HBRC Journal (2014) 10, 145–155

Housing and Building National Research Center

HBRC Journal

http://ees.elsevier.com/hbrcj

FULL LENGTH ARTICLE

Compressive strength prediction of Portland
cement concrete with age using a new model
Metwally abd allah Abd elaty *

Faculty of Engineering, Structural Engineering Department, Tanta University, Egypt

Received 22 December 2012; revised 23 June 2013; accepted 23 September 2013

KEYWORDS Abstract Based on the existing experimental data for compressive strength values of different con-
Concrete; crete mixes, a statistical analysis for the gathered data was conducted. The analysis revealed a model
Compressive strength; for predicting the compressive strength of concrete mixes at any age with the help of two constants (A)
Prediction; and (B) that are considered as a characteristic property for a concrete mix. The constant (A) is intro-
Hydration degree duced as a rate of strength gain constant whereas, (B) is introduced as grade of strength constant.
Once the values of constants (A) and (B) are defined for a concrete mix, the compressive strength at
any age could be simply predicted without collecting data at that age. The values of (A) and (B) could
be determined by one of two methods. Solving two simultaneous equations at two different ages while
performing either design or trial concrete mix is a method that could be used to define the two con-
stants. Other method is based on concrete strength at 28-day age. The proposed model was studied
for different concrete mixes. The study covered some parameters including the influence of, mineral
admixtures as a partial replacement of cement, metakaolin, nano silica fume, curing in water or lime
and the effect of curing temperature.
The analysis reveals that mixes containing no admixtures, mixes containing silica fume and cured at
normal temperature, mixes containing nano silica and cured in water are following with high accuracy
the proposed model.
ª 2013 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Housing and Building National Research
Center.

Introduction

Compressive strength of concrete is one of the most important
* Tel.: +20 1006750733.
and useful properties. As a construction material, concrete is
employed to resist compressive stresses. While, at locations
E-mail address: drmet2828@yahoo.com
where tensile strength or shear strength is of primary impor-
Peer review under responsibility of Housing and Building National
Research Center.
tance, the compressive strength is used to estimate the required
property.
Common trend in concrete technology is to use compressive
strength as a quantitative measure for other properties of
Production and hosting by Elsevier hardened concrete [1].
1687-4048 ª 2013 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Housing and Building National Research Center.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2013.09.005

water/cement ratio. to en- strength on water cement ratio.7 and 10. to be. respectively.2. Implementation of either Abrams’ formula or power for- mula to predict the concrete strength at any age requires col- In Germany. tionships. formula and the fc28 ¼ K2 ðfc7 ÞK1 ð2Þ power formula.a. actually con.10. At tively. fc. ECP [3]. and (x) is the water/binder ratio [7]. respec. . generally to estimate the quality matical relationship between concrete strength and water/ce.]. as one of the most useful formulae in the field of concrete tech- Many a time it may be necessary to estimate the strength of nology. Abd elaty It is well known that. 28. fc7 and fc28 are the strengths in MPa at 7 and 28 days. K1 and K2 are the coefficients which are varied for dif.3 to 0. was the first one describing the dependence of concrete to check serviceability conditions or compliance criteria. for high strength concrete. 3. The rate of gain of strength is faster at start and many studies have shown that when the water/binder ratio is the rate gets reduced with age [1]. tal parameters for a given age and x is the water/cement ratio. 4. Furthermore.t ¼ At xBt ð7Þ Earlier ECP [3] considered compressive strength gain as a parameter of age through the coefficients for ordinary where (fc. parameter – ¼ 1:7fc7 þ 850 ðfc Þ is being expressed in psi ð1Þ trend – regression and four – parameter – optimization meth- odology to extend Abrams’ formula and the power formula to Another formula was proposed as follows: any given age without collecting data at that age. 0. respectively. 6 and 12 months. ing the compressive strength for a specified concrete mix at any .5. Whereas. and using a time factor (a function of age) multiplied by specific age strength (usually 28 – day strength) to estimate the strength at a given age.t ¼ ¼ At Bx Bxt t ferent cements and curing conditions. aggregate type and its properties.146 M. ties. where. 1. x¼ ð5Þ c þ kf þ s British code gives modification factors for permissible compressive strength as 1. For instance. A and B are materials safe could be achieved as considered by BS in the experimental parameters for a given age. and (x) is water/cement ratio by mass. British code (GBFS) content and k is an efficiency factor. fc7 and fc28 are the strengths at 7 and 28 days. 7. formula. 1. respectively. practice do not consider the increase of strength beyond w 28 days for design purposes [ACI [2]. The pro- posed model is a generalization of Abram. 28. Abrams gave the relation. for rapid strength Portland cement concrete those Early age strength prediction in concrete is very useful in values were given as 0. hydration. 1. immediately after mixing cement 63:45 96:55 fc7 ¼ and fc28 ¼ ð4Þ based materials. c is cement 6. 2. . s is granulated blast furnace slag load is applied whereas. But with issuing the last early age strength prediction has several practical applications.24 for 1. where (fc) is the compressive strength of concrete. A and B are experimen- strength. fc.t) is the concrete compressive strength at age t days.a. etc. 1. respectively.0. Cement based materials develop strength with continued To consider the use of mineral admixtures in concrete. sure construction safety and.75. 1. Concrete compressive strength is influenced by many fac- For an average Portland cement concrete cured under tors including. f is fly ash content. its strength. 3 or 7 days and correlate to 28-day where (fc) is the compressive strength. the hydration process takes place. fc ¼ AxB ð6Þ Many research workers have attempted to estimate the strength of concrete at 1.176 (At) and (Bt) are experimental parameters depending on age and 1. . The value of K1 ranges from 0.8363. the power formula is considered strength at 28 days for 1. respectively. 1.2 MPa over the permissible Beside Abrams’ formula.6]. Abrams’ formula [4] development.33 for 3. then build a specific the 7-day strength. It takes the following form [4]: concrete not only at an early age but also at later ages [1]. CSH is 14x 8:2x the compound resulting from hydration and it gives concrete where. prestressing of compressive strength with age had been omitted. In spite of considering the used instead of water/cement ratio as basis for mix design. cement content and proper- normal temperature and moisture. For instance. where x is water/binder ratio. fc7 is taken to lie between [1]. and 12 months as minimum age of member when full design content. material and curing track of minimizing the pollution. of construction and potential durability [8].176 for 3. 0. to monitor strength In the history of concrete technology.0. reducing construction cost and ensuring safety.2 and 1. 3.4. the relation between 28-day strength fc28 and lecting a lot of data at that age. version of ECP [3]. 28-day compressive strength for design purposes. w is water content. Most codes of The water binder ratio takes the following shape. 7. particularly when concreting in cold weather. ment ratio as: Moreover prediction of concrete strength at late ages is being significant from both technical and economical points A fc ¼ ¼ ABx ð3Þ of view. 90 and 360 days age. conditions. This paper ship between compressive strength and water/cement ratio introduces a simple mathematical model that can help predict- as [5]. the coefficients considering the variation It can be used to determine safe stripping time. 7.16. 90 and 360 days. crete develops strength beyond 28 days as well. allowed to add 0. fc28 ¼ 1:4fc7 þ 150 and fc28 Yeh [7] proposed two novel methodologies. application or post – tensioning time. when considering the actual strength Bx values at which the structure is being subjected to full load.111 and 1. 5. Portland cement concrete strength as 0.8 and that of K2 from 3 to 6 [1]. 1. strength prediction becomes more accurate [5. 2. Abrams suggested a mathe.556. Numerous research works have provided certain rela. Moreover (x) is the water/cement ratio.

In of hydration. C2S. strength development.168Ln(x) . Suggested model The development of the proposed model is explained as following. age with the help of two fixed constants indicating the mix. The proposed method compressive strength at 28-day age.0513 R 2 = 0. C3A and C4AF was studied [12. the first method is based on solving two simultaneous equa.3484Ln(x) .1026 Strength.9905 20 C3A 10 C4AF 0 0 100 200 300 400 Age. MPa 50 R 2 = 0. the second depends on to predict concrete strength with age.1742Ln(x) .168Ln(x) . (a) Normal scale and (b) log scale.2.467 C2S R 2 = 0.981 30 (Cement) y = 10.84.9693 R 2 = 0.2.6.3484Ln(x) .1026 Strength.981 40 (C4AF) y = 1.6. The sults may be summarized as follows: two constants should be first calculated at the required age.13]. MPa 50 R 2 = 0.9801 70 (C2S) y = 26. King [9] suggested a nonlinear correlation between acceler. Other methods were reported by Malhotra [10] and Garino The initial strength development of C2S is sluggish. This paper introduces a simple and direct forward method tions at two different ages whereas.666 R 2 = 0. .Compressive strength prediction of Portland cement concrete with age using a new model 147 (a) 80 (C3S) y = 10.9998 C2S (C3A) y = 2.467 C3S 60 R 2 = 0. C3S exhibits fairly rapid short-time strength development and ated strength and strength of concrete at age of 28 days. subsequent gradual strength increase for at least 1 year. He proposed that con.9998 60 Cement (C3A) y = 2. C4AF exhibits a rapid short-term strength this method.981 Cement 40 (C4AF) y = 1. approximate the combined effects of these two factors on Those constants could be estimated by two different methods. 1 Relationship between compressive strength and age for clinker minerals and cement [14].0513 R 2 = 0.981 30 (Cement) y = 10.011Ln(x) . days (b) 80 (C3S) y = 10.101Ln(x) + 12. reasonably high final values. yet the [11] where they made a brief review of the four test procedures strength increases gradually for at least 1 year and reaches covered by ASTM C 684.101Ln(x) + 12.6. The obtained re- be determined to predict the concrete strength at that age.011Ln(x) . Standard practice for estimating concrete strength by the The strength of hydrated C3A is very low even after 1 year maturity method was introduced in ASTM C 1074-93 [8]. Strength development for pure clinker minerals Yeh [7] made a modification for Abrams’ formula to enable predicting concrete strength at any age.666 R 2 = 0.9905 20 10 C3A C4AF 0 1 10 100 1000 Age. introduces two constants describing the development of con- crete strength at any age without collecting data at those ages. both time and temperature could be used to development but only a very moderate strength increase. The compressive strength development of pastes made of pure crete strength at any age depends on two constants that should C3S.6.9801 C3S 70 (C2S) y = 26. Abrams’ formula [4] could be used to predict concrete strength at either 7 or 28 days only based on w/c ratio. days Fig.9693 R 2 = 0.1742Ln(x) .84.

712 (b) 80 R2 = 0. are the contents of the phases C3S.081 R2 = 0.7 R2 = 0.1704Ln(x) + 25.9907 (0.673 R2 = 0. Fig.148 M.1278Ln(x) + 15.9972 0. Abd elaty (0.6622 50 0.673 30 R2 = 0.4886Ln(x) + 5.2791Ln(x) + 9.606Ln(x) + 1.9) y = 3. C2S.9791 60 (0. 1a shows the relationship [14].8) y = 4.2791Ln(x) + 9.8 (0. c2.4 70 (0.6 R2 = 0. a1.5) y = 7.9) y = 3.3202Ln(x) + 2. between age and compressive strength as a normal scale For cements it was found that.4 70 (0. The .2031 Compressive strength (Mpa) R2 = 0.6771 0.8 (0.081 R2 = 0. for narrow ranges of clinker whereas. the compressive strength could be given as.9542 w/c = 0. Fig.9896 40 0.6) y = 6.6622 50 R2 = 0. the and C4AF in clinker and a0.5) y = 7.9907 (0.9 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 Age (days) (0. Compressive f ¼ a0 þ a1 c1 þ a2 c2 þ a3 c3 þ a4 c4 ð8Þ strength = constant (A) * ln(age) + constant (B) with correla- tion factors approaching unity.4) y = 7.5 Compressive strength (Mpa) R2 = 0.9791 60 0. The results are hydrates formed in the hydration of different clinker minerals plotted in Fig.4886Ln(x) + 5.9896 0. 2 Relationship between compressive strength and age for concrete mixes [15].712 (a) 80 R2 = 0.9938 30 0.7) y = 5. 1b presents the same relationship but on a composition and a constant gypsum content and fineness. (a) Normal scale and (b) log scale. the relationship between age and given in Eq. (8)[14].8) y = 4.9938 0. (regression coefficients) whose magnitude depends also on indicating the existing differences in the intrinsic strengths of the hydration time and the employed testing method. a2. the semi-logarithmic scale. a3 and a4 are constants strength increases in the order C3A < C4AF < C2S < C3S. C3A It can be noticed that.7) y = 5.a.1704Ln(x) + 25.6) y = 6.9972 20 0.5 (0.1278Ln(x) + 15.6 40 (0.9 20 10 0 1 10 100 1000 Age (days) Fig.7 (0.a. where c1. or even a moderate strength decline later on. for a given degree of hydration.4) y = 7.3202Ln(x) + 2. existing composition-strength relationship may be expressed with an acceptable accuracy with an equation of the type as For all clinker minerals.2031 0. etc.6771 R2 = 0. 1a and b.9542 w/c = 0.606Ln(x) + 1.

4 46.7 36 40.7 63.8 55 59.5 59.5% – – 31.9 49 50.1 31.3 M31 – 19.3) – – – – 0.1 40.5 50.2 58 66.3 33.3 34.6 61.2 60.3 47.4 39.5 57.6 43.1 47.5 M13 – 23.5 42.7 – – – – – M42 – 28.8 41.4 60.4 52.7 35.2 44 47.4 52.5 33.4 27.5 32.4 40.2 50.6 44.3 54.6 52.8 50.9 27.5% – – 32.6 – 42.1) – – – – 1.9 60.7 39.0% – – 28.Compressive strength prediction of Portland cement concrete with age using a new model 149 Table 1 Raw data from references [14–17.8 64.6 27.8 53.9 – 54.6 50.2 58.1 35.1 39.3 61.7 56.6 45.6 M27 – 23.9 M7 – 27.6 58.3 M37 – 24.8 M24 – 19.4 55.5 52.5 49.9 45.7 – (44.7 – M2 – 17.6 M44 – 28.9 50.2 – – 46.8 M38 – 25.1 52.7 51.9 58.8 50.7 M28 – 21.3 64.4 48 52.1 – – – – – M11 – 19.3 50.7 M14 – 21. Source Mix Age (days) 1 3 (4) 7 14 28 56 112 (90) 224 365 730 1825 Ref.7 58.1 52.8 43.1 – 61.9 – 39.3 53 54 54.2 57.8 27.19].3 33.2 57.8 53.2 47.0% – – 33.7 – – – – 65.8 43 44.2 – – 56.4 – 37 43.7 52.1 33.9 47.2 – 62.2 56.1 Ref.8 57.7 M12 – 19.6 47.2 35.1 66.7 48.7 50.2 55.7 – (46.8 46.2 37.9 – 36.4 – 37.4 31 39.9 52.6 – – 49 50.3 33.2 26.7 60.8 55.2 41 51.3 45.7 30 35.5 50.7 46.8 36.8 30.1 52.9 58.2 23.6 – 42.9 – 65.3 – 65.1 62.7 41.9 – 47.6 32.2 54 57.1 54.6 45.9 – – 44.7) – – – – 2.8 – 41.9 – M34 – 21.8 59.2 54 58 59.8 45.2 M8 – 23.3 53.6 45.6 45.1 68.9 46.4 38 42.5 54.3 M40 – 17.8 58.9 52.1 50 – 57.4 54.5 27.3 37.4 56.7 51.4 37.6 – M48 – 25.3 59.6 27.2 – M33 – 23.8 58.3 69.1 61.3 63 M18 – 21.3 51.2 48.2 38.6 33.1 39.1 49 55.4 54.5 53.6 61.7 51.7 29.5 51.2 51.2 48.3 53.3 61.3 M25 – 20.3 23.6 58.7 M36 – 22.7 32.1 – – 48.9 51.3 42 48.7 – – 54 – 63.9 42.2 – 42.9 48.3 56.7 34.9 42.9 – 47.7 49.3 32.2 41.4 61.5 61.5 50.7 50.6 30.8 – – 54.2 44.2 63.7 42.2 51. [16] nanosilica cured in water 0.9 50.5 – M32 – 19 24.2 54.7 M10 – 17.7 43.3 58.9 54 58.9 46.3 58.8 62.9 42.4 52.4 46.2 53.3 49.5 59.4 – M3 – 19.6 55 56.2 59.4 M21 – 23.9 – 37.6 50.4 53.3 – 36.6 53.5 62 M29 – 20.5 60.6 46.7 52 50.2 46 – – 56.18.6 56.9 – – 56.2 M39 – 30.4 44.4 62.4 M5 – 16.2 30.3 54.8 M20 – 21.2 63.9 49 55.7 42.7 38.5 – – M9 – 17.4 58.7 25. [14] M1 – 18.6 48.4 65.2 42.8 56.3 M19 – 18.3 M23 – 21.5 39.2 – 44.1 38.2 51.3 M47 – 25 – – 47.5 – 39.6 M46 – 24.1 – 63.6 – (48.3 50.3 51.2 – 59 58.6 51.3 59 52.8 34 41.2 – – – – – M41 – 27. [15] M49 22 – 43 – 53 – – – 65 – – M50 13 – 30 – 42 – – – 55 – – M51 8 – 22 – 32 – – – 45 – – M52 5 – 16 – 26 – – – 37 – – M53 3 – 10 – 18 – – – 28 – – M54 2 – 8 – 14 – – – 23 – – Ref.3 53.4 59 57.5 58.5 48.7 64 M45 – 23.9 – (47.8 54.0% – – 27.1 – 43.7 53.4 49.6 57.4 33.5 63.2 35.9 – 53.1 47.3 41.5 35.8 53.6 – 36.7 41.2 52 54.2 M15 – 25.6 58 61.1 47.2 54.3 58.1 M6 – 17.8 58.8 57.5 41 47 56.5 M26 – 24 33.4 26.2 54.8 40.5 – M4 – 19.4 55.5 44.5 43.4 53 54 55.8 56.6 54.2 62.5 28.5 48.6 M17 – 24.7 58 55.4 38.7 57.8 29.4 53.9 33.9 – 41 45.5 57.1 58.3) – – – – (continued on next page) .3 M22 – 27.1 48.2 44.6 30.5) – – – – 1.4 40.5 48.2 M16 – 20.8 28.1 M43 – 29.8 53.6 – M35 – 25.3 63.6 58.9 34.2 – 44.2 40.1 M30 – 19.6 39.2 43.5 – 47.3 34.6 59.1 34 41 44.8 60.7 – – 56.8 – (42.

0 – (82. Regression lines of the form ft = A ln(t) + B could be [14–16.9. age and strength is plotted in Figs.6 86.5) – – – – 1. Experimental data pertinent to values of compressive Fig.0 11.9 76.7 – – – – 12% – (58. (9).07 50.33 – 39.4 up to mixes are gathered from several research papers 0.0 – 45.8) – – – – 0.33 17.7 110.18].0% – – 27 – 35.5 79. It changes from mix to other depending on aggregate type and properties.7 – (88.3) – – – – Ref.5 – (110.7) 20% 19.1 84.33 31.0 (83.5 53.2 – – – – 16% – (57.8 83. w/c = 0.47 (85. For the proposed So.67 – 24.2) – – – – 2.23 71.67 – 33.1 91.7 – (119.1 – (48.8 70.4 23 C 12.0 36.63) 10% 22.2) 66.6 (72.4 – (79.6 – (101.0% – – 35.8) 95.5) – – – – 24% – (94.0 (80.67 29.2 – (56. ft ¼ A lnðtÞ þ B ð9Þ ft ¼ A lnðtÞ þ B with correlation coefficient approaches unity: where.5 – 50. temperature degree. Hydration rate and percentage Considering the regression equation for concrete strength with are two factors related to the used cement.67 – – – 50 C 21.67 76.0 – – – Ref. the relationship between age and compressive strength cement composition.1 62.7 – (95.a.5% – – 32.43 62.97. [16] nanosilica cured in lime 0. [18] 10 C 3.5 69. Besides the used ce.8 90.7 – (87.0) – – – – 1.73 62. Whereas.4 – (95. regression line.4 98.43) 5% 21.1) – – – – 20% – (49.5) 69.0% – – 42 – 56.8 92.33 – – – Cem V. That and method are some factors among the factors affecting both constant will be denoted as the level of strength constant strength level and gain rate at different ages.6) 103.8) – – – – Ref.6) 77.47 75.0 – 30.33 76.97 63.3 80.73 82.2 – (102.93 (82.0 – – – 50 C 10.0 77.33 66.13) 25% 15. Strength development for Portland cement concrete Definition of constants A and B The Portland cement concrete strength level and rate of gain are dependent on many factors.1 99. For each concrete mix.0 23.1 78.67 – 27.4) 66.5 – (94. of the regression line that will be called rate of strength gain tionship between age and strength of Portland cement concrete constant (rate constant).5) 65.4 – (51. [17] silica fume 50 C 0% – (61.7) – – – – 28% – (99.17.8 58.8 93.8 – (54.4 – (39.2 84.150 M. the strength development takes the same for concrete mixes could take the following shape: form for the pure clinker minerals as.1 108. [19] metakaolin% 0% 19. The experimental (grade constant).9 – 53.8 74. the constant (A) denotes the slope results for Adnan [15] are considered to investigate the rela. there are many factors contributing to both of strength understood as the intersected part of the strength axis by the level and its rate of gain at different ages. at normal temperature (20 C).53 72.5% – – 38.0 22.67 – – – Cem V.1 80.3 72.0) – – – – 20% – (87. age as given in Eq. Mix composition.7) – – – – 28% – (65.7 82.9) 83.0 17.0 – – – Ref.77 73.0 74.73 (81.23 64.33 24.a.23) 30% 14.67 17.7) 68.2) 88.2) – – – – 16% – (83.6) 62. the compressive strength . 2a and b show the relationship between age and strength fc at different ages for a large number of concrete strength for concrete mixes containing w/c from 0.3) – – – – Ref.8) previous equation is applied to a specified Portland cement drawn for the given results with a correlation coefficient great- depending on its composition and the relationship between er than 0.3 69.0) 76. 1a and b.23 57.5 (71. the value of constant (B) could be ment.8 100. Abd elaty Table 1 (continued) Source Mix Age (days) 1 3 (4) 7 14 28 56 112 (90) 224 365 730 1825 Ref.5) – – – – 24% – (54.9 80.53 60.5 23 C 7. curing time the values of the compressive strength along with the age. w/c = 0.0 17.4) – – – – 12% – (72. [18] 10 C 2.1 – 48.4 – (89. (ft) is the compressive strength at age (t) days and (A) and (B) are constants.33 22. [17]Silica fume 20 C 0% – (60.07) 15% 20.

MPa Fig. A best fitting curve for the scattered data is given as Fig. 6 Relationship between calculated (A) values versus predicted corresponding ones using Eq. B is the grade constant and fc is the 28-day compressive strength. 4. (10). B 20 Fig. MPa 0 0 5 10 15 20 Fig. 3 Relationship between compressive strength and grade Constant (A) from strength development constant (B).20 30 R2 = 0. A ¼ 1:4035 lnðBÞ þ 2:9956 with r2 ¼ 0:98 ð11Þ Based on Eqs. 4 Relationship between grade constant (B) and rate constant (A). A 0 10 20 30 40 Calculated (B) values (Grade constant) The estimated regression data for (A) and (B) are scattered in Fig.9725 1 40 0 0 10 20 30 Grade constant. Table 1 presents the raw data used in tively. A best fitting curve is drawn joining the results and takes the form B ¼ 0:005ðfc Þ2:20 with r2 ¼ 0:91 ð10Þ 10 where.91 15 (B) 20 10 10 5 0 A= rate constant 0 20 40 60 80 Compressive strength. Fig.005x2. respec- A and B are estimated. with those calculated from actual strength results.Compressive strength prediction of Portland cement concrete with age using a new model 151 Constanta. Predicted (B) values Eq. 7 Actual compressive strength values predicted ones at different ages for different concrete mixes. (10) 30 Grade constant. (A) estimated from the proposed model 40 20 y = 0. 0 Rate constant. Figs. The predicted values seem to be in a well agreement this study.4035Ln(x) + 2. (11). 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 40 Actual strength values. MPa Rate constant. (9) from which the values of the constants versus the expected ones for constants (B) and (A). 8 7 100 6 Predicted compressive strength. A 5 80 4 3 y = 1. 3. B The estimated (B) values are scattered versus the correspond- 20 ing compressive strength at 28 day age in Fig.9956 60 2 2 R = 0. 5 and 6 show the calculated values form given in Eq. 5 Relationship between calculated B values versus predicted corresponding ones using Eq. . (10) and (11) and beside the pre calculated versus age is plotted then a regression curve is fitted of the values of (A) and (B).

152 M. the mean value for the rate constant ranges between 0.8988 20 1 10 100 (30%) y = 15.9038Ln(x) + 48.966 0 90 (5%) y = 11. 24% the literature and given in Table 1 as follows: and 28% silica fume as a percentage replacement by cement mass [17].15 0% R2 = 0.504 R2 = 0.115 Age.868Ln(x) + 22. 9 represents the relationship between Using the estimated constant values for (A) and (B).a.649 25 R2 = 0. 15%. 8 Effect of using silica fume on strength development at 20 C as per the proposed model [17]. Abd elaty 120 (0%) y = 8.9898 40 1 10 100 Age. Fig. days R2 = 0. an age and compressive strength for concrete mixes containing 0%.72Ln(x) + 29. (11). 12%. ment of cement mass [19].418 Sterngth. 100 (0%) y = 11. It could be noticed that the relationship between Based on the compressive strength at 28 days and employ. MPa 70 15 R 2 = 0. equation representing the compressive strength at any 5%.885 50 30 (20%) y = 15.9389 80 10 (10%) y = 12.9. The values of the rate constant (A) seem to be the estimated values for the compressive strength with age.5455Ln(x) + 49.9 and 1.119 R2 = 0.813 R2 = 0. (10) the grade constant (B) could be calculated from the same trend as given in Eq. 20%.8489 Concrete strength.928Ln(x) + 45. MPa 24% 90 28% (16%) y = 11.113Ln(x) + 26. strength for mixes containing metakaolin.8921 Fig. it could be no- ticed that the correlation coefficient for the regression lines is Fig.329Ln(x) + 23. On the other hand.802Ln(x) + 24.063Ln(x) + 28.8785 30 (25%) y = 14.487Ln(x) + 33.9442 60 (24%) y = 14. Application of the proposed model for Portland cement concrete Applicability of the model for mixes containing mineral mixes admixtures The proposed model for the estimation of the concrete Fig.a. 8 shows the relationship between age and compressive strength at different ages is applied to the data taken from strength for mixes containing 0%.889 R2 = 0.8976 80 (20%) y = 14. 20%.677 100 R2 = 0.214Ln(x) + 43. The increased with the increase of metakaolin content which reflects plotted data confirm the reliability of the proposed method for the influence of aging on approaching the final compressive the estimation of the concrete compressive strength with age.187Ln(x) + 28. 10%.9021 60 20 (15%) y = 14.959Ln(x) + 35.074 R2 = 0. days Fig.9927 110 12% 16% 20% (12%) y = 9.283 5 R2 = 0. 9 Effect of using metakaolin on the development of compressive strength as per the proposed model [19]. 25% and 30% metakaolin as a replace- required age could be established. 16%. From regression lines.418 40 R2 = 0.914 70 R2 = 0.0. (A) could be predicted. age and strength of all mixes containing silica fume can follow ing Eq. . 7 shows the relationship between the measured versus about 0. (9) with a correlation coefficient which using Eq.9836 50 (28%) y = 17.

5 (0.0% by Results of Han and Kim [18] were analyzed to investigate the cement mass and cured in water follow the proposed Eq.4.0443Ln(x) + 17.5798Ln(x) + 21.) 10 deg.95.7428Ln(x) + 32.145 30 R2 = 0.9014Ln(x) + 21. 0.5 w (1.7293 R2 = 0.8186 45 1w (1.Compressive strength prediction of Portland cement concrete with age using a new model 153 Cured in water 70 Cured in lime (0%) y = 5. 0.158 Comprssive strength.82Ln(x) + 2.4. for mixes containing 0%. The values of strength development for Portland cement concrete.1201Ln(x) + 20.4 40 y = 8.225 65 0 (0%) y = 5.) y = 6. Days Fig. The results of compressive Applicability of the model to concrete mixes at high temperature strength versus age are scattered in Fig. 10 Effect of using nano silica in concrete mixes on the development of strength as per the proposed model [16]. 10 deg.0%) y = 6. Fig. 11 Effect of temperature degree on the strength development as per the proposed model [18].626 R2 = 0.311 0 R2 = 0.5 and type for control mix. It could be noticed that.0%) y = 5.10 deg. days Fig.9497 (0. 23 deg.9689 (w /c= 0.9894 R2 = 0.961 40 1. 1.9688 0. 50 deg.5.9627 R2 = 0. the proposed equation repre- silica sents the strength gain as a function of age with a correlation coefficient about 0.2138Ln(x) + 25. MPa 23 deg. The strength gain could be . for concrete mixes containing nano V cement at 10. 0.8086 2 Strength. 1. MPa (1.5%) y = 5.8.4 R2 = 0.4.5%) y = 6.2451Ln(x) + 17.4 and 0. 50 deg. Two methods for curing including water and lime solution were applied.0%) y = 6.9259Ln(x) + 22. 0.1605Ln(x) + 13.0%.5 R2 = 0. 23 deg.5%) y = 6.986 R2 = 0. It could be noticed also that the values of The influence of nano silica fume on compressive strength of constant (B) increase with the increase of the nano silica con- concrete mixes was studied [16].9893 (w /c= 0. 23 and 50 C.9922 (w /c= 0.5 w R2 = 0.4 30 y = 6.5 20 50 deg.5. 0.177 10 deg.381 R2 = 0. Whereas. The effect of curing media tent in concrete mixes cured in lime solution.0315Ln(x) + 11.782 R2 = 0.) 50 deg. 10. was investigated. (9) influence of the temperature degree on the compressive with a correlation coefficient more than 0.9699 (w /c= 0.) 1 10 100 Age. 11 coefficients (B and A) for mixes containing nano silica and shows the relationship between age and compressive strength cured in water seem to be greater than the corresponding ones for concrete mixes prepared with w/c of 0.7949Ln(x) + 5.5 55 R2 = 0.9653 25 20 1 10 100 Age.) 23 deg.032 60 1 R2 = 0.0%) y = 5.5 y = 6.9846 (w /c= 0.9724 2w 35 (2.9036Ln(x) + 16.9977Ln(x) + 22. Applicability of the model to concrete mixes containing nano silica and cured in lime solution.1701 10 R2 = 0.7934Ln(x) + 8.286 50 0w (1.5% and 2. 50 y = 8.5%) y = 6. 0.9847 (w /c= 0. 0.8098 R2 = 0.) y = 5.5%.1379Ln(x) + 28.5.7964 (2.9834 0.454 1.

2 25.1 30.363 R2 = 0.1342Ln(x) + 92.07 18. ones at different ages for sample calculation example.58 6.518 0% R2 = 0.9624 110 12% (12%) y = 1.97 41.7341 60 (24%) y = 2.8 3 10 18 28 4. 12 shows the age-compressive strength relationship for 20 concrete mixes containing silica fume at 50 C [17].47 17.5 13 30 42 55 7.7854 50 40 (28%) y = 3. On the other hand and at 50 C.67 1. (9)–(11).0 39.23 10.92 * 0. (9) could be drawn for each 0 mix with varied correlation coefficient. the (A) values tend to in- crease with the increase of silica fume content. The fast 60 W/C=0.a.5122Ln(x) + 96.7782 1 10 100 Age.6468 20% Strength.77 59. days Fig. concrete mixes containing silica fume at 50 C gain most due to the rapid hydration process.38 * Experimental values [15]. Regression lines of the form proposed in Eq.97. the grade constant (B) tends to increase at high temperature W/C=0. It could be noticed that 0 20 40 60 80 100 the values of grade constant (B) are higher compared to the Meausred compressive strength.38 76. it could be concluded (A) values indicate the slower rate of strength gain at later ages that.772 28% R2 = 0.6 as well as at lower temperature degrees. ** Predicted values using the proposed model Eqs. 12 Effect of temperature degree on the strength development at 50 C as per the proposed model [19].81 11. MPa relatively high correlation coefficients above 0.5 80 W/C=0. MPa corresponding values at 20 C.33 ** 6.42 45. the relatively smaller Out of this and based on (B) values.4285 80 (20%) y = 2. Abd elaty 120 (0%) )y = 6.84 23.0 22.63 28. 13 Actual compressive strength values versus predicted to increase with the increase of silica fume content.7 degrees or with reducing of w/c ratio of the mix.21 ** 18.75 13. represented by regression lines as given in Eq.44 2.21 * 0. w/c Notes 1 day 7 days 28 days 1 year A B * 0.4 of the rate constant (A) are increased with reducing w/c ratios W/C=0.532 70 R2 = 0.4 22 43 53 65 7. Moreover. On the other hand. MPa 90 24% (16%) y = 1.8 W/C=0.2 31. The values W/C=0.7 5 16 26 37 5.9685Ln(x) + 71.616 ** 1.1031Ln(x) + 54.9 hydration process due to the high temperature influences clearly the values of the grade constant (B) whereas the values 40 of the rate constant (A) reflect the required period to approach the final compressive strength. Moreover. Fig.6 * 0.2 * 0.7 46.0 ** 10.62 8.789 30.6 8 22 32 45 6. Table 2 Sample calculations.a. The values of (B) constant tend Fig.3 17.99 * 0. of their strength at early ages. the rate values (A) for con- trol mix are greater than the corresponding values for mixes containing silica fume. (9) with 100 Predicted compressive strength.58 56.736 R2 = 0.981 100 16% R2 = 0.9 2 8 14 23 3.371Ln(x) + 80.154 M. .428 ** 30.4133Ln(x) + 84.81 ** 2.

2nd ed. Oluokun. HBRC. temperature 20 C. (11 and 10).A. considered as a function of strength at age of 28-day as [18] S. Efficiency of fly ash in concrete with age. Yeh. L.  Portland cement concrete mixes containing metakaolin or [19] S. Eq. Factors influencing strength tor (A) represents the rate of strength gain with age development of concrete containing silica fume. [10] V. 2006 (Chapter 7). concrete. 13. Standard Practice for Estimating Concrete Strength by the Maturity Method. versus the corresponding predicted ones in Fig. (2006) 1865–1873. F. A new perspective on the used to predict the strength gain of Portland cement hydration characteristics of cement phases. (in Russian). Khatib. 1994. Concrete Technology Theory and Practice. and based on the characteristic Concrete and Commentary. Egypt. The pre- [7] C. ing silica fume at normal temperature 20 C. [8] ASTM C 1074–93.A. Moreover ratio law. ASTM STP 169C. [13] S.W..-H. proposed model for the estimation of Portland cement con- [2] ACI 318–11. Firstly. Generalization of strength versus water–cementitious dicted compressive strength values are in a good agreement ratio relationship to age.A. Cement and concrete research 34 (7) (2004) 1219–1227. and using Building Works. [14] P. concrete. Lea’s Chemistry of Cement and Concrete. pozzolanic silica fume at high temperature and mixes containing nano activity and cement hydration in supperplasticised Metakaolin silica fume particles and cured in lime solutions are not concrete. [5] F. Cement and concrete mixes with age at normal temperature with a Concrete Research 22 (4) (1992) 689–694. Consequently. (9)–(11) that could be [12] J. Wild. A new model for the estimation of compressive sive strength at any age for Portland cement concrete con. Cement and Concrete Research 36 with those previously measured by Adnan [15]. 15–19. ered as a characteristic property for a concrete mix. Colak. Cement and whereas. 1957. respectively. J. Cement and Concrete taining nano silica fume and cured in water at normal Research 36 (7) (2006) 1409–1413.Compressive strength prediction of Portland cement concrete with age using a new model 155 Sample calculations References [1] M. 2009. Shetty. The fac.M. Stroiizdat.J. S. Ramachandran. Six concrete mixes that are previously conducted Materials Laboratory.  The proposed model could be used to estimate the compres- [15] A. Mironov. Lewis Institute. Chartered. B. King.-K. strength of Portland cement concrete. Table 2 introduces a sample calculation and application for the Chand & Company Ltd. International Transport Research Documentation ment with age for Portland cement concrete mixes contain. pp. Chicago. 20. Kim. reasonable accuracy. (10).. factor (B) represents the grade constant which is Concrete Research 25 (7) (1995) 1567–1580. Fly ash concrete mix design and water–cement The results of calculations are given in Table 2. J. V. the actually measured compressive strength values are plotted [6] K. Salleh. Tests and Properties of Concrete.N. 2005 (Chapter 6).G. Hewlett. the compressive strength could be predicted at any re. Beaudoin. [4] A. by Adnan [15] are considered including different w/c ratios. Khatib.A. J. Garino.M. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.S. . Accelerated strength testing is it a solution to a Based on the analysis for the data gathered from the literature contractor’s dilemma?. Han.M. Wild. M. Civil Engineering. New York. Cement and Concrete Research 26 (3) (1996) 465–474. Accelerated Concrete Hardening  The proposed model can represent the strength develop. Concrete International 3 (1981) 17–21 it could be concluded that: [11] N. Structural quired age. (9). Aziz. Jones. Rao. Further Notes on the Accelerated Test for Concrete. ACI Materials Journal 91 (4) (1994) 362–371. Sabir. Cement and Concrete Research 26 (10) (1996) 1537– following the proposed model. Building Code Requirements for Structural crete strength with age. The effects of lime  The proposed Eq. strength at 28 days. Effect of temperature and age on the relationship between dynamic and static elastic modulus of given in Eq. New Delhi. Composites B 42 (3) (2011) 562–569.B. (9) for compressive strength development solution on the properties of SiO2 nanoparticles binary blended with age contains two constants (A) and (B) that are consid. Babu. mix constants (A) and (B) are calculated [3] ECP 203Egyptian Code for Designing and Executing the using Eqs.C. A. Rashid. Design of Concrete Mixtures Bulletin No. [17] S. 1918. Malinina. G. Conclusions [9] J.S.S. (ITRD) (in English). Relative strength. S. Givi. [16] A. Duff. 1544. Malhotra. 1964. Moscow. p.  A mathematical model includes Eqs. 1.