Problem #3:Explain the difference between plastic shrinkage, drying shrinkage, autog enous shrinkage, and chemical shrinkage.

Chemical shrinkage is defined as the phenomenon in which the absolute volume of hydration products is less than the total volume of unhydrated cement and water before hydration. This type of shrinkage is mainly due to chemical reactions in the concrete. Autogenous shrinkage is defined as the macroscopic volume reduction of cementitious materials when cement hydrates after initial setting. Autogenous shrinkage does not include the volume change due to loss or ingress of substances, temperature variation, application of an external force and restraint. Therefore, the autogenous shrinkage is a volume reduction of the concrete with no moisture transfer with the outer environment. While chemical shrinkage induces internal voids and autogenous shrinkage results in element shortening.

Fig. Chemical and autogenous shrinkage interaction in the horizontal direction (Khairallah, 2009) Plastic shrinkage is related to the strain of the concrete surface when it is in the plastic phase, which is a short term phenomenon. This type of shrinkage is mainly due to water evaporation and differs from the drying shrinkage, which is a long term process. Drying shrinkage is due to the loss of the water from the concrete pores. As the water evaporates to the outside, concrete shrinks. Drying shrinkage is similar to the autogenous shrinkage where both occur due to loss of water. But, in drying shrinkage, the water is lost to the outside, whereas in autogenous shrinkage the water is transferred to the pore structure. Reference: Khairallah, R., (2009) Analysis of Autogenous and Drying Shrinkage of Concrete, Master Thesis, McMaster University.

Summary of Estimating Prestress Losses For many reasons the prestressing force in a presstressed concrete member continuously decreases with time. The factors affecting the loss are well known and specified in the ACI code (ACI 318-77). In this code, the design engineers are allowed to use just a lump sum result instead of applying detailed calculations although this may not work well for some design conditions. The methods of calculating loss used in the papers provide reasonable accurate values for the various sources of loss defined in the code. However, the procedures described in the paper are not intended for special structures such as water tanks. The factors contributing to the losses and quantified in the paper include elastic shortening of concrete, creep of concrete, shrinkage of concrete, relaxation of the tendons and friction. These factors cause the loss in prestensioned and posttensioned members differently. Similarly, the level of effects contributed by the factors depends on whether the tendons are bonded or not. The loss from elastic shortening depends on whether the tendons are bonded or unbounded, pretensioned or post-tensioned the moduli of elasticity of the tendons and the concrete, and the average compressive stress in the concrete at the center of gravity of the tendons immediately after the prestress has been applied. The loss from creep of concrete depends on whether the tendons are bonded or not, pretensioned or post-tensioned, whether the concrete is light weight or normal weight, the moduli of elasticity of the tendons and the concrete. The loss from shrinkage of concrete depends on whether the tendons pretensioned or posttensioned the type and duration of curing method used, the ratio of volume to surface area and the relative humidity of the environment. The loss from the relaxation of tendons depend on the type of the tendons including grade, type of manufacturing process, the shrinkage loss, the creep loss the elastic shortening loss and the existing prestressing force. The loss from friction happens if the tendons are tensioned after the concrete is place. The computed one can easily be checked with reasonable accuracy by comparing the measured elongation and the prestressing force applied by the tensioning jack.

Summary of Stress-Strain Curves of normal and Light of Concrete in Compression Using computerized nonlinear analysis techniques, the ultimate behavior of the structural members is rationally predicted. However, to apply these techniques the material properties in terms of strain and stress relationship are to be described accurately. On top of that, there are no sufficient data that show the complete stress strain curves of concrete, especially for high strength concretes, partly due to the difficulty of experimentally measuring the descending portion of the curve. The main purpose of the paper is to obtain the stress and strain curve in compression of concrete specimens up to a strain of 0.006 and to develop an appropriate analytical relationship for the measured curves. These analytical curves can be an input for the numerical method analysis to capture the true physical behavior of the concrete under different loading scenarios. By conducting experimental tests using both normal weight concrete and light weight concrete with a range of strength and obtained from different mixes, the corresponding stress-strain curves were obtained. The analytical relation was then selected to contain constants which can be evaluated from only the knowledge of materials properties. Owing to the difficult of capturing the complete stress-strain relationships using the customary compressive testing machines, a simple technique was developed to obtain the stress-strain curve of the concrete up to the strain of 0.006 with a relatively better accuracy. Although the testing technique developed is simple and gives satisfactory results, it has certain limitations: The testing machine must apply load to both the steel tube and concrete cylinder, therefore, the size of the specimen is limited to by the capacity of the machine, The limit of 0.006 for final strain may be too small when the concrete is laterally confined by reinforcements, The measurement of strain is assumed as purely uniaxial but such state does not exist, The presence of the steel tube precludes any observations of the failure modes of the specimen during testing. From the experimental results, typical stress-strain curves for normal weight and light weight concrete specimens are obtained. Based on the curves, the following remarks can be made: Every stress-strain curve showed an inflection point, The failure of all the specimens was gradual The normal weight concrete, the strain at the peak stress as well as that at the inflection point did not seem vary substantially with the compressive strength For light weight concrete, the peak strain and the strain at the inflection point seem to increase with the compressive strength. It was also observed that the two stress-strain curves for normal weight and lightweight have ascending portions which are quite similar but their descending portions are not similar. Hence, the analytical model describing the stress-strain relationship should have parameters associated with the ascending as well as the descending portions.

The already proposed analytical equations to describe the stress-strain curves have the following comings: They are based on only the ascending part, They contain contains constants which can be changed to fit a given curve, and these constants are not based on any particular physical characteristics of the stress-strain curve, The descending part doesnt always have an inflection point or it doesnt show a long tail, which is a characteristic of concrete behavior. In this paper, the authors captured relatively the actual behavior of concrete by considering four parameters from the ascending and descending parts, the peak stress and its corresponding strain, and the secant modulus of elasticity at the peak stress. It was also possible to generate a stressstrain curve solely from the compressive strength values of the concrete by relating it with the four key points in the curve. Comparisons between the experimental data with the generalized analytical curve for both normal and lightweight concrete were conducted, and both of them showed good agreements. Having known that the analytical models worked well, a computer program was then written to generate a stress-strain curve for any given compressive strength and for a given type of aggregate. The type of aggregate dictates whether the concrete is normal weight or light weight. The analytical expression developed works well up to strains of 0.02 in compression.