Construction and Building Materials 108 (2016) 67–73

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Experimental study on long-term compressive strength of concrete

with manufactured sand
Xinxin Ding a, Changyong Li a, Yangyang Xu b, Fenglan Li a, Shunbo Zhao a,⇑
a
School of Civil Engineering and Communication, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, No. 36 Beihuan Road, 450045 Zhengzhou, China
b
School of Transportation Engineering, Huanghe Jiaotong University, Wuzhi Yingbin Road, 454950 Zhengzhou, China

h i g h l i g h t s

Long-term compressive strength of concrete with manufactured sand (MSC) was examined.

Explain effects of stone powder on workability and compressive strength development.

Forecast model of long-term compressive strength of MSC are proposed.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, experimental studies on compressive strength development of concrete with manufactured
Received 8 October 2015 sand were carried out. Influences of stone powder content on long-term compressive strength of concrete
Received in revised form 11 January 2016 with different water-to-cement ratios were analyzed. Tests results showed that when content of stone
Accepted 15 January 2016
powder was less than 13%, it basically had positive correlation with the long-term compressive strength
of MSC. Based on tests data, forecast model of long-term compressive strength of MSC considering curing
age, water-to-cement ratio and cement’s compressive strength and density are proposed.
Keywords:
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Concrete with manufactured sand (MSC)
Compressive strength
Stone powder
Forecast model

1. Introduction concrete [12], engineered cementitious composites [13] and

Compressive strength is one of the basic mechanical properties
of concrete used for concrete structure design, which has the nat-
ure to be changed with time going. Compressive strength develop-
ment of concrete is of great significance for the reasonable
arrangement of construction procedure and the rational estimation
of construction period, which is also related to the reliability of
structure in service life.
As a new green building material used for replacing natural
sand, manufactured sand (also called as machine-made sand, arti-
ficial sand or crushed-stone sand) has become important in
researches, productions and engineering applications of premixed
concrete [1–9]. With the progressive application, manufactured
sand has been used from partially to completely replacing the nat-
ural sand in concrete [10,11], and the limitation of stone powder in
manufactured sand has changed to an approved proper content [3–
6]. Moreover, it has also been used for lightweight aggregate
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sbzhao@ncwu.edu.cn (S. Zhao).
masonry mortar [14].
Differ from natural sand, manufactured sand has special mor-
phology features such as rough surface, irregular particle shape,
angular edges and distinguish characteristics of stone powder con-
tained, which has some special effects on the workability, basic
mechanical properties and durability of concrete. For examples,
with the same mix proportion as natural sand concrete, a lower
flowability and easily segregated mixture was gotten for concrete
with manufactured sand (MSC) [15–17], water dosage should be
increased if the similar workability of fresh concrete was wanted
[17–19]; commonly, proper content of stone power was beneficial
to workability of fresh concrete and mechanical properties of
harden concrete [6,19–21]. Compared with natural sand concrete,
MSC had higher compressive strength [8,14,22,20,23] and fracture
energy [24], and better bond property to steel rebar [25].
Currently, two methods named as natural environment test and
laboratory test were adopted to study the long-term compressive
strength of concrete. Natural environment tests include core bor-
ing or destructive detection on full-size models and true compo-
nents settled in natural environment [26–28], which always last

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.01.028
0950-0618/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
68 X. Ding et al. / Construction and Building Materials 108 (2016) 67–73

several years, or even the entire service life of the structure. Results Table 2
are combinations of durability factors such as carbonation, freezing Physical and mechanical properties of crushed stone.

and thawing, wetting and drying cycles, harmful ion corrosion, Properties Values
loads multiple effects and other factors in the natural environment. Apparent density (kg/m ) 3
2730
Basic forecast models were using measured/standard value of com- Pile-up density (kg/m3) 1440
pressive strength at 28 days multiplied by parameters considering Crushed index (%) 9.0
the surrounding environment and inner hydration of concrete, Mud content (%) 0.3
Content of needle-pieces (%) 4.9
which could forecast the compressive strength of concrete of struc-
tures/components in a similar environment to estimate the resid-
ual life of structure in active service. However, some limitations
such as little flexibility between different environments and ambi- Table 3
guity physical parameters in these models, make it difficult to Physical properties of manufacture sand.
identify and quantify influences of different factors. Laboratory Manufactured sand MS1 MS2 MS3
tests use concrete specimens to measure the compressive strength Stone powder content (%) 5 9 13
at different curing age in laboratory [29–33], in which impacts of Fineness modulus 3.34 3.27 2.77
different factors are easily considered such as raw materials and Apparent density (kg/m3) 2720 2750 2750
mix proportion of concrete, curing environment and other single Methylene blue value (g/kg) 0.75 0.85 1.00
Water absorption (%) 0.7 0.8 1.0
or multiple factors on the compressive strength of concrete. How-
Bulk density (kg/m3) Loose 1550 1610 1610
ever, tests were always limited within 90 days or 180 days periods Close 1720 1820 1800
[29–32]. What is more, no unified forecast model was proposed Porosity(%) Loose 43.0 41.5 41.5
using this test method. Close 36.8 33.8 34.5
In view of the importance of long-term compressive strength,
and based on the authors’ former research results [29,30], tests
of the long-term compressive strengths of MSC with different
stone powder content were carried out and the forecast models 100
Cement
of long-term compressive strength of MSC are proposed. 90 Stone powder MS3
80 MS2
MS1
Percentage Passing (%)

2. Experiment procedure 70
60
2.1. Raw materials
50
Cement: grade P.O. 42.5 ordinary silicate cement, the chemical composition and 40
physical properties are listed in Table 1.
Crushed stone: mixed in proportion 2:5:2:1 by the series of 5–10 mm, 10– 30
19 mm, 19–26.5 mm and 26.5–31.5 mm, the physical and mechanical properties 20
are presented in Table 2.
10 Coarse aggregate
Manufactured sand: crushed from limestone, approximately 0–4.75 mm parti-
cle size. The stone powder content in mass of manufactured sand was adjusted to 0
5%, 9% and 13%. The physical properties of manufactured sand are listed in Table 3. 1E-3 0.01 0.1 1 10
Others: tap water and commercially available high-performance water reducer Sieve size (mm)
of FDN-1 with water-reducing rate as 19%.
The particle size distributions of cement, stone powder, manufactured sand and Fig. 1. Particle size distribution of the materials used.
coarse aggregate are presented in Fig. 1.

According to previous studies [17,19], coefficients of formula (1) should be

2.2. Mix proportions of MSC
The water absorption of stone powder and larger density of manufacture sand
are important affecting workability of fresh concrete. Proper content of stone pow-
der will improve mixture workability with the same mix proportion [19]. Consider-
ing effects of manufactured sand on the mixture workability and the strength of
hardened concrete, the mix proportion design of MSC was adjusted based on the
Chinese technical code JGJ55-2011 [34]. Water-to-cement ratio (mw/mc) was calcu-
lated using the following Bolomey formula:
taken as aa = 0.445, ab = 0.027. To ensure the workability of MSC, the water
absorbed by stone powder should be added as part of the initial admixing water,
the sand ratio should be increased about 2% on the basis of the ordinary concrete
with natural sand, and reduced 1–2% with the 2–3% increment of stone powder
of manufactured sand. Detailed mix proportions are listed in Table 4.
2.3. Test methods

mw =mc ¼ aa f ce =ðf cu;0 þ aa  ab  f ce Þ ð1Þ Tests for slumps of fresh concrete and compressive strength of hardened con-
crete were in accordance with the specifications of China Standards GB/T50080-
where fcu,0 is the preparation compressive strength of concrete, aa and ab are regres- 2002 [35] and GB/T50081-2002 [36], which are identical to British Standards BS
sion coefficients, fce is the compressive strength of cement at 28 days. EN 12350-2-2009 [37] and British Standard BS EN 12390-3-2009 [38].

Table 1
Chemical composition, physical and mechanical properties of cement.

Chemical properties (%, by weight)

LOI SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO f-CaO MgO SO3 K2O Na2O
1.09 21.13 5.15 3.24 61.32 0.62 3.09 2.47 0.55 0.43
Physical and mechanical properties
Density (kg/m3) Blaine fineness (m2/kg) Consistency Setting time (min) Flexural strength Compressive strength fce (MPa)
(MPa)
Initial Final 3 days 28 days 3 days 28 days
3130 367.2 29.2 185 295 5.4 8.0 29.5 46.8
 X. Ding et al. / Construction and Building Materials 108 (2016) 67–73 69

Table 4
Mix proportions of MSC.

Mixtures C1 C2 C3 D1 D2 D3 E1 E2 E3
mw/mc 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.40 0.40
Stone powder (%) 5 9 13 5 9 13 5 9 13
Sand ratio (%) 44 44 44 36 36 36 34 34 34
Cement (kg/m3) 321 321 321 404 404 404 462 462 462
Water (kg/m3) 180 180 180 180 180 180 185 185 185
Coarse aggregate (kg/m3) 1091 1091 1091 1197 1197 1197 1190 1190 1190
Water-reducer (kg/m3) 2.247 3.210 3.210 2.828 2.828 2.828 3.234 3.234 3.696
Manufactured sand (kg/m3) 858 858 858 673 673 673 613 613 613

Table 5 90
Details of tests and curing ages.
80
Trial No. Groups Designed curing age t (days)
70
Series C 12 3, 7, 14, 28, 42, 56, 84, 118, 178, 238, 298, 358
and E 60

fcu,t (MPa)
Series D 20 3, 7, 14, 28, 35, 42, 56, 70, 84, 98, 118, 148, 178, 208, 50
238, 268, 298, 328, 358, 388
40
30 C1 D1 E1
Cubic specimens in dimension of 150 mm were cast and compacted in moulds C2 D2 E2
20 C3 D3 E3
on a vibrating table, the cast surface was covered with polyethylene sheets for 24 h.
And then they were demoulded and cured under water in plastic boxes in labora- 10
tory room with a temperature of 20 ± 2 °C. Each series of specimens was produced
at the same day, 3 specimens were tested as a group. Details of tests and curing ages 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
are listed in Table 5.
t (days)

Fig. 2. Changes of compressive strength with curing age.

3. Test results and discussion

3.1. Properties of fresh concrete

90
B1 B2 B3 Content of stone power = 3 %
13 %
Measured slump and unit weight (qco) of fresh concrete as well 80 P.O. 42.5 Cement 7%
W/B =0.32 Content of stone power = 7 %
as compressive strength at 28 days (fcu,28) are listed in Table 6. The 70
13 %
cohesiveness of fresh concrete was improved with the increase of 60 3%
stone powder content, where the slump expressed first increase
fcu,t (MPa)

50
and then decrease while stone powder content was 5–9% and 9– A1 A2 A3
13%. Due to the micro-aggregate filling effect of stone powder with 40 P.O.32.5 Cement
smaller particle size [5], 9% stone powder content was the best of W/B =0.47
30
benefit to workability and unit weight of fresh concrete with mw/
20
mc ranging from 0.40 to 0.56.
10

3.2. Long-term compressive strength 0 40 80 120 160 200

Changes of compressive strength of MSC with curing ages t are
shown in Fig. 2, which are similar to authors’ previous test results
as shown in Fig. 3. Where fcu,t is compressive strengths at t days. It
can be seen that the strength grew rapidly within 3–28 days and
slowed down after 28 days. Growth rates of compressive strength
after 28 days were similar among different strength grades of con-
crete. The reason was the same with that of ordinary concrete
[31,32], in which C2S, C3S and C4AF of cement were rich leading
to rapid hydration in the early curing age, resulted in a fast grow-
ing strength. With the continuous hydration process, these reac-
tants were consumed, the growth rate of strength slowed down
with the decrease of hydration speed.
As crystal nuclei effect of stone powder on the increment of
cement hydration varied in different mw/mc of concrete mixture
t (days)
Fig. 3. Changes of compressive strength with curing age in Refs. [29,30].
[15,39,40], the effect of stone powder on the development of com-
pressive strength related to the mw/mc. When the mw/mc was lar-
ger than 0.45, stone powder content up to 13% was beneficial on
the long-term compressive strength, while the mw/mc was less
than 0.40, stone powder content up to 9% was beneficial. Moreover,
with the decrease of mw/mc, increment of compressive strength
reduced with the increase of stone powder content.
Considering the discrete characters of compressive strength at t
days (t P 28), the effects of content of stone powder are evaluated
by the mean ratios of compressive strength of concrete showed in

Table 6
Workability and properties of MSC.

Mixtures C1 C2 C3 D1 D2 D3 E1 E2 E3
Measured slump (mm) 50 70 50 110 160 45 30 60 50
qco (kg/m3) 2410 2460 2420 2446 2454 2452 2450 2463 2425
fcu,28 (MPa) 41.2 41.3 40.5 54.2 50.9 51.5 52.9 61.7 57.7
70 X. Ding et al. / Construction and Building Materials 108 (2016) 67–73

Table 7
Strength ratios between MSC of different stone powder content.

No. C2/C1 C3/C1 D2/D1 D3/D1 E2/E1 E3/E1 B2/B1 B3/B1 A2/A1 A3/A1
Number 9 9 17 17 9 9 6 6 6 6
Mean ratio 1.036 1.026 1.026 1.035 1.017 0.970 1.012 0.995 1.032 1.029
Standard deviation 0.047 0.034 0.032 0.033 0.066 0.050 0.038 0.041 0.051 0.057
Variation coefficient 0.045 0.033 0.031 0.032 0.064 0.051 0.038 0.042 0.049 0.056

0.8 ( fcu,t-fcu,28)/fcu,28 0.8 ( fcu,t-fcu,28)/fcu,28 0.8 ( fcu,t-fcu,28)/fcu,28

0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0 0.0

-0.2 -0.2 -0.2

-0.4 -0.4 -0.4

C1 D1 E1
-0.6 C2 -0.6 D2 -0.6 E2
C3 D3 E3
-0.8 -0.8 -0.8

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
lg(t/28) lg(t/28) lg(t/28)

Fig. 4. Analysis process of test data.

0.8 (fcu,t-fcu,28)/fcu,28 0.8 (fcu,t-fcu,28)/fcu,28

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0

-0.2 -0.2

-0.4 A1 -0.4 B1
A2 B2
-0.6 A3 -0.6 B3

-0.8 -0.8
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
lg(t/28) lg(t/28)

Fig. 5. Analysis process of test data in Refs. [29,30].

Table 7. It can be seen that although the content of stone powder
had an optimal range changed with the mw/mc of concrete mixture,
it was basically positive correlation with the development of com-
pressive strength of concrete while it was not larger than 13%.
4. Forecast model
Based on analyses of former studies [29,30], the compressive
strength of MSC at t days can be forecast by the formula as follow
f cu;t =f cu;28 ¼ ð1  k1 Þ þ k1 lg t= lg 28ðt P 3Þ
where k1 is the statistical parameter.
While takes c = k1/lg 28, formula (2) can be transformed as
ðf cu;t  f cu;28 Þ=f cu;28 ¼ c lgðt=28Þ
4.1. The parameter c
Figs. 4 and 5 with lg(t/28) as the x-axis and (fcu,t  fcu.28)/fcu,28 as
the y-axis are plotted based on experimental data. The parameter c
is statistical analyzed which results are shown in Table 8.
The proposed values of c for concrete with P.O. 42.5 cement is
0.30, and for concrete with P.O. 32.5 cement is 0.55.
Take the mean value of tested compressive strengths at 28 days
for concrete with same strength grade as fcu,28, and chose the pro-
posed values of c, compressive strength at t days can be calculated
ð2Þ by formula (3). The calculated curves fit well with experimental
curves, as shown in Fig. 6.
4.2. Compressive strength at 28 days
ð3Þ

Therefore, the long-term compressive strength of concrete is In meso-level, concrete can be regarded as inert aggregates of
related with compressive strength fcu,28 at 28 days and curing age various sizes scattered in homogeneous matrix of hardened
t. The main works are the determination of parameter c and com- cement gel, where cement matrix is the weak component in con-
pressive strength fcu,28. crete. With the optimal design of aggregate types and structure,
 X. Ding et al. / Construction and Building Materials 108 (2016) 67–73 71

Table 8
Statistical results of tests data. 90 collected data
authors' data
Cement type P.O. 42.5 P.O. 80

Calculated value (MPa)

32.5
No. Series Series Series Series Average Series 70
B C D E A
60
c 0.310 0.293 0.316 0.293 0.298 0.550
Correlation 0.941 0.960 0.911 0.819 0.896 0.954 50
coefficient
Standard 0.015 0.010 0.013 0.023 0.008 0.027 40
deviation
Intercept 0.041 0.009 0.017 0.013 0.002 0.100 30

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
90 Tested value (MPa)
E1
80 E2
Fig. 7. Comparison of calculated values and tested values of fcu,28.
E3
70
60
fcu,t (MPa)

To demonstrate this model, 64 groups of authors’ test data and

50
D1
198 groups of other scholers’ test data [19,42] are collected, which
C1
40 D2 include the compressive strength of MSC at 28 days with the cor-
C2
30 C3 D3 responding mw/mc and the compressive strength and density of
20
cement.
Authors’ test data of MSC have fcu,28 changed from 36.5 MPa to
10
75.8 MPa, mw/mc ranged from 0.56 to 0.31, sand ratio of 30–44%, P.
O. 32.5 cement in density of 2871 kg/m3 and P.O. 42.5 cements in
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
density of 3061–3130 kg/m3, crushed limestone with maximum
t (days)
particle size of 25 mm and 31.5 mm, manufactured sand with
90 limestone powder content of 3–16% and fineness modulus of
B1 2.62–3.67. Other researchers’ test data of MSC have fcu,28 ranged
80 B2 from 25.0 MPa to 84.6 MPa, mw/mc changed from 0.70 to 0.30, sand
B3
70 ratio of 30–46%, P.O. 42.5 and P.O. 52.5 cements in density of
60 2960–3134 kg/m3, coarse aggregate with maximum particle size
fcu,t (MPa)

50
40 A1 90
A2
30 A3 80

20 70

10 60
fcu,t (MPa)

50
0 40 80 120 160 200
t (days) 40
30 C1 D1 E1
Fig. 6. Comparison of test curves and curves calculated by formula (3). C2 D2 E2
20 C3 D3 E3

10

the compressive strength of concrete are related with the volume 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
fraction of cement gel and the compressive property of cement.
t (days)
The compressive property of cement is represented as the cement
compressive strength fce at 28 days. The volume fraction of cement 90
gel is positive related with the cement slurry density in fresh con-
80
crete. Referring to cement compressive strength model at 28 days
[41], ignoring the volume of air, the cement slurry density in fresh 70
concrete can be expressed as Vc/(Vc + Vw), where Vc and Vw are vol- 60
f cu,t (MPa)

umes of cement and water respectively. The concrete compressive

50
strength model at 28 days is built as formula (4).
40
f cu;28 ¼ afce ðV c =ðV c þ V w ÞÞb ð4Þ A1 B1
30
A2 B2
where, a and b are regression coefficients determined by tests data. 20 A3 B3
Take water density as 1000 kg/m3 and cement density as qc,
10
translate volume density Vc/(Vc + Vw) to mass ratio mw/mc which
commonly used in engineering, the compressive strength model 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
can be expressed as formula (5). t (days)
f cu;28 ¼ afce ð1 þ 0:001qc mw =mc Þb ð5Þ Fig. 8. Comparison of calculated value of formula (6) and tested values.
72 X. Ding et al. / Construction and Building Materials 108 (2016) 67–73
Table 9
Statistical results of tests data.
No. Series Series Series Series
A B C D
The mean ratios of calculated 1.122 0.946 1.149 1.119
values to tested values
Standard deviation 0.055 0.024 0.022 0.028
Coefficient of variation 0.049 0.025 0.019 0.025
of 20–31.5 mm, manufactured sand with limestone powder con-
tent of 0–20% and fineness modulus of 2.60–3.40.
a = 5.08 and b = 1.89 are obtained by numerical fitting these 262
group data. The comparisons of tested results with calculated val-
ues of fcu,28 are shown in Fig. 7. The mean ratio of calculated values
to authors’ tests values is 1.107 with a dispersion coefficient of
0.059. The mean ratio of calculated values to other researchers’
tests values is 1.017 with a dispersion coefficient of 0.084.
4.3. Comprehensive model
Combined with formula (3) and (5), the comprehensive model
for forecasting the long-term compressive strength of MSC in com-
pressive strength ranged from 20 MPa to 70 MPa is expressed as
formula (6). The comparisons of tested data with calculated values
using formula (6) are shown in Fig. 8. Mean ratios and correspond-
ing dispersion coefficients of calculated to tested values are listed
in Table 9.
f cu;t ¼ 5:08f ce ðc lgðt=28Þ þ 1Þð1 þ 0:001qc mw =mc Þ1:89
5. Conclusions
(1) The cohesiveness of fresh concrete was improved with the
increase of stone powder content, where 9% stone powder
content was the best of benefit to workability and unit
weight of fresh concrete with mw/mc ranging from 0.40 to
0.56.
(2) Long-term compressive strength for concrete with manufac-
tured sand is similar with the ordinary concrete, a suitable
content of stone powder in manufactured sand has positive
effect on the long-term growth of compressive strength of
concrete. Considering the discrete character of compressive
strength, the suitable content of stone powder was benefi-
cial within 13%.
(3) The forecast models of long-term compressive strength was
proposed based on experiments of MSC under water-curing
situation in laboratory lasted 388 days. One is on the basis of
the compressive strength at 28 days considering the curing
time. Another is directly related to the factors of water-to-
cement ratio, cement strength and density, and curing time.
The forecast results fitted well with test data, and meet the
requirement of engineering applications.
Acknowledgements
The study was financially supported by the NCWU Innovation
Funds for Doctoral Candidate (201515601), the Science and Tech-
nology Innovation Team of Eco-building Material and Structural
Engineering in the University of Henan Province, China
(13IRTSTHN002), and the Fund of Leading Personnel of Science
and Technology of Zhengzhou City, China (096SYJH23105).
References
Series [1] ASTMC33/C33MStandard Specification for Concrete Aggregates, American
Society of Testing and Materials Standards, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013.
E
[2] BSI EN 12620, Aggregates for Concrete, 2008.
1.078 [3] AS2758.1, Aggregates and Rock for Engineering Purposes – Part 1: Concrete
Aggregates, ISBN 0 7337 1730 6, SAI Global, 1998.
0.030 [4] JISA5005, Crushed Stone and Manufactured Sand for Concrete, Tokyo, Japan,
0.027 2009.
[5] B.X. Li, J.L. Wang, M.K. Zhou, Effect of limestone fines content in manufactured
sand on durability of low- and high-strength concretes, Constr. Build.
Mater. 23 (2009) 2846–2850, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2009.02.033.
[6] J.B. Imne, L. André, Q. Mongi Ben, A. Taoufik, Use of limestone sands and fillers
in concrete without superplasticizer, Cem. Concr. Compos. 34 (6) (2012) 771–
780.
[7] D Xirouchakis, A Theodoropoulos, Crushed limestone aggregates for concrete
and masonry: results from tests according to EN 12620, EN 13043, EN 13242,
and EN 13139 standards, in: Proc. 16th Concrete Conference, 2009.
[8] B.X. Li, G.J. Ke, M.K. Zhou, Influence of manufactured sand characteristics on
strength and abrasion resistance of pavement cement concrete, Constr. Build.
Mater. 25 (2011) 3849–3853, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2011.04.004.
[9] P. Nanthagopalan, M. Santhanam, Fresh and hardened properties of self-
compacting concrete produced with manufactured sand, Cem. Concr. Res. 33
(2011) 353–358.
[10] P.A. Jadhav, D.K. Kulkarni, An experimental investigation on the properties of
concrete containing manufactured sand, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2 (2)
(2012) 101–104.
[11] K.B. Rao, V.B. Desai, D.J. Mohan, Experimental Investigations on mode II
fracture of concrete with crushed granite stone fine aggregate replacing sand,
Mater. Res.-Ibreo-Am. J. 15 (1) (2012) 41–50, http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-
14392011005000093.
[12] H.Z. Cui, T.Y. Lo, F. Xing, Properties of self-compacting lightweight concrete,
Mater. Res. Innovations 14 (5) (2010) 392–396, http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/
143307510X12820854748953.
[13] M.A.A. Sherir, K.M.A. Hossain, M. Lachem, Structural performance of polymer
fiber reinforced engineered cementitious composites subjected to static and
ð6Þ fatigue flexural loading, Polymers 7 (7) (2015) 1299–1330, http://dx.doi.org/
10.3390/polym7071299.
[14] D.D. Cortes, H.-K. Kim, A.M. Palomino, J.C. Santamarina, Rheological and
mechanical properties of mortars prepared with natural and manufactured
sands, Cem. Concr. Res. 38 (2008) 1142–1147.
[15] V.L. Bonavetti, E.F. Irassar, The effect of stone dust content in sand, Cem. Concr.
Res. 24 (3) (1994) 580–590.
[16] O.A. Cabrera, L.P. Traversa, N.F. Ortega, Effect of crushed sand on mortar and
concrete rheology, Mater. Constr. 61 (303) (2011) 401–416, http://dx.doi.org/
10.3989/mc.2011.55609.
[17] S.B. Zhao, Y.Y. Xu, C.Y. Li, Study on workability of plastic fresh concrete with
machine-made sand, in: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International
Conference on Transportation and Mechanical & Electrical Engineering,
December, 16–8, 2011, TMEE2011, pp. 2013–2016.
[18] D. Ufuk, Effects of manufactured sand characteristics on water demand of
mortar and concrete mixtures, J. Test. Eval. 43 (3) (2015), http://dx.doi.org/
10.1520/JTE20130321.
[19] S.B. Zhao, X.X. Ding, C.Y. Li, Method of mix proportion design for concrete with
machine-made sand, in: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International
Conference on Transportation and Mechanical & Electrical Engineering,
December, 16–8, 2011, TMEE2011, pp. 2017–2020.
[20] J.L. Wang, Z.F. Yang, Y.H. Liu, Effects of the lithologic character of manufactured
sand on properties of concrete, J. Wuhan Univ. Technol. 12 (2014) 1218–1231.
[21] T. Celik, K. Marar, Effects of crushed stone dust on some properties of concrete,
Cem. Concr. Res. 26 (7) (1996) 1121–1130.
[22] S.J. Park, Study on the fluidity and strength properties of high performance
concrete utilizing crushed sand, Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 6 (4) (2012) 231–
237.
[23] F.L. Li, Y. Zeng, C.Y. Li, Evaluation of relations among basic mechanical
properties of concrete with machine-made sand, Adv. Mater. Res. 418–420
(2012) 473–476.
[24] J.K. Kim, C.S. Lee, C.K. Park, S.H. Eo, The fracture characteristics of crushed
limestone sand concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 27 (11) (1997) 1719–1729.
[25] S.B. Zhao, X.X. Ding, C.Y. Li, Bond-slip relation of plain steel bar in concrete
with machine-made sand, Appl. Mech. Mater. 238 (2012) 142–146.
[26] CEB-FIP Model Code 1990, Final Draft, CEB Bulletin D’Information, 1990 (203)
39–52.
[27] Y. Nur, M. Bryant, Time dependent compressive strength and modulus of
elasticity of Florida concrete. FDOT Contract, No. BD-221, 2001.
[28] Mohammad Ismail, Bala Muhammad, Mohamed ElGelany Ismail, Compressive
strength loss and reinforcement degradations of reinforced concrete structure
due to long-term exposure, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (2010) 898–902.
[29] F.L. Li, Q. Zhu, Z.F. Ge, Study on Strength Developing Regularity of Concrete
with Proto-Machine-Made Sand, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 219
ÓASCE (2011) 137–143.
[30] F.L. Li, Q. Zhu, Strength development of concrete with proto-machine-made
sand, Adv. Mater. Res. 152–153 (2011) 1479–1482.
 X. Ding et al. / Construction and Building Materials 108 (2016) 67–73
[31] S.L. Mak, K. Torii, Strength development of high strength concretes with and
without silica fume under the influence of high hydration temperatures, Cem.
Concr. Res. 25 (8) (1995) 1791–1802.
[32] S.L. Wood, Evaluation of the long-term properties of concrete, ACI Mater. J. 88
(6) (1991). 630-043.
[33] K. Gunasekaran, R. Annadurai, P.S. Kumar, Long term study on compressive
and bond strength of coconut shell aggregate concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 28
(2012) 208–215.
[34] JGJ 55-2011, Specification for Mix Proportion Design of Ordinary Concrete,
Beijing, China, 2011.
[35] GB/T 50080, Standard for Test Method of Performance on Ordinary Fresh
Concrete, Beijing, China, 2002.
[36] GB/T 50081, Standard for Test Method of Mechanical Properties on Ordinary
Concrete, Beijing, China, 2002.
73
[37] BS EN 12350-2-2009, Testing Fresh Concrete – Slump-Test, 2009.
[38] BS EN 12390-3-2009, Testing Hardened Concrete – Compressive Strength of
Test Specimens, 2009.
[39] M.K. Zhou, S.M. Peng, J. Xu, C.H. Zhu, Effect of stone powder on stone chipping
concrete, J. Wuhan Univ. Technol. 11 (4) (1996) 29–34.
[40] V.L. Bonavetti, H. Donza, G. Menendez, O. Cabrera, E.F. Irassar, Limestone filler
cement in low w/c concrete: a rational use of energy, Cem. Concr. Res. 33 (6)
(2003) 856–871.
[41] Francois De Larrard, Concrete Mixture Proportioning: A Scientific Approach,
CRC Press, 1999.
[42] X.X. Ding, C.Y. Li, Y.Y. Xu, F.L. Li, S.B. Zhao, Dataset of experimental study on
long term compressive strength of concrete with manufactured sand,
submitted to Data in Brief, <www.elsevier.com/locate/dib>.