Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers
Structures & Buildings 159
August 2006 Issue SB4
Pages 229242
Paper 13962
Received 02/09/04
Accepted 16/11/05
Keywords:
codes of practice and standards/ Ravindra K. Dhir
concrete technology & Director, CTU, University of
manufacture/ strength & testing of Dundee, UK
materials
Role of cement content in specifications for concrete
durability: aggregate type influences
R. K. Dhir OBE, PhD, CEng, MIMM, Hon FICT, FGS, M. J. McCarthy
In this paper, the second of the series, examining the
role of cement content in specifying concrete durability,
the influences of aggregate characteristics are
considered. As for the first paper, the reported work was
carried out within a framework of mix adjustments,
required to produce practical concretes, that is, with the
inclusion of filler and superplasticising admixture. A total
of five UK normalweight aggregates and a lightweight
aggregate were examined. It is shown that, for a given
w/c ratio and aggregate type, reduction in cement and
water contents (and the associated mix adjustments) did
not adversely affect concrete properties (fresh, bulk
engineering, permeation and durability). Indeed, many
aspects of concrete performance were enhanced, with
the improvements with cement reduction generally
being greatest for aggregates having low absorption.
Furthermore, the influence of cement content at a given
w/c ratio on durability was found to be less significant
than that of a change in aggregate type for the range of
UK materials tested. The implications of the study for
concrete construction practice are discussed.
1. INTRODUCTION
Concrete durability specifications are usually made by
prescription and commonly include mix parameters, such as
minimum cement content, maximum water/cement (w/c) ratio
and minimum-strength class for specific exposure
conditions. 1,2 There have, however, been variations
internationally in the levels that these are set at and, it has
been questioned whether all are necessary to achieve
performance. 35 Studies by the current authors examined this 6
and, covering a range of cement types, showed that variations
in cement content at fixed w/c ratio did not adversely affect
concrete performance and hence that it was not necessary to
specify minimum cement content.
In examining this issue, it was noted that the majority of
standards for specifying concrete durability are normally taken
to apply to the full range of aggregates available. There is,
however, evidence to suggest that aggregate properties, in
particular those of higher porosity,7 can influence concrete
durability. In investigating the role of cement content,
therefore, there was also the need to consider the effect of
aggregate properties, within mix-limit frameworks for
Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4
Michael J. McCarthy Paul A. J. Tittle Shengjun Zhou
Senior Lecturer, CTU, Graduate Engineer, Tully Research Fellow, CTU,
University of Dundee, UK DeAth Consultants, UK University of Dundee, UK
PhD, P. A. J. Tittle PhD and S. Zhou PhD
specifying concrete durability. Moreover, an understanding of
the impact of this factor on durability is essential to the
advancement of specification, the main objective of the study.
This paper, therefore, describes results obtained using a range
of aggregates available in the UK.
2. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME
In designing the test programme, the approach followed was to
examine concretes with varying cement and water contents
and to adjust other ingredients in the mix, such that
requirementsincluding workability and mix-fines content
were controlled and hence that the concretes considered were
practical. In addition, to ensure wide applicability, the study
used materials covering the range of properties typically found
in construction situations in the UK. The mixes considered and
materials used were, therefore, selected following consultation
with industry and advice from the Chairman of the BSI
Committee responsible for BS 5328 8 and BS 8500. 2
Six coarse aggregate types (A1A6), with varying
characteristics were selected. The w/c ratios used ranged from
0.65 to 0.45 and covered those given in BS 5328, 8 current at
the start of the study for different exposure conditions. For
each aggregate type and w/c ratio a reference mix of average
workability was designed and test mixes with cement and
water contents adjusted in equal proportions to cover values
higher and lower than the minimum cement contents of the
standard developed.
As noted above, in examining the effect of cement content, it
was necessary to modify the contents of other ingredients of
the concrete mixes to satisfy specific requirements. This was
done as follows: (a) superplasticiser was used in cement
reduced mixes to maintain workability at the required level; (b)
aggregate contents were adjusted to maintain concrete yield;
and (c) the fines content (particles , 75 m) was controlled, to
keep this at the reference mix level.
The study covered the main durability processes for which
minimum cement contents are specified in standards. In
addition, given that changing cement content may influence
other aspects of performance, the impact on fresh and
engineering properties of concrete was also examined.
Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al. 229
 The results are presented for most properties by (a) examining

Honey-combed
A6: lightweight
(sintered PFA)
the effects of varying cement content with natural gravel

Rounded
aggregate (A3), (b) comparing the effects of aggregates on the

612

1.64

0.90
1.03
15.1




M1 reference mixes and (c) considering the effects of aggregate
type on varying cement content. The impact of the other
changes to the concrete mixes noted above, are covered within
the discussion of the results.

A5: crushed

magnesium
limestone
dolomitic

Angular
3. MATERIALS

Rough
520

2.60

1.30
1.42
3.5
9
17
34
28
3.1. Aggregates
Five normalweight coarse aggregates (A1A5), conforming to
BS 8829 and covering the typical practical range were used,

A4: jurassic oolitic

Table 1. Aggregate impact value (AIV) and aggregate crushing

2.56

1.49
1.56
20

2.8
value (ACV), which are a measure of resistance to

limestone

Smooth
Flaky
pulverisation, generally had progressively higher values (i.e.

44
31
33
30
reducing resistance) from A1 to A5. Water absorption for these
varied from between 0.3 and 4.1%, by mass. To extend the

2.53

1.42
1.58
10

4.1
range, a 612 mm lightweight aggregate 10 (A6), sintered
pulverised fuel ash (PFA) was included, Table 1. All aggregates
were used with a natural medium-grade sand,9 obtained from

1020

2.60

1.55
1.65
1.2
the same quarry as aggregate A3, Table 1.
A3: natural sand/gravel

Rounded
Smooth
11
14
24
20
The normalweight aggregates were used in concrete after
drying to constant weight in laboratory air (20o C, 55%RH) and

510

2.59

1.59
1.66
1.3
adjustments were made to the mix water to allow for
absorption to the saturated surface dry condition. This was
used following a pilot study which indicated that (a) variation
in moisture content of laboratory-dried aggregate was minor
Sand

2.63

1.58
1.68
0.5

All aggregate sizes: mm. All chloride contents ,0.01%, Not applicable, *6.320.0 mm, 10.014.0 mm
and unlikely to have practical implications for concrete
performance and (b) while the performance of a given mix was
influenced slightly by the level of water absorbed, there was
A2: crushed granite

1020

Coarse crystalline

2.63

1.37
1.49
little influence on the changes occuring with variations in
cement and water contents in equal proportions. The 0.5
Angular

lightweight aggregate was used in the saturated surface dry

12
29
25
20

state.
510

2.62

1.33
1.49
0.6

3.2. Other mix constituents

A Portland cement (PC), CEM I, 42.5N, 11 was used, see Table 2.
carboniferous limestone

A limestone powder (LS) to BSEN 12620 12 was added as a filler

1020

2.68

1.41
1.53
Angular/irregular

aggregate to control the fines content (particles , 75 m) in

0.3
A1: crushed

cement-reduced mixes, see also Table 2. A superplasticiser

Rough
13
29
21
23

(based on a carboxylic ether polymer) 13 was included to

achieve the required workability (slump) in some mixes.
510

2.69

1.41
1.53

Table 1. Properties of aggregates used in concrete mixes

0. 3

4. DEVELOPMENT OF CONCRETE TEST MIXES

Mix proportions were developed, as in the current authors
previous study, 6 for a given free w/c ratio (covering the range
0.65 to 0.45), water content and workability (75 mm slump).
Table 3 gives the mix proportions for the normalweight
Water absorption (lab. dry to SSD): %

aggregates, where for the reference mix (M1) the (free) water
contents required to achieve workability of 75 mm slump
varied with aggregate type between 175 and 190 l/m3 , (A1,
Aggregate crushing value: %
Aggregate impact value: %

190; A2, 190; A3, 175; A4, 180 and A5, 185). At each w/c
Bulk density (SSD): Mg/m3

ratio, water reductions of up to 40 l/m3 (M2f, M3f), compared

Surface texture, visual

Particle density (SSD)

Elongation index: *%

with M1, were made, with cement contents correspondingly

Flakiness index: *%

reduced. Superplasticising admixture was used, as required, to

control workability (75 mm slump). As in the previous study, 6
Shape, visual

Compacted

the fines contents (particles , 75 m) were maintained at the

Property

reference mix levels, again using limestone filler. The total

Loose

aggregate contents were also adjusted to maintain concrete

yield.

230 Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al.
 Property CEM I LS (c) Permeation: initial surface absorption and intrinsic air
permeability.
Fineness: m2 /kg 405 1600 (d) Durability: carbonation, chloride diffusion, sulfate attack,
Loss-on-ignition (LOI): % 1.4 43.6 freeze/thaw scaling and abrasion.
Particle density 3.14 2.65
Oil absorption: ml/100g 19.0 6. NORMALWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE
Bulk density (SSD): kg/m3
Loose 0.83
Compacted 1.05 6.1. Fresh properties
Compressive strength: N/mm2 Most of the concretes made with A1A5 aggregates were
1 day 19.5 found to be equally cohesive and to have good finishability
2 day 31.5 with cement reduction (and increases) compared with the
7 day 45.5
28 day 60.0 reference mix (M1), using visual assessment, as indicated in
Initial setting time: min 115 Table 6, for concretes of w/c ratio 0.55. The exception to this,
Soundness: mm 0.0 for cohesion, was M3f, which had slightly poorer performance
Bulk oxide composition: % with most aggregates.
SiO2 21.0
Al2 O3 4.9 0.06
Fe2 O3 2.6 0.02 Bleed water measurements taken over 2 h for concrete of w/c
CaO 64.6 * ratio 0.55, see Table 6, showed that while there was little
MgO 1.2 0.24 difference in bleeding between reference mixes (M1) for the
SO3 3.3 range of aggregates, for a given aggregate type, the bleed
K2 O 0.7 water decreased with reducing water and cement contents in all
Na2 O 0.1
Bogue composition: % cases (A1A5). It was not, however, possible to attribute this
C3 S 53.0 effect to specific aggregate characteristics. Reductions in bleed
C2 S 21.0 water can only improve the overall quality of concrete through
C3 A 8.5 the influence on the aggregate/cement paste interface, owing to
C4 AF 8.0 reduced water movements and flow channels to the concrete
Not applicable/not available surface. Furthermore, such effects are likely to reduce the bulk
* 55.46% calcium as CaO, 99.04% calcium as CaCO3 porosity and enhance the permeation properties of the near-
surface concrete, as noted previously. 14
Table 2. Properties of PC and limestone filler used in concrete
mixes The measured air contents of the test mixes at w/c ratio 0.55,
see Table 6, indicate similar values between M1 concretes of
different aggregate type. In addition, for a given aggregate,
At each w/c ratio, mixes were also tested with water and changes in cement content at fixed w/c ratio had little or no
cement contents raised by up to 30 l/m3 and 65 kg/m3 influence on air content. Collectively for the range of
respectively (M6). This increased the workability to 180 mm aggregates, providing the fines content was kept constant, at a
slump and, therefore in some cases, mixes were also tested given w/c ratio changes in cement content therefore had little
where the water and cement contents were held at the influence on fresh concrete properties.
reference mix level and the superplasticiser was used to give a
slump of 180 mm (M5). For both mixes (M6 and M5), the fine 6.2. Cube strength
total aggregate ratio was adjusted for the high workability (and A typical set of results is shown in Fig. 1(a). At a given age,
the aggregate content for yield in M6). Raising the workability strength increased in mixes with reducing cement content (and
using the superplasticising admixture (M5) was found to have other adjustments made to the concrete mix) (M2f, M3f) and the
little influence compared with M1, see Table 4, and, therefore, reverse occurred as the cement content was increased (M6). The
the raised workability of M6 mixes was ignored in comparing 28-day strength results, expressed as a percentage of M1, are
the effects of changing cement and water contents. For shown plotted against w/c ratio in Fig. 1(b). This indicates that,
lightweight concrete, the reference mix M1 was proportioned at a given w/c ratio, reduction in cement content gave a
following the aggregate suppliers guidelines (water content progressive increase in strength compared with M1, while
175 l/m3 ) and cement and water contents varied as for the increasing cement content (M6) above M1, led to reductions in
normalweight concrete mixes, with cement reduced (M3f) and strength, with greater relative changes (% wrt mix M1) obtained
increased (M6) mixes tested, see Table 5. with increasing w/c ratio. Overall, the results seem to reflect the
combined effect of a number of factors6 including reduced
(more porous) cement paste and increased (denser) aggregate
5. PREPARATION OF CONCRETE MIXES AND TEST contents, enhanced aggregate/cement paste interface with less
METHODS bleeding, and possible absorption/adsorption of water by the
Concrete mixes were produced and tested, as described in the limestone filler, thereby slightly reducing the free w/c ratio of
previous paper, 6 for the range of properties, as noted below. the mix. For mixes containing superplasticing admixture,
hydration of PC may also be influenced by more effective
(a) Fresh: workability, cohesion, finishability, bleeding and air dispersion of cement flocs. 15
content.
(b) Engineering: cube strength, flexural strength, modulus of In general, the results for the M1 mixes for the various
elasticity, drying shrinkage and creep strain. aggregates reduced with increasing aggregate absorption at a

Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al. 231
 w/c Ref CEM I Filler Total fines SP: Free water: Natural Coarse
(PC) % fines l/m3 sand
510: mm 1020: mm

Aggregates A1 and A2 (for natural sand/coarse, first number: A1, second number: A2; A1 not tested for M2f))
0.65 M6* 330 0 337 0 215 660 665 385 375 765 745
M1 290 0 296 0 190 600 605 435 425 875 850
M2f 260 30 296 0.26 170 600 445 885
M3f 230 60 296 0.41 150 585 595 475 460 945 925
0.55 M6* 390 0 396 0 215 610 615 385 375 765 745
M1 345 0 351 0 190 555 560 435 425 875 850
M2f 310 35 351 0.25 170 550 445 890
M3f 275 70 350 0.40 150 535 540 475 465 950 930
0.45 M6* 480 0 486 0 215 550 555 380 370 755 735
M1 420 0 425 0 190 510 515 430 420 860 840
M2f 375 45 425 0.24 170 495 440 885
M3f 330 90 425 0.39 150 470 475 475 465 950 925
Aggregate A3
0.65 M6* 300 0 307 0 195 725 375 755
M1 270 0 276 0 175 635 430 860
M2f 240 30 276 0.19 155 635 450 890
M3f 205 65 276 0.44 135 625 465 930
0.55 M6* 355 0 361 0 195 630 390 780
M1 320 0 326 0 175 565 440 880
M2f 280 40 326 0.25 155 550 460 920
M3f 245 75 325 0.48 135 540 480 955
0.45 M6* 440 0 446 0 195 575 385 770
M1 390 0 395 0 175 510 435 875
M2f 345 45 395 0.16 155 490 455 920
M3f 300 90 395 0.34 135 470 480 960
Aggregate A4
0.65 M6* 325 0 332 0 210 670 370 735
M1 275 0 281 0 180 610 425 850
M2f 245 30 281 0.25 160 605 440 885
M3f 215 60 281 0.40 140 600 460 920
0.55 M6* 380 0 386 0 210 615 370 740
M1 325 0 331 0 180 570 425 850
M2f 290 35 331 0.24 160 560 445 885
M3f 255 70 330 0.39 140 545 460 925
0.45 M6* 465 0 471 0 210 560 365 730
M1 400 0 405 0 180 520 420 840
M2f 355 45 405 0.23 160 505 440 880
M3f 310 90 405 0.38 140 485 460 925
Aggregate A5
0.65 M6* 325 0 332 0 210 665 1130
M1 285 0 291 0 185 605 1285
M2f 255 30 291 0.29 165 605 1340
M3f 225 60 291 0.45 145 600 1390
0.55 M6* 380 0 386 0 210 615 1135
M1 335 0 341 0 185 550 1300
M2f 300 35 340 0.28 165 545 1350
M3f 265 70 340 0.44 145 535 1410
0.45 M6* 465 0 471 0 210 550 1120
M1 410 0 415 0 185 500 1285
M2f 365 45 415 0.29 165 480 1350
M3f 320 90 415 0.49 145 460 1415

All mixes contain PC,42.5 N. All mixes 75 mm nominal slump, except * 180 mm slump
f: filler included to maintain fines content equal to that of M. Coarse aggregate 10 mm and 20 mm single sizes. Coarse aggregate
520 mm

Table 3. Mix proportions for normalweight aggregate concretes (kg/m3 )

given w/c ratio. In addition, the trends for A3 in terms of
changing cement content were observed for aggregates A1A5,
but the changes in strength decreased with increasing
aggregate absorption, as shown in Fig. 2, and the effect was
similar with changing w/c ratio. Overall, the results show that
the type of aggregate used may influence the effect of
changing cement content on cube strength and are likely to
reflect the impact of aggregate properties on the factors
highlighted above, such as aggregate/cement paste interface.
6.3. Other engineering properties
The flexural strength, modulus of elasticity, drying shrinkage
and creep strain for A3 concrete are given in Figs 3(a) to (d).
It is shown that, while flexural strength gave minor reductions

232 Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al.
 Concrete property Mix w/c Aggregate type
ratio
A2 A3 A4 A5

Cube strength (28 day): N/mm2 M1 0.55 48.0 41.5 37.5 39.5
M5 0.55 48.5 41.0 38.0 42.0
Modulus of elasticity: kN/mm2 M1 0.55 31.5 29.0 24.5 23.0
M5 0.55 31.5 28.5 25.0 25.0
ISAT-10: ml/m2 /s M1 0.55 0.29 0.57 0.58 0.57
M5 0.55 0.28 0.54 0.57 0.55
Carbonation depth (20 weeks): mm M1 0.65 21.0 24.0 30.0 28.5
M5 0.65 21.5 23.0 30.5 25.0
Chloride diffusion index, cm2 /s 3 10
7 M1 0.45 4.6 9.1 11.5 17.2
M5 0.45 3.6 9.9 10.1 18.7

Table 4. Comparison of selected properties for reference and superplasticised (high workability)
concretes

w/c Ref CEM I Filler Total fines SP, % fines Free water: Natural sand Coarse
(PC) l/m3
612 mm

0.65 M6* 310 0 318 0 200 755 690

M1 270 0 277 0 175 695 790
M3f 215 55 277 0.41 140 690 850
0.55 M6* 365 0 372 0 200 705 690
M1 320 0 327 0 175 655 790
M3f 255 65 326 0.40 140 640 855
0.45 M6* 445 0 451 0 200 640 690
M1 390 0 396 0 175 595 790
M3f 310 80 396 0.38 140 565 860

All mixes contain PC,42.5 N

All mixes 75 mm nominal slump, except * 180 mm slump
f: filler included to maintain fines content equal to that of M1

Table 5. Mix proportions for lightweight aggregate concretes: kg/m3

both with increasing and decreasing cement contents (and
associated adjustments to the concrete mixes) compared with
M1, the modulus of elasticity increased (but remained within
the limits given in BS 8110, 16 see Fig. 3(b)) and drying
shrinkage and creep strain decreased with reducing cement
content. In these cases, the reverse occurred with increasing
cement content (M6). For flexural strength, it appears that the
potential benefits to the paste/aggregate bond through reduced
bleeding, as mentioned above, may be offset by reduced paste/
aggregate ratio, that is, less paste to cover a greater surface
area of aggregate. The modulus of elasticity (influenced by the
stiffness of the cement paste and aggregate), drying shrinkage
and creep (influenced by the volume stability of the cement
paste and restraining effects of the aggregates) are also likely
to depend on the relative quantities of cement paste and
aggregate in concrete.
The results, for aggregates A1A5 in which tests were carried
out selectively, are given in Table 7, both as measured values
and percentages with respect to their reference mixes. For M1
mixes, performance was best for low-absorption aggregate,
reflecting their influences on aggregate/paste bond, relative
stiffnesses and ability to restrain volume changes in cement
paste. 7 With variation in cement content, the trends were
essentially as for A3, but unlike cube strength, there was no
clear effect of aggregate type on any of the properties. In
general, the results show agreement with other work covering
the effect of cement content on these properties. 4,5,17,18
6.4. Permeation properties
Initial surface absorption results at 10 min (ISAT-10) for
aggregate A3 concrete are shown plotted against w/c ratio in
Fig. 4(a). At a given w/c ratio, ISAT-10 reduced progressively
with cement content, compared with M1, by around 50% for
M3f. With increased cement content (M6), this increased by
between 5% and 10%. Differences in ISAT-10 with changing
cement content were slightly greater with increasing w/c ratio.
The transportation of fluids into concrete depends on the pore
structure and quantities of cement paste and aggregate, and the
characteristics of the aggregate/cement paste interface. 15 The
net result of these effects with reduced cement content, in low-
absorption aggregate concrete such as A3, was enhanced
permeation properties.
The ISAT-10 results for M1 concretes with aggregates A1A5
show that this generally reduced with reducing aggregate
absorption, Table 8. With variation in cement content, all
aggregates gave similar trends to those of concrete with A3
(Fig. 4(a)), although they were influenced by aggregate
characteristics (Table 8). Indeed, reductions in ISAT-10 with
reducing cement content were generally greatest with low-
absorption aggregates. For example, at a w/c ratio of 0.55,

Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al. 233
 Mix Aggregate type

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

*Cohesion
M6 a a a a a
M1 b b b b b
M2f b a b b
M3f c c c c c
Finishability
M6 1 1 1 1 1 to 2
M1 2 2 1 to 2 2 2
M2f 2 1 to 2 2 2
M3f 2 2 2 2 2 to 3
Total bleeding (2 h, % of free water in sample (by mass))
M6 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.8
M1 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.2 0.8
M2f 1.1 0.5 0.9
M3f 0.2 0.4 ,0.1 0.2 0.0
Air content (%)
M6 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.6
M1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7
M2f 1.1
M3f 0.7 0.7 1.1 0.5

Not tested
* Description: behaviour of slumped concrete on tapping
a Very cohesive; gradually slumps further, no shearing
b Cohesive; gradually slumps further, some shearing
c Little cohesion; gradually slumps further, then partial collapse
Description: appearance of concrete after ten passes with float
1. Very good finishability, little effort required to finish; smooth surface, few voids
2. Good finishability, moderate effort required to finish; smooth surface, some voids
3. Unacceptable finishability, difficult to finish; uneven finish exposed aggregate

Table 6. Fresh properties of test concretes (w/c ratio, 0.55)

60 140
M3f
M2f
130
M1 M3f
50
M6
120

40 28-day cube strength: % of M1

Cube strength: N/mm2

M2f 110

M1
30 100

M6
90
20 w/c ratio, 055
80
Aggregate, A3 Aggregate, A3
10
70
535* 415* 325*
0 60
1 10 100 1000 040 045 050 055 060 065 070
Test age: days w/c ratio
(a) (b)

Fig. 1. Influence of cement content on compressive (cube) strength with (a) age and (b) w/c ratio (*28 day strength (N/mm2 ) of
reference mix (M1))

ISAT-10 for mix M3f was between 50% (A1, A3) and 30% (A4,
A5) lower than M1, Fig. 4(b). Differences were slightly greater
with increasing w/c ratio. Increasing cement content (M6), gave
minor increases in ISAT-10 compared with M1, which were
slightly greater for A4 and A5. The results for concrete with
high-absorption aggregate, suggest that water may pass
through the aggregate. Absorption of cement paste into open
pores with this aggregate, however, may improve the
aggregate/cement paste interface, thus countering this effect. 19
Overall, these changes are similar to those noted in other

234 Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al.
 for ISAT-10, thus confirming the effect of reducing cement
80
content on permeation properties of concrete and how this may
be influenced by the nature of aggregate used.
70
6.5. Durability properties
60
6.5.1. Carbonation. Carbonation depths measured at 20 weeks
(equal to 20 years natural exposure) 21 for A3 concrete are
50 A2
shown in Fig. 5(a). With cement reduction, carbonation depths
tended to be slightly lower than for M1 concrete. For increased
A3
40 A5 cement content mixes (M6), carbonation depth also reduced
M3f
M2f A4 slightly compared with M1. These effects reduced with w/c
Agg A1 ratio and the data shows broad agreement of either unchanged,
30 or slightly improved resistance noted in the literature 22,23 with
M6
Ref mix M1 reducing cement content. The carbonation resistance of M1
20 concrete was greatest with low-absorption aggregate and at a
(a) given w/c ratio, it varied by up to 10.0 mm for the range of
80
aggregates tested (Table 9). For low-absorption aggregates
(A1A3), reduction (or increase) in cement content gave slight
70 reductions (or increases) in carbonation depth, compared with
M1 concrete, Table 9 and Fig. 5(b) which reduced with w/c
28-day cube strength: N/mm2

A2
ratio. For high-absorption aggregate (A4, A5) reduction in
60
cement content at 0.65 w/c ratio led to slight increases in
carbonation depth, but at w/c ratios of 0.55 and 0.45,
50 A3 differences between the mixes were relatively minor. In these
M3f A5 cases, increasing cement content (M6) had little or no effect on
M2f A4
Agg A1 carbonation.
40
M6
Carbonation is influenced by both the concrete microstructure
Ref mix M1
30 and chemical reactions of carbonic acid with the alkaline
constituents of concrete. The net effect of enhancement to the
microstructure (c.f. permeation properties) and reduction in
20
(b) alkalis with reducing cement content was a minor
80 improvement or no difference in overall carbonation resistance
for low-absorption aggregates depending on w/c ratio. The
A2
different trends for high-absorption aggregate (A4, A5), and
70
with varying w/c ratio, may be attributed to diffusion of
carbon dioxide through the combination of cement paste and
A3
60 M3f aggregate particles.
Agg A1 M2f A4 A5

6.5.2. Chloride diffusion. The chloride diffusion index results

50
M6 for A3 concrete are shown plotted in Fig. 6(a). At a given w/c
Ref mix M1
ratio, reduction in cement content (M3f) led to reductions in
40 diffusion index of between 1.9 3 10
7 cm2 /s (w/c ratio 0.45)
and 4.4 3 10
7 cm2 /s (w/c ratio 0.65) compared with M1
30
concrete. With increased cement content (M6), the diffusion
index was up to 1.8 3 10
7 cm2 /s higher than M1 concrete at
the high w/c ratio. This compares with similar or reduced
20 chloride ingress rates with reducing cement content noted in
0 1 2 3 4
Aggregate absorption: % by mass chloride tests in the literature. 24,25 The chloride diffusion
(c) indices of M1 concretes increased with increasing aggregate
absorption, with low-absorption aggregate (A1, A2) giving
Fig. 2. Influence of cement content and coarse aggregate results between a third and a fifth of those with high-
absorption on 28-day compression (cube) strength of (a) 0.65, absorption aggregate (A4, A5). In general, with variation in
(b) 0.55 and (c) 0.45 w/c ratio concrete cement content (both increases and decreases compared with
M1 concrete) similar trends to concrete with A3 were obtained
studies, where reductions of approximately 30% in ISAT-10 for those with the other aggregates, see Table 9 and Fig. 6(b).
value have been noted per 100 kg/m3 reduction in cement
content. 14,20 Similar effects to those noted for carbonation are likely to
control chloride diffusion in concrete, that is, concrete
The results from intrinsic air permeability tests on concretes for microstructure and chloride binding capacity, although in this
the range of aggregates gave similar trends to those described casegiven the trends observedit appears that with cement

Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al. 235
 65 34
BS 8110: Part 2
60 Relationship

M1 M3f 32
55 045

Modulus of elasticity: kN/mm2

M2f
Flexural strength: N/mm2

BS 8110: Part 2
50 M1
upper limit 30
M6
055 045
45

28
40 M3f 055
M2f
M6 0 65
35
065 26
BS 8110: Part 2
30 lower limit

25 24
20 30 40 50 60 70 20 30 40 50 60 70
Cube strength (28-day): N/mm2 Cube strength (28-day): N/mm2
(a) (b)

800 800
M6
M6
700 M2f 700

M1 M1
600 M2f 600
Drying shrinkage: strain 3 1026

M3f M3f

Creep: strain 3 1026

500 500

400 400

300 300

200 200

100 100
w/c ratio, 055 w/c ratio, 055

0 0
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 0 4 8 12 16
Drying time: weeks Loading duration: weeks
(c) (d)

Fig. 3. Influence of cement content on (a) flexural strength, (b) modulus of elasticity, (c) drying shrinkage and (d) creep strain of
concrete made with aggregate A3

reduction, the effects of concrete microstructure were greater entrained A3 concrete is shown in Fig. 7. Specimens
than chloride binding in influencing performance across the deteriorated rapidly under the test conditions, with cumulative
range of w/c ratios. The results also suggest that chloride scaling after 56 cycles of 2.92 kg/m2 for M1 concrete. With
diffusion may be occurring through high-absorption aggregate. reduced-cement-content-concrete (M3f), scaling was up to
three times higher than M1, with differences increasing with
6.5.3. Sulfate attack. The expansions measured for specimens exposure period. For increased cement content (M6), scaling
of w/c ratio 0.45 (A1A5) immersed in 5.0% Na2 SO4 solution was marginally less than M1. This is in contrast to other work
at 20o C for 52 weeks show that, while all expansion levels were examining the effect on freeze/thaw resistance, where similar
relatively low (, 160 strain), there was a tendency for least or greater resistance was noted in cement-reduced mixes. 23,26
expansion in concrete with low-absorption aggregate, having
low cement content. This is attributed to the reduced volume of Given the rapid deterioration occurring, the 56 cycle test
reactive cement paste/increased inert aggregate contents and duration was not completed in all cases and for A2 and A4
enhanced microstructure concretes, testing was not possible beyond 42 and 28 test
cycles, respectively. Therefore, for comparison, the results are
6.5.4. Freeze/thaw scaling. The cumulative scaling of non-air- given at 28 test cycles in Table 10. For mix M1, coarse

236 Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al.
 Mix Percentage of M1 (measured value)*

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

Flexural strength: N/mm2

M6 98 (6.1) 95 (5.2) 96 (4.6) 96 (4.7) 96 (4.3)
M1 100 (6.2) 100 (5.5) 100 (4.8) 100 (4.9) 100 (4.5)
M2f 104 (5.7) 96 (4.6) 106 (5.2) 102 (4.6)
M3f 108 (6.7) 105 (5.8) 96 (4.6) 102 (5.0) 109 (4.9)
Modulus of elasticity: kN/mm2
M6 99 (36.5) 94 (29.5) 97 (28.0) 98 (24.0) 96 (22.0)
M1 100 (37.0) 100 (31.5) 100 (29.0) 100 (24.5) 100 (23.0)
M2f 108 (34.0) 103 (30.0) 104 (25.5) 104 (24.0)
M3f 109 (40.5) 110 (34.5) 107 (31.0) 106 (26.0) 109 (25.0)
Drying shrinkage (20 weeks), strain 3 10
6
M6 125 (395) 120 (590) 117 (744) 135 (708) 129 (701)
M1 100 (317) 100 (490) 100 (636) 100 (524) 100 (542)
M2f 95 (464) 93 (593) 87 (458) 95 (510)
M3f 63 (201) 89 (434) 85 (542) 80 (417) 83 (450)
Creep strain (12 weeks), strain 3 10
6
M6 110 (550) 138 (651) 121 (790) 110 (740)
M1 100 (500) 100 (471) 100 (650) 100 (668)
M2f 87 (408) 110 (720)
M3f 88 (442) 79 (371) 82 (535) 87 (579)

Not tested
* Units given for each property applicable to measured value

Table 7. Influence of cement content and coarse aggregate type on engineering properties of concrete (w/c ratio, 0.55)

10 10

w/c ratio, 055

08 08
Reducing with
M6
cement content A4
M6 A5
A3
M1

ISAT-10: ml/m2/s
06 06
ISAT-10: ml/m2/s

Ref mix M1
Agg A1
M2f M2f
A2
04 04

M3f M3f

02 02

0 0
040 045 050 055 060 065 070 0 1 2 3 4
w/c ratio Coarse aggregate absorption: % by mass
(a) Natural gravel, A3 (b) All natural aggregates

Fig. 4. Influence of cement content on initial surface absorption of concrete made with (a) aggregate A3 and (b) all aggregates

aggregate type generally appeared to have no identifiable
influence on scaling resistance and similarly no consistent
effect of cement content was apparent in the concretes. The
results reflect the various factors influencing the scaling
process, including concrete strength, aggregate/cement paste
bond, quantity of freezable water, available pore space for
water pressure relief and the differences in scaling resistance
often noted between different aggregate concretes. 27
As air contents were similar for all mixes tested, the
superplasticiser did not entrain air and thus was unlikely to
influence scaling resistance in cement-reduced concretes.
Clearly, for such conditions, the use of air-entrainment is an
effective means of producing durable concrete. Related work 28
suggests that this type of admixture can be used with concrete
containing filler to enhance performance and reduce variations
between different concretes.

Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al. 237
 Mix w/c ratio 0.65 w/c ratio 0.55 w/c ratio 0.45

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

M6 0.56 0.49 0.71 0.75 0.78 0.46 0.31 0.61 0.67 0.71 0.40 0.27 0.54 0.63 0.67
M1 0.49 0.45 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.40 0.29 0.57 0.58 0.57 0.35 0.24 0.51 0.52 0.50
M2f 0.35 0.47 0.54 0.52 0.25 0.39 0.46 0.45 0.19 0.33 0.42 0.38
M3f 0.29 0.29 0.35 0.50 0.49 0.20 0.19 0.28 0.41 0.42 0.18 0.14 0.24 0.38 0.37

Not tested

Table 8. Influence of cement content and coarse aggregate type on ISAT-10 of concrete: ml/m2 /s

40 40

35 35

A4
M6 30

Carbonation depth (20 weeks): mm

30 Agg A1
Carbonation depth (20 weeks): mm

w/c ratio
M1 Ref mix M1 A5
25 065 25
M3f A2
M2f
M6
20 20
M2f M3f
A3

15 15
055

10 10
w/c ratio, 065
045
5 5

0 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 1 2 3 4
Cement content: kg/m3 Coarse aggregate absorption: % by mass
(a) Natural gravel, A3 (b) All natural aggregates

Fig. 5. Influence of cement content on carbonation resistance of concrete made with (a) aggregate A3 and (b) all aggregates

Mix w/c ratio 0.65 w/c ratio 0.55 w/c ratio 0.45

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

Carbonation depth: mm
M6 28.0 22.0 22.5 30.5 28.5 14.5 13.0 14.0 19.5 18.0 0 0 5.5 6.0 10.5
M1 24.5 21.0 24.0 30.0 28.5 13.5 12.5 15.5 17.5 17.5 0 0 6.0 7.0 10.0
M2f 18.5 20.0 29.0 26.5
M3f 22.5 17.5 21.0 35.0 30.5 12.0 10.5 13.0 20.0 16.5 0 0 6.5 7.5 9.0
Chloride diffusion index: cm2 /s 3 10
7
M6 11.8 12.8 37.2 31.7 35.1 7.3 8.6 22.2 20.1 24.1 3.8 5.2 10.0 12.0 20.1
M1 10.1 9.5 35.4 23.3 31.5 6.7 6.5 21.6 16.0 22.5 3.6 4.6 9.1 11.5 17.2
M2f 4.3 9.3 11.2 16.4
M3f 5.4 8.5 31.0 20.6 28.5 3.9 5.7 17.3 13.9 20.2 2.5 4.0 7.2 11.0 16.0

Not tested

Table 9. Influence of cement content and coarse aggregate type on carbonation depth and chloride diffusion of concrete

6.5.5. Abrasion. The abrasion depth measured for the M1 mix between 0.56 and 1.14 mm, increasing with ACV, see Fig. 8(b),
with A3 and w/c ratio 0.50 (mixes not shown) was 0.71 mm and reducing cube strength. As with A3, abrasion depth
and this tended to reduce slightly with cement reduction (M3f) reduced with cement content, with greatest improvements
and increase with the increased cement content mix (M6), Fig. noted for aggregates with the highest ACV (A4, A5). For mixes
8(a), probably reflecting relative cement and aggregate with increased cement content (M6), abrasion depth increased
contents. For A1A5, abrasion depths of M1 mixes varied by up to 0.13 mm compared with the M1 mixes for aggregates

238 Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al.
 60 60

50 50

w/c ratio, 045

Diffusion index: cm2/s 3 1027

Diffusion index: cm2/s 3 1027

w/c ratio
40 065 40
M1
M6
M3f

30 30

055 A5
20 20

A4
M2f A3 M6
10 045 10
Agg A1
M3f Ref mix M1/M2f
A2
0 0
150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 1 2 3 4
Cement content: kg/m3 Coarse aggregate absorption: % by mass
(a) Natural gravel, A3 (b) All natural aggregates

Fig. 6. Influence of cement content on chloride resistance of concrete made with (a) aggregate A3 and (b) all aggregates

Mix Cumulative scaling (28 cycles): kg/m2

10
Natural gravel, A3 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

w/c ratio, 045

M6 0.04 3.80 1.32 19.18 0.50
8
M1 0.14 4.40 1.60 19.76 0.28
M2f 1.92 25.62 4.02
Cumulative scaling: kg/m2

M3f 0.04 2.88 3.12 26.88 1.20

6
Not tested
M3f
Table 10. Influence of cement content and coarse aggregate
type on freeze/thaw scaling of concrete (w/c ratio, 0.45)
4

M1

2 M6 7. LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE

The test results obtained for the lightweight aggregate (A6)
concretes (mix proportions, Table 5) are given in Table 11, with
0 those of aggregate A3. Concrete with A6 tended to give less
0 20 40 60 change in performance with varying cement content for
Number of freeze/thaw cycles engineering and permeation properties than concrete with A3.
In general, similar types of differences were noted for
Fig. 7. Influence of cement content on freeze/thaw (scaling) of durability with variations in cement content, between A3 and
concrete with aggregate A3
A6 aggregate concretes. Although for the latter, performance
tended to be similar between M3f and M1 and in some cases
for M6 this was slightly better.

with low ACV (A1 to A3), while reductions of up to 0.27 mm 8. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
were obtained for those with high ACV (A4, A5). The study indicates that the requirement in durability
specifications to satisfy all three (or four) parameters, that is
Abrasion resistance of concrete is closely related to its strength, minimum cement content, maximum w/c ratio and minimum
and as expected, was also influenced by aggregate properties. strength class (and cover depth in some cases), is unnecessary
With cement and water content reduction, the slight and that the exclusion of minimum cement content should not
improvements noted at low ACV reflect the changes in cement affect the durability of concrete. Furthermore, the results
paste and aggregate contents between mixes. It appears that demonstrate that there is a need for attention to be given,
with increasing ACV of aggregate, the relative influence of during specification, to the properties of aggregates used in
these factors on abrasion resistance may change. concrete.

Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al. 239
 120 120

w/c ratio, 050 w/c ratio, 050

105 105
M3f
M2f
090 M1
090
Abrasion depth: mm

M6

Abrasion depth: mm
A5
075 A3 075
A2
A3 A4
A gg A1
A3
060 060
A1

390 kg/m cement

350 kg/m cement
310 kg/m cement
270 kg/m cement

A1
045 045

030 030
M3f M2f M1 M6 20 25 30
Mix ref Coarse aggregate acv: %
(a) Natural gravel, A3 (b) All natural aggregates

Fig. 8. Influence of cement content on abrasion resistance of concrete made with (a) aggregate A3 and (b) all aggregates

While small reductions in cement and water contents (up to influence of cement content on concrete performance. It should
20 l/m3 ), with the fines content and workability maintained be noted that in examining the effect of cement content, other
(M2f), have minor influences on fresh properties, slight losses adjustments were made to the concrete mixes, in order that
in cohesion and finishability characteristics may occur when they satisfied practical requirements, for example workability,
these are increased (up to 40 l/m3 ). These effects appear, fines content and yield.
however, to be independent of the characteristics of the
aggregates used and in all cases, the concretes could be
satisfactorily placed, compacted and finished. (a) With small adjustments to water content to give equal
workability of the reference mixes (M1), coarse aggregate
At equal w/c ratio, the engineering properties of concrete were, type had little influence on the fresh properties of concrete,
generally, less influenced by cement content than aggregate (cohesion, finishability, bleeding and air content) or the
type, Table 12. Indeed, for the variables considered in this changes occurring with varying cement content.
study, w/c ratio and coarse aggregate type have the greatest (b) For a given w/c ratio, the cube strength of concrete was
influence on the engineering properties, with cement content found to increase with reducing cement content. These
generally being a second-order effect. Determination of effects tended to increase for aggregate with decreasing
modulus of elasticity based on cube strength relationships, absorption. For the other engineering properties, (flexural
given in standards such as BS 8110, 16 appear to give strength, modulus of elasticity, drying shrinkage and creep)
conservative design values. similar or improved performance was found with reducing
cement content, but no clear effect of aggregate type on
The effect of cement content on permeation and durability these was noted.
properties also tends to be of second order, compared with (c) The permeation properties of concrete (absorption and
aggregate type, see Table 12. Indeed, for the mixes considered, permeability) at a given w/c ratio were found to improve
cement and water reduction, at a given w/c ratio with the with reducing cement content. The effect tended to become
inclusion of filler aggregate to maintain the fines content and progressively greater with reducing aggregate absorption.
achieve a closed structure, 6 generally has little practical (d) Cement content generally had less of an influence on
significance for chemical forms of attack. For freeze/thaw durability properties than that of aggregate type. Low-
scaling, the role of cement content is less clear. Again, absorption aggregate tended to give best performance,
however, this appeared to be a second-order influence although aggregate characteristics had no clear effect on
compared with the effect of aggregate characteristics. Similarly, the changes with cement reduction (at a given w/c ratio).
while the aggregate content (and cement content) influenced (e) Taken collectively, the authors previous study 6 and the
abrasion resistance, this was less than the effect of aggregate study reported in this paper suggest that it is unnecessary
type on the process. Variations in cement content at a given in specifying concrete durability to include minimum
w/c ratio generally have little practical implication for cement content. Furthermore, the current study reveals the
lightweight aggregate concrete and its performance. need to consider aggregate property influences on
durability as an important issue in future standard
9. CONCLUSIONS developments. For example, it may be that specifications
The following conclusions were drawn from the tests carried could differ for aggregate of low (, 3.0%) and high
out to examine the effect of aggregate characteristics on the (. 3.0%) absorption.

240 Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al.
Concrete property Mix Concrete

AGG 3, w/c ratio AGG 6, w/c ratio

0.65 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.65 0.55 0.50 0.45

28-day M6 29.0 38.5 51.5 29.0 34.5 45.0

cube strength: N/mm2 M1 32.5 41.5 53.5 28.5 33.0 42.0
M3f 40.0 48.0 59.5 28.5 33.5 44.0
Flexural M6 3.9 4.6 5.5 4.0 4.3 4.8
strength: N/mm2 M1 4.1 4.8 5.6 3.9 4.2 4.7
M3f 3.9 4.6 5.4 3.8 4.2 4.6
Modulus of elasticity M6 26.5 28.0 29.5 17.5 18.5 20.0
kN/mm2 M1 28.0 29.0 30.0 17.0 18.0 19.5
M3f 29.0 31.0 32.0 17.5 18.0 20.0
Drying shrinkage M6 744 883
(20 weeks) strain 310
6 M1 636 786
M3f 542 746
Creep strain (12 weeks) M6 790 781
strain 310
6 M1 650 685
M3f 535 638
ISAT-10: M6 0.71 0.61 0.54 0.75 0.66 0.64
ml/m2 /s M1 0.66 0.57 0.51 0.77 0.68 0.62
M3f 0.35 0.28 0.24 0.73 0.64 0.58
Air permeability: M6 7.4 6.4 5.7 5.2 2.7 6.9
m2 3 10
17 M1 6.7 5.9 5.2 10.5 8.5 7.4
M3f 3.6 3.1 2.7 10.6 8.6 7.5
Carbonation M6 22.5 14.0 5.5 40.0 25.5 10.5
depth: mm M1 24.0 15.5 6.0 43.0 27.0 13.5
M3f 21.0 13.0 6.5 43.0 25.5 13.0
Chloride diffusion M6 37.2 22.2 10.0 42.2 34.9 20.8
index: cm2 /s 3 10
7 M1 35.4 21.6 9.1 46.3 35.8 21.8
M3f 31.0 17.3 7.2 47.5 38.6 22.5
Sulfate expansion (52 M6 90 215
weeks) strain 310
6 M1 85 240
M3f 20 229
Freeze/thaw scaling M6 2.86 3.94
at 56 cycles: kg/m2 M1 2.92 1.90
M3f 8.32 2.68
Abrasion depth: mm M6 0.76 0.78
M1 0.71 0.48
M3f 0.64 0.53

Not tested

Table 11. Influence of cement content and lightweight aggregate (A6) on concrete performance

Concrete property w/c ratio Variation across Maximum variation across cement content
normalweight (M6, M1, M2f, M3f)
aggregates (M1)
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

Cube strength (28 day): N/mm2 0.55 10.5 9.5 10.5 9.5 4.0 4.5
Flexural strength: N/mm2 0.55 1.7 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.6
Modulus of elasticity: kN/mm2 0.55 14.0 4.0 5.0 3.0 2.0 3.0
Drying shrinkage (20 weeks): strain 3 10
6 0.55 319 194 156 202 291 251
Creep strain (12 weeks): strain 3 10
6 0.55 197 108 280 255 161
ISAT-10: ml/m2 /s 0.55 0.29 0.26 0.12 0.33 0.26 0.29
Air permeability: m2 3 10
17 0.55 7.2 1.9 1.9 3.3 2.6 5.4
Carbonation depth (20 weeks): mm 0.65 9.0 5.5 4.5 4.0 6.0 4.0
Chloride diffusion index: cm2 /s 3 10
7 0.45 13.6 1.3 1.2 2.8 1.0 4.1
Sulfate expansion (52 weeks): strain 3 10
6 0.45 111 0 83 70 103
Freeze/thaw scaling (28 cycles): kg/m2 0.45 19.62 0.10 2.48 1.80 7.70 3.74
Abrasion depth: mm 0.50 0.58 0.19 0.25 0.12 0.29 0.52

Not tested

Table 12. Comparison of cement content and coarse aggregate influences on properties of concrete

Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability Dhir et al. 241
 10. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors acknowledge the financial support and technical
guidance provided to the project by the British Standards
Institution, and industrial partners: BAA plc, British Nuclear
Fuels plc, Castle Cement Ltd, Feb MBT, MAC spa, Scottish
Water and Quarry Products Association. The authors are also
indebted to the Steering Committee Members who gave freely
of their time to guide the project: J. Barling, C. Bolton, S. B.
Desai, T. A. Harrison, R. Khurana, R. Jones, P. Livesey and M.
Will. S. A. Menzies is thanked for his assistance during the
experimental work.
REFERENCES
1. BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTION. BS EN 206-1: ConcretePart
1: Specification, performance, production and conformity.
BSI, London, 2000.
2. BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTION. BS 8500: Concrete
Complementary British Standard to BS EN 206-1Part 2.
Specification for constituent materials and concrete. BSI,
London, 2002.
3. MARSH B. K. A survey of European concreting practice.
Occasional paper, Business Referral Exchange (BRE),
Watford, UK, 1993.
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. THE CONCRETE SOCIETY. The influence of cement content on
the performance of concrete. The Concrete Society,
Crowthorne, 2000, Report CS 124, p. 48.
6. DHIR R. K., MCCARTHY M. J., ZHOU S. and TITTLE P. A. J.
Role of cement content in specifications for durability:
cement type influences. Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers, Structures and Buildings, 2004, 157, No.
2,113128.
7. DHIR R. K., JONES M. R. and TING M. C. Effect of cement
content, aggregate permeability and aggregate paste
interfacial zone in concrete on chloride ingress and
chloride-induced corrosion. Report CTU/2103, 2003, p. 245.
8. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS 5328Part 1. Guide to
specifying concrete, BSI, London, 1997.
9. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS 882. Specification for
aggregates from natural sources for concrete. BSI, London,
1992.
10. BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTION. BS 3797. Specification for
lightweight aggregates for masonry units and structural
concrete. BSI, London, 1990.
11. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS EN 197Part 1.
Definitions and composition, Cement: composition,
specifications and conformity criteria. BSI, London, 2001.
12. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS 12620. Aggregates for
concrete including those for use in roads and pavements.
BSI, London, 2000.
What do you think?
To comment on this paper, please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineers and related professionals, academics and students. Papers
should be 20005000 words long, with adequate illustrations and references. Please visit www.thomastelford.com/journals for author
guidelines and further details.
242 Structures & Buildings 159 Issue SB4 Role of cement content for concrete durability
13. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS 5075: Part 3.
Specification for superplastisizing admixtures. BSI, London,
1985.
14. DHIR R. K., HEWLETT P. C. and CHAN, Y. N. Near surface
characteristics of concrete: assessment and development of
in-situ test methods. Magazine of Concrete Research, 1987,
39, No. 141, 183195.
15. HEWLETT P. C. Leas Cement and Concrete Chemistry.
Arnold, London, 1998, p. 1053.
16. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS 8110. Structural use of
concrete. Code of practice for design and construction. BSI,
London, 1997.
17. HANSEN W. and ALMUDAIHEEM J. A. Ultimate drying
shrinkage of concreteinfluence of major parameters. ACI
Material Journal, 1987, 84, No. 3, 217223.
18. NEVILLE A. M. Creep of concrete as a function of its cement
paste content. Magazine of Concrete Research, 1964, 16,
No. 46, 2130.
19. MASO J. C. La Liaison pate-granulates in le Beton
Hydroulique (BARON J. and SAUTEREY R. (eds)). Press de
lEcole National des Ponts et Chaussees, Paris, 1982, pp.
247259.
20. DHIR R. K., Jones M R. and MCCARTHY M. J. Binder content
influences on chloride ingress in concrete. Cement and
Concrete Research, 1996, 26, No. 12, 17611766.
21. 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.
22. LOO Y. H., CHIN M. S. and ONG C. G. A carbonation
prediction model for accelerated carbonation testing of
concrete. Magazine of Concrete Research, 1994, 46, No.
168, 191200.
23. DHIR R. K., THAM K. and DRANSFIELD J. Durability of
concrete with a superplasticizing admixture. Concrete
Durability, 1987, 1, ACI SP-100, 741764.
24. DIAS W. P. S. Durability indicators of OPC concrete subject
to wick action. Magazine of Concrete Research, 1993, 45,
No. 165, 263274.
25. MANGAT P. S. and MOLLOY B. T. Chloride binding in
concrete containing pfa, ggbs and silica fume under
seawater exposure. Magazine of Concrete Research, 1995,
47, No. 171, 129141.
26. BASHEER P. A. M. CLAM permeability tests for assessing the
durability of concrete. PhD thesis. The Queens University of
Belfast, May, 1991.
27. COMITE EURO-INTERNATIONAL DU BETON. Durable Concrete
Structures. Design Guide, 2nd edn. Thomas Telford, London,
1992, p. 112.
28. DHIR R. K., JONES M. R., MCCARTHY M. J., ZHENG L., SCOREY V.
E. and CHITTIRATTNAKORN S. Optimising the use of Portland
cement in concrete by void minimisation using fillers and
non-Portand binders. Report CTU 1902, 2002, p. 390.
Dhir et al.