Guide for Design

and Proportioning of
Concrete Mixtures for
Pavements
Reported by ACI Committee 325

'

'
•

L[)
N
(Y)

u
<( �
� acI •
�
American Concrete Institute
Always advancing
 First Printing
American Concrete Institute
Always advancing
June 2017
ISBN: 978-1-945487-66-8

Guide for Design and Proportioning of Concrete Mixtures for Pavements

Copyright by the American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI. All rights reserved. This material
may not be reproduced or copied, in whole or part, in any printed, mechanical, electronic, film, or other
distribution and storage media, without the written consent of ACI.

The technical committees responsible for ACI committee reports and standards strive to avoid
ambiguities, omissions, and errors in these documents. In spite of these efforts, the users of ACI
documents occasionally find information or requirements that may be subject to more than one
interpretation or may be incomplete or incorrect. Users who have suggestions for the improvement of
ACI documents are requested to contact ACI via the errata website at http://concrete.org/Publications/
DocumentErrata.aspx. Proper use of this document includes periodically checking for errata for the most
up-to-date revisions.

ACI committee documents are intended for the use of individuals who are competent to evaluate the
significance and limitations of its content and recommendations and who will accept responsibility for
the application of the material it contains. Individuals who use this publication in any way assume all
risk and accept total responsibility for the application and use of this information.

All information in this publication is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either express or
implied, including but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular
purpose or non-infringement.

ACI and its members disclaim liability for damages of any kind, including any special, indirect, incidental,
or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result
from the use of this publication.

It is the responsibility of the user of this document to establish health and safety practices appropriate
to the specific circumstances involved with its use. ACI does not make any representations with regard
to health and safety issues and the use of this document. The user must determine the applicability of
all regulatory limitations before applying the document and must comply with all applicable laws and
regulations, including but not limited to, United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) health and safety standards.

Participation by governmental representatives in the work of the American Concrete Institute and in
the development of Institute standards does not constitute governmental endorsement of ACI or the
standards that it develops.

Order information: ACI documents are available in print, by download, on CD-ROM, through electronic
subscription, or reprint and may be obtained by contacting ACI.

Most ACI standards and committee reports are gathered together in the annually revised ACI Manual of
Concrete Practice (MCP).

American Concrete Institute

38800 Country Club Drive
Farmington Hills, MI 48331
Phone: +1.248.848.3700
Fax: +1.248.848.3701
www.concrete.org
 ACI 325.14R-17

Guide for Design and Proportioning of Concrete

Mixtures for Pavements
Reported by ACI Committee 325

David W. Pittman, Chair

David J. Akers Mohamed Nasser Darwish Steven A. Ragan Peter C. Taylor'

Richard 0. Albright Norbert J. Delatte David Richardson! Samuel S. Tyson
William L. Arent W. Charles Greer John W. Roberts' Thomas J. Van Dam
Jamshid M. Armaghani Jerry A. Holland' Terry W. Sherman Don J. Wade
Bob J. Banka Gary L. Mitchell Alex Hak-Chul Shin W. James Wilde
Neeraj J. Buch Jon I. Mullarky Kurt D. Smith Gergis W. William
Tim Cost' Kamran M. Nemati Anthony M. Sorcic' James M. Willson
Juan Pablo Covarrubias Nigel K. Parkes Shiraz D. Tayabji Dan G. Zollinger

Consulting Members

Michael I. Darter John L. Rice Raymond S. Rollings

The committee would like to acknowledge P. Bly and S. P alotta for their contributions to this guide.
'Members of subcommittee that prepared this guide.
!Chair of subcommittee that prepared this guide.

Concrete mixtures intended for pavements have purposes and
desired characteristics that are different from other types of
mixtures, such as structural or mass concrete. Thus, a guide for
designing concrete mixtures specific to paving, such as high­
ways, streets, airfields, and parking lots, is necessary. This guide
describes a method for designing mixtures and selecting trial
mixture proportions for hydraulic-cement concrete made with and
without supplementary cementitious materials, chemical admix­
tures, and fibers. The guide provides a method that focuses on
designing the concrete mixture in the context of pavement struc­
tural design, concrete production, construction operations, and
the environment in which the pavement will reside. Trial mixture
proportions are for concrete consisting of norma/weight aggre­
gates and concrete with workability suitable for various types of
pavement construction, such as slipform, fixed-form, and laser­
guided screeding. The method provides an initial approximation
of proportions intended to be analyzed to assess their perfor­
mance potential for mixing, transporting, placing, screeding and
consolidating, finishing, texturing, and time-of-setting. The method
also considers the hardened concrete performance parameters of
strength, durability, abrasion resistance, skid resistance, smooth­
ness, and dimensional and shape stability. Methods of checking for
incompatibilities of materials in given construction environments
are included, as well as methods for aggregate grading optimiza­
tion. Resulting proportions should be checked by preparing and
analyzing trial mixtures in the laboratory, then in the field, and
adjusting as necessary to produce the desired concrete characteris­
tics. Special concrete pavement mixtures, such as pervious concrete
or roller-compacted concrete, are not included in the document.
This is a dual-unit document; however, paired values stated in inch­
pound and Sf units are usually not exact equivalents. Therefore,
either system should be used independently of the other.
Keywords: aggregate optimization; aggregates; cementitious materials;
fly ash; incompatibility; intermediate aggregate; mixture proportioning;
mixtures; pavements; slag cement.

CONTENTS
ACI Committee Reports, Guides, and Commentaries are
intended for guidance in planning, designing, executing, and CHAPTER 1-INTRODUCTION, p. 2
inspecting construction. This document is intended for the use 1 . 1-General, p. 2
of individuals who are competent to evaluate the significance
1 .2-Mixture design goals, p. 2
and limitations of its content and recommendations and who
will accept responsibility for the application of the material it
contains. The American Concrete Institute disclaims any and
all responsibility for the stated principles. The Institute shall
not be liable for any loss or damage arising therefrom.
ACI 3 2 5 . 1 4R-17 was adopted and published June 2017.
Reference to this document shall not be made in contract
Copyright© 2017, American Concrete Institute.
documents. If items found in this document are desired by
All rights reserved including rights of reproduction and use in any form or by
the Architect/Engineer to be a part of the contract documents,
any means, including the making of copies by any photo process, or by electronic
they shall be restated in mandatory language for incorporation or mechanical device, printed, written, or oral, or recording for sound or visual
by the Architect/Engineer. reproduction or for use in any knowledge or retrieval system or device, unless
permission in writing i s obtained from the copyright proprietors.
2 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
CHAPTER 2-NOTATION A ND DEFINITIONS, p. 3
2 . 1 -Notation, p. 3
2.2-Definitions, p. 3
CHAPTER 3-BASIC PROPERTIES, p. 4
3 . 1-Desired properties, p. 4
3 .2-Workability, p. 4
3 .3-Strength, p. 8
3 .4-Durabi1ity, p. 10
3 .5-Skid resistance, p . 12
3 . 6-Smoothness, p. 1 2
3.7-Dimensional and shape stability, p . 13
3 . 8-Time of setting, p. 14
3 . 9-Basic properties and considerations, p. 14
3 . 1 0-Sustainability, p. 14
3 . 1 1-Innovative methods and materials, p. 1 5
CHAPTER 4-MATERIALS, p. 16
4 . 1-Aggregate, p. 1 6
4.2-Portland cement, p . 1 7
4.3-Supplementary cementitious materials, p . 17
4.4-Blended cement, p. 18
4.5-Water, p. 19
4.6-Chemical admixtures, p. 1 9
4.7-Fibers, p . 20
4. 8-Summary, p. 21
CHAPTER 5-MIXTURE PROPORTIONING, p. 21
5 . 1-Mixture design, p. 2 1
5 .2-Proportioning methods, p . 2 1
5 .3-Preliminary testing, p . 2 1
5 .4-Proportioning procedure, p . 2 1
CHAPTER 6-SAMPLE MIXTURE DESIGNS, p. 35
6. 1-Example 1 : Urban highway, slipform, traditional
grading, no SCMs (U.S. customary units), p. 36
6.2-Example 2: Urban highway, slipform, optimized
grading, Class C fly ash (U.S. customary units), p. 40
6.3-Example 3: City street, fixed-form, optimized grading,
sulfate soil, slag cement (U.S. customary units), p. 47
6.4-Example 4 : Airfield, slipform, traditional grading,
alkali-silica reaction aggregate, Class F fly ash (U.S.
customary units), p. 52
6.5-Example 5: Parking lot, laser-guided screed, opti­
mized grading, fibers (U. S. customary units), p. 57
6.6-Example 6 : Urban highway, slipform, traditional
grading, no SCMs (SI units), p. 62
CHAPTER 7-REFERENCES, p. 68
Authored documents, p. 69
CHAPTER 1-INTRODUCTION
1.1-General
This document is intended to be used as a supplement to
ACI 2 1 1. 1 , specifically for paving concrete mixtures. ACI
2 1 1 . 1 provides an in-depth discussion of concrete mixture
characteristics and technology. It is unnecessary to repeat
(ciCiJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
this information within this guide. Rather, this guide will
point out the concepts specific to paving mixtures that are
not fully developed in ACI 2 1 1. 1 . Additionally, concepts of
materials' compatibility, durability, solutions for alkali-silica
and sulfate reactions, and aggregate grading optimization
are more fully developed in this document. Mixtures consid­
ered in this document would be suitable as paving mixtures
for airports, highways, streets, or parking lots.
1. 2-Mixture design goals
The design of a concrete mixture suitable for paving
includes the desired outcomes of production, construction,
service life, economy, and sustainability. Material selection
and mixture proportioning are the means of obtaining the
goals of the mixture design, and should consider materials
suitability and availability in relation with the proposed
production technology and construction constraints.
Ideally, the concrete mixture design method will assist the
mixture designer to (Transtec Group, Inc. 20 1 0):
(a) Identify important performance criteria that are func­
tions of the climate, weather during construction, service
conditions, and importance of the project
(b) Identify mixture performance criteria (such as strength
and durability)
(c) Identify recommended test methods
(d) Assess the impact of changes in weather, construction
procedures, materials, and proportions on constructability
and service performance
(e) Provide methods for aggregate blending
(f) Produce mixture proportions based on all the above
(g) Provide mixture performance criteria optimization
opportunities
A successful mixture design will meet the performance
criteria of the paving contractor for: the mixture's ability to
be properly mixed, transported, placed, screeded and consol­
idated, finished, and textured without segregation within the
constraints of the proposed construction operation; schedule
(including weather); production technology; and material
availability. A successful mixture design will also meet
the performance criteria of the owner to provide sufficient
strength, durability, wear resistance, skid resistance, and
dimensional and shape stability while achieving economy
and sustainability. These properties are interrelated. For
instance, placeability and finishability are important to the
integrity of the top 1/8 in. (3 mm) of the slab surface, thus
affecting resistance to freezing and thawing as well as wear
resistance. To achieve all these goals, the optimal combina­
tion of materials and proportions should be provided.
The dilemma of mixture design and proportioning involves
conflicting combinations of benefits and disadvantages as
materials and proportions are varied. Reduction of water
content will increase strength and durability while reducing
shrinkage and edge slump. It may, however, negatively impact
finishability and smoothness, which refers to the undulation of
the concrete surface elevation, not the surface texture or skid
resistance, and could reduce the ability to entrain air, thereby
reducing durability. Raising the air content will increase dura­
bility, but lower strength. Use of locally available aggregate
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 3

may be less expensive, but gap-graded or poorly-shaped mate­ HRWRAadJ adjustment of water requirement for use of
rial may negatively impact finishability, smoothness, and edge high-range water-reducing admixture
slump. Increased water content may increase workability and k regression factor
finishability, but decreases strength and durability. Material Madmix mass of admixture
incompatibilities will further complicate the issue. The intent Madmix water mass of water in admixture
of this guide is to find a way through these issues and produce MAEA water mass of water in air-entraining admixture
successful mixture designs. Magg mass of total aggregate
Mixture design criteria taken into consideration in this Mbase water mass of base water
guide include: Mbatch water mass of batch water
a) Slump McAadJ mass of coarse aggregate shape water
b) Air content adjustment
c) Strength McA.oo mass of oven-dry coarse aggregate
d) Resistance to freezing and thawing McA.sso mass of saturated surface-dry coarse aggregate
e) Sulfate attack Mcem mass of portland cement
f) Alkali-silica reaction Mcm mass of cementitious material
g) Modulus of elasticity MFAadj mass offine aggregate shape water adjustment
h) Thermal expansion and contraction MFA,OD mass of oven-dry fine aggregate
i) Shrinkage MFA,SSD mass of saturated surface-dry fine aggregate
j) Warping Mjtyash mass of fly ash
k) Curling Mjtyashadj mass of fly ash water adjustment
1) Abrasion resistance M,A,OD mass of oven-dry intermediate aggregate
m) Setting time M,A,SSD mass of saturated surface-dry intermediate
n) Permeability aggregate
o) Corrosion resistance of reinforcing steel MsFadJ mass of silica fume water adjustment
Mstag mass of slag cement
CHAPTER 2-NOTATION A ND DEFINITIONS Mstagadj mass of slag cement water adjustment
MrcM mass of total cementitious materials
2. 1-Notation Mwater mass of total design water
A bs absorption of an aggregate MwRA water mass of water in water-reducing admixture
AEA adJ adjustment of water requirement for use of MC moisture content, aggregate
air-entraining admixture N number of test results in a data set
DRDavg dry-rodded density of combined CA and IA RDfiber relative density of fibers
aggregate s standard deviation offc
DRDcA dry-rodded density of coarse aggregate SCMadJ adjustment of water requirement for use of
DRDFA dry-rodded density of fine aggregate SCM
DRD,A dry-rodded density of intermediate aggregate Slagad) adjustment of water requirement for use of
!c compressive strength slag cement
!c' specified compressive strength of concrete v absolute volume of a component
fc,.' required average compressive strength of Vadmix absolute volume of admixture
concrete used as the basis for selection of Vair absolute volume of air
concrete proportions VcA.oo absolute volume of oven-dry coarse aggregate
Fly ashadJ adjustment of water requirement for use of Vcm absolute volume of cementitious material
fly ash VFA,OD absolute volume of oven-dry fine aggregate
Gadmix specific gravity of admixture VFAvoid content = absolute volume of fine aggregate void content
GcA,OD oven-dry specific gravity of coarse aggregate vfiber absolute volume of fibers
GcA.sso saturated surface-dry specific gravity of Vjtyash absolute volume of fly ash
coarse aggregate VtA,OD absolute volume of oven-dry intermediate
Gcem specific gravity of cement aggregate
Gem specific gravity of cementitious material absolute volume of paste
GFA,OD oven-dry specific gravity of fine aggregate w water content
GFA,SSD saturated surface-dry specific gravity of fine WRA adJ adjustment of water requirement for use of
aggregate WRA
specific gravity of fly ash wt weight
oven-dry specific gravity of intermediate Pwater density of water
aggregate
G,A,SSD saturated surface-dry specific gravity of 2. 2-Definitions
intermediate aggregate ACI provides a comprehensive list of definitions through
specific gravity of water an online resource, "ACI Concrete Terminology," https://

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org cCiC'iJ

4 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
www.concrete.org/store/productdetail.aspx?ItemiD=CT 1 3 .
Definitions provided herein complement that source.
mass (weight}-this usage is provided as an aid to under­
standing for users ofthe U.S. customary system in which "mass"
refers to pounds mass, but is often erroneously called "weight",
which is mass multiplied by the acceleration of gravity.
stress ratio-ratio of maximum applied flexural stress to
modulus of rupture.
vibrator trails-localized areas of segregation character­
ized as mortar-rich and often with a compromised air-void
system.
CHAPTER 3-BASIC PROPERTIES
3. 1-Desired properties
This section presents concrete behavior that is desired
during production, construction, and service life as related
to specific concrete mixture properties and components.
Regarding production and construction, a major factor to
be considered is workability. In this document, workability
includes ease of mixing, transporting, placing, screeding and
consolidating, finishing, and texturing. Hardened concrete
performance properties of interest include strength, dura­
bility, skid resistance, smoothness, and dimensional and
shape stability (resistance to excessive warping, curling, or
both). Desired properties are addressed in the mixture design
phase either by being specified in the contract documents, or
by a decision made by the contractor/producer. If the prop­
erty is specified, then the contractor/producer should work
within the specification, but may elect to further enhance the
property in the mixture design. If the property is not speci­
fied, the contractor/producer may still choose to add require­
ments/additives for the mixture.
3. 2-Workability
3.2.1 Effects ofconcrete components
3.2.1.1 Effects of water-A major factor affecting the
workability of a concrete mixture is water content. Increasing
the water content will increase the flow and compactability
of the mixture, but will usually also reduce strength while
increasing segregation, bleeding, and permeability (Mindess
et a!. 2003). Workability decreases with time as water from
the mixture evaporates, is absorbed by the aggregate, and
reacts with cementitious materials during the initial chem­
ical reactions. Increases in ambient temperatures will accel­
erate these effects because higher temperatures increase both
the evaporation and hydration rates (Mindess et a!. 2003).
3.2. 1.2 Effects of agg regate-Effects on all aspects of
workability are related to aggregate particle shape and
surface texture, nominal maximum size, and grading. The
more rounded and smooth the aggregate, the lower the water
requirement; thus, rounded river gravels and sands would be
preferred in this regard. The particle shape of the fine aggre­
gate is especially important to finishability. Increased finish­
ability will result in less hand manipulation of the surface,
producing a smoother-riding pavement, as discussed in
3.2.5 and 3.6. Regarding ease of mixing, more rounded
and smoother aggregate may shorten mixing time. Also, as
(ciCiJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
aggregate becomes flatter, more elongated, or both (failing a
3 : I shape ratio requirement per ASTM D47 9 1 ), issues arise
regarding increased paste content. In some specifications,
the recommended maximum limit of fiat and elongated
aggregate is 1 5 to 20 percent. Cubical or well-rounded parti­
cles are more mobile under vibration and flow more easily
around dowel baskets, chairs, and reinforcement. Angular
aggregate, such as manufactured sand, can sometimes cause
the surface of the concrete to tear as the mixture moves
through the paver.
A more well-graded aggregate has been shown to decrease
segregation, which can cause honeycombing. For tradition­
ally-graded mixtures, it is recommended that when coarse
aggregate graded from No. 4 to 1-112 in. (4.75 to 38 mm)
is specified, the coarse aggregates should be furnished in at
least two separate sizes, with the separation at the 3/4 in. ( 1 9
mm) sieve. For No. 4 to 2 in. (4.75 to 50 mm) material, the
separation should be at the 1 in. (25 mm) size. Such separa­
tion is not necessary when the specified nominal maximum
size of coarse aggregate is 1 in. (25 mm) or less (MoDOT
201 1 ). A more well-graded aggregate has been shown to
increase finishability and smoothness. Being well graded, the
larger particles will not lock with others because ofless direct
contact under vibration and finishing. Tearing of the concrete
surface through the paver is associated with gap-graded
mixtures, which are typically deficient in the No. 8 to No. 30
(2.36 to 0.59 mm) sizes. Coarser fine aggregates are recom­
mended to reduce the occurrence of shrinkage cracking and
joint raveling. Mixtures that are too sandy or where the fine
aggregate is too fine may appear sticky.
Whether to use the traditional two-aggregate blend (coarse
and fine), or to optimize the grading with three or more
aggregate products, is driven by the benefits of a well-graded
combined aggregate. These benefits can include the following:
a) Enhanced finishability, leading to higher smoothness
incentives
b) Less day-to-day variability, leading to less intermittent
problems of edge slump, segregation, and strength variation
c) Less shrinkage cracking
d) Less joint raveling
For example, MoDOT allows a 50 lb/yd3 (23 kg/m3)
reduction in cement content if an optimized grading is used
(MoDOT 20 1 1 ).
However, potential constraints of using more than two
aggregates to optimize grading should also be consid­
ered. These constraints could include, but are not limited
to, economics, available stockpile space at the plant site,
increased time needed for the plant to measure a batch, and
increased water demand or paste content if the additional
aggregate source contains deleterious materials or undesir­
able particle shapes. The cost of bringing in a third or fourth
aggregate or blending two fine aggregates is often offset by a
cement reduction or higher smoothness bonus, or less penal­
ties for excessive cracking (USAF 1 997).
The largest nominal maximum size (NMS) consistent with
workability should be used to minimize shrinkage cracking
and provide the most economical concrete. For two-aggre­
gate systems, however, the choice of a large NMS is often
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCR ETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325.1 4R-17)
overruled by such factors as availability (for example, a
3/4 in. [ 19 mm] NMS may be the most readily available
coarse aggregate), potential for segregation, desirability for
smoothness pay factor incentive, enhancement of flexural
strength, and potential for freezing-and-thawing deteriora­
tion of aggregate.
NMS of the aggregate affects production and construction
operations. As with particle shape, smaller NMS will result in
shorter mixing times. Slipform pavers generally have prob­
lems with placing and consolidating aggregate with NMS of
2 in. (50 mm) and greater. Tearing of the concrete surface
through the paver is associated with larger NMS aggregate.
As NMS decreases, there are fewer low spots produced
under the finishing pan and, as NMS and the proportion of
coarse aggregate increases, the potential for segregation in
stockpiles or mixtures increases.
3.2. 1 .3 Effects of cement Although less important to
-
workability than other components' properties, the char­
acteristics of the cement may also affect workability. For
example, the increased specific surface area caused by cement
fineness associated with Type III cements means they will
have a lower workability at a given water-cementitious mate­
rials ratio (w/cm) than a Type I cement (Mindess et al. 2003).
3.2.1 .4 Effects of supplementary cementitious mate­
rials-The workability of concrete is usually enhanced by
the inclusion of fly ash or slag cement for several reasons.
First, the specific gravity of fly ash and slag cement is typi­
cally lower than portland cement, so a 1 : I mass substitu­
tion of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) for
cement will result in an increase in paste volume, thus
increasing plasticity and cohesiveness of the mixture. If fly
ash is added to increase the total cementitious content, the
increase in fines can compensate for aggregate deficiency
in the smaller particles-for example, coarse sand. Second,
the rounded fly ash particle shape and the nature of the
slag cement usually allows for a reduction in water content
(ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ; Richardson 20 1 5). The water demand can be
lowered by as much as 3 to 5 percent (PCA EB00 1 ; ACPA
2003a). Although fly ash and slag cement both improve
workability, fly ash has the greater effect. In hot weather,
however, some fly ashes may cause early stiffening and loss
of workability of the mixture, as discussed in 3.8 and 4.3 .
Silica fume will markedly increase the water requirement
and stickiness at dosages above 5 percent by mass of cement
because of the high surface area. Silica fume is not typically
used in concrete for pavements, as discussed in 4.3 and 5.4.
Bleeding may be reduced when SCMs with finer particles
are used, especially if water demand has been lowered. Slip­
form low-slump mixtures with higher fines contents may
not bleed, and necessitate prompt curing practices, special
curing methods after finishing, or use of finishing aids.
3.2.1.5 Effects of air-Entrained air increases the paste
volume while acting as a lubricant to improve the workability
of concrete (Scanlon 1 994). Entrained air is particularly effec­
tive in improving the workability of lean mixtures with a low
cement content that otherwise might be harsh and difficult
to work, and of mixtures with angular and poorly-graded
aggregates (PCA EB00 1). Excessive amounts of entrained
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
5
Fig. 3.2. 4a-Slipform paver (courtesy ofGOMACO Corp.).
air, however, can make a mixture sticky and difficult to finish,
may reduce concrete strength, and may increase permeability.
Allowable upper limits are a function of many factors, but
typically are in terms of 8.0 to 9.5 percent (ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ).
3.2.1 .6 Effects of water-reducing admixtures-Water­
reducing admixtures (WRAs) are used to increase work­
ability, reduce water demand, or both, although the rate of
slump loss may not be reduced, depending on the chemistry
of the admixture (PCA EBOO l ) .
3.2. 1 .7 Effects ofset-modifying admixtures Set-retarding
-
admixtures reduce the early rate of hardening and permit
concrete to be handled and vibrated longer (Scanlon 1 994;
ACI 2 1 2.3R).
3.2.2 Ability to be mixed-The concrete mixture should
be able to be mixed successfully with the mixing equipment
intended for the project. Successful mixing entails produc­
tion of a batch that is uniform throughout and achievable in a
minimum amount of time. Occurrences ofcement balls, clumps
of fibers, rocky portions, and so forth, should be minimized.
Smaller-sized rounded aggregate mixtures may not break down
fiber bags as easily as other mixtures. Thus, fiber balls may
appear more often. The variety of mixers that may potentially
be used in a given project should be taken into consideration.
3.2.3 Transportability-Transportability is the concrete's
ability to be transported from the mixer to the delivery
vehicle and into the forms successfully and without harmful
segregation. The mode of transportation should be consid­
ered, along with haul distance. Paving concrete for high­
ways is hauled in dump trucks, agitator trucks, or transit
truck mixers. Care should be taken to minimize segrega­
tion. Low-slump mixtures suitable for slipform paving may
resist segregation, but mixtures intended for form-and-place
paving may require greater slumps, which may lead to a
greater risk of segregation.
3.2.4 Placeability-Placeability is the concrete's ability to
be conveyed from the delivery vehicle into forms without
harmful segregation. Placeability is affected by slump,
which is a measure of fluidity. Slump is commonly specified
in the contract documents with the inclusion of minimum/
6 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

MainFrame

Power Transition
Adjuster (PTA)

Operator's Console

Bogies with 41 in
(1041 mm) Wheelbase

Fig. 3.2. 4b-Bridge deck paver (courtesy ofGOMA CO Corp.).

maximum requirements. The contractor/producer then

selects a slump within the specified limits as a function of
placement methods. Placeability is affected by character­
istics of the mixture, such as grading, particle shape, and
proportions of the combined aggregate; amount and charac­
teristics of cement and other cementitious materials; pres­
ence of entrained air and chemical admixtures; and slump of
the mixture (ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ). On some paving projects, concrete
is placed by pumping, which may necessitate extra care in
proportioning. The mixture should be matched to the type
of paving equipment. Pavers can be classified as heavy or
light. Slipform pavers and some fixed (side) form pavers
are heavy; other fixed form pavers, bridge truss pavers, and
vibratory screeds or tube rollers would be considered rela­
tively light. Heavy pavers (Fig. 3.2.4a) can accommodate
stiffer mixtures. Fig. 3. 2. 4c-Vibratory truss screed.
Bridge deck pavers (Fig. 3.2.4b) are sometimes used for
paving areas too constrained for slipform pavers. Vibrators If the concrete is dumped in front of the paver by trucks, it
on bridge deck pavers may allow higher vibration frequen- will be moved by both the augers and possibly by the vibra-
cies than desired, leading to air-void system disruption. tors. This may lead to a loss of entrained air that may warrant
Lighter pavers may require more handwork, thus needing increasing the initial air content. The mixture should also be
a different mortar content than slipform pavers. Vibratory resistant to segregation by these actions.
screeds, vibratory roller screeds, and laser-guided screeds 3.2.5 Ability to be screeded and consolidated-Paving
(Fig. 3.2.4c, 3.2.4d, and 3.2.4e) provide little or no consoli- concrete is spread, screeded, and consolidated by a variety
dation, but can be used successfully under certain conditions of equipment types and methods such as vibratory screeds,
such as higher-slump concrete or thinner overlays. vibratory roller screeds, laser-guided screeds, and hand
Internal vibration may be necessary for low-slump screeding for small sections. Slipform and fixed-form paving
mixtures. Required manual strike-off, vibration, and bull equipment includes placer-spreaders and pavers (screed
floating behind the screed may bring excessive mortar to the finishers). If the mixture is too stiff, lighter devices may
surface and reduce entrained air near the surface. A somewhat tend to ride up and over the placed concrete. Surface-type
higher slump mixture should be used when pulling slipform screeds, such as vibratory and vibratory-roller screeds and
pavers onto and off headers to facilitate hand consolidation hand strike-off, usually require a more workable mixture,
and finishing operations (Kohn and Tayabji 2003). typically slumps of 5 to 6 in. ( 1 25 to 1 5 0 mm). There is an
Concrete that is placed on the subgrade or base in front of interaction between the mixture stiffness and the paving
the paving machine by a belt placer will be moved laterally equipment. For stiffer mixtures, the screed tilt should be
by the machine's auger or hydraulic plow-pan (Fig. 3.2.4f). increased to enhance consolidation; less screed tilt is neces-

(c]C"iJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
sary for more fluid mixtures because of the tendency to surge
under the screed, which results in a high surface behind it.
Sometimes the paver is equipped with a tamper bar to aid in
consolidation and finishing of low-slump paving mixtures.
However, this action may create a mortar-rich surface that
could scale or craze. To avoid problems associated with a
tamper bar, mixtures that are inconsistent regarding work­
ability should be avoided.
Fig. 3.2. 4d-Vzbratory roller screed (Taylor et al. 2007).
Fig. 3.2. 4e-Laser-guided screed.
Concrete head
Paving direction
Fig. 3.2. 4f-Components of typical slipform paver (Taylor et al. 2007).
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
7
Concrete pavers typically consolidate the concrete by
making use of vibrators. Desired density of the mixture
should be achieved without undue segregation and loss of
entrained air. Regarding proper vibration energy imparted
to the mixture, there is a functional relationship between
mixture characteristics, paver speed, pavement thickness,
and head of concrete. Equipment characteristics such as
vibrator rotor force, vibrator frequency and amplitude,
and vibrator spacing are also interrelated with the mixture,
paving operation, and slab characteristics. Thus, the mixture
characteristics (such as dense-graded versus gap-graded
aggregate) will affect the equipment settings and operational
variables (Tayabji et a!. 2012). With mechanical paving
machines using gang-mounted internal vibrators, overvi­
bration caused by excessive vibrator frequency or incorrect
paver speed can result in vibrator trails resulting in localized
areas of segregation characterized as mortar-rich, often with
a compromised air-void system. The trails provide a plane of
weakness that can result in longitudinal cracking. Addition­
ally, trails may be low in entrained air, resulting in freezing­
and-thawing damage. With surface-type screeds, overvibra­
tion could cause the coarse aggregate to sink deeper, forcing
more paste to the surface, reducing abrasion resistance,
potentially causing crazing and scaling, and resulting in a
less durable surface. The mixture characteristics also affect
the desirable vibrator frequency and spacing, which should
be set correctly to achieve proper overlap of influence zones.
Gaps in the zones can lead to voids in the finished pavement.
The mixture characteristics should be such that well­
formed slipformed edges are achievable, but have sufficient
strength and stability when freshly cast to resist edge slump
(Voigt et a!. 20 1 0). A well-graded material has been shown
to decrease the tendency for excessive edge slump because
of increased particle-to-particle contact. Edge slump can be
reduced by increasing coarse aggregate content, decreasing
water content, decreasing mortar content, and using manu­
factured fine aggregate (Kahn and Tayabji 2003). The
mixture's ability to be consolidated around all embedments
and dowel types and styles, including round, elliptical, and
plate dowels, should be considered.
3.2.6 Finishability-The mixture should be able to be
finished successfully primarily by the action of the finishing
Tamper
Profile pan
\
Side form
8 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
equipment such as screed, strike-off plate, tamper bar,
profile pan, side forms, and longitudinal mechanical floats
with little or no handwork. A surface that is difficult to
close may be suffering from insufficient paste or mortar or
premature stiffening due to possible material incompatibility
(Kohn and Tayabj i 2003). Excessive working of the surface
may result in a weak, nondurable surface. After screeding, or
being extruded by the paving machine, the concrete surface
may have to be smoothed with a bull float or a scraping
straightedge. The mixture should allow all edges, tooled
joints, and isolation joints to be rounded to the specified
radius. For a given type of finishing equipment, the mixture
should be optimized in its response to the finishing equip­
ment. Surface depressions resulting from poor response
under the pan can lead to excessive hand-working and lower
durability from loss of air and perhaps an excessive w/cm
at the slab surface. Longitudinal mechanical floats may
pool slurry on the low edge, indicating a possible incorrect
mixture (Tayabji et al. 20 1 2). Various placing methods may
dictate different mixture characteristics. Slipform pavers,
fixed-form finishing equipment such as screed-finishers and
finisher-floats, laser-guided screeds, vibratory roller screeds
on forms, vibrating screeds on forms, and occasional hand­
work will call for different slumps that vary from 1 to 6 in.
(25 to 1 50 mm). Additionally, specifications will most likely
place restrictions on slump.
Mixtures containing fly ash tend to be stickier and thus
more difficult to finish where high air or high fines contents
are prevalent. Slag cement concrete may appear sticky, but
attempting to remedy the problem with added water may
lead to other problems, such as aggregate segregation at the
surface, leading to reduced freezing-and-thawing resistance.
Slight increases in coarse aggregate content can eliminate
the stickiness issue. In mixtures containing fly ash or slag
cement, bleed water at the slab surface may not form (Kohn
and Tayabji 2003).
3.2.7 Ability to be textured-Surface texturing of the
slab is performed on concrete that is either in the plastic
or hardened state. Types of texturing associated with the
plastic state are turfdrag, burlap drag, brooming, and tining.
Diamond grinding and diamond grooving are applied to
concrete in the hardened state. The mixture should be able to
respond well to the specified texturing methods. The paving
train may include texturing equipment, such as a burlap drag
behind the paver, a separate tining machine, or both. Burlap
and artificial turf drag provides microtexture, whereas
macrotexture is imparted by tining or diamond grooving.
Microtexture is associated primarily with the mortar, and in
the case of tining, the mortar fraction is the wearing surface;
thus, the fine aggregate needs to be resistant to polishing
and the mortar should be durable. The concrete character­
istics will affect the operation of the tining machine. The
w/cm should be low enough for the mortar to be durable,
and the mixture not too wet, which would result in slumped
or closed-up tining serrations or attenuated broom texture,
but not too dry, which would result in rough, toru, poorly
defined serration shapes; insufficient serration depths; or
both. In terms of aggregate grading and mortar volume, the
(ciCiJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
mixture should be consistent batch-to-batch to achieve the
desired surface consistently and to prevent the texture from
excessive depth variance.
3 . 3-Strength
-
3.3 . 1 Flexural strength Concrete pavements are designed
against failure from either fatigue cracking or pumping at
the joints. Thus, strength requirements are typically included
in the contract documents. The contractor/producer may,
however, require a greater strength or a greater strength gain
rate to meet desired construction operations and schedules, to
assure compliance in meeting minimum specified strengths,
to avoid penalties for noncompliance, or to earn incentives.
The characteristics of the mixture have much to do with both
fatigue and erosion modes of failure. Although loads applied
to pavements produce both compressive and tensile stresses,
tensile stresses are more critical because heavy loads will
induce stresses that may be a significant percentage of the
concrete flexural strength, whereas compressive stresses
remain relatively small in relation to the compressive
strength. Thus, the mixture's flexural strength, or modulus
of rupture (MOR), is the primary consideration in mixture
design. The concrete should have sufficient strength to
provide a sufficiently low stress ratio to prolong fatigue life.
As flexural strength increases, the slab thickness require­
ment decreases. Strength is often used as a pay incentive in
end-result (performance) types of specifications.
A negative result of specifying and rewarding higher flex­
ural strength levels is that excessive strength at 28 days from
high cement contents and low w/cm tend to produce concrete
that increases stiffness, thereby increasing risk of cracking
at early ages. Curling stresses increase due to an increased
modulus of elasticity, and the ability to dissipate stresses
through creep relaxation is diminished. ACI 360R cautions
the designer to be careful in choosing a target strength,
w/cm, or both. Additionally, higher compressive strength
can decrease load-carrying capacity because of increased
curling stresses (Walker and Holland 1 999) and can increase
stress concentration at flaws, which increases brittleness and
severity of corner breaks (Ruiz et al. 2005). Some design
professionals advocate specifying a modest strength, such as
650 to 700 psi (4.5 to 4.8 MPa) flexural strength (Ruiz et al.
2005), which will force thicker slabs and reduce shrinkage,
warping, curling, and brittleness problems.
A major factor impacting the flexural strength of concrete
is the paste-aggregate bond. The bond is affected by aggre­
gate surface texture; unit stress at the interface of the paste
and the aggregate; paste strength; and flaws at the interface
that include interfering coatings, encrustations, dust, trapped
bleed water, shrinkage cracks, and locally high w!cm created
due to uneven mixing.
Rougher aggregate enhances bond. As particles become
more angular and as nominal size aggregate (NMS)
decreases, the unit stress at the interface decreases and
strength increases. At constant w/cm, more angular fine
aggregates have been shown to increase flexural strength.
However, the resulting increased water demand to achieve a
constant slump may offset the strength gain. Cleaner aggre-
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
gate, in terms of both coatings and dust content, enhances
flexural strength. Any characteristic of the aggregate that
would lower the water demand will result in less bleed water
and a lower w/cm, both of which increase bond strength.
Concrete strength is diminished by increasing air content.
To achieve adequate strength, the air content should be as
low as allowable while still achieving durability. A sufficient
air-void system is essential for durability. In terms of bond
strength, although a certain level of entrained air may be
necessary for durability reasons, incompatibilities between
cementitious materials and admixtures may cause the air
bubbles to accumulate around aggregate particles, disrupting
the bond strength (Kohn and Tayabji 2003).
Other aspects of a mixture can enhance strength. The
most important is the use of as low a w!cm as practical, as
discussed further in 5.4.4, perhaps accomplished by water­
reducing admixtures. The specific mineralogy of certain
aggregates can increase flexural strength. Optimized grad­
ings have been shown to increase strength because less
mortar is necessary to fill void space, and typically water
demand is less. Finer cementitious and inert materials
such as some mineral components and portland-limestone
cements tend to lower bleed water and improve paste-aggre­
gate bond strength (Shannon et a!. 20 1 5). Finally, the lower
the deleterious material content, the less chance of strength
being negatively impacted. Specifications limit the amount
of weak and abrasion-prone aggregates such as soft chert
and sandstone, shale, and highly plastic materials that can
contribute to water demand. These include clay lumps, clay
dust, and clay coatings.
Under certain circumstances, consideration should be
given to designing for 56- or 90-day strengths instead of
28-day strength targets because of the delay in application of
traffic for certain facilities. This would better use the slower
strength-gaining characteristics of SCMs. The effect and
timing of curing becomes more critical with slower strength­
gaining mixtures. Using more fly ash and slag cement and less
portland cement will generally result in lower early strengths
but higher later-age strengths. At very late ages (6 months and
beyond), this strength differential can be significant.
3.3.2 Compressive strength-The factors that affect
compressive strength are similar to those that affect flex­
ural strength, but some are not as important to compressive
strength as they are to flexural strength. Factors that affect the
bond between the aggregate and the paste tend to affect flex­
ural strength more than compressive strength, such as aggre­
gate surface properties, the aggregate-paste interfacial zone,
and unit stress at the aggregate surface. Thus, for pavements,
these factors should be viewed with an increased emphasis,
as opposed to applications where compressive strength is the
strength of interest. Thus, inadvertent changes in grading,
aggregate source (mineralogy), w/cm, aggregate cleanliness,
and deleterious material content could lead to unconservative
assurance of flexural strength being achieved if compressive
strength is used for quality control. Subtle changes in the
mixture constituents may not significantly affect compres-
sive strength, but can impact flexural strength, so caution
should be used when using compressive strength as a crite-
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
9
rion for acceptance (Richardson and Whitwell 20 1 5). Use of
compressive strength in place of flexural strength for quality
control is discussed more fully in Chapter 5.
3.3.3 Early strength-Acceleration of strength gain may
be desired for fast-track construction, early opening to
traffic, cold weather, or patching. Higher early strength can
be achieved by provision of a lower w/cm (0.33 to 0.43),
Type III cement, silica fume, accelerators, water-reducing
admixtures (WRAs), high-range water-reducing admix­
tures (HRWRAs), and greater cement contents if necessary.
Rapid-setting hydraulic cement and several proprietary
cements can also be used.
Recommendations (Tayabji et a!. 20 1 2) have been made
that additional cement can be used for achieving earlier
strengths, such as 1 00 to 1 5 0 lb/yd3 (59 to 88 kg/m3) Type I or
II (ACI 302 . 1 R). Cement contents of 700 to 800 lb/yd3 (4 1 3
to 472 kg/m3) are recommended by ACI 325. 1 1 R. A survey
(Van Dam et a!. 2005) of state department of transportation
early opening to traffic (EOT) mixtures reported cement
contents of 658 to 900 lb/yd3 (392 to 534 kg/m3 ) for 6- to
8-hour EOT mixtures and 564 to 846 lb/yd3 (335 to 502 kg/
m3 ) for 20- to 24-hour EOT mixtures. It is now recognized,
however, that there is an optimal amount of cement that leads
to maximum strength. Beyond that, strength will not increase
and may actually decrease. Enhancing early strength may
be at the expense of durability and long-term strength. It is
difficult to achieve an adequate air-void system in mixtures
containing high cement contents, low w/cm, and multiple
admixtures, especially with Type III cement. A lower-quality
paste may be produced because of lower homogeneity and
more microcracking. These types of mixtures have resulted
in freezing-and-thawing deterioration and deicer scaling
(Van Dam et a!. 2005). Greater cement contents will result
in higher paste contents and a greater potential for shrinkage
and cracking. In general, paste is also more permeable than
aggregate, so increasing cement content may increase perme­
ability, although a greater cement content that leads to a lower
w/cm may offset the increased permeability to a certain extent.
Designers should strive toward achieving both early strength
and acceptable durability by reasonably reducing the w!cm
and increasing the aggregate volume, such as through aggre­
gate grading optimization (Van Dam et a!. 2005). Types I and
II cements have been used, but usually require an accelerator
and a lower w/cm . Type III cement is also used; however, it
may be advisable to check with users of a specific source
of Type III cement that have experience with its strength­
gaining characteristics. Additionally, use of finer cement
such as Type III may result in a greater water demand and
early setting (ACI 325 . 1 1 R). Class F fly ash, slag cement,
and excessive air content can reduce early strength.
It is common to use w/cm less than 0.40 for 6- to 8-hour
EOT mixtures, while somewhat higher w/cm have been
successful for 20- to 24-hour EOTs. The use of w/cm less
than 0.40 increases the risk of autogenous shrinkage.
The use ofType A and E WRAs can enhance early strengths
by lowering the quantity of water required for placing and
finishing operations, especially if Type I and II cements are
used. In mixtures with low w!cm and containing Type III
cCiC'iJ
10 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING O F CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
cement, the use of Type F HRWRA may be warranted.
Accelerators, typically Types C and E, are used and are
almost a necessity in 6- to 8-hour EOT mixtures (Van Dam
et a!. 2005). Calcium chloride is common; however, if steel
is present, consideration should be given to use of a nonchlo­
ride accelerator such as calcium nitrate because of corrosion
concerns (ACI 3 1 8; ACI 201 .2R). Calcium chloride may also
increase drying shrinkage and negatively impact the micro­
structure; the latter has been linked to reduced freezing-and­
thawing resistance (Van Dam et a!. 2005).
Typical strength-based opening criteria are as follows:
250 psi ( 1 .7 MPa) flexural strength and 3000 psi ( 1 3 . 8 MPa)
compressive strength for 6- to 8-hour mixtures, and 300 to
600 psi (2. 1 to 4.2 MPa) flexural strength and 2500 to 3500
psi ( 1 7 to 24 MPa) compressive strength for 20- to 24-hour
mixtures (Van Dam et a!. 2005). The FAA (2009a) requires
that construction equipment such as pavers are permitted
to ride on the edge of new slabs if the MOR is equal to or
greater than 400 psi (2. 8 MPa). The flexural strength should
be up to 550 psi (3 .8 MPa) if hauling equipment is allowed
to ride on new slabs.
Strength and setting time testing should be performed
using a range of probable temperatures to assess the sensi­
tivity of the mixture to temperature, enabling contingency
plans for adjusting the mixture as necessary in the field.
The use of maturity testing can facilitate both the mixture
proportioning process and field monitoring of the placement
to determine that opening strength has been achieved.
3. 4-Durability
3.4.1 Freezing and thawing, deicer salt attack, sulfate,
and alkali-aggregate reactions-Pavement slabs experi-
ence a variety of conditions that can cause the pavement
to fail prematurely. Freezing-and-thawing damage and
deicer salt attack are durability issues normally attributed
to specific climate regions. The local pavement environ-
ment in which the slab resides should be taken into account
during the mixture design phase of the operation. Although
open-graded bases may be beneficial in reducing trapped
water that can be a source of moisture contributing to
freezing-and-thawing deterioration, the open texture of
the base may cause other problems, as discussed in 3 .7 . 3 .
Thus, the burden of frost resistance must be borne by the
concrete mixture. Additionally, it is important to note
whether pavement slabs in certain geologic areas have the
potential for sulfate exposure and attack and whether the
aggregate being used in the paving mixture has alkali-silica
reaction (ASR) or alkali-carbonate reaction (ACR) paten-
tial so that an appropriate mixture design can be developed
to guard against these durability issues. Both the paste and
the aggregate impact the level of durability that the slab will
exhibit. These four types of durability issues are typically
addressed by the designer/specifier by prescriptive speci-
fication of durable paving materials, both aggregates and
paste. Alternately, sometimes end-result performance speci-
fications will require specific limits on such properties as
freezing-and-thawing resistance or chloride ion penetration
from deicers or saltwater spray (ACI 20 1 .2R). Durability
cCiC'iJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
is considered to be enhanced by use of mixtures that do
not bleed excessively and have relatively low permeability
because of reduced avenues of water penetration. Lower
permeability can be accomplished by optimizing materials,
reducing the w!cm, and lowering paste content.
Successful achievement of a target air content and varia­
tions in air content have been associated with changes in
aggregate grading; recommendations include use of a more
well-graded total aggregate and reducing variation in the
No. 3 0 through No. 1 00 (0.59 through 0. 1 5 mm) sieve size
materials. Additionally, a more angular and rocky mixture
will require the vibrators to run at a higher frequency,
possibly reducing air content.
3.4. 1.1 Freezing-and-thawing deterioration-To maxi­
mize resistance to freezing and thawing, attention should be
paid to both the paste and the coarse aggregate (ACI 20 1 .2R).
The paste should be of low permeability as indicated by the
rapid chloride ion permeability test (RCPT) (ASTM C 1202)
(Taylor et a!. 2007), although the interpretation of the RCPT
results should consider effects of the mixture constituents.
Low w/cm and a good air-void system are critical. SCMs
will help create a denser, less permeable paste. For prop­
erly air-entrained concrete, there is no significant change
in freezing-and-thawing resistance of mixtures containing
SCMs. Even though larger nominal size aggregate (NMS)
mixtures require less water, the larger the NMS, the greater
the local w/cm in the paste-aggregate interfacial transition
zone, which leads to weaker and more permeable concrete
(Mehta and Monteiro 2006). Paving machine vibrator trails
can be associated with oversanded mixtures, poor total
gradings, incorrect vibrator settings, and vibratory spacing.
The trails will be composed of more paste and possibly a
lower entrained-air content. This can lead to reduced dura-
bility because of the increased chances of cracking and less
freezing-and-thawing resistance where vibrator trails exist.
The coarse aggregate should be sound at the NMS that is
contemplated for use-that is, smaller than the critical size
for aggregate freezing-and-thawing deterioration. There are
many limestones, dolomites, and siliceous gravels that are
subject to this problem, which is primarily the result of a
deficient internal voluminous, yet fine, pore system in the
coarse aggregate (ACI 201 .2R). Therefore, freezing and
thawing of damage-prone NMS should be reduced.
3.4. 1 .2 Scaling-Good scaling resistance is discussed in
ACI 2 0 1 .2R and comes from sufficient air content, a proper
air-void system, and a reasonably low w/cm at the surface of
the concrete. The mixture should be sufficiently workable
and contain enough paste so that excessive efforts do not
need to be made to bring paste to the surface for finishing.
Mixtures prone to excessive bleeding will contribute to
the likelihood of scaling. Some water-reducing admix-
tures (WRAs) and high-range water-reducing admixtures
(HRWRAs) may entrain coarse air bubbles, which do not
enhance scaling resistance. Specifications sometimes limit
the use of SCMs (for example, fly ash and slag cement)
because of concerns about scaling. Deicers have sometimes
been found to cause greater surface mortar loss (scaling)
when fly ash is used, especially in higher proportions (Rao
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
and Stehly 20 1 1 ). Typical limits on recommended fly ash
contents are discussed herein. Some laboratory studies have
indicated increased scaling due to the substitution of slag
cement or fly ash for portland cement, but field studies show
that the use of slag cement has little effect as long as sufficient
curing and drying time has been provided prior to freezing
weather and the application of chemical deicers (Bouzoubaa
et a!. 200 1 ; Naik et a!. 2003). Because of increased poten­
tial for deicer scaling from deicer salts, ACI 3 1 8 limits SCM
contents (Taylor et a!. 2007). In Table 26.4.2.2(b) of ACI
3 1 8- 1 4 are the maximum allowable limits of cement replace­
ment for fly ash (25 percent), slag cement (50 percent), silica
fume (1 0 percent), and total SCM (50 percent). As noted
in 5 .4. 5 . 1 , machine-finished high-quality concrete with a
minimum of handwork with SCM contents exceeding these
limits has been shown to be scaling-resistant.
3.4.1 .3 Alkali aggregate reactiviry-ASR or ACR is
discussed in ACI 20 1 .2R and occurs when certain aggregates
react adversely to alkalis in the cement and other mixture
materials or environment, plus water, to form an expansive
gel on each particle that, combined with water, can cause
expansive stresses. These stresses can result in polygonal
(map) and other types of cracking, surface disruptions, linear
expansion, and disintegration. The more common ASR can
occur with reactive siliceous aggregates.
ASR-resistant mixtures are ones where ASR-prone aggre­
gates are avoided, minimized, or the deleterious reactions
are mitigated. Mitigation measures include partial cement
replacement with SCMs such as low-CaO-content fly ash,
slag cement or natural pozzolans, lithium-based ASR-miti­
gating admixtures, and low-alkali cement (less than 0.6
percent total alkalis). A detailed presentation of FHWA and
AASHTO protocols are presented in 4. 1 . 1 .2. ACI 20 1 .2R
indicates that there are conflicting specifications regarding
the importance ofthe alkali contribution of fly ash and recom­
mended minimum cement replacement levels. Combinations
of high alkali and calcium oxide contents in pozzolans are
considered potentially harmful; thus, it is recommended that
the pozzolan be evaluated. It may not advisable to specify a
maximum limit on alkali content of the cement because the
higher alkali content would be advantageous to offset low
hydration rates during cool weather or when SCMs are used
(Tayabji et a!. 20 1 2). Greater cement replacement levels
may be desired for certain fly ashes, but this may conflict
with cool-weather concreting, where fly ash replacement is
normally kept to lower levels to assist in attaining adequate
early strength (Rao and Stehly 20 1 1 ). Finer fly ashes tend
to mitigate ASR more effectively. Modest replacement
of cement with slag cement (30 to 40 percent) has often
been found to be quite effective in providing effective ASR
resistance without contributing to significant cool-weather
concrete issues. The U.S. military uses 40 to 50 percent slag
(USACE 2012).
Some dolomitic aggregates are susceptible to alkali­
carbonate reactivity (ACR). Unlike ASR, there are no known
mitigation strategies for ACR-susceptible aggregates and
they should not be used. Section 4. 1 .2 should be consulted
regarding AAR testing.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
11
3.4.1.4 Sulfate attack-Sulfate in soil, groundwater,
and saltwater can attack concrete paste. Sulfate attack is
discussed in ACI 20 1 .2R. Use of a sulfate-resistant cementi­
tious system, including cements that are low in calcium
aluminate, appropriate SCMs used as partial cement replace­
ment, or both, along with attention to maximum w/cm, are
the usual mitigation strategies. While Type II and Type V
cements are generally preferred for concrete mixtures that
will be exposed to sulfates, equivalent or greater sulfate
resistance may be possible even with Type I cement when
appropriate SCM replacement is incorporated. Slag cement
is especially effective in this role, as greater replacement rates
are possible without significant performance side effects.
Both fly ash and slag cement have been shown to mitigate
sulfate attack through reduction of free lime content during
the pozzolanic reaction, reduction in permeability, and the
dilution effect of reduction of total tricalcium aluminate
(C3A) content. Finer fly ashes tend to mitigate sulfate more
effectively. Fly ashes with a high (greater than 1 0 percent)
calcium oxide (CaO) or C3A contents (typically found in
Class C fly ashes) should be avoided (Rao and Stehly 20 1 1 ).
Sulfate detection and mitigation testing is discussed in 5.3.2.
Mitigation strategies are included in 5 .4.4. 1 .
3.4.1.5 Deleterious materials-Excessive deleterious
materials, including shale, clay balls, and soft chert, can
cause durability-related problems such as popouts, pitting,
and staining. The deleterious content should not exceed
local agency specified limits. In place of local jurisdic­
tions, for airfields, Kohn and Tayabji (2003) refer to ASTM
C33/C33M for civilian projects and USACE (20 12) for
military projects. The American Concrete Pavement Asso­
ciation (ACPA 2004) cautions that mixtures from portable
central mixing plants can be more susceptible to clay balls
because stockpiles are more likely to be placed directly on
the ground, thus increasing the chance of contamination of
the aggregate from the underlying soil. Excessive vibration
may float lighter (deleterious) materials to the surface and
increase the occurrence of popouts and pitting, even if the
deleterious material content is within specification limits.
3.4.2 Abrasion resistance-Abrasion resistance usually
is not explicitly specified for pavements, although abrasion
should be kept in mind when selecting materials and propor­
tions to prevent excessive wear under certain conditions,
such as with parking lots at trucking facilities where the
exterior pavement may be subjected to forklift traffic with
hard rubber wheels and with bins being pushed across the
surface, or abrasion from snow plows, studded tires, and tire
chain wear. Abrasion-resistant aggregate, such as granite,
traprock, and dolomitic limestone, and stronger paste are the
usual components that should be used to achieve acceptable
abrasion resistance. Surface hardness controls abrasion resis­
tance. Although greater paste content generally lowers abra­
sion resistance, the required cementitious material content
may need to be higher than for internal strength alone to
reduce w/cm at the pavement surface, thus increasing abra­
sion resistance of the paste (Famy 200 1 ). Well-graded
aggregate and harder fine aggregate with silicate minerals
12 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING O F CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
in the larger particle sizes contribute to abrasion resistance
(ACI 201 .2R).
A lower fine aggregate content should be used in low­
slump concrete (less than 1 in. [25 mm]) because this
concrete does not normally bleed or segregate. Decreased
fine aggregate contents can improve resistance to abrasion
of concrete that exhibits little bleeding and segregation.
Surface marring and worn-away mortar have been associ­
ated with oversanded mixtures.
At equal compressive strengths, mixtures containing
SCMs generally exhibit equivalent abrasion resistance to
those without SCMs. At greater SCM contents, however,
strengths may not be equal and abrasion resistance may
suffer. Abrasion resistance problems and scaling sometimes
have been associated with concrete mixtures using higher
SCM replacement rates and the use of deicer salts (3.4. 1 .2)
or excessive vibrator energy during construction.
3.4.3 Joint spalling and raveling Material raveling from
- should be avoided (UFC 2004).
joints can be a result of a variety of mixture-related causes.
Mismatching the timing of sawing and type of sawing equip­
ment with the mixture can result in pulling aggregate from
the joint. Excessive joint spalling during service has been
attributed to improper air-void systems and gap-graded
aggregates, as discussed in 3.4.4 and 3.7.3 (Lafrenz 200 1 ).
A more well-graded aggregate performs better than a gap­
or poorly-graded aggregate because of better constructa­
bility (USAF 1 997). Air-void clustering (3.3 . 1 ) can cause
poor aggregate-paste bond, which may result in aggre­
gate dislodgement during sawing, grinding, and grooving
(Tayabji et al. 20 1 2).
Required concrete strengths for the commencement of
sawing operations increase for harder aggregates to prevent
raveling. Required compressive strengths range from a
minimum of 260 psi ( 1 .8 MPa) for soft, rounded coarse
aggregate to 1 0 1 0 psi (7. 0 MPa) for hard, crushed coarse
aggregate (Okomato et al. 1 994). Blades should be matched
to the coarse aggregate type. For softer aggregates, silicon
carbide or carborundum dry-saw blades are effective, but
ACI 325 . 1 1 R recommends wet-saw diamond blades for
hard aggregates. Harder aggregates cause faster saw blade
wear and increase the tendency of the blade to ride up, thus
making the saw cuts shallower (Kohn and Tayabj i 2003).
Harder aggregates may also increase the risk of aggregates
being loosened under the action of sawing, particularly if
sawing is too early, an incorrect blade is used, or the machine
is not well-maintained.
3.4.4 Foreign object damage Foreign object damage
- screed to the mixture impacts smoothness; thus, the mixture
(FOD) is sometimes listed as a separate issue in airfield
specifications. FOD results from objects being sucked into
aircraft engines. Typical FOD results from joint cracking
spalls, ASR, or freezing-and-thawing damage (Tayabji and
Anderson 2007). The mixture designer should therefore try
to minimize the possibility of FODs. A common problem
in airfields is the issue of sliver spalling at the joints. It has
been suggested that tight control of the aggregate grading
using the 0.45 power curve helps to reduce the risk of this
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
occurring (Lafrenz 200 1 ). Raveling at joints and deleterious
materials are discussed in 3 .4. 1 .5 and 3.4.3.
3.4.5 Calibration hardstands and power check pads­
Some agencies have specifications for special applica­
tions such as calibration hardstands and power check pads.
Special attention needs to be paid to the mineralogical type
of aggregate used in these instances. For calibration hard­
stands, aggregates that contain iron oxides or iron-rich
materials that have magnetic properties should be avoided.
Examples include magnetite in granites, high-iron materials
in trap rock, pyrite in limestone, and free iron or iron oxide
in slag aggregate.
For concrete exposed to extended jet engine blast (power
check pads), igneous rocks with low silica content and a
large ferromagnesian mineral content or slag would be
useful. Limestone and dolomite are acceptable. Aggregates
high in silica such as chert, quartz, sandstone, and granite
3.5-Skid resistance
Skid resistance is often included in contract documents.
Both macrotexture and microtexture of the slab surface
are important to skid resistance. Macrotexture is achieved
primarily in the texturing operation, whereas microtexture
is more a function of the mineralogy of the aggregate. As
particles become more angular and rough, the skid resis­
tance increases. Crushed aggregate with rough surfaces
usually offers better skid resistance than rounded, smooth
aggregate. Crushed silica-based aggregates often have better
skid resistance retention than crushed limestones because
of less polishing potential, although this is source depen­
dent. Skid resistance requirements may necessitate the use
of certain coarse aggregates with a greater acid-insoluble
content (such as silica) or a natural siliceous sand as opposed
to a manufactured fine aggregate made from a softer mate­
rial. Angular polishing-resistant natural sands promote skid
resistance even if soft limestone is used as the coarse aggre­
gate. Some specifications limit the amount of pure limestone
materials to avoid polishing.
3.6-Smoothness
Smoothness refers to the undulation of the concrete
surface elevation, not the surface texture or skid resistance.
Smoothness is commonly specified for certain kinds of proj ­
ects, such as highways. Typically, smoothness is measured
with a profilograph or a profilometer. The response of the
should be matched to the paving equipment to achieve good
smoothness numbers. More workable concrete results in
enhanced smoothness.
Surface bumps and rough-riding pavements have been
attributed to nonuniform concrete, possibly caused by aggre­
gate grading and moisture content changes leading to wet
and dry batches . Bumps caused by reinforcement ripple
(restraint of newly-placed concrete settlement by reinforce­
ment) can be addressed by changing to a more well-graded
aggregate. Smoothness is also addressed in 3.2. 1 .2.
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
3. 7-Dimensional and shape stability
3.7.1 Cracking-Cracks in pavement slabs can be the
result of a variety of factors. Thermal volume changes and
restrained drying shrinkage can induce prominent forces
that can generate excessive axial and bending movements,
resulting in stresses that exceed the tensile strength of the
slab. Thermal volume changes are primarily a function
of the aggregate type whereas shrinkage is dependent on
paste content and characteristics as well as aggregate char-
acteristics, such as size, gradation, and modulus of elas-
ticity (MOE). Cracking results primarily from excessive
axial or bending stresses. Harmful axial, in-plane stresses
are produced in the slab as it is restrained from shortening
due to drying shrinking, cooling, or both. Restraint may be
caused by friction at the base. Bending stresses are caused
by upward or downward curvatures of the slab, or both. Such
curvatures are due to differential temperature through the
thickness of the slab and due to differential shrinkage strains
between the top and bottom of the slab, termed "curling" and
"warping", respectively.
Shrinkage limits are usually not specified directly for pave-
ments, and neither are several of the factors that contribute
to curling and warping, such as MOE of the aggregate,
minimum nominal maximum size (NMS), or coefficient of
thermal expansion (CTE). The contractor/producer may,
however, elect to choose mixture proportions and materials
to minimize risk of cracking.
3.7.2 Thermal volume change-Axial and bending move-
ment from changes in temperature is directly related to
the CTE of the concrete. The CTE of the aggregate has a
large impact on the concrete's CTE. The aggregate CTE
is usually lower than the paste CTE. As aggregate volume
increases, the impact of aggregate CTE on concrete CTE
increases. Large differences between aggregate and paste
CTE may lead to stress, which can lower durability. Greater
concrete CTE has been linked to less resistance to tempera-
ture changes (Van Dam et a!. 2005). The aggregate's CTE
is primarily a function of the mineralogical makeup of the
aggregate. Pure limestones typically have a much lower
CTE than silica-based gravels and, therefore, pavement
made with pure limestone coarse aggregate will not exhibit
as large an expansion, contraction, and curling as those made
with siliceous gravels, and joint spacing can be longer. For
bonded concrete overlays, problems will be reduced if the
CTE of the overlay can be matched to that of the base slab
(Taylor et a!. 2007). High-CTE aggregate can potentially be
a problem with continuously reinforced pavements as well
as jointed pavements.
3.7.3 Shrinkage-Axial and bending movement from
drying is directly related to the shrinkage characteristics of
the mixture, which is a function ofthe paste content and char-
acteristics, and the restraint from the aggregate. As nominal
maximum size (NMS) decreases, paste requirements increase,
increasing the potential for shrinkage. Use of 3/4 in. ( 1 9
mm) NMS under conditions where 1 - 1/2 in. (38 mm)
NMS could have been used will increase concrete shrinkage
approximately 25 percent because of the greater water
demand. In addition to the water demand effect, aggregate
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
13
generally acts to control (reduce) shrinkage by restraining
the shrinkage of the cement paste. Larger NMS aggregate
offers more restraint. To minimize shrinkage of the cement
paste, the concrete should contain the maximum practical
amount of incompressible, clean aggregate. Additionally,
the harder the aggregate, the greater the restraint of paste
shrinkage tendencies. Higher cement contents contribute to
drying, autogenous, and plastic surface shrinkage (Van Dam
et a!. 2005).
Coarser fine aggregates, as indicated by a greater fine-
ness modulus (FM), have been shown to reduce volumetric
shrinkage. It is desirable to reduce the percent passing the
No. 50 and No. 1 00 (0.30 and 0. 1 5 mm) sieve sizes of
normalweight fine aggregates, especially if SCMs, finer
portland cements, or greater cementitious material contents
are used. Very fine sands (as indicated by a low FM) can lead
to excessive water demand, shrinkage, and early cracking
even though the fine aggregate may meet ASTM C33/C33M
grading requirements. Some sources recommend or specify
a coarser-than-typical fine aggregate FM of 2.5 to 3.4 (Kohn
and Tayabj i 2003 ; USACE 20 1 2).
A well-graded material has been shown to decrease paste
content and, in turn, suffer less shrinkage. ACI 302. 1 R
limits the recommended percent passing on the No. 30
and No. 50 (0.59 and 0.30 mm) sieves. ACI 302. 1 R recog-
nizes, however, that too little fines content could result in
an increased chance of bleeding, and that the limitations on
water content become increasingly important.
Regarding open-graded drainage bases, there is evidence
that the mortar fraction from the fresh concrete will intrude
into the base, thus increasing the bond between the base
and the slab, which would restrain the panel, setting up a
situation of uncontrolled shrinkage cracking if timely joint
sawing is not carried out (Kohn and Tayabji 2003). Poorly-
graded aggregates that are prone to exhibit excessive segre-
gation under the action of vibration may exacerbate the
problem (Lafrenz 200 1 ).
ACI 360R lists six materials-related adverse factors
that relate to shrinkage: high slump, small NMS, cement
with high shrinkage characteristics, dirty or contaminated
aggregate, inherently shrinkage-prone aggregate, and
certain water-reducing admixtures (WRAs) and high-range
water-reducing admixtures (HRWRAs) that contribute to
shrinkage.
3.7.4 Plastic shrinkage cracking-Plastic shrinkage
cracks are surface cracks that form when the slab surface
evaporation rate exceeds the bleedwater rate, resulting in
surface shrinkage and cracking. Higher cement contents and
low w/cm can increase the potential for plastic shrinkage
cracking (Van Dam et a!. 2005). Gap-graded mixtures may
require more paste that could lead to an increased risk of
plastic shrinkage cracks (PCA EBOO 1 ; Taylor et a!. 2007;
ACPA 2003c).
During high evaporation conditions, delayed set due to
SCM substitution for cement may increase the probability
of plastic shrinkage cracking. SCMs that tend to reduce
bleeding may further aggravate plastic shrinkage cracking.
Lower water demand contributions of SCMs may be benefi-
cCiC'iJ
14 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING O F CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
cial, however, if proper curing is provided (Rao and Stehly
20 1 1 ).
3.7.5 Joint spacing-During the pavement design, trans­
verse contraction joint spacing is specified. The spacing is
a function of allowable joint opening and the likelihood of
midpanel cracks, which are somewhat a function of concrete
characteristics: MOE, CTE, coefficient of shrinkage, and
density. These properties primarily are dependent on the
aggregate's MOE, CTE, specific gravity, and the mixture 's
shrinkage tendency. Joint spacing can be increased as
mixture shrinkage tendency decreases (NMS increases,
water content decreases, aggregate volume increases). Joint
spacing can also be increased as the thermal contraction
tendency decreases (CTE of the aggregate decreases) and
curling stress decreases (MOE decreases).
3.7.6 Load transfer-Longer panel lengths mean wider
joint openings, so unless load transfer features such as
dowels are used, enhanced aggregate interlock will be neces­
sary at the joints for adequate load transfer. Therefore, use
of a larger NMS, a more angular coarse aggregate particle
shape, and more abrasion-resistant coarse aggregate will
contribute to better load transfer. Abrasion-resistant coarse
aggregate, such as a siliceous gravel with lower Los Angeles
Abrasion (LAA) will suffer lower loss of aggregate interlock
with repeated loadings. There is an offsetting set of circum­
stances (abrasion resistance versus shape) regarding evalu­
ation of crushed limestone versus hard river gravel (Taylor
et a!. 2007; Ruiz et a!. 2005; ACI 201 .2R). For greater truck
traffic volumes, dowels are necessary for effective load
transfer. When dowel bar inserters are used, dowel misalign­
ment has been attributed to gap-graded mixtures.
3.8-Time of setting
Proper setting time of the concrete is desired to prevent
problems of delayed sawing and texturing and early-age
cracking. Setting time is affected by many factors, such as
fineness and chemistry of the cement, type and amount of
SCMs, amount of cement and water, w/cm, various admix­
tures, and temperature.
If fly ash or slag cement is substituted for cement, the time
of setting typically will be extended, but this will be depen­
dent on temperature conditions, SCM and portland cement
characteristics, and percentage of SCM replacement. At 73°F
(23°C), mixtures with greater than 25 percent slag cement
may extend set 1 to 3 hours; at 85°F (29°C), the effect on
set time is negligible (ACPA 2003a). Reduction of substi­
tution levels of SCMs may be warranted in cooler weather
unless the SCM is being used to mitigate alkali-silica reac­
tion (ASR), sulfate attack, or both.
Setting delays caused by SCMs can lead to problems with
texturing and joint sawing. Retardation may also contribute
to plastic shrinkage cracking and cracking before sawing
(Hanna et a!. 20 1 0). Early-age cracking has sometimes been
traced to material incompatibility and associated delayed
set, but it can also be driven by any influence that results
in delayed set, including normal SCM interaction. To avoid
early-age cracking, it is recommended to reduce fly ash or
slag cement in cool weather conditions if it will not compro-
(ciCIJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
mise the ASR and sulfate resistance of the concrete (for
example, SCM content should be a 30 percent maximum for
temperatures less than 55°F [ 1 5°C]) (Tayabji et a!. 20 1 2).
A consequence of delayed set is cracking; shorter sawing
windows increase the risk of uncontrolled cracking (Kohn
and Tayabji 2003). Whenever such influences tend to delay
setting and joint sawing, special attention should be given to
timely and effective curing so that early shrinkage is mini­
mized. It is not uncommon in some cases that incompat­
ibility may cause slump loss and early stiffening, which may
complicate consolidation in the pavement. Caution should
be used in attempting to overvibrate a mixture exhibiting
early stiffening, as this can lead to a loss of entrained air.
With increasing emphasis on SCM use in paving concrete,
incompatibility of materials has been more frequently expe­
rienced and the potential warrants caution. Such incompat­
ibility is most commonly associated with Class C fly ash, but
may also be influenced by higher temperatures and certain
water-reducing admixtures. It is driven by insufficient levels
of calcium sulfate, or gypsum (which is contributed entirely
by the portland or blended cement), in the fresh concrete
mixture for the specific materials combination and condi­
tions. Related performance trends are typically slump loss,
set retardation, and poor early strength gain. In extreme
cases, flash set is possible. These issues are more likely or
more extreme in hot weather. Evaluation of incompatibility
potential should be done with trials at the highest envisioned
project temperatures. Mitigation of such tendencies may
include reduced fly ash replacement; reduced water-reducing
admixture dosage; or changing the type of fly ash, water­
reducing admixture, or both. The composition and dosage of
various water reducers can exacerbate problems with early
stiffening, delayed set, slow strength gain, or all of these.
3 . 9-Basic properties and considerations
Overall economic comparisons of alternate mixtures
entail material as well as construction costs. Concrete mate­
rial costs are a function of component unit costs and propor­
tions. Natural, unprocessed aggregates such as gravel are
usually less expensive than crushed aggregates. There are
also cost savings in the use of SCMs as a replacement of the
more expensive portland cement. Additionally, reductions
of total cementitious content may be possible with good
quality control and consistency of strength performance
(low strength standard deviations). Well-graded aggregates
may require less paste in the mixture, which would lead to a
more economical design. However, there is a trade-off when
comparing the cost of bringing in a third aggregate versus
the cost of extra cementitious materials in the traditional
two-aggregate mixtures. There are economic advantages of
optimized gradations regarding increased smoothness incen­
tives, fewer construction problems, and lower life-cycle
costs (ACI 365 . 1 R) .
3.10-Sustainability
Regarding mixture design, sustainability usually refers to
using concrete products that produce a smaller carbon foot­
print over the pavement's life cycle. This typically entails
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
using concrete that contains less portland cement clinker
by using reduced total cementitious content, increasing the
percent cement replaced with supplementary cementitious
materials (SCMs), and increasing durability to achieve longer
pavement life (Van Dam and Taylor 2009). The use ofASTM
C595/C595M blended cements, including portland-limestone
cement, is an excellent way to reduce the portland cement
clinker content of the cementitious materials. The materials
used in making paving concrete have a significant impact on
the sustainability ofthe pavement. The cementitious materials
have the largest environmental impact, emphasizing the need
to use the appropriate amount ofcementing materials, reducing
unwarranted cement through good mixture design and the use
of SCMs, as well as recycled and industrial by-product mate­
rials used as aggregate. Slag cement and fly ash are the SCMs
most commonly used in pavements in the United States. It is
possible, but not common, to consider the use of silica fume,
metakaolin, and ultra-fine fly ash for special applications,
although careful attention will be required to control the risk
of early-age cracking.
Manufacturing portland cement is an energy-intensive
process that involves heating large quantities of finely
ground rocks and minerals to very high temperatures to
produce clinker that is then interground with gypsum to a fine
powder. The carbon dioxide (C02) burden is high because the
process includes decomposing calcium carbonate (CaC03)
rock into calcium oxide (CaO) and C02. Roughly half of the
C02 generated in clinker production comes from this source,
and the proportion is increasing as manufacturers make their
process more energy efficient (Van Dam and Taylor 2009).
Although it is estimated that the global impact of cement
manufacturing on the release of C02 is approximately 4.5
percent (Tayabji et al. 20 1 2), the burdens can be reduced by
any combination of the following:
a) Reduction of the energy and greenhouse gas emissions
associated with portland cement clinker production
b) Reduction of the amount of portland cement clinker in
the cement
c) Reduction of the amount of cement in the concrete
mixture
d) Use of less concrete in a pavement over the life cycle
Portland-limestone cements (ASTM C595/C595M Type
IL), which can have up to 1 5 percent pure limestone inter­
ground with the clinker, improve concrete mixture sustain­
ability by lowering the clinker content and the C02 footprint
and energy content of the cement without detracting from
performance or adding to mixture costs. They can be used
similarly to ordinary portland cements, in combination with
other cementitious materials and admixtures, without opera­
tional distinction (Cost et al. 20 1 3 a).
Most SCMs used in the United States are by-products
from other industries (for example, fly ash is produced from
the burning of coal to produce electricity and slag cement
is a by-product of pig iron production) that beneficially
react with portland cement to enhance the performance of
concrete. The effective use of SCMs not only reduces the
amount of portland cement required, it also reduces the need
to dispose of what otherwise would be industrial waste.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
15
There is increased interest in recycling concrete and other
construction waste for use as aggregates in paving concrete
and supporting layers. This is beneficial because it reduces
the demand for virgin aggregates and reduces the need to
place the waste materials into landfills. If recycled mate­
rials are used in concrete, the mixtures have to be propor­
tioned and tested in the laboratory to ensure that setting
times and strengths are satisfactory. Consideration should
also be given to why the original pavement failed. Recycled
concrete aggregate containing alkali-reactive aggregates or
those prone to freezing-and-thawing damage may not be
advisable for use in paving concrete unless the distress is
mitigated in the new concrete.
The amount of mixture water in paving concrete is
primarily governed by the w!cm and paste requirement of
the aggregate system, and the type and dosage of the chem­
ical admixtures in use. The presence of SCMs will normally
reduce the amount of water needed for a given cementi­
tious content. Therefore, choosing a good aggregate system,
reducing the cementitious content (within limits), and using
water-reducing admixtures will help to reduce the amount of
water required to achieve a given workability.
Ideally, a concrete paving mixture will use an optimized
combined aggregate grading that minimizes the voids and
the paste requirement, resulting in minimal cement and
water required. Aggregates should be resistant to the envi­
ronment and not prone to freezing-and-thawing damage,
alkali-silica reaction (ASR), or alkali-carbonate reaction
(ACR). The quality of the paste, including the cement type,
SCMs, w!cm, and air-void system, should be selected based
on the environment to which the mixture will be exposed
(ACI 201 .2R).
3.11-lnnovative methods and materials
3.11.1 Innovative methods-Several innovative methods
for concrete pavement mixture design and for aggregate
grading characterization are in the process of being devel­
oped. Recently, the established concept of considering the
total aggregate gradation as represented on the individual
percent retained curve has been enhanced by use of the
so-called tarantula curve (Ley and Cook 2014). Although
not widely adopted yet, the concept is being evaluated by
industry (Taylor and Fick 20 1 5). Regarding mixture propor­
tioning, a new method has been developed by the Concrete
Pavement Tech Center (Taylor et al. 20 1 5) based on the work
of Koehler and Fowler (2006). As experience is gained,
these methods may become more established in the industry.
3.11.2 Innovative materials-Many promising materials
for use in concrete pavement mixtures are being advanced.
Several are discussed in this guide: portland-limestone
cement (3.3 . 1 , 3 . 1 0, 4.4, and 4.5) and lightweight aggre­
gate (4. 1 .2). Others include various powder additives for
enhancing the properties or mitigating problems of high­
volume fly ash mixtures (Bentz 20 1 0; Bentz et al. 20 1 0;
Richardson et al. 20 1 5). As these technologies mature, their
use may become more commonplace.
16 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING O F CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
CHAPTER 4-MATERIALS
4 . 1-A ggregate
-
4.1.1 General Aggregate properties as they relate to
desired concrete behavior are presented in Chapter 3. Aggre­
gate should be examined for the potential of freezing and
thawing deterioration and alkali-silica reaction (ASR) and
alkali-carbonate reaction (ACR) behavior.
4.1.1.1 Testing freezing-and-thawing resistance of aggre­
gate-There are many test methods that address freezing­
and-thawing deterioration, such as ASTM C666/C666M.
The method involves the testing of concrete; however, it is
commonly used as an aggregate durability test by using a
durable paste, leaving only the aggregate durability as a vari­
able. ASTM C666/C666M is considered one of the primary
test methods in use; however, it is important to know which
option (Procedure A or B) is being specified by the agency
because the results are different. Unfortunately, testing time
for ASTM C666/C666M is 2 to 3 months and equipment is
expensive. Numerous tests of aggregate by itself have been
used by a variety of agencies to screen or help predict the
possibility of proneness to freezing-and-thawing behavior
(Richardson and Lusher 2014). Local agency test methods
and specifications should be reviewed. Mitigation primarily
consists of reducing the aggregate nominal maximum size
(NMS) to less than the critical size for freezing-and-thawing
behavior, as determined by testing.
4.1.1.2 Testing alkali-aggregate reactivity-For alkali­
aggregate reactive (AAR) aggregate, AASHTO PP 65,
based on FHWA protocols (Thomas et al. 2008), provides
a detailed procedure to identify and mitigate reactive aggre­
gates and their harmful behavior. ASTM C l 778 is similar
to AASHTO PP 65. The process involves two major steps:
the first is to determine whether the aggregate is reactive
and, if so, whether it is of the ACR or ASR variety. If it is
ACR, use of the aggregate should be avoided. If it is ASR,
Step 2 includes methods to deal with the aggregate. Two
alternate methods are offered to determine preventative
measures by: 1 ) testing cement replacement levels using
various supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) or by
varying lithium nitrate admixture levels; or 2) following a
prescriptive method that involves determination of level of
reactivity, level of risk, level of required prevention (based
on the type of structure and acceptable risk), and level of
SCMs or maximum allowable alkali content of the concrete.
Determination of whether the aggregate is reactive or not
can involve examining past histories of the aggregate, which
includes viewing existing structures, searching for mixture
design information, and coring the structures for verifica­
tion purposes. Despite all this effort, the value of the history
of the aggregate hinges on the characteristics of the cement
used in the past versus what is being proposed: these should
match. If not, testing will be required anyway. Petrographic
examination (ASTM C295/C295M) is also recommended.
Expansion testing, however, will offer a more definitive
answer, but is somewhat demanding in effort and time.
ASTM C l 260 mortar-bar expansion testing should be used
for screening purposes. If expansion is greater than or equal
(ciCiJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
to 0. 1 0 percent at 14 days, either ASTM C 1 293 can be used
for verification ( 1 -year duration), or the AASHTO method
allows moving right into mitigation strategies without having
to resort to ASTM C 1 293. Expansion exceeding 0.04 percent
at 1 year in the ASTM C l 293 test is considered potentially
reactive. ASTM C l 293 is considered a better predictor, but
the long test duration is an issue. Once mitigation is indi­
cated, either the 14-day ASTM C l 567 (a modified form of
ASTM C l 260) or a 2-year ASTM C l 293 can be used with
varying types and replacement levels of SCMs or lithium
nitrate being evaluated. Some agencies choose to modify
the test duration for either ASTM C l 260, ASTM C l 567, or
both. The FAA uses 28 days and the military uses less than
0.08 percent expansion at 28 days for ASTM C l 260 and
ASTM C l 567 (USACE 2012).
Alternately, instead of direct mitigation testing, a series
of tables can be used in the AASHTO PP 65 prescriptive
method to arrive at recommended SCM or limited alkali
loading treatments. The prescriptive method includes the
concepts of the importance of the level of aggregate reac­
tivity (nonreactive to very highly reactive), ASR risk (six
levels based on level of reactivity and structure size and
exposure conditions: dry, humid, buried, exposed to alkali),
and level of required prevention (six levels based on level
of risk and classification of structure-that is, severity of
consequences to ASR damage). Knowledge of the required
prevention level steers the designer into allowable levels
of alkali of the concrete (four levels), minimum percent­
ages of low-CaO content fly ash ( 1 5 to 40 percent), or both;
slag cement (25 to 65 percent); or silica fume (minimum 7
percent). There are choices to be made regarding the mixture
throughout the process; thus, the designer needs to be aware
of and familiar with the AASHTO procedure protocols,
which should be consulted if applicable.
4.1.2 Internal curing-Internal curing (IC) refers to the
inclusion of prewetted lightweight aggregate (LWA) in the
mixture that functions as a source of moisture for increasing
hydration of the cementitious materials. The substitution of
a portion of normalweight aggregate with saturated LWA
can reduce cracking from autogenous shrinkage and miti­
gate plastic shrinkage cracking (Henkensiefken et al. 2 0 1 0).
Conclusions from a report by Rao and Darter (20 1 3) indicate
that effects of IC could potentially include a 5 percent reduc­
tion in unit weight, 5 percent reduction in modulus of elasticity
(MOE), 5 percent increase in flexural strength, 5 to 1 0 percent
reduction in coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE), and a
reduction in shrinkage, all of which could lead to improved
fatigue resistance and better control of shrinkage crack (joint)
openings. A 1 0 percent reduction in permeability is typical
and could lead to enhanced joint deterioration resistance.
Reduction in upward curling would be beneficial but has not
been fully documented yet for pavements. A cumulative effect
of the preceding benefits could lead to longer service lives.
Saturation is mandatory and will require constant stockpile
wetting, turning, and monitoring. Increased materials and
handling costs would have to be compared to either reduced
design thickness or decreased service life costs. If LWA is
used, additional laboratory testing will be required. Propor-
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
tions can be established by procedures as presented in ASTM
C 1 76 1 /C 1761M. Additionally, the ESCSI has guidelines for
proportioning the LWA portion of the mixture's fine aggregate
content (ESCSI 20 1 2; Delatte et al. 2007; ACI (308-2 1 3)R;
Rao and Darter 20 13).
IC is a relatively new development and shows promise. It
has been used in structural applications; however, for pave­
ments, it has been limited to applied research and demon­
stration projects. The most recent summary published by
Rao and Darter (20 1 3) of all known IC pavement projects
include one freeway, one off-ramp, one intermodal terminal,
and some residential and collector streets, all in the Dallas/
Ft. Worth, TX, area. The pavement ages were relatively
young, 1 to 8 years old. IC concrete is not considered as a
state-of-the-practice for routine paving mixture design and
has only been used on a few concrete paving projects in
the United States. Thus, proportioning concepts of internal
curing for pavements are not included in this guide.
4 . 2-Portland cement
The effects of portland cement on mixture and slab
performance are discussed in 3 .2, 3 . 3 , 3 .4, 3 . 8, and 3 . 1 0.
The w/cm is the primary factor that controls strength and
permeability. Typically, ASTM C 1 50/C 1 50M Types I and
II are used in paving mixtures in the United States. Some
cements are marketed with a combined type classification,
such as Type 1111, indicating that the cement meets the require­
ments of the indicated types and is being offered as suitable
for use when either type is desired (ASTM C 1 50/C 1 5 0M).
Type II cement is a moderate sulfate-resistant, moderate heat­
of-hydration portland cement. The finer Type III cement is
used for increasing reaction rates for fast-track construction,
patching, or for cooler weather. The choice of type of cement
impacts strength-gain rates. Finer cements tend to react more
quickly, but often increase water demand, thus resulting in
greater shrinkage potential (Taylor et al. 2007).
The availability of a given cement type in a particular
geographic location should be verified before it is specified
for use on a project.
4 . 3-Supplementary cementitious materials
4.3.1 General-Supplementary cementitious materials
(SCMs) such as fly ash, slag cement, and natural pozzolans
can be blended at the cement plant to create ASTM C595/
C595M blended cements or added separately at the concrete
plant. Blended cements are discussed in 4.4. Silica fume, a
common SCM used for high-performance concrete applica-
tions, is not normally used in paving because ofloss of work-
ability and cost (Taylor et al. 2007). It has been suggested
that only fly ash and slag cement be used in paving applica-
tions (Tayabj i et al. 20 1 2), although natural pozzolans have
been used. Certain military specifications, however, allow
the use of silica fume in overseas projects. Silica fume is
only allowed on Department of Defense (DOD) projects
outside the continental United States where Class F fly
ash and slag cement are not available. Silica fume should
conform to ASTM C 1 240 and the optional testing for reac-
tivity with cement alkalis should also be completed. Silica
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
17
fume can be provided either as a dry, densified bulk mate­
rial or as a slurry. Typical silica fume contents range from
7 to 1 0 percent unless a prescribed amount is required to
mitigate alkali-silica reactivity (ASR). For military airfield
pavement construction, a high-range-water reducer (ASTM
C494/C494M, Type F or G) is allowed when silica fume
is used. It is recommended that a knowledgeable admix­
ture manufacturer's representative be on site for the first
4 days of concrete production and placement when silica
fume mixtures are used (USACE 20 1 2). The use of natural
pozzolans, such as metakaolin, is not common in pavements
constructed in the United States (UFC 2004; Delatte 2008)
due to a relatively abundant supply of acceptable fly ash
and slag cement. Yet, in many other countries around the
world, almost all concrete pavements are made with blended
cements containing natural pozzolans. More information can
be found in ACI 232.2R.
The benefits of SCM replacements of portland cement
during construction are improved workability (including
finishability if fine aggregates are harsh), lower vibrator
energy requirements, lower water demand, and reduc­
tion in temperature rise. Benefits post-construction include
increased long-term strength, reduced permeability, increased
resistance to sulfate attack, mitigation of excessive expan­
sion due to ASR, delayed set time, reduced thermal stresses
in early-age concrete, and reduced cost. The FAA (2009a)
allows the use of slag cement and fly ash at the contrac­
tor's discretion (Rao and Stehly 20 1 1 ). The delayed set and
reduced shrinkage aspects common of mixtures containing
SCMs can reduce frictional drag stresses in slabs built on
high-friction bases. At 25 percent and higher replacement
rates, however, Class F fly ash may not gain strength quickly
enough to allow joint sawing before shrinkage cracking
commences (Tayabj i et al. 20 1 2).
Both Class F and C fly ashes are pozzolanic, while Class C
may also be slightly cementitious due to its normally higher
calcium content (ACI 232.2R). Class C ash may have higher
aluminate and alkali contents, however, and may be more
prone to premature stiffening and thermal cracking while
being less sulfate resistant and less beneficial in controlling
ASR. In most cases, it is not recommended that a Class C
fly ash be used in mixtures designed to combat ASR, and
it is not permitted to be used to mitigate sulfate attack, as
it has the potential to make the concrete even more suscep-
tible to this chemical attack (ACI 2 0 1 .2R). Other issues
include problems with finishing, rapid set, poor strength
gain, reduced air content, increased risk of incompatibility,
and increased potential for scaling. Class F fly ash is consid-
ered the more effective fly ash for controlling heat, ASR,
and sulfate attack (Kohn and Tayabj i 2003 ; Rao and Stehly
20 1 1 ), and slag cement may be equally or even more effec-
tive. Class C fly ash will usually delay setting time, although
it has been known to cause severe acceleration. Because of
the spherical shape of fly ash particles, mixtures that use it
as a partial replacement of portland cement generally have a
slightly lower water demand.
4.3.2 Testing for compatibility of cementitious materials,
admixtures, and temperature-Incompatibility of concrete
cCiC'iJ
18 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING O F CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
mixture components can take the form of unusual stiffening
and setting, cracking, poor early strength gain, and inad­
equate air-void systems. Regarding the first three issues,
to be compatible, mixtures need to strike the right balance
of sulfate and aluminate, and calcium and silicates. The
planned sources of portland cement, fly ash, slag cement,
and admixtures should be subjected to a compatibility evalu­
ation, especially if the cement source or chemical admix­
tures to be used are unfamiliar, Class C fly ash replacement
of cement is to be used, or both. It is important to include
some higher-than-expected admixture dosages and SCM
replacement rates, and to test the mixtures at the highest field
concrete temperature expected. Because it may be necessary
to evaluate various combinations and proportions, labora­
tory testing of paste or mortar of the same proportions as
those of parallel concrete mixtures but without aggregates
may be a convenient and time-saving approach, rather than
actual concrete mixtures. Such testing also allows rapid
comparative evaluation of different candidate admixtures,
SCMs, or cements. Specific tests that may be useful include
isothermal calorimetry (ASTM C l 679) or semi-adiabatic
calorimetry, mortar cube strength testing (ASTM C l 09/
C l 09M), mini-slump testing or various setting time tests,
or simple thermal profile testing. Repeated tests with added
sources of calcium sulfate can easily confirm any apparent
incompatibility tendencies in initial mixtures (Cost and
Knight 2007; Roberts and Taylor 2007; Cost and Gardiner
2009; Richardson et al. 20 1 5).
Cements from different sources that all meet specifica­
tions may have subtle differences that can affect the concrete
mixture performance significantly. The same can be said
for SCMs and admixtures. Thus, once materials have been
proven to be compatible, the job specifications should
prohibit source changes unless compatibility of the changed
source is verified.
4.3.3 Matchingfly ash to project requirements-A compat­
ibility evaluation of the actual proj ect materials and propor­
tions (portland cement, SCMs, and admixtures) should be
done (4.3.2). The prequalification exercise should begin
with a review of the mill certifications of the cementitious
materials with an eye toward the goals of the design (for
example, ASR mitigation, early strength, and sulfate resis­
tance), and incompatibility issues.
In choosing a fly ash replacement level, the effect on other
properties should be considered. For instance, if a high
replacement level is required to combat ASR, lower early
strengths may be the result; thus, offsetting strategies will
have to be employed, such as use of an accelerator, lower
w/cm, or choice of a finer fly ash with a low loss on ignition
(LOI). The particle size distribution of fly ash is important
to reactivity and water demand. Particles smaller than 1 0 11m
are considered pozzolanic; particles greater than 45 11m (No.
325 sieve) are not. Also, particles smaller than 45 11m (No.
325 sieve) are effective in reducing water demand. ASTM
C6 1 8 places a maximum limit of 34 percent retained on the
45 11m (No. 325 sieve) size. There is usually no particle size
distribution given in specifications or mill reports (Rao and
Stehly 20 1 1 ).
(ciCiJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
Rao and Stehly (20 1 1 ) present a method for working
through the process of choosing a replacement level of
fly ash. The interactions between ASR reactivity, deicers,
cement alkali content, requirements for early opening
strength, weather during placement, characteristics of the fly
ash, and recommended curing regime are considered. The
steps are shown in Fig. 4.3 .3. Recent research has cast doubt
on the link between potassium acetate deicers and ASR, but
the rest of the fly ash implementation evaluation method­
ology is still very useful.
Recommended testing includes slump, air content,
concrete setting time, bleeding, strength, air voids, rapid
freezing and thawing, scaling resistance, and ASR potential,
as appropriate. The final choice of fly ash replacement level
should be based on the following:
a) Maximum fly ash content that exceeds strength
requirement
b) Maximum fly ash content that has acceptable setting time
c) Maximum fly ash content that still provides adequate
freezing and thawing and scaling durability
d) Minimum fly ash content that limits 1 4-day mortar bar
expansion below 0. 1 percent when tested in a non-deicer
environment
Risk of sulfate attack is discussed in 5.3.2 and mitigation
strategies are presented in 5 .4.4. 1 .
4.3.4 Matching other SCMs to project requirements-A
process of optimizing slag cement replacement levels would
be similar, except that typical rates are notably higher.
Increasing use of systems containing multiple SCMs is
being reported, and may offer certain advantages in many
areas. These combinations may include multiple separately­
hatched components or blended cements with additionally
batched components.
4 . 4-Biended cement
Many blended cements are used in pavement construction
interchangeably with ASTM C 1 50/C 1 50M Type I or Type II
cements, depending on the type and amount of supplemen­
tary cementitious material (SCM) used. Blended cements
are produced by intergrinding or blending two or more fine
materials, such as portland cement and one or more SCMs,
limestone, or both. Blended cements specified under ASTM
C595/C595M are classified as portland-slag cement (Type
IS), portland-pozzolan cement (Type IP), portland-limestone
cement (Type IL), and ternary blended cement (Type IT).
Type IT contains any combination oftwo additional materials
(slag cement, pozzolan, and limestone). The use of blended
cements, rather than adding separate cementitious compo­
nents at the concrete plant, can potentially help prevent
incompatibility problems because the cement manufacturer
is able to optimize calcium sulfate content more effectively
for the specific combination of materials (Taylor et al.
2007). Type IL portland-limestone cements may contain 5
to 1 5 percent interground limestone and are manufactured to
perform similarly to Type I and II portland cements manu­
factured at the same plant. They also interact favorably with
typical SCMs due to secondary hydration reactions that form
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 19

ASSESS PROJECT CONDITIONS

-Opening Time Requirements
-Paving Weather
CHECK MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS
IN ITIAL SELECTION
-Aggregate reactivity
OF MATERIALS
-Cement a l kali content
-Fly ash CaO, LOI, fineness

Does fly ash meet the criteria

CHANGE MATERIAL
associated with the replacement
Aggregate
RANGE level?
Cement
fly ash
Is the curing regime feasible?

USE SIMPLFIED
WITHIN THE RANGE
METHOD
TEST
CHOOSE OPTIMUAL LEVEL

Fig. 4. 3. 3-Fly ash replacementflowchart.

carboaluminates (Cost et a!. 20 1 3b ). Long-term durability
has been researched (Thomas and Hooton 20 1 0).
4.5-Water
4.5.1 General-Water should be free of substances that
would interfere with the hydration of the cementitious mate­
rials. Normally, potable water is considered acceptable by
default. Nonpotable water should be tested for deleterious
effects on the strength and setting characteristics of the
mixture, as per ACI 3 1 8.
4.5.2 Testing-Nonpotable water should be tested in
accordance with ASTM C 1 602/C 1 602M, which involves
testing concrete or mortar for strength and setting time prob­
lems. Optionally, limits on chloride, sulfate, alkalis, and
total solids may be specified. Concrete mixer and plant wash
water and stormwater runoff should be tested for density to
determine frequencies of testing.
4 .6-Chemical admixtures
4.6.1 General-Chemical admixtures for paving include
water reducers, retarders, accelerators, air-entrainers, and
viscosity modifiers. Adding chemical admixtures may help
concrete mixture designers achieve desired concrete prop­
erties more efficiently or economically than adjusting other
ingredients or mixture proportions. Admixtures are also used
to maintain specific properties during concreting operations
or under unusual conditions (ACI 2 1 2.3R). However, admix­
tures should not be used as a substitute for good concrete
practice. They should be used to enhance good concrete,
not to fix bad concrete. Chemical admixtures may have
unintended side effects that need to be accommodated. An
admixture's effectiveness depends on many mixture factors,
including cementitious materials properties, water content,
aggregate properties, concrete materials proportions, mixing
time and intensity, and temperature. In the case of multiple
admixtures in the same mixture, incompatibility issues can
be avoided by use of admixtures from the same manufacturer
(Kohn and Tayabji 2003) with related experienced-based
guidance. The following items present the use of admixtures
that are commonly used in pavement mixtures.
4.6.2 Water-reducing admixtures-Water-reducing admix­
tures (WRAs) are used in paving concrete for a variety of
reasons, including increasing strength by reducing the water
necessary to achieve the desired slump, and improving
workability, especially for fixed-form paving and areas of
handwork. Strength can be increased up to 10 percent for
concrete of equal w/cm, cement content, or slump (Taylor et
a!. 2007). Normal WRAs, ASTM C494/C494M Type A and
water-reducing and retarding admixtures, Type D, in the past
have been the predominant types of WRAs used in paving
concrete. However, mid-range water-reducing admixtures
(MRWRA) have gained wide acceptance in the concrete
industry. Although MRWRA is not a category in ASTM
C494/C494M, this type of admixture can meet ASTM C494/
C494M Type A, B, and D, or Type F, depending on the dosage
rate. High-range water-reducing admixtures (HRWRAs)
Type F and G are not normally used in paving because of
the difficulty in controlling the low slump required for slip­
form paving and because of potential higher cost, and are
prohibited in certain specifications (USAF 1 997). HRWRAs
are typically used in high-volume fiber concretes and are
used to provide workability in low-w/cm high-early-strength
mixtures. HRWRA (polycarboxylate) technology has been
used on some airport and highway paving projects. With all
low-slump concrete mixtures, knowing the moisture condi­
tions (content) of the aggregates is important. When dealing

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org CaCiJ

20 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
with low-slump concrete using HRWRAs, the moisture
content of the aggregate is even more critical.
WRAs can accelerate aluminate reactions in the cementi­
tious system, aggravating the potential for incompatibility­
related behaviors (related discussion in 4.3 .2). In mixtures
that already have marginal cementitious material sulfate
systems, WRAs containing lignosulfonate, triethanolamine,
or both, may result in early stiffening (Kohn and Tayabji
2003). Retardation effects associated with certain WRAs
(notably Type D but occasionally others) may be somewhat
variable with changes in concrete temperature and may
complicate finishing and joint sawing or increase the likeli­
hood of plastic shrinkage cracking and the severity of drying
shrinkage cracking if the concrete surface is not protected
from premature drying. Lastly, studies suggest that some
WRAs may negatively influence the characteristics of the
air-void system (Attiogbe et a!. 1 992; Freeman 2012).
4.6.3 Retarding admixtures-Retarders (Types B and D)
extend the dormancy period, and heat generation may be
delayed, extended, or both, yet ultimate strength is usually
increased. Retarders can be useful for avoiding problems
associated with long transport times. Bleeding rate and
bleeding capacity are increased. In hot weather, excessive
retardation can result in slab cracking due to drying and
shrinkage that occurs before the slab has gained enough
strength to allow the initiation of joint sawing (Kohn and
Tayabji 2003).
4.6.4 Accelerating admixtures-Accelerators (Types C
and E) shorten the dormancy period, therefore setting occurs
earlier, along with a steeper hydration curve and more rapid
release of heat of hydration. Therefore, accelerators permit
earlier finishing, earlier removal of forms, earlier opening to
traffic, and reduction of time of protection against freezing,
but all things equal, will have lower ultimate strength.
Accelerators are useful for situations involving fast-track
construction, such as intersection rehabilitation, patching,
and cold weather. Accelerators have been recommended
to prevent early-age cracking in cold weather. An excess
may cause cracking before finishing or sawing is complete.
Calcium chloride is the most common accelerator, but there
are issues of reinforcement corrosion and durability prob­
lems. Many specifications and guidelines prohibit or limit
its use (Tayabji and Anderson 2007; USACE 2012). ACI
302. 1 R recommends exclusion of admixtures with intention­
ally-added chlorides for conventional reinforced concrete in
moist environments exposed to deicing salt or saltwater mist.
Calcium nitrate is the most common nonchloride accelerator.
4.6.5 Air-entraining admixtures-Entrained air is
commonly provided to improve durability when concrete
is exposed to repeated cycles of freezing and thawing
under saturated conditions. Air entrainment also improves
concrete workability. Good control of air content is crit­
ical to quality and requires frequent air content testing and
admixture dosage adjustment, if necessary. Excessive air
content is a common cause of strength problems. Related
but less frequent issues include air void clustering, coales­
cence, or both, characterized by air void concentrations
around aggregate particle edges, which can contribute to
(ciCiJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
poor paste-aggregate bond and cause low strength and loss
of durability. Some nonvinsol agents may cause air bubbles
to cluster around aggregate particles when the mixture is
retempered (Kozikowski et a!. 2005), typically after late
water addition-for example, holding back water during
hatching, then adding at the job site (Tayabji et a!. 20 1 2).
An air-void system can be improved by increasing slump,
using a more well-graded aggregate, increasing mixing time
up to 1 5 0 seconds, and introducing all the aggregate mate­
rials together on the belt feed (ACPA 2003b). Low-slump
mixtures make entrainment of air more difficult (Kohn and
Tayabj i 2003).
When using SCMs, air-entraining dosages typically need
to be increased. This is dependent on the particular SCM
type, source, class, type of air-entraining admixture, the
mixture temperature, and other conditions. There have been
cases reported where dosage rates were unaffected or even
reduced in the presence of the fly ash (ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ). Fly ash
sources that contain significant carbon content may require
significantly higher dosages, and air control becomes prob­
lematic when the carbon content is variable. Loss on ignition
(LOI), as an indication of carbon content, should be moni­
tored and more frequent air tests performed when variable
LOI sources are used. The foam index test can be useful for
checking each fly ash delivery. Fly ash with LOI values of 4
percent or more will be less able to achieve a proper air-void
system (Tayabji et a!. 20 1 2).
4.6.6 Other admixtures-Viscosity-modifying admixtures
and rheology-controlling admixtures can be used to enhance
the extrusion properties of slipform concrete mixtures.
4.6. 7 Dosage-Care should be taken when choosing
admixture dosage. Typically, dosage is expressed in terms
of fl oz/1 00 lb (mL/ 1 00 kg) total cementitious materials
(TCMs). Setting and early stiffening problems have been
reported on projects where dosage recommendations were
based on cement weight, but field dosages were calculated
based on total cementitious weight. Changing conditions
through the day or season may mean that admixture dosages
have to be adjusted often.
4 . 7-Fibers
Fibers are used in concrete pavements to improve flex­
ural toughness in applications such as bonded and unbonded
concrete overlays and thin concrete pavement designs, and
have been recommended as a possible solution to plastic
shrinkage cracking. When using fibers, extra water should
not be added to compensate for apparent reduction in work­
ability, rather, chemical admixtures or mixture adjustments
should be considered (Famy 200 1 ). The most common fibers
used in paving have been plastic, typically polypropylene,
and either microsynthetic or macrosynthetic. Microsyn­
thetic fibers have been available since the late 1970s; they
are relatively thin denier fibers, typically 3/4 in. ( 1 9 mm) in
length or shorter and used at dosage rates of 0. 75 to 1 .5 lb/
yd3 (0.4 to 0.9 kg/m3). Macrosynthetic fibers have been used
since the late 1 990s; they are larger denier fibers typically
1 - 1/2 to 2-1/4 in. (38 to 57 mm) long and used at dosage
rates of 3 . 0 to 7.5 lb/yd3 ( 1 . 8 to 4.4 kg/m3). The geometry
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
of the macro synthetic fibers, plus improvements in concrete
mixture proportioning and admixtures, has allowed them
to be used at higher dosages than microsynthetic fibers.
In addition to the benefits of microsynthetic fibers (plastic
shrinkage cracking reduction), higher volumes (up to 7.5 lb/
yd3 [4.4 kg/m3]) of macrosynthetic fibers have been reported
to reduce curling, reduce joint edge spalling, increase abra­
sion resistance, and allow longer joint spacing (Walker and
Holland 2007; Holland et al. 2008). Anti-static material
applied to certain types of fibers can sometimes cause an
increase in air content (ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ). Steel fibers have also
been used in concrete pavement applications (ACI 544. 1 R).
4.8-Summary
Table 4.8 is a summary of the effects of material charac­
teristics on the desired properties of the concrete mixture.
CHAPTER 5-MIXTURE PROPORTIONING
5 . 1-Mixture design
Mixture design involves choosing the performance param­
eters that are most important, and then choosing the materials
and proportions to meet the design goals. The mixture designer
should decide the level of desirability for certain parameters
that are important to the success of the mixture. Recommended
optimization criteria to be considered might include:
a) Flexural strength
b) Compressive strength
c) Early strength
d) Workability (ability to be mixed, transported, screeded,
consolidated, finished, and textured)
e) Scaling resistance
f) Resistance to freezing and thawing
g) Abrasion resistance
h) Sulfate resistance
i) Alkali-silica reaction (ASR) and alkali-carbonate reac-
tion (ACR) resistance
j) Reduction of warping
k) Reduction of curling
1) Smoothness
m) Joint spacing
n) Sustainability
o) Cost
5.1.1 Approaches to achieving desired properties-The
two general approaches to achieving the desired properties
of the mixture are through materials/methods specifications
or performance specifications. The more traditional mate­
rials specifications are presented throughout this document.
A listing of the test methods sometimes used in performance
specifications is shown in Table 5 . 1 . 1 .
5.1.2 Weather conditions-The rate of cement hydration
roughly doubles for every change of 20°F (7°C). Beyond
approximately 90°F (32°C), the quality of hydration product
can be significantly reduced. Conversely, low temperatures
will slow rates of setting and strength development.
During weather conditions with high evaporative influ­
ences due to low humidity, wind, and high temperature,
typical problems may include rapid slump loss, reduced air
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
21
content, premature stiffening, plastic shrinkage cracking,
and thermal cracking. To remedy these issues, the designer
should consider use of retarders and slag cement or Class F
fly ash and avoid the use of Class C fly ash with high alumi­
nate content, increasing air-entraining admixture dosage,
and avoid use of cement or fly ash with an excessively high
temperature ( 1 50 to 1 80°F [66 to 82°C]).
During cold weather, consideration may be given to using
higher cement contents, less slag cement or fly ash, Type
III cement, and adjusting air-entraining admixture dosage to
account for lower temperature effects on dosage efficiency
and possibly an accelerator if allowed by the specifications
(Kahn and Tayabji 2003), unless mildly ASR-prone aggre­
gates are present.
5 . 2-Proportioning methods
The mixture proportioning method presented in this guide
is based on the ACI 2 1 1 . 1 absolute volume method, geared
specifically toward paving mixtures. Regarding the subject of
grading, the typical two-aggregate situation is presented. As
an option, several total grading methods of aggregate grading
optimization are offered. Other mixture design methods were
reviewed, and some concepts from these methods were incor­
porated into this guide (Transtec Group, Inc. 2 0 1 0).
5 . 3-Preliminary testing
5.3.1 Testingforfreezing and thawing and alkali-aggregate
reactivity-Section 4. 1 .2 should be reviewed for assessing
potential problems of aggregate freezing-and-thawing dete­
rioration and aggregate alkali-aggregate reactivity (AAR).
5.3.2 Testing for sulfate attack conditions-In areas of
suspected sulfate attack conditions, the soil or groundwater
should be tested via ASTM C 1 580 to determine the level of
sulfate present. A method for extraction of sulfate from soil is
given in ACI 20 1 .2R. If greater than 0. 1 0 percent by weight of
the soil or 1 50 ppm in the water, the condition is potentially
harmful and allowance should be made in the mixture design.
Specific remedies are presented in 5.4.4. 1 . Verification of miti­
gation effectiveness may be required by use of ASTM C 1 0 12/
C 1 0 1 2M, which may take up to 1 8 months. A maximum
expansion of 0.0 1 percent is recommended. Table 5 .3.2 is
derived from ACI 20 1 .2R and ACI 3 1 8, and shows exposure
levels. Sulfate exposure classes are SO, S 1 , S2, and S3. Condi­
tion SO is for conditions where the soluble sulfate exposure is
too low for concern. The other classes are for concrete in direct
contact with sulfates in soil or water. More detailed informa­
tion on recommended cement types and Bogue-calculated
cement compound contents are discussed in ACI 20 1 .2R.
5 . 4-Proportioning procedure
The proportioning procedure follows the steps outlined in
ACI 2 1 1 . 1 and is discussed in the following sections.
5.4.1 Acquiring required information-Once the goals
of the mixture design are established, as discussed in 5 . 1 ,
how they can be met are decided upon. Materials available
to the project should be reviewed and matched to the mixture
design goals. At that point, the mixture proportioning steps
are initiated.
22 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

Table 4 .8-Effect of material characteristics on concrete properties

Material Impact on concrete properties

Aggregate

As angularity increases: flexural strength increases; aggregate interlock at joints and cracks increases; workability decreases;
Angularity
smoothness decreases; demand for paste increases; mixing time increases; gravels may be cheaper than crushed stones.

Flat and elongated

As F&E increases: workability decreases; demand for paste increases; proneness to segregation increases.
(F&E)

As surface texture roughness increases: flexural strength increases; workability decreases (especially finishability); smoothness
Surface texture
decreases; demand for paste increases; mixing time increases.

As NMS increases: flexural strength decreases; aggregate interlock at joints and cracks increases; for nonoptimized gradings,
Nominal maximum size proneness to segregation increases, workability decreases, frequency of low spots under the pan increases, tearing under the
(NMS) pan that requires hand-straightening increases; required joint spacing increases; for frost-susceptible aggregates, proneness to
frost-susceptibility increases; larger NMS offer more restraint to paste shrinkage; as NMS increases, less water is required.

As aggregate becomes more well-graded: flexural strength increases; finishability increases; the mixture performs better in
slipforming, resulting in less surface defects and better smoothness numbers; proneness to segregation decreases; proneness
Grading to edge slump decreases; gap-graded aggregates tend to segregate more and demand more paste, thus causing more shrinkage
issues; larger amount of coarse aggregate will reduce shrinkage; coarser fine aggregate will result in less joint raveling but
increased bleeding.

Coefficient of thermal As CTE increases: curling stresses increase; cracking potential increases; required joint spacing decreases. CTE is necessary
expansion (CTE) input data for AASHTO pavement design software (AASHTO 2014)

Modulus of elasticity As MOE increases: restraint of paste shrinkage increases; curling stresses increase; cracking potential increases; required joint
(MOE) spacing decreases.

Durability Aggregates prone to freezing-and-thawing damage and ASR should be avoided unless proper mitigation steps are adopted.

Impact/abrasion As impact/abrasion resistance increases: breakdown and dust generation may decrease; water demand may decrease; aggregate
resistance interlock at joints and cracks increases; required strength before sawing increases; want increased silica content in aggregate.

Cementitious materials

Cements meeting ASTM C 1 50/C 1 50M chemical and physical requirements for Types I and II are sufficient for most paving
applications as are many ASTM C595/C595M blended cements. Incompatibility problems can arise with certain combinations
Cements
of cement, supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), water-reducing admixtures (WRAs), and temperature. Finer cements
gain strength quicker, may induce more warping and curling, and may drive higher water demand.

Class F and C fly ash, slag cement, and natural pozzolans can increase long-term strength; Class F fly ash, slag cement, and
natural pozzolans can reduce permeability, increase resistance to sulfate attack and excessive expansion due to ASR (slag
cement and Class F fly ash), improve workability (including finishability in the case of harsh mixtures), lower vibrator energy
requirements, lower water demand, reduce temperature rise, delay set time, reduce thennal stresses in early age concrete, and
reduce cost. Delayed set and reduced shrinkage can reduce frictional drag stresses in slabs built on high-friction bases. Modulus
Fly ash, slag cement, and
of elasticity (MOE) will tend to be lower at early ages but greater at later ages.
natural pozzolans
Issues reported include problems with finishing in the case of high fines or air contents, rapid set, poor strength gain, reduced
air content, increased risk of incompatibility, and increased potential for scaling. Concrete may not bleed, necessitating prompt
curing practices, special curing methods after finishing, or use of finishing aides. Incompatibility may cause slump loss and
early stiffening. Retardation may also contribute to plastic shrinkage cracking and cracking before sawing. Deicer salt attack
resistance may be compromised.

Water Nonpotable water should be tested for deleterious effects on the strength and setting characteristics.

Admixtures

WRAs can allow reduction of water for increased strength and durability. WRAs may coarsen the bubble system. WRAs may
Water-reducing
aggravate the potential for incompatibility-related behavior. Retardation may complicate finishing and joint sawing, increase
admixtures
the likelihood of plastic shrinkage cracking and the severity of drying shrinkage cracking, or both.

Air-entraining Air entrainment enhances resistance to freezing-and-thawing damage, sulfate and deicer salt attack, and flowability. Improper
admixtures air-void systems can contribute to joint spalling.

Retarders can delay set during long transport times and can increase ultimate strength. Bleeding may increase. In hot weather,
Retarders
excessive retardation can result in slab cracking.

Accelerators permit earlier finishing, removal of forms, opening to traffic, and reduction of time of protection against freezing,
Accelerators and can prevent early-age cracking in cold weather. An excess may cause cracking before finishing or sawing is complete. With
calcium chloride, there are issues of reinforcement corrosion and durability.

5.4. 1.1 Materials, project conditions, performance mixture design will require every blank to be filled in. The
criteria, and submittals-The information that will be information includes project characteristics and site condi­
necessary for selecting the mixture proportions is presented tions, design details and specifications, anticipated produc­
in a standard form, shown as Table 5.4. 1 . 1 . Not every tion and construction constraints, and materials data. Project

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 23

Table 5 .1. 1-Test methods for performance If it is possible that more than one source of portland cement
specifications and SCM(s) may be used on the project, prequalify mixture
Major performance Performance designs incorporating all the potential cementitious sources to
property property subset Test method avoid incompatibility surprises (Tayabji et al. 2012).
ASTM C78/C78M (using 5.4.1.2 Traffic and required testing -Importance of the
Flexural strength simple beam with third- project could be rated as follows:
Strength
point loading) a) High traffic: greater than 600 average daily truck traffic
Compressive ASTM C39/C39M (ADTT), severe level of consequences of failure, or both
b) Moderate traffic: less than 600 ADTT but greater than
Split tensile ASTM C496/C496M
3 5 00 average daily traffic (ADT), moderate level of conse­
Stiffness Modulus of elasticity ASTM C469/C469M
quences of failure, or both
Freezing-and-thawing
ASTM C666/C666M
c) Low traffic: less than 600 ADTT and less than 3500
resistance ADT, less severe level of consequences of failure and/or low
ASTM C l 202 budget, or both
Transport properties ASTM C I 543 The importance rating would dictate the level of sophis­
Durability AASHTO TP 95
tication of the laboratory testing methods. Examples of
Scaling resistance to
ASTM C672/C672M
more involved testing would be cases of ASR; sulfate soil;
deicing salt compatibility of SCMs/portland cement/admixtures; and
Abrasion resistance ASTM C944/C944M verification of fresh and hardened properties of the concrete
Free shrinkage ASTM C l 57/C l 5 7M beyond the typical slump, air content, and strength results.
Shrinkage 5.4.1.3 Service conditions-Service conditions would
Restrained shrinkage ASTM C l 5 8 1 /C l 5 8 1 M
include such anticipated parameters as freezing and thawing
Flowability -
ASTM C l 43/Cl43M (AASHTO 1 993 ), deicers, other harsh environments, and
Setting time -
ASTM C403/C403M abrasive conditions such as snow plowing. This informa­
tion will assist in selection of slump, nominal maximum
Table 5 . 3 . 2-Sulfate exposure classes size (NMS), aggregate shape, aggregate geologic type,
Water soluble
cement type, inclusion and type of SCMs, admixtures, w/
Exposure Exposure sulfate in soil, Dissolved sulfate in em, strength level, and strength method of testing.
Class category percent by weight water, ppm 5.4.1.4 Production and construction technology­
SI Moderate 0. 1 0 :::: so. < 0.20 1 50 :::: so. :::: 1 500 Another aspect affecting the selection of materials and
proportions involves the construction and production tech­
S2 Severe 0.20 :::: so. :::: 2.00 1 500 ::S S04 ::S I 0,000
nology available to the project. Construction equipment
S3 Very severe so. > 2.00 so. > 1 0,000 and methods are discussed in 3.2, 3.4, and 3 . 6. Concrete
production constraints include such items as the number
characteristics and site conditions include importance of of cementitious material silos at the batch plant as well as
the project, use of the mixture (new, patch, or overlay), the number of aggregate bins or stockpiles and associated
anticipated weather during construction (hot, cold, windy, handling equipment. Small batch plants with only two silos
or dry), and type of paving method (slipform, fixed-form, that serve a wide variety of customers may not be able to
or laser-guided screeds). Pertinent design and specification produce mixtures with requirements for special SCMs or
information includes important performance criteria, such as blends. Likewise, a limited number of bins may preclude
requirement for early opening, whether steel reinforcement special aggregate grading requirements.
will be in the slab, types of dowels (if used [round or plate]), 5.4.2 Selection ofmaterials
and joint spacing. Materials data include mixture constituent 5.4.2.1 Criteria-From the available materials for the
material properties and test records from the production project, the choice of aggregates, cementitious materials,
facility. Space is provided for the inclusion of up to three water, and admixtures is made depending on cost and level
intermediate aggregates (lAs), which are sometimes used for of desirability. Desirability includes physical properties and
making the total combined aggregate more well-graded. An probability of actual availability. The mixture should be
IA is an additional aggregate source that is between a coarse proportioned first to determine the minimum water content
aggregate and a fine aggregate in size. necessary to achieve the desired slump and workability; the
A formalized part of information gathering involves the maximum w/cm is then established (ACI 302. 1 R).
requirement of preconstruction submittals. Typical submittals 5.4.2.2 Aggregate-A full treatment of the impact of
that would be helpful at the start ofthe mixture design process aggregate properties on mixture design is included in Chap­
would be mill certifications of cement and SCMs, certifica­ ters 3 and 4, and should be reviewed at this point in the process.
tions for the aggregates, water, admixtures, and a list of the Aggregates are chosen primarily based on durability and cost;
paving equipment intended for the job. The certifications will, the choice can be modified by other considerations. Durability
in turn, be submitted along other information and the mixture should be considered, and the choices for aggregate selection
proportions at the end of the process (Tayabji et al. 20 1 2). are reduced to use, avoidance, or problem mitigation. Most
local agency specifications contain exclusionary language

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org cCiC'iJ

24 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

Table 5 . 4 . 1. 1-Potential inform ation required or recommended for mixture design

No. 4

16

No. 4

16

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 25

PC total eq. alkali content: Less than 0.6 or

Dry rodded density, lb/ft3
greater than or equal to 0.6 percent
SCM types: Class C, Class F, slag cement, silica
Geologic type 3/4
fume
ASR potential:
no: less than 0. I percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent 1/2 SCM specific gravities
expansion;
maybe: 0. 1 to 0.2 percent

Particle shape: angular, cubical

crushed, crushed gravel, rounded No. 4
natural sand

Fineness modulus

Climate (for example AASHTO Zones I-VI):

I = wet, no freeze; II = wet, freezing-and-thawing cycling; III = wet, hard
freeze-spring thaw; IV = dry, no freeze; V = dry, freezing-and-thawing
cycling; VI = dry, hard freeze-spring thaw

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

26 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

Table 5 . 4 . 3. 1-A pproximate mixing water and air content for different water-only slumps and nominal
maximum sizes of aggregates
Water, lb/yd3 of concrete for indicated nominal maximum sizes of aggregates
Slump, in. 3/8 in. 1 /2 in. 3/4 in. I in. 1 - 1 /2 in. 2 in. 3 in.
Non-air-entrained concrete
I to 2 350 335 315 300 275 260 220
3 to 4 385 365 340 325 300 285 245
6 to 7 410 385 360 340 315 300 270
Approximate entrapped
air content in non-air- 3 2.5 2 1 .5 I 0.5 0.3
entrained concrete, %
Air-entrained concrete
I to 2 305 295 280 270 250 240 205
3 to 4 340 325 305 295 275 265 225
6 to 7 365 345 325 310 290 280 260
Recommended average total air content, percent for level of exposure
Mild exposure 4.5 4.0 3.5 3 .0 2.5 2.0 1 .5
Moderate exposure 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.0 3.5
Severe exposure 7.5 7.0 6.0 6.0 5.5 5 .0 4.5
Note: I in. � 25.4 mm; I lb/yd3 � 0.5932764 kg/m3

with respect to durability to prevent potential problems,
based on experience and testing, and should be consulted. If
proven necessary, aggregate freezing-and-thawing deteriora-
tion and ASR mitigation plans should be developed following
suggested methods such as outlined in 4. 1 . 1 . 1 and 4. 1 . 1 .2 .
Once proven acceptable, other considerations for choosing
aggregate source are gradation (traditional or optimized
gradations), NMS, shape and surface texture, skid resistance,
coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE), modulus of elasticity
(MOE), and abrasion resistance.
5.4.2.3 Cementitious materials-Chapters 3 and 4 should
be reviewed when choosing cementitious material. The basic
choice for cementitious material for concrete pavement is
portland cement. The type is usually I or II, depending on the
local experience and availability. Sometimes, certain aspects
of the project may require some other effect, such as higher
early strength to satisfy early opening criteria (Type III), or
a Type V for high sulfate resistance. ASTM C595/C595M
blended cements (for example, Type IP, Type IS, Type IT, or
Type IL) can also be used and offer some advantages.
SCMs are commonly included in the mixture for the
purposes of heat reduction, enhanced workability, mitiga-
tion of ASR or sulfate attack, increased sustainability, cost
reduction, or all of these. SCMs can be added at the concrete
plant or included as part of blended cement. The decision on
SCM selection should be based on availability, satisfaction
of durability objectives, and compatibility considerations.
5.4.2.4 Chemical admixtures-As discussed in Chapters
3 and 4, chemical admixtures are added to concrete during
mixing to modify fresh or hardened concrete characteristics
such as air content, workability, or setting time, and to adjust
the w/cm affecting strength and permeability. Typical admix-
tures used in paving include air-entraining admixtures, and
normal-range and mid-range water-reducing admixtures.
Others that are used for special situations include HRWRAs,
retarders, and accelerators.
5.4.3 Estimation ofwater content
5.4.3.1 Base water content-The base water content is a
function of desired slump and NMS of the coarse aggregate.
Table 5 .4.3 . 1 (from ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ) is used to select the base

cCiC'iJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 27

Table 5 . 4 . 3 .1. 1-Recommended slumps for various thawing deterioration, the NMS is chosen to be smaller than
types of pavement construction the critical size at which damage occurs, which may result
Slump, in. (mm) in a smaller-than-normal NMS. When reinforcement is in
Types of construction Minimum Maximum
the slab, the NMS should clear the smallest clear spacing
of any of the reinforcing elements in the slab, including
Slipform 1/2 ( 1 2) 2 (50)
plate dowel clearance. Experience has shown that for plate
Form and place 2 (50) 4 ( 1 00) dowels, an NMS of 1 in. (25 mm) can be successfully used
Laser-guided, wet, roller, and with slabs as thin as 4 in. ( 1 00 mm) and 1 - 1 /2 in. (38 mm)
4 ( 1 00) 5 ( 1 25 )
vibrating truss screeds in 5 in. ( 1 27 mm) slabs and thicker as long as optimized
Hand finish 5 ( 1 50) 5+ ( 1 50+) gradings and proper vibration are used. Regarding strength,
as NMS decreases, flexural strength increases. This is partic­
ularly important in projects where strength is a pay incen­
water content. Experience with materials in a specific area
tive. Typical NMS values for a paving mixture are 3/4, 1 , or
can also be used to establish the base water content.
1 - 1/2 in. ( 1 9, 25, or 38 mm). The choice of NMS should be
Regarding recommended air contents, mild exposure is
checked against project specification requirements . Aggre­
for situations where air entrainment is desired for a benefi­
gates susceptible to freezing-and-thawing damage typically
cial effect other than durability, such as to improve work­
have an NMS less than 3/4 in. ( 1 9 mm). This needs to be
ability. This corresponds to ACI 3 1 8 Exposure Category FO.
determined with respect to local conditions (Tayabj i and
Moderate exposure (F 1 ) is service where there is freezing
Anderson 2007). Consideration should be given to adding a
and thawing but no frequent exposure to moisture and nor
larger non-frost-susceptible coarse aggregate size fraction to
deicing salt. Severe exposure is where there is freezing and
accompany the reduced-size frost susceptible coarse aggre­
thawing, frequent exposure to moisture, exposure to deicing
gate to lessen shrinkage issues.
salt, or all of these.
In the ACI 2 1 1 . 1 method, the base water content estab­
5.4.3.1.1 Selection of slump-Table 5 .4.3 . 1 . 1 tabulates
lished in Table 5.4. 3 . 1 assumes the use of cubical crushed
slumps for several methods of pavement slab construction as
coarse aggregate. Actual required water contents will be
recommended by ACI 330R, FAA (2009a), and UFC (2004).
needed for different coarse and fine aggregate particle
Desired slump for paving concrete depends on the projects'
shapes and surface textures. Additionally, the use of SCMs
anticipated placing and finishing methods and equipment.
and chemical admixtures will affect the actual water demand
ACI 330R allows up to 6 in. ( 1 50 mm) slump ifWRAs are
of a given mixture. Adjustments to the base water content
used. PCA EBOO 1 recommends using the higher end of the
for the first trial batch for a given mixture are discussed in
desired slump range in choosing water content; for example,
the following, and may result in substantially less water than
for a 2 in. (50 mm) target slump with a ±1 in. (25 mm)
indicated in Table 5 .4 .3 . 1 . A maximum total water reduc­
specified control, 3 in. (75 mm) should be used for propor­
tion from all considerations of30 percent, however, has been
tioning water content. Past experience will guide the mixture
suggested to prevent finishability problems. As a guide, the
designer in this regard.
water required to achieve a 1 in. (25 mm) slump before addi­
For mixtures to be placed by laser-guided screed or fixed­
tion of WRAs would be considered a minimum.
form methods, higher slumps may be desired and achieved
5.4.3.2 Adjustment of water content for coarse aggre­
by use of an MRWRA or HRWRA. In these cases, some­
gate shape-In ACI 2 1 1 . 1 , the water requirements in Table
times mixtures are proportioned at a lower water content
5 .4.3 . 1 are set up for a cubical crushed stone coarse aggre­
to achieve a lower slump such as 2 in. (50 mm), then the
gate particle shape. More angular and more flat or elongated
MRWRA or HRWRA is added later to achieve the desired
shapes will demand more water. Conversely, crushed gravel
slump. By comparison, the range of slump in Table 5 .4.3 . 1
will demand less water than crushed stone, and uncrushed
i s 1 to 7 in. (25 to 1 80 mm).
rounded gravel even less. Suggested values to adjust the
5.4.3.1.2 Selection of nominal maximum size-NMS is
basic water derived from Table 5 .4.3 . 1 range from + 1 0 lb/
defined as the smallest sieve through which 1 00 percent
yd3 (+6 kg/m3) for severely angular, zero adjustment for
of the material is permitted to pass. Maximum size is the
cubical crushed stone, - 1 0 to -35 lb/yd3 (-6 to -2 1 kg/m3)
smallest sieve through which 1 00 percent of the material is
for cubical crushed gravel (depending on percent crushed),
required to pass. ACI 2 1 1 . 1 recommends an upper limit on
and -20 to -45 lb/yd3 (- 1 2 to -27 kg/m3 ) for rounded gravel
NMS for slabs as one-third the slab thickness, whereas Kohn
(depending on degree of roundness) (PCA EBOO 1 ). As usual,
and Tayabji (2003) limits NMS to no greater than one-fourth
local experience trumps any suggested value.
the slab thickness or 2-1/2 in. (64 mm), whichever is less.
5.4.3.3 Adjustment of water content for fine aggregate
USACE (20 1 2) recommends using NMS of 1 - 1 /2 in. (3 8 mm).
shape-More angular fine aggregate has a greater water
Generally, NMS greater than 2 in. (50 mm) should be avoided
demand. Fine aggregate angularity is related to void space
when paving is to be performed with the slipform method.
in the compacted material, thus fine aggregate dry-rodded
Larger NMS mixtures are more economical. The choice of
density (DRD) is required to calculate fine aggregate void
NMS for paving mixtures, however, is usually tempered
content in percent. Adjustments are tied to an increment
by workability and strength requirements, and availability.
of 8 lb/yd3 (5 kg/m3) per one percent difference between
If the coarse aggregate is prone to aggregate freezing-and-
3 5 percent and the calculated void content. Alternately,

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org CaCiJ

28 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
Table 5 . 4 . 3.5-Suggested reductions in water content for air-entrained mixtures
NMS NMS
Slump, in. (mm) 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) 112 in. (13 mm)
I to 2 (25 to 50) 13 12
3 t o 4 (76 t o 1 00) 12 II
6 to 7 ( ! 50 to 1 80) II 10
suggested shape adjustments (FA ad), are - 1 7 lb/yd3 ( - 1 0
kg/m3) for well-rounded natural sands, zero adjustment
for average fine aggregate, and + 1 7 lb/yd3 (+ 10 kg/m3) for
manufactured fine aggregates, respectively (ACI 2 1 1 .4R).
Using the void content method, void content and water
adjustment are calculated with Eq. (5.4.3.3a) and (5.4.3.3b)
(ACI 2 1 1 .4R).
% VFA void content = [ I � (DRDFAGFA,OD)(p,.,ater))] X 1 00
MFAadj = (-8 lb/yd3 )(35 - % VFA void contelll)
MFAadj = (-4 .7 kg/m3)(35 - % VFA void content)
5.4.3.4 Adjustment ofwater content for SCMs-In general,
water demand is lowered by fly ash and slag cement and raised
by silica fume. A 5 percent reduction of water for both fly ash
and slag cement is suggested (PCA EB001 ; ACPA 2003a);
however, the effect of slag cement may be minimal. Silica fume
and metakaolin will increase water demand; 30 lb/yd3 ( 1 8 kg/
m3) of additional water to compensate for the silica fume's
demand is suggested, although use of silica fume and metaka-
olin is not common for paving mixtures. If a HRWR is used
with the silica fume, water adjustment may not be required.
5.4.3.5 Adjustment of water content for air entrain-
ment-For calculation details, the designer is referred to
ACI 2 1 1 . 1 and Chapter 6 examples in this document; air
entrainment lowers water demand. In place of local experi-
ence, an approximate 10 percent reduction in water content
is suggested in ACI 2 1 1 . 1 . However, in Table 5.4.3 .5, which
is derived from PCA EB00 1 , suggested reduction values
as a function of slump and NMS are presented. The values
shown are for mixtures with 6 to 1 0 percent air content.
5.4.3.6 Adjustment of water content for WRAs and
HR WRAs-For calculation details, the designer is referred to
ACI 2 1 1 . 1 and Chapter 6 examples in this guide. Depending
on the type of WRA (NRWRA, MRWRA, or HRWRA),
suggested water reductions are 5 to 10 percent for NRWRA, 6
to 12 percent for MRWRA, and 12 to 30 percent for HRWRA
(Taylor et al. 2007; PCA EB00 1). WRAs perform best when
the base water content is sufficient to produce a certain slump
without admixtures: 2 to 3 in. (25 to 75 mm) for fixed-form
placement. This water slump i s necessary so that the variation
of setting time and finishability is minimized (Harrison 2004).
5.4.3. 7 Adjustment of water content for fibers-If using
fibers, water demand will increase. Rather than use addi-
tiona! water to restore slump, use of a WRA, MRWRA,
or HRWRA is recommended. If these aids are used to just
compensate for water demand, the water content should not
cCiC'iJ American Concrete Institute � Copyrighted© Material � www.concrete.org
Percent water reduction
NMS NMS NMS NMS
3/4 in. (19 mm) 1 in. (25 mm) 1-112 in. (38 mm) 2 in. (50 mm)
II 10 9 8
10 9 8 7
10 9 8 7
be reduced for use of WRA or increased for the fiber effect
(PCA EBOO 1 ).
5.4.3.8 Calculation offinal trial water content and water
volume-The mass of the base water (Mbase water) and coarse
aggregate shape adjustment (McAadJ) , fine aggregate shape
adjustment (MFAad;), and silica fume adjustment (SFad;) are
summed, then multiplied by the percent adjustments for air
content (AEAad;); fly ash and slag cement (Fly AshadJ, Slagad;) ;
(5.4.3 .3a) and WRA, MRWRA, and HRWRA (WRAadJ, MRWRA adJ,
and HRWRAad), as shown in Eq. (5 .4.3 . 8a) and (5.4.3.8b).
(5.4.3.3b)
Mwater = (Mbase water + McAadj + MFAadj + MsFadj)( 1 - AEAadj)
(5.4.3.3c) ( 1 - Fly AshadJ and/or Slagad;)( 1 � WRAad;)
(5.4.3.8a)
Check: % total water reduction = [Mbase water � M.vater)!Mbase water]
X 1 00 < 30% Vwater = Mwate/( Gw)(Pwater)
(5 .4.3 .8b)
When calculating the actual batch wateramount, the contri-
bution of the admixture water content will be subtracted as
shown in 5 .4. 1 1 . 1 .
5.4.4 Determination of w/cm-The choice of w/cm is
based on requirements for durability, strength, and desired
level of confidence. The project specifier may dictate a
maximum w/cm.
5.4.4.1 Durability-ACT 2 1 1 . 1 references ACI 3 1 8 (which
is based on ACI 20 1 .2R) for recommended maximum values
of w/cm for various durability-related situations. Because
pavements will be directly in contact with soil or a moist
aggregate base, the slab will be exposed to constant mois-
ture. Beyond that, other considerations include exposure
to freezing-and-thawing cycling, deicer salt, sulfate, and
whether reinforcement is to be considered. In the current
pavement design climate, most pavements are plain, although
some designers specify reinforcement in slabs for a variety
of reasons. Table 5.4.4 . 1 a (adapted from Table 1 9.3.2 . 1 of
ACI 3 1 8- 1 4) recommends the following maximum values of
w/cm for slabs subjected to moisture and possibly freezing-
and-thawing cycling and deicer salt.
ACI 201 .2R recommends a maximum w/cm of 0.50 and
0.45 for mild and severe exposure, respectively. ACI 302 . 1 R
agrees with Table 5 .4.4. l a except for a recommendation
of a maximum w/cm of 0.50 for concrete that would fit
into Class F2. Tayabj i and Anderson (2007) recommend a
maximum of 0.45 for severe weathering regions and 0.50
for mild or negligible regions, with a minimum of 0.38. The
FAA (2009a) places a maximum of 0.45, but acknowledges
a lower value may be required for severe exposure. MnDOT
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 29

(Masten 20 1 2) incentivizes w/cm between 0.38 and 0.40
and, as a result, has seen improved pavement longevity.
For soil with significant levels of sulfate, Table 5 .4.4 . 1 b is
derived from ACI 201 .2R; ACI 3 1 8- 1 4 Tables 1 9.3. 1 . 1 and
1 9.3.2. 1 ; and Tayabj i and Anderson (2007). The table lists
recommended maximum values of w/cm, minimum values
of strength, cement types, and SCM types.
Typical maximum values ofw/cm reported in the literature
for pavements range from 0.38 to 0.55, depending on expo­
sure (ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ; USAF 1 997; UFC 2004; MoDOT 20 1 1 ;
USACE 2012; Taylor et a!. 2007). ACI 3 1 8 and ACI 201 .2R
cite specific cementitious combinations and performance­
qualified alternatives. ASTM C 1 0 1 2/C 1 0 1 2M testing should
be used to confirm the performance of specific materials
combinations, but slag cement replacement rates in the
range of 40 to 50 percent have often been found completely
effective in meeting the expansion criteria needed for even
severe sulfate exposure in combination with Type I cement.
Lower minimum replacement rates will generally be neces­
sary when Type II or V cement is used. Class F fly ash used
at 25 to 30 percent replacement will likely provide sulfate
resistance if the aluminate content is inappropriate.
5.4.4.2 Strength
5.4.4.2.1 Thickness design strength, construction acceptance
strength, and mixture design strength-There are three types
of strengths to consider: a) strength used for thickness design;
b) minimum specified construction acceptance strength; and c)
average mixture design strength. Many times, (a) and (b) are
the same and (c) is set greater than (b) to allow for variability.
5.4.4.2.2 Typical strengths-Typical required flexural
strengths for pavement mixtures are 500 to 700 psi (3.4 to 4.8
Table 5 . 4 . 4. 1 a-Recommended maximum values
of w/cm for freezing-and-thawing and deicer
conditions
Exposure class Description
Exposure to moisture and
F2
freezing-and-thawing cycling
Exposure to moisture, freezing-
F3 and-thawing cycling, and deicer
salt
For reinforcement corrosion
Cl
protection: exposure to moisture
For reinforcement corrosion
C2 protection: exposure to moisture
and deicer salt
MPa) or 2500 to 5000 psi ( 1 7.2 to 34.5 MPa) compressive
strength. Strengths are usually determined at 28 days, but some­
times are set at 90 days for airfields (UFC 2004). Conversely,
many projects require opening to traffic as soon as possible.
For thickness design, the FAA (2009a,b) recommends
600 to 700 psi (4. 1 to 4.8 MPa) flexural strength at 28 days.
USACE (20 1 2) places a maximum of a 90-day strength
of 650 psi (4.5 MPa), which in effect is addressing low w/
em and high cement content issues. There is concern about
excess strengths causing the slabs to be brittle, along with
excess paste resulting in shrinkage, warping, and curling
issues. Tayabji and Anderson (2007) and the FAA (2009a)
recommend that the construction specified strength should
be at least 5 percent lower than the thickness design strength
because the airfield will probably not be receiving traffic
until 60 to 90 days after concrete placement. Various agen­
cies have recommendations for minimum compressive
strengths. ACI 3 1 8 recommendations are shown in Table
5 .4.4 . 1 b. Minimum compressive strength is recommended
by ACI 330R as 4000 psi (27.6 MPa) at 28 days (greater
if reinforcing steel is used in an environment that includes
deicers or air-borne salt).
5.4.4.2.3 A CI 211 . 1 method-ACI 2 1 1 . 1 presents the proce­
dure more commonly used in building design. The mixture
average strength.fc,.' is based on the specified thickness design
strength.fc' plus a margin. The margin will allow for the vari­
ability of a particular plant's mixture at a given probability.
The magnitude of the margin is dependent on the variability
of the mixture under consideration; thus, a standard deviation
S of historical strength data is necessary. The margin is also
dependent on the desired probability of avoiding strengths
lower than.fc', typically 99 percent. If sufficient historical data
(N ?. 30 tests of similar concrete) are not available, ACI 2 1 1 . 1
lists required minimum margins. If there are sufficient data
in the historical dataset, two approaches are used to cover
Maximum w!cm different low compressive strength situations
0.45
fc,' =!c' + 1 .34(S) (5.4.4.2.3a)
0.45 (plain)
fc, ' = fc ' + 2.33 (S) - 500 psi
0.40 (reinforced)
(5.4.4.2.3b)
fc,.' = fc' + 2.33(S) - 3.4 MPa
NA
The greatest strength from the two approaches is used for
0.40 design. Detailed examples are included in 6. 1 .3 .2, 6.2.3.2,
6.5.3.2, and 6.6.3.2.

Table 5 . 4 . 4 .1 b-Recommended maximum val ues of w/cm, minimum values of design strength, and
cementitious materials for sulfate conditions
Recommended cementitious materials
Minimum strengthfc',
Exposure class Maximum w!cm psi (MPa) ASTM C J SO/C I SOM ASTM C595/C595M ASTM C I SO/C I SOM + SCMs

IP(MS),
Sl 0.50 4000 (27.6) II I + Class F' or II
IS (MS), IT(MS)

S2 0.45 4500 (3 1 .0) v IP(HS), IS(HS), IT(HS) II + Class F'

IP(HS) + SCM,
S3 0.45 4500 (3 1 .0) V + SCM IS(HS) + SCM, -

IT(HS) + SCM
'Low oxide, fine, or fine ground, check combination via ASTM C l 0 12/C l 0 1 2M; results are acceptable if they meet ACl 3 1 8- 1 4 Table 26.4.2.2(c).

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

30 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
5.4.4.2.4 PCA, A CPA, and AASHTO methods-The
relationship of thickness design strength, construction
acceptance strength, and average mixture design strength
is different for pavements than for other applications of
concrete. Typically, in building applications, the assumed
value for compressive strength used in sizing structural
members is the same as the minimum construction accep­
tance strength (fc') and is specified in the contract documents.
The average strength for mixture design (fc,.') is set higher
than fc' by an amount known as the overdesign or margin.
In pavement applications, however, most pavement design
methods (Packard 1 984; AASHTO 1 993 ; ACPA 2005) use
the average mixture design 28-day strength as the input for
determining slab thickness. The fact that quite a few batches
will have strengths less thanfc,.' is taken care of in the thick­
ness design methodology, notably, an offsetting allowance
for an increase in strength over time. As an example, using
ACPA (2005) guidelines, a recommendation of 650 psi (4.5
MPa) modulus of rupture (MOR) means that this value
should be the target average mixture design strength, not
the minimum allowable strength on-site for acceptance, and
would be also used as the value during the pavement thick­
ness design stage. A detailed example is included in 6.3.3.2.
5.4.4.2.5 FAA method-The procedure for determining
the mixture design strength for FAA airfields, as a func­
tion of slab thickness design strength, is somewhat involved
(FAA 2009a,b). The designer is strongly advised to review
6.3.2. The following is a presentation of the procedure. The
minimum flexural strength allowed for thickness design is
600 psi (4. 1 MPa) for certain design scenarios. This strength
value could be set higher for a specific project (up to 700 psi
[4.8 MPa]). Although the FAA (2009b) recommends reduc­
tion of the thickness design strength by at least 5 percent
to set the minimum field acceptance value, many times in
practice these values are set equal to each other. The average
mixture strength must be set higher (via margin) by the
contractor so that equal to or greater than 90 percent of the
quality control strength test results will be greater than the
lower specification limit (LSL). Thus, the target percent
within limits (PWL) will be equal to or greater than 90
percent. A PWL equal to 90 would result in a pay factor of
1 00 percent. The strength overdesign is primarily a function
of the contractor's variability as measured by the mixture 's
historical standard deviation (FAA 2009a). By FAA's defi­
nition, the LSL is 93 percent of the minimum acceptance
strength. The contract unit price is adjusted with a pay factor
(PF), which is dependent on the PWL. For example, to set
the mixture design strength, if the thickness design was
based on 650 psi (4.5 MPa), a 5 percent reduction to 6 1 8 psi
(4.26 MPa) would be the minimum construction acceptance
strength specified. The LSL would be 93 percent of 6 1 8 psi
(4.26 MPa), which equals 575 psi (3.96 MPa), and if the
contractor desired a 1 05 percent PF, and had an historical
standard deviation of 50 psi (0.3 MPa), the average mixture
design strength would be 643 psi (4.43 MPa). To see all the
steps involved, refer to 6.4.3.2.
5.4.4.2.6 Early-strength mixtures-Early strength recom­
mendations are discussed in 3.3.3.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
5.4.4.2.7 Flexural-compressive strength relationship­
Flexural strength should be used for design and for trial
mixtures for paving concrete. At the time of trial batching,
the final mixture can be used to develop an MOR-compres­
sive strength or MOR-splitting tensile strength relationship
for field quality control work if desired, as discussed in
5.4. 1 5 . It is strongly recommended that the strength relation­
ship be determined with project materials. For preliminary
estimation purposes, a typical MOR-compressive relation­
ship suggested by ACI 330R is
MOR = K(fc') 112 (5.4.4.2.7a)
For rounded aggregate, K = 8 (U.S. customary units) and
0.7 (SI units). For rough-textured crushed aggregate, K =
1 0 (U. S. customary units) and 0.8 (SI units). The units are
psi or MPa. The specifying agency may dictate a minimum
strength. In practice, compressive strength is sometimes
directly specified and the mixture design is based on that.
5.4.2.2.8 Determining w/cm-The relationship between
average mixture design strength (fc, ') (or its MOR counter­
part) and w/cm should be determined, either from experience
with the mixture, or from laboratory work. For preliminary
estimation purposes, Table 6.3.4a (U.S. customary units) or
Table A l .6.3 .4a (SI units) in ACI 2 1 1 . 1 -9 1 can be used.
5.4.4.3 Choice of controlling w/cm-The designer should
choose the minimum w/cm of: 1) minimum mandated
by applicable specifications; 2) minimum for durability
(5 .4.4. 1); and 3) minimum for strength with desired level of
confidence (5 .4.4.2).
5.4.5 Calculation of cementitious masses and volumes
5.4.5.1 Calculation of cementitious materials masses­
For calculation details, the designer is referred to ACI 2 1 1 . 1
and Chapter 6; total cementitious materials content (mass)
is calculated from the w!cm and water content. Individual
cementitious absolute volumes are calculated knowing
the specific gravities of each type of material. The speci­
fying agency may dictate a minimum cement content, total
cementitious content, or both, for the slab to assure sufficient
surface durability and finishability. Minimum cementitious
materials contents are commonly recommended for dura­
bility and workability, but are usually tied to NMS (PCA
EBOO l ; Mindess et a!. 2003 ; Taylor et a!. 2007; MoDOT
201 1 ). Table 5.4. 5 . 1 a lists recommended minimum cementi­
tious material contents as a function ofNMS (PCA EBOO 1 ).
The FAA (2009b) specifies a minimum of 564 lb/yd3 (335
kg/m3); a greater amount may be required for durability or
strength if SCMs are used. Tayabj i and Anderson (2007) and
Tayabj i et a!. (20 1 2) recommend minimum cementitious
contents of 4 70 and 5 1 7 lb/yd3 (279 and 307 kg/m3) in mild
climates and severe climates, respectively. The USAF ( 1 997)
specifies a minimum of 564 lb/yd3 (335 kg/m3) when using
portland cement only; when SCMs are used, the minimum
portland cement content is 5 1 7 lb/yd3 (307 kg/m3).
Table 5 .4.5 . 1 b lists recommended maximum SCM percent­
ages. As an example of current DOT policy, MoDOT specifies
the same cement contents as USAF (1 997) values, and uses
replacement percentages for fly ash, slag cement, and SCM
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325.14R-17) 31

combinations of25, 30, and 40 percent, respectively (MoDOT Table 5 . 4.5.1 a-Minimum cementitious contents
20 1 1 ). Many pavements, however, have been successfully NMS, in. (mm) Minimum cementitious material, lb/yd3 (kglm3)
constructed with SCM contents exceeding these limits when 1 - 1/2 (38) 470 (280)
machine finishing is used, thus involving a minimum of hand­
I (25) 520 (3 1 0)
finishing and reducing poor finishing practices.
Concrete in hot and windy weather placement condi­ 3/4 ( 1 9) 540 (320)
tions should contain less portland cement and more SCMs 1 /2 ( 1 3) 590 (350)
such as Class F fly ash, calcined clay, or calcined shale, and
3/8 (9.5) 6 1 0 (360)
more slag cement. Some Class C ashes may be appropriate.
Caution should be exercised regarding the use of SCMs
during periods of high evaporation rates, as discussed in Table 5 . 4.5.1 b-Limitations of SCMs
3. 7 .4. Less total fine cementitious materials should be used to Limit, percent total cementitious material
help prevent plastic shrinkage cracking. Cold weather condi­ by mass
tions would require the opposite (Kohn and Tayabji 2003 ; FAA USACE USAF
Taylor et a!. 2007). It is also recommended that to enhance Material ACI 318 (2009a) (2012) (1997 )
the rate of strength gain, set accelerators, chemical activa­ Fly ash 25 20 to 30 15 to 35' 1 5 to 2 5
tors, or small amounts of silica fume can be used. Addition­
25 to 5 5
ally, fly ash can be ground finer, although this creates more Slag cement 50 301 40 to 50 -

angular particles (Rao and Stehly 20 1 1 ). J Ol

5.4.5.2 Calculation of cementitious materials absolute
Total fly ash or other
volumes-The absolute volume of a material is a function of pozzolan, slag cement, 50 - - -

its mass, specific gravity, and density of water. and silica fume

Total fly ash or other

(5.4.5 .2) pozzolan, and silica 35 - - -

fume
5.4.6 Determination ofair content Fly ash and slag cement -
25 to 5 5 - -

5.4.6.1 A ir content recommendations-Typical depart­

ment of transportation air content allowable minimums
and maximums range from 4 to 1 0 percent of total concrete
volume, depending on exposure, NMS, and type of paving
operation. The recommendations are based on three expo­
sure classifications. Mild exposure is a climate where the
concrete will not be exposed to freezing or deicing salts.
Moderate exposure is a climate where freezing is expected,
but where the concrete will not be continually exposed
to moisture or free water for long periods before freezing
and will not be exposed to deicing agents. Severe climates
expose the concrete to deicing chemicals or possible satura­
tion by continual contact with moisture or free water before
freezing (ACI 201 .2R).
Some agencies require that the point of acceptance for
air content is behind the paver; thus, to account for air
losses through the paver, mixture design air contents are set
approximately 1 to 2 percent above the acceptance level. The
actual loss is determined during the paving operation and
air-entraining admixture dosages are adjusted accordingly.
Loss of air also occurs due to transportation when paving
concrete is delivered in non-agitating trucks, and can be as
high as 1 to 2 percent (Kohn and Tayabji 2003), although in
other situations the loss may be lower.
The mixture should be proportioned for air content at the
upper end of the allowable range; for example, for a target
air content of 6.0 percent with a -1 to +2 percent allowable
range, the mixture should be proportioned for 8.0 percent
air. This would also allow for a 2 percent loss of air during
transport, placement, or both (PCA EB001 ).
5.4.6.2 Calculation of air volume-In ACI 2 1 1 . 1 , air
content is determined as a percent of total concrete volume.
' B y volume o f portland cement.
IJf temperature is 55°F ( I 3 °C) and s lipfonning is used.
lLimit of I 0 percent fly ash if slag cement is present.
The air content should be checked against air content
required by specification. The air content is based on severity
of climate and NMS and is selected as per Table 5.4.3 . 1 .
5.4.7 Determination ofcoarse aggregate mass and volume
5.4.7.1 Coarse aggregate fraction-From ACI 2 1 1 . 1 , the
recommended coarse aggregate volume fraction is a function
of NMS of the coarse aggregate and fineness modulus (FM)
of the fine aggregate, and is determined from Table 5 .4.7. 1 .
If there i s more than one coarse aggregate, as in an opti­
mized grading, the total coarse aggregate (plus No. 8 [2.36
mm] material) could be calculated and used with Table
5 .4.7. 1 . For pavement, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 states that the coarse aggre­
gate fraction volume can be increased by up to 1 0 percent
beyond the values in the figure. Coarse aggregate content
may have to be reduced by up to 1 0 percent if synthetic fiber
content is between 0.25 and 0.4 percent by volume and 1 5 to
20 percent if fiber content exceeds 0.4 percent (ACI 544.3R).
5.4.7.2 Calculation ofcoarse aggregate mass, oven-dry­
For calculation details, the designer is referred to ACI 2 1 1 . 1
and Chapter 6; the calculation requires coarse aggregate
volume fraction and coarse aggregate dry-rodded density.
The total coarse aggregate mass is calculated (McA +JA ) ,
which includes any intermediate aggregates.
5.4.7.3 Conversion to coarse aggregate mass, SSD-For
calculation details, the designer is referred to ACI 2 1 1 . 1 and
Chapter 6; the calculation requires coarse aggregate absorption.
5.4. 7.4 Calculation of coarse aggregate absolute
volume-For calculation details, the designer is referred

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org CaCiJ

32 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325.14R-1 7)

Table 5 . 4 .7..1-Bulk volume of coarse aggregate lated as the difference between the total volume of a cubic
per unit of vol ume of concrete yard (cubic meter) of concrete and the sum of the volumes of
Nominal Volume of oven-dry-rodded coarse aggregate' per unit all the other materials (coarse and intermediate aggregates,
maximum volume of concrete for different fineness moduli of fine cementitious materials, water, air, and admixture water
size of aggregate! content). Fine aggregate content may have to be adjusted,
aggregate,
depending on the use of the slab. For instance, increased
in. (mm) 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00
wear resistance can be enhanced by minimizing the fine
3/8 (9.5) 0.50 0.48 0.46 0.44 aggregate content in low-slump mixtures if the concrete
1 /2 ( 1 2) 0.59 0.57 0.55 0.53 exhibits little bleeding and segregation (ACI 302 . 1 R). Typi­
3/4 ( 1 9) 0.66 0.64 0.62 0.60 cally, ACT 2 1 1 . 1 proportioning makes mixtures that may be
too sandy for paving.
I (25) 0.71 0.69 0.67 0.65
-
5.4.9.2 Calculation ofFA mass, SSD basis For calculation
1 - 1/2 (38) 0.75 0.73 0.7 1 0.69 details, the designer is referred to ACI 2 1 1 . 1 and Chapter 6;
2 (50) 0.78 0.76 0.74 0.72 the SSD fine aggregate specific gravity is required.
3 (75) 0.82 0.80 0.78 0.76 5.4.10 Total grading approach
5.4. 10.1 General-To optimize the grading distribution
'Volumes are based on aggregates in oven-dry-rodded condition as described in ASTM
C29/C29M. These volumes are selected from empirical relationships to produce of the combined aggregates, blending of three or more indi­
concrete with a degree of workability suitable for usual reinforced construction. For vidual aggregates may be necessary. Typically, this includes
less workable concrete, such as required for concrete pavement construction, they
may be increased by approximately I 0 percent. For more workable concrete, refer
one coarse aggregate, one fine aggregate, and the addition
to 6.3.6 . 1 . of an intermediate-size aggregate, to compensate for defi­
IRefer t o ASTM C 1 36/C 1 36M for calculation o f fineness modulus. ciencies in particle sizes retained on the 3/8 in. through No.
8 (9.5 to 2.36 mm) size sieves. Alternately, sometimes two
to ACI 2 1 1 . 1 and Chapter 6; the calculation requires SSD coarse aggregates, such as No. 4 and No. 67 size numbers
coarse aggregate specific gravity. (ASTM C33/C33M) and a fine aggregate are used. There are
5.4.5.5 Intermediate coarse aggregates-If intermediate­ cases when the addition of a second fine aggregate source
sized aggregates are to be used, their absolute volumes is necessary to supplement deficiencies in the finer aggre­
can be calculated in a similar manner to that of 5 .4.7.4 by gate particle size, although this is less common. ASTM C33/
partitioning the total coarse aggregate fraction into coarse C33M provides a means to optimize combined aggregate
aggregate and intermediate aggregate portions. Examples grading and includes size numbers No. 89 and No. 9 to
are shown in Chapter 6. provide the opportunity to blend these sizes with other aggre­
5.4.8 Determination offiber dosage and volume-Fiber gate products to obtain improved particle distribution. Sizes
volume is calculated by converting from the specified fiber No. 89 and No. 9 are abundant in No. 4 and No. 8 (4.75 and
mass and relative density ofthe fibers (RDJiber) ; typical speci­ 2.36 mm) sieve size particles. These size and grading desig­
fied fiber mass ranges from 0.5 to 1 .6 lb/yd3 (0.3 to 0.9 kg/ nations were developed to supplement the intermediate­
m3) for microsynthetic fibers and 3 . 0 to 7.5 lb/yd ( 1 . 8 to sized aggregate that is often missing in a standard single
4.4 kg/m3 ) for macrosynthetic fibers (Holland et al. 2008). coarse-plus-single fine aggregate combination.
Typical relative density values for synthetic fibers are 0.90 Several methods are commonly employed to optimize
for polypropylene, 1 . 14 for nylon, 1 .38 for polyester, and grading. These include the Shilstone coarseness factor, indi­
2. 70 for alkali-resistant fiberglass (PCA EBOO 1 ). Percent vidual percent retained plot, and the 0.45 power plot. Void
fiber dosage and fiber volume are calculated using Eq. ratio and packing density methods have also been suggested
(5 .4.8a) and (5.4.8b) (U.S. customary units) and (5.4. 8c) and (Transtec Group, Inc. 201 0). The commonly used methods
(5.4.8d) (SI units). are presented in the following. Numerous agency guidelines
and specifications embrace the concept of the total grading
% dosage = ( I 00)(specified fiber mass)I(RDfiber)(Pwater)(27 ft3/yd3) approach, including those of ACI 301 , ACI 302 . 1 R, ACI
(5.4.8a) 304R, ACPA ( 1 989), Mid-West Concrete Industry Board
(MCIB 2000), USAF ( 1 997), FAA (2009a), NCTPC (Taylor
vjibers = (% dosage/1 00)(27 ft3/yd3 ) (5 .4.8b) et al. 2007), and Richardson (2005). Several agency docu­
ments require the use of the coarseness factor (CF) chart
% dosage = ( I OO)(specified fiber mass)/(RDJiber)(Pwa�e�) (5.4.8c) for mixture design acceptance and as a quality control tool
(Tayabj i and Anderson 2007 ; Iowa DOT 2002, 2003, 2004;
vjibers = (% dosage/1 00)(1 m3 ) (5.4. 8d) USAF 1 997; USACE 2012).
-
5.4.10.2 Coarseness factor chart Figure 5 .4. 1 0.2a
5.4.9 Determination offine aggregate volume and mass shows a version of the CF chart. From grading analyses and
5.4.9. 1 Calculation offine aggregate absolute volume­ trial proportions of the different aggregates in the blend, a
For calculation details, the designer is referred to ACI 2 1 1 . 1 combined grading can be determined. From the combined
and Chapter 6 ; the calculation requires absolute volumes of grading, the CF and the workability factor (WF) are calcu­
water, cementitious materials, air, and all coarse aggregates lated as follows (Richardson 2005).
(SSD basis). The fine aggregate absolute volume is calcu-

(c]Ci) American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 33

WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART

45

� .J}V
.--
l---
--- 1 •• .. ---
--
··
Ill
w
z
ii:
.

�rt
1-----" ... t
··.

� Jv
--

:�:�� ..
-·
- --
.- -
...- · w
"'
�
__
_ .. -- - -----
.

- v
�;:;...-
�
I ��
c(
1;-1 -- Cl

1!: --- ----- "'

w
Cl
�
30

t;:::::
:::-y
Cl

v
:::;
c(

--
iii
;:! +
a:
�
25 ROCKY
"'
w
"'
20

100 90 80 70 60 5{1 40
I 30 20 10
c(
0
u

80 70 60 50 40
COARSENESS FACTOR
C04RSENESS �4CTOR

Fig. 5. 4. 1 0. 2a-Coarseness factor chart.

Fig. 5.4. 10.2b-Air Force aggregate proportioning guide
(USAF 199 7).
CF = ((% retained on the 3/8 in. [9.5 mm] sieve)/(%
retained on No. 8 [2 .36 mm] sieve)) x 1 00 Aggregate Proportioning Guide (USAF 1 997). Within the
Shilstone Coarseness factor chart's Zone II, mixtures in Area
WF = % passing No. 8 (2 .36 mm) sieve, adjusted for A have exhibited good slipform behavior, mixtures in Area
cementitious materials content B may be too fine for slipform paving so form-and-place
mechanical paving may be more appropriate, and Area C
The percent aggregate passing the No. 8 (2.36 mm) sieve is for slabs placed and finished via handwork (USAF 1 997;
is adjusted up or down based on the amount of cementitious Kohn and Tayabj i 2003).
material difference from 564 lb (256 kg) that the mixture Caution should be exercised regarding the characteris­
contains. The adjustment is 2.5 percent per 94 lb (43 kg) tics of the intermediate aggregate. Statements regarding the
cementitious material. For example, for a mixture with advantages of adding a third aggregate are made assuming
6 5 8 lb (300 kg) cementitious materials, and 40.0 percent rounded or cubical particle shapes. A flat and elongated
aggregate passing the No. 8 (2.36 mm) sieve, the WF would particle shape could lock the mixture.
be 42.5 percent. The proportions are partitioned into mass of each aggre­
After the CF and WF are determined, they are plotted gate type with Eq. (5 .4. 1 0 . 1 a), (5.4. 1 0 . 1 b), and (5.4. 1 0 . 1 c).
on the CF chart. Other trials of proportions (percentages of
total) can be tried and CF and WF recalculated until a satis­ MeA = (% CA! l OO) (McA+IA) (5.4. 1 0. 1 a)
factory position on the chart is achieved.
If the combined grading falls into Zone I, mixtures may MIA = (% IA/l OO)(McA+IA) (5 .4. 10. l b)
be gap-graded and prone to segregation during placement
and consolidation. They may also lack cohesion, resulting MFA = (% FN l OO)(McA+IA) (5.4. 1 0. l c)
in early cracking, spalling, excessive laitance, and scaling.
Low spots and tears may occur under the paving machine 5.4.10.3 Individual percent retained plot-Some mixture
pan, which results in smoothness issues. Mixtures in Zone designers prefer the individual percent retained (IPR) plot to
IV have high fines contents and are usually oversanded, the coarseness factor chart. The IPR plot allows designers
requiring higher water contents; they are also prone to to provide their own interpretations of the potential char­
segregation during consolidation and finishing, resulting in acteristics of the concrete mixture. Knowing the individual
shrinkage, cracking, variable strength, spalling, excessive gradings and proportions of each aggregate, the individual
laitance, and scaling. Mixtures in Zone V have an excess retained percentages of the combined grading can be calcu­
of coarse aggregate, have insufficient mortar content, are lated. The IPR plot shown in Fig. 5 .4. 1 0.3 is a plot of the
not plastic, and are subject to surface voids development. combined grading, which clearly shows the abundance or
Acceptable mixtures fall in to Zone II, although mixtures lack of material on each sieve.
that plot near the borders of the trend bar (Zone 0) and Many mixture designers desire that an ideal optimized
Zones I and IV require close control (grading and propor­ grading will exhibit minimal gaps in the intermediate sizes.
tions) because small variations can result in the mixture To approximate something like the ideal grading, many
plotting outside of Zone II (Taylor et a!. 2007; Kohn and specifications or guidelines recommend or even require that
Tayabj i 2003). Research (Harrison 2004; Kohn and Tayabji most of the IPR line plot between the 8 and 1 8 percent limits
2003 ; Iowa DOT 2002, 2003, 2004) has further defined an as shown in Fig 5.4. 1 0.3, or lie between 8 and 22 percent
area within Zone II as a more ideal place for slabs-on-ground for smaller top size aggregate (ACI 302 . 1 R; Holland 1 990;
to be. If a mixture plots close to the Zone I to II interface, Harrison 2004; USAF 1 997; KDOT 2004; Iowa DOT 2004;
variations in stockpile gradings could lead to variations in MnDOT 2004; MCIB 2000; Shilstone 2004). There are a
strength results. Figure 5.4. 1 0.2b depicts the Air Force's

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

34 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
MoDOT Gradation 0 ( : ASTM C33 #67)
!JI
'Ii' i
i i
i
: 1 112" : 3/4" 112" : #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100
2" 1" 3/8" SIAVA SI7A
Fig. 5. 4. 1 0. 3-Individual percent retained plot.
variety of caveats and observations regarding the advisability
of this, as detailed by Richardson (2005). The consensus of
the literature is that tools such as the 8 to 1 8 grading limits
should be recommendations (not specifications) that would
include advice as to under what circumstances it is accept­
able to have a given percent retained outside the limits. ACI
302. 1 R recommends the ideal range for the No. 30 and No. 50
(0.59 and 0.30 mm) sieve sizes is 8 to 1 5 percent retained of
each. Typically, when three adjacent deficient sizes occur or
when the percent retained on two adjacent sieves is less than
1 3 percent, the problem needs correction. ACI 302 . 1 R recom­
mends that the following limitations should be imposed:
a) The percent retained on two adjacent sieves should not
fall below 5 percent.
b) The percent retained on three adjacent sieves should not
fall below 8 percent.
c) When the percent retained on two adjacent sieves is
less than 8 percent, the total percent retained on either of
these sieves and the adj acent outside sieve should be at
least 1 3 percent.
The percentage contribution from each of the aggregate
sources can be varied to produce the desired curve char­
acteristics. During production, mixture proportions should
be adjusted to maintain the proper total grading whenever
individual aggregate source grading varies (ACI 302 . 1 R).
Tayabji and Anderson (2007) and USACE (20 1 2) require
quality control testing to verify that the WF and the CF stay
within ±3 and ±5 percent of design values, respectively,
during production. CFs less than 45 or more than 75 are
considered cause for rejection.
5.4.10.4 0.45 power curve-The combined grading can be
plotted where sieve sizes are raised to the 0.45 power versus
percent passing, as shown in Fig. 5.4.1 0.4. A well-graded
material will plot along a line connecting the origin to the
maximum aggregate size (top size line), then bend down­
ward at the No. 8 (2.36 mm) size. Looking at the plot from
left to right, the first point that falls below the line indicates
excessive material was retained on the corresponding sieve,
while a point that plots well above the line indicates insuf­
ficient material retained on the corresponding sieve (Taylor
et a!. 2007). The percentage contribution from each of the
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
0.45 PowerChart-1 ln. Maximum Size
-g>� 60 t--H-t-+-...,_-+--!-7"7-t-h,.f---f-_,_ ,_ ,_ --: __ _ __
� so t-��+-�����+--t-�--t-----i
� t-H-t-+-
�
.. _,_���-T-T--f-_,_--f-----i
4o
#200
#16 #8 #4 318" 112" 314" 112" 2"
#100 #30 S iAvA SI7A
Fig. 5. 4. 10. 4-0.45 power curve.
aggregate sources can be varied to produce the desired curve
characteristics. Meandering across and back of the top size
line indicates a gap-graded material. Two other lines can be
plotted: one connecting the origin with one size larger than
the maximum aggregate size, and one line connecting the
origin with one size smaller than the maximum aggregate
size. If the grading crosses either of these lines, the gapping
is excessive, as shown in Fig. 5 .4. 1 0.4 (USAF 1 997).
In practice, of the three grading optimization tools
discussed, the 0.45 power curve is used the least.
5.4.11 Adjustment ofproportions for moisture and water
content
5.4.11.1 Adjustment of mixture water content for water
content contribution of admixtures-Adjustment of the
water content of the mixture should be considered when
the total water content of the admixtures affects the w/cm
more than 0.0 1 . Usually this applies when total admixture
dosages are greater than 1 0 ft oz/ 1 00 lb (650 mL/ 1 00 kg)
total cementitious material (TCM). The water content of
admixtures is usually 60 to 80 percent by mass. The batch
water content should be lowered by the total water content
of the admixtures. Typically, air entrainment dosages are 3/4
to 3 ft oz/ 1 00 lb (50 to 200 mL/ 1 00 kg) TCM and admixture
Types A, B, and D dosage ranges are 2 to 7 ft oz/ 1 00 lb ( 1 30
to 460 mL/ 1 00 kg) TCM, which individually are too small
to contain significant water contents, whereas admixtures
Types C, E, F, and G dosages are 1 0 to 90 ft oz/1 00 lb (650
to 600 mL/ 100 kg) TCM. The higher dosages contain signif­
icantly high water contents that should be accounted for in
the total water calculations. Each admixture water contribu­
tion should be calculated by volume with Eq. (5.4. l l . l a) and
Eq. (5.4. l l . l b).
Vadmix = (dosage)(MrcM/1 00) (5 .4. l l . l a)
Madmix water = ( Vadmix)( Gadmix)(Pwarer)(% water content of admixture)
(5 .4. 1 1 . 1 b)
Gadmix ofHRWRA is approximately 1 .2 1 and air-entraining
admixture is 1 . 1 5 .
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
5.4.11.2 Aggregate moisture condition-For calculation
details, the designer is referred to ACI 2 1 1 . 1 and Chapter 6;
the aggregate total moisture and absorption data are required.
5.4.12 SCM content mixtures-Mixtures containing SCMs
may warrant special precautions, such as delayed addition of
WRA by 30 to 60 seconds.
5.4.13 Mixture optimization-At this point, the mixture
can be optimized for a variety of parameters. The mixture
designer should decide the level of desirability for certain
parameters that are important to the success of the mixture.
Recommended optimization criteria might include the same
list shown in 5 . 1 .
Mixture optimization entails making a range o f decisions
at certain steps, ultimately resulting in numerous potential
designs that would all meet the goals of the design. Mixtures
can be narrowed down to one by meeting certain goals. The
mixture that best meets these goals would be the final choice.
5.4.14 Laboratory trial batches-As outlined in ACI
2 1 1 . 1 , laboratory trial batches should be made to adjust
water content and to check workability, stiffening/setting,
bleeding, segregation, finishability, and hardened properties.
The procedures and examples presented in ACI 2 1 1 . 1 should
be followed. Typically, a three-point curve of w!cm versus
strength is created.
Kohn and Tayabji (2003) recommend monitoring slump
loss and air content through the laboratory design process.
The trial batch should sit for the length of time representative
of expected haul time and measured for loss of air content
(air loss of 1 to 2 percent can be expected from non-agitating
trucks). Slump should be measured at 3 minutes of mixing
and at the end of mixing to check for false set. Slump should
be continued to be checked through the haul time interval for
loss-of-slump tendencies; a slump loss of 1 in. (25 mm) in 1 5
minutes may indicate false setting or material incompatibility.
The laboratory mixture design process should be conducted at
the anticipated field temperature(s). Otherwise, the required
dosage of air-entraining admixture determined at 70°F (2 1 oq
may have to be decreased by 30 percent for field temperatures
of 40 to 50°F (4 to 1 0°C), and increased by the same amount
for placement temperatures of 1 00 to 1 1 0°F (38 to 43°C).
Temperature of a well-insulated concrete cylinder should
be monitored for the first 12 hours: an increase of less than
1 0°F ( 1 2°C) may be an indication of retardation as a result
of incompatibilities. At least three mixtures with different
values ofw/cm should be checked for the sensitivity ofMOR
to small changes in w/cm.
5.4.1 5 Determination of strength correlation curves­
Sometimes it is desirable to use compressive strength or
splitting tensile strength in place of flexural strength for
quality control purposes. Compressive strength is more
common. In this case, a mixture-specific strength relation-
ship should be established. One approach is to create a rela-
tionship between two strength types (for example, flexural-
compressive or flexural-splitting tensile) by varying the
strength level via changes in w/cm. This is to cover a range
of possible variations in strength due to variations in water
content (either through hatching errors, inaccurate aggre-
gate moisture corrections, or addition of water at the site).
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
35
The relationship between strength types varies with strength
level; hence, a range of strengths is necessary as opposed to
creating a single ratio at a single strength level. The relation­
ship can be created simultaneously with the establishment
of the w/cm-versus-strength curve, discussed in 5 .4. 14. It
is recommended to use a minimum of three strength levels
approximately 1 5 0 to 200 psi ( 1 .0 to 1 .7 MPa) apart that
bracket the specified flexural strength. Two batches per
strength level should be cast on different days, with at least
two replicate specimens per batch, for a total of six batches,
1 2 cylinders, and 12 beams. Using the specified flexural
strength, the corresponding compressive strength is determined
from the curve, and the desired overdesign (margin) is added to
produce the necessary mixture design target. The required w/cm
is determined from the compressive strength-w/cm relationship
(NRMCA 1 992). The process should, however, be checked
via plant trial batches (Mass 1 997).
5.4.16 Field trial batches-Prior to paving, the mixture
proportions should be checked and adjusted if necessary by
field trials to determine if: (a) fresh properties are acceptable
using the equipment to be used; (b) compressive strengths are
within 250 psi (2.8 MPa) of the target strength; and (c) mate­
rial incompatibilities exist. Anticipated hatching, mixing,
and haul time should be the same as during construction.
Prior to production, aggregate moisture contents should be
determined to adjust batch proportions. During the trials, the
mixture should be tested for slump, air content, unit weight,
3- and 7-day strengths, yield, possibly maturity, and mixer
uniformity (front to rear ofthe batch: slump, air content, and
unit weight) (Taylor et a!. 2007; ASTM C94/C94M).
5.4.17 Mixture design submittal-Mixture proportions are
part of the items that are included in the project submittals to
the designer/specifier. There are typically approximately 20
items in the submittal, including the ones discussed in 5 .4. 1 .
The items that pertain to the mixture design are as follows
(Tayabji et a!. 2012):
a) Concrete mixture proportions
b) Air content (if applicable)
c) Density of fresh concrete
d) Slump
e) Combined aggregate grading including CF and WF (if
applicable)
f) Strengths: flexural, compressive, splitting tensile (if
applicable), and any necessary correlations
g) Reactive aggregate mitigation plan
USACE (20 1 2) requires a list of 1 3 test results and certifi­
cations to be included in the mixture design submittal.
CHAPTER 6-SAMPLE MIXTURE DESIGNS
Five example mixtures in U.S. customary units and one
example in SI units are presented to cover four types offacili-
ties (roads, streets, airfields, and parking lots), three methods
ofplacement (slipform, fixed-form, and laser-guided screed),
two methods of handling grading (traditional and optimized),
three types of SCMs (Class F fly ash, Class C fly ash, and
slag cement), four types of durability issues (freezing and
thawing, deicers, alkali-silica reactivity [ASR], and sulfate
soil), a range of particle shapes (rounded to angular), use of
cCiC'iJ
36 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
various chemical admixtures (air-entraining agents, water­
reducing admixtures [WRAs], mid-range water-reducing
admixtures [MRWRAs], and high-range water-reducing
admixtures [HRWRAs]), and fibers.
A summary ofthe mixture proportioning steps is as follows:
I . Acquire required information.
2. Estimate water mass and volume based on desired
slump, nominal maximum size (NMS), aggregate particle
shapes, SCMs, chemical admixtures, and fibers.
3. Choose w/cm based on strength, durability, or both.
4. Calculate cementitious masses and volumes.
5 . Determine required air content.
6. Determine coarse aggregates masses and volumes.
7. Determine fine aggregate mass and volume.
8. Adjust batch water content for admixture water contents.
6 . 1-Example 1 : Urban highway, slipform,
traditional grading, no SCMs (U. S. customary units)
A project for a two-lane urban highway with average daily
truck traffic (ADTT) of 400 and average daily traffic (ADT) of
4000 is located in the central Midwest, in Zone II (AASHTO
1 993). Exposure includes freezing-and-thawing cycles and
deicing salt. The slab will be subjected to snow plowing.
The pavement design calls for a 7 in. thick unreinforced
slab with 1 5 ft transverse joint spacing and round dowels at
the transverse joints. Local concrete suppliers stock ASTM
C33/C33M- 1 3 No. 67 crushed limestone coarse aggregate
and natural siliceous sand. Paving will be done with a slip­
form paver. The department of transportation allows a 25 lb
reduction in cement (from the minimum required 565 lb) if a
WRA is used. The specified air content location is behind the
paver. Experience with similar mixtures with the anticipated
contractor's paving machine is a loss of air through the paver
of approximately 1 percent and loss during transport from
the concrete plant via transit mix truck is usually 0.5 percent.
The department of transportation uses 4500 psi for thick­
ness design and requires a minimum construction acceptance
compressive strength at 28 days of 4500 psi, standard-cured
cast cylinders. Both strength and smoothness are subject to
pay incentives/disincentives. The contractor is responsible for
the mixture design. The required project information is listed
in Table 6. 1 . 1 .
6.1.1 Solution: acquire required information
6.1 .1.1 Preliminary testing-Local experience indicates
there are no concerns for aggregate freezing-and-thawing or
abrasion deterioration, or alkali-aggregate reactivity (AAR)
or sulfate attack, and the water source is potable, therefore
no testing is required.
6.1.1.2 Strategy-Freezing-and-thawing and deicer resis­
tance will be addressed by the department of transportation
(DOT)-specified air content and maximum w/cm. Although
the specified maximum 0.50 wlcm seems high, the DOT expe­
rience is that for the contractor to achieve both 4500 psi and
5.0 percent air behind the paver and considering the mate­
rials available, the actual w/cm will have to be well below
0.45, which meets the recommendations for the durability
issues. The relatively hard coarse aggregate (CA) should
resist snowplow abrasion.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
Prevention of midpanel cracking will be achieved through
the specified, relatively short, 1 5 ft joint spacing; modest
concrete strength; and a low-friction base, plus the contrac­
tor's choice of a low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE)
coarse aggregate (limestone) and greater CA proportion.
Load transfer will be addressed by the DOT-specified use
of dowels, and by reduction of contraction and shrinkage
from a combination of the specified short joint spacing plus
material considerations of CA shrinkage restraint (increased
CA content and relatively hard aggregate), lower contrac­
tion potential (low-limestone CTE), and by preservation of
aggregate interlock (CA abrasion resistance and angularity).
6.1.2 Estimation of water mass and volume
6.1.2.1 Base water content
6.1.2.1.1 Selection of slump-For slipform paving, from
5.4.3 . 1 . 1 , the target slump is 1 - 1 /2 in. DOT specification
tolerances are ± 1 in. ; therefore, the upper end equals 2-1/2
in. From experience, however, the decision is to use 1 - 1/2
in. for proportioning. The slipform paver will be sufficiently
heavy to deal with stiff mixtures.
6.1.2.1.2 Selection of NMS-Locally available aggregate
nominal maximum size (NMS) equals 3/4 in. ; no aggregate
freezing-and-thawing issues; 7 in. thick slab, thus, 7/3 =
2.33 in. is the maximum recommended NMS; no clearance
issues: no reinforcement, and 1 in. dowel clearance equal to
(7 - 1 in.)/2 = 3 in. clearance below dowels.
Therefore, 3/4 in. NMS is OK. This size should assist with
a workable mixture that minimizes problems under the pan
and will contribute toward the smoothness incentive.
From Table 5 .4.3 . 1 : Mbase water = 3 1 5 Jb
The non-air-entrained part of the table is used; adjustment
for air entrainment is discussed in 6.6.2.5.
6.1 .2.2 Adjustment of water content for coarse aggre­
gate shape-Table 5 .4.3. 1 is set up for cubical crushed CA,
hence, no adjustment.
6.1.2.3 Adjustment ofwater contentforfine aggregate shape
% VFA void content = [ 1 - (DRDFA/(GFA,OD)(Pwater))] X 1 00
= [ 1 - ( 1 1 1 .4 Jb/ft3/(2.629)(62.4 Jb/ft3 ))] X 1 00 = 32. 1 %
MFAadj(water adjustment) = (-8 lb/yd3)(35 - % VFA void content)
= (-8 lb/yd3 )(35 - 32. 1) = -23 lb for well-rounded fine
aggregate (FA). The rounded, smooth FA should assist in
enhancing smoothness. Alternatively, if fine aggregate dry­
rodded density (DRD) was not known, - 1 7 lb/yd3 could
have been used.
6.1.2.4 Adjustment ofwater contentfor SCMs-Not applicable.
6.1.2.5 Adjustment ofwater contentfor air entrainment­
From Table 5.4.3.5, percent water reduction AEAadJ = 1 1 percent.
6.1.2.6 Adjustment of water content for WRAs-For
normal WRAs, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 suggests 5 to 1 0 percent reduc­
tion; from local experience, choose WRA adJ = 7 percent.
6.1.2.7 Adjustment ofwater contentforfibers-Not applicable.
6.1 .2.8 Calculation affinal water mass and volume
Mwater = (Mbase water - McAadj - MFAad) - SFadj)(AEAadj)
(WRA adJ)(SCMadJ) = (3 1 5 - 0 - 23 - 0 !b) (( 1 00 - 1 1 )/1 00)
( ( 1 00 - 7)1 1 00) = 242 lb
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325.14R-17) 37

Table 6 .1. 1-Req uired information for Example 1

No. 4

16

No. 4

16

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

38 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

PC total eq. alkali content: Less than 0.6 or

Dry rodded density, lb/ft3 1 1 1 .4
greater than or equal to 0.6 percent
SCM types: Class C, Class F, slag cement, silica
Geologic type Silica 3/4
fume
ASR potential:
no: less than 0 . 1 percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent None 1 12 SCM specific gravities
expansion;
maybe: 0. I to 0.2 percent

Particle shape: angular, cubical

Well-
crushed, crushed gravel, rounded
rounded
natural sand

Fineness modulus 2.73

Climate (for example AASHTO Zones I-VI):

I = wet, no freeze; II = wet, freezing-and-thawing cycling; III = wet, hard
II
freeze-spring thaw; IV = dry, no freeze; V = dry, freezing-and-thawing
cycling; VI = dry, hard freeze-spring thaw

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
Check: percent total water reduction = [(Mbase water - Mwater)l
Mbase water] X 100 < 30%?
= [(3 1 5 - 242)/3 1 5 ] X 100 = 23% < 30% OK
Vwater = Mwate/Gw)(Pwater) = (242 lb)/( 1 . 000)(62.4 lb/ft3 )
= 3 . 8 8 ft3
6.1.3 Determine w!cm
6_1.3.1 Durability-From Table 5 .4.4. 1 a, exposure to mois­
ture, freezing and thawing, and deicers: maximum w!cm = 0.45.
6.1.3.2 Strength-DOT-specified minimum thickness and
construction acceptance};! = 4500 psi. The historical dataset
for this mixture from the plant where the mixture will be
hatched has at least 30 test results; therefore, adjustment of
the standard deviation (S) will not be necessary.
To calculate target mixture strength:
Forfc' < 5000 psi, the larger of the following will govern:
fcr' = fc' + 1 .34(S) = 4500 + 1 .34(400) = 5036 psi
fc,.' fc' + 2.33(S) - 500 4500 + 2.33(400) - 500
= = = 4932 psi
Thus, 5036 psi controls (round to 5040 psi)
This results in a 99 percent probability that the mixture
strengths will be 2: 4500 psi. Thus, the percent within limits
(PWL) will be sufficiently high to result in a pay incentive.
If using modulus of rupture (MOR) thickness design
tables, estimate MOR at the mixture target strength:
MOR = kVfc ', assume k = 10 for crushed stone
= 1 0 .Y5040 7 1 0 psi (typical range approximately 500 to
=
700 psi) OK
The MOR (7 1 0 psi) is not considered excessively high
with respect to contribution to excessive curling stress. In
this case, by experience, the contractor is confident that 7 1 0
psi can b e achieved with the job materials (CA angular,
rough, relatively hard, and at the NMS proposed).
From the strength-w/cm relationship (not shown) estab­
lished with proj ect materials at the upper end of air content
tolerance:
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
39
S = 400 psi, N = 30
Strength-w/cm relationship available
5 040 psi corresponds to a w/cm = 0.4 1
6.1.3.3 Choice of controlling w/cm-Strength controls,
w/cm = 0.4 1 (meets DOT-specified maximum allowable
[0.50], maximum for durability [0.45], and includes 99
percent desired level of confidence).
6.1.4 Calculation of cementitious masses and volumes
Mcem =
Mwate/w!cm = 242 lb/ 0.4 1 = 590 lb
DOT allows a 25 lb reduction in cement if a WRA is used:
565 - 25 540 lb
=
Check DOT-specified minimum 540 lb cementitious content:
590 lb > 540 lb OK
Check Table 5 .4.5 . 1 a for minimum cement content, for NMS
=3/4 in. : 590 lb > 540 lb OK
Von = (Mcem)/(Gcem)(Pwater) = (590 lb)/(3. 1 5)(62.4 lb/ftl) = 3.00 ftl
6.1.5 Determine air content-DOT-specified air: 5.0
percent; use 5 . 0 percent as the target; with DOT job toler­
ances : 4.5 to 6.5 percent. The DOT specification requires
measurement of air behind the paver; thus, the air content of
the as-delivered concrete should be increased by the antici­
pated air loss through the paver plus loss in transit. Local
concrete mixture experience with this mixture for transit loss
and the contractor's paving equipment loss is approximately
0.5 percent and 1 .0 percent, respectively; thus, the mixture
should be proportioned for 6.5 percent (5.0 + 0.5 + 1 .0); this
will also meet the PCA recommendation (EBOO 1 ) of propor­
tioning at the upper end of the job tolerance (5.0 + 1 . 5 6.5).=
6.1.6 Determine coarse aggregate mass and volume
6.1 .6.1 Coarse aggregate fraction-From Table 5 .4.7. 1 ,
for NMS 3/4 in. and fine aggregate fineness modulus (FM)
=
= 2.73, CA volume fraction = 0.63.
For pavement, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 notes that CA volume can be
increased by up to 10 percent. From local experience with
the available aggregate, increase CA fraction by 5 percent
((iC'iJ
40 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
CA fraction = (0.63)( 1 .05) = 0.66
6.1.6.2 Calculation ofCA mass, oven-dry
McA.OD = (CA fraction)(27 ft3/yd3)(DRDcA ) = (0.66)(27 ft3/
yd3)( 1 05.0 lb/ft3) = 1 87 1 lb
6.1 .6.3 Conversion to CA mass, SSD (to express masses in
SSD terms if desired)
McA.sso = (McA.oo)( 1 + Abs/ 1 00) = ( 1 87 1 lb)[ 1 + ( 1 .911 00)]
= 1 907 lb
6.1.6.4 Calculation ofCA absolute volume
VcA,OD = McA,ooi(GcA,oo)(62.4 lb/ft3) = ( 1 87 1 lb)/(2.630)
(62.4 lb/ft3) = 1 1 .40 ft3
6.1.7 Determinefiber mass and volume-Not applicable.
6.1.8 Determine fine aggregate volume and mass
6.1.8.1 FA absolute volume
VFA,OD = 27 ft3 - [ V';vater + Vcm + V,;r + VcA,OD] = 27 - [3.88 +
3 .00 + 1 .76 + 1 1 .40] = 6.96 ft3
6.1 .8.2 Calculation ofFA mass, oven-dry
MFA.OD = ( VFA.oo)(62.4 lblft3)(GFA,oo) = (6.96 ft3)(62.4 lb/ft3)
(2.629) = 1 1 42 lb
6.1.8.3 Calculation ofFA mass, SSD (to express masses in
SSD terms if desired)
MFA,sso = (MFA,oo)( l + Abs/ 1 00) = (1 1 42 lb)( 1 + 0.3/1 00) =
1 1 45 lb
The mixture proportions for Example 1 are shown in
Table 6. 1 . 8 . 3 .
6.1.9 Adjustment of water content for water content of
admixture
6.1.9.1 Choose admixture dosages-Typical air entrain­
ment admixture dosages are 3/4 to 3 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM, and
WRA dosages are 2 to 7 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM. From local expe­
rience, use air-entrainment dosage of 1 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM and
WRA dosage of 4 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM.
6.1.9.2 Calculation ofwater content ofadmixtures volume
and mass-Because the total admixture dosage of 5 fl oz/1 00
lb TCM is less than 1 0, the calculation ofbatch water adjust­
ment would be considered negligible; however, the steps are
shown in the following for completeness.
Assuming 60 percent water content, 1 . 1 5 Gadmix for the air­
entraining admixture (AEA), and 1 .2 1 Gadmix for the WRA:
Vadmix = (dosage)(MrcM/1 00)
VwRA = (4 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM)(590 lb/yd3 TCM)( 1 gal./1 2 8 fl
oz)( l ft3/7.5 gal.) = 0.025 ft3
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
Table 6.1.8. 3-Summary of mixture proportions for
Example 1
Component Amount
Water, lb 242
Type I portland cement, Ib 590
No. 67 limestone CA ssD, lb 1 907
Natural sand FA ssD, lb 1 1 45
Air-entraining agent, ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM I
Water-reducing admixture Type A, ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM 4
Madmir water = ( Vadmu)(Gadmu)(Pwater)(% water content of admixture)
MwRAwater from WRA = (0.025 ft3 )(1 .2 1 )(62.4 lb/ft3 )(0.60)
= 1 . 1 lb
VAEA = (1 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM)(590 lb/yd3 TCM)( l gal./128 fl
oz)( 1 ft3/7.5 gal.) = 0.006 ft3
MAEAwater from AEA = (0.006 ft3 )( 1 , 1 5)(62.4 lb/ft3)(0.60) =
0.2 lb
Mbatch water = Mwater - MWRA water - MAEA water = 242 lb - 1 . 1 lb
- 0.2 lb = 24 1 lb
6.1.10 Adjustment of batch water content for aggregate
moisture content-This step is not a part of mixture propor­
tioning, rather, it is performed during field production. For a
full treatment, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 should be consulted; the calcula­
tions will require each aggregate's total moisture content and
absorption.
6.1.11 Comments on the mixture-The mixture is plotted
in Fig. 6. 1 . 1 1a. There is a gap in the grading on the No. 8
sieve. In Fig. 6. 1 . 1 1 .b, the mixture plots in Zone II. However,
in Fig. 6. 1 . 1 1 c, although the mixture is in the workability box,
it is not in the slipform area (A), and the point plots closely
(less than two percentage points) to the Zone I-II interface,
indicating a potential for segregation if the stockpiles' grad­
ings vary during the project. The proportions of the mixture
components may be able to be changed, or different or supple­
mental aggregate products may be introduced to move the
plotted point away from the Zone I-II interface.
The low w/cm and angular/rough CA of the mixture
should help the contractor achieve a high pay incentive
for strength. To achieve a high smoothness incentive, the
mixture may need to be more workable with respect to
slipform paving, so the contractor should consider the use
of optimized aggregate grading, an SCM, and possibly a
reduction of the CA content.
6 . 2-Example 2: Urban highway, slipform, optimized
grading, Class C fly ash (U. S. customary units)
For the same project as in Example 1 : a two-lane urban
highway with traffic levels of average daily truck traffic
(ADTT) of 400 and average daily traffic (ADT) of 4000 is
located in the central Midwest, thus in Zone II (AASHTO
1 993). Exposure of the slab includes freezing-and-thawing
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 41

and edge slump issues; and ASTM C33/C33M No. 6 and

No. 89 coarse and intermediate crushed limestone aggre­
gates, respectively. The plant has sufficient silos, aggregate
bins, and handling capabilities. The department of transpor­
tation (DOT) allows up to a 5 0 lb reduction in cement (from
the minimum required 565 lb) if the grading is optimized.
The DOT uses 4500 psi for thickness design and requires
a minimum construction acceptance compressive strength
at 28 days of 4500 psi, standard-cured cast cylinders. The
contractor is responsible for the mixture design.
6.2.1 Solution: acquire required information-The
1 112" : 314" 112" l #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #1 00 #200
required project information is listed in Table 6.2. 1 .
•

2" 1" 318" SiAVA SI7A

6.2.1.1 Preliminary testing-Local experience indicates

Fig. 6. 1 . 11 a-Individual percent retainedfor Example 1. there is little concern for aggregate freezing and thawing,
abrasion deterioration, alkali-aggregate reactivity (AAR), or
WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART
sulfate attack. The water supply is potable, so no testing is
required.
Compatibility testing was performed in accordance with
4.3.2 using semi-adiabatic calorimetry, mini-slump, and
mortar cube compressive strength of mixtures containing
the cement, fly ash, and water-reducing admixture (WRA)
sources at the temperature anticipated for the project. No
unusual behavior was observed. The testing indicated that
because fly ash is being used, slowing of strength gain and
v set time will occur, but should not be excessive because of
the modest cement replacement level and the anticipated
mild weather during construction.
20 �-+--�-�--+--4--�-+--�-�
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 6.2.1.2 Strategy-Freezing-and-thawing and deicer dura­
COARSENESS FACTOR
bility will be addressed by the DOT's specified air content,
Fig. 6. 1 . 11 b-Coarseness factor chartfor Example 1. maximum limits on SCMs, and maximum w!cm; although the
specified maximum 0.50 w!cm seems high, the DOT's experi­
WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART
ence is that for the contractor to achieve both 4500 psi and 5.0
percent air behind the paver and considering the materials
available, the actual w!cm will have to be well below 0.45,
w
z which meets the recommendations for the durability issues.
ii:
The relatively hard coarse aggregate (CA) should resist
t
w
D!
snowplow abrasion.
en
w
1-
Prevention of midpanel cracking will be achieved through
<
<!)
w
the specified, relatively short, 1 5 ft joint spacing; modest
"'
<!) concrete strength; and a low-friction base, plus the contrac­
<!)

: tor's choice of a low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE)

w
en
CA (limestone), optimized grading, and greater CA propor­
"'
< tion. Load transfer will be addressed by the DOT-specified
0
0
use of dowels, and by reduction of contraction and shrinkage
80 70 60 50 40 from a combination of the specified short joint spacing plus
COARSENESS FACTOR
material considerations of CA shrinkage restraint (increased
CA content and relatively hard aggregate), lower contrac­
Fig. 6. 1. 11c-Air Force aggregate proportioning guide for
tion potential (low-limestone CTE), and by preservation of
Example 1 (USAF 1997).
aggregate interlock (CA abrasion resistance and angularity).
cycles, deicing salt, and being subjected to snow plowing. The intermediate aggregate has a compact shape (flat and
The pavement design calls for a 7 in. thick unreinforced elongated 0.0 percent), so problems with locking up the
=

slab with 1 5 ft joint spacing and round dowels at the joints.
Paving will be done with a slipform paver. Experience with
similar mixtures with the anticipated contractor's paver is a
loss of air through the paver of approximately 1 percent and
a loss in transit of 0.5 percent. In this example, the mixture
was optimized to allow the use of fly ash; a coarser fine
aggregate to help control undesirable shrinkage cracking
mixture should be negligible. ASR and sulfate attack are not
anticipated; therefore, use of a Class C fly ash is allowable.
6.2.2 Estimation ofwater mass and volume
6.2.2.1 Base water content
6.2.2.1.1 Selection of slump-For slipform paving, from
5 .4.3 . 1 . 1 , the target slump is 1 - 1 /2 in. DOT specification
tolerances are ± 1 in. ; therefore, the upper end equals 2-1/2

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org cCiC'iJ

42 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

Table 6 . 2. 1-Req uired information for Example 2

None No. 4 3 5 .4

Cubical
16 2.8

No. 4

16

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 43

PC total eq. alkali content: Less than 0.6 or

Dry rodded density, lb/ft3 1 1 2.0
greater than or equal to 0.6 percent
SCM types: Class C, Class F, slag cement, silica
Geologic type Silica 3/4 Class C
fume
ASR potential:
no: less than 0. I percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent 112 SCM specific gravities 2.65
expansion;
maybe: 0. 1 to 0.2 percent

Particle shape: angular, cubical

Well­
crushed, crushed gravel, rounded 4. 1 (medium)
rounded
natural sand

Fineness modulus 3.06

Climate (for example AASHTO Zones I-VI):

I = wet, no freeze; II = wet, freezing-and-thawing cycling; III = wet, hard
II
freeze-spring thaw; IV = dry, no freeze; V = dry, freezing-and-thawing
cycling; VI = dry, hard freeze-spring thaw

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

44 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
in. Based on experience, however, the decision is to use
1 - 1/2 in. for proportioning. The slipform paver should be
sufficiently heavy to deal with stiff mixtures.
6.2.2.1.2 Selection of nominal maximum size-Locally
available aggregate nominal maximum size (NMS) equals
3/4 in., no aggregate freezing-and-thawing issues, and 7
in. thick slab; therefore, 7/3 = 2.33 in. is the maximum
recommended NMS. No clearance issues, no reinforce­
ment, and 1 in. dowel clearance equal to (7 - 1 in.)/2 = 3
in. below dowels), so 3/4 in. NMS is OK. This size should
assist with a workable mixture that minimizes problems
under the pan and will contribute toward the smoothness
incentive.
From Table 5.4.3 . 1 , Mbase water = 3 1 5 lb. The non-air­
entrained part of the table is used; adjustment for air entrain­
ment will be handled in 6.6.2.5.
6.2.2.2 Adjustment of water content for coarse aggre­
gate shape-Table 5 .4.3 . 1 is set up for cubical crushed CA,
hence, no adjustment.
6.2.2.3 Adjustment ofwater contentforfine aggregate shape
% VFA void content = [ 1 - (DRDFA/( GFA, oD)( Pwater))] X 1 00
= [ J - ( 1 1 2.0 Jb/ft3/(2.630)(62.4 Jb/ft3))] X J 00 = 3 1 .8%
MFAadj (water adjustment) = (-8 lb/yd3 )(35 - % VFA void content)
= (-8 lb/yd3)(35 - 3 1 . 8) = -26 lb for well-rounded fine
aggregate (FA).
The rounded, smooth FA should assist in enhancing
smoothness. Alternatively, if FA dry-rodded density (DRD)
was not known, - 1 7 lb/yd3 could have been used.
6.2.2.4 Adjustment of water content for SCMs-For fly
ash, a 5 percent water reduction is anticipated.
6.2.2.5 Adjustment ofwater contentfor air entrainment­
From Table 5 .4.3 .5, percent water reduction AEAadJ = 1 1
percent.
6.2.2.6 Adjustment of water content for water-reducing
admixtures-For normal water-reducing admixtures
(WRAs), ACI 2 1 1 . 1 suggests 5 to 10 percent reduction; from
local experience, a WRA adJ = 7 percent is anticipated.
6.2.2. 7 Adjustment of water content for fibers-Not
applicable.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
S = 400 psi, N = 30
Strength-w/cm relationship available
6.2.2.8 Calculation offinal water mass and volume
Mwater = (Mbase water - McAadj - MFAadj - SFadj)(AEAadj)(WRAadj)
(SCMad) = (3 1 5 - 0 - 26 - 0 !b) (( 1 00 - 1 1 )1 1 00)(( 1 00 -
7)11 00)(( 1 00 - 5)11 00) = 227 lb
Check: percent total water reduction = [(Mbase water - Mwarer)l
X 1 00 < 30%?
Mbase water]
= [(3 1 5 - 227)/3 1 5] x 1 00 = 28% < 30% OK
�voter = Mware/( Gw)(Pwate,.)= (227 Jb)/( 1 .000)(62.4 Jb/ft3)
= 3 .64 ft3
6.2.3 Determine w/cm
6.2.3.1 Durability-From Table 5.4.4.1a, exposure to mois­
ture, freezing and thawing, and deicers: maximum w/cm 0.45.
=
6.2.3.2 Strength-DOT-specified minimum thickness and
construction acceptancefc' = 4500 psi. The historical dataset
for this mixture from the plant where the mixture will be
hatched has at least 30 test results; therefore, adjustment of
the standard deviation (S) will not be necessary.
To calculate target mixture strength:
Forfc' < 5000 psi, the larger of the following will govern:
fc,.' = fc ' + 1 .34(S) = 4500 + 1 .34(400) = 5036 psi
fc,.' =fc ' + 2.33(S) - 500= 4500 + 2.33 (400) - 500 = 4932 psi
Thus, 5036 psi controls (round to 5040 psi).
This results in a 99 percent probability that the mixture
strengths will be 2:4500 psi. Thus, the percent within limits
(PWL) will be sufficiently high to result in a pay incentive.
If using modulus of rupture (MOR) thickness design
tables, estimate MOR at the mixture target strength:
MOR = kYfc', assume k = 1 0 for crushed stone:
= 1 0v'5040 = 7 1 0 psi (typical range approximately 500 to
700 psi) OK
The MOR (7 1 0 psi) is not considered overly high with
respect to contribution to excessive curling stress. In this
case, by experience, the contractor is confident that 7 1 0 psi
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
can be achieved with the job materials (CA angular, rough,
relatively hard, and at the NMS proposed).
From the strength-w/cm relationship (not shown) estab­
lished with proj ect materials at the upper end of air content
tolerance, 5040 psi corresponds to a w/cm = 0.4 1 .
6.2.3.3 Choice of controlling w/cm-Strength controls,
w/cm = 0.4 1 (meets specified maximum allowable [0.50],
maximum for durability [0.45], and includes desired 99
percent level of confidence).
6.2.4 Calculation ofcementitious masses and volumes
Mcem = Mwate,Jw/cm = 227 lb/0.41 = 554 lb
DOT allows a 50 lb reduction in cement if an optimized
grading is used: 565 - 50 = 5 1 5 lb.
Check DOT-specified minimum 5 1 5 lb total cementitious
content: 5 54 lb > 5 1 5 lb OK.
Check Table 5.4.5 . l a for minimum cementitious content, for
NMS = 3/4 in. : 554 lb > 540 lb OK.
Fly ash: based on experience and testing, 20 percent (by
mass) is selected.
Check for maximum recommended fly ash replacement
(Table 5.4. 5 . 1 b): 20 percent is OK.
Portland cement mass Mcem = (% PC! l OO)(MrcM) = (80/100)
(554 lb) = 443 lb
Fly ash mass = (% fly ashll OO)(MrcM) = (2011 00)(554 !b) =
I l l lb
Vcm = (Mcem)/(Gcem)(Pwater) = (443 Jb)/(3 . 1 5)(62.4 Jb/ft3)
= 2 .26 ft3
fltty ash = (1 1 1 Jb)/(2.65)(62.4 Jb/ft3) = 0.67 ft3
6.2.5 Determine air content-The DOT air specification is
5.0 percent, which will be used as the target, with job toler­
ances of 4.5 to 6.5 percent. The DOT specification requires
measurement of air behind the paver, thus the air content of the
as-delivered concrete should be increased by the anticipated
air loss through the paver plus loss in transit. Local experience
with this mixture for transit loss and the contractor's paving
equipment loss is approximately 0.5 percent and 1 .0 percent,
respectively; thus, the mixture should be proportioned for 6.5
percent (5.0 + 0.5 + 1 .0). recommendation (EBOO l ) of propor­
tioning at the upper end of the job tolerance (5 .0 + 1 .5 = 6.5).
This higher air content may be necessary because the loss on
ignition (LOI) of the fly ash is greater than 4.0 percent, and
thus may interfere with entraining air.
Adjusted air volume= (0.065)(27 ft3/yd3) = 1 .76 ft3
6.2.6 Determine coarse aggregate mass and volume
6.2.6.1 Coarse aggregatefraction - Table 5 .4. 7. 1 , for NMS
= 3/4 in. and fine aggregate FM = 3 .06, CA volume fraction
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
45
= 0.59. For pavement, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 notes that CA volume can
be increased by up to 1 0 percent. By local experience with
the available aggregate, increase CA fraction by 1 0 percent:
CA fraction = (0.59)( 1 . 1 0) = 0.65
6.2.6.2 Calculation of coarse aggregate and intermediate
aggregate mass, oven-dry-By local experience, use 78
percent ASTM C33/C33M No. 6 CA and 22 percent No. 89
intermediate aggregate (lA) (by mass).
Average DRD = (%CA!l OO)(DRDcA ) + (%1Ai l OO)(DRD1A)
= (78/1 00)(97.0 lb/ft3) + (22/ 1 00)(97.0 lb/ft3) = 97.0 lb/ft3
MccA+IA),OD = (CA fraction)(27 ft3/yd3)(DRDa g) = (0.65)(27
v
ft3/yd3)(97.0 lb/ft3 ) = 1 702 lb
McA.oD = (%CA! l OO)(MccA+IA),oo) (78/ 1 00)( 1 702 !b)
1 328 lb
M1A,OD = (%IA/ l OO)(AfccA+IA),oD) = (22/1 00)( 1 702 lb) = 374 lb
6.2.6.3 Conversion to CA mass, saturated surface-dry (to
express masses in saturated surface-dry terms ifdesired)
McA.sso (McA.oo)( l + Abs/ 1 00) = ( 1 328 lb)[ l + ( 1 .2/1 00)]
=
= 1 344 lb
M1A.sso = (M1A,oo)(l + Abs/ 1 00) = (374 lb) [ l + ( 1 . 51 1 00)] =
380 lb
6.2.6.4 Calculation of coarse aggregate and intermediate
aggregate absolute volumes
VcA.OD = McA,ooi(GcA,oo)(62.4 lb/ft3) = ( 1 328 lb)/(2. 6 1 0)
(62.4 lb/ft3) = 8 . 1 5 ft3
VIA,OD = MIA,ooi(GIA,oD)(62.4 lb/ft3)
= (374 lb)/(2.61 0)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 2.30 ft3
6.2.7 Determinefiber mass and volume-Not applicable.
6.2.8 Determinefine aggregate volume and mass
6.8.1 FA absolute volume
VFA,OD = 27 ft3 - [ Vwater + Vcm + Vjly ash + Vair + VcA,OD + VIA,OD]
= 27 - [3.64 + 2 .26 + 0.67 + 1 .76 + 8. 1 5 + 2.30] = 8.22 ft3
6.2.8.2 Calculation offine aggregate mass, oven-dry
MFA,OD = ( VFA,oo)(62.4 1blft3)( GFA, oo) = (8.22 ft3 )(62.4 lb/ft3)
(2.630) = 1 349 lb
6.2.8.3 Calculation of fine aggregate mass, saturated
surface-dry (to express masses in saturated surface-dry
terms ifdesired)
MFA,sso = (MFA,oo)( l + Abs/1 00) = ( 1 349 lb)( l + 0.911 00) =
1 3 6 1 lb
46 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

Table 6 . 2.8. 3-Summary of mixture proportions for

Example 2 50mm = 2"
37.5mm = 1 -1/2"

Component Amount "

20
i--i--+--+-Ht-t---+----<,_-+--t---:--H �::��� � �;�"
Water, lb 227 t
� 15
r; r--r--i-:--r--t,
:. ' m����=
�:�:�� � �6
Type I portland cement, lb 443 B
Gi .l, ,n., . o.soomm = #3o
0.300mm = #50
D.. 0.150mm = #100
Class C fly ash, lb Ill ii

� ui
10 0.075mm = #200

No. 6 limestone CA sso, lb 1 344

� l•
No. 89 limestone lA sso, lb 380 ; \ i
\ ;
Natural sand FA sso, lb 1 36 1 \i
: 1·112" : 314" 112" : #4 #8 116 #30 #50 #100 #200
Air-entraining agent, ft oz/1 00 lb total cementitious materials I 2" 1" 318" Sieve Size

Water-reducing admixture Type A, ft oz/1 00 lb total

7 Fig. 6. 2. 11 a-Individual percent retainedfor Example 2.
cementitious materials

WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART

The mixture proportions for Example 2 are shown in Table
6.2.8.3.

........ I l l
6.2.9 Adjustment of water content for water content of
admixtures
6.2.9.1 Choose admixture dosages-Typical air entrain­
ment admixture dosages are 3/4 to 3 ft oz/1 00 lb total
cementitious materials (TCM) and WRA dosages are 2 to
7 ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM. By local experience, use air entrain­
ment dosage of 1 ft oz/1 00 lb TCM and WRA dosage of 7 ft
oz/ 1 00 lb TCM.
v
6.2.9.2 Calculation of water content of admixture volume
and mass-Because the total admixture dosage of 8 ft oz/1 00
lb TCM is less than 1 0, the calculation ofbatch water adjust­
COARSENESS FACTOR
ment would be considered negligible; however, the steps are
shown in the following for completeness: Fig. 6. 2. 11 b-Coarseness factor chartfor Example 2.
Assuming 60 percent water content, 1 . 1 5 Gadmix for the air­
entraining admixture (AEA), and 1 .2 1 Gadmix for the WRA: WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART

Vadmix = (dosage)(MrcM/ 1 00)

w
z
VwRA = (7 ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM)(554 lb/yd3 TCM)( l gal./128 ft ii:

oz)( l ft3/7.5 gal.) = 0.040 ft3 t

w
!:::!
"'
w
Madmix water = ( Vadm;x)(Gadmix)(Pwater)(% water content ofadmixture) !;:;:
C)
w
<>:
C)
Mwater from WRA = (0.040 ft3)( 1 .2 1 )(62.4 lb/ft3)(0.60) = 1 .8 lb C)

f
w
IIAEA ( 1 ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM)(554 lb/yd3 TCM)( l gal./1 2 8
= ft "'
<>:
<(
oz)( l ft3/7.5 gal.) = 0.006 ft3 0
()

Mwater from AEA = (0.006 ft3)( 1 . 1 5)(62.4 lb/ft3)(0.60) = 0.2 lb 80 70 60 50 40

COARSENESS FACTOR

Mbatch water = Mwater - MWRA water - MAEA water = 227 lb - 1 . 8 lb Fig. 6. 2.llc-Air Force aggregate proportioning guide for
- 0.2 lb = 225 lb Example 2 (USAF 1997).

6.2.10 Adjustment ofbatch water contentfor aggregate mois­
ture content-This step is not a part of mixture proportioning,
rather, is performed in field production. For a full treatment,
ACI 2 1 1 . 1 should be consulted; the calculations will require
each aggregate's total moisture content and absorption.
6.2.11 Comments on mixture-The mixture is plotted in
Fig. 6.2. l l a. The gap in the grading around the No. 1 6 sieve
is nearly gone, compared to Example 1 . In Fig. 6.2. 1 1 b, the
mixture plots in Zone II, and in Fig. 6.2. l l c, the mixture is
above the slipform area, well away from any zone border.
The low w/cm and angular/rough CA of the mixture
should help the contractor achieve a high pay incentive
for strength. Compared to Example 1 , to achieve a high
smoothness incentive, the contractor made the mixture more
workable regarding slipform paving by using an optimized
aggregate grading and an SCM. Placement, consolidation,

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
and finishing should be improved, thus reducing tearing, low
spots, and hand-finishing.
6 . 3-Example 3 : City street, fixed-form, optimized
grading, sul fate soil, slag cement (U. S. customary
units)
A project for a two-lane city street with traffic levels of
average daily truck traffic (ADTT) of 400 and average daily
traffic (ADT) of 4000 is located in the Western United Sates
and thus is in Zone V (AASHTO 1 993). Exposure includes
freezing-and-thawing cycles and deicing salt. The slab will
be subjected to snow plowing. The soil is suspected to contain
a significant level of sulfate that will be mitigated with slag
cement. Optimized grading will be used that includes locally
available sand and crushed gravel aggregates. The batch
plant has sufficient aggregate bins and handling capabili­
ties for multiple aggregates. The pavement design calls for
a 7 in. thick unreinforced slab with round dowels and 1 5 ft
transverse joint spacing. The paving will be accomplished
using fixed forms. Local practice is to measure air content
in front of the paver. Experience with similar mixtures indi­
cates a loss during transport from the concrete plant via
transit mix truck is approximately 1 .0 percent. A mid-range
water-reducing admixture (MRWRA) will be used.
6.3.1 Solution: acquire required information-The required
project information is listed in Table 6.3 . 1 .
6.3.1.1 Preliminary testing-The soil was tested via
ASTM C 1 580, which showed that the sulfate level in the soil
was 1 .0 percent by weight of soil. ASTM C 1 0 1 2/C 1 0 1 2M
testing indicates that a 20 percent (by mass) replacement of
Type II cement with slag cement will control expansion.
Local experience indicates that there are no concerns
for aggregate freezing and thawing, abrasion deterioration,
or alkali-aggregate reactivity (AAR). The water supply is
potable, so no testing is required.
Compatibility testing was performed in accordance with
4.3.2 using semi-adiabatic calorimetry, mini-slump, and
mortar cube compressive strength of mixtures containing
the Type II cement, slag cement, and water-reducing aggre­
gate (WRA) sources at the temperature anticipated for the
project. No unusual behavior was observed. The testing
indicated that because slag cement is being used, slowing of
strength gain and set time will occur but should not be exces­
sive because of the modest cement replacement level and the
anticipated mild weather during construction.
6.3.1.2 Strategy-Freezing-and-thawing and deicer resis­
tance will be addressed by the city's maximum w!cm and by
air entrainment. Sulfate attack will be handled with Type II
cement and slag cement. The relatively hard coarse aggre­
gate (CA) should resist snowplow abrasion.
Prevention of midpanel cracking will be achieved through
the specified relatively short, 1 5 ft joint spacing; modest
concrete strength; low-friction base; and less cement paste
(optimized grading and greater CAproportion). Load transfer
will be addressed by the city-specified use of dowels, and by
reduction of contraction and shrinkage from a combination
of the specified short joint spacing plus material consider­
ations of coarse aggregate shrinkage restraint (increased
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
47
coarse aggregate content and hard aggregate), and by pres­
ervation of aggregate interlock (coarse aggregate abrasion
resistance and angularity).
The intermediate aggregate has a compact shape (fiat and
elongated = 0.0), so problems with locking up the mixture
should be negligible.
6.3.2 Estimation ofwater mass and volume
6.3.2.1 Base water content
6.3.2.1.1 Selection of slump-For fixed-form paving,
from Table 5 .4.3 . 1 . 1 , the target slump is 3 in. City specifica­
tion tolerances are ±1 in., so the upper end equals 4 in.
6.3.2.1.2 Selection of NMS-Locally available aggregate
nominal maximum size (NMS) equals 3/4 in., no aggregate
freezing-and-thawing issues, 7 in. thick slab, thus 7/3 =
2.33 in. is the maximum recommended NMS. No clearance
issues, no reinforcement, and 1 in. dowel clearance = (7 - 1
in.)/2 = 3 in. below dowels; therefore, 3/4 in. NMS is OK.
This size should assist with a workable mixture that mini­
mizes problems under the pan.
Table 5 .4.3 . 1 : Mbase water = 340 lb
The non-air-entrained part of the table is used; adjustment
for air entrainment will be discussed in 6.6.2.5.
6.3.2.2 Adjustment of water content for coarse aggregate
shape-Table 5 .4.3 . 1 is set up for cubical crushed stone;
therefore, for crushed gravel, reduce by 10 lb/ft3 •
6.3.2.3 Adjustment ofwater contentforfine aggregate shape
% VFA void content = [ 1 - (DRDFA/(GFA,OD)(Pwater))] X 1 00
= [ 1 - ( 1 04.0 lb/ft3/(2.480)(62.4 lb/ft3))] X 1 00 = 32.8%
MFAadj (water adjustment) = (-8 lb/yd3 )(35 - % VFA voidconte/11)=
(-8 lb/yd3)(35 - 32.8) = - 1 8 lb for rounded fine aggregate.
Alternatively, if fine aggregate dry-rodded density (DRD)
was not known, - 1 7 lb/yd3 could have been used.
6.3.2.4 Adjustment of water content for SCMs-For slag,
5 percent water reduction is anticipated.
6.3.2.5 Adjustment of water content for air entrain­
ment-From Table 5 .4 . 3 . 5 , percent water reduction
AEA adJ 1 0 percent.
=
6.3.2.6 Adjustment of water content for water-reducing
admixtures - For midrange water-reducing admixtures
(MRWRA), ACI 2 1 1 . 1 suggests 5 to 1 2 percent reduction;
from local experience, a WRAadJ = 1 0 percent is anticipated.
6.3.2.7 Adjustment of water content for fibers-Not
applicable.
6.3.2.8 Calculation affinal water mass and volume
Mvater = (Mbase water - McAadj - MFAadj - SFadj)(AEAadj)( WRAadj)
(SCMadJ) = (340 - 1 0 - 1 8 - 0 lb)(( l OO - 1 0)/ 100)(( 1 00 -
1 0)11 00)(( 1 00 - 5)1 1 00) = 240 lb
Check: % total water reduction = [(Mbase water - Mwa�e�)l
Mbase water] X 1 00 < 30%?
= [(340 - 240)/340] X 1 00 = 29% < 30% OK
�vater = Mwate/Gw)(Pwato.) = (240 lb)/(1 .000)(62.4 lb/ftl ) = 3.85 ftl
CaCiJ
48 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

Table 6 . 3. 1-Req uired information for Example 3

1 00

None None No. 4 46.3

Crushed Crushed
16 6.0
gravel

200 1 .6 200 2.0

No. 4

16

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 49

PC total eq. alkali content: Less than 0.6 or

Dry rodded density, lb/ft3 1 04.0
greater than or equal to 0.6 percent
SCM types: Class C, Class F, slag cement, silica Grade I 00 or 1 20 slag
Geologic type Silica 3/4
fume cement
ASR potential:
no: less than 0. I percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent None 1 12 SCM specific gravities 2.65
expansion;
maybe: 0. 1 to 0.2 percent

Particle shape: angular, cubical Rounded

crushed, crushed gravel, rounded natural
natural sand sand

Fineness modulus 2.97

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

50 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
6.3.3 Determine w!cm
6.3.3.1 Durability-From Table 5 .4.4. 1 , exposure to mois­
ture, freezing and thawing, and deicers: maximum w/cm
= 0.45. From Table 5 .4.4. 1 b, exposure to Class S2 severe
sulfate: maximum w/cm = 0.45.
6.3.3.2 Strength-City-specified average mixture design
strength 28-day modulus of rupture (MOR) = 550 psi; there
is no need for additional margin. The MOR (550 psi) is not
considered excessively high with respect to contribution
to excessive curling stress. In this case, by experience, the
contractor is confident that 550 psi can be achieved with the
job materials (coarse aggregate [CA] angular, smooth, hard,
and at the nominal maximum size [NMS] proposed).
From the strength-w/cm relationship (not shown) estab­
lished with project materials at the upper end of air content
tolerance: 550 psi corresponds to a w/cm = 0.4 1 .
6.3.3.3 Choice of controlling w/cm-Strength controls,
w/cm = 0.4 1 (meets city-specified maximum allowable
[0.45], maximum for durability [0.45]).
6.3.4 Calculation ofcementitious masses and volumes
Mcem = Mwate/wlcm = 240 lb/0.4 1 = 586 lb
Check city-specified minimum 565 lb total cementitious
content: 586 lb > 565 lb OK
Check Table 5.4.5. 1 a for minimum cement content, for NMS
= 3/4 in.: 586 lb > 540 lb OK
Slag cement is based on ASTM C 1 0 1 2/C 1 0 1 2M testing, 20
percent (by mass) will be used to mitigate sulfate attack.
Check for maximum recommended slag cement replace­
ment, Table 5.4.5. 1 b: up to 50 percent is OK.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
Portland cement (PC) mass Mcem = (% PC!l OO)(MrcM) =
(80/ 1 00)(586 lb) = 469 lb
Slag cement mass Mstag = (% slag cementll OO)(MrcM) =
(2011 00)(586 lb) = 1 1 7 lb
Vcm =
(Mcem)/(Gcem)(Pwater) = (469 lb)/(3. 1 5)(62.4 lb/ftl) = 2.39 ftl
Vslag = ( 1 1 7 lb)/(2.65)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 0.7 1 ft3
6.3.5 Determine air content-There is no air specifica­
tion from the city, so for severe exposure and NMS = 3/4
in., Table 5 .4.3 . 1 is used: 6.0 percent; use 6.0 percent as the
target; with target tolerances: 5.0 to 8.0 percent.
The PCA recommendation (EBOO 1 ) of proportioning is to
design the mixture at the upper end of the tolerance (target
+ 2.0 = 6.0 + 2.0 = 8.0 percent). The local practice is to
measure air in front of the paver. Local experience with this
mixture for loss in transit is approximately 1 .0 percent, thus
proportioning the mixture at 8.0 percent would allow for the
loss during transit.
Adjusted air volume = (0.08)(27 ft3/yd3) = 2. 1 6 ft3
6.3.6 Determine coarse aggregate mass and volume
6.3.6.1 Coarse aggregate fraction-From Table 5 .4.7. 1 ,
for NMS = 3/4 in. and fine aggregate fineness modulus (FM)
= 2.97, CA volume fraction = 0.60. For pavement, ACI 2 1 1 . 1
notes that CA volume can be increased by up to 1 0 percent.
By local experience with the available aggregate, increase
CA fraction by 1 0 percent:
CA fraction = (0.60)( 1 . 1 0)= 0.66
6.3.6.2 Calculation of coarse aggregate and intermediate
aggregate mass, oven-dry-By local experience, use 80
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
percent ASTM C33/C33M No. 67 CA and 20 percent No.
89 IA (by mass).
Average DRD = (%CA!l OO)(DRDcA ) + (%IAI1 00)(DRD1A)
= (80/1 00)( 1 0 1 .0 lb/ft3) + (20/1 00)(99 .0 lb/ft3) = 1 00.6 lb/ft3
M(CA+tA),OD = (CA fraction)(27 ft3/yd3)(DRDavg) = (0.66)(27
ft3/yd3)( 1 00.6 lb/ft3) = 1 802 lb
McA,OD = (%CN 100)(M(cA+IA),oo) = (80/1 00)(1 802 lb) = 1441 lb
MtA,OD = (20/1 00)( 1 802 lb) = 360 lb
6.3.6.3 Conversion to coarse aggregate and intermediate
aggregate mass, saturated surface-dry (to express masses in
saturated suiface-dry terms ifdesired)
McA.sso = (McA oo) [ 1 + (Abs/ 1 00)] = ( 1 441 lb)[ 1 + (0. 8/1 00)]
.
= 1453 lb
M,A,sso = (M,A, oo)[1 + (Abs/ 1 00)] = (360 lb)[1 + (0.811 00)]
= 363 lb
6.3.6.4 Calculation of coarse aggregate and intermediate
aggregate absolute volumes
VcA.oo = McA,ooi(GcA,oo)(62.4 lblft3) = 1 44 1 lb/(2.740)(62.4
lb/ft3) = 8.43 ft3
v,A,OD = MIA, ad(G,A,Oo)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 360 lb/(2. 740)(62.4 lb/ft3)
= 2. 1 1 ft3
6.3.7 Determinefiber mass and volume-Not applicable.
6.3.8 Determinefine aggregate volume and mass
6.3.8.1 Fine aggregate absolute volume
VFA = 27 ft3 - [ 1/;vater + Vcm + Vfly ash + V,;r + VcA.OD + v,A,OD]
= 27 - [3.85 + 2.39 + 0.71 + 2 . 1 6 + 8.43 + 2. 1 1 ] = 7.35 ft3
6.3.8.2 Calculation affine aggregate mass, oven-dry
MFA,OD = ( VFA,oo)(62.4 lblft3 )(GFA,oo) = (7.35 ft3 )(62.4 lb/ft3)
(2.480) = 1 1 3 7 lb
6.3.8.3 Calculation of fine aggregate mass, saturated
suiface-dry (to express masses in saturated surface-dry
terms if desired)
MFA.sso = (MFA,oo)[1 + (Abs/1 00)] = ( 1 1 3 7 lb)[1+ (2.711 00)]
= 1 1 68 lb
The mixture proportions for Example 3 are shown in Table
6.3.8.3.
6.3.9 Adjustment of water content for water content of
admixtures
6.3.9.1 Choose admixture dosages-Typical air entrainment
admixture dosages are 3/4 to 3 ft oz/100 lb total cementitious
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
51
Table 6 . 3 .8.3-Summary of mixture proportions for
Example 3
Component Amount
Water, lb 240
Type II portland cement, lb 469
Slag cement, lb 117
No. 67 crushed gravel CAssD, lb 1 453
No. 89 crushed gravel IAssD, lb 363
Natural sand FAssD, lb 1 1 68
Air entraining agent, fl oz/1 00 lb total
I
cementitious materials
M id-range water-reducing admixture Type A,
10
fl oz/1 00 lb total cementitious materials
materials (TCM). B y local experience, use air entrainment
dosage of 1 ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM and midrange water-reducing
admixture (MRWRA) dosage of 1 0 ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM.
6.3.9.2 Calculation ofwater content ofadmixtures volume
and mass-Because the total admixture dosage of 1 1 ft
oz/ 1 00 lb TCM is more than 1 0, the calculation of batch
water adjustment would be considered significant.
Assuming 60 percent water content, 1 . 1 5 Gadmix for the air­
entraining admixture (AEA), and a 1 .2 1 Gadmix for the WRA:
Vadmix = (dosage)(MrcM! l 00)
VwRA = ( 1 0 ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM)(586 lb/yd3 TCM)( l gaL/ 128 ft
oz)( 1 ft3/7.5 gaL) = 0.06 1 ft3
Madmix water = ( Vadmix)(Gadmix)(Pwater)(% water content ofadmixture)
MwRA water from MRWRA = (0.061 ft3)( 1 .2 1 )(62.4 lb/ft3)
(0.60) = 2.8 lb
V4EA = ( 1 ft oz/ 1 00 lb TCM)(586 lb/yd3 TCM)( l gaL/1 28 ft
oz)( 1 ft3/7.5 gaL) = 0.006 ft3
MAEA water from AEA = (0.006 ft3)(1 . 1 5)(62.4 lb/ft3)(0.60) =
0.2 lb
Mbatch water = Mwater - MWRA water - MAEA water = 240 lb - 2.8 lb
- 0.2 lb = 237 lb
6.3.10 Adjustment of batch water content for aggregate
moisture content-This step is not a part of mixture propor­
tioning, rather, is performed in field production. For a full
treatment, refer to ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ; adjustment of batch water
content for aggregate moisture content will require each
aggregate's total moisture content and absorption.
6.3.11 Comments on mixture-The mixture is plotted in
Fig. 6.3. 1 1 a, where the grading plots fairly well within the
recommended boundaries. In Fig. 6.3 . 1 1 b, the mixture plots
in Zone II. In Fig. 6.3. 1 1 c, the mixture plots a little above the
fixed-form area.
52 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

able siliceous sand and crushed gravel aggregates will be

50mm = 2"
37.5mm"' 1-112"
used. The coarse aggregate (CA) is suspected to be prone
to alkali-silica reaction (ASR). The paving will be accom­
plished using slipform paving. Specifications call for air to
be measured in front of the paver. Experience with similar
mixtures indicates a loss during transport from the portable
central mixing plant via dump trucks is approximately 1 .0
percent. The plant will have several silos available. The
weather during placement will be cool. The required project
information is listed in Table 6.4. 1 .
6.4.1 Solution: gather required information
: 1-112" : 3/4" 112" : #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200
2" 1" 3/8" SiAVA Si7A 6.4.1.1 Preliminary testing-The ASR mitigation proce­
dure outlined in 4. 1 . 1 .2 was followed. ASTM C 1 260 mortar
Fig. 6. 3. 11 a-Individual percent retainedfor Example 3. bar expansion testing indicated an expansion of 0 . 1 5 percent
for both the coarse aggregate (CA) and fine aggregate
WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART
(FA), which placed the aggregate in a potential reactivity
category. Hence, various combinations of mitigating SCMs
and replacement levels were evaluated via ASTM C 1 567 as
'"
"'
.. 40
modified by FAA (28-day, not 1 4-day, soaking) (FAA 2009a).
]i A 30 percent by mass replacement of Type II cement with a
{2
i 35 t--+---r����-r-�
.; low CaO (less than 1 0 percent) Class F fly ash was found to
0..
successfully mitigate the expansion to below 0. 1 0 percent.
The 30 percent replacement is considered borderline high.
The matching of fly ash to the project requirements followed
v 4.3 .4. Early opening time was not a critical consideration
but weather during construction was to be cool, so a fine fly
20 �-+--�-�--+-�--�-+--+--�-�
ash was sought and special curing procedures such as wet­
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
extended was recommended. To avoid air void requirement
COARS�NESS FACTOR
problems, the loss on ignition (LOI) of the fly ash is recom­
Fig. 6.3. 11 b-Coarseness factor chart for Example 3. mended to be at least moderate (2 to 6 percent) and prefer­
ably low (less than 2 percent).
WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART Local experience indicates there are no concerns for aggre­
gate freezing-and-thawing or abrasion deterioration. The
water supply is potable, so no testing is required. Compat­
w
z
ii:
ibility testing was performed in accordance with 4.3.2 using
t semi-adiabatic calorimetry, mini-slump, and mortar cube
w
!::! compressive strength of mixtures containing the cement, fly
"'
w
... ash, and water-reducing admixture (WRA) sources at the
..
(!)
w temperature anticipated for the project. No unusual behavior
0::
(!)
(!)
was observed beyond the expected slower strength gain and
: setting time.
w
"' 6.4.1.2 Strategy-Freezing-and-thawing and deicer resis­
0::
..
0
tance will be addressed by the FAA's specified air content
u
and maximum w/cm (FAA 2009a); ASR mitigation will be
80 70 60 50 40
provided by the Type II cement and Class F fly ash. The hard
COARSENESS FACTOR
CA should resist snow plow abrasion.
Fig. 6. 3. 11 c-Air Force aggregate proportioning chart for Prevention of midpanel cracking will be achieved
Example 3 (USAF 1997). through the specified relatively short, 20 ft joint spacing;
modest concrete strength; a low-friction base; and the
6 . 4-Example 4 : Airfield, slipform, traditional contractor's choice of greater CA proportion. Load
grading, alkali-silica reaction aggregate, Class F transfer will be addressed by the FAA-specified use of
fly ash (U. S. customary units) dowels (FAA 2009b ), and by reduction of contraction and
An airfield runway project is located in the Central shrinkage from a combination of the specified short joint
Western United States and, thus, is in Zone V (AASHTO spacing plus material considerations of coarse aggregate
1 993). Exposure includes freezing-and-thawing cycles and shrinkage restraint (increased coarse aggregate content
deicing salt. The slab will be subjected to snowplowing. The and hard aggregate), and by preservation of aggregate
pavement design calls for a 16 in. thick unreinforced slab interlock (coarse aggregate abrasion resistance and
with 20 ft joint spacing and round dowels. Locally avail- angularity).

cCiC'iJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325.14R-17) 53

Table 6 . 4 .1-Required information for Example 4

Project """' "'" ..v"
nav� ... .., type: (new, overlay, patching)
� New
High: ASR expansion testing and compatability testing of the PC, fly ash,
Importance of proj ect: (high, medium, low)
and WRA is recommended

Materials
Coarse aggregate Grading Intermediate Aggregate No. I Grading
Specific gravity (oven-dry) 2.574 Size Passing, % Specific gravity �uv�n-u•yJ 2.740 Size Passing, %
Specific gravity (saturated surface-dry) 2.600 2 Specific gravity (saturated ourfu�· ·uoyJ 2
Absorption, % 1 .0 1 - 1 /2 Absorption, % 1 - 1/2
Dry rodded density, lb/ft3 1 00.0 I 1 00 Dry rodded density, lb/ft3 I
Flat and elongated, % 0 3/4 95 Flat and elonP"aterl, % 3/4
Siliceous
Geologic type 1/2 53 Geologic type 1/2
gravel
D-cracking potential None 3/8 25 n. .0 potential 3/8
ASR potential: ASR potential:
no: less than 0. 1 percent expansion; no: less than 0 . 1 percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent Maybe No. 4 5 yes: greater than 0.2 percent No. 4
expansion; expansion;
maybe: 0. 1 to 0.2 percent maybe: 0. I to 0.2 percent
Loose density, lb/ft3 8 3 Loose density, lb/ft3 8
Particle shape: angular, cubical Particle shape: angular, cubical
Crushed
crushed, crushed gravel, rounded 16 2.5 crushed, crushed gravel, rounded 16
gravel
gravel gravel
Los Angeles abrasion 23 30 2.2 Los Angeles abrasion 30
50 2 50
1 00 .7 1 00
1 .5 200

' •
uu�uuCUiat� •0gre),u": No. 2 ...
lnte1 �u;m� "'!;!;'�!;""' No. 3
Specific gravity (oven-dry) Size Passing, % Specific gravity (uv�u-Uij) Size Passing, %
Specific gravity (saturated Specific gravity (saturated
2 2
surface-dry) surface-dry)
Absorption, % 1 - 1 12 •uouifHIUII, o/o 1 - 112
Dry rodded density, lb/ft3 I Dry rodded density, lb/ft3 I
Flat and elongated, % 3/4 Flat and elongated, % 3/4
Geologic type 112 Geologic type 112
D-cracking potential 3/8 n ·o potential 3/8
ASR potential: ASR potential:
no: less than 0. 1 percent expansion; no: less than 0 . 1 percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent No. 4 yes: greater than 0.2 percent No. 4
expansion; expansion;
maybe: 0. 1 to 0.2 percent maybe: 0. I to 0.2 percent
Loose density, lb/ft3 8 Loose density, lb/ft3 8
Particle shape: angular, cubical Particle shape: angular, cubical
crushed, crushed gravel, rounded 16 crushed, crushed gravel, rounded 16
gravel gravel
Los Angeles abrasion 30 Los Angeles abrasion 30
50 50
1 00 1 00
200 200

Fine """r""atte PC, SCMs, admixtures, and water

Specific gravity (oven-dry) 2.624 Size Cement type II

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

54 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

PC total eq. alkali content: Less than 0.6 or

Dry rodded density, lb/ft3 1 06.3 0.5
greater than or equal to 0.6 percent
SCM types: Class C, Class F, slag cement, silica
Geologic type Silica 3/4 Class F fly ash
fume
ASR potential:
no: less than 0 . 1 percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent Maybe 1 /2 SCM specific gravities 2.80
expansion;
maybe: 0. 1 to 0.2 percent

Particle shape: angular, cubical Subangular

crushed, crushed gravel, rounded natural O. I S (Iow)
natural sand sand

9 . 1 percent (low)

Fineness modulus 2.89

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
6.4.2 Estimation ofwater mass and volume
6.4.2.1 Base water content
6.4.2.1.1 Selection of slump-For slipform paving, from
Table 5 .4.3 . 1 . 1 , the target slump is 1 - 1 /2 in. Specifications
are ±1 in. ; however, the decision is to design at 1 - 1/2 in. for
proportioning.
6.4.2.1.2 Selection of NMS-Locally available crushed
gravel coarse aggregate NMS = 3/4 in. ; no aggregate
freezing-and-thawing issues; 1 6 in. thick slab, thus 1 6/3 = 5.3
in. is the maximum recommended NMS; no clearance issues;
no reinforcement; and 1- 1/4 in. dowel clearance = ( 1 6 - 1-1/4
in.)/2 = 7-3/8 in. below dowels). So, 3/4 in. NMS is OK. This
size should assist with a workable mixture that minimizes
problems under the pan, and along with the gravel CA, should
result in reasonable mixing times for central-mix operations.
From Table 5 .4. 3 . 1 , Mbase water = 3 1 5 lb
The non-air-entrained part of the table is used; adjustment
for air entrainment will be handled in 6.6.2.5.
6.4.2.2 Adjustment of water content for coarse aggregate
shape-Table 5 .4. 3 . 1 is set up for cubical crushed stone;
hence, for crushed gravel, reduce by 1 0 lb/ft3 .
6.4.2.3 Adjustment ofwater contentforfine aggregate shape
% VFA void content = [1 - (DRDFA/(GFA,OD)(Pwater))] X 1 00
= [ 1 - ( 1 06.3 lb/ft3/(2.624)(62.4 lb/ft3))] X 100 = 3 5 . 1 %
MFAadj (water adjustment) = (-8 lb/yd3)(35 - % VFA void content)
= (-8 lb/yd3)(35 - 3 5 . 1 ) = zero lb for sub-angular FA
6.4.2.4 Adjustment of water content for SCMs-For fly
ash, a 5 percent water reduction is anticipated.
6.4.2.5 Adjustment of water content for air entrain­
m ent-From Table 5 . 4 . 3 . 5 , percent water reduction AEA adJ
= 1 1 percent.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
55
S = 50 psi, N = 30
MOR-wlcm relationship available
6.4.2.6 Adjustment of water content for water-reducing
admixtures-For normal-range water-reducing admixtures
(NRWRAs), ACI 2 1 1 . 1 suggests 5 to 1 0 percent reduction;
from local experience, a WRAadJ = 8% is anticipated.
6.4.2.7 Adjustment ofwater contentforfibers-Not applicable.
6.4.2.8 Calculation affinal water mass and volume
Uvater = (Mbase water - McAadj - MFAadj - SFadj)(AEAadj)(WRAadj)
(SCMad;) = (3 1 5 - 1 0 - 0 - 0 lb)(( 1 00 - 1 1 )11 00)(( 1 00 -
8)/1 00)(( 1 00 - 5)/1 00) = 237 lb
Check: % total water reduction = [(Mbase water - Mwa�e�·)/
Mbase water] X 1 00 < 3 0%?
= [(3 1 5 - 23 7)/3 1 5 ] X 1 00 = 25% < 3 0% OK
V.vater = Uvate/Gw)(Pwater) = (237 lb)/(1 .000)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 3 . 80 ft3
6.4.3 Determine w!cm
6.4.3.1 Durability-From Table 5 .4.4. 1 , exposure to
moisture, freezing and thawing, and deicers:
Maximum w/cm = 0.45
Specified maximum w!cm = 0.45
6.4.3.2 Strength
Specified thickness design strength = 650 psi
Specified minimum acceptance strength = (0.95)(thickness
design strength) = (0.95)(650 psi) = 6 1 8 psi
The contractor desires a 1 05 percent pay factor. To achieve
1 05 percent, the average mixture design strength should be
greater than the acceptance strength by a certain overde­
sign. To arrive at the overdesign, from FAA (2009a), a 95
percent within limits (PWL) should be accomplished. From
FAA (2009a), assuming four quality control tests per lot,
the Q-value necessary would be 1 .35. The average mixture
design strength is then calculated from:
56 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
MORavg = QS + L
where Q is lower quality index; S is standard deviation of the
contractor's historical strengths = 50 psi (N = 30, no adjust­
ment); L is lower specification limit = (0.93)(acceptance
strength) = (0.93)(6 1 8 psi) = 575 psi; MORavg = QS + L =
( 1 .35)(50) + 575 = 643 psi (round to 645 psi).
The MOR (645 psi) is not considered excessively high
regarding contribution to excessive curling stress. In this
case, by experience, the contractor is confident that 645 psi
can be achieved with the job materials (CA angular, smooth,
hard, and at the NMS proposed). From the strength-w/cm
relationship (not shown) established at upper end of the air
content tolerance: 645 psi corresponds to a w/cm = 0.43.
6.4.3.3 Choice of controlling w/cm-Strength controls,
w/cm = 0.43 (meets FAA-specified maximum allowable
[0.45] [FAA 2009a] , maximum for durability [0.45], and
includes desired level of confidence).
6.4.4 Calculation ofcementitious masses and volumes
Mcem = Mwate,Jw/cm = 237 lb/0.43 = 5 5 1 lb
Check specified minimum 564 lb total cementitious content:
5 5 1 lb < 564 lb; use 564 lb.
Increasing the cementitious content will also help with
cool-weather early strength issues.
Check Table 5 .4.5 . 1 a for minimum cement content, for NMS
= 3/4 in. : 564 lb > 540 lb OK.
Check for maximum recommended slag cement replace­
ment (Table 5.4.5. 1b): up to 30 percent is OK.
Portland cement mass Mcem = (% PC/l OO)(MrcM) = (70/ 1 00)
(564 lb) = 395 lb
Fly ash mass Mfly ash= (% fly ash/ l OO)(MrcM) = (301 1 00)
(564 lb) = 1 69 lb
Vcm = (Mcem)/(Gcem)(Pwater) = (395 lb)/(3. 1 5)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 2.01 ft3
Vs/ag = ( 1 69 lb)/(2. 80)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 0.97 ft3
6.4.5 Determine air content-For severe exposure and
NMS = 3/4 in., FAA specifies: 6.0 percent (FAA 2009a),
use 6.0 percent as the target; with job tolerances: 4.8 to 7.2
percent.
The PCA recommendation (EBOO 1 ) of proportioning is
to design the mixture at the upper end of the job tolerance
(target + 1 .2 = 6.0 + 1 .2 = 7.2 percent). The specification is
to measure air in front of the paver. Past experience with this
type of mixture for transit loss is approximately 1 .0 percent;
thus, proportioning the mixture at 7.2 percent would allow
for the loss during transit (7 .2 - 1 .0 = 6.2 > 6.0 percent).
The loss on ignition (LOI) of the fly ash is low (0. 1 5),
so LOI will not be an impediment to achieving proper air
content.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
Adjusted air volume = (0.072)(27 ft3/yd3) = 1 .94 ft3
6.4.6 Determine coarse aggregate mass and volume
6.4.6.1 Coarse aggregate fraction From Table 5 .4.7. 1 ,
-
for NMS = 3/4 in. and fine aggregate FM = 2.89, CA volume
fraction = 0.6 1 . For pavement, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 notes that CA
volume can be increased by up to 1 0 percent. By local expe­
rience with the available aggregate, increase CA fraction by
8 percent:
CA fraction = (0. 6 1 )( 1 .08) = 0.66
6.4.6.2 Calculation of CA mass, oven-dry
McA.OD = (CA fraction)(27 ft3/yd3)(DRDcA ) = (0.66)(27 ft3/
yd3 )( 1 00.0 lb/ft3) = 1 782 lb
6.4.6.3 Conversion to coarse aggregate mass, saturated
surface-dry (to express masses in saturated surface-dry
terms if desired)
McA,SSD = (McA.oo)[1 + (Abs/1 00)] = ( 1 782 lb) [ 1 + ( 1 .011 00)]
= 1 799 lb
6.4.6.4 - Calculation ofcoarse aggregate absolute volume
VcA.OD = McA,ooi(GcA.oo)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 1 782 lb/(2.574)(62.4
lb/ft3) = 1 1 .09 ft3
6.4.7 Determinefiber mass and volume Not applicable.
-
6.4.8 Determinefine aggregate volume and mass
6.4.8.1 Fine aggregate absolute volume
VFA = 27 ft3 - [ V,vater + VC/11 + Vjly ash + V,;r + VcA,OD] = 27 -
[3.80 + 2 . 0 1 + 0.97 + 1 .94 + 1 1 .09] = 7 . 1 9 ft3
6.4.8.2 Calculation offine aggregate mass, oven-dry
MFA.OD = ( VFA,oo)(62.4 lblft3)(GFA.oo) = (7. 1 9 ft3)(62.4 lb/ft3)
(2.624) = 1 1 77 lb
6.4.8.3 Calculation of fine aggregate mass, saturated
surface-dry (to express masses in saturated surface-dry
terms if desired)
MFA,sso = (MFA.oo)[1 + (Abs/ 1 00)] = ( 1 1 77 lb) [ 1 + ( 1 .011 00)]
= 1 1 8 9 lb
The mixture proportions for Example 4 are shown in Table
6.4.8.3.
6.4.9 Adjustment of water content for water content of
admixtures
6.4.9.1 Choose admixture dosages-Typical air entrain­
ment admixture dosages are 3/4 to 3 fl oz/1 00 lb total
cementitious material (TCM). By local experience, use air
entrainment dosage of 1 fl oz/1 00 lb TCM and WRA dosage
of 1 1 fl oz/1 00 lb TCM.
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 57

Table 6 . 4 .8.3-Summary of mixture proportions for

Example 4
Component Amount

Water, lb 237

Type II portland cement, lb 395

Class F fly ash, lb 1 69

3/4 in. crushed gravel CA sso, lb 1 799

Natural sand FA sso, lb 1 1 89

Air entraining agent, ft oz/1 00 lb TCM I

' 1-112" : 314" 112" : #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200
WRA Type A, ft oz/1 00 lb TCM II 2" 1" 318" SiAVASi7A

Fig. 6. 4. 11 a-Individual percent retainedfor Example 4.

6.4.9.2 Calculation ofwater content ofadmixtures volume
and mass-Because the total admixture dosage of 1 2 fl WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART
oz/ 1 00 lb TCM is more than 1 0, the calculation of batch
water adjustment would be considered significant.
Assuming 60 percent water content, 1 . 1 5 Gadmix for the air­
entraining admixture (AEA), and a 1 .2 1 Gadmix for the WRA:
. . .-
· ··
··
Ill

Vadmix = (dosage)(MrcM/1 00)

VwRA = ( 1 1 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM)(564 lb/yd3 TCM) ( l gal./1 2 8 ft

oz)( l ft3/7. 5 gal.) = 0.065 ft3 v
Madmix water = ( Vadmix)(Gadmix)(Pwater)(% water content ofadmixture)
20 �-+--�-�--+--4--�-+--�-�
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
Mvater from WRA = (0.065 ft3)(1 .2 1 )(62.4 lb/ft3)(0.60) = 2.9 lb COARSENESS FACTOR

VAEA = (1 fl oz/100 lb TCM)(564 lb/yd3 TCM)( 1 gal./1 2 8 fl Fig. 6. 4. 11 b-Coarseness factor chartfor Example 4.
oz)( l ft3/7. 5 gal.) = 0.006 ft3
WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART

Mvater from AEA = (0.006 ft3)(1 . 1 5)(62.4 lb/ft3)(0.60) = 0.2 lb 45

w
Mbatch water = Mwater - MwRA water - MAEA water = 237 lb - 2.9 lb
z
ii:
40
- 0.2 lb = 234 lb t IX
w
t:l �
"' u
w 35 it
6.4.1 0 Adjustment of batch water content for aggregate >-
o(
Cl �..J
moisture content-This step is not a part of mixture propor­ w
0:: iii
Cl
tioning, but rather is performed in field production. For a Cl 30 �
IX
full treatment, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 should be consulted; the calcula­ f �
w
tions will require each aggregate 's total moisture content and "'
0::
25
o(
absorption. 0
u
6.4.11 Comments on the mixture-The mixture is plotted 20
80 70 60 50 40 30
in Fig. 6.4. 1 1 a. The gap in the grading on the No. 8 sieve
COARSENESS FACTOR

should be noted. In Fig. 6.4. 1 1 b, the mixture plots in Zone

II. In Fig. 6.4. 1 1 c, the mixture is not in the slipform area A .
The proportions o f the mixture components may be able to
be changed, or different or supplemental aggregate products
may be introduced to move the plotted point away from the
Zone I-II interface.
To achieve a higher smoothness adjustment, the mixture
may need to be more workable with respect to slipform
paving, so the contractor should consider the use of optimized
aggregate grading, and possibly reduction of the CA content.
Fig. 6. 4.11c-Air Force aggregate proportioning chart for
Example 4 (USAF 1997).
6 .5-Example 5 : Parking lot, laser-guided screed,
optimized grading, fibers (U.S. customary units)
A parking lot project is located in the Southeastern United
States, and thus is in Zone I (AASHTO 1 993). Freezing-and­
thawing, deicer, and sulfate exposure is considered negligible.
The slab will be 6 in. thick with a 12.5 ft joint spacing; plate
dowels will be used. Locally available sand and gravel aggre-
gates will be used and have no record of alkali-silica reac­
tion (ASR) problems. Three gravel products will be used in

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org cCiC'iJ

58 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
the optimized grading. The batch plant has sufficient bins for
several aggregates. The client is sensitive to cracking issues,
so polypropylene macrosynthetic fibers will be used. The
paving will be accomplished using a laser-guided screed.
The engineer requires a minimum acceptable compressive
strength at 28 days of 3500 psi, standard-cured cast cylinders.
The required project information is listed in Table 6.5. 1 .
6.5. 1 Solution: acquire required information
6.5.1.1 Preliminary testing-Local experience indicates
there are no concerns for aggregate freezing-and-thawing
deterioration or alkali-aggregate reactivity (AAR) or
sulfate attack, and the water supply is potable, so no testing
is required.
6.5.1.2 Strategy-Prevention ofmidpanel cracking will be
achieved through the specified relatively short, 12.5 ft joint
spacing; modest concrete strength; a low-friction base; and
less paste shrinkage from the optimized grading and greater
coarse aggregate (CA) proportion. Load transfer will be
addressed by the use of dowels, by reduction of contraction
and shrinkage from a combination of the specified short joint
spacing plus material considerations of coarse aggregate
shrinkage restraint (increased coarse aggregate content and
relatively hard aggregate), and by preservation of aggregate
interlock (coarse aggregate abrasion resistance). The inter­
mediate aggregate has a compact shape (flat and elongated =
0.0); therefore, problems with locking up the mixture should
be negligible.
6.5.2 Estimation ofwater mass and volume
6.5.2.1 Base water content
6.5.2.1.1 Selection of slump-For laser-guided paving,
from Table 5.4.3 . 1 . 1 , the target slump is 4 in. The owner's
specification is ±1 in.; however, by experience, the decision
is to design at 4 in. for proportioning.
6.5.2.1.2 Selection of nominal maximum size-Locally
available gravel coarse aggregate nominal maximum size
(NMS) essentially equal to 1 - 1 /2 in.; no aggregate freezing­
and-thawing issues; 6 in. thick slab, thus, 6/3 = 2 in. is the
maximum allowable NMS; no clearance issues; no rein­
forcement, and plate dowel clearance of 1 - 1/2 in. NMS OK
for 6 in. slabs.
Therefore, 1 - 1 /2 in. NMS is OK. From Table 5 .4.3 . 1 :
M&ase water = 300 lb. The non-air-entrained part of Table
5 .4.3 . 1 is used.
6.5.2.2 Adjustment of water content for coarse aggregate
shape-Table 5 .4.3 . 1 is set up for cubical crushed stone,
hence, for a well-rounded gravel, reduce water by 20 lb/ft3 .
6.5.2.3 Adjustment of water content for fine aggregate
shape-No DRDFA data, so for a well-rounded natural sand,
assume - 1 7 lb/ft3 .
6.5.2.4 Adjustment of water content for supplementary
cementitious materials-No supplementary cementitious
materials (SCMs); use 0 percent water reduction.
6.5.2.5 Adjustment ofwater contentfor air entrainment­
Not air entrained: AEAadj = 0 percent.
6.5.2.6 Adjustment of water content for water-reducing
admixtures-Only sufficient water-reducing admixture
(WRA) will be added to counterbalance the effect of fibers;
thus, no reduction of water for WRA .
(ciCiJ American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
6.5.2.7 Adjustment ofwater content forfibers-Not appli­
cable. Water demand will be satisfied by the WRA.
6.5.2.8 Calculation offinal water mass and volume
Mwater = (Mbase wato· - McAadj - MFAadj - SFad)(AEAad)(WRAad)
(SCMad) = (300 - 20 - 1 7 - 0 lb)(( 1 00 - 0)11 00)(( 1 00 -
0)/ 1 00) (( 1 00 - 0)/100) = 263 lb
Check: % total water reduction = [(M&ase water - Mwater)l
Mbase water] X 1 00 < 3 0%?
= [(300 - 263)/300] X 1 00 = 1 2% < 30% OK
Vwato· = Mwate/Gw)(Pwater) = (263 lb)/( l .000)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 4.22 ft3
6.5.3 Determine w/cm
6.5.3.1 Durability-Exposure is negligible.
6.5.3.2 Strength-Specified minimum fc' = 3500 psi. The
historical dataset for this mixture from the plant where the
mixture will be hatched has at least 30 data points; therefore,
adjustment of the standard deviation (S) will not be necessary.
To calculate target mixture strength:
Forfc' < 5000 psi, the larger of the following will govern:
fc,' = fc' + 1 .34(S) = 3500 + 1 .34(400) = 4048 psi
fc,' = fc' + 2.33(S) - 500 = 3500 + 2.33(400) - 500 = 3953 psi
thus, 4048 psi controls (round to 4050 psi)
If using modulus of rupture (MOR) thickness design
tables, estimate MOR at the mixture target strength:
MOR = kYfc'; assume k = 8 for gravel:
=8.Y4050 = 509 psi; round to 5 1 0 psi (typical range approxi­
mately 5 00 to 700 psi) OK
The MOR (5 1 0 psi) is not considered excessively high
regarding contribution to excessive curling stress. In this
case, by experience, the contractor is confident that 5 1 0 psi
can be achieved with the job materials (CA angular, smooth,
hard, and at the NMS proposed).
From established strength-w/cm relationship (not shown):
4050 psi corresponds to a w/cm = 0.5 1
6.5.3.3 Choice of controlling w/cm-Strength controls,
w/cm = 0.5 1 (no specified maximum allowable, maximum
for durability not applicable, and includes desired level of
confidence).
6.5.4 Calculation of cementitious masses and volumes
Mcem = Mwate,.lw/cm = 263 lb/0.5 1 = 5 1 6 lb
Check Table 5.4.5 . 1 a for minimum cementitious content, for
NMS = 1 - 1/2 in. : 5 1 6 lb > 470 lb OK
Vcm = (Mcem)/(Gcem)(Pwater) = (5 16 lb)/(3. 1 5)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 2.62 ft3
6.5.5 Determine air content-From Table 5 .4.3 . 1 ,
entrapped air content is estimated at 1 percent.
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325.14R-17) 59

Table 6 .5 .1-Required information for Example 5

None No. 4 0 None No. 4 4.2

Well­ Well­
rounded 16 rounded 16 0
gravel

1/2

No. 4

16

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

60 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

PC total eq. alkali content: Less than 0.6 or

Dry rodded density, lb/ft3
greater than or equal to 0.6 percent
SCM types: Class C, Class F, slag cement, silica
Geologic type Silica 3/4
fume
ASR potential:
no: less than 0 . 1 percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent None 1 12 SCM specific gravities
expansion;
maybe: 0. 1 to 0.2 percent

Particle shape: angular, cubical Well-

crushed, crushed gravel, rounded rounded No. 4 99.9
natural sand naturnl sand

Fineness modulus 2.39

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
Air volume = (0.01)(27 ft3/yd3) = 0.27 ft3
6.5.6 Determine coarse aggregate mass and volume
6.5.6.1 Coarse aggregate fraction-From Table 5 .4. 7. 1 ,
for NMS = 1 - 1/2 in. and fine aggregate FM = 2.39, CA
volume fraction = 0.75. For pavement, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 notes that
CA volume can be increased by up to 1 0 percent. By local
experience with the available aggregate, increase CA frac­
tion by 4 percent:
CA fraction = (0.75)( 1 .04) = 0.78
6.5.6.2 Calculation of coarse aggregate and Intermediate
aggregate mass, oven-dry-By local experience, use 1 3
percent ASTM C33/C33M No. 4 CA, 6 0 percent No. 57 inter­
mediate aggregate (lA) , and 27 percent No. 89 lA (by mass).
DRDavg = (%CA/1 00)(DRDcA ) + (%1Ail OO) (DRD!A l ) +
(%1Ail OO)(DRDIA2) = ( 1 3/ 1 00)(90.0 lb/ft3) + (60/1 00)(92.0
lb/ft3) + (2711 00)(94.0 lb/ft3) = 92.3 lb/ft3
MeA + IA l +IA2,0D = (CA fraction)(27 ft3/yd3)(DRDavg) = (0.78)
(27 ft3/yd3 )(92.3 lb/ft3) = 1 949 lb
McA. OD = (%CA/ 1 00)(McA+IA,oD) = ( 1 3/100)( 1 949 lb) = 253 lb
MIAI,OD = (60/ 1 00)( 1 949 lb) = 1 1 69 lb
MIA2,0D = (27/ 1 00)( 1 949 lb) = 526 lb
6.5.6.3 Conversion to coarse aggregate and intermediate
aggregate mass, saturated surface-dry (to express masses in
saturated surface-dry terms ifdesired)
McA.SSD = (McA.oD) [ 1 + (Abs/ 1 00)] = (253 lb) [ 1 + (4.011 00)]
= 263 lb
MIAI,SSD = (MIAI,oD)[1 + (Abs/1 00)] = ( 1 1 69 lb)[1 + (4.011 00)]
= 1 2 1 6 lb
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
61
S = 400 psi, N = 30
Strength-w/cm relationship available
MIA2,ssD = (M!A2,oD)[1 + (Abs/1 00)] = (526 lb) [ 1 + (4.0/1 00)]
= 547 lb
6.5.6.4 Calculation of coarse aggregate and intermediate
aggregate absolute volumes
VcA. OD = McA,OD/( GcA.oD)(62.4 lb/ft3) = (253 lb)/(2.420)(62.4
lb/ft3) = 1 . 68 ft3
VIAI ,OD = MIAI,OD/(GIAI ,OD)(62.4 lblft3) = 1 1 69 lb/(2.420)(62.4
lb/ft3) = 7.74 ft3
VIA2,0D = MIA2,oDI(GIA2,oD)(62.4 lb/ft3) = 526 lb/(2.420)(62.4
lb/ft3) = 3 .48 ft3
6.5.7 Determinefiber mass and volume
% dosage = (1 OO)(specified fiber mass)I(RDfiber)(Pwater)(27 ft3/
yd3) = ( 1 00)(3 .0 lb/yd3)/(0.91 )(62.4 lb/ft3)(27 ft3/yd3) = 0.20%
vfiber = (% dosage/ 1 00)(27 ft3/yd3) = (0.20/1 00)(27 ft3/yd3)
= 0.05 ft3
6.5.8 Determine fine aggregate volume and mass
6.5.8.1 Fine aggregate absolute volume
VFA = 27 ft3 - [ Vwater + Vcm + Vair + VcA,OD + VIAI,OD + VIA2,0D
+ T};ber] = 27 - [4.22 + 2.62 + 0.27 + 1 .68 + 7.74 + 3.48 +
0.05] = 6.94 ft3
6.5.8.2 Calculation offine aggregate mass, oven-dry
MFA,OD = ( VFA, OD)(62.4 lblft3)(GFA,OD) = (6.94 ft3)(62.4 lb/ft3)
(2.630) = 1 1 39 lb
6.5.8.3 Calculation of fine aggregate mass, saturated
surface-dry (to express masses in saturated surface-dry
terms if desired)
62 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

20
Table 6 .5 .8.3-Summary of mixture proportions for

!I
18
Example 5 50mm =2"
I 37.5mm = 1-112"

Component Amount
l .t l �
'l I 25.0mm = 1"
19.0mm = 3/4"

I
12.5mm = 112"

I\ l /!\
9.50mm "' 3/8"
Water, lb 263 'i 4.75mm = #4

lj l\ I; 2.36mm "' #8

l \I ��
1.18mm = #16
Type I portland cement, lb 516 I' 0.600mm "' #30

L � 't 1!� �I I
0.300mm = #50
I 0.150mm = #100
No. 4 gravel CA sso, lb
\ J ;I \I
263 0.075mm = #200
l' I
No. 57 gravel lA sso, lb 1216
i' I' . .
't----.j I l \I.
I
'
No. 89 gravel lA sso, lb 547
i' J ' \!
I lj
Natural sand FA sso, lb 1 1 50 J

: 1-112" : 314" 112 #4 #8

l
#16 #30 #50 #100 #200
I
Air entraining agent None 2.. 1" 3 8" SIAVA SbA

WRA Type A, ft oz!l 00 lb TCM 6

Fig. 6. 5. 11a-Jndividual percent retained for Example 5.
Fibers, lb/yd3 3.0
(Note: NMS = 1.5 in.)
WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART
MFA.sso = (MFA. oo) [ 1 + (Abs/ 1 00)] = ( 1 1 39 lb)[ 1 + ( 1 .0/1 00)]
= 1 1 50 lb

The mixture proportions for Example 5 are shown in Table

6.5.8.3.
6.5.9 Adjustment of water content for water content of
admixtures
6.5.9.1 Choose admixture dosages-No air entrainment
admixture for this mixture. By local experience, a WRA
dosage of 6 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM is used. v
6.5.9.2 Calculation ofwater content ofadmixtures volume
and mass-Because the total admixture dosage of 6 fl oz/1 00
lb TCM is less than 1 0, the calculation ofbatch water adjust­ 20 �-+--4--�--+--4-��-�-+--4--�
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
ment would be considered insignificant. For completeness, COARSENESS FACTOR

however, the calculations are shown in the following:

Fig. 6. 5. 11 b-Coarseness factor chart for Example 5.
Assuming 60 percent water content and a 1 .2 1 Gadmix for
the WRA: WORKABI LITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART

V'admix = (dosage)(MreM! 1 00)

w
z
u::
VwRA = (6 fl oz/ 1 00 lb TCM)(5 1 6 lb/yd3 TCM)( 1 gal./1 2 8 fl
t
oz)( 1 ft3/7.5 gal.) = 0.032 ft3 w
�
"'
w
...
Madmix water = ( V'admix)(Gadmix)(Pwater)(% water content ofadmixture) <(
C>
w
II:
C>
C>
Mwater from WRA = (0.032 ft3)( 1 . 2 1 )(62.4 lb/ft3)(0.60) = 1 .4 lb :
w
"'
Mbatch water = Mwater - MWRA water = 263 lb - 1 .4 lb = 262 lb II:
<(
0
()

6.5.1 0 Adjustment ofbatch water contentfor aggregate mois­ 80 70 60 50 40

ture content-This step is not a part of mixture proportioning COARSENESS FACTOR

but rather, is performed in field production. For a full treatment,

ACI 2 1 1 . 1 should be consulted; the calculations will require
each aggregate's total moisture content and absorption.
6.5.11 Comments on mixture-The mixture is plotted in
Fig. 6.5. l l a. The gap in the grading in the No. 8 and No. 1 6
sieves should b e noted. In Fig. 6.5 . 1 1 b , however, the mixture
plots in Zone II. In Fig. 6.5 . 1 1 c, the mixture is in the hand­
finish area (C).
Fig. 6. 5. 11 c-Air Force aggregate proportioning chart for
Example 5 (USAF 1997).
6 .6-Example 6 : Urban highway, slipform,
traditional grading, no SCMs (SI units)
A project for a two-lane urban highway with traffic levels
average daily truck traffic (ADTT) of 400 and average daily
traffic (ADT) of 4000 is located in the Central Midwest and,
thus, is in Zone II (AASHTO 1 993). Exposure includes
freezing-and-thawing cycles and deicing salt. The slab will
be subjected to snowplowing. The pavement design calls

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
for a 1 80 mm thick unreinforced slab with 4.6 m transverse
joint spacing and round dowels at the transverse joints.
Local concrete suppliers stock a No. 67 crushed limestone
coarse aggregate and natural siliceous sand. Paving will be
done with a slipform paver. The department of transporta­
tion (DOT) allows an 1 1 kg reduction in cement (from the
minimum required 335 kg) if a water-reducing admixture
is used. The specified air content location is behind the
paver. Experience with similar mixtures with the anticipated
contractor's paving machine is a loss of air through the paver
of approximately 1 .0 percent and loss during transport from
the concrete plant via transit mix truck is usually 0.5 percent.
The DOT uses 30 MPa for thickness design and requires a
minimum acceptable compressive strength at 28 days of
30 MPa, standard-cured cast cylinders. The contractor is
responsible for the mixture design. The required project
information is listed in Table 6.6. 1 .
6.6.1 Solution: acquire required iriformation
6.6.1.1 Preliminary testing-No concerns for aggregate
freezing-and-thawing deterioration or alkali-aggregate reac­
tion (AAR) or sulfate attack, and the water source is potable,
so no testing is required.
6.6.1.2 Strategy-Freezing-and-thawing and deicer resis­
tance will be addressed by the DOT's specified air content
and maximum w!cm; although the 0.50 w!cm seems high, the
DOT's experience is that, for the contractor to achieve both
30 MPa and 5.0 percent air behind the paver and consid­
ering the materials available, the actual w/cm will have to be
well below 0.45, which meets the recommendations for the
durability issues. The relatively hard coarse aggregate (CA)
should resist snow-plow abrasion.
Prevention of midpanel cracking will be achieved through
the specified relatively short, 4.6 m joint spacing; modest
concrete strength; and a low-friction base; plus the contrac­
tor's choice of a low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE)
CA (limestone) and greater CA proportion. Load transfer
will be addressed by the specified use of dowels, and by
reduction of contraction and shrinkage from a combination
of the specified short joint spacing plus material consider­
ations of CA shrinkage restraint (increased CA content and
relatively hard aggregate), lower contraction potential (low­
limestone CTE), and by preservation of aggregate interlock
(CA abrasion resistance and angularity).
6.6.2 Estimation ofwater mass and volume
6.6.2.1 Base water content
6.6.2.1.1 Selection of slump-For slipform paving, from
Table 5 .4.3. 1 . 1 , the target slump is 40 mm. Specifications
are ± 1 0 mm, therefore, upper end = 50 mm. By experience,
however, the decision is to use 40 mm. The slipform paver
will be sufficiently heavy to deal with stiff mixtures.
6.6.2.1.2 Selection of nominal maximum size-Locally
available aggregate nominal maximum size (NMS) = 1 9
mm; no freezing-and-thawing issues; 1 80 mm thick slab,
thus 1 80/3 = 60 mm maximum NMS allowable; no clear-
ance issues, no reinforcement, and 25 mm dowel clearance
= ( 1 80 - 25 mm)/2 = 50 mm clearance below dowels), so
19 mm NMS is OK. This size should assist with a workable
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
63
mixture that minimizes problems under the pan, and results
in reasonable mixing times for central-mix operations.
From Table A l .6.3.3 of ACI 2 1 1 . 1-91 , Mbase water = 1 90 kg
(per m3 concrete). The non-air-entrained part of the table is
used; adjustment for air entrainment will be discussed in
6.6.2.5.
6.6.2.2 Adjustment of water content for coarse aggregate
shape-ACI 2 1 1 . 1 -9 1 Table A1 .6.3.3 is set up for cubical
crushed CA; hence, no adjustment.
6.6.2.3 Adjustment of water content for fine aggregate
shape
% VFA void content = [ 1 - (DRDFA/(GFA, OD)(Pwater))] X 1 00
= [ 1 - ( 1 785 kg/m3/(2.629)( 1 000 kg/m3))] x 1 00 = 32. 1 %
MFAadj (Water adjustment) = (-5 kg/m3 )(35 - % VFA void content)
= (-5 kg/m3)(35 - 32. 1) = -14 kg for well-rounded fine
aggregate (FA).
The rounded, smooth FA should assist in enhancing
smoothness and reduction in mixing times if allowed. Alter­
natively, if FA dry-rodded density (DRD) was not known,
- 1 0 kg/m3 could have been used.
6.6.2.4 Adjustment of water content for supplementary
cementitious materials-Not applicable.
6.6.2.5 Adjustment of water contentfor air entrainment­
From Table 5 .4.3.5, percent water reduction AEAadJ = 1 1
percent.
6.6.2.6 Adjustment of water content for water-reducing
admixtures-For normal water-reducing admixtures, ACI
2 1 1 . 1 suggests a 5 to 10 percent reduction; from local expe­
rience, WRA adJ = 7 percent is anticipated.
6.6.2.7 Adjustment of water content for fibers-Not
applicable.
6.6.2.8 Calculation offinal water mass and volume
Uvater = (Mbase water - McAadj - MFAadj - SFadj)(AEAadj)(WRA adj)
(SCMadJ) = ( 1 90 - 0 - 1 4 - 0 lb)(( 1 00 - 1 1 )11 00)(( 1 00 -
7)11 00) (( 1 00 - 0)11 00) = 1 44 kg
Check: % total water reduction = [(Mbase water - Mwa�e�·)/
Mbase water] X 1 00 < 3 0%?
= [( 1 90 - 144)1 1 90] X 1 00 = 24% < 30% OK
�vater = Mwate/G,v)(Pwater) = ( 1 44 kg)/( 1 .000)( 1 000 kg/m3) =
0 . 144 m3
6.6.3 Determine wlcm
6.6.3.1 Durability-From Table 5 .4.4 . 1 , exposure to mois­
ture, freezing and thawing, and deicers: maximum w/cm =
0.45 .
6.6.3.2 Strength-DOT-specified minimum thickness and
construction acceptance fc' = 30 MPa. The historical dataset
for this mixture from the plant where the mixture will be
hatched has at least 30 test results; therefore, adjustment of
the standard deviation (S) will not be necessary.
To calculate target mixture strength (from ACI 2 1 1 . 1 ):
cCiC'iJ
64 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)

Table 6 .6 . 1-Req uired information for Example 6

4.8

1 .2

4.8

1 .2

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 65

PC total eq. alkali content: Less than 0.6 or

Dry rodded density, kg/m3 1 785 25
greater than or equal to 0.6 percent
SCM types: Class C, Class F, slag cement, silica
Geologic type Silica 19
fume
ASR potential:
no: less than 0. I percent expansion;
yes: greater than 0.2 percent None 13 SCM specific gravities
expansion;
maybe: 0. 1 to 0.2 percent

Particle shape: angular, cubical

Well-
crushed, crushed gravel, rounded
rounded
natural sand

Fineness modulus 2.73

Climate (for example AASHTO Zones I-VI):

I = wet, no freeze; II = wet, freezing-and-thawing cycling; III = wet, hard
II
freeze-spring thaw; IV = dry, no freeze; V = dry, freezing-and-thawing
cycling; VI = dry, hard freeze-spring thaw

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

66 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
Forfc' < 35 MPa, the larger of the following will govern:
fc,.' = fc' + 1 .34(S) = 30 + 1 .34(3.8) = 3 3 . 8 MPa
fc, ' =fc' + 2.3 3(S) - 3.4 = 30 + 2.33(3.8) - 3 .4 = 3 3 . 1 MPa
thus, 33.8 MPa controls (round to 35 MPa).
If using MOR thickness design tables, estimate modulus
of rupture (MOR):
MOR = k'Jfc'; assume = 0.8 for crushed stone:
= 0.8>/3 5 = 4.7 MPa (typical range approximately 3.4 to 4.8
MPa) OK
The MOR (4.7 MPa) is not considered excessively high
with respect to contribution to excessive curling stress. In this
case, by experience, the contractor is confident that 4.7 MPa
can be achieved with the job materials (CA angular, smooth,
hard, and at the NMS proposed).
From the strength-w/cm relationship (not shown) estab­
lished at upper end of the air content tolerance, 35 MPa
corresponds to a w/em = 0 .4 1 .
6.6.3.3 Choice of controlling w/cm-Strength controls,
w/cm = 0.41 (meets DOT-specified maximum allowable
[0.50], maximum for durability [0.45], and includes 99
percent desired level of confidence).
6.6.4 Calculation ofcementitious masses and volumes
Mcem = Mwate,Jw/cm = 1 44 kg/0.41 = 35 1 kg
DOT allows an 1 1 kg reduction in cement if a water­
reducing admixture (WRA) is used: 335 - 1 1 = 324 kg.
Check DOT-specified minimum 324 kg cementitious
content: 3 5 1 kg > 324 kg OK.
Check Table 5.4.5 . 1 a for minimum cement content, for NMS
= 19 mm: 3 5 l lb > 320 kg OK
Vc, = (Mcem)I(Gcem)(P water) = (3 5 1 kg)/(3 . 1 5)( 1 000 kg/m3) =
0. 1 1 1 m3
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
S = 3 . 8 MPa, N = 30
Strength-w/cm relationship available
6.6.5 Determine air content-DOT-specified air content
= 5.0 percent; use 5 . 0 percent as the target; with DOT-job
tolerances: 4.5 to 6.5 percent. The DOT specification
requires measurement of air behind the paver; thus, the air
content of the as-delivered concrete should be increased by
the anticipated air loss through the paver plus loss in transit.
Local experience with this mixture for transit loss and the
contractor 's paving equipment loss is approximately 0.5
and 1 . 0 percent, respectively; thus, the mixture should be
proportioned for 6.5 percent (5.0 + 0.5 + 1 .0); this will also
meet the PCA recommendation (EBOO 1) of proportioning at
the upper end of the job tolerance (5.0 + 1 .5 = 6.5).
6.6.6 Determine coarse aggregate mass and volume
6.6.6.1 Coarse aggregate fraction-From ACI 2 1 1 . 1 -9 1
Table A 1 .6.3.6 for NMS = 1 9 mm and fine aggregate FM =
2.73, CA volume fraction = 0.63 .
For pavement, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 notes that CA volume can be
increased by up to 1 0 percent. By local experience, with the
available aggregate, increase CA fraction by 5 percent:
CA fraction = (0.63)( 1 .05) = 0.66
6.6.6.2 Calculation of coarse aggregate mass, oven-dry
McA.OD = (CA fraction)(DRDcA) = (0.66)( 1 680 kg/m3) =
1 1 09 kg
6.6.6.3 Conversion to coarse aggregate mass, saturated
surface-dry (to express masses in saturated surface-dry
terms if desired)
McA,SSD = (McA.oo)[ 1 + (Abs/1 00)] = ( 1 1 09 kg)[ 1 + ( 1 .9/1 00)]
= 1 1 3 0 kg
6.6.6.4 Calculation of CA00 absolute volume
VcA,OD = McA,ool(GcA.oo)(Pwater) = ( 1 1 09 kg)/(2.630)( 1 000
kg/m3) = 0.422 m3
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17) 67

Table 6 . 6 .8. 3-Mixture proportions for Example 6

Component Amount

Water, kg 1 44

Type I portland cement, kg 35 1

No. 67 limestone CAsso, kg 1 1 30

Natural sand FAsso, kg 680

Air-entraining agent, mL/1 00 kg TCM 65

WRA Type A, m L/1 00 kg TCM 260

: 1-112" ; 3,... 11r; -.. .a 116 �o 150 1100 1200

6.6.7 Determinefiber mass and volume-Not applicable. 2" 1" 318" Sl�ve Siu

6.6.8 Determinefine aggregate volume and mass

6.6.8.1 Fine aggregate absolute volume Fig. 6. 6. 11 a-Individual percent retainedfor Example 6.

WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART

VFA,OD = 1 .000 m3 - [ Vwater + VC/11 + Vair + VcA,OD] = 1 .000 -
[0. 144 + 0. 1 1 1 + 0.065 + 0.422] = 0.258 m3 45

6.6.8.2 Calculation affine aggregate mass, oven-dry

..
"'
< 40
.. --
-· ·
··
Ill
:5
r=
.;
MFA,OD = ( VFA,OD)(Pwater)(GFA,OD) = (0.258 m3)( 1 000 kg/m3) : 35

(2.629) = 678 kg :::

IL

�
� 30

v
:J
6.6.8.3 Calculation of fine aggregate mass, saturated iii
<
surface-dry (to express masses in saturated surface-dry "'
� 25

terms ifdesired) ;:

20

MFA,ssD = (MFA.oD)[ 1 + (Abs/1 00)] = (678 kg) [ 1 + (0.311 00)] 100 00 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

= 680 kg
Fig. 6. 6. 11 b-Coarseness factor chart for Example 6.
The mixture proportions for Example 6 are shown in Table
6.6.8.3 .
6.6.9 Adjustment of water content for water content of
admixture
6.6.9.1 Choose admixture dosages-Typical air entrain­
ment admixture dosages are 50 to 200 mL/ 1 00 kg TCM and
WRA dosages are 1 3 0 to 460 mL/ 1 00 kg TCM. By local
experience, use air entrainment dosage of 65 mL/ 1 00 kg
TCM and WRA dosage of 260 mL/ 1 00 kg TCM.
6.6.9.2 Calculation ofwater content ofadmixtures volume
and mass-Because the total admixture dosage of 325
mL/1 00 kg TCM is less than 650, the calculation of batch
water adjustment would be considered negligible; however,
the steps are shown in the following for completeness.
Assuming 60 percent water content, 1 . 1 5 GadmLr for the air­
entraining admixture (AEA), and a 1 .2 1 Gadmix for the WRA:
Vadmix = (dosage)(MrcM/1 00)
VwRA from WRA = (260 mL/ 1 00 kg TCM)(35 1 kg/m3 TCM)
(1 m3/ l ,OOO,OOO cm3) = 0.0009 1 3 m3
Madmix water = ( Vadmix)(Gadmix)(Pwater)(% water content ofadmixture)
MwRAwater from WRA = (0.0009 1 3 m3)( 1 .2 1 )( 1 000 kg/m3)
(0.60) = 0.66 kg
COARSF-N�SS FACTOR
f-A EA = (65 mL/ 1 00 kg TCM)(3 5 1 kg/m3 TCM)( l m3! 1 ,000,000
cm3) = 0.000228 m3
Mvater from AEA = (0.000228 m3)(1 . 1 5)(1 000 kg/m3)(0.60)
= 0. 1 6 kg
Mbatch water = Mwater - MwRA water - MAEA water = 1 44 - 0.66 -
0 . 1 6 kg = 1 43 kg
6.6.10 Adjustment of batch water content for aggregate
moisture content-This step is not a part of mixture propor­
tioning, but rather is performed in field production. For a
full treatment, ACI 2 1 1 . 1 should be consulted; the calcula­
tions will require each aggregate's total moisture content and
absorption.
6.6.11 Comments on the mixture-The mixture is plotted
in Fig. 6.6. 1 1 a. There is a gap in the grading on the No. 8
sieve. In Fig. 6.6. 1 1 b, the mixture plots in Zone II. In Fig.
6.6. 1 1 c, however, although the mixture is in the workability
box, it is not in the slipform area (A), and the point plots
close (less than two percentage points) to the Zone I-II inter­
face, indicating a potential for segregation if the stockpile
gradings vary during the project. The proportions of the
mixture components may be able to be changed, or different
or supplemental aggregate products may be introduced to
move the plotted point away from the Zone I-II interface.

American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org

68 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
WORKABILITY-COARSENESS FACTOR CHART
COARSENESS FACTOR
Fig. 6. 6. 11 c-Air Force aggregate proportioning guide for
Example 6 (USAF 1997).
To achieve a high smoothness incentive, the mixture may
need to be more workable with respect to slipform paving,
so the contractor should consider the use of optimized aggre­
gate grading, a SCM, and possibly a reduction of the CA
content.
CHAPTER 7-REFERENCES
Committee documents are listed first by document number
and year of publication followed by authored documents
listed alphabetically.
American Association ofState Highway and Transportation
Officials
AASHTO PP 65- 1 1-Standard Practice for Determining
the Reactivity of Concrete Aggregates and Selecting Appro­
priate Measures for Preventing Deleterious Expansion in
New Concrete Construction
AASHTO TP 95- 1 1-Standard Method ofTest for Surface
Resistivity Indication of Concrete's Ability to Resist Chlo­
ride Ion Penetration
American Concrete Institute
ACI 20 1 .2R-08-Guide to Durable Concrete
ACI 2 1 1 . 1 -9 1 (09)-Standard Practice for Selecting
Proportions for Normal, Heavyweight, and Mass Concrete
ACI 2 1 1 .4R-08-Guide for Selecting Proportions for
High-Strength Concrete Using Portland Cement and Other
Cementitious Materials
ACI 2 1 2.3R- 1 6-Report on Chemical Admixtures for
Concrete
ACI 232.2R-03-Use of Fly Ash in Concrete
ACI 3 0 1 - 1 0-Specifications for Structural Concrete
ACI 302. 1R-04-Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab
Construction
ACI 304R-00(09)-Guide for Measuring, Mixing, Trans­
porting, and Placing Concrete
ACI (3 08-2 1 3 )R- 1 3-Report on Internally Cured Concrete
Using Prewetted Absorptive Lightweight Aggregate
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
ACI 3 1 8- 1 4--Building Code Requirements for Structural
Concrete and Commentary on Building Code Requirements
for Structural Concrete
ACI 325. 1 1 R-0 1-Accelerated Techniques for Concrete
Paving
ACI 330R-08-Guide for Design and Construction of
Concrete Parking Lots
ACI 360R- 1 0-Guide to Design of Slabs-on-Ground
ACI 365 . 1 R-OO-Service Life Prediction
ACI 544. 1R-96-Report on Fiber Reinforced Concrete
ACI 544.3R-08-Guide for Specifying, Proportioning,
and Production of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete
ASTM International
ASTM C29/C29M-09-Standard Test Method for Bulk
Density ("Unit Weight") and Voids in Aggregate
ASTM C33/C33M-1 3-Standard Specification for
Concrete Aggregates
ASTM C39/C39M- 14-Standard Test Method for
Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens
ASTM C78/C78M- 1 0-Standard Test Method for Flex­
ural Strength of Concrete (Using Simple Beam with Third­
Point Loading)
ASTM C94/C94M-1 5-Standard Specification for
Ready-Mixed Concrete
ASTM C 1 09/C 1 09M- 1 3-Standard Test Method for
Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using
2-in. or [50-mm] Cube Specimens)
ASTM C 1 36/C 1 36M- 14-Standard Test Method for
Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates
ASTM C 1 43/C 1 43M-1 2-Standard Test Methods for
Slump of Hydraulic Cement Concrete
ASTM C 1 50/C 1 50M- 1 2-Standard Specification for
Portland Cement
ASTM C 1 57/C 1 57M-08(201 4)-Standard Test Method
for Length Change of Hardened Hydraulic-Cement Mortar
and Concrete
ASTM C295/C295M- 1 2-Standard Guide for Petro­
graphic Examination of Aggregates for Concrete
ASTM C403/C403M-08-Standard Test Method for Time
of Setting of Concrete Mixtures by Penetration Resistance
ASTM C469/C469M- 14-Standard Test Method for
Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson's Ratio of Concrete
in Compression
ASTM C494/C494M- 1 3-Standard Specification for
Chemical Admixtures for Concrete
ASTM C496/C496M- 1 1-Standard Test Method for Split­
ting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens
ASTM C595/C595M- 14-Standard Specification for
Blended Hydraulic Cements
ASTM C6 1 8- 1 2-Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash
and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete
ASTM C666/C666M- 1 5-Standard Test Method for
Resistance of Concrete to Rapid Freezing and Thawing
ASTM C672/C672M- 12-Standard Test Method for
Scaling Resistance of Concrete Surfaces Exposed to Deicing
Chemicals
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
ASTM C944/C944M- 1 2-Standard Test Method for
Abrasion Resistance of Concrete or Mortar Surfaces by the
Rotating-Cutter Method
ASTM C l 0 1 2/C l 0 1 2M-1 3-Standard Test Method for
Length Change of Hydraulic-Cement Exposed to a Sulfate
Solution
ASTM C l 202-1 2-Standard Test Method for Electrical
Indication of Concrete's Ability to Resist Chloride Ion
Penetration
ASTM C l 240- 1 4-Standard Specification for Silica
Fume Used in Cementitious Mixtures
ASTM C l 260- 14-Standard Test Method for Potential
Alkali Reactivity of Aggregates (Mortar Bar Method)
ASTM C l 293-08-Standard Test Method for Determi­
nation of Length Change of Concrete Due to Alkali-Silica
Reaction
ASTM C l 543- 1 0-Standard Test Method for Determining
the Penetration of Chloride Ion into Concrete by Ponding
ASTM C l 567- 1 3-Standard Test Method for Deter­
mining the Potential Alkali-Silica Reactivity of Combina­
tions of Cementitious Materials and Aggregate (Accelerated
Mortar Bar Method)
ASTM C l 580-09-Standard Method for Water-Soluble
Sulfate in Soil
ASTM C l 5 8 1/C l 58 1 M-09-Standard Test Method for
Determining Age of Cracking and Induced Tensile Stress
Characteristics of Mortar and Concrete Under Restrained
Shrinkage
ASTM C l 602/C l 602M-1 2-Standard Specification for
Mixing Water Used in the Production of Hydraulic Cement
Concrete
ASTM C l 679- 14-Standard Practice for Measuring the
Hydration Kinetics of Hydraulic Cementitious Mixtures
Using Isothermal Calorimetry
ASTM C l 76 1 /C l 76 1 M- 1 3-Standard Specification for
Lightweight Aggregate for Internal Curing of Concrete
ASTM C 1 778-1 4-Standard Guide for Reducing the Risk
of Deleterious Alkali-Aggregate Reaction in Concrete
ASTM D479 1 - 1 0-Standard Test Method for Flat Parti­
cles, Elongated Particles, or Flat and Elongated Particles in
Coarse Aggregate
Portland Cement Association
PCA EBOO I - l l -Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures
Authored documents
AASHTO, 1 993, Guide for Design of Pavement Struc­
tures, fourth edition, American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, 700 pp.
AASHTO, 2014, "AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design,"
American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, Washington, DC, http://www.aashtoware.org/
Pavement/Pages/default.aspx
ACPA, 1 989, "Fast Track Concrete Pavements," Tech­
nical Bulletin TB-004. 0 IT, Arlington Heights, IL, 3 1 pp.
ACPA, 2003a, "Slag Cement and Concrete Pavements,"
R&T Update, No. 4.03, American Concrete Pavement Asso­
ciation, Rosemont, IL, 4 pp.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
69
ACPA, 2003b, "Air Content in Concrete Pavements,"
R&T Update, No. 4.05, American Concrete Pavement Asso­
ciation, Rosemont, IL, 4 pp.
ACPA, 2003c, "What to do When Faced with Early Age
Cracking," R& T Update, No. 4.07, American Concrete
Pavement Association, Rosemont, IL, 4 pp.
ACPA, 2004, "Clay Ball Prevention and Repair: Stockpile
Management Is the Key," R&T Update, No. 5 .04, American
Concrete Pavement Association, Rosemont, IL, 4 pp.
ACPA, 2005, "STREETPAVE," Computer Program
MC003P, American Concrete Pavement Association, Rose­
mont, IL.
Attiogbe, E. K.; Nmai, C. K.; and Gay, F. T., 1992, "Air­
Void System Parameters and Freezing-Thawing Durability
of Concrete Containing Superplasticizers-A Summary of
Research Findings," Concrete International, V. 1 4, No. 7,
July, pp. 57-6 1 .
Bentz, D. P., 20 1 0, "Powder Additions to Mitigate Retar­
dation in High-Volume Fly Ash Mixtures," A CI Materials
Journal, V. 1 07, No. 5, Sept.-Oct., pp. 508-5 14.
Bentz, D. P.; Chiara, F. F.; De La Varga, I.; Peltz, M. A.;
and Winpigler, J. A., 20 1 0, "Mixture Proportioning Options
for Improving High Volume Fly Ash Concretes," Interna­
tional Journal ofPavement Research and Technology, V. 3,
No. 5, pp. 234-240.
Bouzoubaa, N.; Zhang, M. H.; Malhotra, V. M.; and
Golden, D. M., 200 1 , "Mechanical Properties and Durability
of Laboratory Produced High Volume Fly Ash Blended
Cements," Seventh CANMETIA CI International Conference
on Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in
Concrete, SP- 1 99, American Concrete Institute, Farmington
Hills, MI, pp. 58-82.
Cost, V. T., and Gardiner, A., 2009, "Practical Concrete
Mixture Evaluation via Semi-Adiabatic Calorimetry," 2009
Concrete Technology Forum - Focus on Performance
Prediction, Cincinnati, OH, 2 1 pp.
Cost, V. T., and Knight, G., 2007, "Use of Thermal
Measurements to Detect Incompatibilities of Common
Concrete Materials," Concrete Heat Development: Moni­
toring, Prediction & Management, SP-24 1 , K. Wang and A.
K. Schindler, eds., American Concrete Institute, Farmington
Hills, MI, pp. 39-58 . (CD-ROM)
Cost, V. T.; Knight, G.; Wilson, W.; Shannon, J.; and Howard,
I. L., 201 3a, "Performance of Typical Concrete Mixtures for
Transportation Structures as Influenced by Portland-Limestone
Cements from Five Sources," 2013 International Concrete
Sustainability Conference, San Francisco, CA, 1 1 pp.
Cost, V. T.; Howard, I. L.; and Shannon, J., 201 3b,
"Improving Concrete Sustainability and Performance Using
Portland-Limestone Cement (PLC) Synergies," Paper
1 3 -4429, 92nd Annual Meeting of The Transportation
Research Board, Washington, DC, 1 5 pp.
Delatte, N., 2008, Concrete Pavement Design, Construc­
tion, and Performance, Taylor and Francis, New York, NY,
3 72 pp.
Delatte, N.; Mack, E.; and Cleary, J., 2007, "Evaluation
of High Absorptive Materials to Improve Internal Curing
of Low Permeability Concrete," State Job No. 1 34227,
CaCiJ
70 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
Federal Contract Number 20809, Ohio Department of
Transportation.
ESCSI, 2012," Guide for Calculating the Quantity of
Prewetted ESCS Lightweight Aggregates for Internal
Curing," Expanded Shale, Clay and Slate Institute, Chicago,
IL, 2 pp.
FAA, 2009a, "Standards for Specifying Construction of
Airports-Part VI-Rigid Pavement," Item P-50 1 , Advisory
Circular 1 5 0/5370- 1 0E, Federal Aviation Administration,
Washington, DC, 38 pp.
FAA, 2009b, "Airport Pavement Design and Evaluation,"
Advisory Circular 1 50/5320-6E, Federal Aviation Adminis­
tration, Washington, DC, 1 1 6 pp.
Farny, J. A., 200 1 , "Concrete Floors on Ground," EB075,
Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL, 1 36 pp.
Freeman, J. M., 2012, "Stability and Quality of Air Void
Systems in Concretes with Superplasticizers," MS thesis,
Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK.
Hanna, K. E.; Morcous, G.; and Tadros, M. K., 20 1 0,
"Class C Fly Ash in Pavements," Final Report, SPR50 1 ,
Nebraska Department o f Roads, Lincoln, NB, 1 3 2 pp.
Harrison, P. J., 2004, "For the Ideal Slab-on-Ground
Mixture," Concrete International, V. 26, No. 3, Mar., pp.
49-55.
Henkensiefken, R.; Briatka, P. ; Bentz, D. P.; Nantung, T.;
and Weiss, J., 20 1 0, "Plastic Shrinkage Cracking in Inter­
nally Cured Mixtures," Concrete International, V. 32, No.
2, Feb., pp. 49-54.
Holland, J. A., 1 990, "Mixture Optimization," Concrete
International, V. 12, No. 1 0 , Oct., p. 10.
Holland, J. A.; Simonelli, R. M.; and Walker, W. W. , 2008,
"Macropolymeric Fibers for Slabs on Grade," Concrete
Construction, June, 6 pp.
Iowa DOT, 2002, "Supplemental Specifications for
Quality Management Concrete," SS-0 1 0 1 5, 6 pp.
Iowa DOT, 2003 , "Quality Management and Acceptance
of PC Concrete Pavement," IM 530, 5 pp.
Iowa DOT, 2004, "Aggregate Proportioning Guide for PC
Pavement," IM 532, 8 pp.
KDOT, 2004, "Optimized Portland Cement Concrete,
Special Provisions, Sections 402/50211 1 02," Kansas Depart­
ment of Transportation, 3 pp.
Koehler, E. P., and Fowler, D., 2006, "ICAR Mixture
Proportioning Procedure for Self-Consolidating Concrete,"
Research Report !CAR No. I 08-1, International Center for
Aggregates Research, University of Texas, Austin, TX.
Kahn, S. D., and Tayabj i, S. D., 2003 , "Best Practice for
Airport Portland Cement Concrete Pavement Construction,"
IPRF-0 1 -G-002- 1 , Innovative Pavement Research Founda­
tion, Washington, DC, 146 pp.
Kozikowski, R. L.; Vollmer, D. B . ; Taylor, P. C.; and
Gebler, S. H., 2005 , "Factors Affecting the Origin of Air­
Void Clustering," PCA R&D Serial No. 27899, Skokie, IL.
Lafrenz, J. L., 200 1 , "Material Selections to Mini­
mize Early Cracking of Concrete Pavement Panels," 2001
Missouri Concrete Conference, University of Missouri­
Rolla, Rolla, MO, 1 1 pp.
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
Ley, T., and Cook, D., 2014, "Aggregate Gradations for
Concrete Pavement Mixtures," CP Road Map, Moving
Advancements into Practice (MAP) Brief, FHWA TPF-5-(286).
Mass, G. R., 1 997, "Airport Paving Quality," Concrete
International, V. 1 9, No. 9, Sept., pp. 46-53.
Masten, M., 2012, "Minnesota's Experience with Low
w/c Ratio Pavements," International Conference on Long­
Life Concrete Pavements, Seattle, WA.
MCIB, 2000, "Concrete Standards, Sections 3-1 and 4-4,"
Mid-West Concrete Industry Board, Kansas City, MO, pp.
10 and 14.
Mehta, P. K., and Monteiro, P. J. M., 2006, Concrete
Microstructure, Properties, and Materials, third edition,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 659 pp.
Mindess, S.; Young, J. F.; and Darwin, D., 2003 , Concrete,
second edition, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River,
NJ, 644 pp.
MnDOT, 2004, "High Performance Concrete Paving,
Section SP-1 1 1 , Special Provisions," Minnesota Department
of Transportation, 1 1 pp.
MoDOT, 20 1 1 , "Concrete, Section 5 0 1 , Standard Specifi­
cations," Missouri Department of Transportation, Jefferson
City, MO, 1 3 pp.
Naik, T. R.; Ramrne, B . W.; Kraus, R. N.; and Siddique,
R., 2003, "Long-Term Performance of High-Volume Fly
Ash Concrete Pavements," ACJ Materials Journal, V. 1 00,
No. 2, Mar.-Apr., pp. 1 50- 1 5 5 .
NRMCA, 1 992, "Standard Practice for Developing a
Correlation Between Compressive and Flexural Strength
in the Laboratory," Publication T1 , National Ready Mixed
Concrete Association, 7 pp.
Okomato, P. A.; Nussbaum, P. J.; Smith, K. D.; Darter, M.
I.; Wilson, T. P. ; Wu, C. L.; and Tayabj i, S. D., 1 994, "Guide­
lines for Timing Contraction Joint Sawing and Earliest
Loading for Concrete Pavements," FHWA-RD-9 1 -079,
Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 23 pp.
Packard, R. G., 1 984, "Thickness Design for Concrete
Highway and Street Pavements," Portland Cement Associa­
tion, Skokie, IL, 4 7 pp.
Rao, C., and Darter, M. I., 2 0 1 3 , "Evaluation of lnternally
Cured Concrete for Paving Applications," Applied Research
Associates, Inc., Champaign, IL, 1 08 pp.
Rao, C., and Stehly, R. D., 20 1 1 , "Handbook for Propor­
tioning Fly Ash as Cementitious Material in Airfield Pave­
ment Concrete Mixtures," IPRF-0 1 -G-002-06-2, Innovative
Pavement Research Foundation, Skokie, IL, 74 pp.
Richardson, D. N., 2005, "Aggregate Gradation Optimi­
zation," Task Order No. R1 98-03 5, Missouri Department of
Transportation, Jefferson City, MO, 1 1 1 pp.
Richardson, D. N., 2 0 1 5 , "Strength and Durability Char­
acteristics of a 70% Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag
Concrete Mix," Project No. R 1 99-035 , Missouri Depart­
ment of Transportation, Jefferson City, MO, 1 34 p.
Richardson, D. N.; Beckemeier, K. W. ; and Volz, J. S.,
20 1 5, "Effects of Powder Additives on High-Volume Fly
Ash Mixtures," A CI Materials Journal, V. 1 1 2, No. 4, July­
Aug., pp. 535-546. doi: 1 0 . 1 4359/5 1 687395
 GUIDE FOR DESIGN AND PROPORTIONING OF CONCRETE MIXTURE FOR PAVEMENTS (ACI 325. 14R-17)
Richardson, D. N., and Lusher, S. M., 20 14, "Prediction
of Freeze-Thaw Durability of Concrete," A CI Materials
Journal, V. 1 1 2, No. 3, May-June, pp. 439-450.
Richardson, D. N., and Whitwell, B. A., 20 1 5 , "Concrete
Production Plant Variables Affecting Flexural Strength Rela­
tive to Compressive Strength," Journal ofMaterials in Civil
Engineering, V. 26, No. 8, pp. 1 - 1 0 .
Roberts, L. R . , and Taylor, P. C., 2007, "Understanding
Cement-SCM-Admixture Interaction Issues," Concrete
International, V. 29, No. 1 , Jan., pp. 33-4 1 .
Ruiz, J . M.; Rasmussen, R . 0 . ; Chang, G . K.; Dick, J . C.;
and Nelson, P. K., 2005, "Computer-Based Guidelines for
Concrete Pavements Volume II-Design and Construction
Guidelines and HIPERPAVE II User's Manual," FHWA­
HRT-04- 1 22, Federal Highway Administration, McLean,
VA, 1 73 pp.
Scanlon, J. M., 1 994, "Factors Influencing Concrete Work­
ability," Significance of Tests and Properties of Concrete
and Concrete Making Materials, ASTM STP- 1 69c, P.
Klieger and J. F. Lamond, eds., ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, pp. 49-64.
Shannon, J.; Howard, I. L.; Cost, T. C.; and Wilson, W.
M., 2 0 1 5 , "Benefits of Portland-Limestone Cement for
Concrete with Rounded Gravel Aggregates and Higher Fly
Ash Replacement Rates," Transportation Research Board
94th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, Paper 1 5 -4049.
Shilstone, Jr., J. M., 2004, "The 8- 1 8 Rule," Concrete
Construction Online.
Tayabji, S. D., and Anderson, J., 2007, "A Proposed Spec­
ification for Construction of Concrete Airfield Pavement,"
IPRF -0 1 -G-002-04- 1 , Innovative Pavement Research Foun­
dation, Skokie, IL, 45 pp.
Tayabji, S. D.; Fick, G.; and Taylor, P., 20 1 2, "Concrete
Pavement Mixture Design and Analysis (MDA)," National
Concrete Pavement Technology Center, DTFH6 1-
06-H-000 1 1 , Work Plan 25, Ames, IA, 74 pp.
Taylor, P., and Fick, G., 2 0 1 5 , "Blended Aggregates for
Concrete Mixture Optimization- Best Practices for Jointed
Concrete Pavements Tech Brief," FHWA-HIF- 1 5-0 1 9, 4 pp.
Taylor, P.; Kosmatka, S. H.; Voight, G. F.; Harrington, D.;
and Grove, J., 2007, "Integrated Materials and Construction
Practices for Concrete Pavement: A State of the Practice
Manual," FHWA No. HIF-07-004, National Concrete Pave­
ment Technology Center, Washington, DC, 326 pp.
Taylor, P.; Yurdakul, E.; Wang, X.; and Wang, X., 20 1 5 ,
"Concrete Pavement Mixture Design and Analysis (MDA):
An Innovative Approach to Proportioning Concrete
American Concrete Institute- Copyrighted© Material- www.concrete.org
71
Mixtures," Report No. TPF-5(205), National Concrete Pave­
ment Technology Center, Ames, IA, 50 pp.
Thomas, M. D. A.; Fournier, B . ; and Folliard, K. J.,
2008, "Report on the Reactivity of Concrete Aggregates
and Selecting Appropriate Measures for Preventing Delete­
rious Expansion in New Concrete Construction," FHWA­
HIF -09-00 1 , Federal Highway Administration, Washington,
DC, 20 pp.
Thomas, M. D. A., and Hooton, R. D., 20 1 0, "The Dura­
bility of Concrete Produced with Portland-Limestone
Cement: Canadian Studies," PCA R&D SN3 142, Portland
Cement Association, Skokie, IL, 26 pp.
Transtec Group, Inc. , 2 0 1 0, "COMPASS: Computer­
Based Guidelines for Job-Specific Optimization of Paving
Concrete," Users Guide, 28 pp.
UFC, 2004, "Standard Practice for Concrete Pavements,"
Unified Facilities Criteria, UFC 3-250-04, U.S. Department
of Defense, 27 pp.
USACE, 2 0 1 2, "Concrete Pavement for Airfields and
Other Heavy Duty Pavements," UFGS 32 13 1 1 , U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Nov., 80 pp.
USAF, 1 997, "Proportioning Concrete Mixtures with
Graded Aggregates - A Handbook for Rigid Airfield Pave­
ments," ETL 97-5, U.S. Air Force, 50 pp.
Van Dam, T. ; Peterson, K. R.; Sutter, L. L . ; Panguluri,
A.; Sytsma, J.; Buch, N.; Kowli, R.; and Desaraju, P., 2005,
"Guidelines for Early-Opening-to-Traffic Portland Cement
Concrete for Pavement Rehabilitation," NCHRP Report 540,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 29 pp.
Van Dam, T., and Taylor, P. C., 2009, "Building Sustain­
able Pavements with Concrete, CP Road Map," Ames, IA,
48 pp. http://www.cproadmap.org/publications/sustain­
ability_briefing.pdf, (accessed Dec., 20 1 0).
Voigt, T. ; Mbele, J.; Wang, K.; and Shah, S., 20 1 0, "Using
Fly Ash, Clay, and Fibers for Simultaneous Improve­
ment of Concrete Green Strength and Consolidatability
for Slip-Form Pavement," Journal of Materials in Civil
Engineering, V. 22, No. 2, pp. 1 96-206. doi: 1 0 . 1 0 6 1 1
(ASCE)0899- 1 5 6 1 (20 1 0)22:2( 1 96)
Walker, W. W. , and Holland, J. A., 1999, "The First
Commandment for Floor Slabs: Thou Shalt Not Curl Nor
Crack . . . (Hopefully)," Concrete International, V. 2 1 , No. 1 ,
Jan., pp. 47-53 .
Walker, W. W., and Holland, J. A., 2007, "Reinforcement
for Slabs on Ground-What It Will Do and Not Do," Concrete
Construction, Special Floors Edition, pp. 2 1 -26.
 ®
•

CCI
 American Concrete Institute
Always advancing

As ACI begins its second century of advancing concrete knowledge, its original chartered purpose
remains "to provide a comradeship in finding the best ways to do concrete work of all kinds and in
spreading knowledge." In keeping with this purpose, ACI supports the following activities:

Technical committees that produce consensus reports, guides, specifications, and codes.

Spring and fall conventions to facilitate the work of its committees.

Educational seminars that disseminate reliable information on concrete.

Certification programs for personnel employed within the concrete industry.

Student programs such as scholarships, internships, and competitions.

Sponsoring and co-sponsoring international conferences and symposia.

Formal coordination with several international concrete related societies.

Periodicals: the ACI Structural Journal, Materials Journal, and Concrete International.

Benefits of membership include a subscription to Concrete International and to an ACI Journal. ACI
members receive discounts of up to 40% on all ACI products and services, including documents, seminars
and convention registration fees.

As a member of ACI, you join thousands of practitioners and professionals worldwide who share
a commitment to maintain the highest industry standards for concrete technology, construction,
and practices. In addition, ACI chapters provide opportunities for interaction of professionals and
practitioners at a local level to discuss and share concrete knowledge and fellowship.

American Concrete Institute

38800 Country Club Drive
Farmington Hills, MI 48331
Phone: +1.248.848.3700
Fax: +1.248.848.3701
www.concrete.org
American Concrete Institute
Always advancing

38800 Country C l u b Drive

Farmington H i l l s , Ml 48331 USA
+1 . 248.848.3700
www.con crete.org

The A m e r i c a n C o n c rete I n stitute (AC I ) is a l e a d i n g a utho rity a n d resou rce

worldwide for the deve l o p m e nt a n d d i stri bution of c o n s e n s u s-based

sta n d a rd s a n d tec h n i c a l reso u rces, ed ucati o n a l pro g r a m s , and certifi cati o n s

for i n d ivid u a l s a n d o rga n i zati o n s i nvo lved i n c o n c rete d es i g n , c o n st r u ct i o n ,

a n d materia l s , w h o s h a re a co m m itment to p u rs u i n g the best u s e o f c o n crete.

I n d ivi d u a l s i nterested in the a ctivities of ACI a re e n c o u ra g e d to explore the

ACI website fo r m e m b e rs h i p o p p o rtu n ities, c o m m ittee activities, and a wide

va ri ety of c o n crete reso u rces. As a vo l u nteer m e m be r-d riven o rg a n izati o n ,

A C I i nvites p a rt n e rs h i p s a n d w e l c o m e s a l l con crete p rofess i o n a l s w h o w i s h to

be p a rt of a res pecte d , c o n n ecte d , soc i a l g ro u p t h at p rovides a n op portu n ity

for p rofessi o n a l g rowth, n etwo r k i n g a n d e nj oy m e nt.