This work compares the sequential air method (SAM) and the results from the hardened air-void analysis (ASTM C 457) for 488 different concrete mixtures from the lab and field. The results show that there is a wide variation of air contents that correlate with a Spacing Factor of 200 μm. These results show the inadequacy of using air content to decide the quality air void system of the concrete. In fact, 25% of the field data was shown to have a Spacing Factor higher than the recommended values. The results from the SAM, Spacing Factor, and volume of fine air voids (chords less than 300 μm) exhibited good agreement for both the laboratory and field data. Since the SAM can be used to test concrete before it sets and it can give important insight into the bubble size and spacing, this makes it a valuable tool to design and evaluate the air void system of fresh concrete and provide insight into the air void system in the hardened concrete.

中文翻译：

---

连续空气法的现场和实验室验证

这项工作比较了连续空气法 (SAM) 和来自实验室和现场的 488 种不同混凝土混合物的硬化气孔分析 (ASTM C 457) 的结果。结果表明，与 200 μm 的间距因子相关的空气含量变化很大。这些结果表明使用空气含量来决定混凝土的空气空隙系统质量是不够的。事实上，25% 的现场数据显示的间距系数高于推荐值。SAM、间距因子和细气孔体积（弦长小于 300 μm）的结果与实验室和现场数据显示出良好的一致性。由于 SAM 可用于在混凝土凝固前对其进行测试，并且可以对气泡大小和间距提供重要信息，