Early Strength Prediction Model of Underwater Pile Foundation Concrete and Demolition Age of Casing

doi:10.16552/j.cnki.issn1001-1625.2025.1039

Abstract

Abstract:

Existing testing methods are difficult to monitor the actual strength of concrete in underwater pile foundation casing and fail to accurately evaluate the compressive strength of underwater pile foundation concrete. To reveal the early compressive strength development law of underwater pile foundation concrete， this study used the independently developed temperature control and self-balancing pressure curing equipment to simulate the underwater pile foundation condition and conducted the influences of different self-weight heights， curing temperatures and curing ages on the early compressive strength of pile foundation concrete. The results show that， compared with standard curing， the compressive strength of concrete specimens simulated underwater curing for 7 d is increased by 6.56%. Curing age is the main factor affecting the early compressive strength of pile foundation concrete， followed by curing temperature， and the influence of self-weight height is relatively weak. Prolonging the curing age improves the improvement effect of curing temperature on the compressive strength of underwater pile foundation concrete. Based on the maturity theory， a prediction model for the early age strength of underwater pile foundation concrete is established， with the relative error between predicted and measured values within 7.0%. Combined with the engineering case of the Guijiang Grand Bridge on the Pingzhao Expressway， the demolition age of the casing is shortened from 17 d to 5 d. The research results provide a reliable basis for the early bearing capacity evaluation and construction decisions of underwater pile foundation.

Key words: pile foundation concrete, early compressive strength, underwater curing, pressure curing, maturity theory, prediction model

CLC Number:

TU528

LI Xiaoqing, WANG Pu, FANG Qixing, WU Peng, TIAN Weijun, DANG Yue, LIU Jinxin, XU Xiangtian. Early Strength Prediction Model of Underwater Pile Foundation Concrete and Demolition Age of Casing[J]. BULLETIN OF THE CHINESE CERAMIC SOCIETY, 2026, 45(5): 1571-1579.

Figures/Tables 13

References 22

[1]	郑士举，刘　辉，蒋利学. 不同测试方式下混凝土抗压强度对比试验研究［J］. 建筑结构， 2022， 52（8）： 105-111.
	ZHENG S J， LIU H， JIANG L X. Comparative experimental research on concrete compression strength under different testing methods［J］. Building Structure， 2022， 52（8）： 105-111 （in Chinese）.
[2]	孟焕陵，赏锦国，黄维纲. 高强钢管混凝土强度发展规律试验研究［J］. 建筑结构， 2009， 39（8）： 20-22+95.
	MENG H L， SHANG J G， HUANG W G. Experimental study on strength developing regularities of high strength concrete filled steel tube［J］. Building Structure， 2009， 39（8）： 20-22+95 （in Chinese）.
[3]	张高展，葛竞成，张春晓，等. 养护制度对混凝土微结构形成机理的影响进展［J］. 材料导报， 2021， 35（15）： 15125-15133.
	ZHANG G Z， GE J C， ZHANG C X， et al. Review on the microstructure formation mechanism in concrete material under different curing regimes［J］. Materials Reports， 2021， 35（15）： 15125-15133 （in Chinese）.
[4]	丁平祥，许艳平，林伟斌. 养护温度对混凝土水化进程影响研究［J］. 建筑结构， 2022， 52（）： 1108-1113.
	DING P X， XU Y P， LIN W B. Study on the influence of curing temperature on the hydration process of concrete［J］. Building Structure， 2022， 52（supplement 2）： 1108-1113 （in Chinese）.
[5]	SHEN J， XU Q， LI Q. Effect of temperature on pore structure and strength of concrete［J］. ACI Materials Journal， 2020， 117（1）： 85-95.
[6]	蒋光遒，李　智，周兴政，等. 不同海水压力下海上风电基础用灌浆料的基本力学性能［J］. 硅酸盐通报， 2024， 43（11）： 4055-4060+4082.
	JIANG G Q， LI Z， ZHOU X Z， et al. Basic mechanical properties of grouting material for offshore wind power foundation under different seawater pressures［J］. Bulletin of the Chinese Ceramic Society， 2024， 43（11）： 4055-4060+4082 （in Chinese）.
[7]	龙朝飞，张戎令，郭海贞，等. 持续负温环境下入模温度对水泥水化热的影响及预测模型［J］. 中南大学学报（自然科学版）， 2022， 53（7）： 2777-2788.
	LONG Z F， ZHANG R L， GUO H Z， et al. Influence and prediction model of molding temperature on cement hydration heat in continuous negative temperature environment［J］. Journal of Central South University （Science and Technology）， 2022， 53（7）： 2777-2788 （in Chinese）.
[8]	杜文涛，王起才，代金鹏，等. 多因素作用下混凝土抗压强度研究［J］. 混凝土， 2022（10）： 43-46+51.
	DU W T， WANG Q C， DAI J P， et al. Study on compressive strength of concrete under the action of multiple factors［J］. Concrete， 2022（10）： 43-46+51 （in Chinese）.
[9]	谢　文，胡业红，樊　磊，等. 复合胶凝体系超高性能修复材料韧性及微细观特征研究［J］. 混凝土， 2025（3）： 102-107.
	XIE W， HU Y H， FAN L， et al. Study on toughness and microstructure characteristics of super high performance composite cementitious repair materials［J］. Concrete， 2025（3）： 102-107 （in Chinese）.
[10]	章雨豪，任腊春，姚　鹏，等. 巷道湿喷支护喷层强度演化的温度效应与应用研究［J］. 煤炭科学技术， 2025， 53（）： 1-12.
	ZHANG Y H， REN L C， YAO P， et al. Temperature effect and application research on strength evolution of shotcrete support in roadways［J］. Coal Science and Technology， 2025， 53（supplement 1）： 1-12 （in Chinese）.
[11]	吴梦珂，张　露，李明明，等. 养护期持续加压提升混凝土强度及抗氯离子渗透的试验研究［J］. 混凝土， 2025（7）： 55-59+67.
	WU M K， ZHANG L， LI M M， et al. Experimental research on continuous pressurization to improve strength and durability of concrete during curing period［J］. Concrete， 2025（7）： 55-59+67 （in Chinese）.
[12]	王开强，孙　庆，董耀武，等. 压力养护钢管混凝土的力学性能和微观结构［J］. 建筑材料学报， 2023， 26（10）： 1096-1103.
	WANG K Q， SUN Q， DONG Y W， et al. Mechanical properties and microstructure of concrete filled steel tube hardening under pressure curing［J］. Journal of Building Materials， 2023， 26（10）： 1096-1103 （in Chinese）.
[13]	李宗利，杜守来. 高渗透孔隙水压对混凝土力学性能的影响试验研究［J］. 工程力学， 2011， 28（11）： 72-77.
	LI Z L， DU S L. Experimental study on mechanical properties of concrete due to high seepage pore water pressure［J］. Engineering Mechanics， 2011， 28（11）： 72-77 （in Chinese）.
[14]	中华人民共和国水利部. 水工混凝土试验规程：［S］. 北京：中国水利水电出版社， 2020.
	Ministry of Water Resources of the People’s Republic of China. Test code for hydraulic concrete：［S］. Beijing： China Water & Power Press， 2020 （in Chinese）.
[15]	中华人民共和国水利部. 水工混凝土施工规范：［S］. 北京：中国水利水电出版社， 2015.
	Ministry of Water Resources of the People’s Republic of China. Specifications for hydraulic concrete construction：［S］. Beijing： China Water & Power Press， 2015 （in Chinese）.
[16]	XUE W P， YAO Z S， JING W， et al. Mechanical damage and failure behavior of shaft-lining concrete after exposure to high pore-water pressure［J］. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering， 2020， 32： 04019339.
[17]	SAUL A G A. Principles underlying the steam curing of concrete at atmospheric pressure［J］. Magazine of Concrete Research， 1951， 2（6）： 127-140.
[18]	WANG L， ZHOU H， ZHANG J F， et al. Prediction of concrete strength considering thermal damage using a modified strength-maturity model［J］. Construction and Building Materials， 2023， 400： 132779.
[19]	KANAVARIS F， SOUTSOS M， CHEN J F. Enabling sustainable rapid construction with high volume GGBS concrete through elevated temperature curing and maturity testing［J］. Journal of Building Engineering， 2023， 63： 105434.
[20]	代金鹏，王起才，屈　伸，等. 基于成熟度理论的低温养护混凝土强度预测模型［J］. 材料科学与工程学报， 2018， 36（2）： 263-267.
	DAI J P， WANG Q C， QU S， et al. Strength prediction model of low temperature curing concrete based on maturity theory［J］. Journal of Materials Science and Engineering， 2018， 36（2）： 263-267 （in Chinese）.
[21]	龙朝飞，张戎令，段　运，等. 基于成熟度理论持续负温下不同入模温度工况的混凝土强度预测模型［J］. 材料导报， 2022， 36（6）： 90-97.
	LONG Z F， ZHANG R L， DUAN Y， et al. Prediction model of concrete strength at different molding temperature conditions based on maturity theory under continuous negative temperature［J］. Materials Reports， 2022， 36（6）： 90-97 （in Chinese）.
[22]	赵明强，詹炳根，张卫星，等. 成熟度法预测混凝土极早龄期强度的应用［J］. 合肥工业大学学报（自然科学版）， 2022， 45（11）： 1528-1534.
	ZHAO M Q， ZHAN B G， ZHANG W X， et al. Application of maturity method in the prediction of concrete strength at very early age［J］. Journal of Hefei University of Technology （Natural Science）， 2022， 45（11）： 1528-1534 （in Chinese）.

Parameter	Self-weight height	Curing temperature	Curing age	Empty column
K₁	113.6	95.0	50.9	114.2
K₂	121.5	108.8	118.2	114.5
K₃	117.2	123.6	136.6	118.3
K₄	119.1	144.0	165.7	124.4
k₁	28.4	23.8	12.7	28.6
k₂	30.4	27.2	29.6	28.6
k₃	29.3	30.9	34.2	29.6
k₄	29.8	36.0	41.4	31.1
R	2.0	12.2	28.7	3.5

Parameter	Self-weight height	Curing temperature	Curing age	Empty column
K₁	113.6	95.0	50.9	114.2
K₂	121.5	108.8	118.2	114.5
K₃	117.2	123.6	136.6	118.3
K₄	119.1	144.0	165.7	124.4
k₁	28.4	23.8	12.7	28.6
k₂	30.4	27.2	29.6	28.6
k₃	29.3	30.9	34.2	29.6
k₄	29.8	36.0	41.4	31.1
R	2.0	12.2	28.7	3.5

Source of variation	Sun of square	Degree of freedom	Mean square	F	F threshold value	Significance
Factor A	8.343	3	2.781	0.46	F_0.01（3，3）=23.46 F_0.05（3，3）=9.28
Factor B	330.227	3	110.076	18.202		*
Factor C	1 780.903	3	593.634	98.162		**
Standard error	36.285	6	6.048
Total sum of square	2 155.758

Source of variation	Sun of square	Degree of freedom	Mean square	F	F threshold value	Significance
Factor A	8.343	3	2.781	0.46	F_0.01（3，3）=23.46 F_0.05（3，3）=9.28
Factor B	330.227	3	110.076	18.202		*
Factor C	1 780.903	3	593.634	98.162		**
Standard error	36.285	6	6.048
Total sum of square	2 155.758

M/（℃∙d）	Measured value/MPa	Predicted value/MPa	Relative error/%
30	13.24	13.77	3.89
60	24.86	23.26	6.84
90	28.44	27.71	2.64
210	32.50	33.83	3.94