Abstract
Concrete mixes can be designed using many methods such as the British method (DOE) and the American method (ACI). It is beneficial to compare different mixes and examine their performances and the associated costs. However, designing and comparing concrete mixes by hand can be time consuming and is prone to errors. Hence, in this work, algorithms were developed and implemented for six mix design methods, which replaced the time-consuming hand calculations with error-free and fast ones, in a user-friendly fashion. The programs successfully designed concrete mixes ranging from 10 to 160 MPa 28-day compressive strengths with minimal errors and provided estimates of the cost of each mix. Also, using the developed programs, methods were compared regarding their suggested concrete ingredients' quantities, associated cost, and general trends. Preliminary comparisons between mix design methods showed that design methods suggest similar mix proportions for a given compressive strength. Further, it was found that designing a mix using ACI method can be costly compared with the other methods. These findings and others would have been difficult to be revealed using traditional methods of mix design. More importantly, the comparisons presented in this work are only a few of the unlimited comparisons that can be easily made between normal and high strength mix design methods, which will unravel other key differences between mix design methods. Such comparisons are vital to engineers to be able to make informed decisions regarding which mix to use from strength, workability, durability, and cost point of views.