Sei sulla pagina 1di 72
NOVEMBER 2015 V. 37 No. 11
NOVEMBER 2015
V. 37 No. 11

Sustainability & Resilience

29 The Challenge of Predicting the Shear Strength of Very Thick Slabs

2015 V. 37 No. 11 Sustainability & Resilience 29 The Challenge of Predicting the Shear Strength
Work quickly. Work simply. Work accurately. StructurePoint’s Productivity Suite of powerful software tools for
Work quickly. Work simply. Work accurately. StructurePoint’s Productivity Suite of powerful software tools for

Work quickly. Work simply. Work accurately.

StructurePoint’s Productivity Suite of powerful software tools for reinforced concrete analysis & design

software tools for reinforced concrete analysis & design Finite element analysis & de- sign of reinforced,

Finite element analysis & de- sign of reinforced, precast ICF & tilt-up concrete walls

sign of reinforced, precast ICF & tilt-up concrete walls Finite element analysis & design of reinforced

Finite element analysis & design of reinforced concrete foundations, combined footings or slabs on grade

Analysis, design
Analysis, design

& investigation of

reinforced concrete beams & one-way slab systems
reinforced concrete
beams & one-way
slab systems

Analysis, design

& investigation of

reinforced concrete beams & slab systems

of reinforced concrete beams & slab systems Design & investigation of rectangular, round &

Design & investigation of rectangular, round & irregularly shaped concrete column sections

Get New Solver for speed & capacity with Version 8.0 Upgrade!

StructurePoint’s suite of productivity tools are so easy to learn and simple to use that you’ll be able to start saving time and money almost immediately. And when you use StructurePoint software, you’re also taking advantage of the Portland Cement Association’s more than 90 years of experience, expertise, and technical support in concrete design and construction.

Visit StructurePoint.org to download your trial copy of our software products.

For more information on licensing and pricing options please call 847.966.4357 or e-mail info@StructurePoint.org.

CI_9-14

more information on licensing and pricing options please call 847.966.4357 or e-mail info@StructurePoint.org. CI_9-14
CONNECTING LEGACIES OF INNOVATION UNDER ONE BRAND. MASTER BUILDERS SOLUTIONS. Partnerships to Build a Sustainable

CONNECTING LEGACIES OF INNOVATION UNDER ONE BRAND.

MASTER BUILDERS SOLUTIONS.

Partnerships to Build a Sustainable Tomorrow

Meeting the construction needs of today and tomorrow requires a connected approach. By creating one global brand for the construction chemicals industry, we are combining the leading expertise and innovative strength of BASF brands with more than a century of experience under one roof: Master Builders Solutions. We are dedicated to partnering with our customers to help them succeed in solving the most challenging construction applications, all while minimizing environmental impact and saving resources.

www.master-builders-solutions.basf.us For careers at BASF please visit http://jobs.basf.us/

For careers at BASF please visit http://jobs.basf.us/ © 2013 BASF Corporation. All rights reserved.

© 2013 BASF Corporation. All rights reserved.

Get

Certified

Since 1980, ACI has tested over 400,000 concrete technicians, inspectors, supervisors, and craftsmen in 20 different certification programs.

When you have a need for qualified concrete professionals— specify ACI Certification.

Visit www.ACICertification.org for:

Descriptions of ACI Certification Programs — Includes program requirements and reference/ resource materials.

Schedule of Upcoming/Testing Sessions — Search by program and/or state.

Directory of Certified Individuals — Confirm an individual’s certification and date of expiration.

CCRL LAB TOUR

The Cement and Concrete Reference Laboratory offers performance examinations for the ACI Concrete Strength Testing Technician and ACI Aggregate Testing Technician – Level 1 certification programs.

Testing Technician – Level 1 certification programs. To schedule your lab for CCRL inspection, and to

To schedule your lab for CCRL inspection, and to arrange for performance testing, contact Jan Prowell at +1.240.436.4800.

Upcoming tour locations are:

November and December 2015 Northern California Southern California

January 2016

Eastern Canada

Northern California

Southern California

Ciinternational

Concrete

The Magazine of the Concrete Community

NOVEMBER 2015

V. 37 No. 11

25
25
46
46

SUSTAINABILITY & RESILIENCE

29

The Challenge of Predicting the Shear Strength of Very Thick Slabs

Results support recommendation to use at least minimum shear reinforcement by Michael P. Collins, Evan C. Bentz, Phillip T. Quach, and Giorgio T. Proestos

38

Quality Control for Concrete Durability

A case study provides comparisons of work performed under performance and prescriptive specifications by Odd E. Gjørv

45

Condition Assessment of Launch Pad 39B

Ensuring the historic site at the John F. Kennedy Space Center will continue to make history by Richard E. Weyers, Alberto A. Sagüés, and Jerzy Z. Zemajtis

ALSO FEATURING

15

Knowledge to Practice: ACI Foundation

Memorial fellowship created to honor ACI’s Dan Falconer

20

Awards at The ACI Concrete Convention and Exposition – Fall 2015

Recipients to be honored at the Opening Session in Denver, CO

25

Notable Concrete in Denver

Some examples of recent precast construction in the region

68

Concrete Q&A

Designing Anchors and Their Attachments for Tensile Loading

November

Ci

Concrete international

PUBLISHER

John C. Glumb, CAE (John.Glumb@concrete.org)

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Rex C. Donahey, PE (Rex.Donahey@concrete.org)

ENGINEERING EDITOR

W. Agata Pyc (Agata.Pyc@concrete.org)

MANAGING EDITOR

Keith A. Tosolt (Keith.Tosolt@concrete.org)

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Lacey J. Stachel (Lacey.Stachel@concrete.org)

ADVERTISING

Todd Eckman Network Media Partners, Inc. (teckman@networkmediapartners.com)

PUBLISHING SERVICES MANAGER

Barry M. Bergin

EDITORS

Carl R. Bischof (Senior Editor), Tiesha Elam, Kaitlyn J. Hinman, Kelli R. Slayden (Senior Editor)

GRAPHIC DESIGNERS

Gail L. Tatum (Senior Designer), Susan K. Esper, Ryan M. Jay, Aimee M. Kahaian

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Angela R. Matthews

Jay, Aimee M. Kahaian EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Angela R. Matthews AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE http://www.concrete.org Tel.
Jay, Aimee M. Kahaian EDITORIAL ASSISTANT Angela R. Matthews AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE http://www.concrete.org Tel.

AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE

http://www.concrete.org Tel. +1.248.848.3700 Fax. +1.248.848.3150

39
39
At the University of Toronto, laboratory staff and research assistants partici- pated in a project

At the University of Toronto, laboratory staff and research assistants partici- pated in a project to construct and load to failure a specimen representing a strip cut from a 13 ft (4 m) thick slab. Engineers from around the globe were invited to provide predictions of the shear response of such thick slabs. For more on the research, see the article on p. 29.

departments

7

President’s Memo

10

On the Move

11

News

16

Chapter Reports

24

Education Seminars

44

What’s New, What’s Coming

54

Industry Focus

55

Products & Practice

58

Product Showcase

60

Calls for Papers

62

Bookshelf

63

Meetings

64

Public Discussion

65

Spanish Translation Synopses

66

Membership Application

67

Bulletin Board

67

Advertisers’ Index

Copyright © 2015 American Concrete Institute. Printed in the United States of America. All correspondence should be directed to the headquarters office: 38800 Country Club Drive, Farmington Hills, MI 48331. Telephone: +1.248.848.3700. Facsimile (FAX): +1.248.848.3701. Concrete International (US ISSN 0162-4075) is published monthly by the American Concrete Institute, 38800 Country Club Drive, Farmington Hills, MI 48331. Periodicals postage paid at Farmington, MI, and at additional mailing offices. Concrete International has title registration ® with the U.S. Patent Trademark Office. Subscription rates: $166 per year (U.S. and possessions); $175 (elsewhere) payable in advance: single copy price is $27.00 for nonmembers, $20.00 for ACI members, both prepaid. POSTMASTER: send address changes to Concrete International, 38800 Country Club Drive, Farmington Hills, MI 48331. The Institute is not responsible for the statements or opinions expressed in its publications. Institute publications are not able to, nor intended to supplant individual training, responsibility, or judgment of the user, or the supplier, of the information presented. Permission is granted by the American Concrete Institute for libraries and other users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) to photocopy any article herein for the fee of $3.00 per transaction. Payments marked ISSN 0162-4075/97 should be sent directly to the Copyright Clearance Center, 21 Congress St., Salem, MA. 01970. Copying done for other than personal or internal reference use without the express permission of the American Concrete Institute is prohibited. Requests for special permission or bulk copying should be addressed to the Publisher, Concrete International, American Concrete Institute. Canadian GST #126213149RT

American Concrete Institute. Canadian GST #126213149RT 4 NOVEMBER 2015 | Ci | www.concreteinternational.com

IN Ci

Concordancies

I n this month’s President’s Memo,

guest author Johan L. Silfwerbrand

calls for a common strategy toward

meeting the numerous challenges faced by our industry. He concludes that working “on a common concrete code would be one of the most important parts” of that strategy (see p. 7). In the interim, it remains worthwhile to compare existing codes against each other, using data from numerical models and/or laboratory tests as benchmarks. This month’s CI includes such an assessment, conducted by a team of researchers at the University of Toronto and focused on the shear capacity of thick, slab-type elements (see p. 29). This work provides strong evidence that the ACI 318 Code overestimates the contribution provided by plain concrete in resisting shear forces in slab-type elements. Further, because it allows that contribution to increase with concrete strength up to a 10,000 psi (69 MPa) limit, the Code may be inadvertently encouraging the use of high-strength concrete in lieu of shear reinforcement. In many cases, the elements are mass concrete placements, and the heat of hydration of high-strength mixtures could force the use of external and internal cooling, easily negating any savings in shear reinforcement. The research also shows the significant benefit of using minimum reinforcement in the form of headed deformed bars. Of course, deep elements with top mats of reinforcing bars will already contain bars (standees) that effectively act as shear reinforcement but probably don’t meet the Code’s anchorage requirements. Additional study of standees might provide value to the industry—even if it’s little more than confirmation that existing elements are not totally dependent on the shear capacity of the concrete alone. Rex C. Donahey

American Concrete Institute

Board of Direction

President

Sharon L. Wood

Past President

Board Members

James K. Wight Anne M. Ellis William E. Rushing Jr.

Directors

Dean A. Browning JoAnn P. Browning Cesar A. Constantino Alejandro Durán-Herrera Augusto H. Holmberg Kimberly Kayler

Cary S. Kopczynski Kevin A. MacDonald Fred Meyer Michael M. Sprinkel Roberto Stark David M. Suchorski

Vice Presidents

Michael J. Schneider

Khaled W. Awad

Executive Vice President

Ronald Burg

Technical Activities Committee

chair

Trey Hamilton III

secretary

Matthew R. Senecal

Michael C. Brown JoAnn P. Browning Catherine E. French Fred R. Goodwin Larry Kahn Neven Krstulovic-Opara Kimberly E. Kurtis Tracy D. Marcotte Jan Olek Michael S. Stenko Andrew W. Taylor Eldon G. Tipping

Educational Activities Committee

chair

Frances T. Griffith

staff liaison

Kathryn A. Amelio

Cesar A. Constantino Alejandro Durán-Herrera Joe Hug Antonio Nanni Ronald L. O’Kane William D. Palmer Jr. Lawrence L. Sutter Lawrence H. Taber Scott Tarr Ronald Vaughn David W. Whitmore

Certification Programs Committee

chair

George R. Wargo

staff liaison

John W. Nehasil

Khaled W. Awad Roger J. Becker William Ciggelakis Alejandro Durán-Herrera J. Mitchell Englestead Brian Green Augusto H. Holmberg Joe Hug Warren E. McPherson Jr. Thomas L. Rozsits Xiomara Sapon Michael M. Sprinkel Pericles C. Stivaros David M. Suchorski Janet White

ACI Staff & Departments

Executive Vice President: Ronald Burg (Ron.Burg@concrete.org) Senior Managing Director: John C. Glumb (John.Glumb@concrete.org)

ACI Foundation:

ann.daugherty@acifoundation.org

Certification:

aci.certification@concrete.org

Chapter Activities:

john.conn@concrete.org

Engineering:

techinq@concrete.org

Event Services:

conventions@concrete.org

Finance and Administration:

donna.halstead@concrete.org

Human Resources:

lori.purdom@concrete.org

Information Systems:

support@concrete.org

Marketing and Business Development:

diane.baloh@concrete.org

Member/Customer Services:

acimemberservices@concrete.org

Professional Development:

claire.hiltz@concrete.org

Publishing Services:

barry.bergin@concrete.org

Sustaining Members

See pages 8-9 for a list of ACI’s Sustaining Members.

To learn more about our sustaining members, go to the ACI website at www.concrete.org/membership/sustainingmembers.aspx.

February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more
February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more
February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more
February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more
February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more
February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more
February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more
February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more
February 2-5, 2016 Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth –Central Hall 4213 – Learn more

February 2-5, 2016

Visit ACI’s World of Concrete booth

–Central Hall 4213

Learn more about ACI’s publications, education, and certification.

Other features:

• Talk to industry experts

• Dedicated contractor’s section

• Membership discounts

• Recursos en español

Talk to industry experts • Dedicated contractor’s section • Membership discounts • Recursos en español #ACIatWOC

#ACIatWOC

President's

Memo

International Cooperation is the Goal

President's Memo International Cooperation is the Goal M y first experience with ACI was at the

M y first experience with

ACI was at the Spring

Convention in 1989 in

Atlanta, GA. I was in the United States as a post-doc and had the pleasure of spending 6 months in Austin, TX, and Urbana- Champaign, IL. My supervisor Sven Sahlin introduced me to his friends Jim Jirsa and Mete Sozen and they introduced me to ACI. Since then I have tried to attend every second convention and I think the reception you

experience when you arrive as a European to ACI is very positive and rather different from the conditions at various conferences elsewhere. I am thinking not only of the official recognition given to international attendees at the Opening Session and the invitation to the President’s Reception but also the welcome from kind individuals. ACI is almost like a very big family. During my first conventions, everyone seemed to be astonished that I had made the long trip from Sweden to North America for such a short visit, but more recently, the astonishment has vanished concurrently with the decreasing air ticket prices. However, the journey is still very long; you just pay less for every hour you spend in the air. Another difference between ACI conventions and most international conferences is ACI’s focus on committee meetings. Having fixed dates for committee meetings at least twice a year facilitates ongoing activities within each committee, and the travel throughout the United States and Canada required of members does not seem to impair the efficiency. In many other volunteer organizations, the process of finding meeting days is very time-consuming and often slows a committee’s progress. Compared to European concrete organizations, I also think that ACI is much better at attracting students and young professionals. Young professionals play important roles as Committee Secretaries or even Chairs, Speakers, and Session Moderators. Personally, I am engaged in the work of both ACI and fib (the International Federation of Structural Concrete). I know

Guest author Johan L. Silfwerbrand, FACI

that efforts are being made to improve the cooperation between these two important international concrete organiza- tions but wish that the progress could be faster. During my time as the President of the Swedish Concrete Association, I was very happy to sign an International Partner Agreement with ACI. We could develop the cooperation further, and any apprehension that the larger society would overshadow the smaller one has been shown to be completely groundless. In Europe, fib paved the way for the current Eurocode 2 that successfully has replaced the national concrete codes in the member states to facilitate trade between the countries.

“…the reception you experience when you arrive as a European to ACI is very positive…”

Being a faculty member at a university with international ambitions and many incoming students, I am pleased that today we can illustrate the hour-long lectures with examples from Eurocode 2 and not just the old Swedish code. Recently, fib released MC 2010, which will form the basis for the next version of Eurocode 2 that may be launched in 2020 or 2025. Simultaneously, ACI has released a new version of ACI 318. When are we going to make one document that could be used across the entire globe? A concrete structure should not be designed differently due only to the fact that Europe is using French units and the United States is using British units. You may argue that it is beneficial to have two competitive codes because the competition may lead to improvements of both. However, I think that in the long run we can neither handle the challenges from global warming, sustainable energy production, clean water, urbanization, and an aging population, nor the competition from other construction materials without a common strategy where the work on a common concrete code would be one of the most important parts.

Johan L. Silfwerbrand, is a Professor with the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

are the foundation of our success. To provide additional exposure to ACI Sustaining Members, Concrete

are the foundation of our success.

To provide additional exposure to ACI Sustaining Members, Concrete International includes a 1/3-page member profile and a listing of all Sustaining Member organizations. All Sustaining Members receive the 1/3-page profile section on a rotating basis.

ACS Manufacturing Corporation

Advanced Construction Technology

Services

American Society of Concrete

Contractors

Ash Grove Cement Co.

Ashford Formula

Baker Concrete Construction, Inc.

Barrier-1 Inc.

BASF Corporation

Bauman Landscape & Construction

BCS

Braun Intertec Corporation

Buzzi Unicem USA

Cantera Concrete Company

CHRYSO, Inc.

Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute

Construction Forms, Inc.

Kleinfelder

Kryton International Inc.

Lafarge North America

Lithko Contracting, Inc.

Mapei

Mason Construction, Ltd.

Meadow Burke

W. R. Meadows, Inc.

Metromont Corporation

MTL

Multiquip Inc.

Municipal Testing

North S.Tarr Concrete Consulting PC

Oztec Industries, Inc.

Pacific Structures

Penetron International Ltd.

Portland Cement Association

Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute

CTLGroup

Saudi Building Code National

Dayton Superior

Committee

Ductilcrete Slab Systems, LLC

Sika Corp.

The Euclid Chemical Co.

Fibercon International, Inc.

Future Tech Consultants

W.R. Grace & Co.

Headwaters Resources, Inc.

Holcim (US) Inc.

Keystone Structural Concrete

S.K. Ghosh Associates, Inc.

STRUCTURAL

Structural Services, Inc.

Tekna Chem

Triad Engineering, Inc.

TWC Concrete Services

Wacker Neuson

Engineering, Inc. TWC Concrete Services Wacker Neuson Since its establishment in 1996, ACTS has become a

Since its establishment in 1996, ACTS has become a regional reference in construction consultancy services and a pioneer in achieving technological advancements in the materials and geo-engineering fields. Its operations cover the whole MENA region through its branches and activities in Lebanon, Qatar and KSA. The company has witnessed a rapid expansion in its service offerings through six separate, yet complementary divisions: Consultancy, Geotechnical Engineering, Material Testing, Technical Standards and Solutions, Certification and Training & Conferences. ACTS’ fully equipped and modern labs, well-trained staff and customer centric services have been awarded with high caliber accreditations as the company became the first consulting firm in the Middle East, in its field, to obtain the ISO 9001, ISO 14001, ISO 17025 and OHSAS 18001 certifications. ACTS is also the local sponsoring group of the American Concrete Institute (ACI) for its certification programs in the Middle East. The company provides a large array of training programs in asphalt and concrete technologies and prepares trainees to become ACI Certified. Additionally, being the representative of IHS, ASTM, BSI, IEEE and other global standards development organi- zations, ACTS has become the region’s one-stop provider of international codes and standards.

For more information about ACTS, please visit their website at www.acts-int.com .

To learn more about our sustaining members, visit our website at www.concrete.org/sustainingmembers

Dayton Superior Corporation is a leading provider of accessories, chemicals, forming, shoring and paving product
Dayton Superior Corporation is a leading provider of accessories, chemicals, forming, shoring and paving product

Dayton Superior Corporation is a leading provider of accessories, chemicals, forming, shoring and paving product solutions within the nonresidential concrete construction industry. Serving the industry for over ninety years, the company’s portfolio includes over 17,000 standard, in stock SKUs, 13 U.S. manufacturing facilities and a network of 15 distribution centers located in the U.S., Canada, Latin America, Australia and China, allowing Dayton Superior to serve customers as a single source provider of world class products and services. Dayton Superior products are found on many of the world’s most prominent civil infrastructure, institutional and commercial construction projects. The company’s commitment to Perform with Precision is illustrated by the 2014 opening of the Dayton Superior Innovation Center. Here, Dayton Superior is able to assess, evaluate, rapid prototype and launch new products at an industry leading pace – transforming industry productivity through innovation and creating a competitive advantage for our customers.

For more information about Dayton Superior Co., please visit their website at www.daytonsuperior.com or call +1.888.977.9600.

website at www.daytonsuperior.com or call +1.888.977.9600. Modern Technology Laboratories (MTL) is a limited liability

Modern Technology Laboratories (MTL) is a limited liability company registered in Saudi Arabia. MTL is ISO 17025 certified and accredited by SASO and iAS. It is the regional leader in advanced and value-added construction materials testing and engineered solutions. Through highly trained and qualified personnel and state-of-the-art equipment, MTL provides superior testing and innovative technical solutions that help its clients execute quality construction projects on time and with least cost. What sets MTL apart from other independent laboratories in the region is its unique capabilities to develop engineered solutions for challenging construction projects. MTL’s customers get both reliable and accurate independent testing and value-added engineering services and solutions tailored to the specific challenges of their particular project. MTL has been providing technical solutions and testing services for many landmark projects in Saudi Arabia such as the Haram and Mataaf Expan- sion Projects in Makkah, the Madinah Haram Expansion Project, the King Abdullah Financial District in Riyadh, the King Abdul-Aziz Airport in Jeddah, the North and South Jeddah Water Treatment Plants, the Makkah Tower, Lamar and Kingdom Tower Tall buildings, Al-Haramain High Speed Rail Project, Aljamaraat Bridge, etc.

To learn more about MTL, please visit their website at http://www.mtl-me.com or call

+(966).2.6774340.

website at http://www.mtl-me.com or call +(966).2.6774340. TEKNACHEM was founded thanks to the willingness of a group

TEKNACHEM was founded thanks to the willingness of a group of technicians and chemists that gained a solid experience from primary companies in the cement and concrete industry. These professionals have been in this sector since 1965. TEKNACHEM is the result of the fusion of a group of experts with significant technical knowledge, which is the result of its success worldwide. A highly qualified sales engineering staff operates on site offering a wide range of products and technical assistance. TEKNACHEM responds to its customers’ needs through its facilities and ability to listen, that guarantees a customized production in line with the clients’ requirements such as: type of application, aggregates to use, weather conditions, implementation constraints. Its customer service offers complete assistance through the “Istituto Italiano per il Calcestruzzo”, an association focused on concrete’s support, research and training. Tekna Chem is presently operating in Algeria with headquarters in Sidi-Bel Abbes, in partnership with the Hasnaoui Group, while in North Africa is creating new opportunities in Tunisia and Morocco. Tekna Chem is also in Spain with Tekna Chem Química and is creating a network of manufacturing facilities in Russia and South America.

For more information about TEKNACHEM, please visit their website at www.teknachem.it or www.tekna-group.com .

On the

Move

Simpson Gumpertz & Heger has recently promoted the following individuals to the indicated positions: ACI member Pedro J. Sifre, Senior Principal, has more than 30 years of experience as a structural engineer. His experience includes new design and renovation of structures for a variety of building types, including institutional, high-rise, industrial, and residential buildings; Wen H. Tong, Senior Principal, has over 30 years of experience in seismic structural dynamic analysis and evaluation of seismic capacities of building structures and equipment for commercial nuclear power plants, DOE facilities, refineries, and hospitals; Kevin Poulin, Principal, has 20 years of experience as a structural designer of projects that range from renovation of existing buildings and design of new buildings to structural peer reviews and feasibility studies; John M. Porter, Associate Principal, has 16 years of structural engineering experience designing new structures and assessing existing structures. His work includes performing condition assessments of existing structures, developing rehabilitation programs to repair deterioration and distress, and helping owners prioritize future repair and maintenance needs; and ACI member Mauro J. Scali, Director of Petrography, is a licensed geologist and concrete petrographer with more than 30 years of experience in the evaluation, testing, and repair of concrete, masonry, stone, and stucco. He is a member of ACI Committees 201, Durability of Concrete; 232, Fly Ash in Concrete; and 233, Ground Slag in Concrete.

Dewberry promoted ACI member David Hieber to Senior Associate. He has more than 15 years of experience in the analysis, design, and management of highway bridges, pedestrian bridges, retaining walls, and other associated highway structures. Hieber received his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in civil engineering from the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, and the University of Washington, Seattle, WA, respectively. He is a member of the Engineering Consultant Leadership Committee of Virginia Transportation Construction Alliance and the American Council of Engineering Companies of

Advertise in Ci

For more information, contact Todd Eckman, Account Executive Network Media Partners • +1.410.584.8487 E-mail: teckman@networkmediapartners.com

Todd Eckman, Account Executive Network Media Partners • +1.410.584.8487 E-mail: teckman@networkmediapartners.com
• +1.410.584.8487 E-mail: teckman@networkmediapartners.com Hieber Babcock Carino Metropolitan Washington. Hieber also

Hieber

E-mail: teckman@networkmediapartners.com Hieber Babcock Carino Metropolitan Washington. Hieber also serves

Babcock

E-mail: teckman@networkmediapartners.com Hieber Babcock Carino Metropolitan Washington. Hieber also serves as the

Carino

Metropolitan Washington. Hieber also serves as the President of the American Society of Highway Engineers-Potomac Chapter. Additionally, he serves as an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Civil, Environmental, and Infrastructure at George Mason University, Fairfax, VA. Hieber is a member of ACI Committee 341, Earthquake-Resistant Concrete Bridges, and Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 343, Concrete Bridge Design.

Avanti International appointed Britt N. Babcock to Vice President of Sales to further develop a growing portfolio of customers and partners nationwide. Babcock comes with a wealth of experience within the industry, having spent the last 4 years as Avanti’s Geotechnical Market Director focusing on mining, tunneling, subways, and soil stabilization.

Honors and Awards

The National Ready Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA) Research, Engineering and Standards (RES) Committee established the Richard D. Gaynor Award in honor of Gaynor, who was the Executive Vice President of NRMCA and the National Aggregates Association (NAA). Gaynor Award recipients are selected for their lifetime contributions to the ready mixed industry in the technical field. The 2015 Gaynor Award recipient is ACI Honorary Member Nicholas J. Carino, a Concrete Technology Consultant based in Cleveland, OH, and an affiliated Consultant with Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. He received his BS, MS, and PhD from Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Carino was an Assistant Professor at The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX. He retired from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in 2004, where he held the position of Research Structural Engineer. He received several awards and recognitions from NIST for his contributions during his 25-year career. He is a four-time recipient of the ACI Wason Medal for Materials Research and has received numerous other ACI and ASTM awards for his technical contributions to the industry. Carino is a Fellow of ASTM International and a Life Member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). Carino is an active member of various ACI committees.

News

New ACI/ICRI Guide to Benefit the Repair Industry

An invaluable new resource for concrete industry professionals—“Guide to the Code for Evaluation, Repair, and Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings”—has been published jointly by ACI and the International Concrete Repair Institute (ICRI). Available as a printed and digital book, the guide provides assistance and examples to professionals engaged in the repair of concrete buildings. The guide has been developed to serve as a companion to “Code Requirements for Evaluation, Repair, and Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings” (ACI 562-13). The primary purpose of this Guide is to help licensed design professionals interpret and properly use the ACI 562 code. Although specifically developed for licensed design professionals, the guide will also provide insight into the use and benefits of ACI 562 for contractors, material manufacturers, building owners, and building officials. The Guide is separated into two main components: Chapter Guides and Project Examples. These two components work together to provide additional information pertaining to how to interpret the performance requirements in ACI 562 and how the requirements may be applied to a broad range of projects.

The Chapter Guides follow the organization of ACI 562, broken down by the corresponding sections. They include particular insight into how the chapters and sections of the Code fit within the whole of the project. Where applicable, flowcharts are provided to illustrate how to navigate the various provisions. Project Examples are included to illustrate how specific provisions within each chapter of ACI 562 are incorporated into the design process. In some instances, additional limited-scope examples within the Chapter Guides better illustrate a point that is not covered by the Project Examples. The Chapter Guides contain information on several topics related to use of the code, including applicability of ACI 562; selection of the building code for the repair design; preliminary evaluations to determine a compliance method for meeting the code requirements; strength reduction factors and load combinations both during and after the repair; require- ments for evaluation, determination of materials properties, and load testing; considerations for design of structural repairs; durability requirements;

construction considerations; and quality assurance. The Guide’s Project Examples illustrate the use of the Code for concrete building repair, rehabilitation, or strengthening projects from inception through completion. These real-world examples are based on actual projects and demonstrate how ACI 562 could be used when repairs are designed. These examples cover several types of projects, including:

Typical parking garage repairs;

Typical façade repairs;

Repair of historic structure for adaptive reuse;

Strengthening of a two-way flat slab; and

Strengthening of double-tee stems for shear. Funding to develop the “Guide to the Code for Evaluation, Repair, and Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings” was provided by ACI, ICRI, and the Strategic Development Council (SDC). Vision 2020, a document prepared in part by SDC, formulated a set of goals for improving the efficiency, safety, and quality of concrete repair and protection activities. The new Guide solidifies the Vision 2020 goals by providing the tools to execute concrete repair and protection, thereby

Time savings for reinforced concrete design Voided slab design, analysis, project examples. Comprehensive guide
Time savings for reinforced concrete design
Voided slab design, analysis,
project examples.
Comprehensive guide providing design
considerations and state-of-the-art practices.
$49.95 Non-member/$34.95 Member
Use code CI-15 and save 15% at www.crsi-webstore.org.
24/7 continuing education.
Distance e-learning makes professional
development easy and convenient.
Visit www.crsi-learning.org for a list of topics.
Get FREE technical and informational downloads at www.crsi.org!
933 North Plum Grove Road, Schaumburg, IL 60173
p: 847.517.1200 • f: 847.517.1206 • e: info@crsi.org
Region offices located nationwide.

News

extending the useful life of existing installations—a key factor in producing a sustainable environment. Order the “Guide to the Code for Evaluation, Repair, and Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings” at www.concrete.org.

Key ACI Staff Promotions

ACI announced staff promotions aimed at increasing alignment and flow from ACI’s technical documents to educational products. Michael L. Tholen has been named the Institute’s new Managing Director of Engineering and Professional Development; Matthew R. Senecal has been named as Manager, Engineering; and Claire A. Hiltz has been named Manager of Professional Development. Tholen will coordinate the efforts and resources of both the Engineering and the Professional Development Departments. He will continue the supervisory and coordination aspects of his previous position in the Professional Development Department and act in a similar role for the Engineering Department. He will oversee the Engineering staff in both departments to allow better interdepartmental coordination and align staffs’ strengths with project requirements. Tholen received his BS in architectural engineering and his MS and PhD in civil engineering from the University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS. Previously at ACI, he was the Engineering Editor of Concrete International and, most recently, Managing Director of Professional Development. ACI’s Engineering Department will be under the direction of Matthew R. Senecal, Manager, Engineering. Senecal received his BS in civil engineering from the University of Notre Dame, South Bend, IN, and his MS in civil engineering from the University of Kansas. He worked as a Civil and Structural Engineer for 14 years before joining the ACI Engineering Department in 2004, where he most recently served as Senior Engineer. As ACI’s new Manager of Professional Development, Claire A. Hiltz will coordinate and implement programs necessary to increase the effectiveness and productivity of ACI Professional Development. Hiltz was previously Course Developer, Professional Development. Hiltz received her bachelor’s of business administration (BBA) from the University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh, WI, and her MS in education in instructional design and technology from Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.

Baker Honored with ASCC Lifetime Achievement Award

ACI Honorary Member Dan Baker, CEO, Baker Concrete Construction, Monroe, OH, received a Lifetime Achievement Award from the American Society of Concrete Contractors (ASCC) on September 24, 2015, at its Annual Conference in Dallas, TX. The Lifetime Achievement Award is ASCC’s

in Dallas, TX. The Lifetime Achievement Award is ASCC’s Tholen Senecal Hiltz highest honor, acknowledging recipients

Tholen

TX. The Lifetime Achievement Award is ASCC’s Tholen Senecal Hiltz highest honor, acknowledging recipients for

Senecal

The Lifetime Achievement Award is ASCC’s Tholen Senecal Hiltz highest honor, acknowledging recipients for their body

Hiltz

highest honor, acknowledging recipients for their body of work within the industry and their service to ASCC. The award was presented by Michael J. Schneider, ACI Vice President and Senior Vice President and Chief People Officer, Baker Concrete Construction. Baker served on the ASCC Board and has made significant donations of time

and monies to both ASCC and its education and research foundation. In 2001, he was the first concrete contractor to serve as ACI President, emphasizing education of contractors and students and providing them opportunities within the Institute during his term in office. In 1991, Baker made a strong statement to his peers and to the construction industry in general, by officially naming safety as Baker’s number-one value. “Dan has influenced thousands of people and had a profound impact on concrete contracting,” said Bev Garnant, ASCC Executive Director. “It is our great pleasure to present him the ASCC Lifetime Achievement Award.”

to present him the ASCC Lifetime Achievement Award.” Baker ASTM Sustainability Committee Forms New Subcommittee

Baker

ASTM Sustainability Committee Forms New Subcommittee on Water Use and Conservation

ASTM Subcommittee E60.07, Water Use and Conservation, will develop standards to support sustainability and the sustainable development of water-related products and processes. These standards will benefit regulators, designers, environmentalists, and many others seeking to address water use and conservation issues. Michael Schmeida, Chair of ASTM Committee E60, Sustainability, says the new subcommittee will address a wide range of issues related to the environmental, social, economic, and other attributes of water. The subcommittee will acquire, promote, and disseminate high-quality technical knowledge to stimulate research in and the development of specifications associated with water use. “Water sustainability is a major, growing concern for all aspects of society: business, public health, food, and more,” Schmeida said. “The time for this subcommittee has come.”

News

Rick Layton, an active ASTM member, has been appointed Chair of E60.07. Layton is affiliated with many organizations dedicated to water standards and code development. Already, he has overseen the creation of major water-related standards dealing with residential wastewater, rainwater quality, and building-water stewardship and reclamation. ASTM welcomes participation in the development of its standards. Become a member at www.astm.org/JOIN.

Parking Garages Achieve Green Garage Certification

The Green Parking Council (GPC) announced the first seven parking facilities in the United States to achieve Green Garage Certification, a comprehensive sustainability standard for existing and new parking facilities evaluating 48 elements of garage operation, programs, structure, and technology. New Green Garages include corporate, university, airport, and hotel facilities. The first parking facilities to achieve Green Garage Certification are:

Bank of America Plaza, Los Angeles, CA;

BG Group Place, Houston, TX;

Canopy Airport Parking, Denver, CO;

Charles Square Garage, Charles Hotel, Cambridge, MA;

Forest Home Garage, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY;

Silver Spring Metro Plaza, Metro Washington, DC; and

Westpark Corporate Center, Tysons, VA. “Cars are getting smarter, people are getting smarter, and parking garages are getting smarter,” explained Paul Wessel, Executive Director of the GPC, an affiliate of the International Parking Institute. “The greening of parking facilities transforms them into enablers of sustainable mobility. Certified Green Garages offer significant benefits for drivers, tenants, building owners, property managers, and society overall.” Launched in 2015, Green Garage Certification recognizes parking facility management practices that maximize perfor- mance while minimizing waste, programs that encourage mobility options and choice, and efficient and sustainable technology and structure design. Sustainable garages frequently

® 4.0 EX SINGLE USE 5.0 REUSABLE Smart Sensors, #1 selling RH test on the
®
4.0 EX SINGLE USE
5.0 REUSABLE
Smart
Sensors,
#1 selling RH test on the
market for over
10 years
So advanced,
it’s almost automatic
Smart
Choices!
U.S. Patent 7,231,815 & 8,047,056 . Additional patents pending
• Easiest to Comply
with ASTM F2170
• 10 Times FASTER
• Lowest Cost/test
• Simplest to Use
MAKE YOUR SMART CHOICE TODAY  CALL NOW • 1.844.444.5637 • WWW.RAPIDRH.COM

News

employ energy-efficient lighting and ventilation systems, guidance systems that help drivers find parking faster, idle- reduction technologies, electric vehicle charging stations, car sharing, bicycle parking, and storm-water management practices. Green Garage Certification is a program of the nonprofit Green Parking Council. For copies of Green Garage Certifica- tion at a Glance, the Elements of Green Garage Certification, the free Green Garage Certification Program Guide, and to purchase the Green Garage Certification Standard, visit www.greenparkingcouncil.org/certification.

Global Design Competition Presents 100-Year Visions for Restoring Louisiana’s Eroding Coast

The international Changing Course design competition has announced the winning teams and their 100-year visions for restoring and sustaining the Mississippi River Delta. The winning teams—comprising some of the world’s top engineers, coastal scientists, planners, and designers —are Baird & Associates, Moffatt & Nichol, and Studio Misi-Ziibi.

The winning teams’ designs are based on a 100-year planning horizon and focus on maximizing the Mississippi River’s natural and sustainable land-building potential while taking into account the needs of navigation and other indus- tries, flood control, and sustainable community develop- ment—a challenge raised by the state of Louisiana’s master planning process. While each of the winning teams offered a different vision, all three identified three major themes as critical to sustaining the Mississippi River Delta today and into the future:

A clear focus on a sustainable delta through using the natural forces of the Mississippi River;

Maximum integration of navigation, flood control, and restoration, including consideration of ideas for a better and more sustainable navigation channel; and

Consideration of a gradual transition of industry and communities into more protected and resilient communities, over time. For more information, visit www.changingcourse.us.

ACI Strategic Advancement Award

www.changingcourse.us . ACI Strategic Advancement Award To showcase the contributions and significant efforts that

To showcase the contributions and significant efforts that have helped further the ACI Strategic Plan, the American Concrete Institute presents the ACI Strategic Advancement Award.

This newest ACI award recognizes individuals or organizations that provide support in the implementation of membership and customer satisfaction; the quality of ACI programs, products, and services; and global credibility and impact.

Nomination forms will be available following the 2015 ACI Concrete Convention and Exposition in Denver, with presentation of the award taking place in 2017.

For further information contact Diane Pociask, ACI Awards Coordinator, at diane.pociask@concrete.org.

Knowledge to Practice:

Knowledge to Practice: Memorial Fellowship Created to Honor ACI’s Dan Falconer The ACI Foundation is honoring

Memorial Fellowship Created to Honor ACI’s Dan Falconer

The ACI Foundation is honoring the late Dan Falconer with the formation of the Daniel W. Falconer Memorial Fellowship. Dan served as ACI’s Managing Director of Engineering for more than 17 years. Dan was a Fellow of ACI, given this distinction for his outstanding contributions to the production and use of concrete materials, products, and structures through education, research, and development. “Dan had an incredible gift of taking a controversial technical issue and breaking it down into practical elements that would develop consensus,” Randall W. Poston, past Chair of ACI Committee 318, said. “This came from his years of practicing structural engineering before joining ACI. He knew with continued resolve and steadfast guidance, committee members would eventually come together and ‘do the right thing.’ In large measure, the reorganization of the ACI 318-14 Structural Concrete Building Code was Dan’s vision of simplifying the use of the code for practitioners.” ACI has agreed to contribute a dollar-for-dollar match for donations made by individuals and companies. To learn more or to donate online, visit www.acifoundation.org. The award is for graduate students studying in the field of structural engineering with an emphasis in reinforced concrete design. Preference will be given to applicants conducting research pertaining to ACI codes or specifications. The fellow- ship includes an optional summer internship in the ACI Engineering Department.

Visit the ACI Foundation at The Concrete Convention & Exposition – Fall 2015

Stop by the ACI Foundation booth in the ACI Pavilion during The ACI Concrete Convention and Exposition in Denver, CO. Talk with Ann Daugherty, Foundation Director, about how you can further concrete innovation and research or help fund scholarships for future leaders.

Concrete Research Council (CRC) Calls for Proposals

In August, the CRC opened its call for research proposals that advance the knowledge and sustainable aspects of concrete materials, construction, and structures. Details include:

Maximum funding is $50,000 per project (increased from $10,000), and CRC will fund up to two worthy projects;

The proposal submission due date is December 1, 2015. Proposals submitted after the due date will be returned without review; and

Projects will be awarded soon after The Concrete Convention and Exposition – Spring 2016.

The Concrete Convention and Exposition – Spring 2016. An ACI Foundation memorial fellowship will honor the

An ACI Foundation memorial fellowship will honor the late Dan Falconer (center), shown here at a reception after a Technical Activities Committee meeting at ACI headquarters in Farmington Hills, MI

Updated information, proposal requirements, and submittal deadlines are located on the CRC website:

www.concreteresearchcouncil.org. For additional questions, or to submit proposals, e-mail Ann Daugherty, Director, ACI Foundation, ann.daugherty@ acifoundation.org.

New Research Products from CRC Co-funded Research

The ACI Foundation, through CRC initiatives, has partnered with other industry entities to leverage its research funds:

CRC 67, Improved Procedures for the Design of Slender Structural Concrete Columns—funded by the Precast/ Prestressed Concrete Institute with support from the ACI Foundation, the Portland Cement Association, and the Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute; Ryan W. Jenkins and Robert J. Frosch, FACI, Purdue University;

CRC 87, Defining Structurally Acceptable Properties of High-Strength Steel Bars through Material and Column Testing (Part 1, Material Testing Report)—funded by the Charles Pankow Foundation, the ACI Foundation, and in-kind materials support by various entities; Chase M. Slavin and Wassim M. Ghannoum, The University of Texas at Austin; and

CRC 88, Proposed Specification for Deformed Steel Bars with Controlled Ductile Properties for Concrete Reinforce- ment—funded by the Charles Pankow Foundation and the ACI Foundation; Conrad Paulson and Scott K. Graham, Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. A complete list of CRC co-funded projects is available at www.concreteresearchcouncil.org/Home/Projects.

Chapter

Reports

New Jersey Chapter – ACI Awards Student Chapter $20,000 Grant for Ready Mixed 90-Minute Rule Research

The New Jersey Chapter – ACI announced the $20,000 award to the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) Student Chapter – ACI for the research proposal “Evaluation of the 90-Minute Rule as an Acceptance Criteria Considering Current Concrete Mix Design Technology and Mix Constituents.” Every year, a substantial amount of ready mixed concrete is returned to concrete plants for disposal. One of the main reasons is strict enforcement of the 90-minute time limit specified in ASTM C94/C94M, “Standard Specification for Ready-Mixed Concrete.” The Principal Investigator is ACI member Mohamed Mahgoub, Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Technology at NJIT, and the Co-Principal Investigator is Nakul Ramanna, Assistant to the Chair and Concrete Laboratory Manager in the John A. Reif Jr. Department of Civil Engineering. The proposed research aims to gain better understanding of how elapsed time affects the quality of a concrete load. To meet the goal, a large number of concrete batches will be tested under different weather conditions and elapsed times. The research results would greatly benefit concrete suppliers, engineers, and inspectors in the concrete industry. The 1-year research project began in August 2015, with commitments from the National Ready Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA), Silvi Group, Sika Corp., and County Concrete. Eric Miller, Silvi South Plainfield Manager; David Jaramillo, Silvi Quality Control Manager; and Nicholas Denicoli, County Concrete Quality Control Manager, will participate in the research effort. Last year, the College of New Jersey received a similar grant from the New Jersey Chapter – ACI. Students from the

grant from the New Jersey Chapter – ACI. Students from the Members of the NJIT Student

Members of the NJIT Student Chapter – ACI

college presented their research at the ACI Fall 2014 Convention in Washington, DC. To learn more about the New Jersey Chapter – ACI, visit www.njaci.com.

Iraq Chapter – ACI Announce Winners of Student Project Competition

The winners of the first student project competition hosted by the Iraq Chapter – ACI were announced in August. The competition was open to undergraduate students from several Iraqi universities. A maximum of two students were allowed to submit a project focused on concrete design, material, and/ or construction. The projects were reported in paper form and included a problem statement/statement of research significance, a conclusion, and a list of references. The goal of the contest was to prepare students for participation in international competitions hosted by ACI. The winners received a certificate and recognition during special ceremonies held in Basrah, Bagdad, and Erbil. The first-place winner was “Prediction of Compressive Strength of Fiber Reinforced Concrete Using Artificial Neural Network” by Hussein Sadiq Latief and Alkarar Taha Yaseen of the University of Basrah, College of Engineering; Alaa C. Galeb, Supervisor. The second-place winner was “Producing Sustainable Accelerated Hardening Cementitious Materials” by Rana Hameed Faisal of the University of Technology, Building and Construction Engineering Department; Maan S. Hassan and Ziyad Majeed, Supervisors. The third-place winner was “Comparison between ACI 318 and EC2: for Beams, Slabs, and Columns” by Bahar Abdul Rahman Hassan of the University of Salahaddin – Hawler, College of Engineering; Salahaddin Abdul Rahman, Supervisor.

College of Engineering; Salahaddin Abdul Rahman, Supervisor. Winners of the first student project competition sponsored
College of Engineering; Salahaddin Abdul Rahman, Supervisor. Winners of the first student project competition sponsored
College of Engineering; Salahaddin Abdul Rahman, Supervisor. Winners of the first student project competition sponsored
College of Engineering; Salahaddin Abdul Rahman, Supervisor. Winners of the first student project competition sponsored

Winners of the first student project competition sponsored by the Iraq Chapter – ACI were (from top left):

Hussein Sadiq Latief, Alkarar Taha Yaseen, and Rana Hameed Faisal, and (bottom left): Bahar Abdul Rahman Hassan

Chapter Reports

To learn more about the Iraq Chapter – ACI, visit www.aci-iraq.com.

India Chapter – ACI to host 2nd Biennial R.N. Raikar International Conference in December

Biennial R.N. Raikar International Conference in December R.N. Raikar The 2nd Biennial R.N. Raikar International

R.N. Raikar

The 2nd Biennial R.N. Raikar International Conference & Banthia- Basheere International Symposium on advances in science and concrete technology will be held at the Lalit Mumbai Hotel, Mumbai, India, December 18-19, 2015. The conference mission is to introduce participants to cutting-edge technologies in the field of

concrete and concrete construction and to facilitate technology transfer in appropriate areas. A number of national and international experts will present, including Nemkumar Banthia, FACI, from the Canadian Academy of Engineering, and P.A. Muhammed Basheer, FACI, from the Irish Academy of Engineering, who will act as co-facilitators of the event. The India Chapter – ACI is fully geared up for this conference, which was named after former chapter officer R.N. Raikar, who was involved with the chapter from its inception in 1979 until his death in 2008. The Chapter is in its 36th year and is dedicated to sharing and exchanging activities, knowledge, and information in the field of concrete. The Chapter has more than 2000 members throughout India, who actively participate in all the chapter programs. To learn more about the India Chapter – ACI, visit www.icaci.com.

Arizona Chapter – ACI Presented Market Forecast During Opening Meeting

In August, the Arizona Chapter – ACI welcomed approxi- mately 60 attendees to its annual Market Forecast to kick off its 2015-2016 membership meetings. The luncheon was held at the DoubleTree Suites Hotel in Phoenix, AZ. The group represented concrete suppliers, product representatives, concrete contractors, general contractors, engineers, and testing labs. The chapter hosts eight lunch meetings throughout the year with the Market Forecast as the first topic. “We like to start our year off with a market forecast because we feel it gives an overview of what to expect in the coming year,” explains Beth Britt, Executive Director of the Arizona Chapter – ACI. “Our meeting topics try to focus on current local market issues, and sometimes knowing which sector of the market will be strong helps us all prepare accordingly. Of course, we all know working in this industry is anything but predictable.”

working in this industry is anything but predictable.” The meeting of the Arizona Chapter – ACI

The meeting of the Arizona Chapter – ACI in August featured the Dodge Construction Forecast

Cliff Brewis, Vice President of Operations at Dodge Data & Analytics, presented. Brewis is part of the management team responsible for the news gathering operations at Dodge. In addition, Brewis has been with Dodge for over 30 years in sales, planning, and operations. Last year’s forecast called for a 4% gain over the previous year, although the market fell short with approximately 3.4% growth in 2014-2015. He expects to see the same rate of growth for next year. Brewis has spoken to chapter members before and he spends valuable time bringing a presentation suited for those working in the Arizona market. “We appreciate the thoroughness of his data,” said Britt. Specific segments for this coming year are in education and public works. It is expected that money will flow for water works, as this has been one of the largest growing areas in construction. Schools are beginning to see growth, with higher education seeing more investments to fund new campuses. Hotel and hospital building is also expected to rise. Elderly care for the retired population in Arizona will see a steady increase, but the concern is how to properly fund those needs. Another area of concern is the highway sector. Transportation funding is declining until solid funding into the future is established; this market will remain slow. “Arizona was hit extremely hard when the housing bubble burst, and we lost many good, long-standing companies in our industry when that happened. Investing in our future begins with concrete because we make the foundation of all that rises from the desert. Arizona hopefully will have learned a valuable lesson in this last recession, and appreciate slow, steady, healthy growth, so we can stay one of the best places to call home,” said Britt. To learn more about the Arizona Chapter – ACI, visit www.azaci.org.

Chapter Reports

Chapter Reports Members of the Georgia Chapter – ACI and guests at the recent awards banquet

Members of the Georgia Chapter – ACI and guests at the recent awards banquet

Georgia Chapter – ACI Celebrates 50-Year Anniversary

The Georgia Chapter – ACI is celebrating its 50-year anniversary this year. Sadly, however, with the recent passing of many of our older members and longtime Georgia Chapter – ACI Secretary LaGrit “Sam” Morris in 2013, records and personal accounts of the Chapter’s history are scarce. Much of what follows is pieced together from the recollections of Wayne Wilson, Certification Activities Chair, Georgia Chapter – ACI. The Georgia Chapter – ACI was first incorporated as the Atlanta Chapter of ACI in 1965 and later changed its name to the Georgia Chapter in 1990. The first Chapter President was Robert A. Shoolbred, followed by numerous Georgia Industry greats like Virgil D. Skipper (1967 and 1974), Eugene Boeke (1976), Donald Lathrup (1978), Donald E. Dixon (1983), Robert Terpening (1989), Robert Kuhlman (1990), Melvyn Galinat (1991), and a host of others over the years. As best as Wilson can tell, because the chapter still has the original felt banner, the Georgia Chapter has been named an Excellent Chapter by ACI every year since 1991. The Chapter works at promoting the proper use of concrete in Georgia. On March 4, 1970, the Chapter, along with the Georgia Concrete and Products Association and Local Chapters of AIA, AGC, CSI, and ACEC, incorporated a sister organization called the Concrete Advisory Board of Georgia (CAB). The following general purpose statement comes from their original incorporation papers: “…[the] objective [is] to promote and encourage constructive cooperation among the participating organizations by providing an instrument

the participating organizations by providing an instrument The annual battering ram contest at Kennesaw State

The annual battering ram contest at Kennesaw State University

through which all may coordinate their efforts to improve the finished product known as concrete, to study problems of common concern in that field and make recommendations thereon.” Wilson remembers taking his first Concrete Field Technician Certification exam from this organization in 1984, long before ACI’s current Field Tech Grade I Certification was created. In 1971, CAB first published standard minimum specifications for ready mixed concrete for use in Georgia, thought by many to be a forerunner to ACI 301. In 1979, they revised this specification to reflect changes in the 1977 ACI 318 Code. The last published revision was completed in 1987 to match updates in the 1983 ACI 318 Code. Current building codes in Georgia now reference current ACI codes and standards. CAB no longer exists today as an organization but the rich history and original incorporation objective of supporting and promoting quality concrete in Georgia is alive and well. The Georgia Chapter – ACI holds monthly lunch meetings so professionals can network and listen to a variety of concrete- related topics. The Chapter hosts an annual summer seminar, the Virgil D. Skipper Memorial Seminar, which highlights a topic of interest. The summer seminar is most popular with the local engineering community because of its four profes- sional development hours (PDHs) and has included recent hands-on programs on decorative concrete, precast, and ready mixed concrete batching and inspection. The Georgia Chapter – ACI has held an annual Georgia Concrete Projects awards program every year since 1978. The Georgia Chapter – ACI Dan R. Brown Awards, named in memory of long-time member Dan Brown in 2005, has grown over the years to an annual banquet that includes more than 200 attendees, 15 to 25 project entries, and a keynote address from the ACI President. The Chapter hosted ACI Fall conventions in 1997 and 2007. Wilson was part of the Convention Committee in 2007 and he is sure many will remember

Chapter Reports

the unbelievable Concrete Mixer at the Georgia Aquarium. The Robert Kuhlman ($5000) and LaGrit “Sam” Morris ($2500) Memorial Scholarships are awarded each fall to Georgia college students enrolled in a concrete-related program. The Student Chapter at Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA, is very active and holds an annual Battering Ram competition to test the students’ concrete design and fabrication abilities. ACI certification is very strong in Georgia, as the Chapter hosts more than 500 certification exam sessions annually in almost all of ACI Field Tech, Lab Tech, Craftsman, and Inspector Programs. Wilson is the Certification Committee Chairman and can attest to the number of dedicated people involved in ACI Certification and what it means to the quality of concrete produced in Georgia. To learn more about the Georgia Chapter – ACI, visit www.aci-ga.org. The 2015 Georgia Chapter – ACI President, Angela San Martin, and the rest of the Board of Directors would like to thank all of the Georgia members for a memorable first 50 years and look forward to another prosperous 50.

Philippines Chapter – ACI Reaches Record of 435 Student Members

The Philippines Chapter – ACI Student Chapter at the Technological Institute of the Philippines in Quezon City (TIPQC) announced that they now have 435 students enrolled as members of ACI. In early September, the Philippines Chapter – ACI hosted a free seminar at Eulogio “Amang” Rodriguez Institute of Science and Technology (EARIST) in Manilla. The seminar theme, “Bridging the Gap Between Concrete Knowledge and Practice,” served as an induction for the student chapter at EARIST, a state university with a small population of engineering students. “Giving a free seminar is a way we help the universities and engineering students learn all about concrete practice,” explained Ellen Chua, Vice President of the Philippines Chapter – ACI. “We are still receiving more requests for seminars and interest in forming an ACI student chapter from state and private universities all over the Philippines.”

state and private universities all over the Philippines.” Officers of the Philippines Chapter – ACI and

Officers of the Philippines Chapter – ACI and the Student Chapter at the Technological Institute of the Philippines in Quezon City (TIPQC)

DELIVERING SUSTAINABLE SOLUTIONS After water, concrete is one of the most sustainable and widely used
DELIVERING SUSTAINABLE SOLUTIONS
After water, concrete is one of the most sustainable
and widely used materials in the world.
Fly ash plays an important role in increasing the
sustainability of concrete. Headwaters Resources is
the nation’s leader in supplying quality fly ash. We
can help you discover how to improve the
performance of your concrete while simultaneously
improving its environmental profile.
Visit www.flyash.com for answers to the most
common questions about fly ash. You can also
contact your expert Headwaters Resources
technical support representative for advice on your
specific sustainability opportunities.
www.flyash.com

Awards at The ACI Concrete Convention and Exposition – Fall 2015

Recipients to be honored at the Opening Session in Denver, CO

S everal annual awards of ACI and the ACI Foundation will be presented during the Opening Session of The ACI Concrete Convention and Exposition, on

November 8, 2015, at the Sheraton Denver Downtown Hotel in Denver, CO. These awards and the recipients include:

ACI Distinguished Achievement Award to Castle Rock Construction Company;

Arthur J. Boase Award to Andrew W. Taylor;

Robert E. Philleo Award to Ramón L. Carrasquillo;

Jean-Claude Roumain Innovation in Concrete Award to Fred R. Goodwin;

ACI Concrete Sustainability Award to Julie K. Buffenbarger;

ACI Young Professional Essay Contest Award to Shane M. Maxemow; and

ACI Commemorative Lecturer in the series honoring Katharine and Bryant Mather to Kenneth C. Hover. Three of these awards are administered by councils of the ACI Foundation. The Concrete Research Council presents the Arthur J. Boase and Robert E. Philleo Awards, and the Strategic Development Council established the Jean-Claude Roumain Innovation in Concrete Award.

ACI Distinguished Achievement Award

“for providing leadership in the advancement of the concrete industry through innovation, information sharing, and concrete promotion” Castle Rock Construction Company (CRCC) has been involved in concrete paving in Colorado for over 35 years. Originally part of the Irving F. Jensen Company, Sioux City, IA, CRCC moved to Colorado in the early 1980s and was a strong advocate for developing a concrete paving market, which was almost nonexistent. CRCC has worked with agencies to develop specifications, such as the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Smoothness Specification and the CDOT Optimized Aggregate Blend Specification, to enhance the durability and quality of concrete paving. In 2011, a new

smoothness specification was instituted, going from a profile index (PI) to an international ride index (IRI). Believing that an optimized aggregate blend would help with the smoothness of concrete roads, the optimized mixture became a positive factor in the production of smoother and more durable concrete pavements. CRCC has shared its experiences with many contractors across the country in the hopes of improving the industry. CRCC has won 14 national paving awards since 2007. Some of its more notable projects include US 287; I-70 and Central Park Design Build in Denver, CO; Pena Boulevard; Broadway in Downtown Denver; and I-76 in Greeley, CO. CRCC also received a Rocky Mountain Chapter – ACI Award for Excellence for Transportation in 2012 for Outbound Pena Boulevard. Recently, CRCC worked with the city of Brush, CO, to design and place its first concrete road in a traditional asphalt setting: Hospital Road, considered “the gateway to the city.” CRCC is currently working on the connector from Boulder to Denver, US 36 Design Build project. The project consists of 1.3 million yd 2 (1.086 million m 2 ) of 10 in. (254 mm) dowelled concrete paving, with several features including bridges, a concrete barrier wall, a concrete bike path, and enhanced drainage. CRCC believes concrete is the best investment in our infrastructure and will continue to promote its use to stretch the taxpayers’ investment in the future. CRCC is a member of the American Concrete Paving Association (ACPA) both locally and nationally, and is also a member of the Colorado Contractors Association.

Arthur J. Boase Award

“for his active and dedicated contributions through research and committee work to the advancement of seismic performance of reinforced concrete structures and to the development of design guides through application of the results of structural concrete research”

Castle Rock Construction Company Andrew W. Taylor , FACI, is an Associate at KPFF Consulting

Castle Rock Construction Company

Andrew W. Taylor, FACI, is an Associate at KPFF Consulting Engineers, Seattle, WA. He has 29 years of experience in structural engineering research and practice, including 7 years with the Building and Fire Research Laboratory at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD. In 2001, Taylor received the ACI Structural Research Award, and in 2007 was named a Fellow of ACI. He is a Chair of ACI Subcommittee 318-H, Seismic Provisions, and a member of ACI Committee 318, Structural Concrete Building Code. He is a member of the ACI Technical Activities Committee (TAC) and serves as a liaison between TAC and Committee 318. Taylor is a consulting member and past Chair of 374, Performance-Based Seismic Design of Concrete Buildings, and a past member of 341, Earthquake- Resistant Concrete Bridges. Taylor has extensive research experience in experimental and theoretical investigations of the seismic behavior of reinforced concrete structures. His specialties include structural vibrations, performance-based seismic design of concrete structures, seismic base isolation, and seismic damping systems. He received his BSCE and MSCE degrees in 1983 and 1985, respectively, from the University of Washington, Seattle, WA, and his PhD from the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, in 1990. Taylor is also a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and a licensed professional and structural engineer in Washington.

Robert E. Philleo Award

“for his contributions through education, research, and consulting to the advancement of concrete technology” Ramón L. Carrasquillo, FACI, is the Founder and President of Carrasquillo Associates, Austin, TX—a forensic engineering consulting firm. Carrasquillo was named a Fellow of ACI in 1993, and is currently Chair of the ACI Construction Liaison Committee and the International Conferences Committee. He is a member of ACI Committees 201, Durability of Concrete; 211, Proportioning Concrete Mixtures; 232, Fly Ash in Concrete; 233, Ground Slag in Concrete; 234, Silica Fume in Concrete; and 301, Specifications for Concrete; and Subcommittee 318-S, Spanish Translation. He is also a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)

a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Taylor Carrasquillo Goodwin and ASTM International.

Taylor

of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Taylor Carrasquillo Goodwin and ASTM International. He is

Carrasquillo

Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Taylor Carrasquillo Goodwin and ASTM International. He is a licensed

Goodwin

and ASTM International. He is a licensed professional engineer in Texas and Puerto Rico. He received his BS in civil engineering from the University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, PR, in 1975, and his MS and PhD in civil engineering from Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, in 1978 and 1980, respectively.

Jean-Claude Roumain Innovation in Concrete Award

“for over 30 years of leadership in the construction chemicals industry, including cement manufacture, R&D and technical support of grouts, adhesives, coatings, shotcrete, stucco, flooring, and concrete repair materials; and for championing improvement in the concrete and concrete repair industry” Fred R. Goodwin, FACI, is a Fellow Scientist in the Product Development group of BASF Construction Chemicals, Beachwood, OH. He received his BS in chemistry from Northwest Missouri State University, Maryville, MO, in 1977. He has over 30 years of experience in the construction chemicals industry, including cement manufacture, research, development, and technical support of grouts, adhesives, coatings, shotcrete, stucco, flooring, and concrete repair materials. In 2011, he was named a Fellow of ACI and also received the ACI Delmar Bloem Distinguished Service Award. He is currently Chair of ACI Committee 515, Protective Systems for Concrete, and the Technical Repair and Rehabili- tation TAC Subcommittee. He is also a member of the ACI Technical Activities Committee (TAC); and ACI Committees 351, Foundations for Equipment and Machinery; 364, Rehabilitation (past Chair); 546, Repair of Concrete; 562, Evaluation, Repair, and Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings; 563, Specifications for Repair of Structural Concrete in Buildings; Committee on Nominations; TAC Concrete Terminology Committee; Technical Committee Manual Task Group; TAC Awards Task Group; and E706, Concrete Repair Education; and Subcommittee 563-I, Proprietary Grouts/ Concrete, of which he is a past Chair. Goodwin has been with BASF and its predecessors for 26 years and is an active member of the International Concrete Repair Institute (ICRI), ASTM International, NACE Interna- tional, Strategic Development Council (SDC), and SSPC. He is a Fellow of ICRI, an Honorary Member of ASTM

Committees C1 and C9, and current Chair of the ICRI Technical Activities Committee; ASTM C09.41, Cement Based Grouts; and SSPC 8.3, Commercial Floor Coatings. He is also a guest Lecturer for the Grouting Fundamentals short course (Colorado School of Mines) and was awarded the Journal of Protective Coatings and Linings Editors Award in 2006, 2010, and 2012. He received the BASF President’s Award in 1990, 2003, and 2005; and the BASF DAVIS Innovation Challenge Award in 2011 and Innovent in 2014. He is a NACE Corrosion Technologist, holds five patents, was named as a Top 25 Innovative Thinker by Technology Publishing in 2013, and frequently speaks at industry events.

ACI Concrete Sustainability Award

“in recognition of her leadership in concrete sustainability, her guidance as Chair of ACI Committee 130, Sustainability, and her tireless efforts as Co-Chair of many ACI sustainability forums” Julie K. Buffenbarger, FACI, serves as a Construction Specialist for LafargeHolcim. Her role is to promote cement, supplementary cementitious materials, aggregates, specialty concrete mixtures, sustainable and resilient design, and

ACI University Award

ACI University Award The ACI award for University Student Activities identifies the universities that qualify for

The ACI award for University Student Activities identifies the universities that qualify for excellent or outstanding status, based on points received for their participation in select ACI-related activities/ programs.

To receive an official entry form or if you have any questions, please e-mail Diane Pociask at diane.pociask@concrete.org. Forms must be completed and submitted by January 31, 2016.

building practice initiatives through technical education, promotion, and specification with owners, architects, engineers, and design agencies. Her additional industry experience includes concrete construction admixture marketing and research with Master Builders, Inc., Cleveland, OH. Buffenbarger has authored over 35 publications on cementitious materials, concrete sustainability, durability and resilience, and concrete admixtures in concrete. She was Co-Editor of ACI SP-269, Concrete: The Sustainable Material Choice, in 2010. Buffenbarger is Chair of ACI Committee 130, Sustainability of Concrete; Secretary of 234, Silica Fume in Concrete; and a member of the ACI Publications Committee; 132, Responsi- bility in Concrete Construction; 232, Fly Ash in Concrete; and C601-E, Concrete Construction Sustainability Assessor. Since 2009, she has served as Co-Chair of ACI’s Concrete Sustainability Forum for numerous fall conventions, including Denver, CO. Buffenbarger previously served as Secretary on ACI Subcommittee 301-H, Tilt-Up Construction and Architectural Concrete, and was a member of the Committee on Nominations, Board Advisory Committee on Sustainable Development, and Awards for Papers Subcommittee SC2, Wason Medal for Materials Research. She volunteered as a Convention Mentor from 2009-2011 and was named a Fellow of ACI in 2011. Buffenbarger is Chair of the Concrete Joint Sustainability Initiative (CJSI) and an active member of the National Ready Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA) and the Portland Cement Association (PCA) technical committees relating to sustainability. She received her BS in chemistry and her MS in synthetic organic chemistry from Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, in 1987 and 1993, respectively. She is also an accredited LEED AP building design and construction professional.

ACI Young Professional Essay Contest Award

Shane M. Maxemow is a Structural Engineer at Robert Silman, Washington, DC, working on a wide range of projects from the Smithsonian Castle to Mt. Vernon. Previously he was employed with the civil engineering firm Bayside Engineering, where he did roadway and drainage design, and the structural firm BillerReinhart Structural Group, where he designed and restored structures from concrete bridges to carbon fiber structures. Maxemow received his BS and master’s degrees in civil engineering in 2012 from the University of South Florida, Tampa, FL. He was the past Governing Board Vice-Chair and Emerging Professionals Co-Chair for the Green Building Council, Tampa Bay Chapter; and also the Founding Chair of the Young Members Committee for the Florida Structural Engineering Association. Maxemow was the recipient of the Suncoast Chapter – ACI Scholarship, 2011; U.S. Green Building Council National Scholarship, 2009; and the Public Works Academy Scholar- ship, 2008-2010.

Buffenbarger Maxemow ACI Commemorative Lecturer Kenneth C. Hover , FACI, is Professor of civil and

Buffenbarger

Buffenbarger Maxemow ACI Commemorative Lecturer Kenneth C. Hover , FACI, is Professor of civil and environmental

Maxemow

ACI Commemorative Lecturer

Kenneth C. Hover, FACI, is Professor of civil and environmental engineering (CEE) at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, where his teaching and research focus on concrete materials, design, and construction. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army Combat Engineers, and was Project Engineer and Project Manager for Dugan and Meyers Construction Co., Cincinnati, OH, working on buildings, interstate bridges, and water treatment plants. Joining THP Structural Engineers in Cincinnati, he became a Partner and Manager engaged in the design and repair of buildings and industrial facilities. Hover’s PhD studies at Cornell were funded by the Exxon Fellowship, designed to bring experienced professionals to engineering programs at U.S. universities. He teaches reinforced and prestressed concrete design, concrete materials, and construction management. In addition to his technical courses, Hover lectures on management skills, leadership, and professional ethics. His research interests include freezing- and-thawing durability, mixture proportions and ingredients, behavior and testing of fresh concrete, and the impact of construction operations and construction environment on concrete quality. He is a Fellow and Past President of ACI, Past President of the Greater Miami Valley Chapter – ACI, and a member of ACI Committees 301, Specifications for Concrete; 305, Hot Weather Concreting; 306, Cold Weather Concreting; and ACI Subcommittee 318-A, General, Concrete, and Construction. He holds the Outstanding Educator Award from the American College Personnel Association (ACPA) and has received ACI’s Kelly, Philleo, Anderson, and Structural Research Awards and the ASCE Materials Division Best Basic Research Paper Award. He holds the top teaching awards in CEE (Chi Epsilon Award), the College of Engi- neering (Tau Beta Pi Award), and Cornell University (The Stephen A. Weiss Presidential Fellowship), plus the Senior Class of 2015 Award as one of the top 1% of Professors at the University. In 2006, he was named one of the “Ten Most Influential People in the Concrete Construction Industry.” Hover received his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in civil engineering from the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, and his PhD in structural engineering from Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. He is a licensed professional engineer in Ohio and New York.

He is a licensed professional engineer in Ohio and New York. Hover Stringer Harn 2015 T.Y.

Hover

a licensed professional engineer in Ohio and New York. Hover Stringer Harn 2015 T.Y. Lin Award

Stringer

professional engineer in Ohio and New York. Hover Stringer Harn 2015 T.Y. Lin Award The winners

Harn

2015 T.Y. Lin Award

The winners of ASCE’s 2015 T.Y. Lin Award—Stuart J. Stringer and Robert E. Harn—will be recognized at the Opening Session in Denver, CO. Their paper “Seismic Stability of Marine Piers Built with Prestressed Concrete Piles,” was published by ACI in SP-295, Recent Advances in the Design of Prestressed Concrete Piles in Marine Structures, in October 2013. ACI member Stuart J. Stringer is an Engineer at Moffatt & Nichol, Seattle, WA. He specializes in the seismic design and analysis of waterfront, marine, and bridge structures. He has been published in several peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings, and research reports for agencies such as the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies and the Federal Highway Administration. He completed his graduate-level research on the seismic design of prestressed concrete pile-supported piers and wharves at the University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Stringer is experienced in the analysis and design of new and retrofit waterfront, marine, and bridge projects, including reinforced, precast, and prestressed concrete, steel, and timber structures. He received his BSCE in civil and environmental engineering and his MSCE in structural engineering from the University of Washington.

Robert E. Harn is a Project Manager at BergerABAM, Federal Way, WA. He oversaw the team responsible for the seismic upgrade of the Port of San Diego’s Broadway Pier, one of the first to use seismic isolation for a pier. The project received the ASCE/COPRI 2013 Project Excellence Award at the Ports 2013 Conference. Harn has been a member of ASCE since 1975. He served as a member on the ASCE/COPRI Volunteer Committee that developed the recently published ASCE 61-14 document, “Seismic Design of Piers and Wharves.” In addition to the T.Y. Lin award paper, Harn has authored and coauthored 16 papers, 12 of which were presented at the ASCE Ports Conferences.

ACI Custom Seminars Personalized training to fit your organization’s needs and goals Convenience You schedule
ACI Custom Seminars Personalized training to fit your organization’s needs and goals Convenience You schedule
ACI Custom Seminars Personalized training to fit your organization’s needs and goals Convenience You schedule
ACI Custom Seminars Personalized training to fit your organization’s needs and goals Convenience You schedule

ACI Custom Seminars

Personalized training to fit your organization’s needs and goals

Convenience

You schedule training whenever it works best for your organization and your employees. You name the location, the time, and the topic; and we’ll make it happen!

Cost-effectiveness

Realize savings by eliminating the high costs associated with em- ployee travel and lodging. We bring the seminar to your door!

Expert instructors

Excellence in the field you choose. Each custom seminar is usually conducted by two instructors who are recognized experts in their field.

State-of-the-art publications

The latest publications prepared by one of more than 130 ACI technical committees can supplement the speaker hand- outs. ACI publications are available at a 50% discount.

Fees

Seminar fees start at $7900 ($8900 for ACI 318-14 Building Code) for a 1-day seminar. Numerous topics are ready to go. Any concrete-related topic can be created and custom- designed to meet your specific organizational needs at an additional cost.

Contact

Eva Korzeniewski, Seminar Coordinator American Concrete Institute 38800 Country Club Drive Farmington Hills, MI 48331 Phone: +1.248.848.3754 Fax: +1.248.848.3792 Eva.Korzeniewski@concrete.org www.concreteseminars.com

Topics

ACI 318-14 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete ACI/PCA 318-11 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete ACI/PCA Simplified Design of Concrete Buildings of Moderate Size and Height Anchorage to Concrete Basics of Concrete Materials and Testing Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures Concrete Repair Basics Construction of Concrete Slabs-on-Ground Design of Concrete Slabs-on-Ground Environmental Engineering Concrete—Design and Details Physical Tester—Basics of Cement Testing Portland Cement Concrete Overlays: State of the Technology Reinforced Concrete Design Repair of Concrete Bridges, Parking Decks, and Other Transportation Structures Repair of Concrete Workshop Seismic and Wind Design Considerations for Concrete Buildings Seismic Design of Liquid-Containing Concrete Structures Troubleshooting Concrete Construction Troubleshooting Concrete Floor Problems Troubleshooting Concrete Forming and Shoring

For more information regarding available Custom Seminar topics, visit www.concreteseminars.com and click on Custom Seminars.

Notable Concrete in Denver

Some examples of recent precast construction in the region

A s ACI prepares to meet for The Concrete Convention

and Exposition, November 8-12, 2015, at the Sheraton Denver Downtown Hotel, in Denver, CO, here are a

few samples of nearby projects:

Circle Point

11030 Circle Point Road, Westminster, CO 80020

The Circle Point office building is a total precast solution with a distinctive kinked floor plate. The total gross area is 340,000 ft 2 (31,600 m 2 ), with about 68,000 ft 2 (6300 m 2 ) per floor. The precast floor and roof components include double tees and prestressed beams. The lateral force-resisting system is made up of four shafts; cast-in-place topping on the floor double tees serve as the diaphragms. At the roof level, the double tees are connected to act as a diaphragm without topping. The exterior walls, made up of highly accented architectural precast panels, are part of the gravity-load system. This complex building enclosure is made up of architectural precast concrete and a glass curtain wall system. The architec- tural precast concrete includes two integral colors, a stone liner, and multiple lines of reveal work. The lower spandrel panels use a dark tan stone liner and an acid-etched finish. The second, third, and roof line spandrel panels are two-tone, adding a lighter buff concrete, plus dramatic relief from multiple reveals. Column panels are single-color, with a color change above the first story. Multiple horizontal reveals in the columns play off those in the spandrel panels. Project credits: Pahl Architecture, PC, Architect; Jirsa+Hedrick and Associates, Structural Engineer; Stresscon Corporation, Precast Supplier; and PCL Construction, General Contractor.

Denver Health Employee Parking Garage

601 Acoma Street, Denver, CO 80204

The Denver Health Employee Parking Garage provides 228,000 ft 2 (21,200 m 2 ) of parking in five stories. The structure has an open interior created by double tees that span between “spread walls” and K-frames, which also resist lateral loads. Altogether, 927 pieces of architectural and structural

precast products went into the building. The architectural concrete wall panels were cast with thin brick, and the surrounding colored concrete was lightly acid-etched. Project credits: Fentress Architects, Architect; Martin/ Martin, Structural Engineer; Stresscon Corporation, Precast

Martin, Structural Engineer; Stresscon Corporation, Precast Circle Point (photo courtesy of Fred Fuhrmeister)

Circle Point (photo courtesy of Fred Fuhrmeister)

Denver Health Employee Parking Garage (photo courtesy of Fred Fuhrmeister) 1st Bank Center (photo courtesy

Denver Health Employee Parking Garage (photo courtesy of Fred Fuhrmeister)

Parking Garage (photo courtesy of Fred Fuhrmeister) 1st Bank Center (photo courtesy of Fred Fuhrmeister) Golden

1st Bank Center (photo courtesy of Fred Fuhrmeister)

1st Bank Center (photo courtesy of Fred Fuhrmeister) Golden Park-N-Ride (photo courtesy of William Towns)

Golden Park-N-Ride (photo courtesy of William Towns)

Supplier; and Hensel Phelps Construction Company, General Contractor.

1st Bank Center

11450 Broomfield Lane, Broomfield, CO 80020

The 1st Bank Center was built to accommodate events including concerts, rodeos, and community functions. The Center contains 6000 seats, 25 suites, 900 club seats, a 200-seat restaurant, two club lounges, and separate basketball and hockey facilities. Precast, prestressed concrete used in the structure include 581 pieces of single-leg risers, triple risers, walls, beams, and stairs. The precast concrete was installed using two hydraulic cranes operating inside the building to coordinate with the roof steel erection. The 1st Bank Center hosts about 130 events each year. While owned by the city and county of Broomfield, CO, the site is managed by Peak Entertainment, a partnership of AEG Live and Kroenke Sports & Entertainment. Project credits: Sink, Combs and Dethlefs, Architect; Martin/Martin, Structural Engineer; Stresscon Corporation, Precast Supplier; and Saunders Construction, General Contractor.

Golden Park-N-Ride

605 Johnson Road, Golden, CO 80401

The Golden Regional Transportation Department (RTD) parking structure serves as the western terminus of the W-Line of the RTD Light Rail System. Keeping the theme of the Jefferson County Judicial Center, the architectural precast concrete maintains the colors, acid-etching, and exposed aggregate textures of the campus. At the south end of the structure, the precast framing creates a tunnel for the light rail train to pass through to reach the boarding platform. The 250,000 ft 2 (23,000 m 2 ) parking structure includes three levels designed to accommodate more than 800 vehicles. The structure is configured four bays deep with the two center bays as a single-leaf ramp. Precast framing components include tees, beams, and columns, with K-frames and hammer- head shear walls for lateral stability, and a load-bearing architectural exterior. Project credits: IBI Group, Architect; Martin/Martin, Structural Engineer; Stresscon Corporation, Precast Supplier; and Hyder Construction, General Contractor.

Santa Fe and C-470 Flyover

South Santa Fe Drive (US 85) at C-470 Westbound, Littleton, CO 80120

The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) added the flyover ramp at Santa Fe Drive and C-470 to reduce congestion on Santa Fe Drive and ease southbound traffic merging onto eastbound C-470. Precast concrete was used for the main structural elements of this $23.3 million project (funded by CDOT, Douglas County, and a federal stimulus grant). The 1713 ft (522 m) elevated structure is made up of 36 curved tub sections (822 ft [250 m] radius) and straight trapezoidal U-girders, supported by precast pier caps, topped

Santa Fe and C-470 Flyover (photo courtesy of EnCon Colorado) with precast, prestressed deck panels.

Santa Fe and C-470 Flyover (photo courtesy of EnCon Colorado)

with precast, prestressed deck panels. Over 200 deck panels were cast directly on the U-girders in the plant to create torsionally rigid sections. The flyover opened 4 months ahead of schedule and under budget, largely due to the use of the precast, prestressed concrete. Erection was done at night to minimize disruption to the public. EnCon Colorado, which produced the precast, received the Award of Excellence for Bridge Construction in the 44th Annual Awards of the Rocky Mountain Chapter – ACI. Project credits: Wilson & Company, Structural Engineer; EnCon Colorado, Precast Supplier; and Edward Kraemer and Sons, General Contractor.

Starz Encore

8900 Liberty Circle, Englewood, CO 80112

The cut-stone appearance of the precast structural panels used on the lower levels of this more than 300,000 ft 2 (28,000 m 2 ) building reflect the granite design on a nearby structure. The design was produced by creating individually sculpted formliners, and panels were turned to create more diversity in the appearance. The structure is three bays wide, framed with 10 ft (3 m) precast twin tees. To create the entablature at front and rear entries, round columns were cast with horizontal

and rear entries, round columns were cast with horizontal Starz Encore (photo courtesy of Barber Architecture)

Starz Encore (photo courtesy of Barber Architecture)

joints to emulate historically correct Roman/Tuscan columns. The project provided many challenges: matching the color, texture, and shape, while hiding joints between panels to replicate the look of stone blocks; designing and erecting the two entablatures; and delivering and erecting precast panels weighing up to 70,000 lb (31,700 kg) each. Project credits: Barber Architecture, Architect; S.A. Miro, Inc., Structural Engineer; and Rocky Mountain Prestress, Precast Supplier.

Read Ci

online cover-to-cover

A flip-book version of the entire current issue of CI is available to ACI members by logging in at www.concreteinternational.com.

Access the flip book by clicking on the link on the CI home page.

by logging in at www.concreteinternational.com . Access the flip book by clicking on the link on

Free

Educational Resources

Visit the ACI Store at www.concrete.org and download free documents from ACI’s Educational Committees. These documents, available in digital editions, cover:

• Materials (including aggregates, reinforcement, cemenititous materials, and admixtures);

• Design examples for concrete structures (including acceptance of test results, masonry shear wall design, basement wall design, and column interaction diagrams); and

• Repair application procedures (including epoxy injection, gravity feed, low-pressure spraying, form-and-pump techniques, and hydrodemolition; plus nine additional topics—five available in Spanish).

form-and-pump techniques, and hydrodemolition; plus nine additional topics—five available in Spanish). CLICK HERE
CLICK HERE
CLICK
HERE
form-and-pump techniques, and hydrodemolition; plus nine additional topics—five available in Spanish). CLICK HERE
form-and-pump techniques, and hydrodemolition; plus nine additional topics—five available in Spanish). CLICK HERE
ALWAYS OPEN! You’ll never have to wait for ACI’s Online Bookstore to open. Our collection
ALWAYS OPEN!
You’ll never have to wait for
ACI’s Online Bookstore to
open. Our collection of over
400 standards, technical
reports, special publications,
and industry favorites is
always open—waiting for you!
Additionally, you can download
many of ACI’s publications
immediately!
ACI’s Online Bookstore—
it’s always open!
www.concrete.org

The Challenge of Predicting the Shear Strength of Very Thick Slabs

Results support recommendation to use at least minimum shear reinforcement

by Michael P. Collins, Evan C. Bentz, Phillip T. Quach, and Giorgio T. Proestos

M any large structures, such as those shown in Fig. 1, incorporate very thick slabs, the shear capacity of which must be evaluated. However, there can be

very large differences in the shear-strength estimates for such slabs given by the procedures in different codes, such as ACI 318 1 or AASHTO LRFD, 2 and few experiments are available to guide engineers as to which approach will give more accurate results. To provide a benchmark against which the accuracy of shear-strength prediction procedures for thick slabs could be measured, it was decided to construct and load to failure a specimen representing a strip cut from a 13 ft (4 m) thick slab (Fig. 2). Apart from its considerable self-weight, the specimen was loaded by an off-center point load, P, dividing the 62 ft 4 in. (19 m) simple span into shear spans, a, of 39 ft 4 in. (12.0 m) and 23 ft (7.0 m) on the east and west sides of the load. The east shear span contained no shear reinforcement, and the shorter west shear span contained about the minimum shear reinforcement per the ACI 318 Code. To assess the ability of the profession to accurately

estimate the shear response of such thick slabs, engineers were invited to provide predictions as to the magnitude of P required to cause failure of the specimen, the location where first failure would occur, the magnitude P required to cause failure if both shear spans had contained minimum shear reinforcement, and the load-deformation response for the actual specimen. This article presents a summary of the results and compares the results with predictions provided by the 66 entries, as well as values calculated based on a number of codes of practice.

Specimen Design

The specimen, shown in Fig. 2, was designed so that it would fail first in the long east shear span (the span not containing shear reinforcement). The specimen’s effective

containing shear reinforcement). The specimen’s effective (a) 17ft 6in. (5.33 m) 6 m thick slab 4

(a)

17ft 6in.

(5.33 m)

6 m thick slab 4 m thick wall
6 m thick slab
4 m
thick
wall

(b)

Fig. 1: Examples of very thick slabs: (a) mat foundation for a high-rise building; and (b) intake structure for hydroelectric powerhouse (Note:

1 m = 3 ft)

Ci

for hydroelectric powerhouse (Note: 1 m = 3 ft) C i The loading to failure of

The loading to failure of the east span is shown in a movie, available at

www.concrete.org/CIvideo1

f ´ = 40 MPa = 5800 psi c b = 250 mm = 9.84
f
´
= 40 MPa = 5800 psi
c
b
= 250 mm = 9.84 in.
Bar
Area
f
y
h
= 4000 mm = 157.5 in.
30M
700 mm 2 1.085 in. 2
573 MPa
83.1 ksi
d
= 3840 mm = 151.2 in.
max aggregate = 14 mm = 0.55 in.
20M
300 mm 2 0.465 in. 2
522 MPa
75.7 ksi
P
d
= 151.2 in.
d
= 3840 mm

Fig. 2: Details of the specimen (Note: 1 mm = 0.04 in.; 1 m = 3 ft)

depth, d, was 151.2 in. (3.84 m), so the shear span-depth ratio, a/d, of the east shear span was 3.12, while that of the west shear span was 1.82. Thus, while direct strut action might increase the shear strength of the west shear span, it would not increase that of the east. To

fit the large specimen into the available

laboratory space, reductions in the overall depth of the specimen were required near each end. The high- strength longitudinal tension reinforce- ment consisted of nine bars with a total yield strength of 812 kip (3610 kN), giving the section a flexural capacity of about 9670 kip-ft (13,100 kN∙m). Thus, the magnitude of P which, in addition to self-weight, would cause flexural failure of the specimen, was predicted to be about 615 kip (2730 kN). Figure 3 summarizes the calculations involved in predicting the value of P that would cause a shear failure in the east shear span. Equations (1a) and (1b) are the traditional “basic expression” for V c for normalweight and normal-strength concrete—still used in ACI 318-14. 1 In using the equation, the term Vd/M is limited to no more than unity. The ACI 318 Code expression was derived 3 based on the correct assumption that the failure shear stress will decrease as the stress in the flexural tension reinforcement

increases

M, kN∙m

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Failure ACI 318-14 (Eq. (1)) V c = 215 +
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Failure
ACI 318-14 (Eq. (1))
V c = 215 + 24.4Vd/M ≤ 240 kip ≥ 227 kip
250
b w = 9.84 in.
P =563 kip
=2505 kN
1000
200
800
150
600
w = 0.656%
P =150.6 kip
= 670 kN
100
130.4
(2))
kip
CSA + AASHTO (Eq.
V c =
1 + 1500ε x
400
V + M/(0.9d)
Failure
ε
=
x
566x10 3
50
P
200
x
self-weight
23 ft 0 in.
39 ft 4 in.
0
0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
x = 26.12 ft (3)
x = 19.69 ft (2)
x = 13.26 ft (1)
V, kip
d = 151.2 in.
V, kN

M, kip-ft

Fig. 3: Shear strength predictions based on ACI 318-14 (Eq. (1)) and CSA/AASHTO Standards (Eq. (2)) (Note: 1 in. = 25 mm; 1 ft = 0.30 m)

Standards (Eq. (2)) (Note: 1 in. = 25 mm; 1 ft = 0.30 m) U.S. customary
Standards (Eq. (2)) (Note: 1 in. = 25 mm; 1 ft = 0.30 m) U.S. customary

U.S. customary units

(1a)

SI units

(1b)

As shown in Fig. 3, for this section with a relatively small

amount of longitudinal reinforcement, the predicted ACI shear strength decreases from 240 to 227 kip (1070 to 1010 kN) as the magnitude of the moment increases. Note that the simplified

version of this ACI equation permits the failure shear stress to

be taken as 2

of 227 kip (1010 kN). Shear failure of a slab with no shear reinforcement involves a flexural crack starting on the flexural tension face and becoming inclined toward the applied load as

it spreads toward the flexural compression face. Because the shear failure surface involves a length along the member about equal to d, sections closer than d to the face of the

support or the face of the load will not be critical. 3 In Fig. 3,

three sections along the east shear span are checked: Section 1, a distance d from the face of the support; Section 2, halfway along the east shear span; and Section 3, a distance d from the face of the load. As P is increased, the moments and shears at these three sections increase from the self-weight values to the

three sections increase from the self-weight values to the , which results in a predicted shear

, which results in a predicted shear strength

failure values. It can be seen that Section 1 has the smallest increment of shear to cause failure; based on the ACI 318 requirements, the magnitude of P at shear failure was predicted to be 563 kip (2505 kN). Thus, the ACI Code would predict that the east shear span would fail in shear near Section 1 when the point load was at 92% of the flexural failure value. In a discussion to the 1962 ACI-ASCE shear report, 3 which proposed the ACI basic expression for V c , Moe suggested that the reason members with higher stress in the flexural tension reinforcement fail at lower shear stress is that they have wider flexural cracks and these wider cracks are not able to transmit such high shear stress. Flexural crack width is a function not only of tensile strain in the longitudinal reinforcement but also of spacing of the cracks. What was not appreciated at the time is that large members have their widest flexural cracks close to the middepth of the member because that is where the largest crack spacing occurs. Along the span of a slab, the crack spacing near middepth varies between about 0.5d and 0.8d, so thicker slabs have more widely spaced cracks. For two slabs, one twice as thick as the other, with the same strain in the flexural tension reinforcement, the thicker slab will have crack widths near middepth about twice as wide as those of the thinner slab. Because of their wider cracks, thicker slabs will fail at lower shear stresses, a phenomenon referred to as the size effect in shear. This size effect is predicted by the Modified Compression Field Theory (MCFT), 4 which forms the basis of the shear provisions of the AASHTO LRFD standard, the Canadian CSA A23.3-14 standard, 5 and the resource for future European standards, “fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010.” 6 In ACI 318 format and U.S. Customary units, an appropriate MCFT expression for V c that clearly identifies the strain effect and the size effect is given by

identifies the strain effect and the size effect is given by (2) where ε x is
identifies the strain effect and the size effect is given by (2) where ε x is

(2)

where ε x is the calculated longitudinal strain at middepth of the member; and s x is the effective longitudinal spacing of the flexural cracks at middepth of the member. If the member has at least minimum shear reinforcement satisfying traditional spacing limits, s x can be taken equal to 12 in. (about 300 mm) and the size effect is eliminated. If the member has no shear reinforcement and the maximum specified aggregate size, a g , is at least 1 in. (25 mm), then s x is taken as 0.75d. For smaller maximum aggregate sizes, s x is taken as 1.25d/(0.65 + a g ), which for the large test specimen is 1.25 × 151.2/(0.65 + 0.55), or 157.5 in. (4 m). The value of ε x can be taken as one-half the strain in the flexural tension reinforcement, where the tension force in this reinforcement is taken as M/(0.9d) + V. The resulting shear-moment interaction diagram shown in Fig. 3 was calculated by assuming values of ε x and then calculating the corresponding values of V and M. The interaction line is labeled CSA + AASHTO because very similar values for the line would have been obtained if the shear provisions of either of these two codes had been used. Note that Eq. (2) predicts a shear failure in the east span when P equals only 150.6 kip

(670 kN). This value is 24% and 27% of the flexural failure and the ACI predicted shear failure values of P, respectively. For the MCFT-based method (ignoring the detrimental effect of the large spacing of the shear reinforcement), the

predicted shear capacity of the west shear span is V c + V s =

193 + 109 = 302 kip (1340 kN), where V s is given by Eq. (3)

109 = 302 kip (1340 kN), where V s is given by Eq. (3) (3) Note

(3)

Note that when the distance between the loading plate and the support plate is less than 2d, the critical section is taken 3 half- way along the shear span. Also note that this predicted shear capacity for the west shear span is about 3.5 times the MCFT predicted shear capacity of the critical east shear span. As previously discussed, it is assumed that the specified minimum quantity of appropriately spaced shear reinforcement will

eliminate the size effect in shear, causing a large increase in V c . The spacing, s, of the shear reinforcement in the west shear span was 59 in. (1500 mm). While this is only 0.39d, it considerably exceeded the traditional 24 in. (610 mm) maximum spacing limit. 1 The CSA code 5 allows this spacing limit to be exceeded if s x in Eq. (2) is set equal to (s − 12) in. Changing s x from 12 to 47 in. (305 to 1190 mm) reduces the predicted shear capacity of the west shear span to 129 + 115 =

244 kip (1084 kN), which is still about 2.9 times the predicted

shear capacity of the east shear span. So for very thick slabs, even widely spaced minimum shear reinforcement is predicted to greatly increase shear capacity. The point load required to fail the west shear span is thus predicted to be

334 kip (1485 kN), which is 2.22 times the load predicted to

fail the east shear span.

Loading until First Failure

The behavior of the specimen during loading until first failure is summarized in Fig. 4. Flexural cracking first occurred under the point load when P reached 45 kip (198 kN), corresponding to a bending moment in the specimen of 1400 kip-ft (1900 kN∙m) and a tensile stress in the concrete of 360 psi (2.48 MPa). At several load stages during the experiment, the magnitude of P was reduced significantly so that cracks could be safely marked and crack widths measured and labeled. Figure 4(a) shows the specimen after P had reached 84.4 kip (375 kN). In the east shear span at the level of the flexural tension reinforcement, seven cracks can be seen. The average spacing of these cracks is 28.5 in. (724 mm) and the average crack width is 0.06 mm (0.003 in.). Two of these seven cracks extend up past the middepth of the member and the spacing between these two cracks equals 93.3 in. (2320 mm), which is 0.60d. Near middepth, these two cracks have an average width about three times greater than the average crack width near the flexural tension face. As P was increased to 141 kip (625 kN), the crack further from the load developed into a potential flexure-shear failure crack (Fig. 4(b)). As P was further increased, a flexural crack originating about 18 ft (5.5 m) from the east support began to spread upward

(a) (b) (c) (d)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

Fig. 4: Diagonal cracking of east span: (a) Load Stage 2 at P = 84.4 kip (375 kN), crack widths at middepth = 0.15 mm (0.006 in.); (b) Load Stage 4 at P = 141 kip (625 kN), crack widths at middepth = 0.75 mm (0.030 in.); (c) Load Stage 5 at failure load P = 154.1 kip (685 kN), spacing between three cracks at middepth = 0.60d and 0.68d, crack widths at middepth up to 3 mm (0.118 in.), deflection under load = 12 mm (0.47 in.); and (d) Load Stage 6 when reloaded maximum P = 97 kip (433 kN), crack widths opened up to 35 mm (1.4 in.)

and crossed the middepth with a slope of about 45 degrees and as this crack propagated toward the point load, the force applied by the displacement- controlled ram decreased from the peak load of 154.1 kip (685 kN) to less than 112 kip (500 kN) (refer to Fig. 4(c)). The applied load was reduced to zero for the weekend, after which the damaged specimen was reloaded. During this loading, P reached a maximum of only 97.4 kip (433 kN), the cracks spread and widened, and P fell to just 3 kip (13 kN) (Fig. 4(d)). Thus, the magnitude of the point load required to cause shear failure of this strip from a 13 ft (4 m) thick slab occurred when the point load was 1.02 times the load predicted by the MCFT- based method and 0.27 times the load predicted by the ACI basic expression

for the shear strength of members not containing shear reinforcement. Note that at the peak load, the maximum shear force resisted at the section 18 ft (5.5 m) from the support was only 22.0 + 56.8 = 78.8 kip (350 kN). This corresponds to a nominal shear stress (V/(b w d)) at failure of only 53 psi (0.365 MPa). In comparison, Eq. (1) predicts that the shear stress at failure will be 161 psi (1.11 MPa), which is three times the experimental failure stress. The traditional ACI simplified equation suggests that at shear failure the nominal shear stress will be 2 which is 152 psi (1.05 MPa), or 2.9 times the experimental value. Perhaps of equal concern, the ACI 318 Code calculations predict that failure should occur first in the west shear span. The ACI 318 Code defines

,
,

the nominal shear strength provided by shear reinforcement, V s , as

strength provided by shear reinforcement, V s , as (4) Ignoring the detrimental effect of the

(4)

Ignoring the detrimental effect of the large spacing of the shear reinforce- ment, the ACI predicted shear capacity of the west shear span is V c + V s = 240 + 90 = 330 kip (1470 kN). At the critical section halfway along the short west shear span, the shear due to self-weight is 33 kip (146 kN), leaving 297 kip (1320 kN) to resist the shear due to P. Thus, the ACI Code-predicted point load to cause a failure in the west shear span is 470 kip (2090 kN), which is 83% of the ACI-predicted load to cause failure of the east shear span. The ACI expressions predict failure in the wrong shear span because for very thick slabs, they greatly underestimate the increase in shear capacity caused by adding minimum shear reinforcement.

Predictions from Engineers

Figure 5 compares the experimental

result from the east shear span with the

66 predictions made by engineers who

responded to the challenge of predicting the failure load of the very thick slab. By coincidence, 33 of the predictions came from engineers in industry and 33 came from engineers in academia. A total of 26 predictions came from Europe, 23 from the United States,

14 from Canada, and one each from

Australia, Brazil, and Mexico. Also shown on the plot are the predictions based on provisions in six different codes. 1,2,5-8 Given the large range of values shown in the figure and the almost uniform distribution of predicted values across the entire range, it is evident that predicting the shear strength of very thick slabs not containing shear reinforcement was a challenging task for the profession. The upper red zone in the figure identifies very unconser- vative predictions, where the ratio of predicted failure load to observed failure load ranges from 1.5 to 5.5. The yellow band in Fig. 5, on the other hand, indicates the “gold standard” prediction range of ±10% from the observed

Applied point load, P , kip

strength. It can be seen that based on this measure, eight of the predictions from industry, five from academia, and three predictions based on codes were excellent. While 20% of the entries were very accurate, the concern is that 44% of the entries and two of the codes were in the red zone and thus made very unconservative predictions. Engineers were challenged to predict not only the magnitude of P required to fail the thick slab strip but also the deflection, Δ, at the location of the load when the load was 25, 50, 75, and 100% of the predicted failure load. A total of 36 of the entries—13 from industry and 23 from academia—submitted predictions for the load-deformation response. Figure 6 compares these predictions with the experimentally determined response. Also shown on the figure are two straight lines

response. Also shown on the figure are two straight lines Fig. 5: Comparison of predictions of

Fig. 5: Comparison of predictions of point load to cause first failure with test result

representing linear elastic response predictions. The steeper line is appropriate for an uncracked specimen (moment of inertia, I , based on the gross section moment of inertia, I g ), while the second line with the much lower slope would be appropriate if the member is fully cracked (I based on the cracked moment of inertia, I cr , which is taken as 0.335I g ) and shear deformations are negligible. Note that in the first case, the predicted deflection at the location of the point load due to self-weight of the specimen equals about 0.04 in. (1 mm), while for the lower stiffness, this self-weight deflection is about three times greater. It can be seen that predicting the load-deformation response of a very thick slab is very challenging. As one would expect, the deformations measured prior to cracking closely followed the linear elastic prediction for the uncracked member. At first cracking, there was a substantial loss of member stiffness, after which the load- deformation response followed an approximately straight line at a slope that was only about 15% of the slope for the uncracked member. The yellow zone around the observed response loading line indicates deflections at a given load that were within ±20% of the experimental values. Five of the predictions lie within this “zone of excellence”; two stay well below the zone, indicating underestimates of stiffness; and 18 stay above, indicating overestimates of stiffness, while the remaining 11 intersect the zone typically because calculated initial post-cracking stiffnesses were too high. Only three of

400

300

200

100

0

684 kip 435 kip 472 kip 723 kip 1.54 in. 0.37 in. 1.04 in. 5.50
684 kip
435 kip
472 kip
723 kip
1.54 in.
0.37 in.
1.04 in.
5.50 in.
848 kip
0.94 in.
2
2
Δ =
402 kip
1.44 in.
258 kip
1.46 in.
Prague
Toronto
P exp = 154 kip = 685 kN
Δ
= 0.47 in. = 12 mm
exp
P
Observed Failure
Brescia
Δ
Prague (Cervenka) Predic on
Experimental

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Displacement under point load, Δ, in.

0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 Displacement under point load, Δ , in. American Canadian European Other

American

0.8 0.9 Displacement under point load, Δ , in. American Canadian European Other University 1.0 1.1

Canadian

Displacement under point load, Δ , in. American Canadian European Other University 1.0 1.1 Industry Fig.

European

under point load, Δ , in. American Canadian European Other University 1.0 1.1 Industry Fig. 6:

Other

University

1.0

1.1

Industry

Fig. 6: Predicted and observed load-deformation response for initial test (failure in east span) (Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25 mm)

the load-deformation predictions met the demanding require- ments that the predicted failure load is within ±10% of the experimental value and the four predicted deformations are within ±20% of the experimental values. These predictions were submitted by Červenka and Sajdlova from a consulting firm in Prague, Czech Republic; Conforti and Facconi of the University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy; and Bentz from the University of Toronto. The first two predictions were made using nonlinear finite element models, while the third used a

650 600 P ex p = 486 kip = 2162 kN 550 Δ = 1.55
650
600
P ex p = 486 kip = 2162 kN
550
Δ
= 1.55 in. = 39.3 mm
exp
500
11
10
450
9
400
350
8
2
2
Δ =
300
3
250
7
Experimental
200
150
P
Observed Failure
100
50
Δ
0
Applied point load, P , kip

0.0

0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0 1.1

1.2

1.3

Displacement under point load, Δ, in.

1.4

1.5 1.6

1.7

Fig. 7: Load-deformation response of repaired specimen (Note: 1 kip = 4.45 kN; 1 in. = 25 mm)

newly developed version of the sectional analysis program Response-2000. 9 With respect to location of failure, Červenka and Sajdlova submitted the most accurate prediction, shown as an insert in Fig. 6, of where the failure would occur and what the specimen would look like as failure progressed. Six of the entries predicted that first failure of the specimen would be a shear failure in the shorter west shear span while two predicted a flexural failure under the load. Because of this, these eight entries predicted that adding minimum shear reinforcement to the east shear span would not increase the failure load of the specimen.

Failure of the West Shear Span

To determine the shear capacity of the shorter west shear span, the failed east end of the specimen was repaired by

strapping that shear span with four pairs of 1.375 in. (36 mm)

diameter Dywidag threadbars and post-tensioning each bar to

about 30 tons (270 kN). The load-deflection response of the

repaired specimen is shown in Fig. 7. It can be seen that at low loads, the deformations of the repaired but cracked member

closely matched the predictions of the elastic equation using E c I cr , where E c is the elastic modulus for the concrete. However,

at higher loads, the stiffness of the member reduced substantially so that at failure the deformation was about 1.8 times the predicted elastic value for the cracked specimen. The conditions of the specimen at 81% of failure load and at failure are shown in Fig. 8(a) and (b). When the point load reached 486 kip (2162 kN), the concrete at the west end of the loading plate crushed (refer to inset illustration in Fig. 7), causing the load

to reduce to about 10% of its peak value. The zone of crushed concrete corresponded closely to what Mihaylov et al. 10 define as the critical loading zone (CLZ). For short shear spans, the CLZ is predicted to carry a large portion of the

shear. 11 Note that the shear force required to fail the shorter west shear span with minimum shear reinforcement was 33 + 307 = 340 kip (1511 kN), which is 340/78.8 = 4.3 times the magnitude of the failure shear of the longer east shear span with no shear reinforcement.

(a) (b)
(a)
(b)

Fig. 8: Diagonal cracking of west span (east span repaired with external reinforcement):

(a)

Load Stage 9 at P = 394 kip (1750 kN), diagonal crack widths up to 4.0 mm (0.157 in.); and

(b)

Load Stage 11 at failure load, P = 486 kip (2162 kN)

West Shear Span Predictions

Figure 9 compares the experimental value of the point load required to fail the west shear span with the 44 predictions made by engineers who responded to the challenge of predicting the failure load of the specimen if the east shear span had also contained shear reinforcement. Again note that the red zone indicates very unconserva- tive predictions and the yellow band identifies excellent predictions within ±10% of the experimental value. Comparing Fig. 9 to Fig. 5, it can be seen that while 29 of the 66 entries were in the red zone for the east shear

span without shear reinforcement, for the west shear span, only one of the 44 entries was in the red zone. Further, for the west shear span, 66% of the predictions were conservative while for the east shear span, only 24% were conservative. For the west shear span, 10 of the predictions (five from industry, four from academia, and the ACI value) were within 10% of the experimental value. There are two CSA predictions shown in Fig. 9—one based on sectional analysis (Eq. (2) and (3)) and the second on a strut-and-tie analysis. For thick slabs with a/d less than about 2, the use of strut-and-tie models 1,2,5 often gives higher and more accurate estimates of failure loads. 11 For this specimen, the strut-and-tie estimate of failure was only 11% higher than the sectional value, indicating that strut action, while significant, is not yet as dominant as it would be for a somewhat shorter shear span.

dominant as it would be for a somewhat shorter shear span. Fig. 9: Comparison of predictions

Fig. 9: Comparison of predictions of point load to cause failure of west shear span with test result

Only two entries predicted the failure loads of both the east shear span and the west shear span within 10% of the experimental values. These entries were from Červenka Consulting and from SNC-Lavalin Hydro in collaboration with École Polytechique de Montréal, Canada. Both groups used their own nonlinear finite element programs. Of these two excellent entries, the load-deformation prediction from Červenka Consulting was more accurate and hence they were chosen as the overall winners of the prediction competition.

Traditional-Sized Specimen

The ACI basic expression for the shear strength of members without shear reinforcement (Eq. (1)) was developed 3 using experiments on beams that were only about 1 ft (0.30 m) deep. To provide a direct comparison with such a beam, a companion beam—about 1 ft in overall depth—was cast on April 27, 2015, along with the 13 ft (4 m) deep specimen. The small specimen was loaded to failure on August 4, 2015, by which time the concrete strength had reached 6500 psi (45 MPa). The small specimen had a d of 10.4 in. (264 mm) and a span of 65 in. (1650 mm) and was loaded by a central point load. The a/d of 3.12 for the small specimen was selected to be the same as for east span of the large specimen. Also, the percentage of longitudinal reinforcement for the two specimens

12

10

8

V , kip

6

4

2

0

0 5

10

M, kN∙m

15

20

25

30

CSA + AASHTO (Eq. (2)) ACI 318-14 (Eq. (1)) Failure V = 11.5 kip =
CSA + AASHTO (Eq. (2))
ACI 318-14 (Eq. (1))
Failure
V = 11.5 kip
= 51.2 kN
50
b w = 6.89 in.
Failure
V exp = 10.7 kip
= 47.4 kN
Failure
V = 9.7 kip
= 43.1 kN
40
A s = 0.456 in. 2
w = 0.649%
f y = 66.4 ksi
P ex p = 21.3 kip
30
1.5 in.
f c ' = 6500 psi
a g = 0.55 in.
1.5 in.
x = 21.4 in.
1.5 in.
65 in.
20
10
self-weight
0
x = M/V
= 21.4 in. (3)
d = 10.4 in.
V , kN

0 50

100

150

M, kip-ft

200

250

300

Fig. 10: Comparison of strength predictions with experimental result for the small specimen (Note: 1 in. = 25 mm; 1 in. 2 = 645 mm 2 ; 1 ksi = 6.9 MPa; 1 psi = 0.0069 MPa)

was very similar. However, the d of the large specimen was 14.5 times d of the small specimen. The shear capacities of the small specimen at different values of bending moment as predicted by Eq. (1) and (2) are shown in Fig. 10. The most significant difference between the two predicted interaction lines is that Eq. (2) predicts a more significant reduction in shear strength as moment increases. Because for this small specimen self-weight shears are

negligible, the section d from the face of the loading plate is predicted to be critical. In the experiment, failure occurred when the applied point load reached 21.3 kip (94.8 kN), corresponding to a shear force of 10.7 kip (47.4 kN). The failure cracks for the two specimens were similar, but the crack in the small specimen was proportionally somewhat closer to the load point. This time, the three cracks crossing middepth on the failure side of the specimen were spaced at 0.50d and 0.78d. For the small specimen, the nominal shear

stress at failure was 149 psi (1.03 MPa) or 1.85

maximum crack width just prior to failure was 0.20 mm

, and the

crack width just prior to failure was 0.20 mm , and the (0.008 in.). In contrast,

(0.008 in.). In contrast, the nominal shear stress at failure for the large specimen was only 53 psi (0.365 MPa) or

0.70

failure was 0.75 mm (0.030 in.). Thus, as the size increased by

, and the maximum crack width measured just prior to

by , and the maximum crack width measured just prior to ACI’s Online Career Center brings
ACI’s Online Career Center brings together great job opportunities and great candidates. This job search
ACI’s Online Career Center brings
together great job opportunities and
great candidates.
This job search engine is specifically
targeted to the concrete industry.
• Easy online job management
• Resume searching access
• Company awareness
• FREE Student Internships
Don’t miss this unique opportunity to
be seen by an exclusive audience of
the industry’s best and brightest!
Visit www.concrete.org.
ACI’s Career Center

a factor of 14.5, the shear stress at failure decreased by a factor of 2.8 and the crack widths near failure increased by a factor of about 3.8. For the small specimen, both Eq. (1) and (2) gave excellent predictions, which were within ±10% of the experimental result.

Summary and Recommendations

To investigate the ability of current design procedures to predict the shear strength of very thick slabs, a specimen representing a strip cut from a 13 ft (4 m) thick slab was constructed and loaded to failure under an off-center point load. Prior to loading of the specimen, engineers were invited to predict the magnitude of the point loads required to fail the two shear spans. The shear strength of the longer shear span (with no shear reinforcement) of the very thick slab was dangerously overestimated by many engineers—44% of the 66 entries predicted failure loads that were more than 1.5 times the experimental value and 12% of the entries predicted failure loads that were more than 3 times the experimental value. The prediction per the basic equation in ACI 318-14, which does not account for the size effect, was 3.7 times the experimental value. Although not detailed herein, it should also be noted that predictions made per Eurocode 2, 7 which also underestimates the size effect, indicated a failure load that was 2.0 times the experimental value. It is concluded that these two traditional shear design procedures can seriously overestimate the strength of very thick slabs in long shear spans not containing shear reinforcement. The second and more positive conclusion is that, as shown by 20% of the entries and three of the codes, excellent estimates of failure load for such shear spans can be made. The engineers who developed the basic ACI expression for shear strength, Eq. (1), 3 intended that engineers should account for the detrimental effects of moment when designing for shear. Unfortunately, this expression, which was based on tests of small, heavily reinforced beams, seriously underesti- mates the influence of moment and neglects the influence of member size on shear stress at failure. Slabs, in contrast, usually have low reinforcement ratios and can be very thick. With this combination of variables, Eq. (1) can be very unconservative—as the experiment in this paper demonstrates. As shown in this project and in the research of Sherwood et al., 12 the addition of minimum shear reinforcement to a very thick slab can more than triple the shear strength of the slab. ACI 318-14, however, suggests that adding minimum shear reinforcement will increase the shear strength by a factor of only 1.38, irrespective of the thickness of the slab. Traditionally, the thickness of slabs has been chosen so that shear reinforcement is not required because placing shear reinforcement was regarded as expensive and the predicted benefits of including it were small. The ability to use large headed bars as shear reinforcement and space the bars further apart than 24 in. (600 mm) significantly reduces placing costs. More importantly, the addition of this shear reinforcement will totally transform the shear behavior of the slab. For very

thick slabs with shear spans long enough to negate direct strut action, safe designs can be ensured by providing at least minimum shear reinforcement.

Acknowledgments

This project would not have been possible without the assistance of many experienced engineers, technicians, and research assistants. The 95 engineers from 17 different countries who took the time and had the courage to answer the challenge of predicting the shear capacity of the very thick slab made it possible to evaluate the current state of the art. Headed Reinforcement Corporation (HRC) was kind enough to donate the headed reinforcement and the couplers, while Dufferin Construction, an operating division of Holcim Canada, generously donated the large quantity of concrete. In addition, Aluma Systems supplied and erected the formwork, Amherst Group did the concrete pumping, and Ontario Cutting and Coring assisted with the demolition of the tested specimen. The enthusiasm and skill of the laboratory staff and of the research assistants made it possible to complete this complex project in the limited time available. Many of them are shown in the cover photograph. Finally, the long-term support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) is greatly appreciated.

References

1. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural

Concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentary,” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2014, 519 pp.

2. “AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and Commentary,”

sixth edition, American Association of State Highway Transportation

Officials, Washington, DC, 2012, 1264 pp.

3. ACI-ASCE Committee 326, “Shear and Diagonal Tension,” ACI

Journal Proceedings, V. 59, No. 1, 2, and 3, Jan., Feb., and Mar. 1962,

pp. 1-30, 277-334, and 352-396, respectively, and discussion and closure, Oct. 1962, pp. 1323-1349.

4. Vecchio, F.J., and Collins, M.P., “The Modified Compression-Field

Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear,” ACI

Journal Proceedings, V. 83, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1986, pp. 219-231.

5. “CSA A23.3-14 - Design of Concrete Structures,” Canadian Standards

Association, Mississauga, ON, Canada, 2014, 290 pp.

6. “fib Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010 (MC2010),”

International Federation for Structural Concrete (fib), Ernst & Sohn, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2013, 402 pp.

7. EN 1992-1-1:2004, “Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures —

Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings,” European Committee for Standardization, CEN, Brussels, Belgium, 2004, 225 pp.

8. “AS 3600-2009: Concrete Structures,” Standards Australia, Sydney,

Australia, 2009, 206 pp.

9. Response-2000, available for download at www.ecf.utoronto.

ca/~bentz/r2k.htm.

10. Mihaylov, B.I.; Bentz, E.C.; and Collins, M.P., “Two-Parameter

Kinematic Theory for Shear Behavior of Deep Beams,” ACI Structural

Journal, V. 110, No. 3, May-June 2013, pp. 447-455.

11. Uzel, A.; Podgorniak, B.; Bentz, E.C.; and Collins, M.P., “Design

of Large Footings for One-Way Shear,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 108, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2011, pp. 131-138.

12. Sherwood, E.G.; Bentz, E.C.; and Collins, M.P., “Effect of Aggregate

Size on Beam-Shear Strength of Thick Slabs,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 104, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2007, pp. 180-190.

Selected for reader interest by the editors.

ACI Honorary Member and Professor Michael P. Collins teaches structural engineering at the University of

ACI Honorary Member and Professor Michael P. Collins teaches structural

engineering at the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. He is a member and former Chair of Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 445, Shear and Torsion, and

a former member of ACI Committee 318,

Structural Concrete Building Code. At Toronto, he has led a long-term research project aimed at developing rational but simple shear design procedures for both reinforced and prestressed concrete structures. The results of this work have influenced design provisions for buildings, bridges, nuclear containment structures, and offshore concrete platforms. As a consulting engineer, Collins has been involved in a number of failure investigations and in evaluating and strengthening concrete structures in distress.

and strengthening concrete structures in distress. Evan C. Bentz , FACI, is an Associate Professor of

Evan C. Bentz, FACI, is an Associate Professor of civil engineering at the University of Toronto. He received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada, in 1994, and his PhD from the University of Toronto in 2000. He is the author of the sectional analysis program Response, is Chair of ACI Committee 365, Service Life Prediction, and a member of Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 445, Shear and Torsion. He has received four teaching awards and two awards for technical papers.

four teaching awards and two awards for technical papers. Phillip T. Quach is completing his Masters

Phillip T. Quach is completing his Masters of Applied Science degree at

the University of Toronto and the tests in this paper will form part of his MASc thesis. He received his bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from the University of Toronto in 2013. During his professional experience year, he worked

in the structural engineering group at

Golder Associates Ltd., Toronto.

engineering group at Golder Associates Ltd., Toronto. Giorgio T. Proestos is a joint PhD candidate at

Giorgio T. Proestos is a joint PhD candidate at the University of Toronto and the Institute for Advanced Study of Pavia, Italy (IUSS). In 2012, he received his BASc in engineering science, with a structural engineering specialty, from the University of Toronto, and his MASc in civil engineering in 2014.

Quality Control for Concrete Durability

A case study provides comparisons of work performed under performance and prescriptive specifications

by Odd E. Gjørv

I n 2005, a new development project began in the Tjuvholmen neighborhood in the harbor region of Oslo, Norway. This project comprises a number of business and apartment

buildings built on concrete substructures positioned in seawater (Fig. 1). The substructures, for which the highest possible durability and service life were required, were finished by 2010. In shallow water, the structures typically include a solid concrete bottom slab on the sea bed. The slab is surrounded by concrete walls partly protected by riprap or wooden cladding and partly exposed to the tides. In deeper water, some structures include an open concrete deck on columns of driven steel pipes filled with concrete, while other structures comprise four large concrete caissons extending as much as 20 m (66 ft) below the surface. Three of these caissons provide up to four levels of parking (Fig. 2). The caissons were prefabricated in dry docks, floated into position, and submerged (Fig. 3).

For all concrete substructures, the owner and developer of the project required a service life of 300 years, which meant that the highest possible durability and long-term performance were needed. As a minimum, all durability requirements had

were needed. As a minimum, all durability requirements had Fig. 1: The new city development on

Fig. 1: The new city development on Tjuvholmen in the Oslo harbor (photo courtesy of Terje Løchen)

to be fulfilled for a 100-year service life according to then- current European concrete standards. To obtain greater durability and service life of the structures, the owner would have preferred having all contracts based on the DURACON (Durability Design of Concrete Structures) Model. 1,2 This model provides for probability-based durability design, performance-based concrete quality control, quality assurance with documentation of achieved construction quality, and condition assessment during operation of concrete structures in severe environments (Fig. 4). While application of the DURACON Model became an option in the final contract, the contract still required documentation of the achieved construction quality based on the DURACON procedures. The project was carried out by two different contractors. One of them (Contractor A) applied the DURACON Model as a basis for the contract. This contractor was in charge of the first four parts of the project, mainly including the solid concrete bottom slabs with perimeter concrete walls exposed to the tidal and splash zones. The experience obtained from the durability design and concrete quality assurance of these concrete structures has been reported in a previous article. 3 The other contractor (Contractor B) applied the prescriptive-

other contractor (Contractor B) applied the prescriptive- Fig. 2: Large, prefabricated concrete caissons shown in

Fig. 2: Large, prefabricated concrete caissons shown in rendering provide up to four levels of submerged parking

based durability requirements according to the then-current European concrete standards but with some additional require- ments and protective measures as a basis for the contract. Contractor B was in charge of the last four parts of the project. These structures mainly included the four large caissons prefabricated in dry docks at two different construction sites. In addition, a number of open concrete decks were also included, partly as prefabricated elements, but mostly produced on site. Because documentation based on the DURACON procedures was required to determine the achieved construction quality of all concrete structures, the project created a unique opportunity for comparing the results obtained through the use of perfor- mance and prescriptive specifications. Further results and experience from the durability design and concrete quality control of the project’s concrete structures are described and discussed in more detail elsewhere. 2

Specified Durability

For design according to the DURACON Model, the overall durability requirement is based on the specification of a given “service period” before the probability for onset of steel corrosion exceeds a certain upper level. In accordance with current standards for reliability of structures, a probability of 10% is adopted for this level. To calculate the probability of corrosion, durability analyses are carried out, providing a basis for selecting proper combinations of concrete quality and concrete cover which would meet the required service period for the given environment. Procedures and input for durability design are described and discussed in more detail elsewhere, 1,2 but it should be noted that in the DURACON Model, the concrete quality is characterized by the chloride diffusivity (D) according to the rapid chloride migration (RCM) method. 4 The RCM method does not require pre-curing of the concrete and so can be carried out very rapidly, independent of concrete age. Because the method provides a very strongly accelerated test, the results can be considered only as a simple relative index. However, the results vary with the density and permeability of the concrete as well as the ion mobility in the pore solution of the concrete, so they do reflect a concrete mixture’s resistance to chloride ingress and thus its general durability properties. Using the 28-day chloride diffusivity (D 28 ) as an input parameter for durability design can be compared to using the 28-day compressive strength as an input parameter for structural design—both parameters are actually relatively simple indexes that can be used to establish that a concrete mixture is fit for purpose. However, it should be noted that the 28-day chloride diffusivity is a much more sensitive concrete quality parameter than the 28-day compressive strength.

Performance-based durability requirements (Contractor A)

Because the current procedures for probability-based durability design according to the DURACON Model are not considered valid for a service period of more than 150 years,

the overall durability requirement to the concrete structures in the first four parts of the project (Contractor A) was based on a probability of corrosion as low as possible and not exceeding 10% for a service period of up 150 years. To further ensure

(a) (b)
(a)
(b)

Fig. 3: Large concrete caissons were: (a) prefabricated in dry docks; and (b) moved into position and submerged in water up to 20 m (66 ft) deep

into position and submerged in water up to 20 m (66 ft) deep Fig. 4: The

Fig. 4: The DURACON Model includes concrete quality control and quality assurance measures, documentation of achieved construction quality, and condition assessment during operation of concrete structures in severe environments 1,2

the durability of the structures, some additional protective measures were applied. For the first concrete structure constructed by Contractor A, provisions were provided for future cathodic protection in combination with embedded probes for chloride control. For the other three structures, the additional protective measure was based on a partial replace- ment of plain carbon steel reinforcing bars with EN 1.4301/ AISI 304 stainless steel bars. To select a proper combination of concrete quality and concrete cover, an initial durability analysis was carried out. Because the concrete quality in the durability design was based on the RCM diffusivity, current experience with the RCM diffusivity of different types of concrete had to be reviewed. 2 On this basis, a concrete with blast-furnace slag cement with 70% slag (CEM III/B 42.5 LH HS) in combination with 10% silica fume was adopted. This mixture typically provides a D 28 of 2.0 × 10 12 m 2 /s. A nominal concrete cover of 100 ± 10 mm (4 ± 0.4 in.) was also adopted, while all the other input parameters needed for the durability design were based on current experience for the local marine environment. As a result, a probability for corrosion of less than 0.3% after a 150-year service would be attained for the most exposed parts of the structures. Therefore, the aforementioned values for the D 28 and the nominal concrete cover were adopted as intended values for the first concrete substructure. Resistance to freezing was also required, and to reduce the risk for early-age cracking of the 100 mm (4 in.) concrete cover, synthetic fibers were required in the mixture. While provisions for future cathodic protection were applied as an additional protective measure for all exposed walls of the first concrete substructure, no additional protective measure for the continuously submerged bottom slab was considered necessary due to the very low oxygen availability. For the second concrete structure, which consisted of an open concrete deck on columns of driven steel pipes filled with concrete, the additional protective measure was based on partial replacement of plain carbon steel reinforcing bars with stainless steel bars. Because this protective measure very soon proved to be a simple and robust technical solution and even proved to be economically competitive, a partial use of stainless steel was adopted for the most exposed sections of the remaining parts of the project. When plain carbon steel was replaced by stainless steel in the outer layer of the reinforcing bar system, the effective concrete cover to the carbon steel reinforcement increased to more than 150 mm (6 in.). As a consequence, the nominal concrete cover to the stainless steel bars could be reduced to 85 ± 10 mm (3.3 ± 0.4 in.) while still maintaining a very low probability of corrosion. At the same time, the addition of fibers to the concrete for these parts of the structures was no longer considered necessary. For all the solid bottom slabs, however, plain carbon steel with a nominal concrete cover of 100 ± 10 mm (4 ± 0.4 in.) and concrete with synthetic fibers were still applied.

Prescriptive-based durability requirements (Contractor B)

For all the concrete substructures in the last four parts of the project (Contractor B), the durability requirements were primarily based on the prescriptive durability requirements according to the then-current European concrete standards for a 100-year service life. These provisions included a maximum water-binder ratio (w/b) of 0.40 and a minimum binder content of 330 kg/m 3 (556 lb/yd 3 ). Provisions also included nominal concrete covers for the permanently submerged parts and the tidal/splash zones of 60 and 70 mm (2.4 and 2.8 in.), respectively. To further increase the durability, however, the nominal concrete cover for the permanently submerged slabs of the caissons was increased from 60 to 80 mm (2.4 to 3.1 in.), while for all external walls with tidal and splash exposure, it was increased from 70 to 90 mm (2.8 to 3.5 in.). For the submerged parts of the structures, cathodic protection in the form of sacrificial anodes was also applied, while above water, provisions were made for future installation of cathodic protection in combination with embedded instrumentation for future chloride control.

Concrete Quality Control

As a basis for the performance-based concrete quality control, ongoing control of both the chloride diffusivity (RCM) of the concrete and the concrete cover were carried out throughout concrete construction. For all the concrete structures for which the probability-based durability design was applied, the specification called for a D 28 of 2.0 × 10 12 m 2 /s or less, while for all the other concrete structures that were only based on prescriptive durability requirements, the D 28 value had to be determined for the given concrete of each new concrete structure before concrete construction started. Although the RCM method is a very rapid test method which provides data on the chloride diffusivity within a few days, this is not good enough for the regular quality control during concrete construction. Based on the DURACON procedures, therefore, a calibration curve relating the chloride diffusivity and the electrical resistivity of the given concrete mixture must be established before concrete construction starts (Fig. 5). Then, the D 28 value is indirectly controlled by regular nondestructive testing of the electrical resistivity of the concrete during concrete construction. All of the quality control measurements of the electrical resistivity were made on compressive strength test specimens (immediately before the specimens were tested for strength) using the four-electrode (Wenner) method. Because the specified concrete covers were substantial and the reinforcement system was mostly highly congested, it was very difficult to measure the cover thickness accurately using conventional cover meters. The use of stainless steel reinforcement further complicated the quality control measurements. While sophisticated scanning equipment for control of thick concrete covers does exist, 2 a more pragmatic approach, based on manual readings of the cover depth on

Fig. 5: Typical calibration curve for an indirect control of the 28-day chloride diffusivity (RCM)

Fig. 5: Typical calibration curve for an indirect control of the 28-day chloride diffusivity (RCM) based on electrical resistivity measurements

protruding bars in all construction joints during concrete construction, was applied. If the quantity of such control measurements was sufficient to produce reliable statistical data, this simple approach was considered adequate for the regular quality control and quality assurance during concrete construction.

Achieved Construction Quality

Upon completion of the concrete construction of each new structure, all data from the regular concrete quality control tests were incorporated as new input parameters for durability analyses used for documenting the achieved construction quality. Because the control of the 28-day chloride diffusivity was only carried out on small and separately produced concrete specimens cured in the laboratory for 28 days, the values may be quite different from that obtained on the construction site. Therefore, some additional documentation of achieved chloride diffusivity on the construction site and the long-term diffusivity of the various types of concrete are also required according to the DURACON approach. As a basis for the documentation, it should be noted that the achieved construction quality is characterized and quantified in the form of the obtained corrosion probability for the required service period of 150 years.

Compliance with durability requirements

For all concrete substructures in the first four parts of the project (Contractor A), a probability of corrosion as low as possible and not exceeding 10% for a 150-year service period was specified. To show compliance, a new durability analysis had to be carried out upon completion of each new concrete structure. These analyses were carried out with input parameters based on the achieved average values and standard deviations of both the 28-day chloride diffusivity and the concrete cover from the regular quality control. All of the other previously assumed input parameters were kept the same. Hence, this documentation primarily reflects the results obtained from the regular control of concrete quality and concrete cover during concrete construction, including the scatter and variability

Table 1:

Probabilities of corrosion based on regular quality control measurements of the 28-day chloride diffusivity and concrete cover (Contractor A)

Part of

     

project

Bottom slab, %

External walls, %

Open deck, %

 

1 0.24

2.1

0.13

 

2 0.92

0.02

NA

 

3 0.64

0.002

NA

 

4 0.01

<0.001

NA

observed. For all the structures where a given value of the 28-day chloride diffusivity had been specified, any unacceptable deviation from this value could be detected and corrected for during concrete construction. For the first concrete substructure in Part 1 of the project, delivered concrete was somewhat retarded compared to the intended type of concrete. Thus, the obtained average 28-day chloride diffusivities of 3.0 and 5.0 × 10 12 m 2 /s for the bottom slab and the external walls of this structure, respectively, were higher than the specified maximum value of 2.0 × 10 12 m 2 /s. However, because this concrete showed a very rapid further reduction of chloride diffusivity over time, it was accepted for the project. For all the external walls in the first concrete structure where a nominal concrete cover of 100 mm (4 in.) was specified, an average concrete cover of 102 mm (4.02 in.) with a standard deviation of 8 mm (0.3 in.) was obtained. For one of the sections in these walls, however, the quality control tests revealed a distinct deviation. For this particular section, an average concrete cover of only 74 mm (2.9 in.) with a standard deviation of 8 mm (0.3 in.) was observed, and as a consequence, the contractor was required to apply an additional protective surface coating on this particular section of the wall. For this first concrete structure as a whole, however, as well as the open concrete deck with stainless steel in the second structure of Part 1 of the project, the probabilities of corrosion were significantly below the specified 10% (refer to Table 1). The specified durability was also achieved with very good margins for all of the additional concrete structures in Parts 2 to 4 of the project. For the concrete substructures in Parts 5 to 8 of the project, which were only based on prescriptive durability requirements (Contractor B), it was not possible to provide any documenta- tion of compliance with the durability specification. Because a performance-based concrete quality control program was also carried out for all these structures, however, documentation of the achieved construction quality in the form of corrosion probability after 150 years could also be calculated (Table 2). The durability analyses were based on the average values and standard deviations of both the 28-day chloride diffusivity and the concrete cover from the regular quality control evaluation of each structure.

Table 2:

Probabilities of corrosion based on regular control measurements of the 28-day chloride

Part of the project

Bottom slab, %

External walls, %

Open deck, %

5

15

3

6

6

*

11 to 13

NA

7

14

1.3

NA

8

NA

NA

4.5

* No quality control measurements for the bottom slab were carried out

The generally higher corrosion probabilities obtained for all the concrete substructures in Parts 5 to 8 (Table 2) com- pared to that in Parts 1 to 4 of the project (Table 1) may be ascribed to several sources. For all the concrete structures in Parts 1 to 4, the concrete was based on a blast-furnace slag cement with 70% slag (CEM III/B 42.5 LH HS) in combina- tion with 10% silica fume, while all the concrete structures in Parts 5 to 8 were produced with concrete based on fly ash cements in combination with 5% silica fume. For most of these structures, a fly ash cement with 30% fly ash (CEM II/B-V 32.5 N) was applied, but some structures comprised a fly ash cement with 20% fly ash (CEM II/A-V 42.5 N). It is well known that blast-furnace slag cements generally give both very low chloride diffusivities and a very rapid reduction of chloride diffusivity, even at low curing temperatures, while fly ash cements generally give both higher chloride diffusivities and a very slow reduction of chloride diffusivity, particularly at low curing temperatures. For all the external walls in Parts 2 to 4 of the project, stainless steel was also used, while the much higher probabilities for the bottom slabs in Table 2 compared to that of the bottom slabs in Table 1 primarily reflect the different concrete covers of 80 and 100 mm (3 and 4 in.), respectively. Although the mixture compositions of the various types of concrete applied to the structures in Parts 5 to 8 of the project were basically the same, the 28-day chloride diffusivities obtained at the different construction sites were quite different from one construction site to the other. Thus, for one of the construction sites, the diffusivity varied from 6.4 to 8.9 × 10 12 m 2 /s, while for another construction site, it typically varied from 12.1 to 16.7 × 10 12 m 2 /s.

In-place quality

For documentation of the achieved in-place quality during the construction period, a number of concrete cores were removed from each concrete structure and tested for chloride diffusivity at different ages up to 1 year (Fig. 6). As part of this testing, a number of concrete cores removed from corresponding dummy elements were also included. Upon removal, all of these cores were wrapped in plastic and sent to the laboratory for testing as soon as possible. Based on the achieved chloride diffusivities after 1 year of site curing combined with the achieved site data on concrete cover as

combined with the achieved site data on concrete cover as Fig. 6: Typical development of chloride

Fig. 6: Typical development of chloride diffusivity (RCM) on the construction site and in the laboratory for up to 1 year

Table 3:

Probabilities of corrosion based on in-place data collected during the first year

Part of

Bottom slab,

External walls,

Open deck,

project

%

%

%

1

<0.001

<0.001

0.02

2

<0.001

<0.001

NA

3

<0.001

<0.001

NA

4

<0.001

<0.001

NA

5

70

25

35

6

*

30

NA

7

20

0.6

NA

8

NA

NA

1.2

* No quality control measurements for the bottom slab were carried out

new input parameters, new durability analyses were carried out for each concrete structure. Also, all the other previously assumed input parameters to the analyses during durability design were kept the same. The typical values of achieved in-place quality expressed as corrosion probability after a 150-year service period are shown in Table 3. For all concrete substructures in Parts 1 to 4 of the project (Contractor A), Table 3 shows very low corrosion probabili- ties compared to that in Parts 5 to 8 (Contractor B). Also, a high variation of corrosion probability was obtained for the open concrete decks. The generally slow development of chloride diffusivity for concrete based on fly ash cements has already been pointed out. In particular, this was true for those structures produced during the winter seasons at low curing temperatures. For marine concrete construction, this may have some implications for an early-age exposure of the concrete to seawater before the concrete has gained sufficient maturity and density. 2 For the concrete structure in Part 6, it should be noted that the in-place data on achieved chloride diffusivity were based only on concrete cores from the separately produced dummy element. Thus, the obtained probability of 30% for the external walls of this structure is not very representative. For

one of the external walls of this structure, a severe segregation of the self-consolidating concrete during concrete construction took place. Therefore, separate investigations based on extensive concrete coring of this particular wall were later on carried out. The investigations clearly demonstrated that the durability properties of this segregated concrete were distinctly reduced. However, it was not possible to provide any docu- mentation of increased w/b of the segregated concrete beyond what was specified as a basis for the contract. Also, because the in-place compressive strength of the segregated concrete was just high enough to be acceptable according to the current concrete standard, the owner had to accept the reduced durability properties in this particular structure according to the applied durability specifications in the contract.

Potential quality

For most types of binder system, the development of chloride diffusivity tends to plateau after about 1 year of water curing at 20°C (68°F) in the laboratory. To provide informa- tion about the potential construction quality of the various structures, the chloride diffusivity was also tested on a number of separately produced and water-cured specimens in the laboratory for up to 1 year, as shown in Fig. 6. These chloride diffusivities combined with the achieved site data on concrete cover were used as new input parameters for further durability analyses. As with the previous analyses, all the other origi- nally assumed input parameters were kept the same. Typically achieved values of the potential construction quality of the various concrete structures are shown in Table 4. For all structures, the potential construction quality was extremely good. The corrosion probability was hardly detectable for structures in Parts 1 to 4 of the project (Con- tractor A) and very low for the concrete structures in Parts 5 to 8 of the project (Contractor B). The results demonstrate that the concrete based on high- volume fly ash cements could reach quite a good potential construction quality given good curing conditions.

Concluding Remarks

For all the concrete structures where a performance-based durability specification was applied as basis to the contract, the durability requirements were achieved with very good margins. For the owner and developer of the project, it was very important to receive a documentation of compliance to the durability specification before the structures were formally handed over from the contractor, because this may have implications both for the future operation and expected service life of the structures. Also, it was observed that the performance-based durabil- ity specification distinctly clarified the responsibility of the contractor for the quality of the construction process. During concrete construction, any unacceptable deviations from the performance-based requirements for concrete quality and concrete cover could be detected and corrected. The required documentation of compliance to the durability specification

Table 4:

Probabilities of corrosion based on laboratory-produced specimens, water cured in the laboratory for 1 year

Part of

   

Open deck,

project

Bottom slab, %

External walls, %

%

1

<0.001

<0.001

0.002

2

<0.001

<0.001

NA

3

<0.001

<0.001

NA

4

<0.001

<0.001

NA

5

0.04

0.01

0.01

6

*

0.05

NA

7

0.5

0.01

NA

8

NA

NA

0.5

* No quality control measurements for the bottom slab were carried out

clearly resulted in improved workmanship with reduced scatter and variability of achieved construction quality. In contrast, where a prescriptive-based durability specifica- tion was applied as basis for the contract, it was not possible to provide any documentation of compliance to the durability specification. Also, the achieved construction quality of the various concrete structures typically showed a higher scatter and variability.

References

1. NAHE, “Durable Concrete Harbor Structures - Part 1: Recommended

Specifications for New Concrete Harbor Structures, Part 2: Practical Guidelines for Durability Design and Concrete Quality Assurance,” Norwegian Association for Harbor Engineers (NAHE), TEKNA, Oslo, Norway, 2004. (in Norwegian)

2. Gjørv, O.E., Durability Design of Concrete Structures in Severe

Environments, second edition, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2014, 254 pp.

3. Gjørv, O.E., “Durability Design and Quality Assurance of Concrete

Infrastructure,” Concrete International, V. 32, No. 9, Sept. 2010, pp. 29-36.

4. AASHTO TP 64-03, “Predicting Chloride Penetration of Hydraulic

Cement Concrete by the Rapid Migration Procedure,” American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, 2003.

Selected for reader interest by the editors.

Odd E. Gjørv , FACI, is Professor Emeritus and former Head of the Department of

Odd E. Gjørv, FACI, is Professor Emeritus and former Head of the Department of Building Materials at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. He is former General Secretary of the Norwegian Academy of Technical Sciences and has served on several ACI committees, including 201, Durability of Concrete; 222, Corrosion of Metals in Concrete; and 357, Offshore and Marine Concrete Structures. He has received several international awards.

What’s

New

Report on Design and Construction of Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Elevated Slabs— ACI 544.6R-15

This report addresses the methodology for analysis, design, and construction of steel fiber-reinforced concrete (SFRC) slabs supported on piles or columns (also called elevated SFRC [E-SFRC]). Sections of the report address the history,

practice, applications, material testing, full-scale testing, and certifications. By compiling the practice and knowledge in the analysis design with FRC materials, the steps in the design approach based on ultimate strength approach using two-way slab mechanisms are presented.

Order Code:

Pages: 38

Price:

544615.CI

$85.50 (ACI members $52.00)

Durability and Sustainability of Concrete Structures – Workshop Proceedings—SP-305

This compilation consists of 48 papers that were presented in October 2015 at the First International Workshop on “Durability & Sustainability of Concrete Structures” in Bologna, Italy, by the Italy Chapter – ACI and the Department of Civil, Chemical, Environmental, and Material Engineering (DICAM) of the University of Bologna. The workshop was co-sponsored by the American Concrete Institute and ACI Committee 201. The papers cover the reduction in green house gases in the cement and concrete industry, recycled materials, innovative binders and geopolymers, life cycle cost assessment in concrete construction, reuse and functional resilience of

reinforced concrete structures, repair and maintenance, testing, inspection, and monitoring. Available in digital format.

Order Code:

Pages: 503

Price:

SP305.CI

$101.50 (ACI members $61.00)

Masonry Designers Guide—2013, Eigth Edition, published by The Masonry Society

Numerous additions and changes have been made that include discussion and examples on new provisions on limit

design of masonry and on partition walls. This edition includes over 70 practical examples for typical masonry buildings and components, practical tips on how to quickly and efficiently design typical masonry and contains drawings and photo- graphs to illustrate concepts and procedures discussed.

Order Code:

Pages: 986

Price:

MDG8.CI

$128.00 (No discount on industry publications)

Winter2015

Whats Coming

Reinforced Concrete Design Handbook— SP-17 (14) Volume 1 – Member Design

Reinforced Concrete Design Handbook— SP-17 (14) Volume 2 – Special Topics

Sustainable Performance of Concrete Bridges and Elements Subjected to Aggressive Environments: Monitoring, Evaluation, and

Rehabilitation—SP-304

Upcoming Themes December 2015—2016 Concrete Product Guide January 2016—Admixtures & Cementitious Materials
Upcoming
Themes
December 2015—2016 Concrete Product Guide
January 2016—Admixtures & Cementitious Materials
February 2016—Infrastructure
For advertising details, contact Todd Eckman • Phone +1.410.584.8487
e-mail: teckman@networkmediapartners.com

Condition Assessment of Launch Pad 39B

Ensuring the historic site at the John F. Kennedy Space Center will continue to make history

by Richard E. Weyers, Alberto A. Sagüés, and Jerzy Z. Zemajtis

S tarting in 1963 and ending in 1966, the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) constructed Launch Complex 39 on Florida’s Merritt

Island. Launch Complex 39 has played a major role in the history of NASA’s John F. Kennedy Space Center, as it served as the launch facility for NASA’s Apollo, Skylab, and Space Shuttle programs. The complex includes the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), Launch Pads 39A and 39B, and a connecting crawler- way used for the transport of launch vehicles from the VAB to the launch pads. The first launch from Pad 39A—Saturn V/ Apollo 4 (a test flight)—was on November 9, 1967. The first launch from Pad 39B—Saturn/Apollo 10—was on May 18, 1969. The last shuttle mission—STS-135—began from Pad 39A with the liftoff of the Shuttle Atlantis on July 8, 2011. The last liftoff from Pad 39B was on October 28, 2009, when the first stage of an Ares 1-X was launched as a test flight for NASA’s Constellation program. This program was canceled shortly after the initial test flight, but has since been replaced with the Space Launch System (SLS)—an advanced heavy-lift launch vehicle designed to facilitate human exploration beyond earth’s orbit. Pad 39A is now leased to Spacex, which will use it to launch its Falcon Heavy rockets. NASA intends to use Pad 39B to launch the SLS. To inform the decision-making process for modifications needed to accommodate the first SLS launch in 2017, we

assessed the reinforced concrete portions of Pad 39B in 2010. The 1964 plans and material specifications were reviewed, followed by on-site measurements of cover depths, corrosion potentials, concrete resistivity, and corrosion current density. Finally, we used a durability forecast model, focused on corrosion issues, to support our evaluation and conclusions. The measurements and our conclusions are summarized in this article.

Components and Exposures

For this assessment, Launch Pad 39B (Fig. 1) was separated into four components: 1) the crawler pad, comprising two sections, east and west, separated by the flame trench over which the launch vehicle was centered; 2) the pipe tunnels, which are within the crawler pad sections and carry the launch water to the flumes and then to the holding ponds; 3) the high-pressure gas bays open to the environment and located on the east side of Pad 39B; and 4) the catacombs, which support the crawler pad on the east and west side of the flame trench. The exterior catacombs are completely soil covered; thus, the only access is through the interior walkways. The east and west catacombs consist of 18 cells each with access through the south end through partial wall openings. In general, each cell is about 40 x 20 ft (12.2 x 6.1 m) in plan

each cell is about 40 x 20 ft (12.2 x 6.1 m) in plan Fig. 1:

Fig. 1: Launch Pad 39B includes concrete catacombs below the crawler pad