Effect of Production and Curing Methods on the Properties of Roller-Compacted Concrete: A Review

Abstract

Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) exhibits many characteristics of both asphalt and rigid pavements, but their use is restricted. Many reasons led to this decision, including the fact that RCC is a type of concrete mixture that requires a specific consistency. It should be firm enough to be compacted by a roller compactor but also have enough moisture to ensure even distribution. The lab-field performance difference of RCC is another reason for decreasing its use. The laboratory RCC mixes are prepared using the modified Proctor compaction method. Subsequently, specimens are fabricated utilizing a vibratory hammer (VH) to evaluate their strength properties. Nevertheless, in the construction industry, pavement is built utilizing static, pneumatic, and vibratory rollers. Consequently, quality control is carried out by acquiring pavement samples and comparing them to laboratory samples. Each of these procedures employs different processes and energies, resulting in variations in field and laboratory behavior. In this investigation, some studies will be discussed about the RCC behavior under field and lab conditions using various design methods, such as the vibrating table (VH), vibratory table (VT), gyratory compactor (GC), and modified proctor (MP). These studies showed a difference in RCC mechanical and macroscale properties between laboratory compaction methods. For instance, VH specimens led to a higher evaluation, while GY specimens produced a less favorable estimation of the hardened properties observed in the field. While the MP and VT compacted specimens had a comparable structural arrangement to the field, they exhibited notable differences in terms of porosity and strength. Other studies revealed the essence of the curing stage in terms of RCC mechanical properties and indicated that some curing processes, like compound curing, may improve RCC performance.