Concrete on site

INTRODUCTION Most of the main problems encountered with in-situ concrete are grouped in this chapter, but inevitably there is some overlap with Chapters 1 and 5. It will be seen in Chapter 5 that the many instances of troubleshooting involving precast concrete products could have also applied to in-situ concrete. However, materials faults were seldom involved; the problems generally related to design and/or workmanship. It is easy to blame the material, because it is usually covered by a stringent specification. Design and workmanship are dealt with by codes of practice, which are state-of-the-art documents, and can be interpreted in different ways. They also relate to a service rather than a product or material, and are therefore difficult to define. When using materials on site there is a resulting tendency to concentrate unfairly on the standardised material shall wording, and to use or sometimes misuse the guidance Codes should clauses. As referred to in the Preface, less than 18% of all troubleshooting cases encountered were attributable solely to the material. This is not only my experience, but also applies to many decades of Laing library problem analyses. It leads inevitably to the conclusion that there is a misdirection of effort in construction quality control. The main focus of testing should be on the construction rather than on the material or product. Why is there a concentration on specifications to resolve less than 18% of the problems? Presumably because it is fairly easy to specify materials, but difficult to specify or control design and workmanship. Whether this situation will change in the future remains to be seen. 3.1 COVERCRETE d OR k Although covercrete d and k are defined in the Glossary, some qualification may be useful. Concentration on the depth of cover, d, is universal; there is

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

little or no interest in the quality, k, of the concrete in that cover. These variables are generally recorded as d, the depth of cover in mm, and the lesser-known k, the permeability, in cm/s. The problem encountered on site was due to non-compliance with a d specification. This had secondary repercussions. First, it was not clear whether the specification requirements were for minimum, nominal or actual cover. Second, where cover to the main steel was of concern, little account seemed to have been taken of cover to the stirrups. As may be seen in Fig. 3.1, this cover is reduced by at least that of the stirrup steel diameter. In general, no consideration was given to the quality of the allegedly reduced cover area(s). Where this quality was considered to be good, attempts were made (sometimes with success) to achieve a deemed-tosatisfy situation with no other work being carried out. Let us consider each of these variables, d and k, separately. 3.1.1 COVERCRETE d Why have a d in the specification? The simplest answer might be to protect the steel from corrosion. Unfortunately, this reasoning seems tacitly to admit an inability to qualify the answer. What is not apparently designed is whether d maintains its protective property over the planned lifetime, or whether it gradually loses it. From site experience, it seems that the underlying philosophy of a d specification is defer the fatal date. In effect, we could well assume that d should be maximised, because the cover will lose its protectiveness with time. However, there are drawbacks to having too much cover: fewer cracks, but each with an enlarged crack aperture; less restraint against shrinkage cracks (see section 1.8).

Fig. 3.1 Difference between strirpup and main rebar cover (all dimesions in mm).

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

The loss of protectiveness of d is generally thought to be due to the advance of a carbonation front. If chlorides and/or aggressive de-icing or anti-frost chemicals are present, this loss of protection may be far more rapid. Carbonation is a reaction between carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the alkaline hydroxides of hydrated cement. The pH value of the matrix in concrete unaffected by external elements is of the order of 12.5, and at any pH value above approximately 9 the rebars will retain a protective passive iron oxide film on their surfaces. This protection is lost at slightly alkaline pH values of 79, and much more rapidly under acidic conditions and/or in the presence of chlorides; corrosion can ensue. Note the word can: corrosion of steel in or at the carbonated zone front needs both moisture and air to be present. The modern design philosophy is possibly to specify d as though effectiveness would be lost according to a rule of thumb such as 1mm gives 1 year. However, there does appear to be an underlying assumption that the cementitious part of the specification will ensure that adequate effective d is left at the end of the planned lifetime. This implies that considerable reliance is actually being placed on k. However, k is still generally placed in a secondary role to d, and it could be argued that, for corrosion durability of reinforced and prestressed concrete, these roles should be reversed. It can be misleading to predict a linear relationship between the speed of advance of carbonation and time. For instance, if 40mm becomes carbonated after 40 years it would be useful to say that 50mm would fare likewise at 50 years. However, in general, the rate of advance of the carbonation front follows the square root of time (BRE, 1981b). If this is applied to the above example then 50mm would become carbonated within 60 and not 50 years. Another problem encountered on site was a one-off, but it is a risk area that is easy to overlook. For carbonation of cement to take place, moisture and air need to be present. If the void/pore structure of the concrete is too dry then the reaction cannot proceed. At the other extreme, if the void structure contains enough water to inhibit or stop the passage of the carbondioxide-containing air then, similarly, carbonation is inhibited or cannot occur. Carbonation tends to proceed most rapidly when the relative humidity of the void structure is about 75% (BRE, 1981b). This could well mean that the reinforcement at the back of concrete exposed to a cavity situation could be more at risk than the rebars nearer the visual face. This was found to be the case when the rear faces of precast panels were exposed for examination by removal of the insulation and partition boards. It is not known what guidance is given in codes concerning this, but the risk factor has been taken into account in the latest revision of the cast stone standard (BS 1217:1997), which gives mandatory requirements for

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

cover to all exposed faces. The term exposed is defined as unprotected by any mortar or similar material, and so applies to visual and cavity faces. It is probable that the only instance when d is of importance is in fire resistance, where the purpose of having cover is to keep the steel sufficiently cool to avoid loss of strength caused by a phase change in the metal. 3.1.2 COVERCRETE k It is commonplace to specify minimum cement or cementitious contents; there seems to be a growing tendency to control k with little knowledge of what it actually is. At the same time, it could well be an admission that there will be variations in the actual steel covers being achieved, but that even when these are at their minima the concrete left as covercrete will still give good performance over the planned lifetime. The main problem with k is that knowledge already exists on how to measure permeability, but it takes too long (at least 3 months) before useful test data emerge. It can be argued that d can be easily confirmed by covermeter tests or similar, but there are errors involved in such testing (as with any testing). More importantly, if the concrete has hardened, what action can be taken to deal with non-complying areas? A strict mix design specification, which can be easily verified by supervision, can generally give compliance with a k requirement. This applies whether the k design is for general weathering durability requirements or for protection when chlorides are present. Long-term research can establish how the permeability characteristics of concrete can be controlled under a variety of durability hazards. It thus follows that a contractually viable solution to producing the optimum k for any risk situation lies in the area of mix design. 3.1.3 IDENTIFICATION The problem is manifested as non-compliance with minimum cover requirements (assuming that the parties concerned are agreed on what is meant by minimum cover) coupled with the covercrete being potentially good enough to give adequate performance: in effect, a low d but accompanied by a low k. 3.1.4 REMEDIAL Illustrate by such means as the history performance of similar concrete and/or by agreed testing of the covercrete that a deemed-to-satisfy situation exists. Proposed action, such as protective coatings or other surface treatments, may have an apparently remedial effect, but it is almost certain to be a waste of resources if the k value is too low.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

If the quality of the covercrete is mediocre or poor, but that concrete has to be retained, remedial measures such as polymer-mortar-based rendering or siliconing might need to be considered. 3.1.5 AVOIDANCE For carbonation, chloride attack or fire resistance a logical appreciation of both d and k would seem to be essential. The carbonation advance with the square root of time, mentioned above, is a general rule, which appears to apply to concretes whose cementitious content is below about 375kg/m3. Above this content, carbonation is generally a few millimetres deep after many years. Therefore, if carbonation is the sole risk, the solution seems to be a minimum cementitious content of the order of 375kg/m3. When chlorides and other corrosion-promoting chemicals are additional (to carbonation) risks, then the mix to be used needs strict specification and control. For example, in marine or de-icing salt exposure, the suggested 375kg/m3 minimum cementitious content needs to be supplemented by specifying that the cementitious content have 30% PFA, 70% GGBS or 7% MS cement replacement. If fire resistance is the only requirement then d is almost certainly the only variable that needs to be specified. Design factors such as secondary meshtype holding reinforcement in the covercrete zone may also need to be considered. The most difficult recommendation to make for carbonation and corrosion-promoting chemical hazards is what the minimum value of d and the maximum for k should be. For the present, assuming that the minimum cementitious content has been achieved and that it has the right ingredients, then a few millimetres of cover seem to be all that is required. However, in order to allow for workmanship and the risk of ingress of aggressive material at the interfaces between mortar and aggregate facets, the minimum cover should logically be twice the maximum aggregate size. This would cater for there being a rebar-aggregate-aggregate path to the exposed face. The definition of minimum cover still remains to be established. This possibly needs to be resolved at Eurocode level, but for a single meaning the wording actual minimum cover to any steel might suffice. This form of wording does not have any obvious interpretative modes. 3.2 SPACERS FOR REBARS Six problems have been experienced with both in-situ and precast concrete; these have been identified separately below as (a)(f). None of these has been found to predominate over the other five. Only example (d) referred to spacers made from mortar; all the others were experienced with the commonly used plastics spacers.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

(a) The use of trestle-type spacers on vertical and other non-horizontal rebars instead of wheel-type spacers. Figure 3.2 illustrates the difference between these two main types of spacer. It can be easily seen that, under the action of filling with concrete and/or compaction, a trestle-type spacer placed onto a vertical bar can rotate and lose some (or, when dislodged, all) of the intended cover design. (b) Because of overloading, spacer feet either punched into relatively soft formwork/mould material or, when the concrete was formed against steel or similar surfaces, distorted spacer feet sprung on stripping. In both cases, spacer feet protruded from the surface of the concrete, but in the latter case this was sometimes accompanied by minute spalling. In the former case (relatively soft formwork), the holes left in this read as pimples in subsequent form uses unless the holes were made good before each reuse. (c) Following aggregate exposure processes, such as grit-blasting, spacer feet were observed to protrude; the blasting had little or no effect on the plastics material. This resistance was predictable, because plastics, and polythene in particular (the common base material for spacers), have good energy-absorption characteristics. Thus concrete will wear away more quickly than polythene, because it does not possess good energy absorption. (d) Mortar spacers either too impermeable or too permeable. In the first case (too impermeable), poor bonding occurred between the fresh concrete and the spacer mortar. This resulted in a gap at the interface, allowing moisture and air to enter and corrosion to take place. In the second case (too permeable) the bond was generally found to be good, but the spacer itself allowed moisture and air penetration, with ensuing rebar corrosion. (e) Because of an inadequately pierced cross-section, and under the action of fire, the plastics material was easily degraded, and the rebar at the position where the spacer had been became too hot.

Fig. 3.2 Trestle-type and wheel-type plastics rebar spacers.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

(f) As (e) but, under the action of normal weathering, spalling occurred at spacer positions with no steel corrosion but with exposure of the rebar to the elements. This problem was commonly observed during the first few months of site exposure in hot weather. The mechanism considered to be responsible was the differential in thermal expansions and responses between the polythene in the spacers and the surrounding concrete. Polythene has about 16 times the thermal expansion coefficient of a typical concrete. A well-pierced spacer section would have had interwoven concrete, causing it to act compositely instead of individually. All these examples have been described at length (Levitt and Herbert, 1970), and Concrete Society (1989) touches on (b) and matters concerned more with design than with troubleshooting. Further references together with photographs are given in the authors book on precast concrete (Levitt, 1982). 3.2.1 IDENTIFICATION (a) Reinforcement cage dislodged with the spacer in the wrong configuration or lying loose on the soffit. Detection of this problem could be by a simple visual inspection or, more commonly, by means of a covermeter survey. (b) Spacer feet protruding from the concretes surface, with holes in relatively soft formwork and minute spalling possible for concrete formed against steel or similar hard, unyielding material. (c) Unsightly protrusion of spacer feet or bases in abrasion-blasted finishes. (d) Corrosion rusting, either in lines at the interface between spacer and concrete boundaries or fairly uniformly over the spacer base. (e) A blackened hole of easily removed carbon, giving direct access to the steel. If the steel has suffered a phase change because of the heat, additional deflection may also have occurred. (f) An approximately conical-shaped spall, exposing the spacer base and, generally, the rebar; the rebar has no corrosion on it at the time that spalling took place. 3.2.2 REMEDIAL (a) Treat as in section 3.1.4 in attempting to achieve a reduced-cover deemed-to-satisfy agreement, or undertake remedial work, such as applying extra cover (Concrete Society, 1984). (b) Knife-cut protruding spacer feet and make good holes in the formwork. The use of heat to remove these protrusions is not recommended because carbon staining could occur, and it is also possible that

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

(c) (d) (e)

(f)

aggregate being calcined could spit out of the surface, constituting a safety risk. Remedy as (b). Cut out mortar spacer down to the rebar and repair with suitable polymer mortar (Concrete Society, 1984). Suspected structural damage due to fire having gained direct access to the steel through the passage where the spacer used to be should be referred to a chartered civil engineer for advice before any decision is made concerning remedial work. Remove as much of the plastics spacer as possible, as well as spalled and unsound concrete, and repair (Concrete Society, 1984).

3.2.3 AVOIDANCE (a) Use only trestle-type spacers on horizontal bars in contact with the base of the form or mould. Wheel-type spacers can be used in all applications, bearing in mind that some types are not strong enough for use on the bottom steel. Wheel-type spacers can be prevented from slipping down vertical and other non-horizontal rebars by holding each spacer in place with an elastic band, which is then left in the concrete. (b) Ensure that the load distribution on spacers is such that the tendency to punch into formwork is minimised. At the same time ensure that not too many spacers are used, because they can encourage planes of possible weakness in the concrete. (c) Avoid using plastics spacers for exposed-aggregate finishes. Mortar spacers are preferred with spacers having aggregate exposure by the same process planned for the concrete. (d) Mortar spacers should be made with a sand/cement ratio between 1.5 and 2.0, preferably of the same fine aggregate (sand) planned for the concrete. Curing of the spacers under damp conditions for at least the first 48 hours is recommended. (e), (f) Ensure that the seating area of both trestle-type and wheel-type spacers is pierced to at least 25% of its section. This permits concrete, under the action of compaction, to interweave with the plastics and cause each spacer to act compositely rather than as an individual piece of material. This caters both for the thermal expansion differential and for degradation under the action of fire. 3.3 TILING AND MOISTURE IN FLOORS Concrete construction processes involve the use of water, and as a rule more water is used than is necessary to hydrate the cement. The result of concretes losing or trying to lose this excess water has been problems in

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

the application of floor coverings such as PVC tiles and sheeting, rubber tiles and synthetic-backed carpet tiles. The problem has been generated from an advisory clause in a particular code of practice (BS 8203:1996). This recommends that, when the surface relative humidity (RH) is measured by a specified means, tiling should not be laid until the RH drops below 75%. Putting aside the validity or otherwise of this recommendation, this 75% is commonly invoked as a contractual mandatory clause. The problem arises because the waiting time necessary to reach this maximum is generally impracticable on site. On the rare occasions when such delay can be countenanced, adhesion and/or floor covering failures are rare. However, it is not definitive that 75% is the right number, nor that it is being measured the correct way, nor that the property of RH is the right one to address, nor that efforts should be directed towards the suitable adhesive for different conditions of dampness of the floor. Another area of difficulty was that of the actual failures, and the five or more causes that could have been responsible, either singly or jointly: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) moisture in the concrete softening the adhesive; an alkaline concrete-adhesive reaction; moisture pressure gradient pushing the coverings upwards; inability of the adhesive to stick to the concrete; temperature gradient across the thickness of the slab, causing mois ture to be driven to the colder lower vapour pressure face, and pushing the covering off of the surface.

The mechanism of (e) is shown in Fig. 3.3. The main problem with the 75% RH recommendation is contractual, and lies within the remits of the main and specialist flooring subcontractors. Because they have to work to stringent time requirements, usually derived

Fig. 3.3 Tiling on ground and supended floors.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

from the site schedule, they tend to withhold any form of guarantee because it is virtually impossible to achieve that maximum. The rule of thumb commonly applied to predict how long a typical concrete slab will take to dry to a moisture condition complying with the 75% maximum is to wait one week for every millimetre thickness of slab. This implies that a wait of two years would be required for a 100mm thick slab. Contractually, this is unacceptable. Clearly, a host of problems arise from this code and the way it is applied, not least the five listed above. It can also be argued that, irrespective of the value of any specification number, there is a tendency to cling to that number just because there is a number there. This is discussed in depth in section 6.6. As far as the causes listed under (a)(e) above are concerned, a project scheduled to last about 30 months began at the end of 1996. It is jointly sponsored by the Department of the Environment under its Partners in Technology (PIT) Scheme and by the Concrete Society, which acts as the main contractor. It is the aim that a technical report (a CSTR) will be published by the Society in 1999, and that the findings will be aimed at making clauses in BS 8203 and other relevant codes more realistic. The author is the convenor of the working party that is controlling the work. Feedback is essential, and the Society will possibly have one or more launches of the CSTR in a preliminary draft form for discussion at seminars and workshops. The project working party reports to a more widely constituted steering group; no matter how wide these representations are, there will possibly be points to report that have not been covered. Some of these points will now be discussed in terms of experience by others; this may well trigger additional feedback. The role of chemical reactions as the cause of adhesion failures has been mentioned earlier, but some reactions also lead to the emission of rather unpleasant gases. Reports on this subject would be useful to the Concrete Society, together with any related research work by organic chemists. Another matter of interest is the growing use of plasticisers and superplasticisers, both in the concrete and in the screeding and levelling materials laid on top. The main advantage of these admixtures is that, for a given workability, they permit large reductions in the total water/cement ratio. This in turn reduces the excess water waiting to dry out, so that the 75% should be reached more quickly. In general, the use of these admixtures in concrete does not seem to have caused any problems. However, the admixtures for some screeds and underlayment levelling compounds are polymer based. Although these will have very low water contents, and hence a lower initial RH, they can also have low permeabilities to the passage of moisture, with a consequently reduced loss rate. Other than by using a vacuum concrete process, methods of trying to eliminate excess water have not proven fruitful. The use of hot air blowers

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

has been found to have no beneficial effect on drying rates. The process drives the water from the surface into the body of the slab but, within as short a period as one day after turning the heating off, the original RH is reinstated as the temperature becomes reasonably uniform in the slab. Moisture moves towards the colder face because of the vapour pressure gradient. Knowledge of this mechanism could be useful both in laying floor coverings and in heating buildings. The aim is to keep moisture as far away as possible from the face to be covered, so consideration could be given to tiling and heating the top floor of a building first and working down to the ground floor as the last to be covered. 3.3.1 IDENTIFICATION This is the discovery that a 75% RH limit has been specified for laying floor coverings, but that this cannot be met within the site limits as laid down in a bar chart. 3.3.2 REMEDIAL The only possible avenues that may be worth pursuing are either to get the specifier to accept the risk situation, or possibly to allow a variation resulting in the use of a more expensive adhesive that can tolerate high levels of water in the floor. 3.3.3 AVOIDANCE The use of plasticising or superplasticising admixtures in the concrete is worth examining as an interim measure and, possibly, as a long-term one pending the findings of the CSTR in 1999. Specifiers should have their attention drawn to the problems generated by the 75% specification, and should be told inter alia that there is no cheap way of getting over the problem. 3.4 FLATNESS OF FLOORS How do we define and specify flatness? This question has created a host of site problems, not least in measuring whether compliance has been achieved. Well-known publications (Concrete Society, 1988; Perkins, 1988) have discussed many of these facets at length, but a simpler approach has been adopted in this section, based on dividing the problem into three main groups identified by increasing dimensions, with a fourth group containing ramps and relatively large and severely exposed floor areas such as multistorey car parks:

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

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

short-distance flatness, 0100mm; middle-distance flatness, 0.15.0m; large-distance flatness, >5.0m; multi-storey car parks.

Flatness here refers to achieving the target of having any three points on the surface lying on a single straight line. In (d) the overall floor design is a slope towards drainage, but the term flatness still applies. 3.4.1 SHORT-DISTANCE FLATNESS, 0100MM This problem shows up as sinkings commonly known as elephant footprints, caused by poorly compacted and/or mixed areas of screed underneath PVC tiles or sheeting. PVC is light reflective, which makes these fairly easy to observe, and the edges of the sinkings are liable to attrition damage. The footprints are generally 13mm deep and of random pattern. The problem has been commonly encountered in hospitals, where this form of construction has been used for corridors, operating theatres and preparation rooms. The general quality of husbandry in these buildings does not seem to have helped the situation, with the movement of vehicles, concentrated loads from operating trolleys, and anaesthetists sitting on three-legged stools not necessarily with all three legs in contact with the ground. Figure 3.4 illustrates the effect of an elephant footprint. Remedial work can be carried out, preferably before applying the smoothing compound and/or the tiling, by cutting out defective patches of screed material and (avoiding any feather-edging) making good with new screed material and, most importantly, ensuring full compaction. It is common to have this defect brought to ones attention after the tiling. In such cases, when the tiling/sheeting have been removed, defective compaction in the screed has been found, and the screed has to be

Fig. 3.4 Elephant footprint on PVC tiles.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

repaired and the surface retiled (see section 3.3) when ready to receive covering. The buildings maintenance department should keep a supply of new floor coverings to cater for the likelihood of repair. These coverings should be identical to the original, to avoid replacements being made with PVC tiling that does not match in colour or shade. The short-distance flatness problem can be avoided by strict supervision of screed laying and compaction. The screeds generally used where this problem has occurred are known as semi-dry, and good workmanship in laying them is essential. Self-levelling screeds are becoming increasingly popular, as they are not so sensitive to the standard of workmanship. Screeds used to be commonly laid wet, and the use of superplasticisers seems to have been instrumental in bringing about a return to this practice. 3.4.2 MIDDLE-DISTANCE FLATNESS, 0.15.0M This problem has been identified on site with in-bay and bay-to-bay flatnesses, where a flatness-measuring device is used. Typical wording in a specification might be a deviation of not more than 3mm under a 3m straightedge. Straightedges are commonly made from a hardened steel, and their straightness can be certified by companies registered with the United Kingdom Accreditation Service. On site, a reasonably accurate method of checking the straightness of a straightedge is simply to look along the edge. It has been found quite easy to record a failure with the 3mm requirement when adjoining bays have been cast to very good individual flatnesses, but they are not horizontal. Figure 3.5 illustrates this, where there is an inverted V at the joint. Failure can also be indicated where the adjoining bays have the same sloping directions, because there is a step at the joint. Problems at stepped joints due to wear and tear are common, and therefore it is sensible to check flatness tolerances both within bays and from bay to bay. Remedial work has been found to be best directed at removal of excesses rather than addition to the deficient zones. This can be achieved by grinding or other suitable means, accepting the aesthetic defect of a terrazzo-like appearance at the ground-off areas. Thin mortar applications to cater for small negative tolerances have generally been found to have mediocre to poor performance. A longer-lasting mortar repair can

Fig. 3.5 Planeness at joint.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

be achieved when at least 10mm of the surface is removed and a repair of at least that thickness can be effected without feather-edging. Many of these middle-distance flatness problems can be avoided by accurate setting-up of stop-ends, rails etc. to which bays have been designed to be cast. Optical setting-out both from site datum levels and from bay-to-bay levellings is recommended. The use of laser alignment on one site to align the floor of a tunnel led to problems because temperature variations along the tunnel caused the laser beam to refract. Forced air circulation had to be used to create a more uniform temperature distribution. 3.4.3 LARGE-DISTANCE FLATNESS, >5M This problem has been identified in buildings such as warehouses and cold stores, where a lack of (mainly) bay-to-bay flatness leads to stepping at joints and interference in the mechanics of mobile racking systems. Storage areas such as these are subject to relatively heavy wear and tear. Even a 3mm step, which could well be permitted under the example specification in section 3.4.2 (not more than 3mm under a 3m straightedge), would be at risk of spalling. Any out-of-flatnesses, especially at joints, will be at risk under the action of moving vehicles, sliding racks and similar. Remedial work would probably be best undertaken following the recommendations listed in section 3.4.2. Severer structural requirements may be under consideration than for smaller floor areas. If so, then fulldepth replacement of all or part of a bay may be necessary. 3.4.4 MULTI-STOREY CAR PARKS Identification of the problem has commonly taken the form of puddling, frost damage and/or reinforcement corrosion where the flatness datum has not been to a slope that is effective for drainage. Although any roof with a slope of less than 10 is defined as flat, roofs of car parks as well as other buildings are commonly designed to a flat slope: 1:70 is typical in a specification. Roofs examined in troubleshooting exercises with a slope of less than 1:60 have commonly been observed to suffer degradation due to inadequate drainage. Clearly, the target for such roofs must be a combination of slope and flatness. Carriage in of water and de-icing salts by vehicles is common, and if drainage is poor, collection of water can promote rebar corrosion. Another observation made on site concerned control joints that should have been placed at high or intermediate parts of a slope or slopes. Sealantfilled joints, not all of which were performing well, had been placed in the bottom of drainage gullies. Ingress into the construction had occurred.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

Remedial work is difficult to recommend, bearing in mind that the common aim of such work would be to improve drainage by, for instance, cutting drainage grooves in the slope. Care would needed in such cutting work, in view of the likely effect of this on the covercrete d. The problem can be avoided by paying special attention to drainage details: not only the slope and flatness of bays, but bay-to-bay slope uniformity, drainage and positioning of control joints. Manual car-washing facilities have been introduced in some car parks. Special drainage is important in these areas to ensure that the effluent from washing operations is removed. Collection of water, especially when cars are being washed in cold weather, can lead to personnel risk if the surfaces become slippery because of water containing detergent or because of icing. 3.5 FLATNESS OF FORMWORK The problem encountered on site concerned the use of untreated birch-faced plywood formwork for in-situ concrete wall construction in concreting sections about 3.5m high by 4.0m wide. A concreting subcontractor was assembling the panels of formwork, then cleaning and reassembling them for four or five reuses in an unprotected enclosure on the site. Each panel of formwork consisted of about eight separate pieces of plywood. Significant movement of the birch was observed in the form of bowing and dishing of individual sheets and lack of alignment at the butt joints in the formwork panels. Figures 3.6 and 3.7 illustrate respectively the problems with the concrete and the formwork that caused them. A Class B finish to BS 8110 Structural use of concrete had been specified, and although the walls were for internal parts of a building and were to be painted, the stepping was unacceptable to the architect. A limit of 2mm maximum stepping was eventually agreed; the wall areas that did not comply with this limit were ground down at these joints to remove positive tolerance. Observations on site indicated that there was minimal supervision of the subcontractor by the main contractor. It is debatable whether any of the problems would have arisen if the main contractor had realised that responsibility for the subcontract work was in the contractors remit, as the expertise should have been there for this sort of work. Perhaps if solar reflectors, escalators or other specialist subcontract work had been undertaken the involvement of the main contractor might have been expected to have been more restricted. 3.5.1 IDENTIFICATION The problem is identified by stepping or lipping at formwork joints, as well as convexity or concavity, discernible by the naked eye, by a

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

Fig. 3.6 Steps in fromwork.

Fig. 3.7 Steps mirrored onot concrete.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

straightedge or by a vertical spirit level. Both types of defect have been found easier to observe in reflected light. 3.5.2 REMEDIAL Grind down lips and other unacceptable high areas. If the appearance of the ground areas is a problem, then grinding the whole area could be considered, because a patchy terrazzo-like effect would result from grinding solely at the joints. 3.5.3 AVOIDANCE Use good-quality timber formwork with known relatively stable moisture and temperature behaviour. Protect formwork from the effects of the weather as much as possible, as well as from direct timber contact with concrete and mould-release agents. For the latter in-use protection, seek the formwork suppliers views on the suitability of painting. If no information can be obtained on a suitable paint, a pigmented paint (Levitt, 1982) could be applied to both the inside and the outside of the forms. The type of paint selected would depend upon how many reuses are planned. Whichever active ingredient base is used in the paint, performance has been found to be more a function of the presence of a pigment than of the base. Consideration could also well be given to improved setting-out of panels of formwork. It is reasonable to assume that with each use there will be some movement. Therefore jig-setting before each use, with the necessary adjustment of soldiers, whalings and shims, could well promote an improved planeness of finish. 3.6 JOINTS BETWEEN PRECAST PAVING AND BETWEEN KERBS Three problems have been encountered on site with the use of both these types of precast concrete product: uneven bedding of paving flags; joints between vertical faces of flags or kerbs; jointing kerbs on a hill.

As in section 3.4, the identification, remedial and avoidance comments have been discussed separately with each of the problems. Some of the recommendations repeat and qualify those published in the mid-1970s (Concrete Society, 1974). For some reason, no reference was made to this useful technical report in the concrete industrys well-known annual reference book, the Concrete Year Book (1997).

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

The three problems listed above are often invoked to cast aspersions on the properties of the precast concrete units. Any troubleshooting problem needs to be examined carefully, and these cases have been found to cause considerable aggravation in this respect. It is not common for the single causes of the three problems in this section to be identified individually. 3.6.1 UNEVEN BEDDING OF PAVING FLAGS Identification of this problem is simple, in general unevenness and stepping at joints (Fig. 3.8). Cost rather than cost-effectiveness considerations have generally been found to be the reason for this problem, in that the base and sub-base were low-cost materials, and a minimum of labour was used in compaction. In addition, the practice has been observed of placing a dab of mortar at each corner of a prepared seating area, placing a paving flag on top, and applying a bolster at the centre to settle the unit in place. In effect, an impact flexural test is being conducted: breakage of the paving flag is the common result. The danger to pedestrians from tripping cannot be overemphasised. Although it is not known how many cases are brought against local authorities for personal injury, my experience with some authorities indicates that the departments dealing with installation, maintenance and legal matters seem to operate in isolation from each other. Information brought to my attention in the mid-1990s indicated that one local authority took maintenance action only when the stepping at paving flag joints exceeded 25mm. The recommended remedial work is to remove all affected slabs, base and sub-base material and reinstate with well-compacted Type 2 sub-base material followed by a minimum of 50mm of well-compacted dry lean concrete. When this has hardened sufficiently, apply a full bed of a sand/ cement 4/15/1 mortar and re-bed flags, leaving vertical joints unfilled and the thickness of a trowels blade apart.

Fig.3.8 Paving slabs on unsuitable base.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

The problem is probably best avoided by having a sub-base, base and bedding specification, as suggested in the previous paragraph. Although this is probably the most expensive method of laying paving flags, the reduced cost of maintenance work and the potential costs for personal injury should also be taken into account. 3.6.2 JOINTS BETWEEN VERTICAL FACES OF FLAGS OR KERBS This problem is commonly found in the form of wedge-shaped spalls or compression cracking at joints. If the products butt, or a stone becomes trapped in the nose, or a line of mortar has been forced into the nose, then point stresses are set up (Fig. 3.9). Paving flags or kerbs laid during cold weather tend to exhibit this spalling more than products laid in warm weather. Even though kerbs are commonly bedded on a backing haunch of in-situ concrete there will still be a weather-exposed face responsive to solar-induced thermal movement. Remedial work is fairly straightforward but, as with most work, the cause has to be removed or inhibited from acting further. All butting joints should be sawn down as far as possible, targeting full product depth, with as thin a blade as possible (2mm, for example). Remove spalled areas and feather-edging, and repair with an SBR or similarly approved mortar. Apart from the possible use of an antifoliant, leave the joint untreated. Spall-repair joints with an aperture wider than 2mm as above, and fill the joint (cut wider if necessary to 3mm or more) completely with a 3/1 to 4/1 sand/cement mortar having an aggregate maximum size of 2mm. The object of leaving a joint of 2mm aperture or narrower unfilled is to promote air-borne dust forming a natural control joint. The filling of wider joints with mortar is to prevent joint-butting or stone-trapping from causing stress-raisers.

Fig. 3.9 Spalling at kerb noses.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

The problem is probably best avoided by specifying that all products be laid to an unfilled trowels-thickness joint, or that joints be deliberately designed to a nominal 510mm width and completely filled with mortar during or after the laying sequence. Although not directly related to this problem, control joints placed through the haunch concrete that backs a kerb should be continued through a kerb-kerb joint and be visible on the face. Control joints in road construction work where precast concrete units are being used are probably best designed to cater for separate and individual movements in bespoke sections of the road. 3.6.3 JOINTING KERBS ON A HILL This problem manifested itself as kerbs moving slowly down the hill because there was little or no restraint. Kerb joints opened up along the incline and dislodged at radius kerbs or similar at the bottom of the hill and/or at corner junctions. The problem appeared to be confined to relatively steep hills: on the few occasions that it has been observed the hills had inclines of 1 in 20 or steeper. Remedial work was not undertaken in any of these cases as far as is known. Common sense suggests that one answer could be to replace or realign dislodged kerbs, coupled with some form of restraint. The restraint could be effected by concreting in a vertical butting unit. This could be a small column, or even a kerb on its end, so that runs of kerb could butt against these restraints. The problem could be avoided by taking this principle of column restraints into the design. An engineering appraisal might be needed to calculate at which kerb centres these restraints would need to be placed. I have had only hearsay evidence of problems with precast interlocking paving blocks, and am therefore unable to include any personal experience here. Most reports have been of these blocks sinking below datum level. Therefore much of what is recommended in section 3.6.1 would appear to be the way in which the main problem of units sinking could have been avoided. 3.7 TOLERANCES The main problems encountered on site with tolerances seem to have been associated with a general lack of appreciation that, although building loci are never at exact and predictable points in space, their variations and catering for these variations are both within the realms of the designer, builder and/or manufacturer. In general, the problems investigated fell into two broad categories: positive and negative tolerances; matching tolerances.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

When a dimension is put into a drawing, tolerances need to be put alongside, because what has been asked for has to be both achievable and buildable. As far as tolerances of achievability are concerned, if what has been dimensioned is something like a window, for example, then it is not logical either to omit tolerances or to specify tolerances that cannot be achieved by the manufacturer. Concerning buildability, and using the same window as the example, if there is too much positive tolerance for the window and/or too much negative tolerance for the opening designed to receive it then it is very likely not to fit. If the case under consideration was a precast concrete cladding unit, then in addition to the geometry of the opening and the dimensions of the cladding unit, there would be the tolerances (for both support and restraint) of the fixings. There is a useful general rule: tolerance is an easy thing to find on a construction site but a difficult thing to lose. More difficulty has been found in assembling parts of a building because they were too large than because they were too small. There are a variety of gap-filling materials available to cater for undersizing, but mechanical or similar removal is all that is generally available to deal with too much positive tolerance. There are notable but rather singular exceptions to this guidance: the aluminous cement beams resting on column haunches described in section 1.7 are an example where significant positive tolerance was critical. I have been involved in many cases where troubleshooting revolved around the subject of tolerances. Of the three examples that follow, the first two relate to positive and negative tolerances and the third to matching tolerances. Example 1 A prestige building had a canopy of single-skin GRC cladding panels fixed to a stainless steel subframe. It had apparently been assumed that the specialistmanufactured subframe would be made to strict tolerances because, possibly, of the use of an expensive alloy. Unfortunately, this did not turn out to be the case; and, probably worse than that, the whole frame was under-dimensioned, and great difficulty was experienced in fixing the GRC panels in their designated positions. Much of the excess negative tolerance was countered by the use of large numbers of stainless steel shims at the fixings. In some cases as many as 12 shims, 3mm thick, were used. The only thing found right on this contract was that, in the other two space dimensions, the fixing points were found to be within an acceptable tolerance. Example 2 The problem concerned rain penetration around the window details of an office block gable end constructed of cast stone ashlar cladding, sill and

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

lintel units. On leaning out of one of the top-storey windows where leakage had been occurring, it was found that both the sill and ashlar unit below could be easily rocked by hand. Arrangements were made to have these taken off the building before a second visit. It was found during the second visit that there were no fixings to the insitu wall relative to the removed stones, nor, with the aid of a torch, could any be seen to the adjacent stones. The rain ingress points at the sill were easily discernible; a direct mortar path allowed passage under the sill. When all 10 storeys of gable end stonework were removed, it was found that less than 10% of the total number of units had been secured to the insitu concrete wall. The main reason for this lack of fixings appeared to be that the in-situ wall was so far out of vertical that the Abbey Dovetail tails were unable to reach the slots cast into the wall. Units were reinstated with countersunk stainless steel expansion bolts both securing the cast stone units and fixing to the in-situ concrete. Example 3 This was an instance of troubleshooting at the design stage, and concerned matching tolerances. Precast concrete units were to be fixed using proprietary cast-in stainless steel slots in the units to locate with floor bolts cast into the in-situ concrete. The problem was that the site, being a refurbishment in a busy metropolis, had no storage room and could not tolerate any delay. Fixing had to be direct from the delivery vehicle onto the facade, and had to be timed for when the tower crane was available. It was agreed that, in order to correlate the precast unit dimensions and the tolerances for the positions of both the site and unit fixing points, the opening (the gap to receive the unit) centre lines rather than column centres would be used for location. Precast units were dimensioned from the centre vertical and horizontal lines, both for their overall sizes and for the cast-in fixing slots. Few problems were encountered on site. Figure 3.10 illustrates how this system was used. 3.7.1 IDENTIFICATION The problem shows itself as difficulty or inability in putting parts of a construction together. 3.7.2 REMEDIAL This is difficult to address, because each case probably needs to be considered individually. Fortuitously, the 1980s and 1990s have seen the advent of many new types of proprietary fixing, which can be used, for instance, as single or double locking or expansion devices. In addition,

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

Fig. 3.10 Tolerances for a slot fixing in a precast concret cladding unit; x and y each 2mm (not to scale).

polymer adhesive systems have some applications where injection or gravity feed are possible. Endoprobes can be used to inspect the efficacy of many of these remedial actions. Sometimes difficulties are known to be likely because of poor alignment, and on-site welding of stainless steel fixings or similar might be a viable remedial measure. 3.7.3 AVOIDANCE Most of the problem areas mentioned above can be avoided by applying realistic detailing and dimensioning, always bearing in mind that tolerances are important all the way from material to product to completed construction. Buildability could possibly be improved by aiming to keep positive tolerances as small as possible and allowing variations to be catered for in the negative tolerance range.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

3.8 RISING DAMP AND A CHEMICAL BARRIER The problem experienced on site related to concrete block masonry walls exhibiting apparent rising damp and how to rectify the situation. There was little point in addressing a rising damp problem unless it could be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the dampness was due to water being drawn up from the ground by capillary attraction. Dampness can be caused by one or more of the following: (a) (b) (c) (d) rising damp from the ground; water penetration through the wall from outside; water penetration through the roof; condensation.

Attention was drawn to a British Standards publication (DD 205:1991) that suggests specific tests for identifying (a) with respect to the other three causes. However, rising damp tends to exhibit a common behaviour, whether it is on brickwork, blockwork or rendered faces: the dampness rises to only 1.01.5m from ground level, and the damp area is generally covered with black mildew. On the site visited it was found that the damp-proof membrane had been omitted. The dampness was diagnosed as rising damp, and it was recommended that a chemical damp-proof course be installed following the guide lines in the code of practice (BS 6576:1985). Apparently, an inexperienced company was chosen to undertake the injection work, and a site re-visit was requested to comment on the possible reasons for the apparent lack of success of the remedial work. Most of the advice given in BS 6576 had apparently been ignored, and the errors that were observed on site included the following: The silicone used (an aluminium stearate might also have been suitable) had a low solids content (about 5% is a typical content). The internal rendering had been reinstated too soon after the injection. The chemical should have been left to become fully effective. This normally takes a year or a little longer. The rendering reinstatement should have been undertaken using a water-repellent mortar, stopping this at the injection line. Where party wall work was being undertaken the neighbour had not been advised of the smell of solvent permeating the wall, nor of the need for ventilation.

3.8.1 IDENTIFICATION The problem is characterised by dampness and mildew growth to a height of 1.01.5m above ground, and chemical injection remedial work is of little apparent benefit.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

3.8.2 REMEDIAL Using a contractor proficient in the application of the British Standard recommendations, step drill and silicone inject the masonry wall as shown in Fig. 3.11, and reinstate mortar and decorations after a period of at least a year. 3.8.3 AVOIDANCE Take special care when installing mechanical damp-proof courses and trays. Many problems found on site have been associated with damaged membranes, as well as with mortar bridging dpm lines. The masonry code of practice (BS 5628 Part 3:1985) recommends that something like 5mm of membrane should be left protruding from the face of the masonry. This is not as common as it probably ought to be, and membranes tend to get bridged by mortar, allowing a path for rising damp. A non-concrete case of dealing with rising damp was studied at the installation date and again just over a year later. It concerned a building that was 150 years old, with a single skin of clay brickwork 320mm thick.

Fig. 3.11 Chemical injection steps for a damp-proof membrance.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

The system studied used an electrical method by placing a direct curren field across the base of the wall just above ground level. The system allegedly relied on the electrical properties of the rising damp, and put an opposing field into the wall. Little or no improvement was observed a the second visit. A possible lesson to be learnt from this is that processes should be examined and understood as far as possible. The best test assessment is probably track history of performance if knowledge of the mechanisms is limited. 3.9 CRACKING IN THE NON-VISUAL ZONE The Glossary defines both crack width and crack aperture; the problems found on site all related to crack aperture, as it was this that was visible. The crack aperture was generally assumed to reflect both the crack-width and the number of cracks beneath the surface in the concrete. For example, it was generally thought that if a crack of 0.5mm aperture was present then the crack width was constant at 0.5mm right down to the steel, and that there was just that one crack. However, the various types of crack geometry shown in Fig. 3.12 demonstrate that this assumption can be misleading. Once a crack has been seen, one or more of the following possibilities arise: (a) Water and air can access the rebar and initiate corrosion. (b) Dirt can collect at the apertures, giving the surface an unsightly appearance. (c) Structural distress may be occurring. (d) The crack may be static or dynamic.

Fig. 3.12 Various crack geometries surface crack widths in mm (not to scale).

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

In general, the problem manifests itself on site as (a). Once a crack is seen it is commonly assumed that there is a corrosion risk, and that something needs to be done about it. Guidance in the British Standard (BS 8110 Part 1:1985) refers to a limiting crack aperture of 0.2mm as acceptable from the point of view of corrosion. The code of practice for water-retaining structures (BS 8007:1987) suggests a limiting crack width of 0.1mm. However, little or no attention appears to have been paid in these guidance documents to the crack geometry. The reference to crack apertures alone, with no reference to what the crack does as it goes into the concrete, might apply to one or two crack-forming mechanisms but cannot cover all causes. Section 1.2 referred to the observed geometry of thermal cracks that, although traversing down to the steel at a constant width of about 0.1mm, had not promoted carbonation, nor chloride-induced corrosion (it was a case of marine exposure), nor additional chloride ingress. There are many publications that refer to crack width geometries as well as to crack aperture, but it probably serves little purpose on the troubleshooting trail to list these. Cracking in concrete is common, and there are very few cases where either macro or micro-cracking is not present; yet most concrete carries on doing the task for which it was intended without exhibiting distress. Reinforced concrete is designed to transfer its weakness in tension to the rebars placed in the tension zone. The steel controls the extent of the concrete yield; it does not stop cracks. As pointed out in a paper published in the 1980s (Richardson, 1986): If it isnt cracked, it isnt working. The aim must be to identify whether or not a crack aperture is a risk. The indirect method of the application of UPV at the surface (BS 1881 Part 203:1986) can indicate both depth and direction fairly accurately if the crack is not bridged by sound-conducting material such as water or detritus. However, one needs to know the risk of water getting to the rebars via the crack only if there is a reasonable indication that the crack is singular and might be as deep as the rebars. The initial surface absorption of concrete (BS 1881 Part 208:1996) has been used on site quite successfully to assess both cracked and uncracked areas. Because of the point-to-point variability in surface permeability it has not yet been possible to suggest a comparison limit for acceptance or rejection. The small amount of site data collected indicates that, if the crack could allow water ingress, significantly higher results would be obtained from cracked zones than would be expected for general surface variabilities. Crack aperture has generally been found to be irrelevant to the dirt retention risk referred to in (b). The mechanism observed was that capillary attraction of rain at the crack aperture resulted in water being drawn in, and the dirt from the water was left on the surface (Fig. 3.13). What this amounts to is that all crack apertures appear larger than they really are. Rubbing ones finger across the crack to remove the dirt reveals a much narrower defect.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

Fig. 3.13 Dirt retention at crack aperture (not to scale).

The structural and crack mobility factors referred to in (c) and (d) fall within the province of an engineering assessment rather than being a material problem. There is little point in dealing with cracks from any of the points of view of identification, remedy or avoidance without a reasonably clear picture of the mechanism(s) that caused the cracking, and of the crack geometry. The two common types of crack-measuring device used on site are transparent plastics cards with different thicknesses of lines for laying alongside cracks, and the crack microscope. Both of these measure crack aperture and not crack width. The crack microscope is possibly too precise a tool, because the need to measure crack aperture beyond a 0.05mm accuracy (which can fairly easily be judged with the human eye against a reference line on the card) is debatable. Furthermore, site conditions and ergonomics need to be considered. There are attractions to using a cheap card that is pocket sized (100mm40mm, say), sufficiently accurate, and virtually unbreakable. However, whichever measuring device is used, the information it provides has been shown to have little value. 3.9.1 IDENTIFICATION The problem is identifiable in one of two forms: either there is some wording in the specification limiting crack apertures, or visual cracks are observed whose position, crack apertures or times of occurrence are not as expected. 3.9.2 REMEDIAL For static cracks that are not considered to be a corrosion risk, rub down to remove all dirt, and apply a flood coat of silicone water-repellent to the recommendations of BS 6477:1992. Static cracks that are considered to be a corrosion risk may be amenable to repair by injecting an epoxide resin. The

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

injection equipment should be connected to a pressure gauge, because it is quite easy, using ordinary hand-pump actuation, to make the damage worse. Cracks exhibiting dynamic behaviour (that is, live cracks) need individual consideration depending upon the site conditions. If the crack aperture is in a narrow range (0.050.25mm), a copolymer capillary introduction may be successful. Wider crack apertures may be amenable to repair using a silicone or similar sealant. 3.9.3 AVOIDANCE Although good design and workmanship minimise the occurrence of cracks, it is essentialboth at specification stage and during the work-not to raise problems when the risks are insignificant or unfounded. The best approach is probably for the parties to agree at a preliminary stage which crack apertures necessitate further investigation and possible action, as well as which cracks do not need attention. 3.10 LARGE-AREA SCALING OF FLOORS The problem occurred with an industrial in-situ concrete floor where a superplasticiser complying with BS 5075 Part 3:1985 had been specified. The admixture was based on a chemical that was added into the truck mixer in the specification range 0.71.2% m/m cement at the delivery point on site. It was added at a concentration of about 1.0% m/m cement for this particular site. As is common with truck-mixed concrete, the admixture was stored in a tank above the mixer drum, and was added and truckmixed on site just before the concrete was discharged. Because of an error at the ready-mix plant, the admixture tank was inadvertently charged with the same volume (about 20L) of an airentraining agent based upon a neutralised vinsol resin. This type of admixture is normally added at one tenth of the concentration of a superplasticiser: 0.1% m/m cement is typical. More importantly, it is recommended to be added into the mixing water when the truck mixer is charged at the plant. The day after casting the bays with the 6m3 of concrete from this truck load, large-area scaling of sheets of surface material occurred down to a thickness of 13mm. The scaled material was darker than the remaining concrete, and at the interface there was a concentration of coagulated bubbles with accompanying delamination parallel to the surface. The remaining concrete was uniformly air-entrained, but the total air content in the hardened concrete was about 12%. Of this percentage, about 1.0% consisted of irregularly shaped entrapped air voids; the remainder consisted of the common spherically shaped air-entrained voids in the

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

diameter range 0.050.50mm. The coagulated bubbles at the interface were mostly in the diameter range 0.050.20mm. The bays affected were replaced with concrete complying with the specification. Although the causes of this scaling were not discussed at the time of the discovery, a comparison of the mechanisms of the action of superplasticisers and air-entraining agents could yield a relevant clue. The plasticising mechanism of a superplasticiser is generally accepted as electrostatic action in setting up repulsive forces between aggregate and cement particles. Thus underdosing or overdosing such admixtures would tend to cause less or more film-over-particle formation respectively. Airentraining agents generally rely on the mixing actions trapping bubbles that are electrostatically bonded between cement particles and the surrounding aggregate-rich matrix. So an overdosing of air-entraining agent could result in a concentration of bubbles, which might join together under the same forces and form a pseudo-entrained/entrapped system of plates of bubbles. These plates might have only enough buoyancy under the action of site compaction processes to rise to just below the surface. If this mechanism is relevant, then if there were cement-rich areas in the ready-mix truck due, perhaps, to insufficient mixing, similar large-area scaling would be expected. However, the scaled areas would be in patches, because if cement-rich areas were responsible they would be unlikely to be uniform in the truck mixer. Furthermore, the amount of air-entraining agent overdosing would not need to be particularly high, because a bubbletrapping mechanism would tend to operate at the cement-rich areas. 3.10.1 IDENTIFICATION The problem would cause large areas of scaling up to 3mm deep of surface layer, exhibiting little air entrainment but with a weak interface of coagulated laminar bubble plates also showing laminar cracking. The remaining substrate concrete from the same batch of concrete would tend to exhibit fairly uniform air bubble distribution. The surface planarity would not change significantly over the scaled areas. The scaling observed, and illustrated in Fig. 3.14, could not have been misdiagnosed as the familiar blistering or small-area scaling, about which much has been published. 3.10.2 REMEDIAL Depending upon the degree of unsound material, a decision may be taken to cut out the top layer to a depth of, say, 1020mm and resurface with new concrete if the underlying substrate is acceptable. If there are more serious doubts (as there were with the case mentioned) then complete replacement may have to be considered.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

Fig. 3.14 Large-area scaling on a slab.

3.10.3 AVOIDANCE All admixtures should be used in accordance with known and acceptable good practice. Those added at the plant or works should be fed in with the mixing water. Superplasticising admixtures added on site should be fed in only after the concrete in the drum has been uniformly mixed and is as close as possible to the required discharge position. 3.11 SILANES The problem encountered on site was with large concrete units precast on site for placement in and above tidal water. The specification required that virtually all concrete be treated with silane according to government recommendations (DoT, 1990). The nature of the problem was twofold. First, the concrete was too impermeable to absorb more than a marginal amount of the two coat specified silane applications. Second, what little managed to get into the concrete penetrated only about 1mm deep. As far as was known at that time (and probably at the time of preparation of this book), silanes had little or no track history in the UK. In contrast, the long-established silicones have had a proven performance over at least 40 years. It is of interest to note that the superseded 1984 edition of the current standard on masonry water repellents (BS 6477:1992) replaced a standard (BS 3826:1969) that referred to silicone only in its title. The aim of these types of treatment is to impregnate (not coat) concrete with a chemical that has or endows the concrete with water-repellent properties. With silanes, one has to wait for a significant amount of time to obtain this property. Therefore the concrete or other material being treated must be capable of being impregnated to a depth that will give an acceptable performance: that is, not so shallow as to be at risk of losing its efficacy too quickly because of wear or weathering. In addition, what impregnates the concrete must be designed to act as a water repellent and not be subject to nor designed for water under more than a nominal pressure. Only silicones, usually based in a volatile solvent such as white spirit, act immediately as water repellents by lining the sides of voids and capillaries with a hydrophobic layer. Silanes have much lower viscosities

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

than silicones in solvent, and should penetrate further if viscosity is the sole criterion. However, silanes are not water repellents, and have to be hydrolysed (chemical transformation by reaction with moisture in the concrete or air) to form silicone. It would be expected that water-repellent properties would only become apparent with time. This was observed on site, where the thin layer of penetration was observed to be water repellent only after several months weathering. An additional factor to bear in mind is based on the physics of fluid penetration. Viscosity controls the speed at which fluids pass through a capillary system, but there has to be pressure driving that fluid. The pressure for fluids in contact with permeable materials such as concrete arises from the capillary attraction force, which is mainly a function of the surface tension of the fluid and of the capillary radii of the permeable material. There is considerable knowledge of capillary sizes in concrete and of the viscosity of silane and silicones, but nothing on the surface tension of either silanes or silicones. Another potential disadvantage of silane is that because hydrolysis is the mechanism that converts the chemical to the water-repellent silicone form, moisture cannot get past the hydrolysed material to hydrolyse the underlying silane. Silanes are virtually solvent-free systems, and have very low boiling points, which can, at 35C, sometimes be lower than the temperature of the concrete. Not only does this make application troublesome in warm weather, but it may also be necessary to spray the concrete with water to promote hydrolysis if its own free moisture availability is low. Another consideration is what to do with the unabsorbable run-off material. A typical cost of silane is about 3 per litre; from the two specified applications of 300mL/m2 each, it would not be unusual to have 500mL/ m2 or more being lost. In the case in question, gutters, filters and collection tanks were installed, and the silane saved was reused. 3.11.1 IDENTIFICATION The problem is flagged by a silane application requirement in the specification. 3.11.2 REMEDIAL Advise the specifier of the following: The concrete will have to be of mediocre or poor quality for the silane to be able to penetrate to a significant depth.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.

A wait of some months will be required for the silane to hydrolyse into the form of a silicone water-repellent. It may not be possible to achieve the specified coverage rates with little or no rejection of the silane. Problems are likely to be encountered in hot weather. Silane is expensive. Silicone in a solvent may be a better proposition.

3.11.3 AVOIDANCE Pre-tender discussion is advised. The contractual aims may well be achievable by better-known and tried means.

Copyright 2003 by Taylor & Francis Group. All rights Reserved.