Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Shrinkage cracking and up- dustrial floor slabs on grade. These prob- everything possible has been done to
ward curling, which result lems can be caused by: minimize shrinkage. Shrinkage testing
• Moist subgrades should be every bit as important as com-
from shrinkage differentials, pressive strength testing for enclosed
• Dry air on the upper slab surface
are common troubles for en- slabs on grade.
• Excess water needed to make con- Compressive strength is overempha-
closed industrial slabs on crete workable but not needed to hy-
grade. The most important sized. The commonly specified 28-day
drate the cement compressive strength has been increased
factor contributing to shrink- Evaporation of moisture from the up- to as much as 5000 psi to permit the re-
age is the amount of water per surface of the slab causes drying duction of calculated slab thickness. De-
per unit volume of concrete. shrinkage. Slab edges curl upward be- spite a lower water-cement ratio, these
cause the top of the slab dries to a lower higher 28-day-strength concretes usually
Understanding this, design- moisture content than the bottom of the have a higher total water content and thus
ers should select materials slab, and therefore shrinks more than the have increased shrinkage. This required
and specify concrete to mini- bottom. early strength development, which aggra-
mize shrinkage and therefore Designers often overlook the effects of vates the problem, is supported by the
shrinkage and curling due to moisture American Concrete Institute (ACI) 302
reduce curling and cracking. loss from slab surfaces because of the requirement for a minimum of 1800 psi at
great emphasis placed on compressive 3 days (Ref. 2).
ndustrial slabs are not covered with car- strength and slump testing and because of
I pet or tile. Since the concrete surface is
the wearing surface, cracking and curling
the lack of information on curling. But
owners expect floor slabs to be relatively
Clean, low-shrinkage aggregates are
less available today than 25 years ago be-
cause environmental considerations re-
seriously reduce their productive and aes- free of shrinkage cracks and free of curled strict quarry operations.
thetic value. This article deals primarily edges at control and construction joints. Floor slabs are being built on higher-
with shrinkage and upward curling of Designers specify control joints at clos- moisture-content subgrades as the cost of
these industrial slabs on grade that are un- er spacings today mostly because of the good industrial land has risen. Moist sub-
der roofs and inside buildings where they Portland Cement Association (PCA) rec- grades increase the moisture gradient
are not exposed to the sun. Most of the ommendations given in Reference 1, first through the slab, and this increases up-
principles, however, also apply to other published in 1978. The additional joints ward curling at free edges.
flatwork. For example, highway and air- recommended by that publication reduce
port pavements, exposed to the sun, are shrinkage cracking. But curling and break- Defining drying shrinkage
subject to both moisture and temperature down of joint edges, at the increased num- In this article drying shrinkage of con-
gradients. For simplicity, the moisture ber of joints, is often a bigger maintenance crete is defined as the reduction in con-
gradients are expressed in equivalent de- problem than the shrinkage cracks elimi- crete volume resulting from a loss of wa-
grees per unit of slab thickness. nated by the extra joints. ter from the concrete after hardening.
Concepts developed here do not apply Unfortunately, enclosed slabs on grade Drying shrinkage is believed (Ref. 3) to
to slabs on grade for tilt-up construction made with portland cement concrete have be caused principally by the contraction
until after the panels have been raised and worse shrinkage and curling problems to- of the calcium silicate gel component of
the roof constructed. To improve floor day than 25 years ago for several reasons: the cement paste when the moisture con-
slabs for tilt-up buildings, cast the wall Shrinkage is neglected. Basic recom- tent of the gel is decreased.
panels on waste slabs rather than on the mendations in References 1 and 2 fail to All practical portland cement concrete
finished floor slab. emphasize the need for low-shrinkage shrinks about 0.04% to 0.08% due to drying
Shrinkage cracking and upward slab concrete for floor slabs on grade. They (Ref. 4), but restraint by reinforcement can
edge curling are common in enclosed in- imply that if slump is low, then almost reduce drying shrinkage by up to one-half.
Effects of aggregate size Table 1. Cumulative Effect of Adverse Factors on Shrinkage
To provide the workability needed for (from Reference 7, Tremper and Spellman)
placement, practical concrete mixes al-
ways contain more water than is needed to Effect of departing from Equivalent
hydrate the cement. When this excess wa- use of best materials increase in Cumulative effect
and workmanship shrinkage %
ter evaporates, the cement paste shrinks.
To fully restrain shrinkage of the cement Concrete temperature at
paste, concrete should contain the maxi- discharge allowed to
mum practical amount of an incompress- reach 80° F, whereas with 8 1.00 1.08 1.08
ible and clean aggregate. reasonable precautions,
If the dry-rodded volume of an incom- temperature of 60° F could
pressible and clean coarse aggregate was have been maintained
equal to the concrete volume, then the
coarse aggregate would fully restrain ce- Used 6- to 7-inch slump
where 3- to 4-inch slump 10 1.08 1.10 1.19
ment-paste shrinkage. That is never the
case, though, for conventional floor slab could have been used
concrete because such a stony concrete Excessive haul in transit
mix would be totally unworkable. mixer, too long a waiting
In actual practice, the dry-rodded vol- period at jobsite, or too 10 1.19 1.10 1.31
ume of the coarse aggregate is only 50% many revolutions at mixing
to 60% of the concrete volume if 1⁄2-inch- speed
maximum size aggregate is used, but can
be as high as 75% of the concrete volume Use of 3⁄4-inch-maximum
if 11⁄2-inch-maximum size aggregate is size aggregate under 25 1.31 1.25 1.64
used (Ref. 5). Therefore, using a larger conditions where 11⁄2-inch
maximum size coarse aggregate will re- could have been used
duce shrinkage if the aggregate itself is Use of cement having
low in shrinkage. relatively high shrinkage 25 1.64 1.25 2.05
characteristics
Selecting the best mix
Water demand of the separate materials Excessive “dirt” in aggre-
used in concrete is the major determinant gate due to insufficient
25 2.05 1.25 2.56
of concrete shrinkage. Variations in water washing or contamination
demand caused by the separate concrete during handling
ingredients have a far greater effect on Use of aggregates of poor
concrete shrinkage than does the common inherent quality with 50 2.56 1.50 3.84
concern over the variation in slump. respect to shrinkage
Research on shrinkage (Ref. 6) shows
there is a cumulative effect on shrinkage Use of admixture that
50 3.84 1.50 5.00
of making poor choices in the selection produces high shrinkage
of material to be used. One study (Ref. 7) Total increase Summation Cumulative 400%
of eight factors that influence the water 183%
content of concrete concluded that their
influence on shrinkage could total 400%
(Table 1). discussed later, slab warping increases as Water reducers and shrinkage
Concrete made with 3⁄4-inch-maximum the modulus of elasticity E of concrete Frequently it is assumed that high-range
size aggregate will shrink about 30% more increases. Unfortunately, low-shrinkage water reducers (HRWRs) or superplasticiz-
than concrete with 11⁄2-inch-maximum size aggregates usually have a high modulus ers will reduce shrinkage in proportion to
aggregate. But concrete placing costs may of elasticity and aggregate is the main their ability to reduce water. This is not the
increase slightly when larger aggregate is determinant of the concrete’s modulus. case. Few designers and specifiers realize
used. Designers, therefore, should specify Designers must compromise between that ASTM C 494, “Standard Specification
that the maximum size coarse aggregate be specifying low-modulus concrete and for Chemical Admixtures for Concrete,”
slightly less than one-third the slab thick- low-shrinkage concrete. To select the (Ref. 8) allows concrete made with admix-
ness, with the understanding that the small best possible mix, specify that shrinkage tures to have shrinkage 35% greater than
increase in cost will be offset through low- tests be made of several concrete mixes, the same concrete without the admixture.
er shrinkage and a better floor slab. each with different aggregates and ce- This permitted increase in shrinkage when
However, the designer often has to ments, to obtain concrete with the lowest admixtures are used means that the reduc-
make tradeoffs. For example, as will be shrinkage for a particular job. tion in water achieved by using water re-
ducers is no guarantee that concrete shrink- low-slump concrete properly cured in a shrinkage reduction by specifying low-
age also will be reduced. The only way to moist environment, with or without rein- shrinkage, stony concrete mixes with
know if a particular water reducer will re- forcement, will have minimum shrinkage large maximum size coarse aggregate.
sult in lower shrinkage is to test it with a and few cracks.” The reader is left to as-
particular mix design. sume that if slump is kept low, then Early strength and shrinkage
everything necessary for low shrinkage Since shrinkage of cement paste is the
Slump and shrinkage has been accomplished. However, sub- primary cause of concrete shrinkage, it
ACI and PCA literature emphasize stantial research evidence (Ref. 6) shows seems appropriate to choose a cement that
low-slump concrete, thereby implying that slump control is only a small factor in produces a hardened paste with low
that low slump is the key to low shrink- the shrinkage equation. shrinkage in order to reduce slab-on-
age. PCA’s “Concrete Floors on Ground” Instead of expecting slump to control grade shrinkage.
(Ref. 1, page 19) states: “Slabs made of shrinkage, designers should effect real Researchers have emphasized (Ref. 6)
coarseness of grind and low C3A content
of cement as important to low-shrinkage
concrete. However, in an effort to obtain
the 1800-psi 3-day strengths formerly re-
quired by ACI 302, Types I and III ce-
ments are frequently specified (Figure 1).
Since they are finer and have relatively
high C3A content, they contribute to un-
desirable shrinkage. The designer who
wants to limit shrinkage should specify
Type II cement, which is coarser-ground
and with less C3A, so long as the amount
of traffic on the slab can be controlled at
early ages. Figure 2 shows that Type II
cement concrete catches up in strength
with Types I and III at 60 to 80 days and
goes on to surpass them.
Figure 1. Concrete made from different types of cement gains early-age strength ACI 302 should require a minimum 3-
at different rates. (From the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Concrete Manual) day concrete strength only for formed, el-
evated structural slabs or for tilt-up slabs
on ground, where early strength really is
needed. I believe that ACI 302 should re-
strict the C3A content of cements to 8% or
10% to reduce slab-on-grade shrinkage.
PUBLICATION #C920825
Copyright © 1992, The Aberdeen Group
All rights reserved