Comparison of Conventional and Self-Consolidating Concrete for Drilled Shaft Construction : Research Project Capsule
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Help
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

Comparison of Conventional and Self-Consolidating Concrete for Drilled Shaft Construction : Research Project Capsule

Filetype[PDF-131.42 KB]


  • English
    • Details You May Also Like

    Details:

    • Corporate Creators:
      Louisiana Transportation Research Center
    • Subject/TRT Terms:
    • Publication/ Report Number:
      12-5C
    • Resource Type:
      Booklet/Pamphlet
    • Geographical Coverage:
      Louisiana
    • Edition:
      Research project capsule.
    • Corporate Publisher:
      Louisiana Transportation Research Center
    • Abstract:
      Signifi cant anomalies have been observed in many of the recently drilled shaft constructions

      throughout Louisiana. The anomalies typically occur in the form of honeycombing within the

      zones of heavy reinforcement or sometimes at the shaft bottom. Self-consolidating concrete

      (SCC) has shown great potential to overcome the diffi culties noted in some pilot studies. As

      an example, SCC was used in the drilled shafts for the Huey P. Long Bridge in New Orleans, La,

      and performed satisfactorily. However, when conventional concrete was used for the Audubon

      Bridge in Louisiana, problems were noted in the construction as well as the shaft resistance. Both

      projects consist of large size shafts constructed in the Mississippi River under similar conditions.

      One possible explanation for the diff erences in shaft performance is the concrete mixture design.

    • Format:
      PDF
    • Collection(s):
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • Download URL:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov

    Version 3.26