aci 301 specifications for structural concrete october 20

ACI 301 Specifications for Structural Concrete

October 20, 21, 22, 2012 Toronto, Ontario

Minutes 301 meeting, October 20, 2012 Meeting 1, Saturday

1. The first meeting of ACI 301 was called to order at 1:01 pm EST on October 20, 2012.

2. The meeting was started by self introductions. The following were in attendance at one or more of the three meetings:

Voting members Jim Cornell, Chairman Michelle Wilson, Secretary Larry Krauser Jon Ardahl Colin Lobo Roger Becker Ward Malisch Nick Carino Frank Malits Domingo Carreira Calvin McCall Mark Chrzanowski Aimee Pergalsky Teck Chua Henry Prenger Anthony DeCarlo Michael Robinson Sidney Freedman Scott Tarr John Gajda Daniel Toon Tom Greene John Turner Charles Hanskat Miroslav Vejvoda Ken Hover Mike Whisonant Steven Jaycox Dennis Wittry Subcommittee members Ramon Carrasquillo Roger Johnston John Hukey David Scott Robert Jenkins Non Voting members Matt Senecal, ACI Staff Liaison Eldon Tipping, TAC Liaison Visitors Urik Dilek Pete Fosnough Thano Drimalus Claude Jaycox Dan Falconer Steve Wilcox

2

Minutes of the Toronto Convention, 2012

3. Resolution of LB 11-02:

The Committee addressed resolution of negative votes from LB 11-02.

3.1 LB 11-02, Item 29, Ref 60, negatives by Carino, and Chrzanowski. There was a motion made by Tarr and seconded by McCall to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 18-0-0. The negative by Chrzanowski was tabled.

10.2.2 Performance and design requirements—Comply with 4.2.2 and 10.2.2.1 through 10.2.2.3. Concrete for slabs to receive a hard troweled finish shall not contain an air-entraining admixture or have a total air content greater than 3%.

3.2 LB 11-02, Item 29, Ref 61, negatives by Carino, Lobo, McCall, and Wilson. There was a

motion made by Tarr and seconded by Lobo to find these negatives persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 18-0-0.

10.2.2.1 Minimum cement content—Cement content shall not be less than 564 lb/yd3.

3.3 LB 11-02, Item 29, Ref 62, negatives by Jaycox and Lobo. There was a motion made by Tarr to

find Jaycox and Lobo persuasive and seconded by Lobo. A motion was made by Tarr and seconded by Lobo to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 19-0-0.

10.2.2.2 Expansion—Unless otherwise specified, the concrete expansion, determined in accordance with ASTM C878/878M, shall be a minimum of 0.03% and a maximum of 0.06% at 7 days of soaking 0.10%, measured in accordance with ASTM C878.

OPTIONAL

If different minimum and maximum expansion limits are desired, specify the requirements. Minimum expansion needed is based on the projected shrinkage for the particular concrete mixture and the amount of reinforcement used. Consult ACI 223 for guidance.

3.4 LB 11-02, Item 31, Ref 65, negative by Carino withdrawn.

3.5 LB 11-02, Item 31, Ref 66, negatives by Ardahl, Chrzanowski, Greene, Jaycox and McCall. There was a motion made by Tarr and seconded by McCall to find Jaycox persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 19-0-0. Negatives by Ardahl, Chrzanowski, Greene and McCall were tabled.

10.2.3.2 Unless otherwise specified, for the proposed concrete mixture, provide laboratory test results for three expansion bars cast and tested in accordance with ASTM C878/878M. Record the expansion test results and submit for acceptance.

SUBMITTALS

Expansion test results for the proposed concrete mixtures.

OPTIONAL

Specify alternate test procedure. Recent test results should not be permitted if tests were not performed using materials proposed for the project.

3


3.6 LB 11-02, Item 31, Ref 67, negatives by Carino, Chrzanowski, Greene, and Jaycox. Carino

withdrew his negative. There was a motion made by Tarr and seconded by Carreira to find the rest of the negative voters persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 18-0-0.

10.2.3.3 Revisions to concrete mixtures—When concrete mixture proportions are revised in accordance with 4.2.3.6, evaluate the effect on expansion by performing laboratory tests on three expansion bars cast with the revised concrete mixture in accordance with ASTM C878. Submit test results along with the revised mixture proportions. and submit test results.

SUBMITTALS

Proportions and expansion test results for revised mixture proportions.

3.7 LB 11-02, Item 32, Ref 68, negatives by Ardahl, Carino and Lobo. There was a motion made by Tarr and seconded by Carino to find Ardahl non-persuasive because the specification needs to allow for post-tensioning. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-0. There was a motion made by Tarr and seconded by McCall to find Carino and Lobo persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-0.

10.2.4 Reinforcement—Use deformed reinforcing bars or deformed welded wire reinforcement meeting the requirements of 3.2 as specified in Contract Documents.

OPTIONAL MANDATORY

Specify the grade of reinforcing bar and the quantity of reinforcement required. Shrinkage-compensating concrete must always be reinforced. Determine the required amount of reinforcement in accordance with ACI 318-08. Refer to ACI 223 for additional guidance.

3.8 LB 11-02, Item 32, Ref 69, negatives by Ardahl and Becker. There was a motion made by Tarr

and seconded by Wittry to find Ardahl and Becker persuasive and to accept a substantive change and revert back to original wording. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-0.

3.9 LB 11-02, Item 33, Ref 72, negatives by Carino and Cornell. Cornell withdrew his negative. There was a motion made by Tarr and seconded by Turner to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-0.

10.3.1.1 Place reinforcement on rigid supports spaced to ensure proper positioning of the reinforcement during placement.

10.2.5 Isolation-joint filler materials—Unless otherwise specified, use compressible isolation-joint filler material that does not develop a stress greater than 25 psi at 50% strain when tested in accordance with ASTM D1621 or D3575.

OPTIONAL

Specify alternative compressible isolation-joint filler material if desired.

4


3.10 LB 11-02, Item 33, Ref 73, negatives by Carino, Chrzanowski, Jaycox, Krauser, Lobo, Malits, and McCall. There was a motion made by Tarr and seconded by McCall to find these voters persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-0.

10.3.1.2 Unless otherwise specified, position reinforcement 2 in. provide 1.5 in. cover from the top surface for reinforced slabs-on-ground. For other members, place steel reinforcement as indicated in Contract Documents.

OPTIONAL

Specify bar reinforcing steel position in reinforced slabs-on-ground if different from 1.5 in. 2 in. from top surface.

3.11 LB 11-02, Item 34, Ref 77, negative by Carino. There was a motion made by Tarr and

seconded by McCall to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-0.

10.3.3 Isolation joints—Provide isolation joints at junctions with columns, walls, drains, or other rigid obstruction in the structure, in accordance with Contract Documents.

MANDATORY

Specify the location of isolation joints required.

3.12 LB 11-02, Item 34, Ref 78, negative by Carino. There was a motion made by Tarr and

seconded by McCall to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-1.

10.3.4 Curing—Unless otherwise specified, wet cure shrinkage-compensating concrete for a minimum of 7 days in accordance with 5.3.6.4.a or 5.3.6.4.b.

OPTIONAL

If curing is to be continued for longer than 7 days, or if a method other than water curing is acceptable, specify the requirements in Contract Documents. Specify if wet curing is to be continued for more than 7 days.

3.13 LB 11-02, Item 2, Ref 5 was tabled.

3.14 LB 11-02, Item 3, Ref 8, negatives by Cornell, Jaycox, and McCall. Cornell and McCall withdrew their negatives. There was a motion made by Gajda and seconded by Chua to find Jaycox non-persuasive because the term “moisture condition” addresses both absorbed and adsorbed moisture. The motion passed by a vote of 18-1-1.

3.15 LB 11-02, Item 8, Ref 16, negatives by Becker, Cornell and Wilson. Becker withdrew his negative. There was a motion made by Gajda and seconded by Pergalsky to find Wilson persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

7.2.3.2 Proportioning—Proportion mixture to attain specified strength in accordance with 4.2.3.

5


3.16 LB 11-02, Item 9, Ref 17, negatives by Becker, Carino and Wilson. Becker and Wilson withdrew their negatives. There was a motion made by Gajda and seconded by Carino to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

7.2.4 Batching and mixing—Batching and mixing shall be in accordance with 4.3.

3.17 LB 11-02, Item 9, Ref 18, negative by Becker. There was a motion made by Gajda and seconded by Carino to find the voter persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 21-0-1.

7.2.4.1 Batching and mixing alternative methods— When batching and mixing procedures differ from Section 4, submit recommendations to Architect/Engineer for acceptance.


3.19 LB 11-02, Item 14, Ref 26, negatives by Carino, Chrzanowski, Cornell, Greene, Hover, Lobo, Malisch, Maltits, McCall, Prenger, and Wilson. The negative by Chrzanowski was tabled. There was a motion made by Gajda and seconded by Greene to find the rest of the negative voters persuasive and to accept a substantive change to revert back to original wording. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-1. 8.1.1 Description—This section covers requirements for mass concrete as designated in Contract Documents.

MANDATORY

Designate portions of structure to be treated as mass concrete. Concrete placements where maximum temperatures and temperature differences must be controlled due to factors including the cementitious content, type of cementitious materials, environment surrounding placement, and minimum dimension of placement should be designated mass concrete.

Evaluate the requirements for each portion of project. In general, a placement of structural concrete with a minimum dimension equal to or greater than 4 ft should be considered mass concrete. Similar considerations should be given to other concrete placements that do not meet this minimum dimension but contain Type III cement, accelerating admixtures or cementitious materials in excess of 660 lb/yd3 of concrete. Consideration should also be given to placements that trap heat.

6



3.21 LB 11-02, Item 16, Ref 28. Negative by Lobo was withdrawn.


4. Meeting 1 was adjourned at 5:10 pm.

301 meeting, October 21, 2012 Meeting 2, Sunday

5. The second meeting of ACI 301 was called to order at 8:35 am EST on October 21, 2012. The meeting began with self introductions.

6. Approval of Meeting Minutes:

The minutes from the Dallas convention, March 18 and 19, 2012, were approved with corrections to the meeting dates, spelling of Gustafson, and inclusion of rationale for finding Ardahl non-persuasive on LB 11-02, Item 24, Ref 46 and Krauser non-persuasive on LB 11-02, Item 27, Ref 56 (provided by S. Tarr, chair of subcommittee G).

7. Announcements:

Chairman Cornell mentioned that Saturday meetings will continue in Minneapolis but move to 1pm-5pm. He also plans to begin virtual meetings, aiming for meetings starting in January and held every 2 weeks to meet balloting schedule. In the interest of time subcommittee chairs should try to handle negatives outside of main meetings and consider any negatives that should be editorial.

8. Membership:

Chairman Cornell discussed membership of 301. There have been no updates to membership since last convention. Chairman plans to add consulting members.

9. Balloting Procedures: Chairman Cornell and M. Wilson discussed balloting procedures. Due to the volume of items in each letter ballot, to aid in preparing the ballot reports and resolution summary tables, it is imperative that all voters use the letter ballot response template provided for each ballot to ensure that all their comments are properly captured.

10. ASR Discussion: H. Prenger presented on the state of the industry for testing and specifications on

alkali silica reactivity. The presentation handout is provided in the meeting minutes (Appendix 1).

11. Trigger Language: Chairman Cornell discussed removal of trigger language and guidelines set in new TSC manual. TSC manual does not include “unless otherwise specified”. Requested clarification from M. Senecal.

12. Subcommittee Reports:

Subcommittee A- General Requirements, Definitions, and Tolerances:

7


S. Jaycox- Subcommittee is currently identifying issues with specification submittal sections. Plan to ballot Section 1 by next convention.

Subcommittee B- Formwork and Reinforcement: D. Toon- Subcommittee worked on resolution of negatives from LB 12-01 and 12-05.

Subcommittee C- Concrete Mixtures, Handling, Placing, Consolidating, and Curing: H. Prenger- Subcommittee worked on resolution of negatives from LB 12-01. Plan to form task group to address language on LB12-03. Subcommittee D- Lightweight and Massive Concrete: J. Gajda- Subcommittee worked on resolution of negatives from LB 11-02.

Subcommittee E- Post-Tensioned Concrete: L. Krauser- Has finalized subcommittee ballot. Plans to ballot Section 9 to main committee prior to year end.

Subcommittee F- Precast Concrete Panels: D. Wittry- Was not available to make report. Subcommittee G- Shrinkage Compensating Concrete and Industrial Floor Slabs: S. Tarr- Subcommittee is working on resolving negative items remaining on LB11-02, and then will work on resolving negatives on LB 12-01. Subcommittee H- Tilt-Up Construction and Architectural Concrete: A. DeCarlo- Subcommittee is working on resolution of negatives from LB 11-02 and LB12-06.

13. New Business: No new business was addressed. 14. Resolution of LB 11-02:


14.1 LB 11-02, Item 35, Ref 81, negatives by Hanskat. There was a motion made by DeCarlo to find Hanskat persuasive and seconded by Hanskat. A motion was made by DeCarlo and seconded by Hanskat to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-0.

12.1.2 Coordination—Coordinate Work specified in this section with work of other trades, and other concrete work on the Project.

14.2 LB 11-02, Item 36, Ref 84, negatives by Carino. There was a motion made by DeCarlo and seconded by McCall to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 21-0-0.

12.1.4.1 Bearing shims—Submit manufacturer’s product data sheet on type of bearing shims.

8


14.3 LB 11-02, Item 37, Ref 87, negatives by Carino. There was a motion made by DeCarlo and seconded by Hanskat to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-2.

12.1.4.4 Drawings—Tilt-up panel shop drawings, including panel locations, erection, bracing and lifting details. Tilt-up panel shop drawings shall be signed and sealed by a licensed design engineer.

S. Tilt-up panel shop drawings

14.4 LB 11-02, Item 37, Ref 89, negatives by Carino and Hanskat. Hanskat withdrew his negative. There was a motion made by DeCarlo and seconded by Hanskat to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-1-1. A motion was made by Lobo and seconded by Hanskat to find McCall non-persuasive on his negative from the previous motion because it is the feeling of the committee that the optional requirement is useful. The motion passed by a vote of 19-2-1.

12.1.4.4.2 Lifting and Bracing Design Drawings— These panel drawings, include locations for lift inserts, brace inserts, concrete strength for lifting, added reinforcement for lifting and bracing design. Lifting and bracing design drawings shall be signed and sealed by a licensed design engineer. If required, submit design calculations signed and sealed by licensed design engineer.

OPTIONAL Request design calculations

14.5 LB 11-02, Item 37, Ref 90, negatives by Ardahl and Malits. There was a motion made by DeCarlo and seconded by Carino to find Ardahl non- persuasive because rebar shop drawings are typically not signed and sealed. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0. There was a motion made by DeCarlo and seconded by Gajda to find Malits persuasive and accept a substantial change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-1.

12.1.4.4.3 Reinforcement Placing Drawings—These drawings shall include reinforcing bar sizes, locations, lengths, splices, and quantities.

14.6 LB 11-02, Item 17, Ref 32, negatives by Carreira, Lobo, Prenger, and Wilson. There was a motion by Gajda and seconded by Chrzanowski to find Carreira non-persuasive because the proportions of the concrete mix design governs over the cement type. The motion passed by a vote of 22-1-0. There was a motion made by Gajda and seconded by McCall to find Lobo, Prenger and Wilson persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

9


8.2.1.1.a Unless otherwise specified or permitted, use hydraulic cement with moderate to low heat of hydration properties or use a portland cement with Class F fly ash or slag cement, or both.

OPTIONAL

Specify if other types of cementitious materials are allowed. Specify maximum allowable quantities of supplementary cementitious materials. In many mass concrete placements, Class F fly ash often makes up 40 to 50% of cementitious materials, or slag cement makes up 50 65 to 75% of cementitious materials. Ternary mixtures are also sometimes used. Reduced replacement levels are sometimes required due to durability concerns related to exposure, as addressed in Section 4. Because concretes with low heat-of-hydration cements, high replacement levels of slag cement, or Class F fly ash generally have delayed set times and lower early strengths, consider early age implications on setting times, form pressures, formwork removal, cylinder handling, curing duration, and post- tensioning. When slag cement is less than 50 65% of cementitious materials, adiabatic temperature rise may be higher than if slag cement is not included in cementitious materials. SUBMITTALS Request to use alternative materials.

14.7 LB 11-02, Item 17, Ref 33, negatives by Krauser and McCall. There was a motion made by Gajda and seconded by McCall to find these voters persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

8.2.1.1.b Unless otherwise specified, do not use ASTM C150 Type III cement or ASTM C1157 HE cement.

OPTIONAL

Specify if ASTM C150 Type III cement or ASTM C1157 HE cement is allowed is permitted, It is acceptable to use these high early strength cements when thermal control plan demonstrates that specified maximum temperature and temperature difference limits will not be exceeded.

10


14.8 LB 11-02, Item 18, Ref 34 and Ref 35, negatives by Carino, Krauser, and Lobo. Carino and Krauser withdraw their negatives. There was a motion by Gajda and seconded by McCall to find Lobo persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 21-0-1.

8.2.1.2 Admixtures—Comply with 4.2.1.4 and following requirement.

8.2.1.2.a Unless otherwise permitted, do not use accelerating admixtures.

SUBMITTALS

Request to use an accelerating admixture.


14.10 LB 11-02, Item 20, Ref 40, Negatives by Chrzanowski and McCall were withdrawn.

14.11 LB 11-02, Item 21, Ref 41, negatives by Lobo and McCall. There was a motion made by Gajda and seconded by McCall to find Lobo non-persuasive because thermal control is common in many DOT specifications and can extend the project, however, proper planning can shorten this time. The motion passed by a vote of 18-1-0. A motion was made by Gajda and seconded by McCall to find McCall persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 20-0-0.

8.3.1.2 Control of concrete temperature—Unless otherwise specified, c Control concrete temperature and temperature difference within concrete from time the concrete is placed until time internal temperature has cooled from its maximum so the difference between average daily ambient and internal temperatures at time of protection removal is less than specified temperature difference limit.

OPTIONAL

Specify if a specific duration of thermal control is required. At least 7 days of thermal control is typically required to avoid exceeding temperature difference limits. A longer period may be required for certain placements.

15. Meeting 2 was adjourned at 12:00 pm. 301 meeting, October 22, 2012 Meeting 3, Monday

16. The third meeting of ACI 301 was called to order at 1:10 pm EST on October 22, 2012. The meeting began with self introductions.

17. Announcements:

Chairman Cornell discussed ballot schedule. Plan to ballot Section 9 next and Section 1 last. M. Wilson will follow up with those individuals who had voting errors on LB 11-02 and LB12-01. 18. Resolution of LB 12-01:


11


18.1 LB 12-01, Item 29, Ref 87, negative by Jaycox. There was a motion made by Prenger and

seconded by Carino to find Jaycox persuasive to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

4.1.2.2 Mixture proportion strength data—Submit field test records used to establish the required average strength in accordance with 4.2.3.3. Submit test data used to establish the average compressive strength of the mixture in accordance with 4.2.3.4.

SUBMITTALS

Method and test data used to establish mixture proportions.

Several different methods can be used to select mixture proportions that will produce the necessary placeability, density, strength, and durability of the concrete.

Field experience of concrete mixtures previously used under similar conditions provides the best assurance that the proposed concrete mixture can be used satisfactorily and will have the specified properties.

If no field test records are available, refer to ACI

211.1 for selecting the initial quantities of materials based on material properties and specified concrete properties. ACI 211.1 recommends mixture characteristics be checked by trial batches in the laboratory or in the field.

Blending aggregates to meet criteria for a combined grading is another proportioning method that can be used. Listed below are some of the different procedures that have been used to determine proportions of blended aggregates:

• Combined fineness modulus; • 8 to 18% retained on each of the standard sieves; • Coarseness factor chart; and • 0.45 power chart.

When one of the above or similar proportioning methods is used, the specific combined grading to which aggregate is to be blended, along with the tolerances for control, should be submitted. This proportioning method also requires concrete characteristics to be checked by trial batches.

12


18.2 LB 12-01, Item 30, Ref 88, negatives by Ardahl, Gajda, Hover, McCall, and Wittry. Hover withdrew his negative. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Gajda to find Gajda and Wittry persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Greene to find part one of Ardhal’s vote non-persuasive because the information is relevant to mixture proportioning and not necessary to require in a submittal to the A/E. The motion passed by 22-0-1. Ardahl withdrew the second part of his negative. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Carino to find the McCall non-persuasive because the committee feels the optional requirements should not be mandatory for all concrete. Chloride limits for concrete are stated in the codes. The motion passed by 19-2-3.

4.1.2.3 Concrete materials—Submit the following information for concrete materials, along with evidence demonstrating compliance with 4.2.1:

For cementitious materials: types, manufacturing locations, shipping locations, and certificates showing compliance with ASTM C150, ASTM C595, ASTM C618, ASTM C845, ASTM C989, ASTM C1157, or ASTM C1240;

For aggregates: types, pit or quarry locations, producers’ names, and aggregate supplier statement of compliance with ASTM C33 gradings, specific gravities, and evidence not more than 90 days old demonstrating compliance with 4.2.1;

For admixtures: types, brand names, producers’ names, manufacturer’s technical data sheets, and certificates showing compliance with ASTM C260, ASTM C494/C494M, ASTM C1017/C1017M, or ASTM D98; and

For water and ice: source of supply. When non-potable source is proposed for use, documentation on effects of water on strength and setting time in compliance with ASTMC1602/C1602M. When specified, documentation on optional requirements of ASTM C1602/1602M.

SUBMITTALS

Information on types, classes, producers’ names, and plant locations for cementitious materials; types, pit or quarry locations, producers’ names, gradings, and properties required by ASTM C33 for aggregates; types, brand names, and producers’ names for admixtures; and source of supply for water and ice. Except for admixtures and water, test results confirming conformance to applicable specifications shall not be older than 90 days. Test results for aggregate soundness, abrasion, and reactivity may be older than 90 days, but not older than 1 year, provided test results for the other properties specified in ASTM C33 indicate that aggregate quality has not changed.

OPTIONAL

Specify if documentation on compliance with the optional requirements of ASTM C1602/C1602M is required when non- potable water is proposed for use. Optional requirements in ASTM C1602/C1602M establish limits on soluble chlorides, sulfates and alkalis, and total solids in mixing water. These limits may be individually specified when applicable to the Work.

18.3 LB 12-01, Item 31, Ref 91, negatives by Becker, Carreira, Gajda, Jaycox, McCall, Pergalsky, Wilson, and Wittry. The Item was withdrawn.

18.4 LB 12-01, Item 32, Ref 92 was withdrawn.


13


18.6 LB 12-01, Item 32, Ref 94, negatives by Becker. There was a motion made by Prenger and

seconded by Carino to find Becker persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 25-0-0.

4.1.2.9 Volumetric batching—When Contractor wants to produce concrete by the volumetric batching method, submit request along with description of proposed method. Submit request and description of method if concrete production by the volumetric batching method is proposed.

SUBMITTALS

Request to use the volumetric batching and proposed method.

18.7 LB 12-01, Item 32, Ref 95, negatives by Becker and Carino. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Jaycox to find Becker and Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 25-0-0.

4.1.2.10 Time of Limits on discharge—When Contractor wants to exceed the maximum time for discharge of concrete permitted by ASTM C94/C94M, submit a request along with a description of the precautions to be taken. Submit request if maximum time or limits on mixer revolutions for discharge of concrete permitted by ASTM C94/C94M are proposed to be exceeded.

SUBMITTALS

Requests to exceed the ASTM C94/C94M required time of discharge.

18.8 LB 12-01, Item 35, Ref 107, negatives by Ardahl, Carino, Greene, Pergalsky, and Wittry.

Pergalsky withdrew her negative. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Jaycox to find Ardahl non-persuasive because regional durability requirements may dictate cements and blended cements other than Type I/ II. The motion passed by a vote of 21-1-3. There was a motion made Prenger and seconded by Lobo to find Carino, Wittry, and Greene persuasive and to accept a substantial change. The motion passed by a vote of 24-1-0.

14


4.2.1.1 Cementitious materials—Unless otherwise specified, use ASTM C150 Type I or Type II cement. Alternatively, use one or a combination of the cementitious materials given in 4.2.1.1.a through 4.2.1.1.f. when specified or permitted or Use cementitious materials that are applicable when required to meet the durability criteria of 4.2.2.7.

OPTIONAL

Specify when cementitious material other than ASTM C150 Type I or Type II is required or permitted. Specify when specific the cementitious materials are required or prohibited that may be used. When one or combinations of cementitious materials given in 4.2.1.1.a through 4.2.1.1.f are used in structures that will be subjected to deicing chemicals, designated to exposure class F3, verify compliance of the concrete with 4.2.2.7.d. Use ACI 318-0811 and ACI 225R to determine what will be acceptable for the project conditions. Refer to PCA Publication EB001 for additional guidance. If it is anticipated that concrete will be exposed to sulfates in service, evaluate the water-soluble sulfates in the soil and groundwater. Use the criteria in 4.2.2.7.a and Table 4.2.2.7.a.1 to determine the cement type Verify the availability of the cement specified.

Specify if less than 15% fly ash is permitted. In some instances, using less than 15% fly ash can increase the concrete’s susceptibility to excessive expansions caused by alkali-silica reactivity (ASR). If a smaller percentage of fly ash is proposed, the proposed project mixture of fly ash and portland cement from the same source should be tested and compared with a control mixture using only the portland cement in accordance with ASTM C441. The project mixture should be considered acceptable, provided the average length increase of the project mixture does not exceed that of the control mixture. For projects where expansions due to ASR can be critical, consider requiring the test comparison at a frequency such as every 3 months during the Work. If reactive aggregates are available and may be used, specify the use of natural pozzolan, fly ash, slag, or silica fume in an amount shown effective in mitigating harmful expansions due to alkali- silica reactivity. Alternatively, specify low- alkali cement be used as described in the Optional Requirements Checklist for 4.2.1.2.

SUBMITTALS

Requests to use cementitious materials other than ASTM C150 Type I or Type II. When ASTM C595 or C1157 cements are used in structures that will be subjected to deicing chemicals, verify compliance of the concrete with Table 4.2.2.7.b.2.

18.9 LB 12-01, Item 60, Ref 163, negatives by Ardahl, Becker, Carreira, and McCall. Carreira and McCall withdrew their negatives. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Greene to find Ardahl non-persuasive because this provision sets a minimum standard

15


documenting conformance to C94 and the producer can request an alternate. The motion passed by a vote of 19-2-4. There was a motion made Prenger and seconded by Carino to find Becker persuasive and to accept a substantial change. The motion passed by a vote of 25-0-0.

4.1.3.24.3.1.1 Ready mixed and site-produced concrete—Unless otherwise specified, measure, batch, and mix concrete materials and concrete in conformance to ASTM C94/C94M. Unless otherwise specified, concrete production facilities and delivery vehicles shall be certified by the NRMCA Program for Certification of Ready-Mixed Concrete Facilities, approval by a state highway agency, or an equivalent program that audits for conformance to the requirements of ASTM C94/C94M for production and delivery. Submit documentation of certification or approval.

OPTIONAL

If concrete materials are to be measured, batched, or mixed other than in conformance to ASTM C94/C94M, specify how these procedures are to be accomplished. Specify if the ready mixed concrete production facility does not need to should be certified by the NRMCA Program for Certification of Ready-Mixed Concrete Production Facilities, approved by state highway agency, or an equivalent program. NRMCA’s Certification Program is in accordance with NRMCA Quality Control Manual — Section 3. Equivalent approval or audit should include documentation that storage of concrete ingredient materials are such as to minimize segregation, breakage and contamination, verification of the accuracy of measuring devices, verification that batching meets accuracy requirements of ASTM C94/C94M, delivery ticket that includes mandatory reporting fields of ASTM C94/C94M, verification of central mixer ability to mix concrete, if used, delivery vehicles are of such condition, verified visually, to ensure ability to mix concrete, availability of functioning revolution counters, defined rated capacity of mixers and verification of accuracy of measuring devices of truck mounted water tanks. The audit should be performed by a licensed engineer or third party.

18.10 LB 12-01, Item 40, Ref 119. Greene withdrew his negative.




18.14 LB 12-01, Item 36, Ref 109 and Ref 111, negative by Hanskat. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by McCall to find Hanskat non-persuasive because the LDP should know the exposure class. Specification is written to the Contractor who only needs to know requirements for concrete for the assigned exposure class as defined in 301. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

16


18.15 LB 12-01, Item 36 Ref 110, Gajda withdrew his negative.

18.16 LB 12-01, Item 39, Ref 117, McCall withdrew his negative.

18.17 LB 12-01, Item 43, Ref 124, negative by Gustafson. There was a motion made by Prenger and

seconded by Carino to find Gustafson persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-1.

4.2.2.3 Size of coarse aggregate—Unless otherwise specified or permitted, nominal maximum size of coarse aggregate shall not exceed three-fourths of the minimum clear spacing between reinforcement reinforcing bars, one-fifth of the narrowest dimension between sides of forms, or one-third of the thickness of slabs or toppings.

OPTIONAL

If an aggregate size requirement differs from that specified by 4.2.2.3 (for example, smaller size in floor toppings), specify nominal maximum size of aggregate.

18.18 LB 12-01, Item 3, Ref 9, negatives by Carino. There was a motion made by Toon and seconded by Carreira to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-1.

2.1.2.1.e Submit data manufacturers product data on formwork release agent or form liner proposed for use with each formed surface. 2.1.2.1.f Submit manufacturers product data on form liner proposed for use with each formed surface.

SUBMITTALS

Data on formwork release agent or formwork liners.

18.19 LB 12-01, Item 6, Ref 18, Carino withdrew his negative.

18.20 LB 12-01, Item 10, Ref 27, Negative by Carino. There was a motion made by Toon and seconded by Pergalsky to find Carino persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

2.2.2.3 Unless otherwise specified required or permitted, do not use earth cuts as forms for vertical or sloping surfaces.

OPTIONAL

Specify if earth cuts are will be permitted as formsor required.

SUBMITTALS

Request to use earth cuts as form surfaces.

18.21 LB 12-01, Item 13, Ref 34, Negative by Becker. There was a motion made by Toon and

seconded by Turner to find Becker persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

2.2.2.6 Provide form-facing materials to produce specified appearance and texture.

17


18.22 LB 12-01, Item 13, Ref 35, negatives by McCall. There was a motion made by Toon and seconded by Carreira to find McCall persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0.

2.2.2.67 Design Provide temporary openings where if needed in at base of vertical formwork to facilitate cleaning and inspection. at construction joint and along form.

18.23 LB 12-01, Item 27, Ref 81, negative by Cornell. There was a motion made by Toon and seconded by Turner to find Cornell persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-1.

2.3.5.1 Establish and maintain survey controls and benchmarks in an undisturbed condition until completion of the concrete structure and its building envelope.final completion and acceptance of project.

18.24 LB 12-01, Item 27, Ref 82, negative by Jaycox. There was a motion made by Toon and seconded by Carreira to find Jaycox persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 23-0-0.

2.3.5.2 Before concrete is placed, inspect formwork for conformance to Contract Documents. and then schedule Notify representative for Special Inspection or Owner’s quality assurance inspection, if specified.

OPTIONAL

Specify if Owner’s quality assurance inspection is to be coordinated by Contractor.

18.25 LB 12-01, Item 15, Ref 43, negatives by Becker and McCall. There was a motion made by Toon and seconded by McCall to find Becker non-persuasive because for formwork, the Manufacture and Execution intentionally have duplication due to means for production of formwork. Formwork with integral chamfer occurs in manufacture. Formwork with chamfer installed during installation of formwork occurs in Execution. The motion passed by a vote of 22-0-0. The McCall negative was tabled.

18.26 LB 12-01, Item 43, Ref 125, negatives by Becker, Carreira, McCall, Wilson, and Wittry. McCall and Wittry withdrew their negatives. Carreira withdrew his negative based on subcommittee taking negative as new business. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Carino to find Becker and Wilson persuasive and to accept a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 21-0-0.

18


4.2.2.4 Air content—

4.2.2.4.a Unless otherwise specified, cConcrete shall be air entrained for members assigned an exposure class F1, F2 or F3. The total air content shall be in accordance with 4.2.2.7.b, unless otherwise specified.

4.2.2.4.b Unless otherwise specified, measure air content at point of delivery in accordance with ASTM C173/C173M or ASTM C231.

4.2.2.4.c Unless otherwise specified, measure air content at the point of delivery.

OPTIONAL

Specify if concrete should be non-air-entrained or an alternative air content is required. Air entrainment should not be used in flatwork to receive a hard steel-troweled finish.

Specify if the air content should be different from 4.2.2.7.b.

Specify if a particular ASTM test method(ASTM C231 or C173/C173M) is required for measuring air content or if an alternative method is required. If concrete is sampled other than at the point of delivery, specify where the concrete is to be sampled and describe the method to obtain samples. It may be necessary to specify that air content be measured at the point of placement to account for loss of air content during pumping. Once the loss of air content during pumping is established, acceptance limits at the point of discharge can be determined.

18.27 LB 12-01, Item 44, Ref 126, negatives by Ardahl and McCall were withdrawn.

18.28 LB 12-01, Item 46, Ref 128, Gajda withdrew his negative.

18.29 LB 12-01, Item 46, Ref 130, was tabled.

18.30 LB 12-01, Item 47, Ref 134, negatives by Carino and Gajda. Gajda withdrew his negative. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Toon to find Carino persuasive on deleting the third footnote and to make a substantive change. The motion failed by a vote of 11-8-1. There was a motion made by Prenger and seconded by Lobo to find Carino persuasive on deleting the fourth footnote and to make a substantive change. The motion passed by a vote of 19-1-0.

19


19. Meeting was adjourned at 5:11 pm. Respectfully Submitted,

Michelle L. Wilson Secretary, ACI 301

*Tolerance on air content as delivered shall be ± 1.5%. †For f’c > 5000 psi reducing air content by 1.0% is permitted. ‡Refer to ASTM C33 for tolerance on oversize for various nominal maximum size designations. §These air contents apply to total mixture. When testing these concretes, however, aggregate particles larger than 1-1/2 in. are removed by sieving, and air content is measured on the sieved fraction (tolerance on air content as delivered applies to this value). Air content of total mixture is calculated from value measured on the sieved fraction passing the 1-1/2 in. sieve in accordance with ASTM C231.

APPENDIX 1 Minutes of the Toronto Convention, 2012

1

ASR

History

Thomas Stanton, California Department of Highways

Bridge DeckU.S. Rt. 68 and MD Rt. 55

Courtesy of Maryland State Highway Administration

Test Methods

1. Manufacturing mortar bars or concrete

Most test methods involve:

prisms2. Storing either in a

moist room or in high alkali solutions

3. Storing at standard or high temperatures

4. Measuring expansion

ASTM C 227 Potential Reactivity of Cement Aggregate

Combinations

• High alkali cement used to make mortar bars

• Length change tested at 3 and 6• Length change tested at 3 and 6 months (expansions of .05% and 0.10%, respectively)

• Not good for slowly reacting aggregates


2

ASTM C 441Effectiveness of Mineral Admixtures or GBFS

in Preventing Excessive Expansion in

Concrete Due to Alkali Silica Reaction

• Pyrex glass

• Length change measured at 14 days

• For fly ash, you can have the same expansion as the low alkali straight portland cement mortar bar

• For slag, you can have up to 0.020% expansion compared to the straight portland cement mortar bar

• There are questions about whether the limits in this test method are conservative enough

ASTM C 1260 - Potential Alkali Reactivity of Aggregates (Mortar Bar Method)

• Mortar bars stored in high alkali solution at high temperatures

• Length measurements taken over a period of 14 days

• Expansion less than 0.10% - Innocuous?p

• Expansion between 0.10 and 0.20% - May or may not be a problem

• Expansion greater than 0.20% - Deleteriously reactive

• May give false positives and false negatives

• Some researchers feel that 0.08% is a better limit

• Does not take into account the alkalis of the cementitious materials

ASTM C 1567 - Test Method for Determining the Potential Alkali Silica

Reactivity of Combinations of Cementitious Materials and Aggregate (Accelerated

mortar Bar Method)• Mortar bars stored in high alkali solution at high

temperatures• Length measurements taken over a period of 14 days• Expansion less than 0.10% - Innocuous?• Expansion between 0.10 and 0.20% - May or may not be

a problem• Expansion greater than 0.20% - Deleteriously reactive• May give false positives and false negatives• Some researchers feel that 0.08% is a better limit• Does not take into account the alkalis of the cementitious

materials

ASTM C 1293 - Test Method for Determination of Length Change of

Concrete Due to Alkali Silica Reaction

• Concrete prisms cast and placed in high alkali solution

• Measurements made out to 1 year (2 years whenMeasurements made out to 1 year (2 years when looking at mitigation with scm’s)

• Expansion must be less than 0.04%• Does not take into account alkalis of cementitious

materials• Generally considered the most accurate of the test

methods

Other methods

• ASTM C 295 - Petrographic Examination of Aggregate for Concrete

• Field Performance


3

New Specifications and Standards

• CSA• FHWA• AASHTO

ASTM• ASTM• DOT’s• Etc.

Current Language in 301

4.2.1.2 Aggregates—Unless otherwise specified, aggregates shall conform to ASTM C33. When a single size or combinations of two or more sizes of coarse aggregates are used, the final grading shall conform to the grading requirements ofshall conform to the grading requirements of ASTM C33, unless otherwise specified or permitted. Aggregates used in concrete shall be obtained from the same sources and have the same size range as aggregates used in the concrete represented by submitted historical data or used in trial mixtures.

Optional

If concrete will be exposed to wetting, extended humidity, or in contact with moist ground, specify aggregates that do not contain materials deleteriously reactive with alkalies in the cement; however such aggregates may be used withhowever, such aggregates may be used with cement containing less than 0.60% alkalies such as (Na2O + 0.658K2O) or with a material such as natural pozzolan, fly ash, slag, or silica fume in an amount shown to be effective in preventing harmful expansion due to alkali-aggregate reaction in accordance with ASTM C441.

Sub C Task

Follow as closely as possible language in new (and yet to be developed) ASTM Standard Practice for Determining the Reactivity of Concrete Aggregates and theReactivity of Concrete Aggregates and the Selection of Appropriate Measures for Minimizing the Risk of Deleterious Expansion in Concrete Construction

Aggregate Reactivity Class

Description of Aggregate Reactivity

14 Day Expansion in C1260

1 Year Expansion in C1293

ASTM Proposed Language

Determine Aggregate Reactivity

R0 Non Reactive ≤0.10 ≤0.04

R1 Moderately Reactive >0.10 ≤0.30 >0.04≤0.12

R2 Highly Reactive >0.30 ≤0.45 >0.12≤0.24

R3 Very Highly Reactive >0.45 >0.24

*For aggregates: types, pit or quarry locations, producers’ names, gradings, specific gravities, evidence not more than 90 days old demonstrating compliance with 4.2.1, and ASTM C1293 expansion data not more than 16 months old; or ASTM C1260 expansion data not more

4.1.2.3

not more than 16 months old; or ASTM C1260 expansion data not more than 6 months old


4

Size and Exposure Condition Aggregate – Reactivity Class

R0 R1 R2 R3

Non-massive concrete in a dry environment

Level 1 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3


Determine the risk level based on aggregate reactivity and size and exposure condition

Massive elements in a dry environment


All concrete exposed to humid air, buried or immersed


All concrete exposed to alkalis in service


Size and Exposure Condition Aggregate – Reactivity Class

R0 R1 R2 R3

Non-massive concrete in a dry environment


M i l t i d Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4

Sub C Proposal

Massive elements in a dry environment


All concrete exposed to humid air, buried or immersed


All concrete exposed to alkalis in service


Class Acceptability of ASR Examples

S3 Minor Risk of ASR Acceptable

Foundations ElementsRetaining WallsLarge numbers of precast elements where economic costs

f l t


Determine the class

of replacement are severeService life normally40-75 years

S4 ASR Cannot be Tolerated

Power PlantsNuclear FacilitiesCritical Elements that are very difficult to inspect and repairService life normally > 75 years

Class Acceptability of ASR Examples

S3 Minor Risk of ASR Acceptable

Foundations ElementsRetaining WallsLarge numbers of precast elements where economic costs

f l t

Sub C Proposal

of replacement are severeService life normally40-75 years

S4 ASR Cannot be Tolerated

Power PlantsNuclear FacilitiesCritical Elements that are very difficult to inspect and repairService life normally > 75 years

Level of ASR Risk Classification of Structure

S3 S4

Level 1 V V

Level 2 W X


Determine the level of risk

Level 2 W X

Level 3 X Y

Level 4 Y Z

Level 5 Z ZZ

Level of ASR Risk Classification of Structure

S3 S4

Level 1 V V

Level 2 W X

Sub C Proposal

Level 2 W X

Level 3 X Y

Level 4 Y Z

Level 5 Z ZZ

Level 1,3,4,5 comes from size and exposure condition


5

Type of SCM Alkali Level of SCM (% Na2Oe)

Minimum Replacement Level

W X* Y* Z* ZZ*‡

Fly Ash(CaO≤18%)

<3.0 15 20 25 35 35

3.0-4.5 20 25 30 40 40


Slag Cement <1.0 25 35 50 65 65

Silica Fume <1.0 1.2xLBA† 1.5xLBA† 1.8xLBA† 2.4xLBA† 2.4xLBA†

Prevention Level Maximum alkali content of concrete (Na2O eq.) lb/yd3

V No limit

W 5.0

X 4 0


Limit alkalis in concrete

X 4.0

Y 3.0

Z Use Option 1

ZZ

The alkali content of concrete is calculated on the basis of the alkali contributed by the portland cement alone.

Sub C Proposal

Mitigation Options Alkali Level of SCM (% Na2Oe)

R0ά R1ά R2ά R3ά

% Fly Ash ‡(CaO≤18%)

<3.0 0 20* 25* 35**

% Slag Cement ‡ <1.0 0 35* 50* 65**

% Silica Fume ‡ <1.0 0 1.2 x LBA* 1.8 x LBA* 2.4 x LBA**

Ternary Blends ‡ N.A. 0 ε ε ε

Lithium Nitrate Admixture N.A. 0 γ γ γ

Alkali Content of Concrete N.A. No limit LBA ≤ 5.0 † LBA ≤ 4.0 † LBA ≤ 3.0 †δ

16 Day ASTM C1567 Results N.A. No Limit 0.10 0.10 0.10

4.2.2.7.e Resistance to Alkali Silica Reaction —Unless concrete will be dry in service and not in contact with the ground; or there is proven history showing satisfactory field performance with the same source aggregate, cement alkalis equal to or less than that proposed for use, SCM quantity equal to or greater than that proposed for use, and field service at least 8 years old; or unless otherwise specified, provide concrete meeting the requirements of Table 4.2.2.7.e based on the aggregate reactivity class defined in Table 4.2.2.7.e. Submit documentation verifying compliance with specified requirements.

What are the issues with the current spec?

Material ASTM C 1260

% Length Change% Length Change

Aggregate 1 (Virginia) 0.062

Aggregate 2 (NY) 0.331

Options

• Keep 301 language as is

• Make minor change

• Follow ASTM language


6

DEF

Why does ACI 301 only limit concrete temperature to 158 (or 150 or 160 or 70C) degrees in mass concrete? It would seems to me that this limit should apply to all concrete with an Exposure Category and Class of C1 or higher condition. Example … concrete in a water treatment plant in Las Vegas or South Florida where by ACI Standards the concrete can be placed at 95 degrees and the ambient can be pushing 100 to 115 degrees Conceivably if the concrete is mainlyambient can be pushing 100 to 115 degrees. Conceivably if the concrete is mainly a rich portland mix, the internal temperature of a thin mixture can head to 150 degrees quickly.

Am I missing something or should I consider moving the temperature limit into the main body of my specification?

Chapter 8

8.1.2Unless otherwise specified, the following criteria shall apply for mass concrete placements:•The maximum temperature in concrete after placement shall not exceed 158°F; and•The maximum temperature difference between center and surface of placement•The maximum temperature difference between center and surface of placement shall not exceed 35°F.

Specify if maximum temperature limit in concrete after placement can be other than 158°F. Maximum temperature is limited to minimize future durability concerns due to delayed ettringite formation [DEF] and potential reductions in ultimate strength. Concrete that contains supplementary cementitious materials may have a reduced risk of DEF and may justify internal temperatures above 158°F (Gajda 2007).

Chapter 13

13.2.12.9 Maximum initial curing temperature—Unless otherwise specified or permitted maximum concrete temperature during initial curing shall not exceedpermitted, maximum concrete temperature during initial curing shall not exceed 153°F. Measure the temperature inside the portion of the member that is likely to experience the highest concrete temperature during curing. A temporary rise in maximum initial curing concrete temperature is permitted for a period less than 2 hours provided it does not exceed the maximum allowable temperature by more than 5°F.

Indicate if a temperature higher than 153°F is acceptable. A maximum concrete temperature of 170°F is acceptable if one of the following measures is used:•ASTM C150 Type V portland cement with Blaine fineness less than 400 m2/kg, or ASTM C595 Type IP blended cement with at least 20% Class F fly ash, or ASTM C595, Type IS blended cement with at least 35% slag cement;•Cement with 1-day mortar strength (ASTM C109/C109M) less than 2900 psi;•Replace portland cement with 20 to 35% (by mass) of fly ash meeting ASTM C618, Class F;•Replace portland cement with 35 to 50% (by mass) of slag cement meeting ASTM C989;•Replace 35 to 50% (by mass) of portland cement with a combination of ASTM ( y )C618, Class F fly ash (maximum 35%), ASTM C989 slag cement, and ASTM C1240 silica fume (maximum 10%);•Replace 35 to 50% (by mass) of portland cement with a combination of ASTM C618, Class C fly ash (maximum 35%) and at least 6% ASTM C1240 silica fume (maximum 10%), ultra-fine fly ash, or ASTM C618 Class N metakaolin; and•Replace 10% (by mass) of portland cement with a metakaolin meeting ASTM C618 Class N.•Indicate which combination of cementitious materials will be acceptable. Select the combinations that will be suitable for the expected service conditions.•For concrete dry or protected from moisture, specify if maximum concrete temperature of 180°F is acceptable.

Condition Maximum temperature after placement, °F

Concrete dry or protected from moisture in service

180

Concrete containing any of the following either as a separately added SCM or in a blended

170as a separately added SCM or in a blended cement:20% ASTM C618 Class F fly ash 35% ASTM C618 Class C fly ash35% ASTM C989 slag cement10% ASTM C1240 silica fume10% metakaolin conforming to ASTM C618 Class N

Other concrete mixtures 158