THE USE AND ABUSE OF THE SLUMP TEST FOR MEASURING THE

WORKABILITY OF CONCRETE

Christopher Stanley*, Unibeton Ready Mix LLC, United Arab Emirates

36th Conference on OUR WORLD IN CONCRETE & STRUCTURES: 14 - 16 August 2011,

Singapore

Article Online Id: 100036022

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://cipremier.com/100036022

Thisarticleisbroughttoyouwiththesupportof

SingaporeConcreteInstitute

www.scinst.org.sg

AllRightsreservedforCIPremierPTELTD

YouarenotAllowedtoredistributeorresalethearticleinanyformatwithoutwrittenapprovalof
CIPremierPTELTD

VisitOurWebsiteformoreinformation

www.cipremier.com
 th
36 Conference on Our World in Concrete & Structures
Singapore, August 14-16, 2011

THE USE AND ABUSE OF THE SLUMP TEST FOR MEASURING THE
WORKABILITY OF CONCRETE

Christopher Stanley*
*
Technical Director, Unibeton Ready Mix LLC
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Street 12 Sector 39 Old Mussafah, 110353
e-mail: <cstanley@unibetonrm.com> webpage: http://www.unibetonrm.com/

Keywords: Specifications, Workability, Slump Test, Concrete

Abstract. There are more than 60 published ways of measuring the so called
workability of concrete. Every inventor of a new method is convinced that he has
the ultimate test for workability. In reality most methods are totally impractical,
generally too expensive, and maybe measure some obscure property of concrete
that is perhaps only indirectly related to the workability of concrete. The Slump test,
which was invented by an American named Chapman in 1913, is the only test which
has stood the test of time and is understood throughout the world. Mention, say, a
100mm slump to any producer or user of concrete almost anywhere in the world,
and he can instantly picture the requirements of that particular concrete. In essence
the Slump measures the consistency of the concrete rather than its true workability
but owes its popularity to the fact that it is a simple and easily, portable test. The
problem is that in this day and age the level of concrete knowledge is generally
declining despite the ever growing sophistication of modern structures. The slump is
a relatively crude but effective test, unfortunately it has become hijacked by people
masquerading as Consulting Engineers who have probably never carried out a
slump test in their entire life. As a result slumps are being specified with values of
240mm with tolerances of 5mm, which apart from being stupid, is almost impossible
to achieve. Another problem is that years ago, high slump values used to be
equated with high water contents in the mix. Nowadays with the advent of the
modern generation of high range water reducing admixtures it is possible to make
highly workable concretes with very low water/ cement ratios. But most Consultants
are unaware of this and still have a habit of specifying concretes with ridiculously
low workabilities; which are hard to pump, place, and compact, and as a
consequence end up taking an inordinate length of time to cast and often result in
the production of concrete with poor quality finishes. And yet with a higher
workability they could have achieved a much higher overall quality concrete with
enhanced properties of both strength and durability, together with a high quality of
finish, and with a reduction in the construction period. This paper reviews the use
of the slump test on both large and small projects and how a sensible approach to
the specification of workability can greatly improve the quality of the overall project.
 Christopher Stanley

1 INTRODUCTION
There are over 60 published methods of measuring the workability of concrete. Most of them are
highly academic or impractical and never see the light of day outside the university or company where
they were developed. An exception is the slump test. In almost every country in the world people refer
to the workability of concrete in terms of its slump. The reason for the popularity of the slump is that
the equipment is light and portable and the test is simple and easy to carry out.

2 THE SLUMP TEST

The slump test was invented by Chapman in 1913. Originally he used a cylinder, but because the
concrete became stuck in the cylinder, especially if it was stiff or cohesive, he put a taper on the
cylinder and the slump cone has remained the same dimension ever since 100mm diameter at the
top, 200mm diameter at the bottom and 300mm in height. Interestingly, if the slope angle of the cone
is changed the recorded slump will remain the same. This was noted by R.V.Watson in 1973 when he
did an evaluation of the slump test as his thesis for the Advanced Concrete Technology Examination,
a requirement for membership of the Institute of Concrete Technology. Watson did slump tests on
specially made cones with a different slope angle as part of his evaluation of the test. Soon after its
invention it was popularized by Duff Abrams in 1917 and in some literature it is referred to as the
Abrams Cone

Figure 1: Slump Cones with three different slope gradients prepared in 1973 by R.V. Watson as
part of his ICT Thesis. He used a standard cone and two others with a base diameter of 250mm
and 300mm. For a range of concretes he was able to show the measured slumps with each
cone was almost the same.

Although it is called a workability test the slump is really a measure of the consistence of the
concrete. If batches of the same concrete are produced with nominally the same, or similar values of
slump, the concrete can be said to be consistent, in that the batches are containing an almost identical
amount and proportion of ingredients per cubic metre. Indirectly the slump is a measure of workability
because the higher the slump the easier the concrete is to place and compact.
But the slump is more related to the overall rheological properties of the concrete. For example a
concrete with a slump of 100mm made from 20mm crushed rock aggregate will be more workable
than a slump of 100mm in concrete made from crushed rock 10mm aggregate. This is because of
particle interlock playing a part in the way the concrete slumps and flows when the cone is lifted off the
moulded concrete. Similarly concrete made with a rounded aggregate will have a greater slump for the
same mix proportions.
 Christopher Stanley

Figure 2: Carrying out a slump test on samples of 20mm, 10mm and fine aggregate. The finer
the aggregate the smaller is the angle of repose. The slump of the concrete is a function of the
predominant size of aggregate in the mix.

The slump is also dominated by the angle of repose of the particles of aggregate in the mix. For
example if stockpiles of dry aggregate are observed it will be noted that the 20mm aggregate has a
steeper angle of repose than the fine aggregate. Therefore if it is required to make more workable
concrete it follows that this is achieved by increasing the proportion of fine aggregate in the mix. In
other words the workability of the concrete is dominated by the predominant size of the aggregate in
the mix. Many mix design methods increase the amount of fine aggregate in the mix as the required
workability increases. Another important aspect of this is also to reduce the tendency of the concrete
to segregate as the workability increases. However the relationship between the slump and the
predominant size of aggregate in the mix is not very often fully appreciated.
Over the years there have been minor changes in the way the slump test is carried out. In the
earlier British Standards the slump test was carried out by filling the cone in four equal layers and
tamping each layer 25 times to compact it. This was later changed to three layers and 25 tamps in line
with the ASTM method.
Earlier the slump was measured to the mid height but now both methods measure to the highest
point but the ASTM method measures to the highest point within the central area. The height of the
slump is measured by standing the cone alongside the slumped concrete; placing the slump tamping
rod across the top of the cone and measuring the height from the highest point of the concrete to the
underside of the rod. This measurement is very critical in the ASTM where the slump is reported to the
nearest 5mm. In the British & BSEN standards the slump is measured to the nearest 10mm. With
either of these measurements it is difficult to bend down low enough to accurately measure the slump
and the accuracy of measurement is further complicated by taking the measurements against the
curved surface of the bar and somewhat prone to error. The writer believes it is better to use a straight
piece of flat wood in preference to a slump cone rod for a more accurate measurement. Even though
it means carrying around an additional object, it helps to minimize the testing error. Especially, where
the slump test is incorrectly specified, by using small tolerances in the measured value.
It is important to check that the footrests on the slump cone are manufactured so that they are
 Christopher Stanley

flush with the base. This ensures that the cone can not rock when a person steps off the rests on
completion of the test. Also important is that the test is carried out on a rigid non-absorbent base.
Safety aspects are important, including wearing of correct safety gear, especially gloves, when
carrying out the test.
Cones often become deformed, especially when they are run over by vehicles on site and the
attempts made to straighten them! Strict dimensional tolerances are set out in the standards and
these should be checked and adhered to. Very few people use the correct type of scoop when
carrying the test and this is important especially in maintaining a representative sample of concrete
throughout the test. Thorough mixing of the sample before the start of the test is absolutely essential.

Figure 3: Typical measurement of the slump of a concrete which leads to inaccuracy because
of round tamping bar. The use of a flat piece of wood in place of the bar makes the
measurement easier and more accurate.

Slumps are usually specified at true, shear, or collapse slumps, however with modern highly workable
concretes, shear slumps, usually the result of low workability concretes, lacking a sufficient amount of
fine aggregate in the mix, nowadays are a comparatively rare occurrence.
Some slump cones are supplied with a filling funnel which can be placed over the top in order to
prevent concrete spilling down the sides whilst the cone is being filled with concrete. This funnel does
not form part of the standard test apparatus. There is a tendency to over fill the funnel with concrete
which tends to result in a lower recorded slump being obtained when the filling funnel is used.

MEASURED SLUMP (mm)

Using a Filling Funnel Standard Slump

170 180
175 185
175 185
170 185

Table 1: The variation in the measured slump when a filling funnel is placed on the top of a
slump cone for ease of filling the cone with concrete.

The slump cone should be filled on its own in order to obtain a realistic result from the test. Another
 Christopher Stanley

important aspect of the test which is often overlooked is that the inside of the cone should be wiped
with a damp cloth before the test commences. This prevents concrete adhering to the cone and being
uplifted during the removal of the cone, resulting in a reduction in the measured slump.

NOMINAL SLUMP 160 mm

Slump Cone Interior Condition

Moist Dry
Slump mm Slump mm

160 150
170 160
170 155
165 155

Table 2: The effect on the measured slump if the inside surface of the cone is not moistened
before use.

NOMINAL SLUMP 180mm

Time Taken to Lift Cone

Measured Slump (mm)
(Sec)

3 205
5 190
7.5 185
10 180
20 175
30 165
Table 3: The rate at which the cone is raised from the concrete after completing the filling also
has an impact on the recorded slump. The standard specifies 2-5 seconds. The table above
shows that lifting the cone too slowly has a tendency to reduce the recorded slump value.

The slump test is a simple rough and ready test, and this needs to be appreciated whenever the
test is specified as a quality control test to monitor concrete production. When the writer began
working in the construction industry almost all concrete was specified to have a 25mm slump because
it was placed either by chute or by crane and skip. Such concrete tended to be cohesive and stick in
the chute or skip and had to be assisted to flow with a shovel. The workability by the mid 1960s
increased to about 50mm slump and the slump tolerance then tended to be specified as +/-25mm, or
one third of the specified slump value, whichever was the greater. Then with the rise in the use of
concrete pumps, as a means of placing concrete, the slump specified increased to 75mm with a
tolerance of one third of the slump. Even that was not a high enough slump value and there were
many instances of pump blockages and excessive wear on pipelines. In the mid 1990s with the
advent of superplasticisers and PHC admixtures, it became possible to place highly workable
concretes with very low water/cement ratios. Workabilities increased to slumps around 240mm.
Unfortunately, university education did not keep pace with the advances in new technology, and there
was still a persistent misunderstanding that workable concrete could only be achieved with the
addition of excess water in the concrete mix. This has resulted in misinformed engineers writing
ridiculous specifications where concretes are sometimes specified with a slump of 240mm and a
tolerance of +/- 5mm in the slump.
This is virtually impossible to achieve. In one project involving the casting of over 7000 cubic
 Christopher Stanley

metres of concrete in a heavily reinforced raft foundation the Consultant arrogantly stated that he
would rigorously enforce such a specification. At such a high slump where the concrete flows on
removal of the cone, maintaining such tight tolerances is an almost impossibility. It was however
accomplished by slightly increasing the 10mm aggregate fraction of the mix. As the concrete flowed
out on removal of the cone, a mini mountain of coarse material remained in the middle of the spread
of concrete. This remained constant even though slight changes of the workability were evident in the
overall flow characteristics. The result was that only two trucks were rejected in the entire pour for
being 5mm out of tolerance. Without this change in the mix, the end result could have been
catastrophic, with many loads of perfectly satisfactory concrete being rejected.

Grade 40/20 Concrete OPC + MS Mix

Measured Slump (mm)
Fully Automated Batched Concrete
140 140 145
145 145 145
Concrete Batched 2018 hrs 0538 hrs 140 140 140
Total Supply 841 m 145 145 135
Specified Slump 125 25 145 140 145
Nominal Target 140 -150mm 140 145 140
Batch Size 8-10 m 135 140 145
Concrete Temperature 24C - 31C 140 135 140
140 145 140
145 140 145

Mean Slump 142 mm

Minimum Slump 135 mm
Maximum Slump 145 mm
SD Slump 3.3 mm

3
Table 4: Summary of the first 30 results on a pour of over 800 m . The remaining results were
similar. This emphasizes the tight production control that can be obtained using a highly
computerized batching plant.

Minimum Slump at Maximum Slump at

Concrete Grade Specified Slump (mm)
Site (mm) Site (mm)

C 25 160 40 190 200

C 30 110 30 130 140

C 40 180 40 200 220

C 50 180 40 180 210

C 60 200 40 220 240

C 60 [ Slump Flow ] 650 800 650 750

Table 5: Typical Actual slump ranges obtained on a number of sites for different grades of
concrete and specified workabilities.

The concrete may be batched at a plant and have to travel, say 15km, to the site. The concrete
therefore has to be batched with an increased workability to allow for some loss in workability during
transit, and this is particularly difficult to calculate, especially in conditions of hot drying winds or high
 Christopher Stanley

ambient temperatures or a combination of both. In addition the loss in workability is also influenced by
the traffic flow. During rush hours it may take trucks longer to reach their destination whereas at night
time the journey time may be considerably reduced. Even so the concrete is expected to arrive on site
with exactly the right slump.

Slump loss of concrete in the UAE

SLUM P LOSS - m m

300

200

100

0
Initial slump After 1hr After 2hrs After 3 hrs
Conc Soc 220 150 65 15
Unibeton 210 155 65 20
TIME AFTER MIXING - hrs

Conc Soc Unibeton

Table 6: The loss of workability with time in a hot arid environment where the concrete does
not contain a workability retention admixture. A comparison between values published by the
Concrete Society in its Guide to Construction of Reinforced Concrete in the Arabian
Peninsula and comparative values obtained by a local Ready Mixed concrete company.

If say ten technicians are given a sample of concrete and asked to perform a slump test, even if
the test is carried out strictly in accordance with the standard procedure, it is doubtful if all the results
could come within 10mm of each other. Some years ago, during the writers teaching career, he was
able to produce any desired slump to order whilst carrying out the test strictly in accordance with the
standard procedure. Whilst this paper is not the place to elaborate on the details, sufficient to say,
that anyone with sufficient knowledge of the slump test, can easily produce a test to the required
slump if required. If concrete arrives on site with a slightly higher slump than required, the correct
procedure is to retain the concrete until the required slump is reached, rather than rejecting a perfectly
good truckload of concrete.
Many tests have been carried out which confirm that small differences in the measured slump
value have no effect whatsoever on the properties of the hardened concrete or any effect on its
performance or long term service life. If the concrete arrives on site with a slightly lower slump than
specified, the workability can be corrected, not by the addition of extra water, but by careful addition of
extra admixture. It is important to realize that some admixtures may slightly retard the early setting and
hardening process, especially where cement replacements such as GGBFS or PFA are incorporated
in the mix, and therefore their addition needs to be carefully controlled and supervised.
As attitudes have changed towards the specification of the slump test, changes in the permitted
tolerances have also been implemented. The table below shows a range of values in old and present
specifications, together with a current suggested recommendation for Slump Class S4 in BS 8500.
 Christopher Stanley

Reference Requirement is Permitted slump of Permitted slump of

standard/year 180mm snatch samples incremental samples

BS5328 1981,
180mm 130mm to 250mm 120mm to 240mm
1990,1997

Slump class S4 160 -

BS EN 206, 2000 140mm to 240mm 150mm to 230mm
210mm

BS EN 206, 2000 Fixed value > 180mm 130mm to 240mm 140mm to 230mm

Slump class S4 160 -

BS 8500, 2002 140mm to 240mm 150mm to 230mm
210mm

Current suggested Slump class S4 of

160mm to 240mm ( 40mm)
recommendation 200mm

ASTM C 94/C 94M Over 100mm 40mm of specified slump

Table 7: Range of specified tolerances in different standard concrete specifications.

Raw material or measured

Control Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
concrete property

Cement (kg/m3) 400 400 310 400

Coarse aggregate (kg/m3) 985 1060 1075 985

Fine aggregate (kg/m3) 715 800 850 715

Water (kg/m3) 200 160 155 200

Admixture Nil 3.88 2.96 3.88

Water/Cement ratio 0.50 0.40 0.50 0.50

Slump 100 100 100 200

Compression strength MPa

1 day 10.5 15.5 11.5 11.5

3 days 23 30 22.5 23

7days 35 48 36.5 36

28 days 42 56 40 42

Table 8: Table of concrete mixes showing that by the addition of 3.88 kg of an admixture, the
same properties of the concrete can be obtained relative to the control mix but with double the
slump.
 Christopher Stanley

For many years people have tried to control the slump of concrete during the initial period of the
mixing process. This is accomplished by measuring the power consumption of the mixer in Watts. The
stiffer the concrete, the greater will be the power consumption. The problem is that it takes several
seconds after the addition of materials for the mixed concrete to achieve a steady state, and in this
time it is likely that the concrete may have already been slightly overdosed with water, admixture, or a
combination of both. Where ready mixed concrete is being supplied the workability can be assessed
by coupling a pressure transducer into the hydraulic drive of the mixer drum. The hydraulic pressure is
a function of the power to turn the drum which is a function of its workability; the stiffer the concrete
the greater the hydraulic pressure. Years ago when the pressure was shown on Bowden gauges the
accuracy was not sufficient, especially at the higher workability ranges. However, now with the use of
LCD displays, the accuracy is much greater, and the trucks can be pre-calibrated for a range of
slumps in both full and part loads. In addition greater accuracy can be obtained by checking the
hydraulic pressure at both slow and fast drum speeds.

Figure 4: Hydraulic Pressure Sensor. This can be connected to the hydraulic drive of the ready
mix vehicles truck drum and the pressure to turn the drum which is a function of the concrete
workability can be calibrated against the slump of the concrete and shown as a numerical
value on an LCD display.

Another technique is to insert a probe through the wall of a truck drum. The pressure exerted
against the probe as the drum rotates can also be calibrated to give an indication of the slump of the
concrete within the truck.

Figure 5: Concrete Mixer Truck showing the use of a workability probe developed by Dr. Denis
Beaupre which can be calibrated against the slump of the concrete.
 Christopher Stanley

In addition the probes can be used to measure the concrete temperature and the number of truck
revolutions and this information can be sent back to a monitoring station at the plant. Such devices
can minimize the amount of concrete being wasted carrying out slump tests on site, which in one area
typically result in the wastage of about 12,500 m3 of concrete in a typical month.
With the advent of highly workable and self- compacting concretes, attention has focused on
another use of the slump cone for the slump flow test. In this test the slump cone is filled in one
continuous layer before being lifted and the concrete allowed to flow across a flat base. The diameter
of the flow is measured and is usually required to be within about 650mm 750mm, so the slump test
has found a new application and is likely to be a standard test for many years to come.

3 CONCLUSION
It is important to understand both the advantages and the disadvantages of the slump test and
correctly specify meaningful slump limits, in order to ensure a successful uninterrupted supply of
concrete to any job site. Whatever the slump of the concrete, providing it can be placed and properly
compacted with the available equipment on site, without re-tempering the concrete with water, the
concrete can be used without any detrimental effect to the building or structure concerned. It is
wasteful to dispose of any concrete that can still be used whether there is a difference in the slump or
the time it has been waiting to be placed. Common sense must prevail, together with the need to
conserve resources and sustain the environment.

4 REFERENCES
[1] Watson, R.V. The performance of a modified slump cone. Advanced Concrete Technology
thesis. December 1973. (Copy currently held by Information Services, The Concrete
Society.) London.

[2] Titford, E.M. The Golden Age of Concrete. London 1964

[3] British Standards Institution. BS 1881: Part 2: 1970. Testing Fresh Concrete.

[4] British Standards Institution. BS 1881: Part 102: 1983. Testing Concrete. Method of
determination of Slump.

[5] Abrams, D.A. Experimental Studies of Concrete. Chicago 1918

[6] Neville, A.M. Properties of Concrete 4th Edition. London 2005

nd
[7] Neville, A.M. & Brooks J.J. Concrete Technology 2 Edition. London 1987

[8] British Standards Institution. BS 8500-1: 2006. Method of Specifying and Guidance for the
Specifier.

[9] British Standards Institution. BS EN 12350-2: 2009. Testing Fresh Concrete Part 2: Slump
Test.

[10] American Society of Testing Materials. C143/C143M 10a. Test for the Slump of Hydraulic
Cement Concrete.

[11] American Society of Testing Materials C94/C 94 M-07. Specification for Ready Mixed
Concrete.

[12] THE CONCRETE SOCIETY. Guide to the Construction of Reinforced Concrete in the
Arabian Peninsula, The Concrete Society. London 2008