47 views

Uploaded by t_bouziani

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Ancor Bolts design
- Physics Notes Class 11 Chapter 9 Mechanical Properties of Solids
- Seismic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Buildings [SZ].pdf
- rheology
- Viscous flow in a pipe
- Asabe Pe 2011
- Recent Developments in Progressive Colapse Design
- Cyclic Plasticity
- Mad Revisedword
- The Result is Different When Powergraph Being Turned on and Off
- appendix.pdf
- ASTM C165
- Modelling Multi-phase Liquid-sediment Scour and Resuspension Induced by Rapid Flows Using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) Accelerated With a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU)
- 01 Casing Dimensions, Materials & Strengths.ppt
- RUUKKI Hot-rolled steel sheets, plates, coils - Mechanical cutting.pdf
- Empirical Formulas for Collapse Resistance Under Nonuniform Loading
- 13.IJMPERDAPR201813
- vt
- E767
- Plasticity Flow Rule Isotropic Hardening Pics

You are on page 1of 9

DOI 10.1617/s11527-005-9035-2

between numerical simulations and concrete rheometers

results

N. Roussel

C RILEM 2006

two slump geometries, the ASTM Abrams cone and a

paste cone, are presented. These results are compared Fresh cementitious materials, as many materials in in-

to experimental results in the case of a cone filled with dustry or nature, behave as fluids with a yield stress,

cement pastes in order to validate the proposed nu- which is the minimum stress for irreversible deforma-

merical method and the chosen boundary conditions. tion and flow to occur. This yield stress is an unique

The correlation between slump and yield stress ob- material property and may, in the case of cement pastes

tained numerically for the ASTM Abrams cone is then (i.e. fine particles), be measured using conventional

compared to the experimental correlations obtained rheological tools. For example, Couette Viscometer [1]

by testing concrete with different rheometers dur- or parallel plates rheometer [2] are used in the labo-

ing comparative studies that were organized at LCPC ratory to measure the yield stress value. In the case

Nantes (France) in 2000 and MB Cleveland (USA) in of concretes containing coarse aggregates, large scales

2003. rheometers had to be developed (the BTRHEOM [3],

the BML [4] or the two-point test [5]). Even if, in situ,

Résumé Des résultats de simulations numériques simpler and cheaper tests such as the slump test [6]

d’écoulements sont présentés pour deux géométries are still often preferred, these apparatus represent a big

d’essais, le cône d’Abrams et le mini cône. La valida- step forward in the field of concrete science. However,

tion de la méthode numérique et des choix portant sur there still exists a discrepancy between the various con-

les conditions aux limites de l’écoulement est réalisée crete rheometers, [7,8]. These apparatus give the same

par comparaison avec des résultats expérimentaux rheological classification of materials but they do not

sur pâtes de ciment dans le cas du mini cône. La give the same absolute values of the rheological pa-

corrélation obtenue numériquement dans le cas du rameters. On the other hand, the slump test does not

cône d’Abrams est ensuite comparée aux corrélations give any value of a physical parameter at all. Its result

expérimentales obtenues pour différents rhéomètres à can not be expressed in physical rheological units but

bétons lors des campagnes de comparaisons orga- it has also proved through the years to be able to clas-

nisées au LCPC Nantes (France) en 2000 et à MB sify different materials in terms of their ability to be

Cleveland (USA) en 2003. cast.

The aim of this paper is to propose a theoretical cor-

relation between slump and yield stress and to compare

N. Roussel it to the experimental correlations obtained in the two

LCPC Paris, France rheometers comparison campaign [7,8]. In the first part

502 Materials and Structures (2006) 39:501–509

2. Literature study

der to relate slump to yield stress. Murata [11] and

Schowalter and Christensen [12] wrote a relation be-

tween slump and yield stress by assuming that the cone

could be divided into two parts. In the upper part, the

shear stress does not reach the yield stress and no flow

occurs. In the lower part of the cone, the shear stress

induced by the self-weight of the material is higher

Fig. 1 Initial cone shape and cylindrical coordinates. than the yield stress and flow occurs. The height of the

flowing lower part decreases until the shear stress in

this zone becomes equal to the yield stress, after which

Table 1 Cone geometries the flow stops. Schowalter and Christensen [12] wrote

Cone ASTM Abrams cone paste cone

a relation between the final total height of the cone

and the yield stress that did not depend on the mould

H0 (mm) 300 50 geometry. This relation or similar ones were success-

Rmin (mm) 200 35 fully validated by Clayton and co-workers [13] or Saak

Rmax (mm) 100 50

and co-workers [14] in the case of cylindrical moulds.

However, in the case of conical moulds, a discrepancy

between predicted and measured slumps was systemat-

ically obtained. In the above studies, the experimental

of the present work, results of numerical simulations results suggested that these relations and the fact that

are presented for the ASTM Abrams cone [6] and a they did not depend on the mould geometry are valid

paste cone test [9]. The geometries of these molds are for high slumps (i.e. low yield stress) (Clayton and co-

given in Figure 1 and Table 1. It should be noted that workers [12], Pashias and co-workers [15], Saak and

we are not using here what is called mini slump but co-workers [13]). In the case of the ASTM Abrams

the “ASTM C230 flow table conical mold” This cone cone, Hu and co-workers [16] gave a semi empirical

is used usually in conjunction with the flow table. It correlation between the yield stress τ0 (Pa) measured

is not the case here. The originality of the present ap- using the BTRHEOM, the density ρ and the slump

proach lies in using a rigorous three dimensional ex- (mm):

pression of the behaviour law and plasticity criterion

(read 2.2). (τ0 − 212)

s = 300 − 347 (1)

The numerical results are first compared to the ρ

paste cone test results and standard Vane test mea-

surements [10] on cement pastes. The good agree- 2.2. Yield criterion

ment between the obtained numerical results and ex-

perimental values over a wide range of yield stress It should be noted that all the above analytical ap-

confirms the validity of the numerical approach and proaches involve a unidimensional expression of the

allows us to use the numerical results obtained for yield criterion and behaviour law: flow occurs or stops

ASTM Abrams cone to predict slump in terms of yield when the shear stress becomes higher or lower than the

stress. yield stress. The other components of the stress ten-

In the last part of this paper, the numerical correla- sor are not taken into account when writing a scalar

tion between slump and yield stress is compared to the yield criterion. This greatly simplifies the analysis of

correlation between slump and yield stress obtained for the flow but is valid only if the flow is dominated by

three concrete rheometers: the BTRHEOM, the BML shear stresses (i.e. the diagonal terms of the devia-

and the two-point test. toric stress tensor can be neglected compared to the

Materials and Structures (2006) 39:501–509 503

shear stress). In fact, this assumption is true only in literature, a Bingham model is, in this case, a possi-

the ideal two-dimensional case studied by Coussot and ble rheological model. On the other hand, when the

co-workers [17] (very high slumps). This simplifica- above conditions are not fulfilled, it is then needed to

tion is similar to the use of the lubrication theory in take into account the presence of the particles [23, 24,

the squeezing flow literature [18]. The squeezing flow 25]. This type of approach is a lot more complex but

test is a simple compression test carried out on cylin- is the only suitable technique when confined flows or

drical samples with reduced slenderness. The appa- flows between steel bars are studied. In this paper, we

ratus consists in two coaxial circular parallel plates, will only use an homogeneous approach. As a con-

without any rotation. By using the lubrication theory, sequence, the validity of the presented results will be

only the shear stress is considered and the flow can be doubtful when the smallest characteristic dimension of

easily studied but this theory generates what is called the flow becomes lower than 5 times the biggest parti-

the “squeezing flow paradox”. On the plane of sym- cles or, in other words, when the slump is higher than

metry between the two plates, the shear stress equals 25 cm.

zero. The unidimensional yield criterion is of course Other authors have previously developed homoge-

not fulfilled and the material should flow as a solid neous numerical simulations of the slump flow. Tani-

body (i.e. “plug flow”). But Lipscomb and Denn [19] gawa and Mori [26] developed an innovative visco-

have demonstrated that plug regions can not exist in plastic finite element analysis introducing a frictional

squeezing flow of yield stress fluids. Clearly a solid interface law at the base of the slumping cone. They

body can not move radially outward with a velocity calculated the slump in terms of the yield stress but,

that increases with the radial coordinate as the con- as they did not have any experimental way to measure

servation equations demand. Wilson [20] has pointed the rheological parameters of concrete, they did not

out that this paradoxical “yielded/unyielded” region is compare their results to experimental measurements.

due to the neglect of the extensional stresses close to Later, Schowalter and Christensen [12] compared their

the centre plane where they are of a higher order than analytical prediction to Tanigawa and Mori numeri-

the shear stress. A proper three-dimensional criterion is cal results and found a good agreement. It should be

thereafter needed to avoid this paradox and Adams and noted that both predictions were based on a unidimen-

co-workers [21] can be quoted “a comprehensive yield sional plasticity criterion. Hu [27] assumed that the

criterion is one which is based upon a combination of shape of the deposit stayed conical and calculated the

all the acting components of the stress”. In this paper, state of stress using an elastoplastic finite element anal-

a 3D yield criterion will be used as it is the only way to ysis. Once again, a unidimensional yield criterion was

obtain correct quantitative results when the flow is not considered.

a purely shearing flow. Recently, Chamberlain and co-workers [28] calcu-

lated rigorously stresses in a purely plastic cylindrical

2.3. Numerical simulations sample using either von Mises or Tresca plasticity crite-

rion in order to determine the height of incipient failure,

Several authors have also developed numerical simu- which is the height of material required to just initiate

lations of this free surface stoppage flow. Two types flow for a given cylinder radius. This is equivalent to

of method are available when trying to simulate the calculating the critical yield stress for which flow does

flow of a rough suspension such as concrete. The first start or does not for a given cylindrical geometry. They

method consists in only considering an homogeneous found a discrepancy between the mono dimensional

fluid whereas the second one takes into account the approximation written by Schowalter and Chistensen

presence of the particles. The homogeneous approach [12] and their three dimensional approach. They also

is easier to implement but is valid only when the small- studied the dependency of the critical yield stress on

est characteristic dimension (thickness of the flow, size the cylinder radius.

of the mould, spacing between bars) of the flow is high

compared to the size of the biggest particle (5 times 2.4. Behaviour at the interface

larger for example in [22]) and when the material stays

homogeneous (which seems to be the case during a Most analysis in the literature are carried out assum-

slump test on a standard concrete). As accepted in ing sticky flow at the base of the deposit. If we go into

504 Materials and Structures (2006) 39:501–509

further details, the following distinction could be made. assumption, the influence of the lifting speed of the

In the case of fluid concretes (i.e. low yield stress, high mould (that depends on the operator) or of the plastic

slumps), this assumption is probably valid as these con- viscosity (if a Bingham model is chosen to describe

cretes behaves just like suspensions but, in the case of the material behaviour) on the measured slump have

high yield stresses, this assumption should be ques- not been studied: the velocity of the flow and its ki-

tioned. A concrete with a high yield stress may be ob- netic energy are not taken into account and the final

tained by two different trends in the mix proportioning. shape is calculated as a quasi static state assuming it is

On one hand, the amount of cement or fine particles reached slowly enough. In other words, what happens

may be high. The colloidal force network that can be before stoppage of the flow does not influence the shape

built between these fine particles increases the yield at stoppage. Tatersall and Banfill [29] experimentally

stress of the mixture. The concrete is similar to a dense concluded that the slump of fresh concrete is indeed

fine suspension and, in this case, the assumption of a highly correlated with yield stress but is not signifi-

sticking flow is also valid as experimentally obtained by cantly affected by the plastic viscosity. This conclusion

Pashias [15]. On the other hand, the amount of coarse was also reached by Murata [11]. Let us check here that

particles may be high. The behaviour of the obtained neglecting inertia effects is a correct assumption on a

concrete becomes closer to the behaviour of a cohesive theoretical point of view: let us roughly compare the

granular material. In this case, as for a granular ma- typical inertia stress (I = ρV 2 ) to the material yield

terial, the behaviour at the interface may be frictional. stress. For a small slump the flow duration is of the or-

Because of the uncertainty in the behaviour at the inter- der of magnitude of 1s for a slump of the order of 10 cm.

face, the results obtained with a sticky flow assumption We thus have I ≈ 20 Pa, a value much smaller than the

should be considered with care in the case of high yield material yield stress in that case (typically larger than

stress concretes as the validity of the assumption of a several hundreds of Pa). For a large slump the flow du-

sticking flow depends on the tested material aspect and ration is of the order of magnitude of 2–3 s for a slump

mix proportioning. of the order of 20 cm. We thus have again I ≈ 20 Pa, a

More recently, Chamberlain and co-workers [28] value once again much smaller than the material yield

studied the influence of the plate roughness on the crit- stress in that case (typically larger than several tenths

ical yield stress assuming a coulomb type friction law of Pascals). This confirms the experimental deductions

at the interface involving a friction coefficient μ equal of [29] and [11].

to zero for a perfect slip case. They showed that, above As the final shape only depends on the yield stress

a critical value μc depending on the cylinder radius, and as the final shape is the only point of interest for

there was no influence of the friction parameter on the the engineer, we will only study this aspect of the flow

height of incipient failure (or critical yield stress) and in his paper.

that the interface could then be considered as perfectly

rough. They also showed that the difference between

height of incipient failure predicted for the perfect slip 3. Numerical simulations

(μ = 0) and perfectly rough (μc = 0) cases increased

from zero for small radii to 18% for a radius equal to The cylindrical frame of reference (O, r, θ, z) is shown

2τ0 /ρg. In the case of typical concrete, this reference on Figure 1. p is the pressure, is the stress tensor

radius becomes 0.16 m (yield stress of the order of mag- and (d) is the deviatoric stress tensor. s is the slump.

nitude of 2000 Pa and density around 2500 kg/m3 ). The s is the dimensionless slump and τ0 the dimensionless

radius of the ASTM Abrams cone being equal to 0.1 yield stress as defined by Showalter and Christensen

m, the error made while neglecting the friction at the [12].

interface in the case of concrete should be lower than

18% for low slumps and high yield stress. s = s/H0

In all the above analytical studies, inertia (or dynamic) It can already be noted here that, although this scal-

effects are neglected. Because of this simplifying ing was suitable for Schowalter results, it does not apply

Materials and Structures (2006) 39:501–509 505

on the cone geometry. We chose to use this scaling

however as it allows us to plot the predicted results for

the two studied geometries on the same figure.

As already stated, in this work, we wanted to im-

plement a proper three dimensional yield criterion (see

2.2). A 3D Bingham model was thus used to describe

the tested fluid behaviour. Moreover, in order to avoid

Fig. 2 Calculation grid and initial hydrostatic pressure in the

the undetermination of the strain state when the yield

cement paste before lifting of the paste cone mould. Note that

criterion is not fulfilled, the material was assumed to be- the horizontal to vertical scale ratio is not equal to 1.

have as an incompressible elastic solid up to the yield

stress, beyond which it behaves as a Bingham fluid. The initial pressure is hydrostatic and the speed at

Other methods exist to avoid this undetermination such which the mould is numerically lifted is infinite as

as the biviscosity model introduced by O’Donovan and the mould simply disappeared at t = 0 s. This “bru-

Tanner [30] or the exponential model proposed by Pa- tal” lifting could have generated non negligible iner-

panastasiou [31] but, as whether or not flow starts is tia effects taken into account by the code. The final

concerned, it was of particular interest to use a type of predicted shape could have been affected by the high

model where a situation of no flow at all (just deforma- mean kinetic energy of the flow that is not, as in real-

tion) can exist. This was the case here. The computa- ity, dissipated by the lifting of the mould. To solve this

R

tional fluid mechanics code Flow3D [32] was chosen problem, we chose to study numerical fluids with high

R

to solve the fluid mechanics equation. Flow3D is a plastic viscosity. This indeed generated slow flows, in

general purpose computer program with many capa- which inertia effects were negligible no matter the lift-

bilities. Using input data, the user can select different ing speed. The calculations were thus carried out with

physical options to represent a wide variety of fluid a plastic viscosity equal to 300 Pa.s for concrete in the

flow phenomena. The program can be operated in sev- ASTM Abrams cone and 10 Pa.s for cement paste in the

eral modes corresponding to different limiting cases paste cone (far above the traditional plastic viscosities

of the general fluid equations. In the opinion of the of these materials). It may be reminded here that, as

present author, FLOW3D is very user friendly when the final shape only depends on the yield stress when

dealing with otherwise complex free surface transient inertia effects are negligible which is the case of the

flow of non Newtonian fluids. real ASTM Abrams cone (read 2.5), the values chosen

The invariant generalization of a Bingham fluid used for the plastic viscosity do not matter. The obtained nu-

here is the one proposed by Oldroyd [33] based on the merical results are plotted on Figure 3. Examples of

three dimensional von Mises yield criterion: two dimensional predicted shapes are shown on Figure

4 for the ASTM Abrams cone. The presence of an un-

1/2

1 yielded zone (usual in this type of simulation) can be

(d) = τ0 d : d + η d, 1 (d) : (d) ≥ τ 2

2 2 0 noted.

The calculated values of the slump confirm the fact

where d is the strain rate tensor and η the plastic vis- that slump depends of course on yield stress and den-

cosity. When the flow is dominated by shear stress and sity but also on the tested volume and initial height.

shear rate, the previous relation simplifies to the famous Indeed, the predicted dimensionless slump is differ-

Bingham scalar model: ent for the two cone geometries. As already stated, the

scaling suggested by Schowalter and Christensen [12],

τ = τ0 + η · γ , τ ≥ τ 0 although suitable for his own experimental results, does

not apply here.

The generated grid in the case of the paste cone is 4. Comparison with experimental results

shown in Figure 2. The one used for the ASTM Abrams

cone is similar. The cell size is smaller in the zones Measurements were carried out using the paste cone

where the shearing is the highest. geometry given in Table 1 while the yield stress

506 Materials and Structures (2006) 39:501–509

stress for the ASTM Abrams cone and paste cone. Both numerical

predictions and experimental results are plotted for the paste cone

test.

N’Guyen and Boger [10]. It can be noted that two dif-

ferent Vane test geometries were used on the HAAKE

R

ViscoTester VT550 to measure the yield stresses of

the tested mixtures. Indeed, as the yield stresses of the

studied mixtures varied from 0.6 Pa to 300 Pa, it was

necessary to change the geometry of the rotating tool

in order to measure an acceptable torque with a suffi-

cient precision. Several types of cements and mix pro-

portioning were tested but the mixing procedure was

Fig. 4 Examples of obtained shapes for the ASTM Abrams

always the same: the dry ingredients are first mixed for cone (a) yield stress = 2600 Pa (b) yield stress = 2000 Pa. Den-

2 min at the lowest mixer rpm setting (260 rpm), then sity = 2500 kg/m3 for both simulations.

the fluids are added and all are mixed for 2 min. The

mixer is then stopped to scrape its edges. A higher ro-

tation speed (700 rpm) is applied for 15 min followed time between the filling of the mould and its lifting to

by a 15 min final mixing phase at the lowest mixer rpm prevent any thixotropic effect from increasing the yield

setting. This chosen mixing procedure had two advan- stress. The mould was slowly lifted in order to elimi-

tages: it ensured good particle dispersions in the fluid nate any inertial effects that could take place. But, as

phase and gave any chemical binders enough time to different operators realized these tests, this slow lift-

act. ing speed was probably not constant. The spread and

The cone experimental results were obtained by var- height measurements were done after a 2 min waiting

ious users over a year period. The plate surface was the time. For each test, two perpendicular diameters and

same for all the tests. The maximum particle size of the maximum thickness of the collapsed sample were

these materials was 100 μm. It was largely smaller measured. The obtained results are plotted on Figure 3.

than the characteristic size of the mould. It was also The agreement between the numerical simulations and

smaller than the minimum height measured after col- the experimental results is very good. The experimental

lapsing of the sample (4 mm). There was no waiting critical dimensionless yield stress seems to be around

Materials and Structures (2006) 39:501–509 507

0.58. It is however difficult to precisely check the value be emphasized that we do not have at the moment any

of this critical yield stress as it is impossible not to de- way to measure the real value of the yield stress. It has

form the cone while lifting the mould. The good agree- been proven in [7] and [8] that the rheometers did not

ment between numerical and experimental results on give the same results. This does not mean that one is

the entire studied range of yield stress confirm the fact correct and the others are wrong, this could mean that

that no sliding occurs at the base of the deposit and that they are all wrong or at least that none of them is cor-

the use of a proper three-dimensional plastic criterion rect on the entire range of yield stress tested. Thus, the

allows a correct quantitative numerical prediction of yet unanswered question is “What is the real correla-

the final slump. tion between yield stress and slump?” In the frame of

this paper, this means that we do not have any way to

conclude on the validity on the simulations in the case

of concrete unless by reminding that they proved to be

5. Astm abrams cone and concrete rheometers

very efficient to simulate the flow of cement pastes and

that all the theoretical assumptions to carry valid simu-

The validation of the proposed numerical method ob-

lations in the case of concrete are fulfilled in the range

tained in the previous section allowed us to use the

of 5 to 25 cm slump.

proposed numerical method to predict the ASTM cone

It should be emphasized that, as the behaviour at the

slump in terms of the tested concrete yield stress. Apart

base of the deposit is unknown for high yield stresses

from the possible sliding at the interface that may occur

(possible sliding, read Section 2.4.), the validity of the

in the case of high yield stress concretes (see §2.4), the

obtained numerical results should be limited to slumps

flow in the case of the ASTM Abrams cone is identi-

higher than 5 cm. Moreover, for slumps higher than

cal. The numerical correlation between slump in mm

25 cm, the thickness of the flowing layer of concrete

and the ratio yield stress/density is plotted on Figure 5

becomes of the same order as the size of the biggest

along with the experimental results obtained in the two

aggregate and the homogeneous fluid mechanics ap-

rheometers comparison campaign. MBT-LCPC com-

proach proposed here is not valid any more (read Sec-

parison carried out at LCPC (Nantes, France) in 2000

tion 2.3.).

[7] and at MB (Cleveland, USA) in 2003 [8]. It has to

However, from the numerical predicted results, a

simple linear approximation may be written for slumps

between 5 cm and 25 cm.

τ0

s = 25.5 − 17.6 (2)

ρ

the efficiency of any concrete rheometer compared to

another. However, it seems that, in the 5–25 cm slump

range, the BTRheom correlation between measured

yield stress and measured slump is the closest to the

numerical correlation. For the lowest yield stresses and

the highest slumps, it seems that the BTRheom correla-

tion overestimates the yield stress. This may be linked

to the fact that the sliding assumption at the peripheral

interface needed in the analysis of the BTRheom data is

correct in the traditional concrete range (see §2.4) but,

when the yield stress becomes lower, the behaviour

at the interface becomes sticky and the shear stress

at the interface may not be neglected any more com-

Fig. 5 Yield stress-slump correlations. Experimental results for pared to the measured yield stress. The spontaneous

various rheometers and numerical correlations. formation of a limit layer (made up with water and fine

508 Materials and Structures (2006) 39:501–509

elements) limiting the friction may not occur for low presented. The obtained numerical results have been

yield stress concrete that behave just like traditional first compared to paste cone test results and standard

suspensions and the flow pattern may differ from the Vane test measurements on cement pastes. The good

theoretical one used to calculate the yield stress from agreement between the obtained numerical results and

the torque measurements. During the comparison cam- experimental values over a wide range of yield stress

paign at MB (Cleveland, USA) [8], this specificity of have confirmed the validity of the proposed numerical

the BTRHEOM was already spotted when comparing approach and its associated boundary conditions and

the various rheometers by measuring purely viscous allowed us to use the numerical results obtained for

oils. Concerning the two other apparatus, their main ASTM cone to predict slump in terms of yield stress. A

potential drawbacks may be reminded here: simple numerical correlation between slump and yield

stress has then been proposed.

- The ratio between the gap between the BML cylin- In the last part of this paper, this numerical correla-

ders and the maximum particle size is small. In the tion has been compared to the experimental correlation

geometry used in [8], the gap was only 45 mm, thus between slump and yield stress obtained for three con-

only allowing, on a theoretical point of view, the test- crete rheometers: the BTRHEOM, the BML and the

ing of concretes with particles smaller than 9 mm two-point test during comparison campaigns held in

[22]. When it is not the case, the consequence, if 2000 and 2003. It seems that, in the range of traditional

there is one, is very difficult to predict. However, in concretes (slump between 50 mm and 250 mm), there

the case of fluid concretes such as Self Compacting is a good agreement between the BTRHEOM measure-

Concretes (SCC) often prepared with smaller parti- ment and the theoretical prediction.

cles, the BML could prove the most suitable of the

three apparatus in the opinion of the present author.

It can be noted that the BML correlation between

yield stress and slumps gets closer to the numerical

predictions obtained here when the yield stress is of References

the order of several hundreds Pa.

- Because of the complexity of the flow in the two- 1. Shaughnessy R, Clark PE (1988) The rheological behaviour

of fresh cement pastes. Cem Concr Res, 18:327–341.

points test, the stress (or velocity) field can not be rig- 2. Nehdi M, Rahman M-A (2004) Estimating rheological prop-

orously calculated. The rheological parameters are erties of cement pastes using various rheological models for

simply extrapolated from the global measurements different test geometry, gap and surface friction. Cement

without taking into account the fact that some non Concrete Res., 34:1993–2007.

3. De Larrard F, Hu C (1996) The rheology of fresh high-

flowing zones, the sizes of which depend on the ro- performance concrete. Cem Conc Res, 26(2):283–294.

tation speed and of the tested material itself, might 4. Operating manual (2000) the BML viscometer, the viscome-

appear in the sample closed to the rotating impeller ter 4, Con Tec.

or to the external walls. However, in the case of 5. Tatersall GH, Bloomer SJ (1979) further development of the

two-point test for workability and extension of its range.

fluid concretes or SCC, this phenomenon may be Magazine of Concrete Research 31:202–210.

neglectible. As for the BML, the two points test cor- 6. ASTM Designation C-143-90 (1996) Standard test method

relation between yield stress and slumps gets closer for slump of hydraulic cement concrete. Annual Book of

to the numerical predictions obtained here when the ASTM Standards, 04.01, Am. Soc. Test. Mat., Easton, MD,

pp. 85–87.

yield stress decreases below the order of several hun- 7. Ferraris CF, Brower LE editors (2001) Comparison of

dreds Pa. concrete rheometers: International tests at LCPC (Nantes,

France) in October, 2000. National Institute of Standards

and Technology Interagency Report (NISTIR) 6819.

8. Ferraris CF, Brower LE editors (2004) Comparison of con-

6. Conclusion crete rheometers: International tests at MB (Cleveland OH,

USA) in May, 2003. National Institute of Standards and

In the first part of the present work, results of numer- Technology Interagency Report (NISTIR) 7154.

9. ASTM Designation C230/C230M-03, Standard Specifica-

ical simulations using a three dimensional expression tion for Flow Table for Use in Tests of Hydraulic Cement.

of the behaviour law and plasticity criterion for the Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 04.01, Am. Soc. Test.

ASTM Abrams cone and a paste cone test have been Mat., Easton, MD (2004).

Materials and Structures (2006) 39:501–509 509

10. Nguyen QD, Boger DV (1985) Direct yield stress measure- 22. Coussot P, Ancey C (1999) Rhéophysique des pâtes et des

ment with the vane method. J. Rheol., 29:335–347. suspensions, EDP Sciences, (in French).

11. Murata J (1984) Flow and deformation of fresh concrete. 23. Petersson O (2003) Simulation of Self-Compacting

Materials and Structures RILEM, 98:117–129. Concrete- Laboratory experiments and numerical modelling

12. Schowalter WR, Christensen G (1998) Toward a ratio- of testing method, Jring and L-Box test’, Proceedings of the

nalization of the slump test for fresh concrete: compar- 3rd international RILEM Symposium on Self-Compacting

isons of calculations and experiments. J. Rheol., 42(4):865– Concrete, RILEM PRO33 Reykjavik, Iceland, 202–207.

870. 24. Martys NS (2005) Study of a dissipative particle dynamics

13. Clayton S, Grice TG, Boger DV (2003) Analysis of the slump based approach for modeling suspensions. Journal of Rhe-

test for on-site yield stress measurement of mineral suspen- ology 49(2):401–424.

sions. Int. J. Miner. Process., 70:53–21. 25. Wallevik JE (2003) Rheology of particle suspensions; Fresh

14. Saak AW, Jennings HM, Shah SP (2004) A generalized ap- Concrete, Mortar and Cement Pastes with Various Types of

proach for the determination of yield stress by slump and Lignosulfonates. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Structural En-

slump flow. Cem Concr Res 34:363–371. gineering, The Norwegian University of Science and Tech-

15. Pashias N, Boger DV, Summers J, Glenister DJ (1996) a nology.

fifty cent rheometer for yield stress measurements. J. Rheol. 26. Tanigawa Y, Mori H (1989) Analytical study on deforma-

40(6):1179–1189. tion of fresh concrete, Journal of Engineering Mechanics

16. Hu C, de Larrard F, Sedran T, Boulay C, Bosc F, Deflo- 115(3):493–508.

renne F (1996) Validation of BTRHEOM, the new rheometer 27. Hu C (1995) Rheologie des bétons fluids (rheology of fluid

for soft-to-fluid concrete. Materials and Structures, RILEM, concretes), thèse de doctorat de l’ENPC (PhD Thesis) France

29(194):620–631. (In French).

17. Coussot P, Proust S, Ancey C (1996) Rheological interpre- 28. Chamberlain JA, Clayton S, Landman KA, Sader JE (2003)

tation of deposits of yield stress fluids. Journal of Non- Experimental validation of incipient failure of yield stress

Newtonian Fluid Mechanics 66(1):55–70. materials under gravitational loading, Journal of Rheology,

18. Covey GH, Stanmore BR (1981). Use of the parallel 47(6):1317–1329.

plate plastometer for the characterisation of viscous fluids 29. Tatersall GH, Banfill PGF (1983) The Rheology of Fresh

with a yield stress, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 8:249– Concrete, Pitman, London.

260. 30. O’Donovan EJ, Tanner RI (1984) Numerical study of the

19. Lipscomb GG, Denn MM (1984) Flow of Bingham fluids in Bingham squeeze film problem. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid

complex geometries. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 14:337– Mech, 15:75–83.

346. 31. Papanastasiou TC (1987) Flows of Materials with yield. J.

20. Wilson SDR (1993) Squeezing flow of a Bingham material. Rheol., 31:385–404.

J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 47:211–219. 32. Flow3D version 8.1, User’s manual, volume 1, 2004.

21. Adams MJ, Aydin I, Briscoe BJ, Sinha SK (1997) A finite 33. Oldroyd JG (1947) A rational formulation of the equations of

element analysis of the squeeze flow of an elasto-viscoplastic plastic flow for a Bingham solid. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc.,

paste material. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 71:41–57. 43:100–105.

- Ancor Bolts designUploaded byandyhr
- Physics Notes Class 11 Chapter 9 Mechanical Properties of SolidsUploaded byBasharat Hunzai
- Seismic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Buildings [SZ].pdfUploaded byafsajghfd1
- rheologyUploaded bySrikrishna Purohit
- Viscous flow in a pipeUploaded byAbhishek Sharma
- Asabe Pe 2011Uploaded byMohd Zulhafizi
- Recent Developments in Progressive Colapse DesignUploaded byAna-Camelia Sauca
- Cyclic PlasticityUploaded bymilan44
- Mad RevisedwordUploaded byAlfeus Shalonda
- The Result is Different When Powergraph Being Turned on and OffUploaded byHanumantha Thippeswamy
- appendix.pdfUploaded byRakesh
- ASTM C165Uploaded byLakruwan
- Modelling Multi-phase Liquid-sediment Scour and Resuspension Induced by Rapid Flows Using Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) Accelerated With a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU)Uploaded byfernando salim
- 01 Casing Dimensions, Materials & Strengths.pptUploaded byBogieGuntur
- RUUKKI Hot-rolled steel sheets, plates, coils - Mechanical cutting.pdfUploaded byX800XL
- Empirical Formulas for Collapse Resistance Under Nonuniform LoadingUploaded byClOudyo Virgílio
- 13.IJMPERDAPR201813Uploaded byTJPRC Publications
- vtUploaded byDeva Raj
- E767Uploaded byRufo Francisco
- Plasticity Flow Rule Isotropic Hardening PicsUploaded byabbasiftikhar1657
- Beam ColumUploaded bymn
- Midterm Wk 9 TuesUploaded byDuongPham
- 2141906Uploaded byJayant Sagar
- Chapter 4Uploaded byolibira
- Biomedical engineering.docxUploaded byJade
- DDDDDUploaded bykhurshedlakho
- compression test coneUploaded byfaizan
- 03-2012Uploaded bypio.miranda
- IJMPE 2016.pdfUploaded byANIS ROSYIDAH
- C-09-A403-SM&FMUploaded byPurushotham Neerugatti

- Continuous Medium Method & Wide Column Analogy - Soloution of Assignment No. 7 - T SectionUploaded byAfzal Waseem
- Link 180Uploaded byJose Luis Navarrete
- Rock Bolting FinalUploaded byHina Jalal
- Numerical Simulation of Progressive Collapse for a Reinforced Concrete BuildingUploaded byfoush basha
- Seismologi_3_Elastisitas Dan Gelombang SeismikUploaded byHilmi El Hafidz Fatahillah
- civil engeeringUploaded byfarhad_hadegh
- Mechanism of Chip Formation in MachiningUploaded byRahul Kumar K
- DD20_CircularPrecastConcreteManholes.pdfUploaded bylian9358
- Exsiting and AdditionUploaded byAnton170387
- LOT ThesisUploaded byRamesh Pallavoor
- Planetary Geology in the 1980sUploaded byBob Andrepont
- ApsimUploaded byvinhxuann
- EValuation of the Thixoformability of AA7004 and AA7075 AlloysUploaded byPhung Tuan Anh
- hygrothermal analysisUploaded byعمرو دراغمة
- Workbench Verification ManualUploaded byOskrRojas
- CMAMEUploaded byAmine Abf
- Lecture 1Uploaded byRakesh S India
- UHA-34Uploaded byChandra Shekar
- Course Contents MSc Civil (1)Uploaded byusman javed
- REODATA41.pdfUploaded byMunzuara Akther
- Engineering CalculatorsUploaded byirzan78
- 162_Course Details M.tech. (MED)Uploaded bySonali Mahure
- D 2290 – 00 ;RDIYOTA_Uploaded byquick_bad
- 3D Static and Dynamic AnalysisUploaded byvanmurthy
- Tank Foundation Uplift Force - Structural Engineering Other Technical Topics - Eng-TipsUploaded byAnitha Mercy
- Review Critical PlaneUploaded byJay Srivastava
- ShaftUploaded byBontio Armando Jeremia Hutagalung
- Analytical Model for the Effective Strain in FRP-wrapped Circular RC ColumnsUploaded bydxzaber
- Chapter 11/19 of Rock EngineeringUploaded byHakan_KURU
- 05 Chapter 3 Numerical ModelingUploaded byColinSim