evaluating the strength gain and structural properties of self-compacting concrete by incorporating...

1840

Available online through - http://ijifr.com/searchjournal.aspx

www.ijifr.com

Published On: February 12, 2016

International Journal of Informative & Futuristic Research ISSN: 2347-1697

Volume 3 Issue 6 February 2016 Reviewed Paper

Abstract

Self-compacting concrete is identified as “highly flow able” and stable concrete that can spread readily into place and fill the formwork without any vibration and without undergoing any significant segregation. The design of concrete mix is not a simple task on account of widely varying properties of the constituent materials and many factors affect its target value. The mix design problem is a multi-characteristic optimization problem. However, in the present work, the problem is considered to the single characteristic optimization problem and the characteristic to be optimized strength of concrete. In the present paper, Okamora technique has been applied to obtain optimum of SCC mix design to get the mechanical and structural strength of concrete and cement is replaced by GGBS and fine aggregate is replaced by Robo sand and the experimentation work includes the fresh properties tests on SCC to know the characteristic behaviour and the hardened properties of SCC is determined to know the compression strength, split tensile strength,

flexural strength of beams and durability properties.

1. INTRODUCTION

Self-compacting concrete speaks to a standout amongst the hugest advances in solid

innovation for quite a long time. Lacking homogeneity of the cast solid because of poor

Evaluating The Strength Gain And Structural

Properties Of Self-Compacting Concrete By

Incorporating Robo Sand And GGBS Paper ID IJIFR/ V3/ E6/ 001 Page No. 1840-1853 Subject Area Civil Engineering

Keywords Mix Design, Self-Compacting Concrete, Robo Sand, Compression Strength,

Flexural Strength, Durability, GGBS

1st S.Kavitha

Research Scholar,

Department Of Civil Engineering,

Dr. M.G.R Educational & Research Institute University,

Chennai - India

2nd

R.Umadevi

Assistant Professor ,

Department Of Civil Engineering ,

ACS college Of Engineering, Bangalore - India

http://www.ijifr.com/

1841

ISSN: 2347-1697

International Journal of Informative & Futuristic Research (IJIFR)

Volume - 3, Issue -6, February 2016

Continuous 30th Edition, Page No.:1840-1853

S. Kavitha, R. Umadevi:: Evaluating The Strength Gain And Structural Properties Of Self-Compacting Concrete By Incorporating Robo Sand And GGBS

compaction or isolation might radically bring down the execution of developed solid.

SCC has been produced to guarantee sufficient compaction and encourage situation of

solid in structures with congested fortification and in limited regions. Self-Compacting

concrete was presented in Japan in the late 1980's keeping in mind the end goal to defeat

the blockage of steel support in the event of intensely strengthened structures viz,

seismic safe structures and so forth. SCC in the meantime is spread everywhere

throughout the world with a consistently expanding number of utilizations. In regards to

its composition, SCC contains the identical add-ons conventionally vibrated natural

concrete which might be cement aggregates, water additives and admixtures. However

high volume of tremendous plasticizer for reduction of the liquid limit and for better

workability, the high powder content material as “lubricant” for the coarse aggregates as

good as the use of viscosity-sellers to increase the viscosity of the concrete need to be

taken into account have employed the following ways to obtain self-compact potential

of SCC. Inadequate mixture content, Low water/powder ratio and Use of higher dosage

of super-plasticizer. Robo sand, the ideal substitute for waterway sand Eco-preventing

so as to accommodate items whose use helps moderate nature consumption of ground

water levels. Robo Sand's one of a kind properties - desk area molecule shape, steady

degree and zero debasements - are the reasons that basic advisors and solid technologists

like to utilize these products. The Andhra Pradesh administration is empowering the

utilization of Robo sand, a characteristic sand substitute for development reason. GGBS

is readily available material and it is less pricey compared to normal cement. So it is

preferred as the partial addition for the concrete. It minimizes the usage of cement in

constructions. The structural behaviour of Reinforced concrete beams by GGBS

resembled the typical behaviour of reinforced cement concrete beams and there is

increase in load carrying capacity of GGBS beams with age. It provides good durability

to the structures and also it maintains low dry shrinkage. By using the slag, we can

provide the clean, healthy and eco-friendly environment.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Materials

The materials used in the present investigation are as follows:

53 Grade, Ordinary Portland Cement

Coarse aggregate

Fine aggregate

Filler material as GGBS

Super plasticizer

2.1.1 Cement (53 Grade OPC)

Cement is such a material that has cohesive and adhesive properties in the presence of

water such cements are called hydraulic cements. These consist preliminary of silicates

and aluminates of lime. On this experiment 53grade OPC manufacturer Adithya Birla

was used for all SCC mixes. The cement used was contemporary with none lumps, the

1842

ISSN: 2347-1697





testing of cement used to be completed as per IS: 8112-1989. Compressive strength of

mortar is determined to verify cement confirms IS specification. IS 269-1976 and able to

develop required compressive strength of concrete the test carried out as per IS 4301

part C 1988.

Table 1: Test results of Birla super brand cement (530Grade OPC)

No Properties Test Results

Limitations As per IS 12269

2004 1 Normal Consistency (in %) 30% 30 -35 %

2 Specific Gravity 3.1 Less than or equal to 3.15

Setting Time(in Minutes)

3 a)Initial Setting Time 70 < 30mins

b)Final Setting time 220 > 600mins

Compressive Strength (MPa) (70.6*70.6*70.6mm Cubes)

4 3 days strength 39 Not less than 27Mpa

7 days strength 48 Not less than 37Mpa

28 days strength 60 Not less than 53Mpa

5 Fineness of cement 2% <10%

6 Temperature during testing 28°C 28°C+ 2%

2.1.2 Fine Aggregates

Locally available sand gathered from the river bed Tungabhadra was used as high-

quality mixture sand used to be having fineness modulus 2.62 along with conforming to

grading zone II as per IS

Table 2: Sieve investigation results of fine aggregate

Sieve

Retained

Cumulative

Cumulative

%Cumulative

Retained

% Retained

Zone Grade

Dimension

Weight(Gm)

Passing

Weight

Weight

10 mm 0 0 0 100

4.75 mm 18 18 1.8 98.2

2.36 mm 40 58 5.8 94.2

1.18 mm 82 140 14.0 86

Zone II

600µ 372 512 51.2 48.8

300µ 394 906 90.6 9.4

150µ 84 990 99.0 1

Pan 10 1000 - 0

Fineness modulus 2.624

1843

ISSN: 2347-1697





Table 3: Fine Aggregate’s physical properties

Physical Properties

Fine aggregates

Specific gravity 2.64

Water absorption 1.5%

Fineness modulus 2.62

Bulk density (kg/m3) 1768

2.1.3 Coarse aggregates

The crushed stone blend had been gathered from the nearby quarry. Coarse aggregate

used within the experimentation had been 20mm down dimension and verified as per IS

383: 1970.

Table 4: Sieve analysis results of 12.5mm well graded coarse aggregate

Sieve

Retained

Retained

Retained %

%Cumulative

weight

cumulative

Cumulative

Remarks

Dimension

passing

(gm)

weight

weight

80 mm 0 0 0 100

40 mm 0 0 0 100

Confirms

20 mm 0 0 0 100

IS 383-1970

10 mm 2270

2270

45.4

54.6

4.75 mm 2690 4960 99.2 0.8

Pan 40 5000 - 0

Table 5: Coarse Aggregate’s physical properties

Physical properties Coarse aggregates

Specific gravity 2.65

Water absorption 0.3%

Bulk density 1584 (kg/m3)

2.1.4 Filler ( GGBS)

Blast furnace slag cements are in use for moderately long period due to the overall

economic system in their creation as good as their improved performance characteristics

in aggressive environments. GGBS is received by using quenching molted iron slag

from a blast furnace in water or steam to supply a glassy granular product. Then it is

dried and grounded in to a best powder. In the last decade a fine deal of study work has

1844

ISSN: 2347-1697





been performed addressing the effectively of GGBS.

2.1.5 Super plasticizer (SP)

It is a chemical compound used to develop the workability without using any additional

water. The super plasticizer used in the present work is the commercially available

brand Glenium B233.

Table 6: Properties of Gleniun B233 (Superplasticizer)

Parameters

Specifications

Results

(as per IS 9103)

Physical state Light brown liquid Light brown liquid

Chemical name of active Polycarboxylate Polymers

Polycarboxylate Polymers

ingredient

Relative density at 25 C 1.08±0.02 1.083

Ph Min.6 6.92

Chloride ion content (%) Max 0.2 0.0079

Dry material content 34 (±5%) 34.58

3. METHODOLOGY

The experimental work will be conducted in the following five phases.

The primary segment incorporated a complete literature review and data assortment in

the following areas:

1. Basic desires of SCC.

2. Properties of Fresh SCC.

The second section involves fabrication, upgrading and calibration of the tools with

moulds. The equipment’s for V-funnel and U-tube exams had been made-up to assess

the self-compatibility of recently ready SCC. Moulds are fabricated used for casting of

specimens required for assessing the properties of hardened SCC.

In third section, the Okamura process of mix design of a suitable SCC was applied in an

exploratory method. A series of trials were once carried out towards raise a proper

combine design making use of local aggregates by varying the W/C ratio and Okamora

for calculating cement content simultaneously up to the desired strength M40 is

achieved. In the fourth phase, compressive split and flexural specimen moulds were

casted and cured for 28 days. The fifth phase, involved the study of experimental data

and comparison with various codes for the satisfactory requirements of SCC.

3.1 Mix design procedures:

SCC is widely used all over the world in spite of a lot of advantages including reduction

in labour and fast way construction etc. but there is refusal any actual mix design

procedure for making of SCC. Some of the methods suggested by various eminent

personalities and researchers across the world regarding development and mix design

1845

ISSN: 2347-1697





procedure for SCC are been listed below:

Japanese Method (or) Okamura’s method EFNARC Method

Nan-Su Method Of Mix Design For S.C.C

JagadishVengala and RV Ranganath’s Method and etc. In spite of all above mentioned Mix design procedures in this paper work Okamora and

Ozawa method of mix design is used for design mix.

3.2 The detailed steps for mix design are described as follows:

Count on air content material as 2% (100 liters) of concrete quantity.

Calculate the coarse aggregate Content via volume (50 –• 60%) of mix volume.

Take up satisfactory aggregate Quantity of 40 to 60% of the mortar volume.

Substitute cement with 10% GGBS of cementations material.

Optimize the dosages0of super plasticizer.

Carry out SCC tests.

3.2.1 Mixing procedure for SCC

Mixing procedure for SCC is described as follows:

Binder and aggregate are blended for one minute.

The 1st phase (70%) of water was once brought with pooled for two minutes

SP along with the 2nd

phase (30%) of water used to be added

and blended for 2 minutes.

The combine was stopped and kept leisure for two minutes.

The combo was once remixed for one minute and discharged for SCC

assessments.

3.2.2 Blend proportions:

Mix type with percentage relative proportion sand mix proportions of constituent

Materials are tabulated.

Table 7: Mix Design as per Dr. Hajime Okamura for 100 Liters of concrete

Constituent 3

Mix proportion (Kg/m )

Powder 21

Water 20 Litres

Coarse aggregate 91

water to powder ratio 0.40

Fine aggregate 70

Proportion 1:1.19:1.10

1846

ISSN: 2347-1697





Table 8: Mix Design as per Dr.Hajime Okamura For 100 Litres of concrete No. Mix proportions

Powder Fine Aggregate Coarse

Aggregate

Water

Powder

ratio Cement GGBS Natural Robo

1 Normal SCC 6.8 1.7 10.12 0 9.36 0.4

2 RS 50%,GGBS

20%

5.45 3.06 5.06 5.06 9.36 0.4

3 RS 50%,GGBS

40%

4.08 4.42 5.06 5.06 9.36 0.4

4 RS 50%,GGBS

60%

2.72 5.78 5.06 5.06 9.36 0.4

5 RS 75%,GGBS

20%

5.45 3.06 2.53 7.59 9.36 0.4

6 RS 75%,GGBS

40%

5.45 4.42 2.53 7.59 9.36 0.4

7 RS 75%,GGBS

60%

5.45 5.78 2.53 7.59 9.36 0.4

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Fresh properties

The properties of workability tests for M40 grade SCC are as shown in Table 1.9

Table 9: Workability of fresh concrete

No.

Description

SCC

M1

M2

M3

M4

M5

M6

1 Slump flow (mm) 660 670 690 695 710 690 700

2 V-funnel (sec) 7 9 8 8 9 8 10

3 L-box (H2/H1) mm 0.9 0.85 0.9 0.95 0.9 0.8 0.9

4 T5 (sec) 2.3 2.8 3.9 4.1 2.9 3.9 4.2

4.2 Hardened Properties

4.2.1 Compressive Strength

It is noted from Table 10 that the 56-days compressive strength for GGBS and ROBO

sand based on M40 grade SCC is 45.23 MPa, which is about 4.92% more than the

design strength. From the test results for 7 days, 28days and 56 days compressive

strength based on SCC, it may be noted that the results are satisfactory. The

Compressive strength of GGBS and ROBO sand based SCC after 7days, 28 days and 56

days

1847

ISSN: 2347-1697





Table 10: Results of Compressive strength

Compressive Strength (N/mm2)

No.

Description

28

56

7

1 Normal SCC 34.49 41.33 50.22

2 20% GGBS + 50% RS 35.60 43.12 51.88

3 40% GGBS + 50% RS 36.80 44.51 52.92

4 60% GGBS + 50% RS 34.90 42.20 50.71

5 20% GGBS + 75% RS 36.20 44.48 52.35

6 40% GGBS + 75% RS 37.10 45.23 53.54

7 60% GGBS + 75% RS 35.30 42.90 51.24

Figure 1 : Compressive Strength of Various Mix Proportion

1848

ISSN: 2347-1697





4.2.2 Split Tensile strength

From Table Table 11 it is evident that the Split tensile strength of GGBS and Robo

sand based SCC is more than that of control mix based SCC for 7 days, 28 days and 56

days of curing period.

Table 11: Results of Split Tensile strength

Split Tensile Strength (N/mm2)

No.

Description

28

56

7

1 Normal SCC 2.66 3.81 4.13

2 20% GGBS + 50% RS 2.83 4.10 4.34

3 40% GGBS + 50% RS 3.26 4.51 4.76

4 60% GGBS + 50% RS 2.75 3.96 4.23

5 20% GGBS + 75% RS 2.98 4.32 4.51

6 40% GGBS + 75% RS 3.44 4.73 4.89

7 60% GGBS + 75% RS 2.90 4.22 4.47

Figure 2: Split Tensile Strength of Various Mix Proportion

1849

ISSN: 2347-1697





4.2.3 Flexural Strength

From Table 12 it is evident that the Flexural strength of GGBS Robo sand based SCC

is more than control mix based SCC for 7 days, 28 days and 56 days of curing period.

Table 12: Results of Flexural strength

Flexural Strength (N/mm2)

No.

Description

7

28

56

1 Normal SCC 4.21 4.95 5.69

2 M2 40% GGBS + 50% RS 4.53 5.45 6.05

3 M5 40% GGBS + 75% RS 4.76 6.25 7.10

Figure 3: Flexural Strength of Normal SCC and Optimum Mix Proportions

4.3 Durability test

4.3.1 Sulphate attack test

The sulphate attack was evaluated by means of measuring the burden losses of the

specimens at 7, 28 & 56 days respectively. The results for sulphate attack experiment

are proven here Table 13.

1850

ISSN: 2347-1697





Table 13: Results of loss of strength due to Sulphate Attack Test (Normal SCC)

Compressive Strength

Loss of Compressive Strength of

Normal SCC

No.

Description

28

56

28

56

7 7

1 Normal SCC 34.49 41.33 50.22 31.04 36.37 43.59

Figure 4: Average Compressive Strength V/S Loss of Compressive Strength of NSCC

Table 14: Results of loss of strength due to Sulphate Attack Test (40% GGBS + RS 50%)


Loss of Compressive Strength of

No.

Description

40% GGBS + 50% RS

28

56

28

56

7

7

1

40% GGBS +

36.80

44.51

52.92

34.63

41.34

48.68

RS 50%

1851

ISSN: 2347-1697





Figure 5: Average Compressive Strength V/S Loss of Compressive Strength (40% GGBS + RS 50%)

Table 15: Results of loss of strength due to Sulphate Attack Test (40% GGBS + RS 75%)


Loss of Compressive

Strength of 40% GGBS +

(N/mm2)

No.

Description

75% RS

7

28

56

7

28

56

1 40% GGBS + RS 75% 37.10 45.23 53.54 35.13 42.29 49.58

Figure 6: Average Compressive Strength V/S Loss of Compressive Strength (40% GGBS + RS 75%)

1852

ISSN: 2347-1697





5. CONCLUSION

The subsequent conclusions be able to drawn from the experimental investigations

carried out on the behaviour of concretes with GGBS and ROBO sand like partial

replacements for cement and sand.

It is decided that there's an develop within the compressive strength used for

different concrete mixes completed with GGBS and ROBO sand substitute

mixes. The increase is when you consider that of excessive reactivity of

GGBS.

Compressive strength increases with increase of percent of Robo sand and

GGBS upto certain limit.

In order to increase the strength cement is replaced by combination of

GGBS.

According to mix the combine gradation of 45% RS and 55% NS meets the

grading limits of IS: 383, But it has been found that on adding more percent

of Robo Sand i.e 50% RS and 50% NS also for the mix RS 75% and NS 25%

in concrete gives maximum compressive strength.

Good compressive strength is obtained when 40% GGBS is replaced with

cement and natural sand is replaced by 50% and 75% Robo sand.

The maximum 56 days split tensile strength was obtained with 40% GGBS

replaced with cement.

The maximum 56 days flexural strength was obtained at mix (50% RS and

50% NS) and mix (75% RS and 25% NS) along with cement replacement

with GGBS 40%.

Durability test implemented in the investigation by way of acid attack test

with 10% sulphuric acid revealed that 40%GGBS replaced with cement,

Robo sand replaced with50% and 75% of natural sand in concrete is more

durable in terms of durability factors than control mix.

It is observed that mixture of GGBS with Robo Sand concrete will be durable

as compared to control concrete. The other forms of fillers, viz., fly ash, stone powder, and floor glass (as

advocated by way of EFNARC) could also be tried in extraordinary mixtures

and the property of the mixes could also be investigated 6. REFERENCES [1] H.Okamora And M.Ouchi Self-compacting concrete progress, present use and future.

First worldwide RILEM Symposium on Self-compacting Concrete. Rilem Publications

SARL, 3-14.1999

[2] Poppe A.M. And Schutter, G.D. 2005. Cement hydration within the presence of

execessive filler contents. Cem. Concr. Res., 35 (12): 2290-2299.

[3] EFNARC 2005. European guidelines for self-compacting concrete, specification,

production and use. May 2005.

[4] Japan Society of Civil Engineers, ―Recommendation for Construction of Self

1853

ISSN: 2347-1697





Compacting Concrete‖,157- 164 pp., 1998.

[5] VenuMalagavelliet. Al “high performance CONCRETE WITH GGBS AND ROBO

SAND”/international journal of engineering and science/ vol. 2(10), 2010, 5107-5113.

[6] Swamy R.N, High Performance Durability Through Design. International Workshop on

High-performance Concrete, ACI-SP, Vol.159 (14), pp. 209-230, 1996.

[7] SyamPrakash*, ‘Ready Mixed Concrete using Manufactured Sand as Fine Aggregate ‘,32nd Conference on Our World in Concrete and Structures:28-29 August 2007.

[8] M. Sailakshmi and Dr.B.S.R.kprasad., ’strength and Workability traits of excessive performance Concrete with Partial replacement of Cement and Sand with GBBS and

Robosand., international Journal of Engineering study & technological know-how

(IJERT)Vol. 2 issue 8, August – 2013.

[9] IS: 12089 (Specification for Granulated Slag for Manufacture of Portland Slag Cement),

Indian Standard Code of Practice, 1987.

[10] IS: 383 (Specification for coarse and fine aggregates from natural sources for concrete),

Indian Standard Code of Practice, 1970.

[11] IS: 10262 – 1982: (Recommended Guidelines for Concrete Mix Design) Indian Standard

Code of Practice.

[12] IS: 456 – 2000: (Plain and Reinforced Concrete Code of Practice) Indian Standard Code

of Practice.

[13] IS 12269: 1987, (Specification for 53 grade Ordinary Portland Cement) Indian Standard

Code of Practice.

[14] IS 2386 – 1963: (Methods of Test for Aggregates for Concrete) Indian Standard Code of

Practice