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)