Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179
DOI 10.1617/s11527-012-9824-3
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
An empirical approach for the optimisation of aggregate
combinations for self-compacting concrete
Prakash Nanthagopalan • Manu Santhanam
Received: 11 February 2010 / Accepted: 4 January 2012 / Published online: 17 January 2012
 RILEM 2012
Abstract The fresh and hardened properties of self-
compacting concrete (SCC) depend on number of
factors such as paste composition, paste content,
aggregate content, aggregate gradation etc. In the
present investigation, the influence of the packing
density of aggregates on the properties of SCC was
evaluated. Experiments were conducted to measure
the packing density for different combinations of
aggregates precisely. A ternary packing diagram
(TPD) was developed based on the packing density
of measured and interpolated data. Considering the
limitations in generalising the TPD and the difficulty
involved in adopting mathematical models for aggre-
gates, an attempt was made to establish a simple
method for the selection of the combination of
aggregates resulting in maximum packing density
from the particle size distribution of aggregates
(represented by the Coefficient of uniformity—Cu).
Further, studies were extended to investigate the effect
of aggregate packing density on fresh and hardened
SCC properties. The results indicate that for a constant
paste volume and paste composition, with increase in
packing density of aggregates, the fresh properties and
P. Nanthagopalan
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400076, India
M. Santhanam (&)
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
e-mail: manusanthanam@gmail.com
the compressive strength of SCC were improved
positively. An attempt was also made to identify the
influence of 10 different proportions of aggregates
having the same packing density on the properties of
SCC. The results indicate that at the same aggregate
packing density, the fresh concrete properties were
influenced significantly by the choice of the aggregate
combination, while there was little or no influence on
the hardened properties. Furthermore, the experimen-
tal data obtained was used for supplementary valida-
tion of the existing model (compressible packing
model) for predicting the packing density and the fresh
behaviour of SCC.
Keywords Packing density  Ternary packing
diagram  Mixture proportioning  Self-compacting
concrete  Compressible packing model
1 Introduction
Proportioning of aggregates for concrete is influenced
by geometrical characteristics of aggregates such as
shape, angularity, texture, particle size distribution
(PSD), wall effect and method of compaction. These
parameters are collectively reflected in terms of the
packing density [1, 2]. Packing density of aggregates
is an indicator of the voids content. Aggregates with
higher packing density result in lesser void content, in
turn minimising the volume of paste to fill up the
1168
voids. Apart from economic benefit due to lower
cement content, research has shown that the packing
density has significant influence on the fresh and
hardened properties of concrete [3]. Moreover, higher
fraction of aggregates results in enhancement of
hardened concrete properties such as drying shrink-
age, creep, strength and stiffness [4]. The first work
published on particle packing for concrete was by
Feret in 1892 (from [5]). Fuller and Thompson [6]
experimentally investigated the importance of size
distribution of aggregates on the properties of con-
crete, on the basis of packing of constituent materials.
Later, a number of research studies were devoted to
developing models for proportioning particles to attain
densest packing. A review of particle packing theories
can be found elsewhere [7]. Theoretical models are
always desirable for providing a general platform for
an alternative optimisation of aggregates, but the
development is extremely difficult. The applicability
of the theoretical models is quite good only for
particles that are almost spherical in shape [8]. Many
theoretical models are available for predicting the
packing density of aggregates. However, very few
models [9, 10] are capable of predicting the packing
densities and behaviour of concrete precisely. In the
present investigation, the compressible packing model
(CPM) [10] was validated with the available experi-
mental data obtained from the present study.
Experimental studies on packing of particles also
gained interest on par with theoretical studies. In a
study by Jones et al. [11], the applicability of particle
packing models to both aggregate and powder phases
was evaluated. The largest improvements in the void
ratio were achieved with aggregate phase and only
small improvements in voids ratio could be achieved
with the powder phase. Moreover, proportioning
concrete mixtures based on particle packing up to
powder phase tended to produce harsh mixes. This
result suggests the use of packing density concept
specifically for the optimisation of aggregate phase. In
another study [12], experiments were carried out to
investigate the influence of packing density of con-
crete mixtures on their properties by using quartz sand
and crushed granite aggregates. The studies were
focussed initially on binary mixtures and then
extended for ternary and multi-component mixtures.
From the results, it was observed that the mixtures
with maximum packing density resulted in minimum
porosity, minimum permeability, maximum slump
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179
and maximum compressive strength. A number of
studies were conducted on packing density for ternary
systems [13, 14]. Generally, the packing density of
ternary mixtures is represented in a triangular diagram.
The range of proportions of aggregates for normal
concrete compositions, when represented in the
ternary packing diagram (TPD), is relatively small
compared to the available combinations of aggregates
in the diagram. Small variations within this range may
have large effects on the rheological behaviour of
concrete [4]. This is applicable to SCC also.
2 Research significance
Self-compacting concrete (SCC) mixture proportion-
ing is an optimisation problem that greatly depends on
the characteristics of all materials. Adequate informa-
tion is available for the selection of cementitious
materials, admixtures and their proportions for SCC.
However, limited information is available for the
selection of combination of aggregates despite their
significant influence on the properties of SCC. Hence,
there is a need for establishing a practicable method
for proportioning the aggregates for SCC. Therefore,
in this study, a new method was used to determine the
optimal aggregate combination giving maximum
packing density. This proposed approach, irrespective
of the gradation, shape and size of the aggregates, can
be used with confidence for optimising the aggregate
combinations without any predefined assumptions.
3 Experimental investigation
The present investigation involved four phases. In the
first phase, a TPD was developed based on the
experimental and interpolated data of the packing
density of aggregates. The second phase involved the
establishment of a relationship between the PSD and
the packing density of aggregates. In the third phase of
the investigation, the influence of packing density of
aggregates on the properties of SCC was evaluated.
Added to that, the influence of different proportions
of aggregates having same packing density on the
performance of SCC was also assessed. The fourth
phase involved validating the existing CPM with the
available experimental data for predicting the packing
density of aggregates and the fresh properties of SCC.
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179 1169

3.1 Materials used Table 2 Physical properties of the aggregates used

Properties River 12.5 mm 20 mm
In the present investigation, Ordinary Portland sand max. max.
Cement—53 grade [15] (equivalent European grade size size
is CEM I 42.5) and fly ash (Class F) from North
Specific gravity [15, 16] 2.57 2.80 2.78
Chennai Power Station, India were used. The chemical
Water absorption (%) [15, 16] 0.50 0.24 0.20
composition of cement is given in Table 1. A poly-
Bulk density (kg/m3) [17] 1678 1528 1644
carboxylic ether (PCE) based superplasticiser (SP)
Void content (%) [17] 34.8 45.5 40.9
with an active solids content of 33% and a microbial
polysaccharide viscosity modifying agent (VMA)
were used as chemical admixtures. Potable water
was used. Two different size of coarse aggregates
(Crushed Granite—maximum sizes 12.5 and 20 mm) Table 3 Particle size distribution of aggregates [18]
which are commonly used in India and fine aggregate Sieve River sand 12.5 mm max. 20 mm max.
(River sand) were used. The physical properties [16– size (% passing) size (% passing) size (% passing)
(mm)
18] and the PSD [19] of the aggregates are given in
Tables 2 and 3 respectively. 25 100.00 100.00 100.00
20 100.00 100.00 94.89
3.2 Determination of packing density 16 100.00 100.00 57.57
of the aggregates 12.5 100.00 88.73 13.37
10 100.00 37.23 3.41
The packing density of aggregates was determined 6.3 100.00 1.16 0.00
experimentally, using a modified version of the test 4.75 99.00 0.00 0.00
procedure described in ASTM C 29 [18]. Generally, 2.36 95.90 0.00 0.00
when aggregates are mixed and poured into a 1.18 78.40 0.00 0.00
0.6 39.50 0.00 0.00
Table 1 Chemical composition of cement used
0.3 17.70 0.00 0.00
Chemical composition Proportion 0.15 3.20 0.00 0.00
(% by mass)
0.075 0.70 0.00 0.00
CaO 61.18
SiO2 20.01
Al2O3 4.98
container by using scoop or shovel, two types of
Fe2O3 4.88
subjectivities are encountered during the measurement
MgO 1.78
of packing density. The height from which the
SO3 2.36
aggregates are poured and the method of pouring
Loss on ignition 2.18
may lead to error in the measurement of the packing
Total chloride content 0.03
density. Though the standard deviation for a single
Na2O 0.20 operator for coarse aggregate (maximum size 25 mm)
K2O 0.60 and fine aggregate is 14 kg/m3 in ASTM C 29, it
Insoluble residue 1.23 would be ideal to obtain consistent test results
Compound % by mass irrespective of the operator. The error due to subjec-
tivity in measuring the packing density is eliminated
Bogue compound composition
of cement
by using the method developed in this study. Figure 1
C3S 49.82
shows the test set up for determining the packing
density of aggregates. It consists of a steel bucket with
C2S 19.78
a top diameter of 340 mm and bottom diameter of
C3A 4.94
140 mm and height of 310 mm. A tightly fitting
C4AF 14.84
hinged trap door is provided at the bottom of the
1170
Fig. 1 Test setup for determining the packing density of aggregates
Fig. 2 a Photograph of coarse and fine aggregates separately and b Photograph of coarse and fine aggregates after mixing
bucket with a quick release catch to guide the falling of
aggregates. The bucket rests on a stand. A cylindrical
container of diameter 270 mm (max. size of the
aggregate was 20 mm) with a capacity of 10 l was
used for receiving the aggregates falling from the steel
bucket. The dimensions of this container were selected
to avoid wall effects and related variations (literature
suggests that the cylinder diameter should be more
than 10 times the maximum size of aggregates [2]).
The distance from the bottom of the steel bucket to the
top of the cylindrical container was 200 mm. In the
present study, two different sizes of coarse aggregates
(12.5 mm max. size and 20 mm max. size) and river
sand were used. The test procedure is as follows.
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179
Step 1 A mass equivalent of 12 l of coarse aggre-
gates (12.5 mm max. size and 20 mm max.
size) and river sand was taken according to
the corresponding volume proportions in
separate plastic trays (see Fig. 2a).
Step 2 The three types of aggregates were mixed
manually for obtaining a proper blend (see
Fig. 2b).
Step 3 The mixed aggregates were poured into the
top steel bucket (see Fig. 1) without any
compaction. The bottom door of the steel
bucket was then opened to make the aggre-
gates fall instantaneously into the bottom
container.
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179 1171

0.0
1.0
was determined; the packing densities are reported in
0.1 Table 4. As 24 data points are inadequate for devel-
0.9
oping a TPD, interpolation was performed to generate
0.2
0.8 additional data points, using radial basis function.
0.3 For interpolation, the inverse multi quadrics radial
)

12
me

0.7

.5
basis function [20] with shape parameter r was used.
lu

mm
0.4
Vo

0.6
(%

(%
0.5 1
0.5 Uðk xkÞ ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð3Þ
mm

Vo
0.6 1 þ ðr k xkÞ2

lu
20

0.4

me
)
0.7
0.3 Each experimental coordinate was represented as a
0.8
0.2
vector in three dimension space i.e.
0.9
0.1 X ¼ ðx1 ; x2 ; x3 Þ ð4Þ
1.0
0.0 where x1 is the proportion of the aggregate by volume;
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
x2 is the proportion of 12.5 mm coarse aggregate by
River sand (% Volume) volume; x3 is the proportion of 20 mm coarse aggre-
Fig. 3 Experimental points for packing density determination gate by volume.
The norm function is represented by
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Step 4 The excess aggregates remaining above the
k X k ¼ kðx1 ; x2 ; x3 Þk ¼ x21 þ x22 þ x23 ð5Þ
top level of the bottom cylinder were struck
off. The mass of the cylinder along with the The interpolation matrix A was formulated from
aggregates filled in was measured and the
1
empty weight of the cylinder was deducted to Ai;j ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
  2 ; 1  i; j  24 ð6Þ
determine the exact quantity of combined 1 þ r X i  X j 
aggregates filled in the bottom container.
where Xi represents the ith experiment. The interpo-
Knowing the mass of the individual aggregate type lating coefficients cj were determined by solving the
added and the volume of the container, the void equation
content was calculated. The packing density of the
aggregates was calculated from the void content. The C ¼ ðc1 ; c2 ; . . .; c24 Þ ¼ A1 B ð7Þ
equations for calculating the void content and packing where B = (b1, b2, b3,…,b24) bi represents the packing
density are as follows: density of corresponding experimental coordinate Xi,
  
Void content ¼ Vc  M1 =S1 þ ðM2 =S2 Þ 1 B i B 24.
þ ðM3 =S3 ÞÞÞ=Vc ð1Þ The packing density of the required combination of
aggregates Z = (z1, z2, z3) can be determined by the
where Vc is the volume of the container; M1, M2, M3 following equation.
are the mass of each aggregate type; S1, S2, S3 is the
Packing density of the required combination
specific gravity of corresponding aggregate type.
X 24
1
Packing density ¼ 1  void content ð2Þ ¼ Cj qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
  2 ð8Þ
j¼1 1 þ r Z  X j 

3.3 Development of ternary packing diagram
Experiments were conducted for different proportions
of aggregates (by volume). 24 different combinations
of aggregates were selected in order to cover a wide
range of ternary proportions (see Fig. 3). Based on
Eqs. 1 and 2, the packing density of the aggregates
This function was used in a MATLAB program, for
determining the packing density of several other
combinations to get adequate data for developing the
TPD. The final packing diagram is presented in Fig. 4.
The maximum packing density obtained was 0.68
and the minimum packing density was 0.54. Each
packing density can be achieved by various
1172 Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179

Table 4 Proportions
Fine aggregate 12.5 mm 20 mm Experimental Theoretical Difference
of aggregates with
(% volume) max. size max. size packing density packing density A–B
corresponding packing
(% volume) (% volume) (A) (B)
density
100.00 0.00 0.00 0.610 0.619 0.009
70.00 0.00 30.00 0.670 0.670 0.000
30.00 0.00 70.00 0.670 0.661 0.009
0.00 0.00 100.00 0.540 0.542 0.002
0.00 30.00 70.00 0.550 0.547 0.003
0.00 70.00 30.00 0.580 0.537 0.043
0.00 100.00 0.00 0.520 0.522 0.002
30.00 70.00 0.00 0.630 0.633 0.003
70.00 30.00 0.00 0.650 0.663 0.013
80.00 10.00 10.00 0.650 0.651 0.001
60.00 20.00 20.00 0.680 0.680 0.001
45.00 45.00 10.00 0.670 0.676 0.006
45.00 10.00 45.00 0.680 0.690 0.010
40.00 40.00 20.00 0.650 0.674 0.024
40.00 30.00 30.00 0.660 0.679 0.019
40.00 20.00 40.00 0.680 0.683 0.003
30.00 40.00 30.00 0.640 0.653 0.013
30.00 30.00 40.00 0.67 0.657 0.013
20.00 60.00 20.00 0.610 0.609 0.001
20.00 40.00 40.00 0.620 0.620 0.000
20.00 20.00 60.00 0.620 0.624 0.004
10.00 80.00 10.00 0.560 0.564 0.004
10.00 45.00 45.00 0.560 0.581 0.021
10.00 10.00 80.00 0.610 0.584 0.026
Mean difference 0.01

combinations of aggregates. From Fig. 4, it is clear that

0.0 the higher packing density contours are localised in the
1.0
0.1
portion where the 12.5 mm maximum size aggregates
0.9 are lower in quantity. In other words, 20 mm maximum
0.2 0.56 0.8 size aggregates and the fine aggregates play a dominant
0.54 0.58
12.

0.3 role in determining the packing density of aggregates.

)
me

0.7
5m
lu

0.4 (This is in agreement with available literature [21].)

Vo

0.60 0.63 0.6

m

For validation of the interpolated data, four different

(%
(%

0.5
0.5
combinations were chosen randomly and experiments
Vo
mm

0.6 0.64
lu

0.4 were conducted. Figure 5 shows that the calculated

20

me

0.66
0.7 values of packing density are indeed close to the
)

0.3
0.8
0.2
measured values.
0.68
0.9
0.1
3.4 Mapping PSD to the packing density
1.0
0.0 of aggregates
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
River sand (% Volume)
The TPD is suitable for ready mixed concrete plants
Fig. 4 Ternary packing diagram of the aggregates and large scale construction sites having batching
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179
0.70
0.68
Measured packing density
0.66
0.64
0.62
0.60
0.58
0.56
0.54
0.52
0.52 0.54 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.62 0.64
Calculated packing density
Fig. 5 Relationship between calculated and measured packing
density
plants. However, for an individual user, developing
TPD is cumbersome and not a viable solution.
Moreover, as the developed TPD shown in Fig. 4 is
material specific, there are limitations in generalising
the TPD. Hence, in the present investigation, for an
individual user, an attempt was made to establish an
empirical relationship for determination of packing
density of aggregates. Among the parameters which
influence the packing density, PSD is significant. A
well known parameter in the field of soil mechanics,
called the coefficient of uniformity (Cu) [22], was
chosen as the parameter that expresses the PSD of the
aggregates. Cu expresses the gradation of the particle
sizes qualitatively. In other words, it indicates how
well the particles are graded. Larger the Cu value,
wider is the range of particles. As the range of particle
sizes dictates the packing density of the particles, it
was decided to use Cu for further investigations. Cu is
calculated by using the following formula:
Cu ¼ D60 =D10
where D60 is the implies 60% of the particles are finer
than this size and D10 implies 10% of the particles are
finer than this size.
From the PSD of individual aggregates, the PSD for
different combined proportions of aggregates was
calculated. For each PSD, the D60 and D10 were
determined to calculate the Cu value. The correspond-
ing packing density was obtained from the TPD shown
in Fig. 4. A plot between Cu and packing density of
aggregates, shown in Fig. 6, indicates that there is a
good correlation between the two parameters. As the
1173
y = 0.0045x + 0.54
0.68 2
R = 0.97
0.66
Packing Density
0.64
0.62
0.60
0.58
0.66 0.68 0.70 10 15 20 25 30 35
Cu
Fig. 6 Relationship between Cu and packing density of
aggregates
Cu value increases the packing density of the aggre-
gates increases. This could be attributed to the fact that
as the Cu value increases the range of particles sizes
increases and helps in better packing of aggregates.
Therefore, it was decided to use this relationship for
the determination of the packing density of aggregates.
The Cu values will vary depending upon the grading of
aggregates.
3.5 Procedure for the calculation of packing
density of aggregates using the proposed
method
From the experimentally determined PSD of individ-
ual aggregates, the PSD of any number of aggregate
combinations can be calculated mathematically. For
each of these combinations, the corresponding Cu
value can be obtained by using Eq. 9. Due to the
material specific nature, there are limitations in
generalising the equation mentioned in the Fig. 6 for
ð9Þ
the calculation of packing density of aggregates.
Hence, for the calculation of packing density of
aggregates, the combination of aggregates giving
maximum Cu value can be selected for performing
an experiment based on the procedure given in Sect.
3.2. Based on the Eq. 1, the void content of the
aggregate combination can be determined. The void
content indicates the minimum amount of paste
required to complete the volume of concrete. Beyond
this stage, the user would only have to determine the
paste composition (w/c, cement replacement by min-
eral admixture, etc.). The paste content in excess of the
1174 Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179

voids content can be decided based on the desired level
of workability—trials can be conducted to ascertain
this aspect. The advantages of using this method over
the commercially available software for the calcula-
tion of packing density of aggregates are its simple
nature, ease, and reliability.
4 Influence of packing density on fresh concrete
properties of SCC
In the preceding sections, the experimental and
empirical methods for the calculation of packing
density of aggregates were described. In this section,
the influence of packing density of aggregates on the
properties specifically the fresh concrete properties of
SCC is discussed. Three different packing densities—
0.68, 0.66 and 0.64—were chosen for the investiga-
tion. For achieving SCC, a minimum of 40% fine
aggregate is essential [23] and moreover to minimise
the demand in the requirement of paste while selecting
the combination of aggregates for different packing
densities, it was decided to keep the fine aggregate
proportion (40% by volume) constant and only the
coarse aggregate proportion was changed (10–50% by
volume) for obtaining the three different packing
densities. The packing densities less than 0.64 had fine
aggregate content less than 40%, which is not suitable
for the production of SCC and hence, not considered
for the investigations. The paste composition and
the paste volume (volume of cement ? fly ash ?
water = 388 l [23]) were kept constant for all the
mixtures so that any change in the fresh concrete
properties would be a result of the change in the
packing density of the aggregates.
The mixture design details and the results of fresh
concrete tests such as slump flow, T500 and J ring are
shown in Table 5. From the results, it can be observed
that as the packing density increases from 0.64 to 0.68,
the slump flow increases from 420 to 615 mm. The
reason could be attributed to the fact that with an
increase in packing density the void content decreases,
and so the amount of paste required for filling the voids
decreases. Therefore, the excess paste available after
filling the voids is used for the enhanced flow of SCC.
The passing ability of the concrete (blocking assess-
ment) was also checked by conducting the J ring test
[24]. The results indicate that when the packing density
increased, the J ring flow increased as the excess paste
available after filling the voids was sufficient enough to
make the aggregates to pass through the reinforcement.
From the test results, it is evident that the fresh
properties of SCC are significantly influenced by the
packing density of the aggregates.
5 Influence of packing density on compressive
strength of SCC

Table 5 Mixture proportions and fresh concrete properties of Cubes were cast for the three different packing
the SCC for different packing densities densities with same paste composition and paste
Packing density 0.64 0.66 0.68 volume (388 l). Therefore, any change in the com-
pressive strength would be a direct influence of the
3
Cement (kg/m ) 348 348 348 packing density of the aggregates. For each packing
Fly ash (kg/m3) 147 147 147 density value, three 150 mm cubes were tested at
3
Water (kg/m ) 184 184 184 28 days to determine the compressive strength. From
Paste volume (l/m3) 388 388 388 Table 6, it is observed that when the packing density
River sand (kg/m3) 629 629 629
Coarse aggregate—max. size 12.5 mm 857 514 171
(kg/m3) Table 6 Influence of packing density on compressive strength
Coarse aggregate—max. size 20 mm 170 510 851 Packing Proportions of Compressive Standard
(kg/m3) density aggregates River strength, deviation
SP dosage (% bwoc) 0.16 0.16 0.16 sand: CA 12.5 mm: (MPa) @ (MPa)
CA 20 mm 28 days
VMA dosage (% bwoc) 0.011 0.011 0.011
(% volume)
Slump flow (mm) 420 500 615
T500 (s) – 9.72 3.84 0.68 40:10:50 45.6 0.56
J ring flow (mm) 380 465 600 0.66 40:30:30 42.7 0.44
0.64 40:50:10 40.5 0.67
bwoc by weight of cementitious materials
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179 1175

increased from 0.64 to 0.68, the compressive strength Table 7 Proportion ID of different proportions of aggregates
increased from 40.5 to 45.6 N/mm2. This could be Proportion Fine Coarse Coarse
attributed to the fact that with increase in packing ID aggregate aggregate aggregate
density, the interlocking of aggregates increases and River sand 12.5 mm 20 mm
void content decreases, resulting in higher strength. (% volume) max. size max. size
(% volume) (% volume)
Moreover, with increase in packing density the paste in
excess of the void content will help in better compac- 1 40 10 50
tability leading to higher strength. Therefore, the 2 45 10 45
packing density has a significant influence on the 3 45 15 40
compressive strength of concrete. Though the available 4 50 10 40
results indicate the influence of the packing density on 5 50 20 30
compressive strength of SCC, it would be ideal to 6 55 5 40
conduct tests on large number of specimens at various 7 55 15 30
ages to have adequate data to conclude reliably. Besides 8 60 10 30
the influence on the properties of SCC, maximising 9 60 20 20
packing density of aggregates would lead to lesser 10 65 5 30
paste, which in turn will reduce the cost of the SCC.

aggregate proportions are changed, keeping the pack-

6 Influence of different proportions of aggregates
having same packing density
From the results of the previous sections (4 and 5), it is
clear that the packing density has a significant
influence on the properties of SCC. However, for
comprehensive evaluation on the properties of SCC,
further studies are essential on factors other than
packing density in influencing the properties of SCC.
From the viewpoint of aggregates, the proportion of
aggregates may have an effect on the properties of
SCC. It was observed from the TPD (see Fig. 4) that
each packing density can be achieved by different
combinations of aggregates. However, there is no
assurance that all the proportions having same packing
density will result in similar properties of SCC.
Therefore, the investigations were extended to identify
the influence of the different proportions of aggregates
having same packing density on the performance of
SCC. Ten different proportions of aggregates having
the packing density of 0.68 were selected. The details
of the aggregate proportions are given in Table 7.
Experiments were conducted by keeping the paste
composition and the paste volume (388 l) constant.
The mixture proportions are given in Table 8.
For each proportion of aggregates, 3 cubes were
tested at 28 days for the compressive strength. From
the results given in Table 8, it is clear that there is
significant change in the fresh properties (the slump
flow varies from 720 to 445 mm) of SCC when the
ing density constant; however, there is no significant
difference in compressive strength for different pro-
portions of aggregates (range is between 43.6 and
44.9 N/mm2). The pronounced variation in the slump
flow could be attributed to the fact that with increase in
fine aggregate content, the surface area increases,
demanding higher amount of paste to wet the surface
of aggregates resulting in reduced slump flow. On the
other hand, the mixtures with higher coarse aggregate
contents result either in segregation or blocking of
aggregates. The T500 and J ring tests were also
conducted for the corresponding SCC mixtures. The
results indicate that as the proportion of the fine
aggregate increases, the requirement of the paste to
wet the aggregate surface increases, and so the
cohesion of the SCC mixtures increases. As a result,
the time taken for T500 increases (from 1.5 s to 5.2 s)
with increase in the fine aggregate fraction. In the J
ring test, the slump flow with J ring decreases from 710
to 380 mm with increase in fine aggregate proportion.
In addition, the difference between slump flow without
and with J-ring also increases, indicating increased
risk of blocking. This is due to insufficiency of the
paste available to wet the surface of the fine aggregate,
at large fine aggregate contents.
Based on the literature and from the results reported
in the previous section, it is evident that the packing
density of the aggregates plays a crucial role in
improving the fresh and hardened concrete properties
of SCC. However, the results of this section reveal that
1176 Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179

Table 8 Details of SCC mixtures prepared using different aggregate combinations giving same packing density
Proportion ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Cement (kg/m3) 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348
Fly ash (kg/m3) 147 147 147 147 147 147 147 147 147 147
Water (kg/m3) 184 184 184 184 184 184 184 184 184 184
River sand (kg/m3) 629 708 708 786 786 865 865 944 944 1022
Coarse aggregate-max. 171 171 257 171 343 86 257 171 343 86
size 12.5 mm (kg/m3)
Coarse aggregate-max. 851 766 681 681 510 681 510 510 340 510
size 20 mm (kg/m3)
SP dosage (% bwoc) 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16
Slump flow (mm) 720 690 700 660 635 570 555 530 480 445
T500 (s) 1.50 2.20 2.06 3.12 3.04 4 5 5.2 – –
J ring flow (mm) 710 670 670 635 615 520 505 495 415 380
Compressive strength 44.9 44.7 44.3 43.6 44.8 44.6 44.2 43.9 44.2 43.8
(MPa)
Remarks Segregation Aggregate Aggregate NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
and aggregate stayed in stayed in
stayed in centre and centre and
centre NS NS
Results obtained from compressive packing model
Predicted yield stress (Pa) 241 263 268 296 308 336 349 405 422 481
Predicted plastic viscosity 86 89 90 94 97 102 105 116 120 131
(Pa s)
Partial compaction index 1.997 1.623 1.596 1.325 1.351 1.102 1.109 0.908 0.904 0.738
0
of coarse aggregates, Kgg
a
(confined conditions )
Partial compaction index 2.445 2.462 2.462 2.48 2.48 2.497 2.498 2.516 2.516 2.533
of fine particles, KC0
(confined conditionsa)
bwoc By weight of cementitious materials, NS no segregation
a
Distance between rebars = 43 mm

selection of maximum packing density of aggregates
alone should not be a criterion for the improved
performance of the SCC; in addition, selection of
aggregate combinations should also be considered for
obtaining the improved fresh concrete performance of
the SCC.
7 Validation of the compressible packing model
The obtained experimental data was used for the
supplementary validation of the CPM developed by
Larrard [10] in predicting the packing density of the
aggregates and the fresh concrete behaviour of SCC.
The packing density of individual fractions was
entered in the model, and the model predicted the
packing densities for all combinations specified with-
out any fit or adjustable parameter. The compaction
0
index (Kconf ) value assumed for a simple pour of the
mix, without dry-rodding or vibration, is 4.1 [10] and it
accounts for the dimensions of the cylinder used in the
present study for the determination of packing density.
The results of the CPM predictions are shown in
Table 4, as the theoretical packing density (B). From
Table 4, it is evident that the CPM predicts the
packing density values of ternary mixtures very close
to the experimentally obtained data with a mean error
of 1%. Further, the model was used for predicting the
fresh concrete properties of the SCC, using the mixes
prepared from aggregate combinations showing the
same packing density of 0.68 (described in Table 8).
From Fig. 7 (plotted using values in Table 8), it is
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179 1177

750
Yes
700
Slump flow (mm)

650

Segregation
600

550

500

450 No

400 2.44 2.46 2.48 2.50 2.52 2.54 2.56

200 250 300 350 400 450 500 K'C
Predicted yield stress (Pa)
Fig. 9 Relationship between partial compaction index of fine
Fig. 7 Relationship between slump flow obtained and pre- particles and segregation (Note The left side of the error bar
dicted yield stress indicates mixtures that segregated)

Yes those of the original work [25]. However, segregation

and blocking are not material phenomena, but rather
Presence of retained aggregate

depend on both material nature and the structure to be

cast. The casting process also has a great influence on
these properties. In general, the results of this study
demonstrated that the CPM predicts the packing
density of aggregates and the fresh behaviour of
SCC with a good degree of precision.

No
0.6 0.8 1.0
Fig. 8 Relationship between partial compaction index of
coarse aggregates and aggregate blocking (Note The right side
of the error bar indicates mixtures with aggregate blocking)
clear that the predicted yield stress decreased with
increase in slump flow, as expected. The predicted
plastic viscosity increased with increase in the T500
time (see Table 8). These results indicate that the
rheological parameters predicted by the CPM are in
close agreement with the experimental data. From
Figs. 8 and 9, it is observed that the aggregate blocking
occurred for mixes with partial compaction index of
0
coarse aggregates (Kgg ) value greater than 1.62 and the
segregation occurred for mixes with partial compac-
tion index of fine particles (KC0 ) value less than 2.45
respectively. The critical values of KC0 and Kgg 0
for the
present investigation differ marginally compared to
8 Conclusions
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
K'gg
(i) In the present study, the packing density of
aggregates was determined precisely by using a
funnel setup. A TPD suitable for ready mixed
concrete plants was developed based on exper-
imental and interpolated data. A simple rela-
tionship was also established between the
packing density of aggregates and their com-
bined PSD (using coefficient of uniformity Cu).
From the results, it is clear that the Cu can be
considered as a valuable parameter and confi-
dently used for the determination of the optimal
combination of aggregates instead of old fash-
ioned ideal grading curve theories. The numer-
ical value of Cu may vary for aggregates from
different locations; however, for a given source
of aggregates, the maximum packing density
will be obtained for proportions yielding higher
Cu value. In mixture proportioning of concrete,
for designing the proportions of aggregates, this
1178
proposed relationship can be used for any
gradation or any shape, as it depends on the
combined PSD of the particles alone without
any predefined assumptions.
(ii) Investigations were carried out to evaluate the
influence of packing density of aggregates on the
properties of SCC. Three different packing
densities (0.64, 0.66 and 0.68) were considered
for the investigation. The results indicate that for
a constant paste volume and paste composition,
when packing density was increased from 0.64 to
0.68, the slump flow increased from 420 to
615 mm and the slump flow with J ring increased
from 380 to 600 mm. This could be attributed to
the fact that with increase in packing density the
void content decreases, demanding lesser paste
to fill the voids, so that the excess paste improves
the flow properties of SCC. Positive influence of
packing density was also observed on the
hardened properties with an increase in com-
pressive strength from 40.5 to 45.6 N/mm2.
Moreover, an attempt was also made to evaluate
the influence of 10 different proportions of
aggregates having the same packing density
(0.68), with constant paste volume and paste
composition, on the properties of SCC. The
results indicate that the fresh concrete properties
were significantly influenced by aggregate pro-
portions, with little or no influence on the
hardened properties. From this result, it is
evident that for improving the properties of
SCC, the maximum packing density criterion has
to be considered along with the selection of
appropriate aggregate combinations for the
optimisation. In the present investigation, though
the available results clearly imply the influence
of packing density on the fresh and hardened
concrete properties, it is deemed essential to
extend the present studies using different types
of aggregate and binders to conclude precisely
that the relationships apply irrespective of the
constituent types. The above said investigations
will be performed as a future work.
(iii) The CPM was validated using the experimental
data obtained in this study.
Acknowledgments The authors wish to express their sincere
thanks to Dr. F. de Larrard, LCPC Centre de Nantes, France for
giving insights about the CPM model and for having technical
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179
discussions. The authors extend their thanks to Dr. Antony
Vijesh, Assistant Professor, Department of Mathematics, Indian
Institute of Technology Indore, India for his help regarding the
interpolation of experimental data.
References
1. Andreasen AHM, Andersen J (1930) Uber die beziehung
zwischen kornabstufung und zwischenraum in produkten
aus losen kornern (mit einigen experimenten). Kolloid Z
50:217–228
2. Goltermann P, Johansen V, Palbol L (1997) Packing of
aggregates: an alternative tool to determine the optimal
aggregate mix. ACI Mater J 94(5):435–443
3. Glavind M, Pedersen EJ (1999) Packing calculations
applied for concrete mix design. In: Proceedings of creating
with concrete, University of Dundee, pp 1–10
4. Johansen V, Andersen PJ (1991) Particle packing and con-
crete properties. Material Science of Concrete II. The
American Ceramic Society, Westerville, pp 111–147
5. Joisel A (1952) Composition des betons hydrauliques. Ann
IITBTP 58:992–1065
6. Fuller WB, Thompson SE (1907) The laws of proportioning
concrete. Trans Am Soc Civ Eng 59:67–172
7. Senthil Kumar V, Santhanam M (2003) Particle packing
theories and their application in concrete mixture propor-
tioning: a review. Indian Concr J 77:1324–1331
8. Romagnoli M, Siligardi C (2004) Comparison of models for
dense particle packing. In: Proceedings of Congresso,
AIMAT Ancona, 29 Giugno-2, Luglio
9. Dewar JD (1999) Computer modelling of concrete mixtures.
E & F N Spon, London
10. De Larrard F (1999) Concrete mixture proportioning—a
scientific approach. E and FN Spon, London
11. Jones MR, Zheng L, Newlands MD (2002) Comparison of
particle packing models for proportioning concrete con-
stituents for minimum voids ratio. Mater Struct 35:301–309
12. Andersen PJ (1990) Control and monitoring of concrete
production. PhD Thesis, Academy of Technical Sciences,
The Technical University of Denmark
13. Standish N, Yu AB (1987) Porosity calculations of ternary
mixtures of particles. Powder Technol 49(3):249–253
14. Ridgway K, Tarbuck KJ (1968) Particulate mixture bulk
densities. Chem Proc Eng 49:103–105
15. IS 12269 (2004) Specification for 53 grade ordinary port-
land cement. Bureau of Indian Standards
16. ASTM 127 (2001) Standard test method for density, relative
density (specific gravity), and absorption of coarse aggre-
gate. American Society for Testing and Materials Standards,
West Conshohocken
17. ASTM C 128 (2001) Standard test method for density,
relative density (specific gravity), and absorption of fine
aggregate. American Society for Testing and Materials
Standards, West Conshohocken
18. ASTM C 29 (2001) Standard test method for bulk density
(Unit Weight) and voids in aggregate. American Society for
Testing and Materials Standards, West Conshohocken
Materials and Structures (2012) 45:1167–1179
19. IS 2386 (2002) Methods of test for aggregates in concrete—
Part I: particle size and shape. Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi
20. Fasshauer GE (2007) Meshfree approximation methods
with MATLAB. World Scientific Company, River Edge
21. McGeary RK (1961) Mechanical packing of spherical par-
ticles. J Am Ceram Soc 44(10):513–522
22. Hazen A (1892) Some physical properties of sands and
gravels. Massachusetts State Board of Health. Annual
Report, pp 539–556
23. Nanthagopalan P, Santhanam M (2009) Experimental
investigations on the influence of paste composition and
1179
content on the properties of self-compacting concrete.
Construct Build Mater 23:3443–3449
24. ASTM C 1621 (2006) Standard test method for passing
ability of self-compacting concrete by J ring. American
Society for Testing and Materials Standards, West
Conshohocken
25. De Larrard F (2009) Concrete optimisation with regards to
packing density and rheology. In: Proceedings of 3rd
International RILEM symposium on Rheology of cement
suspensions such as fresh concrete, Iceland, pp 1–8