IRJET- Fundamentals of Maturity Methods for Estimating Concrete Strength: Review

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 02 | Feb 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2406
Fundamentals of Maturity Methods for Estimating Concrete
Strength: Review
SANJEEV R RAJE1, PRITAM A DESHMUKH2 R M SWAMY3, Dr. Y S PATIL4
1PG Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Shivajirao S Jondhle College of Engineering and Technology,
Maharashtra, India & VP-Technical, Navdeep Constuction Co., Mumbai, India
2PG Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Shivajirao S Jondhle College of Engineering and Technology,
Asangaon, Maharashtra, India
3Professor & Guide, Department of Civil Engineering, Shivajirao S Jondhle College of Engineering and Technology,
Maharashtra, India
4Professor & HOD, Department of Civil Engineering, Shivajirao S Jondhle College of Engineering and Technology,
Maharashtra, India
---------------------------------------------------------------------***----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - This review paper encapsulates the conclusions
drawn from research carried out concerning the
fundamentals underlying various traditional maturity
method used to predict the in-place strength of concrete. It is
shown that if the temperature change of the concrete after
the time of blending is not greater than a certain value, the
concrete gains strength during and after treatment in
relation to its “Maturity” (established in temperature-time)
approximately in accordance with the same law as holds for
normally cured concrete. Concrete which is elevated in
temperature very quickly is shown not to obey this law, and
to be severely affected the strength at a later age. The use of
the too rapid early temperature rises often implemented in
practice introduces various opposing variables which
recommend delayed treatments, optimum temperatures, and
other arrangements of the curing cycle; such pragmatism is
unnecessary, however, if a slow initial temperature gradient
is used. The maturity method is calculated by using different
maturity models. These models are based on time-
temperature record and mainly, known as The Nurse-Saul &
the Arrhenius function. A strength-maturity relationship of
the concrete mix is reviewed. The temperature history of the
field concrete, for which strength is to be predicted, is
recorded from the time of concrete placement to the time
when the strength prediction is desired. The documented
temperature history is used to calculate the maturity index of
the field concrete. Using the calculated maturity index and
the strength maturity relationship, the strength of the field
concrete is predicted. The Nurse-Saul function has been
broadly used in predicting gain of compressive strength of
concrete cured in the temperature range of +10°C to +32°C.
This papers review published studies and discusses use of
maturity methods for in-situ strength.
Key Words: Maturity method, Maturity index, Concrete
temperature, Nurse-Saul and Arrhenius function, Concrete
strength at Early-age, Curing Time and Condition,
Estimation of compressive strength, Equivalent Age, steam
curing & Atmospheric pressure,
1. INTRODUCTION
Determination of the strength of in-situ concrete is
perceptibly crucial to contractors. Judgements such as
when to strip forms, when to remove shores, when to
post-tension, and when to terminate cold-weather
protection are based on attaining a minimum level of
concrete strength. Waiting too long to perform these
operations is costly, but acting hastily may cause the
structure to crack or breakdown. The information used to
make these judgments is usually obtained from field
pullout tests, cured cylinders, or penetration testing. The
maturity method is another practice that can be used to
assess the strength of in-situ concrete.[2] This non-
destructive method has more popular but not been
extensively used in the U.S.A. The adoption of ASTM
standard practice for assessing concrete strength by
maturity method (ASTM C-1074) has amplified its use.
The maturity method is simply a practice for forecasting
concrete strength based on the temperature history of the
concrete. Strength surges as cement hydrates. The amount
of cement hydrated is contingent on how long the concrete
has cured and at what temperature. Maturity is a measure
of how far hydration has developed.
1.1 Maturity Concept
Strength growth in concrete happens due to the hydration
reaction between cement and water. The degree of
strength development can be contingent upon several
factors including curing conditions (temperature and age),
type and source of cement, water-to-cement ratio, etc. The
curing circumstances are known to have the utmost effect
on the rate of strength development, especially the
concrete temperature for a given mixture of concrete. [3-10]
In general, the degree of strength gain for concrete cured at
high temperatures are much superior compared to lower
temperatures, especially at early ages. [1]
In first decade of 19th century, attempts have been made to
evaluate the collective influence of time and temperature

on the strength growth characteristics of concrete.[11] In the
early 1950’s a number of researchers suggested the
combining of the effects of time and temperature by a
single factor.[12-14] This parameter for the first time was
called maturity by Saul.[14] The maturity is computed as the
product of time and temperature above some datum
temperature ensuing concrete casting. As stated by Saul,
the datum temperature is -10°C. The maturity concept
states that concrete samples from a given mixture will have
identical strengths at identical maturity regardless of their
thermal history. This means that an exclusive relation
exists between maturity and strength of concrete for any
combination of time and temperature.
1.2 Maturity model
A. Nurse-Saul function:
Maturity models are used to change time-temperature
curing history of concrete into maturity values which can
be related to concrete strength improvement. Numerous
maturity functions have been anticipated since the early
1950s. Saul suggested the following relation to compute
the maturity of concrete. [12]
t
M (t, T) =∑ (T -T0) Δ t ... Eq. 1
0
Where,
M (t, T) = Maturity of concrete as a function of time t and
Temperature T,
T = Temperature of concrete,
T0 = Datum temperature, and
Δ t = Time interval.
Eq.(1) is known as the Nurse-Saul function. The datum
temperature (T0) is the temperature at which no rise in
strength of concrete occurs with time. When linking the
two different maturity functions, it is necessary that the
two functions must be compared for the same datum and
reference temperatures. The reference temperature is
usually taken as 20°C. Then Eq.(1) for constant
temperature, Tr, can be written as
M (t, T) = (Tr – T0) t20 ... Eq. 2
Where,
t20 = time required for reaching maturity at 20°C, and
Tr = reference temperature.
The value of T0 is taken as -10°C.
Substituting the values Tr = 20°C and T0 = -10°C, and using
Eq. (1) and (2), the following relation can be developed.
t20 = ∑(T+10) Δ t ... Eq. 3
30
Where,
t20 is time required to reach an equivalent maturity at
20°C. This also specifies relative maturity at 20°C in
hours.[15] Rastrup [16] gave a time-temperature function of
the form:
t1 = 2 (T - Tr)/10 t2 …Eq. 4
Where,
t1 = curing time at the temperature Tr,
t2 = the curing time at temperature T, and
Tr = reference temperature
The function suggested by Rastrup is based on a well-
known physio-chemical rule which states the speed of
reaction is doubled when the temperature is increased by
10°C. For the case of variable temperatures, a sum is
formed over the time gap by the following relation
t
t20 = ∑ 2 (T- Tr)/10 Δ t … Eq. 5
0
B. Arrhenius function:
A model based on the Arrhenius function for thermal
activation is generally used in several European countries
and also in North America. This model, as first proposed
by Freiesleben-Hanson and Pedersen[17], is of the form:
t - E
M (t,T)= ∫ k e[ ----- ]dt … Eq. 6
0 R Tk
Where,
k = a constant
Tk = temperature of concrete in degrees Kelvin,
E = activation energy in kilo joules per mole, and
R = universal gas constant
The model presented in Eq. 6 has been found to be capable
of taking into account the influence of temperature within
a range of -10° to 80°C.[17]
In concrete, hydration reaction is an exothermic and due
to the same, activation energy (E) can differ with the
temperature. Properties of basic cement ingredients & its
composition will have great impact on the activation
energy.
2. LITERATURE SURVEY
2.1 McIntosh[12] was perhaps the first to develop a
parameter in 1949, which he called concept of "Basic Age",
to unite the influence of temperature and time. The basic
age was computed as the product of time and temperature
above -1.1°C. In this study, cube specimens were cured by
using electrical curing. Based on the results obtained, he
concluded that the strength of treated samples was greatly
dependent upon maximum temperature. To obtain a
strength level, maximum temperature declined with rising
basic age of the specimens, and major strength gain in

concrete occurred at an early age when the temperature
neared the maximum. [12]
2.2 Nurse[13] used the product of time and temperature
above 0°C as a parameter to unite the effects of curing
history. In this study, prism specimens were subjected to
steam curing at atmospheric pressure and were tested for
strength properties including compressive strength using
numerous types of aggregates and cement. The test results
showed that concrete made with non-reactive aggregates
(assuming no reaction between cement and aggregate)
displayed a non-linear relation between relative
compressive strength and the product of time and
temperature. However, this association was invalid for
concrete made with reactive aggregates, for which most of
the strength data points were well above the smallest
curve. [13]
2.3 Saul[14] carried out investigation work on steam curing
of concrete at atmospheric pressure. He computed the
maturity by Eq.(1). His equation of strength improvement
with maturity specified that concrete of the same mix at
the same maturity (reckoned in temperature-time) has
almost the same strength whatever permutation of
temperature and time go to create that maturity. Saul
stated that his relation was valid for concrete that has not
reached +50°C until 01½ - 02 hrs, or about +100°C until
05-06 hrs after the time of mixing. He specified that when
concrete is elevated in temperature more swiftly than
above, the law of strength gain does not hold well. Under
this situation, strength increase occurs more rapidly
during its first few hours of treatment; afterwards, the
strength was unfavourably affected. He further stated that
the association is valid for the temperatures ranging
between +40°C and +100°C, and times up to 28 days. Saul
pointed out that concrete would not set at freezing point,
but once it has set, it will continue to gain strength even at
-10°C. He suggested a datum temperature of -10.5°C for
long period of high and low temperatures. [14]
2.4 In 1956, Plowman[18] tried to develop a relationship
between concrete strength and maturity. He used cube
samples that were initially subjected to normal curing for
24 hours prior to being cured at various curing
temperatures. Curing temperatures varied between -
11.5°C and +18°C. Based on his test results and data
derived from preceding studies he developed a relation
between maturity and strength as:
S = A+ B log (M (t, T)) ... Eq. 7
Where,
S is strength,
A and B are empirical constants, and
M (t, T) is maturity based upon the Nurse-Saul function.
The constants A and B are linearly connected to the
strength at any age. Plowman recommended a datum
temperature of -11.7°C. He concluded that Eq.(7) was
independent of the quality of cement, w/c, aggregate/
cement ratio, curing temperatures below 37.8°C, and the
shape of test specimens. [12]
2.5 Several researchers comprising McIntosh[19],
Klieger[20], and Alexander and Taplin[21] have reported that
the maturity relation between strength and maturity as
regulated by the Nurse-Saul function is significantly
influenced by initial concrete curing temperatures. These
studies pointed out that the maturity determined by Eq.(7)
is not exclusively related to concrete strength when a wide
variation in initial curing temperatures occurs.
In agreement with the results of these studies, the Eq.(7) is
valid only under the following conditions:
(1) The linear relation between the logarithm of maturity
and strength is valid within the span of maturity
represented by 3 to 28 days at normal temperatures.
(2) The initial curing temperature of concrete is from
+15.5°C to +26.6°C.
(3) No loss of moisture occurs during the curing
period.[19][20][21]
2.6 Ordman and Bondre[22] found the Plowman's strength-
maturity relation, Eq.(7), binding for concrete subjected to
accelerated curing at +85°C for curing cycles of 06, 19, and
23 hours with a ½ hour period permissible before and
after heating for moulding and testing of specimens. [22]
3. CASE HISTORIES
3.1 Many construction projects have successfully used the
maturity notion in determining the strength gain of in-situ
concrete in structures during construction. Bickley[23] and
Malhotra[24] have reported the use of the maturity concept
in the determination of in-situ strength of concrete during
construction of the CN-tower in Toronto. The maturity-
strength relation was used to decide appropriate time for
formwork removal. In this project, maturity-strength
relation was pre-established for each concrete blend, and
was compared with the actual core test results. The
maturity forecasts showed a very good correlation with
core test results. The maturity method was then used for
checking the strength gain of the entire structure.[23]
3.2 Mukerjee[25] also stated the use of maturity method to
predict strength gain of in-place concrete in Toronto. He
found that strength-maturity data could be sufficiently
described by the Plowman's model (Eq.6) described
earlier. The constants (A & B) of this model were
determined for concretes to match local temperatures
using experimentally determined data. He found that
model forecasts were close to the actual strength of in-

place concrete determined from the push-out cylinders
cast in structures.
Also, the maturity method was used effectively by
Mukerjee to predict the in-place strength of concrete slabs
throughout construction of buildings at the University of
Waterloo in 1971 and 1972. This method was also used to
scrutinize the strength gain of lightweight concrete floor
slabs of a 37-story tower completed in Toronto to
determine the earliest time for post tensioning operation
of slab.[25]
3.3 Hulshizer and Edgar[26] described a test program,
connecting both field and laboratory tests, to judge the
performance of the maturity concept for predicting the
strength gain of concrete. They stated that the maturity
method was a reliable technique to evaluate in-situ
concrete strength and for monitoring the actual program of
curing. The concept was used to determine safe formwork
stripping times for a 10 km long, 5.8 m inside diameter,
tunnel arch lining. In this work, the use of maturity concept
moderated winter curing time which resulted in
approximately 25 to 30% saving in heat relative to that of
the conventional cold weather curing obligations.
Additionally, further economic advantages resulted from
reduction in labor, inspection and supervision cost, and
reduced schedule durations. [26]
4. CONCLUSIONS
This review paper mainly focus on the concepts &
fundamentals of maturity methods and presentation of
work done by many research scholars, as referred below.
A large number of researchers have proven that maturity-
strength relationship can be considerably influenced by
several parameters. These parameters involve curing
temperature, aggregate type and source, cement type and
source, w/c ratio, etc. Many empirical formulae were
derived to establish & solve the relationship between time
and the temperature.
Numerous maturity meters are commercially accessible to
automatically determine the maturity of concrete. These
meters are suitable for monitoring the concrete strength
gain in construction projects. Due to the ease and ability to
approximate strength gain under fluctuating temperature
conditions, the maturity method has been used to screen
strength gain in many construction projects with
considerable success. The use of maturity method for in-
situ concrete strength determination can provide
development in construction productivity which can result
in considerable savings in energy and labor cost.
In order to have an accurate prediction of strength gain in
concrete, it is advocated that maturity-strength relation
must be developed for this concrete prior to its use for
anticipated curing conditions, for each source and type of
materials, and water to cement ratio.
REFERENCES
1. Naik T R, Ph.D, “Maturity of Concrete : Its Application
and Limitations”, Department of Civil Engineering &
Mechanics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, paper
in Advances in Concrete Technology CANMET, March
1992
2. ACI Committee 228, "In-Place Methods for
Determination of Strength of Concrete", ACI Materials
Journal, Proceedings Vol. 85, No. 5, September 1988,
pp. 446-471.
3. Fink, G.J., "The Effects of Certain Variations in
Consistency and Curing Conditions on the
Compressive Strengths of Cement-Lime Mortars",
ASTM, Proceedings Vol. 44, 1944, pp. 780-792.
4. Bloem, D.L., "Effect of Curing Condition on
Compressive Strength of Concrete Test Specimens",
National Ready Mixed Concrete Association, NRMCA
Publication No. 53, Silver Spring, Maryland, 1969.
5. Barnes, B.D., Orndorff, R.L., and Roten, J.E.,"Low Initial
Curing Temperature Improves the Strength of
Concrete Test Cylinders", ACI Journal, December 1977,
pp. 612-615.
6. Meininger, R.C., "Effects of Initial Field Curing on
Standard 28-day Cylinder Strengths", ASTM Journal of
Cement, Concrete, and Aggregates, 1983, pp. 137-141.
7. Naik, T.R., "Temperature Effects on Compressive
Strength, Shrinkage and Bond Strength for Fly Ash
Concrete", Proceedings, Ninth International Ash Use
Symposium, Vol. 1: Concrete and Related Products,
EPRI GS-7162, January 1991, pp. 5-1 -5-16.
8. Naik, T.R. and Singh, S.S., "Effects of Inclusion of Fly
Ash and Temperature on Abrasion Resistance of
Concrete", Proceedings, Second CANMET/ ACI
Conference on Durability of Concrete, Montreal,
Canada, August 1991, pp. 683-707.
9. Gardener, N.J., "Effect of Temperature on the Early-
Age Properties of Type I, Type II and Type III Fly Ash
Concretes", ACI Journal, Proceedings Vol. 87, No. 1,
January-February 1989, pp. 68-78.
10. Castillo, C. and Durrani, A.J., "Effect of Transient High
Temperature on High-Strength Concrete", ACI
Materials Journal, Proceedings Vol. 87, No. 1, January-
February 1990, pp. 47-53.
11. Malhotra, V.M., "Maturity Concepts and the Estimation
of Concrete Strength - a Review", Department of
Energy, Mines and Resources, Mines Branch, Ottawa,
IC277, November 1971, 43.
12. McIntosh, J.D., "Electric Curing of Concrete", Magazine
of Concrete Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, January 1949, pp.
21-28.
13. Nurse, R.W., "Steam Curing of Concrete", Magazine of
Concrete Research, Vol. 1, No. 2, June 1949, pp. 79-88.
14. Saul, A.G.A., "Principles Underlying of the Steam
Curing of Concrete at Atmospheric Pressure",
Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 2, No. 6, March
1951, pp. 127-140.

15. Naik, T.R., "Maturity Functions for Concrete Cured
During Winter Conditions", In Temperature Effects on
Concrete, ASTM STP 858, T.R. Naik, Ed., American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1983,
pp. 107-117.
16. Rastrup, E., "Heat of Hydration in Concrete", Magazine
of Concrete Research, Vol. 6, No. 17, 1954, 79-92.
17. Freiesleben-Hansen, P., and Pedersen, E.J.
"Maleinstrument ti Kontrol of Betons Haerding",
Nordisk Betong, 1977, pp. 21-25.
18. Plowman, J.M., "Maturity and the Strength of
Concrete", Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 8, No.
22, March 1956, pp. 13-22.
19. McIntosh, J.D., "The Effects of Low-Temperature
Curing on the Compressive Strength of Concrete",
Proceedings, RILEM Symposium on Winter
Concreting, Danish Institute for Building Research,
Copenhagen, Denmark, 1956, 18.
20. Klieger, P., "Effects of Mixing and Curing
Temperatures on Concrete Strength", American
Concrete Institute, Proceedings Vol. 54, No. 12, June
1958, pp. 1063-1081.
21. Alexander, K.M. and Taplin, J.H., "Concrete Strength,
Paste Strength, Cement Hydration and the Maturity
Rule", Australian Journal of Applied Science, Vol. 13,
1962, pp. 277-284.
22. Ordman, N.B. and Bondre, N.G., "Accelerated Curing
Tests on Concrete", Engineering, Vol. 185, No. 4798,
1958, pp. 243-248.
23. Bickley, J.A., "Practical Application of the Maturity
Concept to Determine in-situ Strength of Concrete",
Transportation Research Record, No. 558, TRB, 1975,
pp. 45-49.
24. Malhotra, V.M., and Carette, G.G., "In Situ Testing for
Concrete", In Progress in Concrete Technology, V.M.
Malhotra, Ed., Energy, Mines, and Resources Canada,
Ottawa, Canada, 1980, pp. 750-796.
25. Mukherjee, P.K., "Practical Application of Maturity
Concept to Determine In-Situ Strength of Concrete",
Transportation Research Record, No. 558, TRB, 1975,
pp. 87-92.
26. Hulshizer, A.J., and Edgar, M.A., "Implementation of
Concrete Strength-Maturity Concept Yields
Construction Economies", Presented at the, ASCE -
1984 Spring Convention, Atlanta, Georgia, May 15,
1984.
27. Malhotra, V.M., "Maturity Strength Relations and
Accelerated Strength Testing", Canada Mines Branch
Internal Report, MPI(P) 70-29, 1970, 44.

IRJET- Fundamentals of Maturity Methods for Estimating Concrete Strength: Review

More Related Content

What's hot (19)

Similar to IRJET- Fundamentals of Maturity Methods for Estimating Concrete Strength: Review (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

IRJET- Fundamentals of Maturity Methods for Estimating Concrete Strength: Review