DURABILITY PROVISIONS FOR VICROADS

STRUCTURAL CONCRETE

H.H. LoH, BE(CML)

ENGTNFRR - BRIDGE D~PMENT SECnON
PRINCIPAL BRIDGE ENGINEER's DEPAR'IMENT
VlcROADS, VICTORIA

F. ANDREWS-PHAEooNOS, BE(HONS), MIEAUST., CPENG.

TEoooCAL CONSULTANT - CONCRETE
MATERIALS TEOiNOLOGY DEPAR'IMENT
VIcROADS, VICTORIA

Henry Loh graduated from Melbourne University

in 1968, joining the Rural Water Corporation of
Victoria in 1969. Since late 1969, he has worked
for VicRoads with extensive experience in the
design of bridges and other road structures. He is
currently involved in research and development
activities in the Development Section of the
Principal Bridge Engineer's Department of
VicRoads.

Fred Andrews-Phaedonos graduated from Monash

University in 1978 with an honours degree in
Civil Engineering. Since then he has wolked for
VicRoads, mainly in bridge and concrete related
areas. At present he is a member of the Materials
Teclmology Department, where he is a technical
specialist in the areas of concrete teclmology,
diagnostic assessment, protection and repair of
concrete.

ABSTRACT: Durable concrete is produced by atatal quality process.l1leappropna1e - --

specification of durability requirements is an integral part of this process. For practical
purposes, a relatively dense and impenneable concrete cover to the steel reinforcement is
the main requirement to ensure long-term durability. Since July 1992, VicRoads has
progressively incorporated a number of durability provisions into its standard QA
Bridgework Specification, Section 610 - "Structural Concrete",

This paper presents an overview of the durability provisions in Section 610 (July 1993
version). Areas covered include concrete cover, grade, class and designation, exposure
classification, minimum compressive strength, minimum cementitious material content,

PAPER NO. 27
maximum water/cementitious material ratio and use of blended cement as an alternative to
ordinary portland cement. Concrete mix design, consistency of concrete prior to placing,
practical on-site curing requirements based on minimisation of evaporative moisture losses
from all freshly placed and unprotected concrete, and formwork removal times are also
discussed.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The authors wish to thank the Chief Executive of VicRoads

for his permission to publish this paper. The views expressed in this paper are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of VicRoads. The authors also wish to
thank Messrs Tony Christian, Rex Atkins, Joe Bordonaro, Hank De Goede, GeoffWigg and
Frank Rapattoni for their valuable support and contributions to developing the new
Standard Specification, Section 610 - "Structural Concrete".

PAPER NO. 27
1. INTRODUCTION

There are many ways to produce good concrete work for a given set of conditions. This
paper serves as a record of the VicRoads' approach to providing durability provisions in
its standard QA Bridgework Specification, Section 610 - "Structural Concrete" (I). These
provisions contain a number of important initiatives which should ensure that the desirable
standards of concrete durability will be achieved.

Durability of concrete is a vast and complex topic. Both the complexity and difficulty of
ensuring durability have resulted in the ongoing and c0stly remedial and rehabilitation
works being carried out on concrete structures in many parts of the world. Hence, the
need to design, specify and construct durable and cost-effective concrete structures has
been in the forefront of concrete technology and worldwide attention in recent years.

Tremendous advances have been made in the science of concrete technology. In spite of
this, working with concrete is still very much an art. Like any art, its mastery involves
the mastery of both theory and practice.

Growing environmental and economic considerations to minimise and recycle industrial

wastes have resulted in the push to use blended cement as an alternative to ordinary
portland cement (OPC) in normal strength concrete, especially in bridge construction.

2. BACKGROUND

The publication of the AUSTROADS Draft Bridge Design Code March 1991, in particular
Section 5.4 - Design for Durability, was the impetus and stimulus behind the investigations
carried out on durability of concrete. Prior to this, durability as a concrete property was
not explicitly provided for as a requisite bridge design or specification requirement. In
effect, the new '92 AUSTROADS Bridge Design Code(1) (hereafter referred to as the
Code) has challenged and changed the way an old familiar construction material like
concrete is looked at and thought about.

Through a series of discussions and literature reviews, a number of internal reports lJ•4•5l on
concrete durability were prepared. The major findings of the investigations were presented
in a seminar to the concrete industry groups prior to their implementation into Section 610
(July 1992 version) as first stage interim measures. In this version, use of blended cement
was subject to approval on merit; where proposed, full documentation on concrete
performance characteristics and construction techniques together with reasons for its use
were to be provided.

VicRoads has limited experience in the use of supplementary cementltlous materials

(SCMs). Nevertheless, some 25 mixes containing one of these SCMs were approved for
use in bridge structures over a recent two-year (1991 to early 1993) period. To keep
abreast of the recent trend towards the greater use of SCMs within the overall concrete
building and construction industry, further literature reviews to idendify the major
technical and practical aspects concerning the use of SCMs in concrete were carried out
and reported!"'. As a result, use of both SCMs in blended cement and ope has been
incorporated as standard options in the current Section 610.

27-1
Adequate curing is essential to good durable concrete. An internal investigation report(7)
on curing of cast-in-place concrete has been prepared with a view to practical
implementation of curing requirements into the Specification. The report emphasised the
importance of a theoretical and practical understanding of the fundamental concrete mix
parameters and the physical structure and volumetric composition of the hydrated cement
paste through the application of basic concrete technology. This has resulted in the
adoption of new curing regimes and form work removal times in the Specification.

3. BASIC PRINCIPLES

The basic principles underpinning the durability provisions in Section 610 are summarised
as follows:

1. A good all-round theoretical and practical understanding and appreciation of;

a. the fundamentals of basic concrete technology,

b. durability distress mechanisms,
c. cement and SCMs chemistry,
d. construction practices and the effects of the classical four Cs of
constituents, compaction, curing and cover on permeability and durability
of concrete,
e. the difference between in-situ and laboratory concrete and between the
surface layer and internal body of the concrete.

2. In general, strength alone is not an adequate measure of durability. Both durability

and strength requirements are to be satisfied simultaneously. Durability
requirements usually govern and exceed those for strength.

3. Select and specify the relevant levels of durability and strength requirements
with respect to exposure classifications and in-service conditions.

4. For practical purposes, long-term durability can best be ensured by a relatively

dense and impermeable concrete cover. In other words, durability is only skin
deep because of the location of the steel reinforcement near this cover layer.

5. New and timely water-adding!water-retaining on-site curing regimes based on

minimisation of evaporative moisture losses from freshly placed and unprotected
concrete.

The durability provisions will be subject to ongoing review. Changes can be made twice
yearly in February and July as up-to-date knowledge and information dictate. It is also
intended that the performance and effectiveness of the Specification are to be monitored
and reviewed on an ongoing basis. In particular, a research project is proposed to evaluate
the performance and sensitivity of SCMs concrete with respect to the specified curing
regimes in the Specification. Existing consultative and education processes with the
concrete industry and VicRoads construction personnel on the provisions of Section 610
will be maintained and expanded as required.

27-2
4. SECTION 610, AUSTROADS, AS 3600(1), AS 1379(')

Design for durability, in accordance with the Code, is now an integral part and the first
step in the structural concrete bridge design process. The aim is to ensure that a concrete
structure has the ability to withstand the expected physical and chemical wear and
deterioration throughout its intended life without the need for undue maintenance.
However, the Code warns that 'Durability is a complex topic and compliance with these
(Code) requirements may not be sufficient to ensure a durable structure'.

4.1 Differences between Section 610, AUSTROADS, AS 3600 and AS 1379

Concrete is specified, manufactured and tested in accordance with the requirements of AS

1379 - "The Specification and Manufacture of Concrete", various relevant Australian
Standards and Section 610. The main differences between Section 610, AUSTROADS,
AS 3600 - "Concrete Structures" Code and AS 1379 are summarised in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1 - Differences between AUSTROADS and AS 3600

I Description
I AUSTROADS I AS3600
I
Nom. Design Life (yrs.) 100 40-60
EC A, Bl, B2, C, U AI-2, BI, B2, C, U
Cover - Nominal cover specified. - Nominal cover
- 5 to 20 mm > AS 3600. implied.
Special Class Concrete - For EC Bl & above. - Usage not specified.
- w/c , c/c, cement type. - c/c, cement type.

Notes: EC - Exposure Classification, w/c - water/cement ratio, c/c - cement content.

Table 2 - Differences between Section 610 and AUSTROADS/AS 1379

Description Section 610 AUSTROADSt"AS 1379

·Concrete Designation E.g. VR330/32 E.g. S 32 Performance

Special Class Concrete All structural concrete
Cover Minimum
Compressive Strength Minimum 3, 7, 28 days
W/C or w/c Ratio Water/Cementitious
Material (W/C) ratio
C/C or clc Cementitious Material
Content (C/C)
For EC B I and above.
Nominal
Characteristic 28 days
Water/Cement Ratio
Cement Content

27-3
5. DURABILITY PROVISIONS IN SECTION 610

Section 610 is essentially a QA performance specification. Specification of prescriptive

concrete performance parameters like maximum water/cementitious material fW/C) ratio
and minimum cementitious material content (C/C) is in accord with the Code's intent and
AS 1379's requirements for performance order concrete. The basis and details of the
durability provisions are dealt with below.

5.1 Minimum versus Nominal Covers

All concrete covers are specified as minimum covers with zero negative tolerances. The
values of these minimum covers are generally consistent with and satisfy the Code's
specified nominal values less the negative tolerance allowances therein.

Concern has been expressed about the practicality and difficulty of implementing the
Code's abstract 'nominal cover' concept in the field. Nominal cover is not a quantity that
is directly measurable and used on site. It has to be thought through with both negative
and positive tolerances to achieve the end result and may be more prone to mistakes in
implementation on the actual jobs, whereas the existing 'minimum cover' approach in
bridge construction is a well tried and accepted method that has proved to be reliable.

5.2 Concrete Grade versus Strength Grade

Concrete grade is a grade of concrete with a specified minimum cementitious material

content, a maximum water/cementitious material ratio and a minimum compressive
strength at 3, 7 and 28 days. The term 'concrete grade' is used instead of the usual
'strength grade' in order to:

1. Put into effect the Code's emphasis on durability requirements.

2. Move away from the previous reliance on achieving strength alone.
3. Convey the fact that concrete would have to satisfy both durability and strength
requirements simultaneously.
4. Emphasise that it is important for concrete to achieve other specified durability
requirements as well as strength, although strength, at this stage, will remain the
most important measure to achieve the specified durability.

5.3 Class of Concrete

All VicRoads' structural concrete is specified as special class performance concrete (32
MPa or higher) in accordance with Appendix C, Clause C4.2 of AS 1379. Normal class
concrete (25 MPa) is not used because it does not afford the user the opportunity to control
the quality of the concrete (with respect to maximum W/C ratio, minimum C/C or cement
type) as only strength (f J, slump and maximum nominal aggregate size can be specified.
As well, for normal class 25 MPa concrete, where the water/cement ratio can be 0.65 or
higher, it appears that a long period of continuous moist curing is required (greater than
6 months)(lo.11) to achieve capillary discontinuity. Further, 'the importance of eliminating
continuous capillaries is such that this might be considered a necessary condition for a
concrete to be classified as "good"' Neville (1981)(10).

27-4
5.4 Concrete Designation

Concrete grade is designated by the letters VR (VicRoads) followed by a three digit

number indicating the minimum cementitious material content in kg/m 3 and a two digit
number indicating the specified minimum compressive strength at 28 days. For example,
concrete grade 32 or grade 32 concrete or 32 MPa concrete is designated as concrete gradc
VR330/32. This contrasts with AS 1379 where a similar grade is designated as S 32
Performance. VicRoads has adopted this approach because:

1. VicRoads' concrete differs significantly from the concrete specified to AS 3600

requirements (e.g. see Tables 1 & 2) in the general building construction industry.
2. The new designation will clearly distinguish between concrete supplied to VicRoads
specifications and concrete supplied to AS 3600 requirements.
3. Although VicRoads' structural concrete forms only a small yearly proportion of the
overall amount of concrete used in Victoria, it represents almost all of the
concretes for building bridges and associated structures in this State.

5.5 Exposure Classifications

Environmental effects, expressed as requirements for various exposure classifications in

the Code, are an integral part of the evaluation of durability requirements of concrete.
'The properties of concrete have no meaningful manifestation in isolation from the
environment' Ryan and Samarin (1992)(111. The relevant exposure classifications are
shown on the bridge drawings. Durability requirements for concrete in exposure
classification U and in marine and other aggressive environments are not specified in
Section 610. These requirements will be detailed separately by the designer and noted on
the bridge drawings and in special Clauses in the construction specification.

5.6 Minimum Compressive Strengths

The basis for acceptance or rejection of concrete is the specified minimum 28 day
compressive strength as measured by testing of site-sampled test cylinders. This is in spite
of the many limitations of the standard test to 'prove' the potential quality of as-cast
concrete. Table 3 below is reproduced from Table 610.051 in Section 610.

Table 3 - Minimum Compressive Strengths

Minimum Compressive
Strength (MPa)
Concrete
Grade 3 7 28
days days days
VR330/32 15 24 32
VR400/40 18 30 40
VR450/50 23 40 50
VR470/55 25 45 55

27-5
The 3 and 7-day compressive strengths are also specified in order to ensure that both
portland cement and SCMs concretes are designed with comparable rate of strength
development for durability considerations. Documentary evidence of previous performance
and relevant test results complying with the minimum compressive strength requirements
given in Table 3 are to be submitted by the contractor as part of the concrete mix design
submission. In the absence of documentary evidence the contractor is required to
undertake trial mix(es).

The values of minimum compressive strength given in Table 3 are those shown in Table
5.16.1.2 of the Code, except for concrete grade VR470/55 and the 7-day value for
concrete grade VR450/50. The 55 MPa concrete has been introduced to especially cater
for the manufacture of some of the VicRoads standard precast concrete bridge beams.

5.7 Minimum C/C, Maximum W/C Ratio

Table 610.061 in Section 610 is reproduced as Table 4 below.

Table 4 - Cementitious Material Content (C/C) and

Water/Cementitious Material (W/C) Ratio

Cementitious Water/Cementitious
Concrete
Material Content Material Ratio
Grade
(min) (kg/m 3) (MPa)

VR330/32 330 0.50

VR400/40 400 0.45
VR450/50 450 0.40
VR470/55 470 0.36

These two performance parameters are the most difficult to resolve. The different
requirements between the '92 AUSTROADS Code and AS 3600 and among the various
State Road Authorities have added to the difficulty. Nevertheless, there is an intimate
relationship between the water content (generally in the range 180 ± 20 litres/m3 , with or
without the use of chemical admixtures), c/c or C/C, w/c or W/C ratio, target slump or
strength, impermeability and the applied curing regimes. In simple and practical terms,
the properties of concrete can be said to depend in the first instance entirely on the
water/cement or cementitious material ratio. The lower the w/c or W/C ratio (within
limits) the better the properties of well-eompacted standard concrete mixes.

The numerical values of C/C and W/C adopted either conform to or exceed the Code's
recommended minimum requirements (Le. 320/0.56, 390/0.46 and 450/0.40 for 32, 40
and 50 MPa concrete respectively). The minimum C/C are about 10% less than
VicRoads' previous (c/c) provisions (Le. 380132, 450/40 and 500/50 respectively). A
W/C ratio of no greater than 0.50 for 32 MPa concrete is considered to be the minimum
requirement to obtain a relatively impermeable cover concrete with the limited curing
periods generally specified and encountered on site.

27-6
5.8 SCMs (Fly Ash. Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag. Silica Fume)

Much research information is available on SCMs. Most is highly specialised and job-
specific. In general, there are few disadvantages with these materials provided good mix
design procedures and the usual good construction techniques of placing, compactin~ and
curing are followed. Some limitations of these materials (compared to OPC concrete)
include physical/chemical material variability, slower early rate of strength gain, longer
setting times, extended formwork removal and curing times. However, in normal strength
concrete. judicious use of chemical admixtures, careful mix proportioning and construction
procedures can generally minimise these limitations.

As a first step, SCMs have been incorporated into Section 610 at moderate cement
replacement levels and only in single combination with portland cement. The minimum
mass of portland cement in concrete mixes containing either GGBF slag, fly ash or silica
fume is specified to be 60%. 75 % or 90% respectively of the total mass of cementitious
material in the concrete mix. The use of higher SCMs replacement levels for special
applications such as marine environments, chemical or sulphate attack, alkali aggregate
reaction etc. will be considered and specified on the bridge drawings and in the
construction specification on a case by case basis.

5.9 Concrete Mix Design

The contractor is required to submit as part of the mix design details the following:

I. The source, type and proportions of the constituent materials.

2. Aggregate gradings and saturated surface-dry densities.
3. Chemical admixtures details and manufacturer's recommended method of use.
4. The nominated slump and where a superplasticizer is used the final slump.
5. The maximum water content and maximum water/cementitious material ratio.
6. Documentary evidence of previous performance. relevant tests results including 3,
7 and 28-day compressive strengths and indicative setting times for the relevant
temperature condition.
7. The method of placement and the element(s) of the structure in which concrete is
to be placed.
8. Full details of concrete curing methods as specified in Section 610. This is to
ensure that the contractor is committed to adequate curing. so that curing is not
considered a burden or an after thought.

Again. where documentary evidence on the performance of the concrete mix design is not
available. the contractor is required to undertake trial mix(es).

5.10 Consistence of Concrete

Section 610 requires that 'Each batch (truckload) of concrete delivered to site shall be
visually inspected to ensure consistency of concrete supply, and the estimated slump shall
be recorded on the identification certificate for the batch. Both the visual inspection and
slump estimate shall be carried out prior to any addition of a superplasticizer'.

27-7
5.11 Curing

Both water-adding (e.g. by ponding) or water-retaining (e.g. use of formwork, plastic

sheet or curing compound) curing techniques are specified. Resin and PVA based curing
compounds are not allowed. The essence is to minimise the amount and rate of
evaporative water losses immediately after the concrete has been placed and finished. It
appears that the lower the water/cement ratio, the lower the amount and rate of drying(lJ).

5.11.1 Evaporation and Temperature Limits

A chart for evaporation of freshly placed concrete is included in the Specification. When
the value of the rate of evaporation as determined from the chart exceeds 0.50 kg/or per
hour, the contractor is required to take precautions such as the application of an aliphatic-
alcohol based evaporative retarding compound or controlled fog spray to minimise
evaporative moisture losses. The contractor is also required to satisfy temperature limits
and other precautionary measures with regard to hot, cold and wet weather concreting.

5.11.2 Curing Periods

Table 610.211 in Section 610 is reproduced as Table 5 below.

Table 5 - Specified Periods of Curing

Periods of Curing (excluding steam curing)

Periods of Curing (days)

Concrete Exposure Type of Average Atmospheric Temperature

Grade Classification Cement During Curing

W·C to n·c Above n·c

VRJ30/32 A, B1 GP 7 6

GB 9 g

VR400/40 B2 GP 6 5

GB 8 7

VR450/50 C GP 5 5
VR470/55
GB 7 7

For concrete decks and slab., the period. of curing shall be extended by 2 day•.

Notes: 1. Type of cement:

GP • General purpose portland cement.
GB • General purpose blended cement.
2. When the average atmospheric temperature during the specified periods of
curing falls below IO·C, the period. of curing shall be extended hy 2 days.
3. Where a higher concrete grade is adopted than that shown for a particular
exposure classification, the periods of curing for the higher concrete grade
may be adopted.

For practical reasons, average atmospheric/ambient temperature has been

adopted in place of concrete surface temperature.

27-8
'An estimate of the required duration of curing is a complex problem'u.). It depends on
the water/cement or cementitious material ratio, the type and amount of cement or
cementitious material, SCMs additions, concrete temperature, exposure classification and
ambient conditions during and after curing. An analytical procedure(7) (based on OPC
concrete) undertaken to gain some insight into the problem is briefly outlined below:

1. From work by Powers et al.(1947,1959)(ls.lI) on cement hydration and capillary

continuity or discontinuity in portland cement pastes in relation to curing. In
particular, the theoretical mathematical relationship developed for firstly, the
geUspace ratio (x), degree of cement hydration (m) and the water/cement ratio
(w/c) and secondly, the amount of water that can be lost by evaporation and/or
self-desiccation before the required degree of hydration m (for given w/c and
corresponding x) ceases.
2. From work by van der Molen (1979)(16) on performance-based curing of concrete.
In particular, the theoretical/empirical graphical relationship established for cement
pastes between firstly, concrete maturity (M) and m and secondly, the coefficient
of permeability (k) and x at the onset of capillary discontinuity. (Note: The
minimum maturities provided in Table 5 are from around 1.6 to 2.2 times those
determined from this analysis.)
3. From Neville (1981)(10) for the determination of the volumetric composition of
sealed hydrated cement pastes for given w/c and corresponding minimum required
m and x.

The minimum curing periods/maturities provided in Table 5 are generally in line with
current international practices. As a comparison, these provisions exceed those specified
in Table 6.5 of BS 8110: Part 1 (1985)(i.e. from no special requirements to 3 to 7 days
for T > 10°C for OPC/SCMs concrete) or in Table d.l0 in CEB-FIP Model Code
1990(l4)(Le. 2 to 6 days for T > IOOC for OPC concrete and plus I to 2 additional days
for SCMs concrete). The curing periods are also generally in line with the major findings
of Ho (1992)(17) on the effectiveness of water-retaining curing techniques.

5.11.3 Water-Retaining versus Water-Adding Curing Techniques

Curing is "the maintenance of a satisfactory moisture content/vapour pressure and

temperature in the concrete, during its early stages, to drive the cement hydration process
to the minimum desired degree so that desired properties of the concrete may develop".
By this definition, there is a large body of concrete technology literature which supports
the view that 'For the normal range of workability used in construction there will always
be sufficient water at the time of placement for curing. Thus, the main requirement after
placing the concrete is to ensure that the moisture available is not significantly reduced by
evaporation'(11). The literature review(7) undertaken indicated that, although not the same
as water-adding curing, the desired minimum degree of hydration or gel/space ratio and
hence desired concrete properties can be obtained by water-retaining curing techniques.

5.12 Fonnwork Removal Times

Formwork is kept in position to achieve strength requirement and as an integral strategy

to ensure initial uninterrupted and continuous curing of the formed concrete surfaces.

27-9
The new minimum periods for removal of formwork and form work supports range from
1 day for sides of slabs and piles to 7 days (or achieving 7-day compressive strength,
whichever is the greater) for soffits of structural components such as beams, slabs,
cantilevers, crossheads etc. For SCMs concrete these periods have been increased by 1
day for soffit and high column/wall side forms, but excluding side forms for low columns
(less than 4 metres) and walls (less than 2 metres), or the sides of slabs and piles.

6. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The durability provisions in VicRoads standard QA Bridgework Specification Section 610 -

"Structural Concrete" (July 1993 version) are underpinned by up-to-date knowledge.
These provisions go beyond the '92 AUSTROADS Code recommended minimum
requirements. Use of both SCMs in blended cement and OPC has been incorporated as
standard options. New concrete grade designations, mix design requirements and
form work removal times have been introduced. Curing regimes are in line with
international practices. The effectiveness of these provisions will be monitored, appraised,
augmented and improved as required. Durability of concrete is a vast and complex
problem. Much remains to be done. The new VicRoads Standard Specification for
Structuaral Concrete is another step towards specifying and constructing better, more cost-
effective and durable concrete.

7. REFERENCES

1. "Section 610 - Structural Concrete". VicRoads Standard QA Bridgework

Specification (July 1993).
2. "Section 5.4 - Design for Durability". '92 AUSTROADS Bridge Design Code and
Commentary.
3. Loh, H.H. (1991). "Durability Provisions for VicRoads Concrete Bridgeworks",
VicRoads Internal Investigation Report, November.
4. Bromham, B. (1992). "Supplementary Cementitious Materials in Structural
Concrete", VicRoads Internal Investigation Report, January.
5. Loh, H.H. (1992). "Designing for Durability in VicRoads Bridgework Concrete",
VicRoads Internal Investigation Report, April.
6. Andrews-Phaedonos, F. (1993). "Use of Supplementary Cementitious Materials in
Concrete", VicRoads Internal Investigation Report, March.
7. Loh, H.H. (1993). "Practical Curing Requirements for VicRoads CIP Bridgework
Concrete", VicRoads Internal Investigation Report, June.
8. Australian Standard AS 3600 - 1988. "Concrete Structures".
9. Australian Standard AS 1379 - 1991. "The Specification and Manufacture of
Concrete" .
10. Neville, A.M. (1982). "Properties of Concrete", Pittman Book Limited, 3rd
Edition, pp 33, 26-32.
11. Powers, T.C., Copeland, L.E., and Mann, H.M. (1959). "Capillary Continuity or
Discontinuity in Cement Pastes", Journal PCA Res. & Dev. Lab., May.
12. Ryan, W.O., and Samarin, A. (1992). "Australian Concrete Technology",
Longman Cheshire Ply. Ltd., P 213.
13. Beresford, F.D. (1978). "MythS of Curing", Myths of Curing Seminar, Concrete
Institute of Australia, Melbourne, August.

27-10
14. "CEB-FIP Model Code 1990", Published by Thomas Telford Services Ltd. 1993,
pp 426-7.
15. Powers, T.C. (1947). "A Discussion of Cement Hydration in Relation to the
Curing of Concrete" , Pmc. 27th Ann. Meeting, Highway Res. Board , Washington.
16. van der Molen, J.L. (1979). "Performance-based Curing of Concrete", The Inst.
of Engineers Aust., National Conference Publication No. 79/9.
17. Ho, D.W.S. (1992). "The Effectiveness of Curing Techniques on the Quality of
Concrete", CSIRO Div. of Building, Construction and Engineering, TR 92/3.
18. "Recommended Practice: Durable Concrete", Concrete Institute of Australia,
February 1990, P 36.

27-11