Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers
Structures & Buildings 157
April 2004 Issue SB2
Pages 113127
Paper 13268
Received 10/02/2003
Accepted 18/02/2003
Keywords:
R. K. Dhir
concrete technology &
Director, Concrete
manufacture/design methods and
Technology Unit, University
aids/strength & testing of materials
of Dundee, UK
Role of cement content in specifications for concrete
durability: cement type influences
R. K. Dhir, M. J. McCarthy, S. Zhou and P. A. J. Tittle
In this paper, which describes part of a major
investigation, the role of cement content in
specifications for concrete durability is examined. The
main cements considered were (a) Portland cement
(PC; CEM I), (b) PC/30% PFA (CEM II/B-V) and (c)
PC/50% GGBS (CEM III/A), while other BS EN 197-1
cements were tested selectively. Concretes of fixed w/c
ratio (w/(PC + addition) ratio), but with cement contents
varying around the minimum values given in standards
were evaluated. The workability of concrete with low
cement and water contents was controlled with a
superplasticiser and the fines content was maintained by
the use of ground limestone as a filler. Tests were
carried out to examine these effects on the fresh,
engineering, permeation and durability properties of
concrete. The results show that at fixed w/c ratio,
reduction in cement content by up to 22% had no
adverse effect on most concrete properties and, if
anything, gave some improvement. The various cement
types and combinations tested had little effect on the
trends observed. Overall, it was concluded that, in
addition to minimum strength class and maximum w/c
ratio (and in some cases cover depth), specifying
minimum cement content for concrete durability was
not necessary.
1. INTRODUCTION
Specifications for concrete durability are normally made in
terms of prescriptive limiting mix parameters namely,
maximum w/c ratio (cement content for a manufactured
cement), minimum strength class and minimum cement content
(and in some cases cover depth) in relation to exposure
conditions. The main parameter controlling hardened concrete
properties (for a given set of conditions and materials) is the w/
c ratio and a reduction normally gives improvements in
strength, permeation and durability. Strength class within
durability specifications is included to reduce differences
caused by the various cement types and aggregates that may
be used, while the cement content provides the capacity to
bind chloride ions, carbon dioxide and other aggressive
chemicals, (cover depth provides the physical barrier protecting
reinforcement from the environment).
Of these parameters, there are disagreements on the role of
Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2
M. J. McCarthy
Senior Lecturer, Concrete
Technology Unit, University
of Dundee, UK
Specifications for concrete durability
S. Zhou P. A. J. Tittle
Research Fellow, Concrete Graduate Engineer, Tully
Technology Unit, University DeAth Consultants, East
of Dundee, UK Sussex, UK
cement content. Indeed, a survey in Europe indicates that of
15 countries, there are wide variations (up to 150 kg/m3 ) in
minimum cement contents specified for similar exposure
1
conditions and in some cases, the parameter is not used. As a
result, in the recently prepared European concrete standard, EN
206-1, only some informative provisions are given for Portland
cement concrete (PC; CEM I) and member states have made
their own national provisions for limiting values, within
2
complementary documents, for example BS 8500 in the UK.
In the UK, the minimum cement content listed in the standards
is related to the maximum w/c ratio, at a water content of
180 l/m3 , which provides an average workability with most
3
aggregates. If the desired hardened concrete performance can
be achieved independently of the cement content, then the
fresh properties could be controlled through the use of
water-reducing admixtures (plasticising and superplasticising)
available.
Data addressing this are limited, but suggest that the influence
of cement content at a fixed w/c ratio should have only a minor
3,4
effect on concrete properties. However, little information is
available on cements other than CEM I, such as combinations
with pulverised fuel ash (PFA) or ground granulated
blastfurnace slag (GGBS). Given the PFA and GGBS reaction
characteristics and their effect on various concrete properties, it
is possible they may influence performance associated with
variations in cement content at a given w/c ratio.
The results described in this paper cover part of a
comprehensive study, instigated by the British Standards
Institution (BSI) and carried out at the Concrete Technology
Unit, University of Dundee (directed by a project steering
committee). The project was funded by the BSI and industry
and its main objective was to examine the role of cement
5
content, at the limits of the specification BS 5328 and BS
2
8500 and beyond, on the properties of concrete at a given w/c
ratio. This paper considers the influence of cement content and
type, on the full range of fresh, engineering, permeation and
durability properties.
2. MATERIALS
The main cement constituents used in the test concretes
included a Portland cement of strength class 42.5 N (CEM I)
Dhir et al. 113
 6 7
conforming to BS EN 197-1, a PFA to BS 3892, Part 1 and a
8 16 24
GGBS to BS 6699. In addition, selective tests were carried out
on concrete with the following cements or additions, which
conformed to the appropriate standards, ground limestone
9 10 11
powder (LS), metakaolin (MK), silica fume (SF), rapid
6
hardening Portland cement (PC, 52.5 N) and sulphate resisting
12
Portland cement SRPC. A summary of the properties of these
materials is given in Table 1.
The coarse aggregate was natural gravel in 10 and 20 mm
13
fraction sizes, conforming to BS 882, with a particle density
of 2.60 and water absorption of 2.70%. The natural sand, also
to BS 882, was of medium grade, with corresponding values of
14
2.63 and 0.60% respectively. LS was used as filler, to
maintain the fines content (particles , 75:) in cement reduced
concrete.
A superplasticising admixture, conforming to BS 5075,
15
Part 3 was used in all cement and water reduced mixes and
in concretes where cement and water contents were at the
reference mix level, but the workability was raised (M5).
using either BS, CEN and ASTM standard methods, or
procedures developed at the University of Dundee, as
described in Table 2.
4. DEVELOPMENT OF TEST CONCRETES AND
PILOT STUDIES
To establish mix proportions, a pilot study was carried out with
the Portland cement and the following combinations:
(a) PC (CEM I); (b) PC/30%PFA (CEM II/B-V); and (c) PC/50%
GGBS (CEM III/A). As an example, the mix proportions for
CEM I concrete at 0.55 w/c ratio, are given in Table 3. This
25
series used the BRE mix design method to establish reference
mixes (M1) over the practical w/c ratio range (0.45, 0.55 and
0.65, i.e. water/(PC + addition (where used)) of average
workability (75 mm slump) but with no admixture. Minor
differences in water contents between cement types were used,
reflecting their effect on water demand. Thereafter, test mixes
were developed at these w/c ratios, with changes in water
content of
20 l/m3 (M2),
40 l/m3 (M3) and +20 l/m3 (M6)
and corresponding changes in cement content, compared to the
reference mixes.

3. PREPARATION AND TESTING
Concrete was produced using a horizontal, forced-action pan
mixer of 0.04 m3 capacity. After testing for fresh concrete
properties, concrete was cast into steel moulds, and stored for
24 h at 208C under damp hessian/plastic sheeting, prior to
demoulding and water curing at 208C until testing/exposure
(at 28 days, unless otherwise stated). The fresh, engineering,
permeation and durability properties of concrete were tested
In mixes with reduced cement and water contents (M2 and
M3), the aggregate contents were adjusted for yield and
superplasticising admixture used to maintain workability, while
for those with increased cement and water contents (M6), the
aggregate contents were similarly adjusted (for yield) and the
fine to total aggregate ratio increased for the higher
workability. An additional mix (M5), where the cement and
water contents were as for the reference mix, but workability

Property PC, 42.5N PFA1 GGBS LS MK CSF PC, SRPC

(CEMI) 52.5N

Fineness: m2 /kg 405 7.2 2 509 1600 3474 15750 510 405
Loss-on-ignition (LOI): % 1.4 5.0 0.9 43.6 1.0 1.3 1.0
Particle density 3.14 2.27 2.90 2.65 2.59 2.20 3.14 3.16
Compressive strength: N/mm2
7 day 45.5 48.5 48.0
28 day 60.0 62.0 59.0
Initial setting time: min 115 100 110
Soundness: mm 0.0 0.0 0.0
Bulk oxide composition: %
SiO2 21.0 46.9 35.8 55.1 95.3 21.2 21.0
Al2 O3 4.9 23.2 13.7 0.06 41.1 0.7 4.6 3.3
Fe2 O3 2.6 8.8 0.5 0.02 0.57 0.3 2.7 4.4
CaO 64.6 3.4 41.0 55.5 0.03 0.3 64.6 64.6
MgO 1.2 0.8 5.9 0.24 0.19 0.4 1.2 2.6
P2 O5 0.05 0.04
TiO2 1.5 0.43 0.01
SO3 3.3 2.3 1.0 0.3 3.2 2.3
K2 O 0.7 3.7 0.33 1.98 0.8 0.7 0.3
Na2 O 0.1 4.4 0.21 0.01 0.3 0.2 0.2
MnO 0.09 0.17
Bogue composition: %
C3 S 53.0 54.0 66.0
C2 S 21.0 19.0 9.0
C3 A 8.5 7.3 1.2
C4 AF 8.0 8.0 13.3

Notes: not applicable.

1
Water demand 95 %, strength factor 0.88.
2
% retention on 45 m sieve.

Table 1. Main properties of cements and additions used in concrete mixes

114 Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al.
 Concrete property Method Specimen details Test arrangement

Fresh properties
16
Workability (slump) BS 1881: Part 102 300 mm cone of hand- compacted Reduction in height on removal of cone
concrete taken as measure of workability
Bleeding ASTM C 232 14 l of hand-compacted concrete Bleed water periodically collected for up
17
(Method A) to 2 h.
Air content BS 1881: Part 101 8 l of hand-compacted concrete Monitor change in air pressure within a
16
(Method B) sealed test chamber.
Cohesion and BS 1881: Part 10216 Slumped concrete from slump test Visual assessment on slump cone resonse
finishability Dundee University to strike and 10 passes of float.

Engineering properties
16
Compressive strength BS 1881: Part 116 2 No. 100 mm cubes Tested periodically up to 180 days.
16
Flexural strength BS 1881: Part 118 2 No. 100 3 100 3 500 mm prisms Third point load testing at 28 days.
16
Static modulus of BS 1881: Part 121 1 No. 100 mm 3 300 mm Cyclic loading to (0.33 3 fcu ),
elasticity cylinder where fcu mean 28 day cube strength.
Strain measured.
18
Drying shrinkage Dundee University 3 No. 75 3 75 3 300 mm prisms Storage at 208C, 55% RH for up to
(water-cured to 7 days) 20 weeks.
Length change measured periodically.
18
Creep strain Dundee University 1 No. 100 mm 3 300 mm Constant stress of (0.50 3 fcu ) applied for
cylinder (wax sealed at 28 days) 12 weeks. Strain measured periodically.

Permeation properties
16
Initial surface absorption BS 1881: Part 208 2 No. 150 mm cubes (at 28 days, 200 mm head of water applied for 10 min,
(ISA) oven-dried at 1058C) prior to removal and measurement of rate
of water absorption into specimen.
19
Intrinsic air permeability Dundee University 2 No. 54 mm 3 50 mm cylinders Air pressures between 0.21 and 0.76 N/mm2
(at 28 days, oven-dried at 1058C) applied, and steady-state outflows
recorded. Calculation uses as solution to
Darcys Law.

Durability properties
20
Carbonation rate Dundee University 1 No. 100 3 100 3 500 mm prism 4.0% CO2 , 208C, 55% RH for up to
(at 28 days, air-dried at 208C, 20 weeks. Carbonation depth periodically
55% RH for 14 days, then wax measured using phenolphthalein indicator
21
sealed on 5 faces) solution.
Chloride diffusion Dundee University 2 No. 100 mm 3 25 mm slices Two-compartment diffusion cells, partially
22
(PD method) immersed in 5.0M NaCl solution, with a
PD of 7.5 V passed across the assembly.
Calculation uses a solution to Ficks Law.
Sulphate attack Dundee University 3 No. 75 3 75 3 300 mm prisms Expansion periodically measured during
immersion in 5.0% Na2 SO4 solution
(208C) for up to 1 year. Exposure
condition is 5.6 times the most severe
environment defined in BRE Digest 363.
23
Freezethaw (scaling) Draft CEN/TC 4 No. 150 3 150 3 50 mm slab 56 temperature cycles (208C over 24 h),
resistance (water/air cured to 31 days) with 67 ml of 3.0% NaCl solution ponded
on test surface.
Abrasion resistance Dundee University 1 No. 300 3 300 3 100 mm slab Abrasion depth measured after 15 minutes
24
(modified BCA) (at 28 days, air-dried at 208C, exposure to rotating/impacting wheels
55% RH for 14 days)

Note:  Water-cured (208C) to 28 days prior to pre-test treatment/exposure/testing, unless stated otherwise.

Table 2. Concrete test methods

was raised, using the superplasticising admixture, to match the
increased cement and water content mix (M6), was also tested.
Appropriate adjustments were also made to the aggregate
contents of these mixes to allow for the high workability.
Results from tests using CEM I for selected concrete properties
of this pilot study are given in Fig. 1. As can be seen, at a
given w/c ratio, reduction in cement content, compared to the
reference concrete (M1), gave little or no difference in 28 day
cube strength. For increased workability, achieved with the
admixture, (but the same cement content as the reference
concrete, M5) there was no noticeable effect, while that with
increased water and cement content (M6), gave minor
reductions in strength. The initial surface absorption at 10 min
(ISA-10) reduced progressively with cement content reduction,
with differences of between 0.25 and 0.30 ml/m2 per second

Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al. 115
 difference (or else benefits
W/C Mix PC Total SP: % Free water: Natural Natural gravel
(CEM 1) fines fines l/m3 sand with cement reduction), the
510 mm 1020 mm effect on carbonation led to
increases in depth, ranging
.
0 55 M6 355 360 0 195 630 390 780 from 2.0 to 5.0 mm between
M5 320 325 0.22 175 660 410 815 M1 and M3 over the w/c
M1 320 325 0 175 565 440 880 ratio range tested. While little
M2 280 285 0.29 155 590 460 920 or no effect was found for
M3 245 250 0.49 135 615 480 955 chloride diffusion with
varying cement content at
Table 3. Example of concrete mix proportions for pilot study (kg/m3 ) 0.45 and 0.55 w/c ratio, an
increase of 8.0 3 10
7 cm2 /s
was noted at w/c ratio 0.65
between M1 and M3. In
noted between M1 and M3 over the w/c ratio range tested. general, only minor changes occurred between the reference
Again, there was little difference between the reference concrete (M1) and increased cement content concrete (M6) for both
and mixes where workability was raised using the admixture properties.
(M5), but minor increases were noted with increased cement
content (M6). The results reflect the changes in volume of the The results suggest that some aspects of performance may be
more porous cement paste and denser aggregate fractions. affected adversely through cement content reduction at fixed
w/c ratio, due to deficiency of fines in these mixes (failure to
While the strength and permeation results suggest little achieve a closed structure) and reduction in chemical binding.

M6 M5 M1 (Reference) M2 M3

70 09
(a) 28 day cube strength (b) Initial surface absorption

60
W/C 065
28 day cube strength: N/mm2

07

045 055

ISA-10: ml/m2/s
50
045
05

40
055

03
30
W/C 065

20 01

40 60
(c) Depth of carbonation (d) Chloride diffusion

50
Chloride dif. coef: 107 cm2/s

30
Carbonation depth: mm

40
W/C 065
W/C 065
20 30

055
055 20

10
045
10
045

0 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Cement content: kg/m3 Cement content: kg/m3

Fig. 1. Influence of cement content on selected properties of CEM I concrete (pilot series)

116 Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al.
Similar effects were noted with the other cements tested. initiation time and the total bleeding at 2 h were influenced by
Therefore, mixes used in the study were designed on the basis reducing cement content. Indeed, for mix M2f, bleeding
that, for those with reduced cement content, limestone filler initiation was extended by 10 min and the water collected
would be included to maintain the fines content at the reduced by more than 60% at 2 h, compared to M1, while for
reference mix level. M3f, bleeding initiated at 1 h, but very small quantities of
water were collected over the test period. Minor differences
5. CEM I CONCRETE were found between M1 and the corresponding mixes, M5 and
The mix proportions for the CEM I concrete for the range of M6. The air content results given in Table 5 were all found to
w/c ratios are given in Table 4. These are similar to those of the be around the 1.0% level and given the accuracy of the test
pilot study (Table 3), except for the use of LS as filler in the method, can be taken to be essentially unaffected by the range
cement reduced mixes to maintain the fines content (M2f, of cement contents used.
M3f), and minor adjustments to the admixture dosages to
achieve the target slump of 75 mm. 5.2. Engineering properties
Figure 2(a) shows the 28 day cube strengths of CEM I concretes at
5.1. Fresh properties the various w/c ratios and Fig.2(b) the strength development to
It was noted that for cement reduced concrete mixes M2f and 180 days at 0.55 w/c ratio. The 28 day strengths increased with
M3f, there was very little change in cohesion and finishability cement reduction, compared to the reference mix, M1, ranging
over the range of w/c ratios tested, compared to the reference from about 5.0 N/mm2 for M3f at 0.45 w/c ratio to
concrete (M1). When cement content was increased (M6) or 8.0 N/mm2 at 0.65. With increased cement content (M6),
superplasticiser used to raise workability (M5), cohesion and reductions in 28 day strength compared to M1 of between 3.0 and
finishability improved slightly. In all cases, the test concretes 5.0 N/mm2 were obtained over the w/c ratio range. However, with
gave acceptable handling and finishing characteristics. the use of superplasticiser to raise workability (M5), 28 day
strengths were very similar to M1. In general, the strength
The results for the bleeding tests are given in Table 5. Both the changes with variation in cement content were maintained with
time (Fig. 1(b)).
W/C Mix PC Filler Total SP: % Free water: Natural Natural gravel
(CEM I) The test results for the other
3 engineering properties are
fines fines l/m Sand
510 mm 1020 mm given in Table 6. With
cement reduction, there was
0.65 M6 300 0 305 0 195 725 375 755 little or no change in flexural
M5 270 0 275 0.27 175 750 395 780 strength. The modulus of
M1 270 0 275 0 175 635 430 860 elasticity test results suggest
M2f 240 30 275 0.19 155 635 450 890
M3f 205 65 275 0.44 135 625 465 930 that with reduced cement
content, there was a gradual
increase in this property, with
0.55 M6 355 0 360 0 195 630 390 780
M5 320 0 325 0.22 175 660 410 815 values of 29.0 kN/mm2 for M1,
M1 320 0 325 0 175 565 440 880 compared to 31.0 kN/mm2 for
M2f 280 40 325 0.25 155 550 460 920 M3f. In this case, concrete
M3f 245 75 325 0.48 135 540 480 950 with increased cement content
(M6) and raised workability
0.45 M6 440 0 445 0 195 575 385 770 with superplasticiser addition
M5 390 0 395 0.15 175 600 405 815 (M5) gave slight reductions in
M1 390 0 395 0 175 510 435 875
the modulus of elasticity of up
M2f 345 45 395 0.16 155 490 455 920
M3f 300 90 395 0.34 135 470 480 960 to 1.0 kN/mm2 .

Table 4. CEM I concrete mix proportions with fines content adjusted (kg/m3 ) The drying shrinkage results
indicate that reductions in
cement content gave
W/C Mix Bleeding Air reductions in shrinkage,
content: which were up to
Initiation time: % free water in sampley % of M1 % approximately 100
min (by mass) %
microstrain between M1 and
M3f. Increasing the cement
0.55 M6 10 1.6 105 0.9
content (M6) or the use of
M5 10 1.8 120 0.8
M1 10 1.5 100 0.8 superplasticiser to raise
M2f 20 0.5 35 1.1 workability (M5), increased
M3f 60 , 0.1 3 1.1 drying shrinkage, compared
to M1, with greatest effects
y
total bleeding at 2 h (up to 100 microstrain) noted
Table 5. Bleeding characteristics and air contents of CEM I concretes for the former. The creep
strain results are less clear,

Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al. 117
 M6 M5 M1 (Reference) M2f M3f

70 70
(a) 28 day cube strength (b) Strength development

60
60
28 day cube strength: N/mm2

50

Cube strength: N/mm2

045
50
40

30
40
055
20

30
W/C 065
10
W/C 055

20 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 40 80 120 160 200
Cement content: kg/m3 Age of concrete: days

Fig. 2. Influence of cement content on: (a) 28 day cube strength; (b) strength development of CEM I concrete

second were obtained, with slightly greater differences noted at

Property W/C Mix CEM 1 % of M1
high w/c ratio. Increasing cement content (M6) led to minor
increases in ISA-10, compared to M1, of up to 0.08 ml/m2 per
Flexural strength: 0.55 M6 4.6 96
second, with greatest effects, again at high w/c ratio. The use
N/mm2 M5 4.5 94
M1 4.8 100 of superplasticiser to raise workability (M5) gave little
M2f 4.6 96 difference in ISA-10 compared to mix M1. As indicated in Fig.
M3f 4.6 96 3(b), similar trends were generally noted for air permeability to
those of ISA-10.
Modulus of elasticity: 0.55 M6 28.0 97
kN/mm2 M5 28.5 98
M1 29.0 100 5.4. Durability
M2f 30.0 103
M3f 31.0 107 The carbonation depths for CEM I concretes are given in
Fig. 4(a). With reduction in cement content, lower carbonation
depths for concretes of 0.55 and 0.65 w/c ratio were obtained,
Drying shrinkage: 0.55 M6 744 117
310
6 M5 700 110 with differences between M1 and M3f of 2.0 and 4.0 mm
M1 636 100 respectively. At 0.45 w/c ratio, no differences in carbonation
M2f 593 93 depth between concretes were found. With increased cement
M3f 542 85 content (M6), carbonation depth reduced slightly, by up to
2.0 mm, compared to M1 over the w/c ratio range. However,
Creep: 310
6 0.55 M6 790 121 the use of superplasticiser to raise workability (M5), tested at
M5 770 118 0.65 w/c ratio, gave little or no difference.
M1 650 100
M2f 720 110
M3f 535 82 The chloride diffusion index results are given in Fig. 4(b). With
cement reduction, these reduced by 8.0 3 10
7 cm2 /s and
1.5 3 10
7 cm2 /s between M1 and M3f for the 0.65 and
Table 6. Engineering properties of CEM I concretes
0.45 w/c ratio concretes respectively. Increasing cement
content (M6) lead to minor increases in chloride diffusion at
0.65 w/c ratio compared to mix M1, but had no effect at lower
suggesting increases in creep between M1 and M2f of w/c ratios. The use of superplasticiser to raise workability (M5;
70 microstrain, but reductions in excess of 100 microstrain, tested at 0.45 w/c ratio), similarly gave no difference.
between M1 and M3f. Increasing cement content (M6) or
raising workability with superplasticiser (M5) increased creep The expansion test results for concrete in the sulphate exposure
by 120 and 140 microstrain respectively. are given in Fig. 4(c). These indicate lower expansions with
reduced cement contents, with reductions of about
5.3. Permeation 60 microstrain between M1, and M2f and M3f concretes.
The ISA-10 results are given in Fig. 3(a) and indicate Increases in cement content (M6) lead to minor increases in
reductions in ISA-10 with reducing cement content. Indeed, expansion, whilst the use of superplasticiser to raise
between M1 and M3f, reductions of 0.2 to 0.25 ml/m2 per workability (M5) had little or no effect compared to M1.

118 Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al.
 M6 M5 M1 (Reference) M2f M3f

09 10
(a) Initial surface absorption (b) Air permeability

W/C 065 8
07

Air permeability: 1017 m2

W/C 065
055
ISA-10: ml/m2/s

045
055
05 6
045

03 4

01 2
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Cement content: kg/m3 Cement content: kg/m3

Fig. 3. Influence of cement content on: (a) initial surface absorption; (b) air permeability of CEM I concrete

40 60
(a) Depth of carbonation (b) Chloride diffusion

50

Chloride dif. coef: 107cm2/s

30
Carbonation depth: mm

40

W/C 065 W/C 065

20 30

055 055 20

10
045
045 10

0 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
3 3
Cement content: kg/m Cement content: kg/m

150
(c) Sulfate attack
M6

120
Sulfate expansion: 106

M5

90

M1 (Reference)

60

M2f

30
W/C 045
M3f

0
250 300 350 400 450 500
Cement content: kg/m3

Fig. 4. Influence of cement content on: (a) depth of carbonation; (b) chloride diffusion; (c) sulfate attack of CEM 1 concrete

Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al. 119
 Freezethaw scaling results of non air-entrained concrete are
given in Fig. 5(a). The comparisons are made at 28 cycles, since
this was the longest period that all concretes gave reliable
readings and had not totally disintegrated. With reduction in
cement content, the quantity of scaled material increased, with
differences of slightly more than 1.0 kg/m2 measured between
M1 and M3f. Increasing cement content (M6) led to slight
reductions in the level of scaling.
The influence of cement content on abrasion is shown in
Fig. 5(b) which indicates relatively minor effects on abrasion
depth. Indeed, whilst abrasion of M3f concrete was slightly
lower and M6 slightly higher than M1, abrasion depths for all
concretes were within 0.1 mm.
6. CEM II/B-V AND CEM/IIIA CONCRETE
Examples of the mix proportions for the CEM II/B-V and
CEM III/A concretes at 0.55 w/c ratio are given in Table 7.
These were similarly proportioned to CEM I concretes (Table 4),
with a minor adjustment to the reference mix water content of
the CEM II/B-V concrete (used at all w/c ratios) to account for
its reduced water demand. The changes in cement and water
contents were as for CEM I concretes and the same w/c ratios
were tested. LS and superplasticising admixture were also used

M6 M5 M1 (Reference) M2f M3f

8 15
(a) Freeze-thaw scaling (b) Abrasion depth

12
F/T scaling (28 cycles): kg/m2

Abrasion depth: mm
09

06

2
03

W/C 045 W/C 050

0 0
250 300 350 400 450 500 200 250 300 350 400 450
Cement content: kg/m3 Cement content: kg/m3

Fig. 5. Influence of cement content on: (a) freezethaw scaling; (b) abrasion depth of CEM I concrete

(a) CEM II/B-V

W/C Mix PC PFA Filler Total SP: % Free: Natural Natural gravel
(CEM 1) fines fines water: sand
l/m3 510 mm 1020 mm

0.55 M6 235 100 0 341 0 185 610 400 805

M5 210 90 0 306 0.17 165 645 420 835
M1 210 90 0 306 0 165 550 450 900
M2f 185 80 33 305 0.15 145 545 470 935
M3f 160 70 71 305 0.53 125 525 490 980
(b) CEM III/A

W/C Mix PC GGBS Filler Total SP: % Free Natural Natural gravel
(CEM 1) fines fines water: sand
l/m3 510 mm 1020 mm

0.55 M6 175 175 0 356 0 195 620 390 780

M5 160 160 0 326 0.16 175 650 410 815
M1 160 160 0 326 0 175 555 440 880
M2f 140 140 40 325 0.18 155 540 460 920
M3f 120 120 75 320 0.33 135 530 480 955

Table 7. Example of mix proportions for CEM II/B-V and CEM III/A concretes (kg/m3 )

120 Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al.
in the appropriate mixes. The test results for the CEM II/B-V However, greater relative improvements were apparent in the
and CEM III/A concretes are given in Figs 69 and former concrete mixes. While this behaviour was generally
comparisons are made between the reference mix M1 and M2f, similar with test age for CEM I and CEM II/B-V concrete,
M3f and M6 for the various properties of these concretes with differences in long-term strength of CEM III/A concrete, tended
CEM I concrete in Table 8. to reduce with cement content. Test results for the other
engineering properties (Table 8) indicate that, while there were
As with CEM I, the cohesion and finishability of CEM II/B-V differences in the level of changes occurring, with variation in
and CEM III/A concretes with cement reduction were the same cement content, between concretes, which may relate to the
or slightly poorer than those of the reference mix M1, while different starting points (or strengths), consistent trends were
minor improvements were noted with increased cement generally obtained in all cases.
content.
The effect of cement content on the ISA-10 of CEM II/B-V and
The 28 day strength tests for CEM II/B-V and CEM III/A CEM III/A concretes (Fig. 7) was similar to that of CEM I
concretes (Figs 6(a) and 6(b)) gave similar changes in strength concrete, although with reductions in cement content, less
with variations in cement content, compared to the significant reductions in water absorption were found for the
corresponding reference mixes M1, to those of CEM I (Table 8). former concretes, compared to the references (M1, Table 8).

M6 M5 M1 (Reference) M2f M3f

70 70
(a) CEM II/B-V concrete (b) CEM III/A concrete

60 60

28 day cube strength: N/mm2

28 day cube strength: N/mm2

50 50

40 045 40

045
055
30 30
055
W/C 065
20 W/C 065 20

10 10
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Cement content: kg/m3 Cement content: kg/m3

Fig. 6. Effect of cement content on 28 day cube strength of: (a) CEM II/B-V; (b) CEM III/A concretes

M6 M5 M1 (Reference) M2f M3f

09 09
(a) CEM II/B-V concrete (b) CEM III/A concrete

07 W/C 065 07
W/C 065 055
ISA-10: ml/m2 per s
ISA-10: ml/m2 per s

055
05 05
045
045

03 03

01 01
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Cement content: kg/m3 Cement content: kg/m3

Fig. 7. Effect of cement content on initial surface absorption of: (a) CEM II/B-V; (b) CEM III/A concretes

Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al. 121
 M6 M5 M1 (Reference) M2f M3f

60 60
(a) CEM II/B-V concrete (b) CEM III/A concrete

50 50

Carbonation depth: mm
Carbonation depth: mm

40 40
W/C 065 W/C 065
30 30

055
055
20 20
045 045

10 10

0 0
50 50
(a) CEM II/B-V concrete (b) CEM III/A concrete

40 40
Chloride diff. coef.: 107 cm2/s

Chloride diff. coef.: 107 cm2/s

30 W/C 065 30
W/C 065

20 20
055

055
10 045 10
045

0 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Cement content: kg/m3 Cement content: kg/m3

Fig. 8. Effect of cement content on depth of carbonation and chloride diffusion of: (a) CEM II/B-V; (b) CEM III/A concretes

With increasing cement content, similar increases in absorption
were noted in all cases. The effects of cement type and content
on air permeability (Table 8) were similar to those of ISA-10.
The carbonation depths of CEM II/B-V and CEM III/A concretes
(Fig. 8), indicate similar trends with variation in cement
content at a given w/c ratio to those of CEM I concrete (Table
8). The exception to this was mix M5, where slight variations
between concretes were obtained. The chloride diffusion index
test results for CEM II/B-V and CEM III/A concretes (Fig. 8)
also gave comparable trends with variation in cement content
to those of CEM I, with little or no effect at low w/c ratio and
more noticeable effects as this increased (Table 8). The
influences of cement content on sulphate expansion for CEM
II/B-V and CEM III/A concretes were also in line with those
noted for CEM I concrete (Table 8).
For freezethaw exposure to 28 test cycles, mixes with lowest
cement content exhibited least scaling (Fig. 9) for CEM II/B-V
and CEM III/A concrete. This was in contrast to CEM I, where
the reference concrete (M1) had lower scaling (Table 8). With
increased cement content (M6), scaling was lower for CEM II/
B-V and slightly higher for CEM III/A than M1, compared to
minor reductions for CEM I. Abrasion depth tended to reduce
with cement content for both CEM II/B-V and CEM III/A
concretes (Fig. 9). The changes for these were slightly greater
than those of CEM I concrete (Table 8). With increased cement
content (M6) only minor differences were noted for all
concretes compared to their references.
7. OTHER CONCRETE TYPES
To widen the scope of the study and application of its findings,
a range of concretes containing a further eleven cements and
combinations, covered in BS EN 197-1 were also examined
selectively, namely: (a) PC/20%LS; (b) PC/15%MK; (c) PC/
10%SF; (d) PC/25%PFA/5%LS; (e) PC/25%PFA/5%MK; ( f ) PC/
25%PFA/5%SF; (g) PC/45%GGBS/5%LS; (h) PC/45%GGBS/
5%MK; (i) PC/45%GGBS/5%SF); ( j) PC-52.5N; and (k) SRPC. In
these cases, reference mix M1 and test mix M2f were
considered and selective properties tested.
The test results for these concretes are given in Table 9 and
indicate that similar trends to those noted for the CEM I, CEM
II/B-V and CEM III/A concretes were generally found. Indeed,

122 Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al.
 M6 M1 (Reference) M3f

15 15
(a) CEM II/B-V concrete (b) CEM II/A concrete

12 12
F/T scaling (28 cycles): kg/m2

F/T scaling (28 cycles): kg/m2

9 9

6 6

3 3

W/C 045 W/C 045

0 0
15 15
(a) CEM II/B-V concrete (b) CEM III/A concrete

12 12
Abrasion depth: mm

Abrasion depth: mm
09 09

06 06

03 03

W/C 050
W/C 050

0 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Cement content: kg/m3 Cement content: kg/m3

Fig. 9. Effect of cement content on freezethaw scaling and abrasion depth of: (a) CEM II/B-V; (b) CEM III/A concretes

similar or improved performance for cube strength, permeation,
carbonation depths and chloride diffusion indices was obtained
in all cases, between reference and cement reduced mixes.
8. DISCUSSION
At a given w/c ratio
(a) the variations in cement and water content used change
the cement paste and aggregate contents in the test
concretes
(b) for cement and water reduced mixes, the use of LS as filler
(finer than cement), to maintain the fines content, is likely
to influence the availability of nucleation sites for cement
hydration, packing of solids and achievement of a closed
structure
(c) the use of the superplasticising admixture may modify the
fresh properties and in dispersing solids, hydration
characteristics between concretes
(d) the performance of the reference mixes with the various
cements and combinations give the test concretes different
starting points. These effects modify concrete, the degree to
which depends mainly on the relative importance of the
paste and aggregate phases on the specific property of
concrete under investigation.
The influence of cement content at a given w/c ratio led to
minor changes in the cohesion and finishability of concrete,
but for the materials used, acceptable handling properties were
always achieved. The effects of less water in cement-reduced
concrete and particle packing, through the inclusion of filler,
contribute to reduced bleeding, for all cement types tested. The
air content results suggest no effect of cement content or type
on this property and that the ground limestone filler and
superplasticising admixture do not cause significant air-
entrainment.
Increased compressive strength with reduction in cement
content reflects the reduction in pore volume associated with
less cement paste (relatively high porosity) and increased
aggregate contents (low porosity) in these mixes. The increase
in physical contact between aggregates may also contribute to
26
this, although increased interfacial transition zones (ITZ)
could partly offset it. The use of LS is likely to give rise to
improved concrete microstructure, through potential chemical

Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al. 123
124
Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2

Property Mix Difference compared to M1 reference

CEM I CEM II/B-V CEM III/A

0.65 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.65 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.65 0.55 0.50 0.45

28 day Cube strength: N/m2 M6
3.5
3.0
2.0
2.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
1.0
2.5
M2f +2.5 +2.5 +2.0 +2.5 +4.0 +2.0 +2.5 +2.5 +3.0
M3f +7.5 +6.5 +6.0 +6.5 +8.5 +8.0 +6.5 +8.5 +7.5

Flexural strength: N/mm2 M6
0.2
0.2
0.1 +0.1
0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.2
0.2
M2f 0
0.2
0.1 +0.5 +0.3 +0.3 +0.6 +0.4 +0.5
M3f
0.2
0.2
0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.4 +0.6 +0.5 +0.4
Specifications for concrete durability

Modulus of elasticity: kN/mm2 M6
1.0
1.5
1.0

M2f +1.0 +4.5 +4.5
M3f +2.0 +4.5 +6.0

Drying shrinkage microstrain M6 +108 +62 +112

M2f
43
77
135
M3f
96
144
163

Creep strain: microstrain M6 +140 +35 +37

M2f +130

M3f
115
50
63

ISA-10: ml/m2 per second M6 0 +0.04 +0.03 +0.03 +0.04 +0.04 +0.07 +0.06 +0.05
M2f
0.19
0.18 +0.18
0.06
0.07
0.05
0.07 +0.09
0.08
M3f +0.31 +0.29
0.27
0.16
0.17
0.14
0.23
0.21
0.20

Air permeability: m2 3 10
17 M6 +0.5 +0.3 +0.17

M2f
1.5
M3f
2.6
2.1
2.5

Carbonation depth: mm M6
1.5
1.5
0.5
1.5
1.0
2.0
2.0
0.5
1.5
M2f
4.0
5.0
3.5
M3f
3.0
2.5 +0.5
4.5
4.5
0.5
1.0
2.0
0.5
Dhir et al.

Chloride diffusion index: M6 +1.8 +0.6 +0.9 +1.5 +0.6 +0.9 +1.4 +1.3 +0.5
cm2 /second 3 10
9 M2f +0.2 0
M3f
3.6
4.3
1.9
0.3
4.7
0.7
3.0
1.7
0.3
 27, 28
reaction with cement and absorption/adsorption of water,

+0.54

0.88
influencing available free water. These effects were similar for

+3

38

49
all concretes, but gave better relative improvements at high
w/c ratio and for CEM II/B-V and CEM III/A and some of the
other combinations tested. Early and long-term strength of the

0.07

0.18
various concretes was generally unaffected by cement content.

The exception to this was CEM III/A concrete, which gave
reduced strength gains at later ages with reduced cement
content, suggesting long-term reactivity of pozzolanic
materials, which rely on lime for activation, may be curtailed.

The minor benefits in flexural strength with cement reduction
for CEM II/B-V and CEM III/A concretes appear to relate to the
different starting points, between concretes. The slight

reductions in the flexural/cube strength ratios, with cement

reduction in most cases, suggest this may cause a minor
increase in brittleness. The increase in modulus of elasticity
+5.16

1.7

with cement reduction is mainly due to the effect of increased

+15

74

89

aggregate volume, providing restraint and reduced cement

paste, undergoing elastic deformation, in the mixes. The slight
benefits noted with CEM II/B-V and CEM III/A, may again
+0.18

0.38

relate to the different starting points. The relative quantities

and actions of cement paste (deforming) and aggregate
(restraining) are also evident in the shrinkage and creep results,
although cement type had no effect in these cases.

The effects noted above, in terms of quantities and porosities of

cement paste and aggregates in concrete, are likely to influence
permeation, giving reductions in ISA-10 and air permeability

with decreasing cement contents. The benefits of filler on

microstructure are also likely to contribute and seem to be
dominant over any effects of ITZ. In reducing cement content,

0.28

+1.52

the relative improvement was influenced by the reference

+4

60

65

concrete quality. This effect is greater in more permeable

concretes and hence those of high w/c ratio and containing
CEM I benefited more than the other concretes.
Table 8. Comparison of effect of cement content for various cement type concretes
+0.05

0.01

0.07

The relative quantities of cement and aggregates and presence

of filler influence concrete durability. For carbonation and
chloride diffusion, the enhanced permeation with reduced
cement content is offset by corresponding influences on

chemical binding of carbon dioxide and chloride ions. Similar

performance for these properties between reference and cement
reduced mixes at low w/c ratio suggests a balance between the

effects of reduced alkalinity/chloride binding and enhanced

microstructure. With increased w/c ratio, the microstructure
appears to have a greater influence than binding. Whilst little
effect is noted with increased cement content for carbonation,
M2f
M3f

M2f
M3f

M2f
M3f
M6

M6

M6

the greater influence of microstructure is apparent for chloride

ingress. As with permeation, the effects of cement content
appear to be slightly greater where the reference concrete has
higher values. Improvements in sulphate resistance, with
reduced cement content, are due both to reduction in cement
Freezethaw scaling at 28

paste and thus potential for expansive product formation with

Sulfate attack microstrain

sulphate exposure and the effects of enhanced microstructure.

Notes: not tested.
Abrasion depth: mm

The behaviour was consistent between cements.

cycles: kg/m2

Factors influencing freezethaw scaling include concrete

strength and pore space for pressure relief, which mainly
control deterioration rates. The results suggest that the
characteristics of cement are more critical than the quantity of
freezable water and changing cement content in relation to

Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al. 125
 Cement/combination Mix W/C 0.55 W/C 0.65 W/C 0.45

Cement 28 day ISA
10: Cement Carbonation Cement Chloride diff.

content: strength: ml/m2 per content: depth: content: Index: 3
kg/m3 N/mm2 second kg/m3 mm kg/m3 10
7 cm2 /s

CEM II/A-L M1 320 33.5 0.60 270 36.5 390 10.9

(PC/20%LS) M2f 280 37.0 0.51 240 37.0 345 9.1
CEM II/A-Q M1 320 48.5 0.41 270 36.0 390 2.3
(PC/15%MK) M2f 280 57.5 0.35 240 34.5 345 1.1
CEM II/A-D M1 320 50.0 0.35 270 33.0 390 3.9
(PC/10%SF) M2f 280 58.5 0.26 240 27.0 345 1.8
CEM II/B-M M1 300 28.0 0.53 255 31.0 365 7.6
(PC/25%PFA/5%LS) M2f 265 30.5 0.48 225 27.0 320 6.6
CEM II/B-M M1 300 30.5 0.43 255 32.0 365 4.1
(PC/25%PFA/5%MK) M2f 265 34.5 0.37 225 27.0 320 4.4
CEM 11/B-M M1 300 33.0 0.42 255 34.0 365 5.1
(PC/25%PFA/5%SF) M2f 265 38.0 0.32 225 28.5 320 5.7
CEM V/A M1 320 31.0 0.58 270 36.0 390 3.8
(PC/45%GGBS/5%LS) M2f 280 33.0 0.53 240 33.5 345 3.0
CEM V/A M1 320 37.0 0.51 270 35.0 390 1.1
(PC/45%GGBS/5%MK) M2f 280 39.5 0.41 240 30.0 345 0.8
CEM V/A M1 320 38.0 0.47 270 37.5 390 1.6
(PC45%GGBS/5%SF) M2f 280 41.5 0.35 240 35.0 345 1.2
PC, 52.5N M1 320 44.0 0.55
M2f 280 46.0 0.40
SRPC M1 320 38.5 0.51
M2f 280 40.5 0.40

Notes: all mixes have 75 mm nominal slump.

not tested.

Table 9. Influence of cement content on selected properties of various concretes

damage. Although not tested in the study, it is likely that the
use of air-entrainment would reduce the differences observed
29
between cement content and type. Reductions in abrasion
with cement content are due to reduced cement paste (more
porous) and increased aggregates (denser) and hence wearing
material at the concrete surface. This effect was greater in CEM
II/B-V concrete (lowest strength) suggesting that the relative
wearing resistances of the aggregate and cement paste phases
are important.
Overall, the durability results highlight the importance of
achieving a closed structure to ensure performance. These may
be met effectively by controlling the fine material content of
concrete, which can be through the use of ground limestone, at
the required w/c ratio.
9. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
The results of the study are of direct practical relevance to
engineers specifying concrete for different exposure classes.
Indeed, taken collectively, the findings suggest that the use of
the main parameters for durability specification, maximum w/c
ratio, minimum strength class and minimum cement content
(and in some cases cover depth), as is currently the case in the
majority of national standards, is not necessary and the
exclusion of minimum cement content should not be
detrimental to the performance of concrete in structures.
Without the need for a cement content limit, greater scope for
more efficient exploitation of available materials, with reduced
water and cement contents in mix design will be possible. As
shown by the results obtained, many aspects of concrete
performance are enhanced and the risk of problems often
associated with high cement contents, including heat of
hydration, drying shrinkage, creep and damaging alkali-silica
reaction would be reduced. Furthermore, this approach is likely
to provide a number of environmental and economic benefits
in the use of concrete.
When the issue of durability is considered in the development
or revision of future standards, the findings of this study
suggest that in addition to the mix limit parameters, the
following factors, (a) the importance of achieving a closed
structure and (b) the influence of cement type, which can be
greater than cement content, and their impact on performance
of concrete also need to be considered.
10. CONCLUSION
The results indicate that the achievement of a closed structure
through the provision of adequate fines is an important factor
in ensuring concrete durability. With cement reduction, this
was met in the study through the use of LS filler. Using this
approach, the main conclusions from the work were as follows.
(a) For the range of cements tested, reduction in cement
content at a given w/c ratio essentially had only a minor
effect on cohesion, finishability and air content. Bleeding
reduced significantly in cement reduced concrete mixes.
(b) Most engineering properties were improved with reduction
in cement content at a given w/c ratio. Similar behaviour
was noted for the cements and combinations tested.
(c) For the cements and combinations tested, significant
improvements in permeation properties (ISA-10 and
intrinsic air permeability) were obtained with cement
reduction.

126 Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability Dhir et al.
(d) Reduction in cement contents did not adversely affect the
durability of concrete for the cements and combinations
tested.
(e) The practical implications suggest that in addition to w/c
ratio and strength class (and in some cases cover depth), it
is not necessary to specify minimum cement content for
concrete durability with the range of cements and cement
combinations to EN 197-1. The need to ensure a closed
structure and to consider cement type influences on
durability are important issues in future standard
developments.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge the financial support for the project
provided by the British Standards Institution, and industrial
partners, namely BAA plc, British Nuclear Fuels plc, Castle
Cement plc, Feb MBT, MAC spa, North, East and West of
Scotland Water Authorities, and Quarry Products Association.
The authors are also indebted to the Steering Committee
Members who gave freely of their time to guide the project,
namely, Mr C Bolton, Mr J Barling, Professor S B Desai,
Professor T A Harrison, Mr R Khurana, Mr R Jones, Mr P
Livesey and Mr M Will. Mr S A Menzies is thanked for his
assistance during the experimental work.
REFERENCES
1. MARSH B. A Summary of European Concreting Practice.
Building Research Establishment Report BR 294, BRE,
Garston, 1993.
2. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Concretecomplementary
British Standard to BS EN 2061, BSI, Milton Keynes,
2002, BS 8500 Parts 1 and 2.
3. HARRISON T. A. The Role of Minimum Cement Content in the
Achievement of Durability Concrete. ACT Course Lecture
Notes, 1997.
4. DHIR R. K., TITTLE P. A. J. and MCCARTHY M. J. Role of
cement content in specifications for durability of
concretea review. Concrete, 2000, Nov/Dec, 6876.
5. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Guide to Specifying
Concrete, ConcretePart 1, BSI, Milton Keynes, 1997, BS
5328: Part 1.
6. BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTION. Definitions and Composition,
Cement: Composition, Specifications and Conformity
Criteria for Common CementsPart 1. BSI, Milton Keynes,
2000, BS EN 1971
7. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Pulverized-fuel Ash for Use
with Portland Cement. BSI, Milton Keynes, 1997, BS 3892:
Part 1.
8. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Ground Granulated Blast
Furnace Slag for Use with Portland Cement. BSI, Milton
Keynes, 1992, BS 6699.
9. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Aggregate for Concrete
Including Those for Use in Roads and Pavements. BSI,
Milton Keynes, 2000, prEN 12620.
10. BRITISH BOARD OF AGREMENT. Agrement Certificate No 98/
3540, Metastar Metakaolin, 1999.
11. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Silica Fume for Concrete
Please email, fax or post your discussion contributions to the secretary by 1 October 2004: email: daniela.wong@ice.org.uk;
fax: 44 (0)20 7799 1325; or post to Daniela Wong, Journals Department, Institution of Civil Engineers, 17 Great George Street,
London SW1P 3AA.
Structures & Buildings 157 Issue SB2 Specifications for concrete durability
Definitions, Requirements and Conformity Control. BSI,
Milton Keynes, 1998, pr EN 13263.
12. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Sulfate Resisting Portland
Cement, BSI, Milton Keynes, 2000, BS 4027.
13. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Aggregates from Natural
Resources for Concrete. BSI, Milton Keynes, 1992, BS 882.
14. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Limestone Fines for Use
with Portland Cement. BSI, Milton Keynes, 2000, BS 7979.
15. BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTE. Superplasticizing Admixtures.
BSI, Milton Keynes, 1985, BS 5075: Part 3.
16. BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTION. Methods of testing concrete/
testing concrete. BSI, Milton Keynes, 1983, BS 1881: Parts
102 106,116, 118, 121, and 1996, Part 208.
17. AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS. Test Method
for Bleeding of Concrete. ASTM, Philadelphia, 1992, ASTM
C232-92.
18. ONG L T. Studies of the Engineering Properties of Hardened
Concrete Incorporating Pulverised-fuel Ash as a Pozzolana.
Internal report, University of Dundee, 1983.
19. DHIR R. K., HEWLETT P. C. and CHAN Y. N. Near surface
characteristics of concrete: intrinsic permeability. Magazine
of Concrete Research, 1989, 41, No. 147, 8797.
20. DHIR R. K., JONES M. R. and MUNDAY J. G. L. A practical
approach to studying carbonation of concrete. Concrete,
1985, 19, No. 10, 3234.
21. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION (CEN). Method
for Measurement of Hardened Concrete Carbonation Depth,
drafted CEN/TC51/WG12/TG5, 1995, modified in
University of Dundee, 1998.
22. DHIR R. K., JONES M. R., AHMED H. E. H. and SENEVIRATNE
A. M. G. Rapid estimation of chloride diffusion coefficient
in concrete. Magazine of Concrete Research, 1990, 42, No.
152, 177185.
23. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION (CEN). Test
Methods for the FreezeThaw Resistance of Concrete-test
with Water or with Sodium Chloride Solution, Part 1:
Scaling. drafted pr ENV CEN/TC 51, 1996.
24. DHIR R. K., HEWLETT P. C. and CHAN Y. N. Near-surface
characteristics of concrete: abrasion resistance. Materials
and Structures, 1991, 24, 122128.
25. TEYCHENNE D. C., NICHOLLS J. C., FRANKLIN R. E. and HOBBS
D. W. Design of Normal Concrete Mixes, Building Research
Establishment (BRE), Department of the Environment
(DOE), London, 1988.
26. JONES R. and KAPLAN M. F. The effects of coarse aggregate
on the mode of failure of concrete in compression and
flexure. Magazine of Concrete Research, 1957, 9, No. 26,
8994.
27. LARRARD F. D. Ultrafine particles for the making of very
high strength concretes. Cement and Concrete Research,
1989, 19, 161172.
28. FELDMAN R. F., RAMACHANDRAN V. S. and SEREDA P. J.
Influence of CaCO3 on the hydration of 3CaO.Al2 O3 . Journal
of the American Ceramic Society, 1965, 48, No. 1, 2530.
29. DHIR R. K., MCCARTHY M. J., LIMBACHIYA M. C., ZHANG D. S.
and EL-SAYED H. PFA concrete: air-entrainment and
freezethaw durability. Magazine of Concrete Research,
1999, 51, No. 1, 5364.
Dhir et al. 127