Sie sind auf Seite 1von 143

i

PROPERTIES OF GLASS FIBER REINFORCED SELF COMPACTING


CONCRETE

WONG CHOON SIANG

A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the


requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Engineering (Civil Structure)

Faculty of Civil Engineering


Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

JANUARY 2012

iii

To my beloved family

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my deepest gratitude and appreciation to both my


supervisors, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Abdul Rahman Mohd Sam and Dr. Roslli Noor
Mohamed for their guidance, advice, and encouragement. A very thank you for all
the knowledge and experiences shared with me under your supervision.

I would like to forward my sincere appreciation to family for their love,


endless support, care, and motivation throughout my whole study life in university.
Their support is a thrust for me to complete my report successfully at time.

Special thanks dedicated to all the laboratory technicians for their cooperation
and assistance throughout the completion of laboratory work and report. My
appreciation also extends to my friends who always gave me helping hand and their
advices.

ABSTRACT

Self Compacting Concrete (SCC) is able to flow under its own weight and
completely fill the formwork, even in the presence of congested reinforcement,
without any compaction, while maintaining homogeneity of the concrete. Majority of
concrete cast rely on compaction to produce good quality concrete. However,
compaction is difficult to be done in conditions where there are dense reinforcement
and large casting area. Usage of SCC will overcome the difficult casting conditions
and reduce manpower required. Addition of fibers will enhance the tensile and
ductile behaviour of concrete with brittle nature. SCC was added with relatively short,
discrete, and discontinuous glass fibers to produce Glass Fiber Reinforced Self
Compacting Concrete (GFRSCC). The purpose of this study is to investigate the
workability and mechanical properties of plain SCC and GFRSCC. Control concrete
(NC), plain SCC, and GFRSCC samples were prepared. Water-cement ratio of 0.40
was used for all concrete mixes. The fiber and brand of superplasticizer used were
alkaline-resistance glass fiber and Rheobuild 1100, respectively. Three fiber contents
of 0.5%, 1.0%, and 1.5% by volume of concrete were utilised in this study. The
laboratory testing included slump flow test, L-Box test, sieve segregation resistance
test, density test, ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test, compressive strength test,
splitting tensile strength test, and flexural strength test. The dosage of
superplasticizer required increased as fiber content increased. Plain SCC and
GFRSCC were highly workable than NC. The experimental results show that plain
SCC exhibited higher compressive strength than NC and GFRSCC. The splitting
tensile strength of NC was higher than plain SCC and GFRSCC due to negative
effect of superplasticizer added. The flexural strength of NC was slightly higher than
plain SCC. All GFRSCC exhibited higher flexural strength than plain SCC. The
optimum fiber content was 1.0% by volume of concrete. GFRSCC with 1.0% fiber
content developed higher load at first crack and ultimate load than NC and plain SCC
slabs.

vi

ABSTRAK

Konkrit Tanpa Pemadatan (SCC) berupaya untuk mengalir di bawah berat


sendiri, mengisi ruang acuan dan mengekalkan keseragaman dalam konkrit walaupun
terdapat susunan tetulang yang padat. Majoriti konkrit bergantung kepada pemadatan
untuk menghasilkan konkrit yang berkualiti. Tetapi, kerja pemadatan sukar untuk
dijalankan dalam keadaan yang terdapat susunan tetulang yang padat dan kawasan
penuangan yang besar. Penggunaan SCC akan mengatasi keadaan penuangan yang
sukar dan mengurangkan tenaga buruh yang diperlukan. Penambahan gentian akan
meningkatkan sifat-sifat tegangan dan kemuluran konkrit yang asalnya bersifat rapuh.
SCC ditambah dengan gentian kaca yang pendek, diskret, dan tidak selanjar untuk
menghasilkan Konkrit Tanpa Pemadatan diperkuat dengan Gentian Kaca (GFRSCC).
Objektif kajian ini adalah untuk mengkaji kebolehkerjaan dan sifat-sifat mekanikal
SCC biasa dan GFRSCC. Sampel konkrit yang disediakan termasuklah konkrit
kawalan biasa (NC), SCC biasa, dan GFRSCC. Nisbah air-simen 0.40 digunakan
untuk semua campuran konkrit. Gentian kaca ketahanan-alkali dan superplasticizer
berjenama Rheobuild 1100 digunakan dalam kajian ini. Tiga jenis peratus kandungan
gentian sebanyak 0.5%, 1.0%, dan 1.5% daripada isipadu konkrit digunakan dalam
kajian ini. Kajian makmal yang dijalankan termasuklah ujian runtuhan kon, L-Box,
rintangan pengasingan konkrit, ketumpatan, halaju gelombang ultrasonik (UPV),
kekuatan mampatan, kekuatan tegangan pembelahan, dan kekuatan lenturan.
Kandungan superplasticizer yang diperlukan meningkat apabila peratus kandungan
gentian bertambah. Kebolehkerjaan SCC biasa dan GFRSCC adalah sangat tinggi
berbanding dengan NC. Hasil ujikaji menunjukkan sampel SCC biasa mempunyai
kekuatan mampatan yang lebih tinggi daripada NC dan GFRSCC. Kekuatan tegangan
pembelahan NC adalah lebih tinggi daripada SCC biasa dan GFRSCC. Penambahan
superplasticizer memberikan kesan negatif terhadap kekuatan tegangan pembelahan
konkrit. Kekuatan lenturan NC adalah lebih tinggi sedikit daripada SCC biasa. Semua
sampel GFRSCC mempunyai kekuatan lenturan yang lebih tinggi daripada SCC yang
biasa. Peratus kandungan gentian optimum ialah 1.0% daripada isipadu konkrit.
Papak GFRSCC dengan kandungan gentian 1.0% mencapai beban pada retakan
pertama dan beban muktamad yang lebih tinggi daripada papak NC dan SCC biasa.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER

TITLE

PAGE

TITLE PAGE

DECLARATION

ii

DEDICATION

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

iv

ABSTRACT

ABSTRAK

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vii

LISTS OF TABLES

xi

LISTS OF FIGURES

xiii

LISTS OF ABBREVIATIONS

xix

LISTS OF SYMBOLS

xxi

LISTS OF APPENDICES

xxiii

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Introduction

1.2

Problem Statement

1.3

Objectives of Study

1.4

Scope of Study

1.5

Significance of Study

viii
2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1

Introduction

2.2

Self Compacting Concrete

2.2.1 Properties of Fresh Self Compacting


Concrete

2.2.2 Properties of Hardened Self Compacting


Concrete
2.3

13

Fiber Reinforced Concrete

15

2.3.1 Types and Properties of Fibers

15

2.3.2 Mechanism of Fiber Reinforcement

19

2.3.3 Properties of Fresh Fiber Reinforced


Concrete

20

2.3.4 Properties of Hardened Fiber Reinforced


Concrete
2.4

Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete

21
23

2.4.1 Properties of Fiber Reinforced Self


Compacting Concrete

23

2.4.2 Previous Studies on Fiber Reinforced Self


Compacting Concrete

24

METHODOLOGY

46

3.1

Introduction

46

3.2

Preparation of Raw Materials

47

3.2.1 Cement

48

3.2.2 Aggregate

49

3.2.3 Superplasticizer

50

3.2.4 Water

51

3.2.5 Glass Fiber

52

3.2.6 Steel Bars

52

3.2.7 Plywood

53

Mix Design Method

53

3.3.1 Mix Proportion

53

3.3

ix
3.4

Preparation of Mould and Formwork

55

3.5

Mixing of Concrete

57

3.6

Preparation of Samples

59

3.7

Laboratory Testing of Fresh Concrete

62

3.7.1 Slump Test and Slump Flow Test

62

3.7.2 L-Box Test

66

3.7.3 Sieve Segregation Resistance Test

67

Laboratory Testing of Hardened Concrete

69

3.8.1 Density

69

3.8.2 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) Test

69

3.8.3 Compressive Strength Test

71

3.8.4 Tensile Splitting Strength Test

72

3.8.5 Flexural Strength Test of Concrete Prisms

73

3.8.6 Flexural Strength Test of Small-scale Slabs

75

3.8

RESULT AND ANALYSIS

79

4.1

Introduction

79

4.2

Analysis and Discussions of Results

80

4.2.1 Sieve Analysis

80

4.2.2 Workability

82

4.2.3 Density of Hardened Concrete

86

4.2.4 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV)

87

4.2.5 Compressive Strength

89

4.2.6 Splitting Tensile Strength

93

4.2.7 Flexural Strength of Concrete Prisms

96

4.2.8 Flexural Strength of Small-scale Slabs

99

4.2.9 Neutral Axis of Slabs

103

4.2.10 Failure Mode of Concrete

105

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

110

5.1

Conclusions

110

5.2

Recommendations

112

x
REFERENCES

113

APPENDIX A

117

APPENDIX B

120

xi

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO.

TITLE

PAGE

2.1

List of test methods for workability properties of SCC

10

2.2

Selected properties of fibers

16

2.3

Results of slump flow and L-Box tests

25

2.4

Physical properties of aggregates

27

2.5

Physical properties of polypropylene fibers

28

2.6

Mix proportions of LLSCC with polypropylene fibers


(in kg/m3)

28

2.7

Types of specimens and properties of fibers used

33

2.8

Slump flow of different mixes (in cm)

36

2.9

J-Ring test results for different mixes

36

2.10

L-Box test results

37

2.11

Compressive strength (N/mm2) for different mixtures

39

2.12

Typical properties of fibers

40

3.1

Initial dosage of superplasticizer for plain SCC and


GFRSCC mixes

3.2

3.3

54

Mix proportions for control concrete, SCC, and GFRSCC


mixes without wastage (per m3)

55

The number of samples prepared

60

xii
4.1

Sieve analysis of fine aggregate

81

4.2

Sieve analysis of coarse aggregate

81

4.3

Requirements for self compacting concrete

85

4.4

Dosage of superplasticizer required for plain SCC and


GFRSCC (percentage by mass of cement)

85

4.5

Density of hardened concrete cubes

86

4.6

UPV test results of concrete cubes

88

4.7

UPV test results of concrete cylinders

88

4.8

UPV test results of concrete prisms

89

4.9

Compressive strength of NC, plain SCC, and GFRSCC

90

4.10

Splitting tensile strength of NC, plain SCC, and GFRSCC

93

4.11

Flexural strength of NC, plain SCC, and GFRSCC

97

4.12

The result of flexural strength test of slabs

99

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO.

TITLE

PAGE

1.1

The casting of large area of concrete slab

1.2

Concrete slab with dense reinforcement

2.1

Highly workable SCC

2.2

J-Ring test method

10

2.3

V-Funnel test method

11

2.4

L-Box test method

11

2.5

U-Box test method

12

2.6

Fill-Box test method

12

2.7

Orimet device

13

2.8

Shapes of steel fibers (a) Round, (b) Rectangular, (c)


Indented, (d) Crimped, (e) Hooked ends, (f) Melt extract
process, (g) Enlarged ends

17

2.9

Types of monofilament and film polypropylene fibers

18

2.10

The diagram of fibers bridging across a crack

20

2.11

The relationship

2.12

between compressive and

flexural

strengths of concrete with curing time

26

Lightweight Expanded Clay Aggregates (LECA)

27

xiv
2.13

The difference in the rate of slump flow over SP volume


percentage for LLSCC and FR-LLSCC

2.14

Graph of tensile strength versus volume percentage of the


fibers

2.15

29

30

Graph of flexural strength versus volume percentage of the


fibers

30

2.16

Fibers used for studies

32

2.17

Flow-Channel test

34

2.18

Flow distance and respective flow speed for different


mixtures tested immediately after the mixing

2.19

Flow distance and respective flow speed for different


mixtures tested at 40 minutes after the mixing

2.20

35

PFRCC7 mix with heavy congestion (left) CFC305 mix


with light congestion (right)

2.21

35

38

Load-deflection curves of FRSCHPC beams at the age of


28 days

40

2.22

Multiple crack pattern of CFC305

41

2.23

Failure mode of panels of CFC307

42

2.24

Hooked-end steel fibers

43

2.25

Slump flow test

43

2.26

J-Ring test

44

2.27

V-funnel test

44

3.1

Methodology flow chart

47

3.2

Holcim Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC)

48

3.3

Sand as fine aggregate

49

xv
3.4

10 mm size coarse aggregate

50

3.5

Superplasticizer

51

3.6

12 mm length AR-glass fiber

52

3.7

Dimension and arrangement of reinforcement of concrete


slab

3.8

56

Plywood formwork and steel reinforcement of concrete


slab (plastic spacers were used to form concrete cover of
thickness 25 mm)

56

3.9

Weighing machine

57

3.10

Mechanical pan mixer

58

3.11

High capacity mechanical pan mixer

58

3.12

Curing tank

60

3.13

Compaction of NC mix with poker vibrator (left); Free


flow of self compacting concrete mix along a channel
(right)

61

3.14

The wet gunny sacks used for curing process

62

3.15

Slump test apparatus

63

3.16

Slump measurement

64

3.17

Slump flow apparatus in laboratory

64

3.18

Measurement of diameter of slump flow

65

3.19

Dimension of L-box

66

3.20

L-box made from plywood

67

3.21

Sieve pan and 5 mm sieve for sieve segregation resistance

3.22

test

68

Direct transmission method

70

xvi
3.23

UPV test equipment

70

3.24

Compression test machine, ADR 2000

72

3.25

Flexural strength testing machine

74

3.26

Detail of prism under four-point loading test (front view)

74

3.27

Arrangement of demec discs on concrete surface

76

3.28

Mechanical extensometer

76

3.29

Data logger

77

3.30

Setup of small-scale slab flexural strength test

78

3.31

Detail of slab under four-point loading test (front view)

78

4.1

Sieve analysis graph of fine and coarse aggregates

82

4.2

Slump test for control concrete (NC) mix

83

4.3

Spread diameter of concrete mix in slump flow test

84

4.4

L-Box test

84

4.5

Paste remaining on the pan in sieve segregation resistance


test

4.6

Relation between density and curing age for all concrete


cube specimens

4.7

92

Relation between splitting tensile strength and curing age


for each type of concrete samples

4.10

90

Some of the observed voids on the surface (red circles


indicate the voids)

4.9

87

Relation between compressive strength and curing age for


each type of concrete specimens

4.8

85

94

Comparison of splitting tensile strength among the


GFRSCC samples

94

xvii
4.11

Some voids observed on the surface (red circles indicate


the voids)

4.12

Relation between flexural strength and curing age for each


type of concrete samples

4.13

96

97

Comparison of flexural strength among the GFRSCC


samples

98

4.14

Load-deflection curves for all concrete slabs

100

4.15

Cracking pattern and corresponding load values of NC slab

101

4.16

Cracking pattern and corresponding load values of plain


SCC slab

4.17

101

Cracking pattern and corresponding load values of


1.0%GFRSCC slab

102

4.18

Load-deflection curves until the load at first crack observed

102

4.19

Slab depth versus concrete strain for NC slab

103

4.20

Slab depth versus concrete strain for plain SCC slab

104

4.21

Slab depth versus concrete strain for 1.0%GFRSCC slab

104

4.22

Failure mode of NC cube

105

4.23

Failure mode of plain SCC cube

105

4.24

Failure mode of 0.5%GFRSCC cube

106

4.25

Failure mode of 1.0%GFRSCC cube

106

4.26

Failure mode of 1.5%GFRSCC cube

107

4.27

Failure on fractured surface of NC cube (red lines indicate


broken aggregates)

4.28

108

Failure on fractured surface of plain SCC cube (red lines


indicate broken aggregates)

108

xviii
4.29

4.30

Failure on fractured surface of 1.0%GFRSCC cube (red


lines indicate broken aggregates)

109

Failure mode of reinforced concrete slabs

109

xix

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AR-glass fiber

Alkaline Resistance glass fiber

BS

British Standard

DOE

Department of Environment

EN

European Standard

EFNARC

European Federation of Specialist Construction


Chemicals and Concrete Systems

FRC

Fiber Reinforced Concrete

FR-LLSCC

Fiber Reinforced LECA Lightweight Self Compacting


Concrete

FRSCC

Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete

FRSCHPC

Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting High Performance


Concrete

GFRSCC

Glass Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete

GGBFS

Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag

HPC

High Performance Concrete

ITZ

Interfacial Transition Zone

LECA

Lightweight Expanded Clay Aggregates

LVDT

Linear Variable Differential Transducer

NC

Conventional Concrete or Control Concrete

xx
OPC

Ordinary Portland Cement

PP

Polypropylene

SAJ

Syarikat Air Johor

SCC

Self Compacting Concrete

SCHPC

Self Compacting High Performance Concrete

SP

Superplasticizer

UPV

Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity

xxi

LIST OF SYMBOLS

Ac

Cross-sectional area of the specimen in which the


compressive force acts

Average distance between the point of fracture and the


nearest support

D, final

Mean diameter of slump spread

Cross-sectional diameter of concrete cylinder

d1

Width of the concrete prism

d2

Height of the concrete prism

Maximum load at failure

fc

Compressive strength

fcf

Flexural strength

fct

Tensile splitting strength

H1

Vertical distance from the base to the surface of


concrete at the position of reinforcing bars of L-box

H2

Vertical distance from base to concrete surface at the


end of the channel of L-box

Distance between the supporting rollers

Jsf

Slump flow spread of J-Ring test

Length of the line of contact of the concrete cylinder

xxii
LF

Maximum flow distance of L-Box test

LJ

Difference in height of the mixtures inside and outside


the J-Ring

LL

Difference in height inside and outside the steel bars of


L-Box test

LS

Elevation difference before and after opening the


sliding shutter of L-Box test

Ma

Mass of concrete sample poured on the sieve

Mb

Mass of cement paste or mortar passing the sieve

Maximum load

Sf0

Slump flow spread measured immediately after mixing

Sf45

Slump flow spread measured 45 minutes after mixing

T500

Time to achieve 500 mm spread diameter

T5MINUTES

Time for discharge to complete for V-Funnel test

tfinal

Time to achieve final spread diameter

Hfinal

Difference in concrete level between the beginning


and end of the L-box

xxiii

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX

TITLE

PAGE

Concrete Mix Design

117

Determination of Fiber Content

120

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Introduction

Self Compacting Concrete (SCC) was originating in Japan and well


established in some countries such as Sweden and United State [1]. Apart from
individual symposium papers, several publications have been produced by some
committees, such as EFNARC Specifications and Guidelines for Self Compacting
Concrete and The European Guidelines for Self Compacting Concrete [2, 3, 4].
EFNARC stands for The European Federation of Specialist Construction Chemicals
and Concrete Systems. SCC can be defined as a concrete that is able to flow under its
own weight and completely fill the formwork, even in the presence of dense
reinforcement without any compaction, while maintaining the homogeneity of the
concrete [1 4]. SCC can also be known as Super-Workable Concrete [5]. The high
workability is one of the crucial properties for SCC and can be controlled by
appropriate dosage of superplasticizer [6]. Fiber Reinforced Concrete (FRC) is
defined as a concrete incorporating relatively short, discrete, and discontinuous fibers.
The fibers used are steel fiber, polypropylene fiber, carbon fiber, glass fiber, asbestos
fiber, and natural organic fiber. The role of fibers is to improve the tensile properties
of concrete due to its brittle nature [7, 8].

2
Both SCC and FRC can be categorized as High Performance Concrete (HPC)
due to its special proportions and properties. HPC is a specialized concrete designed
to provide several benefits in the construction of concrete structures that cannot
always be achieved routinely using conventional ingredients, normal mixing and
curing practices [5]. Besides, HPC can be termed as concrete in which its ingredients
and proportions are specifically chosen and developed for particularly appropriate
properties for the expected use of the structure [6].

Inclusion of fibers into SCC will produce Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting
Concrete (FRSCC) with superior properties in fresh and hardened state. The
reinforced fibers in concrete may improve the tensile strength, flexural strength,
impact strength, toughness, drying shrinkage, and failure pattern of the concrete [9,
10]. Generally, the raw materials required for production of FRSCC are cement,
coarse and fine aggregates, water, superplasticizer, and fibers. Modification to the
FRSCC mixtures has been done by using different types of fibers and lightweight
material such as Light Expanded Clay Aggregate (LECA). LECA is a type of
lightweight aggregate and being used to reduce the self-weight of the structures as
well as the cross-sectional area of members [11, 12]. The investigations on the
influences of fibers on properties of FRSCC have been presented by many
researchers. This study was conducted to investigate the properties of FRSCC with
glass fiber, namely Glass Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete (GFRSCC).

1.2

Problem Statement

The majority of concrete cast required compaction to ensure that the


development of adequate strength and durability. Generally, the purpose of
compaction of concrete is to achieve the highest possible density of the concrete [6].
Dense microstructure of concrete will results in low permeability, high strength, high
resistance to chloride and sulfate attacks, low carbonation, and improved durability.
Insufficient compaction will lead to the formation of voids, which results in negative

3
impact on the physical and mechanical properties of concrete. Inclusion of voids will
also influence the protection of the embedded steel reinforcement [1]. Compaction of
concrete is done manually by using vibrators in construction site. However,
compaction will be difficult to be carried out at conditions as follows:

i)

Large concrete casting areas.

ii)

Presence of congested reinforcement

iii)

Inaccessible areas and spaces, etc.

The concrete floor slabs in factories and commercial buildings are of large areas and
often subjected to continuous static and dynamic loadings. Self-weight is considered
as static loading; while vibrations and impact loadings can be categorized as dynamic
loadings. The loadings are usually induced by storages, containers, machineries, and
heavy vehicles that present in the factories and commercial buildings. Hence, the
concrete slabs have to exhibit good fatigue and impact strength to prevent failure in
fatigue [6].

FRSCC will be suitable in the construction of industrial concrete floor slabs


due to the combined features of both SCC and FRC. The elimination of compaction
enables the casting of large area of concrete slab to be completed in shorter time with
reduced cost and manpower required. Besides, the fibers within FRSCC will improve
the tensile properties, flexural strength, impact strength, toughness, and post-cracking
behaviour of concrete. Therefore, FRSCC is an ideal solution for the construction of
concrete slabs to maintain the serviceability of slab throughout their service lifespan.
Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2 show the casting of a large area of concrete slab with
congested reinforcement in commercial centre in Italy.

Figure 1.1: The casting of large area of concrete slab [4]

Figure 1.2: Concrete slab with dense reinforcement [4]

1.3

Objectives of Study

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the properties of the plain Self
Compacting Concrete (SCC) and Glass Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete

5
(GFRSCC). Comparisons will be made among the properties of normal concrete
(NC), plain SCC, and GFRSCC. The concrete specimens are subjected to appropriate
tests to determine the fresh and hardened properties of the concrete. Observations
will be made to evaluate the fiber conditions after cracking occurred and failure
mode of the concrete specimens. The objectives of this study are as follows:

i)

To design and produce mix proportions for GFRSCC.

ii)

To evaluate the physical and mechanical properties of GFRSCC.

iii)

To obtain and compare the physical and mechanical properties of


conventional concrete (NC), plain SCC, and GFRSCC

1.4

Scope of Study

The scope of this study is focused on the properties of FRSCC with glass
fiber. Three volume percentages of fibers are utilized to investigate the influence of
volume percentage of fibers to properties of concrete. The scope and limitations of
this study are:

i)

The type of cement used is Holcim brand Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC).

ii)

The type of fiber used is alkaline-resistance glass fiber.

iii)

The size of crushed aggregate used is 10mm.

iv)

All the concrete specimens are subjected to wet curing.

v)

The appropriate tests and evaluations of concrete specimens are done in


laboratory scaled sample.

vi)

The testing and evaluation of concrete mainly on workability, compressive


strength, splitting tensile strength, flexural strength, and failure mode of
concrete specimens.

6
1.5

Significance of Study

FRSCC has great potential and wider applications in construction industry


due to the combined benefits of both SCC and FRC. FRSCC with elimination of
compaction and improved toughness of hardened concrete make it more suitable for
use in construction of structures with dense reinforcements and subjected to impact
and earthquake loads.

The results of this study will present the physical and mechanical properties
of the plain SCC and GFRSCC. For GFRSCC, the optimum fiber content will be
determined from the test results and applied to the mix proportions of the reinforced
concrete slabs. The fiber conditions and failure patterns of the concrete specimens
will also be observed.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1

Introduction

Utilization of Self Compacting Concrete (SCC) has become more popular in


most countries due to its enhanced properties and performance. The properties that
are of particular concern are flowing ability, ability to pass through congested
reinforcements, ability to fill spaces without leaving internal voids, resistance to
bleeding and segregation without the needs of vibration or compaction [2]. Self
Compacting Concrete has been described as the most revolutionary development in
concrete construction for several decades by the European Federation for Specialist
Construction Chemicals and Concrete Systems (EFNARC) [3]. One of the problems
of the cement-based matrix is the brittle type of failure which occurs under tensile
stress or impact loading, and reason for the addition of fibers into the cement-based
materials is to increase the tensile properties and toughness of the matrix [13].
Basically, FRSCC is developed by modifying the mix proportion and adding fibers
into SCC mix. Hence, FRSCC will exhibits the properties of both SCC and FRC.

8
2.2

Self Compacting Concrete

SCC was first initiated in Japan in the mid-1980s to overcome the shortage
of labour or manpower in construction industry [1-4]. In Europe, it was probably first
used in civil works for transportation networks in Sweden during the mid-1990s [4].
Globally, the structures are now incorporating SCC for the use in the difficult
concrete casting conditions where vibration or compaction is difficult and steel
reinforcement is congested [5].

2.2.1 Properties of Fresh Self Compacting Concrete

The main properties of SCC are the properties in the fresh state. The key
properties of SCC are the ability to flow, to pass through reinforcement cages, to fill
spaces without leaving internal voids, and to avoid bleeding and segregation. SCC is
a highly pumpable material and has been pumped 297 m (92 floors) to the top of
Eureka building in Melbourne, Australia [2].

The filling ability, also known as unconfined flowability of the fresh concrete
is related to the mobility of the concrete. Fresh SCC with good filling ability will be
able to flow and completely fill into the moulds or formworks under its own weight
[1, 3, 4]. Passing ability or confined flowability is the ability of SCC to flow through
tight openings such as spaces and gaps between steel reinforcements without
segregation or blockage [3, 4]. Good passing ability will ensures good concrete-steel
bonding as the reinforcements are completely covered by the highly workable
concrete mix. The ability of SCC to remain homogenous in composition during
transport and placing is termed as segregation resistance of SCC [3, 4]. Segregation
can be defined as separation of the constituents of a heterogeneous mixture so that
their distribution is no longer uniform [6]. There are two types of segregation, i.e. the

9
separation of coarser aggregates from mortar and separation of cement paste from
aggregates [5]. Bleeding is a form of segregation in which some of the water in the
mix tends to rise to the surface of freshly placed concrete [6]. SCC mixes should be
sufficiently viscous and stable to avoid segregation and bleeding, without any
compaction. Generally, the desired properties of SCC can be achieved through low
water-binder ratio, mineral admixtures, and chemical admixtures used. Figure 2.1
shows the highly workable SCC being poured out from concrete truck mixer [4].

Figure 2.1: Highly workable SCC [4]

The testing for three main properties of SCC is well established by various
publications, such as EFNARC Specifications and Guidelines for Self Compacting
Concrete and The European Guidelines for Self Compacting Concrete. The list of
test methods for workability aspect of SCC is shown in Table 2.1. Some of the test
methods are shown in Figure 2.2 to Figure 2.7 [8].

10
Table 2.1: List of test methods for workability properties of SCC [3, 4]

Test method

Property

Slump Flow (Diameter)

Filling ability

Slump Flow (T500mm)

Filling ability

J-Ring

Passing ability

V-Funnel

Filling ability

V-Funnel at T5minutes

Segregation resistance

L-Box

Passing ability

U-Box

Passing ability

Fill-Box

Passing ability

GTM Screen Stability Test

Segregation resistance

Orimet

Filling ability

Figure 2.2: J-Ring test method [8]

11

Figure 2.3: V-Funnel test method [8]

Figure 2.4: L-Box test method [8]

12

Figure 2.5: U-Box test method [8]

Figure 2.6: Fill-Box test method [8]

13

Figure 2.7: Orimet device [8]

2.2.2 Properties of Hardened Self Compacting Concrete

The compressive strength of SCC is usually higher than conventional


concrete due to the lower water-binder ratio and usage of mineral and chemical
admixtures. The improvement in the mechanical properties of SCC is due to the
formation of dense structure of hydrated cement paste through the low water-binder
ratio and admixtures used. The fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag
(GGBFS), and silica fume has been used widely as pozzolanic materials in
production of high performance concrete such as SCC [5]. Pozzolanic materials are
siliceous or siliceous and aluminous materials, which in themselves possess little or
no cementitious property, but will in finely divided form and in the presence of
moisture, chemically react with calcium hydroxide liberated from hydration of
cement at ordinary temperature to form compounds possessing cementitious
properties [6 8]. The pozzolanic admixtures react in two ways, i.e. through
pozzolanic reaction and micro-filler effect [5]. Pozzolanic reaction will forms

14
additional C-S-H gel and results in formation of denser microstructure of the
concrete. Besides, the pozzolanic admixtures in finely divided form will also act as
filler and fill into the voids between the cement particles. The superplasticizer is used
to produce SCC with high workability, good resistance to segregation and bleeding,
and can be placed without any compaction [6]. The usage of superplasticizer will
induces electrostatic repulsion between cement particles. Dispersion of cement grains
and release of water trapped within cement flocks will result in proper hydration of
cement and subsequently produce concrete with dense microstructure and low
permeability [5]. SCC exhibits higher compressive strength than conventional
vibrated concrete is due to the lack of vibration of SCC gives an improved interface
between the aggregate and hardened paste [4]. When normal concrete is vibrated,
water will tend to migrate to the surface of the concrete and causing development of
porous and weak interfacial zones between aggregate and paste [1].

Tensile strength and compressive strength are closely related to each other
but not in direct proportionality. Generally, the tensile strength of concrete will
increases as compressive strength increases [6]. Since the compressive strength of
SCC is higher, hence the tensile strength of SCC will also higher than conventional
concrete. It is often assumed that tensile strength of concrete is about 10 percent of
the compressive strength.

The durability of a concrete is closely associated to the permeability of the


concrete. Good quality concrete should limit the ingress or penetration of deleterious
agents such as moisture and CO2 into the concrete to maintain the durability [4]. The
permeability of concrete is primarily related to porosity and pore size within the
concrete; while they are the function of the water-cement ratio and degree of
hydration [5]. The reduced permeability and porosity of concrete can be achieved
through proper compaction, low water-binder ratio, and admixtures used. The
concrete with improper and uneven compaction will results in inclusion of voids and
aggravates the ingression of aggressive agents into the concrete. Properly designed
SCC will have consistently low permeability and more durable than conventional
concrete [4]. Generally, usage of pozzolans contributes to reduction of permeability

15
of SCC; while superplasticizer enhances the workability of fresh concrete with low
water-binder ratio. Superplasticizer also enables better dispersion of cement particles
and leads to better hydration of cement [5, 6].

2.3

Fiber Reinforced Concrete

The use of fibers in brittle matrix materials has a long history going back at
least 3500 years when sun-baked bricks reinforced with straw were used to build the
57 m high hill of Aqar Quf near Baghdad [1]. In recent years, intensive research have
been done and resulted in development of fibers such as polypropylene, glass, carbon,
and asbestos fibers being added into concrete [14].

2.3.1 Types and Properties of Fibers

Fiber is a small piece of reinforcing material possessing certain


characteristics and properties, and they can be circular or flat [8]. Generally, there are
four types of fibers as follow:

i) Metallic fibers - steel, stainless steel, etc.


ii) Polymeric fibers - polypropylene, carbon, aramid, nylon, polyester, etc.
iii) Mineral fibers - glass, etc.
iv) Natural occurring fibers - bamboo, jute, cellulose, wood, sisal, etc.

Fibers can be categorized as two types based on their length, i.e. micro fibers
(l < 30mm) and macro fibers (l 30mm). The micro fibers are mainly used to reduce

16
the shrinkage cracks; while macro fibers are for structural purposes [15, 16]. The
fiber types can further classified into two main groups, namely fibers with higher
elastic modulus than concrete matrix and those with lower elastic modulus [5]. Steel,
glass, carbon, and aramid fibers are among the fibers that exhibit higher elastic
modulus than concrete matrix; while the fibers with lower elastic modulus are
polypropylene, nylon, and organic fibers [5, 13]. These fibers vary considerably in
geometry, properties, effectiveness, and cost. Table 2.2 shows the selected properties
of some fibers [14].

Table 2.2: Selected properties of fibers [14]

Fiber
Steel
Glass
Asbestos
Crocidolite
Chrysotile
Carbon
High modulus
High strength
Polypropylene
Nylon
Polyester
Polyethylene
Sisal
Wood fiber
Bamboo

Specific gravity
(g/cm3)

Modulus of
elasticity (GPa)

Tensile strength
(GPa)

7.8
2.6

200.0
80.0

1.0-3.0
2.0-4.0

3.4
2.6

196.0
164.0

3.5
3.1

1.9
1.9
0.9
1.1
1.4
0.9
1.5
1.5
-

380.0
230.0
5.0
4.0
8.2
0.1-0.4
26.5
71.0
35.0

1.8
2.6
0.5
0.9
0.7-0.9
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.5

Steel fiber is one of the commonly used fibers. Steel fibers may be produced
either by cutting wire, by shearing sheets, or from a hot-melt extract [7]. Round steel
fibers are produced by cutting or chopping the wire; while flat sheet fibers are
manufactured by slitting or shearing flat sheets [5]. Modern steel fibers are generally
deformed along their lengths or at the ends to improve the mechanical bond between
the fiber and matrix [5, 7]. Steel fibers will rust when exposed at the concrete surface;

17
however, they appear to be durable within the concrete due to the alkaline
environment of concrete. Figure 2.8 shows some shapes of the steel fibers used [13].

Figure 2.8: Shapes of steel fibers (a) Round, (b) Rectangular, (c) Indented, (d)
Crimped, (e) Hooked ends, (f) Melt extract process, (g) Enlarged ends [13]

Polypropylene fibers are the most common low-modulus synthetic or


polymeric fibers. They are available in two forms: monofilaments produced form
spinnarets, and film fibers produced by extrusions [5, 13]. Figure 2.9 shows types of
monofilament and film polypropylene fibers. Polypropylene fibers are resistant to
most chemicals and the concrete will always be the first to deteriorate if subjected by
aggressive chemical attacks. Time-dependent deterioration will not be a significant
factor for the fibers [13, 14]. Its high melting point of 165 C enables it to be used at
temperatures over 100 C for short period without deterioration [13]. Polypropylene
fibers are not suitable for structural purposes, but they are effective in reducing
plastic shrinkage cracking of concrete [1, 7].

18

Figure 2.9: Types of monofilament and film polypropylene fibers [1]

Glass fibers are produced in a process in which molten glass is drawn, in the
form of filaments, through the bottom of heated platinum bushing or tank containing
several hundred holes. The glass fibers are collected in strands of about 200
filaments after solidification process. Glass fibers are available both as chopped
strand and as a continuous roving [7, 13]. There are varieties of glass fibers
available in the market as follows:

i) E-glass or borosilicate glass used in the reinforcement of plastics.


ii) C-glass used where mineral acid resistance is desirable.
iii) S-glass an expensive high strength fiber used in demanding areas only.
iv) A-glass or soda-lime-silica glass cheap fiber made from scrap sheet or
bottle glass.
v) AR-glass alkaline resistant glass.

The highly alkaline environment within the concrete will reduce the strength of the
glass fibers [7]. Majority of the glass fibers do not have good resistance to the alkalis

19
present in concrete. The development of AR-glass fibers has solved this problem by
providing adequate resistance to alkali attack in concrete. AR-glass fibers contain
approximately 16 % to 20 % of zirconia (ZrO2) which provides the alkali-resistant
property [5, 7, 13, 14].

There are numerous types of fibers with different characteristics used for
applications with different performance requirements. In general, the fundamental
requirement for inclusion of fibers into the concrete is the uniform dispersion of
fibers throughout the matrix, irrespective of the types and properties of fibers.

2.3.2 Mechanism of Fiber Reinforcement

The principle role of the fibers is to control the cracking of the FRC and
bridging across the cracks once the concrete matrix has cracked, and thus providing
post-cracking ductility to the FRC [7]. At the elastic range of load-deflection curve
of FRC, there is little influence of fibers on the strength of the FRC. Until the initial
cracking of the matrix, it is reasonable to assume that both the fibers and the matrix
behave elastically and there is no slippage between the fibers and the matrix [5].
After initial cracking has formed, the fibers will contribute in carrying the increasing
load provided that the pull-out resistance of the fibers is higher than the load at initial
cracking. The load is transferred through the matrix to the fiber by shear deformation
at the fiber-matrix interface [5, 14]. In the post-cracking zone, the fibers also increase
the toughness by providing energy absorption mechanisms through the gradual
debonding and pull out of the fibers that bridging the cracks. Figure 2.10 illustrates
the diagram of fibers bridging across a crack [7].

20

Figure 2.10: The diagram of fibers bridging across a crack [7]

Traction-free zone is where the crack is wide enough for all the fibers to be pulled
out. A fiber bridging zone is the zone in which stresses are transferred by frictional
slip of the fibers. The last zone of a cracking is aggregate interlocking zone, with
enough aggregates interlock to transfer some stress within the matrix itself [7]. The
failure of FRC is generally due to pull-out of fibers rather than yielding or fracture of
fibers. However, if the fibers are long enough to maintain the bond, they will
probably fail by yielding or fracturing at high strains [5].

2.3.3 Properties of Fresh Fiber Reinforced Concrete

Addition of fibers will reduce the workability of fresh concrete considerably


[5, 8, 10, 17]. Small quantities of fibers in concrete mix may increase the cohesion
and prevent sedimentation due to their interlocking network characteristics [1, 8].
Non-uniform distribution of fibers throughout the concrete mix will also leads to low
workability of fresh concrete [8]. Besides distribution of fibers, workability is

21
influenced by several factors regarding to the fiber, such as fiber type, geometry,
aspect ratio, and content within the concrete mix [17]. Generally the fibers are added
last to the fresh concrete. Fibers should always be added to the mix in a clump-free
state [1, 7].

2.3.4 Properties of Hardened Fiber Reinforced Concrete

Strength, toughness, impact resistance, fatigue, durability, creep, and


shrinkage are the properties of particular interest for hardened FRC. Fibers have no
significant effect on the compressive strength and elastic modulus of FRC [7, 10].
The use of steel fibers in lower strength concrete mixtures increases their
compressive strength by enhancing the toughness [5]. However, addition of fibers
will probably decrease the compressive strength of FRC as compare to normal
concrete. Inclusion of fibers resulting in formation of voids within the concrete and
subsequently reduce the strength of FRC. Compressive strength is not the concerned
aspect for FRC as the principle role of fibers is to control the cracking of concrete
and increase the tensile properties of FRC. The addition of fibers will provide the
brittle concrete with ductile properties [16]. Improvement in tensile properties and
ductility of FRC are achieved by the bridging action of the fibers [5, 7].

A major role of fibers in FRC is to provide toughness, i.e. increasing the


energy required for the fracture process [14]. Toughness of concrete can be defined
as the area under the load-deflection curve in tension and flexure. It is a measure of
the energy absorption capacity of the FRC [1, 7]. The increase in toughness occurs
almost entirely in the post-cracking part of the curve. Any increase in fiber volume,
regardless of the type of fiber, will increase the toughness of FRC [7].

22
Impact strength is important when concrete is subjected to a repeated falling
object or impact of a large mass at high velocity [6]. The impact resistance of plain
concrete is quite low and can be increased by the addition of fibers [7]. Improvement
in impact strength for FRC is mainly dependent on the type and geometry of fiber
used. Normally, steel and carbon fibers are more effective in improving the impact
resistance than synthetic fibers [5, 7]. The FRC with steel fibers of deformation along
the length and at the ends will have higher impact resistance than those with straight
fibers.

Fatigue strength is defined as the maximum flexural stress at which FRC can
withstand a number of cyclic loads before failure [5]. Failure in fatigue is said to take
place when a material fails under a number of repeated loads [6]. In many structures,
the concrete are often subjected to both static and dynamic loadings. Dynamic
loading is the factor leads to fatigue within the concrete. The fatigue strength of FRC
increases with the addition of fibers and increasing volume fraction of fibers. The
improvement is due to the effectiveness of the fibers to bind the cracks together and
inhibiting crack extension during the applied load cycles [5, 7].

The inclusion of fibers will have positive influence in reducing the crack
widths due to creep and shrinkage. Durability is an important property of FRC for
any specific application. Previous studies indicated that the rate of chloride
penetration of FRC is greater than rate of conventional concrete, which shows that
the permeability of FRC is lower than normal concrete [5, 7]. FRC with lower
permeability will prone to chemical attacks such as carbonation and sulfate attack.
Many design considerations have to take into account for production of good quality
FRC since it consists of the normal concrete ingredients and also fibers. The
properties of fibers include fiber tensile strength, fiber stiffness, dimensions of fiber,
shape of fiber, and orientation of fiber within the concrete mix.

23
2.4

Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete

Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete (FRSCC) is produced when


fibers are added into SCC mix. FRSCC should exhibits the benefits or features of
both SCC and FRC. Production of FRSCC requires careful control of some factors to
reduce the negative influences due to inclusion of fibers, while maintaining the
performance of SCC.

2.4.1 Properties of Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete

Addition of fibers into SCC will enhance the properties of FRSCC produced.
FRSCC will exhibit the properties of both SCC and FRC. Therefore, in general, FRC
will have the properties as follows:

i) Good filling ability, passing ability and resistance to segregation and bleeding.
ii) Improved toughness, impact strength, and fatigue strength of the concrete.
iii) Better post-cracking ductility than conventional concrete.
iv) Improved resistance to creep and shrinkage.

The properties mentioned above are the general properties exhibited by SCC and
FRC [1, 2, 4 8, 13, 14]. Mix proportion of FRSCC should be considered about the
influence of fibers within the concrete mix. The use of appropriate mineral and
chemical admixtures will enhance the properties of fresh and hardened FRSCC.
Production of good quality of FRSCC requires many precautions to be taken during
mixing process. The fibers should be added in clump-free state in order to achieve
uniform distribution throughout the concrete mix.

24
2.4.2 Previous Studies on Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete

The increasingly development and utilization of SCC in the construction


industry has led to many researches and studies conducted on SCC. The concept of
addition of fibers into SCC mixes can produce concrete with more enhanced
properties and performance. Inclusion of fibers into SCC has led to development of
Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete (FRSCC). FRSCC belongs to a different
category from conventional concrete and hence its mix proportions and properties
also differ from the normal concrete. Nowadays, there are still researches and studies
being conducted to evaluate the concrete mix proportions and various properties of
FRSCC.

Corinaldesi et al. had conducted a study to investigate the properties of steel


fiber reinforced self compacting concrete used to produce thin precast elements. The
coarse and fine aggregates used were crushed limestone aggregate (10 mm maximum
size) and sand (6 mm maximum size), respectively. Limestone powder was used as
mineral admixture and as an addition to the concrete [9]. The purpose of the addition
approach is to serve as fine filler material and improvement of workability [1, 7].
Water-fine material ratio of 0.34 was applied for the mix proportion. Straight steel
fibers with dosage of 0.6 percent by volume and melamine-based superplasticizer
with dosage of 1.6 percent by cement mass were employed on the basis of
information reported in previous literatures studied by Corinaldesi et al. [9]. The
testing for concrete included the workability properties, strength, and durability
aspect.

Slump flow test and L-box test were performed to evaluate the workability
properties of fresh concrete [9]. Different workability parameters will be addressed
by different test methods. Filling ability and passing ability of fresh concrete were
assessed by slump flow test and L-box test, respectively [3]. For slump flow test,
measurements such as mean diameter (final) of the concrete flow obtained after
releasing of standard slump cone, elapsed time to gain the mean diameter of 500 mm
(t500), and the elapsed time to gain the final configuration (tfinal) were recorded. While

25
for L-Box test, difference in concrete level between the beginning and end of the box
(Hfinal), and the elapsed time to gain the final configuration (tfinal) were obtained.
Table 2.3 shows the results of both tests [9].

Table 2.3: Results of slump flow and L-Box tests [9]

Slump (mm)

290

final (mm)

650

t500 (sec)

tfinal (sec)

30

Hfinal (mm)

90

tfinal (sec)

30

Slump flow

L-Box

The specification and guidelines for SCC from EFNARC (2002) had specified the
typical range for diameter of slump flow (final) is 650 mm to 800 mm; while the
elapsed time to achieve 500 mm diameter concrete flow (t500) is 2 sec to 5 sec [3].
From the slump flow test results, the concrete had qualified as SCC due to fulfillment
of the specification and criteria. The L-box test results indicate that the concrete
showed satisfactory performance in terms of passing ability in narrow section with
reinforcing steel bars [9].

Compressive strength of 40 MPa was requested for the thin precast elements.
Cubic and prismatic specimens were produced for compressive and flexural tests.
Figure 2.11 shows the results of strength of curing time up to 180 days [9].

26

Figure 2.11: The relationship between compressive and flexural strengths of


concrete with curing time [9]

From the graph, compressive strength of 40 MPa was easily developed at the
curing age of 28 days. The ratio of flexural strength to compressive strength of the
results obtained ranging from 0.11 to 0.16 [9]. In general, the ratio for normal
concrete ranges from 0.11 to 0.23 [7]. Hence, it can be seen that the inclusion of
fibers did not significantly improve the flexural strength of the FRSCC, and this
probably due to the low dosage of fibers employed.

Mazaheripour et al. had performed an investigation to study the effect of


polypropylene fibers on the properties of fresh and hardened lightweight SCC.
Lightweight Expanded Clay Aggregates (LECA) were used in this study to reduce
the overall weight of the SCC produced [10]. LECA are aggregates made of
expanded clay that were produced in rotary kiln at temperature of about 1200 C.
The aggregates are in the form of pellets as shown in Figure 2.12. The aggregates are
lightweight, spongy, and highly water absorbent. It is due to the presence of high
content of voids and honeycombs within the round shape aggregates [11, 12].

27

Figure 2.12: Lightweight Expanded Clay Aggregates (LECA) [12]

The other raw materials used for production of concrete were silica fume,
superplasticizer, limestone, and polypropylene fibers. The maximum size of natural
coarse aggregates used was 10 mm; while the size of fine aggregates was 4.75 mm.
The LECA were used as replacement for natural aggregates in the study.
Polypropylene fibers of 12 mm long were used. Appropriate mix design was
achieved through a series of trial mixes conducted during the study [10]. The
physical properties of aggregates and polypropylene fibers are shown in Table 2.4
and Table 2.5, respectively.

Table 2.4: Physical properties of aggregates [10]

Components

Density
(kg/m3)
Bulk Density
(kg/m3)
Absorption
(%)

Natural

Natural fine

LECA coarse

LECA fine

coarse (NC)

(NF)

(LC)

(LF)

2690

2590

53020

69020

1440

1400

38520

48530

0.7

2.6

302

302

28
Table 2.5: Physical properties of polypropylene fibers [10]

Tensile
Properties

Polypropylene

Length of
fiber (mm)

12

strength
(MPa)
350

Density

Melting

(kg/m3)

point (C)

900

160

Appearance

White color

Two mixes, i.e. G and I mix designs were selected among others to study the
impact of polypropylene fibers. The testing parameters were workability,
compressive strength, tensile strength, and flexural strength. Table 2.6 shows the mix
proportions of LECA Lightweight Self Compacting Concrete (LLSCC) with
polypropylene fibers [10].

Table 2.6: Mix proportions of LLSCC with polypropylene fibers (in kg/m3) [10]

For Fiber Reinforced LECA Lightweight Self Compacting Concrete (FR-LLSCC),


the slump flow reduced and time required to achieve 500 mm of slump flow (T50)
increased with the increasing on percentage volume of fibers. When the volume
percentages of polypropylene fibers were increased, the filling height of U-Box test
had shown decreasing trend, which indicated that passing ability of FR-LLSCC is
reduced. Therefore, inclusion of polypropylene fibers will reduce the flowing and
passing ability of fresh concrete remarkably [10]. The fibers interlock and entangle
around the aggregate particles and considerably reduce the workability [5]. Besides,
addition of fibers will also affect the performance of superplasticizer (SP) in the

29
concrete mixture. Figure 2.13 shows the comparison in the rate of slump flow over
the SP volume percentage for four different mix designs. From the figure, for GP0.0
and IP0.0 without polypropylene fibers, the steeper slope indicates that the slump
flow increases sharply with the increase of the SP percentage in the mix; while the
increasing rate is much less steep for GP0.2 and IP0.2 where 0.2 percent of fibers
were added in the mix [10].

Figure 2.13: The difference in the rate of slump flow over SP volume percentage for
LLSCC and FR-LLSCC [10]

For both design mixes G and I, the values of compressive strength of FRLLSCC were fluctuated with increasing volume percentage of fibers. Polypropylene
fibers did not have significant impact on the compressive strength of FR-LLSCCs.
The results on splitting tensile strength test and flexural strength test are shown in
Figure 2.14 and Figure 2.15, respectively.

30

Figure 2.14: Graph of tensile strength versus volume percentage of the fibers [10]

Figure 2.15: Graph of flexural strength versus volume percentage of the fibers [10]

Splitting tensile strength increased as the volume percentage of polypropylene fibers


in FR-LLSCC is increased. From the graph, the maximum increase rate of tensile
strength for the G and I design mixes are about 14 percent for volume percentage of
0.3% polypropylene fibers. The flexural strength result is shown based on the values
of modulus of rupture obtained [10]. Modulus of rupture can be defined as the
flexural tensile strength at failure, or the theoretical maximum tensile stress reached

31
in the bottom fiber of the test concrete beam [5, 6]. From the graph, the values of
modulus of rupture for both design mixes show an ascending trend with the
increasing of volume percentage of fibers. The maximum increase rate for volume
percentage of 0.3% fibers are 10.7% and 8.7% for mix G and I, respectively [10]. For
volume fractions of polypropylene fibers less than one percent, it has generally been
found that increases in tensile and flexural strengths of concrete are less than 25%. It
is due to the low modulus of elasticity of the fibers combined with less than the
critical volume fraction [13].

Workability is one of the significant aspects for Self Compacting High


Performance Concrete (SCHPC) and is determined by the SP dosage and waterbinder ratio. Therefore, the workability of Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting High
Performance Concrete (FRSCHPC) depends not only on the SP dosage and waterbinder ratio, but also on properties of fiber used. Ding et al. had carried out an
investigation on the workability of fiber cocktail reinforced self-compacting high
performance concrete. This research presents the results on the workability of monofiber and fiber cocktail or hybrid steel-polypropylene (PP) fibers reinforced SCHPC.
The fibers used can be divided into micro fibers ( < 30mm) and macro fibers (
30mm). The micro fibers are mainly used to reduce the shrinkage cracks, and the
macro fibers will be used for structural purposes. The fibers used are shown in Figure
2.16. This study focused on the workability studies on the fresh concretes with
mono-micro-fibers, mono-macro-fibers, and hybrid-macro-fibers. Table 2.7 shows
the types of specimens and properties of different fibers [15].

32

Figure 2.16: Fibers used for studies [15]

33
Table 2.7: Types of specimens and properties of fibers used [15]

Content (kg/m3)
Specimen

Fiber type

Equivalent
Length

Steel

PP

fiber

fiber

(mm)

diameter

Pieces/kg

(mm)

PFRCA1

PP fiber A

14

0.075

9 mil

PFRCA2

PP fiber A

14

0.075

9mil

PFRCC7

PP fiber C

52-55

0.4-0.8

0.16 mil

PFRCD7

PP fiber D

40

1.1

29000

PFRCE7

PP fiber E

54

0.5

SFRCC30

Steel fiber C

30

30

0.6

15000

SFRCC50

Steel fiber C

50

30

0.6

15000

SFRCF10

Steel fiber F

10

0.16

1.1 mil

SFRCF30

Steel fiber F

30

0.16

1.1 mil

30

30

CFC305

CFC307

Steel fiber C
& PP fiber D
Steel fiber C
& PP fiber D

For fresh concrete with micro fibers, the flowability test of FRSCHPC was
conducted by flow-channel test. The flow time for the 750mm long channel and the
maximum flow distance of the fresh concrete in the channel were measured. Figure
2.17 shows the flow-channel test [15].

34

Figure 2.17: Flow-channel test [15]

The experimental test was conducted right after the mixing and 40 minutes after the
mixing of concrete to evaluate the time-dependent behaviour of FRSCHPC. The
results are shown in Figure 2.18 and Figure 2.19 for different mixtures with and
without fibers, respectively. From the figure, it can be seen that conventional
concrete (OC), SFRCF10, and PFRCA1 have similar flow behaviour immediately
after the mixing of concrete; while the flowability of SFRCF30 and PFRCA2 are
reduced dramatically. There is no significant difference between flow behaviour of
both mixes tested immediately and 40 minutes after mixing. The FRSCHPC mixes
still exhibit consistent workability over certain period of time. The reduced
flowability of SFRCF30 and PFRCA2 is probably caused by the presence of higher
fiber content as compared to SFRCF10 and PFRCA1 [15].

35

Figure 2.18: Flow distance and respective flow speed for different mixtures tested
immediately after the mixing [15]

Figure 2.19: Flow distance and respective flow speed for different mixtures tested at
40 minutes after the mixing [15]

For the evaluation of workability of fresh concrete with macro fibers, slump
flow test, J-Ring test, and L-Box test were performed to investigate the workability
parameters of the FRSCHPC with macro fibers. Flow-channel test was not used
because macro fibers will cause blockage on the small diameter of flow-channel

36
outlet. Slump flow test for different mixes was done immediately (Sf0) and 45
minutes (Sf45) after mixing. The results of slump flow test are shown in Table 2.8.

Table 2.8: Slump flow of different mixes (in cm) [15]

The acceptance criteria for SCHPC should be in between 650 mm and 800 mm for
slump flow test [3]. From the table, the slump flow of mixtures PFRCC7 and
PFRCE7 are much less than allowable slump flow, therefore, those two mixtures are
not suitable to be categorized as SCHPC. Besides, balls of fibers were formed for
both the mixtures. The design mixes of PFRCD7, SFRCC30, SFRCC50, and
CFC305 exhibited good flowability for both immediately and after 45 minutes of
mixing [15].

J-Ring and L-Box tests were performed to evaluate the flowing ability and
passing ability of FRSCHPC, respectively. The difference in height of the mixtures
inside and outside the J-Ring (LJ) and the slump-flow spread (Jsf) were measured and
the result is shown in Table 2.9 [15].

Table 2.9: J-Ring test results for different mixes [15]

37
The slump flow with obstructions of J-Ring test for the mixes lie within the range of
allowable values for slump flow without obstructions, hence, it can be said that
mixes of PFRCD7, SFRCC30, SFRCC50, and CFC305 show good flowing and
passing ability [3, 15]. The mixes of PFRCC7 and PFRCE7 show neither flowing
ability nor passing ability due to the relatively smaller slump flow diameter and
larger difference in height. For L-Box test, the maximum flow distance (Lf), the
elevation difference before and after opening the sliding shutter (LS), the difference
in height inside and outside the steel bars (LL), and the overflow height H2 and H1
were measured. The results for different mixes are listed in Table 2.10 [15].

Table 2.10: L-Box test results [15]

It can be seen that the values of Lf, LS, and H2/H1 of mixtures PFRCC7 and
PFRCE7 are much lower than those of other mixtures; but the LL values of both
mixtures are higher than that of other mixtures. Figure 2.20 shows the congested
conditions near the steel bars for two design mixes [15].

38

Figure 2.20: PFRCC7 mix with heavy congestion (left) CFC305 mix with light
congestion (right) [15]

The ratio of H2 to H1 is termed as blocking ratio, the nearer the blocking ratio to
unity, the better the flow of concrete. Typical range of values for a concrete to be
classified as SCHPC is between 0.8 and 1.0 [3]. The blocking ratio of both PFRCC7
and PFRCE7 mixtures are 0.1 only, which is much lower than the minimum
allowable ratio. From the above observations, mixtures of PFRCC7 and PFRCE7 are
not suitable to be categorized as SCHPC. The hybrid-fibers reinforced SCHPC can
perform as well as those mono-fibers reinforced and plain SCHPC. Generally, the
good workability of the fresh FRSCHPC with mono or hybrid fibers can be described
by the smaller fiber length compared to the bar spacing and properties of fiber, such
as small frictional coefficient of fiber surface. Based on the workability results, the
mechanical properties and failure patterns of the FRSCHPC will be studied in the
next phase.

Ding et al. performed an investigation on strength and flexural toughness of


fiber cocktail reinforced self-compacting high performance concrete. Same fibers
were used as previous study, i.e. steel and polypropylene fibers [15, 16]. This
research presents the results of influences of fibers on the compressive strength,
flexural toughness, and failure patterns of FRSCHPC with different mono-fibers and
fiber cocktails. The aim of this study was to investigate load-carrying capacity of

39
FRSCHPC after the peak-load, hence only macro fibers were used [16]. The same
design mixtures from previous study were used [15]. Table 2.11 shows the
compressive strengths for different mixtures for three concrete ages. From the table,
inclusion of fibers did not significantly enhance the compressive strength of
FRSCHPC. All the concrete can be categorized as high strength FRSCHPC as the
compressive strengths exceeded 70 N/mm2 after 28 days [16].

Table 2.11: Compressive strength (N/mm2) for different mixtures [16]

Curing
age

OC

PFRCC7

PFRCD7

PFRCE7

SFRCC30

SFRCC50

CFC305

30

29.5

40

38.4

32.54

28.35

30.65

50

50.22

52.11

54.78

64.86

56.54

59.1

28

77

70

76

72.2

75.2

81.2

74.27

(days)

The flexural properties were evaluated through flexural beam and flexural
panel tests. Figure 2.21 shows the load-deflection curves of four different mixtures at
the age of 28 days [16].

40

Figure 2.21: Load-deflection curves of FRSCHPC beams at the age of 28 days [16]

The post-crack behaviour exhibited by the beam of SFRCC30 was better than those
of PFRCC7, PFRCD7, and PFRCE7 over the entire deflection range [16]. In the
post-cracking zone, the fibers may increase the strength of the concrete by bridging
and transferring the loads across the cracks. Hence, steel fibers of higher elastic
modulus and tensile strength will be more advantageous as compared to
polypropylene fibers. The typical properties of both fibers are shown in Table 2.12
[7].

Table 2.12: Typical properties of fibers

Fiber

Modulus of elasticity (GPa)

Tensile strength (GPa)

Steel

200

0.5 2.0

Polypropylene

5 - 77

0.15 0.75

However, the load bearing capacity of SFRCC30 decreased with the rate faster than
PFRCC7, PFRCD7, and PFRCE7 after deflection of 1.5mm. The polypropylene

41
fibers (40 mm 55 mm) used was longer than steel fibers (30 mm); therefore, the
shorter steel fibers were pulled out first with the increasing of beam deflection [16].
Beam of PFRCD7 shows relatively lower first-crack strength, but with good
workability. Thus, the fiber combination of steel fiber C and polypropylene fiber D
will probably produce SCHPC with good workability and high post-crack behaviour
[15, 16]. PFRCC7 and PFRCE7 have not been taken into account for further
investigation because both mixtures did not achieve desired workability [15]. The
results show that the mean values of the flexural strength of PFRCD7, SFRCC30,
SFRCC50, and CFC305 were 8.12 N/mm2, 7.95 N/mm2, 6.96 N/mm2, and 7.41
N/mm2, respectively after 28 days. The flexural strength achieved by CFC305 shows
that the hybridization of fibers did not negatively influence the flexural properties of
concrete. Besides, the observation shows that the flexural failure pattern of the beams
changed from only one main crack for SFRCC30 into multiple crack pattern of
CFC305 as shown in Figure 2.22. This indicates that the tensile stress distributed
more uniformly in the beam with hybrid fibers. The longer polypropylene fibers will
continue to transmit the tensile stresses across the cracks after the shorter steel fibers
are pulled out. Besides, due to the multiple crack formation, the maximum crack
width decreased [16].

Figure 2.22: Multiple crack pattern of CFC305 [16]

42
Flexural panel test was conducted primarily to observe the failure patterns of
the fibers. Typical failure mode of hybrid fiber reinforced panel is shown in Figure
2.23.

Figure 2.23: Failure mode of panels of CFC307 [16]

It has been observed that polypropylene fibers were partly broken down and partly
pulled out as most of the steel fibers were pulled out. The fiber hybridization can
better prevent the further pulling out of the steel fibers from the concrete matrix after
cracking occurred. The results of this study had concluded that the fiber cocktail will
provide positive hybrid and fiber-reinforced effect for SCHPC [16].

Fiber inclusion will reduce the workability of the concrete [5, 17]. For on-site
applications, high fluidity of the concrete is a prime requirement, especially in the
presence of slender elements and dense reinforcements. Therefore, passing ability
and filling ability are the important essential properties to be considered [18]. The
combination of FRC and SCC together will probably produce FRSCC with enhanced
properties in both fresh and hardened states. Sahmaran et al. had conducted a study
on workability of FRSCC with two cylindrical types of steel fibers. The fibers used
were hooked ends (Dramix ZP 305) and straight type (Dramix OL 6/16). The length
and aspect ratio of the ZP 305 was 30 mm and 55; while for OL 6/16 was 6 mm and

43
37.5, respectively. The hooked-end fibers are shown in Figure 2.24. In this study,
steel fibers were added into concrete mix to produce mono-fiber and hybrid-fiber
reinforced SCC. The other raw materials used were normal Portland cement, crushed
limestone and sand, limestone powder, and polycarboxylic ether type superplasticizer.
The water-cement ratio used was 0.40 for all the mixtures [17].

Figure 2.24: Hooked-end steel fibers [8]

Workability, compressive strength, split tensile strength, and ultrasonic pulse


velocity (UPV) tests were performed to investigate the fresh and hardened properties
of concrete. The testing methods on workability aspect were given in EFNARC
guideline, which included slump flow test, J-Ring test, and V-funnel test [3, 4, 17].
The test apparatus were shown in Figure 2.25 to Figure 2.27.

Figure 2.25: Slump flow test [3]

44

Figure 2.26: J-Ring test [17]

Figure 2.27: V-funnel test [17]

The results indicated that as the volume fraction of OL 6/16 fibers increased,
the slump flow (T500) and V-funnel time had decreased, which means that the filling
ability of the concrete was improved. This is probably due to the brass coating and
smooth surface of the straight fibers, which reduce the energy loss during movement
of particles [17]. Steel fibers are prone to clumping or balling. Hooked-end fiber is a
type of deformed fiber and tends to cluster together during mixing [5, 7]. Therefore,
the ZP 305 fibers with hooked ends and larger dimensions will lead to blockage of
particles during flow. However, slump flow (D) and J-Ring height did not show any

45
significant effect due to the fiber content [17]. Longer fibers give better
reinforcement but will reduce the workability of the concrete [1]. Results of tests on
fresh concrete shown the slump flow and J-Ring height were within the permissible
range; while the V-funnel time had exceeded the upper limit of the range suggested
by EFNARC. However, the EFNARC specifications are designated for plain SCC
only; therefore the FRSCC produced can also be categorized as SCC [17].

For the compressive strength, an increasing trend was observed for the age of
56 days as the OL 6/16 content was increased in all mixes. The concrete with higher
content of hooked-end fibers exhibited higher splitting tensile strength. The hooked
ends of the fibers have improved the matrix-fiber bond and provide better
reinforcement. Mixture with fibers being proportioned equally possessed the highest
splitting tensile strength among all the mixtures. Result from UPV test had shown
that no obvious relation existed between the pulse velocity and the amount of fibers.
In the study, effect of fiber hybridization on FRSCC can be observed as the mix
containing equal amounts of ZP 305 and OL 6/16 fibers gave the highest splitting
tensile strength [17].

46

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1

Introduction

This chapter discusses on the source of materials used, procedures of


preparation of materials, preparation of specimens, and the laboratory tests involved
in this study. This study was conducted to investigate the properties of Self
Compacting Concrete (SCC) and Glass Fiber Reinforced Self Compacting Concrete
(GFRSCC). The concrete samples produced were normal concrete (NC), plain SCC,
and GFRSCC with different fiber percentages. Laboratory testing was carried out on
fresh and hardened concrete to investigate the physical and mechanical properties of
the concrete specimens. The hardened concrete tests were conducted for concrete
samples at different curing age, which were 3 days, 7 days, 14 days, and 28 days.
Comparisons were made among the properties of conventional concrete, SCC, and
GFRSCC. Observation and visual inspection were conducted to evaluate the fiber
conditions and failure mode of the concrete specimens. Small-scale slabs were cast to
assess the flexural strength and cracking patterns of the slabs. Generally, the
methodology flow chart is illustrated in Figure 3.1.

47

Start
Preparation of Raw Materials
Samples Preparation
Testing on Fresh Properties
Samples Curing
Testing on Hardened Properties
Results and Data Analysis
Conclusion and Recommendations

End

Figure 3.1: Methodology flow chart

3.2

Preparation of Raw Materials

The type of materials used in this study were cement, coarse aggregate, fine
aggregate, superplasticizer, alkaline-resistance glass fiber, water, steel bars, and
plywood. The AR-glass fiber was obtained from the manufacturer. The other
materials were available in Structure and Material Laboratory in the Faculty of Civil
Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru.

48
3.2.1 Cement

There is wide variety of cements that are used for construction purposes.
Portland cement is the most common cement used in construction today. The raw
materials required for the manufacture of Portland cement are calcareous materials,
such as limestone or chalk, and argillaceous materials such as shale or clay. There
are many types of cements such as Ordinary Portland Cement, Blended Cement,
Rapid Hardening Portland Cement, Sulfate Resisting Portland Cement, Slag Cement
and many more. The chemical compositions of the cements are different and will
exhibit different properties depending on their chemical compositions. For this study,
the cement used was Holcim brand Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) and conformed
to BS EN 197-1: 2000 - Compositions, Specifications and Conformity Criteria for
Common Cements [19]. Holcim is currently the second largest cement manufacturer
in the world, just behind Lafarge. Figure 3.2 shows the Holcim cement used in this
study.

Figure 3.2: Holcim Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC)

49
3.2.2 Aggregate

Both fine and coarse aggregates were used in the concrete mix. The fine and
coarse aggregates were sand and crushed granite, respectively. The use of smaller
coarse aggregates will produce concrete with better workability as compared to
concrete with larger aggregates. Therefore, the size of crushed aggregates used was
limited to 10 mm. The fine and coarse aggregates were placed under open air for 24
hours to achieve air dry condition. Air dry aggregate is defined as aggregate with
small amount of moisture being removed from the surface, but internal pores are
partially filled with moisture. Sieve analysis was carried out on the sand and crushed
aggregates to determine the grading of aggregates. The sieve apparatus used was in
accordance to BS 410: 1986 - Specification for Test Sieves [20]. The standard
procedure for sieve test was stated in BS EN 933-1: 1997 Determination of Particle
Size Distribution: Sieving Method [21]. Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4 show the sand and
10 mm size coarse aggregate, respectively.

Figure 3.3: Sand as fine aggregate

50

Figure 3.4: 10 mm size coarse aggregate

3.2.3 Superplasticizer

Superplasticizer is a type of high-range water reducing admixture and is an


essential element for production of SCC. Superplasticizer consists of very large
molecules and dissolves in water to produce negatively charged ions or anions. The
anions will be adsorbed on the surfaces of the cement particles and causing them to
become negatively charged. Repulsion will occur and water trapped within the
cement flocs is released. The released water will contribute to proper hydration of
cement and workability of the concrete [5, 6].

Superplasticizer was added to produce SCC and GFRSCC. In this study, the
purpose of addition of superplasticizer is to increase the workability of concrete at a
given water-cement ratio. The superplasticizer used was available in the laboratory
and in the form of dark-brown liquid. The brand of superplasticizer used was
Rheobuild 1100. Figure 3.5 shows the superplasticizer used to produce self
compacting concrete.

51

Figure 3.5: Superplasticizer

3.2.4 Water

Water is an important element of concrete mix as it will leads to proper


cement hydration process and act as a lubricant to produce workable concrete.
Hydration process is essential to produce dense and durable concrete; while workable
concrete will reduce the difficulty in concrete compaction and placement. Mixing
water with impurities will give negative influence on the properties of concrete
produced. The quality of mixing water was based on BS EN 1008: 2002 Mixing
Water for Concrete [22]. In this study, the mixing water was obtained from the tap
water in laboratory as it was easily available and the most trusted source for
concreting purpose. The fresh tap water was supplied by Syarikat Air Johor (SAJ).

52
3.2.5 Glass Fiber

Fiber was added into plain SCC mix to produce GFRSCC mix. The fiber used
was AR-glass fiber and can be categorized as straight-type flexible fiber. The fiber
was obtained from the manufacturer in the roving form and then cut into short fiber
of length 12 mm. The glass fiber has diameter of 15 m and density of 2400 kg/m3.
Figure 3.6 shows the glass fiber of length 12 mm.

Figure 3.6: 12 mm length AR-glass fiber

3.2.6 Steel Bars

The diameter of steel bars used were 5 mm and 12 mm. Steel bars with
diameter 5 mm was used as reinforcement for reinforced concrete slabs; while steel
bars of diameter 12 mm was used in L-Box test apparatus. Three steel bars with
specific spacing were installed in front of the outlet of vertical section of the L-box.
The steel bars will act as obstruction for the flow of concrete when the sliding gate is
opened.

53
3.2.7 Plywood

Plywood was used to produce the apparatus for slump flow and L-Box tests.
Plywood formworks were required for casting of reinforced concrete slabs. The
plywood available in laboratory was 12 mm in thickness. The dimension of plywood
can be tailor-made by wood cutter in the laboratory.

3.3

Mix Design Method

The standard DOE mix design method was used to produce the mix
proportions for all the concrete specimens. Control concrete (NC) is the concrete
comprised of cement, water, fine and coarse aggregates; while plain SCC was
produced with addition of superplasticizer. Addition of the glass fiber to the plain
SCC mix will produce GFRSCC mix.

3.3.1 Mix Proportion

The designed characteristic strength was 40 MPa at 28 days for mix


proportions of all the concrete mixes. Water-cement ratio of 0.40 was used based on
the previous study. The fine and coarse aggregates used were sand and 10 mm
crushed aggregate, respectively. Sieve analysis was conducted to determine the
grading of the aggregates used for this study. From the results, the sand was
categorized as medium class, and the grading of crushed aggregate was 4 mm to 15
mm.

54
Superplasticizer was added to the conventional concrete mix to produce plain
SCC and GFRSCC mixes. The suitable dosage of superplasticizer was determined
from trial mix and must fulfill the requirements specified by EFNARC. Slump flow
test was applied to determine the initial dosage of superplasticizer required for the
self compacting concrete mixes. EFNARC guidelines have specified that the spread
diameter for self compacting concrete lies between 550 mm and 800 mm; while time
to achieve 500 mm spread diameter lies between 2 sec to 5 sec [3, 4]. Table 3.1
shows the initial dosage of superplasticizer for plain SCC and GFRSCC mixes. The
dosage is measured in percentage by mass of cement.

Table 3.1: Initial dosage of superplasticizer for plain SCC and GFRSCC mixes

Concrete

Plain SCC

0.5%GFRSCC

1.0%GFRSCC

1.5%GFRSCC

1.44

2.24

2.72

5.41

GFRSCC was produced by addition of AR-glass fiber into plain SCC mix.
The fiber length used was 12 mm. Three volume percentages of fiber were utilized
for this study, i.e. 0.5%, 1.0%, and 1.5% by volume. Table 3.2 shows the mix
proportions for control concrete (NC), plain SCC, and GFRSCC mixes. The
procedure of the concrete mix design method is shown in APPENDIX A. The
calculation of the fiber content required is shown in APPENDIX B. For the casting
of GFRSCC slab, optimum fiber dosage was determined from the 7-day flexural
strength of concrete prisms. Additional of 10 % to 30 % of extra volume was
included in the designed mix proportion to take into account for the wastage.

55
Table 3.2: Mix proportions for control concrete, SCC, and GFRSCC mixes (per m3)

Quantities

Control concrete

Plain SCC

GFRSCC

Cement (kg)

550

550

550

Water (kg)

230

230

230

Coarse aggregate (kg)

860

860

860

Fine aggregate (kg)

740

740

740
12.32 (0.5%)

Superplasticizer (L)

7.92

14.96 (1.0%)
29.76 (1.5%)
13.0 (0.5%)

Glass fiber (kg)

26.0 (1.0%)
39.0 (1.5%)

Remark: The percentage stated in bracket indicates the fiber content in concrete

3.4

Preparation of Mould and Formwork

The concrete specimens were prepared in the form of cube, prism, cylinder
and slab. The standard steel moulds used were cube moulds of 100 x 100 x 100 mm,
cylinder moulds of 200 x 100 mm (height x diameter), and prism moulds of 100 x
100 x 500 mm. Plywood formworks of size 1000 x 500 x 100 mm (length x breadth
x thickness) were used for casting of reinforced concrete slabs. The dimension of
plywood formwork and reinforcement of concrete slab are shown in Figure 3.7 and
Figure 3.8. The moulds and formworks were checked for cleanliness and proper
assembling of joints. The interior surfaces of the moulds and formworks were coated
with a layer of oil before placing the fresh concrete.

56

Figure 3.7: Dimension and arrangement of reinforcement of concrete slab

Figure 3.8: Plywood formwork and steel reinforcement of concrete slab (plastic
spacers were used to form concrete cover of thickness 25 mm)

57
3.5

Mixing of Concrete

Weighing machine was used to weigh the required materials before mixing of
concrete. All the concrete specimens were mixed by mechanical pan mixer; while the
concrete slabs were mixed by high capacity mechanical pan mixer. Figure 3.9 to
Figure 3.11 show the weighing machine, mechanical pan mixer, and high capacity
pan mixer, respectively.

Figure 3.9: Weighing machine

58

Figure 3.10: Mechanical pan mixer

Figure 3.11: High capacity mechanical pan mixer

59
For mixing of control concrete, the cement, fine and coarse aggregates were
first mixed to obtain dry homogenous mix. Then, the mixing water was added to the
mix gradually. For mixing of plain SCC, the cement, fine and coarse aggregates were
first mixed. Then, 70 % of mixing water was poured into the mixer to be mixed for 2
minutes. Lastly, the rest of the mixing water with superplasticizer was added to the
mixer gradually. For GFRSCC, glass fibers were added into the mixer at the first
stage to obtain dry homogeneous mix. The rest of the mixing procedure was the same
as mixing of plain SCC.

3.6

Preparation of Samples

For all concrete types, three concrete cubes, cylinders, and prisms each were
prepared for each curing age of 3 days, 7 days, and 28 days. The number of samples
prepared is shown in Table 3.3. Optimum fiber dosage of 1.0% by volume of
concrete was added for casting of GFRSCC slab. The three reinforced concrete slabs
prepared for the study are as follows:

i) Control reinforced concrete slab;


ii) Reinforced plain SCC slab;
iii) Reinforced GFRSCC slab with glass fibers.

60
Table 3.3: The number of samples prepared

Sample identification

Cube

Cylinder

Prism

Slab

NC

SCC

0.5%GFRSCC

1.0%GFRSCC

1.5%GFRSCC

The fresh SCC and GFRSCC mixes were placed into the steel mould without
any compaction; while the fresh control concrete (NC) mix was placed into the
mould in three layers, with compaction for each layer done by vibrating table.
Vibration was stopped once bubbling effect is observed on the concrete surface.
After the top layer has been compacted, trowel was used to smooth and level the
concrete surface. The specimens were left to harden for 24 hours. After 24 hours, the
specimens were demoulded and submerged in a curing tank filled with water for wet
curing. The curing process was made at 3, 7, and 28 days. Figure 3.12 shows the
curing tank in the laboratory.

Figure 3.12: Curing tank

61
For concrete slabs, fresh SCC and GFRSCC mixes were placed into the
plywood formwork without compaction; while control concrete (NC) mix was
compacted by poker vibrator until bubbling effect is observed on the concrete surface.
Trowel was used to smooth and level the top concrete surface. Figure 3.13 shows the
different casting condition of control concrete and self compacting concrete slabs.
After seven days, the slabs were demoulded and subjected to curing of 28 days. The
curing of concrete slabs was done by covering the slabs with wet gunny sacks. The
gunny sacks were kept wet by spraying water on it from time to time to maintain the
moist condition for effective curing process. Figure 3.14 shows the wet gunny sacks
used for the curing process of concrete slabs.

Figure 3.13: Compaction of NC mix with poker vibrator (left); Free flow of self
compacting concrete mix along a channel without compaction (right)

62

Figure 3.14: The wet gunny sacks used for curing process

3.7

Laboratory Testing of Fresh Concrete

The testing methods of fresh concrete properties include slump test, slump
flow test, L-Box test, and sieve segregation resistance test. The assessment of fresh
concrete is in the workability aspect of fresh concrete mix.

3.7.1 Slump Test and Slump Flow Test

Slump test was conducted on the fresh conventional concrete (NC) mix. The
apparatus required and testing procedures were stated in BS EN 12350-2: 2009
Slump Test. The mould is in the form of a hollow frustum of a cone with base

63
diameter of 200 mm, top diameter of 100 mm, and cone height of 300 mm. The
compacting rod is of circular cross-section and having a diameter of 16 mm, with
rounded ends. The mould was placed on a horizontal base plate. Then, the mould was
filled with a layer of concrete mix in approximately one-third of the height of mould
and subjected to compaction. Compaction was made by striking 25 strokes using the
tamping rod. The strokes were applied uniformly over the cross-section of each layer
to achieve proper and uniform compaction. The mould was filled with three layers of
concrete mix. The surface of the concrete was leveled after the compaction was done
for the top layer. The mould was raised up slowly in vertical motion with no lateral
or torsional motion being applied to the concrete. After the removal of the mould,
the slump was measured and recorded [23]. Figure 3.15 and Figure 3.16 show the
slump test apparatus and measurement, respectively.

Figure 3.15: Slump test apparatus

64

Figure 3.16: Slump measurement [23]

Slump flow test was conducted for fresh SCC and GFRSCC mixes. The
slump cone used is the same as those of slump test. The base plate used has to be at
least 900 mm square, marked with a circle for location of the slump cone and
concentric circle of 500 mm diameter [4]. Figure 3.17 shows the slump flow
apparatus in laboratory. The base plate was made from plywood and of 1000 mm
square.

Figure 3.17: Slump flow apparatus in laboratory

65
The apparatus required and testing procedures for the slump flow test are in
accordance with the Specification and Guidelines for Self Compacting Concrete
published by EFNARC and European Guidelines for Self Compacting Concrete [3,
4]. The mould was placed on the base plate on the circle marking the location of the
slump cone. The mould was filled with concrete mix in one placing without any
compaction. The surface of the concrete was levelled by trowel. The mould was then
raised vertically and the concrete mix was allowed to flow out freely. The stopwatch
was started simultaneously and time taken for the concrete to achieve the 500 mm
diameter spread, T500 will be recorded [3, 4]. The final diameter of the concrete
spread was measured in two perpendicular directions as shown in Figure 3.18 [17].
The average diameter, D of the concrete spread was then determined. The concrete
spread was then observed for segregation. The cement paste may segregate from the
coarse aggregate and form a ring of paste at the boundary of concrete spread.
Segregated coarse aggregate may remain in the centre of the concrete spread if
severe segregation occurs.

Figure 3.18: Measurement of diameter of slump flow [17]

66
3.7.2 L-Box Test

L-Box test was performed on the fresh SCC and GFRSCC mixes. The
apparatus and testing procedures of L-Box test are stated in Specification and
Guidelines for Self Compacting Concrete published by EFNARC [3, 4]. The L-box
was made by using plywood and reinforcing bars as the obstructions for the concrete
flow. Figure 3.19 shows the dimension of L-box. The L-box made from plywood is
shown in Figure 3.20.

Figure 3.19: Dimension of L-box [3]

67

Figure 3.20: L-box made from plywood

The L-box was placed on firm ground and ensured that the sliding gate can be
opened and closed freely. The vertical section of the L-box was filled with fresh
concrete mix and allowed it to stand for 1 minute. Then, the sliding gate was lifted
and concrete was allowed to flow out into the horizontal section. The stopwatch will
be started simultaneously. When the concrete stops flowing, the vertical distances H1
and H2 were measured. H1 is the vertical distance from the base to the surface of
concrete at the position of reinforcing bars; while H2 is the vertical distance from
base to concrete surface at the end of the channel. The whole test was performed
within 5 minutes as stated by the guideline. The ratio of H2/H1, the blocking ratio,
was determined [3].

3.7.3 Sieve Segregation Resistance Test

Sieve segregation resistance test or GTM screen stability test was conducted
on fresh plain SCC and GFRSCC mixes. This test was used to assess the segregation

68
resistance of fresh concrete mix. The apparatus required were perforated sieve with 5
mm square apertures and frame diameter of 300 mm and sieve pan as shown in
Figure 3.21. The apparatus and procedures for the test are based on the EFNARC and
European Guidelines for Self Compacting Concrete. Ten litre of concrete sample was
placed into a container and covered with lid to prevent evaporation. The container
was allowed to stand for 15 minutes. The mass of empty sieve pan was determined.
After 15 minutes, the top 2 litre or approximately 4.8 kg of the concrete sample was
poured into the 5 mm sieve and covered with lid. The concrete sample was poured
onto the sieve from a height of 500 mm above in smooth continuous movement. The
mortar or paste of the sample was allowed to flow through the sieve into the sieve
pan for 2 minutes. Actual mass of concrete sample poured, Ma was determined. The
lid and sieve were removed after 2 minutes. The mass of sieve pan filled with mortar
was determined. Mass of mortar passing sieve, Mb was calculated by subtracting the
empty pan mass from the filled pan mass. The passing ability or segregation ratio can
be calculated using Equation 3.1 given as [3, 4]:
Segregation ratio = (Mb / Ma) x 100

(Eqn. 3.1)

where,
Mb

is the mass of cement paste or mortar passing the sieve, in kg;

Ma

is the mass of concrete sample poured on the sieve, in kg.

Figure 3.21: Sieve pan and 5 mm sieve for sieve segregation resistance test

69
3.8

Laboratory Testing of Hardened Concrete

The testing methods of hardened concrete properties include density test,


compressive strength test, tensile splitting strength test, and flexural strength test.
The assessment of hardened concrete is to evaluate the mechanical properties of
concrete.

3.8.1 Density

Density of concrete was determined for all the concrete cubes after achieving
the specific curing age. The density test is in accordance with BS EN 12390-7: 2009
Density of Hardened Concrete [24]. The concrete cube was weighed using
weighing machine and the mass was recorded in unit kilogram. Density of hardened
concrete can be determined by dividing the mass with the volume of the concrete
cube.

3.8.2 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV) Test

Ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test was carried out on the concrete cubes,
cylinders, and prisms. UPV test was used to measure the time taken for an ultrasonic
pulse to travel from the transmitting transducer to the receiving transducer, passing
through the concrete specimen. The apparatus and testing methods are in accordance
to BS 1881-203: 1986 Recommendations for Measurement of Velocity of
Ultrasonic Pulses in Concrete [25].

70
The test was carried out at both opposite sides of the concrete cubes and
cylinders. While for concrete prisms, the test was conducted on both ends of the
specimens. The test was conducted at three positions for cubes and prisms, i.e.
bottom, centre, and top on the sides. For concrete cylinders, the test was performed at
the centre of the flat surfaces. Before conducting the test, both the surfaces of
transducers were coated with grease. Direct transmission method was used in this test
as shown in Figure 3.22. Figure 3.33 shows the equipment for UPV test. The time
taken by the pulse to travel along the concrete specimen was recorded. The velocity
of pulse travelling through the specimen can be determined by dividing the time
taken and length of the specimen.

Figure 3.22: Direct transmission method [25]

Figure 3.23: UPV test equipment

71
3.8.3 Compressive Strength Test

The testing of compressive strength of hardened concrete is in accordance to


the BS EN 12390-3: 2009 - Compressive Strength of Test Specimens [26]. The
compressive strength test was done using compression test machine, ADR 2000. The
test specimen was concrete cube of dimension 100 x 100 x 100 mm. The surfaces of
testing machine and concrete cubes were cleaned to remove any loose grit or other
extraneous materials. The excess moisture on the surface of the specimen was wiped
before placing in the machine. Then, the concrete cube was positioned in the
compression test machine so that the load applied is perpendicularly to the direction
of casting [26]. Constant loading rate of 3.0 kN/s was applied to the sample. The
maximum load and compressive strength shown by the machine was recorded. The
compression test machine, ADR 2000 is shown in Figure 3.24. The compressive
strength is given by Equation 3.2 [26]:

(Eqn. 3.2)
where,

is the compressive strength, in MPa;

is the maximum load at failure, in N;

Ac

is the cross-sectional area of the specimen which the compressive


force acts, in mm2.

72

Figure 3.24: Compression test machine, ADR 2000

3.8.4 Tensile Splitting Strength Test

Tensile splitting strength test was carried out for all the concrete cylinders
after achieving certain curing age. The dimension of concrete cylinder prepared was
200 x 100 mm. The apparatus and testing procedures are in accordance with the BS
EN 12390-6: 2009 Tensile Splitting Strength of Test Specimens [27]. The testing
machine for tensile splitting tensile strength was the same as compressive strength
test. Excess moisture on the surface of the specimen was wiped before placing in the
testing machine. The surface of specimen should be free from any loose grit or other
extraneous materials. The test specimen was placed centrally in the testing machine.
The upper platen and lower platen has to be parallel during loading. Constant loading
rate of 0.94 kN/s was applied to the specimen and the maximum load shown by the
machine was recorded. The tensile splitting strength is given by Equation 3.3 [27]:

73

(Eqn. 3.3)
where:
!

ct

is the tensile splitting strength, in MPa;

is the maximum load, in N;

is the length of the line of contact of the specimen, in mm;

is the designate cross-sectional diameter, in mm.

3.8.5 Flexural Strength Test of Concrete Prisms

Flexural strength test was conducted on the concrete prisms using flexural
strength testing machine as shown in Figure 3.25. The testing procedures are stated
in BS EN 12390-5: 2009 Flexural Strength of Test Specimens [28]. The dimension
of the prism is 100 x 100 x 500 mm. The surfaces of the specimen and testing
machine were cleaned to remove excess moisture and impurities. The concrete prism
was placed correctly on the testing machine with the direction of loading
perpendicular to the direction of casting of the specimen. Constant loading rate of 0.5
kN/s was applied and maximum load shown by the machine was recorded. Figure
3.26 shows the detail of prism under four-point loading test. The flexural strength is
given by Equation 3.4 [28]:

(Eqn. 3.4)
where:
!

cf

is the flexural strength, in MPa;

is the maximum load, in N;

74
I

is the distance between the supporting rollers, in mm;

d1

is the width of the specimen, in mm;

d2

is the height of the specimen, in mm.

Figure 3.25: Flexural strength testing machine

Figure 3.26: Detail of prism under four-point loading test (front view)

75
The Equation 3.4 is applicable to the prism at which the fracture occurs
between the two interior loading points. If the fracture occurs outside the load points
by not more than 5.0 percent of the span length, the flexural strength is given by the
Equation 3.5 [6, 7]:

cf =

3

(Eqn. 3.5)

1 22

where:
!

cf

is the flexural strength, in MPa;

is the maximum load, in N;

is the average distance between the point of fracture and the


nearest support, in mm;

d1

is the width of the specimen, in mm;

d2

is the height of the specimen, in mm.

3.8.6 Flexural Strength Test of Small-scale Slabs

Three small-scale reinforced concrete slabs, i.e. NC, plain SCC, and
1.0%GFRSCC slabs were tested to investigate the structural performances and
cracking patterns of the slabs. A smooth and dry surface of concrete slab was
prepared by patching cement paste into the voids on the surface. White paint was
applied to the concrete surface so that the cracks developed can be easily observed
during the flexural test. Demec discs were installed on the concrete surface using
epoxy adhesive. The purpose of installation of demec discs is to determine the
concrete strain during testing. The horizontal length between two demec discs was
150 mm. The location and shifting of neutral axis can be investigated through the
result. Figure 3.27 shows the arrangement of demec discs on the concrete surface.

76
The concrete strain was determined using mechanical extensometer as shown in
Figure 3.28.

Demec
disc

Figure 3.27: Arrangement of demec discs on concrete surface

Figure 3.28: Mechanical extensometer

The equipments required for the flexural strength test were hydraulic jack,
load cell, data logger, and Linear Variable Differential Transducer (LVDT).

77
Reinforced concrete slab of dimension 1000 x 500 x 100 mm was placed on two
roller supports. Two other rollers were placed on top of slab with a distance of 200
mm at the centre of slab and spreader was placed on the two rollers. The rollers were
acted as the point loads. Load cell was positioned at the centre of spreader. Load cell
and LVDT were used to measure the load applied and deflection, respectively. Three
LVDTs were positioned at the bottom of mid-span and loading points of concrete
slab. All the components for data recording were connected to a data logger. The
data logger available in laboratory is shown in Figure 3.29. Hydraulic jack was used
to apply appropriate loading to the slab. Loading was applied with increment of 0.5
kN or 1.0 kN until failure occurred. Figure 3.30 shows the setup of small-scale slab
flexural strength test. Figure 3.31 shows the detail of slab under four-point loading
test. The cracking pattern on the slab was observed and recorded.

Figure 3.29: Data logger

78

Load cell
Spreader

LVDT

Figure 3.30: Setup of small-scale slab flexural strength test

Figure 3.31: Detail of slab under four-point loading test (front view)

79

CHAPTER 4

RESULT AND ANALYSIS

4.1

Introduction

This chapter presents the analysis and discussions of the results obtained from
the laboratory work. Sieve test was carried out on fine and coarse aggregates to
determine the grading. The laboratory tests conducted for fresh concrete were slump
test, slump flow test, L-box test, and sieve segregation resistance test; while tests for
hardened concrete included density test, ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test,
compressive strength test, splitting tensile strength test, flexural strength test, and
small-scale slab flexural test. The concrete specimens tested included control
concrete, plain SCC, and GFRSCC with three different fiber contents. Analysis on
the fresh and hardened properties of concrete will be presented in the following
topics. Observation on concrete failure mode and distribution of voids within the
concrete were discussed.

80
4.2

Analysis and Discussions of Results

The analysis and discussions made will be shown in tables, graphs and
figures for better and clearer understanding.

4.2.1 Sieve Analysis

Sieve analysis was performed on the fine and coarse aggregate to determine
the grading. The grading for fine and coarse aggregates used is in accordance to BS
882:1992 Specification for Aggregates from Natural Sources for Concrete [29].
The result shows that the percentage of fine aggregate passing 600 m sieves is
40.4 %. The percentage passing of fine aggregate for each sieve size falls in the
range of limit for medium grading. Hence, the fine aggregate used is categorised as
medium grade sand. The percentage passing of coarse aggregate for each sieve size
falls in the range of limit as specified by the standard. The coarse aggregate used is
classified within the grading of 4 mm to 15 mm. Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 show the
sieve analysis results for fine and coarse aggregates, respectively. Figure 4.1 presents
the graph of sieve analysis for both aggregates.

81
Table 4.1: Sieve analysis of fine aggregate

Retained

Passing

Percentage

Grading limit

weight (g)

weight (g)

passing (%)

in BS

5.00 mm

500

100

2.36 mm

26

474

95

65 100

1.18 mm

122

352

70

45 100

600 m

150

202

40

25 80

300 m

113

89

18

5 48

150 m

69

20

Pan

20

Sieve size

Table 4.2: Sieve analysis of coarse aggregate

Sieve size

Retained

Passing

Percentage

Grading limit

(mm)

weight (g)

weight (g)

passing (%)

in BS

28.0

2495

100

19.0

2490

100

100

13.2

35

2455

98

90 100

9.5

415

2040

82

50 85

4.0

1910

130

0 10

2.8

40

90

Pan

90

82

Figure 4.1: Sieve analysis graph of fine and coarse aggregates

4.2.2 Workability

Different type of workability tests were carried out for fresh control concrete
and self compacting concrete mixes. Slump test was performed on fresh control
concrete (NC) mix. The slump value of control concrete mix was 20 mm, indicating
a dry concrete mix with water-cement ratio of 0.40. Figure 4.2 shows the slump test
of control concrete mix.

83

Figure 4.2: Slump test for control concrete (NC) mix

Self compacting concrete was produced by adding suitable dosage of


superplasticizer into control concrete mix. Portland cement will have a tendency to
flocculate in wet concrete. It is due to the electrostatic attraction forces of the
adjacent cement particles that carrying opposing charges. This flocculation entraps
considerable amount of water, thus leaving less water available for workability of the
mix [5, 7, 30]. The main action of the long molecules in superplasticizer is to wrap
themselves around the cement particles and induce highly negative charge on the
surface. Inter-particle electrostatic repulsion leads to deflocculation and dispersion of
cement particles. Therefore more water will be available to improve the workability
of the concrete mix [5 8, 30].

The dosage of superplasticizer required for plain SCC and GFRSCC was
determined through trial mix of concrete. The workability of concrete mix added
with glass fiber will reduce as fiber content increase from 0.5% to 1.5%, therefore,
more superplasticizer are required in order to produce self compacting concrete. A
concrete mix can only be classified as self compacting concrete if it has fulfilled the
three workability parameters, i.e. filling ability, passing ability, and segregation
resistance [30]. Slump flow test, L-box test, and sieve segregation resistance test
were utilized in this study to assess the workability aspect of fresh self compacting
concrete mixes. The workability tests are shown in Figure 4.3 to Figure 4.5,

84
respectively. Table 4.3 shows the requirements for a concrete mix to be categorised
as self compacting concrete [1, 3, 4, 8, 31]. Table 4.4 shows the dosage of
superplasticizer required for plain SCC and GFRSCC in this study.

Figure 4.3: Spread diameter of concrete mix in slump flow test

Figure 4.4: L-Box test

85

Figure 4.5: Paste remaining on the pan in sieve segregation resistance test

Table 4.3: Requirements for self compacting concrete [1, 3, 4, 8, 31]

Parameter

Test method

Unit

Range of test value

Slump Flow

mm

550 850

T500 Slump Flow

sec

1.8 5.0

L-Box

0.8 1.0

0 - 20

Filling ability

Passing ability

Segregation resistance

Sieve Segregation
Resistance

Table 4.4: Dosage of superplasticizer required for plain SCC and GFRSCC
(percentage by mass of cement)

Concrete

Plain SCC

0.5%GFRSCC

1.0%GFRSCC

1.5%GFRSCC

1.44

2.24

2.72

5.41

86
From observation, no excessive coarse aggregate was remained in the centre
of the concrete spread. A border of cement paste without coarse aggregate was
observed occurred at the edge of concrete spread. However, it was minor segregation
since the border of the paste extended to several millimetres only.

4.2.3 Density of Hardened Concrete

The mass of all concrete cubes were weighed after achieve specific curing
age. Density of hardened concrete can be determined by the division of mass over the
volume of the cube. The results on the density of hardened concrete are presented in
Table 4.5. The relation between density and curing age of concrete cube specimens is
shown in Figure 4.6.

Table 4.5: Density of hardened concrete cubes

Curing age
(days)

NC (kg/m3)

GFRSCC (kg/m3)

Plain SCC
(kg/m3)

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2400

2407

2402

2379

2362

2411

2432

2475

2393

2372

28

2423

2400

2464

2383

2387

2411

2413

2447

2385

2374

Average
density

87

Figure 4.6: Relation between density and curing age for all concrete cube specimens

The range of average density of the specimens is between 2374 kg/m3 to 2475
kg/m3. There is no significant difference in density for NC, SCC, and all GFRSCC
cubes since the maximum percentage difference is 4.3 percent only. There is no
obvious trend between density and curing age of the concrete specimens. The mass
of glass fiber added is very low and hence does not influence much on the density of
the hardened concrete.

4.2.4 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity (UPV)

The UPV test involves the measurement of velocity of electronic pulses


travelling through concrete from a transmitting transducer to a receiving transducer.
The velocity of pulse can be obtained by division of path length at which the pulse
travelled with time taken by pulse to travel through concrete. The test is useful in

88
detecting internal flaws such as inadequate compaction, cracking, voids, and
segregation in concrete [5, 6]. UPV test was carried out at three positions for
concrete cube and prism, i.e. bottom, centre, and top on the side. The test was
conducted at the three positions to evaluate the uniformity of the concrete at different
position. For concrete cylinder, the test was conducted at the centre of the flat
surfaces only. The results of the UPV test for different concrete specimens are shown
in Table 4.6 to Table 4.8.

Table 4.6: UPV test results of concrete cubes

Curing

GFRSCC (km/s)

Plain SCC

age

NC (km/s)

(km/s)

(days)

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

(3.9)(3.9)( 3.9) (3.9)(3.9)(3.9) (4.2)(4.2)(4.1) (4.1)(4.2)(4.1) (4.1)(4.1)(4.1)

(4.5)(4.5)(4.5)

(4.2)(4.2)(4.2) (4.3)(4.4)(4.3) (4.2)(4.2)(4.2) (4.4)(4.3)(4.3)

28

(4.5)(4.5)(4.7)

(4.5)(4.5)(4.5) (4.6)(4.7)(4.6) (4.6)(4.6)(4.6) (4.4)(4.4)(4.4)

Remark: The pulse velocity is indicated in the bottom, centre, top positions.

Table 4.7: UPV test results of concrete cylinders

Curing

NC (km/s)

age (days)

GFRSCC (km/s)

Plain SCC
(km/s)

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

4.2

4.0

4.0

4.2

4.1

4.0

4.2

4.1

4.3

4.1

28

4.3

4.4

4.4

4.5

4.3

Remark: The pulse velocity is indicated in centre position.

89
Table 4.8: UPV test results of concrete prisms

Curing
age

GFRSCC (km/s)
NC (km/s)

(days)

Plain SCC
(km/s)

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

(4.0)(4.0)(4.0) (4.1)(4.1)(4.1) (4.1)(4.1)(4.1) (4.1)(4.1)(4.0) (4.0)(4.0)(4.0)

(4.2)(4.1)(4.2) (4.2)(4.3)(4.2) (4.2)(4.2)(4.2) (4.1)(4.1)(4.1) (4.1)(4.2)(4.2)

28

(4.2)(4.2)(4.2) (4.5)(4.5)(4.5) (4.6)(4.6)(4.6) (4.6)(4.6)(4.6) (4.4)(4.4)(4.4)

Remark: The pulse velocity is indicated in the bottom, centre, top positions.

In the region of imperfections or defects, the ultrasonic pulse will be


diffracted around the periphery (boundary) of the defect and require longer time to
reach the receiving transducer. Hence, the travel time is longer and the pulse velocity
is lower [5]. From the findings, there is no obvious trend exist between the ultrasonic
pulse velocity and curing age for all the concrete samples. The values of ultrasonic
pulse velocity of NC, plain SCC, and all GFRSCC specimens show no difference for
each curing age. This shows that the glass fiber added does not influence the pulse
velocity of concrete. From the UPV results of concrete cubes and prisms, there is no
significant difference in pulse velocity for the three positions. This indicates that the
distribution of cement paste, aggregate, and glass fiber is uniform within the
hardened concrete.

4.2.5 Compressive Strength

Compressive strength test was carried out after the UPV test. Compression
test was done on all the concrete cubes after achieving specific curing age. The result

90
of compressive strength for different curing age are tabulated and plotted in Table
4.9 and Figure 4.7.

Table 4.9: Compressive strength of NC, plain SCC, and GFRSCC

Curing age
(days)

NC (MPa)

GFRSCC (MPa)

Plain SCC
(MPa)

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

26.8

23.4

28.8

27.8

27.4

34.1

41.6

38.9

41.0

30.2

28

47.4

53.3

51.1

49.6

34.9

Figure 4.7: Relation between compressive strength and curing age for each type of
concrete specimens

91
In general, the compressive strength of all concrete specimens increases for
longer curing age. Curing tank provides a moist environment for the concrete to
ensure adequate moisture is available for continuous hydration process to occur
within the concrete. The product of hydration forms a random three-dimensional
network that fills the space originally occupied by water [5]. Therefore, the
compressive strength of concrete will increase with the progress of curing age.

From the findings, plain SCC exhibits higher compressive strength than
control concrete (NC). Plain SCC shows compressive strength more than 40 MPa at
7 and 28 days. Case studies done by Domone (2006) indicated that about 80 % of
concrete mixes being studied were having compressive strengths in excess of 40
MPa [31]. The action of superplasticizer results in better dispersion of cement
particles, and subsequently better distribution of cement particles. The well-dispersed
cement particles will leads to better hydration process within the concrete, and hence
increase the compressive strength of concrete [6]. When control concrete is vibrated,
water will tend to migrate upward and creates bleeding channels as well as
development of porous and weak interfacial zones. The weak phases formed will also
reduce the compressive strength of concrete [1, 32]. Besides, the lower compressive
strength of NC may also caused by insufficient degree of compaction of concrete.

The compressive strength of plain SCC is higher than all GFRSCC. The
addition of glass fibers will not impart positive influence on the compressive strength
of concrete. The results of study conducted by Sivakumar et al. (2007) indicated that
the concrete samples with individual non-metallic fibers (glass, polypropylene, and
polyester) did not show any increment in compressive strength as compared to
control concrete [33]. The same trend applies since all the GFRSCC have lower
compressive strength as compared to plain SCC.

The results show that GFRSCC with 0.5% and 1.0% fiber contents have
similar 7-day and 28-day compressive strength. Both GFRSCC can achieve high
compressive strength more than 40 MPa at 28 days. This may be due to the high

92
workability of concrete mix which permits certain volume of the glass fibers to be
distributed uniformly within the mix, without reducing the compressive strength of
concrete significantly [34]. Glass fiber is flexible fiber and can be easily distributed
within concrete mix as compared to rigid fiber, such as steel fiber. However,
GFRSCC with 1.5% fiber content exhibits the lowest compressive strength among all
GFRSCC. There were many tiny voids observed on the fracture surface of the
concrete cubes, which may be the weak zones within the concrete. Weak zones or
phases may be formed due to the addition of high fiber content (1.5%) within the
concrete. The observed void on the fracture surface on one of the 1.5%GFRSCC
cube samples is shown in Figure 4.8.

Figure 4.8: Some of the observed voids on the surface (red circles indicate the voids)

93
4.2.6 Splitting Tensile Strength

Splitting tensile strength test was carried out on all the concrete cylinders
after achieving certain curing age. The result of splitting tensile strength test is
presented in Table 4.10. Figure 4.9 shows the relation between splitting tensile
strength and curing age of all concrete samples. Figure 4.10 presents the comparison
of splitting tensile strength among the GFRSCC samples.

Table 4.10: Splitting tensile strength of NC, plain SCC, and GFRSCC

Curing age
(days)

NC (MPa)

GFRSCC (MPa)

Plain SCC
(MPa)

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.74

1.98

2.58

3.06

2.60

3.18

2.80

2.71

3.26

2.92

28

4.44

3.54

3.45

4.29

3.39

94

Figure 4.9: Relation between splitting tensile strength and curing age for each type
of concrete samples

Figure 4.10: Comparison of splitting tensile strength among the GFRSCC samples

95
Generally, there is increasing trend between splitting tensile strength and
curing age for all concrete samples. Control concrete (NC) exhibits higher splitting
tensile strength than plain SCC and all GFRSCC. There is similar trend from the
study conducted by Parra et al. (2011), which indicated that the tensile strength of
SCC was lower than normal vibrated concrete. The result was caused by the addition
of superplasticizer that has negative effect on the aggregate-paste bond [32]. The
failure of concrete in tension is governed by the interfacial region between the
cement and aggregate particles, also known as aggregate-paste bond. The aggregatepaste bond will have greater influence on tensile strength than compressive strength
of concrete [7, 32]. Therefore, the addition of superplasticizer will probably weaken
the aggregate-paste bond, and decrease the splitting tensile strength of concrete. A
consequence of adding superplasticizer is the formation of ettringite crystals which
are small and nearly cubic in shape rather than needle-like within a concrete [6]. The
cubic-shaped ettringite crystals formed will probably consumed more growth space
and induce internal stresses that may damage the aggregate-paste bond.

One of the purposes of inclusion of fibers is to improve the tensile and


flexural properties of concrete [1, 8]. However, for GFRSCC with fiber content of
0.5%, the splitting tensile strength is similar to the plain SCC. The study done by
Sivakumar et al. (2007) concluded that it may be due to the short length of glass fiber
added into concrete [33]. From Figure 4.10, the splitting tensile strength of GFRSCC
increases as fiber content increases from 0.5% to 1.0% for each curing age. The
increase in tensile strength is due to the increase amount of fibers bridging the
diametric splitting crack [33]. GFRSCC with 1.0% fiber content exhibits the
highest splitting tensile strength among the others. The tensile strength of GFRSCC
decreases for fiber content up to 1.5%. Obvious voids can be observed on the
fracture surface of the cylinders tested. The addition of high fiber content (1.5%)
may result in formation of excess voids that reduce the splitting tensile strength of
concrete. Figure 4.11 shows the voids observed on the fracture surface of
1.5%GFRSCC cylinder sample.

96

Figure 4.11: Some voids observed on the surface (red circles indicate the voids)

4.2.7 Flexural Strength of Concrete Prisms

Flexural strength test was carried out for all concrete prisms. Four-point
loading test was utilised for the test. Since the fracture occurs within the two loading
points for all concrete prisms, therefore, Equation 3.4 was applied for the calculation
of flexural strength. The result of flexural strength test is tabulated and shown in
Table 4.11 and Figure 4.12, respectively. Figure 4.13 is plotted to show the
comparison of flexural strength among the GFRSCC samples.

97
Table 4.11: Flexural strength of NC, plain SCC, and GFRSCC

Curing age
(days)

GFRSCC (MPa)

Plain SCC
NC (MPa)

(MPa)

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

4.49

4.85

4.97

5.23

4.51

5.41

5.47

5.53

5.62

5.27

28

6.16

5.34

7.20

7.70

6.61

Figure 4.12: Relation between flexural strength and curing age for each type of
concrete samples

98

Figure 4.13: Comparison of flexural strength among the GFRSCC samples

Similarly, there is ascending trend between flexural strength and curing age.
In general, the flexural strength of control concrete is slightly higher than plain SCC,
with small difference of 13.3 percent. It shows that the addition of superplasticizer
will not significantly influence the flexural strength of concrete. Mirza et al. (2002)
carried out an experimental study to investigate the effect of alkaline-resistance glass
fiber reinforcement on the flexural strength of lightweight concrete. The result
revealed that there is improvement in flexural strength of lightweight concrete with
addition of glass fiber [35]. Similar trend is observed since all the GFRSCC prisms
exhibit higher flexural strength than plain SCC prisms. The purposes of fiber
addition are to bridge across the cracks that developed within the matrix and improve
the flexural strength of concrete [1, 7].

For GFRSCC, increasing fiber content from 0.5% to 1.0% is observed to


increase the flexural strength of concrete for each curing age. However, the flexural
strength of GFRSCC with 1.5% fiber content is decreased. The result of study
conducted by Mirza et al. (2002) showed that the flexural strength of lightweight

99
concrete increased as fiber content increased from 0.125% to 0.625%, and the
strength reduced for 0.75% fiber content [35]. It indicated that there will be an
optimum fiber content for fiber reinforced concrete. The optimum fiber content for
this study is 1.0% by volume of concrete. The optimum fiber content was used to
cast the GFRSCC slab.

4.2.8 Flexural Strength of Small-scale Slabs

The test samples were control concrete (NC) slab, plain SCC slab, and
GFRSCC slab with 1.0% fiber content. The amount and arrangement of
reinforcement bars were the same for all three concrete slabs. The flexural strength
tests of concrete slabs were carried out to investigate the load-deflection relationships
and cracking patterns of different concrete slabs. The result of flexural strength test
of slabs is shown in Table 4.12. The load-deflection curves at centre point for three
reinforced concrete slabs are presented in Figure 4.14. All concrete slabs were failed
in flexural mode.

Table 4.12: The result of flexural strength test of slabs

Properties

NC

Plain SCC

1.0%GFRSCC

Ultimate load (kN)

24.5

26.5

27.0

9.63

7.64

8.54

Load at first crack (kN)

14.0

15.5

18.5

Number of macro-cracks

Deflection at ultimate
load (mm)

100

Figure 4.14: Load-deflection curves for all concrete slabs

The trend of load-deflection curves is similar for the three reinforced concrete
slabs. Plain SCC slab exhibits slightly higher load at first crack and ultimate load
than NC slab, with percentage difference up to 10 percent only. The slight increment
may be due to the stronger bond between concrete and reinforcement for plain SCC
slab. Generally, the bond between concrete and reinforcement is related to
compressive strength and toughness of the concrete. The strength of the bond
between SCC and reinforcement bar was found to be similar or higher than those of
normal vibrated concrete [30]. The small increment in strengths of plain SCC may
caused by the type of the reinforcement bar used. Non-deformed steel bar was used
and it cannot provide good bonding with concrete matrix as compared to deformed
bar.

The load at first crack and ultimate load of 1.0%GFRSCC slab are higher
than plain SCC slab, with difference up to 20 %. For fiber reinforced concrete
members subjected to flexure, the load at first crack will increase due to crack
arresting mechanism of the fibers, and subsequently increase the ultimate load of the

101
concrete [5]. However, due to the short lengths of the glass fibers, they get pulled out
easily at high crack widths. It indicates that the glass fibers have poor ability to
bridge the cracks at high levels of strain [33]. The deflection at ultimate strength
shows no obvious trend for all the concrete slabs. The cracking patterns and
corresponding load values of the three concrete slabs are shown in Figure 4.15 to
Figure 4.17, respectively.

Figure 4.15: Cracking pattern and corresponding load values of NC slab

Figure 4.16: Cracking pattern and corresponding load values of plain SCC slab

102

Figure 4.17: Cracking pattern and corresponding load values of 1.0%GFRSCC slab

From observation, control concrete (NC) and plain SCC slabs developed two
macro-cracks; while 1.0%GFRSCC slab developed three macro-cracks. The loaddeflection curves are plotted until the load at which the first crack was observed for
all the concrete slabs. The load-deflection curves until the load at first crack are
shown in Figure 4.18.

Figure 4.18: Load-deflection curves until the load at first crack observed

103
From the curves, NC and plain SCC slabs behave almost linear until the first
crack was observed. The load-deflection trend for 1.0%GFRSCC slab is probably
due to the crack-bridging action of the fibers. Cracking will occurs if the fibers are
unable to sustain the large crack width developed within the concrete matrix.

4.2.9 Neutral Axis of Slabs

As the load increased gradually, the location of the neutral axis of the slab
will be shifted upward towards the compression zone. Generally, all concrete slabs
exhibit the same trend, i.e. the neutral axis shifted upward to compression zone as the
applied load increased. Figure 4.19 to Figure 4.21 show the graphs of slab depth
versus concrete strain for the three concrete slabs.

Figure 4.19: Slab depth versus concrete strain for NC slab

104

Figure 4.20: Slab depth versus concrete strain for plain SCC slab

Figure 4.21: Slab depth versus concrete strain for 1.0%GFRSCC slab

105
4.2.10 Failure Mode of Concrete

The concrete cubes were subjected to compression load until failure. The
failure modes of the concrete cubes after 28-day of curing age for control concrete
(NC), plain SCC, and all GFRSCC cubes are shown in Figure 4.22 to Figure 4.26,
respectively.

Figure 4.22: Failure mode of NC cube

Figure 4.23: Failure mode of plain SCC cube

106

Figure 4.24: Failure mode of 0.5%GFRSCC cube

Figure 4.25: Failure mode of 1.0%GFRSCC cube

107

Figure 4.26: Failure mode of 1.5%GFRSCC cube

Under compression load, the failure cracks developed were approximately


parallel to the direction of the applied load. Besides, some cracks were also formed at
certain angle to the applied load. For this study, the failure modes of the concrete
cubes are the general type of failure mode, and no unsatisfactory failure modes are
obtained. The types of failure within concrete are divided into two types, i.e. failure
through cement paste and aggregate.

In this study, the primary failure type was failure through aggregates for all
the concrete cubes. In general, all concrete samples have achieved 28-day
compressive strength greater than 40 MPa and, therefore, can be classified as high
strength concrete [36]. The interfacial transition zone (ITZ) is stronger and dense in
the case of high strength concrete; hence the cracks tend to take the weakest point
through the aggregates [37]. ITZ is the interfacial zone between the hydrated cement
paste and other materials within a concrete, such as aggregates, fibers, and steel
reinforcement [7, 37]. Failure on aggregates is indicated by the broken or shearing of
aggregates. The failures through aggregates of some concrete samples are shown in
Figure 4.27 to Figure 4.29, respectively.

108

Figure 4.27: Failure on fractured surface of NC cube (red lines indicate broken
aggregates)

Figure 4.28: Failure on fractured surface of plain SCC cube (red lines indicate
broken aggregates)

109

Figure 4.29: Failure on fractured surface of 1.0%GFRSCC cube (red lines indicate
broken aggregates)

For reinforced concrete slabs, all slabs were failed in flexural or bending
mode. The failure mode of the three concrete slabs is shown in Figure 4.30.

Figure 4.30: Failure mode of reinforced concrete slabs

110

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1

Conclusions

From this study, the conclusions that can be drawn based on the observations
and analysis of the results are as follows:

a) As the fiber content increase, the dosage of superplasticizer required will


increase in order to produce self compacting concrete. Self compacting
concrete has three crucial characteristics, i.e. filling ability, passing ability,
and segregation resistance. The filling ability, passing ability, and segregation
resistance are assessed by slump flow test, L-Box test, and sieve segregation
resistance test, respectively.

b) Water-cement ratio of 0.40 is applied for all concrete mixes. The workability
is low for control concrete mix. All the plain SCC and GFRSCC mixes
produced exhibit very high workability and fulfilling the requirements and
specifications.

c) There are no significant differences in density and ultrasonic pulse velocity


for control concrete (NC), plain SCC, and all GFRSCC samples. The values

111
of ultrasonic pulse velocity are similar at three positions on the side of all
concrete cubes and prisms.

d) For all concrete samples, the compressive, splitting tensile and flexural
strengths show ascending trend with curing age.

e) Plain SCC exhibit higher compressive strength than NC and all GFRSCC.
For GFRSCC, 0.5%GFRSCC exhibits the highest compressive strength
among the others. The compressive strength of 1.5%GFRSCC is relatively
lower as compared to others. Addition of high fiber content (1.5%) may cause
the formation of weak phases within the concrete matrix, which significantly
reduce the strength of concrete.

f) The splitting tensile strength of NC is higher than plain SCC due to the
negative effect of superplasticizer on the aggregate-paste bond. For both
0.5%GFRSCC and 1.5%GFRSCC, the splitting tensile strength obtained is
similar to plain SCC. The splitting tensile strength of GFRSCC with 1.0% of
fiber content is the highest among all GFRSCC.

g) The flexural strength of NC is higher than plain SCC, with small increment of
14 percent only. Generally, all GFRSCC exhibit higher flexural strength than
plain SCC. The optimum fiber content for GFRSCC is 1.0% by volume of
concrete.

h) The trend of load-deflection curves is similar for NC, plain SCC, and
1.0%GFRSCC slabs. The load at first crack and ultimate load of plain SCC
slab is slightly higher than NC slab, with increment up to 11 percent. The
1.0%GFRSCC exhibits the highest load at first crack and ultimate load.

112
5.2

Recommendations

There are few limitations in this study. For the purpose of future study,
several recommendations are proposed as follows:

a) This study is emphasized on the workability and strength properties of SCC


and GFRSCC. The aspects on shrinkage, creep, and durability of both
concretes should be included in future studies.

b) The properties of FRSCC using different types of fibers, such as


polypropylene and carbon fibers, should be included in future studies.

c) The effect of using different sizes and types of aggregates on the properties of
concrete should be included in future research and studies.

d) Different chemical admixtures and mineral additives should be utilised in


concrete mix proportions to study the effect to the properties of concrete.

e) The effect of vibration or dynamic loading on the performance of GFRSCC


should be included in future studies.

113

REFERENCES

[1]

Editted by Newman, J. and Choo, B.S. (2003). Advance Concrete


Technology Processes. Butterworth-Heinemann, an imprint of Elsevier,
Linear House, Jordan Hill, Oxford OX2 8DP, 200 Wheeler Road, Burlington
MA 01803.

[2]

Ken, W.D. (2006). Concrete Mix Design, Quality Control and Specification.
Taylor and Francis, 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN.

[3]

Specification and Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete February 2002.


European Federation of Specialist Construction Chemicals and Concrete
Systems, EFNARC.

[4]

The European Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete Specification,


Production and Use May 2005. BIBM, CEMBUREAU, ERMCO, EFCA,
and EFNARC.

[5]

Gambhir, M.L. (2004). Concrete Technology Third Edition. Tata McGrawHill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi.

[6]

Neville, A.M. (1995). Properties of Concrete. Addison Wesley Longman


Limited.

[7]

Mindess, S., Francis, J.Y. and Darwin, D. (2003). Concrete Second Edition.
Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.

[8]

Shetty, M.S. (2006). Concrete Technology-Theory and Practice. S. Chand


and Company LTD., New Delhi.

[9]

Corinaldesi, V. and Moriconi, G. (2004). Durable Fiber Reinforced SelfCompacting Concrete. Cement and Concrete Research Volume 34, 2004, pg.
249-254.

[10]

Mazaheripour, H., Ghanbarpour, S., Mirmoradi, S.H. and Hosseinpour, I.


(2010). The Effect of Polypropylene Fibers on the Properties of Fresh and

114
Hardened Lightweight Self-Compacting Concrete. Construction and
Building Materials Volume 25, Issue 1, 2010, pg. 351-358.
[11]

AEC

(Architecture-Engineering-Construction)

Online

(2009).

LECA

(Lightweight Expanded Clay Aggregate) for Construction, Agriculture and


Landscaping.
http://www.aeconline.ae/13/pdcnewsitem/01/89/79/index_13.html
[12]

Claytek. LECA (Lightweight Expanded Clay Aggregate).


http://www.claytek.co.uk/leca_home.htm

[13]

Hannant, D.J. (1978). Fibre Cement and Fibre Concretes. John Wiley and
Sons, Wiley-Interscience Publication.

[14]

Ramachandran, V.S., Feldman, R.F. and Beaudoin, J.J. (1981). Concrete


Science Treatise on Current Research. Heyden and Son Ltd.

[15]

Ding, Y., Liu, S., Zhang, Y. and Thomas, A. (2008). The investigation on
the Workability of Fiber Cocktail Reinforced Self-Compacting High
Performance Concrete. Construction and Building Material Volume 22,
2008, pg. 1462-1470.

[16]

Ding, Y., Zhang, Y. and Thomas, A. (2009). The Investigation on Strength


and Flexural Toughness of Fibre Cocktail Reinforced Self-Compacting High
Performance Concrete. Construction and Building Materials Volume 23,
2009, pg. 448-452.

[17]

Sahmaran, M., Yurtseven, A. and Yaman, I.O. (2005). Workability of


Hybrid Fiber Reinforced Self-Compacting Concrete. Building and
Environment Volume 40, 2005, pg. 1672-1677.

[18]

Edited by Bartos, P.J.M, Marrs, D.L. and Cleland, D.J. (1996). Production
Methods and Workability of Concrete. Proceedings of the International
RILEM Conference, E & FN Spon, an imprint of Chapman & Hall.

[19]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (2009) BS EN 197-1: 2009. Cement Part 1:


Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for common cements.
London.

[20]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (1986) BS 410: 1986. Specification for test
sieves, London.

[21]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (2002) BS EN 1008: 2002. Mixing water for
concrete: Specification for sampling, testing, and assessing the suitability of

115
water, including water recovered from processes in the concrete industry, as
mixing water for concrete. London.
[22]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (2009) BS EN 12350-2: 2009. Testing fresh


concrete Part 2: Slump test. London.

[23]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (2009) BS EN 12390-7: 2009. Testing


hardened concrete Part 7: Density of hardened concrete. London.

[24]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (2009) BS EN 197-1: 2009. Testing concrete


Part 203: Recommendations for measurement of velocity of ultrasonic pulses
in concrete. London.

[25]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (2009) BS EN 12390-3: 2009. Testing


hardened concrete Part 3: Compressive strength of test specimens. London.

[26]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (2009) BS EN 12390-6: 2009. Testing


hardened concrete Part 6: Tensile splitting strength of test specimens.
London.

[27]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (2009) BS EN 12390-5: 2009. Testing


hardened concrete Part 5: Flexural strength of test specimens. London.

[28]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (1983) BS 1881-119: 1983. Testing concrete


Part 119: Method for determination of compressive strength using portions of
beams broken in flexure (equivalent cube method). London.

[29]

British Standard Institute (BSI) (1992) BS 882: 1992. Specification for


aggregates from natural sources for concrete. London.

[30]

Schutter, G.D., Bartos, P.J.M., Domone, P. and Gibbs, J. (2008). SelfCompacting Concrete. Whittles Publishing, Dunbeath, Caithness KW6 6EY,
Scotland, UK.

[31]

Domone, P.L. (2006). Self-Compacting Concrete: An Analysis of 11 years of


Case Studies. Cement and Concrete Composites, Volume 28, 2006, pg.
197208.

[32]

Parra, C., Valcuende, M. and Gomez, F. (2011). Splitting Tensile Strength


and Modulus of Elasticity of Self-Compacting Concrete. Construction and
Building Material, Volume 25, 2011, pg. 201-207.

[33]

Sivakumar, A. and Santhanam, M. (2007). Mechanical Properties of High


Strength Concrete Reinforced with Metallic and Non-Metallic Fibers.
Cement and Concrete Composites, Volume 29, March 2007, pg. 603-608.

116
[34]

Bartos, P. (1992). Fresh Concrete Properties and Tests. ELSEVIER


SCIENCE PUBLISHERS B.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

[35]

Mirza, F.A. and Soroushian, P. (2002). Effects of Alkali-Resistant Glass


Fiber Reinforcement on Crack and Temperature Resistance of Lightweight
Concrete. Cement and Concrete Composites, Volume 24, Issue 2, April
2002, pg. 223-227.

[36]

National Ready Mixed Concrete Association, NRMCA (2001). CIP 33


High Strength Concrete.
http://www.nrmca.org/aboutconcrete/cips/33p.pdf

[37]

The Concrete Portal. Hardened Concrete Strength.


http://www.theconcreteportal.com/hard_strength.html

117

APPENDIX A

CONCRETE MIX DESIGN

Stage 1:
Characteristic Strength

40 N/mm2 at 28 days
(Proportion defective 5 %)

Standard Deviation

8 N/mm2

Margin

(k =.1.64)

Target Mean Strength

40 + 13 = 53 N/mm2

Cement Type

OPC

Coarse Aggregate Type

Crushed

Fine Aggregate Type

Crushed

Free-water / Cement Ratio

0.46

Applied Free-water Cement Ratio

0.40

Slump

30 mm 60 mm

Maximum Aggregate Size

10 mm

1.64 x 8 = 13 N/mm2

Stage 2:

118
:

230 kg/m3

Cement Content

230 / 0.40 = 575 kg/m3

Maximum Cement Content

550 kg/m3

Applied Cement Content

550 kg/m3

Free-water Content

Stage 3:

Modified Free-water Cement Ratio :

0.42

Stage 4:
Relative Density of Aggregate

0.27 (assumed)

Concrete Density

2380 kg/m3

Total Aggregate Content

2380 230 550 = 1600 kg/ m3

Percentage passing 600 m = 40.4 %

Stage 5:
Grading of Fine Aggregate

(Sieve analysis of fine aggregate)


Proportion of Fine Aggregate

46 %

Fine Aggregate Content

1600 x 0.46 = 740 kg/m3

Coarse Aggregate Content

1600 740 = 860 kg/m3

119
Mix Proportion:

Fine

Coarse

Quantities

Cement (kg)

Water (kg or L)

Per m3

550

230

740

860

9.9

4.1

13.3

15.5

Per trial mix


of 0.018 m3

Aggregate (kg) Aggregate (kg)

Remark: Trial mix of three prisms with wastage of 20 %

120

APPENDIX B

DETERMINATION OF FIBER CONTENT

Density of Glass Fiber,

2400 kg/m3

Volume of Fiber Required, Vf

Percentage of Fiber, Pf x Volume of


Concrete, Vc

Calculation of fiber content for trial mix of 3 prisms with 20 % wastage


Percentage of fiber, Pf of 1.5 % is applied to calculate the fiber content,
Volume of Concrete, Vc

Volume of Fiber Required, Vf

Mass of Fiber Required, Mf

3 x 0.1 x 0.1 x 0.5 x 1.20

0.018 m3

Pf x Vc

(1.5 / 100) x 0.018

2.70 x 10-4 m3

Vf x

(2.70 x 10-4) x 2400

0.648 kg

121
Calculation of fiber content for one concrete slab with 20 % wastage
Optimum percentage of fiber of 1.0 % is applied to calculate the fiber content,
Volume of Concrete, Vc

Volume of Fiber Required, Vf

Mass of Fiber Required, Mf

1.0 x 0.5 x 0.1 x 1.20

0.06 m3

Pf x Vc

(1.0 / 100) x 0.06

6. 0 x 10-4 m3

Vf x

(6.0 x 10-4) x 2400

1.440 kg