Next: Notation
Up: Main
Previous: List of Tables
LIST OF FIGURES
- Figure 1. Gaps,
i.e.,
links missing, in the knowledge
of concrete rheology to be filled in order to make rheology truly usable
by the engineer
- Figure 2. Size
distribution of the aggregates used in
the mortars and concretes
- Figure 3. Size
distribution of the binders
used in
the mortars and concretes
- Figure
4. Experimental plan. Method of
calculating
the proportions
of dry materials in the series of ordinary concretes and concretes with
HRWRAs. The cement content of the mortars (compositions 6-10-11) have been
increased to reduce bleeding. S* is the volumetric ratio of sand to total
aggregate and C* is the volumetric proportion of cement of the optimum
or central mixture.
- Figure 5. Mini-slump
tests on
cement pastes in
the presence of HRWRA. A spread of 40 mm corresponds to zero slump
because it corresponds to the diameter of the base of the mini-cone used.
TS = total solid content of the HRWRA (% by mass). T0 is the initial
time, just after mixing, at which the mini-slump was measured. The other two
curves indicate the mini-slump value after 10 minutes (T0+10 min) and after
1 hour (T0 +1h).
- Figure 6.
Measurement of torque
as a
function of the
angular velocity for three groups of concrete, and fit with a model of the
Herschel-Bulkley type. In each group, the curves are ranked as expected as
a function of the water content of the mixtures (i.e., the torque decreases
as the water content increases).
- Figure
7. Relationship between yield
stress from
the Herschel-Bulkley (HB) model and slump for all of the mixtures
tested.
- Figure 8.
Relationship between
yield
stress from the
Herschel-Bulkley (HB) model and slump flow (spread) for the self-leveling
concretes.
- Figure
9. Measurements of torque as a
function of
rotational speed, for the BO8C mixture. The test was repeated using a larger
range of rotational speed.
- Figure
10. Calculation of the Bingham
parameters
based on the Herschel-Bulkley model. The dotted straight line departs from
the same point as the HB model (abscissa 0, ordinate '0).
- Figure
11. Suspension with minimum water
content.
No shearing movement is possible without localized rupture of the particle
structure
- Figure
12. Suspension containing an excess of
liquid compared with the minimum content
- Figure
13. Comparison of the experimental
values of
packing density with the predictions of the Compressible Packing Model for
dry cement-sand-gravel mixtures
- Figure 14. Packing
density of the cement
as a function of the dosage of HRWRA (SP) in the water-demand
test
- Figure 15. Plastic
viscosity (µ') of
the mortars and concretes as a function of their relative solid concentrations
- Figure 16.
Different states of
compaction
of a wet mixture.
- Figure 17. Yield
stress as a function of
relative concentration of solids
- Figure
18. Comparison between
experimental values and model values of the yield stress.
- Figure
19. Relationship between the experimental yield stress and the relative concentration of the aggregate
(g/g*), for mixtures with HRWRA.
- Figure
20. Relationship between the yield
stress and the silica fume content. K'fs = 1.5.
- Figure
21. Experimental setup of Tanigawa
et al. [9,
10] for recording the
slump as a function of time.
- Figure
22. Schematics of the modified
slump cone test. T is the "slump time".
- Figure 23.Rod and
top plate in the
modified slump apparatus.
- Figure 24. The
modified slump test
apparatus: A) View from above the mold showing the top plate; B) View of the
mold, the rod attached to the base and the top plate at the final
position.
- Figure
25. Comparison
of the slump values
between the standard slump test and the modified test.
- Figure
26. Comparison between the
experimental yield stresss from fitting the Herschel-Bulkley model and
predictions from Hu's model (equation 18)
[7]. The line
represent the perfect
correlation (45° line)
- Figure
27. Comparison between
experimental yield stress from fitting the Herschel-Bulkley model and
predictions using equation 19. The line represent
the perfect correlation
(45°
line).
- Figure
28. Relationship between the
ratio µ/
T and the final
slump
- Figure
29. Comparison between
measured plastic
viscosity using the BTRHEOM and predictions from the plastic
viscosity model (equation 20)
for concretes with
slumps between 120 and 260
mm. The slope of the best fit straight line, shown, passing through the
origin is 1.09 with a standard error of 0.03.
- Figure
30. Nomographs for estimating
the yield stress and plastic viscosity of concrete from the results of
the modified slump test (for a concrete with a density of 2400
kg/m3).
From the slump measurements the first graph will give the yield stress.
From the second graph by plotting the coordinates of slump and time (T),
estimate the plastic viscosity (µ) by interpolating between values
corresponding to nearest curves)
Next: Notation
Up: Main
Previous: List of Tables