FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

TO INVESTIGATE THE EFFECT OF WATER QUALITY ON

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF CONCRETE
BY

TREVOR KAWASE PAUL TUSIIME

14/1/328/D/257 14/1/328/D/436

A RESEARCH REPORT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF A BACHELOR OF SCIENCE
DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

SUPERVISOR: ENG. PATRICK SEKIGINGO

MAY, 2018

1
 DECLARATION
We, KAWASE TREVOR and TUSIIME PAUL humbly declare that the content in this
research is as a result of our effort through effective research work and it has never been
submitted to any institution of higher learning for any academic award. I hereby submit this
report as part of the requirements for the award of Bachelor of Civil Engineering at Ndejje
University and that it will be used for assessment.

Signature: ……………………. Date: …………………………

KAWASE TREVOR

14/1/328/D/257

Signature: ……………………. Date: …………………………

TUSIIME PAUL

14/1/328/D/436

i
 APPROVAL
This proposal exclusively contains original work done by KAWASE TREVOR AND TUSIIME
PAUL that has not been presented for a Degree in any other University work and has been
submitted under the approval of University supervisor

Name: Eng. PATRICK SEKIGINGO

Signature: ___________________ Date: __________________

ii
 ACKNOWLEGDEMENT
We would like to acknowledge the almighty God who made it possible for us to complete this
research successfully.

We also thank our Faculty supervisor ENG. PATRICK SEKIGINGO for offering us with
technical advice and for sacrificing time whenever approached for any assistance and guidance
and the great environment of team work at each task at hand.

We would also like to express our gratitude towards key personnel, workers and fellow
colleagues at campus i.e., Ekirapa Christopher, Sengendo Amos, Mugide Juliet and Nicholas
who we worked alongside, exchanging ideas through the research period.

We would like to acknowledge our parents who provided us with financial assistance during the
research period.

iii
 ABSTRACT
Concrete is the most widely used construction material in the world. Production of Portland
cement used in concrete produces over 2.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse
gases worldwide. In addition, concrete is one of the largest water consuming industries.
Approximately 150 liters of water is required per cu. m. of concrete mixture, without considering
other applications of water at the concrete industry. Water is a critical environmental issue and
water supplies and water quality are becoming more limited worldwide.

This work carried out to assess the strength of concrete using storm water, borehole water and
swamp water in concrete mix as a comparison with the strength of concrete made by tap water.
The compressive strength of block samples of 150×150×150mm were evaluated in duration of 7,
14 and 28 days. The compressive strength was measured for each type of water and the results
show that; using storm water and borehole water is not suitable since storm water and borehole
water varied from the expected compressive strength for a 1:2:4 mix by 25.3% and 21.8%
respectively. Swamp water varied from the expected strength for a 1:2:4 mix by 14.1% making it
suitable for concreting. The performance requirements in British Standards requires that the
compressive strength of concrete cubes for a 1:2:4 mix not be more than 20% from the expected
strength of 25Mpa.

The chemical composition of the different water types from the different sources affects the
concrete strength under many considerations like; hydration process and the properties of
concrete in the future; durability of concrete.

iv
 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

OPC Ordinary Portland cement

PPC Pozzolana Portland cement
CML Central Materials Laboratory
BS British Standards
TSS Total Suspended Solids
IS Indian Standards

v
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................. i
APPROVAL ................................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEGDEMENT ............................................................................................................. iii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... iv
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ....................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... viii
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... viii
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Problem statement ............................................................................................................ 2
1.3. Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 2
1.3.1 Main objective .......................................................................................................... 2
1.3.2 Specific objective ...................................................................................................... 2
1.4. Justification ...................................................................................................................... 3
1.5. Scope of the study ............................................................................................................ 3
LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................... 4
2.1. CONCRETE DEFINITION ............................................................................................. 4
2.2. CHARACTERISTICES OF CONCRETE ....................................................................... 4
2.2.1. Advantages of concrete ............................................................................................. 4
2.3. MATERIALS FOR MAKING CONCRETE ................................................................... 7
2.3.1. Aggregates ................................................................................................................ 7
2.3.2. Cementitious binders ................................................................................................ 8
2.3.3. Water ......................................................................................................................... 9
2.3.4. Admixtures................................................................................................................ 9
2.4. HYDARTION OF CEMENT......................................................................................... 10
2.5. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ...................................................................................... 12
2.6. MIXING WATER FOR CONCRETE ........................................................................... 12
2.7. IMPURITIES IN WATER ............................................................................................. 13
2.7.1. Suspended solids ..................................................................................................... 13

vi
 2.7.2. Dissolved solids ...................................................................................................... 14
2.7.3. Dissolved organic material. .................................................................................... 14
2.8. STORM WATER ........................................................................................................... 15
METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 16
3.1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 16
3.2. SAMPLE PREPARATION............................................................................................ 16
3.2.1. Materials preparations ............................................................................................. 16
3.2.2. Water collection ...................................................................................................... 16
3.3. CONCRETE PRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 16
3.4. SLUMP TEST ................................................................................................................ 17
3.5. CURING......................................................................................................................... 18
3.6. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST ............................................................................ 18
3.7. WATER SAMPLES ANALYSES ................................................................................. 18
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 19
4.1. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL COMPOSITION OF THE WATER SAMPLES ....... 19
4.2 SLUMP TEST RESULTS ................................................................................................... 19
4.3. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH RESULTS .................................................................... 20
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................... 26
5.1. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 26
5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................... 26
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 28
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 29
APPENDIX A: WATER SAMPLE TEST RESULTS ............................................................. 29
APPENDIX B: CUBE WEIGHTS ............................................................................................ 32
APPENDIX C: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH RESULTS ..................................................... 35
APPENDIX D: PICTURES ...................................................................................................... 38

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Three failure modes of materials ............................................................................................... 6
Figure 2-2: Toughness of steel and concrete. ............................................................................................... 6
Figure 4-1: 7, 14 and 28 days’ compressive strengths for C20 ................................................................... 21
Figure 4-2: 28 days’ compressive strengths for C20 ................................................................................... 22
Figure 4-3: 7, 14 and 28 days’ compressive strengths for C25 ................................................................... 23
Figure 4-4: 28 days’ compressive strengths for C25 ................................................................................... 24

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Major compounds of ordinary Portland cement ......................................................................... 9
Table 4-1: Physical and Chemical composition of the water samples ........................................................ 19
Table 4.2: Slump test results ....................................................................................................................... 19
Table 4-3: 7, 14 and 28 Days Average Crushing Load Strength for Class C20............................................. 20
Table 4-4: 7, 14 and 28 Days Average Compressive Strength for Class C20 ............................................... 20
Table 4-5: 7, 14 and 28 Days Average Crushing Load Strength for Class C25............................................. 22
Table 4-6: 7, 14 and 28 Days Average Compressive Strength for Class C25 ............................................... 23

viii
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background
Water is an important ingredient of concrete, which not only actively participates in the
hydration of cement but also contributes to the workability of fresh concrete. Cement is a
mixture of complex compounds, the reaction of cement with water leads to its setting and
hardening.

All the compounds present in the cement are anhydrous but when brought into contact with
water they get hydrolyzed, forming hydrated compounds. Since water helps to form the strength
giving cement gel, the quality of water is to be critically monitored and controlled during the
process of concrete making.

Impure water used to make concrete can cause problems when setting or in causing premature
failure of the structure. And it has been found (Abram, 1924) that impurity in water samples
used in mixing concrete can impair the strength of concrete especially the compressive strength
of concrete. In a similar way, water used for curing concrete can impair the strength of the
concrete (Smith, 1976)

As water, universally the most abundant and naturally available solvent can contain a large
number of impurities ranging from less to very high concentrations of them. In practice, very
often, great control on properties of cement and aggregate is exercised, but the control on the
quality of water is often neglected. A popular yard-stick to the suitability of water for mixing
concrete is that, if it is fit for drinking it is fit for making concrete. This does not appear to be a
true statement for all conditions.

The concrete mixing water is generally required to comply with the standards of American
society for testing and materials (ASTM). The standards specified for various aspects of water do
not represent the true picture of their purpose on setting and strength development of concrete.

Even though the basic requirement for water for concreting is its portability, the question that
comes to mind is the availability of potable water for concreting. In Uganda for example,
provision of water to meet domestic demand has not been fulfilled.

As of June 2017, the average access to safe water in rural areas was estimated at 70% which is a
3% increase from 67% as of June 2016. The main technology options used for water supply
improvements in rural areas include deep boreholes (42%), shallow wells (25%), and protected

1
springs (21%); others include tap stands and kiosks of piped schemes and rainwater harvesting
tanks. (Ministry of Water and Environment, 2017)

If the potable water available cannot meet the domestic requirement, it will be difficult for an
average contractor to comply with the requirement for mixing water in the contract document.

The contractors would seek for alternative means by using available surface water once it is
clean, clear and of little or no odor for concrete work without testing its suitability. In rural areas
of Uganda, most of the contractors rely of water that is collected in ditches by storm water
trenches, boreholes, shallow wells and unprotected springs.

1.2. Problem statement

Cement as a binder that holds and forms a strong bond with other composite materials concrete
such as fine and coarse aggregates. The binding power of cement can only be activated through
the application of water. Water is regarded as an indispensable ingredient as the hydration of
cement is possible only in its presence.

The quality of mixing water affects the setting, hardening and strength of concrete. Great control
on properties of cement and aggregate is exercised, but the control on the quality of water is
often neglected. Sometimes water with a high content of suspended solids is used for concreting
works and less caution is taken. This affects the strength and serviceability of structures since
these depend on the properties of concrete with which the structure is constructed.

The quality of water in the mix plays a vital role on the strength of the concrete. Due to the
scarcity of potable water in rural areas, contractors have resorted to collecting storm water,
borehole water, swamp water or swallow well waters which is used for concreting works and
curing. In common practice, the collected water collected is not tested for suitability which might
not achieve the required class of concrete as stated in the contract.

1.3. Objectives
1.3.1 Main objective

To investigate the effect of water quality on the compressive strength of concrete.

1.3.2 Specific objective

a) To determine the parameters in the different sources of water from different sampling
sources and points.
b) To develop a mix design of concrete attaining C15, C20 and C25 using the different
sources of water.
c) To ascertain the compressive strength of the concrete cubes at 7 days, 14 days and 28
days.

2
1.4. Justification
In order to achieve durability, serviceability and any other purpose for a structure, concrete
mixed at the site requires special quality control which should be carried out during preparation,
batching, mixing and placing of tile concrete mix.

This research will investigate on how the compressive strength of concrete can be affected when
mixed with water from different sources. This will ensure better quality control exercised on the
quality of water used for concreting works in order to achieve a durable structure in rural areas.

A practical recourse for evaluating the effect of using water of questionable quality is to make
comparative tests for times of set and strength of concrete between water from the different
sources and clean water in order to also achieve the right amount of water that can be used in a
mix design that will produce the desired class of concrete.

1.5. Scope of the study

This research covers the effects of storm water, swamp water, borehole water and tap water
(control) on the compressive strength of concrete. The water samples used in the investigation
were collected from Ndejje University catchment area with exception of the tap water which was
collected from Kampala.

The study involved determination of a few water quality parameters for the different water
samples in order to determine their suitability.

3
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. CONCRETE DEFINITION

Concrete is a composite material composed of coarse granular material (the aggregate or filler)
embedded in a hard matrix of material (the cement or binder) that fills the space among the
aggregate particles and glues them together (Li, 2011).

Concrete’s versatility, durability, sustainability, and economy have made it the world’s most
widely used construction material. Concrete is the most widely used construction material in the
world, and its popularity can be attributed to two aspects. First, concrete is used for many
different structures, such as dams, pavements, building frames, or bridges, much more than any
other construction material. Second, the amount of concrete used is much more than any other
material. Its worldwide production exceeds that of steel by a factor of 10 in tonnage and by more
than a factor of 30 in volume. (Li, 2011).

Concrete is produced in a cruder way and its quality varies considerably. Even the quality of
cement, the binder of concrete, is guaranteed by the manufacturer in a manner similar to that of
steel; however, the quality of concrete is hardly guaranteed because of many other factors, such
as aggregates, mixing procedures, and skills of the operators of concrete production, placement,
and consolidation.

2.2. CHARACTERISTICES OF CONCRETE

2.2.1. Advantages of concrete

a) Economical: Concrete is the most inexpensive and the most readily available
material in the world. The cost of production of concrete is low compared with other
engineered construction materials. The three major components in concrete are water,
aggregate, and cement. Compared with steels, plastics, and polymers, these
components are the most inexpensive, and are available in every corner of the world.
This enables concrete to be produced worldwide at very low cost for local markets,
thus avoiding the transport expenses necessary for most other materials.

b) Ambient temperature-hardened material: Because cement is a low-temperature

bonded inorganic material and its reaction occurs at room temperature, concrete can
gain its strength at ambient temperature. No high temperature is needed.

4
c) Ability to be cast: Fresh concrete is flow able like a liquid and hence can be poured
into various formworks to form different desired shapes and sizes right on a
construction site. Hence, concrete can be cast into many different configurations.

d) Energy efficient: Compared with steel, the energy consumption of concrete

production is low. The energy required to produce plain concrete is only 450–750
kWh/ton and that of reinforced concrete is 800–3200 kWh/ton, while structural steel
requires 8000 kWh/ton or more to make.

e) Excellent resistance to water: Unlike wood (timber) and steel, concrete can be
hardened in water and can withstand the action of water without serious deterioration,
which makes concrete an ideal material for building structures to control, store, and
transport water, such as pipelines, dams, and submarine structures.

f) High-temperature resistance: Concrete conducts heat slowly and is able to store

considerable quantities of heat from the environment. Moreover, the main hydrate
that provides binding to aggregates in concrete, calcium silicate hydrate (C–S–H),
will not be completely dehydrated until 910oC. Thus, concrete can withstand high
temperatures much better than wood and steel. Even in a fire, a concrete structure can
withstand heat for 2–6 hours, leaving sufficient time for people to be rescued. This is
why concrete is frequently used to build up protective layers for a steel structure.

g) Less maintenance required: Under normal conditions, concrete structures do not

need coating or painting as protection for weathering, while for a steel or wooden
structure, it is necessary. Moreover, the coatings and paintings have to be replaced
few years.

2.2.2. Limitations

a) Quasi-brittle failure mode: The failure mode of materials can be classified into
three categories: brittle failure, quasi-brittle failure, and ductile failure, as shown in
the Figure below.

5
 Figure 2-1: Three failure modes of materials

Figure 2-2: Toughness of steel and concrete.

Materials exhibiting a strain-softening behavior (Figure 1-12b) are called quasi-brittle

materials. Both brittle and quasi-brittle materials fail suddenly without giving a large
deformation as a warning sign. Concrete is a type of quasi-brittle material with low
fracture toughness.

b) Low tensile strength: Concrete has different values in compression and tension
strength. Its tension strength is only about 1/10 of its compressive strength for
normal-strength concrete, or lower for high-strength concrete. To improve the tensile
strength of concrete, fiber-reinforced concrete and polymer concrete have been
developed.

c) Low toughness (ductility): Toughness is usually defined as the ability of a material

to
consume energy. Toughness can be evaluated by the area of a load–displacement
curve.
Compared to steel, concrete has very low toughness, with a value only about 1/50 to
1/100 of that of steel, as shown in Figure 2-2. Adding fibers is a good way to improve
the toughness of concrete.

d) Formwork is needed: Fresh concrete is in a liquid state and needs formwork to hold
its shape and to support its weight. Formwork can be made of steel or wood. The
formwork is expensive because it is labor intensive and time-consuming. To improve
efficiency, precast techniques have been developed.

e) Long curing time: The design index for concrete strength is the 28-day compression
strength. Hence, full strength development needs a month at ambient temperature.
The
improvement measure to reduce the curing period is steam curing or microwave
curing.

6
 f) Working with cracks: Even for reinforced concrete structure members, the tension
side has a concrete cover to protect the steel bars. Due to the low tensile strength, the
concrete cover cracks. To solve the crack problem, pre-stressed concrete is
developed, and it is also realized as a third-generation concrete. Most reinforced
concrete structures have existing cracks on their tension sides while carrying the
service load.

2.3. MATERIALS FOR MAKING CONCRETE

2.3.1. Aggregates

Aggregates constitute a skeleton of concrete. Approximately three-quarters of the volume of

conventional concrete is occupied by aggregate. It is inevitable that a constituent occupying
such a large percentage of the mass should contribute important properties to both the fresh
and hardened product. Aggregate is usually viewed as an inert dispersion in the cement paste.
However, strictly speaking, aggregate is not truly inert because physical, thermal, and,
sometimes, chemical properties can influence the performance of concrete (Neville, 1990).

2.3.1.1. Effects of aggregates

a) Aggregate in fresh and plastic concrete: When concrete is freshly mixed, the
aggregates are suspended in the cement–water–air bubble paste. The behavior of fresh
concrete, such as fluidity, cohesiveness, and rheological behavior, is largely
influenced by the amount, type, surface texture, and size gradation of the aggregate.
The selection of aggregate has to meet the requirement of the end use, i.e., what type
of structure to be built.

b) Aggregate in hardened concrete: Although there is little chemical reaction between

the aggregate and cement paste, the aggregate contributes many qualities to the
hardened concrete. In addition to reducing the cost, aggregate in concrete can reduce
the shrinkage and creep of cement paste. Moreover, aggregates have a big influence
on stiffness, unit weight, strength, thermal properties, bond, and wear resistance of
concrete.

2.3.1.2. Classification of aggregates

Aggregates can be divided into several categories according to different criteria, such as
size, source, and unit weight. Classification of aggregates in accordance with size:

a) Coarse aggregate: Aggregates predominately retained on a No. 4 (4.75-mm) sieve

are classified as coarse aggregate. Generally, the size of coarse aggregate ranges from
5 to 150 mm. For normal concrete used for structural members such as beams and

7
 columns, the maximum size of coarse aggregate is about 25 mm. For mass concrete
used for dams or deep foundations, the maximum size can be as large as 150 mm.

b) Fine aggregate (sand): Aggregates passing through a No. 4 (4.75 mm) sieve and
predominately retained on a No. 200 (75 µm) sieve are classified as fine aggregates.
River sand is the most commonly used fine aggregate. In addition, crushed rock fines
can be used as fine aggregate. However, the finish of concrete with crushed rock fines
is not as good as that with river sand

2.3.1.3. Characteristics of aggregates suitable for concrete works

To produce high-quality concrete, ensure that the aggregate is clean, hard, strong,
durable, and round or cubical in shape.

Organic matter, dirt, silt, clay, or chemicals may cause finished concrete to deteriorate by
inhibiting the bond between the cement paste and the aggregate or by reacting with the
constituents of the cement. Excessive fines may also inhibit bonding and produce a mix
that is structurally weak and susceptible to breakdown by weathering.

Wash the aggregate to remove harmful ingredients. To determine mix proportions, ensure
that the aggregate is in a saturated, surface-dry condition or adjust the water-to-cement
ratio to compensate for the amount of water contained in the aggregate.

Aggregate should be strong and resistant to abrasion from weathering and wear. Weak,
friable, laminated, or very absorptive aggregate particles are likely to cause deterioration
of the finished concrete. Inspect aggregate frequently to disclose weaknesses.

2.3.2. Cementitious binders

2.3.2.1. Classification of binders

Based on the composition, the binder can be classified into organic and inorganic. An
organic binder can be easily burned and thus cannot stand with fire. Polymer and asphalt
are two commonly used organic binders.

Inorganic binders are usually made of different natural minerals. The inorganic binder
can be further classified into non-hydraulic cement and hydraulic cement. Typical
examples of non-hydraulic cement are gypsum and lime.

The main difference in composition between two types of inorganic cements is that the
hydraulic cement contains some amounts of clayey impurities (silicate composition).
Examples of hydraulic cement include hydraulic lime, pozzolan cement, and Portland
cement.

8
 2.3.2.2. Portland cement

Portland cement (PC) concrete is the most popular and widely used building material, due
to the availability of the basic raw materials all over the world, and its ease of use in
preparing and fabricating all sorts of shapes.

Table 2-1: Major compounds of ordinary Portland cement

Compound Oxide Color Common Weight
Composition Name Percentage
Tricalcium silicate C3 S White Alite 50
Dicalcium silicate C2 S White Belite 25
Tricalcium aluminate C3 A white/grey n/a 12
Tetracalcium C4AF Black Ferrite 8
aluminoferrite

2.3.3. Water

Water is an important ingredient of concrete, and a properly designed concrete mixture, typically
with 15 to 25% water by volume, will possess the desired workability for fresh concrete and the
required durability and strength for hardened concrete. The roles of water are for hydration and
workability.

The total amount of water in concrete and the water-to-cement ratio may be the most critical
factors in the production of good-quality concrete. Too much water reduces concrete strength,
while too little makes the concrete unworkable. Because concrete must be both strong and
workable, a careful selection of the cement-to-water ratio and total amount of water are required
when making concrete (Popovics, 1992).

As stated by Abrams' law, a lower water-to-cement ratio yields a stronger, more durable
concrete,
whereas more water gives a freer-flowing concrete with a higher slump (Taha, 2012). Impure
water used to make concrete can cause problems when setting or in causing premature failure of
the structure.

2.3.4. Admixtures

Mineral admixtures are finely divided siliceous materials that are added to concrete during
mixing in relatively large amounts. They are those ingredients in concrete other than hydraulic
cement, supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), water, aggregates, and fiber
reinforcement that are added to the mixture immediately before or during mixing.

They are in the form of powder or fluids and are added to the concrete to give it certain
characteristics not obtainable with plain concrete mixes. There are a variety of chemical

9
admixtures available for use in concrete mixtures to modify fresh and hardened concrete
properties. The four commonly used mineral admixtures are silica fume, slag, fly ash, and
metakaoline.

The major reasons for using chemical admixtures in concrete mixtures are:

a) To achieve certain properties in concrete more effectively than by other means.

b) To maintain the quality of concrete during the stages of mixing, transporting, placing,
finishing, and curing (especially in adverse weather conditions or intricate placements).
c) To overcome certain emergencies during concreting operations.
d) Economy benefits.
e) Decrease hydration heat
f) Improve the workability of fresh concrete.
g) Enhance strength, and the durability of hardened concrete.

2.4. HYDARTION OF CEMENT

The concrete (or specifically, the cement in it) needs moisture to hydrate and cure (harden).
When concrete dries, it actually stops getting stronger. Concrete with too little water may be dry
but is not fully reacted. The properties of such a concrete would be less than that of a wet
concrete. The reaction of water with the cement in concrete is extremely important to its
properties and reactions may continue for many years.

When water is added to cement, each of the compounds undergoes hydration and contributes to
the final concrete product. Only the calcium silicates contribute to strength. Tricalcium silicate is
responsible for most of the early strength (first 7 days). Dicalcium silicate, which reacts more
slowly, contributes only to the strength at later times. The equation for the hydration of
tricalcium silicate is given by:

Tricalcium silicate + Water → Calcium silicate hydrate + Calcium hydroxide + heat

2 Ca3SiO5 + 7 H2O → 3CaO.2SiO2.4H2O + 3 Ca(OH)2 + 173.6kJ

Upon the addition of water, tricalcium silicate rapidly reacts to release calcium ions, hydroxide
ions, and a large amount of heat. The pH quickly rises to over 12 because of the release of
alkaline hydroxide (OH-) ions. This initial hydrolysis slows down quickly after it starts resulting
in a decrease in heat evolved.

The reaction slowly continues producing calcium and hydroxide ions until the system becomes
saturated. Once this occurs, the calcium hydroxide starts to crystallize. Simultaneously, calcium
silicate hydrate begins to form. Ions precipitate out of solution accelerating the reaction of

10
tricalcium silicate to calcium and hydroxide ions. (Le Chatlier's principle). The evolution of heat
is then dramatically increased.

The formation of the calcium hydroxide and calcium silicate hydrate crystals provide "seeds"
upon which more calcium silicate hydrate can form. The calcium silicate hydrate crystals grow
thicker making it more difficult for water molecules to reach the un-hydrated tricalcium silicate.
The speed of the reaction is now controlled by the rate at which water molecules diffuse through
the calcium silicate hydrate coating. This coating thickens over time causing the production of
calcium silicate hydrate to become slower and slower.

Dicalcium silicate also affects the strength of concrete through its hydration. Dicalcium silicate
reacts with water in a similar manner compared to tricalcium silicate, but much more slowly. The
heat released is less than that by the hydration of tricalcium silicate because the dicalcium
silicate is much less reactive. The products from the hydration of dicalcium silicate are the same
as those for tricalcium silicate:

Dicalcium silicate + Water → Calcium silicate hydrate + Calcium hydroxide +heat

2 Ca2SiO4 + 5H2O → 3CaO.2SiO2.4H2O + Ca(OH)2 + 58.6 kJ

The other major components of portland cement, tricalcium aluminate and tetracalcium
aluminoferrite also react with water. Their hydration chemistry is more complicated as they
involve reactions with the gypsum as well. Because these reactions do not contribute
significantly to strength.

The strength of concrete is very much dependent upon the hydration reaction just discussed.
Water plays a critical role, particularly the amount used. The strength of concrete increases when
less water is used to make concrete. The hydration reaction itself consumes a specific amount of
water. Concrete is actually mixed with more water than is needed for the hydration reactions.

This extra water is added to give concrete sufficient workability. Flowing concrete is desired to
achieve proper filling and composition of the forms. The water not consumed in the hydration
reaction will remain in the microstructure pore space. These pores make the concrete weaker due
to the lack of strength-forming calcium silicate hydrate bonds. Some pores will remain no matter
how well the concrete has been compacted.

Low water to cement ratio leads to high strength but low workability. High water to cement ratio
leads to low strength, but good workability.

Time is also an important factor in determining concrete strength. Concrete hardens as time
passes because the hydration reactions get slower and slower as the tricalcium silicate hydrate
forms. It takes a great deal of time for all of the bonds to form which determine concrete's
strength. It is common to use a 28-day test to determine the relative strength of concrete.

11
2.5. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Compressive strength or compression strength is the capacity of a material or structure to
withstand loads tending to reduce size, as opposed to tensile strength, which withstands loads
tending to elongate.

For designers, compressive strength is one of the most important engineering properties of
concrete. It is a standard industrial practice that the concrete is classified based on grades. This
grade is nothing but the Compressive Strength of the concrete cube or cylinder. Cube or Cylinder
samples are usually tested under a compression testing machine to obtain the compressive
strength of concrete.

The compressive strength of concrete is given in terms of the characteristic compressive strength
of 150 mm size cubes tested at 28 days (fck). The characteristic strength is defined as the strength
of the concrete below which not more than 5% of the test results are expected to fall.

The compressive strength of concrete is determined in batching plant laboratories for every batch
in order to maintain the desired quality of concrete during casting. The strength of concrete is
required to calculate the strength of the members. Concrete specimens are a cast and tested under
the action of compressive loads to determine the strength of concrete.

2.6. MIXING WATER FOR CONCRETE

The quality of the mixing water for production of concrete can influence the setting time, the
strength development of concrete and the protection of the reinforcement against corrosion.
When assessing the suitability of water of unknown quality for the production of concrete, both
the composition of the water and the application of the concrete to be produced should be
considered.

In general, the suitability of water for the production of concrete depends upon its origin.
Portable water is considered as suitable for use in concrete. Such water needs no testing. (British
Standard EN 1008, 2002)

Water can exist in a solid form as ice, a liquid form as water, or a gaseous form as vapor. Mixing
water is the free water encountered in freshly mixed concrete. It has three main functions:

a) It reacts with the cement powder, thus producing hydration products.

b) It acts as a lubricant, contributing to the workability of the fresh mixture.
c) It secures the necessary space in the paste for the development of hydration products.

The amount of water added for adequate workability is always greater than that needed for
complete hydration of the cement in practice. Unlike other raw materials, the raw water supply

12
varies significantly in quality, both from one geographical region to another and from season to
season.

Water derived from an upland surface source, for instance, usually has a low content of dissolved
solids and is relatively soft, but has a high concentration of organic contamination, much of it
colloidal. By contrast, water from an underground source generally has a high content of
dissolved solids and a high hardness level but a low organic content. Seasonal variations in water
quality are most apparent in surface waters.

Excessive impurities in mixing water not only may affect setting time and concrete strength, but
also may cause efflorescence, staining, corrosion of reinforcement, volume instability, and
reduced durability.

There is a simple rule concerning the acceptability of mixing water: if water is potable, that is, fit
for human consumption, with the exception of certain mineral waters and water containing sugar,
it is also suitable for concrete making. In other words, if water does not have any particular taste,
odor, or color, and does not fizz or foam when shaken, then there is no reason to assume that
such water will hurt the concrete when used properly as mixing water. However, some water that
is not
for drinking may be fitted or suitable for concrete production (Portland cement Association,
2005). Some water unsuitable for drinking is still satisfactory for concrete making (Li, 2011).

2.7. IMPURITIES IN WATER

The unique ability of water in dissolving, to some extent, virtually every chemical compound and
supporting practically every form of life means that raw water supplies contain many
contaminants. Water impurities can be either dissolved in the water or present in the form of
suspensions. Water should be avoided if it contains large quantities of suspended solids,
excessive amounts of dissolved solids, or appreciable amounts of organic materials.

The major categories of impurities found in raw water include:

a) Suspended solids.
b) Dissolved solids.
c) Dissolved organic material.

2.7.1. Suspended solids

Suspended solids in water include silt, clay, pipe work debris, organic matter, and colloids.
Usually up to about 2000 ppm of suspended clay or silt can be tolerated (Mindess, et al., 2003).
Higher amounts may increase water demand, increase drying shrinkage, or cause efflorescence.
Muddy water should be allowed to clear in settling basins before use.

13
Colloidal particles, either organic or inorganic, are not truly in solution or suspension and give
rise to haze or turbidity in the water. The degree of colloidal contamination can be determined by
a fouling index test or by turbidimetry.

2.7.2. Dissolved solids

Total dissolved solids (TDS) are the residue in ppm obtained by the traditional method of
evaporating a water sample to dryness and heating at 1800C. This residue includes colloids,
nonvolatile organic compounds and salts that are stable at this temperature. It can be measured
directly or estimated by multiplying the conductivity of the water inµS/cm at 25◦ C by 0.7.

Water containing less than 2000 ppm of dissolved solids can in most instances be used safely,
although this depends on the nature of the dissolved material.

Soluble carbonates and bicarbonates can promote rapid setting; large quantities of carbonates and
sulfates may cause a reduction in 28-day strength or long-term strength. Some soluble inorganic
salts may retard the setting and hardening of concrete. Salts of zinc, copper, lead, and, to a lesser
extent, manganese and tin fall into this category, as well as phosphates, arsenates, and borates.

Soluble inorganic salts of up to 500 ppm can generally be tolerated in mixing water. Acidic
waters can be used in concrete making; the pH of the water may be as low as 3.0, at which level
there are more problems surrounding the handling of the water than will occur in the concrete.
Organic acids may affect the setting and hardening of concrete. Alkaline waters, containing
sodium or potassium hydroxide, may cause quick setting and low strengths at concentrations
above 500 ppm.

2.7.3. Dissolved organic material.

Organic impurities in water usually arise from the decay of vegetable matter, principally humic
and fulvic acids, and from farming, paper making, and domestic and industrial waste. These
include detergents, fats, oils, solvents, and residues from pesticides and herbicides. In addition,
water-borne organics may include compounds leached from pipe lines, tanks, and purification
media.

A water purification system can also be a source of impurities and so must be designed not only
to remove contaminants from the feed water, but also to prevent additional recontamination from
the system itself. Colored natural water generally indicates the presence of dissolved organic
material, mostly tannic and humic acids, which may retard the hydration of cements.

Many organic compounds that occur in industrial wastes may also severely affect the hydration
of cement or entrain excessive amounts of air. Natural water that are slightly acid are harmless,
but water containing humid or other organic acids may adversely affect the hardening of concrete
(Neville, 1996)

14
2.8. STORM WATER
Storm water is that originates during precipitation events e.g. rain and snow/ice melt. Storm
water can soak into the soil (infiltrate), be held on the surface and evaporate, or runoff and end
up in nearby streams, rivers, or other water bodies (surface water).

In natural landscapes such as forests, the soil absorbs much of the storm water and plants help
hold storm water close to where it falls. In developed environments, unmanaged storm water can
create two major issues: one related to the volume and timing of runoff water (flooding) and the
other related to potential contaminants that the water is carrying (water pollution).

Storm water is also a resource and important as the world's human population demand exceeds
the availability of readily available water. Techniques of storm water harvesting with point
source water management and purification can potentially make urban environments self-
sustaining in terms of water because impervious surfaces (parking lots, roads, buildings,
compacted soil) do not allow rain to infiltrate into the ground, more runoff is generated than in
the undeveloped condition.

15
 CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

3.1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter stipulates the details of the laboratory and field work that were carried out in the
investigation. It includes the tests that were carried out to assess the different types of water for
making concrete as well as tests on fresh and hardened concrete to determine compressive
strengths.

3.2. SAMPLE PREPARATION

3.2.1. Materials preparations

For sample preparation, well graded granite coarse aggregates of maximum size 20 mm were
obtained and stockpiled. Fine aggregates (Plaster sand) were obtained and they were air dried
and stockpiled. Ordinary Portland cement was purchased for the research work from a hardware
shop and delivered to the laboratory by means of a motorcycle. Moulds made of timber of sizes
150mm x l50mm x 150mm were used with the inside coated with oil.

3.2.2. Water collection

Tap water, swamp water and borehole water were collected in the month of February and storm
water was collected in the month of March during the rainy season. Clean water from a tap in
town which is connected on the NWSC grid was collected. This water was used as our control
experiment. Borehole water was collected from a borehole opposite the Ndejje University Main
Library.

Swamp water was collected from a swamp that feeds the agriculture fish pond located below the
Sports and surface runoff (Storm water) was collected from the unpaved road drainages of the
road from Lady Irene Campus to the Main Library, Ndejje University. The runoff was collected
when it had just started raining. All of the above water samples except tap water were taken to
the National Water and Sewerage Corporation Laboratory in Bugolobi for testing.

3.3. CONCRETE PRODUCTION

The mix ratio used in the production of all the cubes is 1:2:4 (C25) and 1:3:4 (C20). The
batching was done by volume. The mixing of concrete was manually done at cement water ratio
16
of 0.5. Concrete cubes production was carried out in accordance with BS 1881: part 108:1983.
Each layer of concrete received 35 strokes of a 25mm square steel runner. The cubes were 72 in
number and were properly cured.

The coarse aggregates, fine aggregate and cement were mixed all together to form a heap for a
particular class i.e., C20. This heap was then divided into 4 sub-heaps for the different types of
water. The different water types were then mixed with the respective dry mixes on concrete
under the same conditions.

Each heap was able to give us 3 cubes mixed with a particular type of water. At each sub-heap,
the different types of water were mixed in water to cement ratio of 0.5 and mixed together
manually using a hoe and spade to produce a homogeneous mixture of wet concrete. Another
heap was then mixed for a different class i.e., C25 and the above the above procedure repeated.

3.4. SLUMP TEST

We performed the concrete slump test to determine the workability of our freshly laid concrete
as per (BS 1881: Part 102: 1983) as indicated in the steps below.

a) Ensuring the inner surface of the cone is clean and damp or dry and then placed the
bottom of the cone on a clean, smooth, horizontal, firm and non-absorbent surface.

b) While firmly holding the cone, we filled the cone with fresh concrete within 2 minutes
after mixing. The cone was filled in three layers, each approximately one third of the
height of the cone when tamped.

c) We tamped each layer with 25 strokes of the tamping rod, the strokes being distributed
uniformly over the cross-section of the layer.

d) Heaping the concrete above the cone before the top layer is tamped was done. After the
top layer had been tamped, we strike off the concrete level with the top of the cone with a
sawing motion of the tamping rod.

e) With the cone still held down, we removed away excess concrete found outside of the
cone.

f) Then removed the cone from the concrete by raising it vertically, slowly and carefully in
5 to 10 seconds. The entire operation from the start of filling to the removal of the cone
was carried out without interruption and completed within 2.5 minutes.

g) Immediately after the cone was removed, we measured the slump to the nearest 5mm by
using the rule to determine difference between the height of the cone and of the highest
point of the specimen being tested.

17
3.5. CURING
Curing of the concrete cubes was covered with an impervious sheet and stored in a vibration-free
place. Each concrete cube was marked distinctly for identification. Each bunch of cubes made
with the different types of water was cured with their different types of water.

The concrete cubes were immediately submerged in the water that was used to make them i.e.,
cubes that where made using borehole water are submerged in borehole water at room
temperature (250C) and only be removed at the time for the compressive strength test (to
determine the compressive strengths), that is after 7, 14 and 28 days of curing.

3.6. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST

The cubes for the different types of water used in their mixture was weighed at their different
days of curing i.e. 7, 14, and 28 days, density determined and a dimensional check was carried
out.

The cured cube was placed with the cast faces in contact with the platens of the Compressive
strength machine electrically operated. In accordance with BS 1881: part 116:1983; the load on
the cube was applied at constant rate of stress.

The load was applied without shock and increased continuously until failure. The maximum load
applied to the cube was recorded and the average failure load for every three concrete cubes
containing aggregate of the same size was recorded as well.

The cross – sectional area of each cube was calculated and the compressive strength will be
determined using the equation below:
𝑴𝒂𝒙𝒊𝒎𝒖𝒎 𝒍𝒐𝒂𝒅 (𝑵)
𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒔𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒈𝒕𝒉 = 𝑨𝒓𝒐𝒔𝒔−𝒔𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒄𝒖𝒃𝒆(𝒎𝒎𝟐) 𝑵/𝒎𝒎2

3.7. WATER SAMPLES ANALYSES

The parameters of the sampled water which were monitored included Alkalinity (Total), Bi-
carbonate HCO3-, Carbonates CO3-, pH (Physical-Chemical), Sulphate SO4-2, Total Suspended
Solids (TSS) amongst others.

18
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

4.1. CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL COMPOSITION OF THE WATER

SAMPLES
Table 4-1: Physical and Chemical composition of the water samples
Swamp Storm Borehole
Parameter Units Limit Conformity
water (S1) water (S2) water (S3)
Alkalinity: BS EN 1008:
mg/L 20 52 68 1500
Total 2002
Bi-carbonates mg/L 24.4 63.44 82.96 500
Carbonates mg/L 24.4 63.44 82.96 500
Not less IS 3025 (Part
pH - 6.30 6.60 6.96
than 6.0 11): 1986
IS 3025 (Part
Sulphates mg/L 10 124 13 400
24): 1986
IS 3025 (Part
TSS mg/L 91 824 17 2000
17): 1986

The result of the waste water analysis shows higher concentration of sulphates and Total
Suspended Solids for storm water compared to other water samples. All the water samples were
within the permissible limits as shown in table 4-1.

4.2 SLUMP TEST RESULTS

Table 4.2: Slump test results
Class Slump (mm) Average slump Slump description
(mm)
C25 19.0 20.0 17.0 18.7 True
C20 24.0 25.0 26.0 25.0 True

19
4.3. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH RESULTS
Compressive strength test of the concrete was determined by crushing the cubes at 7, 14, 28
days. The results for compressive strengths are presented below:

Table 4-3: 7, 14 and 28 Days Average Crushing Load Strength for Class C20
Average Crushing Load (KN)
Type of water Identification
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days
Swamp water S1 250.000 283.333 363.333
Storm water S2 223.333 246.667 343.333
Bore well water S3 233.333 273.333 356.667
Tap water (Control) S4 303.333 336.667 440.000

Table 4-4: 7, 14 and 28 Days Average Compressive Strength for Class C20
Average Compressive Strength (N/mm2)
Type of water Identification
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days
Swamp water S1 11.111 12.593 16.148
Storm water S2 9.926 10.963 15.259
Bore well water S3 10.370 12.148 15.852
Tap water
S4 13.481 14.963 19.555
(Control)
Note: The expected compressive strength at 7 days is 15 N/mm2 (3/4 of the expected 28 days’ strength i.e.,
20 N/mm2).

20
Figure 4-1 presents the relation between curing time and the compressive strength of concrete
cubes of Class 20 (C20) made by different water types.

Figure 4-1: 7, 14 and 28 days’ compressive strengths for C20

From figure 4-1 above, it is observed that the compressive strength increases with age; after
casting the concrete mixes, the compressive strength increases as the number of curing day
increases.

21
Figure 4-2 below shows the compressive strength of concrete at 28 days mixed and cured with
the different water sample for Class 20

Figure 4-2: 28 days’ compressive strengths for C20

Table 4-5: 7, 14 and 28 Days Average Crushing Load Strength for Class C25
Average Crushing Load (KN)
Type of water Identification
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days
Swamp water S1 336.667 400.000 483.333
Storm water S2 296.667 370.000 420.000
Bore well water S3 343.333 383.333 440.000
Tap water
S4 390.000 443.333 553.333
(Control)

22
Table 4-6: 7, 14 and 28 Days Average Compressive Strength for Class C25
Average Compressive Strength (N/mm2)
Type of water Identification
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days
Swamp water S1 14.963 17.778 21.481
Storm water S2 13.185 16.444 18.667
Bore well water S3 15.259 17.037 19.556
Tap water
S4 17.333 19.704 24.593
(Control)
Note: The expected compressive strength at 7 days is 18.75 N/mm2 (3/4 of the expected 28 days’ strength
i.e., 25 N/mm2).

Figure 4-3 presents the relation between curing time and the compressive strength of concrete
cubes of Class 25 (C25) made by different water types.

Figure 4-3: 7, 14 and 28 days’ compressive strengths for C25

23
Figure 4-3 below shows the compressive strength of concrete at 28 days mixed and cured with
the different water sample for Class 25

Figure 4-4: 28 days’ compressive strengths for C25

Figures 4-4 show that compressive strength of concrete samples at 28 days prepared with swamp
water, storm water, borehole water and tap water. The concrete samples prepared and cured with
swamp water shows higher compressive strength than other combinations (i.e., storm water and
borehole water).

According to specification in BS1881 – 116 (1983), the compressive strength for a 1:2:4 (C25)
mix at 28 days should not be less than 20 N/mm2. The compressive strength of swamp water at
28 days (21.5 N/mm2) and that tap water (24.6 N/mm2) passed the permissible limit strength of
20 N/mm2. The compressive strength of storm water and borehole water at 28 days was observed
to be below the permissible limit strength as shown in figure 4-4 above.

Storm water was observed to be below the permissible limit at 28 days due to the high
concentration of sulphates and Total Suspended Solids at shown in table 4-1. The high
concentration of these caused a reduction in the compressive strength of the concrete.

24
The expected compressive strength for at 1:2:4 (C25) mix at 28 days is 25 MPa. And since the
compressive strength for a 1:2:4 mix at 28 days should not be less than 20 N/mm 2, therefore the
compressive strength of concrete for that mix should not vary from the expected strength by
more than 20%.

Storm water and borehole water vary from the expected compressive strength for a 1:2:4 mix by
25.3% and 21.8% respectively making them unsuitable for concreting. Swamp water varies from
the expected compressive strength by 14.1% which is less than 20%. Therefore, this makes
swamp water suitable for concreting. In addition to that, the swamp water was carefully collected
by picking the clear top waters and this was done during the dry season where there was little
contamination from runoff.

25
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. CONCLUSION
This research was carried out to investigate the effect of different types of mixing water on
properties of concrete especially compressive strength. The study analyzed the quality of some
water samples. Then, tests were conducted on concrete made with the water samples.

Based on the results from the research, the following conclusions were made:

a) The results show that concrete made with storm water and borehole water have 28 – day
compressive strength less than the permissible strength (20 N/mm2) for a 1:2:4 (C25) mix
making them unsuitable for concreting.
b) From the analysis of tests carried out, it was revealed that, the concrete made with
questionable water sample i.e., storm water, borehole water and swamp water with a
constant water – cement ratio of 0.5, only swamp water was above the permissible limit
of 20 N/mm2 for a 1:2:4 mix making it suitable for concreting.
c) The compressive strength obtained for concrete made with storm water and borehole
water varied from the expected compressive strength of 25 MPa for Class 25 (1:2:4) by
25.3% and 21.8% respectively making them unsuitable for concreting.
d) From present study, the swamp water since it was carefully collected and was fairly clear
with little contamination can be safely used as mixing water for concrete, as this is
important because of the water shortage in many areas of the world.
e) Swamp water compared favorably with tap water for mixing concrete without any
significant reduction in compressive strength. However, its effects on concrete durability
needs to be established before using it for construction work.
f) Different water sources have different levels of impurities and these generally have
significant impact on the strength of concrete.
g) Regardless of the mixing water sources; the compressive strength of concrete increases
with increase in curing age.

5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS
Portable or fresh water should always be employed in the production of concrete to enable it
attain maximum compressive strength over time.

26
All water intended to be used for production of concrete must be tested for suitability to make
sure it conforms to the standards.

Swamp water is recommended for concrete works since it compared favorably with tap water
and its quality depends on the location thus it should be tested for suitability when collected
before use.

Storm water (runoff) should not be used for concreting works since it usually contains a great
amount of suspended solids and also contaminants that come along as it flows through the
catchment area.

27
 REFERENCES
Abram, D. A., 1924. Test of impure waters for mixing concrete. Chicago: Structural Materials
Research Laboratory.

British Standard EN 1008, 2002. Mixing water for concrete - Specification for sampling, testing
and assessing the suitability of water, including water recovered from processes in the concrete
industry, as mixing water for concrete. s.l.:EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR
STANDARDIZATION.

Li, Z., 2011. Advanced Concrete Technology. Canada: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New
Jersey.

Mindess, S., Young, J. F. & Darwin, D., 2003. Concrete, 2nd Edition. U.S.A: Prentice Hall,
Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458, U.S.A.

Ministry of Water and Environment, 2017. Water and Environment Sector Performance Report
2017, Kampala: Government of Uganda .

Neville, A. a. B., 1990. Concrete technology. Essex: UK: Longman Group.

Popovics, S., 1992. Concrete materials: properties, specificaton. and testing. Park Ridge : NJ:
Noyes Publications .

Smith, 1976. Curing of Concrete. Michigan, USA, American Concrete Institute, pp. 145-159.

Taha, R., 2012. Use of Production and Brackish Water in Concrete Mixtures. International
Journal of Sustainable Water and Environmental System.

28
 APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: WATER SAMPLE TEST RESULTS

29
30
31
APPENDIX B: CUBE WEIGHTS
Table 1: 7 days’ Weights for Different Water Samples

Class Type of water Identification Weights of Average

Cubes (Kg) Weights (Kg)
Swamp water 8.266
S1 8.006 8.174
8.250
Storm water 8.374
S2 8.136 8.255
8.256
C20
Bore well water 8.090
S3 8.448 8.164
7.954
Tap water 8.402
(Control) S4 8.514 8.405
8.300
Swamp water 8.242
S1 8.504 8.419
8.512
Storm water 8.440
S2 8.340 8.361
8.302
C25
Bore well water 8.300
S3 8.410 8.227
7.970
Tap water 8.252
(Control) S4 8.378 8.343
8.400

32
Table 2: 14 days’ Weights of Different Water Samples

Class Type of water Identification Weights of Cubes Average Weights

(Kg) (Kg)
Swamp water 8.102
S1 8.326 8.313
8.510
Storm water 8.048
S2 8.160 8.147
8.232
C20
Bore well water 8.274
S3 8.488 8.333
8.238
Tap water 8.172
(Control) S4 8.352 8.328
8.460
Swamp water 8.596
S1 8.288 8.396
8.304
Storm water 8.084
S2 8.254 8.281
8.504
C25
Bore well water 8.216
S3 8.606 8.487
8.640
Tap water 8.002
(Control) S4 8.328 8.208
8.294

33
Table 3: 28 days’ Weights of Different Water Samples

Class Type of water Identification Weights of Average Weights

Cubes (Kg) (Kg)
Swamp water 8.406
S1 8.190 8.395
8.590
Storm water 8.230
S2 8.340 8.266
8.228
C20
Bore well water 8.282
S3 8.058 8.153
8.120
Tap water 8.326
(Control) S4 8.582 8.370
8.202
Swamp water 8.558
S1 8.180 8.336
8.270
Storm water 8.312
S2 8.332 8.343
8.386
C25
Bore well water 8.714
S3 8.888 8.635
8.304
Tap water 8.408
(Control) S4 8.302 8.365
8.386

34
APPENDIX C: COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH RESULTS
Table 4: 7 days’ compressive strength

Class Type of Identification Crushing Compressive Average Average

water Load strengths Crushing compressive
(KN) (N/mm2) Load (KN) strength
(N/mm2)
Swamp 230 10.222
water S1 230 10.222 250.000 11.111
290 12.889
Storm 200 8.889
water S2 220 9.778 223.333 9.926
250 11.111
C20
Bore well 170 7.555
water S3 240 10.667 233.333 10.370
290 12.889
Tap water 250 11.111
(Control) S4 300 13.333 303.333 13.481
360 16.000
Swamp 330 14.667
water S1 320 14.222 336.667 14.963
360 16.000
Storm 350 15.556
water S2 250 11.111 296.667 13.185
290 12.889
C25 Bore well 390 17.333
water S3 300 13.333 343.333 15.259
340 15.111
Tap water 430 19.111
(Control) S4 350 15.556 390.000 17.333
390 17.333

35
Table 5: 14 days’ compressive strength

`Class Type of Identification Crushing Compressive Average Average

water Load (KN) strengths Crushing compressive
(N/mm2) Load (KN) strength
(N/mm2)
Swamp 230 10.222
water S1 280 12.444 283.333 12.593
340 15.111
Storm 260 11.556
water S2 200 8.889 246.667 10.963
280 12.444
C20
Bore well 260 11.556
water S3 300 13.333 273.333 12.148
260 11.556
Tap water 410 18.222
(Control) S4 310 13.778 336.667 14.963
290 12.889
Swamp 360 16.000
water S1 400 17.778 400.000 17.778
440 19.556
Storm 340 15.111
water S2 370 16.444 370.000 16.444
400 17.778
C25
Bore well 370 16.444
water S3 380 16.889 383.333 17.037
400 17.778
Tap water 440 19.556
(Control) S4 400 17.778 443.333 19.704
490 21.778

36
Table 6: 28 days’ compressive strength

Class Type of Identification Crushing Compressive Average Average

water Load (KN) strengths Crushing compressive
(N/mm2) Load (KN) strength
(N/mm2)
Swamp 390 17.333
water S1 320 14.222 363.333 16.148
380 16.889
Storm 320 14.222
water S2 360 16.000 343.333 15.259
350 15.556
C20
Bore well 400 17.778
water S3 300 13.333 356.667 15.852
370 16.444
Tap water 460 20.444
(Control) S4 440 19.556 440.000 19.555
420 18.667
Swamp 550 24.444
water S1 420 18.667 483.333 21.481
480 21.333
Storm 400 17.778
water S2 400 17.778 420.000 18.667
460 20.444
C25
Bore well 450 20.000
water S3 470 20.889 440.000 19.556
400 17.778
Tap water 600 26.667
(Control) S4 500 22.222 553.333 24.593
560 24.889

37
APPENDIX D: PICTURES

Figure 1: Cast concrete cubes Figure 2: Cured concrete cubes

Figure 3: Sieving of aggregates Figure 4: Collected storm water

Figure 5: Curing of the concrete cubes Figure 6: Weighing the concrete cubes

38
Figure 7: Swamp water collection Figure 8: Operation of the compressive strength machine

39