EFFECTS OF CURING AND DRYING ENVIRONMENTS ON SPLITTING TENSILE STRENGTH OF CONCRETE

By J. A. Hanson

Authorized Journal JUIY 1968,

Reprint

from

Copyrighted Concrete Vol. 65, pp. Institute 535-543.

of the

American

Proceedings

EFFECTS OF CURING ENVIRONMENTS TENSILE STRENGTH

AND

DRYING

ON SPLITTING OF CONCRETE

By

J.

A.

Hanson

PORTI.AiND RESEARCH AND

CEX4ENT

ASSOCIATION LABOK.+TOK1E3

lIEVEI.OPMENl

.5420 OId

Orchard Road Skokie.Illinois 60076

TITLE NO. 65-40

Effects of Curing and Drying Environments on Splitting Tensile Strength of Concrete

By J. A. HANSON

The splitting

tensile

strengths

of lightweight investigated the effects The initial first moist

and

normal weight concretes were test series which clea 1+ with curing showed ing humidity strength. strength and that had for drying the prior While the to duration drying effect of

in two of the series currelative tensile splitting in the

environments. the a+ 50 on the a

period

percent splitting loss of early

little

there

was

lightweight

concrete

drying periods, atmosphere led ting were levels ing from for strengths. subiected of relative 7 days.

continued storage in the drying +0 considerable gain in the split-

In

the

second
for after

series, initial

concretes
moist of cur-

to cirying humidity Only

2 I days changes

a+ different splitting varied

minor

strength

were found

as the relative

humidity

75 to

I O percent. age-strength curing; humidity: Monfore (material): shale relation; drying; fine compressive drying shrinkaggremoist curhumidity tensile aggregates;

Keywords: strength; age; gravel gate ing: probe: strength; expanded concretes; moisture

concretes; (material):

aggregates;

lightweight relative splitting

lightweight con}ent; sand

aggregates;

research: testing.

W THE SPLITTING TENSILE TEST (ASTM C496-66) has been adopted as a convenient and relative measure of the tensile strength of concrete. In the test, a concrete cylinder is placed on its side in the testing machine and subjected to diametral compression. Such compression induces uniform tensile stresses normal to the loaded diameter, causing the specimen to fail by splitting along the diameter. Reference 1 provides a discussion of

ACI JOURNAL/JULY 1968

early studies of this test and its concomitant advantages and disadvantages. Over the past few years, several investigational-~ have shown that some amount of drying of structural lightweight concrete may reduce the splitting tensile strength of concrete cylinders. Similar but more erratic results have been obtained from modulus of rupture tests of plain concrete beams. On the other hand, such drying of normal weight concrete appears to cause only a small reduction of the splitting strength, and some increase may even be evident. This same relative behavior has been found with concretes steam cured at atmospheric pressures and then allowed to cool and dry at room temperatures.~,~ The splitting strength of the steam-cured normal weight concrete at 28 days was about 98 percent of that of continuous moist-cured concrete, while the splitting strength of the steam-cured lightweight concrete dropped to about 75 percent. Close correlation Isg has been shown between the splitting tensile strength of lightweight concrete subjected tc~ a period of drying and the diagonal tension strength of reinforced beams and slabs containing the same concrete, though little or no correlation was found with concretes continuously moist cured. This relationship between splitting tensile strength and diagonal tension resistance was adopted by ACI 318-631) to compute the contribution of lightweight concrete to the shear resistance of reinforced beams and slabs. Section 505 of the Code provides that the splitting tensile strength of lightweight concrete be determined after 7 days moist curing followed by 21 days drying at 73 F (23 C) and 50 percent relative humidity. Since most research has been performed under these same curing and storage conditions, questions have arisen as to the minimum strength
ACI JOURNAL

may be encountered in practice with other curing periods, or with drying at other ambient relative humidities. A further question has been raised regarding the amount of tensile strength which may be recovered with additional age of drying concrete. The two somewhat limited test series reported herein provide some insight into these questions. Series I was planned to study the effects of various durations of initial moist curing on the splitting tensile strength of drying concretes at intervals of time up to 2 years. Series II concerned the effect of drying at relative humidities other than the generally prescribed value of 50 percent. Such a study is of importance to the humidity control required in commercial testing laboratories.
that

TESTING Aggregates and concrete

PROCEDURE mixes

The concretes used in both test series utilized a single lightweight aggregate and a single normal weight aggregate, both in their commercial gradings. The gradings of the fines of both aggregates fell within the limits of ASTM C-330-64T and ASTM C-33-67, respectively. The lightweight aggregate (No. 14 in the PCA series) was a rotary -kihi expanded shale. The
Long-time Research ACI member .). A. Hanson Methods
is manager,

Laboratory Portland

Section,

Construction

Department,

Cement Association Research and Development Division, Skokie, Ill. At PCA Mr. Hanson has beet? concerned with all types of concrete products, Iightweight concrete, concrete masonry, architectural concrete; and is the author of numerous a member of the prefabricated building elements. He papers and reports. Currently, he is Technical Activities Committee, Architectural Concrete, and a Lightweight Aggregates and and Committee 533, Precast the Federation International on Prestressed Lightweight Building Research Institute.

Institutes

chairman of AC! Committee 303, member of AC I Committee 213, Lightweight Aggrqaie Concrete, PaceIs. tie is also a member of de la Precontrainte Commission Concrete, and a member of the

JULY 1968

particles of this aggregate are generally rounded and coated as a result of presizing prior to expansion. The normal weight aggregate was sand and gravel obtained from Elgin, Illinois. Concretes containing this sand and gravel have been used for comparison purposes in all previous PCA studies of structural lightweight concrete under aggregate code No. 8. The all-lightweight concrete and normal weight concrete of Series I were proportioned to obtain a nominal compressive strength of 4500 psi (316 kg/cm) at 28 days. In Series II, three types of concretes were employed: all-lightweight, lightweight coarse aggregate with normal weight sand fines, and all normal weight aggregate. These were each proportioned for two nominal strength levels: 3000 and 5000 psi (211 and 352 kg/cm~) at .28 days. AH test specimens were 6 x 12-in. (15 x 30-cm) cylinders consolidated by internal vibration. Concrete placing and proportioning procedures were in accordance wi.thlACI 613A-5911 as modified by the recomrnenda.tions of Reference 12. The mix proportions, plastic properties, and 28-day compressive strengths of concretes in both test series are provided in Table 1. The Type I portland cement was a blend of four commercial brands.
Curing Series and testing

IThe purpose of this series was to investigate the effect of the duration of the initial moist curing period on the splitting tensile strength. The four initial moist curing periods chosen were 3, 7, 14, and 28 days. After initial moist curing, all specimens were stored at 73 F (23 C) and 50 percent relative humidity. Consequently for each curing condition, sufficient alllightweight concrete specimens were produced to

ACI JOURNAL

TASLE I--MIX

PROPORTIONS OF CONCRETES*

All-lightweight 25 55 502 ) concrete ii376 E9F I Elan 454 Series II All-lightweight 10 Sand-lightweight 10 10 Elgin I 49 47 / I ( 290 274 10 10 351 457 sand and gravel / 1566 1 1480 ) concrete 1662 1679 (Aggregate 1 concrete 56 54 ;;; ( ( j 424 390 ~ ;;g concrete ;;; (Aggregate sand and- gravel I 1480 ; ; lC45 i 1 298 47 , 372 15 ~___. 64

concrete

(Aggregate

14) I 8) ~144.7 1 3 4636 96.7 1 112 1 4850

(Aggregate ( 5.8 I __-~

._~ ~~ (Aggregate j 14 with ;:; Elgin 14) ( sand fines) 100.1 97.7 ( ;3/4 ( ;;a;

8) 6.5 6.2 ( ( 143.3 144.0 I ( lb per 21/A z yd3 by I I 3310 4820 0.5933 to obtain

*Equivalent metric units may be obtained by using the following conversion factors: (a) multiply in. by 2.54 to obtain cm. kg/W, (b) multiply lb per ft3 by 16.0185 to obtain kg/r@, (c) multiply iGross water and floor-dry aggregate.

vl

obtain the compressive strength (two specimens per test) and the splitting tensile strength (four specimens per test) as a function of time to 2 years age of concrete. In addition, these properties were determined for continuously moist cured concretes. In the case of the Elgin normal weight concrete the same properties were determined only under continuous moist curing, and after 7 and 28 days of moist storage followed by drying. Four additional lightweight and two normal weight specimens, one from each of the initial moist storage conditions, were inst~umented to obtain relative humidity distribution, weight loss, and drying shrinkage. Brass tube wells, 5/32 in. (4 mm) inside diameter to receive the Monfore relative humidity probe,l:] were installed at distances of Y4, 3A, 13A, and 3 in. (6, 19, 44, and 75 mm) from the cylinder exterior surface. The wells allowed a gaging length of 1 in. which was centered at middepth of each 6 x 12-in. (15 x 30-cm) cylinder. The cylinder ends were sealed with an amide epoxy to force all drying of the concrete to occur in the lateral direction. Drying shrinkage was obtained witk a 10-in. (25-cm) Whittemore strain gage. Fig. 1 shows a typical installation of wells, gage points fo,r Whittemore gage, and direct reading relative humidity indicator. Series 11The purpose of this series was to study the effect of storage at various levels of relative humidity on the splitting tensile strength of concrete otherwise tested in strict accordance with Section 505 c)f ACI 318-63.1( Ten batches at each strength level of the three concretes provided four specimens for compressive strength and eight specimens for splitting tensile strength at the five levels of relative humidity storage of 100, 75, 50, 30, and 10 percent. The specimens were
ACI JOURNAL

placed in these atmospheres after 7 days of moist curing and were all tested at 28 days. The ambient temperatures accompanying each relative humidity level were controlled to 73 L 2 F (23 L- 1 C). Two control cylinders from each batch were tested for compressive strength after storage at the standard conditions (ASTM C330-64T) of 7 days moist curing followed by 21 days drying at 50 percent relative humidity. In both series of tests, with the exceptions noted above, compressive strength was determined according to the requirements of ASTM C39-66, and splitting tensile strength according to ASTM C496-66.

.4$-:

-L.

Fig.

iinstrumentation

for

relative

humidity cylinder.

measurements

in

6
J(JL <Y 1968

x 12-in. concrete

TEST Series I

RESULTS

AND

DISCUSSION

Relative humidity distributionTables 2a and 2b present results obtained on relative humidity distribution, drying shrinkage, and weight loss of the 6 x 12-in. (15 x 30 cm) cylinders over the 3 year storage period. Fig. 2 is a typical plot of these data for the particular condition of 7 days moist curing followed bydrying at 73 F and 50 percent relative humidity. Perhaps the most striking feature of the data is the long period of time indicated for 6 x 12-in. concrete cylinders to attain moisture equilibrium in the 50 percent relative humidity atmosphere. After 3 years of drying, the relative humidity at the center of the lightweight concrete cylinders varies from 57 to 64 percent, depending on the length of initial moist curing. The normal weight concretes dried somewhat faster than the lightweight but these too have not reached moisture equilibrium. It should be noted that, while considerable moisture gradients still exist in the concretes, after 1 year of drying the weight loss and drying shrinkage curves have nearly attained equilibrium. The low drying shrinkage indicated by this particular lightweight concrete, relative to that of the normal weight, has been found in other studies.~ Such indications with these relatively small concrete cylinders point toward the extreme slowness with which full-sized structural members lose moisture. The extremely slow rate of drying of large concrete sections leads to reduced creep and shrinkage relative to that found in usual laboratory sized specimens.5 Splitting tensile st~engthTable 3 presents the compressive and splitting tensile strengths of alllightweight and normal weight concretes after the various lengths of initial curing and during the

ACI JOURNAL

9 TABLE 2aRELATIVE (6X

Depth -+

HUMIDITY ( 15X 30

DISTRIBUTION CM) CYLINDERS)

IN

PERCENT

12-IN.

cove r,
in.

I
~ O I 3 days I 7 days I 14 days

Time I 28 days

of dryinz I 90 days concrete I 180 days I 1 year 12 years I 3 years

All-1 ightweight Moist cured, 3 days

% ( 6 lmm) ?~ (19 )~~) 1Y4 (44 mm) 3 (75 mm) cured,

100
100 100

94 100 100 100

88 97 100 100

80 94 99 100

70 88 95 97

60 70 84 86

58 63 74 79

56 61 69 72

52 58 62 64

50 53 55 57

100
7 days 100 100 100 100 14 days
100

Moist %

( 6 mm)

94 100 100 100

89 98 100 108

81 94 100 100

73 89 98 99

61 73 87 92

57 65 78 84

56 62 72 78

53 56 64 67

52 55 57 59

3A (19 mm) l% (44 mm) 3 (75 ]mm) cured, (3 m,~)

Moist

\~ (
l~g 3

?& (19 mm) (4kmm) (75

Iljo 100

95 100 100 100

91 188 100 100

84 98 99 100

76 92 97 99

63 76 88 93

59 68 80 87

58 64 74 81

55 59 65 70

53 55 57 61

mm) ~100
cured, 28 days 100 100 100 100

Moist

Y4 ( 6mm) ?~ (lg mm) 134 (44 mm) 3 (75 mm)

92 100 100 100

86 99 100 100

79 96 100 100 Norm

71 91 99 99 weight

60 77 92 95 concrete

58 70 84 91

57 66 78 84

55 60 69 73

54 56 61 64

Moist % % 3

cured, ( 6 mm) (19 mm) (75mm) cured

7 days 100 100 100 100 28 days 100 100 100 100 85 98 100 100 82 76 87 94 98 69 80 90 92 58 68 76 78 57 84 70 73 55 61 66 89 52 55 58 61 50 52 54 56 89 97 108 100 84 93 98 99 77 8a 94 96 68 81 89 92 59 67 76 78 57 61 69 72 56 59 63 65 52 55 57 59 50 52 53 55

1Y4 (44 mm)

Moist

( 6mm) $~ (Ig mm) 1?4 (44 mm) 3 (75mm)

94
97 99

JULY 1968

1}

TABLE

2bDRYiNG (6X 12-IN.

SHRINKAGE (15X30 CM) :=

I 28 days shrinkage, All-lightweight I 90 days millionths

AND

WEIGHT

LOSS

CYLINDERS) -
I 180 days in. per in. ]

%?: I ---= .=:===== cfays i o I 3 days I 7 daY~ I 14 days

. Drying

1 year

I 2 YearS ! 3 YearS

concrete 490 450 450 400 concrete 67o 550 lbconcrete 1 720 620 I 750 630 790 67o 810 690 i i 1 570 560 560 480 640 590 620 560 650 640 680 630 1 , 670 680 710 660

310 70 14 28 0 ,0

80 60 80 80 ,

130 Hlw 120

210

310 250 ,60

170

240 . Normal weight 460 380 Weight

70 28

160 150

260 220

1..1
370 290 0.74 0.58 0.48 0.46

1 loss,

1(

All-1 ightweight . 0.60 0.44 0.38 0.34 0.86 0.70 0.60 0.58

~;l:
28

lo

0.44 0.28 0.24 0 0.20

;:: 0.84 0.80

I M 1R
0.96 : 0.94 1.08 1.06 0.98 0.88 1 1.04 0.94

;$- ~ :,;;
1.24 1.18 ; 1.27 1.25

Normal weight concrete _. .

0

70 28

0.30 0.24 metric I

0.46 0.34 units: I

0.60 0.46

I :2 i :H /
l!b by 0.4536 to obtain kg.

1.08 ~
1.04

1.12 1.07

*Equivalent

multiply

TABLE

3COMPRESSIVE AFTER
3 days

ANID

SPLITTING

TENSILE OF MOIST

STRENGTHS

OF

CON1

CRETES
Moist cure, days

DIFFERENT

DURATIONS
Age

CURINGSERIES

of concrete I 90 days (Aggregate ~ 180 days 14) I

7 days AH

I 14 days light-weight

I 28 d~ys concrete

1 year

I 2 years

Compressive 3 7 14 $,8 Continued Splitting 3 7 14 28 Continued

strength,

+ psi 3500 4150 4130 4700 4850 4760 5120 5280 5320 5400 5970 5850 5480 5960 5720 6420 6620 5400 5800 5750 6530 6840 5500- 577C 5350 6460 6760 , 385 385 397 433 492

I tensiIe

2620

33OO PSI 310

4320

strength,l

1-

1+ psi

313 315 .

313 3C7 305 420 sravel ccmcrete

365 328 332 343 458 ( Agm-egate 8)

396 417 415 373 494

398 424 404 435 513

276

342 Elsin sand

407 and

Compressive 7 2!8 Continued Splitting 7 28 Continued

strength,

4.130 2!XC tensile I 3;0 ! psi 232 psi by :3330 strength, 1

4630 4560

3!310 5600 5240

4740 5940 5390 5300 5530

4860 5460 5570 --

I 19
;6. 0.0703

371

4!30 467

443 525 4:.. ?

505

506523

I 2_L:L %Equivalent metric units: multiply $Average of two .specime Rs. $Average of four specimens.

-448... to obtain kg/cm~.

506-

AU JOURNAL

11
100
90
80

=--7-7
.
I I

LIGHTWEIGHT

CONCRETE

70 g n 60

. ~%
I

Cover

i 1

60
50 c

E:
?K \ \>>_
J \ . . _-=-==.:__ ---- -
28 90D 180D 90D 180D

NORMAL WEIGHT

CONCRETE

-3 Cover I ~ Cover ~~ Cover )Cover L.!

_ ,
IYR

. _ .

2YR

iyiE:7!??E5?
028 I YR 2 YR

TIME

OF DRYING

Fig. 2TyPical weigh+ loss of

relative

humidity

distribution,

drying

shrinkage,

and

x [2-in.

cylinders

moist cured

7 days (Series I).

JULY 1968

12

following 50 percent relative humidity storage. Fig, 3 provides curves of the tabulated data which have been augmented by auxiliary tests performed during the first few days after start of drying. The solid curves of these two diagrams indicate the continuous increase of splitting strength achieved with continuous moist curing. Comparison of the two curves also indicates the approximately equal splitting strength of both types of concrete when moist curing prevails. PfeiferL found this in his study of concretes containing seven different lightweight aggregates and at two levels of compressive strength. As would be expected from the previous studies, Fi g. 3 indicates that drying of the lightweight concrete brings about an early loss of splitting strength. Considering only initial moist curing periods of 7 to 28 days, the early splitting strength of this drying concrete, containing this particular aggregate and no natural sand fines, is approximately 75 percent of the 28-day splitting strength of the continuous moist cured concrete. The duration of initial moist curing appears to have little effect on the magnitude of this tensile strength loss. It is of interest to note that this reduction of splitting strength occurs during the period of greatest moisture gradient in the cylinders, as indicated by Table 2 and Fig. 3. Due to the moisture gradient, drying shrinkage will not be uniform across the concrete cross section, and the potential shrinkage near the exterior surface will be reduced through the restraint of the interior material. Tensile stresses will then be self-induced near the exterior surface and balancing compressive stresses in the interior. The induced tensile stresses will reduce the resistance to externally caused tensile stresses.

ACI JOURNAL

13
600 -

Go

400.

/. 9/ d,L 44 . i L L 4: < 20; x AFTER -Y CURING v

200

DRYING I NITIAL

10

LI
3DA.

iDA

74DA

28DA

0
90DA I(30DAIYR 2YR

AGE

AFTER

CASTING CONCRETE

LIGHTWEIGHT

600

l-~ DRYING AFTER

400

E o x

200

- 10

3Dli

7DA

14DA

28DA

90DA

180DA

IYR

2~-

AGE

AFTER

CASTING CONCRETE

NORMALWEIGHT

Fig. 3-Effect

of moist curing sfrength

and

drying l).

time

on splitting

tensile

(Series

.JIJLY 1968

114

The Initial loss of splitting strength of the drying lightweight concrete is followed by a gain as the concrete ages (Fig. 3). After one year the splitting strength is about 30 percent greater than the minimum, or about 80 percent of the potential strength indicated by continuous moist curing. In tests involving a number of all-lightweight concretes, Grieb and Wernerz found the average dry splitting tensile strength of such concretes to be about 90 percent of the moist cu:red strength at I year. With lightweight concrete containing quartz sand fines, Lewis and Blakey:] found the l-year splitting strength to be equal for dry and moist concrete. the increased splitting It is gratifying to note strength since this is evidence that the diagonal tension resistance of structures also increases with age of concrete. If these results are considered typical of lightweight concretes in general, the ACI 318-631) curing requirement, 7 days moist curing followed by 21 days of drying prior to tests for splitting strength, appears to provide a conservative (mini.mum) value of this property. As has been consistently found with Elgin gravel concrete, drying for 21 days apparently increases the splitting strength at 28 days over that found with continuous moist curing. Grieb and Werner,z studying a crushed limestone concrete, found that drying reduced the splitting strength by 10 to 15 percent. AS indicated by the lower diagram of Fig. 3, the splitting strength of the dry Elgin concrete at 2 years is about equal to that of the con.tinuosuly moist cured Elgin concrete.
Series II

Compressive strengtk-Table 4 presents the 28-day compressive and splitting tensile strengths of the three types of concrete, each at two
ACl JOURNAL

F 4

TABLE AT
AII-lightweigh.t Lightweight
1.

+28-DAY DIFFERENT
concrete f I

COMPRESSIVE
AND RELATIVE SPLITTING TENSILE

STRENGTHS

OF

CONCRETES II*
with sand Control, + .Nonixil

STORED

IN

AIR

HUMIDITIESSERIES
concrete

weight

concrete Co;,trol,t I,,,

Relative humidity percent

f,>
f$r!
PSI F.,g psi

Control, f.> psl

f,>
psi

f.,
psi 357 509 372 417 360 431 361 439, 360 427

f ;;l 6.46 5.81 5.77 .5 x2

5.78

fw!>
psl F,P p .si

100 302 452 6.18 I 4.95 281 380 296 351 7.5 2650 5200 2790 5280 50

2380 5070

365 424

6,47

30

I
5,C9
5.2, 5.14 psi x 0.0703

2770 5360

:%
294 354 multiply

3020 4420 3160 4600 3360 5100 3320

mm . . ..

6,87 $,~~ 3230 4650 392 471 6.88

I
to

398 496 398 ~~?

10 2810 5150 metric strength of two accordance with units:

2470 5340 2650 5310 2630 5160 2880 5200 7780 5280
obtain

3360 h620 34s0 5720 3450 5940 3580 .5840 3340 5920
kg/cm~,

3580 5840 3630 5810 3440 5910 3520 sg~o 3480 6000

3400 48oO 3220 4820 3340 5160 3300 4818 3300 4500

* Equivalent t Aerage compressive data obtained in strict

c yli:ders Section

after 7 days moist curing and with exception 505, ACI 318-63,

21 days at 50 Percent relative humidity. 01 relative IIumldlty storage Condltlons,

All

other

16

strength levels, which were subj ected to various levels of relative humidity storage after 7 days of moist curing. The aggregates in these concretes were all-lightweight, lightweight coarse with sand fines, and Elgin sand and gravel. Examination of the data discloses little effect of the relative humidity storage level on compressive strength. With the possible exception of the results from 100 percent relative humidity storage (continuous moist curing) only random variations of compressive strength from that of the standard 50 percent storage are noted. Under continuous moist curing the lightweight and normal weight concretes averaged 5 and 10 percent lower, respectively, than the drying concretes. Splitting tensile stnengthThe splitting tensile strengths of each of the concretes are shown in Fig. 4 as a function of the storage relative humidity. Each of these curves for the lightweight concretes indicates a drop of the splitting strength when the concretes are allowed to dry after 7 days moist curing. This effect is more pronounced for the higher strength concrete than for the lower, and is also greater for the all-] ightwelght concrete than for the sand lightweight. These indications agree with Pf eif erb who reported as follows: for 3000 psi all-lightweight concretes, the splitting strengths varied from 80 to 95 percent of the moist cured strength, and for 5000 psi, these percentages varied from 65 to 85; similar results for sandlightweight concrete were 95 to 105 and 80 to 100 percent. A most important observation from Fig. 4 is the minor change of splitting tensile strength as the 21-day drying storage changes from 173 F (23 C), 75 percent relative humidity to 73 F, 10 percent relative humidity. Ivey and ButhA found similar indications with other lightweight concretes, except
AH JOURNAL

17

500

r
~~

ALL

LTWT.

CONC.

35

400

500

400

300

F:,~
LTWT. CONC./SAND psi FINES f~ =5800 30; o f:= 3400 psi 25> x 20 _J~ 7 : 100 80 60 40 20 0

35

0+ F

:~:yo:;w::N;~,

RELATIVE

HUMIDITy,O/o

Fig. 4-28-Day splitting tensile strengths of concretes dried at different relative humidifies for 2 I days, temperature 73*2 F [Series II).

JULY 1968

18

that splitting strengths of concretes stored at 80 percent relative humidity were about equal to those of continuously moist cured concretes. Similar to the previous discussion of Series I, the splitting strength of the Series II Elgin normal weight concrete increased as the concrete dried. ASTM C496-66, Splitting Tensile Strength of Concrete Cylinders, requires that lightweight concrete, tested in accordance with ACI 318-63() shall be stored at 73 & 3 F (23 & 2 C) and 50 & 5 percent relative humidity for 21 days after 7 days moist curing. Commercial testing laboratories seldom have facilities sufficiently refined to control the relative humidity within these limits. From the results of this study and those of Reference 4, it would appear that wider limits, perhaps &15 percentage points, might be allowed without sacrifice of uniform splitting test results, although additional studies, incorporating other lightweight aggregates, may be advisable. Splitting ratio, F, PThe ACI 318-6310 defines the shear parameter of structural lightweight concrete FSPas the ratio of the splitting tensile strength to the square root of the compressive strength of the same concrete. Since Series II of this study satisfied other Code requirements, the variation of F,p vvith variation of relative humidity storage couldl be determined as indicated in Table 4. Small variations of the F.p of the dry concretes may be noted. The average F~P (excluding the moist cured) for the al.l-lightweight, sand-lightweight, and normal weight concretes, respectively, are 5.1, 5.8, and 6.9. Pf eif ers reported the following corresponding data: 4.8-6.4, 5.9-6.4, and 7.0; the range in each case covering the seven lightweight aggregates which he studied.

AH JOURNAL

19 CONCLUSIONS

This somewhat limited study was planned to furnish insight into some of the effects of drying on the splitting tensile strength of lightweight aggregate concrete. Since only a single lightweight aggregate, a single natural sand, and a single normal weight gravel were used, the data reported may not be precisely applied to all lightweight and normal weight concretes. However, the observed effects of curing and drying environments on tlhe splitting strength should provide information on some little understood aspects of this property- of concrete, particularly since these observations are in general accord with previous findings. The long-time measurements of relative humidity distribution (Series I) have indicated the extreme slowness with which concrete dries. Normal weight concrete, with its lower aggregate absorption, may reach moisture equilibrium with the ambient atmosphere faster than lightweight concrete. However, the accompanying I;ests of drying shrinkage and weight loss show that these properties attain equilibrium much earlier than does the internal relative humidity. The tests have reconfirmed the initial loss of splitting strength that generally occurs with drying of lightweight concrete. This loss of splitting strength is little affected by prior moist curing periods varying between 7 and 28 days. The Series I tests have shown that the drying concretes regain splitting tensile strength as the concrete ages, reaching perhaps 80 percent of the potential obtainable under I to 2 years of moist curing. This regain of splitting strength points toward an increased shear resistance occurring with age of concrete structures, though it should be noted that large structural members dry much slower
JULY 1968

than 6 x 12-in. (15 x 30 cm) cylinders. This regain indicates curing requirements of AC-I 318-6310 and ASTM 496-66 provide conservative values of splitting strength for design purposes. The Series II tests have shown that any drying environment between 75 and 10 percent relative humidity has about the same effect on splitting tensile strength measured at 28 days. This would indicate that the current requirements of ASTM 496-66 for maintaining 50 +5 percent relative humidity during the 21-day storage period might be broadened to a tolerance of perhaps f 15 percentage points.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This investigation was carried out in the Products and Applications Development Section of the Portland Cement Association Laboratories. Particular credit is due Emil Greinke, Senior Technician, for conduct of the Series I tests and to Albert Litvin, Senior Engineer, for those of Series II.

ACI JOURNAL

21

REFERENCES

1. Hanson, J. A., Tensile Strength and Diagonal Tension Resistance of Structural Lightweight Concrete, JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 58, No. .1, July 1961, ACI pp. 1-39. Also, P(2A Development Department Bulletin D50.
2. Grieb, W. E.t$and Werner, G., Comparison of the Splitting Tensile Strength of Concrete with Flexural and Compressive Strength, Public Roads, V. 32, No. 5, Dec. 1962, pp. 97-106. 3. Lewis, R. K., and Blakey, F. A., Moisture Conditions Influencing the Tensile Splitting Strength of Lightweight Concrete, Constructional. Review (Sydney), V. 38, No. 8, Aug. 1965, pp. 17-22. 4. Ivey, D. L., and Buth, E., Splitting Tension Test of Structural Lightweight Concrete, ASTM Journal of Materials, V. 1, No. 4, Dec. 1966, pp. 859-871,
5.

Pfeifer,

D.

VV., Sand Replacement in Structural

Splitting Tensile Strength, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 64, No. 7, July 1967, pp. 384-392. Also, PCA Development Depc!rtment Bulletin .Dlzo. 6. Hanson, J. A., Optimum Steam Curing Procedure in Precasting Plants, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 60, No. 1, Jan. 1963, pp. 75-100. Also, PCA Development Department Bulletin D62. 7. Hanson, J. A,, Optimum Steam Curing Procedures for Structural Lightweight Concrete, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 62, No. 6, June 1965, pp. 661-672. Also, PCA Development Department Bulletin D92. 8. Ivey, D. L., and Buth, E., Shear Capacity of Lightweight Concrete Beams, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 64, No. 10, Oct. 1967, pp. 634-643. 9. Hognestad, E.; Elstner, R. C.; and Hanson, J. A., Shear Strength of Reinforced Structural Lightweight .Aggregate Concrete Slabs, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 61, No. 6, June 1964, pp. 643-656. Also, PCA Development Depa~tment Bulletin D78. 10. ACI Committee 318, Building Cocie Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-63) , American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1963, 144 pp. 11. ACI Committee 613, Subcommittee on Proportioning Lightweight Aggregate Concrete, Recommended for Structural Practice for Selecting Proportions

Lightweight Concrete

.LightweightConcrete (ACI 613A-59) , American ConcreteInstitute,Detroit, 1959, 10 pp.

JULY 1968

22

12. Landgren, R.; Hanson, J. A.; and Pfeifer, D. W., An Improved Procedure for Proportioning Mixes of Structural Lightweight Concretes, Jou?maZ, PCA Research and Development Laboratories, V. 7, No. 2, May 1965, pp. 47-65. Also, PCA Resem-ch Department .Buttetin 183. 13. Monfore, G. E., A Small Probe-Type Gage for Measuring Relative Humidity, Journal,, PCA Research and Development Laboratories, V. 5, No. 2, May 1963, PP. 41-47. Also, PCA Research Department Bulletin 160. 14. Pfeifer, D, W., Sand Replacement in Structural Lightweight Concrete Creep and Shrinkage Studies, 2, Feb. 1968, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 65, No. pp. 131-140. Also, PCA Development Bulletin D128. 15. Hansen, T. C., and Mattock, A. H., Influence of Size and Shape of Member on the Shrinkage and Creep of Concrete, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 63, No. 2, Feb. 1966, pp. 267-290. Also, PCA Development Department Bulletin D103.

SinopsisResumeZusammenfassung

Efecto del Resistencia

Curado y Condici~nes de Secado en la a la Tensi6n por Compression Diametral del Concreto

Se investigaron las resistencias a la tension por compression diametral de concreto ligero y de peso normal en dos series de ensayes que tratan con 10S efectos del curado y las condiciones de secado. La primers serie mostr6 que la duraci6n del periodo initial de curado htimedo, antes del secado a 50 por ciento de humedad relativa, tiene poco efecto en la resistencia compresi6n diametral. a la tensi6n por A pesar de que se produjo una perdida de resistencia a la tension por cortante para concreto ligero al iniciarse el periodo de secado, un almacenamiento i~ una ganancia continuo en atmosfera seca condujo considerable de resistencia a la tensibn. En la segunda serie, el concreto se sometio a secado durante 21 alias con diferentes niveles de humedad rela.tiva despu& de un curad.o iniciaI htimedo de 7 alias. Solamente se obtuvieron cambios menores en la resistencia a la tension cuando se vario la humedad relativa de 75 a 10 por ciento.
ACI JOURNAL

23

Influence de IAmbiance Resistance au Dedoublement

de Ressuage sur la en Tension du Beton

Les r&istances au dedoublement en tension de bktons I+gers et normaux ont &6 ~tudi~es lors de deux s6ries dessais clans lesquels linfluence de lambiance de ressuage et s&chage 6tait consid&-&e. Les premi&es s6ries ont montrh que la durke de ressuage initial &tat hurnide pr6c6dent un shchage ii 50 pourcent dhumidit6 relative avait peu dinfluence sur la resistance au dedoublement en tension. Tandis quon notait une diminution de r&istance au dedoublement pour le bkton 16ger tr$s t6t durant la p&iode de skchage; un stockage conti.nu clans Iatmosphere de s~chage conduisait ~ un gain consid&able dam la r&istance au d6doublement. Dans les secondes skries, les betons ont ete soumis a un sechage durant ~!1 jours a different niveaux dhumidite relative! apres ressuage initial etat humide de 7 j ours. Seulement des changements mineurs de r&istance au d6doublement ont W trouv% lorsque lhumidit6 relative varie de 75 ~ 10 pourcent. Der Einfluss der Lagerungsbedingungen Spaltzugfestigkeit von Beton auf die

Die Spaltzugfestigkeit von Leichtbeton und Normalbeton wurde im Rahmen von zwei Versuchsreihen studiert, wobei vor allern der Einfluss der Lagerungsbedingungen untersucht wurde. Die erste Versuchsreihe zeigte, class die Dauer einer Feuchtlagerung, die einer anschliessenden Austrocknungsperiode bei einer Luft feuchtigkeit von auf die Spaltzugfestigkeit wenig 50 ZO vorangeht, Einfluss hat. Zu Beginn der Austrocknungsperioden wurde zwar ein geringer Abfall der S,paltzugfestigkeit beobachtet; langere Austrocknung fflhrte jedoch zu einem merklichen Anstieg der Spaltzugfestigkeit. In der zweiten Versuchreihe wurden die Bet(mproben nach einer anfanglichen Feuchtlagerung von sieben Tagen einundzwanzig Tage lang verschiedenen relativen Luftfeuchtigkeiten ausgesetzt. Eine Variation der relativen Luftf euchte zwischen 10 uncl 75% hatte nur einen geringfiigigen Einfluss auf die Spaltzugfestigkeit.

JULY 1968

PCA,

R& D, Ser.1314-2

Bulletins

Published

by

the

Development Research and

Department Lak>oratories

Development of the Cement

Bulletins

Portland
DIOOIndex and of Development Index. Cement

Association
D1-D99. Annotated List with Author

Department

Subject

Published by Portland Skokie, Illinois ( 1967). DIO1Rotational H. MATTOCK. Capacity of

Association,

Research

and

Development

Laboratories,

Hinging

Regions

in

Reinforced

Concrete

Beams,

by

ALAN

Miami, Flu. (November 1964) pages national Symposium, Cop yrighted 1965 by American Society of Civil Eng {neers.
D102Tests of Partially Prestressed Concrete Girders, by HOCNESTAD. Reprinted Society

Reprinted

from

FLEXUHAL MECHANICS OF REINFOI+CE~ CONCKEZE, proceedings

143-181, joint sponsorship.

D. MAGUKA and EIVIND

Of the

Inter-

DONALD

frprn the Jou?mat of the ,.St?wcturaIDivision, Proceedings of tize American of CtvZl Engineers, Proc. Paper 4685, 92, ST 1, 327-350 (February 1966).

D103Influence of Size and Shape of Member on the Shrinkage and Creep of Concrete. by TORBEN C. HANSEN and ALAN H, MATTOCK. of the American Concrete Institute (February 1966): Proc@edReprinted from Jownat irsgs 63, 267-290 ( 1966). DIOQCast-in-Place Concrete Residences With Insulated Walls, by HARRY L. SCOGCIN. Reprinted from Journal of the PCA Research and Development Laboratories, 8, No. 2, 21-29 (May 1966). D105TensiIe Testing of Concrete Reprinted from Jousma~of 42-52 (May 1966). Block and Wall Elements, by RICHARDO. HEDSTROM. PCA Research and Development Laboratories, 8, No. 2,

the

D106High Strength Bars as Concrete Reinforcement. Part 8. Similitude in Flexural Cracking of T-Beam Flanges, by PAUL H. KAAR. Reprinted from Journal of the PCA Research and Development Laboratories, 8, No. 2, 2-12 (May 1966). D107Sesmicic Resistance of Reinforced ConcreteA Laboratory Test Rig, by NORMAN W. HANSON and HAROLD W. CONNER. Reprinted from Joti?vsal of the PCA Research and D?veloprnent Laboratories, 8, No. 3, 2-9 (September 1986). D108Rotational Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Beams. by W. GENE CORLEY. Reprinted from Journal of the Structural Division, Proceedings of the Amertcan cietu of Civil Engineers, Proc. Paper 4939, 92, ST5, 121-146 (October 1966). D109Laboratory Studies B. E. COLLEY.
Reprinted from

So-

of the Skid Resistance

of Concrete.

by

G. G. BALMER and 1966). by R. W.

ASTM

Jouma[ of Materiais 1, No. L 536-559 ( september Concrete

of the

Dl10Connections
LAFRAUGH Reprinted and

in Precast
D. D. from JoumaL

StructuresColumn

Base

Plates,

MAGURA.

cember 1966).

Prest~essed Conc?w!e Institute, 11, No. 6, 18-39 (Deby ALBERT LrrvlN and JosEpH J. sHID~L~~.
American Concrete Institute, Paper No.

DillLaboratory

Study

of Shotcrete.

Reprinted from Symposium on Shotcreting, 13 in Publication 5P-14, 165-184 (1966).

Dl12Tests

on Soil-Cement

and Cement-Modified
of the PCA Research

Bases in Minnesota, by
and Development

!CORBJORN

J. 1,

LARSEN. Reprinted from Journal 25-47 (January 1967). Laboratories, 9, No.

D 113Struct ural Model ALDD, MAGURA. Reprinted from

2-24 Dl14General HAROLD (January Relation W.

Testing-Reinforced
PCA

and Prestressed
ReseaTctt and

Mortar

Beams.

by
9,

DONNo.

Josswra~ of the 1967).

f2ewto~ment

Laboratories,

1,
by

of

Heat

Flow

Factors

to

the

Unit

Weight

of

Concrete,

BREWER. Joumat 1967). in W. of the PCA Research and De Vf?tOpmerzt .Labomtones, 9, No. 1,

Reprinted from 48-60 (January Dl15Sand Replacement DONALD from

Structural PFEIFE~ of the and

Lightweight J. A. HANSON. Concrete

ConcreteSintering

Grate

Aggre-

gate:; . by
Reprinted

64, 121-127 (1967)

Jouwtal

American

Institute

(March,

]967); Proceedings by
1967);

Dl16Fatigue Tests of Reinforcing BarsTack BURTONand EIVINDHocNmsrAm Reprinted from Journal of the American
64, 244-252 (1967)

Welding
Concrete

of Stirrups,
Institute (May,

KENNETH T.
Proceedings

Dl17Connections Shrinkage,
Reprinted

in Precast Concrete by K. T. BURTON. W.

from Joumaz of the

StructuresEffects
G. COEiLEY, and E. Coracmte

of
Institute,

Restrained

Creep

and

HOGNESrAD.

1967).

Pmstressed

12, No. 2, 18-37 (April,

Dl18CasiniPlacece Concrete Residences with Insulated WallsInfluence of Shear Connectors on Flexural Resistance, by HARRY L. SCOGGIN and DONALDW. PFEIEER. Reprinted from JOumaZ of the PCA Research and Dewtownent Laboratories, 9, No. 2, 2-7 (May 1967), Dl19Fatijgue of Soil-Cement. B:eprinted from Journat 37-59 (May 1967). by T. J.
of the PCA LARSEN Research

and
and

P. J. NUSSBAUM. Dwelopment Laboratories, Tensile

1967);

9, No 2,

D120Sand Replacement in Structural by DONALD W. PrEIFER.

Reprinted from 384-392 (1967). Journal of the

Lightweight
Anwrican

Concret~;Splitting
Inst, tute (July

Strength,
64,

Concrete

Proceedings

D121Seismic Resistance of Reinforced W. HANSON and HAROLD W, CONNER.

Fteprinted

Concrete

Beam-Column

Joints, 1967).
of the

by

NORMAN
Society

of

civiLEngineers,

from

Journal of the Structural Division. Proceedings PTOC. Paper 5537, 93, ST5, 533-560 (October

American

D122Precast
HAROLD

Rigid Frame W. CONNER

from

BuildingsTest
of the PCA

of Scarf Conn(?ctions,
ReseaTch and

by PAUL H. KAAR and

Reprinted

Journa~

34-42 (September 1967). D123Precast

PAUL H.

Dcvetolnnent Labo~atories, 9, No. 3,

Rigid
KAAR.

Frame

BuildingsComponent
PCA Re=mch

Tests,

by HAROLD W.

CONNER

and

Reprinted from Jourma~ of the 43-55 (September 1967),

and

D=Ve~o~mQ~t

~aboratoties,

9,

No.

3,

D124Aggregate

Interlock at Joints in Concrete Pavements, by E. E. COLLEY and H. A. HUMPHREY. Reprintedfrom Highway Research RECORD, Number 189,1-18(196?).
CHILDS.

D125Cement Treated Subbases for concrete pavements, by L. D.

D126 Sand Replacement in Structural Tests, by DONALD W. PFEIFER. ings 64, 735-744 (1067).
Reprinted from JournuL of the

Repr,nted from Highway Research REcOm, Number 1~9. 1943 (1967). Lightweight Concrete-Freezing and Thawing
Proceed-

Amer+can

Conc~ete Institute (November 1967); Beams:,

Division, 94, ST2,

D127 U1tim ate Torque of Reinforced Rectangular Reprinted from Journal of the Structural
ciety of Civil Engineers, PTOC. PafwT 5814,

W THOMAS T. C. Hsu.
the American 1968). So-

Proceedings of 485-510 (Febroary

i)128-Sand Replacement in Structural Lightweight Concrete-Creep and Shrinkage Studies, by DONALD W. PFEIFER. Reprinted from Journal of the A?ne~ican Corzc~ete Institute (February 1968); P~oceedings, 65, 131-140 (1968).

D129Shear and Moment Transfer Between W. HANSON and JOHN M. HANSON.

Reprinted from Journal 1, 2-16 (January 1968) of the PCA

Concrete
Research

Slalbs and Columns,

and Development

by NORMAN
10, No.

Laboratories,

D130Trends in Consumer HOGnTES.TAD. Reprinted from

Institute, D131Influence Walls, by of pages Mortar

Demands
Proceedings, 22-32 (1967 ). and Block

for New
Fall

Grades

of Reinforcing
Meeting, Concrete

Steel,

by EIVIND
Steel

Business

Reinforcing

Properties ALBERT the PCA

on LITVIN,

Shrinkage and and J. A.

Cracking HANSON.

of

Masonry

RICHARD

O.

HEDSTROM,

Reprinted from Journal of No. 1, 34-51 (January 1968). D132 Toward MCHENRY. Reprinted Engineering a Generalized Treatment

Research

Development

Laboratories.

10,

of

Delayed

Elasticity

in

Concrete,

by

DOUGLAa

from PUBI.ICATIOXS, (Zurich) , Vol 26,

International pages 269-283

Association (1966).

for

Bridge

and

Structural

D133 Torsion

of Structural

ConcreteA

Summary
STRUCIWIAL 165-176

of Pure
CONCRETE, (1968).

Torsion:
American

by

THOMAS

T.

C.

Hsu. Reprinted from

Paper SP 18-8 in

PUbliCatio~ SP-1!3,
ConcretePlain

TORSION

OF

Concrete

Institute,

D13+Torsion of Structural T. C. HSU.

Concrete

Reef angular
American

Sections,
Concrete

by THOMAS
Institute,

Reprinted from TORSION OF .%RUCWRAL SP 18-8 in Publication SP-18, 203-238 (1968). D135<Torsion of Structural ConcreteBehavior T. C.

CONCRETE,

of

Reinforced

Concrete

Rectangular Institute,

Members,

by

THOMAS

Hsu.
S. RUC,URAL CONCRETE, SP-18, 261-306 (1988). American Concrete

Reprinted Paper SP

from TORSION OF 18-10 in Publication

D136Precast
PAUL H.

Rigid
KAAR

Frame
and

BuildingsSummary
W. of CONNER. the PCA Research

of

a Laboratory
Development

Investigation,
Laboratories, 10,

by
No.

HAROLD

Reprinted from JOUTnal 2, 25-34 (May 1968).

and

D137 Clear

Coatings

for

Exposed
oj

Architectural
the PCA Research

Concrete,
and

by

ALBEK~

LITVIN. 10, No

Reprinted from Journal 2, 49-57 (May 1968). D138Torsion and of :Bending Reprinted ceedings, Structural in Beams

Development

Laboratories,

ConcreteInteraction Without Stirrups, the American by

Surface THOMAS Concrete

for T.

Combined C. HSU.

Torsion, 1968):

Shear. Pro-

from Journal of 65, 51-60 (1068).

Institute

(January

D139Influence of Aggregate Pave merits, by W. J.

Properties
NOWLEN.

on Effectiveness
PCA Research and

of Interlock
Develom?zent

Joints

in Concrete
10, No.

Reprinted from Journal 2, 2-8 (May 1968). D 140Torsion Without of Web Reprinted 1968 ) Structural Reinforcement, from Jomnal

of

the

Laboratories,

ConcreteUniformly of by the THOMAS Prest?wssed T. C.

Prest HSU.

ressed

Rectangular

Members

Concrete

Institute,

13,

No.

2, 34-44

(April

D141Effects of Curing and Drying crete, by J. A. HANSON.

Reprinted (1968). from American

Environments Concrete

on

Splitting
(JU1Y

Tensile

Strength

of Con65, 535-543

Institute

1968);

proceedings,

Printed

in US. A

Effects

of Curing

and

Drying

Environments of Concrete u

on Splitting
KEYWORDS;

Tensile Strength
age-strength

relation; compressive strength; coucrctc$ curing; ttryin~ drying shrinkage; expanded shale aggregates; fine aggregates; gravel (material); humiclity; lightweight a~ywgate concretes; lightweight aggregates; moist curing; moisture content; research; sand (material); splitting tensile strength; testing.
SYNOPSIS:

/ , , I

The splitting tensile strmgdls of lightweight anrf normal

wcigbt

concretes

were investigated in two test series which dtalt with the effects of the curing and drying environments. The first series showed that the [Iuration of the initial moist curing periuti prior to drying at 50 percent relative humidity had little effect on the splitting tensile strength. ~tbile there was a loss of splitting strength for the lightweight crmcrcte early in the drying pcriocts, continued storage in the drying atmosphere lcd 10 considerable gain in the splitting strengths. In the second series, ctsncrctcs
wmc subjected to drying for 2!1 c1ays at different levels of rela tivc humidity initial moist clu]ing for 7 days. Only minor changes of splitting strrmgth were as the relative hnmi(lity varied from 75 to 1(I percent. REFERENCE:

after found

Tensile

Hanson, J. A., Effect of Curiug and Drying Environmrmts ou Splitting V. 65, No. 7, Jn]y 1968. Strength of Concrete, ACI JC)URNA1. Procce[lings.

pp. 535-543.

Effects

of Curing

and

Drying

Environments of Concrete

on Splitting

Tensile Strength

KEYWORDS: age-strength relation; compressive strength; concretes; ctlring; drying; drying shrinkage; expanded shale aggregates; fine aggregate$ gravel (material); humidity; lightweight aggregate concretes; lightweight aggregates; moist curing: moisture content; research; sand (material); splitting tensile strength; testin~.

SYNOPSIS: The splitting tensile strengths of lightweight and normal weight concretes Irere hlVeSl@tted in two test series which dealt with the efTccts of the curing and drying environments. The first series showed that the duration of the initial moist curing period prior to drying at 50 percent relative humidity ba{l IittIe effect on the splitting ttmsile strength. While there was a loss of splitting strength for the lightcontinued storage in the drying atmoweight concrete early in the drying periods, sphere! led to cor]siderahle gain in the splitting strengths. In the second series, ccmcrctes for 21 days at different levels of relati~,c bumiditv after wmw subjected to [lrying initial moist curing for 7 days. Only minor chmges of splitting strength were found as the relati\c humidity varied from 75 to 10 percent, REFERENCE: H~IIS~JII> J. A., Effect of Curing ACI JOURN.!L Tensile Strcngth of Concrete, PP. 535-543 and Drying Environments Proceedings, V. 65, No. nn Splitting 7, July 1968,

1 1 I I

1
1

I I I I I i

Effects

of Curing

and Drying

Environments
of Concrete L! ] I I
I

on Splitting

Tensile Strength

KEYWORDS: age-strength relatiou; compressive strength: concretes; curing; drying; drying shrinkage; cxpandcrt shale aggregates; fine aggrwgatcs; gravel (material); humidity; lightweight aggreg~te concretes; lightweight aggregates moist curing; moisture com
tent; xcscal-ch; sand (material); tt!nsilc test splitting strengths series which tensile of strength; testing.

[
SYNOPSIS:
were drying curiug

The

splitting
in two

lightweight dealt with

antf normal
the effects of

weight the

concretes curing and moist on the

[ I 1 1

investigated eot iro])mcnts, period priol-

The first scritx showml that to drying at 50 percent relative

the duration of the humidity had little

initial eflect

Wbile there was a loss of splitting strength for the lightsplitting tensile strength. nreight concrete early in the drying pcriocfs, continued storage in the drying atmosphere led to considerable gain in the splitting strengths. In the sccrmd series, ~oncrctes were subjected to thying for 21 days at different Ievcls of relative humidity after initial moist curing for 7 days. Only minor changes of splitting strength were found as the relatile humidity varied from 75 to 10 percent. REFERENCE: Hanson, J. A., Effect of Curing Tensile Strength of Concrctc, ACI JOURNAL pp.535-543. and Drying Environmcnrs on Splittin$ Proceedings, V. 65, RIO. 7, July 1~16~,

1 1 , I 1 I I I , I i