Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

RILEM TC 266-MRP: Round-Robin rheological tests on high performance mortar and concrete with adapted rheology—evaluating structural build-up at rest of mortar and concrete

  • RILEM TC 266-MRP - ROUND-ROBIN RHEOLOGICAL TESTS
  • Published:
Materials and Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a round-robin testing program undertaken by RILEM TC-266-Measuring Rheological Properties of Cement-Based Materials in May 2018 at the Université d’Artois in Bethune, France. Seven types of rheometers were compared; they consisted of four ICAR rheometers, Viskomat XL rheometer, eBT-V rheometer, Sliding Pipe Rheometer (SLIPER), RheoCAD rheometer, and 4SCC rheometer, as well as the plate test. This paper discusses the results of the evolution of the static yield stress at rest of three mortar and five concrete mixtures that were determined using two ICAR rheometers, Viskomat XL, and eBT-V rheometers, as well as the plate test. For the measurements carried out with rheometers, three different structural build-up indices (i.e., structural build-up rate, critical time, and coupled effects of initial static yield stress and rate of structural build-up) were determined. The indices were established using: (i) two static yield stress values measured after 10 and 40 min of rest; and (ii) two static yield stress values measured after 10 and 40 min of rest plus the initial dynamic yield stress (no rest and obtained from the flow curves). The paper discusses the test results and highlights inaccuracies that could be encountered in determining the static yield stress. Test results indicate that the ICAR rheometers and the selected thixotropic indices can provide similar results, and that the spread of results obtained from different rheometers can be considerably reduced when using three yield stress values to calculate the rate of the static yield stress at rest. In order to enhance the accuracy of measurements, it is recommended to increase the number of measurements of the yield stress to at least three points over one hour after mixing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Roussel N (2006) A thixotropy model for fresh fluid concretes: theory, validation and applications. Cem Concr Res 36:1797–1806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2006.05.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Roussel N, Lemaître A, Flatt RJ, Coussot P (2010) Steady state flow of cement suspensions: a micromechanical state of the art. Cem Concr Res 40:77–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.08.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Wallevik JE (2009) Rheological properties of cement paste: thixotropic behavior and structural breakdown. Cem Concr Res 39:14–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2008.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Wallevik JE, Rheocenter I, Iceland IC (2011) Particle flow interaction theory-thixotropic behavior and structural breakdown. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Our World of Concrete and Structures, Singapore. pp 14–16

  5. Assaad J, Khayat KH, Mesbah H (2003) Assessment of thixotropy of flowable and self-consolidating concrete. Mater J 100:99–107

    Google Scholar 

  6. Roussel N (2005) Steady and transient flow behaviour of fresh cement pastes. Cem Concr Res 35:1656–1664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lecompte T, Perrot A (2017) Non-linear modeling of yield stress increase due to SCC structural build-up at rest. Cem Concr Res 92:92–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2016.11.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Perrot A, Pierre A, Vitaloni S, Picandet V (2015) Prediction of lateral form pressure exerted by concrete at low casting rates. Mater Struct 48:2315–2322. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-014-0313-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ma S, Qian Y, Kawashima S (2018) Experimental and modeling study on the non-linear structural build-up of fresh cement pastes incorporating viscosity modifying admixtures. Cem Concr Res 108:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kruger J, Zeranka S, van Zijl G (2019) 3D concrete printing: a lower bound analytical model for buildability performance quantification. Autom Constr 106:102904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.102904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Roussel N (2018) Rheological requirements for printable concretes. Cem Concr Res 112:76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.04.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Perrot A, Rangeard D, Pierre A (2016) Structural built-up of cement-based materials used for 3D-printing extrusion techniques. Mater Struct 49:1213–1220. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-015-0571-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Roussel N, Ovarlez G, Garrault S, Brumaud C (2012) The origins of thixotropy of fresh cement pastes. Cem Concr Res 42:148–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2011.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Omran AF, Naji S, Khayat KH (2011) Portable vane test to assess structural buildup at rest of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mater J 108:628–637

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lecompte T, Perrot A, Picandet V et al (2012) Cement-based mixes: shearing properties and pore pressure. Cem Concr Res 42:139–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Assaad J, Khayat KH (2004) Influence of internal friction and cohesion on the variations of formwork pressure of self-consolidating concrete. Spec Publ 222:19–32

    Google Scholar 

  17. Feys D, Sonebi M, Amziane S, et al RILEM TC 266-MRP - Round-Robin rheological tests on high performance mortar and concrete with adapted rheology: rheometers, mixtures and procedures. Mater Struct 56(4):90

  18. Lapasin R, Papo A, Rajgelj S (1983) Flow behavior of fresh cement pastes. A comparison of different rheological instruments and techniques. Cem Concr Res 13:349–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mantellato S, Palacios M, Flatt RJ (2019) Relating early hydration, specific surface and flow loss of cement pastes. Mater Struct 52:5. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-018-1304-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Khayat KH, Omran AF, Naji S et al (2012) Field-oriented test methods to evaluate structural build-up at rest of flowable mortar and concrete. Mater Struct 45:1547–1564. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-012-9856-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Megid WA, Khayat KH (2018) Evaluating structural buildup at rest of self-consolidating concrete using workability tests. ACI Mater J 115:257–265

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ovarlez G, Roussel N (2006) A physical model for the prediction of lateral stress exerted by self-compacting concrete on formwork. Mater Struct 39:269–279. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-005-9052-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Perrot A, Amziane S, Ovarlez G, Roussel N (2009) SCC formwork pressure: influence of steel rebars. Cem Concr Res 39:524–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Assaad JJ, Khayat KH (2006) Effect of casting rate and concrete temperature on formwork pressure of self-consolidating concrete. Mater Struct 39:333–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Billberg PH, Roussel N, Amziane S et al (2014) Field validation of models for predicting lateral form pressure exerted by SCC. Cement Concr Compos 54:70–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Khayat K, Assaad J, Mesbah H, Lessard M (2005) Effect of section width and casting rate on variations of formwork pressure of self-consolidating concrete. Mater Struct 38:73–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gardner NJ, Keller L, Khayat KH et al (2016) Field measurements of SCC lateral pressure—Toronto 2014. Lateral 12:14

    Google Scholar 

  28. Saric-Coric M, Khayat KH, Tagnit-Hamou A (2003) Performance characteristics of cement grouts made with various combinations of high-range water reducer and cellulose-based viscosity modifier. Cem Concr Res 33:1999–2008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Naji S, Khayat KH, Karray M (2017) Assessment of static stability of concrete using shear wave velocity approach. ACI Mater J 114:105–115

    Google Scholar 

  30. Roussel N, Cussigh F (2008) Distinct-layer casting of SCC: the mechanical consequences of thixotropy. Cem Concr Res 38:624–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.09.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Megid WA, Khayat KH (2017) Bond strength in multilayer casting of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mater J 114:467–476

    Google Scholar 

  32. Megid WA, Khayat KH (2019) Effect of structural buildup at rest of self-consolidating concrete on mechanical and transport properties of multilayer casting. Constr Build Mater 196:626–636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Shahab AR, Lloret Kristensen E, Fischer P, et al (2013) Smart dynamic casting or how to exploit the liquid to solid transition in cementitious materials. In: 7th RILEM International Conference on Self-Compacting Concrete and 1st RILEM International Conference on Rheology and Processing of Construction Materials

  34. Wolfs RJM, Bos FP, Salet TAM (2018) Early age mechanical behaviour of 3D printed concrete: numerical modelling and experimental testing. Cem Concr Res 106:103–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.02.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mechtcherine V, Bos FP, Perrot A et al (2020) Extrusion-based additive manufacturing with cement-based materials – production steps, processes, and their underlying physics: a review. Cement Concr Res 132:106037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2020.106037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Reiter L, Wangler T, Roussel N, Flatt RJ (2018) The role of early age structural build-up in digital fabrication with concrete. Cem Concr Res 112:86–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.05.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Perrot A, Lecompte T, Estellé P, Amziane S (2013) Structural build-up of rigid fiber reinforced cement-based materials. Mater Struct 46:1561–1568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Amziane S, Perrot A (2017) The plate test carried out on fresh cement-based materials: How and why? Cem Concr Res 93:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2016.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lootens D, Jousset P, Martinie L et al (2009) Yield stress during setting of cement pastes from penetration tests. Cem Concr Res 39:401–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.01.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ivanova I, Mechtcherine V (2019) Evaluation of structural build-up rate of cementitious materials by means of constant shear rate test: parameter study. In: Rheology and Processing of Construction Materials. Springer, pp 209–218

  41. Ivanova I, Mechtcherine V (2020) Possibilities and challenges of constant shear rate test for evaluation of structural build-up rate of cementitious materials. Cem Concr Res 130:105974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ivanova I, Mechtcherine V (2020) Effects of volume fraction and surface area of aggregates on the static yield stress and structural build-up of fresh concrete. Materials 13:1551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Nerella VN, Beigh MAB, Fataei S, Mechtcherine V (2019) Strain-based approach for measuring structural build-up of cement pastes in the context of digital construction. Cem Concr Res 115:530–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Feys D, Wallevik JE, Yahia A et al (2012) Extension of the Reiner-Riwlin equation to determine modified Bingham parameters measured in coaxial cylinders rheometers. Mater Struct 46:289–311. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-012-9902-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Wallevik OH, Feys D, Wallevik JE, Khayat KH (2015) Avoiding inaccurate interpretations of rheological measurements for cement-based materials. Cem Concr Res 78:100–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Yuan Q, Zhou D, Khayat KH et al (2017) On the measurement of evolution of structural build-up of cement paste with time by static yield stress test vs. small amplitude oscillatory shear test. Cem Concr Res 99:183–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Teng L, Zhu J, Khayat KH, Liu J (2020) Effect of welan gum and nanoclay on thixotropy of UHPC. Cem Concr Res 138:106238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Dzuy NQ, Boger DV (1985) Direct yield stress measurement with the vane method. J Rheol 29:335–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Mahaut F, Mokéddem S, Chateau X et al (2008) Effect of coarse particle volume fraction on the yield stress and thixotropy of cementitious materials. Cem Concr Res 38:1276–1285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2008.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Khalil N, Aouad G, El Cheikh K, Rémond S (2017) Use of calcium sulfoaluminate cements for setting control of 3D-printing mortars. Constr Build Mater 157:382–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Stokes J, Telford J (2004) Measuring the yield behaviour of structured fluids. J Nonnewton Fluid Mech 124:137–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnnfm.2004.09.001

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  52. Feys D, Cepuritis R, Jacobsen S et al (2018) Measuring rheological properties of cement pastes: most common techniques, procedures and challenges. RILEM Tech Lett 2:129–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Qian Y, Kawashima S (2018) Distinguishing dynamic and static yield stress of fresh cement mortars through thixotropy. Cement Concr Compos 86:288–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Qian Y, Kawashima S (2016) Use of creep recovery protocol to measure static yield stress and structural rebuilding of fresh cement pastes. Cem Concr Res 90:73–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Ferraris CF, Brower LE, Banfill PFG (2001) NISTIR 6819: Comparison of concrete rheometers: International tests at LCPC (Nantes, France) in October, 2000. US Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology

  56. Ferraris CF, Ferraris CF, Beaupr D, et al (2004) Comparison of concrete rheometers: International tests at MB (Cleveland OH, USA) in May, 2003. US Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology

  57. Koehler EP (2004) Development of a portable rheometer for Portland cement concrete. Master of Sciences Thesis, University of Texas, Austin

  58. Feys D, Keller H, El Cheikh K, et al RILEM TC 266-MRP: Round-Robin rheological tests on high performance mortar and concrete with adapted rheology: a comprehensive flow curve analysis. Mater Struct 56(5):105

  59. Sleiman H, Perrot A, Amziane S (2010) A new look at the measurement of cementitious paste setting by Vicat test. Cem Concr Res 40:681–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Tchamba JC, Amziane S, Ovarlez G, Roussel N (2008) Lateral stress exerted by fresh cement paste on formwork: laboratory experiments. Cem Concr Res 38:459–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.11.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Amziane S, Perrot A, Lecompte T (2008) A novel settling and structural build-up measurement method. Meas Sci Technol 19:105702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Zhang M-H, Ferraris C, Zhu H et al (2010) Measurement of yield stress for concentrated suspensions using a plate device. Mater Struct 43:47–62. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-009-9469-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Svermova L, Sonebi M, Bartos PJ (2003) Influence of mix proportions on rheology of cement grouts containing limestone powder. Cement Concr Compos 25:737–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Coussot P, Boyer S (1995) Determination of yield stress fluid behaviour from inclined plane test. Rheol Acta 34:534–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors recognize the help of the scientific and technical team at the Université d’Artois, LGCgE Laboratoire de Génie Civil et Géo-Environnement. The authors are grateful to Mr. Faber Fabbris from concrete producer EQIOM for planning and providing “just in time” mortar and concrete mixtures of different rheological properties. The authors are very thankful to all other participants in the round-robin testing compaign: Geert De Schutter, Chafika Djelal, Khadija El Cheikh, Faber Fabbris, Shirin Fataei, Dimitri Feys, Markus Greim, Irina Ivanova, Laurent Libessart, Helena Keller, Viktor Mechtcherine, Ivan Navarrete, Egor Secrieru, Yannick Vanhove and their organisations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CNRS, Sigma, Institut Pascal, Université Clermont Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Sofiane Amziane

  2. Missouri S&T, Center for Infrastructure Engineering Studies, Rolla, MO, USA

    Kamal Khayat

  3. School of Natural and Built Environment, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK

    Mohammed Sonebi

  4. UMR CNRS 6027, IRDL, Univ. Bretagne-Sud, 56100, Lorient, France

    Arnaud Perrot

Authors
  1. Sofiane Amziane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kamal Khayat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammed Sonebi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Arnaud Perrot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

This document is the result of an experimental campaign supported by and carried out by a task group of RILEM TC 266-MRP. Other members of the task group who contributed to the experimental campaign and data treatment are: DF, ES, HK, KE, YV, CD, SF, MG, II, LL, VM, and IN. Other members of RILEM TC 266-MRP, not involved in the task group are: RC, GDS, SF, SG, MH, SJ, KL, JL, DL, TP, NR, WS, JV, JEW, AY, and JZ. This paper was reviewed and approved by all members of the committee.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnaud Perrot.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None of the authors declare a conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

RILEM TC 266-MRP: Chair: Mohammed Sonebi.

Deputy Chair: Dimitri Feys.

TC Members: Sofiane Amziane, Rolands Cepuritis, Chafika Djelal-Dantec, Khadija El Cheikh, Siamak Fakhryee Nejad, Shirin Fataei, Dimitri Feys, Markus Greim, Steffen Grünewald, Michael Haist, Irina Ivanova, Stefan Jacobsen, Helena Keller, Kamal Khayat, Karel Lesage, Laurent Libessart, Julian Link, Dirk Lowke, Viktor Mechtcherine, Ivan Navarrete, Arnaud Perrot, Tilo Proske, Nicolas Roussel, Wolfram Schmidt, Geert de Schutter, Egor Secrieru, Mohammed Sonebi, Yannick Vanhove, Jon E. Wallevik, Ammar Yahia, Jiang Zhu.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amziane, S., Khayat, K., Sonebi, M. et al. RILEM TC 266-MRP: Round-Robin rheological tests on high performance mortar and concrete with adapted rheology—evaluating structural build-up at rest of mortar and concrete. Mater Struct 56, 150 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-023-02236-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-023-02236-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation