Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Portlands vs. Blended Hydraulics

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Dee;

TxDot has evolved a good experience history and spec for fly ash.  The spec,
source('s), and chemistry seems to be the key (when isn't it).  Without a
good spec and tight control of the materials you'll have problems.

A great deal of work has also be done at the Univ. of Texas on this as well.
No doubt there are several other sources of experience as well.  A simple
starting point might be to look at a TxDot spec.  You should visit
www.dot.state.tx.us and search on "fly ash".

cmd


----- Original Message -----
From: Dee Henrie <dee(--nospam--at)adamsmithinc.com>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 1999 3:26 PM
Subject: RE: Portlands vs. Blended Hydraulics


>
>
> Although I am in steel construction, I attend construction coordination
> meeting regularly.  The question came up regarding the addition of fly ash
> and why it was not allowed on this particular project.  The Owners Rep.
had
> had a bad experience with it and would not allow it and the Structural
> Design Engineer said it was company policy not to allow it.  I can
> understand the Owners rep comment, but the Engineers was interesting.  My
> point before I ramble much farther and expose my ignorance is this.
> Does the addition of fly ash provide an improved Concrete, and in
> what area's?
> In Durability
> Workability
> Crack resistance
> Freeze thaw breakdown resistance
> Alkalinity improvement (reduce carbonation)
> Finish
> I look forward to the final word on this.
>
> Dee Henrie
> Adams & Smith Inc.
>
>
>