Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

Cement is a composite material composed of aggregate bonded together with a fluid cement
which hardens over time .Cement is one of the many constituents of concrete, part of the glue
that holds the other materials together. It is made by mixing cement, supplementary
cementitious materials, water, fine aggregate (sand), coarse aggregate (gravel or crushed
stone) with or without admixtures, reinforcement, fibres or pigments. The most popular
artificial material on Earth isn’t steel, plastic, or aluminum — it’s concrete. Concrete is easily
and readily prepared and fabricated in all sorts of conceivable shapes and structural systems.
Its great simplicity lies in the fact that its constituents are ubiquitous and are readily available
almost anywhere in the world. As a result of its ubiquity, functionality and flexibility it has
become by far the most popular and widely used construction material in the world.

Over the years, technologies have improved greatly. A greatest innovation of concrete is Self-
compacting Concrete. Self-compacting concrete (SCC) is a relatively new product that sees
the addition of superplasticiser and a stabiliser to the concrete mix to significantly increase
the ease and rate of flow. By its very nature, SCC does not require vibration. It achieves
compaction into every part of the mould or formwork simply by means of its own weight
without any segregation of the coarse aggregate. Developed in Japan and Continental Europe,
SCC is now being used in the Bangladesh where, apart from health and safety benefits, it
offers faster construction times, increased workability and ease of flow around heavy
reinforcement. Having no need for vibrating equipment spares workers from exposure to
vibration .No vibration equipment also means safe construction site.

The future of concrete focuses on sustainability, the reuse of materials alongside very high
strengths. There is a growing interest in using waste materials as alternative aggregate
materials and significant research is made on the use of many different materials as aggregate
substitutes such as coal ash, blast furnace slag, fibre glass waste materials, waste plastics,
rubber waste, sintered sludge pellets and others. This type of use of a waste material can
solve problems of lack of aggregate in various construction sites and reduce environmental
problems related to aggregate mining and waste disposal. The use of waste aggregates can
also reduce the cost of the concrete production. Concrete recycling gains importance because

-1-
it protects natural resources and eliminates the need for disposal by using the readily
available concrete as an aggregate source for new concrete or other applications. According
to a 2004 FHWA study, 38 states recycle concrete as an aggregate base; 11 recycle it into
new Portland cement concrete. The states that do use recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) in
new concrete report that concrete with RCA performs equal to concrete with natural
aggregates. Most agencies specify using the material directly in the project that is being
reconstructed.

The growing problem of waste tyre disposal can be alleviated if new recycling routes can be
found for the surplus tyres. One of the largest potential routes is in construction, but usage of
waste tyres in civil engineering is currently very low. This study investigates the potential of
incorporating recycled rubber tyre chips into Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) concrete. The
use of rubberized concrete is becoming popular day by day which produces light weight and
durable concrete with low cost. Rubberized concrete does not exhibit brittle failure when
specimens loaded in compression. It is due to its ability to with stand large tensile
deformations, the rubber particles act as springs, delaying the widening of cracks and
preventing full disintegration of the concrete mass. In SCC shredded rubber can be used by
replacing suitable amount of fine aggregate not the coarse aggregate.

In Bangladesh, the volume of demolished concrete is increasing due to deterioration of

concrete structures as well as the replacement of many low-rise buildings by relatively high-
rise buildings caused by booming of real estate business. Disposal of the demolished concrete
is becoming a great concern to the developers of the buildings. If demolished concrete and
rubberized concrete are used for new construction, the disposal problem will be solved, the
demand for new aggregates will be reduced, and finally consumption of the natural resources
for making aggregate will be reduced.

1.2 Scope of the Research

Concrete is the most consumed construction material for buildings at present. The
achievement of designed strength and durability of concrete relies largely on sufficient
compaction during placement. Inadequate compaction can dramatically lower the
performance of mature concrete in-situ. Therefore, to ensure adequate compaction and
homogeneity of the cast concrete and to facilitate its placement especially in structures with
congested reinforcement and restricted areas, self-compacting concrete has been introduced.

-2-
It all started around 1988 at Tokyo University when Okamura et al. (1998) established the
basic description of SCC. The history of self-compacting concrete (SCC) dates back to late
1980s. SCC concepts originally were thought to be a tool to enhance long-term durability of
structures having members with congested reinforcements. It has generated tremendous
interest since its inception. It has been considered as the greatest breakthrough in concrete
technology for many decades due to the improved performance and working environment.

SCC is a concrete that is capable of self-compacting, occupies all the space in the formwork
without any external effort (in the form of mechanical vibration, floating, poking etc.). For
the concrete to occupy the full space, flowing through the formwork, without any external
effort, it has to have an acceptable level of passing ability, filling ability and stability.
Because of the heterogeneous nature of concrete, its high fluidity and the fact that it contains
materials with different specific gravities, cohesiveness becomes an issue, as it is very
difficult to keep its constituents in a cohesive form where higher mass particles tend to settle
down. This problem however can be tackled by adding larger amounts of finer material.
Owing to its excellent user-friendly characteristics, SCC is a highly attractive alternative
today in traditional construction industry.

Depending on its composition, SCC can have a wide range of different properties; from a
normal to an ultra-high compressive strength, from a poor to an extremely high durability.
The mixture of SCC is strongly dependent on the composition and characteristics of its
constituents in its fresh state. The properties of SCC in its fresh state have a great influence
on its properties in the hardened state. Therefore it is critical to understand its flow behavior
in the fresh state. Since the SCC mix is essentially defined in terms of its flow-ability, the
characterization and control of its rheology is crucial for its successful production.

This is even more relevant if the rubber and recycled aggregate are added to SCC. Self-
compacting rubberized concretes (SCRC) and recycled aggregate concrete (SCRAC) must
maintain their flow- ability and passing ability despite the presence of a large volume fraction
of rubber and recycled aggregate. This presents a challenge which makes the control of
rheology crucial for the successful production of SCRC/SCRAC. The prediction of SCC
filling behavior is very difficult especially in the presence of rubber and recycled aggregate.

-3-
However, an understanding of the behavior and the flow characteristics is crucial to achieving
a high quality SCC.
I hope that this research will be a small contribution in the advance of the utilization of the
rubber and recycled aggregates as construction material in the future in the perspective of
Bangladesh.

1.3 Objectives of the Research

The objectives of our research are :

 To study the fresh properties (Slump, V-Funnel, L-Box) of the Self-
Compacting Concrete (SCC).
 To study the fresh properties (Slump, V-Funnel, L-Box) of the Self-
Compacting Concrete made with rubber.
 To study the fresh properties (Slump, V-Funnel, L-Box) of the Self-
Compacting Concrete made with recycled coarse aggregate.
 To study the mechanical properties of hardened concrete including
compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, water absorption, water
permeability and flexural strength of SCC, SCC with rubber and SCC with
recycled coarse aggregate.
 To investigate the results of SCC having different proportions of rubber and
recycled aggregate.
 To compare the results among SCC, SCC with rubber and SCC with recycled
coarse aggregate.

1.4 Research Methodology

For the ease of research purpose, total work was divided into several phases. Each of the
phases had definite purpose, definite layout. All these together gave us the required output
which was expected to find our final result.

Phase-1: Selection of the Suitable Aggregate Gradation

Large numbers of aggregate gradation are in practice for concrete mix design. Various
researcher, specification, codes have suggested different types of aggregate gradations. Along
with the conventional gradation procedures (i.e. use two distinct portion – fine aggregate and
coarse aggregate), recently many researchers giving an extra emphasis on combined gradation

-4-
(Crouch et al. 2000; Shilstone 1990; Taylor 1986). Primary objective of this phase is selection
of aggregate gradation that is suitable for available materials in Bangladesh. Warda Binte
Ashraf (2012) proposed two aggregate gradations to give better concrete properties compared
to other aggregate gradation methodologies in terms of concrete workability and compressive
strength. These gradation band are “5-10-14-18” and 5-10-1822” band gradation. These two
gradation band are selected from the aggregates found in the local market.

Phase-2: Collection of Aggregate Materials

Our main target was comparative analysis of fresh and strength properties of concrete made
from fresh aggregate, rubber and recycled aggregate that was easily available around us.
Fresh aggregate are to be collected from local market. Local companies crush the stone for
producing coarse aggregate of different sizes. As the source of these stone is the mountains,
hills of our hilly region and also we have to import the stone from the neighboring countries,
in some cases these stone is not very economic. So it becomes costly and ineffective when
local companies cannot provide with the desired gradation of aggregates. In most cases, it
becomes hard to find the exact gradation we expect to have for our work with the fresh
aggregates. Recycled aggregates were collected from the crushing of cylinders, beams that
were found on the backyard of our laboratory. Those beams or cylinders were made for the
purpose research works. We also collected the recycled aggregates from neighboring building
debris. We have used sylhet sand for the research work. Sylhet sand is costly but not easily
available throughout the country. This sand is good in engineering properties and has good
impact in the concrete mix.

Shredded rubber is not available in local market. Rubbers usually available are in the form of
crump and scrap. But they are used as coarse material in concrete. In our research rubber is
used as a replacement of fine material in concrete. So we collected shredded rubber (finer)
from the Bangladesh Rubber Industries (BRI). It is the residual portion of tire rubber and not
available throughout the country.

Phase-3: Collection of Cementitious Materials

Large amounts of powder materials are added to SCC to increase flow ability and to facilitate
self-compacting. However, an excess amount of concrete added will greatly increase the cost
of materials and dry shrinkage. To obtain the required properties such as segregation

-5-
resistance, Fly Ash and Ground Granular Blast-furnace Slag (GGBS) are used to increase the
content of binders. So Cementitious materials include Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC), Fly
Ash, and Ground Granular Blast-furnace Slag (GGBS). Nowadays OPC is hardly available in
local market. Basically it is found as a form of Portland Composite Cement (PCC). So we
collected the OPC from Holcim Cement (Bangladesh) Limited and used Holcim OPC in our
research. Fly Ash and GGBS are also not available in local market. So we had to collect these
material from Holcim Cement (Bangladesh) Limited.

Phase-4: Collection of Chemical Admixures

To impart better workability and viscosity to the mixture to avoid segregation and to obtain a
uniform slump flow of 750 mm, a naphthalene-based high range water reducing admixture
(HRWRA) and viscosity-modifying admixture (VMA) calcium sulfate dehydrate were added.
In our research we used MasterGlenium ACE 30 (JP) admixtures and VMA which was
collected from BASF Bangladesh Limited, Chemical Company.

Phase-5: Preparation of Test Equipments

To investigate the fresh properties of SCC, SCC with rubber and SCC with recycled
aggregate we built some equipments including L-box and V-funnel in standard dimension.

Phase-6: Laboratory Experiments

With the aggregates (coarse and fine aggregate) collected from our local sources, we have
carried out our laboratory experiments for finding our required output. Comparative analysis
of fresh (slump, L-box, V-funnel) and hardened (compressive strength, split cylinder
strength, water absorption, water permeability, flexural strength) properties of concrete was
the main target of our laboratory experiment. We have selected different type’s shapes of
molds to carry out our experiments such as cylinder for compressive strength, split tension
strength, water absorption and modulus of elasticity test, cube for water permeability test and
small beams shapes for flexural strength test. All these were carried out for different mixer of
fresh aggregates, rubber and recycled aggregates. We have used the various proportions of
shredded rubber such as 10%, 15% and 20% by volumetric replacement of sand. Besides, We
have used the various proportions of recycled coarse aggregate such as 30%, 40% and 50%
by weight.

-6-
 Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

Reinforced concrete is one of the most versatile and widely used construction materials. With
the demand increasing for reinforced concrete structures in the modern society to meet the
needs of new developments, increasing population and new ambitious structural design ideas,
the reinforcement in concrete structures is becoming more dense and clustered. The heavy
and dense reinforcement can raise problems of pouring and compacting the concrete. The
concrete must be able to pass the dense rebar arrangement without blocking or segregating.
The design of such concrete is very challenging because poor placement and the lack of good
vibratory compaction can lead to the inclusion of voids and loss of long term durability of
concrete structures. This has been a concern for engineers for many years.

During the last decade, concrete technology has made an enormous advance through the
introduction of self-compacting concrete (SCC). Self-compacting or self-consolidating
concrete is a relatively new generation of high-performance concrete that is able to achieve
impressive deformability and homogeneity in its fresh state, filling all the space around the
reinforcement, passing through dense reinforcing steel bars while compacting under its own
weight without any external vibration.

SCC with its outstanding properties, impressive deformability, gives designers and architects
more freedom of creativity that was not possible previously. Lighter and slender members
can be made from SCC, larger span bridges can be developed, and underwater structures can
be built, making SCC a highly promising material for the future of the in-situ and pre-cast
construction industries. Since its early use in Japan, SCC has now started to be an alternative
to vibrated concrete across the world in such areas where normal vibrated concrete is difficult
or impossible to pour and vibrate. However those applications are still few and vibrated
concrete is still considered as the standard concrete. As more and more investigations are
done into SCC, it is likely to move from being a fringe technology to becoming a concrete of
choice for construction because of reduced health concerns, i.e. no vibration-induced noise.

-7-
In this chapter, a general overview of the properties and applications of SCC will be given,
highlighting the influence of materials used on its characteristics in the fresh and hardened
states.

2.2 Self Compacting Concrete

2.2.1 Self-Compacting Concrete Definition

The British Standard (BS EN 206-9, 2010) defines “SCC is the concrete that is able to flow
and compact under its own weight, fill the formwork with its reinforcement, ducts, boxouts
etc, whilst maintaining homogeneity”.
Other researchers (Ozawa et al., 1989; Bartos and Marrs, 1999; Khayat, 1999) have defined
SCC in almost the same terms as a highly flow-able concrete that should meet the following
requirements:
 Flow-ability: SCC should flow under its own weight and fill all parts of formwork
without any external aid or vibration.
 Passing ability: SCC should pass through heavy reinforcing steel bars.
 Segregation resistance: SCC should maintain its homogeneity without any migration
or separation of its large components (aggregates or fibres).

2.2.2 Advantages and Disadvantages of Using SCC

The use of SCC on site offers many advantages:
 Eliminating vibration and lower noise level: This will certainly put less physical
demands on site workers, something that is clearly a desirable objective, including
preventing “white finger” syndrome, which is mainly related to the vibrating
equipment.
 Easy placement and filling: the impressive filling ability, flow-ability and passing
ability of SCC eases placement significantly even with very complex shaped
structures and where heavy reinforcement or very long formwork is involved, and
eliminate honeycombing, blow holes and grout loss.
 Better surface finish: SCC ensures a uniform architectural surface finish with little to
no remedial surface work.
 Reduce manpower and construction time: SCC can be placed at a faster rate with
no vibration and less screeding resulting in reducing manpower and saving
construction time.

-8-
  Improve durability: due to the dense matrix of SCC and the high consolidation and
bond around reinforcement, the structural durability is improved.

Among sixty eight case studies of the applications of self-compacting concrete (SCC), which
were published from 1993 to 2003, the period of increasingly widespread use of SCC in
many countries, Domone (2006) reported that 67% were using SCC for technical advantages
where vibration is either difficult or impossible due to the heavy reinforcement or
inaccessibility, 14% were for economical reason to reduce labour work and construction time,
while 10% were for new types of structure such as thin sections, pre-cast units and
steel/concrete composite. The rest of the cases involved environmental causes including
reducing noise level and improving working conditions.

We should however also mention the possible disadvantages of using SCC compared with
conventional concrete can include the high cost of materials which can subsequently be
overcome by the low cost of labour. Another disadvantage can be related to the nature of
SCC, because of its high fluidity, handling and transporting SCC becomes a bit delicate,
although the outstanding results would definitely overcome these disadvantages.

2.2.3 Fresh State Properties of Self-Compacting Concrete

 Deformability (flow and filling ability)

 Passing Ability
 Segregation Resistance (homogeneity/cohesiveness)

2.2.4 Deformability (flow and filling ability)

Deformability refers to the ability of SCC mix to deform and undergo changes in shape with
completely filling all areas and corners of the formwork horizontally and vertically while
maintaining its homogeneity. The deformability of SCC is characterized by the concrete’s
fluidity and cohesion, and mainly assessed using the slump flow test described later in this
Chapter. Kennedy (1940) proposed the ‘Excess Paste Theory’ as a way to explain the
mechanism governing the workability of concrete. Kennedy states that there must be enough
paste to cover the surface area of the aggregates, and that the excess paste serves to minimize
the friction among the aggregates and give better flow-ability. Without the paste layer, too
much friction would be generated between the aggregates resulting in extremely limited
below workability.
-9-
2.2.5 Passing Ability
Passing ability refers to the ability of SCC mix to pass through congested reinforcement
without blocking, whilst maintaining good suspension of coarse particles in the matrix, thus
avoiding arching near obstacles and blockage during flow. The J-ring and L-box tests are the
most common methods used to assess this property. The probability of blocking increases
when the volume fraction of large aggregates and/or fibres increases. The size of aggregates,
their shapes and their volume fraction influence the passing ability of SCC, moreover, the
presence of fibres especially long and hooked or crimped ends make self-compacting fibre
reinforced concrete (SCFRC) more difficult to pass through reinforcement.

Okamura and Ouchi (1999) reported that the potential of collision and contacts between
particles increases as the distance between particles decreases; which therefore results in an
increase in the internal stresses when concrete is deformed, particularly near obstacles
causing blockage. Research shows that the energy required for flowing is consumed by the
increase of internal stresses. Limiting the coarse aggregate content whose energy
consumption is high can effectively reduce the risk of blockage.

Highly viscous paste also prevents localized increases in internal stress due to the approach of
coarse aggregate particles (Okamura and Ouchi, 1999) and therefore increases the passing
ability of SCC. Roussel et al. (2009) state that highly fluid SCC could be more prone to have
its coarsest particles blocked in highly reinforced zones, which is related to the instability of
the material, and to the increases in the local volume fraction of coarse aggregates near an
obstacle.

Blocking can be also increased as the gaps between steel bars are reduced. The spacing
between bars is typically recommended to be 3 times the maximum aggregate size (EFNRC,
2005). For fibre-reinforced concrete, the bars should be placed 1 to 3 times the maximum
fibre length (Koehler and Fowler, 2003).

2.5.3 Segregation Resistance (homogeneity/cohesiveness)

Segregation resistance refers to the ability to retain the coarse components of the mix and the
fibres in suspension in order to maintain a homogeneous material. Stability is largely
- 10 -
dependent on the cohesiveness and the viscosity of the concrete mixture which can be
increased by reducing the free water content and increasing the amount of fines (Khayat et
al., 1999). Segregation resistance is largely controlled by viscosity; therefore ensuring a high
viscosity can prevent a concrete mix from segregation and/or bleeding. Bleeding is a special
case of segregation in which water moves upwards by capillary action and separates from the
mix. Some bleeding is normal for concrete, but excessive bleeding can lead to a decrease in
strength, high porosity, and poor durability particularly at the surface (Douglas, 2004). Two
basic methods can ensure adequate stability; the first approach is based on the Japanese
method. It uses a super-plasticiser (SP), low water/cement ratio, high powder content, mineral
admixtures, and low aggregate content. The second approach is based on incorporating a
viscosity-modifying admixture (VMA), low or moderate powder content and super-plasticiser
(Bonen, 2004).

2.2.7 Difference between SCC and Normal Vibrated Concrete (NVC)

SCC consists of cement, aggregates, water and admixtures which are quite similar to the
composition of conventional vibrated concrete, however, the reduction of coarse aggregates,
the large amount of fines, the incorporation of super-plasticizer, the low water to cement
ratio, is what led to self-compactability. What makes SCC unique is the migration of air
bubbles to the surface without any vibration which is mainly due to the dense matrix, mix
proportion and the material characteristics. The smooth passing ability through reinforcement
bars and the impressive filling ability of all the formwork without any segregation or bleeding
are remarkable, even in narrow structural elements with complicated shapes and heavy
reinforcement, thanks to the balance between high fluidity and moderate viscosity. All these
properties in the fresh state would lead to a high strength and durable concrete in the
hardened state.

2.2.8 Mechanisms of Achieving SCC

In the fresh state, SCC should achieve high flow-ability as well as rheological stability which
means it must be as fluid as possible in the fresh state to fill under its own weight all the far
reaching corners in the form work and pass through heavy reinforcement without segregation.
The methodology of selecting the right amount of materials and admixtures is crucial to
achieve this goal.

- 11 -
The following three main rules have been suggested by Okamura and Ouchi (2003).
 Limiting Aggregate Content.
 Using Super-plasticiser.
 Reducing Water-Powder Ratio.

Limiting Aggregate Content: The friction between the aggregates limits the spreading and
the filling ability of SCC. By reducing the volume and the maximum size of coarse
aggregates, and replacing crushed aggregates with round ones the passing ability of SCC in
congested areas can be increased, thus improving the workability and optimizing the packing
density of skeleton.

High Amount of Super-plasticiser: Achieving a highly flowable mix would conflict with
keeping the homogeneity at an acceptable level. The mechanism of achieving this is by the
dispersion effects of super-plasticiser on flocculated cement particles, by reducing the
attractive forces among them. An optimum amount is necessary as a high amount would
result in segregation and a low amount would compromise the fluidity. Obtaining a good
degree of cohesiveness can guarantee a considerable improvement in the overall performance
(Kwan and Ng, 2010).

High Paste Volume: SCC contains a high volume of paste, the role of which is to maintain
aggregate separation (Tviksta, 2000). Okamura and Ouchi (2003) indicated that the internal
stresses can increase when concrete is deformed, particularly near obstacles. The energy
required for flowing is consumed by those increased internal stresses, resulting in blockage.
Also, paste with high viscosity prevents localized increases in internal stresses due to the
approach of coarse aggregate particles. A high amount of fine particles increases the
workability and cohesiveness while simultaneously reducing the interlocking of coarse
particles which could result in a blocking behaviour (Khayat, 2000). The necessity of
including this large amount of fines requires that there should be cement replacement
materials such as GGBS, silica fume, fly ash...etc., in order to avoid excessive heat
generation.

Using Viscosity Modifying Agents (VMA): These products are generally cellulose

- 12 -
derivatives, polysaccharides or colloidal suspensions. The use of VMA gives the same effect
as the fine particles in minimising bleeding and coarse aggregate segregation by thickening
the paste and retaining the water in the skeleton. For normal strength SCC with high water to
binder content, the introduction of such products seems to be justified. On the other hand,
they may be less useful for high performance SCC with low water to binder ratio. Viscosity
agents are assumed to make SCC less sensitive to water variations. Because of the small
quantities of viscosity agents required, however, it may be difficult to achieve accuracy of
dosage (Tviksta, 2000).

2.2.9 SCC Applications

Following its success in Japan with more than 400,000 m3 of annual production for bridges
and buildings, other parts of the world have embraced SCC.
 At over 828 meters (2,716.5 ft) and 166 stories, Burj Khalifa (2010) in Dubai holds
the record of the tallest building and free standing structure in the world with the
largest number of stories. Self-compacting concrete is playing a greater role in high-
rise construction to overcome the problem of congested reinforcement and ease of
placement. The groundwater in which the Burj Dubai substructure is constructed is
particularly severe, with chloride concentrations of up to 4.5%, and sulfate of up to
0.6%. The chloride and sulfate concentrations found in the groundwater are even
higher than the concentrations in seawater. Accordingly, the primary consideration in
designing the piles and raft foundation was durability. The concrete mix for the piles
which are 1.5 m in diameter and 43 m long with design capacity of 3000 tonnes each
was a 60 MPa mix based on a triple blend with 25% fly ash, 7% silica fume, and a
water to cement ratio of 0.32. A viscosity modifying admixture was used to obtain a
slump flow of 675 +/- 75 mm to limit the possibility of defects during construction.
 The 800 million dollar Sodra Lanken (1997) Project in Sweden (notably was one of
the largest infrastructure projects that used SCC. The six kilometres long four-lane
highway in Stockholm involved seven major junctions, and rock tunnels totalling over
16 km partly lined with concrete and over 225,000 cubic meters of concrete.
Incorporating SCC was ideal to cope with the density of reinforcement required and
the highly uneven rock surfaces.
 Another example can be found in the UK at St George Wharf (2004), London
Docklands where SCC has been used to save time and manpower (Figure 2.33). SCC

- 13 -
 was used in limited areas on two floors in lift shaft walls, upstand beams and columns
and for stairs precast on site.
 Dragon Bridge (2012), Alcalá De Guadaira, Seville, Spain (Figure 2.34). This
spectacular 124 m long bridge, distributed in four spans, stands out due to its unique
shape. The concrete structure represents a dragon that seems to emerge from the
Guadaira river in the province of Seville. The dragon’s body is made up of an egg-
shape section, 4 meters high and 2 meters wide, of self-compacting reinforced
concrete. Its shape was clad in “trancadis” using more than 4,500 square meters of
mosaic tiles.

2.3 History of Development

In the mid-1980s, research undertaken into underwater placement technology within the UK,
North America and Japan led to the development of concrete mixes with a high degree of
washout resistance. However, the creation of durable structures from such mixes required
adequate compaction by skilled workers. At the same time in Japan, a gradual reduction in
the number of skilled workers in the construction industry was leading to a reduction in the
quality of construction work, with subsequent knock-on effects on concrete durability
(Okamura et al., 1998). One solution to overcome the durability problems in concrete
structures independently of the quality of construction work was to use self-compacting
concrete (SCC) (Okamura and Ouchi, 2003).

2.3.1 Evolution of Self Compacting Concrete

Self-compacting concrete (SCC), a new kind of high performance concrete (HPC) with
excellent deformability and segregation resistance, was first developed in Japan in 1986. It is a
special kind concrete that that can flow through and fill the gaps of reinforcement and corners
of molds without any need for vibration and compaction during the placing process. Though
showing good performance, SCC is different from the HPC developed in North America and
Europe, which emphasizes on high strength and durability of concrete. In terms of workability,
HPC merely improves fluidity of concrete to facilitate placing; however, it cannot flow freely
by itself to pack every corner of molds and all gaps among reinforcement. In other words,
HPC still requires vibration and compaction in the construction process. Comparatively SCC
has more favorable characteristics such as high fluidity, good segregation resistance and the
distinctive self-compacting ability without any need for vibration during the placing process.

- 14 -
In 1993, Okamura proposed a mix design method for SCC. His main idea was to conduct first
the test on paste and mortar in order to examines the properties and compatibility of
superplasticizer(SP), cement, fine aggregate and Puzzolanic materials, then followed by the
trial mix of SCC. The major advantage of this method is that it avoids having to repeat the
same kind of quality control test on concrete, which consumes both time and labour. However,
the drawbacks of Okamura’s method are that (1) it requires quality control of paste and mortar
prior to SCC mixing, while many ready mixed concrete producers do not have the necessary
facilities for conducting such tests and (2) the mix design method and procedures are too
complicated for practical implementation.

The “Standardize mix design method of SCC” proposed by the JRMCA is a simplified version
of Okamura’s method. This method can be employed to produce SCC with a large amount of
powder materials, and a water/binder ratio of <.30. On the other hand, the Laboratory Central
Des Ponts et Chausses (LCPC), the Swedish Cement and Concrete Research Institute (CBI),
research groups in both Mainland China and Taiwan all have proposed different mix design
methods of HPC. The LCPC’s approach is developed on the basis of the BTRHEOM
rheometer and RENE LCPC software. It is difficult for others to adopt their method without
purchasing the software. CBI’s approach makes use of the relationship between the blocking
volume ratio and clean reinforcement spacing to fraction particle diameter ratio. However, it is
not clear how carryout the critical tests because concrete mixed with the coarse aggregates and
paste only is susceptible to severe segregation. In Taiwan, the method proposed by Hwang et
al. involves a densified mixture design algorithm, which is derived from the maximum density
theory and excess paste theory. Nevertheless, there is no information yet concerning the
relationship between their method and ability of concrete passing through reinforcement or its
segregation resistance. Hon’s group of Mainland China has not disclosed their mix design
procedures, but just offered some useful principles. They have also shown that too low a paste
volume not only impairs the passing ability of concrete, but also reduce its compression
strength if no vibration is used in the mixing process.

In 2002 EFNARC published their “Specification & Guidelines for Self-Compacting

concrete” which, at that time, provided state of the art information for producers and users.
Since then, much additional technical information on SCC has been published but European
design, product and construction standards do not yet specifically refer to SCC and for site
applications this has limited its wider acceptance, especially by specifies and purchasers.

- 15 -
Goodie CI studied SCC is not expected to ever completely replace conventionally vibrated
concrete, the use of the material in both the precast and ready-mix markets in the UK,
Europe and the rest of the world is expected to continue to increase as the experience and
technology improves, the clients demand a higher- quality finished product and the
availability of skilled labour continues to decrease.

Khayat et al (1999) published that By employing self-compacting concrete, the cost of

chemical and mineral admixtures is compensated by the elimination of vibrating
compaction and work done to the surface of the normal concrete .

Bertil Persson (2001) carried out an experimental and numerical study on mechanical
properties, such as strength, elastic modulus, creep and shrinkage of self-compacting concrete
and the corresponding properties of normal compacting concrete. The study included eight
mix proportions of sealed or air-cured specimens with water binder ratio (w/b) varying
between 0.24 and 0.80. Fifty percent of the mixes were SCC and rests were NCC. The age at
loading of the concretes in the creep studies varied between 2 and 90 days. Strength and
relative humidity were also found. The results indicated that elastic modulus, creep and
shrinkage of SCC did not differ significantly from the corresponding properties of NCC.

Nan Su et al (2001) proposed a new mix design method for self-compacting concrete. First,
the amount of aggregates required was determined, and the paste of binders was then
filled into the voids of aggregates to ensure that the concrete thus obtained has flow ability,
self-compacting ability and other desired SCC properties. The amount of aggregates,
binders and mixing water, as well as type and dosage of super plasticizer to be used are
the major factors influencing the properties of SCC. Slump flow, V-funnel, L-flow, U-box
and compressive strength tests were carried out to examine the performance of SCC, and
the results indicated that the proposed method could be used to produce successfully SCC
of high quality. Compared to the method developed by the Japanese Ready-Mixed
Concrete Association (JRMCA), this method is simpler, easier for implementation and less
time- consuming, requires a smaller amount of binders and saves cost.

Bouzoubaa and Lachemi (2001) carried out an experimental investigation to evaluate the
performance of SCC made with high volumes of fly ash. Nine SCC mixtures and one control
concrete were made during the study. The content of the cementations materials was

- 16 -
maintained constant (400 kg/m3), while the water/cementations material ratios ranged from
0.35 to 0.45. The self-compacting mixtures had a cement replacement of 40%, 50%, and 60%
by Class F fly ash. Tests were carried out on all mixtures to obtain the properties of fresh
concrete in terms of viscosity and stability. The mechanical properties of hardened concrete
such as compressive strength and drying shrinkage were also determined. The SCC mixes
developed 28-day compressive strength ranging from 26 to 48 MPa. They reported that
economical SCC mixes could be successfully developed by incorporating high volumes of
Class Ffly ash.

Sri Ravindra rajah (2003) et al made an attempt to increase the stability of fresh concrete
(cohesiveness) using increased amount of fine materials in the mixes. They reported about the
development of self-compacting concrete with reduced segregation potential. The systematic
experimental approach showed that partial replacement of coarse and fine aggregate with
finer materials could produce self-compacting concrete with low segregation potential as
assessed by the V-Funnel test. The results of bleeding test and strength development with
age were highlighted by them. The results showed that fly ash could be used
successfully in producing self- compacting high-strength concrete with reduced
segregation potential. It was also reported that fly ash in self-compacting concrete helps in
improving the strength beyond 28 days. Self-Compacting Concrete.

Hajime Okamura and Masahiro Ouchi (2003) addressed the two major issues faced by the
international community in using SCC, namely the absence of a proper mix design method
and jovial testing method. They proposed a mix design method for SCC based on paste and
mortar studies for super plasticizer compatibility followed by trail mixes. However, it was
emphasized that the need to test the final product for passing ability, filling ability, and flow
ability and segregation resistance was more relevant.

Paratibha Aggarwal (2008) et al presented a procedure for the design of self-compacting

concrete mixes based on an experimental investigation. At the water/powder ratio of 1.180 to
1.215, slump flow test, V-funnel test and L-box test results were found to be satisfactory, i.e.
passing ability; filling ability and segregation resistance are well within the limits. SCC was
developed without using VMA in this study. Further, compressive strength at the ages of 7,
28, and 90 days was also determined. By using the OPC 43 grade, normal strength of 25 MPa

- 17 -
to 33 MPa at 28-days was obtained, keeping the cement content around 350 kg/m3 to 414
kg/m3.

Girish (2010) et al presented the results of an experimental investigation carried out to find
out the influence of paste and powder content on self-compacting concrete mixtures. Tests
were conducted on 63 mixes with water content varying from 175 l/m3 to 210 l/m3 with three
different paste contents. Slump flow, V funnel and J-ring tests were carried out to examine
the performance of SCC. The results indicated that the flow properties of SCC increased with
an increase in the paste volume. As powder content of SCC increased, slump flow of fresh
SCC increased almost linearly and in a significant manner. They concluded that paste plays
an important role in the flow properties of fresh SCC in addition to water content. The
passing ability as indicated by J-ring improved as the paste content increased.

E. Todorova, G. Chernev, G. Chernev. The aim of the “influence of metakaolinite and

stone flour on the properties of self-compacting concrete” was the manufacture and
characterization of mixture for self-compacting concrete with participation of powder
additives (metakaolinite and stone flour) and super plasticizers (viscocrete 5370 and
viscocrete 5800). The influence of chemical admixtures and powder additives on concrete
properties was made by the different methods: sorption ability; sем; ftir and potential.
Physical and mechanical properties as compressive strength; spreading and fluidity were
measured. Tests for mechanical and physical properties of self-compacting concrete
established, that the best appropriate mixtures were these with metakaolinite and
1,25 % Viscocrete 5370, with stone flour and admixture of 1,2 % Viscocrete 5370 and
Viscocrete 5800. The strength pressure reaches 71 МРа, 65, 1 МРа and 63, 3 МРа,
respectively. SЕМ micrographs proved evenly distribution of fine fraction in
concrete mixture. Metakaolinite and stone flour showed excellent values for each test
using for investigation properties of prepared mixtures. They improve the
characteristics of self- compacting concrete. Better results showed mixtures with higher
content of powder materials and super plasticizers.

Cristian Druta (2003) carried out an experimental study on to compare the Splitting
Tensile Strength and Compressive Strength values of self-compacting and normal
concrete specimens and to examine the bonding between the coarse aggregate and the
cement paste using the Scanning Electron Microscope. In this experiment used mineral

- 18 -
admixes Blast Furnace Slag, Fly Ash and Silica Fume and chemical admixes Super
plasticizers and Viscosity-Modifying Admixtures, It has been verified, by using the
slump flow and U-tube tests, that self-compacting concrete (SCC) achieved
consistency and self-compatibility under its own weight, without any external vibration
or compaction. Also, because of the special admixtures used, SCC has achieved a
density between 2400 and 2500 kg/m3, which was greater than that of normal
concrete, 2370- 2321 kg/m3.Self-compacting concrete can be obtained in such a way, by
adding chemical and mineral admixtures, so that its splitting tensile and compressive
strengths are higher than those of normal vibrated concrete. An average increase in
compressive strength of 60% has been obtained for SCC, whereas 30% was the increase in
splitting tensile strength. Also, due to the use of chemical and mineral admixtures, self-
compacting concrete has shown smaller interface micro cracks than normal concrete, fact
which led to a better bonding between aggregate and cement paste and to an increase
in splitting tensile and compressive strengths. A measure of the better bonding was the
greater percentage of the fractured aggregate in SCC (20-25%) compared to the 10% for
normal concrete.

Subramanian and Chattopadhyay (2002) are research and development engineers at the
ECC Division of Larsen & Toubro Ltd (L&T), Chennai, India. They have over 10 years of
experience on development of self-compacting concrete, underwater concrete with ant
wash out admixtures and proportioning of special concrete mixtures. Their research was
concentrated on several trials carried out to arrive at an approximate mix proportion of
self-compacting concrete, which would give the procedure for the selection of a
viscosity modifying agent, a compatible super plasticizer and the determination of their
dosages. The Portland cement was partially replaced with fly ash and blast
furnace slag, in the same percentages as Ozawa (1989) has done before and the
maximum coarse aggregate size did not Exceed. The two researchers were trying to
determine different course and fine aggregate contents from those developed by
Okamura. The coarse aggregate content was varied, along with water-powder (cement, fly
ash and slag) ratio, being 50%, 48% and 46% of the solid volume. The U- ube trials were
repeated for different water-powder ratios ranging from 0.3 to 0.7 in steps of 0.10. On the
basis of these trials, it was discovered that self-compatibility could be achieved when
the coarse aggregate content was restricted to 46 percent instead of 50 percent tried by
Okamura (1997). In the next series of experiments, the coarse aggregate content was fixed
- 19 -
at 46 percent and the sand content in the mortar portion was varied from 36 percent to 44
percent on a solid volume basis in steps of 2 percent. Again, the water-powder ratio was
varied from 0.3 to 0.7 and based on the U-tube trials a sand content of 42 percent was
selected. In order to show the necessity of using a viscosity-modifying agent along
with a super plasticizer, to reduce the segregation and bleeding, the mixture proportion
developed by the two researchers was used to cast a few trial specimens. In these trials,
viscosity-modifying agent was not used. The cast specimens were heavily
reinforced slabs having 2400x600x80 mm and no vibration or any other method of
compaction was used. However, careful qualitative observations revealed that the
proportions needed to be delicately adjusted within narrow limits to eliminate bleeding as
well as settlement of coarse aggregate. It was difficult to obtain a mixture that was at the
same time fluid but did not bleed. This led to the conclusion that slight changes in water
content or granular geometry of aggregate may result either in a mixture with inadequate
flowing ability, or alternatively one with a tendency for coarse aggregate to segregate.
Therefore, it became necessary to incorporate a viscosity-modifying agent in the
concrete mixture. Viscosity-modifying agents can be a natural polymer such as guar gum,
a semi-synthetic polymer such as hydroxyl propyl methyl cellulose, or water- soluble
polysaccharides, including those derived from a microbial source such as welan gum.
Experiments involving three types of gums were being carried out by the two
researchers. One commonly used thickener in cement- based systems, namely hydroxyl
propyl methyl cellulose (HPMC), a low-priced gum known as guar gum and a special
product called welan gum were selected for studying their suitability for use in self-
compacting concrete. On a first consideration, a1l these qualified as viscosity modifying
agents. However, some of these substances, with the exception of welan gum, had
shortcomings. Guar gum had to be made into a suspension in water after heating to
60˚C and stirring for about one hour. This solution lost its suspending power after twelve
hours. HPMC was not compatible with the naphthalene formaldehyde super
plasticizer and entrained excessive air, causing a reduction in strength (Fig.1) Welan gum
is suitable for use in self-compacting concrete because it combines with most types of
super plasticizer and has superior suspending power, compare to guar gum and
hydroxy propylmethy cellulose (HPMC). In order to arrive at an acceptable combination of
dosages of welan gum and superlasticizer, Subramanian and Chattopadhyay (2002) ran
several tests related to the tendency of the concrete to bleed and its ability to pass the U-
tube test. They discovered that with a combination corresponding to 0.1 percent

- 20 -
of welan gum and 0.53 percent by weight of water acrylic copolymer type super
plasticizer, a satisfactory self- compacting mixture could be obtained.

Surabhi.C.S, Mini Soman, Syam Prakash.V Carried out an experimental study on cement
content in the SCC mix is replaced with various percentage of limestone powder and the
fresh and hardened properties were studied. It is observed that limestone powder can be
effectively used as a mineral additive in SCC. Then conclude that result the 7 day and 28 day
compressive strength increases with increase in content of limestone powder up to 20%. The
improvement in compressive strength at 28 day is about 20% for a replacement of 20% of
cement with limestone powder. But further addition of limestone powder reduces the
strength. All the hardened properties like cylinder compressive strength, split tensile strength,
flexural strength and modulus of elasticity improves with the addition of limestone powder.

Mayur B. Vanjare, Shriram H. Mahure (2012) carried out an experimental study on to focus
on the possibility of using waste material in a preparation of innovative concrete. One kind of
waste was identified: Glass Powder (GP). The use of this waste (GP) was proposed in
different percentage as an instead of cement for production of self-compacting concrete. The
addition of glass powder in SCC mixes reduces the self-compatibility characteristics like
filling ability, passing ability and segregation resistance. The flow value decreases by an
average of 1.3%, 2.5% and 5.36% for glass powder replacements of 5%, 10% and 15%
respectively.

Suraj N. Shah., Shweta S. Sutar, Yogesh Bhagwat carried out an experimental study on
to find out the effect of addition of red mud, which is a waste product from the
aluminium industries, and foundry waste sand, which is a waste product from foundry,
on the properties of self- compacting concrete containing two admixtures and
experimentation combinations of admixtures which is taken Super plasticizer & VMA.
It can be concluded that maximum compressive strength of self-compacting concrete
with the combination of admixtures (SP+VMA) may be obtained by adding 2% foundry
waste sand which is a waste material of ferrous industry (foundry).

N. Bouzouba and M. Lachemi carried out an experimental study on producing and

evaluating SCC made with high- volumes of fly ash is presented. The high-volume fly
ash self-compacting concretes (except one) have a slump flow in the range of 500 to 700

- 21 -
mm, a flow time ranging from 3 to 7 seconds, a segregation index ranging from 1.9 to
14%, and bleed water ranging from0.025 to 0.129 mL/cm2. The temperature rise of the
self-compacting concrete was 5 to 10 C lower than that of the control concrete, and the
setting times of the self-compacting concrete were 3 to 4 hours longer than those of
the control concrete. The self- compacting concrete developed compressive
strengths ranging from 15 to 31 MPa and from 26 to 48 MPa, at 7 and 28 days, respectively.

Manu santhanam and Subramanyam (2004) discussed the existing research about various
aspects of self-compacting concrete , including materials and mixture design , test methods ,
construction-related issues, and properties. They summarized that Self-Compacting Concrete
is a recent development that shows potential for future applications. It meets the demands
places by requirements of speed and quality in construction.

R.V(2003) found that use of fine fly ash for obtaining Self compacting concrete resulted
in an increase of the 28 day Compressive Strength Concrete by about 38%. Self-
compacting concrete was achieved when volume of paste was between 0.43 and 0.45.

Subramanian and Chattopadhyay (2002) described the results of trails carried out to arrive
at an approximate mix proportioning of Self compacting concrete. Self-
Compatibility was achieved for Water to Powder ratio ranging from 0.9 to 1.1 when Coarse
Aggregate and Sand content were restricted to 46 % and 40% of the mortar volume
respectively.

Hardik Upadhyay carried out an experimental study on different mix design methods using a
variety of materials has been discussed, as the characteristics of materials and the mix
proportion influences self- compatibility to a great extent. It can be a boon considering
improvement in concrete quality, significant advances towards automation and concrete
construction processes, shortened construction time, lower construction cost and much
improvement in working conditions as it reduces noise pollution. Properties of self-
compacting concrete with different types of additives.

Zoran Grdic (2008) carried out an experimental study on present’s properties of self-
compacting concrete, mixed with different types additives: fly ash, silica fume, hydraulic

- 22 -
lime and a mixture of fly ash and hydraulic lime. Due to test results, the addition of fly ash to
the mixture containing hydraulic lime is quite beneficial, bringing a substantial improvement
of the behaviour of SCC FAHL concrete. Also, this mixture has smaller filling capacity and
fluidity than other mixtures.

Naik and Singh (1997) conducted tests on concretes containing between 15% and
25% by mass Class F and Class C fly ashes to evaluate compressive strength. The effects of
moisture and temperature during curing were also examined. The results of the research
showed that concretes containing Class C fly ash and were moist cured at 73°F (23°C)
developed higher early age (1 to 14 days) compressive strengths than concretes with Class F
fly ash. The long-term (90 days and greater) compressive strength of concretes containing fly
ash was not significantly influenced by the class of fly ash. The air-cured concretes
containing Class F fly ash did not develop strengths equivalent to air-cured normal concretes
and air-cured concretes containing Class C fly ash developed relatively greater compressive
strengths than air-cured concretes containing Class F fly ash. For concretes containing either
class of fly ash, compressive strengths at 7 days increased with an increase in curing
temperature.

Safiuddin (2008) et al. observed that drying shrinkage occurs when concrete hardens
and dries out at the early age. It induces potential flow channels in the form of micro-
cracks. These cracks provide the access to deleterious agents, and thus affect the
durability of concrete. The drying shrinkage of SCC does not differ very much from
that of normal concrete. Several studies reported that it could be even lower in SCC. In
general, the reduced coarse aggregate content and the increased amount of cementing
material are expected to cause more drying shrinkage in SCC. But the porosity also
affects the drying shrinkage of concrete. As the porosity is reduced in SCC, it
compensates the negative effects of aggregate and binder on drying shrinkage. In
addition, the drying shrinkage tends to decrease in SCC since a very small amount of free
water is available in the system. Also, SCC has minimum empty voids on concrete surface
that are largely responsible for drying shrinkage.

Felekoglu et al. (2005) has done research on effect of w/c ratio on the fresh and hardened
properties of SCC. According to the author adjustment of w/c ratio and super plasticizer

- 23 -
dosage is one of the key properties in proportioning of SCC mixtures. In this research,
fine mixtures with different combinations of w/c ratio and super plasticizer dosage levels
were investigated. The results of this research show that the optimum w/c ratio for
producing SCC is in the range of 0.84- 1.07 by volume. The ratio above and below this
range may cause blocking or segregation of the mixture.

Nagataki, Fujiwara (1992) performed the slump flow test of SCC mix to find out whether the
concrete mix is workable or not. They also performed the segregation test of SCC mix, by
using locally available materials, the value ranging from 500-700 mm is considered as the
slump required for a concrete to be self-compacted.

2.3.2 Influence of Admixtures on Concrete Properties

In the following are presented several papers, found in the literature, on the effects of
mineral and chemical admixtures on the fresh and hardened concrete. The mineral admixtures
referred to are blast-furnace slag, fly ash, and silica fume. The chemical admixtures
considered are high range water reducer or superplasticizer and viscosity-modifying agent.

2.3.2.1 Mineral Admixtures

Mineral admixtures are added to concrete as part of the total cementitious system. They
may be used in addition to or as a partial replacement of Portland cement in concrete
depending on the properties of the materials and the desired effect on concrete (Mindess et
al., 2003). Mineral admixtures are used to improve a particular concrete property such as
workability, strength or compactability. The optimum amount to use should be established by
testing to determine (1) whether the material is indeed improving the property, and (2) the
correct dosage rate, as an overdose or underdose can be harmful or not achieve the desired
effect, because they react differently with different cements (Kosmatka et al., 2002).

2.3.2.2 Blast Furnace Slag

Blast furnace slag (BFS), also called slag cement, is made by rapidly quenching molten
blast-furnace slag and grinding the resulting material into a fine powder. BFS is classified by
ASTM C 989 according to its level of reactivity. Depending on the desired properties, the
amount of BFS can be as high as 50 percent by mass, of the total cementitious materials

- 24 -
content (Ramachandran,1981). In his research, Russell (1997) found out that the use of slag
cement lowers concrete permeability, thereby reducing the rate of chloride ion diffusion.
Proper proportioning of slag cement can eliminate the need to use low alkali or sulfate-
resistant Portland cements. Russell’s results showed that BFS can be used to enhance the
strength gain at later ages than 28 days, it replaces 20 to 30 percent by mass of the Portland
cement.

Sobolev (1999) studied the effect of adding up to 50% by mass granulated blast-furnace
slag in the cementitious material that resulted in the increasing of chemical and thermal
resistance. The very low permeability of the concrete obtained, provided high resistance to
chemical attack and to freezing and thawing cycles. There was no visible destruction of blast
furnace slag concrete samples after 140 cycles of freezing and thawing at -50ºC, and they
also demonstrated high resistance to elevated temperatures.

Ozyildirim (2001) studied three concrete mixtures placed in the jointed plain concrete
paving project in Newport News, Virginia. The main goal was to reduce the shrinkage and
improve the flexural strength of the concrete. Two of the mixtures that he used contained
ground-granulated blast furnace slag and the third contained Class F fly ash. The content of
blast-furnace slag in the two mixtures was 30% by mass of the total cementitious material
and the maximum water-cement ratio was 0.50.

Flexural strengths at 28 days were similar for fly ash and blast-furnace slag concretes, but
after 60 days they were greater for those which contained slag. The shrinkage values of
concretes containing slag cement were slightly greater than the values of concretes with fly
ash. For freezing and thawing tests the acceptance criteria at 300 cycles were a weight loss of
7 percent and less, a durability factor of 60 and more, and a surface rating (ASTM C 672) of
3 or less. Blast-furnace slag concretes complied with those requirements, but the fly ash
concretes had slightly higher weight loss than required.

Hale (2000) et al. investigated the effects of the cement replacement with 25% by mass
blast-furnace slag on fresh and hardened concrete properties. As a result, compressive
strengths were increased by approximately 25 percent at 28 days as compared to normal
Portland cement mixtures. The use of 25 percent blast-furnace slag led to minor to moderate
reductions in slump and slightly lower air contents as compared to conventional mixtures.

- 25 -
Klieger and Isberner (1967) have conducted a comprehensive study on the properties of
pastes and concretes made with Portland blast-furnace slag cements (ASTM Type IS). Five
commercial IS brands were included in these tests, in addition to a number of Portland
cements.
These IS type cements were made by intergrinding a mixture of Portland cement clinker and
granulated blast-furnace slag or by making an intimate and uniform blend of Portland cement
and fine granulated blast-furnace slag. The amount of slag used in the mixtures was between
20% and 350% by mass of the total cementitious material.

The compressive strengths of concretes made with type IS cements were generally lower
at early ages than the strengths of concretes made with Type I cement. However, at 3 months,
one year, and 3 years, the strengths were generally equal to or greater than those of the Type I
cement. Also, at the same compressive strength, values of splitting tensile strength were
essentially equal for both types of cement.

2.3.2.3 Fly Ash

Gebler and Klieger (1983) studied concretes containing fly ash in order to determine its
effect on the air-void stability. 10% to 20% by mass of fly ash was used in the total amount of
cementitious material. The tests undertaken indicated that air contents of concrete containing
Class C fly ash appeared to be more stable than those of concrete containing Class F fly ash.
This occurred primarily because Class C fly ashes have lower organic matter content and
carbon content values. The studies revealed that the higher the organic matter content of a fly
ash, the higher would be the air-entraining admixture requirement for concrete in which the
admixture is used. Practically, all concretes containing fly ash required more air-entraining
admixture than concretes without fly ash and the concretes containing Class C fly ash tended
to lose less air than concretes with Class F fly ash.

Naik and Singh (1997) conducted tests on concretes containing between 15% and 25% by
mass Class F and Class C fly ashes, to evaluate time of setting, bleeding, compressive
strength, drying shrinkage, and abrasion resistance. The effects of moisture and temperature
during curing were also examined. The results of the research showed that concretes
containing Class C fly ash and were moist cured at 73°F (23°C) developed higher early age
(1 to 14 days) compressive strengths than concretes with Class F fly ash. The long-term (90
days and greater) compressive strength of concretes containing fly ash was not significantly
influenced by the class of fly ash.
- 26 -
The air-cured concretes containing Class F fly ash did not develop strengths equivalent to
air-cured normal concretes and air-cured concretes containing Class C fly ash developed
relatively greater compressive strengths than air-cured concretes containing Class F fly ash.
For concretes containing either class of fly ash, compressive strengths at 7 days increased
with an increase in curing temperature. Concretes with fly ash showed less bleeding than
conventional ones. Further, concretes with Class C fly ash showed less bleeding than
concretes with Class F fly ash. Also, drying shrinkage results for concretes containing fly ash
were essentially the same as for conventional concretes , regardless of initial curing
temperature. Drying shrinkage results for concretes with Class F fly ash were, on the average,
slightly less than for concretes with Class C fly ash. The abrasion resistance of the concretes
was essentially dependent on their compressive strength and time of setting for most of the
concretes containing the two types of fly ash was retarded.

Dietz and Ma (2000) in their research, showed a possible application of lignite fly ash
(LFA) for the production of Self-Compacting Concrete (SCC). The lignite fly ash has not
only some characteristics of potential hydraulic materials, it can also improve the rheological
properties of the fresh concrete because of its fineness, which is a primary advantage for
SCC. Self-compacting concrete with lignite fly ash shows a good flowing ability and high
self compactability.

Lignite Fly Ashes (LFA) are fine residues of ground lignite burned in the power plant
industry. In comparison with fly ashes from coal, LFA contains obviously more free lime and
sulfate. The chemical and mineralogical composition of the LFA shows wide variations and
because of that, fly ash with a free lime content of approximately 22% was chosen for the
project. The choice of this type of ash was due to its availability and its constant quality. Two
differently lignite fly ashes were used. One LFA, which was untreated showed a high free
lime content and was called Untreated Lignite Fly Ash (U-LFA). The other fly ash, which
was treated with water, was called Treated Lignite Fly Ash (T-LFA). In the latter case, the
free lime has changed into calcium hydroxide. Cementitious material consisted of 75%
cement and 25% fly ash, by mass. It was discovered that, if the cement is replaced from 10%
to 25% by U-LFA or TLFA, the water requirement is reduced. This is favorable for the
workability of the fresh concrete. The reduced water requirement indicated that the grains of
the cement - LFA mixture were more densely compacted. The volume between the particles,
which should be filled with water, became smaller due to the denser packing. Furthermore,
the spherical LFA particles favorably affected the workability of the mixture. It was seen that
- 27 -
the U-LFA set very quickly. The setting and hardening of the cement-U-LFA paste was
clearly shortened by U-LFA. The higher the U-LFA proportion was, the faster the paste
hardened and, because of this, U-LFA was replaced by T-LFA, which shortened the setting
times only slightly. The slump flow and funnel tests showed values within the ranges of other
tests previously undertaken. The compressive strengths of hardened concrete specimens
decreased with the increasing proportion of U-LFA over 25%, while they remained
approximately constant when T-LFA was used in percentages that exceeded 25%. After 28
days, compressive strengths between 50 MPa and 60 MPa and splitting tensile strengths
between 4 and 5 MPa were obtained for self-compacting concretes, with w/c ratios ranging
from 0.3 to 0.46.

2.3.2.4 Chemical Admixtures

Chemical admixtures represent those ingredients which can be added to the concrete mixture
immediately before or during mixing. The use of chemical admixtures such as water
reducers, retarders, high-range water reducers or superplasticizers (SP), and viscosity-
modifying admixtures is necessary in order to improve some fundamental characteristics of
fresh and hardened concrete. They make more efficient use of the large amount of
cementitious material in high strength and self-compacting concretes and help to obtain the
lowest practical water to cementing materials ratio.Chemical admixtures efficiency must be
evaluated by comparing strengths of trial batches. Also, compatibility between cement and
supplementary cementing materials, as well as water reducers, must be investigated by trial
batches. From these, it will be possible to determine the workability, setting time, bleeding,
and amount of water reduction for given admixture dosage rates and times of addition. Due to
the fact that this research dealt only with superplasticizers and viscosity modifiers, papers
found in the literature about these types of chemical admixtures would be presented in the
following.

2.3.2.5 Superplasticizers

A study of four commercially available superplasticizers used in type I Portland cement

concrete mixes was done by Whiting (1979). They represented both melamine- and
naphthalene-based formaldehyde condensation products. Hardened concrete specimens were
prepared and tested for compressive strength development, drying shrinkage, freeze-thaw
resistance, and resistance to deicing scaling. From his research, Whiting found out that high
range water reducers were capable of lowering the net water content of concrete mixtures
- 28 -
from 10% to 20% when used in dosages recommended by the manufacturers. Also it was
found out that one- and three-day compressive strengths could be substantially increased
through use of high range water reducers. Compressive strengths over 10,000 psi (70 MPa)
were obtained after 28 days of curing. The drying shrinkage was slightly reduced in the
attempt to lower the net water content of the concrete mixtures. Freeze-thaw durability and
resistance to deicer scaling of air-entrained concretes containing superplasticizer were equal
to or slightly better than air-entrained normal concretes prepared with equal slump and
cement content.

Ozkul and Dogan (1999) studied the effect of a N-vinyl copolymer superplasticizer on the
properties of fresh and hardened concretes. Workability of concrete was measured by slump
flow test and in situ tests were undertaken to find out the pumping ability of superplasticized
concrete. The coarse aggregate was crushed stone with the maximum size of 25 mm. By
using this chemical admixture, which was a little bit different from the conventional ones, the
ability of water reduction was increased along with the retention of high workability for a
longer time.In situ test results obtained by Ozkul and Dogan (1999) demonstrated that the
superplasticized concrete could be pumped easily from a height of about 13 m and the filling
capacity was greater than 85%. The pumping pressure was the same as for normal pumpable
concrete and no segregation was observed. For mixtures with water-cement ratios between
0.3 and 0.45, the slump diameters were between 500 mm and 740 mm and the compressive
strength varied between 53 MPa and 68 MPa at 28 days of age.

In their work, Roncero (1999) et al. evaluated the influence of two superplasticizers (a
conventional melamine based product and a new-generation comb-type polymer) on the
shrinkage of concrete exposed to wet and dry conditions. Tests of cylinders with embedded
extensometers have been used to measure deformations over a period of more than 250 days
after casting. In general, it was observed that the incorporation of superplasticizers increased
the drying shrinkage of concretes when compared to conventional concretes, whereas it did
not have any significant influence on the swelling and autogenous shrinkage under wet
conditions. The melamine-based product led to slightly higher shrinkage than the comb-type
polymer.

Kasami (1978) et al. have investigated the pumpability of superplasticized concrete under
field conditions. In their experiment, about 2000 m3 of normal and lightweight aggregate
concrete, involving 14 mixes with and without superplasticizers were pumped horizontally.
- 29 -
The pumping distance was 109 m and line diameter 125 mm. The dosage of the naphthalene-
based superplasticizer was in the range of 0.03% to 0.04% by weight of cement and concrete
mixing was done in ready-mix agitator-type trucks. After the addition of the superplasticizer,
the mixer was rapidly agitated for one minute. Following this process, the concrete was
pumped at rates of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 m3/h. Pump pressure and line pressure were
measured at each pumping rate. The tests data indicated that pumping pressure and line
pressure loss for normal weight concrete were reduced by about 30%, whereas those for
lightweight concrete were reduced by no more than 10%.

The effect of superplasticizer on the balance between flowability and viscosity of paste in
self-compacting concrete was investigated by Ouchi (1996) et al. From experimental results,
the ratio of V-funnel speed to flow area of cement paste with a fixed amount of
superplasticizer was found to be almost constant, independent of the water-cement ratio. A
higher amount of superplasticizer resulted in a lower ratio of V-funnel speed to flow area.
The ratio was proposed as an index for the effect of superplasticizer on cement paste flowing
ability and viscosity from the viewpoint of achieving self-compactability. However, the
relationship between high range water reducer amount and its effect was found to differ
depending on the type of cement or chemical admixture.
A rational mix-design method (Figure 2.6) for self-compacting concrete was proposed by
Okamura (1997) et al. and the indexes for flowability and viscosity were defined as Γm and
Rm, respectively. They were defined as follows:

Γm = (r1r2 – r20)/ r2

Rm = 10/t
Where r1 and r2 are the measured flow diameters perpendicular on each other; r0 is the flow
cone’s bottom diameter; and t is the measured time (in seconds) for cement paste to flow
through the funnel. These indexes are practical to use because they are easy to obtain from
simple test results. Larger Γm values indicate higher flow ability and smaller Rm values
indicate higher viscosity. A cement paste with Γm = 5 and Rm = 1 was found to be the most
appropriate mixture for achieving self-compacting concrete.

2.3.2.6 Viscosity Modifiers

The viscosity modifiers or viscosity modifying admixtures (VMA) were developed in order
to improve the rheological properties of cement paste in concretes (Khayat and Guizani,

- 30 -
1997). These admixtures enhance the viscosity of water and eliminate as much as possible the
bleeding and segregation phenomena in the fresh concrete. Because not all types of viscosity
modifiers have showed satisfactory results, research has concentrated on only two types:
welan gum and anti washout admixtures.

In their research, Takada (1999) et al. investigated the influence of welan gum, a kind of
natural polysaccharide-based viscosity agent, on the water-cementitious material ratio. It
was found that the viscosity modifier raised the value of the ratio due to its characteristics
to make the mixture viscous. Welan gum increased the viscosity of the free water in the
fresh concrete by the ability of its polymers’ characteristics to associate each other in water.
The tests results showed that a slump flow value of 650 ± 30 mm and a V-funnel time of 11
± 2 sec were achieved by using 0.01 to 0.02 percent viscosity agent and 0.025 to 0.035
percent superplasticizer from the total cementitious material. The values were considered
adequate for a workable self-compacting concrete.

Khayat (1997) et al. evaluated the properties of welan gum in achieving self-compacting
concrete for use in congested members and confined areas. The viscosity-modifying
admixture (welan gum) was used to ensure adequate stability for concrete cast in deep
structural members and wall elements in order to avoid segregation and bleeding which can
result in local structural defects that can affect its mechanical properties. All the SCC
mixtures had high filling capacities ranging between approximately 60 and 70 percent,
indicating excellent deformability without blockage among closely spaced obstacles. No
external bleeding was observed on the top surface of any of the cast wall elements and the
settlement values of the self-compacting mixtures measured on 150 cm walls ranged
between 1.4 and 2.9 mm. This corresponds to 0.1 and 0.2 percent of the wall heights and is
less than that for normal concrete, which was around 0.4 percent. In order to verify the
properties of self-compacting concrete, Dehn (2000) et al. studied the interaction between
the superplasticizer and viscosity-modifying agent and the bonding between the reinforcing
bars and self-compacting concrete. They found out that the polymer in the viscosity modifier
(welan gum) and the polymer in the superplasticizer restrain each other and this phenomena
results in a higher segregation resistance and some larger dosage of SP for a particular
deformability. It was also seen that depending on the mix design and chemical admixtures
dosages the bond behavior in self-compacting concrete was better than the bond in
conventional concrete.

- 31 -
Trial mixes with varying dosages of viscosity-modifying admixture (VMA) and high range
water reducing admixture (HRWR) to achieve a wide range of flow behavior were
investigated by Ferraris (1999) et al. In these mixes, the VMA was incorporated in order to
enhance the yield value and viscosity of the fluid concrete, hence reducing bleeding,
segregation, and settlement. The enhanced cohesiveness could ensure better suspension of
solid particles in the fresh concrete and therefore good deformability and filling capacity was
achieved during casting. The HRWR used was a carboxylated copolymer-based mixture and
the VMA was a modified cellulose product. Even though the dosages of chemical admixtures
have been varied, the slump flow tests undertaken, were not enough to determine whether a
flowable concrete was self-compacting or not.

Subramanian and Chattopadhyay (2002) carried out several trials to achieve an approximate
mix proportion of self-compacting concrete. At the initial stages of development, mixtures
were formulated without incorporating any viscosity-modifying agents. After several trials, it
was apparent that these admixtures imparted exceptional stability to the mixture. The
viscosity-modifying agent was then required, because slight variations in the amount of water
or in the proportions of aggregate and sand would have made the concrete unstable, that is,
water or slurry might have separated from the remaining material. However, not all VMAs
were suitable for concrete applications, due to the fact that some of them restricted the choice
of superplasticizer. The welan gum that was used, a well-known viscosity-modifying agent,
was found incompatible with melamine formaldehyde condensate-based type of
superplasticizer, but after a few trials, a naphthalene formaldehyde condensate and an acrylic
polymer superplasticizers were found to be suitable for application in self-compacting
concrete. Another two types of viscosity-modifiers, a hydroxy propyl methyl cellulose
(HPMC) and guar gum, were also selected for being used along with the concrete, but they
failed to react properly with the HRWR admixture. The guar gum had to be made into a
suspension in water after heating it to 60˚C and stirring for about one hour, but it lost its
suspending power after 12 hours. The HPMC entrained excessive air, causing a reduction in
strength. Subramanian and Chattopadhyay (2002) found out that with a combination
corresponding to 0.012 percent of welan gum and 0.036 percent acrylic polymer
superplasticizer by weight of cementitious material satisfactory self-compacting mixture
could be obtained. Investigations regarding the effects of viscosity-modifying admixture
(VMA) concentration, placement height, and mode of consolidation on enhancing the stability

- 32 -
of mixtures were done by Khayat and Guizani (1997). In a first phase, bleeding and settlement
were determined using 70 cm high columns cast with concrete containing 0.035 and 0.07
percent viscosity modifiers dosages. The water-cement ratios were between 0.50 and 0.70
and the slump values from 140 to 200 mm. In the second phase, bleeding, settlement, and
segregation were evaluated for concretes with 200 mm slump, cast in 50, 70, and 110 cm
high columns. This time the mixtures had a water-cement ratio of 0.50 and the same amounts
of VMA, which was chosen to be welan gum. The superplasticizer used was a liquid
sulfonated naphthalene.

The studies showed that the addition of welan gum affected the aqueous phase of the cement
paste where chains of the water-soluble polymer could imbibe some of the free water in the
system, thus enhancing the viscosity of the cement paste. As a result, less free water can be
available for bleeding. The enhanced viscosity of the cement paste can also improve the
capacity of the paste to suspend solid particles, process that reduces the sedimentation.
Mixtures containing a viscosity modifier exhibited a shear thinning behavior whereas the
apparent viscosity decreased with the increase in shear rate. The mixtures incorporated 0.035
and 0.07 percent of viscosity-modifying admixture and between 0.022 and 0.035
superplasticizer, by mass of cementitious materials. All mixtures incorporating VMA
exhibited lower rates of increase in bleeding and settlement than those without VMA,
regardless of water-cement ratios. Also, concretes containing 0.035 and 0.07 percent
viscosity-modifying admixture had approximately 30 and 50 percent lower segregation
coefficients than conventional ones, regardless of the height of casting. As seen from the
above investigations, it is important to enhance the stability of fluid concrete used to facilitate
the casting in congested or restricted areas. The enhanced cohesiveness of such concrete can
reduce structural defects resulting from increased porosity under aggregate and embedded
reinforcement. This can lead to improve tensile strength, impermeability, and bond strength
with reinforcement, especially in deep structural sections, which can contribute to the
reduction in congestion.

2.3.2 Self Compacting Recycled Aggregate Concrete

Recycled aggregate concrete is gaining its popularity because of its environment friendly
nature, its strength properties and easy availability. Because of the fact that, in some
countries, the natural aggregates are a scarce resource, and also because the surface
extractions destroy the landscape and upset the biological balance, it is necessary to find a
- 33 -
new source of aggregates to guarantee the concrete production. The new source has
accomplished two main goals: on the one hand, to maintain the price of concrete, which until
now was the cheapest construction material; and on the other, to preserve the environment,
without creating piles of waste over the world. With the passage of time, importance of using
recycling materials is gaining popularity in all context of our daily life. Construction and
Demolition Wastes use is increasing over time, proportionate with the development of the
towns and the countries. Reducing, reusing and recycling appear to be the best option, thus,
also increasing the lifetime of landfills and reduce exploitation of the natural resources

2.3.2.1 Recycled Stone Aggregate Concrete.

In a study by Limbachiya et al. (2000), concrete specimens made with up to 30 % RCA had
equal compressive strengths for w/c ratios greater than 0.25.Exteberria et al. (2007) found
similar behavior with tests using 25 % RCA. They also performed the experiment with the
same w/c ratio. This study tested concrete made with 0, 25, 50, and 100 % RCA concrete
mixes and concluded that up to 25 % could be replaced without significant change in
compressive strength or a different w/c ratio; however, to obtain the same strength with 50-
100 %RCA, w/c ratio needed to be 4–10 % lower, and without this alteration, the compressive
strength for 100 % RCA mixes was reduced by 20–25 % (Exteberria et al. 2007).

Yang et al. (2008) attributed a reduction in compressive strength for RCA concrete to the
increased water absorption of the aggregate and found that at relatively low water absorption
(relatively low RCA fraction) concrete had equivalent compressive strengths while higher
RCA fraction sand absorption compressive strengths were 60–80 % of that of conventional
control concrete, but that the compressive strength improved with age.

Several past and recent tests (e.g.,Kang et al. 2012) show that the splitting tensile strength of
RCA concrete is comparable to conventional concrete. Insome cases, RCA concrete
performed superior to NA concrete with regards to tension.

Singh and Sharma, in his paper “Use of Recycled Aggregate in Concrete- A Paradigm
Shift” states that recycled aggregate possess relatively lower bulk density, crushing and
impact values and higher water absorption as compared to natural aggregate. The
compressive strength of recycled aggregate concrete is relatively lower up to 15% than
natural aggregate concrete.

- 34 -
Sudhir et al (2013) experimented that the slump of the normal concrete is observed to be
less than the recycled one. The compressive strength of concrete containing 50% RCA has
strength in close proximity to that of normal concrete. Tensile splitting test shows that
concrete has good tensile strength when replace up to 25-50%. The strength of concrete is
high during initial stages but gradually reduces during later stages.

As per the experiment conducted by Puri et al (2013), there is a considerable increase in the
compressive strength as well as flexural strength of concrete when the aggregates are fully
or partially replaced with construction debris. However maximum strength was shown by
concrete mix having 25% recycled debris aggregates and 75% natural aggregates. In
construction debris concrete, there is a minor reduction in workability of the concrete mix.
Murali et al (2012), Compared to natural aggregate concrete the compressive strength of
recycled aggregate was decreased by 18.76%.The split tensile strength of recycled
aggregate was decreased by 9.55% than the natural aggregate. The flexural strength of
recycled aggregate was decreased by 17.39% compared to natural aggregate.

By Gonculves et al, Full replacement of natural aggregate by recycled aggregate leads to a

decrease of concrete strength up to 16%. Replacements up to 50% lead to concrete strength
reduction less than 5%. The use recycled concrete aggregate produces concrete with lower
performances to durability related properties, mainly due to higher porosity of recycled
aggregate. According to Cement and Concrete Association of New Zealand Technical
Report in “Best Practice Guide for the use of Recycled Aggregates in NewConcrete,”11the
fresh density of recycled aggregate concrete at 100% replacement of coarse aggregate will
generally be 5% to 10% lower than the corresponding natural aggregate concrete owing to
the adhered mortar on the recycled coarse aggregate. Lower replacement levels of recycled
aggregate would have less effect on the concrete strengths. Recycled aggregate concrete is
generally reported to be between 15% and 40% weaker than natural aggregate concrete.
Tensile and flexural strengths of recycled aggregate concrete at 100% replacement level
have been found to have the same or at most 10% lower strength than the natural aggregate
concrete counterpart. Takuya et al (2009) states from the shear failure tests, the recycled
aggregate usage specimens provides 30% reduction III shear strength compared with those
using normal aggregate. No obvious influence of the moisture conditions as well as the
sorting of the recycle aggregates was observed in shear strength. From the bending failure
test, initial crack load and growth were in the earlier loading stage in case of the low grade

- 35 -
recycled aggregate usage. However, both strength and yielding stiffness of the test beams
using the recycled aggregate were as well as those using the normal aggregate.

By Sonawane and Pimplikar, Use of recycled aggregate up to 30% does not affect the
functional requirements of the structure as per the findings of the test results. Various tests
conducted on recycled aggregates and results compared with natural aggregates are
satisfactory as per IS 2386. Due to use of recycled aggregate in construction, energy & cost
of transportation of natural resources & excavation is significantly saved. This in turn
directly reduces the impact of waste material on environment. Some finding by Sonawane
and Pimplikar

 The specific gravity in saturated surface dry condition of recycled concrete

aggregate was found from 2.35 to 2.58 which are less but satisfying
results. If specific gravity is less than 2.4, it may cause segregation;
honeycombing & also yield of concrete may get reduced

 The RCA from demolished concrete consist of crushed stone aggregate with
old mortar adhering to it, the water absorption ranges from 1.5% to 7.0%,
which is relatively higher than that of the natural aggregates. Thus the water
absorption results are satisfactory

 The bulk density of recycled aggregate is lower than that of natural aggregate,
thus results are not satisfactory; due to less Bulk Density the mix proportion
gets affected.

 The recycled aggregate is relatively weaker than the natural aggregate against
different mechanical actions. As per IS 2386 part (IV), the crushing and
impact values for concrete wearing surfaces should not exceed 30% & for
other than wearing surfaces 45% respectively. The crushing & impact values
of recycled aggregate satisfy the BIS specifications limit. From crushing &
impact test it is found that use of recycled aggregate is possible for application
other than wearing surfaces.

 The average compressive strengths of cubes cast are determined as per IS 516
using RCA and natural aggregate at the age 3, 7, & 28days and reported in
Table2. As expected, the compressive strength of RAC is slightly lower than
the conventional concrete made from similar mix proportions. The reduction
- 36 -
 in strength of RAC as compare to NAC is in order of 8-14% and 10-16%for
M-30 & M-40 concretes respectively. The amount of reduction in strength
depends on parameters such as grade of demolished concrete, replacement
ratio, w/c ratio, processing of recycled aggregate etc. As per test results the
strength of recycled aggregate cube is more than target strength, so RCA can
be used for construction purpose.

 The average flexural strength of recycled aggregate are determined at the age
7, & 28 days varies from 3.30 N/mm2- 5.637 N/mm2 respectively. The
reduction in flexural strength of recycled aggregate as compared to NAC is 3 -
16% respectively, so it is satisfactory.

Malešev et al. insisted that the quantity of recycled aggregate varies with river aggregate
by % of 0, 50,100 respectively. The properties of workability (slump test) immediately
after mixing and 30 minutes after mixing, bulk density of fresh concrete, air content, bulk
density of hardened concrete, water absorption (at age of 28 days), wear resistance (at age
of 28 days), compressive strength (at age of 2, 7 and 28 days), splitting tensile strength (at
age of 28 days), flexural strength (at age of 28 days), modulus of elasticity (at age of 28
days), drying shrinkage (at age of 3, 4, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days), bond between ribbed and
mild reinforcement and concrete are tested. Ninety nine specimens were made for testing
of the listed properties of hardened concrete. It has been found that workability of concrete
with natural and recycled aggregate is almost the same if water saturated surface dry
recycled aggregate is used. Also, if dried recycled aggregate is used and additional water
quantity is added during mixing, the same workability can be achieved after a prescribed
time. Bulk density of fresh concrete is slightly decreased with increase in the quantity of
recycled aggregate. The authors also insist that for concrete, compressive strength mainly
depends on the quality of recycled aggregate. If good quality aggregate is used for the
production of new concrete, the recycled aggregate has no influence on the compressive
strength, regardless of the replacement ratio of natural coarse aggregate with recycled
aggregate. The same findings are found for concrete tensile strength (splitting and
flexural). The modulus of elasticity of concrete also decreases with increasing recycled
aggregate content as a consequence of lower modulus of elasticity of recycled aggregate
compared to natural aggregate. Shrinkage of concrete depends on the amount of recycled
concrete aggregate. Concrete with more than 50% of recycled coarse aggregate has
significantly more shrinkage compared to concrete with natural aggregate. Increased
- 37 -
shrinkage is a result of the attached mortar and cement paste in the recycled aggregate
grains.

Brett et al (2010) insist that the use of recycled aggregates in concrete is both economically
viable & technically feasible. In addition to demolition waste sources, RA can also be
composed of excess Concrete materials returned to the plant
Mirza and Saif have studied the effect of silica fume on recycled aggregate concrete
characteristics. The percentages of recycled aggregate replacements of natural aggregate
used by weight were 0, 50, and 100%, whereas the percentages of silica fume replacements
of cement used by weight were 5, 10, and 15%. The results show that the compressive and
tensile strengths values of the recycled concrete aggregate increase as the recycled
aggregate and the silica fume contents increase. The study also indicates that in order to
accommodate 50% of recycled aggregate in structural concrete, the mix needs to
incorporate 5% of silica fume.

Gupta discusses that normally coarse aggregate is the fractured stone obtained from rocks
in hills or pebbles from river bed, and because of depletion of good conventional aggregate
in certain regions, the need for development of Recycled Aggregate technology should be
taken up commercially. It is similar to fly ash, which is available from electrostatic
precipitators of various super thermal power stations which is an industrial waste material.
It is chemically reactive when, mixed with cement for use in concrete. This is also useful as
partial replacement of cement, as it gives concrete having better impermeability. Thus, it
has a wider use in construction industry. He also notifies large scale recycling of
demolished waste will offer, not only the solution of growing waste disposal problem and
energy requirement, but will also help construction industry in getting aggregates locally.
Such demolition waste can be crushed to required size, depending upon the place of its
application and crushed material is screened in order to produce recycled aggregate of
appropriate sizes. An aggregate produced by demolished buildings will be called Recycled
Aggregates. Sankarnarayanan et al. find out the scenario in India presence of Construction
& Demolition waste and other inert material (e.g. drain silt, dust and grit from road
sweeping) and observes the following:

 The potential to save natural resources (stone, river sand, soil etc.) and energy, exits
in these wastes.

 Its occupying significant space at landfill sites.

- 38 -
  Its presence spoils processing of bio-degradable as well recyclable waste,
Construction & Demolition waste has potential use after processing and grading,
Utilization of Construction & Demolition waste is quite common in industrialized
countries but in India so far no organized effort has been made.

Vyas and Bhatt concluded that the compression test result indicates an increasing trend of
compressive strength up to 40% replacement of recycled aggregate & then it decreases at
the 100% replacement of recycled aggregate after 28 days. The results also show that the
concrete specimens with 40% replacement of recycled aggregate get the highest strength
when compared to the concrete specimens with different percentage of recycled aggregate.
The results shows that the pull out strength is gradually increasing up to the replacement of
40% recycled aggregate than it is decreeing to the replacement of 100% recycled aggregate.
The results also shows that the concrete specimens with 40% replacement of recycled
aggregate get the highest pull out strength when compared to the concrete specimens with
different percentage of recycled aggregate which is in agreement with the compressive
strength results. Hence the recycled aggregate can be used in concrete with 40%
replacement of natural coarse aggregate. The recycled aggregate is relatively weaker than
the natural aggregate against different mechanical actions.

As per IS 2386 part (IV), the crushing and impact values for concrete wearing surfaces
should not exceed 30% & for other than wearing surfaces 45% respectively. The crushing &
impact values of recycled aggregate satisfy the BIS specifications limit. From crushing &
impact test it is found that use of recycled aggregate is possible for application other than
wearing surfaces. The percentages of recycled aggregate replacements of natural aggregate
used by weight were 0, 50, and 100%, whereas the percentages of silica fume replacements
of cement used by weight were 5, 10, and 15%. The results show that the compressive and
tensile strengths values of the recycled concrete aggregate increase as the recycled
aggregate and the silica fume contents increase. The study also indicates that in order to
accommodate 50% of recycled aggregate in structural concrete, the mix needs to
incorporate 5% of silica fume.

- 39 -
2.3.2.2 Use of Recycled Aggregate Concrete

History of use of recycled aggregate concrete is not a recent concept. The extensive research on
recycled concrete aggregate and recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) was started from year 1945
in various part of the world after Second World War, but in a fragmented manner. First effort has
been made by Nixon in 1977 who complied all the work on recycled aggregate carried out
between 1945-1977 and prepared a state-of-the-art report on it for RILEM technical committee
37-DRC. Nixon concluded that a number of researchers have examined the basic properties of
concrete in which the aggregate is the product of crushing another concrete, where other
concentrated on old laboratory specimens. However, a comprehensive state-of-the-art document
on the recycled aggregate concrete has been presented by Hansen & others in 1992 in which
detailed analysis of data has been made, leading towards preparation of guidelines for production
and utilization of recycled aggregate concrete.
It has been estimated that approximately 180 million tones of construction & demolition waste
are produced each year in European Union. In general, in EU, 500 Kg of construction rubble
and demolition waste correspond annually to each citizen. Indicatively 10% of used aggregates
in UK are RCA, whereas 78,000 tons of RCA were used in Holland in 1994. The Netherland
produces about 14million tons of buildings and demolition wastes per annum in which about 8
million tons are recycled mainly for unbound road base courses. The 285 million tons of per
annum construction waste produced in Germany, out of which 77 million tons are demolition
waste. Approximately 70% of it is recycled and reused in new construction work. It has been
estimated that approximately 13 million tons of concrete is demolished in France every year
whereas in Japan total quantity of concrete debris is in the tune of 10-15 million tons each year.
The Hong Kong generates about 20 million tons demolition debris per year and facing serious
problem for its disposal.. A recent report of Federal Highways Administration, USA refers to
the relative experience from European data on the subject of concrete and asphalt pavement
recycling as given. The rapid development in research on the use of RCA for the production of
new concrete has also led to the production of concrete of high strength/performance.

The Califor.nia Department of transportation's (Caltrans) current specifications allows the use
of recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) for specific applications. Specifically, RCA can be used
in pavement supporting layers. Caltrans initially limited the amount of RCA to 50 percent by
weight of the total aggregate. Today, 100% of recycled concrete aggregate is allowed by a
40
special provision. Caltrans is working with the concrete and aggregate industries to develop
further applications/uses of RCA.

“The review team found that RCA, under specific conditions, has the potential to produce
strong, durable materials suitable for use in the highway infrastructure,” says Jason Harrington
of the FHWA Recycling Team. RCA helps to increase structural strength in the pavement
base, resulting in improved load carrying capacity.Selected international experience has been
outlined here which has relevance for the Indian situation:

A) Scotland – About 63% material has been recycled in 2000, remaining 37% material being
disposed in landfill and exempt sites.

a) The Government is working out on specifications of recycling and code of practice.

b) Attempts are being made for establishing links with the planning system,
computerizing transfer note system to facilitate data analysis and facilitating dialogue between
agencies for adoption of secondary aggregates by consultants and contractors.

B) Denmark – According to the Danish Environmental Protection Agency (DEPA), in 2003,

30% of the total waste generated was Construction & Demolition waste.

a) According to DEPA around 70-75% waste is generated from demolition activity,

20-25% from renovation and the remaining 5-10% from new building developments.
b) Because of constraints of landfill site, recycling is a key issue for the country.

c) Statutory orders, action plan and voluntary agreements have been carried out, e.g.,
reuse of asphalt (1985), sorting of Construction & Demolition waste (1995) etc.

C) Netherlands – More than 40 million Construction & Demolition waste is being generated
out of which 80% is brick and concrete.

a) A number of initiatives taken about recycling material since 1993, such as

prevention of waste, stimulate recycling, promoting building materials which have a longer
life, products which can be easily disassembled, separation at source and prohibition of
Construction & Demolition waste at landfills.

41
D) USA – Construction & Demolition waste accounts for about 22% of the total waste
generated in the USA.

a) Reuse and recycling of Construction & Demolition waste is one component of

larger holistic practices called sustainable or green building practice.

b) Green building construction practices may include salvaging dimensional number,

using reclaimed aggregates from crushed concrete, grinding drywall scraps, to use as soil
amendment at the site.

c) Promoting “deconstruction” in place of “demolition”.

d) Deconstruction means planned breaking of a building with reuse being the main
motive.

e) E) Japan – Much of the R&D in Japan is focused on materials which can withstand
earthquake and prefabrication

a) 85 million tons of Construction & Demolition waste has been generated in 2000,
out of which 95% of concrete is crushed and reused as road bed and backfilling material, 98%
of asphalt + concrete and 35% sludge is recycled.

F) Singapore – Construction & Demolition waste is separately collected and recycled. A

private company has built an automated facility with 3, 00,000 ton per annum capacity.

G) Hong Kong – Concrete bricks and paving blocks have been successfully produced
impregnation of photo catalyst for controlling NOx in ambient air.

H) India – Use for embankment purpose in bridges, roads etc. up to 3% to 4% of total

production.

2.3.3 Self Compacting Rubberized Concrete

Waste tires are dramatically creating significant environmental, health, and esthetic issues,
posing a key management problem without an easy solution. Using waste tires in concrete
production is one possible disposal option, but more potential solutions to this problem are still

42
needed (Khaloo et al., 2008 and Savas et al., 1997). The purpose of aggregating rubber is to
increase concrete's flexibility, elasticity, and capacity to absorb energy. A no. of studies carried
out to investigate the fresh and hardened properties of rubberized concrete but very few studies
have been carried out on self compacting rubberized concrete SCRC so far. Najim et al. reviewed
the fresh and hardened properties of rubberized concrete. They also studied application for plain
rubberized concrete and self compacting rubberized concrete.Mehmet G et al. investigated
permeability properties of self compacting rubberized concrete.Topcui B et al. and Big-nozzi M C
et al. also used recycled tyre rybber waste in a self compacting concrete and investigated properties
of self compacting rubberized concrete.Many researchers have therefore used rubber particles as
aggregates in concrete production to eliminate poor deformation capacity, low tensile strength,
and improve energy absorption capacity (Ozbay et al., 2011).

Results from previous tests indicated that introducing rubber particles as aggregate enhanced
deformation and energy absorption capacities while they decreased workability and mechanical
properties (Eldin and Senouci, 1993, Khatip and Bayomy, 1999 and Topçu, 1995). Few studies
have produced rubberized self-compacting concrete (RSCC) to diminish the negative effect of
rubber aggregate on concrete workability. Although the effects of rubber aggregate content on
the fresh and mechanical properties of RSCC have been studied in several studies (Bignozzi and
Sandrolini, 2006, Güneyisi, 2010, Najim and Hall, 2010, Topçu and Bilir, 2009 and Turatsinize
and Garros, 2008), there is still a dearth of data on its impact resistance, transport and durability
properties.Topçu and Demir (2007) investigated durability properties of rubberized concrete and
mortar, under the effect of freezing and thawing, seawater, and high temperature effects. They
concluded that 10% rubber aggregate in volume is the optimum amount to produce economical
and sufficient durable RSCC. Additionally, vehicle impacts taking place with rubberized
concrete barriers have been approached as a solution for collision problems (Topçu and Avcular,
1997). Generally, several impact tests have been used to demonstrate the relative brittleness and
impact resistance of concrete and similar construction materials (Barr and Baghli, 1988,Kishi et
al., 2002, Mindess and Cheng, 1993 and Ong et al., 1999). In this regard, ACI Committee 544
(1996) proposed a drop-weight impact test to evaluate the impact resistance of fiber concrete.
The test is widely used since it is simple and economical. However, the results obtained from this
test are often noticeably scattered. The review of literature indicates that although a few studies
has been carried out on SCRC, they have been limited to small scale specimens such as cubes,

43
cylinders, prisms. Even though studies indicate that the reduction in strength of rubberized
concrete could be remedied to a certain extend by the pretreatment of shredded rubber with
admixtures such as polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), the possibilities of using SCRC for structural
purposes have not been investigated to date.

Generally, several impact tests have been used to demonstrate the relative brittleness and impact
resistance of concrete and similar construction materials (Barr and Baghli, 1988,Kishi et al.,
2002, Mindess and Cheng, 1993 and Ong et al., 1999). In this regard, ACI Committee 544
(1996) proposed a drop-weight impact test to evaluate the impact resistance of fiber concrete.

44
 Chapter 3

MATERIALS

3.1 Introduction

Concrete is a composite materials, composed of cement (commonly Portland cement) and

other cementations materials such as fly ash and slag cement, aggregate (generally coarse
aggregate made of gravels or crushed rocks such as limestone, or granite, plus a fine aggregate
such as sand), water and chemical admixtures. The strength, durability and other characteristics
of concrete depends on the properties of its ingredients, proportions of the mix, methods of
mixing, compaction and other controls during placing, compaction, curing. Concrete solidifies
and hardens after mixing with water and placement due to a chemical process known as
hydration. The water reacts with the cement which bonds the other components together
eventually creating a robust stone-like material.

3.2 Constituents of Self Compacting Concrete

The properties of concrete depend on the quantities and qualities of its component. The
following sections of the chapter discuss the major elements of concrete and their effects on
concrete properties.

3.2.1 Cementitious Materials

In our research cementitious materials include
 Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC)
 Fly Ash (FA)
 Ground Granular Blast-furnace Slag (GGBS)

3.2.1.1 Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC)

Ordinary Portland Cement is the most common type of cement in general use around the world,
used as a basic ingredient of concrete, mortar, stucco, and most non-specialty grout. It is a fine

45
powder produced by grinding Portland cement clinker (95%) and a limited amount of Gypsum
which controls the setting time.

ASTM C150 defines Portland cement as "hydraulic cement (cement that not only hardens by
reacting with water but also forms a water-resistant product) produced by pulverizing clinkers
consisting essentially of hydraulic calcium silicates, usually containing one or more of the
forms of calcium sulfate as an inter ground addition.

The European Standard EN 197-1 as: “Portland cement clinker is a hydraulic material which
shall consist of at least two-thirds by mass of calcium silicates(3 CaO·SiO2 and 2 CaO·SiO2),
the remainder consisting of aluminum- and iron-containing clinker phases and other
compounds. The ratio of CaO to SiO2 shall not be less than 2.0. The magnesium oxide content
(MgO) shall not exceed 5.0% by mass”.

3.2.1.2 Fly Ash (FA)

Fly ash (or pulverised fuel ash) is a by-product of coal-fired electricity generating plants.
Because of its pozzolanic properties, fly ash (Figure 2.13) can be used as a partial replacement of
Portland cement in SCC. The use of fly ash in SCC mixtures generally improves both its fresh
and hardened properties. It can replace up to 30% by mass of Portland cement increasing the
strength of SCC and its chemical resistance and durability. However, the maximum strength is
reached more slowly than concretes made with only Portland cement.

Due to its small spherical shape, adding FA to SCC mix can improve its workability while
reducing water demand (Koehler et al., 2007). Bouzoubaa and Lachemib (2001) reported that the
use of fly ash and GGBS in SCC reduces the amount of super-plasticiser needed to obtain slump
flow spread as compared with concrete made with only Portland cement.

Furthermore, Kim et al. (1996) studied the effect of fly ash on the workability of super-flowing
concrete and reported that replacing 30% of cement with FA can result in excellent workability.
FA increases the reactivity of SCC, leading to increased compressive strength, improved
durability and reduced drying and autogenous shrinkage (Obla et al., 2003).

46
3.2.1.3 Ground Granular Blast-furnace Slag (GGBS)
Ground granulated blast-furnace slag (Figure 2.8) is a by-product from the blast-furnaces used to
make iron. It has been successfully used in many countries around the world achieving many
technical benefits in construction industries (Uysal and Sumer, 2011; Boukendakdjia et al., 2012;
Dinakar et al., 2013). Adding GGBS to self-compacting concrete offers many advantages related
to increasing its compactability, workability and retaining it for a longer time, while protecting
cement against both sulphate and chloride attack (Russel, 1997). Because GGBS has 10% lower
density than Portland cement, replacing an equal mass of cement by GGBS will result in a larger
paste volume, which substantially increases the segregation resistance and flow-ability.

Water demand tends to be less for concrete made with GGBS, owing to the smoother surface
texture of the slag particles compared to cement, and to the delay in the chemical reaction (Lewis
et al., 2003). Oner and Akyuz (2007), in their experiments on 32 different mixtures of SCC
containing GGBS, indicated that as GGBS content increases, water-to-binder ratio decreases for
the same workability and thus GGBS has a positive effect on the workability. They proved
further that the strength gain when using GGBS is more steady than concrete made with only
cement with the same binder content. Although it tends to have lower strength at an early stage
but as the curing period is extended (Figure 2.9), the strength increase was higher for the GGBS
concretes. The reason is that the slow pozzolanic reaction and that the formation of calcium
hydroxide requires time.

Ramachandran et al. (1981) reported that depending on the desired properties, the amount of
GGBS by the total mass of cementitious material content can be as high as 50 per cent. Oner and
Akyuz (2007) indicated further that the compressive strength of concrete mixtures containing
GGBS increases as the amount of GGBS increases. After an optimum point, at around 55% of
the total binder content, the addition of GGBS does not improve the compressive strength
(Figure 2.10), which can be explained by the presence of unreacted GGBS, acting as a filler
material in the paste.
3.2.2 Aggregates
Aggregate, the main constituent of concrete, contains 60 to 80% of the total volume of concrete.
Proper selection of the type and particle size distribution of the aggregates affects the
workability and the hardened properties of concrete. Aggregates are used in the concrete for
47
different reasons like economy, volume stability, durability problems e.g. shrinkage, freezing
and thawing of hardened concrete caused by the concrete.

Aggregates are divided into two distinct categories--fine and coarse. Fine aggregates generally
consist of natural sand or crushed stone with most particles passing through a 3/8-inch sieve.
Coarse aggregates are any particles greater than 0.19 inch, but generally range between 3/8 and
1.5 inches in diameter. Gravels constitute the majority of coarse aggregate used in concrete with
crushed stone making up most of the remainder.

Natural gravel and sand are usually dug or dredged from a pit, river, lake, or seabed. Crushed
aggregate is produced by crushing quarry rock, boulders, cobbles, or large-size gravel.
Recycled concrete is a viable source of aggregate and has been satisfactorily used in granular
sub-bases, soil-cement, and in new concrete.

After harvesting, aggregate is processed: crushed, screened, and washed to obtain proper
cleanliness and gradation. If necessary, a benefaction process such as jigging or heavy media
separation can be used to upgrade the quality. Once processed, the aggregates are handled and
stored to minimize segregation and degradation and prevent contamination.

Table 3.1 Classification of Aggregates Based on Particle Size

Aggregate Fraction Size Range

Coarse Retained on No.4
Fine Passing No.4- Retained on No.200
Microfines Passing No. 200 Sieve

3.2.2.1 Fine Aggregates

Fine aggregate is the inert or chemically inactive material, most of which passes through a
4.75 mm sieve and contains not more than 5 per cent coarser material. They may be classified
as follows:

48
  Natural sand: Fine aggregate resulting from the natural disintegration of rocks and
which has been deposited by streams or glacial agencies.
 Crushed stone sand: Fine aggregate produced by crushing of hard stone.
 Crushed gravel sand: Fine aggregate produced by crushing of natural gravel.
Sand consists of small angular or rounded grains of silica. Sand is commonly used as the fine
aggregate in cement concrete. Both natural and artificial sands are used for this purpose.
Functions of sand:

 It fills the voids existing in the coarse aggregate.

 It reduces shrinkage and cracking of concrete.

 By varying the proportion of sand concrete can be prepared economically for any
required strength.

 It helps in hardening of cement by allowing the water through its voids.

 To form hard mass of silicates as it is believed that some chemical reaction takes place
between silica of sand and constituents of cement.

The fine aggregates serve the purpose of filling all the open spaces in between the coarse
particles. Thus, it reduces the porosity of the final mass and considerably increases its strength.
Usually, natural river sand is used as a fine aggregate. However, at places, where natural sand
is not available economically, finely crushed stone may be used as a fine aggregate.

In our country, fine aggregates are found in two forms namely, local sand and Sylhet sand. Local
sand easily is available and less costly. On the other hand, Sylhet sand is collected in from river in
the Sylhet region and supplied throughout the country. Sylhet sand is a bit costly. We have used
only Sylhet sand particles those passed through the No.4 sieve as fine aggregate, as we had to
maintain the combined aggregate gradation within the proposed band gradation “5-10-14-18”.

Sylhet Sand: Sylhet sand was coarser than local sand and had materials distributed through the
all sieve. It gave the well graded curve. Well graded curve is recommended for use to get better

49
quality of concrete. It is collected from the rivers in the Sylhet region of Bangladesh. It is then
distributed throughout the country to meet the demand our construction need. It is reddish in
color.
3.2.2.2 Coarse Aggregate

By definition, coarse aggregate retains on No. 4 sieve. For our project work, we have used
aggregates which passed through 1inch sieve and retained on No. 4 sieve as coarse
aggregate. Gravel or crushed stone is the coarse aggregate in most mixes.

Fresh Coarse Aggregate: Fresh coarse aggregate refers to the aggregate that is
collected from the natural resources. Coarse aggregate shall consist of naturally occurring
materials such as gravel, or resulting from the crushing of parent rock, to include natural
rock, slag, expanded clays and shale (lightweight aggregates) and other approved inert
materials with similar characteristics, having hard, strong, durable particles.

Igneous rock, these rocks are primarily crystalline and are formed by the cooling of molten
rock material beneath the earth’s crust (magma). Sedimentary rocks, these rocks are formed
from deposited insoluble material (e.g., the remains of existing rock deposited on the bottom of
an ocean or lake). This material is transformed to rock by heat and pressure. Sedimentary rocks
are layered in appearance and are further classified based on their predominant mineral as
calcareous (limestone, chalk, etc.), siliceous (sandstone, etc.) or argillaceous (shale, etc.).
Metamorphic rock, These are igneous or sedimentary rocks that have been subjected to heat
and/or pressure great enough to change their mineral structure so as to be different from the
original rock.

Aggregates are produced in a quarry or mine whose basic function is to convert in situ rock into
aggregate with specified characteristics. Usually the rock is blasted or dug from the quarry
walls then reduced in size using a series of screens and crushers. Some quarries are also
capable of washing the finished aggregate.

We have collected fresh coarse from the local market. The main problem we have faced that
aggregates were either gap graded or uniformly graded. There were different qualities of
aggregates found in the market. These qualities are based on the quality of rocks found in the

50
nature and also the method of production of aggregates. The aggregates we have collected were
mainly crushed stones.
Recycled Coarse Aggregate: Construction materials are increasingly judged by their
ecological characteristics. Concrete recycling gains importance because it protects natural
resources and eliminates the need for disposal by using the readily available concrete as an
aggregate source for new concrete or other applications. . The states that do use recycled
concrete aggregate (RCA) in new concrete report that concrete with RCA performs equal to
concrete with natural aggregates. Most agencies specify using the material directly in the
project that is being reconstructed. Recycling of concrete is a relatively simple process. It
involves breaking, removing, and crushing existing concrete into a material with a specified
size and quality.

We have used recycled aggregates those were collected from the crushing of cylinders, beams
that were found on the backyard of our laboratory. Those beams or cylinders were made for the
purpose research works.

3.2.2.3 Shredded Rubber

Shredded rubber is a loose-fill surface option that is made of 100% clean, ground, recycled
rubber tires. It is non-toxic and free of metals. Shredded rubber is available in six colors. The
bright attractive colors and soft, inviting texture are attractive to children. Our shredded rubber
will not rot, does not absorb or retain water, and will not freeze. We collected it from
Bangladesh Rubber Industries (BRI).

3.2.3 Water

Combining water with a cementitious material forms a cement paste by the process of
hydration. The cement paste glues the aggregate together, fills voids within it, and makes it
flow more freely. A lower water-to-cement ratio yields a stronger, more durable concrete,
whereas more water gives a free-flowing concrete with a higher slump. Impure water used to
make concrete can cause problems when setting or in causing premature failure of the structure.

Hydration involves many different reactions, often occurring at the same time. As the reactions
proceed, the products of the cement hydration process gradually bond together the individual
sand and gravel particles and other components of the concrete to form a solid mass.
51
The water used in making concrete specimen was of good drinkable quality. As the quality of
water effects the strength of concrete .The water cement ratio adopted was 0.40, 0.50, and 0.60.
The strength of concrete depends upon water cement ratio. Greater the water cement ratio,
lesser will be the strength of concrete.

3.2.4 Chemical admixtures

Chemical admixtures are materials in the form of powder or fluids that are added to the
concrete to give it certain characteristics not obtainable with plain concrete mixes. In normal
use, admixture dosages are less than 5% by mass of cement and are added to the concrete at the
time of batching/mixing. In our research we used two types chemical admixtures. These are:

 Superplasticizers
 Viscosity Modifying Admixtures

3.2.4.1 Superplasticizers

Superplasticizers (high-range water-reducers) are low molecular-weight, water-soluble polymers

designed to achieve high amounts of water reduction (12-30%) in concrete mixtures in order to
attain a desired slump (Gagne et al., 2000). These admixtures are used frequently to produce
high-strength concrete (> 50 MPa), since workable mixes with water-cement ratios well below
0.40 are possible (Whiting, 1979). They also can be used without water reduction to produce
concretes with very high slumps, in the range of 150 to 250 mm (6 to 10 inches). At these high
slumps, concrete flows like a liquid (Figure 3.5) and can fill forms efficiently, requiring very
little vibration. These highly workable mixtures are called flowing concretes and require slumps
to be in excess of 190 mm (8.5 inches).

Water-reducing admixtures are negatively charged organic molecules that adsorb primarily at
the solid-water interface, whereas solid particles carry residual charges on their surfaces, which
may be positive, negative, or both (Russell, 1983). In cement paste, opposing charges on
adjacent particles of cement can exert considerable electrostatic attractions, causing the particles
to flocculate. A considerable amount of water is tied up in these agglomerates and adsorbed on
the solid surfaces, leaving less water available to reduce the viscosity of the paste and hence that
of the concrete. Molecules of the water-reducing admixtures interact to neutralize these surface
charges and cause all surfaces to carry uniform charges of like sign (Mindess et al., 2003).
52
Particles now repel each other, rather than attract, and remain fully dispersed in the paste, thus,
most of the water is available to reduce the viscosity of the paste and of the concrete. Because
superplasticizers have air-detraining properties, an air-entraining agent must be added to the
concrete to get a stable air void system before a superplasticizer is added (Gagne et al., 1996).

In our research we used MasterGlenium ACE 30 (JP) admixtures and VMA which was collected
from BASF Bangladesh Limited, Chemical Company.

3.2.4.2 Viscosity-Modifying Admixtures

Viscosity modifiers are high molecular-weight, water-soluble polymers used to raise the viscosity
of water. Such compounds increase the cohesiveness of fresh concrete, reducing its tendency to
segregate and bleed (Ferraris, 1999). They work by attaching their long molecules to the water
molecules, process which inhibits the free displacement of water. These admixtures are helpful in
improving the properties of lean concretes with low cement contents, concrete placed under water,
and concretes or grouts that are placed by pumping. In the latter case, they reduce pumping
pressures through improved lubricating properties, as well as reducing segregation tendencies.
When compounds in this category are used to improve the cohesiveness of concrete being placed
underwater, they are classified as anti washout admixtures. Viscosity-modifying admixtures are
added in concretes used in places with extreme congestions due to reinforcement configurations
or unusual geometry forms, where fluid but cohesive concrete is required in order to resist
bleeding and segregation (Dodson, 1990).

The materials commonly used are polyethylene oxides, cellulose ethers, natural gums, and
polyacrylamides or polyvinyl alcohol. Other materials used are finely divided solids such as
clays and lime, but they tend to reduce the strength of the concrete and for these reasons are
primarily used in grouts when strength is not of major importance.

3.3 Effect of Cement properties

Different properties of cement affect the properties of strength of concrete, its workability and
durability. Cement should be tested for its following properties:
 Fineness

53
Fineness or particle size of Portland cement affects rate of hydration, which is responsible for
the rate of strength gain. The smaller the particle size the greater the surface area-volume ratio,
which means more area available for water-cement reaction per unit volume. Approximately
95% of cement particles are smaller than 45 micron with the average particle size about 15
microns. Fineness is measured in terms of surface area per unit mass. Fineness can be tested
by Wagner turbidimeter test, Blaine Air-permeability test, 45-micrometer sieve and electronic
particle size analyzer.

 Soundness

Soundness refers to the ability of a hardened cement paste to retain its volume after setting.
Lack of soundness is observed in the cement samples containing excessive amounts of
hardburnt free lime or magnesia. Autoclave expansion test is used to determine soundness of
cement.

 Consistency

Consistency of a cement paste refers to its ability to flow. Normal consistency pastes are
required to be prepared for testing cement specimens. A paste is said to have a normal
consistency when the plunger of Vicat apparatus penetrates it by 10±1 mm. the corresponding
water-cement ratio is reported.

 Setting Time

Initial setting time is the time that elapsed from the instance of adding water until the pastes
ceases to behave as fluid or plastic. Whereas final setting time referred to the time required for
the cement paste to reach certain state of hardness to sustain some load. Setting time is tested
by Vicat's apparatus or Gillmore's needle.

 Compressive Strength

Compressive strength of cement is tested by 50 mm mortar cubes made by using standard sand
and cured in a prescribed way. The cubes are tested under a compression testing machine. The
strength of cement varies with time; therefore in general it is reported as 3 day, 7 day or 28 day
strength.
 Heat of hydration
54
 The heat generated during the reaction of cement and water is known as heat of hydration. The
factors affecting heat of hydration are C3A, C2S, water-cement ration, fineness of cement and
curing temperature. Conduction calorimeter is used to test heat of hydration.

 Loss on Ignition

A cement sample of known weight is heated between 900 - 1000°C (1650 - 1830°F) until a
constant weight is obtained. The weight loss of the sample due to heating is then determined.
A high loss on ignition (more than 3%) indicates prehydration and carbonation, which may be
due to inappropriate storage or adulteration.

 Specific gravity (relative density)

Specific gravity is generally required in mix proportioning for concrete. The particle density
(measured by excluding the air between particles) of OPC is found to be in the range of 3.1 to
3.25 Megagram per cubic meter. The relative density of OPC is assumed as 3.15. The density
of cement is determined by Le Chatelier apparatus.

 Bulk Density

The bulk density can be determined by dividing the mass of cement particles and air between
particles by the volume of cement sample. Bulk density of OPC ranges from 830 kg/cu.m to
1650 kg/cu.m. This test can be done with the help of two beakers having same amount of
cement. The cement in one beaker is slightly vibrated which shows a decrease in the volume.

3.4 Effect of Cement Replacement Materials (CRMs)

Stability and flow-ability are the main characteristics of SCC. They are achieved by limiting the
coarse aggregate content, the maximum aggregate size and reducing water–powder ratios
together with using super-plasticisers (SP) ( Okamura et al., 1998). During the transportation and
placement of SCC the increased flow-ability may cause segregation and bleeding which can be
overcome by enhancing the viscosity of concrete mix, this is usually supplied by using a high
volume fraction of paste, by limiting the maximum aggregate size or by using viscosity
modifying admixtures (VMA) (Khayat, 1999). However, chemical admixtures are expensive and
may contribute to increasing the cost of concrete. On the other hand, achieving high powder

55
content by increasing the cement content is not feasible, and may lead to a significant rise in
material cost and some negative impacts on concrete properties associated with the rise in
temperature during hydration and higher drying shrinkage. Alternatively, incorporating cement
replacement materials (CRMs) in concrete can impart many advantages to concrete through
enhancement of particle distribution, cohesiveness, and reduction of the risk of thermal cracking
as well as the improvement of certain mechanical and rheological properties.
All CRMs have two common features; their particle size is smaller or the same as Portland
cement particle and they become involved in the hydration reactions mainly because their ability
to exhibit pozzolanic behaviour. By themselves, pozzolans which contain silica (SiO2) in a
reactive form, have little or no cementitious value. However, in a finely divided form and in the
presence of moisture they will chemically react with calcium hydroxide at ordinary temperatures
to form cementitious compounds (Lewis et al., 2003; Domone and Illston, 2010). The most
common CRMs used are ground granulated blast furnace (GGBS), microsilica or silica fume
(SF) and pulverised fuel ash or fly ash (FA).

3.5. Effect of Aggregate Characteristics

Aggregate characteristics have a significant effect on the behavior of fresh and hardened
concrete. These effects of aggregate characteristics change continuously as a function of
particle sizes. The impact of some particle characteristics on the performance of concrete is
different for micro fines, fine and coarse aggregates as well as the characterization tests
required for each of these fractions.

The main characteristics of aggregate that affect the performance of fresh and hardened
concrete are:

 Shape and texture

 Grading

 Absorption

 Mineralogy and coatings

 Strength and stiffness

56
  Maximum size

 Specific gravity or relative density

 Soundness

 Toughness

3.5.1 Shape and Texture

Shape and texture of coarse aggregate apparently are not as important as shapeand texture of
fine aggregate, but they play a role on the behavior of fresh and hardened concrete. Shape and
texture affect the demand for sand. Flaky, elongated, angular, and rough particles have high
voids and require more sand to fill voids and to provide workable concrete, thus increasing the
demand for water [Legg, 1998]. Poorly shaped aggregates may also increase segregation.

Flaky and elongated particles tend toproduce harsh mixtures and affect finish ability [Legg,
1998]. According to Shilstone [1990], flaky and elongated particles, principally those of
intermediate sizes (between 3/8 in. (9.5mm), and No. 8 (2.36 mm)), can affect the mobility of
mixtures and contribute to harshness.

3.5.2 Maximum Size of Aggregate

Maximum size of aggregate, MSA, influences workability, strength, shrinkage, and
permeability. Mixtures with large maximum size of coarse aggregate tend to produce
concrete with better workability, probably because of the decrease in specific surface [Washa,
1998]. There is an optimal maximum size of coarse aggregate that produces the highest
strength for a given consistency and cement content [Popovics, 1998], [Washa, 1998]. For
example, in high-performance concrete (HPC) with low water-cement ratio and high cement
content, a high value of MSA tends to reduce strength. This can be explained by the
observation that bond with large particles tends to be weaker than with small particles due to
smaller surface area-to-volume ratios. Mixtures with coarse aggregate with large maximum
size tend to have reduced shrinkage and creep [Washa, 1998]. Finally, for a given water-
cement ratio, the permeability increases as the maximum size of the aggregate increases
[Helmuth, 1994].

57
3.5.3 Grading of Aggregates

Grading or particle size distribution affects significantly some characteristics of concrete like
packing density, voids content, and, consequently, workability, segregation, durability and
some other characteristics of concrete. Particle size distribution of fine aggregate plays a very
important role on workability, segregation, and pumpability offresh concrete. Many authors
claim that uniformly distributed mixtures produce better workability than gap-graded mixtures
[Golterman, 1997; Glavind, 1993; Johansen, 1989; Johansson, 1979], although higher slumps
could be achieved with gap-gradedmixtures. Some properties of hardened concrete are also
affected by grading. Uniformly distributed mixturesgenerally lead to higher packing resulting
in concrete with higher density and less permeability[Golterman, 1997; Glavind, 1993;
Johansen, 1989], and improved abrasion resistance [Mehta, 1993].
Consequently, uniformly distributed mixturesrequire less paste, thus decreasing bleeding,
creep, and shrinkage [Washa, 1998; Shilstone, 1999]. Finally, Aitcin [1998] emphasizes that
although an excess ofcoarse aggregate could decrease drying shrinkage it will increase the
amount of microcracks within the paste. The scarcity or excess of any size fraction could result
in poor workability and in poor durability of concrete [Galloway, 1994; Shilstone, 1990].The
amounts of coarse and fine aggregate must be in balance. For example, excess sand requires
more cementitious materials, produces sticky mixtures, makes pumping difficult, causes
finishing and crazing problems [Shilstone, 1999], and increases bleeding and permeability
[Mindess, 1981]. On the other hand, insufficient sand produces “bony” mixtures and other
types of finishing problems [Shilstone, 1990; Mindess, 1981]. Both coarse aggregate and fine
aggregate should be uniformly graded. If fine aggregate is too coarse it will produce
bleeding,segregation and harshness, but if it is too fine, the demand for water will be increased
[Galloway, 1994]. Proper grading should depend on shape and texture of aggregates. For
instance, suitable grading for natural sands could leadto bad results whenusing manufactured
sands [Hudson, 1999; Johansson, 1979].
Grading should also be changed depending on the construction procedures. For
example,pumpable concrete requires a high fine-aggregate content, just as hand finishing
requires more fines passing the N 50 sieve than mechanical finishing does [Galloway, 1994].
The effect of grading on strength is controversial. Although, according to some authors, a
given strength canbe achieved with both well-graded mixtures and poorly graded mixtures
[Shilstone, 1990], some studiesindicate that increased strength concrete can be achieved with
58
well-graded mixtures [Cramer, 1995]. Permeability, one of the most important factors
affecting concrete durability, is significantly related to void content of aggregate mixture: the
lesserthe void content, the lesser the permeability. In reducing permeability, it is desirable to
have the highest aggregate content possible. Consequently, well-graded mixtures produce
concrete that is more durable. Unfortunately, previous versions of ASTMC 33 may have
contributed to problem concrete mixtures [Shilstone, 1994], since aggregate complying with
ASTM C 33 could lead to gap grading or at least to an excess of one size and the specification
did not address the use of blends.
The current version of ASTM C 33 permits the use of blends, such that the resultant aggregate
will have better characteristics than the original aggregates. The particle size distribution of
microfines may have an effect on concrete behavior. However, due to the inherent difficulties
related to the characterization of such small particles, little research has been made to evaluate
the effect of grading, shape and texture of microfines on concrete behavior. Ahn [2000]
determined the size distribution of the microfines in his research using a laser diffraction
scanner and a hydrometer, in terms of weight and in terms of volume, respectively. It was
found that the effect of different types of microfines with distinct grading on fresh concrete
behavior was clearly dissimilar. However, the effect of grading was not separated from the
effect of shape and texture, and was not quantitatively determined.
We have used combined aggregate gradation for final mix design of concrete. It was done to
ensure the adequate percentage of each size of aggregate according to the “5-10-18-22” band
gradation. Band gradation has been discussed on chapter 4 namely design of concrete mix and
combined gradation in chapter 4. Chapter 5, laboratory investigations, contains the combined
gradation that was used for the laboratory work.

3.5.4 Effect of Absorption

Aggregate porosity may affect durability as freezing of water in pores in aggregate particles
can cause surface popouts [Popovics, 1998; Helmuth, 1994]. However, Forster [1994] states
“that relationship between absorption and freeze-thaw behavior has not proven to be
reliable.” Nevertheless, absorption can be used as an initialindicator of soundness.
Furthermore, aggregates with low absorption tend to reduce shrinkage and creep [Washa,
1998].

59
3.5.5 Effect of Strength and Stiffness

The strength and the stiffness of coarse aggregate directly influence the behavior of hardened
concrete: Although in normal concrete, strength is controlled by the paste or by the transition
zone between paste and aggregate, the strength of high-performance concrete depends not only
on the strength but on the mineralogy of coarse aggregate as well [Alexander, 1989; Cetin,
1998; Ezelding, 1991]. At the same time, according to Kaplan [1959], aside from texture and
shape the modulus of elasticity is the aggregate property that most affects compressive and
flexural strengths of concrete. According to Popovics [1979] “within limits, the higher the
elastic modulus of aggregate, the lower the flexural strength.” In addition, the elastic modulus
of aggregate, as well as its volume concentration, affects the elastic modulus of concrete and
the long-term effects, shrinkage and creep [Alexander, 1989; Mehta, 1993; Washa, 1998].

De Larrard [1999] and Dewar [1999] agree that the aggregate source has an impact on concrete
strength. Dewar suggests multiplying a basic concrete strength by a factor that depends on the
aggregate source and varies from 0.90 to 1.85. De Larrardproposes the following equation to
account for the aggregate characteristics on strength.
f c=p.fcm/(q.fcm+1)

where, fc = concrete strength

fcm= strength of the matrix
p and q = empirical constants that depend on the aggregate type.

3.5.6 Effect of Soundness and Toughness

Soundness, according to Forster [1994], is the aggregate resistance to weathering that primarily
includes resistance to freezing and thawing, and to a lesser extent, resistance to wetting and
drying; and heating and cooling. A sound aggregate has a satisfactory durability factor when
used in properly mature concrete with enough air void content [Mather, 1999]. Durability
problems such as pop-outs” and D-cracking in pavements in some regions have been reported
associated with unsound aggregates [Mindess, 1981].

60
 Chapter 4

MIX DESIGN

4.1 Introduction

Mix design is actually the task of proportioning of concrete mixture. The proportioning
depends on the particular ingredients used which will themselves depend on the application. In
spite of considerable investigation on the theoretical aspects of mix design, it still mains largely
an empirical formula.

The points that design methods consider are

Economy: Mix design methods are directly concerned with the material cost of concrete and as
cement are usually the most costly ingredient of concrete, the primary objective is to minimize
the use of cement.

Workability: The concrete should be supplied with minimum workability that will permit
adequate placement and handling.

Strength and durability: most design procedures are primarily based on achieving a specified
compressive strength at a particular age limit. It is assumed that if this becomes satisfactory
result, other properties will also be satisfactory.

In this part of research we will discuss about mix design of total 7 mixes. Mix ratio, water
cement ratio, water powder ratio of each mix will be provided here. And we will also check our
mix design with EFNARC mix design. Properties, quality and quantity of aggregate and
admixtures will also be checked whether they satisfy EFNARC mix design criteria or not. Fresh
concrete properties(Flow ability, passing ability, segregation resistance etc) won’t be checked in
this section. These properties will be discussed in Chapter 6. The name and type of concrete
mixes are shown in Table 4.1 so that we may easily identify the particular mix.

61
Table 4.1 Mixtures Designation
Mix No. Mixture Designation Description

1 SCC Concrete made with normal coarse and

2 Rubber 10%
3 Rubber 15%
4 Rubber 20%
5 Recycle 30%
6 Recycle 40%
7 Recycle 50%
fine aggregate
10% of fine aggregate by volume
replaced by shredded rubber
15% of fine aggregate by volume
replaced by shredded rubber
20% of fine aggregate by volume
replaced by shredded rubber
30% of coarse aggregate by weight
replaced by recycled coarse aggregate
40% of coarse aggregate by volume
replaced by recycled coarse aggregate
50% of coarse aggregate by volume
replaced by recycled coarse aggregate

4.2 SCC Mix Design

Available SCC mix designs are

 SCC mix design method proposed by Okamura (1993)

 SCC mix design method proposed by Okamura and Ouchi
 Standardized mix design method of SCC proposed by the JRMCA
 EFNARC mix design

4.3 EFNARC Mix Design

For Self Compacting Concrete EFNARC mix design is now used widely all over the world. The
EFNARC specifications defines specific requirements for the SCC materials, its composition and
its application. EFNARC Specifications are discussed in this part.

62
Many different test methods have been developed in attempts to characterise the properties of SCC.
So far no single method or combination of methods has achieved universal approval and most of
them have their adherents. Similarly no single method has been found which characterises all the
relevant workability aspects so each mix design should be tested by more than one test method for

the different workability parameters. Alternative test methods for the different parameters are listed
in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 List of test methods

Method Property

1 Slump-flow by Abrams Cone Filling ability

2 T50cm Slump-flow Filling ability
3 J-ring Passing ability
4 V-funnel Filling ability
5 V-funnel at T5minutes Segregation Resistance
6 L-box Passing ability
7 U-box Passing ability
8 Fill-box Passing ability
9 GTM screen stability test Segregation Resistance
10 Orimet Filling ability

4.3.1 Workability Criteria for the Fresh SCC

These requirements are to be fulfilled at the time of placing. Likely changes in workability during
transport should be taken into account in production. Typical acceptance criteria for Self-
compacting Concrete with a maximum aggregate size up to 20 mm are shown in Table 4.3.

63
 Table 4.3 Acceptance criteria for Self Compacting Concrete
Typical range of values
Method Unit
Minimum Maximum
1 Slump-flow by Abrams Cone mm 650 800
2 T50cm Slump-flow sec 2 5
3 J-ring mm 0 10
4 V-funnel sec 6 12
5 V-funnel at T5minutes sec 0 +3
6 L-box (h2/ h1) 0.8 1.0
7 U-box (h2-h1)mm 0 30
8 Fill-box % 90 100
9 GTM screen stability test % 0 15
10 Orimet sec 0 5

4.3.2 Mix Composition

The mix composition shall satisfy all performance criteria for the concrete in both the fresh and
hardened states.

Table 4.4 Mix Composition

Requirements
Coarse aggregate < 50%
Water powder ratio = 0,8-1,0
Mix Design Total powder content 400-600 Kg /m3
Sand content > 40 % of the mortar (volume)
Sand < 50% of paste volume
Sand > 50% by weight of total aggregate
Free water < 200 l
Paste > 40 % of the volume of the mix

64
4.4 Laboratory Mix Design

The design strength of all SCC Mix is 35 MPa. Proportions of mixture used in our research are
given below.

Table 4.5 Mixture Proportion

Material SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
(Kg/m3) 10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%
(Mix 1) (Mix 2) (Mix 3) (Mix 4) (Mix 5) (Mix 6) (Mix 7)

Total Powder Content 480 480 480 480 480 480 480

Cement 260 260 260 260 260 260 260

Fly Ash 166 166 166 166 166 166 166

GGBS 54 54 54 54 54 54 54

Coarse 1035 1035 1035 1035 724.5 621 517.5

Aggregate(SSD)
Recycle Aggregate 0 0 0 0 310.5 414 517.5

Fine Aggregate 748 673.2 635.8 598.4 748 748 748

Shredded Rubber 0 28.55 42.82 57.01 0 0 0

Water 137.76 162.24 162.24 162.24 144 144 144

HRWRA(% of powder) 0.75 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.75 0.75 0.75

65
 Table 4.6 Mix Ratio
Mix Water Powder ratio Powder : FA : CA Cement:Fly Ash:GGBS
(by weight)
SCC (Mix 1) 0.287 1 : 1.56 : 2.16 1: 0.64 : 0.21
Rubber 10% (Mix 2) 0.338 1 : 1.46 : 2.16 1: 0.64 : 0.21
Rubber 15% (Mix 3) 0.338 1 : 1.41 : 2.16 1: 0.64 : 0.21
Rubber 20% (Mix 4) 0.338 1 : 1.37 : 2.16 1: 0.64 : 0.21
Recycle 30% (Mix 5) 0.30 1 : 1.56 : 2.16 1: 0.64 : 0.21
Recycle 40% (Mix 6) 0.30 1 : 1.56 : 2.16 1: 0.64 : 0.21
Recycle 50% (Mix 7) 0.30 1 : 1.56 : 2.16 1: 0.64 : 0.21

66
 Chapter 5

LABORATORY INVESTIGATION & TEST PROCEDURE

5.1 Introduction
The aim of the experimental program is to compare the properties of Self Compacting concrete
made with normal coarse and fine aggregate and Self Compacting concrete having different
percentage of recycled coarse aggregate and shredded rubber. The basic tests carried out on
materials used for casting concrete samples are discussed in this chapter. At the end, the
various tests conducted on the specimens are discussed.

5.2 Investigation of Materials

To design a concrete mix, information of material properties are required as some of the
information are directly used in the design, some are required to conform to the minimum
requirement demanded by the strength and durability restraint of concrete mix to be designed.
Sampling technique is adopted for material investigation purpose. Standard and specified rules
and instructions were strictly followed while testing the materials as accurate recording and
manipulation of data is a necessary to get representative results.

5.2.1 Gradation

Sieve analysis carried out on coarse and fine aggregate. Separate sieve analysis have been done
for normal coarse aggregate, recycled coarse aggregate, sand and shredded rubber. All standard
sieves were used in sieve analysis. Sieve sizes used for coarse aggregate gradation were 1 1/2
inch, 1inch, 3/4 inch, 1/2 inch, 3/8 inch, No. 4. We stockpiled those aggregates according to their
sizes. Sieve sizes used for fine aggregate gradation were No.4, No.8 ,No. 16, No. 30, No.50,
No.100, No. 200. Coarse aggregate were in dry condition whereas fine aggregate were in oven-
dry condition. Gradation Curve of Aggregates are given below.

67
 150
100
50

% Finer
0 % finer

100 10 1
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig : 5.1 Gradation Curves of Normal Coarse Aggregates

150
% Finer

100
50
0 % finer

100 10 1
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig : 5.2 Gradation Curves of Recycled Coarse Aggregates

Sylhet Sand
150

100
% Finer

50
% Finer
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig : 5.3 Gradation Curves of Sylhet Sand

120
100
80
% Finer

60
40
% Finer
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig : 5.4 Gradation Curves Shredded Rubber

68
5.2.2 Combined Gradation

We have used combined aggregate gradation.“Combined” here refers to a combination of both

coarse and fine aggregate grading in the ratio that they are present in the concrete mixture.
Locally available coarse aggregates are not properly graded; they do not contain the particles of
all sizes. These aggregates contain the particles of definite sizes which gives the poorly graded,
uniformly graded or graded aggregate gradation. To avoid this to happen, we mixed all sized
aggregates according to the suggested band gradation to get a well graded aggregate gradation.
We have used a single gradation for all the mixtures of aggregates. As our fine aggregates
contained very low percentage of particles retained on No. 8, we have used the fines of coarse
aggregates those passed through the No. 4 sieve.

69
Table 5.1 Combined Gradation Total amount = 5500gm
Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(gm)
1½ inch 37.5 0 0 0 100
1 inch 25 0 0 0 100
¾ inch 19 600 10.81 10.81 89.19
½ inch 12.5 2370 42.7 53.51 46.49
3/8 inch 9.5 740 13.33 66.84 33.16
#4 4.75 1220 21.98 88.82 11.18
#8 2.36 10.2 0.18 89.0 11.0
#16 1.18 103.1 1.86 90.86 9.14
#30 0.6 226.1 4.07 94.93 5.07
#50 0.3 127.3 2.29 97.22 2.78
#100 0.15 28.9 0.52 97.74 2.26
#200 0.075 3.5 0.06 97.8 2.20
pan 50 0.90 98.7 1.30

Fineness Modulus =6.36

120

100

80
% Finer

60

40 % Finer

20

0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: 5.5 Combined Gradation Curve

70
5.2.3 Aggregate Test Results

To find out the properties of aggregates, several laboratory tests have to be carried out. The
results of our investigations have been included in here and guidelines and procedures are
discussed in chapter 3 namely “Materials”.
Table 5.2 Properties of fine aggregates
Serial No. Characteristics Value

1 Type Uncrushed (Sylhet Sand)

2 Bulk Specific Gravity (Sand) 2.63
3 Bulk Specific Gravity (Shredded Rubber) 1.14
4 Unit Weight , kg/m3 1440
5 Unit Weight(shredded rubber), kg/m3 550
6 Water absorption (Sand) 1.70
7 Fineness modulus (Sand) 2.75
8 Fineness modulus (Shredded Rubber) 2.45

Table 5.3 Properties of Coarse aggregates

Serial No. Characteristics Value

1 Specific Gravity (CA) 2.63

2 Specific Gravity (RCA) 2.71
3 Fineness modulus (CA) 7.84
4 Fineness modulus (RCA) 8.09

Table 5.4 Fineness Modulus of mixture

Mixture Type Fineness Modulus

1 SCC (Combined Gradation) 6.36

2 Rubber 10% (FA mixture) 2.82
3 Rubber 15% (FA mixture) 3.03
4 Rubber 20% (FA mixture) 2.75
5 Recycle 30% (CA mixture) 8.09
6 Recycle 40% (CA mixture) 8.05
7 Recycle 50% (CA mixture) 8.07

71
5.2.4 Test result of Cementitious Materials

Cementitious Materials include Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC), Fly Ash (FA), and Ground
Granular Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS). Composition and physical properties of binders are given
below on Table 5.6.

Table 5.5 Composition and Physical Properties of Binders

Binders SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO LOI SSA(m2/kg) SG

(%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Cement 20.49 6.57 3.27 62.40 1.91 1.57 305.4 3.14
FA 55.5 27.9 6.3 6.27 1.6 5.01 86.95%(<45μm ) 2.15
GGBS 34.81 13.63 0.32 40.51 6.96 0.40 422 2.92

 Percent by weight
 LOI : Loss of ignition
 SSA : Specific surface area
 SG : Specific Gravity

5.3 Steps of Investigation

Investigation procedures included different steps like sieving, casting of concrete, curing,
testing. These steps were handled very carefully as quality control of concrete mixtures depends
on these.

5.3.1 Sieving of Aggregate

Coarse aggregates those are found in the local market are do not fulfill the aggregate
gradation band “5-10-18-22” or “5-10-14-18” proposed for better concrete properties. Those
coarse aggregates only contain the definite size of particles. They are not properly gradated. To
get a well-gradated aggregate gradation, we had to sieve the particles according to their sizes.
Sieve sizes that we used for the purpose were 1inch, 3/4 inch, 1/2 inch, 3/8 inch, No. 4. We
stockpiled those aggregates according to their sizes.

72
 Fig : 5.6 Drying of aggregates

Fig : 5.7 Sieving of coarse aggregates Fig : 5.8 Sieving of Fine aggregates

73
5.3.2 Mix design

The mix design was made using the EFNARC guidelines. Recycled aggregates have
greaterabsorption capacity than the fresh aggregates. Gradation used for the mix design was
fixed for all the mixtures. Total of seven mixes were prepared. One is simple SCC, three
percentage of rubber content (10%, 15% and 20% of total fine aggregate replaced by
volume)were used to make three rubberized concrete mixes and other three mixes were from the
three percentage of recycled coarse aggregate(30%,40% and 50% of total coarse aggregate
replaced by weight.

5.3.3 Casting of concrete

Casting of concrete included several steps. Mixing machine was used for mixing the
ingredients of concrete properly. Slump tests, L-Box tests and V-Funnel tests were carried out.
Concrete paste was casted in the mold. No vibrator was used for compacting the concrete paste
in the mold. The molds were removed one days later. Then samples were put in a water tub for
curing.

Fig : 5.9 Slump Tests Fig : 5.10 L-Box and V-Funnel Tests

74
 Fig : 5.11 Casting of Concrete

5.3.4 Curing

Curing is the process in which the concrete is protected from loss of moisture and kept within
a reasonable temperature range. This process results in concrete with increased strength and
decreased permeability. Curing is also a key player in mitigating cracks, which can severely
affect durability.Water curing is carried out by supplying water to the surface of concrete in a
way that ensures that it is kept continuously moist. The water used for this purpose should
not be more than about 5°C cooler than the concrete surface. Spraying warm concrete with
cold water may give rise to thermal shock that may cause or contribute to cracking. Alternate
wetting and drying of the concrete must also be avoided as this causes volume changes that
may also contribute to surface crazing and cracking. Different types of curing procedures
exist such as ponding, sprinkling and wet covering. Our samples were dipped into the water
tub fully. Curing with water was carried through whole time, we took out the samples just
before the testing.

75
 Fig : 5.12 Curing of Concrete

5.3.5 Testing

Test of fresh concrete (Slump Test, V-Funnel Test ,L-Box Test ) were conducted before. After
the completion of curing, test of hardens concrete were done. Harden concrete test includes
Compressive Strength Test, Split Cylinder Test, Water Absorption Test, Water Permeability
Test, Flexure Test and Modulus of Elasticity Test. Testing was done on 7days, 28 days and 56
days. Strength of the samples is a valuable criterion of the potential quality of the concrete.
Strength at early stages is desirable during the first stages of concrete operation to aid in
establishing the proper mix. Strength at the later stages are more indicative of the actual strength
of concrete in the structure and are therefore more valuable for reference purposes.

5.4 Preparation of Specimen

Total 133 specimens were casted. Among them 14 were cube,112 were cylinder and 7 were
beam. Cubic specimens are 150mm x 150mm x 150mm, cylindrical specimens are 100 mm
diameter and 200 mm height and the beam specimens are 600mm x 150mm x150mm.
76
5.5 Test Procedures
All the test procedure are discussed below.

5.5.1 Slump Test

Slump Test indicates the flow ability property. The slump test with its simple and rapid
procedure is used to evaluate the deformability of SCC in the absence of obstacles. This test
measures two different aspects; the filling ability by measuring the horizontal flow diameter SF
and the viscosity of mix by measuring the time needed for SCC to reach 500 mm flow (t500). The
segregation resistance in this test can be detected visually. Because of its simplicity, the slump
test can be done either on site or in the laboratory with inverted or upright Abram’s cone.

100mm

300mm

200mm

D2

D1

Fig : 5.13 Slump Test Apparatus with Upright Cone

The cone is placed on a non-absorbing levelled flat steel surface with a plane area of at least
900 mm x 900 mm, filled with SCC, and lifted in 2 to 4 sec to a height of 15 to 30 mm; SCC
flows out under the influence of gravity. Two horizontal perpendicular diameters d 1 and d2 as
illustrated in Figure 5.13.
77
5.5.2 L-Box Test

The L-box test is used to assess the filling and passing ability of SCC, or in other words the
ability of concrete to pass though reinforced bars without blocking or segregation. After filling
the vertical column of the L-box, the gate is lifted to allow SCC to flow into the horizontal part
after passing through the rebar obstructions. Two measurements are taken, (H1, H2) heights of
concrete at the beginning and end of the horizontal section, respectively. The ratio H2/H1

represents the filling ability, and typically, this value should be 0.8 to 1, while the passing
ability can be detected visually by inspecting the area around the rebar. In L-box, 2 or 3 smooth
steel bars with 12 mm diameter can be used to represent light or dense reinforcement with
distance between them 59 and 41 mm, respectively.

Fig : 5.14 L-Box Test Apparatus (all dimensions are in mm)

Calculate H2/H1, the blocking ratio. The whole has test performed within 5 minutes. Blocking of
coarse aggregate behind the reinforcement bars can be detected visually.

78
5.5.3 V-Funnel Test

The equipment consists of a v shaped funnel as, show in Fig. An alternative type of V-funnel,
the O funnel, with circular. The test was developed in Japan and used by Ozawa et al. The
equipment consists of V-shaped funnel section is also used in Japan. The described V-funnel
test is used to determine the filling ability (flow ability) of the concrete with a maximum
aggregate size of 20mm. The funnel is filled with concrete and the time taken for it to flow
through the apparatus measured. After this the funnel can be refilled concrete and left for 5
minutes to settle. If the concrete shows segregation then the flow time will increases
significantly.

Fig : 5.15 V-Funnel Test Apparatus

Though the test is designed to measure flow ability, the result is affected by concrete properties
other than flow. The inverted cone shape will cause any liability of the concrete to block to be
reflected in the result-if, for example there is too much coarse aggregate. High flow time can
also be associated with low deformability due to a high paste viscosity, and with high inter-
particle friction. While the apparatus is simple, the effect of the angle of the funnel and the wall
effect on the flow of concrete is not clear.

79
5.5.4 Compressive Strength Test

Cylindrical specimens of size 100 mm diameter and 200 mm height were cast for conducting
compressive strength test for each mix. The test method conforms to the ASTM standard
requirement of specification C39 for cylinder. This test was carried at the end of 7 days, 28
days and 56 days of curing. Calibration equation was used at the time of testing to measure
actual load. The compressive strength of any mix was taken as the average of strength of
specimens.

Fig : 5.16 Cylinder for Compressive Strength Test

Magnitude of Compressive Strength is ,

fc'=P/A
Here ,
fc'= Concrete Compressive Strength(MPa)
P= Maximum Load (N)
A=Cross Sectional Area of Specimen(mm^2)

80
5.5.5 Split Cylinder Test

The splitting tests are well known indirect tests used for determining the tensile strength of
concrete sometimes referred to as split tensile strength of concrete. The test consists of
applying a compressive line load along the opposite generators of a concrete cylinder placed
with its axis horizontal between the compressive platens. Due to the compression loading a
fairly uniform tensile stress is developed over nearly 2/3 of the loaded diameter as obtained
from an elastic analysis. The tensile strength of the resultant mix is judged in terms of split
tensile strength. For this, cylindrical specimens of size 100 mm dia × 200 mm height were cast.
The test was conducted at the end of 7 days ,28 days and 56 days of curing and the average of
the samples was taken as the representative split tensile strength of the mix.

Fig: 5.17 Cylinder for Split tensile test

Tensile strength of concrete measured from following formula.

Here, ft = Splitting Tensile Strength (MPa)

P= Maximum Applied Load by Testing Machine (N)
L= Length (mm)
D= Diameter (mm)
81
5.5.6 Water Absorption Test

ASTM C1585 guidelines were followed in this test. Water Absorption Test carried were out on
28 and 56 days. This test method is used to determine the rate of absorption of water. We let
the cured specimen be in the normal water for 24 hours and then the specimen is oven dried for
24 hours. Two cylindrical specimens were used of each type. Average values were taken as
final result.

Fig: 5.18 Water Absorption test

Water Absorption is measured from SSD weight and Oven-dry weight of specimen by using
following formula.

Here, Wa= SSD weight of Specimen (gm)

Wo= Oven-dry weight of Specimen (gm)
A= Water Absorption (%)
82
5.5.7 Water Permeability Test

Water Permeability Test This test method is used to determine the rate of absorption (sorptivity)
of water by hydraulic cement concrete by measuring the increase in the mass of a specimen
resulting from absorption of water as a function of time when only one surface of the specimen is
exposed to water. The specimen is conditioned in an environment at a standard relative humidity
to induce a consistent moisture condition in the capillary pore system. The exposed surface of the
specimen is immersed in water and water ingress of unsaturated concrete is dominated by
capillary suction during initial contact with water. This test was conducted at 56 days on cubic
specimen having dimension 150mm x 150mm x150mm. The apparatus is used to determine the
depth of penetration of water under pressure in the concrete specimens. The water pressure kept
above 5 bar .The penetration of water was measured, after the testing period (72 hours), by
breaking the specimen. The quantity of penetrated water, can also be measured through the
graduated burettes fitted on top of the apparatus. Results of this test expressed as the maximum
depth of penetration.

Fig: 5.19 Water Permeability Test Apparatus Fig: 5.20 Measurement of Depth of water

83
5.5.8 Flexural Strength Test

Flexural Strength Test was carried out according to ASTM C78 guidelines using simple beam
with third point loading. The test for flexural strength of concrete beams under third point
loading utilizes a beam testing machine which permits the load to be applied normal to the
loaded surface of the beam. The specimen is tested on its side with respect to its molded
position. The beam is centered on the bearing supports. The dial indicator of the proving ring is
placed at the zero reading. The load is applied at a uniform rate and in a way to avoid shock.
The load required to cause specimen failure is obtained from the dial indicator's final reading
and the proving ring calibration curve. The testing machine was a servo-controlled system,
which allows the test to perform automatically within a closed loop. When failure occurred
outside of the middle third of the specimen, but not more than 5% of the span length, a different
formula for calculating the modulus of rupture result have been used. If failure occurs outside
of the middle third of the specimen's tension area by more than 5%, then the result cannot be
used.

Fig: 5.21 Flexure Test with Three Point Loading Fig: 5.22 Failure of Beam

Results are calculated as the modulus of rupture determined from the following formula.

Here, R= Modulus of rupture (MPa)

P= Maximum applied load indicated by the testing machine (N)
l= Span Length (mm)
b= Average width of specimen (mm)
84
 d=Average depth of specimen (mm)
5.5.9 Modulus of Elasticity Test

ASTM C469 testing provides a stress to strain ratio value and a ratio of lateral to longitudinal
strain for hardened cylindrical concrete at whatever age and curing conditions may be
designated. ASTM C469 is a compression test whereby a load is applied with a Constant-Rate
of-Traverse (CRT) type machine until a specified stress. The modulus of elasticity and
Poisson’s ration values will be found within the working stress range (0 to 40% of the ultimate
strength). These values are used to determine the size of structural members, the quantity of
reinforcements, and to compute the stress for observed strains. The modulus of elasticity under
static rate will be less than values found under dynamic or seismic rate and greater than values
under slow load application.

ASTM C469 requires three steps:

1. Determine the ultimate strength of a companion specimen by following ASTM C39. This
involves applying a compressive axial load until failure occurs. Place the specimen on the
platen so the axis of the specimen is aligned with the center of thrust of the spherically seated
bearing block. Apply a load of 20 to 50 psi/s continuously and without shock until failure.
Ensure the specimen fails within the prescribed permissible time tolerances in the
specification.

2. Attach the required strain-measuring equipment (compressometer-extensometers). Place the

specimen on the lower platen. Align the axis of the specimen with the center of thrust of the
spherically seated bearing block and slowly bring the block to bear load on the specimen.
This will ensure uniform seating is obtained. Apply the load at a constant rate within the
range 35± 5 psi until it reaches 40% of the ultimate load. Return the load to zero at the same
rate. The first loading is primarily used to seat the strain measuring equipment and should not
be recorded.

3. ASTM C469 recommends completing at least two subsequent loadings to ensure

repeatability. If repeatable, average the results. Apply the load at a constant rate within the
range 35± 5 psi until it reaches 40% of the ultimate load. Return the load to zero at the same
rate. During loading, record applied load, longitudinal, and transverse strain when the strain
85
reaches 50 millionths and when the applied load is equal to 40% of the ultimate load.
Ambient temperature and humidity should be maintained as constant as possible through the
duration of this test.

Fig: 5.23 Modulus of Elasticity Test of concrete

86
 Chapter 6

TEST RESULT AND ANALYSIS

6.1 Introduction

In this chapter investigations for various conditions on using recycled coarse aggregate and
shredded rubber are being discussed. To conduct the investigation a total of 133 samples have
been casted for seven concrete mixes. Tests were conducted at 7 days, 28 days and 56 days.
Compressive and split cylinder tensile strength, modulus of elasticity test, and absorption test of
cylindrical samples tests were carried out according to ASTM standard. Flexure Test was also
carried out according to ASTM standard for concrete beam .In case of water permeability test
European standards were followed.

6.2 Gradation of Concrete Mix

Sieve analysis were carried out for each concrete mix. This part includes the gradation curve of 7
design mixes. Gradation results and curves for concrete mix 2 and mix 5 are given below.

Table 6.1 Sieve Analysis of 10% Rubber and 90% Sylhet Sand (Mix 2)

Weight of Sample taken = 472 gm

Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(kg)
#4 4.75 0 0 0 100
#8 2.36 13.2 2.80 2.80 97.2
#16 1.18 107.2 22.7 25.5 74.5
#30 0.6 192.8 40.85 66.35 33.65
#50 0.3 114.8 24.32 90.67 9.33
#100 0.15 34 7.20 97.87 2.13
#200 0.075 6.7 1.42 99.29 0.71
pan 3.1 0.66 99.95 0.05
Total 468.7 gm

87
 120
100
80

% Finer
60
40 Time(s)
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: 6.1 Gradation Curve of Mix 2(10% rubber, 90% sand)

Table 6.2 Sieve Analysis of 30% Recycled Aggregate and 70% Normal Aggregate (Mix 5)
Weight of Sample taken = 5kg
Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(kg)
1½ inch 37.5 0 0 0 100
1 inch 25 0.01 0.6 0.6 99.4
¾ inch 19 0.74 28.8 29.4 70.6
½ inch 12.5 2.21 33.4 62.8 37.2
3/8 inch 9.5 0.88 18.6 81.4 18.6
#4 4.75 1.01 17 98.4 1.6
pan 0.06 1.2 99.6 0.4
Total 4.91 kg

120
100
80
% Finer

60
40 Time(s)
20
0
10 1 0.1
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: 6.2 Gradation Curve of Mix 5(30% RCA, 70% CA)

Rest of the gradation curves and sieve analysis results shown in APPENDIX D.
88
6.3 Test of Fresh concrete

Test of fresh concrete includes Slump Test ,V-Funnel Test and L-Box Test.

6.3.1.Slump Test

A cone of crest diameter 100mm, bottom diameter 200mm and height 300mm is used for
determining slump. Slump values are given below.

Table 6.3 Slump values of different Mixes

Mixture Designation 5 seconds Slump Flow(mm) Remarks

SCC 705 SCC
Rubber 10% 685 SCC
Rubber 15% 700 SCC
Rubber 20% 690 SCC
Recycle 30% 676 SCC
Recycle 40% 670 SCC
Recycle 50% 640 SCC

6.3.2 L-Box Test

A L-Box having standard dimensions was used to measure the passing ability by measuring the
ratio of h2/h1 .Results given below on Table 6.4

Table 6.4 h2/h1 ratio of different Mixes

Mixture Designation h2/h1 Remarks

SCC 0.95 SCC
Rubber 10% 0.86 SCC
Rubber 15% 0.84 SCC
Rubber 20% 0.93 SCC
Recycle 30% 0.86 SCC
Recycle 40% 0.83 SCC
Recycle 50% 0.79 SCC

89
6.3.3 V-Funnel Test

A V-Funnel having standard dimensions was used to measure the filling ability by measuring
the time required for emptying funnel .Results given below on Table 6.5

Table6.5 Time taken for emptying of V-Funnel

Mixture Time(sec) Results Remarks

Designation
SCC 10 No Blockage SCC
Rubber 10% 11 No Blockage SCC
Rubber 15% 12 No Blockage SCC
Rubber 20% 12 No Blockage SCC
Recycle 30% 11 No Blockage SCC
Recycle 40% 15 Slight Blockage SCC
Recycle 50% 18 Slight Blockage SCC

6.4 Test of Hardened concrete

Test of hardened concrete includes Compressive Strength Test, Split Test, Water Absorption
Test, Water Permeability Test, Modulus of Elasticity Test and Flexural Strength Test.

6.4.1 Compressive Strength

Compression test is done on specimens having diameter of 100mm and height of 200mm
concrete cylinder. For each type two specimens have been tested on 7days,28 days & 56 days
and the average value is taken. Compressive Strength of 28days are given on table on Table
6.4. Rest calculation of compressive strength have been shown in Appendix A. Compressive
Strength of 7 days ,28days, and 56 days shown table on Table 6.6.

90
Table 6.6 Compressive Strength Test (28 days)

Calibration Equation : Y=0.998X-110.8 (KN)

Mix Sample Reading Actual Compressive Average (MPa)
(KN) Strength(ksi) (ksi)
SCC 1 428 5.657 6.174 42.51
2 486 6.690
Rubber 10% 1 237 2.248 2.132 14.67
2 224 2.016
Rubber 15% 1 211 2.084 2.021 13.93
2 205 1.940
Rubber 20% 1 223 1.998 1.918 13.21
2 214 1.837
Recycle 30% 1 398 5.122 5.077 34.98
2 393 5.032
Recycle 40% 1 410 5.355 5.136 35.39
2 389 4.916
Recycle 50% 1 416 5.443 5.363 36.95
2 407 5.282

Table 6.7 Compressive Strength of concrete mixes

Mixture Compressive Strength (MPa)

Designation
7 Days 28 Days 56 Days

SCC 25.03 42.51 51.89

Rubber 10% 10.40 14.67 18.96
Rubber 15% 10.7 13.93 15.62
Rubber 20% 11.10 13.21 13.62
Recycle 30% 23.76 34.98 37.68
Recycle 40% 24.70 35.39 40.20
Recycle 50% 26.13 36.95 41.07

6.4.2 Split Cylinder

Split cylinder test is done on the specimens having diameter of 100mm and length of 200mm
concrete cylinder. The tensile strength determined by split cylinder test at 7 days, 28 days and 56
days of two specimens and average is considered. Concrete Tensile strength (7 days) cylinders
for different types of mix are shown on the Table 6.6. Tensile Strength of 7 days, 28days, and

91
56 days shown table on Table 6.8. Rest calculation of tensile strength has been shown in
Appendix B.

Table 6.8 Split Cylinder Test (7 days)

Calibration Equation : Y=1.0091X-23.723 (KN)

Mix Sample Reading Actual Tensile Average (MPa)
(KN) Strength (psi) (psi)
SCC 1 58 156 165 1.14
2 62 174
Rubber 10% 1 60 165 147 1.01
2 52 129
Rubber 15% 1 40 75 107 0.74
2 54 138
Rubber 20% 1 52 129 120 0.83
2 48 111
Recycle 30% 1 70 210 192 1.32
2 62 174
Recycle 40% 1 62 174 192 1.32
2 70 210
Recycle 50% 1 64 183 174 1.20
2 60 165

Table 6.9 Tensile strength of concrete mixes

Mixture Tensile Strength (MPa)
Designation
7 Days 28 Days 56 Days

SCC 1.14 3.35 2.73

Rubber 10% 1.01 2.05 2.67
Rubber 15% 0.74 1.39 2.16
Rubber 20% 0.83 1.26 1.65
Recycle 30% 1.32 2.11 2.61
Recycle 40% 1.32 2.57 1.80
Recycle 50% 1.20 3.04 2.54

92
6.4.3 Water Absorption

Water Absorption Test for concrete was done according to ASTM C1585 method. This test was
conducted on 28 days and 56 days on two specimen (concrete cylinder) and average value
taken.Water absorption capacity of of each type of sample is given below.

Table 6.10 Water Absorption Test (28 days)

Type SSD Weight OD Weight Absorption Average

(gram) (gram) (SSD Wt.-OD Wt./OD (%)
Wt)*100%
SCC 3931 3831 2.610 2.55
3943 3847 2.495
Rubber 10% 3703 3352 4.250 3.96
3750 3617 3.677
Rubber 15% 3489 3316 5.217 5.24
3581 3402 5.2616
Rubber 20% 3505 3358 4.377 4.43
3513 3362 4.490
Recycle 30% 3899 3772 3.367 3.34
3929 3803 3.313
Recycle 40% 3863 3730 3.566 3.45
3986 3857 3.344
Recycle 50% 3843 3711 3.556 3.77
3841 3694 3.979
Table 6.11 Water Absorption Test (56 days)
Type SSD Weight OD Weight Absorption Average
(gram) (gram) (SSD Wt.-OD Wt./OD (%)
Wt)*100%
SCC 3952 3865 2.15 2.18
3945 3860 2.20
Rubber 10% 3754 3611 3.96 3.86
3740 3605 3.75
Rubber 15% 3566 3395 5.04 5.03
3550 3380 5.03
Rubber 20% 3450 3301 4.51 4.53
3460 3310 4.54
Recycle 30% 3927 3781 3.86 3.72
3910 3775 3.58
Recycle 40% 3868 3743 3.34 3.31
3875 3752 3.28
Recycle 50% 3865 3742 3.29 3.67
3860 3710 4.05
93
 Table 6.12 Water Absorption of concrete

Mixture Water Absorption(%)

Designation
28 Days 56 Days

SCC 2.55 2.18

Rubber 10% 3.96 3.86
Rubber 15% 5.24 5.03
Rubber 20% 4.43 4.53
Recycle 30% 3.34 3.72
Recycle 40% 3.45 3.31
Recycle 50% 3.77 3.67

6.4.4 Water Permeability

Water Permeability Test for concrete was done according to ASTM C1585-13 method. This test
was conducted at 56 days on cubic specimen having dimension 150mm x 150mm x150mm. The
apparatus is used to determine the depth of penetration of water under pressure in the concrete
specimens. The water pressure kept above 5 bar .The penetration of water was measured, after
the testing period (72 hours), by breaking the specimen. The quantity of penetrated water, can
also be measured through the graduated burettes fitted on top of the apparatus. The maximum
depth of penetration of water on specimen is given below on Table 6.13.

Table 6.13 Water Permeability Test (56 days)

Type Pressure Initial Water Final Water Depth Of Penetration Maximum

(bar) Head Head (mm) Depth
(ml) (ml) D1 D2 D3 (mm)
SCC 5 25 20 1 5 2 5
Rubber 10% 5 25 500 50 100 30 100
Rubber 15% 5 25 710 90 110 100 110
Rubber 20% 5 25 490 85 125 115 125
Recycle 30% 5 25 50 18 30 25 30
Recycle 40% 5 35 50 20 25 6 25
Recycle 50% 5 25 95 25 62 25 62

94
6.4.5 Flexural Strength

Flexural Strength Test for Concrete was conducted by following ASTM C-78 Method. Test was
done at 56 days on concrete beam having standard dimension (150mm x 150mm x 600mm).The
beams were cured properly in proper way. Loading system was three point loading. The testing
machine was a servo-controlled system, which allows the test to perform automatically within a
closed loop. Results are calculated as the modulus of rupture. When failure occurred outside of
the middle third of the specimen, but not more than 5% of the span length, a different formula for
calculating the modulus of rupture result have been used. If failure occurs outside of the middle
third of the specimen's tension area by more than 5%, then the result cannot be used. Span
Length, L=18 inch used.Test Results are provided below on table 6.12.

Table 6.14 Flexural Strength Test (56 days)

Load Calibration Equation,Y=0.972X+63.82 (lb)

Beam Width Beam
Type Load Actual (mm) Avg. Depth Avg. Modulus
from Load Width (mm) Depth of
Reading (lb) Left Centre Right b Left Centre Right d Rupture
(lb) Support Support (mm) Support Support psi
(mm)
b1 b2 b3 d1 d2 d3 (Mpa)
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
SCC 8600 8424 6.00 6.10 6.05 6.05 6.00 5.90 6.10 6.00 697
(4.80)

Rubber 6680 6567 6.05 6.10 6.00 6.05 6.00 6.10 6.10 6.06 534
10% (3.68)

Rubber 6900 6771 6.00 6.15 6.10 6.08 6.10 6.00 6.10 6.06 546
15% (3.76)

Rubber 4920 4847 6.10 6.10 6.00 6.07 6.00 6.10 6.00 6.03 396
20% (2.73)

Recycle 7490 7344 6.00 6.10 6.00 6.03 6.10 5.90 6.20 6.07 595
30% (4.10)

Recycle 8420 8247 6.00 6.10 6.00 6.03 6.00 5.95 6.00 5.98 689
40% (4.75)

Recycle 7800 7646 6.10 6.00 6.20 6.10 6.15 6.20 6.10 6.15 600
50% (4.13)

95
6.4.6 Modulus of Elasticity

ASTM C469 method is followed and Universal Testing Machine was used for this test. The test
was conducted on 28 and 56 days on two specimen (cylinder concrete) of each types and average
values were taken. Gage length was 75mm for all specimen and extensometer constant 0.002,
extensometer range 0.002-5mm and a load calibration equation Y=0.975X-573.1 (lb) used in this
test. 28 days test result of SCC(mix 1) are given below. Rest calculations have been provided in
APPENDIX A.
Table 6.15 Modulus of Elasticity Test (28 days)

Type Extenso- Strain Load Reading Actual Load Stress Average

meter *10E-05 (lb) (lb) (psi) Stress
Reading
(mm) (mm/mm) Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample psi
1 2 1 2 1 2 (MPa)
2 5.333 3800 4000 3132 3327 249.24 264.75 257
(1.77)
4 10.667 7000 6900 6251 6154 497.44 489.72 493
(3.40)
SCC 6 16.000 9900 10000 9080 9177 722.56 730.28 726
(5.00)
8 21.333 12000 12400 11127 11516 885.46 916.41 901
(6.21)
10 26.667 14300 15000 13370 14052 1063.9 1118.2 1091
(7.52)

Modulus of Elasticity is determined from Stress Vs Strain curve based on those data. The slope
of Stress Vs Strain curve is Modulus of Elasticity( E).Stress Vs Strain curves are given below for
corresponding data. Rest Modulus of Elasticity curves have been shown in APPENDIX C.

SCC
Modulus of Elasticity, E=29321
2.5
Stress(Mpa)

2 y = 29321x
1.5
1
Stress(Mpa)
0.5
0 Linear (Stress(Mpa))
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015
Strain

Fig: 6.3 Modulus of Elasticity of SCC(28 days)

96
Table 6.16 Modulus of Elasticity at 28days and 56 days

Modulus of Elasticity (MPa)

Mixture
Designation From Compressive Strength From Graph
28 Days 56 Days 28 Days 56 Days

SCC 311230 34380 29321 26502

Rubber 10% 18293 20783 14851 26410
Rubber 15% 16483 16272 16371 16828
Rubber 20% 17350 17610 14592 23885
Recycle 30% 28229 29298 18362 24538
Recycle 40% 28392 30262 21412 32549
Recycle 50% 29012 30587 23512 32974

6.5 Result Analysis

Comparison and interpretation of test results are given below.

6.5.1 Gradation Results

Table 6.17 Determination of Gradation Type

Mixture Gradation D60 D30 D10 Cu Cc Remarks

Designation Materials
SCC CA 16.0 11.0 6.3 2.54 1.20 Poorly Graded
Rubber 10% FA 1.0 0.57 0.3 3.33 1.09 Poorly Graded
Rubber 15% FA 1.0 0.70 0.43 2.33 1.14 Poorly Graded
Rubber 20% FA 0.87 0.55 0.32 2.72 1.09 Poorly Graded
Recycle 30% CA 16.0 12.0 6.3 2.54 1.43 Poorly Graded
Recycle 40% CA 17.0 12.5 6.1 2.79 1.51 Poorly Graded
Recycle 50% CA 17.5 13.3 6.5 2.69 1.56 Poorly Graded

A well graded aggregate sample should have a uniformity co-efficient (Cu) greater than 4 for
coarse aggregate and greater than 6 for fine aggregate and a co-efficient of curvature (Cc) should
lie between 1 and 3 for both coarse and fine aggregate. All of our mixture sample satisfied only
the criteria of co-efficient of curvature but hardly satisfied the criteria of uniformity co-efficient.
So all the mixture are not well graded. We had better identify them as poorly graded.
97
6.5.2 Slump Test Results

720

700

680
Slump(mm)

660
705 700
640 685 690 Slump(mm)
676 670
620 640

600
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.4 Variation of Slump Value

The consistency and workability of self-compacting concrete were evaluated using the slump
flow test. Because of its ease of operation and portability, the slump flow test is the most widely
used method for evaluating concrete consistency in the laboratory and at construction sites. In
this study, the diameter of the concrete flowing out of the slump cone was obtained by
calculating the average of two perpendicularly measured diameters for determining the above
mentioned properties of concrete. The results from Fig: 6.4 show that the self-compacting
concrete was complying with the requirements found in the literature for all mixtures. Thus, self-
compacting concrete was assumed to having a good consistency and workability after gradually
adjusting the chemical admixtures in the mix.

98
6.5.3 L-Box Test Results

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
h2/h1

0.5 0.95 0.93

0.4 0.86 0.84 0.86 0.83 0.79 h2/h1
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.5 Variation of L-Box Test Results

If the concrete flows as freely as water, at rest it will be horizontal, so h2/h1 = 1. Therefore
the nearer this test value, the ‘blocking ratio’, is to unity, the better the flow of the concrete.
The EU research team suggested a minimum acceptable value of 0.8.T20 and T40 times can
give some indication of ease of flow, but no suitable values have been generally agreed.
Obvious blocking of coarse aggregate behind the reinforcing bars can be detected visually.

All the above developed mixes (Mix 1, Mix 2, Mix 3, Mix 4, Mix 5 and Mix 6) except mix 7
that satisfied the flow-ability criterion and showed no signs of segregation, were subjected to
the passing ability test using L-box to ensure that they were able to pass through the narrow
gaps that exist between reinforcing bars in a real reinforced concrete structural element.

 SCC fully satisfied the passing ability criteria.

 Addition of recycled aggregate in different proportions caused variation in L-
Box results. With the increase of the percentage of recycled aggregate the
passing ability was found to be decreased. The ratio h2/h1 for mix 7 was
slightly deviated from standard criteria because of presence of large sized
particle in that mix.
 Addition of shredded rubber in different proportions caused slight variation in
passing ability but it satisfied the standard criteria of EFNARC.

99
6.5.4 V-Funnel Test Results

20
18
16
14
Time(sec)

12
10
18
8 15 Time(S)
6 11 12 12 11
10
4
2
0
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.6 Variation of V-Funnel Test Results

Interpretation of result
This test measures the ease of flow of the concrete; shorter flow times indicate greater flow
ability. For SCC a flow time of 10 seconds is considered appropriate. The inverted cone
shape restricts flow, and prolonged flow times may give some indication of the
susceptibility of the mix to blocking. After 5 minutes of settling, segregation of concrete
will show a less continuous flow with an increase in flow time.

All the above developed mixes (Mix 1, Mix 2, Mix 3, Mix 4, and Mix 5) except Mix 6
and Mix 7 that satisfied the flow-ability criterion and showed no signs of blockage.

 SCC fully satisfied the flow ability criteria.

 Addition of recycled aggregate in different proportions caused noticeable variation in
V-Funnel results. With the increase of the percentage of recycled aggregate the flow
ability was found to be decreased. The time of emptying of V-Funnel for mix 6 and 7
were deviated from standard criteria because of presence of large sized particle in that
mix. So, the blockage problem occurred.
 Addition of shredded rubber in different proportions caused also slight variation in
flow ability but it satisfied the standard criteria of EFNARC.

100
6.5.5 Compressive Strength Results
From the test data graphs have been plotted to compare compressive strengths among
different mixes.

30
Compressive Strength(MPa)

25

20

15
25.03 24.7 26.13 7 days Compressive
23.76
10 Strength(MPa)

5 10.4 10.7 11.1

0
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.7 Variation of Compressive Strength Test Results(7 days)

Interpretation of result
 In our research, design Compressive Strength of SCC was 35 MPa. After 7 days we
obtained the compressive strength value of SCC is around 25 MPa which is more
than 70% of design strength.
 In case of recycled aggregate SCC strength gain is almost close to SCC.
 The compressive strength is found to be increased with the increase of percentage
of recycled coarse aggregate. Hence mix 7 results larger compressive strength value
than mix 5 and 6.
 In case of rubberized SCC the compressive strength values found are very low. The
strength gain in 7 days is only 30% of design strength.
 Initially the compressive strength is found to be increased with the increasing
percentage of shredded rubber.
 The reduction in strength of rubberized concrete would be remedied to a certain
extent by the pretreatment of shredded rubber with admixtures such as Polyvinyl
Alcohol (PVA)
101
 45

Compressive Strength(MPa) 40
35
30
25
20 42.51
36.95 28 days Compressive
34.98 35.39
15 Strength(MPa)
10
14.67 13.93 13.21
5
0
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.8 Variation of Compressive Strength Test Results (28 days)

Interpretation of result
 After 28 days we obtained the compressive strength value of SCC is around 42 MPa
which is more than the design strength.
 In case of recycled aggregate SCC strength gain is almost close to design strength.
 The compressive strength found to be decreased with the increasing percentage of
shredded rubber.
 Strength gain of Mix 2,Mix 3 and Mix 4 are 42%,40% and 38% of design strength
respectively.

Overall comparison of compressive strength is shown in Fig: 6.9 below.

102
 60

50
Compressive Strength(MPa)

40 SCC
Rubber 10%
30 Rubber 15%
Rubber 20%
20
Recycle 30%

10 Recycle 40%
Recycle 50%
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Days

Fig: 6.9 Variation of Compressive Strength of Mixes with days

Interpretation of result
 From the graph we can see that the compressive strength of SCC (Mix 1) is
increasing with time. After 56 days its compressive strength is close to 150% of
design compressive strength.
 For recycled aggregate SCC (Mix 5,Mix 6 and Mix 7) the compressive strength is
found to be increased with time and strength gain is also quite satisfactory.
 Compressive strength is increasing with the increase of recycled aggregate percentage
and perhaps it is due to the good quality of recycled aggregate.
 For rubberized SCC it is seen that initially compressive strength increasing with the
increasing of the percentage of rubber but later compressive strength is found to be
decrease with the increase of rubber percentage.
 Strength gaining of rubberized SCC is very poor and maximum 50% of design
strength.

103
6.5.6 Tensile Strength Results

From the test data graphs have been plotted to compare tensile strengths amo ng
different mixes.

4
3.5
Tensile Strength(MPa)

3
2.5
2
3.35 28 days Tensile Strength(MPa)
1.5 3.04
2.57
1 2.05 2.11
1.39 1.26
0.5
0
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.10 Variation of Tensile Strength Test Results (28 days)

Interpretation of result
Tensile strength is an important property of concrete because concrete structures are highly
vulnerable to tensile cracking due to various kinds of effects and applied loading itself. However,
tensile strength of concrete is very low in compared to its compressive strength .Usually tensile
strength of concrete varies from 2 to 5 MPa.

 From the 28 days test result it is seen that tensile strength of SCC and recycled
aggregate SCC(Mix 1,Mix 5,Mix 6 and Mix7) are quite satisfactory.
 In case of recycled aggregate SCC tensile strength is found to be increased with the
increasing of recycled aggregate. The tensile strength of Mix 5,Mix 6 and Mix 7 are
2.11, 2.57 and 3.04 respectively.
 In case of rubberized SCC tensile strength found from test is quite low. Only concrete
Mix 2 lies in the range of tensile strength.
 Tensile strength is decreasing with the increase of the percentage of rubber content.

104
Overall comparison of Tensile strength is shown in Fig: 6.10 below.

3.5

3
Tensile Strength(MPa)

2.5 SCC
Rubber 10%
2 Rubber 15%
Rubber 20%
1.5
Recycle 30%
1 Recycle 40%
Recycle 50%
0.5

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Days

Fig: 6.11 Variation of Tensile Strength of Mixes with days

Interpretation of result

 From Fig: 6.10 it is seen that the tensile strength of SCC tensile strength is initially
increasing with time but after 28 days it is decreasing with time. But tensile strength
of concrete is increasing with time. This is maybe we got to erroneous result in
testing.
 Recycled aggregate SCC (Mix 5,Mix 6 and Mix7) the variation of tensile strength is
similar to SCC.
 In case of rubberized SCC(Mix 2,Mix 3 and Mix 4) tensile strength is found to be
increased with time.

105
6.5.7 Water Absorption Results
From the test data graphs have been plotted to compare water absorption among
different mixes.

5
Water Absorption(%)

3
5.24
4.43 28 days Water Absorption(%)
2 3.96 3.77
3.34 3.45
2.55
1

0
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.12 Water Absorption Test Results (28 days)

Interpretation of result
One of the most important properties of a good quality concrete is low absorption, especially
one resistant to freezing and thawing. A concrete with low absorption resists ingress of water
and is not as susceptible to freezing and thawing. Water enters pores in the cement paste and
even in the aggregate. The average absorption of the test samples shall not be greater than 5%
with no individual unit greater than 7%.
 From the 28 days absorption test result it is seen that SCC has very low absorption
only 2.55% which satisfies the criteria of standard concrete.
 In case of recycled aggregate SCC (Mix 5,Mix 6 and Mix7) the result found from test
slightly higher than SCC but less than 5% which are satisfactory.
 Water absorption is found to be increasing with the increasing of the percentage of
recycled aggregate because recycled aggregate concrete contains more voids than
normal concrete.
 Rubberized concrete showed poor result. Absorption is quite high in case of Mix
2,Mix 3 and Mix 4.The water absorption of Mix 5 exceed 5% which is not acceptable.
 Absorption increases with the increase of rubber content.
106
Overall comparison of Water Absorption is shown in Fig: 6.13 below.

5
Water Absorption(%)

4 SCC
Rubber 10%
3 Rubber 15%
Rubber 20%
2
Recycle 30%
Recycle 40%
1
Recycle 50%

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Days

Fig: 6.13 Variation of Water Absorption of Mixes with days

Interpretation of result
Usually water absorption of concrete decreases with time. This is because the voids in concrete
gets filled up which results low porosity.
 From Fig: 6.12 we can see that the value of absorption of SCC is decreasing. Though
this graph is plotted only with two points, it can be predicted that absorption will
decrease with time.
 In case of Recycled aggregate concrete the results are same as SCC except Mix 4,the
change of absorption of Mix 5 and Mix 6 are quite normal with time.
 In case of Rubberized SCC(Mix 2, Mix 3 and Mix 4) the absorption is found to be
decreased with time.

107
6.5.8 Water permeability Results
From the test data graphs have been plotted to compare water permeability among
different mixes.

140

120
Maximum Depth(mm)

100

80

60 125
110 Maximum Depth(mm)
100
40
62
20
30 25
0 5
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.14 Variation of Maximum Depth of Penetration of Mixes (56 Days)

Interpretation of result

Water permeability (measured in terms of maximum depth of water penetration) of existing

concrete in a structure is an essential and important step for the definition of its durability,
performance and lifetime. If concrete is impermeable, corrosive agents cannot penetrate and
attack it. Thus, the lesser the depth of penetration causes the higher durability. Usually
maximum depth of penetration is around 25mm.

 In case of SCC (Mix 1), maximum depth of penetration is very low which indicates
higher durability concrete.
 In case of recycle SCC (Mix 5, Mix 6), maximum depth of penetration is low but for
Mix 7 its value increases.
 In case of rubberized SCC (Mix 2, Mix 3, Mix 4), maximum depth of penetration is
higher which indicate very low durability concrete. As rubber is porous, so depth of
penetration is higher through medium.

108
6.5.9 Flexural Strength Results

From the test data graphs have been plotted to compare flexural strength among
different mixes.

5
Modulus of Rupture(MPa)

3
4.8 4.75 Modulus of Rupture (MPa)
2 3.76 4.1 4.13
3.68
2.73
1

0
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.15 Variation of Flexural Strength of Mixes (56 Days)

Interpretation of result

After the Splitting tensile test another common test performed for determination of tensile
strength is the Flexure test which is also known as modulus of rupture test. Usually flexural
strength of concrete is between 3 and 5 MPa.

 In case of SCC (Mix 1), modulus of rupture is 4.6 MPa which is in the range of 3 to
5 MPa. So Mix 1 satisfies the flexural strength value range.
 In case of recycled SCC (Mix 5, Mix 6, Mix 7), modulus of rupture is in the range of
3 to 5 MPa. So all three Mix satisfies the flexural strength value range.
 In case of recycled SCC, Modulus of rupture value is initially increasing upto 40% of
recycle aggregate, then its value decreases.
 In case of rubberized SCC (Mix 2, Mix 3), modulus of rupture is in the range of 3 to
5 MPa. But for Mix 3, value doesn’t satisfies the above range value.
 In case of rubberized SCC, Modulus of rupture value is initially increasing upto 15%
of rubber content, then its value decreases.
109
6.5.10 Modulus of Elasticity Results
From the test data graphs have been plotted to compare modulus of elasticity among
different mixes.

35000
Modulus of Elasticity(MPa)

30000
25000
20000
15000 31502 32549 32974
56 days Modulus of
26410 23885 24538
10000 Elasticity(MPa)
16828
5000
0
SCC Rubber Rubber Rubber Recycle Recycle Recycle
10% 15% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fig: 6.16 Variation of Modulus of Elasticity of Mixes (56 Days)

Interpretation of result
Modulus of elasticity is the slope of stress-strain linear portion of the relationship. The elastic
limit is “the greatest stress which a material is capable of sustaining without any deviation from
proportionality of stress to strain (Hooke’s law).” Modulus of elasticity of normal concrete lies
in the range of 14000 - 41000 MPa.

 In case of SCC (Mix 1), modulus of elasticity is 31502 MPa for 56 days which is
in the range of 14000 to 41000 MPa. So Mix 1 satisfies the modulus of elasticity
range value.
 In case of recycled SCC (Mix 5, Mix 6, Mix 7), modulus of elasticity is in the
range of 14000 to 41000 MPa. So all three Mix satisfies the modulus of elasticity
range value.
 In case of recycled SCC, Modulus of elasticity value is increasing with the
increase percentage of recycle aggregate.
 In case of rubberized SCC (Mix 2, Mix 3 and Mix 4), modulus of Elasticity
found are very low but fall within the range.
 Modulus of Elasticity increasing with the decrease with the increasing of rubber
content.

110
 35000

30000
Modulus of Elasticity(MPa)

25000
SCC
20000 Rubber 10%
Rubber 15%
15000
Rubber 20%
10000 Recycle 30%
Recycle 40%
5000
Recycle 50%
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Days

Fig: 6.17 Variation of Modulus of Elasticity of Mixes with days

Interpretation of result

Usually modulus of elasticity of concrete increases with the increase of compressive strength. Fig:
6.16 shows variation of Modulus of Elasticity with time. From this graph we got the following
observation.

 Modulus of Elasticity is found to be increased with time for all mixes.

 In case of Recycled aggregate SCC, Modulus of Elasticity is almost same as SCC.
 In case of Rubberized SCC, Modulus of Elasticity is relatively low comparing with others.

111
 Chapter 7

CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION

7.1 Introduction

Self Compacting Concrete is a greatest innovation over normal concrete. Use of recycled
aggregate and shredded rubber effectively is a contemporary concept for advancement. To
recapitulate the main outcomes of the investigation and to unwrap some potential scopes of
further research work related to recycled aggregate and shredded rubber are the features of this
chapter. This chapter will provide us with the reasonable opportunities and possible benefits of
recycling the demolished aggregate and rubber. Different parameters related with the strength of
concrete prepared with normal aggregate, recycled aggregate and shredded rubber will be
summarized here. This study has tried to find the maximum use of recycled aggregate and
shredded rubber without hampering in the strength of concrete. The results obtained in this
study indicate an opportunity to use the recycled aggregates and shredded rubber in a specific
range of percentage.

7.2 Conclusion

The important outcomes and findings from the research are as follows:

 The development of self-compacting concrete mixes is a complex process requiring

the resolution of conflicting demands of flow-ability and non-segregation which can
be achieved by increasing the paste content and decreasing the large aggregate
volume. The resistance to segregation was checked visually only.
 It has been verified, by using the slump flow, L-Box and V-Funnel tests, that self
compacting concrete (SCC) achieved consistency, flowability and self
compactability under its own weight, without any external vibration or
compaction. Also, because of the special admixtures used, SCC has achieved a
density between 2400 and 2500 kg/m3, which was greater than that of normal
concrete, 2370-2321 kg/m3.

112
 Self-compacting concrete can be obtained in such a way, by adding chemical and
mineral admixtures, so that it’s splitting tensile and compressive strengths are
higher than those of normal vibrated concrete.
 Also, due to the use of chemical and mineral admixtures, self-compacting concrete
has shown smaller interface micro cracks than normal concrete, fact which led to a
better bonding between aggregate and cement paste and to an increase in splitting
tensile and compressive strengths. A measure of the better bonding was the greater
percentage of the fractured aggregate in SCC (20-25%) compared to the 10% for
normal concrete.
 In addition, self-compacting concrete has two big advantages. One relates to the
construction time, which in most of the cases is shorter than the time when normal
concrete is used, due to the fact that no time is wasted with the compaction through
vibration. The second advantage is related to the placing. As long as SCC does not
require compaction, it can be considered environmentally friendly, because if no
vibration is applied no noise is made.
 Fresh properties of concrete are deviated from standard criteria of SCC with the
increase in percentage of recycled aggregate, due to large particle size of aggregate.
 So replacement with recycled aggregate within a range of 30-40% shows better
SCC characteristics.
 No significant change in fresh properties is observed in case of rubberized SCC.
So replacement of fine aggregate with shredded rubber has less impact on fresh
properties.
 Hardened properties of concrete except water absorption and water permeability are
almost same in case of SCC and recycled SCC.
 Value of hardened properties of concrete increase with the increase of recycle
aggregate percentage.
 Rubberized SCC show greater deviation in hardened properties from SCC. Increase
in rubber content results poor quality SCC.
 So replacement with rubber content within a range of 10-15% can be considered
optimum to get better results.

113
7.3 Recommendation
Based on this study the following suggestions can be made.

 As SCC technology is now being adopted in many countries throughout the world,
in the absence of suitable standardized test methods it is necessary to examine the
existing test methods and identify or, when necessary, develop test methods
suitable for acceptance as International Standards. Such test methods have to be
capable of a rapid and reliable assessment of key properties of fresh SCC on a
construction site. At the same time, the testing equipment should be reliable, easily
portable and inexpensive. The test procedure should be carried out by a single
operator and the test results have to be interpreted with a minimum of training.
Also, the results have to define and specify different SCC mixes. One primary
application of these test methods would be in verification of compliance on sites
and in concrete production plants, if self-compacting concrete could be
manufactured in large quantities.
 In L-box laboratory test, there was an inevitable delay in manually lifting the gate to
release the mix thus increasing the measured times. The delay is the more, the larger
the content of coarse aggregate and / or fibres in the mix. This problem needs to be
solved by providing an alternative method for opening the gate in a single lift.
 However, unless this work is carried out without delay, there will be a real risk of
each country adopting more or less different test methods, making any future
harmonization very difficult, so that standardization of tests capable of dealing with
the key properties of SCC is urgently required.
 Furthermore, secondary advantages of SCC, as for instance rapid drying, ought to be
more investigated in order to fully exploit the potential.
 This research can be carried out by using different proportions of mineral admixtures
(Fly Ash, GGBS).
 This research can be also carried out by using different proportions of steel fibre.
 High strength Self Compacting Concrete can attained by increasing cement content.
Now a days high strength self compacting concrete can be prepared by using only
Portland Composite Cement (PCC) as cementitious material.

114
 REFERENCES

ASTM C29 (1997). Test Method for Bulk Density (“Unit weight”) and Voids in Aggregate,
American Society for testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.

ASTM C33 (2003). Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregate, American Society for testing
and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.

ASTM C39 (1999). Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete
Specimens, American Society for testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.

Atkins, H. N., “Highway Materials, Soils, and Concretes”, 4 th Edition, Prentice Hall, pp.277-
330 (2003).

Avram, C., I. Facaoaru, O. Mirsu, I. Filimon, and I. Tertea, “Concrete Strength and Strains”,
Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, pp.105-133, 249-251 (1981).

Barksdale, R. D., “The Aggregate Handbook”, National Stone Association” (1993).

Bartos, J. M., “Measurement of Key Properties of Fresh Self-compacting Concrete”,

CEN/PNR Workshop, Paris (2000).

Bekir Topçu Ilker, Bilir Turhan. Experimental investigation of some fresh and_
hardened properties of rubberized self-compacting concrete. Mater Des
2009;30(8):3056–65.

Bennenk, I. H. W., (2005). Self-compacting concrete - Five years of experience with SCC in the
Netherlands. In Proceedings of the 18th BIBM International Congress, Amsterdam, pp. 211-218.

Benson, S. D. P. , Karihaloo, B. L., (2005a). CARDIFRC®-Development and mechanical

properties. Part I: Development and workability. Magazine of Concrete Research, 57(6), pp. 347-
352.

115
Benson, S. D. P. , Karihaloo, B. L., (2005b). CARDIFRC®-Development and mechanical
properties. Part III: Uniaxial tensile response and other mechanical properties. Magazine of
Concrete Research, 57(8), pp. 433-443.

Benazzouk A, Douzane O, Langlet T, Mezreb K, Roucoult JM, Quéneudec M. Physico-

mechanical properties and water absorption of cement compositecontaining shredded rubber
wastes. Cem Concr Compos 2007;29:732–40.

Bentz, D. P., “Drying/hydration in cement pastes during curing”, Materials and Structures,
Vol. 34, No. 243, pp.557-565 (2001).

Best Practice Guide for the use of “Recycled Aggregates in New Concrete” published by the
Cement & Concrete Association of New Zealand (CCANZ) in October 2011.

Billberg, P., (1999). Self-compacting concrete for civil engineering structures- The Swedish
experience, Report no 2:99. Swedish Cement and Concrete Research Institute, Stockholm.

Bijen, J. M. and M. de Rooij, “Aggregate – Matrix Interfaces”, International Conference on

Concretes, Dundee, Scotland (1999).

Bignozzi MC, Sandrolini F. Tyre rubber waste recycling in self-compacting

concrete. Cem Concr Res 2006;36(4):735–9.

Brouwers, H. J. H., Radix, H. J., (2005). Self-Compacting Concrete: Theoretical and

experimental study. Cement and Concrete Research, 35 (11), pp. 2116–2136.

Bouzoubaa, N., Lachemib, M., (2001). Self-compacting concrete incorporating high-volumes of

class F fly ash: preliminary results. Cement and Conrete Research, 31(3), pp. 413-420.

BS EN 12350-8, (2010). Testing fresh concrete, Part 8: Self-compacting concrete- Slump test
flow, British Standards publication.

BS EN 206-9, (2010). Concrete, Part 9: Additional rules for self-compacting concrete (SCC),
British Standards publication.
116
BS EN 12350-10, (2010). Testing fresh concrete, Part 10: Self-compacting concrete- L-box test,
British Standards publication.

Boukendakdjia, O., Kadrib, E. H., Kenaic, S., (2012). Effects of granulated blast furnace slag
and superplasticizer type on the fresh properties and compressive strength of self-compacting
concrete. Cement and Concrete Composites, 34(4), pp. 583–590.

Bury, M. A., Christensen, B. J., (2002). Role of innovative chemical admixtures in producing
self-consolidating concrete. In 1 st North American Conference on the Design and Use of Self-
Consolidating Concrete, Chicago, IL, ACBM, pp.137-141.

CCANZ TECHNICAL REPORT in “TR 14 Best Practice Guide for the use of Recycled
Aggregates in New Concrete.”

Cement Admixture Association. "Admixture Types". Retrieved 25 December 2010.

Chetna M. V., Darshana R. B.,” Destructive Strength Properties of Recycled Coarse Aggregate”,
International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE) ISSN:
2278-3075, Volume-2, Issue-3, February 2013
Correia, J. R.; de Britto, J.; Pereira, A. S. Effects on concrete durability of using recycled
ceramic aggregates. // Materials and Structures. 39(2006), pp. 169-177.

"CHAPTER 9 Designing and Proportioning Normal Concrete Mixtures". PCA manual. Portland
Concrete Association. Retrieved 1 October 2012.

Deeb, R., Ghanbari, A., Karihaloo, B. L., (2012). Development of self-compacting high and ultra
high performance concretes with and without steel fibres. Cement and Concrete Composites,
34(2), pp. 185–190.

Deeb, R., Karihaloo, B. L., (2013). Mix proportioning of self-compacting normal and high
strength concretes, Magazine of Concrete Research, 65(9), pp.546–556

Dehn, F., K. Holschemacher, and D. Weisse, “Self-Compacting Concrete - Time Development

of the Material Properties and the Bond Behavior”, LACER No. 5, pp.115-123 (2000).

117
Detwiler, R. J., R. Wenk, and P. Monteiro, “Texture of calcium hydroxide near the aggregate
cement paste interface”, Cement and Concrete Research Journal, Vol. 18, Issue 5, pp.823-829
(1988).

Dhir, R. K. and T. D. Dyer, “Modern Concrete Materials: Binders, Additions and

Admixtures”, Thomas Telford Publishing, London, UK (1999).

Dietz, J. and J. Ma, “Preliminary Examinations for the Production of Self-Compacting

Concrete Using Lignite Fly Ash”, LACER No.5, pp.125-139 (2000).

Dinakar, P., Sethy, K. P., Sahoo, U. C., (2013). Design of self-compacting concrete with ground
granulated blast furnace slag. Materials and Design, 43, pp. 161-169, ISSN 02613069,
10.1016/j.matdes.2012.06.049.

Dodson, V., “Concrete Admixtures”, VNR Structural Engineering Series (1990).

Domone, P. L, (2003). Fresh Concrete. In: Advanced Concrete Technology: Concrete properties.
Newman, J. and Choo, B., (eds). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd, pp. 20-30.

Domone, P. L, (2006). Self-compacting concrete: An analysis of 11 years of case studies.

Cement and Concrete Composites, 28(2), pp. 197–208.

Domone, P. L, Illston, J. M., (2010). Construction Materials: Their Nature and Behaviour. 4th
ed. Taylor and Francis Publication, ISBN. 041546515X, pp.590.

Douglas, R. P., (2004). Properties of Self-Consolidating Concrete Containing Type F Fly Ash,
M.Sc. Thesis, Northwestern University.Evanston, Illinois, SN. 2619.

EFNRC, (2005). The European Guidelines for Self-Compacting, Specification, Production and
Use. [Online] Available at: www.efnarc.org [Accessed 07/12/2014]

El-Gammal A, Abdel-Gawad AK, El-Sherbini Y, Shalaby R. A compressive

strength of concrete utilizing waste tire rubber. J Emerg Trends Eng Appl Sci
2010;1(1):96–9.

118
Ferraris, C. F., L. Brower, J. Daczko, C. Ozyldirim, “Workability of Self-Compacting
Concrete”, Journal of Research of NIST, Vol. 104, No. 5, pp.461-478 (1999).

Ferraris, C. F., “Concrete Mixing Methods and Concrete Mixers: State of the Art”, NIST
Journal, Vol. 106, No. 2, pp.391-399 (2001),
Gagne, R., A. Boisvert, and M. Pigeon, “Effect of Superplasticizer on Mechanical Properties
of High - Strength Concretes with and without Silica Fume”, ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 93,
No. 2, pp.111-120 (1996).

Gaimster, R., Dixon, N., (2003), Self-compacting concrete, in Advanced concrete technology,
Newman, J., Choo, B. S. (eds), Elsevier, 3, pp. 202-223.

Ganjian E, Khorami M, Maghsoudi A. Scrap–tyre–rubber replacement for

aggregate and filler in concrete. Constr Build Mater 2009;23:1828–36.

Gebler, S.H. and P. Klieger, “Effect of Fly Ash on the Air-Void Stability of Concrete”,
Portland Cement Association, R & D Bulletin 085.01T (1983).

Gebler, S.H. and P. Klieger, “Effect of Fly Ash on Some of the Physical Properties of
Concrete”, Portland Cement Association, R & D Bulletin 089.01T (1986).

Gebler, S.H. and P. Klieger, “Effect of Fly Ash on the Durability of Air Entrained Concrete”,
Portland Cement Association, R & D Bulletin 090.01T (1986).

Gonculves, A., Esteves A., and Vieira, M., Influence Of Recycled Concrete Aggregate On
Concrete Durability, National Laboratory of Civil Engineering, Portugal.

Gupta Y. P., “Use Of Recycled Aggregate In Concrete Construction: A Need For Sustainable
Environment” 34th Conference on “Our World In concrete and Structures, 16 – 18 August
2009, Singapore

Hale, W. M., T. D. Bush, and B. W. Russell, “Interaction of blast furnace slag and Class C fly
ash with type I cements”, Paper No. 01-045, TRB (2000).

Halstead, W. J., “Use of Fly Ash in Concrete”, NCHRP Synthesis 127 (1986).
119
Hansen, T. C., Recycling of demolished concrete and masonry.// RILEM Rep. 6, E&FN Spon,
London, 1992Hanson, J. A., “Effects of curing and drying environments on splitting tensile
strength of concrete”, ACI Journal, pp.535-543 (1968).

Holm, T. A., “Lightweight Concrete and Aggregates”, Standard Technical Publication 169C
(1994).
Hsiung C, Cheng L, Yuen Y. Experimental study on compressive strength of
rubberized concrete. Core J China 2004;182:40–2.
Janković, K. Using recycled brick as concrete aggregate. //Proceedings of 5 Triennial Int. Conf.
on Challenges in Concrete Construction. Dundee, 2002. pp. 231-240

Japan Concrete Institute: Current status and future prospects of recycled concrete 2006

Johansen, K. and T. A. Hammer, “Drying Shrinkage of Norwegian Self-Compacting

Concrete”, SINTEF Trondheim (2002).

Kasami, H., T. Ikeda, and S. Yamana, “Workability and Pumpability of Superplasticized

Concrete”, Internl. Symp. on Superplasticizers in Concrete, Ottawa, Canada (1978).

Khalaf, F. M. DeVenny, A. S. Recycling of Demolished Masonry Rubble as Coarse Aggregate in

Concrete: Review. //Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. 16(2004), pp. 331-340

Khayat, K.H. and Z. Guizani, “Use of Viscosity-Modifying Admixture to Enhance Stability of

Fluid Concrete”, ACI Materials Journal, pp.332-340 (1997).

Khayat, K.H., K. Manai, A. Trudel, “In situ mechanical properties of wall elements cast using
self-consolidating concrete”, ACI Materials Journal, pp.491-500 (1997).
Klieger, P. and A. W. Isberner, “Laboratory Studies of Blended Cements – Portland Blast
Furnace Slag Cements”, PCA Journal, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.2-22 (1967).

Kosmatka, S. H., B. Kerkhoff, and W. C. Panarese, “Design and Control of Concrete

Mixtures”, 14th Edition, Portland Cement Association (2002).

Kuroiwa, S., “High Performance Concrete in Severe Environments”, ACI SP-140, pp.147-161
(1993).
120
Lachemi, M., Hossain, K., Lambros, V., Bouzoubaa, N., (2003). Development of Cost Effective
Self-Consolidating Concrete Incorporating Fly Ash, Slag Cement, or Viscosity-Modifying
Admixtures. ACI Materials Journal, 100(5), pp. 419-425.

Malešev M., Radonjanin V. and Marinković S., “Recycled Concrete as Aggregate for Structural
Concrete Production” April 2010.

Mindess, S., J. F. Young, and D. Darwin, “Concrete”, Second Edition, Prentice Hall (2003).

Murali, G., Vivek, V. C. M., Rajan, G., Janani, G. J., ShifuJajan, N. and Ramya, S. R. (2012),
Experimental Study On Recycled Aggregate Concrete. / International Journal of Engineering
Research and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622.

Naik, T. R. and S. Singh, “Influence of fly ash on setting and hardening characteristics of
concrete systems”, Materials Journal, Vol.94, Issue 5, pp.355-360 (1997).

Najim KB, Hall MR. A review of the fresh/hardened properties and applications
for plain- (PRC) and self-compacting rubberized concrete (SCRC). Constr Build
Mater 2010;24(11):2043–51.

Neville, A. M., “Hardened Concrete: Physical and Mechanical Aspects”, ACI (1971).

Neville, A. M., “Properties of concrete”, Third Edition, Longman Scientific & Technical, UK
(1993).

Nmai, C. and B. Violetta, “The Use of Flowing Concrete in Congested Areas”, Concrete
International, pp.53-57 (1996).

Oh, S. G., Noguchi, T., Tomosawa, F., (1997). Evaluation of pass ability of self-compacting
concrete by visualization mode.In proceeding of Japan concrete institute, 19(1), pp. 37-42.

Okamura, H, “Self-Compacting High-Performance Concrete”, Concrete International, pp.50-

54 (1997).

Okamura, H., Ozawa, K., (1995). Mix design for self-compacting concrete. Concrete Library of
JSCE, 25, pp. 107-120.
121
Okamura, H., Ouchi, M., Hibino, M., Ozawa, K., (1998). A rational mix-design method for
mortar in self-compacting concrete. In the 6th East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural
Engineering and Construction, Taipei, ROC, 2, pp. 1307-1312.

Okamura, H., Ouchi, M., (1999). Self-compacting concrete. Development, present use and
future. In 1st International RILEM Symposium on Self-Compacting Concrete, Skarendahl, Å.
and Petersson, Ö. , (eds). Stocknolm, Sweden, RILEM, pp. 3-14.

Okamura, H., Ouchi, M., (2003), Self-compacting concrete, Journal of Advanced Concrete
Technology, 1(1), pp. 5-15.

Oner, A., Akyuz, S., (2007). An Experimental Study on optimum usage of GGBS for the
compressive strength of concrete. Cement and Concrete Composites, 29(6), pp. 505-514.

Ouchi, M., M. Hibino, and H. Okamura, “Effect of Superplasticizer on Self-Compactability of

Fresh Concrete”, TRR 1574, pp.37-40 (1996).

Ouchi, M. and M. Hibino, “Development, Applications and Investigations of Self-compacting

Concrete”, International Workshop, Kochi, Japan (2000).

Ozawa, K., “Development of high performance concrete based on the durability design of
concrete structures”, EASEC-2, Vol. 1, pp.445-450 (1989).

Ozkul, M. H. and A. Dogan, “Properties of fresh and hardened concretes prepared by N-vinyl
copolymers”, International Conference on Concretes, Dundee, Scotland (1999).

Ozyildirim, C., “Investigation of Self-consolidating Concrete”, Paper No. 01-345, TRB (2003).

Paul J. Management of used or scrap tyres. Encycl Polym Sci Eng

1985;14:787–802.

Perry, C. and J. E. Gillott, “The influence of mortar-aggregate bond strength on the behavior of
concrete in uniaxial compression”, Cement and Concrete Research Journal, Vol. 7, Issue 5,
pp.553-564 (1977).

122
Pfeifer, D. W., “Sand replacement in structural lightweight concrete – splitting tensile
strength”, ACI Journal, pp.384-392 (1967).

Pfeifer, D. W., “Fly Ash Aggregate Lightweight Concrete”, Portland Cement Association,
R&D Bulletin 003.01T (1969).

Puri N., Kumar B., Tyagi H. (2013) Utilization of Recycled Wastes as Ingredients in Concrete
Mix, International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE)
ISSN: 2278-3075, Volume-2, Issue-2.Ramachandran, V. S., R. F. Feldman, and J. J. Beaudoin,
“Concrete Science”, Heyden & Son Ltd. (1981).

Rahman MM, Usman M, Al-Ghalib Ali A. Fundamental properties of rubber

modified self-compacting concrete (RMSCC). Constr Build Mater 2012;36:
630–7.

Ramachandran, V. S., “Concrete Admixtures Handbook”, Properties, Science, and

Technology, Noyes Publications (1984).

Roncero, J., R. Gettu, and I. Carol, “Effect of chemical admixtures on the shrinkage of cement
mortars”, ACI SP-189, pp.273-294 (1999).

Roussel, N., Nguyen, T., Yazoghli, O., Coussot, P., (2009). Passing ability of fresh concrete: A
probabilistic approach. Cement and Concrete Research, 39(3), pp. 227-232.

Roziere, E., Granger, S., Turcry, P., Loukili, A., (2007). Influence of Paste Volume on Shrinkage
Cracking and Fracture Properties of Self Compacting Concrete. Cement and Concrete
Composites, 29(8), pp. 626-636.

Ruhl, M.; Atkinson, G. The influence of recycled aggregate on stress- train relation of concrete.
// Darmstadt Concrete.14(1999).

Russell, H. G., “High Performance Concrete – from buildings to bridges”, Concrete

International, Vol. 19, No. 8, pp.62-63 (1997).

Russell, P., “Concrete Admixtures”, Eyre & Spottiswoode Publications Ltd. (1983).
123
Schutter, D., (2005). The European Guidelines for Self-Compacting, Specification, Production
and Use. [Online] Available at: www.efnarc.org. [Accessed 7/10/2014].

Shadle, R., Somerville, S., (2002). The Benefits of Utilizing Fly Ash in Producing Self-
Compacting Concrete. In 1st North American Conference on the Design and Use of Self-
Consolidating Concrete, Chicago, pp. 217-222.

Singh S. K., Sharma P. C. (2007), Use of Recycled Aggregate in Concrete- A Paradigm Shift

Sobolev, K. G., “High Performance Concretes”, International Conference on Concretes,

Dundee, Scotland (1999).

St John, D. A., “Concrete Petrography”, A handbook of investigative techniques, Wiley &

Sons, New York (1998).

Su, N., Hsu, K., Chai, H., (2004). A simple mix design method for self-compacting concrete.
Cement and Concrete Research, 31(12), pp. 1799-1807.

Su, N., Miao, B., (2003). A new method for the mix design of medium strength flowing concrete
with low cement content. Cement and Concrete Composites, 25(2), pp. 215-222.

Subramanian, S., “Interfaces in concrete – Achieving performance”, International Conference

on Concretes, Dundee, Scotland (1999).

Subramanian, S. and D. Chattopadhyay, “Experiments for mix proportioning of self-

compacting concrete”, The Indian Concrete Journal, pp.13-20 (2002).

Sudhir, P.P., Ganesh S. I., Prasant D. S.., (2013) “Recycled Coarse Aggregates”, International
Journal of Advanced Technology in Civil Engineering, ISSN: 2231 – 5721, Volume-2, Issue-1

Takada, K., “Influence of chemical admixtures on the mix proportion of general purpose self-
compacting concrete”, International Conference on Concretes, Dundee, Scotland (1999).
Thrane, L. N., (2007), Form filling with self-compacting concrete. Ph.D. Thesis, Danish
Technological Institute. ISBN 97-8877-8772-473.

124
Topcu IB, Bilir T. Experimental investigation of some fresh and hardened
properties of rubberized self-compacting concrete. Mater Des 2009;30:
3056–65.

Uysal, M., Sumer, M., (2011).Performance of self-compacting concrete containing different

mineral admixtures. Construction and Building Materials, 25(11), p. 4112–4120.

Whiting, D, “Effects of High-Range Water Reducers on Some Properties of Fresh and

Hardened Concretes”, Portland Cement Association, R & D Bulletin 061.01T (1979).

Whiting, D, and W. Dziedzic, “Effects of Conventional and High-Range Water Reducers on

Concrete Properties”, Portland Cement Association, R & D Bulletin 107T (1979).

Whiting, D, “Strength and Durability of Concretes Containing Fly Ash”, Portland Cement
Association, R & D Bulletin 099.01T (1989).

Yong, P.C. and Teo, D. C. L.,” Utilization of Recycled Aggregate as Coarse Aggregate in
Concrete”, UNIMAS E-Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 1: issue 1 /August 2009.

125
 APPENDIX A

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH RESULTS

Formula of Compressive Strength is ,

fc'=P/A
Here,
fc'= Concrete Compressive Strength (MPa)
P= Maximum Load (KN)
A=Cross Sectional Area of Specimen (m^2)

Table A1 Compressive Strength 7 days

Calibration Equation : Y=1.007X-3.829 (KN)

Mixture Sample Reading Actual Compressive Average (MPa)

Designation (KN) Strength(ksi) (ksi)
SCC 1 223.5 3.956 3.628 25.03
2 187.0 3.299
Rubber 10% 1 83.5 1.435 1.507 10.40
2 91.5 1.579
Rubber 15% 1 57.2 1.676 1.553 10.7
2 70.7 1.430
Rubber 20% 1 96.4 1.667 1.611 11.10
2 90.1 1.554
Recycle 30% 1 202.3 3.574 3.448 23.76
2 188.2 3.321
Recycle 40% 1 205.2 3.627 3.585 24.70
2 200.5 3.542
Recycle 50% 1 211.9 3.747 3.793 26.13
2 217.0 3.839

126
Table A2 Compressive Strength 28 days

Calibration Equation : Y=0.998X-110.8 (KN)

Mixture Sample Reading Actual Compressive Average (MPa)
Designation (KN) Strength(ksi) (ksi)
SCC 1 428 5.657 6.174 42.51
2 486 6.690
Rubber 10% 1 237 2.248 2.132 14.67
2 224 2.016
Rubber 15% 1 211 2.241 2.202 13.93
2 205 2.163
Rubber 20% 1 223 1.998 1.918 13.21
2 214 1.837
Recycle 30% 1 398 5.122 5.077 34.98
2 393 5.032
Recycle 40% 1 410 5.355 5.136 35.39
2 389 4.916
Recycle 50% 1 416 5.443 5.363 36.95
2 407 5.282

Table A3 Compressive Strength 56 days

Calibration Equation : Y=0.998X-110.8 (KN)

Type Sample Reading Actual Compressive Average (MPa)

(KN) Strength(ksi) (ksi)
SCC 1 535 7.567 7.531 51.89
2 531 7.495
Rubber 10% 1 172 2.679 2.752 18.96
2 180 2.824
Rubber 15% 1 120 1.741 2.267 15.62
2 114 2.793
Rubber 20% 1 126 1.849 1.976 13.62
2 140 2.102
Recycle 30% 1 400 5.157 5.469 37.68
2 436 5.780
Recycle 40% 1 446 5.978 5.835 40.20
2 430 5.692
Recycle 50% 1 450 6.050 5.961 41.07
2 440 5.871

127
 APPENDIX B

SPLITING TENSILE STRENGTH RESULTS

Tensile strength of concrete measured from following formula.

Here, ft = Splitting Tensile Strength (MPa)

P= Maximum Applied Load by Testing Machine (N)
L= Length (mm)
D= Diameter (mm)

Table B1 Spliting Tensile Strength 7 days

Calibration Equation : Y=1.0091X-23.723 (KN)

Type Sample Reading Actual Tensile Average (MPa)
(KN) Strength (psi) (psi)
SCC 1 58 156 165 1.14
2 62 174
Rubber 10% 1 60 165 147 1.01
2 52 129
Rubber 15% 1 40 75 107 0.74
2 54 138
Rubber 20% 1 52 129 120 0.83
2 48 111
Recycle 30% 1 70 210 192 1.32
2 62 174
Recycle 40% 1 62 174 192 1.32
2 70 210
Recycle 50% 1 64 183 174 1.20
2 60 165

128
Table B2 Spliting Tensile Strength 28 days

Calibration Equation : Y=1.0091X-23.723 (KN)

Type Sample Reading Actual Tensile Average (MPa)
(KN) Strength(psi) (psi)
SCC 1 130 481 486 3.35
2 132 490
Rubber 10% 1 90 301 297 2.05
2 88 292
Rubber 15% 1 68 201 201 1.39
2 68 201
Rubber 20% 1 58 156 183 1.26
2 70 210
Recycle 30% 1 92 310 306 2.11
2 90 301
Recycle 40% 1 94 319 373 2.57
2 118 427
Recycle 50% 1 130 481 441 3.04
2 112 400

Table B3 Spliting Tensile Strength 56 days

Calibration Equation : Y=1.0091X-23.723 (KN)

Type Sample Reading Actual Tensile Average (MPa)
(KN) Strength(psi) (psi)
SCC 1 112 400 396 2.73
2 110 391
Rubber 10% 1 110 391 387 2.67
2 108 382
Rubber 15% 1 92 310 314 2.16
2 96 328
Rubber 20% 1 79 251 240 1.65
2 74 229
Recycle 30% 1 110 391 378 2.61
2 104 364
Recycle 40% 1 78 247 261 1.80
2 84 274
Recycle 50% 1 130 481 369 2.54
2 80 256

129
 APPENDIX C

MODULUS OF ELASTICITY TEST RESULTS

Extensometer Range : 0.002-5mm

Extensometer Constant : 0.002
Gauge Length : 75mm
Load Calibration Equation: Y=0.975X-573.1 lb

Table C1 Modulus of Elasticity Test Results 28 days

Load Reading Actual Load Stress Average

Mix Extensometer Strain (lb) (lb) (psi) Stress
Reading
(mm) *10E-05 Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample (psi)
(mm/mm) 1 2 1 2 1 2
2 5.333 3800 4000 3132 3327 249.24 264.75 257
(1.77)
4 10.667 7000 6900 6251 6154 497.44 489.72 493
(3.40)
SCC 6 16.000 9900 10000 9080 9177 722.56 730.28 726
(5.00)
8 21.333 12000 12400 11127 11516 885.46 916.41 901
(6.21)
10 26.667 14300 15000 13370 14052 1063.9 1118.2 1091
(7.52)
1 2.667 1750 1400 1133 792 90.16 63.03 77
(0.53)
2 5.333 2600 2000 1962 1377 156.13 109.58 133
(0.92)
Rubber 3 8.000 3100 2600 2445 1962 194.57 156.13 175
10% (1.21)
4 10.667 3800 3250 3132 2596 249.24 206.58 228
(1.57)
5 13.333 4500 3800 3814 3132 303.51 249.24 276
(1.90)
1 2.667 1500 650 889 61 70.74 4.85 38
(0.26)
2 5.333 2700 1400 2059 792 163.85 63.03 113
(0.79)
Rubber 3 8.000 4000 1900 3327 1279 264.75 101.78 183
15% (1.26)
4 10.667 5400 2550 4692 1913 373.38 152.23 263
(1.81)
5 13.333 6500 3000 5764 2352 458.68 187.17 323
(2.23)

130
 Load Reading Actual Load Stress Average
Extensometer Strain (lb) (lb) (psi) Stress
Reading
Mix (mm) *10E-05 Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample psi
(mm/mm) 1 2 1 2 1 2 (MPa)
1 2.667 1600 1000 987 402 78.54 31.99 55
(0.38)
2 5.333 2400 1500 1767 889 140.61 70.74 106
(0.73)
Rubber 3 8.000 3250 2150 2596 1523 206.58 121.19 164
20% (1.13)
4 10.667 4200 2900 3522 2254 280.27 179.37 230
(1.58)
5 13.333 5000 3550 4302 2888 342.34 229.82 286
(1.97)
1 2.667 1500 1000 889 402 70.74 32.00 51
(0.35)
2 5.333 2300 1900 1670 1279 132.89 101.78 117
(0.81)
Recycle 3 8.000 3200 2700 2547 2060 202.68 163.93 183
30% (1.26)
4 10.667 4400 4900 3717 4204 295.79 334.54 315
(2.17)
5 13.333 5100 5400 4399 4692 350.06 373.38 363
(2.50)
2 5.333 1800 3000 1182 2352 94.06 187.17 141
(0.97)
4 10.667 4100 5400 3424 4692 272.47 373.38 323
(2.23)
Recycle 6 16.000 6700 7600 5959 6837 474.20 544.07 509
40% (3.51)
8 21.333 8500 9700 7714 8884 613.86 706.97 660
(4.55)
10 26.667 10900 11700 10055 10834 800.15 862.14 831
(5.73)
2 5.333 3000 3100 2352 2445 187.17 194.57 191
(1.32)
4 10.667 5200 5400 4497 4692 357.86 373.38 366
(2.52)
Recycle 6 16.000 8100 7700 7324 6934 582.83 551.79 567
50% (3.91)
8 21.333 10500 9800 9664 8982 769.07 714.76 715
(4.92)
10 26.667 12600 11900 11712 11029 932.01 877.66 905
(6.24)

131
Test results of 28 days are shown graphically on figure below to measure modulus of elasticity.

SCC
E=29321 MPa
2.5
2 y = 29321x
Stress(Mpa)

1.5
1 Stress(Mpa)
0.5
Linear (Stress(Mpa))
0
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015
Strain

Rubber 10%
E=14851 MPa
2.5
2 y = 14851x
Stress(Mpa)

1.5
1 Stress(Mpa)
0.5 Linear (Stress(Mpa))
0
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015
Strain

Rubber 15%
E=16371 MPa
2.5
2 y = 16371x
Stress(Mpa)

1.5
1 Stress(Mpa)
0.5 Linear (Stress(Mpa))
0
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015
Strain

132
 Rubber 20%
E=14592 MPa
3

Stress(Mpa)
2 y = 14592x
Stress(Mpa)
1
0
Linear
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015 (Stress(Mpa))
Strain

Recycle 30%
E=18362 MPa
3
Stress(Mpa)

2 y = 18362x
Stress(Mpa)
1
0
Linear
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015 (Stress(Mpa))
Strain

Recycle 40%
E=21412 MPa
3
Stress(Mpa)

2 y = 21412x
Stress(Mpa)
1
0
Linear
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015 (Stress(Mpa))
Strain

Recycle 50%
E=23512 MPa
3
Stress(Mpa)

2 y = 23512x
Stress(Mpa)
1
0
Linear
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015
(Stress(Mpa))
Strain

Fig : C1 Modulus of Elasticity 28 days

133
Table C2 Modulus of Elasticity Test Results 56 days

Extensometer Strain Load Reading Actual Load Stress Average

Mix Reading *10E-05 (lb) (lb) (psi) Stress
(mm) (mm/mm) Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample (psi)
1 2 1 2 1 2 (MPa)
2 5.333 2800 3300 2157 2644 171.65 210.40 191
(1.32)
SCC 4 10.667 5500 6300 4790 5570 381.17 443.25 412
(2.84)
6 16.000 8500 9200 7714 8397 613.86 668.21 641
(4.42)
8 21.333 10900 11500 10054 10639 800.07 846.62 823
(5.67)
10 26.667 13400 13800 12492 12882 994.08 1025.1 1010
(6.96)
2 5.333 2500 4400 1864 3717 148.33 295.79 222
(1.53)
Rubber 4 10.667 5300 7800 4594 7032 365.58 559.59 463
10% (3.19)
6 16.000 7500 10500 6739 9664 536.27 769.04 653
(4.50)
8 21.333 9200 12900 8397 12004 668.21 955.25 812
(5.59)
10 26.667 11000 15400 10152 14442 807.87 1149.3 978
(6.74)
1 2.667 1500 1000 889 402 70.74 31.99 51
(0.35)
Rubber 2 5.333 2300 1700 1669 1084 132.82 86.26 110
15% (0.76)
3 8.000 3400 2150 2742 1523 218.20 121.19 170
(1.17)
4 10.667 5500 2600 4789 1962 381.09 156.13 269
(1.85)
5 13.333 6900 3200 6154 2547 489.72 202.68 346
(2.38)
1 2.667 3500 1300 2839 695 225.92 55.31 141
(0.97)
2 5.333 4800 2000 4107 1377 326.82 109.58 218
Rubber (1.50)
20% 3 8.000 5500 2700 4789 2059 381.09 163.85 272
(1.87)
4 10.667 6900 3800 6154 3132 489.72 249.24 370
(2.55)
5 13.333 8200 4400 7422 3717 590.63 295.79 443
(3.05)

134
 Extensometer Strain Load Reading Actual Load Stress Average
Type Reading *10E-05 (lb) (lb) (psi) Stress
(mm) (mm/mm) Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample (psi)
1 2 1 2 1 2 (Mpa)
2 5.333 4500 2800 3814 2157 303.51 171.65 238
(1.64)
Recycle 4 10.667 7100 5100 6349 4344 505.27 345.68 425
30% (2.93)
6 16.000 9400 7500 8592 6739 683.73 536.27 610
((4.20)
8 21.333 11200 9300 10347 8494 823.39 675.93 750
(5.17)
10 26.667 13200 11300 12297 10444 978.56 831.11 905
(6.24)
2 5.333 5000 5000 4302 4302 342.34 342.34 342
(2.36)
4 10.667 7400 9100 6642 8300 528.56 660.49 595
Recycle (4.09)
40% 6 16.000 9700 12500 8884 11614 706.97 924.21 816
(5.62)
8 21.333 11300 15400 10444 14442 831.11 1149.3 990
(6.82)
10 26.667 13300 18400 12394 17367 986.28 1383.1 1185
(8.16)
2 5.333 6000 6500 5277 5764 419.93 458.68 439
(3.02)
4 10.667 10800 10700 9957 9859 792.35 784.55 788
Recycle (5.43)
50% 6 16.000 14500 14400 13564 13467 1079.4 1071.7 1075
(7.41)
8 21.333 17500 17900 16489 16879 1312.2 1343.2 1328
(9.15)
10 26.667 20100 21000 19024 19902 1513.9 1583.8 1549
(10.67)

Test results of 58 days are shown graphically on figure below to measure modulus of elasticity.

135
 SCC
E=26502 MPa
8
y = 26502x
6
Stress(Mpa)
4
Stress(Mpa)
2
Linear (Stress(Mpa))
0
0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003
Strain

Rubber 10%
E=26410 MPa
3.5
3 y = 26410x
Stress(Mpa)

2.5
2
1.5
Stress(Mpa)
1
0.5 Linear (Stress(Mpa))
0
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015
Strain

Rubber 15%
E=16828 MPa
3.5
3 y = 16828x
2.5
Stress(Mpa)

2
1.5
Stress(Mpa)
1
Linear (Stress(Mpa))
0.5
0
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015
Strain

136
 Rubber 20%
E=23885 MPa
4

Stress(Mpa)
3 y = 23885x
2 Stress(Mpa)
1
0
Linear
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015 (Stress(Mpa))
Strain

Recycle 30%
E=24538 MPa
4
Stress(Mpa)

y = 24538x
2 Stress(Mpa)

0
Linear
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015 (Stress(Mpa))
Strain

Recycle 40%
E=32549 MPa
4
Stress(Mpa)

3 y = 32549x
2 Stress(Mpa)
1
0 Linear
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015 (Stress(Mpa))
Strain

Recycle 50%
E=32974 MPa
4
Stress(Mpa)

3 y = 32974x
2 Stress(Mpa)
1
0
Linear
0 0.00005 0.0001 0.00015 (Stress(Mpa))
Strain

Fig : C2 Modulus of Elasticity 56 days

137
 APPENDIX D

SIEVE ANALYSIS

Table D1 Sieve Analysis of 10% Rubber and 90% Sylhet Sand(Mix 2)

Weight of Sample taken = 472 gm

Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(kg)
#4 4.75 0 0 0 100
#8 2.36 13.2 2.80 2.80 97.2
#16 1.18 107.2 22.7 25.5 74.5
#30 0.6 192.8 40.85 66.35 33.65
#50 0.3 114.8 24.32 90.67 9.33
#100 0.15 34 7.20 97.87 2.13
#200 0.075 6.7 1.42 99.29 0.71
pan 3.1 0.66 99.95 0.05
Total 468.7 gm

Table D2 Sieve Analysis of 15% Rubber and 85% Sylhet Sand(Mix 3)

Weight of Sample taken = 460 gm

Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(kg)
#4 4.75 0 0 0 100
#8 2.36 13.5 2.93 2.93 97.07
#16 1.18 115.1 25.02 27.95 72.05
#30 0.6 227.3 49.4 77.35 22.65
#50 0.3 87.5 19.02 96.37 3.63
#100 0.15 12.9 2.81 99.18 0.82
#200 0.075 3.2 0.70 99.88 0.12
pan 0.5 0.11 99.99 0.01
Total 460 gm

138
Table D3 Sieve Analysis of 20% Rubber and 80% Sylhet Sand (Mix 4)

Weight of Sample taken = 444 gm

Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(kg)
#4 4.75 0 0 0 100
#8 2.36 7.2 1.62 1.62 98.38
#16 1.18 77.6 17.48 19.1 80.9
#30 0.6 209.2 47.11 66.21 33.79
#50 0.3 109.7 24.71 90.92 9.08
#100 0.15 29.2 6.58 97.5 2.5
#200 0.075 5.8 1.31 98.81 1.19
pan 5.0 1.13 99.94 0.06
Total 443.7 gm

Table D4 Sieve Analysis of 30% Recycled Aggregate and 70% Normal Aggregate (Mix 5)

Weight of Sample taken = 5kg

Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(kg)
1½ inch 37.5 0 0 0 100
1 inch 25 0.01 0.6 0.6 99.4
¾ inch 19 0.74 28.8 29.4 70.6
½ inch 12.5 2.21 33.4 62.8 37.2
3/8 inch 9.5 0.88 18.6 81.4 18.6
#4 4.75 1.01 17 98.4 1.6
pan 0.06 1.2 99.6 0.4
Total 4.91 kg

139
Table D5 Sieve Analysis of 40% Recycled Aggregate and 60% Normal Aggregate (Mix 6)

Weight of Sample taken = 5kg

Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(kg)
1½ inch 37.5 0 0 0 100
1 inch 25 0.01 0.2 0.2 99.8
¾ inch 19 1.46 29.2 29.4 70.6
½ inch 12.5 1.83 36.6 66 34
3/8 inch 9.5 0.59 11.8 77.8 22.2
#4 4.75 1.01 20.2 98 2
pan 0.07 1.4 99.4 0.6
Total 4.97 kg

Table D6 Sieve Analysis of 50% Recycled Aggregate and 50% Normal Aggregate (Mix 7)

Weight of Sample taken = 5kg

Sieve Sieve Amount % Retained Cumulative % Finer
Opening(mm) Retained % Retained
(kg)
1½ inch 37.5 0 0 0 100
1 inch 25 0.02 0.4 0.4 99.6
¾ inch 19 1.48 29.6 30 70
½ inch 12.5 1.98 39.6 69.6 30.4
3/8 inch 9.5 0.51 10.2 79.8 20.2
#4 4.75 0.88 17.6 97.4 2.6
pan 0.1 2 99.4 0.6
Total 4.97 kg

Gradation curves of concrete mix are given below.

140
 120
100
80

% Finer
60
40 % Finer
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: D1 Gradation Curve (Mix 2)

Rubber 15%, Sand 85%

120
100
80
% Finer

60
40
% Finer
20
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: D2 Gradation Curve (Mix 3)

Rubber 20%
120
100
80
% Finer

60
40
20 Time(s)
0
10 1 0.1 0.01
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: D3 Gradation Curve (Mix 4)

141
 Recycle 30%
120
100
80

% Finer
60
40
20 % finer
0
100 10 1
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: D4 Gradation Curve (Mix 5)

Recycled 40%
120
100
80
% Finer

60
40
20 % finer
0
100 10 1
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: D5 Gradation Curve (Mix 6)

Recycled 50%
120
100
80
% Finer

60
40
% finer
20
0
100 10 1
Sieve Opening(mm)

Fig: D6 Gradation Curve (Mix 7)

142
143
- 115 -
116
.

- 87 -
- 67 -
- 68 -
69