 No
2 43' x 15' x 5' 11/19/2008 No 38' x 5' x 19' 1/9/2009 No 5' 2/18/2009 No 5' 3/20/2009 No
3 43' x 27' x 7'-3 10/30/2008 No 38' x 6' x 16' 11/21/2008 No 6' 1/23/2009 No 6' 2/25/2009 No
4 43' x 15' x 5' 11/4/2008 No 38' x 5' x 18' 12/10/2008 No 5' 3/5/2009 No 5' 3/20/2009 No
5 43' x 19' x 6'-6 2/3/2009 No 38' x 5' x 20' 2/17/2009 No 5' 3/31/2009 No 5' 5/5/2009 No
6 46' x 18' x 5'-9 11/4/2008 No 38' x 8'-4 x 37' 11/19/2008 Yes 8'-4 1/6/2009 No 8'-4 1/22/2009 No
7 43' x 25'-6 x 9' 8/5/2008 Yes 38' x 7' x 35' 9/3/2008 Yes 7' 10/15/2008 Yes 7' 10/30/2008 No
8 77' x 39'-7 x 10'-6 12/30/2008 Yes 46' x 9' x 41' 2/12/2009 Yes 9' 4/3/2009 No 9' 4/17/2009 Yes
9 77' x 39'-7 x 10'-6 6/11/2009 Yes 46' x 9' x 34' 6/30/2009 Yes 9' 8/14/2009 Yes 9'
10 43' x 19' x 5'-3 3/5/2009 No 38' x 8'-4 x 7' 3/13/2009 No 8'-4 5/21/2009 No 8'-4 6/4/2009 Yes
11 43' x 17' x 5'-9 1/20/2009 No 38' x 5' x 5' 1/28/2009 No 5' 2/20/2009 No 5' 3/6/2009 No

Page 30 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Completion of Thermal Control
• Hottest portion of concrete has reached and
begun to cool from its maximum temperature
• Concrete has reached and begun to cool from
its maximum temperature difference
• At least 3 days has elapsed
• Difference between the hottest portion of
concrete and the average air temperature is
< current difference limit

Page 31 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

Summary
• The implementation of the Thermal
Control Plan saved money and kept the
project on schedule
• No thermal cracking in concrete was
reported

Page 32 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009

View publication stats

References
• Iowa DOT Standard Specifications and
Special Provisions
• Engineering Mass Concrete Structures,
November 2006 – PCA by J. Gajda and
E. Alsamsam
• ACI 207.4R-05
• I-80 over Missouri River
Thermal Control Plan by CTL

Page 33 2009 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Symposium August 20, 2009