Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
,
whereas several of the more recent advances in
both wet-mix and dry-mix shotcrete technology
have taken place in Canada. Research initiatives
in both the private sector and the universities,
particularly the University of British Columbia
and University Laval, Quebec, were instrumental
in driving these advances.
There are now over a hundred publications in
the technical literature detailing these advances in
shotcrete technology in general, and providing case
history examples of the use of shotcrete for infrastructure repair/retrot in particular. The following
are some useful sources of information:
American Shotcrete Association:
Shotcrete (four issues per year since 1999),
www.shotcrete.org
Shotcrete Training Schools
American Concrete Institute (ACI)
ACI 506R-90, Guide to Shotcrete
ACI 506.2-95, Specication for Shotcrete
ACI CCS-4, Shotcrete for the Craftsman
ACI C 660, Shotcrete Nozzleman Certication
ASTM International
Specications for Shotcrete Materials
Standard Test Methods
Standard Practices for Sampling and Testing
American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Ofcials (AASHTO-AGC-ARTBA)
Task Force 37 Report, Guide Specications
for Shotcrete Repair of Highway Bridges,
February, 1998.2
Task Force 37 Report, Inspectors Guide
for Shotcrete Repair of Bridges, December,
1999.
Overview
Marine Structures
In 1995, a prototype repair program was undertaken of berth faces at the Port of Montreal in the
St. Lawrence River.7 The combined effects of frost
damage, alkali-aggregate reactivity, and deicing
chemical attack had caused severe deterioration of
the original concrete structure. In some places, the
concrete was turning into rubble. Repairs were
carried out by removing disintegrated material, as
shown in Fig. 4, and applying a tied-back and
anchored wet-mix, air-entrained, silica fume
shotcrete. Approximately two-thirds of the berth
Air content
Total
Slump
Minimum 28-day compressive strength
Maximum boiled absorption
7 1%
3818
3 in
5800 psi
8%
20
7 1%
2265
80 20 mm
40 MPa
8%
Specied
Actual
5670 psi
39.1 MPa
200 m
1.4 in.1
35.8 mm1
Mass
lb/yd3
674
kg/m3
400
Silica fume
76
45
50
30
758
45
2040
1210
8.4
303
180
Fly ash
Coarse aggregate
10 to 25 mm (SSD)
Fine aggregate* (SSD)
*
Synthetic ber
Water (estimate)
Water-reducing admixture
of the seawall has demonstrated remarkable durability, considering its age and the exposure conditions.
By 2000, however, there were numerous locations,
comprising approximately 1640 ft (500 m) in total
length, where waves and tidal action had caused
scour and erosion, undermining the seawall. Figure 8
shows one such location near Siwash Rock where
scour and erosion from wave and tidal action had
created a cave in the sandstone under the seawall.
The seawall was repaired in these environmentally sensitive intertidal regions using a specially
designed air-entrained, wet-mix, silica fume
shotcrete reinforced with macrosynthetic bers.
The shotcrete mixture design and specied and
actual shotcrete performance characteristics are
shown in Tables 4 and 5, respectively.
The shotcrete was supplied in 1763 lb (800 kg)
bulk bin bags that were discharged into a 2.6 yd3
(2 m3) tilting drum mixer mounted on a atbed
truck. All shotcrete equipment and materials were
mounted on a shotcrete train that moved along the
seawall performing the underpinning repairs
where required. Figure 7 shows a view of the
shotcrete train. On relatively calm days, when there
was no major wave action, the contractor was able
to continue shotcreting until about half an hour
before the incoming tide reached the work, with
no washout or detrimental effects on the shotcrete.
Standard dose
Total
7 to 10%
7 to 10%
4%
4%
3910
2320
Combined coarse and ne aggregate gradation to conform to ACI 506R-90 Table 2.1 Gradation
No. 2 requirements
*
MPa
Specied
47.3
30 MPa
53.9
40 MPa
ASTM C 642
7 days
8%
5.0%
8%
ASTM C 642
7 days
17%
11.0%
17%
Fig. 9: Shotcrete repairs to damaged concretefaced rip-rap in the Devonian Park part of
Stanley Park Seawall
Shotcrete
4.0%
1.4 in.1
0.0067 in.
13.4%
5.6%
0 to 0.04 in.
72.5 to 160 psi
7395 psi
4.0%
35.7 mm1
0.17 mm
13.4%
5.6%
0 to 1 mm
0.5 to 1.1 MPa
51 MPa
Bridges
General
758 lb/yd3
2545 lb/yd3
450 kg/m3
1510 kg/m3
396 lb/yd3
235 kg/m3
1.69 lb/yd3
Air-entraining admixture
26 to 52 oz/yd3
1.0 kg/m3
1 to 3 L/m3
(approximately 150 ml/L
of shooting water)
4350 psi
5800 psi
30 MPa
40 MPa
4.5%
4.5%
10.2%
10.2%
4.5%
4.5%
1150 Coulombs
0.4 kg/m2
Repair of deteriorated aqueducts, pressure headrace tunnels, canals, and other water conveyance
devices;
Repair of deteriorated and leaking swimming
pools, water reservoirs, sumps, pits, sewage
treatment facilities, and other liquid containing
facilities;
Repair of 50-year-old concrete ships now
used as a breakwater at Powell River, British
Columbia19,20 (refer to Fig. 15); and
Repair of a steel framed terracotta and masonry
clad heritage high rise building. 21 (refer to
Fig. 16).
Space precludes a detailed discussion of these
various projects, but references are provided for
the projects that have been written up by the author
or others and published in technical literature.
Closure
References
7. Morgan, D.R.; Rich, L.; and Lobo, A., About FaceRepair at the Port of Montreal, Concrete International, V. 20,
No. 9, Sept. 1998, pp. 66-73.
8. Gendrau, M.; Beaupr, D.; Lacombe, P.; and De
Montigny, J., Use of Dry-Mix Shotcrete to Repair a Lighthouse
Structure, Shotcrete, V. 2, No. 4, Fall 2000, pp. 16-20.
9. Morgan, D.R.; Ezzet, M.; and Pfhol, C., Rehabilitation of
the Seawall at Stanley Park, BC, Canada with Synthetic FiberReinforced Shotcrete, Shotcrete: More Engineering Developments, 2nd International Conference on Engineering Developments in Shotcrete, Cairns, Australia, Oct. 4, 2004, pp. 201-208.
10. Forrest, M.P.; Morgan, D.R.; Obermeyer, J.R.; Parker,
P.L.; and LaMoreaux, D.D., Seismic Retrot of Littlerock
Dam, Concrete International, V. 17., No. 11, Nov. 1995,
pp. 30-36.
11. Heere, R., Durability of Shotcrete Rehabilitation Treatments of BC Hydro Dams, Masters of Applied Sciences
thesis, University of British Columbia, Feb. 1995, pp. 201.
12. Heere, R.; Morgan, D. R.; Banthia, N.; and Yogendran,
Y., Evaluation of Shotcrete Repaired Concrete Dams in
British Columbia, Concrete International, V. 18, No. 3, Mar.
1996, pp. 24-29.
13. Town, R., Restoring the Century-Old Wachussett
Aqueduct, Shotcrete, V. 6, No. 3, Summer, 2004, pp. 2-4.
14. Morgan, D.R., and Neill, J., Durability of Shotcrete
Rehabilitation Treatments of Bridges, Transportation Association of Canada Annual Conference, Winnipeg, Manitoba,
Sept. 15-19, 1991, p. 36.
15. Venzina, D.; Talbot, C.; Gendreau, M.; Pigeon, M.; and
Morgan, D.R., Development of Durable Dry-Mix Shotcrete
in Quebec, Shotcrete, V. 3, No. 2, Spring 2001, pp. 18-20.
16. Beaupr, D.; Talbot, C.; Gendreau, M.; Pigeon, M.; and
Morgan, D.R., Deicer Salt Scaling Resistance of Dry- and
Wet-Process Shotcrete, ACI Materials Journal, V. 91, No. 5,
Sept.-Oct. 1994, pp. 487-494.
17. Talbot, C.; Pigeon, M.; Beaupr, D.; and Morgan, D.
R., Inuence of Surface Preparation on Long-Term Bonding
of Shotcrete, ACI Materials Journal, V. 91, No. 6, Nov.-Dec.
1994, pp. 560-566.
18. Collins, P.; Adebar, P.; Sealbrook, P.; Kuchma, D.; and
Sacre, P., External Repair of Cracked Grain Silos, Concrete
International, V. 19, No. 11, Nov. 1997, pp. 22-28.
19. McAskill, N. A.; Morgan, D. R.; Hatch, D.; and Osualdini,
M., Evaluation and Restoration of World War I and II Concrete
Ships, Third ACI/CANMET International Conference on
Durability of Concrete (supplementary papers), V. M. Malhotra,
ed., Nice, France, May 22-27, American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, Mich., 1994, p.14.
20. McAskill, N. A., and Heere, R., Shotcrete Repair of WWII
Concrete Hulks, Shotcrete, V. 6, No. 3, Summer 2004, pp. 10-14.
21. Heere, R.; Morgan, D. R.; McAskill, N. A.; and Knowlton,
T., Shotcrete Rehabilitation of a Vancouver, BC, Historic High
Rise Building, Shotcrete, V. 1, No. 4, Nov. 1999, pp. 10-13.