Expect Compressive

Strength Test Results Less

Than Specified Strength on
Every Project
Use engineering judgment, test reserve cylinders, and extract cores only if
evaluation is warranted

by James Klinger, Colin L. Lobo, Eamonn F. Connolly, and Bruce A. Suprenant

S
urprised by the title? On every project, experienced ACI 301-20, Section [Link],1 establishes the process of
concrete industry professionals recognize that determining the required average strength, f′cr, at a 99%
individual compressive strength test results can be probability of compliance (strength tests can fail the criteria at
lower than the specified strength, f′c. While there are numerous a 1% probability).
reasons this might occur, one important reason is: the Relative to the first criteria for acceptable strength test
standards for acceptance criteria used in the United States are results, f′cr should be at least 1.34ss greater than f′c, where ss is
based on statistical concepts that permit a low test result, and the standard deviation of at least 30 strength tests of the same
it is standard practice for concrete producers to design class of concrete from a previous project. In a statistical
concrete mixtures based on a probability of about 10% that normal distribution, the factor 1.34 indicates that about 10%
an individual strength test may be less than f′c.1-3 This is done of individual strength tests can be less than f′c.
such that the owner benefits from an economical and ACI 318-19, Section [Link], and ACI 301-20, Section
sustainable concrete mixture that complies with the ACI [Link](d), establish the same minimum frequency of
318-19 Code4 and represents limited risk to structural compressive strength testing at one test for each 150 yd3 of
performance considering the use of safety and resistance concrete. ACI 301 is usually referred to in the Project
factors in design. When a compressive strength test result is Specifications and by the AIA MasterSpec® Section 033000-
substantially less than f′c, engineering judgment, use of reserve Cast-in-Place Concrete.7 Some project specifications call for
cylinders, and, if necessary, evaluation of extracted cores tests at a higher frequency, typically at one test per 100 yd3 of
assist in resolving the issue. concrete. Table 1 shows how often the measured compressive
strength test is likely to be below f′c based on statistical concepts
Is it Normal for a Strength Test to be Less for testing frequency at one test per 100 or 150 yd3 of concrete.
than f′c and How Often? For a project with 10,000 yd3 of concrete, expect seven to
An individual compressive strength test result less than f′c 10 tests less than f′c. On a large project with 100,000 yd3 of
is acceptable in accordance with the Code.3,5,6 The strength concrete, this number is 67 to 100. If this is not observed, the
acceptance criteria in Section [Link] of ACI 318-19 state concrete mixture is overdesigned more than that required by
that strength test results are acceptable if: ACI 301. This can be related to prescriptive requirements
• The average of three consecutive tests equals or exceeds f′c; where a maximum water-cementitious materials ratio (w/cm)
is not consistent with f′c or a minimum cement content is
and
• Each individual test exceeds (f′c − 500 psi) or 0.9f′c, if f′c specified. Some producers also increase strength of mixtures
to avoid problems associated with testing.
exceeds 5000 psi.

[Link] | Ci | FEBRUARY 2022 37

Table 1:
Expected number of compressive strength test results less than f′c
Minimum number of tests Expected number of tests less than f′c
Volume of placed One per 150 yd3 One per 150 yd3
concrete, yd3 (ACI 318-19, ACI 301-20) One per 100 yd3 (ACI 318-19, ACI 301-20) One per 100 yd3
1000 7 10 1 1
10,000 70 100 7 10
50,000 334 500 34 50
100,000 667 1000 67 100

When strength test results are lower than f′c, it is possible concrete cost up to about $15 per cubic yard. For a project
that the failure may be in the testing and not representative of with 10,000 yd3 of concrete, the additional concrete cost
the delivered concrete. This is especially true when the would be $150,000. And on a large project with 100,000 yd3
fabrication, handling, curing, and testing of the cylinders are of concrete, the additional concrete cost would be $1,500,000.
not conducted in accordance with relevant ASTM standards. That is the benefit the owner receives based on allowing some
Testing issues can therefore complicate how many test results strength tests below f′c. With an increased cement content,
will be less than f′c and, more importantly, if the strength test there can also be adverse performance issues such as
results are representative of the delivered concrete. increased potential for cracking due to higher shrinkage or
When strength tests fail to meet the ACI 318 acceptance thermal effects. In this era of green construction, increasing
criteria, steps must be taken to increase subsequent strength the strength of concrete also increases its carbon footprint and
tests. Guidance on steps to increase future strength tests is makes it more difficult to achieve project goals for
provided in the Commentary Section R26.12.3.1(b) of sustainability.
ACI 318-19. A more relevant suggested sequence of
evaluation is described by the National Ready Mixed Use Test Cylinders Wisely—Discuss at
Concrete Association (NRMCA).8 If an individual strength Preconstruction Meeting
test fails to meet the second criteria in ACI 318-19 for During the preconstruction meeting, the engineer should
acceptable strength test results, then the Code requires a provide direction to the testing agency regarding appropriate
low-strength investigation. actions when strength test results are less than f′c. Typically, a
Testing agencies fail to recognize that a compressive set of four to six cylinders are cast from a concrete sample
strength test can be less than f′c and still comply with the (Fig. 1). Preferably, additional “hold” cylinders are available
acceptance criteria in the Code. Regretfully, the test agency to test at a later age if needed (Fig. 2).
marks the test report as “failed” or “rejected,” both of which The specifics of reserve or hold cylinders are discussed in a
are inappropriate characterizations. First, the test did not fail later section. It should, however, be noted that these cylinders
acceptance criteria in the Code and second, the testing agency should be used prior to core tests because the design team felt
does not have the authority to accept or reject. This it prudent to require reserve or hold cylinders in the project
misleading information often creates unnecessary confusion, specifications and the owner felt it beneficial to pay for them.
cost, and delays. This issue should be discussed at the Deciding to core adds an extra cost without gaining the
preconstruction meeting. Some testing agencies believe they benefit of additional information from reserve cylinders that
should alert the owner or design team if the measured strength are already paid for.
on a single cylinder at 7 days does not achieve some assumed One additional testing item should be discussed, as per
percentage of the specified 28-day strength. This practice NRMCA CIP 35 recommendations: “If one or both of a set of
could cause unnecessary panic and should be avoided because cylinders break at strength less than f′c, evaluate the cylinders
there is typically no requirement at 7 days, testing one for obvious problems and hold the tested cylinders for later
cylinder is not a valid test, and each mixture has a unique rate examination.”3 This is generally common practice at a testing
of strength gain. agency; however, it should be discussed to make sure the
cylinders are available for examination. Often, just measuring
It Costs Less to be Less than f′c—Owner the weight of a cylinder before testing to calculate an
Benefits approximate density can be useful to determine if there was
What is the cost if no strength tests can be less than f′c? improper consolidation, embedded foreign objects, or other
If f′c is the absolute minimum strength, the mixture must be problems.
designed for a strength level at least three standard deviations Sometimes engineers are reluctant or refuse to consider the
greater than f′c. This will require at least 50 lb higher cement information provided by the reserve or hold cylinders. If that
content in each cubic yard of concrete. This could increase the is the case, a conversation with the owner should take place

38 FEBRUARY 2022 | Ci | [Link]

 Fig. 2: The test agency made seven 4 x 8 in. concrete cylinders. Two cylinders were tested at
7 days, three cylinders were tested at 28 days, and two hold cylinders remained available for
testing at later age if needed

Fig. 1: Typically, four to six 6 x 12 in. concrete indicates that judgment should be applied as to the
cylinders are cast at the jobsite to fulfill significance of low strength test results and whether they are
project specification requirements (photo a cause for concern. If further investigation is deemed
courtesy of PCA) necessary, such investigation may include in-place tests as
described in ACI 228.1R-199 or, in extreme cases, the taking
prior to construction. The owner only wants to pay to receive and testing of cores.
a benefit and, if the reserve or hold cylinders do not do so, Engineering judgment is developed through experience. An
they should be removed from the testing contract. engineer should evaluate low strength test results in view of
the following observations:
Investigating Low Strength Test Results • Any discrepancy or deficiency in testing provides a
ACI 318 and ACI 301 provide requirements when a low lower-bound value of the concrete delivered to the project.
strength test must be investigated. Engineering judgment Thus, if a testing issue is suspected, the actual compressive
should be used to determine the scope of the investigation to strength is higher than the test value. Further, the most
verify if corrective action is necessary. First, ask yourself: if likely problem could be a lack of proper initial curing of
the test result is true, does it matter? test specimens at the jobsite;
Section [Link], Part (b), of ACI 318-19 requires the • Concrete compressive strength increases with age. Thus,
engineer to consider if “calculations indicate that structural concrete strength tested at a later age is higher than the
adequacy is significantly reduced.” If the low test result is strength tested at an earlier age. The rate of strength gain is
adequate, why spend time and money determining the root greater for mixtures containing supplementary
cause? A root cause analysis should be considered, however, cementitious materials such as fly ash or slag cement; and
when there are more than the anticipated number of low • Compressive strength from a single cylinder tested at a
strength results based on accepted statistical principles. later age can be used as the basis to determine if the
The engineer has tools for investigating a low strength test concrete is structurally adequate. Thus, even though it is
result, including: 1) using experienced engineering judgment; not a Code-recognized strength test, it can be used as the
2) assessing testing variations from standards; 3) supplementary basis for acceptance. The engineer can consider that
data from reserve or hold cylinder testing; 4) nondestructive service and live loads on a structural member may be
testing for a relative assessment; and 5) core testing using the applied at an age later than 28 days.
criteria for core strength in ACI 318.
Assessing testing variations from ASTM standards
Engineering judgment It is important that procedures are conducted in accordance
ACI 318-19 uses the word “judgment” 16 times in the with ASTM standards. Deficiencies in handling and testing
document. The first instance included in the Introduction cylinders will result in a lower measured strength.10 All
might be the most important: “The Code and Commentary violations add up to cause significant reductions in measured
cannot replace sound engineering knowledge, experience, and strength. Richardson11 states that “the simplicity of the
judgment.” Commentary Section R26.12.6.1 in ACI 318-19 strength test is misleading because the measured results are

[Link] | Ci | FEBRUARY 2022 39

very much dependent upon strictly adhering to standardized but it seems to date back at least 50 years. Recent project
uniform procedures. Violation of these procedures can lead to specifications we have encountered (for a hotel, medical
inaccurate results. All too often, the results of strength center, transit center, and water treatment facility) included
measurements are fraught with testing errors. Most deviations the following provision:
from the standardized procedures for testing result in low “Compressive strength tests: ASTM C39/C39M-12, one set
strength results. The consequences of falsely low results can for each 100 cu. yd. or fraction thereof, of each class of
be: 1) unnecessary delays; 2) costly follow-up testing; concrete placed in any one day or for each 5,000 sq. ft. of
3) wasteful overdesign; and 4) possible rejection of concrete surface area placed: one specimen tested at 7 days, two
acceptable for the intent.12” specimens tested at 28 days and one specimen retained in
Per ACI 214R-11(19), Section 3.3: “Deviations in field reserve at the laboratory for later testing if required.”
sampling, specimen preparation, curing, and testing The project specification requires one extra specimen for
procedures may cause lower strength test results.” The each 100 yd3 of concrete placed. For a project with 10,000 yd3
committee provides a list of principal sources of strength of concrete, the owner pays for 100 additional reserve or hold
variation: cylinders. And on a large project with 100,000 yd3 of concrete,
• Improper sampling from the batch; the owner pays for an additional 1000 reserve or hold
• Variations due to fabrication techniques: cylinders. The cost of making, curing, storing, and testing a
◦ Substandard conditions, cylinder varies from $75 to $150. The cost will be lower if the
◦ Incorrect tools, hold cylinders are not tested. For simplicity, consider the cost
◦ Poor quality, damaged, or distorted molds, to be $100, thus increasing the testing cost by as much as
◦ Nonstandard molding and consolidation, and $100,000. The design team and owner must believe that the
◦ Incorrect handling of fresh test samples; increased cost is necessary and beneficial to the project. In
• Differences in curing: other words, project specifications requiring reserve or hold
◦ Delays in beginning initial curing, cylinders anticipate possible issues and the need and use of
◦ Temperature variation, additional strength data. Balance this cost with that for core
◦ Variable moisture control, tests and associated schedule delays.
◦ Nonstandard initial curing, The Portland Cement Association’s (PCA) Design and
◦ Delays in bringing cylinders to the laboratory, Control of Concrete Mixtures recognizes the use of “hold”
◦ Rough handling of cylinders in transport, and cylinders: “In addition to the cylinders for acceptance testing,
◦ Improper final curing; and project specifications often require one or two 7-day cylinders
• Variations in sample testing: and one or more ‘hold’ cylinders. The 7-day cylinders monitor
◦ Uncertified tester, early strength gain to signal potential problems in meeting
◦ Specimen surface preparation, specified strength. Hold cylinders are commonly used to
◦ Inadequate or uncalibrated testing equipment, provide additional information in case the cylinders tested for
◦ Nonstandard loading rate, and acceptance are damaged or do not meet the required
◦ Poor recordkeeping. compressive strength. For low 28-day test results, the hold
Assessing testing variations can be time consuming and cylinders are typically tested at 56 days.”13 This statement was
costly. However, a review of the strength test report can first included in 2003 in the 14th edition of this publication.14
provide a preliminary assessment of the testing procedures: In response to a question regarding the minimum number
• Check cylinder diameter and height. They should not all be of reserve cylinders, the November 2011 Q&A in Concrete
exactly 6 x 12 in. or 4 x 8 in.; International stated: “It’s prudent to have at least one ‘hold’
• Check coefficient of variation between companion cylinder as a backup for a poorly fabricated or damaged
cylinders tested at the same age. On average, this should cylinder (it’s not acceptable to discard a cylinder break result
not exceed 3% and the difference in strength between simply because it was low—it must fall outside a range
companion cylinders should not exceed 8% more often provided in the precision statement in ASTM C39, ‘Standard
than about 1 in 20; Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical
• Check the 3- and 7-day strengths compared to the 28-day Concrete Specimens’).”15 NRMCA CIP 353 also advocates for
strength. They should have a consistent trend; and the use of additional reserve cylinders that can be tested if one
• Other details may provide some information: truck cylinder of a set breaks at a lower strength.
sampled, load size, time between batching and sampling, First introduced into ACI 318-1416 and continued in
ambient temperature and other conditions, and dates of ACI 318-19, Commentary Section R26.12.1.1(a) states:
cylinder casting and of transporting to the lab. “Casting and testing more than the minimum number of
specimens may be desirable in case it becomes necessary to
Supplementary data from reserve or hold cylinders discard an outlying individual cylinder strength in accordance
It’s unclear when reserve or hold cylinders became a with ACI 214R. If individual cylinder strengths are discarded
normal addition to project specifications for concrete testing, in accordance with ACI 214R, a strength test is valid provided

40 FEBRUARY 2022 | Ci | [Link]

at least two individual 6 x 12 in. cylinder strengths, or at least PCI MNL-116-21 provides more definitive guidance on the
three 4 x 8 in. cylinder strengths, are averaged. All individual use of one cylinder as a test: “Only one specimen may be used
cylinder strengths that are not discarded in accordance with to determine stripping or stress transfer strength as production
ACI 214R are to be used to calculate the average strength.” progresses. If any specimen shows definite evidence (other
Thus, the Code is endorsing the concept of using reserve or than low strength) of improper sampling, molding, handling,
hold cylinders. curing, or testing, it shall be discarded, and the strength of the
remaining cylinder shall be considered the test result.”18 Note
One cylinder strength information that the purpose for this is to estimate in-place strength for
The Commentary in ACI 318-63 addressed the issue of a production of prestressed members.
single cylinder as a test: Historically, engineers on many different projects have
“An excessive discrepancy in strength between individual used engineering judgment to accept concrete strength at a
cylinders constituting a test indicates either a faulty specimen later age based on supplemental information from one
or improper sampling and testing procedures. If it can be cylinder. We encourage engineers to continue to use
established that one of the specimens was faulty, its strength engineering judgment and supplemental strength information
should be discarded, and the other value used as the test result. in determining if the concrete is acceptable.
In the absence of such evidence, it may be necessary to
discard the entire test since its validity as a measure of In-Place Concrete Strength from Core Testing
concrete quality is questionable.”17 Too often, construction managers or general contractors
While the 1963 Commentary on the Code recommended initiate core testing without direction from the engineer when
that the single value be used as the test result, code a compressive strength test is below f′c. This is often an
commentaries following the 1963 edition indicate that one unnecessary expense and frequently leads to core removal and
single cylinder is not a valid strength test. testing that is not in accordance with ASTM C42/C42M,

How to Become 

ACI-CERTIFIED
TESTING/TRAINING CENTERS
ACI has partnered with like-minded
organizations across the globe to train
candidates and administer written and
performance exams


PROMETRIC TESTING CENTERS
ACI also has partnered with Prometric
to allow candidates to take written
exams at their convenience

If you’re a craftsman, technician, or inspector, earning an ACI Certification

provides you with the credentials to build the best concrete structures in
the world. If you’re a specifier or owner, you know many codes require
ACI-certified personnel on the jobsite. Visit [Link]/certification.
CCRL TOURS
Performance exams for select
programs can be taken during your
CCRL lab evaluation

[Link] | Ci | FEBRUARY 2022 41

“Standard Test Method for Obtaining and Testing Drilled acceptance criterion (1) in Section [Link](a) of “every
Cores and Sawed Beams of Concrete.”19 ACI 318-19, average of any three consecutive strength tests equals or
Commentary Section R26.12.6.1(c), considers the engineer as exceeds f′c” would have no meaning. If f′c were a minimum,
the specifier of the tests. This is an important distinction, as then, of course, the average of three consecutive strength
ASTM C42/C42M recognizes that this individual is permitted tests would always exceed f′c. Therefore, this Code criterion
to alter default requirements and is responsible for the analysis clearly acknowledges that some individual strength test
or review and acceptance of core test results. results will be less than f′c.
In addition, Commentary Section R26.12.6.1 of ACI As for a financial adjustment, how would that be
318-19 provides three important considerations with respect calculated? As stated in Common Sense Construction Law,24
to core testing: the requirement that financial adjustments be reasonably
• Measuring compressive strength of cores should only be proportionate to actual damages stems from the fact that
used in extreme cases; courts have traditionally refused to enforce what amounts to a
• Extraction of cores and their subsequent testing is typically penalty for breach of contract. One primary objection to
at an age later than specified for f′c; and penalties is that while the law favors reimbursement for loss,
• Core strengths need not be adjusted based on the age of the it does not approve of granting a windfall or unearned profits,
cores. even to an innocent party. To allow an injured party to recover
The same commentary section also states that the Code an amount more than the actual damages it has suffered would
provides “conservative acceptance criteria” for cores for in effect put that party in a better position that it would have
“virtually any type of construction.” And that “Lower strength had been in had the contract been performed. This result
may be tolerated under many circumstances, but this is a would be inconsistent with the basic theory of contract
matter of judgment on the part of the licensed design damages.
professional and building official.” Per ACI 318-19, Section In closing, the owner is benefiting from a reduced concrete
[Link], Part (e): “Concrete in an area represented by core cost by allowing some test results to be below f′c. Providing a
tests shall be considered structurally adequate if (1) and (2) financial credit for this issue would indeed be granting a
are satisfied: windfall to the owner and would not be appropriate.
(1) The average of three cores is equal to at least
85 percent of f′c. References
(2) No single core is less than 75 percent of f′c.” 1. ACI Committee 301, “Specifications for Concrete Construction
When “extreme cases” arise and cores are necessary, use (ACI 301-20),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI,
the American Society of Concrete Contractors (ASCC) 2020, 69 pp.
“Technical Checklist: Concrete Core Testing”20 to ensure that 2. ACI Committee 214, “Guide to Evaluation of Strength Test Results
drilled cores are obtained and tested properly. of Concrete (ACI 214R-11) (Reapproved 2019),” American Concrete
Before commissioning expensive and possibly disruptive Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2011, 16 pp.
core tests, the project team should consider in-place testing. 3. “CIP 35—Testing Compressive Strength of Concrete,” National
As stated in ACI 318-19, Commentary Section R26.12.6.1: Ready Mixed Concrete Association, Alexandria, VA, 2014, 2 pp.
“In-place tests of concrete, such as probe penetration (ASTM 4. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural
C803[21]), rebound hammer (ASTM C805[22]), or pullout test Concrete (ACI 318-19) and Commentary (ACI 318R-19),” American
(ASTM C900[23]), may be useful in determining whether a Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2019, 623 pp.
portion of the structure actually contains low-strength 5. ACI Committee E702, “Designing Concrete Structures: Acceptance
concrete. Unless these in-place tests have been correlated with of Concrete Compressive Strength Test Results According to ACI 318-19
compressive strength using accepted procedures, such as (ACI E702.3-21),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI,
described in ACI 228.1R, they are of value primarily for 2021, 5 pp.
comparisons within the same structure rather than as 6. Malisch, W.R., and Suprenant, B.A., “Acceptance of Concrete Test
quantitative estimates of strength.” Results,” Concrete Contractor, Aug./Sept. 2015, pp. 6-8.
7. MasterSpec®, The American Institute of Architects, Washington, DC.
Claims, Credits, and Damages, Oh My! 8. “In-Place Concrete Strength Evaluation—A Recommended
The most often cited claim is: “The 28-day cylinder Practice,” Publication 133, National Ready Mixed Concrete Association,
strength should be at or above specified strength or the owners Alexandria, VA, 2011.
are not getting what they paid for. There is nothing wrong 9. ACI Committee 228, “Report on Methods for Estimating In-Place
with accepting the concrete if you are satisfied that it is Concrete Strength (ACI 228.1R-19),” American Concrete Institute,
adequate, but perhaps there should be a financial adjustment Farmington Hills, MI, 2019, 48 pp.
to the benefit of the owners as they clearly did not get what 10. “CIP 9—Low Concrete Cylinder Strength,” National Ready
they paid for.” Mixed Concrete Association, Alexandria, VA, 2014, 2 pp.
Unfortunately, this argument assumes that f′c is an 11. Richardson, D.N., “Review of Variables that Influence Measured
absolute minimum. If this were true, then the Code strength Concrete Compressive Strength,” Journal of Materials in Civil

42 FEBRUARY 2022 | Ci | [Link]

Engineering, V. 3, No. 2, May 1991. 19. ASTM C42/C42M-20, “Standard Test Method for Obtaining
12. Goeb, E.O., “Why Low Cylinder Tests in Hot Weather?” Concrete and Testing Drilled Cores and Sawed Beams of Concrete,” ASTM
Construction, Jan. 1986, 3 pp. International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020, 7 pp.
13. Wilson, M.L., and Tennis, P.D., Design and Control of Concrete 20. “Technical Checklist: Concrete Core Testing,” American Society
Mixtures, 17th edition, EB001, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL, of Concrete Contractors, St. Louis, MO, June 2008, 4 pp.
2021, 586 pp. 21. ASTM C803/C803M-18, “Standard Test Method for Penetration
14. Kosmatka, S.H.; Kerkhoff, B.; and Panarese, W.C., Design and Resistance of Hardened Concrete,” ASTM International, West
Control of Concrete Mixtures, EB001, 14th edition, Portland Cement Conshohocken, PA, 2018, 5 pp.
Association, Skokie, IL, 2002, 358 pp. 22. ASTM C805/C805M-18, “Standard Test Method for
15. “Concrete Q&A: Reserve Cylinders for Compressive Strength Rebound Number of Hardened Concrete,” ASTM International, West
Testing,” Concrete International, V. 33, No. 11, Nov. 2011, p. 72. Conshohocken, PA, 2018, 4 pp.
16, ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural 23. ASTM C900-19, “Standard Test Method for Pullout Strength of
Concrete (ACI 318-14) and Commentary (ACI 318R-14),” American Hardened Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA,
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2014, 519 pp. 2019, 10 pp.
17. ACI Committee 318, “Commentary on Building Code 24. Smith, Currie & Hancock’s Common Sense Construction Law:
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-63),” SP-10, American A Practical Guide for the Construction Professional, fourth edition, T.J.
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1963, 91 pp. Kelleher, Jr. and G.S. Walters, eds., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
18. “Manual for Quality Control for Plants and Production of York, 2009, 736 pp.
Structural Precast Concrete Products,” MNL-116-21, Precast/Prestressed
Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL, 2021, 340 pp. Selected for reader interest by the editors.

ACI member James Klinger is a Concrete ACI member Eamonn F. Connolly is the
Construction Specialist for the American Director of Engineering at James McHugh
Society of Concrete Contractors (ASCC), St. Construction Co., Chicago, IL, USA. He
Louis, MO, USA. He is a member of Joint has over 20 years of extensive and
ACI-ASCC Committee 117, Tolerances; ACI wide-ranging experience as a structural
Committees 134, Concrete Constructability, engineer and manager in the design
and 318, Structural Concrete Building Code; and construction of numerous high-rise
and ACI Subcommittee 318-A, General, buildings and infrastructure projects.
Concrete, and Construction. Klinger He is the past Chair of ACI Committee
received his master’s degree in structural engineering from the 309, Consolidation of Concrete, and a member of Joint ACI-
University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA. ASCC Committee 117, Tolerances, as well as ACI Committees 134,
Concrete Constructability; 347, Formwork for Concrete; and 435,
Colin L. Lobo, FACI, is Executive Vice Deflection of Concrete Building Structures; and ACI Subcommittees
President of the Engineering Division at the 301-I, Post-Tensioned Concrete - Section 9, and 318-A, General,
National Ready Mixed Concrete Association Concrete, and Construction. He received his BS in civil engineering
(NRMCA), Alexandria, VA, USA. He serves from the Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL, USA, and his
on several ACI committees, including 132, Master of Philosophy in Engineering from University of Aberdeen,
Responsibility in Concrete Construction; Aberdeen, UK. He is a licensed structural engineer in Illinois and a
211, Proportioning Concrete Mixtures; 214, licensed professional engineer in eight states.
Evaluation of Results of Tests Used to
Determine the Strength of Concrete; 301, Bruce A. Suprenant, FACI, is the ASCC
Specifications for Concrete Construction; Technical Director, St. Louis, MO. He is a
318, Structural Concrete Building Code; and 329, Performance member of ACI Committees 134, Concrete
Criteria for Ready Mixed Concrete. He received his BE in civil Constructability, and 302, Construction
engineering from the University of Mysore, Mysore, Karnataka, of Concrete Floors; and Joint ACI-ASCC
India; his MS from Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA; and Committees 117, Tolerances, and 310,
his PhD from Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA. He is a Decorative Concrete. His honors include
licensed engineer in the state of Maryland. the 2021 ACI Arthur R. Anderson Medal,
the 2020 ACI Construction Award, the 2013
ACI Certification Award, the 2010 ACI Roger H. Corbetta Concrete
Constructor Award, and the 2010 ACI Construction Award.

[Link] | Ci | FEBRUARY 2022 43