A Study of Curing Methods and Type II Cements on the Durability of Concrete, R-11-Z(1), 1969

A program of A (90 day moist room), B (14 day moist room) and C (7 day moist room and 7 day 50%_humidity) type curing for the R-11-Z program of durability of concrete using the automatic freeze and thaw machine (ASTM C-291) has been used in the Materials Department of the Iowa State Highway Commission since December 6, 1966. A summary of the results obtained from then until March 25, 1968, indicates that the B and C type curing are yielding very little valuable information. However, the A cure exhibits a wide range of durability factors and also groups the aggregates in an order which is related to the service record (there are definite exceptions. The biggest disadvantage to the A cure is the length of time that it takes to complete the test (90 day cure and 38 day test). The Kansas Highway Department has experimented with different cements and aggregates in order to determine which combination offers a concrete with the best durability factor possible. In an experimental test section of highway, concrete made with a Type II cement appeared to have better durability than others made with Type I cements. Because of this, a question has been raised at the Iowa State Highway Commission - Can concrete made with Type II cements, because of a lesser amount of tricalcium aluminate, yield better durability than concrete made with Type I cements?

Methods for Removing Concrete Decks from Bridge Girders, TR-647, 2014

With ever tightening budgets and limitations of demolition equipment, states are looking for cost-effective, reliable, and sustainable methods for removing concrete decks from bridges. The goal of this research was to explore such methods. The research team conducted qualitative studies through a literature review, interviews, surveys, and workshops and performed small-scale trials and push-out tests (shear strength evaluations). Interviews with bridge owners and contractors indicated that concrete deck replacement was more economical than replacing an entire superstructure under the assumption that the salvaged superstructure has adequate remaining service life and capacity. Surveys and workshops provided insight into advantages and disadvantages of deck removal methods, information that was used to guide testing. Small-scale trials explored three promising deck removal methods: hydrodemolition, chemical splitting, and peeling