In this comparative study, four popular design methods are chosen and three particular aspects are included, namely, the versatility of the methods, the economy and the accuracy of their prescriptions. It is concluded that LJ Murdock's method, though relatively cumbersome, is the most flexible whereas the British Department Of The Environment (DOE) procedure, the simplest. Murdock's prescriptions are also found to be the most economical over a large strength range while the New Zealand-PCA method prevails over the remainder; the ACI method yields the most expensive mixes and the DOE's lie somewhere in between for most cases. Results from a test programme indicate that the actual strengths of the mixes prescribed by all four methods are considerably lower than the design values. This is attributable to the poorer strength quality of the locally manufactured cement. Remedial measures are suggested to make each method applicable under given conditions. The number of the covering abstract for the conference is TRIS no 394142. (Author/TRRL)

Media Info

  • Features: Figures; References; Tables;
  • Pagination: p. 18-23

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00394144
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Source Agency: ARRB
  • ISBN: 0-85825-201-5
  • Report/Paper Numbers: 83/12
  • Files: ITRD, TRIS, ATRI
  • Created Date: Aug 31 1985 12:00AM