'achieving the highest standards'

Specification and Guidelines

for
Self-Compacting Concrete

February 2002

EFNARC, Association House, 99 West Street, Farnham, Surrey GU9 7EN,

UK tel: +44 (0)1252 739147 fax: +44 (0)1252
739140 www.efnarc.org
FOREWORD

EFNARC is the European federation dedicated to specialist construction chemicals and concrete systems. It was
founded in March 1989 as the European federation of national trade associations representing producers and
applicators of specialist building products. Membership has since widened and now includes many of the major
European companies who have no national trade association to represent their interests either at national or
European level. EFNARC members are active throughout all the countries of Europe.

EFNARC main activities at European level and at CEN Technical committees are in flooring, the protection and
repair of concrete, in soft ground tunnelling, in sprayed concrete, and now in self- compacting concrete. It
provides a common voice for the industry to make known its position and view to the European Commission
departments dealing with the CPD, CEN Technical Committees and other Groups dealing with European
harmonisation of Specifications, Standards, Certification and CE marking relevant to our industry.

In each product area it operates through specialist Technical Committees that have been responsible for
producing Specifications and Guidelines which have become recognised as essential reference documents by
specifiers, contractors and material suppliers throughout Europe and beyond.

The utilisation of Self-compacting Concrete (SCC) is growing rapidly. The concrete community of various
European countries intensely researches its application and implements experiences. This Specification and
Guideline utilises EFNARC's broad practical experience with SCC to provide a framework for design and use of
high quality SCC. It is based on the latest research findings as well as an abundance of field experience from
EFNARC's members all over Europe.

However EFNARC recognises that this is a technology which is still evolving and further advances may
require this Specification's requirements to be modified or extended. The responsible Technical Committee will
continue to monitor progress in this field and it is our intention to update the document at regular intervals.
Feedback from those using this document is therefore invited and will be taken into account at the next revision.

All comments on this specification and its requirements should be submitted

to: Brian Poulson, EFNARC Secretary-General

Little Barn, 2 Beechwood Court, Syderstone, Norfolk, PE31 8TR,
UK Tel: +44 1485 578 796 Fax: +44 1485 578 193
E-mail: [email protected]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

EFNARC wishes to acknowledge gratefully

all the contributions and comments
made by members of its SCC Technical Committee
and by the participants at its industry
workshop at the University of Paisley in
December 2001

Although care has been taken to ensure, to the best of our knowledge that all data and information contained herein is
accurate to the extent that it relates to either matters of fact or accepted practice or matters of opinion at the time of
publication, EFNARC assumes no responsibility for any errors in or misrepresentation of such data and/or information or any
loss or damage arising from or related to its use.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or
by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of EFNARC.

ISBN 0 9539733 4 4 © EFNARC 2002

 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

1 INTRODUCTION

Self-compacting concrete (SCC) has been described as "the most revolutionary development in concrete
construction for several decades". Originally developed to offset a growing shortage of skilled labour, it has
proved beneficial economically because of a number of factors, including:

 faster construction
 reduction in site manpower
 better surface finishes
 easier placing
 improved durability
 greater freedom in design
 thinner concrete sections
 reduced noise levels, absence of vibration
 safer working environment

Originally developed in Japan, SCC technology was made possible by the much earlier development of
superplasticisers for concrete. SCC has now been taken up with enthusiasm across Europe, for both site and
precast concrete work. Practical application has been accompanied by much research into the physical and
mechanical characteristics of SCC and the wide range of knowledge generated has been sifted and combined in
this guideline document.

2 SCOPE

The EFNARC Specification defines specific requirements for the SCC material, its composition and its
application. The Annexes also include a wealth of useful advice to designers, concrete manufacturers,
contractors, specifying authorities and testing organisations.

3 REFERENCED STANDARDS

EN 197-1 Cement ; Composition, specifications and conformity criteria

EN 206-1 Concrete – Specification, performance, production, and conformity EN
450 Fly ash for concrete – Definitions, requirements and quality control EN
934-2 Admixtures for concrete – Definitions and requirements
EN 1008 Mixing water for concrete
EN 12350-1 Testing fresh concrete: Part 1: Sampling EN
12350-2 Testing fresh concrete: Part 2: Slump test EN
12620 Aggregates for concrete
EN 12878 Pigments for colouring of building materials based on cement …
EN 13263 Silica fume for concrete – Definitions, requirements and conformity control EN
ISO 9001 Quality management systems – Requirements

Note : Some of these EN standards may still be in preparation; the latest version should be referred to.

3.1 Requirements

SCC can be designed to fulfil the requirements of EN 206 regarding density, strength development, final strength
and durability.

Due to the high content of powder, SCC may show more plastic shrinkage or creep than ordinary concrete mixes.
These aspects should therefore be considered during designing and specifying SCC. Current knowledge of these
aspects is limited and this is an area requiring further research. Special care should also be taken to begin curing
the concrete as early as possible.

The workability of SCC is higher than the highest class of consistence described within EN 206 and can be
characterised by the following properties:

 Filling ability
 Passing ability
 Segregation resistance

A concrete mix can only be classified as Self-compacting Concrete if the requirements for
all three characteristics are fulfilled.
3
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

3.2 Test methods

Many different test methods have been developed in attempts to characterise the properties of SCC. So far no
single method or combination of methods has achieved universal approval and most of them have their adherents.
Similarly no single method has been found which characterises all the relevant workability aspects so each mix
design should be tested by more than one test method for the different workability parameters.

Alternative test methods for the different parameters are listed in Tables 1 and 2. The test methods are described in
detail in Annex D.

Table 1: List of test methods for workability properties of SCC

Method Property
1 Slump-flow by Abrams cone Filling ability
2 T50cmslumpflow Filling ability
3 J-ring Passing ability
4 V-funnel Filling ability
5 V-funnel at T5minutes Segregation resistance
6 L-box Passing ability
7 U-box Passing ability
8 Fill-box Passing ability
9 GTM screen stability test Segregation resistance
10 Orimet Filling ability

For the initial mix design of SCC all three workability parameters need to be assessed to ensure that all aspects
are fulfilled. A full-scale test should be used to verify the self-compacting characteristics of the chosen design
for a particular application.

4
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

For site quality control, two test methods are generally sufficient to monitor production quality. Typical
combinations are Slump-flow and V-funnel or Slump-flow and J-ring. With consistent raw material quality, a
single test method operated by a trained and experienced technician may be sufficient.

Table 2: Workability properties of SCC and alternative test methods

Property Test methods

Lab Field Modification of test
(mix design) (QC) according to
max. aggregate
size
Filling ability 1 Slumpflow 1 Slumpflow none
2 T50cmslumpflow 2 T50cmslumpflow
4 V-funnel 4 V-funnel max 20 mm
10 Orimet 10 Orimet
Passing ability 6 L-box 3 J-ring Different openings in L-box,
7 U-box U-box and J-ring
8 Fill-box
Segregation 9 GTM test 9 GTM test None
resistance 5 V-funnel at T5minutes 5 V-funnel at T5minutes

3.3 Workability criteria for the fresh SCC

These requirements are to be fulfilled at the time of placing. Likely changes in workability during
transport should be taken into account in production.

Typical acceptance criteria for Self-compacting Concrete with a maximum aggregate size up to 20 mm are
shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Acceptance criteria for Self-compacting Concrete.

Typical range of values

Method Unit Minimum Maximum
1 slumpflow by Abrams cone mm 650 800
2 T50cmslumpflow sec 2 5
3 J-ring mm 0 10
4 V-funnel sec 6 12
5 Time increase, V-funnel at T5minutes sec 0 +3
6 L-box (h2/h1) 0,8 1,0
7 U-box (h2-h1) mm 0 30
8 Fill-box % 90 100
9 GTM Screen stability test % 0 15
10 Orimet sec 0 5

These typical requirements shown against each test method are based on current knowledge and practice.
However future developments may lead to different requirements being adopted. Values outside these ranges may
be acceptable if the producer can demonstrate satisfactory performance in the specific conditions, eg, large spaces
between reinforcement, layer thickness less than 500 mm, short distance of flow from point of discharge, very few
obstructions to pass in the formwork, very simple design of formwork, etc.

Special care should always be taken to ensure no segregation of the mix is likely as, at present, there is not a
simple and reliable test that gives information about segregation resistance of SCC in all practical situations.
Further important comments on the suitability of the test methods are provided in Annex D.

GUIDANCE NOTES
5
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

ANNEX B: CHECKLIST
The Checklist has been designed to aid Specifiers, Producers and Contractors in ensuring that all key elements
of a SCC application have been considered ahead of the work starting.

Property Reference Requirement Validation

MIX CONSTITUENTS
Compliance of EN 197 -1
Cement Control of the cement type
Recommended cement amount: 350-450 Kg.
Compliance of EN 12620
Aggregates Control of particles smaller than 0,125 mm
Control of moisture content
Determination of the sieve curve
Compatibility with the space between reinforcement
Mixing Water Compliance of prEN 1008
Compliance of EN 934-2
Admixtures Determination of the types needed
Determination of the expected dosage
Compliance of prEN 12620, EN 450 or prEN 13263
Additions Determination of the sieve curve
Definition of the addition to be used
Determination of the increase of the water demand
Pigments Compliance of 12878
Raw materials Definition of all raw materials to be used
MIX COMPOSITION
Execute the mix design
Coarse aggregate < 50%
Water powder ratio = 0,8-1,0
Mix design Total powder content 400-600 Kg /m3
Sand content > 40 % of the mortar (volume)
Sand < 50% of paste volume
Sand > 50% by weight of total aggregate
Free water < 200 l
Paste > 40 % of the volume of the mix
WORKABILITY TESTS
Slump flow - Abrams 650 – 800 mm
T 50cm slump flow 2 – 5 sec
J Ring 0 – 10 mm
V Funnel 8 – 12 sec
V Funnel- T 5min + 3 sec.
L Box H2 / H1 = 0,8-1,0
U Box H2-H1 = 30 mm max
Fill Box 90 – 100 %
Screen Stability 0 – 15 %
Orimet test 0 – 5 sec
PROPERTIES OF HARDENED CONCRETE
Mechanical strength Achieving the expected values after 24h, 7d, 28d
Shrinkage As specified
Mod. of elasticity Achieving the expected values
CONFIRMATORY TESTS
Filling ability
Passing ability
Full scale test Segregation resistance
Maintenance of the workability > 1 hour

6
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

ANNEX C: TROUBLE-SHOOTING GUIDE

Causes for not fulfilling the specified requirements can be very diverse. In Tables C.1a and C.1b, a list is
provided of possible causes for not fulfilling the requirements of the different tests.

If a certain test result is out of range this can have different causes. The possible cause can be found with more
certainty by checking the value to other test methods and subjectively checking the workability characteristics. In
this way the best possible action for solving a problem can be found. Table C.2 provides a list of possible actions
and the effect that usually occurs in concrete. It is obvious that the effect depends upon the size of the action and
on the actual workability and composition of the concrete mix. Every action can have both positive and negative
effect on the different concrete characteristics.

If the test results between different batches or loads vary considerably, the cause can be the variation of: cement
characteristics,
addition characteristics, grading
of aggregates,
moisture content of aggregates,
temperature,
mixing procedure, time of testing

The use of a viscosity modifying agent (VMA) can suppress some of these variations to a certain extent. For the

understanding of these tables the following definitions apply:

'Yield value' is the force (shear stress) that must be exerted on a material to initiate flow.

'Viscosity' is a measure of the resistance of a material to flow due to internal friction (and is the ratio of applied
stress to shear rate)

'Blockage' occurs when a material cannot flow through a specified opening (or orifice) due to interlocking of the
aggregate particles

Table C.1a: Fault-finding for low results

result less than possible cause

1 slumpflow by Abrams cone mm 650 a viscosity too high

c yield value too high
2 T50cmslumpflow sec 2 b viscosity too low
3 J-ring mm 10 a viscosity too high
c yield value too high
d segregation
f blockage
4 V-funnel sec 8 b viscosity too low
5 Increase in V-funnel at T5minutes sec g doubtful result
6 L-box (h2/h1) 0,8 a viscosity too high
c yield value too high
f blockage
7 U-box (h2-h1) mm 0 g false result
8 Fill-box % 90 a viscosity too high
c yield value too high
9 Screen stability test % 5 a viscosity too high
f blockage

7
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

Table C.1b: Fault-finding for high results

result more than possible cause

1 slumpflow by Abrams cone mm 750 b viscosity too low

d segregation
2 T50cmslumpflow sec 5 a viscosity too high
c yield value too high
3 J-ring mm b viscosity too low
d segregation
4 V-funnel sec 12 a viscosity too high
c yield value too high
f blockage
5 Increase in V-funnel at T5minutes sec 3 d segregation
e rapid loss in workability
f blockage
6 L-box (h2/h1) 1 g false result
7 U-box (h2-h1) mm 30 a viscosity too high
c yield value too high
f blockage
8 Fill-box % 100 g false result
9 Screen stability test % 15 d segregation

8
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

Table C.2: Possible corrective actions from identified faults

possible action effect on:

passing segregation
filling ability strength shrinkage creep
ability resistance
a viscosity too high
a1 increase watercontent + + - - - -
a2 increase paste volume + + + + - -
a3 increase superplasticiser + + - + 0 0
b viscosity too low
b1 reduce watercontent - - + + + +
b2 reduce paste volume - - - - + +
b3 reduce superlasticiser - - + - 0 0
b4 increase viscosity modifying agent - - + 0 0 0
b5 use finer powder + + + 0 - -
b6 use finer sand + + + 0 - 0
c yield value too high
c1 increase superplasticiser + + - + 0 0
c2 increase paste volume + + + + - -
c3 increase mortar volume + + + + - -
d segregation
d1 increase paste volume + + + + - -
d2 increase mortar volume + + + + - -
d3 reduce watercontent - - + + + +
d4 use finer powder + + + 0 - -
e rapid loss in workability
e1 use slower reacting cement type 0 0 - - 0 0
e2 increase retarder 0 0 - - 0 0
e3 use different superplasticiser ? ? ? ? ? ?
e4 exchange filler for cement ? ? ? ? ? ?
f blockage
f1 reduce maximum aggregate size + + + - - -
f2 increase paste volume + + + + - -
f3 increase mortar volume + + + + - -
g false result
g1 check test conditions n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

+ gives usually a better result for concrete

0 has usually no significant result
- gives usually a worse result for concrete
? Effect cannot be predicted
n.a. not applicable

9
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

ANNEX D: TEST METHODS

Introduction

It is important to appreciate that none of the test methods for SCC has yet been standardised, and the tests
described are not yet perfected or definitive. The methods presented here are descriptions rather than fully
detailed procedures. They are mainly ad-hoc methods, which have been devised specifically for SCC.

Existing rheological test procedures have not been considered here, though the relationship between the results of
these tests and the rheological characteristics of the concrete is likely to figure highly in future work, including
standardisation work. Many of the comments made come from the experience of the partners in the EU-funded
research project on SCC (7). A further EU project on test methods is about to start.

In considering these tests, there are a number of points which should be taken into account:
 one principal difficulty in devising such tests is that they have to assess three distinct, though related,
properties of fresh SCC – its filling ability (flowability), its passing ability (free from blocking at
reinforcement), and its resistance to segregation (stability). No single test so far devised can
measure all three properties.
 there is no clear relation between test results and performance on site;
 there is little precise data, therefore no clear guidance on compliance limits;
 duplicate tests are advised;
 the test methods and values are stated for maximum aggregate size of up to 20 mm; different test values
and/or different equipment dimensions may be appropriate for other aggregate sizes;
 different test values may be appropriate for concrete being placed in vertical and horizontal elements;
 similarly, different test values may be appropriate for different reinforcement densities;
 in performing the tests, concrete should be sampled in accordance with EN 12350-1. It is wise to remix
the concrete first with a scoop, unless the procedure indicates otherwise.

V funnel test and V funnel test at T 5minutes

Introduction
The test was developed in Japan and used by Ozawa et al (5). The equipment consists of a V-shaped funnel, shown
in Fig.D.4.1. An alternative type of V-funnel, the O funnel, with a circular section is also used in Japan.
The described V-funnel test is used to determine the filling ability (flowability) of the concrete with a maximum
aggregate size of 20mm. The funnel is filled with about 12 litre of concrete and the time taken for it to flow
through the apparatus measured.
After this the funnel can be refilled concrete and left for 5 minutes to settle. If the concrete shows
segregation then the flow time will increase significantly.

Assessment of test
Though the test is designed to measure flowability, the result is affected by concrete properties other than flow.
The inverted cone shape will cause any liability of the concrete to block to be reflected in the result – if, for
example there is too much coarse aggregate. High flow time can also be associated with low deformability due
to a high paste viscosity, and with high inter-particle friction.
While the apparatus is simple, the effect of the angle of the funnel and the wall effect on the flow of concrete is
not clear.

Figure D.4.1: V-funnel test equipment (rectangular section)

1
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

Equipment
 V-funnel
 bucket ( ±12 litre )
 trowel
 scoop
 stopwatch

Procedure flow time

About 12 litre of concrete is needed to perform the test, sampled normally. Set the
V-funnel on firm ground.
Moisten the inside surfaces of the funnel.
Keep the trap door open to allow any surplus water to drain.
Close the trap door and place a bucket underneath.
Fill the apparatus completely with concrete without compacting or tamping, simply strike off the concrete
level with the top with the trowel.
Open within 10 sec after filling the trap door and allow the concrete to flow out under gravity.
Start the stopwatch when the trap door is opened, and record the time for the discharge to complete (the flow
time). This is taken to be when light is seen from above through the funnel.
The whole test has to be performed within 5 minutes.

1
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

Procedure flow time at T 5 minutes

Do NOT clean or moisten the inside surfaces of the funnel again.
Close the trap door and refill the V-funnel immediately after measuring the flow time. Place a
bucket underneath.
Fill the apparatus completely with concrete without compacting or tapping, simply strike off the concrete level
with the top with the trowel.
Open the trap door 5 minutes after the second fill of the funnel and allow the concrete to flow out under
gravity.
Simultaneously start the stopwatch when the trap door is opened, and record the time for the discharge to
complete (the flow time at T 5 minutes). This is taken to be when light is seen from above through the funnel.

Interpretation of result
This test measures the ease of flow of the concrete; shorter flow times indicate greater flowability. For SCC a
flow time of 10 seconds is considered appropriate. The inverted cone shape restricts flow, and prolonged flow
times may give some indication of the susceptibility of the mix to blocking.
After 5 minutes of settling, segregation of concrete will show a less continuous flow with an increase in flow
time.

L box test method

Introduction
This test, based on a Japanese design for underwater concrete, has been described by Petersson (2). The test
assesses the flow of the concrete, and also the extent to which it is subject to blocking by reinforcement. The
apparatus is shown in figure D.6.1.
The apparatus consists of a rectangular-section box in the shape of an ‘L’, with a vertical and horizontal section,
separated by a moveable gate, in front of which vertical lengths of reinforcement bar are fitted. The vertical
section is filled with concrete, then the gate lifted to let the concrete flow into the horizontal section. When the
flow has stopped, the height of the concrete at the end of the horizontal section is expressed as a proportion of that
remaining in the vertical section (H2/H1in the diagram). It indicates the slope of the concrete when at rest. This
is an indication passing ability, or the degree to which the passage of concrete through the bars is restricted.
The horizontal section of the box can be marked at 200mm and 400mm from the gate and the times taken to
reach these points measured. These are known as the T20 and T40 times and are an indication for the filling ability.
The sections of bar can be of different diameters and spaced at different intervals: in accordance with normal
reinforcement considerations, 3x the maximum aggregate size might be appropriate.
The bars can principally be set at any spacing to impose a more or less severe test of the passing ability
of the concrete.

Assessment of test
This is a widely used test, suitable for laboratory, and perhaps site use. It assesses filling and passing ability of
SCC, and serious lack of stability (segregation) can be detected visually. Segregation may also be detected by
subsequently sawing and inspecting sections of the concrete in the horizontal section.
Unfortunately there is no agreement on materials, dimensions, or reinforcing bar arrangement, so it is
difficult to compare test results. There is no evidence of what effect the wall of the apparatus and the
consequent ‘wall effect’ might have on the concrete flow, but this arrangement does, to some extent,
replicate what happens to concrete on site when it is confined within formwork.
Two operators are required if times are measured, and a degree of operator error is inevitable.

Equipment
 L box of a stiff non absorbing material see figure D.6.1.
 trowel
 scoop
 stopwatch

1
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

Figure D.6.1: L-box

Procedure
About 14 litre of concrete is needed to perform the test, sampled normally.
Set the apparatus level on firm ground, ensure that the sliding gate can open freely and then close it. Moisten the
inside surfaces of the apparatus, remove any surplus water
Fill the vertical section of the apparatus with the concrete sample. Leave it to
stand for 1 minute.
Lift the sliding gate and allow the concrete to flow out into the horizontal section.
Simultaneously, start the stopwatch and record the times taken for the concrete to reach the 200 and 400 mm
marks.
When the concrete stops flowing, the distances “H1” and “H2” are measured.
Calculate H2/H1, the blocking ratio.
The whole test has to be performed within 5 minutes.

Interpretation of result
If the concrete flows as freely as water, at rest it will be horizontal, so H 2/H1 = 1. Therefore the nearer this test
value, the ‘blocking ratio’, is to unity, the better the flow of the concrete. The EU research team suggested a
minimum acceptable value of 0.8. T20 and T40 times can give some indication of ease of flow, but no suitable values
have been generally agreed. Obvious blocking of coarse aggregate behind the reinforcing bars can be detected
visually.

1
 Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete

ANNEX E: References

1. Japan Society of Civil Engineers, ‘Recommendations for Design and Construction of Anti-
washout Underwater Concrete’, Concrete library of JSCE, 19 (1992) 89 p.
2. Petersson, Ö., Billberg, P., Van, B.K., ‘A model for self-compacting Concrete’, Proceedings of
International RILEM Conference on ‘Production Methods and Workability of Concrete’, edited by
P.J.M. Bartos, et al. (Chapman & Hall/E & FN Spon) (Paisley, 1996) 483-490.
3. Bartos, P.J.M., ‘An appraisal of the Orimet Test as a Method for On-site Assessment of Fresh SCC
Concrete’, Proceedings of International Workshop on Self-Compacting Concrete, (Japan, August 1998)
121-135.
4. Haykawa, M., ‘Development and Application of Super Workable Concrete’, Proceedings of
International RILEM Workshop on ‘Special Concretes - Workability and Mixing’, edited by Prof.
P.J.M. Bartos, (Paisley, 1993) 183-190.
5. Ozawa, K., Sakata, N., Okamura, H., ‘Evaluation of Self-Compactibility of Fresh Concrete Using the
Funnel Test’, Concrete Library of JSCE, (25) (June 1995) 59-75.
6. Rooney, M., Bartos, P.M.J., ‘Development of the settlement column segregation test for fresh self-
compacting concrete (SCC)’, to appear in the second international symposium on SCC, Tokyo, Japan
(2001).
7. Brite-EuRam programme: BE96-3801/BRPR-CT96-0366, ‘Rational production and improved
working environment through using self-compacting concrete’.
8. Henderson N A, Baldwin N J R, McKibbins L D, Winsor D S, & Shanghavi H B, 'Concrete
technology for foundation applications', CIRIA Report C569: 2002

© EFNARC 2002

Applications to reproduce all or part of this

document should be made to EFNARC
at the address shown on the title page