CSA Material Selection Criteria

ConSpec Associates, Inc.
Materials Selection Criteria
Forced Ranking
Flashcards for Engineers

CSA Material Selection Criteria ©’93
OBJECTIVE DEFENDABLE
SPECIFICATIONS
Purpose: In-Depth method of proper
material selection based upon
individual project needs and
anticipated material performance.

SPECIFICATIONS
Scope: Analyze, set order of priority for
material properties needed, evaluate
materials based on those properties,
and specify materials in order of
“anticipated” performance.

SPECIFICATIONS
System
Three sets of evaluation cards plus
worksheet & instructions

• OBJECTIVE (White) – These properties re
those that are quantifiable by ASTM,
AASHTO, or other recognized test
procedure
• SUBJECTIVE (Canary) – Properties or
Attributes not easily quantified, heavily
dependant upon individual preference
• PROCEDURAL (Green) – Field
accountability of all aspects of repair from
pre-bid site visit to final punch list.
SPECIFICATIONS

SPECIFICATIONS
OVERVIEW – Repair projects have for some time
been reviewed, evaluated, and specified based
upon “New Construction” criteria. In many
cases, these criteria are not only inappropriate
but also counterproductive to the repair process.
A new thought process must be undertaken if
the repair is to be a success.

• Select Objective cards based upon the
material properties/needs of the project.
• Place them in order of priority/need for
the condition under consideration.
• Insert the resultant list (in order) in the
column “PROPERTY” on the
selection table.
INSTRUCTIONS
OBJECTIVE PROPERTIES

INSTRUCTIONS
– List the 3, 4 or more manufacturers being
considered under “MFGR”.
– Determine each manufacture’s number
(psi, inches/inch, etc.) for each property
and assign a rating from 4 (BEST) to 1
(WORST). Inserting in appropriate
manufacturer’s R (Rating) column for
each property. (NOTE: Best is not
always the highest number for a given
property, i.e., the lower the shrinkage the
better.)

INSTRUCTIONS
- Multiply the W (Weight) by the R (Rating) to
get the T (Totals) for each property and
sum the results to get a weighted total.
(NOTE: Do not be limited by the property cards
included in the CSA deck, or by the total of ten lines on
the Product Selection Table. Other properties such as
ELONGATION, VISCOSITY, etc., may be applicable for
the particular product you are analyzing, such as
urethane, epoxy or other repair material. The CSA
Material Selection Criteria should be a solid base but
not “Carved-In-Stone” depending on your particular
needs.)

• Analyze the products to see if any
do not meet a specified “minimum”
or “maximum” criteria you may
have for a particular property.
Eliminate the product if this is the
case.
• List the products in your
specification in order of
performance, not in alphabetical or
order of familiarity.
INSTRUCTIONS

BOND
STRENGTH
(psi)
FLEXURAL
STRENGTH
(psi)
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psi)
SPLITTING
TENSILE
STRENGTH
(psi)

SHRINKAGE
(inch/inch)
RAPID
CHLORIDE
PERMEABILITY
(Coulombs)
MODULUS OF
ELASTICITY IN
COMPRESSION
(psi)
LINEAR COEF.
OF THERMAL
EXPANSION
(inch/inch/deg.f)

ABRASION
RESISTANCE
H22 WHEEL
(% loss)
WATER
ABSORPTION
(%)
WATER VAPOR
TRANSMISSION
(US Perms)
CHLORIDE ION
PENETRATION
(% water absorption
reduction)

POTLIFE
(minutes)

SUBJECTIVE PROPERTIES
USER
FRIENDLY
FAMILIARITY
PAST
PERFORMANCE
TRACK RECORD
COST
MFGR'S
REPUTATION
TECHNICAL
SUPPORT
SINGLE
SOURCE
RESPONSIBILITY
LOCAL
AVAILABILITY
DEPTH OF
PRODUCT LINE
RANGE OF ARCH
COATINGS, COLORS & TEXTURES

PROCEDURAL
SITE VISITS
ARCHITECT
ENGINEER
PUNCHLIST
SIGN-OFF
PRE-BID
VISIT - MEETING
PRE-
CONSTRUCTION
MEETING
FIELD
MOCKUP
SITE VISITS
MANUFACTURER
INSTALLER
CERTIFICATION
CONTROLLED
INSPECTION

CSA MATERIAL SELECTION CRITERIA
PRODUCT SELECTION TABLE
MFGR 1 PRODUCT
MFGR 2 PRODUCT
MFGR 3 PRODUCT
MFGR 4 PRODUCT

Please note: Shrinkage compensated does not mean 0%
shrinkage. Actual shrinkage should be reported in inches/inch
or percentage(%). Also 0% expansion does not mean a material
has no shrinkage and again should be reported as inches/inch
or percentage(%). When wet and dry shrinkage values are
given, dry shrinkage is a more stringent test and closer to field
conditions. All comparative test results must be from the same
ASTM/AASHTO test method.
If no values are available or Max/Min are exceeded T=0 (ie W x R
therefore = 0 )
W = Weight R =Rating (1-4) T = Total (W x R)

CSA Preliminary Material Review
for 9 Products ©’93
Bonsal Conproco Euclid Five Star Degussa Degussa Sika Silpro Sto
# of Mfgrs providing
Same Tests
V.O. Repair Conpro Set Verticoat St Conc V/O HBA HB2 123 Plus VO Patch OhMor 702
Agency Standard Property a b c d e f g h i
ASTM C39 Comp Str 4000 5000 2 of 9
ASTM C39 Coef of TE 4.8 x 10-6 4.5 x 10-6 2 of 9
ASTM C109 Comp Str 5000 6525 6500 5000 5000 5800 7000 63008 of 9
ASTM C157 Len Change 500 0.04% 350 350 0.19% 0.10% 6 of 9
ASTM C191 Set Time 14 - 20 25 - 40 15 - 30 180 - 240 20 - 30 5 of 9
ASTM C293 Flex Str 2000 15002 of 9
ASTM C307 Tensile 680 1 of 9
ASTM C348 Flexural 930 1500 750 1000 1180 5 of 9
ASTM C469 M of E 2.7 x 10-6 1.9 x 10-6 2.0 x 10-6 2.26 x 10-6 4 of 9
ASTM C496 Split Ten 660 360 500 900 565 5 of 9
ASTM C531 Coef of Exp 5.0 x 10-6 1 of 9
ASTM C666 Freeze Thaw >80% 96 100 98 99 5 of 9
ASTM C672 Res F/T 50 cyc - 0 1 of 9
ASTM C882* Bond Strength 2200 1250 2400 2200 1650 5 of 9
ASTM C928 Comp Str 6500 1 of 9
ASTM C932 Ten Bond 400 1 of 9
ASTM C1042 Sl-Sh Bond 1605 1760 670 941 4 of 9
ASTM C1202 Coulombs <1000 1 of 9
ASTM D2240 Durometer 80-85% 1 of 9
ASTM D4541 Dir Ten Bond 500 1 of 9
AASHTO T-277 Coulombs 500 1 of 9
Tests Available 2 10 5 5 11 11 6 6 6

PROPERTY METHOD MAX MIN
MFG
B
W R T MFG E W R T
MFG
F
W R T
MFG
H
W R T
C-157 SHRINKAGE 500
1
0 350
1
0 350
1
0 ---
1
0
C-882 BOND --- 9 1250 9 2400 9 1650 9
C-496 SPLIT TEN 660 8 360 8 500 8 --- 8
C-109 COMP 5000 7 5000 7 5800 7 6500 7
C-666 F/T --- 6 96 6 100 6 99 6
C-348 FLEX 930 5 750 5 1000 5 1180 5
B 4 E 4 F 4 H 4
B 3 E 3 F 3 H 3
B 2 E 2 F 2 H 2
B 1 E 1 F 1 H 1

PROPERTY METHOD
MFG
B
W R T
MFG
E
W R T MFG F W R T
MFG
H
W R T
C-157 SHRINKAGE 500 10 3 350 10 4 350 10 4 --- 10
C-882 BOND --- 9 1250 9 2 2400 9 4 1650 9 3
C-496 SPLIT TEN 660 8 4 360 8 2 500 8
3
--- 8
C-109 COMP 5000 7 2 5000 7 2 5800 7 3 6500 7 4
C-666 F/T --- 6 96 6 2 100 6 4 99 6 3
C-348 FLEX 930 5 2 750 5 1 1000 5 3 1180 5 4
4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3
2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1

PROPERTY METHOD
MFG
B
W R T
MFG
E
W R T
MFG
F
W R T
MFG
H
W R T
C-157 SHRINKAGE 500
1
0 3 30 350
1
0 4 40 350
1
0 4 40 ---
1
0 0 0
C-882 BOND --- 9 0 0 1250 9 2 18 2400 9 4 36 1650 9 3 27
C-496 SPLIT TEN 660 8 4 32 360 8 2 16 500 8 3 24 --- 8 0 0
C-109 COMP 5000 7 3 21 5000 7 3 21 5800 7 4 28 --- 7 0 0
C-666 F/T --- 6 96 6 2 12 100 6 4 24 99 6 3 18
C-348 FLEX 930 5 2 10 750 5 1 5 1000 5 3 15 1180 5 4 20
93 112 167 65

OBJECTIVE DEFENDABLE SPECIFICATIONS
When can/should it be used?
1 - Select Materials For Specific Project
Cards require both tactile response and
thought process by the specifier to
determine best properties for application
under consideration

2 - Evaluate Substitute Materials After
Award
CSA MSC allows contractor to submit
substitute material for evaluation after
project award with objective review based
upon second forced ranking

3 - Provide Traceability of Selection in
Case of Litigation
Should a review of the material selection
ever come into question, say in the case
of a “repair of the repair”, the specifier can
provide an “objective” review of his
selection process.

OTHER APPLICATIONS
Selection Process is good for any
class/set/group of materials that have
quantifiable test results based on a
recognized set of standards.

CSA Material Selection Criteria

SPECIFICATIONS

PROPERTY METHOD MAX. MIN
MFG
1
W R T
MFG
2
W R T
MFG
3
W R T
MFG
4
W R T
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
9 9 9 9
8 8 8 8
7 7 7 7
6 6 6 6
5 5 5 5
4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3
2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1

CSA Material Selection Criteria

More Related Content

What's hot (16)

Similar to CSA Material Selection Criteria (10)

More from Patrick J. Morrissey (20)

CSA Material Selection Criteria