You are on page 1of 7

SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017

Use of M-Sand as a Replacement of Cement and


Fine Aggregate
R Lakshmi Priyanka1B.Ravi Kiran2G V L N Murthy3
1 M.Tech student (149F1D8721), Nova Engineering college, Eluru
2 Assistant professor, Department of civil engineering, Nova Engineering college, Eluru
3 Assistant professor, Department of civil engineering, Sri Vasavi Engineering college, Tadepalligudem

ABSTRACT
M-Sand is crushed aggregates produced from hard granite stone which is cubically shaped with rounded edges.
Concrete industry now will have to go for crushed sand or what is called manufactured sand (M-SAND). The use of
M-Sand as a replacement of cementious component in concrete depends on several factors i.e. the design strength,
workability, water demand and finally the cost. There is optimum cement content beyond which little or no
additional strength is achieved by increase in the cement content. So, by maintaining the optimum cement content in
the concrete and decreasing it’s content by blending it with materials such as stone dust, fly ash, silica fume,
Metakaoline, GGBS or combinations of these materials. In the present work, an experimental investigation was
carried out, replacing cement with 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35% of M-Sand and replacing fine aggregate
with 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 100% of M-Sand. In M30 grades of concrete, the test results are compared
with conventional concrete.

INTRODUCTION in cost. So we are investigating to replace cement with


Concrete commonly used structural material stonedust as it resembles cement in fineness, colour,
for all types of construction. Communities aroundthe and water absorbing properties.
world rely on concrete as a safe, strong and simple
building material. It is used in all types ofconstruction, LITERATURE REVIEW
from domestic work to multi-storey office blocks and Extensive research works both at National and
shopping complexes.In the recent times its use in International level has been done on the useof various
constructionhas been increased considerably thus the admixtures in mortars and concrete’s with a common
cities and towns are virtually becoming goal.
concretejungles. The demand is likely to increase in  To combat the environmental hazards from the
the future to match the growing population, housing, industrial wastes.
transportation and other amenities.  To modify the properties of traditional concrete to
Due to the recent spurt in construction activity brought the desired level suitable to the specific
on by the current economic boom,the cost of circumstances.
construction has been increasing by up to 15% every  To conserve the natural resources used in the
year, a major factor for thisescalation in costs is the production of construction materials.
price of raw materials like cement, steel, timber,  To bring down the increasing cost economics of
aggregates etc. As conventional natural resources are cement, building blocks and high strength
being depleted, the costs of these materials are concrete.
increasing.  To combat the scarcity of traditional ordinary
Already investigations have been made by partial Portland cement and bricks.
replacement of fly ash, marble powderand blast  Of late, to rehabilitate the existing structures
furnace slag in place of cement. Studies have been which are deteriorated over a period of time etc.
revealed that fly ash concrete haveless strength when
compared to conventional concrete, but with the use of 1.”Flexural behavior of high strength stone dust
super plasticizers inaddition will not only compensate concrete”. V. Bhikshma, R. Kishore &N.H.M. Raju
deficiency in its strength, but also modifies its [1] concluded stone dust material can be used as
properties. partial or full replacementof river sand as fine
Partial replacement of cement with marble powder is aggregate without altering the strength, workability or
allowed upto 10%. As cement is thecostliest ingredient settingcharacteristics of concrete. They presented the
in the concrete, so it will be economical to replace results of tests on cubes (150×150×150mm) and under
cement other thanaggregates when they are compared reinforced concrete beams (150×230×1500 mm) in

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 112


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
order to obtain the flexural behavior of under Ferric oxide(2.28%)
reinforced RC beams. A total of 24 cubes and 10  Magnesium oxide (1.57%).
beams weretested for direct compression and flexure Size of fine M-sand passing through
at 28 days. Stone dust is useful as fine aggregatein 75 micron.
RCC and PCC, Masonry blocks construction, Road Properties of M-SAND
formation, Landscaping, Precast structural elements 1. The manufactured sand has required
like RCC ventilators, Jallies, Rings for wells, Flower gradation of fines, physical properties such as
pots and Waterstorage tubs, Back fill material in shape, smooth surface textures and
reinforced earth work construction, Filter media in consistency which makes it the best sand
sandfilters, and Lining of drains . suitable for construction.
2.” Influence of fine stone dust on high strength 2. These physical properties of sand
concrete”. V. Syam Prakash*,Dhanya Krishnan, G. Provides greater strength to the concrete by
Jeenu [2] conducted a study on the mechanical reducing segregation, bleeding,
properties and behavior of high strength concrete and honeycombing, voids and capillary.
mortar using fine stone dust, the residue produced 3. Thus required grade of sand for the given
during the production of manufactured sand. they purpose helps the concrete fill voids
concluded that Tests on mechanical properties ofhigh between coarse aggregates and makes
strength concrete mixes with various percentages of concrete more compact and dense, thus
additives indicate that 60% of addition of fine stone increasing the strength ofconcrete.
dust is optimum to produce high strength concrete 4. The saturated water absorption and porosity
without muchreduction in strength. of mixes containing optimum percentage of
3.“Experimental Study on Partial Replacement of M-sand are lower compared to those mixes
Cement by Neutralized Red Mud in Concrete”. A. B. without M-sand.
Sawant, M. B. Kumthekar, V. V. Diwan, K. G. 5. The rate of penetration of water in to
Hiraskar[3] made an attempt to check the effectiveness the pores in concrete is comparatively less in
of neutralized red mud as a partial replacement of the case ofconcrete mixes with optimum
portland cement. After testing of 5 blended cement percentage of M-sand. Thus the use of M-
samples (5% to 25 % replacement of san resulted in a practically impermeable
Cement by NRM) with an increment of 5 %, they concrete.
concluded that the optimum use ofNRM is 15% as a 6. Cusher stone dust containing mainly of sio2
partial replacement of cement by NRM. does not show cementitious property in the
4.”Experimental study on Use of stone powder in presence of water. However, it can exhibit
concrete and mortar as an alternative ofsand”. H. M. significant cementitious property when
A. Mahzuz1, A. A. M. Ahmed2 and M. A. Yusuf3 [4] reacting with the byproduct of cement
.The study focuses on todetermine the relative hydration at high temperature.
performance of concrete by using powder sand. From
laboratory experiments, it was revealed that concrete EXPERIMENTAL SET UP
made of stone powder and stone chip gainedabout
15% higher strength than that of the concrete made of Cement
normal sand and brick chip. Physical Properties of ordinary Portland cement of
KCP-53 Grade
MATERIALS USED
1. Cement s.no Property Test results
2. Aggregates 1 Normal consistency 33%
Fine Aggregate 2 Specific gravity 2.98
Coarse Aggregate 3 Initial setting time 100min
3. M-Sand 4 Final setting time 160 min
5 Fineness of cement 98%
M-SAND
M-sand is crushed aggregates produced from hard M-SAND
granite stone which is cubically shaped with grounded Specific Gravity of M-SAND= 2.82
edges, washed and graded with consistency to be used
as a substitute of river sand. Manufactured Sand is a Fine aggregate
sand produced from crushing of granite stones in Specific Gravity of SAND =2.98
required grading to be used for construction purposes Fineness modulus of sand= 3.71
as a replacement for river sand. M-sand having major
chemical constituents as Coarse aggregate
silica (70.74%), Specific Gravity of coarse aggregate
Aluminium dioxide (20.67%),

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 113


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
=2.83 highdurability is vital, the durability requirement will
Fineness modulus of coarse aggregate determine the water-cement ratio to be used.
= 8.53 4. Maximum nominal size of aggregate
In general, larger the maximum size of
CONCRETE MIX DESIGN aggregate, smaller is the cement requirement for a
particular water-cement ratio, because the workability
INTRODUCTION of concrete increases with increase in maximum size
The process of selecting suitable ingredients of the aggregate. However, the compressive strength
of concrete and determining their relativeamounts with tends to increase with the decrease in size of
the objective of producing a concrete of the required, aggregate.
strength, durability, andworkability as economically as IS 456:2000 and IS 1343:1980 recommend that the
possible, is termed the concrete mix design. The cost nominal size of the aggregate shouldbe as large as
of concrete is made up of the cost of materials, plant possible.
and labour. The variations in the cost of materials 5. Grading and Type Of Aggregate
arisefrom the fact that the cement is several times The grading of aggregate influences the mix
costly than the aggregate, thus the aim is to produceas proportions for a specified workability andwater-
lean a mix as possible. From technical point of view cement ratio. Coarser the grading leaner will be mix
the rich mixes may lead to high shrinkageand cracking which can be used. Very lean mix isnot desirable since
in the structural concrete, and to evolution of high heat it does not contain enough finer material to make the
of hydration in mass concrete which may cause concrete cohesive.The type of aggregate influences
cracking. strongly the aggregate-cement ratio for the
The actual cost of concrete is related to the desiredworkability and stipulated water cement ratio.
cost of materials required for producing a minimum An important feature of a satisfactory aggregate is the
mean strength called characteristic strength that is uniformity of the grading which can be achieved by
specified by the designer of the structure. This mixing different size fractions.
depends on the quality control measures, but there is 6. Quality Control
no doubt that the quality control adds to the cost of The degree of control can be estimated
concrete. The extent of quality control is often an statistically by the variations in test results.
economic compromise, and depends on the size and Thevariation in strength results from the variations in
type of job. The cost of labour depends on the the properties of the mix ingredients and lackof control
workability of mix, e.g., a concrete mix of inadequate of accuracy in batching, mixing, placing, curing and
workability may result in a high cost of labour to testing. The lower the differencebetween the mean and
obtain a degree of compaction with available minimum strengths of the mix lower will be the
equipment. cement-content required.The factor controlling this
FACTORS AFFECTING THE CHOICE OF MIX difference is termed as quality control.
PROPORTIONS
The various factors affecting the mix design are: MIXDESIGNFOR“M30”GRADE
1. Compressive strength
It is one of the most important properties of concrete The bureau of Indian standards,
and influences many other describable properties of recommended a set of procedure for design of concrete
the hardened concrete. The mean compressive strength mix mainly based on the work done in national
required at a specific age, usually 28 days, determines laboratories. The mix design procedures are covered in
the nominal water-cement ratio of the mix. The other IS: 10262-2009. Those methods can be applied for
factor affecting the strength of concrete at a given age both medium strength and high strengthconcrete. The
and cured at a prescribed temperature is the degree of following mixes are designed are based on Indian
compaction. standard recommended methodof concrete mix design
2. Workability IS: 10262-2009.
The degree of workability depends on 3 factors
1. These are the size of the section to MIX PROPORTION
be concreted. Cement =330kg/m3
2. The amount of reinforcement. Water =132kg/m3
3. The method of compaction to be Fine aggregate =873 kg/m3
used Coarse aggregate =1237 kg/m3
3. Durability Chemical admixture =7 kg/m3
The durability of concrete is its resistance to Water-cement ratio =0.40
the aggressive environmental conditions.High strength
concrete is generally more durable than low strength
concrete. In the situationswhen the high strength is not
necessary but the conditions of exposure are such that

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 114


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
40
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH VALUES 30
FORREPLACEMENT OF CEMENT BY M-
SAND 20
10
3-Days Compressive Strength Results
0
Cement replacement with Compressive 0 5 10 15 20 25
S.No
M sand by (%)(mix) strength (Mpa)
1 0 20.4
2 5 18.89 28-Days Compressive Strength Results
3 10 20.44 Cement
4 15 18.67 replacement Compressive
S.No
5 20 16.00 with M sand by strength (Mpa)
6 25 14.22 (%)(mix)
7 30 12.44 1 0 39.11
8 35 11.56 2 5 38.00
3 10 39.56
4 15 32.00
3 Days Compressive Strength
5 20 31.11
30 6 25 26.67
20 7 30 24.00
8 35 22.22
10
0 28-Days Compressive Strength
0 5 10 15 20 25

7-Days Compressive Strength Results


Cement replacement with Compressive
S.No
M sand by (%)(mix) strength (Mpa)
1 0 28.89
2 5 28.00
3 10 29.78
4 15 24.67
5 20 24.44 Compressive Strength Results For Replacement of
6 25 21.11 Cement by M-Sand
7 30 18.00
8 35 16.00 Cement
Replacement with
Stone 3 days 7 days 28days
7 Days Compressive strength
dust by (%)(Mix)

0 20.44 28.89 39.11


5 18.89 28.00 38.00
10 20.44 29.78 39.56
15 18.67 24.67 32.00
20 16.00 24.44 31.11
25 14.22 21.11 26.67
30 12.44 18.00 24.00
35 11.56 16.00 22.22

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 115


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017

Comparision of Compressive strengths for M30 7-Days Compressive Strength Results


F.A Replacement
Compressive
with Msand
SNO Strength(Mpa)
by (%)(Mix)

1 0 27.77
2 10 15.55
3 20 23.77
4 30 23.11
5 40 29.33
6 50 22.44
7 60 20.00
8 100 15.11

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Compressive Strength Values For Replacement Of


F.A By M-Sand

3-Days Compressive Strength Results

F.A Replacement
Compressive
with Msand
SNO Strength(Mpa)
by (%)(Mix)
28-Days Compressive Strength Results
1 0 17.77
2 10 18.22 F.A Replacement with
Compressive
3 20 22 Msand
SNO Strength(Mpa)
4 30 24.44 by (%)(Mix)
5 40 25.77
6 50 20 1 0 31.77
7 60 19.33 2 10 26
8 100 6.47 3 20 28.88
4 30 36.66
3-Days Compressive Strength 5 40 43.11
6 50 28.22
7 60 27.11
8 100 14.66

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 116


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
Compared to compressive strengths of 5%,
28-Days Compressive 10% of addition of M-sand, the
compressivestrength of 15%, 20%, 25%,
Strength 30%, 35% fly ash concrete has been
60
decreased.
Whereas comparing to traditional concrete,
40 compressive strength of 10% has
beenroughly same.
20 Hence for economical view 10% is preferable
and it is suggested.
0 From the above study we conclude that the
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 100 compressive strength of the concrete
cubeshas maintained up to 40% when F.A is
replaced by M-sand.
Compared to compressive strengths of 10%,
Compressive Strength Results For Replacement of 20% of addition of M-sand, thecompressive
F.A by M-Sand strength of 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, fly ash
concrete has been decreased.
Cement Replacement Whereas comparing to traditional concrete,
with Stone compressive strength of 40% has
3 days 7 days 28days beenroughly same.
dust by (%)(Mix)
Hence for economical view 40% is preferable
0 17.77 27.77 31.77 and it is suggested.
10 18.22 28.00 39.56
20 22 23.77 28.88 REFERENCES
30 24.44 23.11 28.88
1) ”Flexural behaviour of high strength stone dust concrete”. V.
40 25.77 29.33 43.11 Bhikshma, R.Kishore & N.H.M.Raju Department of Civil
50 20 22.44 28.22 Engineering, University College of Engineering, Osmania
60 19.33 20.00 27.11 University, Hyderabad, India.Challenges, Opportunities and
Solutions in Structural
100 6.47 15.11 14.66 2) Engineering and Construction – Ghafoori (ed.) © 2010 Taylor
& Francis Group, London,ISBN 978-0-415-56809-8
Comparision of Compressive strengths for M30
3) Influence of fine stonedust on high strength concrete”. V.
Syam Prakash*,Dhanya Krishnan, G. Jeenu, College of
50 Engineering, Trivandrum, Kerala, India-August 2007.
45
4) Experimental Study on Partial Replacement of Cement by
40 Neutralized Red Mud in Concrete”.
35 A. B. Sawant, M. B. Kumthekar, V. V. Diwan, K. G. Hiraskar.
30 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced
Technology (IJEAT) ISSN: 2249 –8958,Volume-2,Issue-
25 1,October2012.
20 5) ”Experimental study on Use of stone powder in concrete and
15 mortar as an alternative of sand”. H. M. A. Mahzuz1, A. A. M.
Ahmed2 and M. A. Yusuf3. Department of Civil and
10 Environmental Engineering, Shahjalal University of science
and Technology, Bangladesh1 ,Department of Civil
5 Engineering, Leading University, Sylhet, Bangladesh2 and
0 Civil Engineering Department, University of Information
Technology and sciences, Chittagong, Bangladesh3,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 100 December,2010.

6) Experimental investigation on partial replacement of cement


with flyash in design mix concrete”.Prof. Jayeshkumar
Pitroda1, Dr. L.B.Zala2, Dr.F.S.Umrigar3 Assistant Professor
CONCLUSIONS & Research Scholar1, Head & Professor2, Civil Engineering
Department, B.V.M.Engineering College, Vallabh
Vidhyanagar-Gujarat – India , Principal3, B.V.M. Engineering
From the above study we conclude that the College, Vallabh Vidhyanagar – Gujarat – India.
compressive strength of the concrete cubes
has maintained up to 10% when cement is 7) Sawdust Ash (SDA) as Partial Replacement of Cement”.
C.Marthong Lecturer, Civil Engineering Department, Shillong
replaced by M-sand.

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 117


SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
Polytechnic, Shillong Shillong, Meghalaya, India
.International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 , Vol. 2, Issue4, July-
August 2012, pp.1980-1985

8) ”Investigation on Compressive strength of concrete with rice


husk ash as partial replacement of ordinary Portland cement”.
Maurice E.Ephraim, Godwin A. Akeke and Joseph O. Ukpata.
Department of Civil Engineering, Rivers State University of
Science and Technology Port Harcourt, Nigeria-2012

9) Partial Replacement of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) with


Bambara Groundnut Shell Ash (BGSA) in Concrete”. B. A.
Alabadan, M. A. Olutoye, M. S. Abolarin and M. Zakariya–
June,2005.

10) “Partial replacement of cement with marble dust powder”.


Prof. P.A. Shirulea, Ataur Rahmanb , Rakesh D. Guptac. Dept.
Of Civil Engineering, SSBT’s COET, Bambhori, Jalgaon,
Maharashtra. International Journal of Advanced Engineering
Research and Studies -2012.

11) “The effect of the using waste marble dust as fine sand on the
mechanical properties of the concrete”. Bahar Demirel,
Department of Construction, Faculty of Technical Education,
Firat University, Elazig, 23119, Turkey

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 118