Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747

DOI 10.1617/s11527-016-0821-9

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

The effect of controlled permeable formwork liner

on the mechanical properties of concrete
S. Kothandaraman . S. Kandasamy

Received: 5 July 2015 / Accepted: 2 February 2016 / Published online: 26 February 2016
 RILEM 2016

Abstract Controlled permeable formwork (CPF) Keywords Controlled permeable formwork

liner was developed primarily to improve the surface Rebound hammer
Abrasion resistance
Mechanical
quality of concrete and thereby its durability. CPF properties
Surface pores
liner allows air and water to escape from the surface
adjacent to the formwork. This paper reports an
experimental study carried out to investigate the
influence of CPF liner on the strength and certain 1 Introduction
mechanical properties of concrete with three different
water–cement (w–c) ratios. The specimens were The quality of cover zone has a major influence on the
prepared against CPF liner and impermeable steel durability of reinforced concrete elements. Cover zone
formwork (IMF) and tested at various ages starting forms the first line of defence against either physical or
from 7 to 365 days. Various tests were conducted to chemical deterioration. Aggressive agents penetrate
assess surface quality; compressive, split tensile and into concrete through surface zone, thus the transport
flexural strengths, rebound hammer and abrasion properties of this zone will determine the rate of
resistance of concrete. The results indicate that CPF penetration into the core concrete and hence its
concrete performed better than IMF concrete in all lifespan. On the contrary, the surface of the concrete
aspects. The present investigation reveals that the use is more vulnerable to poor curing and compaction than
of CPF liner has significantly improved the tensile the concrete in the heart of the section [1]. Therefore, a
strength (say, 20 %) of concrete and the abrasion well compacted, dense, hard and strong concrete
resistance has been enhanced to a remarkable level surface zone with low permeability and low diffusivity
(50–80 %). Further, the surface quality is very essen- are preferable for durable concrete.
tial to assess the cube strength of concrete and the The traditional approaches and techniques adopted
existing testing method slightly underestimates the to improve the quality of concrete certainly serve the
cube strength. purpose, but not at surface level. The commonly used
form work, made from impregnated plywood or steel,
are essentially impermeable to air and water. When the
fresh concrete is subjected to compaction by internal
needle vibrator, the air and water migrate to the
S. Kothandaraman (&)
S. Kandasamy
interface of concrete and formwork, which normally
Department of Civil Engineering, Pondicherry
Engineering College, Puducherry 605014, India get trapped at the formwork interface. The water
e-mail: [email protected] which reaches the interface increases the effective
4738 Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747

water–cement (w–c) ratio in the cover region. Visu- • Filter—allows the passage of air and water away
ally, this may be evident on all concrete surfaces from the fresh concrete but retains cement and
through the presence of blowholes and pin holes other fine particles.
following formwork removal [2]. This is really a • Drainage system—transfers air and water filtered
serious problem because the first line of defence of all from fresh concrete.
structural elements against carbonation, chlorides, • Structural support—that supports the filter and
frost and abrasion, is the cover zone, which inciden- drainage elements and also maintains the required
tally poor in quality compared to core concrete. This formwork profile and resists the concrete
situation is analogous to concrete-aggregate interface. pressure.
Mehta has stated that the w–c ratio around the
The CPF systems are classified into three types [8].
aggregates will generally be higher compared to the
remaining part of concrete. He adds, ‘‘…higher the • Type I: Two-layer filter fabric systems that are
proportion of elongated and flat particles, the greater fixed over a structural support and tensioned
will be the tendency for water films to accumulate next in situ. These systems are reusable (3–5 times)
to the aggregate surface, thus weakening the interfa- with careful cleaning between uses.
cial transition zone’’ [3]. • Type II: A single-layer filter fabric system that is
Controlled permeable formwork (CPF) liners are fixed over a structural support and tensioned
the formwork system essentially intended to improve in situ. These systems are generally single-use
the quality of the surface zone of concrete. CPF liners products.
are permeable to air and water, but prevent the escape • Type III: A two-layer system combining a filter
of cement and other fine particles. This ensures the fabric bonded to a backing grid. This type of CPF
reduction of w–c ratio and increase in cement content is fixed onto a structural support, but does not need
in the surface zone of concrete [4–7]. CPF liner creates tensioning because the filter fabric is pre-tensioned
a uniform surface, denser and less porous concrete in the manufacturing process and the tension is
surface/skin. maintained by the backing grid. This type can be
Although there are several types of CPF systems used more than once. With regard to the drainage
available in the market, all share the same general capacity, performance of this system is better than
principles of function. The basic three components of the other two types.
any CPF system are explained below (Fig. 1).

2 Research significance

Though the use of CPF liner has come into usage

during the 1980s [8], our knowledge and understand-
ing on the effect of this liner on the performance of
concrete remains very limited and scanty. However,
this section will discuss the available technical input
on this innovative material. Adam et al. [9] studied the
effect of CPF liner on the durability of concrete
containing ordinary Portland cement (OPC) and
pulverised fuel ash (PFA). They found that use of
CPF liner had significantly improved the surface
hardness and durability properties, such as water
absorption, water penetration and chloride diffusion.
Investigations carried out by Basheer et al. [10]
confirmed the decrease in the permeability of concrete
and the increase in resistance to the ingress of both
Fig. 1 Elements of CPF system [8] carbon dioxide and chlorides due to CPF liner. Metin
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747 4739

[11] and Nolan et al. [12] also confirmed that use of C40 and C45. The proportions of various mixtures are
CPF liner had dramatically reduced water permeabil- presented in Table 1.
ity and increased resistance to ingress of chloride and
carbonation attack. 3.3 Preparation and curing of specimens
McKenna [13] studied the effect of CPF liner on
carbonation-induced corrosion by subjecting the con- Steel moulds were used throughout the study to cast
crete specimens to accelerated CO2 exposure. They different concrete specimens. The sides of the moulds
reported that CPF lined concrete could deliver supe- were smooth with machine finished surface, which did
rior carbonation-induced corrosion resistance. Simi- not require any mould releasing agent. However, a thin
larly, McCarthy et al. [14] reported from their study coat of oil was applied on the surface of mould and
that the use of CPF liner had significantly enhanced the subsequently gently rubbed off with a dry cloth. For
chloride and corrosion resistance of concrete. CPF specimens, the liner was affixed to the side plates
McCarthy and Giannakou [15] confirmed this perfor- of mould with the glue supplied by the manufacturer
mance of CPF lined in situ concrete under splash zone (Fig. 2). CPF liner does not require any releasing
and inter-tidal regions in marine environment. agent. Demoulding was quite easy due to liner, the
moment side face nuts were slightly loosened then the
plates had detached from the concrete surface effort-
3 Experimental program lessly. The specimens cast without CPF liner were
identified as ‘‘IMF’’ specimens and those made with
3.1 Materials CPF liner were identified as ‘‘CPF’’ specimens.
The concrete mixes were prepared in a pan mixer of
OPC, 43 grade conforming to IS: 8112-1989 [16] was capacity 55 l. The moulds were filled with concrete
used. Its specific gravity was 3.14. Locally available and compacted using a needle vibrator. Care was taken
river sand conforming to Zone-II [17] was used. The to ensure that the needle did not come into contact with
fineness modulus of sand was 2.54 and its specific the CPF liner. The specimens were demoulded after
gravity was 2.73. Crushed stone aggregate conforming 24 h and water cured till the date of test.
to IS: 383-1987 [17] was used. The fineness modulus
of coarse aggregate was 8.15 and its specific gravity
was 2.68. The maximum size of coarse aggregate was 3.4 Testing of specimens
20 mm (graded). The tap water available in the
Pondicherry Engineering College campus was used, 3.4.1 Surface pore measurement
which conformed to the requirements of IS: 456-2000
[18]. In this investigation, Naphthalene Formaldehyde In order to make a quantitative assessment on surface
Condensate (NFC) based super plasticizer (SP) was quality, an image analysis was carried out on the
used, and conforming to IS: 9103-1999 [19]. Type-II vertical cast surface of specimens in accordance with
CPF liner was used in this work. It was a single layer ASTM B 276 [20]. Cube specimens of 150 mm size
system. It had two sides, one side acted as filter and were used. Image was taken by using a universal serial
other side acted as drain. Based on the cost, usage and bus (USB) microscope with a magnification of 509.
to derive identical performance, Type II liner was The captured images were processed using ‘De-winter
selected for this research work. material plus’ software to recognize and quantify the
surface pores. One specimen in each category of
3.2 Concrete mixture proportions concrete mixture was considered for this study. In each
specimen eight images were captured from four side
It was envisaged to understand the impact of cement faces. Totally, 24 images in each of IMF and CPF
content, concrete strength and w–c ratio on the specimens were captured. Based on the 24 observa-
performance level of CPF concrete. Based on the tions the average value was reported as surface pores.
above objectives three concrete mixtures were con- The individual test value, which deviated by ±5 %
sidered in this work. They were designated as C33, from the average was rejected.
4740 Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747

Table 1 Concrete mixture proportions

Mixture Composition (kg/m3) Super plasticizer Main composition parameters Slump
designation (l/m3) (mm)
Cement Coarse Fine Water Ratios SP/C
aggregate aggregate (%)
C CA FA W SP W/ CA/ TA/
C FA C

C33 330 1165 760 160 2.5 0.48 1.53 5.83 0.76 110
C40 400 1150 710 165 3.0 0.41 1.62 4.65 0.75 100
C45 450 1170 700 140 5.4 0.31 1.67 4.15 1.20 100
TA total aggregate

tested for split tensile strength by using the above said

compression testing machine. Tests were carried out
on triplicate specimens and average split tensile
strength values were reported.

3.4.4 Flexural strength

Flexural test were done in accordance to the IS:

516-1959 [21]. Beam specimens of 100 9 100 9
500 mm long were used. After the specific curing
period, the concrete beams were subjected to flexural
Fig. 2 Photos of mould preparation to cast cube specimens. test under third-point loading. Tests were carried out
a IMF, b CPF on triplicate specimens and average flexural strength
values were obtained.
3.4.2 Compressive strength
3.4.5 Rebound number
Cube specimens of 150 mm size were cast to study the
effect of CPF liner on strength of concrete. Under each In order to gain some knowledge on the surface
category 12 specimens were cast to find the compres- hardness of concrete and to differentiate IMF and CPF
sive strength at 7, 28, 90 and 365 days. Three concrete specimens, rebound hammer test was per-
specimens were tested for each test result. Automatic formed. The rebound hammer functions based on the
compression testing machine of 3000 kN capacity was principle of surface hardness of concrete. The rebound
used for this purpose and testing was carried out in number and the strength of concrete are having nearly a
accordance with IS: 516-1959 [21]. The load was linear relation. The test was performed on all the
applied at the rate of 140 kg/cm2/min till the cube specimens of 150 mm cube right from 7 to 365 days in
specimens crushed and the crushing load was recorded accordance with IS: 13311: Part 2-1999 [23]. Before
automatically. conducting compressive strength test the specimens
were subjected to rebound hammer test. In each
3.4.3 Split tensile strength specimen two opposite faces were considered and on
each face six shots were made. Having considered
Split tensile test was carried out in accordance to the three specimens in each category, totally 36 shots were
IS: 5816-1999 [22]. Cylindrical specimen of 100 mm made and the average has been considered. While
diameter and 200 mm high were used. After the taking the average, any value, which deviated by ±5
specific curing period, the concrete cylinders were units from the average was rejected.
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747 4741

3.4.6 Abrasion resistance dry and light in colour. Some white patches were also
noticed on the surface. May be due to dry surface the
Abrasion resistance of concrete was determined as per Ca(OH)2 deposits are seen. Further, IMF specimens
IS: 9284-1979 [24]. The test was conducted on with higher w–c ratio suffered more surface defects.
100 mm size cubes at the age of 7, 14, 28, 60, 90 However, in CPF specimens the surface quality
and 365 days. Pneumatic sand blasting equipment was appeared nearly alike irrespective of w–c ratio.
used and the abrasive charge used was river sand of
size passing 1 mm IS-sieve and retained on 0.5 mm 4.2 Surface pore
IS-sieve and driven by air pressure. The abrasive loss
of specimen was taken as the percentage loss in mass Figure 4 shows that the surface pores of CPF and IMF
for two separate impressions made on the same face of concrete specimens. The average surface pores of CPF
the cube specimen under test. and IMF concrete specimens were 2 and 24 %
respectively. Use of CPF liner had resulted in 12
times improvement in terms of surface pores. From the
4 Results and discussion typical picture (Fig. 4), it is clear that CPF specimen
surface attained a smooth and fine grained texture.
4.1 Visual inspection
4.3 Compressive strength
As soon as the specimens were demoulded, the surface
characteristics were visually scrutinised and com- The variation of compressive strength with age of
pared. The surface morphology picture has been various concrete mixtures is presented in Fig. 5. The
shown in Fig. 3. IMF specimens had a number of results are the average of three test specimens. The
pin and blowholes on the surface. In contrast, CPF standard deviation and error bars are indicated in
specimens exhibited even surface with almost free of Fig. 5. The standard deviation of IMF specimens lies
pin and blowholes. Also, cement particle retaining in the range of 1.8–2.5 MPa and that for CPF
effect of CPF liner could be verified by the smooth specimens is in the range of 1.0–2.5 MPa.
surface. On scratching the surface with thumb nails, It may be observed that the use of CPF liner had
mark could be on IMF specimens; however, no mark contributed to improve the compressive strength
could be formed on CPF specimens. The IMF marginally. The increase in strength lies in the range
specimens were dark in surface texture when com- of 3–4 % over a period of 1 year of observation. This
pared to CPF specimens. This may be due to presence percentage increase may appear to be small, but from a
of higher moisture on the surface of IMF specimens. close observation of Fig. 5, it could be learnt that the
On the other hand, the CPF specimens were relatively CPF specimens had very consistently yielded higher

Fig. 3 Surface morphology

picture of cube specimens.
a IMF (Scale-1:23), b CPF
(Scale-1:23)
4742 Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747

Fig. 4 Typical concrete surface pore. a IMF, b CPF

Fig. 5 Compressive 70

2.5
2.3
strength vs age

1.7
2.4

1.6
60

1.8
1.5
Compressive strength (MPa)

1.8

1.7
2.4

1.4
C33-CPF

2.1
2.0
1.9
1.9

50
2.0
2.5
1.0

C33-IMF
2.4
1.4
2.1
2.3

40 C40-CPF
1.8
2.3

C40-IMF
30 C45-CPF
C45-IMF
20

10

0
7 28 90 365
Age (Days)

strength compared to IMF specimens. This behaviour distribution of the compressive load over the entire
conveys an important underlying theme on the method mass of the concrete specimen. Apart from attaining a
of assessment of cube strength of concrete. Compres- consistent higher compressive strength in CPF con-
sive strength reflects the characteristics of the entire crete, on further scrutiny of Fig. 5, it is learnt that the
volume of the concrete specimen. By improving the standard deviation of the CPF specimens is also
quality of concrete superficially the physical beha- consistently smaller compared to that of IMF speci-
viour of the entire mass cannot be modified. mens. Out of 12 sets, 10 set of CPF specimens had
In spite of this fact, the compressive strength had lower standard deviation, which supports the above
been very consistently increased among all the sam- conclusion. Therefore, the use of CPF liner had not
ples of CPF lined specimens. By the use of CPF liner contributed to enhance the strength of concrete, but
the surface hardness of the concrete had been helped to assess the cube compressive strength more
increased. This superficial tough layer acted as precisely.
capping (as intentionally done for cylinder specimen The efficiency of CPF liner (expressed in percent-
as per ASTM C 617 [25]) and helped for an even age increase in strength over the IMF specimens) for
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747 4743

4.5 diameter. However, at the vicinity of the load point

7D 28D
4 compressive stress prevails for a depth of about
90D 365D
3.5 0.1 9 (diameter of specimen) [3]. CPF specimens are
Efficiency (%)

3 confined with a thin shell of tough concrete layer. With

2.5 regard to the thickness of this tough layer various
2 authors have reported different thickness based on
1.5
their own method of testing/investigation. Initially,
Kasai et al. [26] reported this thickness as 30 mm.
1
Subsequently, Price and Widdows [2] reported as
0.5
20 mm and recently, Liu et al. [6] reported that this
0
0.31 0.41 0.48 thickness might not be larger than 5 mm. Once this
W-C ratio shell is broken then the core concrete hardly offers any
resistance and the specimen fails instantaneously.
Fig. 6 Efficiency (compressive strength) of CPF liner vs w–c Therefore this mechanism of failure leads to substan-
ratio tially higher (split) tensile strength.
The efficiency of CPF liner against split tensile
different w–c ratio has been indicated in Fig. 6. It is strength was found to increase with increase in w–c
learnt that the efficiency of CPF liner increases with ratio and strength of concrete (Fig. 8). However,
the increase in w–c ratio, age and strength of concrete. against age this efficiency was found to get reduced
beyond 90 days. The minimum and the maximum
4.4 Tensile strength efficiency were found to be 11 % (at 7-day) and 25 %
(at 365-day) respectively.
4.4.1 Split tensile strength
4.4.2 Flexural strength
The variation of split tensile strength with age of
various concrete mixtures is presented in Fig. 7. The The variation in flexural strength of various concrete
standard deviation along with error bar has been mixtures is shown in Fig. 9. The standard deviation
indicated in Fig. 7. Compared to compressive and error bar have also been indicated in Fig. 7. There
strength, tensile strength property of concrete has is a significant improvement in flexural strength due to
been influenced to higher extent by the use of CPF CPF liner. In flexure test the bottom layer of the beam
liner. When a cylindrical specimen is subjected to a is subjected to the maximum tensile stresses. In IMF
line of compressive load longitudinally, a uniform concrete, the cover zone of concrete is weaker than the
transverse tensile stress is developed along the vertical core concrete. Once the outer layer of concrete is

Fig. 7 Split tensile strength 7

vs age
0.15
0.10

0.21

6
0.15
0.10
Split tensile strength (MPa)

0.20

C33-CPF
0.15
0.21

0.21
0.21

0.21
0.12

0.15
0.20

0.20

5 C33-IMF
0.15
0.15

0.21
0.17

0.21
0.21

0.20
0.20

C40-CPF
0.21

4
C40-IMF
3 C45-CPF
C45-IMF
2

0
7 28 90 365
Age (Days)
4744 Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747

ruptured, then the specimen will fail instantaneously compared to IMF specimens. The standard deviation
irrespective of the strength of core concrete as it and error bar are also indicated in Fig. 11.
happens in splitting test. This dense and hard cover The efficiency of CPF liner, against the rebound
zone delays the formation of initial crack. This has number, decreased with age in all the concrete
caused increase in flexural strength of concrete. mixtures (Fig. 12). This may be due to the reason that
The efficiency of CPF liner against flexural strength the CPF lined concretes might have derived majority
increases with increase in w–c ratio and strength of of the advantage during the early age itself. The
concrete (Fig. 10). The minimum and the maximum rebound number, however, is found to increase with
efficiency were found to be 11 % (at 7-day) and 26 % w–c ratio and strength of concrete. The minimum and
(at 365-day) respectively. the maximum efficiency were 21 % (7-day) and 58 %
(365-day) respectively.
4.5 Rebound number
4.6 Abrasion resistance
The values of rebound number, which is the direct
indicator of the surface hardness, of various concrete The abrasion loss, by sand blasting, of various
mixtures are shown in Fig. 11. The rebound number of concrete mixtures is shown in Fig. 13. The standard
CPF specimen has been significantly improved when deviation and the error bar are indicated in Fig. 13.
30 28
7D 28D 7D 28D
26
90D 365D 90D 365D
25 24
Efficiency (%)
Efficiency (%)

22
20
20
18
15
16

10 14
12
5 10
0.31 0.41 0.48 0.31 0.41 0.48
W-C ratio W-C ratio

Fig. 8 Efficiency (against split tensile strength) of CPF liner vs Fig. 10 Efficiency (against flexural strength) of CPF liner vs
w–c ratio w–c ratio

10
0.17

9
0.20

0.21
0.17

0.15

0.21
0.20

8 C33-CPF
0.20
Flexural strength (MPa)

0.10

0.21
0.12

0.21

0.20
0.21
0.15

0.21

C33-IMF
0.17

0.21

7
0.21

0.21

0.20
0.21

0.21
0.21

6 C40-CPF

5 C40-IMF

4 C45-CPF

3 C45-IMF

2
1
0
7 28 90 365
Age (Days)

Fig. 9 Flexural strength vs age

Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747 4745

60

1.5
0.7
50

2.7
1.1
2.1
2.3
C33-CPF

1.8
2.4
2.0
Rebound number

1.7

1.2

1.9
1.8

1.5
40 C33-IMF

2.1

2.9
1.5

2.5
2.1
C40-CPF

2.6
1.7
2.7
30

2.0
C40-IMF

20 1.7 C45-CPF

C45-IMF
10

0
7 28 90 365
Age (Days)

Fig. 11 Rebound number vs age

70
7D 28D concrete they are listed in the ascending order. The
60 90D 365D efficiency range is given in brackets.
1. Compressive strength (2–4 %)
Efficiency (%)

50
2. Split tensile strength (11–26 %)
40 3. Flexural tensile strength (11–26 %)
4. Rebound number (22–46 %)
30
5. Abrasion resistance (50–78 %)
20
It is obvious that the impact of CPF is only
10 superficial. It is noteworthy to discuss the impact of
0.31 0.41 0.48 such tough layer on various properties of concrete.
W-C ratio Compressive strength reflects the characteristics of the
entire mass of the specimen. Therefore the improve-
Fig. 12 Efficiency (against rebound number) of CPF liner vs ment made superficially could not make great impact
w–c ratio
on the compressive strength and hence it is the lowest.
Tensile strength of concrete (both splitting and
CPF specimens had shown excellent resistance against flexural) is primarily controlled by its surface quality.
abrasion. Therefore, the performance of CPF against the tensile
The efficiency of CPF liner was found to increase strength is more than that attained in compressive
with increase in w–c ratio, strength of concrete and age strength. The rebound hammer test influences the top
(Fig. 14). However, after 60 days there was no zone of concrete: according to BS 1881-202: 1986
increase in efficiency. The minimum and the maxi- (withdrawn), the depth of this zone is about 30 mm.
mum efficiency were 50 % (60-day) and 78 % (7-day) Though the depth of influence of CPF is not yet made
respectively. certain, it is reported to be in the range of 5–30 mm.
However, over the depth of CPF influence, the
concrete properties may not be uniform. As the
5 Summary rebound number reflects the average quality of con-
crete over a depth, its value is more influenced than
Based on the overall studies on the concrete property a that occurred in tensile test. In the abrasion test the
summary has been drawn. In order to compare the depth of reach is shallow; about 2–3 mm. Over this
extent of impact of CPF on the performance of shallow depth the variation in concrete property may
4746 Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747

Fig. 13 Abrasion loss vs 0.4

0.02

0.02
C33-CPF C33-IMF

0.02
age
0.35 C40-CPF C40-IMF

0.02
C45-CPF C45-IMF
0.3

loss in weight (%)

0.01
0.25

0.01
0.01
0.2

0.01
0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01
0.15

0.01
0.01

0.01
0.01
0.01

0.01
0.01

0.01
0.01

0.01
0.01

0.01
0.1

0.01

0.01
0.01

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01

0.01

0.01
0.01

0.01

0.01
0.05

0
7 14 28 60 90 365
Age (Days)

80 pores and other blemishes. The surface pores of

7D 14D
75
28D 60D CPF specimen was about 2 %, which was 12
90D 365D
times smaller than that of IMF specimens. In
70
Efficiency (%)

IMF concretes the extent of surface pores and

65 blemishes were higher in mixtures with higher
w–c ratio. But in CPF concretes the extent of
60
improvement attained among all the concretes
55 were nearly alike. That is, irrespective of the w–
50 c ratio CPF liner functions for identical surface
finish.
45
0.31 0.41 0.48
(2) The improvement achieved on the surface
quality had ensured to assess the cube com-
W-C ratio
pressive strength of concrete more precisely.
Fig. 14 Efficiency (abrasion loss) of CPF liner vs w–c ratio The existing method of assessment underesti-
mates the cube strength of concrete by about
3–4 %.
remain identical. Therefore the abrasion test has
(3) Tensile strength of concrete primarily depends
shown such a high efficiency.
up on the surface tensile strength. As CPF liner
Had the rebound and abrasion tests influenced the
helped to improve the surface quality, tensile
concrete to an identical depth then the efficiency could
strength had been substantially improved in
have become equal. This conveys that the tensile
CPF specimens. The increase in tensile strength
strength of concrete is essentially controlled by an
was in the range of 11–26 % over the period of
extremely thin layer of superficial concrete.
1 year of observation.
(4) The use of CPF liner had improved the surface
hardness (rebound number) significantly. The
6 Conclusions
improvement level was in the range of
21–58 %. The maximum efficiency was
The mechanical characteristics of concrete specimens
attained during the early age (7-day) and
cast against CPF liner and conventional impermeable
thereafter the rate of increase was less (Fig. 12).
formwork were investigated. The following conclu-
(5) CPF specimens had exhibited excellent resis-
sions can be drawn from the present investigation.
tance against abrasion. The efficiency of CPF
(1) The use of CPF liner substantially improved the against abrasion resistance had gone as high as
surface quality of concrete, such as surface 80 %. Like rebound number, the maximum
Materials and Structures (2016) 49:4737–4747 4747

efficiency was obtained at 7-day itself and 7. Brueckner R, Williamson SJ, Clark LA (2012) Rate of the
thereafter it decreased (Fig. 14). However, thaumasite form of sulphate attack under laboratory con-
ditions. Cem Concr Compos 34:365–369
there was no further decrease after 60 days. 8. Price WF (2000) Controlled permeability formwork. CIRIA
(6) Based on the overall test results, it was learnt Report, C 511
that the efficiency of CPF liner was on the 9. Adam AA, Law DW, Molyneaux T, Patnaikuni I, Aly T
increase with the increase in w–c ratio. This is in (2010) The effect of using controlled permeability form-
work on the durability of concrete containing OPC and PFA.
conformity with the findings of Basheer et al. Aust J Civ Eng 6:1–12
[10]. This behaviour conveys an essential 10. Basheer L, Nanukuttan SV, Basheer PAM (2008) The
characteristic of CPF liner in general and about influence of reusing ‘Formtex’ controlled permeability
the external surface of concrete in particular. formwork on strength and durability of concrete. Mater
Struct 41:1363–1375
That is, CPF liner drains out water such that the 11. Arslan Metin (2001) The effects of permeable formworks
final w–c ratio may be the same in all the with sucker liners on the physical properties of concrete
mixtures at the surface level (however, this surfaces. Constr Build Mater 15:149–156
needs verification). Secondly, higher the w–c 12. Nolan E, Basheer PAM, Long AE (1995) Effects of three
durability enhancing products on some physical properties
ratio higher will be the extent of the surface of near surface concrete. Constr Build Mater 9:267–272
defects, and this reinforces the conclusion (1). 13. McKenna P (2010) The effect of controlled permeability
(7) Considering various strengths of concrete, the formwork on carbonation-induced corrosion. In: Third FIB
efficiency of CPF was on the increase with international congress, Scotland, pp 1–8
14. McCarthy MJ, Giannakou A, Jones MR (2000) Specifying
strength level and age as well. However, with concrete for chloride environments using controlled per-
regard to rebound number and abrasion resis- meability formwork. Mater Struct 34:566–576
tance, these two properties did not increase with 15. McCarthy MJ, Giannakou A (2002) In-situ performance of
age. The maximum efficiency was attained at CPF concrete in a coastal environment. Cem Concr Res
32:451–457
7-day itself. Rather, IMF concretes gained these 16. IS: 8112 (1989) Specification for 43 grade ordinary Portland
properties at a higher rate at early age. cement. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
17. IS: 383 (1987) Specification for coarse and fine aggregates
from natural source for concrete. Bureau of Indian Stan-
dards, New Delhi
18. IS: 456 (2000) Plain and reinforced concrete, code of
References practice. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
19. IS: 9103 (1999) Specification for concrete admixtures.
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
1. Cairns J (1999) Enhancements in surface quality of concrete 20. ASTM B 276 (2000) Standard test method for apparent
through use of controlled permeability formwork liners. porosity in cemented carbides. American Society for Test-
Mag Concr Res 51:73–86 ing Materials, New Mexico
2. Price WF, Widdows SJ (1991) The effect of permeable 21. IS: 516 (1959) Methods of tests for strength of concrete.
formwork on the surface properties of concrete. Mag Concr Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
Res 43:93–104 22. IS: 5816 (1999) Method of test for splitting tensile strength
3. Mehta PK, Monteiro PJM (2006) Concrete, microstructure, of concrete. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
properties and materials, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, 23. IS: 13311: Part 2 (1992) Methods of test for non-destructive
pp 26, 73 testing of concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
4. Coutinho JS (2003) The combined benefits of CPF and RHA 24. IS: 9284 (1979) Method of test for abrasion resistance of
in improving the durability of concrete structure. Cem concrete. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
Concr Compos 25:51–59 25. ASTM C 617 (2003) Standard practice for capping cylin-
5. Chen Cuicui, Liu Jianzhong, Cui Gong, Liu Jiaping (2012) drical concrete specimen. American Society for Testing
Effect of controlled permeability formwork on the improve- Materials, New Mexico
ment of concrete performance. Procedia Eng 27:405–411 26. Kasai Y, Nagano M, Sato K, Suga K (1998) Study on the
6. Liu Jiaping, Miao Changwen, Chen Cuicui, Liu Jianzhong, evaluation of concrete quality prepared with permeable
Cui Gong (2013) Effect and mechanism of controlled per- forms and plywood forms. Trans Jpn Concr Inst 10:59–66
meable formwork on concrete water adsorption. Constr
Build Mater 39:129–133