1. INTRODUCTION
⌅The
European “PARTNER” project (2002-2006) had the overall objective of
establishing a unified test procedure for evaluating the potential
alkali-reactivity of aggregates across the different European economic
and geological regions (11.
Nixon, P. J.; Lindgård, J.; Borchers, I.; Wigum, B. J.; Schouenborg, B.
(2008) The EU “PARTNER” Project - European standard tests to prevent
alkali reaction in aggregates final results and recommendations. In:
Broekmans M A T M, Wigum B J (editors): Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Alkali-Aggregate Reaction in Concrete, 16-20 June, 2008, Trondheim, Norway.
, 22.
Lindgård, J.; Nixon, P.J.; Borchers, I.; Schouenborg, B.; Wigum, B.J.;
Haugen, M.; Åkesson, U. (2010) The EU “PARTNER” project - European
standard tests to prevent alkali reactions in aggregates: Final results
and recommendations. Cem. Concr. Res. 40 [4] , 611-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.004.
).
As part of it, field site tests have been carried out since 2004 to
assess the reliability of the different test methods to evaluate the
alkali-reactivity potential of aggregates. One hundred concrete cubes
made with 13 different European aggregate combinations were stored on
eight different European field sites in order to compare their
expansions with the laboratory test results. This document presents the
results of field site tests after 15 years of outdoor exposure to
evaluate the four expansion test methods developed by RILEM (33.
Nixon, P.J.; Sims. I. (eds) (2016) RILEM Recommendations for the
prevention of damage by alkali-aggregate reactions in new concrete
structures. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7252-5.
) and four regional concrete test methods (Table 1).
The regional tests are the German concrete method, the Norwegian
concrete prism test, the Danish mortar bar test TI-B51 and the Danish
Chatterji method.
Test method | Brief outline of method |
---|---|
RILEM AAR-2 Accelerated mortar bar method (44. RILEM (2000) AAR-2 - Detection of potential alkali-reactivity of aggregates - the ultra-accelerated mortar bar test. Mater. Struc. 33 [229] , 283-289. , 55. On behalf of the membership of RILEM TC 219-ACS, Nixon P J, Sims I (2016) RILEM Recommended test method: AAR-2-Detection of potential alkali-reactivity-Accelerated mortar-bar test method for aggregates. In: Nixon, P.; Sims. I. (eds) RILEM recommendations for the prevention of damage by alkali-aggregate reactions in new concrete structures. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7252-5_4. ) |
Mortar bars made with the aggregate and a reference high alkali cement are stored in 1M NaOH at 80ºC and their expansion monitored over a 14 days period. Two alternative prism sizes are used; 25x25x285 mm3 (AAR-2.1) or 40x40x160 mm3 (AAR-2.2). |
RILEM AAR-3 Concrete prism method (66. RILEM (2000) AAR-3 - Detection of potential alkali-reactivity of aggregates - method for aggregate combinations using concrete prisms. Mater. Struc. 33 [229] , 290-293. ) |
Expansion test for 12 months. Wrapped concrete prisms, (75±5)x(75±5)x (250±50) mm3,
made with the aggregate and a reference high alkali cement (1.25% ±
0.05% sodium oxide equivalent) are stored in individual containers in a
constant temperature room at 38°C and measured at 20°C. This wrapped
version was withdrawn by RILEM TC 219-ACS in 2010. A revised test
procedure without wrapping was published in 2016 (77.
On behalf of the membership of RILEM TC 219-ACS, Nixon P J, Sims I
(2016) RILEM Recommended test method: AAR-2-Detection of potential
alkali-reactivity -38°C test method for aggregate combinations using
concrete prisms. In: Nixon P., Sims I. (eds) RILEM recommendations for
the prevention of damage by alkali-aggregate reactions in new concrete
structures. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7252-5_5. ). |
RILEM AAR-4.1 Accelerated concrete prism method (88. On behalf of the membership of RILEM TC 219-ACS, Nixon P J, Sims I (2016) RILEM Recommended test method: AAR-2-Detection of potential alkali-reactivity -60°C test method for aggregate combinations using concrete prisms. In: Nixon P, Sims I (eds) RILEM recommendations for the prevention of damage by alkali-aggregate reactions in new concrete structures. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7252-5_6. ) |
Expansion test for 20 weeks. Concrete prisms, (75±5)x(75±5)x(250±50) mm3, made with the aggregate and a reference high alkali cement (1.25% ± 0.05% sodium oxide eq.) are stored in individual containers within a reactor at 60°C and measured at 20°C. |
Draft RILEM AAR-4 Alt. Accelerated concrete prism method (99. Nixon, P.; Lane, S. (2006) PARTNER Report No. 3.3. Experience from testing of the alkali reactivity of European aggregates according to several concrete prism test methods, SINTEF Report SBF52 AQ6021 / ISBN 82-14·04081-7 1 978- 82- 14-04081-7. p. 35 + appendices. ) |
Accelerated expansion test for 20 weeks. Wrapped concrete prisms, (75±5)x(75±5)x (250±50) mm3, made with the aggregate and a reference high alkali cement (1.25% ± 0.05% sodium oxide equivalent) are stored in individual containers in a constant temperature room at 60°C and measured at 20°C. This draft wrapped version of the 60°C accelerated concrete prism test (ACPT) was withdrawn by RILEM TC 219-ACS in 2010. |
German concrete method (1010.
Deutscher Ausschuss für Stahlbeton, DAfStb (Ed.)(2013) Vorbeugende
maßnahmen gegen schädigende alkalireaktion im beton, Alkali-Richtlinie.
Beuth, Berlin, (DAfStb-Richtlinie). ) |
Test duration of 270 to 273 days. Concrete prisms (100x100x500 mm3) and one cube (300 mm3) are stored in a fog chamber at 40°C with measurements taken immediately with no cooling down period. The expansion of concrete prisms and the maximum crack width on the cube are determined. |
Norwegian concrete prism method (1111.
Norwegian Concrete Association (2005) NB, Alkali-aggregate reactions in
concrete, Test methods and Requirements to Test Laboratories, NB
Publication No. 32 (in Norwegian). ) |
Accelerated expansion test for 12 months. Concrete prisms (100x100x450 mm³) made with the aggregate and a reference high alkali cement are stored in individual containers in a room at 38°C and 100% relative humidity and measured at 20°C. |
TI-B51 - The Danish mortar bar test (1212. Chatterji, S. (1978) An accelerated method for the detection of alkali-aggregate reactivities of aggregates. Cem. Concr. Res. 8 [5] , 647-649. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(78)90047-9. ) |
Mortar bars made with the aggregate are stored in saturated NaCl solution at 50°C and their expansion is monitored for 52 weeks. |
The Danish Chatterji method (1313. Chatterji, S.; Jensen, A.D. (1988) A simple chemical method for the detection of alkali-silica reactivity of aggregates. Cem. Concr. Res. 18 [4] , 654-656. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(88)90058-0. ) |
The degree of reaction between silica in the aggregate and KCl is determined by measuring the alkalinity after 24 hours reaction compared to a non-reactive standard. |
All aggregates were also analysed petrographically according to RILEM AAR-1 within the “PARTNER” project (33.
Nixon, P.J.; Sims. I. (eds) (2016) RILEM Recommendations for the
prevention of damage by alkali-aggregate reactions in new concrete
structures. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7252-5.
). The results are described in (22.
Lindgård, J.; Nixon, P.J.; Borchers, I.; Schouenborg, B.; Wigum, B.J.;
Haugen, M.; Åkesson, U. (2010) The EU “PARTNER” project - European
standard tests to prevent alkali reactions in aggregates: Final results
and recommendations. Cem. Concr. Res. 40 [4] , 611-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.004.
) and not considered in this paper.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
⌅2.1 General
⌅To evaluate the reliability of different laboratory test methods, concrete cubes were produced with the same concrete mixture as used in the prisms for the accelerated laboratory testing. The concrete cubes with 300 mm lateral length were stored at different outdoor exposure sites in Europe. The expansion and the maximum crack width were determined periodically at approximately the same temperature (15°C) in spring and autumn.
2.2 Materials
⌅Thirteen
aggregate combinations (of the 22 aggregate types included in the
laboratory test program) were selected with the purpose of covering most
types of reactive aggregates throughout Europe and with respect to
mineralogical properties and alkali-reactivity (Table 2).
In some cases the coarse fraction was tested in combination with
non-reactive sand (N3 from Norway) or a fine fraction was tested with a
non-reactive coarse aggregate (F2 from France) or the fine and the
coarse fractions were tested together. Additionally, non-reactive
reference aggregates (F2) were tested. A brief petrographic description
and details about the reported reactivity in concrete structures of
these aggregates are given in (22.
Lindgård, J.; Nixon, P.J.; Borchers, I.; Schouenborg, B.; Wigum, B.J.;
Haugen, M.; Åkesson, U. (2010) The EU “PARTNER” project - European
standard tests to prevent alkali reactions in aggregates: Final results
and recommendations. Cem. Concr. Res. 40 [4] , 611-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.004.
). The aggregates were grouped into three categories according to their reported field behaviour:
-
non-reactive aggregates (green),
-
moderately reactive aggregates that react in timescales of 15 to 50 years (yellow) and
-
highly reactive aggregates that react in timescales of 5 to 20 years (red).
The former classes for “slowly” and “normally” reactive aggregates in (22.
Lindgård, J.; Nixon, P.J.; Borchers, I.; Schouenborg, B.; Wigum, B.J.;
Haugen, M.; Åkesson, U. (2010) The EU “PARTNER” project - European
standard tests to prevent alkali reactions in aggregates: Final results
and recommendations. Cem. Concr. Res. 40 [4] , 611-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.004.
) are re-named in this paper as “moderately” and “highly” reactive aggregates to comply with classes in North America (14-1614. ASTM C1778 - 19a, Standard guide for reducing the risk of deleterious alkali-aggregate reaction in concrete.
15.
AASHTO R 80-17, Standard practice for determining the reactivity of
concrete aggregates and selecting appropriate measures for preventing
deleterious expansion in new concrete construction.
16.
CAN/CSA-A23.2-27A, Standard practice to identify potential for
alkali-reactivity of aggregates and measures to avoid deleterious
expansion in concrete.
).
The former RILEM standard cement CEM I 42,5 R provided by NORCEM AS, Norway was used for preparing the concrete. The total alkali content of the cement was 1.26 mass% Na2O-equivalent.
2.3 Mixture proportions
⌅Concrete was made with 440 kg/m³ cement, and the water to cement ratio was 0.50. The air content was approximately 1.5 vol.-%; no air-entraining agent was added to the concrete mix. In case of inappropriate workability of the concrete (slump < 20 mm) a superplasticizer was added. In accordance with the RILEM test method AAR-3 and AAR-4.1 the aggregate combination consisted of one of the following (see Table 2):
-
the fine and coarse test aggregates (C + F);
-
the fine test aggregate combined with non-reactive coarse aggregate (F + NRC);
-
the coarse test aggregate combined with non-reactive fine aggregate (C + NRF).
).
Sample number | Origin | Aggregate details | Combinations * | Reported reactivity in structures |
---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | France (Seine Valley) | Gravel with flint | C + NRF | Non-reactive. No evidence of damage in structures, but considered to be potentially reactive with clear pessimum effect. |
F2 | France | Non-reactive limestone | C + F | Non-reactive |
It2 | Italy (Piemont region) | Gravel with quartzite and gneiss | C + F | Moderately reactive, damage between 15 to 50 years |
N2 | Norway (South-East) | Sandstone | C + NRF | |
N4 | Norway (South-East) | Gravel with sandstone and catacl. rocks | C + F | |
S1 | Sweden | Gravel with porphyritic rhyolite | C + F | |
P1 | Portugal | Silicified limestone | C + NRF | |
B1(RF)* | Western Belgium | Silicified limestone | C + F | Highly reactive, damage between 5 to 20 years |
B1 | C + NRF | |||
D2 | Denmark | Sea-dredged sand semi-dense flint | F + NRC | |
N1 | Norway (middle) | Cataclasite | C + NRF | |
G1 | Germany (Upper Rhine Valley) | Crushed gravel with siliceous limestone and chert | C + NRF | |
UK1 | United Kingdom | Greywacke | C + F | |
* C = coarse aggregate F = fine aggregate NRC = non-reactive coarse aggregate (= F2C) NRF = non-reactive fine aggregate (=N3F) RF = reactive fine aggregate (=B1F) |
The aggregate fractions were combined in proportions of 30 mass-% fines (0 to 4 mm) and 70 mass-% coarse aggregates: 30 mass-% 4 to 10 mm and 40 mass-% 10 to 20 mm.
2.4 Methods and Exposure Conditions
⌅Two concrete cubes with 300 mm lateral length were produced for each field site and each aggregate combination (Table 3). All the cubes representing one concrete mix (i.e. one aggregate combination) were cast at one laboratory (generally in the country of origin of the aggregate) and transported to all the other laboratories (field test sites). After production, the cubes were kept in the moulds for one day, de-moulded and stored in a room at 20 ± 2°C and ≥ 95% relative humidity (or were covered with moist fabric) for 6 days before being transported to the different field sites (Figure 1).
Aggregate | Reactivity | Borås Forest | Borås Highway | Trondheim | Brevik | Watford | Düsseldorf | Milan | Valencia |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | Non-reactive | F1-Wa | F1-Mi | ||||||
F2 | F2-BF | F2-BH | F2-Br | F2-Du | F2-Va | ||||
IT2 | Moderately reactive | IT2-Br | IT2-Mi | ||||||
N2 | N2-Br | N2-Wa | |||||||
N4 | N4-Br | N4-Du | N4-Mi | ||||||
P1 | P1-BF | P1-Mi | |||||||
S1 | S1-BF | S1-BH | S1-Br | S1-Du | S1-Va | ||||
B1(RF) | Highly reactive | B1(RF)-BF | B1(RF)-BH | B1(RF)-Br | B1(RF)-Du | B1(RF)-Va | |||
B1 | B1-BF | B1-Tr | B1-Wa | B1-Mi | B1-Va | ||||
D2 | D2-BF | D2-BH | D2-Tr | D2-Wa | D2-Va | ||||
G1 | G1-BF | G1-Tr | G1-Du | G1-Mi | |||||
N1 | N1-BF | N1-BH | N1-Tr | N1-Wa | N1-Du | N1-Va | |||
UK1 | UK1-BF | UK1-BH | UK1-Tr | UK1-Wa | UK1-Va |
At the different field sites, each institute that participated in this research installed two pairs of reference studs into the top surface and into the two adjacent side faces, before the cubes were exposed outdoors. Most laboratories pre-drilled holes before gluing the studs. All cubes were stored in the same direction in relation to the four cardinal points to minimize deviations between the labs resulting from different exposure to direct solar radiation (Figure 2).
During exposure, one cube was
stored with its base in a tray filled with water and the other was
exposed only to ambient rainfall (Figure 2).
The tray was filled with water to simulate a permanently wet concrete,
so that the bottom of the first cube was immersed 50 to 60 mm in water
during the whole testing time. The reference points at the bottom of the
first cube were always above water level enabling length change
measurements. Since 2010 (6 years after exposure) the trays were
refilled only by rainfall instead of a manual control of the water level
due to the fact that there were no significant differences between the
two conditions. The concrete cubes were stored on eight different field
sites that were selected to cover all climates in Europe (22.
Lindgård, J.; Nixon, P.J.; Borchers, I.; Schouenborg, B.; Wigum, B.J.;
Haugen, M.; Åkesson, U. (2010) The EU “PARTNER” project - European
standard tests to prevent alkali reactions in aggregates: Final results
and recommendations. Cem. Concr. Res. 40 [4] , 611-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.004.
). Figure 3 gives the mean monthly temperature and precipitations for each field site.
).
The dimensions of the cubes at the top surface and two adjacent side faces as well as the crack width were determined periodically (first 2½ years every three months, afterwards every half year). Some laboratories have only measured once a year. The measurements were conducted at the field site at temperatures around 15°C and preferably in periods with rather stable temperatures over a 24-hour period and with limited sunshine. The mean expansions of the three side faces are presented in Figure 4.
)
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
⌅3.1 Field site tests
⌅Figure 4 shows the mean expansion of selected cubes from four field sites Milan, Italy (Mi), Düsseldorf, Germany (Du), Brevik, Norway (Br) and Trondheim, Norway (Tr). The cubes were stored “partly immersed in water”. For comparison with laboratory test results, one cube for each aggregate combination that was reliably measured up to 15 years was selected. The selection was necessary because some cubes weren’t measured constantly over the entire 15 year period. The colours used in all the figures correspond to the aggregate reactivity (see 2.2).
All
highly reactive aggregates expanded within the first six years at the
four field sites and showed high expansions from 0.3% to 1.6% after 15
years. In the mild and warm climates of Düsseldorf, Germany (Du) and
Milan, Italy (Mi) the expansion rates decreased after some years,
whereas in cold climates like Trondheim, Norway (Tr) (Figure 5) and Borås, Sweden (shown in (22.
Lindgård, J.; Nixon, P.J.; Borchers, I.; Schouenborg, B.; Wigum, B.J.;
Haugen, M.; Åkesson, U. (2010) The EU “PARTNER” project - European
standard tests to prevent alkali reactions in aggregates: Final results
and recommendations. Cem. Concr. Res. 40 [4] , 611-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.004.
))
the expansion still continued, probably due to frost that damages the
concrete further once ASR has caused sufficient cracks (1717.
Fournier, B.; Lindgård, J.; Wigum, B.J.; Borchers, I. (2018) Outdoor
exposure site testing for preventing Alkali-Aggregate Reactivity in
concrete - a review. MATEC Web Conf. 199, 03002. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819903002.
).
The cubes with the moderately reactive aggregates expanded considerably slower with expansions of about 0.09% to 0.22% after 15 years.
The
cubes with the non-reactive aggregate F2 neither expanded at any field
site nor showed significant cracking. However, the Damage Rating Index
(DRI) determined on polished sections and qualitative damage assessment
performed on thin sections revealed that an alkali-silica reaction (ASR)
occurred to a small extent (1818.
Fernandes, I.; Leemann, A.; Fournier, B.; Menéndez, E.; Lindgård, J.;
Borchers, I.; Custódio , J. (2020) PARTNER Project post documentation
study - condition assessment of field exposure site cubes (Part II -
results of microstructural analyses), Proceedings of the 16th ICAAR, Lisbon, Portugal.
). The gravel with flint F1 was considered to be potentially reactive with clear pessimum effect (22.
Lindgård, J.; Nixon, P.J.; Borchers, I.; Schouenborg, B.; Wigum, B.J.;
Haugen, M.; Åkesson, U. (2010) The EU “PARTNER” project - European
standard tests to prevent alkali reactions in aggregates: Final results
and recommendations. Cem. Concr. Res. 40 [4] , 611-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.004.
). Deviating from (1919.
Borchers, I.; Müller, C. (2012) Seven years of field site tests to
assess the reliability of different laboratory test methods for
evaluating the alkali-reactivity potential of aggregates. In Proceedings
of the 14th International Conference on Alkali Aggregate Reactions (ICAAR), Austin, Texas.
), the gravel with flint F1 is classified as non-reactive in this paper because damage in structures was not evident (22.
Lindgård, J.; Nixon, P.J.; Borchers, I.; Schouenborg, B.; Wigum, B.J.;
Haugen, M.; Åkesson, U. (2010) The EU “PARTNER” project - European
standard tests to prevent alkali reactions in aggregates: Final results
and recommendations. Cem. Concr. Res. 40 [4] , 611-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.09.004.
)
and the cubes in Milan only showed very little expansions of 0.05 %
after 9 years and no significant cracking. Thin section analysis also
revealed for this concrete little ASR compared to the majority of
moderately and all highly reactive aggregates (1818.
Fernandes, I.; Leemann, A.; Fournier, B.; Menéndez, E.; Lindgård, J.;
Borchers, I.; Custódio , J. (2020) PARTNER Project post documentation
study - condition assessment of field exposure site cubes (Part II -
results of microstructural analyses), Proceedings of the 16th ICAAR, Lisbon, Portugal.
). Based on experiences from other field site tests, a limit value of 0.050% is applied to identify non-reactive aggregates (1717.
Fournier, B.; Lindgård, J.; Wigum, B.J.; Borchers, I. (2018) Outdoor
exposure site testing for preventing Alkali-Aggregate Reactivity in
concrete - a review. MATEC Web Conf. 199, 03002. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201819903002.
).
For the following laboratory-field-correlations, the mean laboratory test results of all participating laboraties were used. Some results were excluded in the case they turned out to be unreliable and if the laboratory was unexperienced with the test method.
3.2 RILEM AAR-2.1 and AAR-2.2 - Accelerated mortar bar test
⌅Both versions of the AMBT (AAR-2.1 and AAR-2.2) were able to reliably distinguish between non- and highly reactive aggregates (Figure 6). It also identified the majority of the moderately reactive aggregates. The expansion of the Portuguese silicified limestone (P1) was below the acceptance limit value with both prism sizes. However, the very slowly reacting Swedish Gravel with porphyritic rhyolite (S1) behaved very differently depending on the prism size. It passed with the long thin prisms (AAR-2.1) and failed with the short fat ones (AAR-2.2).
)
3.3 RILEM AAR-3 and AAR-4.1 - Concrete prism test and accelerated concrete prim test
⌅The concrete prism test methods AAR-3 and AAR-4.1 were effective in distinguishing between the non- and highly reactive aggregates (Figure 7 and Figure 8). In general, the highly reactive aggregates showed expansion above 0.16% in AAR-3 and between 0.10% and 0.20% in AAR-4.1. An exception is the flint containing sand D2 that showed only little expansions in the laboratory tests and even passed AAR-3.
).
).
Looking
at the moderately reactive aggregates, the two versions of RILEM test
method AAR-4.1 were detecting its reactivity potential more reliably, if
the limit value of 0.03% after 20 weeks as proposed in (33.
Nixon, P.J.; Sims. I. (eds) (2016) RILEM Recommendations for the
prevention of damage by alkali-aggregate reactions in new concrete
structures. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7252-5.
)
is applied. AAR-3 failed in identifying the slowest reacting aggregates
P1, S1 and IT2, whereas N4 expanded just above the proposed acceptance
limit value of 0.05% after 52 weeks (33.
Nixon, P.J.; Sims. I. (eds) (2016) RILEM Recommendations for the
prevention of damage by alkali-aggregate reactions in new concrete
structures. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7252-5.
).
The AAR-4.1 was far better, and displayed the reactivity potential of
four of the five moderately reactive aggregates. Only P1 was close to
the limit value of 0.03%. The results confirm the RILEM-proposed
acceptance limit of 0.03% (33.
Nixon, P.J.; Sims. I. (eds) (2016) RILEM Recommendations for the
prevention of damage by alkali-aggregate reactions in new concrete
structures. RILEM State-of-the-Art Reports, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7252-5.
)
and suggest an assessment after 20 instead of 15 weeks. Otherwise, S1
would be classified as non-reactive. P1, S1 and IT2 are the slowest
reacting aggregates in this comparison (no figures).
3.4 German and Norwegian concrete test methods
⌅As for RILEM AAR-3 and AAR-4.1, the German and the Norwegian concrete test methods were able to distinguish between non- and highly reactive aggregates (Figure 9). However, the German method failed to identify the moderately reactive aggregates. Even the additional 300 mm-cube didn’t show maximum crack widths ≥0.20 mm (not shown) for these aggregates. The overall expansions were lower compared with AAR-3, probably caused by a higher alkali leaching rate in the German fog chamber.
).
Compared
with AAR-3 and the German method, the Norwegian CPT had the best match
with the field performance of the cubes. It correctly displayed the
alkali-reactivity potential of the three tested moderately reactive
aggregates, even for the very slowly reacting S1. This can probably be
attributed to the bigger prisms (100 x 100 x 450 mm³) and less alkali
leaching compared to AAR-3 (75 x 75 x 250 mm³) (2020. Lindgård, J. (2013) Alkali-silica reaction (ASR) - Performance testing, Doctoral thesis at NTNU, 2013-269. Retrieved from https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/249422.
).
3.5 Danish mortar bar test TI-B51 and the Danish Chatterji method
⌅In the Danish mortar bar test TI-B51, the expansion after 20 and 52 weeks is used for classifying aggregates into three alkali-reactivity classes. The names of the classes below are used in Figure 10 instead of the original ones described in the method:
-
Non-reactive: Expansion <0.04% after 20 weeks
-
Moderately reactive: Expansion <0.1% after 20 weeks and >0.1% after 52 weeks
-
Highly reactive: Expansion >0.1% after 20 weeks
The TI-B51 was able to show successfully the reactivity potential of the non-reactive F1 and all highly reactive aggregates, but underestimated the reactivity potential of the moderately reactive aggregates N2, P1, IT2 and S1 (Figure 10). Furthermore, the classes used in this paper compared with the classes described in the procedure of TI-B51 differ a lot. Except for B1, the four other highly reactive aggregates were classified as moderately reactive according to the limit values for TI-B51.
).
The result of the Danish Chatterji method is a calculated Δ-value that is shown in Figure 11. The results suggest that Δ-values of 19 and higher are indicating a potential reactivity of the aggregate. Highly reactive aggregates revealed Δ-values between 30 and 50. Exceptions are aggregates with flint like F1 and D2. The non-reactive F1 gave a very high Δ-value and the highly reactive D2 had a very low one compared to the other highly reactive aggregates.
).
4. CONCLUSIONS
⌅The European “PARTNER” project (2002-2006) evaluated the reliability of four RILEM concrete prism tests and four regional test methods to assess the alkali-reactivity potential of aggregates. In addition, field site tests with concrete cubes produced with 13 different aggregate combinations were carried out for comparison with the laboratory results. After about 15 years of outdoor exposure, the main conclusions from this research are as follows:
-
None of the two non-reactive aggregates showed any signs of ASR in the outdoor exposure sites.
-
Highly reactive aggregate combinations caused significant expansion of concrete cubes at the field sites in Norway, Germany and Italy within the first six years of storage.
-
All five moderately reactive aggregate combinations (timescale of reaction 15 to 50 years based on field experience) showed signs of damaging ASR.
-
Once a deleterious ASR has occurred frost could probably further damage the concrete.
-
The field site tests confirm that all laboratory tests correctly identified highly reactive and non-reactive aggregate combinations. However, of the RILEM test methods, AAR-4.1 seems to be best suited to identity the potential reactivity of moderately reactive aggregate combinations. The results confirm the limit value of 0.03% after 20 week instead of 15 weeks.
-
The Norwegian concrete prism test at 38°C was also reliably identifying the moderately reactive aggregate combinations, probably due to reduced alkali leaching of the prims compared to RILEM AAR-3.