Cement, Concrete, and Aggregates, June 2003, Vol. 25, No.

1
Paper ID CCA11842_251
Available online at: www.astm.org

J. E. Gillott1 and T. Quinn2

Strength and Sulfate Resistance of Concrete

Made With High Alumina Cement, Type 10
Portland Cement, Type 10 Portland Cement Plus
Fly Ash and Type 50 Portland Cement

ABSTRACT: Concrete prisms and cylinders were made using four different cementitious materials. These were high alumina cement (HAC), Type
10 Portland, Type 10 with 20% replaced with fly ash and Type 50 Portland Cement. Specimens were used for measurement of length change and
estimation of compressive strength over a period of about 18 months exposure to fog-room conditions, room temperature Na2SO4 solution or 40°C
water bath. None of the concrete samples made with the 3–types of Portland–based cementitious material showed distress due to sulfate attack. The
concrete made with HAC and which had probably not undergone the conversion reaction also showed good resistance to sulfate attack but samples
in which conversion had probably occurred cracked and disintegrated in the Na2SO4 solution.

KEYWORDS: concrete, Portland binders, high alumina cement, sulfates, strength, durability

Introduction ume proportion of sulfate solution to mortar bars of 4  0.5

Concrete prisms (76
76
280 mm) and concrete cylinders
(100
200 mm) were cast using four different cementitious mate-
rials during spring and summer of the year 2000 for a comparative
study of sulfate resistance and strength development. The main
purpose was to use the samples and data in the 3rd and 4th year ma-
terials courses in civil engineering. The cementitious material in
the four different batches of concrete consisted of high alumina ce-
ment (HAC), (calcium aluminate cement, ciment fondu), Type 10
Portland cement,3 Type 10 Portland cement of which 20% was re-
placed by Sundance fly ash (Type C)4 and Type 50 Portland ce-
ment.3 Available chemical and physical analyses and mix designs
are shown in Table 1a,b,c. The prisms were made for measurement
of length change, which was recorded in triplicate on prisms as a
function of time of immersion in room temperature Na2SO4 solu-
tion. The cylinders were used for estimation of compressive
strength as a function of time in the fog-room, 40°C water bath or
Na2SO4 solution. Treatment is summarized in Table 2.
In ASTM C1012-95 a procedure is described that “provides a
means of assessing the sulfate resistance of concretes and mortars,”
by measurement of length change of mortar bars immersed in a sul-
fate solution. The procedure used in this work differed in that con-
crete, rather than mortar, test specimens were used. Also ASTM
C1012 calls for the use of a container large enough to allow a vol-
1
Emeritus Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, The University of
Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada.
2
Technologist, Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Calgary,
AB T2N 1N4, Canada.
3
CSA Standards, CAN/CSA–A5
4
CSA Standards, CAN/CSA–A23.5
Manuscript received 12/13/2002; accepted for publication 4/16/2003;
published XX.
volumes of solution to 1 volume of mortar bars. In the present work
the volume proportion was about 3.3 volumes of solution to 1 vol-
ume of concrete prisms and the ratio was about 2.1 for solution to
concrete cylinders. The prisms and cylinders were stored in con-
tainers (Fig.1a) but in both cases the volume proportion was less
than that required by ASTM. This followed because the concrete
specimens occupy a larger volume than a corresponding number of
mortar bars and too few containers were available to compensate
for the difference. A review of ASTM C1012 in assessing sulfate
resistance of different mortars with a view to establishing accep-
tance limits was given by Patzias (1987, 1991).
Objectives
The principal objectives of the work were as follows:
1. To demonstrate to 3rd and 4th year students of civil engineer-
ing the effects of sulfate attack on concrete made with four
types of cementitious material.
2. To provide students with evidence of sulfate attack in the
form of:
(a) Cracking and disintegration of test specimens;
(b) Length change of test specimens;
(c) Changes in compressive strength of test specimens.
3. To demonstrate to students:
(a) The differences in sulfate-resistance of the four types of
concrete;
(b) That evidence of sulfate resistance could be obtained
within a reasonably short time-frame (say 6 months) by
means of a “practical” easy-to-use-test.
4. To provide answers to several questions such as:
(a) Would modification of the standard test (ASTM C1012)
impair its utility? In this work specimens were made of

Copyright © 2003 by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. 21
22 CEMENT, CONCRETE, AND AGGREGATES

TABLE 1a—Proportions by weight (kg/m3) of ingredients in four concrete mixtures.

Ingredients

CEMENT HAC P.C. Type 10 P.C. Type 50 Fly Ash Water Coarse Agg. Fine Agg. W/cm

High Alumina 400 160 1127 620 0.4

Portland Type 10 370 185 1050 750 0.5
Type 10 Fly Ash 296 74 185 1050 750 0.5
Portland Type 50 370 185 1050 750 0.5

Abbreviations: HAC  High Alumina Cement ; Agg.  Aggregate; P.C.  Portland Cement; W/cm  Water/Cementitious Material

TABLE 2—Treatment of concrete prisms and cylinders made with high

TABLE 1b—Chemical analyses of portland cements. alumina cement and portland cementitious materials.

Cement Type Prisms: Length Change Data

Type 10 Type 50 (a) High Alumina Cement

Chemical Analysis % % Fog Room (70 Days) → Na2SO4 solution
Fog Room (3 Days) → Water bath 40°C (70 Days) → Na2SO4 solution
Silica (SiO2) 20.5 21.4 (b) Portland Cementitious Materials
Alumina (Al2O3) 4.1 3.3 Type 10
Iron Oxide (Fe2O3) 2.7 3.8 Type 10  Fly Ash → Fog Room (7 Days) → Na2SO4 solution
Calcium Oxide (CaO) 63.2 62.5 Type 50
Magnesium Oxide (MgO) 4.5 4.5
Sulphur Trioxide (SO3) 2.4 2.2 Cylinders: Compressive Strength Data
Loss on Ignition at 1050°C 2.8 ...
Loss on Ignition at 550°C 0.9 ... (c) High Alumina Cement
Loss on Ignition ... 1.0 Fog Room (
18 Months)
Insoluble Residue 0.14 0.10 Fog Room (70 Days) → Na2SO4 solution
Calcium Oxide, Free (FCaO) 1.01 0.42 Fog Room (3 Days) → Water bath 40°C (
18 Months)
Equivalent Alkali (As Na2O) 0.55 0.56 Fog Room (3 Days) → Water bath 40°C (70 Days) → Na2SO4 solution
C3 S 62.8 58.0 (d) Portland Cementitious Materials
C2S 11.5 17.7 Type 10 Fog Room (
18 Months)
C3A 6.3 2.3 Type 10  Fly Ash → →
C4AF 8.3 11.4 Type 50 Fog Room (7 Days) → Na2SO4

TABLE 1c—Physical analyses of portland cements. of knowledge in this area since student class notes, where
these topics are covered, were not available to people in civil
Cement Type
engineering practice some of whom expressed interest in the
Type 10 Type 50
results.
Physical Analysis % %
Methodology
Fineness 45m% Retained 3.1 1.8
Blaine m2/kg 379 380 The concrete prisms made with high alumina cement were
Setting Time–Initial (Min.) 108 151 divided into two groups. One group was cured in the fog room (22°C
False Set % 72 ... 100% R.H.) for 70 days after casting and then immersed in a room
Autoclave Expansion % 0.11 0.10 temperature bath of solution containing 50g/L (0.352 moles/L) of
Sulfate Resistance % ... 0.022
Compressive Strength at 1 Day Mpa 15.9 ... Na2SO4 (ASTM C1012-95). The other group was precured in the
Compressive Strength at 3 Days Mpa 27.5 27.4 fog room for 3 days after casting and then placed in a water bath at
Compressive Strength at 7 Days Mpa 33.9 34.1 40°C. Then, 70 days after casting, that group of prisms was trans-
Compressive Strength at 28 Days Mpa 43.3 43.1 ferred into the solution of Na2SO4. The concrete prisms made with
Type 10 cement, Type 10 plus fly ash, and Type 50 cement were pre-
conditioned for 7 days in the fog room and then immersed in the
concrete—the normal material of construction—rather room temperature bath of Na2SO4 solution (Table 2).
than mortar. The point has been made by others that at The concrete cylinders made with high alumina cement were di-
least some tests of concrete itself are desirable to assure vided into groups. One group was cured continuously in the fog
satisfactory performance (Struble et al., 2001). room for about 18 months but 70 days after casting half of that
(b) Would the performance of “modern” high alumina ce- group was immersed in the room temperature bath of sodium sul-
ment differ from that of the material described in the fate solution. Another group was precured in the fog room for only
literature? 3 days after casting and then transferred to a water bath at 40°C for
5. The primary objectives were to use the results of this work in about 18 months. Half the cylinders of that group were transferred,
teaching 3rd and 4th year materials courses. However, the at an age of 70 days after casting, to the room temperature bath of
write-up was amplified to include a brief review of the state sodium sulfate solution.
 GILLOTT AND QUINN ON STRENGTH AND SULFATE RESISTANCE 23

FIG. 1—Effect of Na2SO4 Solution on Concrete Prisms.

Concrete cylinders were also made with each of the other three
cementitious binders (Type 10 Portland cement; Type 10 plus fly
ash; Type 50 Portland cement). In each case some cylinders were
held under fog room conditions throughout the test period (
18
months) while half of each set was removed from the fog room
after 7 days and placed in the room temperature bath of sodium
sulfate solution (Table 2).
Results
1. The length change recorded on the concrete prisms made
with high alumina cement and cured in the fog room for 70
days prior to immersion in the sulfate bath showed only a
very small expansion (0.02%) and no visible cracks by 433
days after casting (Fig.1b). In contrast the prisms placed in
water at 40°C for 70 days prior to immersion in the sulfate
bath expanded by 0.025% by 265 days after casting and
showed excessive expansion (
0.25%) with severe cracking
and deterioration by 433 days (Fig. 1c).
2. The concrete prisms made with the other cementitious agents
showed no significant expansion or cracking during 18
months in the Na2SO4 solution (Fig.1d, e, f ). Expansion val-
ues at 18 months for prisms made with Type 10 cement, Type
10 plus fly ash and Type 50 cement were 0.006%, 0.008%,
and 0.003% respectively.
3. Concrete cylinders made with high alumina cement and cured
in the fog room gained strength rapidly and reached over
50MPa within 5 days and about 65MPa within 14 days. By 8
24 CEMENT, CONCRETE, AND AGGREGATES
months and 1 year strengths were lower (about 50MPa) but
by 18 months some strength recovery to about 60MPa had
occurred.
4. HAC concrete cylinders placed in the sulfate bath after
70 days in the fog room also had a strength of about
60MPa by 18 months and were generally in excellent
condition but a few small cracks were visible in one cylinder
(Figs. 2a, b).
5. Concrete cylinders made with high alumina cement and
placed in the 40°C water bath after 3 days in the fog room
showed a rapid decrease in strength to about 40MPa, which
declined further to slightly more than 30MPa at 8 months and
1 year with recovery to about 40 MPa by 18 months.
6. The corresponding HAC cylinders placed in the sulfate bath
after 70 days at 40°C had a strength of a little over 30MPa at
FIG. 2—Effect of Na2SO4 Solution on Concrete Cylinders.
about 1 year. By 18 months the strength had decreased to only
about 20MPa and the cylinders were cracked and disintegrat-
ing (Fig. 2c).
7. Concrete cylinders made with Type 10 and Type 50 Portland
cement gained strength more rapidly than the cylinders made
with the Type 10 plus fly ash binder but by 28 days all three
types of concrete had compressive strengths in excess of
40MPa. At an age of about 18 months the compressive
strength of all cylinders was about 55MPa regardless of the
storage conditions. Hence in these tests concrete cylinders
made with the three types of Portland cementitious material
and immersed in the Na2SO4 solution had virtually no differ-
ence in compressive strength from that of the cylinders stored
continuously in the fog room and no cracks were visible
(Figs. 2d, e, f ).
 GILLOTT AND QUINN ON STRENGTH AND SULFATE RESISTANCE
Discussion
Sulfates occur in ground water, soils, sea water, fertilizers, and
industrial pollutants and also form by oxidation of sulfides. When
present in significant amounts they have long been a recognized
cause of durability failure of Portland cement concrete. More
recently sulfates have been associated with internal causes of dura-
bility problems such as delayed ettringite formation and thaumasite
attack (Parker, 2000; Gillott & Rogers, 2003; Day, 1992; Collepardi
1999). In an attempt to address the sulfate problem Bied (1926) de-
veloped high alumina cement, which was patented by Ciments La-
farge in 1908 in France following earlier work and patents in Ger-
many and England.
High alumina cement (calcium aluminate cement, ciment fondu)
is made in a kiln by the fusion of bauxite and limestone with
some compounds of iron, which acts as a flux. The principal min-
erals formed in the kiln are CA (CaO.Al2O3) and C12A7
(12CaO.7Al2O3). The material formed in the kiln is ground to a
fine powder which when mixed with water to a paste hardens and
gains strength rapidly with considerable evolution of heat. Strength
may reach 80 per cent of ultimate within 24 hours. On hydration,
pseudo–hexagonal calcium aluminum hydrates (CAH10, C2AH8)
and aqueous alumina gel (AH3) are formed. Unlike hydrated Port-
land cement Ca(OH)2 is not present in the hydrated paste of high
alumina cement. The hexagonal Ca–aluminum hydrates are
metastable and with time in the presence of moisture they trans-
form to the denser C3AH6 (hydrogarnet) and alumina gel. The
transformation takes place by a through solution mechanism so wa-
ter has to be present for the reaction to occur.
This transformation is known as the conversion reaction, which
occurs more rapidly with increase of temperature and concentra-
tion of lime and alkalies, which is why contact with Portland ce-
ment concrete may accelerate conversion. The increase in density
of the individual crystallites on conversion causes an increase in
porosity and permeability and a significant decrease in strength of
the cementitious material. Prior to conversion high alumina cement
concrete has excellent resistance to sulfate attack attributed in part
to the absence of Ca (OH)2, to the presence of aqueous alumina gel
and to the low reactivity of CAH10 with sulfate ions. After conver-
sion however the increased permeability renders the material much
more liable to poor durability performance since aggressive ions
such as SO3 and CO2 may enter via the pore system. Also sulfate is
said to react expansively with C3AH6 and if CO2 is present it may
lead to formation of calcium carbonate (Neville, 1997, p.101).
Strength loss attributed to conversion has been considered to be the
cause of actual structural collapse in various countries. In other
applications high alumina cement has excellent refractory proper-
ties. There are various descriptions of its nature and behavior
in standard texts (Neville, 1997; Neville and Wainwright, 1975;
Robson, 1962).
In the present work the concrete prisms made with high alumina
cement and cured in the fog room prior to being placed in the
Na2SO4 bath showed virtually no expansion, cracking or other
signs of deterioration to an age of about 18 months (Fig. 1b).
The prisms immersed in a water bath at 40°C, however, showed
greatly increased susceptibility to sulfate attack since expansion
and cracking occurred in the Na2SO4 bath (Fig. 1c).
The fog-room cured HAC cylinders showed rapid strength
development though strength–loss occurred at an age of about 1
year followed by strength recovery at a greater age. Immersion in a
water bath at 40°C, however, led to considerable loss of strength
presumably due to conversion though, as with the fog-room cured
25
cylinders, some strength recovery occurred at about 18 months.
Strength recovery has been noted in the literature and attributed by
some to growth of hydration products from previously unreacted
cement. It has also been pointed out that if this is the correct expla-
nation some of the strength recovered may be subsequently lost due
to later conversion. It is possible, however, that strength recovery
may result from other causes such as a decrease in stress concen-
trations associated with blunting or shortening of small cracks or
from stress relaxation due to creep and microstructural changes.
The HAC concrete cylinders cured in the fog room showed good
resistance to sulfate attack though small cracks were noted in one
cylinder by about 18 months.
The cylinders placed in the 40°C bath prior to immersion in the
sulfate solution showed severe cracking and deterioration by an age
of about 18 months (Figs. 2b, c). These results for the HAC con-
crete prisms and cylinders agree with previous findings reported in
the literature which have attributed strength loss and increased
susceptibility to sulfate attack to acceleration of the conversion
reaction by elevated temperatures in the presence of moisture. This
conclusion could not be confirmed in this work as neither thermal
nor X-ray diffraction data were available.
Sulfates occur in soils in many parts of Canada such as the
Prairie Provinces and Canadian researchers, together with their
colleagues in the U.S.A. and Europe made early contributions to
the understanding and remediation of the sulfate problem (Bates
et al., 1913; Mackenzie, 1920; Thorvaldson et al., 1927). The
recognition of the part played by the individual cement minerals
paved the way to the development of sulfate resistant Portland ce-
ment and provided a logical explanation for the role of pozzolans
in improving resistance of Portland cement concrete to sulfate at-
tack. The principal cementitious phases in Portland cement paste
are calcium silicate hydrates (C-S-H) but Ca(OH)2 and calcium
sulphoaluminate hydrates are also present. The latter compounds
have been shown to be the most readily attacked by SO4 ions
though C-S-H itself becomes unstable under some conditions so
the cement may lose its cementitious properties and all that re-
mains of the concrete may be aggregates with little or no bond be-
tween the particles.
Resistance of Portland cement concrete to sulfate attack may be
improved by reducing the content of Ca(OH)2 and calcium
sulphoaluminate hydrates in the cement paste. One approach is to
decrease the ratio of C3S to C2S in the Portland cement since on
hydration C3S produces three times as much Ca(OH)2 as is
formed by hydration of the C2S. Alternatively pozzolanic materi-
als such as fly ash or silica fume may be incorporated in the con-
crete mixture. Under favorable conditions of hydration those ma-
terials react with the Ca(OH)2 forming C-S-H so a sulfate
susceptible compound with poor cementitious properties is re-
placed by a more resistant and better bonding agent. The amount
of calcium sulpho-aluminate hydrates in the cement paste may be
reduced by decreasing the quantity of C3A in the Portland ce-
ment. This is achieved by suitable adjustments to the composition
of the charge entering the kiln during manufacture of the Portland
cement. In sulfate resistant cement (e.g., CSA Type 50) both the
C3S to C2S ratio and the C3A content are lower than in Normal
Type 10 Portland cement.
As stated in the section of this paper dealing with the three types
of Portland cement concrete tested none of the prisms showed any
marked change in length during approximately 18 months in the
bath of Na2SO4 solution. Likewise compressive strengths of the
concrete cylinders made with all three types of Portland cementi-
tious binders exceeded 50MPa regardless of whether conditioned
26 CEMENT, CONCRETE, AND AGGREGATES
in the fog-room or immersed in the bath of Na2SO4 solution. These
results indicate that the concrete made here under laboratory con-
ditions has very satisfactory properties, which may well be superior
to that sometimes encountered in the field. Also concrete used in
practice is generally subjected to more severe and variable condi-
tions of exposure which no doubt affects performance. One of the
reviewers of this paper suggested that another “aspect to consider
is the small specific surface of concrete specimens relative to
mortar-bar specimens.”
It is also possible that the excellent performance of all varieties
of Portland cement concrete, including that made with Type 10
cement, was influenced by the smaller volume ratio of solution to
solid than is recommended in ASTM C1012-95. Since this paper
was submitted for publication additional cylinders (4 in.
8 in.;
100
200 mm) have been cast using the same mix design as in
the previous work but made only with Type 10 Portland cement.
About 1/3 of the cylinders are being held under fog-room condi-
tions while about 2/3 of the cylinders were removed from the fog-
room after 7 days and divided into two sets of 1/3 each. One set
was placed in a room temperature bath (bath #1) of sodium sul-
fate solution (concentration 50 g/L) in which the volume of solu-
tion was about twice the volume of the concrete cylinders i.e., the
same as in the original work. The second set of cylinders removed
from the fog-room was placed in a room temperature bath (bath
#2) of sodium sulfate solution (concentration 50g/L) but in which
the volume of solution was about four times the volume of the
concrete cylinders as recommended by ASTM C1012. At an age
of 90 days the average compressive strength of the cylinders was
51.6MPa (fog-room), 49.7MPa (sulfate bath #1) and 48.1MPa
(sulfate bath #2) and no cracks were visible in any of the speci-
mens. Hence it seems unlikely that the lower volume ratio of so-
lution to solid than is recommended by ASTM C1012 is the fac-
tor responsible for the high resistance of the concrete to sulfate
attack.
Conclusions
The three types of concrete made with Portland—based cemen-
titious materials showed no cracking and no differences in visual
appearance, length change characteristics or compressive strength
whether specimens were immersed in the sulfate solution or stored
in the fog room. Hence the test procedure did not demonstrate sig-
nificant differences in resistance to sulfate attack between these
three types of concrete and indeed all three types appeared to be un-
affected by the Na2SO4 solution. Results such as those reported in
this paper could convey a false sense of security since, if the evi-
dence has been correctly interpreted, the presence of sulfates seems
to be a relatively common cause of durability problems in concrete
particularly when it is made with Normal (Type 10) Portland ce-
ment. Field exposure in many civil engineering applications no
doubt subjects concrete to harsher conditions than that of the
controlled environment of the sulfate bath. Also concrete is
required to remain durable for much longer than the 18 months of
this experiment.
The reported shortcomings of Type 10 Portland cement in the
presence of sulfates may become evident for purposes of test or
demonstration if leaner concrete mix designs than those used in the
present work were employed. Such mixes would be expected to be
weaker, more permeable and absorptive with higher voids ratio and
lower density than those used in this work (Patzias, 1987; Robson,
1962). However, it would be preferable to be able to test the sulfate
susceptibility of concrete made with job-mix designs so possibly a
change in concentration, composition or temperature of the solu-
tion may be better alternatives. It is also possible that continuously
circulating the Na2SO4 solution may increase its effectiveness by
reducing the likelihood that conditions of local equilibrium are
established.
Concrete made with high alumina cement and cured in the fog
room gained strength rapidly and reached higher strength values
(
65MPa at 28 days) than any of the Portland cement concretes
tested (
40–45 MPa at 28 days). However the high alumina ce-
ment concrete showed a rapid loss of strength and poor resistance
to sulfate attack after exposure to conditions favoring the conver-
sion reaction. Hence these results appear to support those who
consider it prudent to avoid the use of high alumina cement partic-
ularly for structural applications in civil engineering practice
(Neville, 1998). The close parallel between the performance of this
“modern” high alumina cement and that reported in previous liter-
ature was disappointing since I had nurtured the hope that changes
may have been made to this material, which would overcome or
moderate its reported drawbacks.
Acknowledgments
Sincere thanks are expressed to Don McCullough and Gerd
Birkle for help with the photography and to Chrissy Ziegler for sec-
retarial support. Rick Ketcheson, Canada Cement Lafarge, is
thanked for his interest in the work and for the supply of the
cements used in the project. Lafarge Canada, Inc. is also thanked
for the average chemical and physical analyses of the cements.
References
ASTM C1012-95, 1996, “Standard Test Method for Length
Change of Hydraulic-Cement Mortars Exposed to a Sulfate
Solution,” Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Cement;
Lime; Gypsum, Vol.04.01, pp. 460–464.
ASTM C642-97.2000, “Standard Test Method for Density,
Absorption and Voids in Hardened Concrete,” Annual
Book of ASTM Standards, Concrete and Aggregates,
Vol.04.02, pp. 321–323.
Bates, P. H., Phillips, A. J., and Wig, R. J., 1913, “Action of
Salts in Alkali Water and Sea Water on Cements,” U.S.
Dept. Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, Tech.
Paper 12.
Bied, J., 1926, “Recherches Industrielles sur les Chaux, Ciments, et
Mortiers,” Dunod, Paris, p. 224.
Collepardi, M. 1999, “Damage by Delayed Ettringite Formation,”
Concrete International, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 69–74.
Day, R. L., 1992, “The Effect of Secondary Ettringite Formation on
the Durability of Concrete: A Literature Analysis,” Port-
land Cement Assoc., Research & Development Bulletin,
RD 108T, pp. 1–115.
Gillott, J. E. and Rogers, C. A., 2003, “The Behavior of Silicocar-
bonatite Aggregates from the Montreal Area,” Cement and
Concrete Research, April, Vol. 33, pp. 471–480.
Hall, C., 1989, “Water Sorptivity of Mortars and Concretes: A Re-
view,” Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 41, No. 147,
pp. 51–61.
Mackenzie, C. J., 1920, “Concrete Mixtures in Alkali Soils,” Engi-
neering Journal, Vol. 3, p.176.
Neville, A. M., 1998, “A ‘New’ Look at High Alumina Cement,”
Concrete International, Vol. 20, No. 8, pp. 47–55.
Neville, A. M., 1997, “Properties of Concrete,” 4th ed., J. Wiley &
Sons, Inc., pp. 1–844.
 GILLOTT AND QUINN ON STRENGTH AND SULFATE RESISTANCE
Neville, A. M. and Wainwright, P. J., 1975, “High-Alumina
Cement Concrete,” Construction Press, Longmans.
Parker, D., 2000, “Thaumasite Sulfate Attack Spreads,” New
Civil Engineer, Institution of Civil Engineers, March 23, p. 5.
Patzias, T., 1987, “Evaluation of Sulphate Resistance of Hydraulic
Cement Mortars by the ASTM C1012 Test Method,”
Concrete Durability, Katherine and Bryant Mather Interna-
tional Conference, American Concrete Institute, SP-100, J.
M. Scanlon, Ed., pp. 2103–2120.
Patzias, T., 1991, “The Development of ASTM Method C1012
with Recommended Acceptance Limits for Sulfate Resis-
27
tance of Hydraulic Cements,” Cement, Concrete, and
Aggregates, Vol. 13, No.1, pp. 50–57.
Robson, T. D., 1962, “High Alumina Cements and Concretes,” J.
Wiley & Sons and Contractors Record, pp. 1–263.
Struble, L. J., Taylor, P.C., and Conway, J. T., 2001, “Case Study
in Performance Testing of Hydraulic Cement,” Cement,
Concrete and Aggregates, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 94–104.
Thorvaldson, T., Vigfusson, V. A., and Larmour, K. R., 1927, “The
Action of Sulfates on the Components of Portland
Cement,” Trans. Royal Soc., Canada 3rd Series, 21, Section
111, p. 295.