Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
com
Construction
and Building
MATERIALS
www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat
a,*
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Anna University, Chennai 600 025, India
Department of Civil Engineering, Crescent Engineering College, Chennai 600 048, India
Received 21 August 2006; received in revised form 10 April 2007; accepted 11 April 2007
Available online 12 July 2007
Abstract
Self-compacting concrete (SCC) demands large amount of powder content and nes for its cohesiveness and ability to ow with out
bleeding and segregation. In the present investigation, part of this powder is replaced with high volume y ash based on a rational mix
design method developed by the authors. Because of high y ash content, it is essential to study the development of strength at early ages
of curing which may prove to be a signicant factor for the removal of formwork. Rate of gain in strength at dierent periods of curing
such as 12 h, 18 h, 1 day, 3 days, 7 days, 21 days and 28 days are studied for various grades of dierent SCC mixes and suitable relations
have been established for the gain in strength at the early ages in comparison to the conventional concrete of same grades. Relations have
also been formulated for compressive strength and split tensile strength for dierent grades of SCC mixes.
2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Self-compacting concrete; Conventional concrete; Fly ash; Mix design; Compressive strength; Split tensile strength; Workability
1. Introduction
Self-compacting concrete (SCC) represents a milestone
in concrete research. SCC is a highly owable, non-segregating concrete that can spread in to place, ll the formwork and encapsulate the reinforcement without any
mechanical vibration for consolidation. SCC was originally
developed at the University of Tokyo, Japan during the
year 1986 by Prof. Okamura and his team to improve the
quality of construction and also to overcome the problems
of defective workmanship. A prototype of SCC for structural applications was rst completed in 1988 and was
named High Performance Concrete, and later proposed
as Self Compacting High Performance Concrete. A committee was formed to study the properties of SCC, including a fundamental investigation on workability of concrete,
which was carried out at the University of Tokyo, Japan
[1].
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 98 4046 2778; fax: +91 44 2275 0520.
E-mail address: binusrajiv@yahoo.co.in (B. Sukumar).
0950-0618/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.04.005
1395
Table 1
Properties of the constituent materials
Material used
Specic
gravity
Fineness
modulus
Bulk
density
(kg/cm3)
Blaines specic
surface neness
(m2/kg)
Cement
(53 Grade)
Fly ash (Class F)
Coarse aggregate
(12 mm down
size)
River sand
(Zone II)
Quarry dust
3.14
336
2.12
2.65
6.82
1620
428
2.40
2.69
1185
2.60
2.64
1720
Table 2
Composition and physical properties of binders
Components
Class F y ash
SiO2
Al2O3
Fe2O3
CaO
MgO
Alkalies as Na2O
Sulphur as SO3
K2O
LOI
SSA (m2/kg)
SG
21.4
4.9
3.8
64.2
1.1
0.20
2.1
0.44
2.1
336
3.14
57.9
33.54
2.69
0.65
0.49
0.46
0.13
0.87
1.05
428
2.12
LOI, loss on ignition; SSA, specic surface area; SG, specic gravity.
3. Mix design
The conventional design of concrete mix is based on the
assumption that particles of dierent sizes ll up larger
voids eecting densest packing with the cement paste providing the necessary hardened cement paste to form concrete of design strength under a particular degree of
control. This conventional concrete is basically a three con-
1396
Table 3
Mix proportions for various grade of SCC
Mix ID
Cement (kg/m3)
FA (kg/m3)
CA (kg/m3)
w/p ratio
SP % of binder
VMA % of binder
AS30
BS30
AS40
BS40
AS50
BS50
AS60
BS60
AS70
BS70
250
133
333
246
417
357
500
463
583
566
275
275
215
215
153
153
101
101
50
50
117
87
60
37
17
842
842
835
835
828
828
820
820
813
813
772
772
766
766
759
759
753
753
745
746
0.34
0.34
0.33
0.33
0.32
0.32
0.32
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1397
Table 4
Workability test results with recommended limits
Mix
ID
w/p
ratio
SP/b
ratio
Slump ow
(mm)
AS30
BS30
AS40
BS40
AS50
BS50
AS60
BS60
AS70
BS70
0.34
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.32
0.32
0.32
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.7
793
675
786
690
773
685
766
695
742
680
Recommended limits
T50cm slump
ow (s)
V-funnel ow at
Tf (s)
1.0
1.5
1.0
2.0
1.5
2.0
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
600800
3
5
4
5
4
4
5
4
5
4
<3
<6
V-funnel at
Tmin (s)
L-Box T20,
T40 (s)
4
6
5
5
5
5
6
5
6
6
1.0,
2.0,
1.0,
2.0,
1.5,
1.5,
1.5,
1.5,
1.5,
1.5,
<Tf + 3
1 0.5,
2 0.5
1.5
2.5
1.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
L-Box
h2/h1
1.0
0.91
0.99
0.92
0.96
0.89
0.95
0.94
0.95
0.90
>0.8
GTM
segregation ratio
3.0
10.2
4.2
9.8
5.5
8.5
6.2
9.5
6.8
8.2
<15
w/p, water/powder (cement + y ash + ller); SP/b, super plasticiser/binder (cement + y ash).
cal specimens were tested as per IS: 5316 and IS: 1199 for
the split tensile strength of dierent grades of SCC mixes
after 1 day, 3 days, 7 days, 21 days, 28 days and 56 days
of curing. The test results for the compressive strength
and tensile strength are given in Table 5. Compressive
strength of SCC is compared with the expected strength
of conventional concrete as per IS: SP: 23-1982 and is given
in Table 6.
Table 5
Compressive strength of SCC and the expected strength of conventional concrete as per IS: SP: 23-1982
Mix ID
12 h
18 h
1 day
3 days
7 days
14 days
28 days
Expected strength (N/mm ) for conventional concrete as per IS: SP: 23-1982
CV30
2.91
4.20
5.40
CV40
3.88
5.60
7.20
CV50
4.85
7.00
9.00
CV60
5.82
8.40
10.80
CV70
6.79
9.80
12.60
12.60
16.80
21.00
25.20
29.40
20.10
26.80
33.50
40.20
46.90
25.68
34.24
42.80
51.36
59.92
30
40
50
60
70
18.12
13.89
23.24
18.21
28.28
23.10
32.18
27.31
35.68
31.42
27.60
21.27
35.26
28.41
43.54
34.69
49.81
41.83
55.92
48.80
34.91
27.32
44.18
34.63
54.52
43.65
62.45
52.03
70.68
60.90
39.62
32.50
50.24
42.30
61.82
52.00
70.93
61.90
81.25
71.50
Table 6
Results on the Split tensile strength of SCC (AS30AS70 and BS30BS70)
Curing period (days)
1
3
7
14
28
AS40
AS50
AS60
AS70
BS30
BS40
BS50
BS60
BS70
1.40
2.40
3.12
3.66
4.06
1.65
2.99
3.96
4.60
5.01
2.01
3.42
4.58
5.64
5.95
1.56
3.30
4.85
5.64
6.72
2.14
3.65
5.48
6.67
7.54
1.21
2.00
2.76
3.25
3.72
1.49
2.47
3.35
3.98
4.53
1.26
2.98
3.76
4.75
5.06
1.94
3.38
4.35
5.24
5.79
1.98
3.61
4.84
5.73
6.45
1398
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Period of curing
SCC
Conventional concrete
12 h
18 h
1 day
3 days
7 days
14 days
28 days
0.108fc28
0.155fc28
0.198fc28
0.444fc28
0.689fc28
0.869fc28
1.000fc28
0.097fc28
0.140fc28
0.180fc28
0.420fc28
0.670fc28
0.856fc28
1.000fc28
0.5 day
0.75 day
1 day
3 day
7 day
14 day
28 day
AS30 AS40 AS50 AS60 AS70
Grades of SCC
4.5
Split tensile strength (MPa)
Table 7
Relationship for the expected compressive strength of SCC in comparison
to that of conventional concrete
y = 0.0861x + 0.783
R = 0.98
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
80
70
0.5 day
60
0.75 day
50
1 day
40
3 day
30
7 day
20
14 day
10
28 day
0
BS30
BS70
6
y = 0.0855x + 0.8814
R = 0.99
4
3
2
1
0
0
45
10
20
30
40
50
60
40
35
30
25
AS30
20
BS30
15
10
5
0
0
10
20
30
Table 8
Relation between split tensile strength and Compressive strength for
various grades of SCC
y = 0.0863x + 0.7938
1399
R = 0.98
Grades of SCC
Relationship obtained
SCC30
SCC40
SCC50
SCC60
SCC70
Combined
3
2
1
0
0
20
40
60
80
8
7
y = 0.0824x + 0.7697
R = 0.98
3
2
1
0
0
20
40
60
Compressive strength (MPa)
80
8
y = 0.0813x + 0.8604
R = 0.99
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
20
40
60
80
Compressive strength (MPa)
100
Table 9a
Comparison of proposed relation with the experimental results (AS30
AS70)
Sl.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Compressive strength
(N/mm2)
Tensile
strength
(N/mm2)
Tensile
strength
(N/mm2)
Percentage
error
8.14
10.32
12.76
14.61
16.21
18.12
23.24
28.28
32.18
35.68
27.60
35.26
43.54
49.81
55.92
34.91
44.18
54.52
62.45
70.68
39.62
50.24
61.82
70.93
81.25
1.4
1.65
2.01
1.56
2.14
2.40
2.99
3.42
3.30
3.65
3.12
3.96
4.58
4.85
5.48
3.66
4.60
5.62
5.64
6.67
4.06
5.01
5.95
6.72
7.54
1.5
1.69
1.90
2.05
2.18
2.35
2.78
3.21
3.53
3.82
3.14
3.79
4.49
5.02
5.53
3.76
4.54
5.41
6.08
6.77
4.15
5.05
6.02
6.79
7.66
6.66
2.36
5.78
1.80
2.12
7.5
6.54
6.50
3.66
0.64
4.48
2.00
3.38
0.90
2.65
1.30
3.88
7.20
1.47
2.16
0.79
1.16
1.03
1.56
3.23
1400
relations are developed between tensile strength and compressive strength for various grades of SCC ranges from
30 to 70 MPa. Figs. 48 show the relation between tensile
strength and compressive strength of various grades of
SCC. Relation between split tensile strength and compressive strength obtained are tabulated in Table 8. A single
relationship has been proposed, which is suitable for all
grades of SCC. The proposed equation is given by
fct 0:0843f ck 0:818
where fct is tensile strength in MPa and fck is compressive
strength in MPa.
Percentage error of the proposed equation with regard
to the test results are determined and tabulated in Tables
9a and 9b. It is observed that as the percentage error is less
than 3.7% on an average and the proposed equation can be
well accepted.
Table 9b
Comparison of proposed relation with the experimental results (BS30
BS70)
Sl.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Compressive strength
(N/mm2)
Tensile
strength
(N/mm2)
Tensile
strength
(N/mm2)
Percentage
error
6.05
8.12
10.22
12.36
13.89
14.3
18.21
21.27
23.10
27.31
27.32
28.41
31.42
32.5
34.63
34.69
41.83
42.30
43.65
48.80
52.00
52.03
60.90
61.90
71.50
1.21
1.49
1.71
1.94
2.0
2.16
2.47
2.76
2.98
3.38
3.25
3.35
3.61
3.72
3.98
3.98
4.35
4.53
4.63
4.84
5.06
5.24
5.73
5.79
6.45
1.32
1.50
1.68
1.86
1.99
2.02
2.35
2.61
2.77
3.12
3.12
3.21
3.47
3.56
3.74
3.74
4.34
4.38
4.50
4.93
5.20
5.20
5.95
6.04
6.85
8.33
0.66
1.06
4.30
0.50
6.93
5.10
5.74
7.58
8.33
4.16
4.36
4.03
4.49
6.41
6.41
0.23
3.42
2.88
1.82
2.60
0.77
3.69
4.13
5.84
4.15
Acknowledgements
The authors sincerely thank the Principal and Management of B.S. Abdur Rahman, Crescent Engineering
College, Chennai 600 048, for their constant encouragement and support to carry out this experimental investigation.
References
[1] Ozawa K, Maekawa K, Okamura H. Development of the high
performance concrete. Proc JSI 1989;11(1):699704.
[2] Skarendahl A, Peterson O. State of the art report of RILEM technical
committee 174-SCC, self compacting concrete. S.A.R.L, Paris:
RILEM Publications; 2000. p. 1722.
[3] Santhanam Manu, Subramanian S. Current developments in selfcompacting concrete. Indian Concrete J 2004;78(6):1122.
[4] Jagadish V, Sudharshan MS, Ranganath RV. Experimental study for
obtaining self-compacting concrete. Indian Concrete J 2003;77(8):
12616.
[5] Sukumar Binu, Nagamani K, Srinivasa Raghavan R, Chandrasekaran E. Rheological characteristics and acceptance criteria for selfcompacting concrete. In: Proceedings of national conference on
recent developments in materials & structures, Calicut: National
Institute of Technology; 2004. p. 41725.
[6] Sukumar Binu, Nagamani K, Indumathi M. Rational mix design
method for self-compacting concrete. In: Proceedings of national
conference on concrete technology for the future (NCCTF-2006)
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
1401