SUSTAINABLE SELF COMPACTING

CONCRETE
(REPLACEMENT OF FINE AGGREGATE WITH GBFS )

FROM,
NAME USN GUIDED BY,
MAHANTESH S NAGUR 1EP16CV410
NAVEEN.K 1EP16CV414 NIKESH JAIN
PRADEEPA KUMAR KAMBALE 1EP16CV417 Assistant professor
SRINATHA.B.C 1EP16CV430
 INTRODUCTION :-

• SCC is a concrete that is able to flow under its own weight and completely fill the formwork, while maintaining
homogeneity even in the presence of congested reinforcement, and then consolidate without the need for vibrating
compaction
.
• A sustainable construction development has become a great concern and challenge faced by construction industry due to
depleting natural resources and increasing construction and demolition waste (Wai et al 2012).

• According to (Mehta, 2002) the global concrete industry consumes close to 10 billion tons of aggregates (2002 data), and
produces over 1 billion tons of construction and demolition waste annually.

• Natural sand which is used as fine aggregate forms most of constitutes of concrete. So there is a huge demand which has
forced us to look for any other alternative material.

• One of the alternative material is using by-products or solid wastes from industries.

• Some of the alternative for fine aggregate are manufactured sand, granite fines, glass powder, offshore sand Granulated
Blast Furnace Slag (GBFS) is one of such alternative material.
• sustainability means “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet
their own needs.
• The sustainability of the cement and concrete industries is imperative to the well-being of our planet and to human
development
 OBJECTIVES:-

• To examine whether the developed SCC mixes meet the SCC criteria in both the fresh and hardened states.
• To simulate the flow characteristics of the SCC mix in the L-box test.
• To reduce the usage of fine aggregate by partial replacement of GBFS.
• To focus on achieving towering strength concrete by using GBFS.
 AIM AND SCOPE

• Aim of this Project In present situation there is a more noteworthy requirement for compacting toward oneself solid because of aliment
of part and structural prerequisite, additionally to enhance sturdiness of the structure.
• Presently the world is going to confronting more noteworthy need of superior solid, strength perspective and SCC where the ordinary
method for compacting may not be constantly helpful under distinctive site condition
• Yielding that perspective, we can utilize that modern waste material as supplementary material in fine aggregate.

.
 LITERATURE REVIEW:-

LITERATURE FINDINGS

JIGAR P. PATEL • Compressive strength and split tensile strength for steel
slag aggregates is similar to conventional concrete.

• Results proved that if up to 50 to 75% steel slag

aggregates are used in traditional concrete there would
be much change in durability.

• The steel slag aggregates provide better adhesion between

the particles and cement matrix
 LITERATURE REVIEW:-

LITERATURE FINDING

HUSSIN AND AWAL 1996:MUJAH,(2016) • Palm oil fuel ash for partial replacement of cement
• Pozzolanic cement is used in production

LITERATURE FINDING

MOHAMMED NADEEM, ARUN.D • Compressive strength of concrete improved by replacement of 4 to

7% normal coarse aggregate with crystallized slag.
• In case of 30 to 50% replacement of fine aggregate by slag sand the
compressive strength increased up to 5 to 6%.
• Workability of concrete improved by 20% by replacing fine
aggregate with granular slag.
• The density of crystallized slag is 9% heavier than the natural
aggregate.
METHODOLOGY
 MIX DESIGN: -

ABSOLUTE VOLUME METHOD: -

M40 grade concrete

V concrete =V paste +V aggregates = 1m3

V paste = 0.4
W/cementitious ratio = 0.5

cement – 450 Kg/m3

Wt. of water = 200kg/m3
Wt. of GGBS = 148 Kg/m3
Coarse aggregates wt. = 729 Kg/m3
Fine aggregates = 891 Kg/m3

50% REPLACEMENT OF NORMAL AGGREGATES BY GBFS

Volume of normal fine aggregate = (50/100) *0.33

= 0.165
Volume of GBFS = (50/100) *0.33
= 0.165
Density of GBFS = 2.50
Weight of normal FA = 0.165*2.7*1000
= 445.5 Kg/m3
Weight of GBFS = 0.165*2.50*1000
=412.5 Kg/m3
PROPORTIONS: -
Cement = (450/450) = 1
GGBS = (145/450) =0.32
Water cement ratio = (200/450) = 0.44
Normal fine aggregate = (445.5/450) = 0.99
GBFS = (412.5/450) = 0.917
Coarse aggregates = (729/450) = 1.62

Cement: GGBS: Normal FA: GBFS:CA

1 : 0.32 : 0.99 : 0.92 :1.62

W/C ratio = 0.44

Superplasticizer =0.8
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

MATERIALS USING: -

Cement, Fine aggregates, coarse aggregates, sand, GGFS, GGBS, Admixtures

BASIC TESTS: -
1. CEMENT: -

PROPERTIES OF CEMENT (OPC 53 GRADE)

PROPERTIES OF CEMENT IS CODE LIMITS OBTAINED RESULTS

Fineness of cement IS 4031 part 2-1999 5%
Consistency of cement IS 4031 part 4- 1988 32%
Specific gravity of cement IS 4031 part 11-1988 2.95
2.GBFS
PROPERTIES OF GGBS IS CODE OBTAINED RESULTS
Specific gravity IS 1727-1967 2.65
Fineness modulus IS 1727-1967 8%

3.FINE AGGREGATE
PROPERTIES IS CODE OBTAINED RESULTS
Specific gravity IS 2386 part 3-1963 2.65
Fineness modulous IS 2386 part 3-1963 2.75
4)COARSE AGGREGATES:
PROPERTIES IS CODE OBTAINED RESULTS
Specific gravity and IS 2386-PART3:1963 2.7
Water absorption
Fineness modulous IS 2386-PART1:1963 7.1

FRESH CONCRETE TEST: -

1) Slump cone test
2) L Type flow test
1.SLUMP CONE TEST

RESULTS
• Spread diameter = 700mm
• Time taken for the concrete to reach
spread diameter 700mm = 7 sec
2. L TYPE FLOW TEST

RESULTS: -
Passing ratio PL=H2/H1
=10/12
=0.833
 HARDENED CONCRETE TESTS

1.COMPRESSIVE TEST RESULTS AT 7 DAYS

SL no Replaceme Compressive Test Results Average

nt of % of
N/mm2
GBFS
1 2 3
1 0 11.38 15.26 17.70 14.78
2 30 31.6 27.55 23.37 27.50
3 50 28.44 29.91 30.71 29.68
4 70 27.15 22.66 20.44 23.41
5 100 28.4 17.91 16.26 20.85

COMPRESSIVE SRENGTH RESULTS FOR 7 DAYS

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH IN N/mm2

35
29.68
30 27.5

25 23.49
20.85
20
14.78
15

10

0
0% 30% 50% 70% 100%
MIX PROPORTIONS
2.COMPRESSIVE TEST RESULTS AT 14 DAYS
SL no Replacem Compressive Test Results Averag
ent of % e
N/mm2
of GBFS
1 2 3 N/mm2

1 0 14.93 22.31 21.11 19.45

2 30 34.75 27.82 25.95 29.50
3 50 35.2 30.66 30.22 32.02
4 70 22.96 22.70 22.27 26.64
5 100 26.04 28.06 29.86 27.98
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH IN N/mm2

35
COMPRESSIVE SRENGTH RESULTS FOR 14 DAYS
32.02
29.5
30 27.98
26.64
25
19.45
20

15

10

0
0% 30% 50% 70% 100%
MIX PROPORTIONS
3.COMPRESSIVE TEST RESULTS AT 28 DAYS
SL no Replacement Compressive Test Results Average
of % of GBFS
N/mm2 N/mm2
1 2 3

1 0 22.35 23.65 20.06 22.02

2 30 30.08 31.77 31.05 30.96
3 50 35.24 39.77 35.55 36.85
4 70 27.13 29.8 28.00 28.31
5 100 29.28 23.51 27.95 26.91

COMPRESSIVE SRENGTH RESULTS FOR 28 DAYS

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH IN N/mm2

40 36.85
35
30.96
30 28.31
26.91
25 22.02
20
15
10
5
0
0% 30% 50% 70% 100%
MIX PROPORTIONS
 DISCUSSION

DISCUSSION: -
 Among all the 5 mixes replacement of GBFS (0%,30%,50%,70%,100%) the compressive strength results compared and the
result is 50% replacement of GBFS gives better results compared to other mixes.
 By replacement of fine aggregate by 50% of GBFS may results in reducing the fine aggregate usage and it leads to environment
friendly.
 Less damage to atmosphere by increasing usage of GBFS in place of fine aggregates.
 The compressive strength of 50% usage of GBFS leads to more compressive strength when compared to nominal mix.

 Durability of the concrete may increase usage of GBFS in place of fine aggregate.
4.SPLIT TENSILE TEST RESULTS AT 28 DAYS
SL no Replacem Compressive Test Results Averag
ent of % of e
N/mm2
GBFS
1 2 3 N/mm2

1 0 2.23 2.46 2.34

2 30 2.40 2.77 2.58
3 50 1.69 2.46 2.07
4 70 2.44 1.89 2.16
5 100 4.07 4.20 4.13
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH IN N/mm2

TENSILE SRENGTH RESULTS FOR 28 DAYS

4.5 4.13
4
3.5
3
2.58
2.5 2.34
2.04 2.16
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0% 30% 50% 70% 100%
MIX PROPORTIONS
 DISCUSSION: -
 Among all the 5 mixes replacement of GBFS (0%,30%,50%,70%,100%) the tensile strength results compared and the result is
100% replacement of GBFS gives better results compared to other mixes.
 By replacement of fine aggregate by 100% of GBFS may results in reducing the fine aggregate usage and it leads to
environment friendly.
 Less damage to atmosphere by increasing usage of GBFS in place of fine aggregates.
 The split tensile strength of 100% usage of GBFS leads to more compressive strength when compared to nominal mix.
 Durability of the concrete may increase usage of GBFS in place of fine aggregate.
 CONCLUSION

• Granular Slag can be a very good replacement for river sand with respect to economy, strength and the considerations of
availability of resources
• The fresh state of SCC with the presence of 100% GBFS, it caused lower flow ability, passing ability and resistance to segregation
of SCC mix.
• By experimental investigations it is indicated that the strength parameters such as compressive strength, split tensile strength and is
similar when compared to the normal SCC.
• Concrete acquires similar strength in compressive strength at 50%GBFS as sand replacement.
• Split tensile strength have similar strength with Sand replacement compared to SCC having River sand.
THANK YOU