TECHNOTE

FHWA Publication No: FHWA-HRT-11-038

FHWA Contact: Ben Graybeal, HRDI-40, 202-493-3122, benjamin.graybeal@dot.gov

Ultra-High 

Performance Concrete

Introduction

Advances in the science of concrete materials have 

led to the development of a new class of cementitious 

composites, namely ultra-high performance concrete 

(UHPC). The mechanical and durability properties of 

UHPC make it an ideal candidate for use in developing 

new solutions to pressing concerns about highway 

infrastructure deterioration, repair, and replacement.(1)

Since 2000, when UHPC became commercially available 

in the United States, a series of research projects has 

demonstrated the capabilities of the material. Three 

State transportation departments have deployed 

UHPC components within their infrastructure, and 

many more are actively considering the use of UHPC. 

This TechNote provides an introduction to UHPC and 

discusses practical considerations associated with it.

Definition

UHPC is a cementitious composite material composed 

of an optimized gradation of granular constituents, a 

water-to-cementitious materials ratio less than 0.25, 

and a high percentage of discontinuous internal fiber 

reinforcement. The mechanical properties of UHPC 

include compressive strength greater than 21.7 ksi 

(150 MPa) and sustained postcracking tensile strength 

greater than 0.72 ksi (5 MPa).1

 UHPC has a discontinuous pore structure that reduces liquid ingress, significantly enhancing durability as compared to conventional and high-performance concretes. 

1 The tensile behavior of UHPC may generally be defined as “strainhardening,” a broad term defining concretes wherein the sustained 

postcracking strength provided by the fiber reinforcement is greater 

than the cementitious matrix cracking strength. However, the definitional dependence on cementitious matrix cracking strength may in -

appropriately include or exclude some concretes that exhibit dissimilar 

precracking and postcracking strength levels. The postcracking tensile 

strength and strain capacity of UHPC is highly dependent on the type, 

quantity, dispersion, and orientation of the internal fiber reinforcement. 

Applications

UHPC is being considered for use in a wide variety of 

highway infrastructure applications. The high compressive and tensile strengths allow for the redesign 

and optimization of structural elements. Concurrently, 

the enhanced durability properties facilitate a lengthening of design life and allow for potential use as thin 

overlays, claddings, or shells. 

In the United States, UHPC has been used in three 

prestressed concrete girder simple-span bridges. The 

first two, located in Iowa and Virginia, used UHPC 

as a replacement for conventional concrete within 

I-girder shape members (see figure 1). In both cases, 

the tensile properties of UHPC were engaged to allow 

for the elimination of the mild steel reinforcement 

shear stirrups. The third bridge, located Iowa, used a 

prestressed deck-bulb-double-tee girder shape. This 

girder shape was optimized to engage the mechanical and durability properties of UHPC in a shape that 

facilitated accelerated construction.(2–4)

An optimized bridge redecking system has also been 

developed.(5) The two-way ribbed precast slab system, 

also known as a waffle slab, uses the mechanical and 

durability properties of UHPC to create a resilient, 

lightweight deck. This concept has been tested and is 

scheduled to be deployed by the Iowa Department of 

Transportation in 2011.(6)

UHPCs have demonstrated exceptional performance 

when used as a field-cast closure pour or grout material 

in applications requiring the onsite connection of 

multiple prefabricated elements.(7) This use of UHPC 

has gained significant momentum recently, with 

States around the country considering the application. In 2009, two bridges using field-cast UHPC 

to create deck-level connections between precast 

Research, Development, and Technology

Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

www.fhwa.dot.gov/research 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101-2296
2

concrete elements were constructed in New York. 

In one case, the UHPC was used in transverse connections between precast deck panels. In the other 

case, the UHPC was used in longitudinal connections 

between the top flanges of deck-bulb-tee girders (see 

figure 2). Field-cast UHPC will also be used in the 

longitudinal and transverse deck-level connections of 

the UHPC waffle slab bridge.

UHPC is also being investigated for use in a variety of 

other applications. These applications include precast 

concrete piles, seismic retrofit of substandard bridge 

substructures, thin-bonded overlays on deteriorated 

bridge decks, and security and blast mitigation applications. (See references 8–13.) In a general sense, UHPC 

has proven to be particularly relevant in applications 

where conventional solutions are lacking. For example, 

conventional connection solutions have hindered the 

use of prefabricated elements; field-cast UHPC allows 

for a redesign and simplification of the system while 

simultaneously promoting long-term durability.(7)

Availability

The development of concretes within the UHPC class 

has progressed in recent years. The most readily available UHPC product in the United States is a proprietary 

product sold by a large multinational construction 

materials supplier. This product has undergone a 

significant body of testing in order to demonstrate its 

specific characteristics. Alternate UHPC products are 

available in other parts of the world. Most notably, 

there are approximately five commercialized products available in Europe. Some of these product 

manufactures appear to be monitoring the U.S. market 

in preparation for the launch of competing UHPC 

products. Additionally, various research programs 

in Europe are facilitating the development of nonproprietary UHPC products produced from locally available constituents. Research programs in the United 

States are also progressing along this path.(14)

Mixing and Casting

UHPC is sufficiently similar to conventional concrete 

that the large majority of conventional concreting 

operations remain relevant and applicable. Nearly any 

conventional concrete mixer will mix UHPC. However, 

it must be recognized that UHPC requires increased 

energy input compared to conventional concrete, so 

mixing time will be increased. This increased energy 

input, in combination with the reduced or eliminated 

coarse aggregate and low water content, necessitates 

the use of modified procedures to ensure that the 

Figure 1. This Wapello County, Iowa, structure was the first UHPC bridge constructed in the United States.

Source: New York State Department of Transportation

Figure 2. Longitudinal connections are cast between 

deck-bulb-tee girders on the Route 31 Bridge in 

Lyons, NY. Field-cast UHPC can simplify connection 

details and ease constructability.
3

UHPC does not overheat during mixing. This concern 

can be addressed through the use of a high-energy 

mixer or by lowering the temperatures of the constituents and partially or fully replacing the mix water 

with ice. These procedures have allowed UHPC to be 

mixed in conventional pan and drum mixers, including ready-mix trucks (see figure 3).

The placement of UHPC may immediately follow mixing

or be delayed while additional mixes are completed. 

Although the dwell time prior to the initiation of the 

cement hydration reactions can be influenced by factors such as temperature and chemical accelerators, 

it frequently requires multiple hours before UHPC 

will begin to set. During any extended dwell time, the 

UHPC should not be allowed to self-desiccate.

Casting of fiber-reinforced concretes requires special 

considerations in terms of placement operations. UHPCs 

tend to exhibit rheological behaviors similar to conventional self-consolidating concretes, thus possibly necessitating additional form preparation but also allowing for 

reduced during-cast efforts. Internal vibration of UHPC 

is not recommended due to the fiber reinforcement, 

but limited external form vibration can be engaged as a 

means to facilitate the release of entrapped air.

The long-term mechanical and durability properties of 

UHPC can be affected by casting procedures because 

the dispersion and orientation of the fiber reinforcement 

is influenced by the casting. First, fiber reinforcement 

tends to show a preference for aligning in the direction 

of flow during casting. This behavior must be recognized and considered when the casting sequence for 

a component is developed. Second, the ability of the 

fiber reinforcement to be maintained in suspension in 

the UHPC is dependent on the rheology of the concrete. 

Thus, any modification of the rheology or overreliance 

on form vibration must be carefully considered. 

Curing Procedures

Applying appropriate curing methods is essential to 

the performance of any concrete, especially UHPC. 

Like all concretes, UHPCs require hydration water, but 

unlike other concretes, UHPCs have been engineered 

to require very little additional water, instead facilitating appropriate rheological behaviors through the use 

of an optimized gradation of granular materials. The 

reduced water content in a UHPC mix necessitates 

careful attention to curing practices so as not to allow 

the included water to escape prior to hydration.

Immediately after casting, any exposed UHPC surface needs to be sealed with an impermeable layer. 

Metal, plastic, or plastic-coated wood are appropriate 

materials with which to seal the surface. The seal must 

rest against the UHPC and should not allow for any 

space between the covering material and the fresh concrete. Sealing of the surface eliminates the possibility 

of surface dehydration, which can lead to cracking and 

significant degradation of final material properties.

Figure 3. UHPC is delivered via truck chute to a precast girder form. UHPC can be used in both precast and 

field-cast applications.
4

Supplemental heat may be applied to UHPC castings after placement in order to accelerate setting 

behaviors and attainment of final properties. It is 

important to ensure that any added heat serves to 

raise the temperature of the UHPC while not allowing 

material dehydration.

The UHPC should remain sealed in the formwork until 

it has attained sufficient properties to allow it to selfsupport and not self-desiccate. A compressive strength 

of 14 ksi (97 MPa) is frequently used as a surrogate 

value to indicate the attainment of an acceptable level 

of hydration.

It is possible to supplement the natural curing process 

of UHPC through the use of a steam treatment. This 

treatment can both enhance the final mechanical 

and durability properties of UHPC and accelerate 

the acquisition of said properties. A common steam 

treatment consists of subjecting the UHPC to a 194 °F 

(90 °C), 95 percent humidity environment for at least 

2 days. If applied, this treatment frequently occurs at a 

precast concrete plant soon after form stripping. This 

treatment is not necessary and can be ignored if the 

properties of the as-cast UHPC are appropriate for the 

application being considered.

Testing Procedures

In general, well-established testing procedures for conventional concrete are applicable to UHPC. However, in 

some instances, procedures may need to be modified 

to appropriately capture the true behaviors of the 

UHPC.(15–17) Compression testing is a prime example. 

The conventional test method is generally appropriate, 

but compressive strengths as high as 35 ksi (240 MPa) 

may necessitate smaller specimen sizes, different 

specimen shapes, higher test machine capacities, or 

different specimen preparation techniques. 

Flow Testing

Mix quality of self-consolidating concretes is frequently 

assessed through a slump cone flow test. With UHPC, 

it is more common to use the ASTM C1437 test, which 

measures flow of hydraulic cement mortars.(18) Both 

an initial flow reading and a dynamic flow reading are 

recorded. Frequently, this test is completed immediately after mixing to assess consistency between mixes 

and appropriateness for casting.

Compression Testing

Compressive strength is arguably the most readily 

captured and used property of concrete. Research has 

demonstrated that standard concrete compression 

testing methods (i.e., ASTM C39, ASTM C109) are 

applicable to UHPC.(19,20) However, these test methods 

may benefit from slight modification to facilitate 

efficient use. Most notably, a loading rate of 150 psi/s 

(1  MPa/s) has been demonstrated to be acceptable, 

thus allowing for individual tests to be completed in a 

reasonable timeframe.(15)

Additional research has demonstrated that, at the high 

strength levels achieved with UHPC, cube compressive 

tests are an appropriate substitute for cylinder compression tests (see figure 4).(21,22) Companion cylinder 

and cube strength results tend to be within 5 percent 

of one another, thus allowing for direct substitution 

of results. If cylinder tests are used for specimens at 

strength levels above those appropriate for capping 

methods, both cylinder ends must be ground planar to 

within the ASTM C39 specification of 0.5 degrees. Also 

recognize that the high compressive strengths of UHPC 

may necessitate the use of higher capacity compression 

testing platens and machines.

Modulus of Elasticity Testing

UHPC does not present any specific challenges or require 

any specific modifications to the standard ASTM C469 

test method for static modulus of elasticity.(23)

Tensile Testing

UHPC in particular and fiber-reinforced concrete in 

general present specific challenges in terms of quantifying tensile behaviors. Tensile cracking strength 

of UHPC can be measured through the same tests 

used for conventional concrete. However, special 

precautions must be taken to ensure that the true 

cracking strength, not a postcracking fiber reinforcement-enhanced strength, is recorded as the cracking 

strength. Prism flexure testing and split cylinder testing are both appropriate means of determining first 

cracking, but the specimen must be closely monitored 

to capture the load at first cracking, since the load 

may continue to increase thereafter without noticeable change in global specimen behavior. Monitoring 

of specimens can be done visually, audibly, or through 

the use of nondestructive testing equipment.(15,24) 

Figure 4. Either cylinders or cubes can be used for 

compression testing of UHPC.
5

The postcracking tensile behavior of UHPC is one of 

the unique properties that differentiate it from conventional concrete. UHPC generally falls into the category 

of strain-hardening fiber-reinforced concrete, which 

means that the postcracking strength provided by 

the fiber reinforcement bridging a crack is equal to or 

greater than the cracking strength of the cementitious 

matrix. This behavior is responsible for the multicracking response of UHPC components and allows for the 

potential inclusion of UHPC tensile strength and strain 

capacities in structural design calculations.

No standardized test for quantitative determination of 

the full range of UHPC tensile behaviors exists in the 

United States. Overseas, most notably in France, a set 

of standardized prism flexure tests is used to quantify 

the tensile response. Development of standardized 

tests is underway in the United States, with an emphasis on the development of a test to directly capture the 

tensile response by pulling cast or extracted UHPC 

prismatic specimens (see figure 5). Until such a test 

is available, the use of non-standardized tests or the 

derivation of tensile response from the testing of a 

full-scale structural component may be necessary. 

Chloride Penetration Testing

Conventional, ponding-type chloride penetration tests, 

such as AASHTO T259, can be completed on UHPC 

specimens.(25) Exposed steel fiber reinforcement may 

corrode during long-duration tests, but this should 

not impact the overall test results. When completing 

such a test, recognize that UHPC frequently contains 

unhydrated cementitious constituents. Thus, initial 

water penetration can lead to additional hydration 

and a further reduction in permeability. Also recognize that testing extracted powder samples for chloride 

concentration may require extra processing in order to 

remove included fiber pieces.

Rapid chloride penetrability testing can be completed 

on UHPC samples as well. Whether reinforced by steel 

or organic fibers, the reinforcement within the UHPC 

matrix is generally dispersed and discontinuous. 

Tests have shown that steel fiber reinforcement within 

UHPC does not provide a direct path to complete an 

electric circuit. As such, completing the ASTM C1202 

test on a UHPC cylinder containing 0.5-inch (13-mm)-

long steel fiber reinforcement can provide a comparative result indicative of chloride ion penetrability.(26)

Freeze-Thaw Durability Tests

Conventional freeze-thaw test methods, such as 

ASTM C512, can be applied to UHPC.(27) However, the 

unhydrated cementitious particles frequently present 

in UHPC can hydrate when contacted by water. Thus, 

any exposure of the UHPC to liquid water can result in 

surface penetration of the water, localized hydration, 

and increased dynamic modulus. In practice, freezethaw testing can indicate that the UHPC performance 

is bolstered through exposure to these conditions, 

while in actuality the thaw portion of the cycle is 

facilitating delayed hydration and a requisite dynamic 

modulus increase.

Scaling and Other Durability Tests

Other conventional concrete durability test methods 

can generally be applied to UHPC specimens. Many 

of these tests can provide comparative results 

indicating the relative durability of UHPC in terms 

of conventional concrete. However, many of these 

tests use subjective, qualitative measures to assess 

performance. Since these measures have been developed for use with conventional concrete, UHPC may 

exceed the anticipated performance range, thus making 

comparisons between individual UHPCs difficult.

Sample Preparation and 

Extraction

The creation and/or acquisition of UHPC samples 

for material testing does not differ significantly from 

methods used for conventional concrete. Cast specimens may be fabricated into any shape desired through 

the use of conventional concrete molds. However, it is 

important to recognize that UHPC flow during casting 

can cause preferential fiber orientation that may impact 

later test results. 

Extraction of specimens from larger components 

may be completed through methods normally used 

for conventional concrete. In general, UHPC and conventional concrete are both composed of similar 

constituent materials. Not surprisingly, conventional 

cutting and grinding equipment has been found to 

be both applicable and effective. 

Figure 5. Testing procedures aimed at directly 

capturing the tensile behavior of UHPC are under 

development.
6

Structural Design, Analysis, and 

Modeling

As with any structural material whose physical

properties are outside the bounds of existing structural 

design specifications, the design of UHPC structural 

components presents challenges not normally present

in the design of routine reinforced concrete components. However, it must be recognized that the 

properties of UHPC can be determined and that 

full-scale structural testing has demonstrated the 

fundamental structural performance of UHPC. (See 

references 2, 3, and 28–32.) The understanding and 

appropriate application of basic structural engineering 

principles such as flexure and shear are critical in the 

development of effective UHPC designs.

Analysis of UHPC structural components is not 

necessarily more complex than analysis of conventional 

reinforced concrete structures. However, it is imperative that the analysis be completed rationally without 

allowing preconceived notions of reinforced concrete 

behavior to cloud the computations. For example, the 

compressive stress-strain response of conventional 

concrete has a parabolic shape that is sometimes modeled through a rectangular stress block. Such a stress 

block would only be appropriate for UHPC if appropriate factors were applied to adjust the block to match 

the stiffer and more linear UHPC response. Moreover, 

it is frequently desirable to include the sustained tensile 

capacity of UHPC in an analysis. Although this extra 

stress block may increase the complexity of the calculation, it does not introduce new theory and should be 

able to be computed appropriately.

More complex analytical procedures for UHPC have 

been developed recently.(33) These procedures rely 

on commercially available finite element software to 

accurately model the structural response of UHPC 

components and structures (see figure 6).

Inspection

Inspection of structural concrete components in the 

deployed infrastructure involves a set of well-known 

processes and inspection tools. Inspection of UHPC 

is no different than that of conventional concrete, 

except that the years of experience associated with 

UHPC assessment has not yet been developed. In 

general, any inspection procedure associated with 

conventional concrete should be applicable to 

UHPC structures. The simplest inspection process, 

namely visual inspection, will differ primarily in 

that the scale of defects considered significant will 

be reduced. UHPC tends to exhibit tightly spaced, 

small-width cracks that are difficult to locate with the 

unaided eye.(34) The use of an evaporative, penetrating liquid, such as alcohol, can greatly simplify the 

identification of cracks.

Advanced inspection technologies, such as acoustic 

methodologies, can be simplified and expanded when 

used on UHPC structures. The comparatively homogenous composition of UHPC, in conjunction with its 

increased modulus of elasticity, expands the potential 

technologies applicable to this concrete to include 

some items previously reserved for metals.(35)

Conclusion

Whether used to facilitate accelerated construction, 

lengthen span ranges, or rehabilitate substandard 

infrastructure, UHPC can facilitate the development 

of unique solutions to existing challenges. As with 

any new material, utilization will grow as innovative 

applications are developed and market demand intensifies. A decade of research and deployment efforts by 

groups associated with the U.S. highway transportation sector has demonstrated that UHPC is a material 

both capable of and poised for future deployment in 

infrastructure-scale applications.

Figure 6. Finite element computer modeling techniques have been calibrated and demonstrated capable of 

modeling UHPC structural response.
7

References

1. Graybeal, B. (2009). “UHPC Making Strides,” Public 

Roads, Vol. 72, No. 4, pp. 17–21, Federal Highway 

Administration, McLean, VA. 

2. Graybeal, B. (2009). Structural Behavior of a 2nd 

Generation Ultra-High Performance Concrete 

Pi-Girder, Report No. PB2009-115496, National 

Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.

3. Graybeal, B. (2009). Structural Behavior of a 

Prototype Ultra-High Performance Concrete 

Pi-Girder, Report No. PB2009-115495, National 

Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.

4. Graybeal, B. (2010). “Design, Fabrication, 

and Testing of a 2nd Generation Ultra-High 

Performance Concrete Pi-Girder,” Proceedings, 3rd 

International fib Congress, Washington, DC. 

5. Garcia, H. (2007). Analysis of an Ultra-High 

Performance Concrete Two-Way Ribbed Bridge 

Deck Slab, Report No. PB 2007-112112, National 

Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.

6. Aaleti, S., Sritharan, S., Bierwagen, D., and Wipf, T.

(2011). “Experimental Evaluation of Structural 

Behavior of Precast UHPC Waffle Bridge Deck

Panels and Connections,” Proceedings, Transportation 

Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.

7. Graybeal, B. (2010). Behavior of Field-Cast 

Ultra-High Performance Concrete Bridge Deck 

Connections Under Cyclic and Static Structural 

Loading, Report No. PB2011-101995, National 

Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.

8. Vande Voort, T., Suleiman, M., and Sritharan, S. 

(2008). Design and Performance Verification of 

UHPC Piles for Deep Foundations, Final Report, 

Iowa Highway Research Board Project TR-558, 

Iowa State University, Ames, IA.

9. Massicotte, B. and Boucher-Proulx, G. (2010). 

“Seismic Retrofitting of Bridge Piers with UHPFRC 

Jackets,” Designing and Building with UHPFRC: 

State of the Art and Development, pp. 531–540 , 

Wiley-ISTE, London.

10. Brühwiler, E., and Denarié, E. (2008). “Rehabiltation of Concrete Structures Using UltraHigh Performance Fiber-Reinforced Concrete,” 

Proceedings, The Second International Symposium 

on Ultra-High Performance Concrete, Kassel, 

Germany.

11. Schmidt, C., Riedl, S., Geisenhanslüke, C., and 

Schmidt, M. (2008). “Strengthening and Rehabilitation of Pavements Applying Thin Layers of 

Reinforced Ultra-High Performance Concrete 

(UHPC-White Topping),” Proceedings, The 

Second International Symposium on Ultra-High 

Performance Concrete, Kassel, Germany.

12. Rebentrost, M., and Wight, G. (2009). “Investigation 

of UHPFRC Slabs Under Blast Loads,” Proceedings, 

Ultra-High Performance Fiber Reinforced Concrete 

2009, Marseille, France.

13. Green, B. (2010). “An Investigation of UHPC/RPC 

Materials for Enhanced Penetration Resistance,” 

Presented at the American Concrete Institute Fall 

Convention, Pittsburgh, PA. 

14. Wille, K., Naaman, A., and Parra-Montesinos, G. 

(2011). “Ultra-High Performance Concrete with 

Compressive Strength Exceeding 150 MPa (22 

ksi): A Simpler Way,” ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 

108, No. 1, pp. 46–54, American Concrete Institute, 

Farmington Hills, MI.

15. Graybeal, B. (2006). Material Property Characterization of Ultra-High Performance Concrete, 

Report No. FHWA-HRT-06-103, Federal Highway 

Administration, McLean, VA.

16. Graybeal, B. and Tanesi, J. (2007). “Durability of an 

Ultrahigh-Performance Concrete,” ASCE Journal 

of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 19, No. 10, 

pp. 850–854, American Society of Civil Engineers, 

Reston, VA.

17. Graybeal, B. (2010). Simultaneous Structural 

and Environmental Loading of an Ultra-High 

Performance Concrete Component, Report No. 

PB2010-110331, National Technical Information 

Service, Springfield, VA.

18. ASTM International (2007). “Standard Test 

Method for Flow of Hydraulic Cement Mortar,” 

ASTM Standard C1437, West Conshohocken, PA. 

19. ASTM International (2010). “Standard Test 

Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical 

Concrete Specimens,” ASTM Standard C39, West 

Conshohocken, PA.

20. ASTM International (2008). “Standard Test Method 

for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement 

Mortars (Using 2-in. or [50-mm] Cube Specimens),” 

ASTM Standard C109, West Conshohocken, PA.

21. Graybeal, B. and Davis, M. (2008). “Cylinder or Cube: 

Strength Testing of 80 to 200 MPa (11.6 to 29 ksi) 

Ultra-High-Performance Fiber-Reinforced Concrete,” 

ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 105, No. 6, pp. 603–609, 

American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI.

22. Graybeal, B. (2007). “Compressive Behavior 

of Ultra-High Performance Fiber-Reinforced 

Concrete,” ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 104, No. 2, 

pp. 146–152, Farmington Hills, MI.
8

23. ASTM International (2010). “Standard Test Method 

for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson’s Ratio 

of Concrete in Compression,” ASTM Standard 

C469, West Conshohocken, PA.

24. Graybeal, B. (2006). “Practical Means for 

Determination of the Tensile Behavior of UltraHigh Performance Concrete,” Journal of ASTM 

International, Vol. 3, No. 8, ASTM International, 

West Conshohocken, PA. 

25. American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials (2006). “Standard Method 

of Test for Resistance of Concrete to Chloride Ion 

Penetration,” AASHTO Standard T259, Standard 

Specifications for Transportation Materials and 

Methods of Sampling and Testing, Washington, DC.

26. ASTM International (2010), “Standard Test Method 

for Electrical Indication of Concrete’s Ability to 

Resist Chloride Ion Penetration,” ASTM Standard 

C1202, West Conshohocken, PA.

27. ASTM International (2008). “Standard Test Method 

for Resistance of Concrete to Rapid Freezing 

and Thawing,” ASTM Standard C666, West 

Conshohocken, PA.

28. Graybeal, B. (2006). Structural Behavior of UltraHigh Performance Concrete Prestressed I-Girders, 

Report No. FHWA-HRT-06-115, Federal Highway 

Administration, McLean, VA. 

29. Graybeal, B. (2008). “Flexural Behavior of an 

Ultrahigh-Performance Concrete I-Girder,” ASCE 

Journal of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 6, 

pp. 602–610, American Society of Civil Engineers, 

Reston, VA.

30. Crane, C.K. (2010). “Shear and Shear Friction of 

Ultra-High Performance Concrete Bridge Girders,” 

Ph.D. Dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, 

Atlanta, GA.

31. Harris, D. (2004). “Characterization of the Punching 

Shear Capacity of Thin UHPC Plates,” Master’s 

Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State 

University, Blacksburg, VA.

32. Degen, B. (2006). “Shear Design and Behavior 

of Ultra-High Performance Concrete,” Master’s 

Thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.

33. Chen, L., and Graybeal, B. (2010). Finite Element 

Analysis of Ultra-High Performance Concrete: 

Modeling Structural Performance of an AASHTO 

Type II Girder and a 2nd Generation Pi-Girder, 

Report No. PB2011-100864, National Technical 

Information Service, Springfield, VA.

34. Meade, T., and Graybeal, B. (2010). “Flexural 

Response of Lightly Reinforced Ultra-High 

Performance Concrete Beams,” Proceedings, 3rd 

International fib Congress, Washington, DC.

35. Washer, G., P. Fuchs, B. Graybeal, and J. Hartmann. 

(2004). “Ultrasonic Testing of Reactive Powder 

Concrete,” IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, 

Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control, Vol. 51, No. 2, 

IEEE Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency 

Control Society, New York, NY.

Researchers—This synopsis was developed by Ben Graybeal at FHWA’s Turner-Fairbank Highway 

Research Center. Additional information can be gained by contacting him at 202 493 3122 or in the FHWA 

Office of Infrastructure Research and Development located at 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101.

Key Words—Ultra-high performance concrete, UHPC, Fiber-reinforced concrete, Bridge, Accelerated 

construction, Durable infrastructure system, Prefabricated bridge elements and systems, and Test methods.

Notice—This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation 

in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of 

the information contained in this document. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or 

manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this TechBrief only because they are 

considered essential to the objective of the document.

Quality Assurance Statement—The Federal Highway Administration provides high-quality information 

to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards 

and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. 

FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous 

quality improvement.

March 2011 FHWA-HRT-11-038

HRDI-40/03-11(300)E