Thesis

“HEALTH ANALYSIS OF HIGH PERFORMANCE
CONCRETE BY USING WASTE MATERIAL”

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
In Faculty of Engineering & Technology
To
GANPAT UNIVERSITY, KHERVA
February 2014
Submitted by
Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel
(Registration No: EN/004/006/2009)
Under the Guidance of

Dr. Harshvadan. S. Patel
Principal, Government Engineering College, Patan, Gujarat
GANPAT UNIVERSITY
GANPAT VIDYANAGAR
Kherva, Dist. Mehsana – 384012, Gujarat
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY
DECLARATION
I, Mr. Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel, Reg. No. EN/004/006/2009 registered as a
research Scholar for Ph.D. program in Faculty of Engineering, Ganpat University, do hereby
submit my thesis, entitled “Health Analysis of High Performance Concrete by Using
Waste Material" in printed as well as in electronic form for holding in the library of
records of the University.
I hereby declare that:
1. The electronic version of my thesis submitted herewith in CDROM which is in PDF

format.
2. My thesis is my original work of which the copyright vests in me and my thesis do not
infringe or violate the rights of anyone else.
3. The contents of the electronic version of my thesis submitted herewith are the same as
those submitted as final hard copy of my thesis after my viva voce and adjudication of
my thesis.
4. I agree to abide by the terms and conditions of the Ganpat University Policy on
Intellectual Property (hereinafter Policy) currently in effect, as approved by the
competent authority of the university.
5. I agree to allow the university to make available the abstract of my thesis to any user in
both hard copies (printed) and electronic forms.
6. For the University’s own, non-commercial, academic use I grant to the University the
non-exclusive license to make limited copies of my thesis in whole or in part and to
loan such copies at the University’s discretion to academic persons and bodies approved
from time to time by the University for non-commercial academic use. All usage under
this clause will be governed by the relevant fair use provisions in the Policy and by the
Indian Copyright Act in force at the time of submission of the thesis.
7. I agree to allow the University to place such copies of the electronic version of my
thesis on the private intranet maintained by the University for its own academic
community.
8. I agree to allow the University to publish such copies of the electronic version of my
thesis on a public access website of the internet.
9. If in the opinion of the University my thesis contains patentable or copyrightable

material and if the University decides to proceed with the process of securing
copyrights and/or patents, I expressly authorize the University to do so. I also undertake
not to disclose any of the patentable intellectual properties before being permitted by
the University to do so, or for a period of one year from the date of final thesis
examination, whichever is earlier.
10. In accordance with the Intellectual Property Policy of the University, I accept that any
commercializable intellectual property contained in my thesis is the joint property of
me, my co-workers, my supervisors and the Institute. I authorize the University to
proceed with protection of the intellectual property rights in accordance with prevailing
laws. I agree to abide by the provisions of the University Intellectual Property Right
Policy to facilitate protection of the intellectual property contained in my thesis.
11. If I intend to file a patent based on my thesis when the University does not wish so, I
shall notify my intention to the University. In such case, my thesis should be marked as
patentable intellectual property and access to my thesis is restricted. No part of my
thesis should be disclosed by the University to any person(s) without my written
authorization for one year after my information to the University to protect the IP on
my own, within 2 years after the date of submission of the thesis or the period necessary
for sealing the patent, whichever is earliest.
Research Scholar:
Mr. Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel

Reg. No: EN/004/006/2009
Date: 25th February, 2014

Place: Ganpat University
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Health Analysis of High Performance Concrete
by Using Waste Material" submitted by Mr. Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel is his bonafide
work carried out in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of
Philosophy degree in Civil Engineering. This research work is a record of his own work
carried out under my guidance and is up to my satisfaction.
Research Guide:
Dr. H.S. Patel
Principal
Govt. Engineering College, Patan
Forwarded through
Dr. P. H. Shah
Dean
Faculty of Engineering. & Technology.
Ganpat University

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Health Analysis of High Performance
Concrete by Using Waste Material" submitted by Mr. Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel
fulfill the suggestions given by doctoral committee during pre-doctoral seminar held on
26th October, 2013, vide Ganpat University letter no. 89/GNU/Ph.D./1289/2013 dated 20th
November, 2013 are duly incorporated in this thesis.
Research Guide:
Dr. H.S. Patel
Principal
Govt. Engineering College, Patan
Forwarded through
Dr. P. H. Shah
Dean
Faculty of Engineering. & Technology.
Ganpat University

February 2014
EXAMINER’S CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Health Analysis of High Performance Concrete
by Using Waste Material" submitted by Mr. Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel is his bonafide
work carried out in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of
Philosophy in Civil Engineering of Faculty of Engineering & Technology; Ganpat University
is hereby approved for the award of Ph.D degree.
External Examiner Internal Examiner
Date: Date:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research work is by far the most important triumph in my career and it would
be not possible without people who supported me and believed in me.
I would like to extend my gratitude and my sincere thanks to Late Dr. J. A. Desai. I have
lost one of the best teachers we had ever met. I personally have lost my guru, my mentor,
and a great human being. I fall short of words to express my grief on the sad demise of our
beloved Desai Sir. I pray to God for his soul rests in peace.
I would like to thank my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Harshvadan S. Patel, for the patient
guidance, encouragement and advice to rejuvenate my research work. He has provided
throughout my time as his student. I have been extremely lucky to have a supervisor who
cared so much about my work, and who responded to my questions and queries so
promptly.
I feel privileged to offer my sincere thanks and owe an enormous deal of gratitude to
Honorable Dr. M. S. Sharma, Vice Chancellor, Honorable Dr. P. H. Shah, Dean (FET),
Deputy Director (FET) & Principal (UVPCE), Dr. Amit Patel Registrar of Ganpat
University, for giving permission to pursue doctoral studies under the university.
I would like to thank staff members of UVPCE, Kherva for their support in performance
evaluation and laboratory investigations.
I also wish to express my gratitude towards my wife Sushila, children Bhrugu &
Maharshi and Parents for their love, encouragement and for putting up hardship during
the whole tenure of my research work
Last but not least I would like to thank my family and parents, who taught me the value of
hard work by their own instance. They rendered me enormous support being apart
during the whole tenure of my research work.
Last I want to pray GOD for encouraging and motivating me to carry out my research
successfully.
Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel

ABSTRACT
Manufacturing of high performance concrete, which is majorly used as building material

in the major and huge infrastructure projects, is a daunting task. Though the recent
advancements have conquered the hurdles of the preparation of high performance
concrete, the use of green materials such as Fly Ash and Rice Husk Ash is limited. Apart
from the green materials, many conventional and mineral admixtures or micro materials
are available in the market, which enhances the quality and performance of concrete such
as Metakaoline, Alccofine and Silica Fume etc.
The quality of concrete mix is assessed through various mechanical properties like
compressive strength, flexural strength and split tensile strength and various durability
tests like rapid chloride penetration test (RCPT), sorptivity test, chloride resistance test,
accelerated corrosion test and sea water attack test are carried out to analyse the
performance of HPC.
The objective of this study is to evaluate the structural strength of high performance
concrete by utilizing green and pozzolanic material as supplementary cementitious
material and potential use of non-destructive testing devices for in-situ strength parameters
of HPC during and after construction. About 7,520 concrete specimens of different for
different mix proportions were analysed in the study. This research study primarily
focuses on the development of empirical correlations for estimating the 28 & 56 days
compressive strength, flexural strength and split tensile strength for diverse range of
water/binder ratio for binary and ternary concrete mixes. Detailed laboratory
investigations are performed covering almost all available supplementary cementitious
materials nearby area of Gujarat state of India. Measurement of reliability of developed
models is done by validating the developed empirical models by performing the field and
laboratory investigations.
This study helps in identifying influence of Alccofine, Fly Ash, Rice Husk ash, Fly Ash on
strength characteristics of HPC. The use of alternative material of Portland cement leads to
reduction of emission gases and impact on production capacity of cement plant. This study
also provides a strategy to reducing the cost of waste disposal and its related gains. This
i
research work will enhance and accelerates the decision making process in the pre, during
and post construction phases of any infrastructure projects.
Further the above developed empirical model can be applied for all manufacturing of high
performance concrete using supplementary cementitious material. These developed
correlations can offer excellent engineering judgment and assist in decision making
process for the structural evaluation of the HPC during pre-construction, during and post-
construction phases.
The developed empirical correlations are integrated into a single platform by developing a
comprehensive tool using Visual Basic (VB) software which behaves as a quick decision
making tool for a policy makers, concessionaires, designers and quality control engineers.
Key words: High Performance Concrete, Supplementary Cementitious Material, Waste

Utilization, Health Analysis of Concrete, Non-destructive Testing of Concrete,
Mechanical Properties, Durability Properties.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT i
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
LIST OF TABLES vii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
ABBREVIATIONS xvii
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Research Background 1
1.1.1 Concrete and Environment 1
1.1.2 Sustainability and Concrete Industry 1
1.1.3 High Performance Concrete 2
1.1.4 Research Significance 4
1.1.5 Study Contribution 5
1.1.6 Research Objective 5
1.1.7 Scope of Research work 6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 High Performance Concrete 7
2.2 Utilization of Fly Ash in HPC 10
2.3 Utilization of Metakaoline in Concrete 13
2.4 Utilization of Rice Husk Ash in Concrete 15
2.5 Utilization of Silica Fumes in HPC 16
2.6 Utilization of Alccofine in HPC 19
2.7 Mix Design of High Performance Concrete 21
2.8 Concluding Remarks 22
3. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction 23
3.2 Materials 23
3.2.1 Binder 23
3.2.1.1 Fly Ash (FA) 24
iii
3.2.1.2 Silica Fume (SF) 25
3.2.1.3 Rice Husk Ash (RHA) 25
3.2.1.4 Alccofine (A) 26
3.2.1.5 Metakaoline (M) 27
3.2.1.6 Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) 28
3.2.2 Aggregates 28
3.2.3 Water 33
3.2.4 Glenium Sky 784 Super Plasticizer 33
3.3 Research Methodology 34
4. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
4.1 Overview 36
4.2 Concrete Specimens 36
4.2.1 Binary Mix 37
4.2.2 Ternary Mix 37
4.3 Design of Experiment 39
4.4 Experimental Program 40
4.5 Concrete Mixing 41
4.6 Curing of Specimens 42
4.7 Workability Properties 42
4.7.1 Slump Test 42
4.7.2 Flow Test 43
4.7.3 Test Results for Binary Mix 44
4.7.4 Test Results for Ternary Mix 47
4.8 Mechanical Properties of Concrete 49
4.8.1 Compressive Strength Test 49
4.8.1.1 Test Results for Binary Mix 50
4.8.1.2 Test Results for Ternary Mix 53
4.8.2 Splitting Tensile Test 56
4.8.3 Flexural Strength 65
iv
4.9 Durability Properties 72
4.9.1 Rapid Chloride Permeability Test (RCPT) 72
4.9.2 Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion test 76
4.9.3 Sorptivity 79
4.9.4 Chloride Resistance Test 82
4.9.5 Sea Water Attack Test 84
4.10 Non Destructive Testing of Concrete 87
4.10.1 UPV Test 87
4.10.1.2 Test Results for Ternary mix 91
4.10.2 Rebound Hammer Test 92
4.10.2.2 Test results for Ternary Mix 96
4.11 Concluding Remarks 98
4.12 Summary of Results 99
5. DEVELOPMENT OF EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS AND VALIDATION

5.1 Overview 108
5.2 Empirical Correlations for Binary Mix Incorporating
Supplementary Cementitious Materials 109
5.3 Empirical Correlations for Ternary Mix Incorporating
Supplementary Cementitious Materials 122
5.4 Empirical Correlations Strength Parameter Predation from RH
and UPV for Binary Mix Incorporating Supplementary
Cementitious Materials 131
5.5 Empirical Correlations Strength Parameter Prediction from RH
and UPV for Ternary Mix Incorporating Supplementary
Cementitious Materials 144
v
6. DEVELOPMENT OF VB PLATFORM
6.1 Introduction 152
6.2 VB Platform 152
6.3 Screen Shots of Developed VB Model 155
7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Conclusions 158
7.2 Future Scope of Research Work 161
REFERENCES 162
PAPERS PUBLISHED 170
APPENDIX – I 171
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Physical and Chemical Properties of Fly Ash 24
Table 3.2 Physical and Chemical Properties of Rice Husk Ash And Silica 26
Fume
Table 3.3 Physical and Chemical Properties of Alccofine 27
Table 3.4 Physical and Chemical Properties of and Metakoline 27
Table 3.5 Physical and Chemical Properties of Cement 28
Table 3.6 Physical Properties of Fine Aggregates 30
Table 3.7 Gradation Results of Fine Aggregate 31
Table 3.8 Physical Properties of Coarse Aggregates (10 mm) 31
Table 3.9 Gradation Results of Coarse Aggregate (10 mm) 32
Table 3.10 Physical Properties of Coarse Aggregates (20 mm) 32
Table 3.11 Gradation Results of Coarse Aggregate (20 mm) 33
Table 4.1 Chloride Ion Penetrability Based on Charge Passed (ASTM 73
C1202)
Table 4.2 Velocity Criterion for Concrete Quality Grading (IS 13311 Part 88
1:1992)
Table 4.3 Summary of Results Obtained From Experimental Investigation 99
of Binary Mix
of Ternary Mix
for Durability Properties
Table 5.1 Proposed Correlation Equations for 28 Days Strength of Binary 120
Mix Incorporating Supplementary Cementitious Materials
Table 5.3 Proposed Correlation Equations for 28 Days Strength of Ternary 129
vii
Mix Incorporating Supplementary Cementitious Materials From
RH & UPV
RH & UPV
RH & UPV
RH & UPV
Table 6.1 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Rice Husk Ash as SCM 152
Table 6.2 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Fly Ash as SCM 153
Table 6.3 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Alccofine as SCM 153
Table 6.4 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Silica Fume as SCM 153
Table 6.5 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Metakoline as SCM 154
Table 6.6 Input Data Range for Ternary Mix for Alccofine and Fly Ash as 154
SCM
Table 6.7 Input Data Range for Ternary Mix for Silica Fume and Fly Ash 154
as SCM
Table 6.8 Input Data Range for Ternary Mix for Metakoline and Fly Ash as 155
SCM
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Layout of the Programme of Investigation 34
Figure 4.1 Casted Cube, Beam and Cylindrical Samples 38
Figure 4.2 Numbers of Samples For Experimental Investigation 39
Figure 4.3 General Model of a Process (Montgomery, 2009) 40
Figure 4.4 Drum Mixer Used In Experimental Investigation 41
Figure 4.5 Curing of Samples In Water Tank 42
Figure 4.6 Slump Test In Laboratory 43
Figure 4.7 Flow Test In Laboratory 44
Figure 4.8 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk 44
Ash as SCM
Figure 4.9 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as 45
SCM
Figure 4.10 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as 45
SCM
Figure 4.11 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume 45
as SCM
Figure 4.12 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline 46
as SCM
Figure 4.13 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine 47
and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.14 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume 48
and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.15 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline 48
and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.16 Compressive Strength Testing Apparatus In Laboratory 49
Figure 4.17 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk 50

Ash as SCM
Figure 4.18 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as 51
SCM
Figure 4.19 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine 51
as SCM
ix
Figure 4.20 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica 52
Fume as SCM
Figure 4.21 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating 52
Metakaoline as SCM
Figure 4.22 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine 54
and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.23 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica 54
Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.24 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating 55
Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.25 Split Tensile Strength Testing Apparatus In Laboratory 57
Figure 4.26 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk 58
Ash as SCM
Figure 4.27 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as 58
SCM
Figure 4.28 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine 59
as SCM
Figure 4.29 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica 60
Fume as SCM
Figure 4.30 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating 60
Metakaoline as SCM
Figure 4.31 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine 62
and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.32 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica 63
Figure 4.33 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating 64
Figure 4.34 Flexural Test Apparatus In Laboratory 65
Figure 4.35 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash 66
as SCM
Figure 4.36 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as 66
SCM
Figure 4.37 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as 67
SCM
x
Figure 4.38 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as 68
SCM
Figure 4.39 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as 68
SCM
Figure 4.40 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine and 69
Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.41 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume 70
and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.42 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline 71
and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.43 Rapid Chloride Permeability Test Apparatus 73
Figure 4.44 Rapid Chloride Permeability Test Results of Concrete Mix 74

Incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM
Incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
Incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.47 Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion Test In Laboratory 76
Figure 4.48 Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion Results of Concrete Mix 77

Figure 4.51 Sorptivity Test Apparatus In Laboratory 80
Figure 4.52 Sorptivity Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine 81

and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.53 Sorptivity Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica 81
Figure 4.54 Sorptivity Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating 82
Figure 4.55 Chloride Resistance Test In Laboratory 82
Figure 4.56 Chloride Resistance Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating 83

Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM
xi
Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.59 Sea Water Attack Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating 86
Figure 4.62 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests On Casted Specimens 88
Figure 4.63 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice 89

Husk Ash as SCM
Figure 4.64 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly 89
Ash as SCM
Figure 4.65 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating 90
Alccofine as SCM
Figure 4.66 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica 90
Fume as SCM
Metakaoline as SCM
Figure 4.69 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica 91
Figure 4.71 Rebound Hammer Testing In Laboratory 93
Figure 4.72 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating 93

Rice Husk Ash as SCM
Fly Ash as SCM
Fly Ash as SCM
xii
Silica Fume as SCM
Metakaoline as SCM
Metakaoline Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 5.1 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Compressive 110
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
Figure 5.6 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Flexural Strength of 113
Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as SCM
Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
Figure 5.11 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Split Tensile 116
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as
SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
xiii
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine Ash as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating as Fly Ash & Alccofine
as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Silica Fume
as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Metakaoline
as SCM
Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Alccofine as SCM
Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Silica Fume as SCM
Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Metakaoline as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Alccofine as
SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Silica Fume
as SCM
Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Metakaoline
as SCM
Strength (NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice
Husk Ash as SCM
Strength (NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly
Ash as SCM
xiv
Strength (NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating
Alccofine as SCM
Strength (NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica
Fume as SCM
Metakaoline as SCM
Figure 5.30 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Flexural Strength 135
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash
as SCM
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as
SCM
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as
SCM
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as
SCM
Strength (NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice
Husk Ash as SCM
Ash as SCM
Alccofine Ash as SCM
Strength (NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica
Fume Ash as SCM
xv
Metakaoline as SCM
Strength (NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash
& Alccofine as SCM
Ash & Silica Fume as SCM
Ash & Metakaoline as SCM
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash &
Alccofine as SCM
Silica Fume as SCM
Metakaoline as SCM
Ash & Alccofine as SCM
Ash & Silica Fume as SCM
Strength (NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash
& Metakaoline as SCM
xvi
ABBREVIATIONS
A Alccofine
ACC Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion Test
ACI American Concrete Institute
ASTM American Standard of Testing Materials
C Cement
FA Fly Ash
f'c Compressive Strength
fcr Flexural Strength
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
fsp Split Tensile Strength
GGBS Ground Granulated Blast Slag
HPC High Performance concrete
IS Indian Standard
M Metakaoline
NDT Non-Destructive Testing
NSC Normal Strength Concrete
OPC Ordinary Portland Cement
RCPT Rapid Chloride Penetration Test
RH Rebound Hammer
RHA Rice Husk Ash
SCM Supplementary Cementitious Materials
SF Silica Fume
UPV Ultrasonic Pulse velocity
VB Visual Basic
W/B ratio Water/ Binder ratio
xvii
Health Analysis of High Performance Concrete by Using Waste Material
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 RESEARCH BACKGROUND
1.1.1 CONCRETE AND ENVIRONMENT
Concrete is an extraordinary and key structural material in the human history. As written
by Brunauer and Copeland (1964)17, “Man consumes no material except water in such
tremendous quantities”. It is no doubt that with the development of human civilization,
concrete will continue to be a dominant construction material in the future. However, the
development of modern concrete industry also introduces many environmental problems
such as pollution, waste dumping, emission of dangerous gases, depletion of natural
resources etc.
Presently, Portland cement and supplementary cementitious materials are cheapest binders
which maintain enhance the performance of concrete. However, out of these binders,
production of Portland cement is very energy exhaustive along with CO2 production.
About 1 tonne of CO2 is produced in manufacturing of each tonne of Portland cement
(PC). Thus, cement production accounts for about 5% of total global CO2 emissions
(Tatem, 2003)94. On the other side of the spectrum, in order to reduce the rate of climate
change, a global resolution to an 8% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2010 was
set in the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. Developed countries are much aware for its need and a
climate change tax was introduced by them. In this connection, UK Government also
introduced same kind of tax on 1st April 2001, in order to achieve its target of a 12.5%
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions which is the government’s domestic goal of a 20%
reduction in CO2 emissions by 2010. Therefore, it is evident that, in order to keep its
position as a dominant material in the future, the model of concrete industry needs to be
shifted towards “sustainability”.
1.1.2 SUSTAINABILITY AND CONCRETE INDUSTRY
Sustainability is defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Brundtland,
1
1987)18. Therefore, sustainable development is disturbed with protecting the world’s

resources and sharing its benefits for the betterment of generations to come.
In order to fulfill its commitment to the sustainable development of the whole society, the
concrete of tomorrow will not only be more durable, but also should be developed to
satisfy socio-economic needs at the lowest environmental impact. In his prediction for the
21st century concrete construction, Swamy (1998)92 stated “bearing in mind the technical
advantages of incorporating PFA, slag, SF and other industrial pozzolanic by-products in
concrete, and the fact that concrete with these materials provides the best economic and
technological solution to waste handling and disposal in a way to cause the least harm to
the environment, PFA, slag, SF and similar materials thus need to be recognized not
merely as partial replacements for PC, but as vital and essential constituent of concrete”.
Thus, using various wastes or by-products in concrete is a major contribution of the 21st
century concrete industry to the sustainable development of human society.
By-products from various industries cause a major environmental problem around the
world. In order to encourage waste recycling and prevent waste dumping, a landfill tax has
also been imposed in the developed countries. However, the waste dumping is still a
serious environmental issue throughout the world. Among various by-products generated
by the industries, Fly Ash (FA) and Rice Husk Ash have attracted much attention by
concrete researchers. As stated by Mehta (1998)63, “the goal of sustainable development of
the cement and concrete industries is, therefore, very important, and it can be reached if
we make a serious effort for complete utilization of cementitious and pozzolanic by-
products produced by thermal power plants and metallurgical industries.”
1.1.3 HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE
It is mistaken to bestow that supplementary cementitious materials were used in the

concrete only because of their availability and just for economic considerations. These
materials present some unique desirable properties which cannot be met by using OPC
only (Neville, 1995a)76. For producing high performance concrete (HPC), it is well
recognized that the use of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs), such as Silica
Fume (SF), Alccofine andFly Ash (FA) are necessary. The concept of HPC has definitely
evolved with time. Initially it was equated to high strength concrete (HSC), which
certainly has some merit, but it does not show a complete and true picture. There is a need
2
to consider other properties of the concrete as well which sometimes, may even take
priority over the strength criterion. Various authors proposed different definitions for
HPC. High Performance Concrete is a concrete which made with appropriate materials,
combined according to a selected mix design; properly mixed, transported, placed,
consolidated and cured so that the resulting concrete will give an excellent performance in
the structure in which it is placed, in the environment to which it is exposed and with the
loads to which it will be subjected for its design. Thus, HPC is directly related to durable
concretes.
There are numerous ways to measure the durability of concrete. The resistance to chloride,
water and air penetration is some of the simplest measures to determine the durability of
concrete. The penetration of water, chloride and other aggressive ions into concrete
primarily governs the physical and chemical processes of deterioration (Monteiro, 1993)96.
The microstructure of concrete mainly controls the physical/chemical phenomena
associated with water movements and the transport of ions in concrete. Thus, HPC may be
defined as the concrete having high resistance to fluid penetration as well as satisfying the
strength requirement.
The mineral materials, when used in HPC, can enhance either or both the physical and
durability properties of concrete. Concretes with these cementitious materials are used
extensively throughout the world. Some of the major users are power, gas, oil and nuclear
industries. The applications of such concretes are increasing with the passage of time due
to their excellent performance, low influence on energy utilisation and environment
friendliness (Mehta, 1999)63.
In order to compare the strength and durability performance of the HPC concrete, it is
necessary to produce them with the same set of materials and test them under the same
environmental conditions. The type of aggregate, curing and testing conditions and
strength grades were different between different previous studies (Khatri and
Sirivivatnanon, 1995)49, which made it difficult to generalise the results for any given
application. Nonetheless, in most cases, the effect of using high volumes of SCMs was
found to decrease both the early age and long-term strengths (Mukherjee et al., 1997;
Mehta, 1989)69. In some cases, SF was added to compensate for the decrease in early
strength (Erdem and Kirca, 2008)28 whilst trying to maintain/enhance the durability
3
characteristics associated with high level replacements of Portland cement with these
materials.
However, a close examination of published data would indicate that the effects of SF
addition on high performance concretes containing large quantities of FA and GGBS are
not consistent. The use of HPC in concrete structures has increased in recent years
(Aitcin, 2004)3. An increasing interest in the use of HPC in construction industry has made
it necessary to explore all its properties. The durability properties of normal strength
concrete (NSC) has been comprehensively studied for many decades, but these properties
of HPC have not been studied to the same level. Therefore, the influence of SF on HPC
with high volumes of FA and GGBS needs a greater attention.
With this background, a comprehensive experimental investigation was carried out to

consider the effects of both the type and content of different SCMs on the properties HPC.
It was intended that the data from this systematic investigation could contribute to the
development of performance based specifications for both strength and durability.
1.1.4 RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
As stated in introduction, one of the main objectives of this research was to produce data
from a systematic investigation so as to contribute to the development of performance-
based specifications for HPCs. Although the latter was not part of this research, it was
considered to be essential to measure both physical properties and durability
characteristics of HPCs containing both binary and ternary blends of Portland cement and
supplementary cementitious materials. The criteria for assessing the quality of hardened
HPCs are dependent on their intended purposes. For instance, a HPC designed for a
sulphate exposure condition needs to be assessed differently from that designed to resist a
marine exposure condition. This means that a general research on HPC with the aim of the
data contributing to the development of performance based specifications should not be
confined to one transport property or durability mechanism. This performance based
specifications will be beneficial for developing countries like India as industries are
switching from oil to coal due to energy crisis. Empirical correlations developed for
estimating the concrete strength parameters can be used for the instant in-situ strength
assessment of HPC, defining project management strategies of construction of building,
development of mix proportion of high performance concrete.Empirical correlations
4
developed for estimating the concrete strength parameters can be used in the defining the
desired/optimum strength requirements with different SCM proportions of the HPC and
for the preliminary cost estimates during pre-construction phase.
1.1.5 STUDY CONTRIBUTION
This study helps in identifying Influence of Alccofine , Fly Ash, Rice Husk Ash, Fly Ash
on strength characteristics of HPC. The use of alternative material of Portland cement
leads to reduction of emission gases and impact on production capacity of cement plant.
This study also provides a strategy to reducing the cost of waste disposal and its related
gains. This research work will enhance and accelerates the decision making process in the
pre, during and post construction phases of any infrastructure projects.
1.1.6 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
The primary objective of this research work is to develop common unified in-situ
approach by developing simple and multivariate linear parametric regression models for
estimating the strength parameters of concrete to accelerate the decision process of mix
design and to simplify the Quality assurance assessment of any concrete structure.
Following sub objectives are defined to achieve above main objective of research:
 To determine the effect of mechanical and durability characteristics of HPC by

incorporating supplementary cementitious material.
 To identify the optimum proportion of green materials like Fly Ash, Silica Fume
and Rice Husk Ash and micro materials like Alccofine and Metakaolin in order to
accelerate the mechanical properties of the concrete mix along with cement.
 To develop multi-variate parametric regression models for estimating the flexural
strength with different proportions and combinations of Alccofine , Metakaolin,
Silica Fume, , Rice Husk Ash, Cement, Fly Ash and Water/Binder ratio.
 To develop multi-variate parametric regression models for estimating the split
tensile strength with different proportions and combinations of Alccofine ,
Metakaolin, Silica Fume, Rice Husk Ash, Cement, Fly Ash and Water/Binder
ratio.
5
 To develop multi-variate parametric regression models for estimating the

compressive strength with different proportions and combinations of Alccofine,
Silica Fume, Rice Husk Ash, Cement, Fly Ash and Water/Binder ratio.
 To develop multi-variate parametric regression models for estimating the
mechanical properties of HPC by rebound hammer and ultrasonic pulse velocity
test.
 To validate the developed empirical models by performing the field and laboratory
investigations
1.1.7 SCOPE OF RESEARCH WORK
To accomplish the defined objectives for this research work the following scope of work
was defined:
 Identifying and collecting the samples of appropriate green materials and the micro
materials that are suitable for the concrete mix
 Green materials that were used for the research work are Fly Ash, Silica Fume and
Rice Husk Ash and Micro materials that were used are Alccofine and Metakaolin.
 Detailed laboratory investigations for determination of mechanical properties of
HPC like compressive strength, flexural strength, split tensile strength test and
slump test were performed with different proportions and combinations of green
materials and micro materials.
 Detailed laboratory investigations for determination of durability characteristics of
HPC like sulphate test, chloride test, alkalinity test and Sorptivity test.
 To asses and analyze the laboratory results of mechanical properties obtained at 7,
28 and 56 days.
 Detailed field investigations like Rebound Hammer test and UV test were
performed in order to develop the empirical relationship between laboratory and
In-situ assessment.
 Performing the statistical analysis of results obtained from experimental
investigation.
6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
To define the objectives and scope in the proposed research area, detailed literature survey
is carried out in terms of both, experimentation and theory pertaining to the proposed area
of research.
2.1 HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE
Concrete has some advantages as main material for construction in comparison to the
other construction materials. It is the most readily available material everywhere and it
possesses excellent resistance to water in comparison to wood and steel. Therefore,
concrete has become a more durable material. In addition, the plastic consistency of fresh
concrete makes it easier to be formed into a variety of shapes and sizes using prefabricated
formwork P. Kumar Mehta(1986)63.
The rapid development of construction industry has led to an increase in the demand for
tall and long span concrete structures and this demand can be accomplished by high
strength concrete, a type of concrete with compressive strength greater than 6,000 psi (41
MPa). It is due to the fact that high strength concrete can carry loads more efficiently
than normal concrete, reduce the total amount of material needed and reduces overall cost
of the structure.
Prof. Dr. Harald Justnes (2012)34concrete can never be made sustainable since it is based on
non-renewable mineral resources. However, concrete can be made more sustainable (or less un-
sustainable) by replacing cement with supplementary cementing materials based on industrial
by-products like slag and fly ash. Larger amount of fly ash can be used if loss in early strength
is counteracted by finer grinding or special grinding (mechanical activation) or accelerators.
Muthu,K. U., M. S. Ramaiah (2008)72 Self-Compacting Concrete technology is widely

accepted as a quality product and investigations show that Nan Su’s method is simple to
apply and can be used for producing high strength self-compacting concrete. The
investigation of SCC under fatigue loading is very few. In the near future new concrete
viz. Geopolymer concrete, Basalt fibre concrete, Bacterial concrete, and Nano composites
will find suitable applications in the construction industry. The investigations related to
7
Light weight concrete applications in structural concrete are in progress and a rational
method of mix design of Foam concrete is required. The application high volume Fly ash
technology to the construction of rigid pavements is found to be suitable for sustainable
developments. The above application would help to solve many environmental issues.
Numerous investigations were reported in the study of shear strength of concrete beams. A
data base of about 400 tests indicates a wide scatter between the theoretical and computed
ultimate shear strength of beams. Application of ANN provides a better tool in predicting
the ultimate shear strength of beams. In the recent past, the Arching action on slabs has
been revisited and methods are proposed including the same.
Kulkarni,Vijay(2011)52 the concrete industry scenario in India and the current practice of
specifying concrete. The paper provides a few definitions of performance specifications
and highlights their advantages. The basic elements of performance specifications such as
pre-qualification, sampling, testing methods, development of acceptance criteria and the
bonus-penalty system are briefly described. It is suggested that some pilot projects
demonstrating the benefits of performance specifications may be taken up in India in the
near future.
Patel.,Vatsal,Shah., Niraj(2013)99 effect of Mineral and Chemical Admixtures used to

improve performance of concrete. High Performance Concrete can be prepared to give
optimized performance characteristics for a given loading and exposure conditions along
with the requirements of cost, service life and durability. The success of High Performance
Concrete requires more attention on proper Mix Design, Production, Placing and Curing
of Concrete. For each of these operations controlling parameters should be achieved by
concrete producer for an environment that a structure has to face.
Desai S N and Patil H S. (2011)22 “Geolite Based Spent Catalyst” (GBSC) of size 30μm to
50 μm which is finer than cement gives very smooth finishing surface and due to its
fineness requirement of surface area and water is very high. Achieving higher strength at
lower W/B ratio, super plasticizer is must. Initial strength of cement with GBSC is lower
but after 90 days it gives the same strength whatever the strength given by normal
concrete. Optimum design mix is obtained by replacing 35% cement with GBSC,
W/B=0.5 and admixture = 1%. In this mix design cost reduces by 14.166% and strength
reduces by 7.639% which is negligible. So, this type of mix design is cost saving. The
8
main benefit of this petroleum industry waste (GBSC) and FES dust in making concrete is
to save environment from hazardous material and to minimize the pollution.
Mccarthy M J, Dhir R K, Newlands M D and Singh S P (2011)61 it is noted that some of

the low ECO2 concretes require longer times to attain the early strength necessary for
structural applications. The results indicate that at equal design strength, there was little or
no difference in measured carbonation depth of concrete with difference cement types.
Work examining some of the recycle material, refer to above indicates that providing this
concrete are proportional for equivalent strength to conventional concrete, similar
performance can be achieved. The result indicates that with reducing cement contains
minor enhancement in abbreviation resistance were noted, which appears to a reflect the
increase aggregate contents associated with cement reduction.
Mishra A, Babu Narayan K S, Yaragal S C and Desai S N (2011)65 the possibilities of use
of some of the industrial waste products in concrete such as Marble powder from marble
cutting units, jerosite from zinc extraction units, geolite based spent catalyst from
petroleum industry, iron ore tailing from iron ore companies etc. For every water-cement
ratio the compressive strength at 20 % replacement level is lesser than the control mix
concrete and concrete containing 10% marble powder. While preparing trial concrete mix
with part replacement of cement by industrial waste it was observed that the water
requirement increased due to very fine particles of waste.The penetration resistance is
found to increase as the percentage of marble powder increases in the concrete mixes for
all the water cement ratios tested.
Bhattacharjee B, Mishra A and Rai H S (2011)16 an investigation on slump retention was

also carried out and overall possibilities of using metakaolin as an alternative Pozzolana as
against Silica Fume was demonstrated. The result indicate that with addition Fly Ash,
super plasticizer dosage reduce by up to 1.5% although there is a reduction in 28 days
cube compressive strength 10 to 15%. Specifying durability performance is a grey area of
concrete technology as the understanding of phenomena involve in deterioration of
concrete is steel poor.
9
2.2 UTILIZATION OF FLY ASH IN HPC
The worldwide production of coal combustion products is estimated to be about 1300

million tonnes per year by the cement and concrete industry. To achieve a sustainable
development of the concrete industry, the rate of the use of pozzolanic and cementitious
by-products will have to be accelerated (Malhotra & Mehta (2002))56. Reusing
greater amounts of FA in concrete mixtures and replacing higher quantities of cement will
certainly help to reduce a major problem of environmental impact. Incorporating high
volumes of FA in concrete is one of the possible ways for making green concrete.
Design requirements related to mechanical characteristics will be perfectly fulfilled

and with this type of concrete it will be possible to build more durable structures while
contributing significantly to the construction sustainability.
The following characteristics are typical for HVFAC: a minimum of 50 to 60% Fly Ash by
mass of cementitious materials; low water content, generally less than 130 kg/m3of
concrete; cement content not more than 200 kg/m3of concrete, but generally about 150
kg/m3; low water/cementitious ratio, generally less than 0.35.
P. Kumar Mehta.(2003)63 took Class F Fly Ash, OPC Cement replacement is 15 to 60 %

by Fly ash and W/B ratio is 0.30 to 0.40. At the age of 28 days 25-30 % replacement
achieved good compressive strength, thermal cracking & salt resistant. Use more than
50% FA for sustainable development.
Roongta., Dewangan & Dr. Usha (2004)88 , IS 1489:1969 for PPC was introduced in
India the addition of Fly Ash was limited from 10–25% only & now in IS 1489:1991 the
limit of Fly Ash addition in PPC is 15–35%. This research and development work was
carried out in Quality Control Department of Cement Manufacturing Company Limited
Meghalaya India in the laboratory scale, to know the impact of higher addition of Fly Ash
beyond BIS limit (up to 50%), with respect to clinker quality, fineness and Indian
Specification IS 1489:1991 for Portland Pozzolana Cement. At 0% ,40%,42%,
45%,47%,50% replacement of Fly ash, they found compressive strength (28 days)
69,58,58,52,52,48 MPa respectively.
Donald Burden (2006)24 take PPC cement replacement 0%, 30%, 40% and 50% by Fly ash
and water/binder ratio 0.35, 0.4 & 0.50. At 28 days, fly ash at replacement levels of 30%,
10
40% and 50% has slightly lower compressive strength, higher permeability, and higher
carbonation rates respectively then concrete containing no Fly Ash. Increasing w/c ratio
decreases compressive strength, increases permeability and increases carbonation rates.
S. Gopalakrishnan (2006)32, M30 grade concrete was cast using Fly Ash at 50% cement
replacement level. A slump of about 100 mm was to be achieved for the workability. The
strength values were almost similar at the age of 28 days and HVFAC exhibited higher
strength at later ages. The flexural strength was found to be higher for HVFAC. HVFAC
showed very low chloride permeability and low water absorption and reduced water
permeability compared to that of OPC based concrete. The abrasion resistance of HVFAC
was found to be marginally better compared to OPC based concrete.
Yijin., Shiqiong., Jian and Yingli (2008)102 the Fly Ashes collected by electro-static
precipitators and airflow classing technology. Due to their spherical shape and smooth
surface features, the Fly Ash demonstrated improved water reduction effect with increased
fineness. The incorporation of ultra-fine C Fly Ash may increase the setting time of
cement paste. The water demand ratio of UFA decrease with the increasing of fineness.
The water reducing rate of 30% ultra-fine C Fly Ash reach 10%, ultra-fine C Fly Ash is a
kind of good mineral water reducer. Ultra-fine C Fly Ash has significantly increased the
slump and reduced the slump loss of concrete.
Md.JahirAlam (2009)62 ,The waste from the Power Plant is extensively used in concrete as
a partial replacement for cement and an admixture and is used as a suitable conventional
material for road constructions. From the test results, it is observed that 5-10%
Barapukeria Fly Ash was successfully blended with ordinary portland cement without
sacrificing strength and durability characteristics. It was observed that the geotechnical
properties of Fly Ash are suitable for the use of conventional material in building and road
constructions. The analysis of the samples at specific curing period indicates steeper
profiles against chloride salt concentration increase.
Vanita Agarwal (2008)98 it is found that the proportions of Fly Ash in Concrete can vary
from 30% - 80% for various grades of concrete. It is observed that the later age strength of
concretes having more than 40% replacement of cement by Fly Ash suffers adversely
though water/ binder ratio is gradually reduced. For concretes with less than 40%
replacement of cement, the characteristic strength at 28 days is on higher side. Whereas,
11
for concrete with 40% replacement of cement, the 28 days Compressive strength is at par
with that of plain concrete.
Saravanakumar. P., and Dhinakaran. G. (2010)90 effect of NaCl concentration on

compressive strength of concrete for lower grade of M20 was found to be higher and to an
extent of 25% at the age of 28 days. It was also found that there was a declining trend
when grade of concrete increases to 25 and 30. The rate of increase of chloride penetration
in concrete with NaCl, went unto 63, 42 and 80% for M20, M25 and M30 grade concrete
with respect to control concrete. It was evident from the results of accelerated electrolytic
corrosion test that, increase in grade of concrete from M20 to M25 decreases slightly the
corrosion rate and further increase in grade to M30 resulting increase in corrosion for
higher values of NaCl concentration.
Gandage Abhijeet S., Kalantri Abhijeet and Dixit Bhoosan (2010)30 Class C type of Fly
Ash is used to produce High Performance Concrete. Lime is reacting during curing
process, the early strength gain within 3-7 days is less compared to normal concrete but at
the end of 28 days the compressive strength is more than the target strength. Replacement
of Fly Ash up to 20% - 25% gives optimal strength. The 70% - 80% compressive strength
gained within seven days. Replacing Fly Ash with cement gives holistic solution and
sustainable manner for concrete without any additional cost.
12
BalaMurugan S., Mohan Ganesh G. and Santhi A.S (2010) , compressive strength was
going to reduced gradually with increasing Fly Ash up to 0% to 60%. Class C and Class F
type Fly Ash have same compressive strength after 7 days. The compressive strength for
accelerating curing was higher than to warm water curing. The Class C type Fly Ash gain
more strength with replacement of 40% compare to class F type Fly Ash while class F
type Fly Ash gain more strength compare to class C type Fly Ash with replacement of
60% Fly Ash. The replacement of 40% Fly Ash for Class C and Class F gives good
strength with later ages and it was economic compared to other.
Pofale A.D. and DeoS.V. (2010)81, the compressive strength and flexure strength of
concrete mixes was increased with replacement of sand by Fly Ash was 34% and 24%
respectively. The strength was going to increased by replacing sand with Fly Ash.
Workability of concrete using Fly Ash was higher than to control concrete and density was
decreased by replacing sand with Fly Ash. Cost Decreases by replacing sand with Fly Ash.
12
Ranka Ajay I., and Mehta Prakash V. (2010)85 the new water soluble silane
nanotechnology shows the promise to address the perpetual problem of creating a
permanent breathable 1-2 mm deep cementitious membrane to prevent water ingress. The
durability of controlling chemical deterioration extend by water. The water soluble silanes
to water proof can be applied to basements, elevator pits, underground sumps, water
containing bodies, sunken, utility area, stone, etc. surfaces from water.
2.3 UTILIZATION OF METAKAOLINE IN CONCRETE
Dr.Vaishali. And G.Ghorpade (2011)97 various metakaolin based HPC mixes were
attained by absolute volume method. Tested for compressive strength & Chloride ion
permeability test as per ASTM C 1202 has been conducted on various HPC mixes to
measure the permeability values of HPC produced with metakaolin. The experimental
results indicate that metakaolin has the ability to considerably reduce the permeability of
high performance concrete. The various details about the chloride ion permeability test
have been presented in this paper.
V. Matejka, P. Matejkova, P. Kovar, J. Vlcek, J. Prikryl, P.Cervenka, Z. Lacny and

J.Kukutschova (2012)59 , the raw kaoline (sample K) consists of kaolinite as a main phase
and also consists of quartz and mica which represent the typical admixtures of
kaoline.After the calcination at 6000C the basal diffraction peak of kaolinite disappears,
what is typical feature of the dehydroxylation of the kaolinite structure and confirms the
metakaolinite formation.It is evident, that the values of compressive strength measured for
the mortars containing 5 to 10% of Metakaoline composites are higher in comparison to
the values measured for the sample mortars.
Mahdi Valipour, FarhadPargar, Mohammad Shekarchi and Sara Khani (2012)55Pozzolans

primarily affect the pore structure refinement of concrete, which leads to higher strength
and lower permeability. Because Zeolite is more cost effective, accessible, and natural
(environmentally friendly), it seems that it could be a good substitute for Silica Fume and
Metakaoline. The results of compressive strength test show that the optimal replacement
level is 7.5–10% for silica fume, 10–15% for Metakaoline and approximately 10% for
Zeolite. Sorptivity decreases as their replacement percentage of Metakaoline increases.
Zeolite shows resistivity lower than that of SF and equal to that of Metakaoline, while SF
13
has the highest electrical resistivity. The gas permeability of all concrete specimens
containing pozzolans decreased in comparison with that of the control concrete.
Muhammad Burhan Sharif (2011)67 the compressive strength of concrete is related both
with Metakaoline-binder ratio and water-binder ratio. The maximum strength is obtained
at 15% replacement level for all water-binder ratios. For all water-binder ratios studied the
Metakaoline-binder ratio of 20% showed the best resistance to carbonation for concrete
made with binder content of 300 kg/m3 and the Metakaoline binder ratio of 15%gave the
maximum resistance to carbonation for concretes prepared with binder content 400 kg/m3.
R. Madandoust, J. Sobhani, and P. Ashoori (2013)54 a different behaviour could be seen

for M20 as a mixture with 20% of Metakaoline replaced with Portland cement. In this
mixture, Water Penetration Depth increased about 30% by curing period from 28 days to
90 days. The generous effects on the durability might be attributed to the pozzolanic
reactions developed in the concrete mixtures incorporated Metakaolin or zeolite as
supplementary cementitious materials.
Alaa M. Rashad (2013)4 partially replacing 10% MK with FA in alkali activation system
gives lower porosity and higher impact strength. Other researchers believed that the
inclusion of 33.3% FA in MK based geopolymer gives the highest compressive strength,
but depends on the mole ratio and curing condition.
Beulah M., and Prahallada M. C. (2012)14 the test results indicate that use of replacement
cement by Metakalion in HPC has improved performance of concrete up to 10%.
Patil.B. B, and P. D. Kumbhar (2012)79 , the compressive strength of concrete increases

with increase in HRM content up to 7.5%. Thereafter there is slight decline in strength for
10%, 12% and 15% due excess amount of HRM which reduces the w/b ratio and delay
pozzolanic activity. The higher strength in case of 7.5% addition is due to sufficient
amount of HRM available to react with calcium hydroxide which accelerates hydration of
cement and forms C-S-H gel. The 7.5% addition of high reactivity Metakaolin in cement
is the optimum percentage enhancing the compressive strength at 28 days by 7.73% when
compared with the control mix specimen. The 7.5% addition of high reactivity Metakaolin
in cement is enhanced the resistance to chloride attack. The compressive strength of
concrete incorporated with 7.5% HRM is reduced only by 3.85% as compared with the
reduction of strength of control mix specimen is by 4.88%. The 7.5% addition of high
14
reactivity Metakaolin in cement is also enhanced the resistance to sulfate attack. The
compressive strength of concrete incorporated with 7.5% HRM is reduced only by 6.01%
as compared with the reduction of strength of control mix specimen by 9.29%.
Khatib,.J.M. (2007)48 the optimum replacement level of cement with MK is about 15%.
Linear relationship exists between V and Ed for air cured and water cured specimens. A
systematic increase in MK content of up to at least 20% leads to a decrease in shrinkage
and an increase in expansion after 56 days of curing. Correlation between the various
properties is also conducted. At a low water to binder ratio of 0.3, the optimum
replacement level to give maximum strength enhancement is 15% MK. This optimum
level is lower than that obtained at a higher water to binder ratio of 0.45. A systematic
increase in MK content of up to at least 20% (as partial PC replacement) in concrete leads
to a decrease in shrinkage and an increase in expansion after 56 days of curing.
2.4 UTILIZATION OF RICE HUSK ASH IN CONCRETE
In India, rice production has increased during these years, becoming the most important
crop. Rice Husks are residue produced in significant quantities. While in some regions,
they are utilized as a fuel in the rice paddy milling process, in our county they are treated
as waste, causing pollution of environment and disposal problems. Due to increasing
environmental concern, and the need to preserve energy and resources, efforts have been
made to burn the husks under controlled conditions and to utilize the resultant ash as a
building material. In addition, rice husks are able to be an ideal fuel for electricity
generation (Bui, 2001).
Ismail and Waliuddin 1996, Zhang and Malhotra (1996)56, Mahmud et al. (2004)30 the
published literature shows that the hardened properties of concrete are improved in the
presence of RHA. For example, RHA provided significant improvements in compressive
and tensile strengths, ultrasonic pulse velocity, and transport properties of high strength
and high performance concretes.
The use of Rice Husk Ash (RHA) in concrete was patented in the year 1924. Up to 1978,
all the researches were concentrated to utilize ash derived from uncontrolled combustion.
Mehta published several papers dealing with Rice Husk Ash utilization during this period.
15
He established that burning rice husk under controlled temperature– time conditions
produces ash containing silica in amorphous form (Gastaldini et. al., 2007)31
Depending on produce method, the utilization of Rice Husk Ash as a pozzolanic material
in cement and concrete provides several advantages, such as improved strength and
durability properties. Rodrý´guez de Sensale (2006)87 reported that mortars and concrete
containing RHA have compressive strength values inferior or superior to that of OPC
concrete. (Karim. M, 2012)47 mortars and concrete containing RHA improve durability of
concrete at various ages. Generally, there are two types of RHA in concrete. The type of
RHA which is suitable for pozzolanic activity is amorphous rather than crystalline.
Therefore, substantial researches have been carried out to produce amorphous silica. The
results have shown that RHA quality depends on temperature and burning time.
Apparently, for an incinerator temperature up to 700°C, the silica is in amorphous form

and silica crystals grew with time of incineration. The combustion environment also
affects specific surface area, so that time, temperature and environment also must be
considered in the processing of rice husks to produce ash of maximum reactivity.
2.5 UTILIZATION OF SILICA FUMES IN HPC
Silica Fume (SF) is an extremely reactive pozzolanic material. It is a by-product obtained

from the manufacture of silicon or ferrosilicon. It is extracted from the flue gases from
electric arc furnaces. SF particles are very fine with particle sizes about hundred times
smaller than those of average size of OPC particles. It is a densified powder or is in the
form of water slurry. The standard specifications of Silica Fume are defined in ASTM -
1240. It is commonly used at a replacement level of 5% to 12% by mass of total
cementitious materials. It can be used successfully for the structures where high strength is
needed or significantly reduced permeability to water is the major concern. Extraordinary
procedures are required to be adopted for handling, placing and curing concrete with these
very fine SF particles.
Memona.,Radin & Zainc (2002)64 is suggested compressive strength at the age of 28 days,
0 %, 30% & 70% replacement achieved 54 Mpa ,63 Mpa& 64 Mpa. Concrete mixes (30%
and 70%) exhibited better performance than the NPC concrete in seawater exposed to tidal
zone. The pore size distribution of both high-strength concrete (MSS-0 and MSS-40) was
16
significantly finerat the age of 6 months were reduced about three times compared to NPC
concrete.
A.K. Mullick (2007)71 Proposedternary blends of OPC with 10 % Silica Fume and 45%
granulated slag gives 69.5 MPa strength at 28 days. A mixture of 32.5% OPC, 60.5% slag
and 7% Silica Fume was found to result in compressive strength of 50 MPa at 48 hours,
when cured at 38oC. Addition of 22.5 kg Silica Fume to 300 kg cement + 350 kg Fly Ash
mixes of self-compacting concrete (SCC) resulted in high early strength (21 MPa at 3 days
and 45 MPa at 28 days) along with increase in cohesiveness.
Muhamad Ismeik (2009)68 found that maximum compressive strength at 28-day obtained
as 60 MPa at 15% SF replacement level with w/cm ratio of 0.30, and the minimum 35
MPa obtained at 5% SF replacement level at a w/cm ratio of 0.40. Dr. Mattur, Gopinatha,
& Shridhar. (2009)60 silica fume based ternary blends, with VMA, improved the flow
properties, as required for SCC and achieved target strength at 56days.
Pathik.,Rao., and Dordi. (2011)78 In combination with 10% Silica Fume, the different
resistance against chloride penetration of the various types of cement was distinctly
reduced. Amudhavalli.N.K., and Jeena Mathew (2012)5 When compared to other mix the
loss in weight and compressive strength percentage was found to be reduced by 2.23 and
7.69 when the cement was replaced by 10% of Silica Fume. The normal consistency
increases about 40%, when Silica Fume percentage increases from 0% to 20%. The
optimum 7 and 28-day compressive strength and flexural strength have been obtained in
the range of 10-15% Silica Fume replacement level. Mahdi Valipour, Farhad Pargar,
Mohammad Shekarchi and Sara Khani (2012)55 the 24 h of water absorption is highly
dependent on the amount of capillary pores and plays a more important role in water
permeation, causing the specimens containing SF and Metakaoline to permeate less water.
For all concretes containing pozzolans, the amount of chloride at a depth of 20 mm was
lower than that of recorded in the control mixture. The results of compressive strength test
show that the optimal replacement level is 7.5–10% for Silica Fume, 10–15% for
Metakaoline and approximately 10% for Zeolite. Sorptivity decreases as their replacement
percentage of Metakaoline increases.
Kiachehr Behfarnia and Omid Farshadfar (2013)50 Change in compressive strength, mass
and dimensions of concrete specimens were measured after 6 and 9 months immersion in
17
5% and 10% Magnesium Sulfate solutions, optimum replacement percentage of

pozzolanic binders, regarding compressive strength, were 15% Silica Fume in Silica Fume
SCC, 15% Metakaoline in Metakaoline SCC and also 10% Zeolite in Zeolite SCC. The
ultra-high strength concrete (UHSC) was excellent with compared to SF and UFS. It may
attributed to the average particle size of UFS which is smaller than Silica Flume and
cement leading to the formation of dense matrix and interface bonding property of
hardened concretes. Slump retention for UHSC was good compared to SF and UFS P.
Dinakar (2010)43.
S. Bhanja and B. Sengupta (2004)15, Suggested Silica Fume incorporation in concrete

results in significant improvements in the tensile strengths of concrete, along with the
compressive strengths. Increase in split tensile strength beyond 15% Silica Fume
replacement is almost insignificant, whereas sizeable gains in flexural tensile strength
have occurred even up to 25% replacements.
Yunsheng Xu, D.D.L. Chung (2000)103 , Two methods of silane introduction, namely
silane in the form of a coating on Silica Fume particles and silane in the form of an
admixture, were found to enhance the workability of Silica Fume mortar similarly and
increase the tensile and compressive strengths of Silica Fume cement paste similarly.
JiYajun, Jong Herman Cahyadi (2003)45 , The Silica Fume agglomeration has been found
in blended pastes, which cannot be broken down by normal mixing. The compressive
strength of blended cement paste is not significantly increased up to 28 days due to this
agglomeration. Pore structure is not sufficiently refined by silica fume replacement.
M.C.G. Juenger, C.P. Ostertag (2004)46, Large particles of Silica Fume may either
decrease or increase expansion due to alkali–silica reaction in mortar. Under the
accelerated testing conditions, agglomerated Silica Fume decreased expansion when used
as a 5% replacement of reactive sand. When the same sand was replaced by 5% of sintered
Silica Fume aggregates, expansion considerably increased.
Andrew J. Maas, Jason H. Ideker, Maria C.G. Juenger (2007)6 , It appears that when Silica
Fume is alkali silica reactive, there is a pessimism effect with expansion related to the
percentage of Silica Fume used; smaller amounts of Silica Fume result in higher
expansions than larger amounts. All Silica Fume agglomerates appear to react with pore
solution under scanning electron microscopy.
18
Raharjo. D, Subakti. A, Tavio (2013)83 , The formula of SCC compressive strength at 28

of concrete age can be drawn SCC Compressive Strength at 28 days = 40.848 + 3.100395
Cement - 0.587366 Water - 2.69854 Sand - 3.19724 Stone Crush + 0.544276 Silica Fume
+ -1.93886 Fly Ash + 0.830342 Iron Slag + 1.724703 Viscocrete (kg).
El-Hadj Kadri and Roger Duval (2009)26 , A 10% substitution of Portland cement by Silica
Fume gave a greater cumulative hydration heat and greater compressive strength than the
reference concrete at all stages. On the contrary when the silica fume content increases up
to 30%, the dilution effect reduces these improvements.
Kulkari.,Vijay R., Pathak.,S.R (2013)51 , Addition of both silica fume and fly ash resulted
in reducing the chloride ion permeability of concrete from “moderate” (2000-4000
coulombs) to “low” (1000-2000 coulomb) level in accordance with ASTM C 1202. The
percentage reduction in chloride ion permeability from 28 days to 90 days was found to be
highest in case of mixes containing OPC and Fly Ash. Such reduction was however
marginal in the case of mixes containing OPC and Silica Fume.
2.6 UTILIZATION OF ALCCOFINE IN HPC
ALCCOFINE 1203 is a specially processed product based on slag of high glass

content with high reactivity obtained through the process of controlled granulation.
Due to its unique chemistry and ultra-fine particle size, ALCCOFINE1203 provides
reduced water demand for a given workability, even up to 70% replacement level
as per requirement of concrete performance. ALCCOFINE 1203 can also be used as a
high range water reducer to improve compressive strength or as a super workability aid to
improve flow. Alccofine1203 is known to produce a high-strength concrete and is used in
two different ways: as a cement replacement, in order to reduce the cement content
(usually for economic reasons); and as an additive to improve concrete properties (in both
fresh and hardened states). Therefore, utilization of Alccofine1203 together with Fly Ash
provides an interesting alternative and can be termed as high strength and high
performance concrete (www.alccofine.com).
Pathik Ajay., Rao., A.N.Vyasa., Pai B V B., Dordi Cyrus. (2010)78 , Replacing 10%
cement by Alccofine improves workability, workability retention and permits additional
19
strength gains. Alccofine strength gains are at both early and later ages. This makes it a
'preferred material' for use in high performance concrete.
Sheng, Wan& Chen (2008)91 , For HPC with GGFBS at w/b of 0.30, compressive strength
reaches highest value at optimum replacement of 15%. Cahit And Okan (2008)20Concrete
containing 40% slag with 450 kg/m3 cement exhibits greater strength (83.8 Mpa) than that
of control normal PCC Concrete.
Venu Malagavelli And P. N. Rao (2010)100 , The percentage increase of compressive

strength of concrete is 11.06 and 17.6% at the age of 7 and 28 days by replacing 50% of
cement with GGBS and 25% of sand with ROBO sand The percentage of increase in the
compressive strength are 19.64 and 8.03% at the age of 7 and 28 days and the percentage
of increase in the split tensile strength is 1.83% at the age of 28 days, by replacing 30% of
sand with ROBO sand with 1.5% admixture. Oner A., & S. Akyuz (2007) 77 The optimum
level of GGBS content for maximizing strength is at about 55–59% of the total binder
content.
Pazhani.K., Jeyaraj.R (2010)80 ,The water absorption for 30% replacement of cement with
GGBS decreases by 4.58%. Also, the water absorption for 100% replacement of fine
aggregate with copper slag decreases by 33.59%. The chloride ion penetrability for 30%
replacement of cement with GGBS decreases by 29.90%. Also, the 100% replacement of
fine aggregate with copper slag decreases by 77.32%. The pH value for 30% replacement
of cement with GGBS decreases by 0.39%. Also, for 100% replacement of fine aggregate
with copper slag decreases by 3.04%.
Chanakya Arya (2012)21, GGBS concrete is expected to show a higher surface

concentration than OPC concrete due to its greater binding capacity. The Silica Fume
concrete also has a smaller effective porosity than the OPC concrete. Replacing 50% of
OPC with GGBS slightly increases weight sorptivity yet effective porosity is smaller than
for OPC concrete. K. SuvarnaLatha, M V SeshagiriRao, Srinivasa Reddy. V (2012)93 the
grain size of GGBS is less than ordinary portland cement, its strength at early ages is less
but continues to gain strength over a long period.
Maiti.S.C. and Agarwal Raj K (2009)58 Good quality concrete containing 55% GGBS has
been successfully used to build concrete dam and combat alkali-silica reaction in concrete.
Mulick,A.M. (2007)70 Ternary blends of OPC with Silica Fume and Fly Ash or granulated
20
slag are particularly useful to render greater durability to concrete. Limited Indian
experience with such triple blends is discussed.
Mishra A, Babu Narayan K S, Yaragal S C, Desai S N (2011)16It has been demonstrated

that low calcium FA based geo polymer concrete have excellent compressive strength,
suffer very little drying shrinkage and low creep, have excellent sulphate resistance and
good acid resistance. It can be seen that very high compressive strength have been
achieved for GPC mixes, with wet gunny bags curing.
2.7 MIX DESIGN OF HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE
Nataraja. M. C., Das Lelin (2010)75, The mix design as per IS 10262:200935 is in line
with ACI 211.1. The code permits the use of supplementary materials such as chemical
and mineral admixtures. Provisions of IS 456:200037 are applicable for durability
requirements with all types of exposure. The flowing concrete for RMC applications can
be designed. The code illustrates this with an M40 concrete with and without Fly Ash. A
typical mix design (first mix) for commonly used M20 grade is illustrated in the paper
based on the properties of the ingredients using the new BIS and ACI methods. The fine
aggregate content in ACI method is higher compared to new BIS method. Coarse
aggregate is substantially more with BIS method. Thus, ACI mix will lead to higher
workability. Presumably, it would also contribute to increased strength as the voids are
filled by fine aggregate.
Basu, P. C., Saraswati, S. (2006)13, Existing IS codes are suitable for characterisation of
concrete ingredients for HVFAC. Major observations on IS 3812 (Part - I and II): 2003
specifications for characterisation of Fly Ash are, (a) the standard specifies suitable
requirements for characterisation of Fly Ash. Requirement mentioned about average
fineness is not necessary and may be deleted. (b) Most important requirement for
characterisation of Fly Ash is to restrain the LOI to 5 percent. (ii) IS codes impose
limitation of 35 percent on the maximum usage of Fly Ash in portland pozzolana cement
but there exists no limitation on the quantity of Fly Ash in concrete mix, if it is mixed
separately in site batching. (iii) HVFAC should be produced in mechanised batching plant
or RMC plant under necessary quality control. Target strength for developing HVFAC or
any concrete mix produced by mechanised mixer need not be fixed at characteristic
strength plus 1.65 times standard deviation. A conservative estimate of target strength is
21
1.2 times the characteristic strength for mix not leaner than grade M30. (iv) Neither IS
code nor codes of any other country provides guidelines on mixing method of HVFAC.
Published work on this subject suggests mixing method has influence on the performance
of HVFAC and other types of concrete mixes.
Maiti., S. C., Agarwal., Raj K.,Kumar. (2006)57the mineral admixtures, like flyash and
ggbs contribute to the strength development process at 28-days, similar to that of OPC in
concrete. This reinforces the observations made by an independent approach using
generalized Abram's Law for multi component cementing materials. The relationships can
thus be used for selecting water-cementitious materials ratio for the target 28-day
compressive strength of concrete containing Fly Ash or GGBS and a superplasticiser.
These relationships however cannot be used for very high-strength concrete that is, for
concrete having 28-day compressive strength above 80 MPa, using silica fume and a PC-
based superplasticiser. The trial mix approach is best for selecting mix proportions for
such high strength concrete.
2.8 CONCLUDING REMARKS
Ultra High Performance Concrete (UHPC) is one of the latest developments in

concrete technology. HPC refers to materials with a cement matrix and a
characteristic compressive strength in excess of 41 MPa, possibly attaining 75 MPa. The
hardened concrete matrix of High Performance Concrete (HPC) shows extraordinary
strength and durability properties. These features are the result of using very low
amounts of water, high amounts of cement, fine aggregates and micro fine
powders. These materials are characterized by a dense microstructure. The sufficient
workability is obtained by using superplastisizers. Supplementary cementitious materials
like Alccofine, Silica Fume, Metakaoline, Fly Ash, Rice Husk Ash are essential
ingredients of HPC. These material comprises of extremely fine particles and not only
fills up the space between the cement grains, but also reacts with the cement which
increasing the bond between cement matrix and aggregate particles. As a result of its
superior performance, HPC has found application in the storage of nuclear waste,
bridges, roofs, piers, long span girders, shell and seismic-resistant structures.
22
3. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter reviews the constituent materials, properties and deterioration mechanisms of
structural concrete. This was done in order to firstly identify the most significant
properties of structural concrete which should be investigated in this research work before
establishing the limits within which supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) can be
used as a cement replacement material in structural concrete. The second reason was to
achieve a good understanding of the factors which affect various properties of concrete, so
that the experimental programme can be designed to investigate the comparative influence
of SCMs on properties of concrete.
A comprehensive review of the structural concrete is beyond the scope of this thesis.
Detailed information can be readily found from the literature (Neville, 1995a; Monteiro,
1993; BS 8110: Part 1, 1997; The Institution of Structural Engineers and The Concrete
Society, 1987)76, 96, 19.
3.2 MATERIALS
Concrete can be defined as a stone like material that has a cementitious medium within
which aggregates are embedded. In hydraulic cement concrete, the binder is composed of
a mixture of hydraulic cement and water (ACI Committee 116)2. Concrete has an oven-dry
density greater than 2000 kg/m3 but not exceeding 2600 kg/m3 (BS EN 206-1:2000)27. The
materials used for concrete will be briefly reviewed in the following sections.
3.2.1 BINDER
The function of the binder in concrete is to chemically bind all the constituent materials to
form a stone like material. The commonly used binders in concrete are cement, Fly Ash
(FA), Silica Fume (SF), Metakaoline, Alccofine and Rice Husk Ash (RHA).
23
3.2.1.1 FLY ASH (FA)
Fly Ash (FA) class F, known also as pulverized- fuel ash, is the by-product obtained by
electrostatic and mechanical means from flue gases of power station furnaces fired with
pulverized coal. The similarity of FA to natural pozzolans of volcanic origin has
encouraged the use of FA in conjunction with Portland cement in making the concrete.
FA is complicated in its chemical and phase compositions. It consists of heterogeneous

combinations of glassy and crystalline phases. However, wide ranges exist in the amounts
of the three principal constituents- SiO2 (25 to 60%), Al2O3 (10 to 30%), and Fe2O3 (5 to
25%). FA can be categorised into two classes, i.e. Class F and Class C, according to
ASTM C 618-99 (1999)7. If the sum of these three ingredients is 70% or greater, the FA is
categorised as Class F. However, as Class C, FA generally contain significant percentages
of calcium compounds reported as CaO, the sum of the three constituents just mentioned
is required only to be greater than 50%. The Fly Ash used in this research work was
collected from Wanakbori Thermal Power Station, Kheda, and Gujarat. Physical and
Chemical properties of Fly Ash is presented in table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Physical and Chemical Properties of Fly Ash

Sr Results Required as per IS
Test
No Obtained 3812:Part 1 : 2003
SiO2 +Al2O3 + Fe2O3 percent by mass,
1 95 70
minimum
2 SiO2 percent by mass, minimum 64 35
3 MgO percent by mass maximum 2 5
Total sulphur as sulphur trioxide (SO3),
4 1.6 2.75
percent by mass, maximum
Loss on Ignition(LOI), percent by mass,
5 1 12
maximum
6 Specific gravity 2.24 --
2
Fineness – specific surface area in m /kg,
7 380 320
minimum
Lime reactivity, average compressive
8 5.2 4
strength in N/mm2, minimum
It is generally accepted that, in the pozzolanic reaction of FA, the Ca(OH)2 produced
during cement hydration reacts with the silicate and aluminate phases of FA to produce
24
calcium silicate and aluminate hydrates (Lea, 1970)53. Its pozzolanic activity is attributed
to the presence of SiO2 and Al2O3 in amorphous form (Wesche, 1991)101.
3.2.1.2 SILICA FUME (SF)
Silica Fume (SF) is an extremely reactive pozzolanic material. It is a by-product obtained

from the manufacture of silicon or ferro-silicon. It is extracted from the flue gases from
electric arc furnaces. SF particles are very fine with particle sizes about hundred times
smaller than those of average size of OPC particles. It is a densified powder or is in the
form of water slurry. The standard specifications of Silica Fume are defined in ASTM
1240. It is commonly used at a replacement level of 5% to 12%by mass of total
cementitious materials. It can be used successfully for the structures where high strength is
needed or significantly reduced permeability to water is the major concern. Silica fume
used in this study was taken from BASF Inc. Extraordinary procedures are required to be
adopted for handling, placing and curing concrete with these very fine SF particles.
Physical and Chemical properties of Silica Fume is presented in table 3.2.
3.2.1.3 RICE HUSK ASH (RHA)
Amorphous (non-crystalline) RHA was used as a supplementary cementing material

(SCM). It was available in very fine powder form with a grey color.RHA was tested for
relative density, Blaine specific surface area, accelerated pozzolanic activity, particle size
distribution, and chemical composition. The accelerated pozzolanic activity was
determined according to the procedure used for Silica Fume. The hydrometer method, as
mentioned in ASTM D 422 (2004)11 was applied for the particle size analysis of RHA.
The borate fusion whole rock analysis by XRF spectrometry was used to determine the
oxide composition and loss on ignition of RHA. The rice husk ash used in this study was
obtained from rice processing mill, Bavla. Physical and Chemical properties of Rice Husk
Ash is presented in table 3.2.
In addition, the RHA was tested for the sulfur, carbon and chloride contents. The LECO
C/S Analyser was used to determine the total sulfur and carbon contents of RHA by
combustion. The chloride content was obtained by the pressed powder XRF analysis.
25
Table 3.2 Physical and Chemical Properties of Rice Husk Ash and Silica Fume
Rice Husk Ash
Parameter Unit Results Obtained
SiO2 % 80.2
Al2O3 % 0.14
Fe2O3 % 0.1
Reactive Slice % 18.1
MgO % 0.23
SO3 % 0.26
Na2O % 0.37
Cl2 % 0.17
Loss of Ing. % 4.7
CaO % 0.55
Phosphorous (P2O5) % 0.35
Potassium (K2O) % 1.3
PH % 8.9
Silica Fume
SiO2 % 86.7
Loss of Ing. % 2.5
Moisture % 0.7
Pozz. Activity Index % 129
Sp. Surface Area m2/gm 22
3.2.1.4 ALCCOFINE (A)
Alccofine is a new generation, ultrafine, low calcium silicate product, manufactured in

India. It has distinct characteristics to enhance 'performance of concrete' in fresh and
hardened stages. Alccofine performs in superior manner than all other mineral admixtures
used in concrete within India. Due to its inbuilt CaO content, Alccofine triggers two way
reactions during hydration
 Primary reaction of cement hydration.

 Pozzolanic reaction: ALCCOFINE also consumes by product calcium
hydroxide from the hydration of cement to form additional C-S-H gel
26
This results in denser pore structure and ultimately higher strength gain. The Alccofine
used in this study was obtained from Abuja cement outlet. Physical and Chemical
properties of Alccofine is presented in table 3.3.
Table 3.3 Physical and Chemical Properties of Alccofine

Bulk Particle Size Distribution
Fineness Specific
Density
(cm2/gm) Gravity D10 D50 D90
(Kg/m3)
>12000 2.9 700-900 1.5 micron 5 micron 9 micron
Chemical Properties
CaO SO3 SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 MgO
61-64% 2-2.4 % 21-23 % 5-5.6 % 3.8-4.4 % 0.8-1.4 %
3.2.1.5 METAKAOLINE (M)
Metakaoline is a highly reactive pozzolanic classified as ultra-fine with an average

diameter around 1-2 microns. The presence of Metakaoline has a huge effect on the
hydration of cement. When Portland cement alone hydrates, typically 20-30% of the
resulting paste mass is CH. However, when Metakaoline is added, it reacts rapidly with
these newly forming CH compounds to produce supplementary calcium silicate hydrate.
The pozzolanic reaction of Metakaoline is considered to be very effective and similar than
Silica Fume. Thus, the partial replacement of cement by Metakaoline will increase the
performance of concrete either in early or at long term ages. The Metkaoline used in
this study was retrieved from 20 Micron (An Industry located in Kutch Region of Gujarat).
The optimum cement replacement content is less than 20%. Some authors indicate 5% and
for Portuguese Metakaoline report the value 15%.
Table 3.4 Physical and Chemical Properties of Metakaoline

Percentage By Mass
Chemical Properties
Metakaoline (M)
Silicon dioxide, SiO2 51.6
Aluminium oxide, Al2O3 41.3
Ferric oxide, Fe2O3 0.64
Calcium oxide CaO 0.52
Magnesium oxide MgO 0.16
Loss on ignition 0.72
2
Specific surface area (m /kg) 2200 – 2500
27
3.2.1.6 ORDINARY PORTLAND CEMENT (OPC)

The basic raw material is clinker, which is made from the limestone. Three grades of
cement are generally available in market – 53, 43 & 33 grades. The requirements of
properties of all these cements are given in the following Indian standards. IS: 12269 -
1987 (53 grade)40, IS: 8112-1989 (43 grade)44, IS: 269-1989 (33 grade)42. In this
Dissertation Work, the Ambuja Cement 53 Grade is selected. The technical properties are
as follows (Table 3.5):
Table 3.5 Physical and Chemical Properties of Cement
Average Value for OPC Used Standard Value for
Property
in Present Investigation OPC
Specific gravity 3.15 -
Consistency (%) 31% -
Initial setting time (min) 42 > 30
Final setting time (min) 450 <600
Soundness (mm) 1.1 <10
2
Compressive Strength (N/mm )
3-days 29 >27
7-days 40 >37
28-days 57 >53
Chemical Properties
Silicon dioxide, SiO2 20.1
Aluminium oxide, Al2O3 4.51
Ferric oxide, Fe2O3 2.5
Calcium oxide CaO 61.3
Magnesium Oxide MgO 1
Loss on ignition 2.41
2
Specific surface area (m /kg) 200-300
3.2.2 AGGREGATES
Concrete is made of aggregates which are bound with cement paste which is a product
from cement hydration, a reaction between cement and water. Some admixtures can be
used to meet the requirements of concrete properties e.g. to increase workability, to retard
time set, to achieve high compressive strength, and to increase its durability
(Ramachandran, 1995)84.
28
The aggregate for concrete consists of coarse aggregate and fine aggregate. The fine
aggregate has a grading of size between 150 µm to 4.75 mm whereas coarse aggregate has
larger size than fine aggregate, up to the size of 63 mm (ASTM C33-03, 2003)10.
To produce high strength concrete, it is very important to select the materials. In

this study, the aggregate used is coarse aggregate which has maximum size of 10
mm. This use is based on the result investigated in previous research which showed that
the use of small coarse aggregate leads to the increase of concrete strength in
comparison to the larger aggregate as smaller aggregate is stronger than the larger
ones. In addition, the low strength of concrete using larger aggregate is caused by the
bigger size of aggregate make the transition zone becomes larger and more vary (Aïtcin
P.C, 1988, Aïtcin, 2004)3.
In addition to the aggregate size, since the cement matrix becomes a granular
skeleton of the aggregate, the lower the distance between two adjacent coarse aggregate
particles, the higher the matrix strength. Aggregates may be natural, man-made.
Recycled from material previously used in construction can be used as aggregates. As at
least three-quarters of the volume of concrete is occupied by aggregates, they impart
considerable influence on strength, dimensional stability, and durability of concrete. They
also play a major role in determining the cost and workability of concrete mixtures.
Aggregate properties greatly influence the behaviour of concrete, since they occupy about
80% of the total volume of concrete. The aggregate are classified as
I. Fine aggregate and II. Coarse aggregate
Fine aggregate are material passing through an IS sieve that is less than 4.75mm
gauge beyond which they are known as coarse aggregate. Coarse aggregate form the
main matrix of the concrete, whereas fine aggregate form the filler matrix between
the coarse aggregate. The most important function of the fine aggregate is to provide
workability and uniformity in the mixture. The fine aggregate also helps the cement paste
to hold the coarse aggregate particle in suspension.
According to IS 383:197043 the fine aggregate is being classified in to four

different zone, that is Zone-I, Zone-II, Zone-III, Zone-IV. Also in case of coarse aggregate
maximum 20 mm coarse aggregate is suitable for concrete work. But where there is no
29
restriction 40 mm or large size may be permitted. In case of close reinforcement 10 mm

size also used.
They contribute to both the weight and stiffness of concrete. Generally, coarse aggregates
are derived from rock. Their properties depend on the mineralogical composition of rock,
the environmental exposure to which the rock has been subjected, and the method of
crushing employed to get the different sizes. In India, crushed rock is used as coarse
aggregate.
River sand is preferred for fine aggregate of late the lack of availability of river sand has
led to the use of artificial sands, especially in southern states.
The general size of coarse aggregate is 10mm and 20mm. The important parameters of
coarse aggregate that influence the performance of concrete are its shape, texture and the
maximum size. Since the aggregate is generally stronger than the paste, its strength is not a
major factor for normal strength concrete, or for HES and VES concretes. However, the
aggregate strength becomes important in the case of high performance concrete. Physical
properties of aggregates used in this study are presented in table 3.6 to 3.11.
Table 3.6 Physical Properties of Fine Aggregates

Test Method Results Specifications
Sr. No. Type of Test
Standard Obtained As Per IS-383
A Particle Size and Shape IS-2386-P-1
1 Material Finer than 75-Micron (%) 1.6 Max.-3%
Deleterious Materials and Organic
B IS-2386-P-2
Impurities (%)
1 Clay Lumps -- Max.-1%
2 Soft Particles -- --
3 Light Weight Peces (Coal and Lignite) -- Max.-1%
4 Clay, Fine Silt, & Fine Dust -- --
5 Organic Impurities -- --
C Specific Gravity IS-2386-P-3 2.6
D Water Absorption (%) IS-2386-P-3 0.08
E Bulk Density (gm/cc) IS-2386-P-3 --
F Soundness (5 Cycles) IS-2386-P-5 --
1 By Sodium Sulphate (%) -- Max.-10%
2 By Magnesium Sulphate (%) -- Max.-15%
30
Table 3.7 Gradation Results of Fine Aggregate

Size Fine Aggregate Specification As Per IS-383
Total Weight in gm. = 1000 Percentage Passing For
Zone-IV
Zone-II
Individual Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative
Zone-III
IS Sieve
Zone-I
Weight Weight Percentage Percentage
Size
Retained Retained Retained Passing
gm. gm. % %
10 mm 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 100
4.75 mm 36 36 3.6 96.4 90-100 90-100 90-100 95-100
2.36 mm 82 118 11.8 88.2 60-95 75-100 85-100 95-100
1.18 mm 169 287 28.7 71.3 30-70 55-90 75-100 90-100
600 mic. 220 507 50.7 49.3 15-34 35-59 60-79 80-100
300 mic. 281 788 78.8 21.2 20-5 30-8 12-40 15-50
150 mic. 148 936 93.6 6.4 0-10 0-10 0-10 0-15
Pan 64 1000 100 0
Total 1000 F.M.= 2.67
Table 3.8 Physical Properties of Coarse Aggregates (10 mm)

Sr. Test Method Results Specifications As
Type of Test
No. Standard Obtained Per IS-383
1 Material Finer than 75-Micron -- Max. – 6%
2 Flakiness and Elongation Index 29.7
3 Angularity Number --
B Specific Gravity IS-2386-P-3 2.82
C Water Absorption IS-2386-P-3 0.9
D Bulk Density IS-2386-P-3 1555
E Mechanical Properties IS-2386-P-4
1 Aggregate Crushing Value 16.8 Max. – 45%
2 10% Fines Value --
3 Aggregate Impact Value 10.3 Max. – 45%
4 Aggregate Abrasion Value 21.3 Max. – 50%
5 Polished Stone Value --
F Stripping Value IS-6241 --
G Soundness (5 Cycles) IS-2386-P-5 --
1 By Sodium Sulphate -- Max. – 12%
2 By Magnesium Sulphate -- Max. – 18%
31
Table 3.9 Gradation Results of Coarse Aggregate (10 mm)

Size Coarse Aggregate (10 mm) Specification As Per IS-383
Percentage Passing For Single Sized Aggregate of
Total Weight in gm. = 9420
Nominal Size (mm)
Percentage Retained
Cumulative Weight
Percentage Passing
Individual Weight
Cumulative
Cumulative
Retained
Retained
IS Sieve
63 40 20 16 12.5 10
Size
gm. gm. % %
80 mm 0 0 0 100 100 - - - - -
63 mm 0 0 0 100 85-100 100 - - - -
40 mm 0 0 0 100 0-30 85-100 100 - - -
20 mm 0 0 0 100 0-5 0-20 85-100 100 - -
16 mm 0 0 0 100 - - - 85-100 100 -
12.5 mm 0 0 0 100 - - - - 85-100 100
10 mm 1090 1090 10.09 89.10 0-5 0-5 0-20 0-30 0-45 85-100
4.75 mm 7540 8630 86.3 13.7 - - 0-5 0-5 0-10 0-20
2.36 mm 790 9420 94.20 5.8 - - - - - 0-5
Total (9420)
Table 3.10 Physical Properties of Coarse Aggregates (20 mm)

Sr. Test Method Results Specifications
Type of Test
No. Standard Obtained As Per IS-383
1 Material Finer Than 75-Micron -- Max. – 6%
2 Flakiness and Elongation Index 23.6
3 Angularity Number --
B Specific Gravity IS-2386-P-3 2.88
C Water Absorption IS-2386-P-3 0.95
D Bulk Density IS-2386-P-3 1478
E Mechanical Properties IS-2386-P-4
1 Aggregate Crushing Value 16.8 Max. – 45%
2 10% Fines Value --
3 Aggregate Impact Value 8.9 Max. – 45%
4 Aggregate Abrasion Value 16.8 Max. – 50%
5 Polished Stone Value --
F Stripping Value IS-6241 --
G Soundness (5 Cycles) IS-2386-P-5 --
1 By Sodium Sulphate -- Max. – 12%
2 By Magnesium Sulphate -- Max. – 18%
32
Table 3.11 Gradation Results of Coarse Aggregate (20 mm)

Size Coarse Aggregate (20 mm) Specification As Per IS-383
Percentage Passing For Single Sized Aggregate of
Total Weight in gm. = 25000
Nominal Size (mm)
Percentage Retained
Cumulative Weight
Percentage Passing
Individual Weight
Cumulative
Cumulative
Retained
Retained
IS Sieve
63 40 20 16 12.5 10
Size
gm. gm. % %
80 mm 0 0 0 100 100 - - - - -
63 mm 0 0 0 100 85-100 100 - - - -
40 mm 0 0 0 100 0-30 85-100 100 - - -
20 mm 1700 1700 6.8 93.2 0-5 0-20 85-100 100 - -
16 mm 16250 17950 71.8 28.2 - - - 85-100 100 -
12.5 mm 4210 22160 88.64 11.36 - - - - 85-100 100
10 mm 2430 24590 98.36 1.64 0-5 0-5 0-20 0-30 0-45 85-100
4.75 mm 410 25000 100 0 - - 0-5 0-5 0-10 0-20
2.36 mm 0 25000 100 0 - - - - - 0-5
Total (25000)
3.2.3 WATER
Water plays two roles in the production of concrete, which are as mixing water and curing
water (Popovics, 1992)82. The mixing water is the free water present in freshly mixed
concrete. It has three main functions: (i) it reacts with the cement powder, thus producing
hydration; (ii) it acts as a lubricant, contributing to the workability of the fresh mixture;
and (iii) it secures the necessary space in the paste for the development of hydration
products. The water used in this study was potable in nature. The amount of water needed
for adequate workability is practically always greater than that needed for complete
hydration of the cement. Usually, if water is potable, then it is also suitable in making the
concrete.
3.2.4 GLENIUM SKY 784 SUPER PLASTICIZER
GLENIUM SKY 784 is the super plasticizer based on second generation polycarboxylic
ether polymers, developed using nano technology. The product has been primarily
developed for producing economical, high performance, high grade ready-mix concrete
with total performance control. GLENIUM SKY 784 is free of chloride and low alkali. It
is compatible with all type of cements. Major Uses of GLENIUM SKY 784 are following
33
 To produce economical, high grade concrete (>M45) with minimum micro-silica or

Metakaolin.
 GLENIUM SKY 784 is used for the production of high quality ready-mix concrete.
 GLENIUM SKY 784 may be used in combination with GLENIUM STREAM 2 for
producing Rheodynamic concrete, capable of self-compaction, even in the presence of
dense reinforcement.
GLENIUM SKY 784 is based on technology on Total Performance Control concept which
ensures that ready-mix producers, contractors and engineers get a concrete that is the same
high quality as originally specified; starting from the production at the batching plant, to
the delivery and application into place and followed by its hardening process. Utilizing
rheodynemic concrete thechnology, it provides a concrete mix with exceptional placing
characteristics and accelerated cement hydration for early strength development and high-
quality concrete.
3.3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This part of thesis describes the research methodology used in achieving the objectives
mentioned in Chapter 1. Details of the materials used, the methods adopted in preparing
the test specimens and the different test procedures are discussed in preceding chapters.
The experimental program consisted of four main stages, the layout of which is shown in
figure. 3.1
Figure 3.1 Layout of the Programme of Investigation
34
Stage 1: Selection of Supplementary Cementitious Materials
In this stage SCM were selected based on results obtained from literature review,
chemical analysis, cost effectiveness and availability in nearby areas. Based on scrutiny
process, SCM’s selected are Fly Ash (FA), Silica Fume (SF), Metakaoline, Alccofine and
Rice Husk Ash (RHA).
Stage 2: Mix Proportions
The mix proportions of various constituents of concrete were established for a constant
slump between 60-90 mm after a number of trials. This slump value was chosen due to
excessive use of this range in the field. In Table 4.3 and 4.4, a summary of the
investigation is presented.
Stage 3: Experimental Investigation
The influence of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) on various physical and

durability properties of concrete was investigated from destructive and nondestructive
testing. In Table 4.3 and 4.4 summary of the investigation is presented. The results of
stage 3 are discussed in Chapter 4.
Stage 4: Development of Empirical Model
The empirical model is developed by multivariate regression analysis to predict

compressive strength, flexural strength and split tensile strength from SCM proportion and
NDT results at diverse water/binder ratio for binary and ternary mixes at 28 and 56 days.
Stage 5: Development of VB Platform
Empirical models are used to develop visual basic platform for quick, easy and rapid
structural health monitoring tool high performance concrete construction.
35
4. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
4.1 OVERVIEW
Based on literature review, it is proved that the use of supplementary cementitious

materials in concrete has dual advantages in supporting green environment as well
as improving some of concrete properties. The utilization of green materials as Fly Ash
reduces the waste from the combustion of coal-fired power station and reduces CO2
emissions due to the utilization of Portland cement in concrete industry. Hence, in this
research it was decided to use supplementary cementitious material to improve the
strength of HPC.
As high performance concrete not only depends on its strength but also on other
mechanical properties, the mechanical properties of high performance concrete
incorporated with supplementary cementitious materials were also investigated i.e.
properties of fresh concrete, properties of hardened concrete and the durability of
concrete. Test for fresh concrete consists of time setting and slump test. In addition, test
for hardened concrete consists of compressive strength, flexural strength, and split
tensile strength. In addition to the hardened concrete tests, the durability tests of concrete
were also conducted which consisted of rapid chloride penetration test, sorptivity test,
chloride attack test and sea water attack test. In addition, nondestructive testing from
rebound hammer and ultrasonic pulse velocity is also conducted on concrete specimen for
development of model for in situ quality monitoring.
4.2 CONCRETE SPECIMENS
This research observed two factors to produce high strength concrete, i.e. the use of
supplementary cementitious material and variation in W/B ratio in high performance
concrete. This research commenced by finding the optimum concrete mix design of HPC
using SCM. HPC mixes were designed by IS 10262: 200935 for High Performance
Concrete. The concrete specimens have dimensions of 150 x 150 x 150 mm cubes
36
for compressive strength test, beams of 150 x 700 x 700 mm for flexural strength test and
cylinder of dia.150 mm x 300 mm for split tensile strength.
To compare the result of conventional high performance concrete, a series of control

concrete mixes was also investigated incorporating various SCM. Therefore, all variations
of mix proportion used in this experiment are:
4.2.1 BINARY MIX
a) High performance concrete comprising of Rice Husk Ash (5%, 7.5%, 10% and
12.5%) as supplementary cementitious material incorporating variation in W/B
ratio from 0.3 to 0.5.
b) High performance concrete comprising of Fly Ash (20% to 35%) as supplementary
cementitious material incorporating variation in W/B ratio from 0.3 to 0.5.
c) High performance concrete comprising of Alccofine (4% to 14%) as
supplementary cementitious material incorporating variation in W/B ratio from 0.3
to 0.5.
d) High performance concrete comprising of Silica Fume (6%, 8%… 14%) as
to 0.5.
e) High performance concrete comprising of Metakaoline (6%, 8%… 14%) as
to 0.5.
f) Super-plasticizer content has been taken 1.00% of total binder content on all above
mentioned proportion.
4.2.2 TERNARY MIX
a) High performance concrete comprising of Fly Ash (20%, 25% and 30%) and
Alccofine (6%, 7% and 8%) as supplementary cementitious material incorporating
variation in W/B ratio from 0.3 to 0.5.
b) High performance concrete comprising of Fly Ash (20%, 25%, and 30%) and
Silica Fume (9%, 10% and 11%) as supplementary cementitious material
incorporating variation in W/B ratio from 0.3 to 0.5.
37
c) High performance concrete comprising of Fly Ash (20%, 25%, and 30%) and
Silica Fume (10%, 11%, 12% and 13%) as supplementary cementitious material
incorporating variation in W/B ratio from 0.3 to 0.5.
d) Super-plasticizer content has been taken 1.0% of total binder content on all above
mentioned proportion.
The number of specimens needed for this experiment is shown in Figure 4.2 ,
matrix of specimens. For concrete tests 4644 concrete cubes, 1944 concrete cylinders
and 936 concrete beams were used. Same number of specimens is also used for
nondestructive testing of concrete.
Figure 4.1 Casted Cube, Beam and Cylindrical Samples
38
Mechanical Properties of Concrete : Binary Mix

Flexural Strength Test Split TensileStrength Test
Compressive Strength Test (Cubes)
Mix (Beams) (Cylinders)
7 14 28 56 Total 28 56 Total 28 56 Total
Rice Hush Ash 36 36 36 36 144 36 36 72 36 36 72
Fly Ash 72 72 72 72 288 36 36 72 36 36 72
Alccofine 99 99 99 99 396 36 36 72 36 36 72
Silica Fume 45 45 45 45 180 36 36 72 36 36 72
Metakaoline 45 45 45 45 180 36 36 72 36 36 72
Binary Mix Total 297 297 297 297 1188 180 180 360 180 36 216
Mechanical Properties of Concrete : Ternary Mix

Flexural Strength Test Split TensileStrength Test
Compressive Strength Test (Cubes)
Mix (Beams) (Cylinders)
7 14 28 56 Total 28 56 Total 28 56 Total
Fly Ash + Alccofne 81 81 81 81 324 81 81 162 81 81 162
Fly Ash +Silica Fume 108 108 108 108 432 108 108 216 108 108 216
Fly Ash + Metakaoline 99 99 99 99 396 99 99 198 99 99 198
Ternary Mix Total 288 288 288 288 1152 288 288 576 288 288 576
Durability Properties : Ternary Mix

RCPT & Sorptivity Test
Chloride Attack Test Sea Water Attack Test
(100 mm Ø and 50 mm thick AECT (Cubes)
Mix (Cubes) (Cubes)
Disc.)
28 56 Total 28 56 Total 28 56 Total 28 56 Total
Fly Ash + Alccofne 162 162 324 81 81 162 81 81 162 81 81 162
Fly Ash +Silica Fume 216 216 432 108 108 216 108 108 216 108 108 216
Fly Ash + Metakaoline 198 198 396 99 99 198 99 99 198 99 99 198
Ternary Mix Total 576 576 1152 288 288 576 288 288 576 288 288 576
Figure 4.2 Numbers of Samples for Experimental Investigation
4.3 DESIGN OF EXPERIMENT
Design of experiment or experimental design is about planning and conducting

experiments and about analyzing the resulting data, so that valid and objective
conclusions are obtained. If experiment is a representation of a model as can be seen in
figure 4.3, planning an experiment is about preparing a process as a combination of
operations, machines, methods, people and other resources in which some of variables are
controllable and other variables are uncontrollable, and transforming some input into an
output that has one or more response observable variables.
The experimental design utilizes multivariate optimization, a technique that is being used
increasingly in chemistry, chemical engineering, food engineering, pharmacology and
others fields. The major advantage of multivariate design is that it has a higher
applicability, minimal costs and a high degree of accuracy. In addition, interaction
39
among factors can only be discovered by using multivariate strategies. Moreover, the
objective of the experimental design may include:
a) Determining which variables are most influential on the response.

b) Determining where to set the influential controllable variables so the output is almost
always near the desired value.
c) Determining where to set the influential controllable variables to lead the small
variability in output, and
d) Determining where to set the influential controllable variables to minimize the effect
of uncontrollable factors.
Figure 4.3 General Model of a Process (Montgomery, 2009)
Each design factor consists of a level which figures out the different treatment of
each factor. In addition, when the design of experiment has two levels for each factor,
the result is considered as linear response. In this research, With the factors and level
being used in design of experiment resulted in:
a) Variation supplementary cementitious material

b) Variation in water/binder ratio.
c) NDT test for in-situ health monitoring
4.4 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
In the experimental program, three basic tests for mechanical properties of concrete were
conducted i.e. tests for compressive strength, flexural strength and split tensile strength.
The mechanical properties of concrete were tested at the ages of 7 days, 14 days, 28 days
and 56 days. The compressive strength was tested on concrete cubes of 150 x 150 x
40
150 mm after water curing for 7 days, 14 days, 28 days and 56 days. The flexural
strength was tested using concrete beams with dimension of 150 x 700 x 700 mm after
curing in the water for 7 days, 14 days, 28 days and 56 days. The split tensile strength was
tested using concrete cylinders with dimension φ150 mm x 300 mm after curing in the
water for 7 days, 14 days, 28 days and 56 days. Besides those strength tests of the
concrete, the durability tests of concrete were also conducted which consisted of rapid
chloride penetration test, sorptivity test, chloride attack test and sea water attack test. In
addition, nondestructive testing from rebound hammer and ultrasonic pulse velocity is also
conducted on concrete cubes and beam of dimension same as specimen of compressive
strength test and flexural strength test.
4.5 CONCRETE MIXING
Before mixing the concrete, binders were kept dry and placed in a moisture-proof
container to prevent the initiation of hydration and difficulties in handling. Fine and
coarse aggregate was maintained in a saturated surface-dry condition 24 hours prior to use.
All the concrete materials were stored at room temperature in the range of 200 to 300C.
It is important to have proper mixing to ensure all surfaces of the aggregate

particles were coated with binder paste and the ingredients were blended into a uniform
mass. In this study, the drum type mixer was used as shown in figure 4.4 The workability
tests adopted in this investigation was slump test for the concrete. The slump test
was carried out in accordance to IS: 1199 – 195936.
Figure 4.4 Drum Mixer Used in Experimental Investigation
41
4.6 CURING OF SPECIMENS
Concrete must be properly cured to develop its optimum properties. To prevent

evaporation of water from the un hydrated concrete, the specimens were
immediately covered with wet gunny sack after molded. The specimens were removed
from the molds after 24±8 hours, moist cured in water tank as shown in figure 4.5.
Figure 4.5 Curing of Samples in Water Tank
4.7 WORKABILITY PROPERTIES
Following test perform for find out Workability Properties of concrete

 Slump test
 Flow test
4.7.1 SLUMP TEST
The workability of concrete is one of the functions of the relative magnitudes of various
concrete mix constituents. Slump Test is one of the tests which measure the
parameters close to workability and provide useful information about it. It is the most
commonly used method of measuring consistency of concrete which can be employed
either in lab or at the site. From this test, slump is deduced by measuring the drop from the
top of the slumped fresh concrete. Additional information on workability of concrete
can be obtained by observing the shape of the slump in concrete. Slump test as per
IS: 1199 – 195936 is followed. The apparatus used for doing slump test are Slump cone
42
and tamping rod. Procedure to determine workability of fresh concrete by slump test is as
follows:
a) The internal surface of the mould is thoroughly cleaned and applied with a light
coat of oil.
b) The mould is placed on a smooth, horizontal, rigid and nonabsorbent surface.
c) The mould is then filled in four layers with freshly mixed concrete, each
approximately to one-fourth of the height of the mould.
d) Each layer is tamped 25 times by the rounded end of the tamping rod (strokes are
distributed evenly over the cross section).
e) After the top layer is rodded, the concrete is struck off the level with a trowel.
f) The mould is removed from the concrete immediately by raising it slowly in the
vertical direction.
g) The difference in level between the height of the mould and that of the highest
point of the subsided concrete is measured.
h) This difference in height in mm is the slump of the concrete.
Figure 4.6 Slump Test in Laboratory
4.7.2 FLOW TEST
Since the slump test was not suitable for the analysis of the fluidity of high performance
concrete, the slump flow test is conducted. The testing apparatus consists of a normal
slump cone and a steel plate with the dimensions of 900 × 900 mm. With this
43
apparatus, the time for high performance concrete to spread to 500 mm in diameter
for T50 time and the final slump flow diameters in the two orthogonal directions can
be measured as shown in figure 4.7.
Figure 4.7 Flow Test in Laboratory
4.7.3 TEST RESULTS FOR BINARY MIX
Slump test was performed on various proportions of supplementary cementitious material

as Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Metakaoline, Alccofine and Rice Husk Ash. Results obtained
from slump testing are under prescribed limit for all supplementary cementitious material
for binary as well as ternary mix. The results obtained from slump test for workability of
concrete is shown in figure 4.8 to 4.15.
Figure 4.8 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as
SCM
44
Figure 4.9 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.10 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
Figure 4.11 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as SCM
45
Figure 4.12 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
46
4.7.4 TEST RESULTS FOR TERNARY MIX
Figure 4.13 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine And Fly Ash as SCM
47
Figure 4.14 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
48
Figure 4.15 Slump Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM
4.8 MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE
Following Test Perform for Find out Mechanical Properties of Concrete
a) Compressive strength test (IS : 516 – 1959)38

b) Split Tensile strength test (IS : 5816-1970)39
c) Flexural strength test (IS : 516 – 1959)38
4.8.1COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST
The compression test was conducted as per IS 516–1959. The specimens were kept in
water for curing for 7 days, 14 days, 28 days and 56 days and on removal were tested in
dry condition and grit present on the surface. The load was applied without shock and
increased continuously at a rate of approximately 140 kg/sq. cm/min until the resistance of
the specimen to the increasing load breaks down and no greater load can be sustained. The
maximum load applied to the specimen was then recorded and the appearance of the
concrete for any unusual features in the type of failure was noted. Average of three values
was taken as the representatives of the compressive strength of the sample as noted.
Experimental set up for compressive strength testing is shown in figure 4.16.
Figure 4.16 Compressive Strength Testing Apparatus In Laboratory
49
4.8.1.1TEST RESULTS FOR BINARY MIX
The compressive strength is tested for the concrete for 3 cubes on different curing periods
for mix incorporating RHA as SCM. Then it is tested for twelve different proportions of
Rice Husk Ash and variable water/binder ratio. With the increase in the proportion up to
7.5%, there is a gradual increase in strength. Highest compressive strength is obtained
from combination of 7.5% of RHA and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show that it was
possible to obtain a compressive strength of as high as 70.41 MPa after 28 days. In
addition, strengths up to 72.46 MPa were obtained at 56 days. The results obtained from
compressive strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM is
shown in figure 4.17.
Figure 4.17 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
for mix incorporating Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for twenty four different
proportions of Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio. With the increase in the proportion
up to 25%, there is a gradual increase in strength. Highest compressive strength is
obtained from combination of 25% of FA and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show that it was
possible to obtain a compressive strength of as high as 30.55 MPa after 28 days. In
addition, strengths up to 35.11MPa were obtained at 56 days. The results obtained from
compressive strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Fly Ash as SCM is shown in
figure 4.18.
50
Figure 4.18 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
The compressive strength was tested for the concrete for 3 cubes on different curing
periods for mix incorporating Alccofine as SCM. Then it is tested for thirty three different
proportions of Alccofine and variable water/binder ratio. At 7% of Alccofine, if
percentage of Alccofine is increase or decrease, Strength is gradually decrease. Highest
compressive strength is obtained from combination of 7% of Alccofine and 0.3 W/B
Ratio. The results show that it was possible to obtain a compressive strength of as high as
27.14 MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to 30.15MPa were obtained at 56 days.
The results obtained from compressive strength testing of concrete mix incorporating
Alccofine as SCM is shown in figure 4.19.
Figure 4.19 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
51
for mix incorporating Silica Fume as SCM. Then it is tested for fifteen different
proportions of Silica Fume and variable water/binder ratio. With the increase in the
proportion up to10%, there is a gradual increase in strength. Highest compressive strength
is obtained from combination of 10% of FA and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show that it
was possible to obtain a compressive strength of as high as 34.74 MPa after 28 days. In
compressive strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Silica Fume as SCM is shown
in figure 4.20.
Figure 4.20 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as

SCM
Figure 4.21Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as

SCM
52
for mix incorporating Metakaoline as SCM. Then it is tested for fifteen different
proportions of Metakaoline and variable water/binder ratio. With the increase in the
proportion up to 12%, there is a gradual increase in strength. Highest compressive
strength is obtained from combination of 12% of Metakaoline and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The
results show that it was possible to obtain a compressive strength of as high as 40.32 MPa
after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to 52.42MPa were obtained at 56 days. The results
obtained from compressive strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Metakaoline as
SCM is shown in figure 4.21.
4.8.1.2 TEST RESULTS FOR TERNARY MIX
for mix incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for nine different
proportions of Alccofine and Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio. With the increase in
the proportion, there is a gradual increase in strength. Highest compressive strength is
obtained from combination of 8% of Alccofine and 25% of FA and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The
results show that it was possible to obtain a compressive strength of as high as 66 MPa
obtained from compressive strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Alccofine and
Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.22.
for mix incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for nine different
proportions of Silica Fume and Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio. With the increase
in the proportion, there is a gradual increase in strength. Highest compressive strength is
obtained from combination of 11% of Silica Fume and 20% of FA and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The
results show that it was possible to obtain a compressive strength of as high as 78MPa
obtained from compressive strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Silica Fume and
Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.23.
for mix incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for nine different
53
Figure 4.22 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM
54
Figure 4.23 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.24 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM
55
proportions of Metakaoline and Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio. With the increase
in the proportion, there is a gradual increase in strength. Highest compressive strength is
obtained from combination of 12% of Metakaoline and 30% of FA and 0.3 W/B Ratio.
The results show that it was possible to obtain a compressive strength of as high as 66
MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to 73.27MPa were obtained at 56 days. The
results obtained from compressive strength testing of concrete mix incorporating
Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.24.
4.8.2 SPLITTING TENSILE TEST
The split tensile test were conducted as per IS 5816:199939. The size of cylinder is 300
mm length with 150 mm diameter. The specimen were kept in water for curing for 28 days
and 56 days and on removal were tested in wet condition by wiping water and grit present
on the surface. The test is carried out by placing a cylindrical specimen horizontally
between the loading surfaces of a compression testing machine and the load is applied
until failure of the cylinder along the vertical diameter. The maximum load applied to the
specimen was then recorded and the appearance of the concrete for any unusual features in
the type of failure was noted. Average of three values was taken as the representative of
batch. The test is carried out by placing a cylindrical specimen horizontally between the
loading surfaces of a compression testing machine and the load is applied until failure of
the cylinder along the vertical diameter. To find split tensile strength following equation
has used. Figure 4.25 shows the testing of split tensile test.
Split tensile strength = 2P/ (πDL)

Where,
P = maximum applied load indicated by the testing machine [N]
L = length, in [mm]
D = diameter, in [mm]
56
Figure 4.25 Split Tensile Strength Testing Apparatus in Laboratory
4.8.2.1 TEST RESULTS FOR BINARY MIX
The result implore that the Fly Ash have pronounced effect on the tensile strength of
concrete. In addition, the splitting tensile strength of pozzolan concretes seemed to be
higher than that of control concrete, since the grain and pore refinement of concretes
resulted from the very high fineness of particles and pozzolanic reaction of the
ashes.
The split tensile strength is tested for the concrete for 3 cylinders on different curing
periods for mix incorporating RHA as SCM. Then it is tested for twelve different
proportions of Rice Husk Ash and variable water/binder ratio. With the increase in the
proportion up to 12.5%, there is a gradual increase in strength. Highest split tensile
strength is obtained from combination of 12.5% of RHA and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The results
show that it was possible to obtain a split tensile strength of as high as 4.62 MPa after 28
days. In addition, strengths up to 4.65 MPa were obtained at 56 days. The results obtained
57
from split tensile strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM is
shown in figure 4.26.
Figure 4.26 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as
SCM.
Figure 4.27 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
periods for mix incorporating Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for twenty four different
proportions of Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio. Highest split tensile strength is
obtained from combination of 25% of FA and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show that it was
possible to obtain a Split tensile strength as high as 2.89MPa after 28 days. In addition,
58
strengths up to 5.08MPa were obtained at 56 days. The results obtained from split tensile
strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.27.
periods for mix incorporating Alccofine as SCM. Then it is tested for thirty three different
proportions of Alccofine and variable water/binder ratio. Highest split tensile strength is
obtained from combination of 7% of Alccofine and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show that
it was possible to obtain a split tensile strength as high as 2.60MPa after 28 days. In
split tensile strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Alccofine as SCM is shown in
figure 4.28.
Figure 4.28 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
periods for mix incorporating Silica Fume as SCM. Then it is tested for thirty three
different proportions of Silica Fume and variable water/binder ratio. Highest split tensile
strength is obtained from combination of 10% of Silica Fume and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The
results show that it was possible to obtain a split tensile strength as high as 3.28MPa after
28 days. In addition, strengths up to 5.30MPa were obtained at 56 days. The results
obtained from split tensile strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Silica Fume as
SCM is shown in figure 4.29.
59
Figure 4.29 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as
SCM
periods for mix incorporating Metakaoline as SCM. Then it is tested for fifteen different
proportions of Metakaoline and variable water/binder ratio. Highest split tensile strength
is obtained from combination of 12% of Metakaoline and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show
that it was possible to obtain a split tensile strength as high as 3.42MPa after 28 days. In
split tensile strength testing of concrete mix incorporating Metakaoline as SCM is shown
in figure 4.30.
Figure 4.30 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as

SCM
60
The split tensile strength was tested for the concrete for 3 cylinders on different curing
periods for mix incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for nine
different proportions of Alccofine and Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio. Highest
Split tensile strength is obtained from combination of 8% of Alccofine, 25% Fly Ash and
0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show that it was possible to obtain a split tensile strength as
high as 7.00MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to 7.7MPa were obtained at 56
days. The results obtained from split tensile strength testing of concrete mix incorporating
Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.31.
periods for mix incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for nine
different proportions of Silica Fume and Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio. Highest
Split tensile strength is obtained from combination of 11% Silica Fume, 20% Fly Ash and
0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show that it was possible to obtain a split tensile strength as
high as 7.00 MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to 8.27MPa were obtained at 56
days. The results obtained from split tensile strength testing of concrete mix incorporating
Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.32.
periods for mix incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for
twelve different proportions of Metakaoline and Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio.
Highest split tensile strength is obtained from combination of 12% of Metakaoline, 30 %
Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results show that it was possible to obtain a split tensile
strength as high as 5.00MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to 6.03MPa were
obtained at 56 days. The results obtained from split tensile strength testing of concrete mix
incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.33.
61
Figure 4.31 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM
62
Figure 4.32 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
63
64
Figure 4.33 Split Tensile Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM
4.8.3 FLEXURAL STRENGTH
The test beam 100 x 100 x 700 mm was symmetrically supported on two parallel
steel rollers 38 mm in diameter and the distance between the centers of the two rollers
adjusted to 40 cm. The load is applied through one rollers mounted at the center point of
the supporting span. The load is applied without shock and increased continuously at a rate
of 180 kg/cm2/minute for the specimen. The load is increased till the specimen fails and
the maximum load sustained is recorded. The position of crack is observed and measured.
The flexural strength is expressed as the modulus of rupture fb as per the IS516.
Observations and results recorded at 28 and 56 days are tabulated in table 4.3 and 4.4.
Figure 4.34 Flexural Test Apparatus in Laboratory

The flexural strength is tested for the concrete for 3 beams on different curing periods for
mix incorporating RHA as SCM. Then it is tested for twelve different proportions of RHA
and variable water/binder ratio. Highest flexural strength is obtained from combination of
7.5 % RHA and 0.3 W/B Ratio. The results show that it was possible to obtain a flexural
strength as high as 5.87 MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to 6.58 MPa were
65
obtained at 56 days. The results obtained from flexural strength testing of concrete mix
incorporating RHA as SCM is shown in figure 4.35.
Figure 4.35 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
mix incorporating Fly Ash as SCM. Then it is tested for twenty one different proportions
of Fly Ash and variable water/binder ratio. Highest flexural strength is obtained from
combination of 25% Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results show that it was possible to
obtain a Flexural strength as high as 3.87 MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to
4.53MPa were obtained at 56 days. The results obtained from flexural strength testing of
concrete mix incorporating Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.36.
Figure 4.36 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
66
mix incorporating Alccofine as SCM. Then it is tested for thirty three different proportions
of Alccofine and variable water/binder ratio. Highest flexural strength is obtained from
combination of 7% Alccofine and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results show that it was possible to
obtain a flexural strength as high as 3.65 MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to
4.34MPa were obtained at 56 days. The results obtained from flexural strength testing of
concrete mix incorporating Alccofine as SCM is shown in figure 4.37.
Figure 4.37 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
The flexural strength is tested for the concrete for 3 beams on diverse curing periods for
mix including Silica Fume as SCM. Then it is tested for fifteen diverse proportions of
Silica Fume and variable water/binder ratio. Highest flexural strength is obtained from
combination of 10% Silica Fume and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results show that it was possible
to obtain a flexural strength as high as 4.13 MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to
4.91MPa were obtained at 56 days. The experimental results from flexural strength testing
of concrete mix incorporating Silica Fume as SCM is shown in figure 4.38.
mix including Metakaoline as SCM. Then it is tested for fifteen diverse proportions of
Metakaoline and variable water/binder ratio. Highest flexural strength is obtained from
combination of 12% Metakaoline and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results show that it was possible
to obtain a flexural strength as high as 4.22 MPa after 28 days. In addition, strengths up to
67
5.02 MPa were obtained at 56 days. The experimental results from Flexural strength
testing of concrete mix incorporating Metakaoline as SCM is shown in figure 4.39.
Figure 4.38 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as SCM
Figure 4.39 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
mix incorporating Alccofine, Silica Fume and Metakaoline with Fly Ash as SCM. The
experimental results from Flexural strength testing of these concrete mix proportions are
shown in Figure 4.40, 4.41 and 4.42.
Figure 4.40 depicts that at proportion of 8% Alccofine and 25 % Fly Ash, the results
obtained are satisfactory. Similarly in case of Silica Fume and Fly Ash, the optimum
proportion was 11% and 20% respectively as shown in figure 4.41. The results obtained
from ternary mix of Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM depicts that there is substantial
increment of flexural strength at proportion 12% Metakaoline and 30% Fly Ash.
68
Figure 4.40 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM
69
Figure 4.41 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
70
Figure 4.42 Flexural Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM
71
4.9 DURABILITY PROPERTIES

Following test perform for find out durability Properties of concrete
 Rapid chloride penetration test
 Sorptivity test
 Chloride attack test
 Sea water attack test
4.9.1 RAPID CHLORIDE PERMEABILITY TEST (RCPT)
This test method was originally developed by the Portland Cement Association, under a
research program paid for by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The original
test method may be found in federal highway report, “Rapid Determination of the
Chloride Permeability of Concrete.” Since the test method was developed, it has been
modified and adapted by various agencies and standard‟s organizations. These include:
• AASHTO T2771, “Standard Method of Test for Rapid Determination of the Chloride
Permeability of Concrete”
• ASTM C12029, “Standard Test Method for Electrical Indication of Concrete‟s Ability to
Resist Chloride Ion Penetration”
Many concrete structures are built today with specifications calling for low-permeability
concrete. The construction industry accepts this test procedure as a measurement for
determining chloride permeability.
As mentioned above, the Rapid Chloride Permeability test was developed in a FHWA
research program. The program was created to develop techniques to nondestructively
measure the chloride permeability of in-place concrete. Prior to the development of the
test.
Chloride migration through concrete, even in high water/cement ratio concrete, is a very
slow process. So, researchers looked for a test method that would accelerate this
migration. They found that when an electrical current was applied to a concrete specimen
it increased and accelerated the rate at which the chlorides migrated into concrete. The
researchers also found that if one measured the coulombs (the integral of current v/s. time
72
plot) that were passed through the sample and then compared these numbers to results
from a ponding test a good correlation existed. From these findings, researchers developed
the test procedures that are currently specified in AASHTO T2771 and ASTM C12029.
TEST PROCEDURE
The test method involves obtaining a 100 mm dia. and 50 mm thick disc sample from the
concrete being tested. The side of the cylindrical specimen is coated with epoxy, and after
the epoxy is dried, It is then placed in the test device (see test method for schematic of
device). The left-hand side (–) of the test cell is filled with a 3% NaCl solution. The right-
hand side (+) of the test cell is filled with 0.3N NaOH solution. The system is then
connected and a 60-volt potential is applied for 6 hours. Readings were taken every 15
minutes. At the end of 6 hours the sample is removed from the cell and the amount of
coulombs passed through the specimen is calculated.
Table 4.1 Chloride Ion Penetrability Based on Charge Passed (ASTM C1202)9.
Charge Pass Chloride

Remarks
(Coulombs) Penetrability
>4000 High High W/C ratio (>0.60) conventional PCC

Moderate W/C ratio (0.40–0.50) conventional
2000-4000 Moderate
PCC
1000-2000 Low Low W/C ratio (<0.40)
Latex-modified concrete or internally-sealed
100-1000 Very Low
concrete
<100 Negligible Polymer-impregnated concrete, Polymer concrete
Figure 4.43 Rapid Chloride Permeability Test Apparatus
73
Rapid Chloride Permeability test is conducted on cylindrical specimens of various

proportions of different supplementary cementitious material. Results of the rapid
determination of chloride permeability of concrete test show that highest resistance to
chloride penetration is obtained from combination of 8% Alccofine, 30% Flay Ash and 0.3
W/B Ratio. The results show that it was possible to obtain a resistance to chloride
penetration as high as 1911 coulombs MPa after 28 days 365.6 coulombs were obtained at
56 days. The results obtained from rapid chloride permeability test incorporating
Alccofine and Flay Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.44. For samples incorporating Silica
Fume and Flay Ash, results shows that it was possible to obtain a resistance to chloride
penetration as high as 2040 coulombs MPa after 28 days 529 coulombs were obtained at
56 days for 11% and 30% Flay Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results obtained from rapid
chloride permeability test incorporating Silica Fume and Flay Ash as SCM is shown in
figure 4.45. For samples incorporating Metakaoline and Flay Ash, results shows that it
was possible to obtain a resistance to chloride penetration as high as 1900 coulombs MPa
after 28 days 600 coulombs were obtained at 56 days for 13% Silica Fume and 30% Fly
Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results obtained from rapid chloride permeability test
incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.46.
Figure 4.44 Rapid Chloride Permeability Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating
74
75
4.9.2 ACCELERATED ELECTROLYTIC CORROSION TEST
For corrosion test the cylindrical specimen of 100 mm dia. & 200 mm height is taken.
While casting a 25 mm rod is placed at the center such that there is 25 mm cover at
bottom. The test setup that essentially measures resistivity of concrete consists of a
constant DC supply providing constant voltage of 60V through a shunt in a constant
voltage mode 80mA in constant current mode. The test was carried out in a 6% NaCl
solution with an embedded reinforcement bar as a working electrode and a rectangular
copper bar as a counter electrode. The variable parameter voltage was recorded at every
15min interval for 6 hrs in constant current study. The specimens were then taken out,
visually inspected and carefully split open to access the corroded steel bar. The
reinforcement bar was then cleaned as per ASTM G1 of 1981 by dipping it in dark
solution consisting of HCl of specific gravity 1.191 + antimony trioxide 20 gm + stannous
chloride 50gm for 25 min. Each bar was the weighed again to the accuracy of 0.1 mg to
find out the change in wt.
The discussion of Bamforth are of great significance in projecting the service life of
blended cement concrete vis-à-vis OPC concrete, which takes into account a surface
chloride level, the chloride corrosion threshold concentration, the effective diffusion
coefficient and the cover to reinforcement. According to him 24/30 grade concrete,
containing 40% Fly Ash is comparable to 50/60 grade concrete of OPC to offer 75 years‟
service life. In other words, he projected that Fly Ash blended concrete at lesser grade of
32/40 is sufficient with a cover thickness of 50mm as against 50/60 grade of OPC concrete
with 100 mm cover thickness to meet the service life criteria of 75 yrs. This study once
again establishes the redundancy of high strengths for service life, more so when
complementary cement materials are blended with OPC in the concrete.
Figure 4.47 Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion Test in Laboratory
76
4.9.2.1 TEST RESULTS OF TERNARY MIX
Experimental results of weight loss in % on steel rod of 25mm diameter embedded in

concrete cylinder for different for different proportions of supplementary cementitious
material. For samples incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash, results shows that it was
possible to obtain weight loss in % on steel rod as low as 28% after 28 days and 17.52%
were obtained at 56 days for 8% Alccofine and 30% Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The
results obtained from Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion test incorporating Alccofine and
Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.48. For samples incorporating Silica Fume and Fly
Ash, results shows that it was possible to obtain weight loss in % on Steel rod as low as
55.75% after 28 days and 28.75% were obtained at 56 days for 11% Silica Fume and 30%
Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results obtained from Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion
test incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.49. For samples
incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash, results shows that it was possible to obtain weight
loss in % on steel rod as low as 55.75% after 28 days and 28.75% were obtained at 56
days for 13% Metakaoline and 30% Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results obtained from
Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion test incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM is
shown in figure 4.50.`
Figure 4.48 Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion Results of Concrete Mix

77
Figure 4.49Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion Results of Concrete Mix

Figure 4.50 Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion Results of Concrete Mix

78
4.9.3 SORPTIVITY
Many building materials used in the construction industry are porous. The ingress of
moisture and the transport properties of these materials have become the underlying
source for many engineering problems such as corrosion of reinforcing steel and damage
due to freeze-thaw cycling or wetting and drying cycles. In the 1970‟s, suggested the
importance of studying the unsaturated flow of water in porous mediums. The capillary
potential (suction), the water diffusivity, and the hydraulic conductivity were stated as
being the three key parameters that needed further investigation (Hall 1987)33. This
research was conducted to devise experimental methods to quantify and transport
properties. Sorptivity was introduced as a testing method that consisted of a uni-directional
water absorption within a specimen. The cumulative absorbed volume of water per unit
area of inflow surface was related to the square root of the elapsed time (t0.5). The
following relationship was developed.
I=S.t1/2
Where S is termed the Sorptivity, which can be related to the hydraulic diffusivity of the
material. In short, Sorptivity is based on the rate of absorption, which is proportional to the
surface area exposed to moisture and time.
TEST PROCEDURE
The Sorptivity can be determined by the measurement of the capillary rise absorption rate
on reasonably homogeneous material. Water was used as the test fluid. The specimen were
drowned as shown in figure with water level not more than 5mm above the base of
specimen and the flow from the peripheral surface is prevented by sealing it properly with
non-absorbent coating. The quantity of water absorbed in a time period of 30 minutes was
measured by weighing the specimen on a top pan balance weighing up to 0.1mg. Surface
water on the specimen was wiped off with a dampened tissue and each weighing operation
was completed within 30 seconds.
Sorptivity(S) is a material property which characterizes the tendency of a porous material

to absorb & transmit water by capillarity. The cumulative water absorption (per unit area
of the inflow surface) increases as the square root of elapsed time„t‟.
79
I=S.t1/2 So, S =i/t1/2

Where,
S = Sorptivity in mm/min1/2
t = Elapsed time in min.
I = Δw/Ad
ΔW = Increase in weight
A = Surface area of the specimen through which water penetrated
d = Density of water
Figure 4.51 Sorptivity Test Apparatus in Laboratory
4.9.3.1 SORPTIVITY TEST RESULTS FOR TERNARY MIX

For samples incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash, results shows that it was possible to
obtain Sorptivity (mm/min0.5) as low as 0.1053 mm/min0.5 after 28 days and 0.0380
mm/min0.5were obtained at 56 days for 8% Alccofine and 30% Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio.
The results obtained from sorptivity test incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM is
shown in figure 4.52. For samples incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash, results shows
that it was possible to obtain sorptivity (mm/min0.5) as low as 0.1255 mm/min0.5 after 28
80
days and 0.0405 mm/min0.5 were obtained at 56 days for 11% Silica Fume and 30% Fly
Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results obtained from sorptivity Test incorporating Silica
Fume and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.53. For samples incorporating
Metakaoline and Fly Ash, results shows that it was possible to obtain sorptivity
(mm/min0.5) as low as 0.1378 mm/min0.5 after 28 days and 0.0559 mm/min0.5 were
obtained at 56 days for 13% Metakaoline and 30% Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results
obtained from sorptivity test incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in
figure 4.54.
Figure 4.52 Sorptivity Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine and Fly
Ash as SCM
Figure 4.53 Sorptivity Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume and
Fly Ash as SCM
81
Figure 4.54 Sorptivity Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline and
Fly Ash as SCM
4.9.4 CHLORIDE RESISTANCE TEST
This test was carried out on the 150 x 150 x 150 mm concrete cube. Total 6 cubes are
casted and demolded after 24 hours and at the ends of 28 days of normal curing period
tested. The specimens were taken out from the curing tank and initial weight was taken.
5% of sodium chloride by weight of water was added with water as per earlier
investigators. The concentration of the solution was maintained throughout this period by
changing the solution periodically. The specimens were taken out from the sulphate
solution after 28 days of continuous soaking. The surface of the cubes were cleaned,
weighed & then tested in the compressive testing machine under the uniform rate of
loading of 120 kg/cm2/min. The changes in strength of the concrete cube were calculated
as per IS: 516-195938.
Figure 4.55 Chloride Resistance Test in Laboratory
82
4.9.4 .1TEST RESULTS FOR TERNARY MIX:
The average loss of weight and loss of compressive strength of concrete is considerably
low. This indicates that incorporation of pozzolanic materials in concrete could be
considered to be reasonable in the aspects of more chloride resistance. For samples
incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash, results shows that it was possible to obtain % loss
chloride attack as low as 2.33% strength loss and 2.78% of weight loss for 8% Alccofine
and 30% Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results obtained from chloride resistance test
incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.56. For samples
incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash, results shows that it was possible to obtain % loss
chloride attack as low as 2.93% strength loss and 3.09% of weight loss for 11% Silica
Fume and 30% Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results obtained from chloride resistance
test incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.57. For samples
incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash, results shows that it was possible to obtain % loss
chloride attack as low as 3.22% strength loss and 3.46% of weight loss for 13%
Metakaoline and 30% Fly Ash and 0.3 W/B ratio. The results obtained from chloride
resistance test incorporating Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM is shown in figure 4.58.
Figure 4.56 Chloride Resistance Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating

83
Figure 4.57 Chloride Resistance Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica
Figure 4.58 Chloride Resistance Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating

4.9.5 SEA WATER ATTACK TEST
Effect of seawater on concrete deserves special attention. First, coastal and offshore sea
structures are exposed to the simultaneous action of a number of physical and chemical
84
deterioration processes, which provide an excellent opportunity to understand the

complexity of concrete durability problems in practice.
Concrete exposed to marine environment may deteriorate as a result of combined effects

of chemical action of seawater constituents on cement hydration products, alkali-aggregate
expansion (when reactive aggregates are present), crystallization pressure of salts within
concrete if one face of the structure is subject to wetting and others to drying conditions,
frost action in cold climates, corrosion of embedded steel in reinforced or prestressed
members, and physical erosion due to wave action and floating objects. Attack on concrete
due to any one of these causes tends to increase the permeability; not only would this
make the material progressively more susceptible to further action by the same destructive
agent but also to other types of attack.
Test Procedure
This test was carried out on the 150 x 150 x 150 mm concrete cube. Total 6 cubes are
casted and demolded after 24 hours and at the ends of 28 days of normal curing period
tested. The specimens were taken out from the curing tank and initial weight was taken.
5% of sea water (Jamnagar) by weight of water was added with water as per earlier
investigators. The concentration of the solution was maintained throughout this period by
changing the solution periodically. The specimens were taken out from the sulphate
solution after 28 days of continuous soaking. The surface of the cube were cleaned,
weighed & then tested in the compressive testing machine under the uniform rate of
loading of 120 kg/cm2/min. The changes in strength of the concrete cube were calculated
as per IS: 516-195938.

Effect of sea water on the strength of concrete incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash
explained in terms of weight loss (%) and strength loss (%) for different mix proportions.
Figure 4.59 show the relationship between % loss due to sea water and various proportions
of Alccofine and Fly Ash. Lowest loss in terms of weight (2.07%) and strength (5.18%) of
concrete is observed in concrete having 8% Alccofine and 30% of Fly Ash at 0.3 W/B
ratio. The results obtained for mix incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash explained in
terms of weight loss (%) and strength loss (%) for different mix proportions. Figure 4.60
85
show the relationship between % loss due to sea water and various proportions of Silica
Fume and Fly Ash. Lowest loss in terms of weight (2.69%) and strength (5.75%) of
concrete is observed in concrete having 11% Silica Fume and 30% of Fly Ash at 0.3 W/B
ratio. Figure 4.61 show the relationship between % loss due to sea water and various
proportions of Metakaoline and Fly Ash. Lowest loss in terms of weight (3.07%) and
strength (7.01%) of concrete is observed in concrete having 13% Metakaoline and 30% of
Fly Ash at 0.3 W/B ratio.
Figure 4.59 Sea Water Attack Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine
and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.60 Sea Water Attack Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica
86
Figure 4.61Sea Water Attack Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating

4.10 NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF CONCRETE
Following tests are performed for Non-Destructive testing

1. Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity test
2. Rebound Hammer test
4.10.1 UPV TEST
This nondestructive test consists of measuring the ultrasonic pulse velocity through the
concrete. The tests can be performed on samples in the laboratory or on-site. When the
surface of a semi-infinite solid is excited by a time varying mechanical force, energy is
radiated from the source as three distinct types of elastic wave propagation. The fastest of
these waves has particle displacements in the direction of travel of the disturbance and is
called the longitudinal, compression or P-wave.
Equipment Used:
 Electric Pulse Generator.
 Transducer: One Pair.
 Amplifier.
 Electronic Timing Device.
87
Procedure:
 Clean the concrete surface thoroughly.
 Apply grease on the concrete surface where test is to be conducted.
 Press probes on the surface of the structural element to remove air gaps.
 Note down the distance between the 2 probes.
 Read time taken for the ultrasonic pulse from the instrument.
 Calculate Velocity = distance / time
 Repeat the test on multiple areas of the element if necessary.
Table 4.2 Velocity Criterion for Concrete Quality Grading (IS 13311 Part 1:1992)
UPV(m/s) Concrete Quality

Above 4500 Excellent
3500 to 4500 Good
3000 to 3500 Medium
Below 3000 Doubtful
Figure 4.62 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Tests on Casted Specimens

Figure 4.63 to 4.67 the relationship between ultrasonic pulse velocity and various
proportions of supplementary cementitious material for binary mix of curing period 28
88
days and 56 days. The results obtained from UPV test given satisfactory results according
IS 13311 Part 1:1992.
Figure 4.63 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash
as SCM
Figure 4.64 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
89
Figure 4.65 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
Figure 4.66 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as
SCM
Figure 4.67Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as

SCM
90
Figure 4.68 to 4.70 the relationship between ultrasonic pulse velocity and various
proportions of supplementary cementitious material for ternary mix of curing period 28
days and 56 days. The results obtained from UPV test given satisfactory results according
IS 13311 Part 1:1992.
Figure 4.68 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine and Fly
Ash as SCM
Figure 4.69 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume and Fly
Ash as SCM
91
Figure 4.70 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline and Fly
Ash as SCM
4.10.2 REBOUND HAMMER TEST
Rebound hammer test is most commonly used one in India among the existing non-
destructive methods. Due to its rapidity and easiness in execution, simplicity, portability,
low cost and non-destructiveness it is widely used all over the world. The rebound
hammer test is described in IS 13311(Part 2): 1992, BS 1881: Part 202 (1986) and TS
3260 (1978). It is usually used in comparing the concrete in various parts of a structure
and indirectly as measuring concrete strength. The hammer weighs about 1.8 kg and is
suitable for use both in a laboratory and in the field. The rebound of an elastic mass
depends on the hardness of the surface against which its mass strikes. The results of
rebound hammer are significantly influenced by several factors such as: smoothness of
test surface; size, shape, and rigidity of the specimens; age of the specimen; surface and
internal moisture conditions of the concrete; type of coarse aggregate; type of cement;
carbonation of concrete surface. Amasaki presented the effect of carbonation on rebound
hammer results. Grieb presented the effect of aggregate type on rebound hammer results.
As per IS:13311 (part 2), the cubes were tested by Rebound hammer by holding them in
compression testing machine under a fixed load of 7 N/mm2. Rebound number or
indices for horizontal position were obtained. About 9 readings on each of the two faces
of the cubes were noted.
92
Figure 4.71 Rebound Hammer Testing in Laboratory
The rebound hammer test is performed on various specimens of different mix proportions
for binary mixes. The rebound hammer values concrete incorporating Rice Husk Ash as
SCM are ranging between 34 N/mm2 to 49 N/mm2 for 28 days and 56 days curing period.
The results obtained from rebound hammer test are graphically represented in figure 4.72.
Figure 4.72 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice
Husk Ash as SCM
The rebound hammer test is performed on various specimens of different mix proportions
for binary mixes. The rebound hammer values concrete incorporating Fly Ash as SCM are
93
ranging between 16 N/mm2 to 19 N/mm2 for 28 days and 56 days curing period. The
results obtained from rebound hammer test are graphically represented in figure 4.73.
Similar tests are performed for binary mix of Silica Fume, Metakaoline and Alccofine as
SCM and their respective results are shown in figure 4.74 to 4.76. Results obtained from
ternary mix are graphically represented in figure 4.77 to 4.79.
Figure 4.73 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash
as SCM
Figure 4.74 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash
as SCM
94
Figure 4.75 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica
Fume as SCM
Figure 4.76 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating

Metakaoline as SCM
95
Figure 4.77 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM
96
Figure 4.78 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
Figure 4.79 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating MetakaolineFly Ash as SCM
97
4.11 CONCLUDING REMARKS

Series of tests were carried out on the concrete cubes to evaluate the mechanical
properties of Ultra High Performance Concrete (UHPC). This chapter presented the
results obtained from the testing program. The results are the slump test, compressive
strength, split tensile strength, flexural strength, durability performance measures like
RCPT, Sea water attack test, sorptivity and also NDT test method like Rebound hammer
and UPV Test. The results obtained from utilization alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM in
ternary mix has given effective results and there is substantial improvement in strength
and durability characteristics of high performance concrete. Such integrated approach of
utilization of industrial waste and low cost cementitious product will lead to cost and
environment effective production of HPC.
98
Table 4.3 Summary of Results Obtained From Experimental Investigation of Binary Mix
Total Cementionus CA Water Comp. Strength Rebound Hammer UPV Flextural Strength Split Tensile Strength
Cement FA SP Slump
Test ID Binder Materials 20 mm 10 mm (W/C) W/B ( N/mm2 ) ( N/mm2 ) (Km/S) ( N/mm2 ) ( N/mm2 )
% Kg. % Kg. % Kg. Kg Kg % Liters mm 7 14 28 56 28 56 28 56 28 56 28 56
RH1 470.00 95% 446.5 5% 23.50 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 179.65 0.38 72 33.59 51.34 63.38 63.48 43.10 43.17 5.28 5.27 5.57 6.24 3.74 4.02
RH2 470.00 92.5% 434.8 8% 35.25 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 179.65 0.38 77 33.93 49.83 64.01 65.69 43.53 44.67 5.27 5.27 5.60 6.27 3.99 4.03
RH3 470.00 90% 423 10% 47.00 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 179.65 0.38 82 30.97 39.27 58.44 59.00 39.74 40.12 5.28 5.27 5.35 5.99 3.72 4.01
RH4 470.00 87.5% 411.3 13% 58.75 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 179.65 0.38 87 29.22 47.26 55.14 58.85 37.50 40.02 5.27 5.27 5.20 5.82 4.02 4.04
RH5 470.00 95% 446.5 500% 23.50 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 141.00 0.30 57 36.95 56.47 69.72 69.83 47.41 47.48 5.30 5.29 5.84 6.55 3.25 3.50
4.12 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
RH6 470.00 92.5% 434.8 750% 35.25 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 141.00 0.30 52 39.43 58.44 70.41 72.26 47.88 49.14 5.29 5.29 5.87 6.58 3.47 3.50
RH7 470.00 90% 423 1000% 47.00 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 141.00 0.30 57 36.00 53.36 64.28 64.90 43.71 44.13 5.30 5.29 5.61 6.29 3.23 3.49
RH8 470.00 87.5% 411.3 1250% 58.75 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 141.00 0.30 57 33.97 50.34 60.65 64.74 41.24 44.02 5.29 5.29 5.45 6.11 3.50 3.51
RH9 470.00 95% 446.5 500% 23.50 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 235.00 0.50 97 32.27 47.82 57.62 57.71 39.18 39.24 5.26 5.24 5.31 6.06 4.30 4.62
RH10 470.00 92.5% 434.8 750% 35.25 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 235.00 0.50 92 32.59 48.30 58.19 59.72 39.57 40.61 5.24 5.24 5.34 6.09 4.59 4.63
RH11 470.00 90% 423 1000% 47.00 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 235.00 0.50 95 29.75 44.10 53.13 53.64 36.13 36.47 5.26 5.24 5.10 5.82 4.28 4.61
RH12 470.00 87.5% 411.3 1250% 58.75 100% 793.31 698.59 465.73 1.00 235.00 0.50 92 28.07 41.61 50.13 53.50 34.09 36.38 5.24 5.24 4.96 5.65 4.62 4.65
FA1 372.00 80% 297.6 20% 74.40 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 46 11.32 18.42 22.19 25.51 16.70 17.80 5.34 5.27 3.30 3.73 2.12 4.01
FA2 372.00 75% 279 25% 93.00 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 51 15.04 19.50 23.50 27.01 16.77 17.83 5.34 5.26 3.39 3.83 2.24 4.07
FA3 372.00 70% 260.4 30% 111.60 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 50 13.99 18.15 21.86 25.13 16.68 17.79 5.34 5.27 3.27 3.70 2.09 4.00
FA4 372.00 65% 241.8 35% 130.20 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 45 12.39 16.07 19.37 22.26 16.54 17.73 5.35 5.27 3.08 3.48 1.86 3.90
FA5 372.00 78% 290.2 22% 81.84 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 47 14.83 19.24 23.18 26.64 16.75 17.82 5.34 5.27 3.37 3.81 2.21 4.05
FA6 372.00 76% 282.7 24% 89.28 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 49 14.44 18.72 22.56 25.93 16.72 17.80 5.34 5.27 3.32 3.76 2.16 4.03
FA7 372.00 73% 271.6 27% 100.44 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 52 12.70 16.46 19.84 22.80 16.57 17.74 5.35 5.27 3.12 3.52 1.90 3.92
FA8 372.00 71% 264.1 29% 107.88 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 54 13.00 16.86 20.31 23.35 16.60 17.75 5.35 5.27 3.16 3.57 1.95 3.94
FA9 372.00 80% 297.6 20% 74.40 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 40 17.04 22.10 26.63 30.61 16.94 18.15 5.33 5.24 3.61 4.08 2.53 4.62
FA10 372.00 75% 279 25% 93.00 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 44 18.05 23.40 28.20 32.41 17.02 18.18 5.32 5.24 3.72 4.20 2.68 4.68
FA11 372.00 70% 260.4 30% 111.60 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 43 15.74 21.78 26.24 30.16 16.91 18.14 5.33 5.24 3.59 4.05 2.50 4.60
FA12 372.00 65% 241.8 35% 130.20 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 39 13.94 19.29 23.24 26.71 16.75 18.07 5.34 5.25 3.37 3.81 2.22 4.49
FA13 372.00 78% 290.2 22% 81.84 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 41 16.69 23.08 27.81 31.97 17.00 18.17 5.32 5.24 3.69 4.17 2.64 4.66
FA14 372.00 76% 282.7 24% 89.28 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 43 16.24 22.47 27.07 31.12 16.96 18.16 5.32 5.24 3.64 4.12 2.57 4.63
FA15 372.00 73% 271.6 27% 100.44 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 45 14.28 19.76 23.80 27.36 16.78 18.08 5.34 5.25 3.42 4.00 2.27 4.51
FA16 372.00 71% 264.1 29% 107.88 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 47 14.63 20.23 24.38 28.02 16.81 18.10 5.33 5.25 3.46 4.04 2.33 4.53
FA17 372.00 80% 297.6 20% 74.40 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 37 17.31 23.95 28.85 33.16 17.05 18.38 5.32 5.23 3.76 4.40 2.74 5.02
FA18 372.00 75% 279 25% 93.00 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 41 18.02 25.36 30.55 35.11 17.15 18.42 5.31 5.23 3.87 4.53 2.89 5.08
FA19 372.00 70% 260.4 30% 111.60 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 40 16.77 23.59 28.42 32.67 17.03 18.37 5.32 5.23 3.73 4.37 2.70 5.00
99
FA20 372.00 65% 241.8 35% 130.20 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 36 14.85 20.90 25.18 28.94 16.86 18.30 5.33 5.23 3.51 4.11 2.40 4.88
FA21 372.00 78% 290.2 22% 81.84 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 38 17.78 25.01 30.13 34.63 17.12 18.41 5.31 5.23 3.84 4.50 2.86 5.07
FA22 372.00 76% 282.7 24% 89.28 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 39 17.30 24.34 29.33 33.71 17.08 18.39 5.32 5.23 3.79 4.44 2.78 5.04
FA23 372.00 73% 271.6 27% 100.44 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 42 15.21 21.40 25.79 29.64 16.89 18.31 5.33 5.23 3.55 4.16 2.46 4.90
FA24 372.00 71% 264.1 29% 107.88 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 43 15.58 21.92 26.41 30.36 16.92 18.32 5.33 5.23 3.60 4.21 2.51 4.92
Cement FA SP Slump
A1 372.00 96% 357.1 4% 14.88 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 51 9.82 12.32 16.65 18.50 16.40 17.26 5.36 5.30 2.86 3.34 1.61 3.10
A2 372.00 95% 353.4 5% 18.60 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 49 9.88 12.39 16.74 18.60 16.40 17.67 5.36 5.28 2.86 3.35 1.62 3.79
A3 372.00 94% 349.7 6% 22.32 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 52 10.67 13.39 18.09 20.10 16.47 17.70 5.36 5.27 2.98 3.48 1.74 3.85
A4 372.00 93% 346 7% 26.04 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 53 13.89 16.06 21.71 24.12 16.67 17.78 5.35 5.27 3.26 3.82 2.08 3.99
A5 372.00 92% 342.2 8% 29.76 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 50 9.19 12.37 16.71 18.57 16.40 17.67 5.36 5.28 2.86 3.35 1.61 3.79
A6 372.00 91% 338.5 9% 33.48 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 54 9.54 12.83 17.34 19.27 16.43 17.68 5.36 5.27 2.92 3.41 1.67 3.82
A7 372.00 90% 334.8 10% 37.20 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 55 9.84 13.24 17.89 19.88 16.46 17.70 5.36 5.27 2.96 3.46 1.72 3.84
A8 372.00 89% 331.1 11% 40.92 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 57 9.58 12.89 17.42 19.36 16.44 17.68 5.36 5.27 2.92 3.42 1.68 3.82
A9 372.00 88% 327.4 12% 44.64 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 56 9.66 13.00 17.57 19.52 16.45 17.69 5.36 5.27 2.93 3.43 1.69 3.83
A10 372.00 87% 323.6 13% 48.36 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 51 8.64 12.10 15.71 17.46 16.35 17.64 5.37 5.28 2.77 3.25 1.52 3.75
A11 372.00 86% 319.9 14% 52.08 100% 743 700 467 1.00 187.00 0.50 53 8.74 12.24 15.89 17.66 16.36 17.65 5.37 5.28 2.79 3.27 1.54 3.76
A12 372.00 96% 357.1 4% 14.88 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 46 11.11 14.74 19.15 21.28 16.54 17.53 5.35 5.28 3.06 3.58 1.85 3.56
A13 372.00 95% 353.4 5% 18.60 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 45 11.17 14.82 19.25 21.39 16.54 18.00 5.35 5.25 3.07 3.59 1.86 4.36
A14 372.00 94% 349.7 6% 22.32 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 47 12.07 16.02 20.80 23.12 16.63 18.04 5.35 5.25 3.19 3.74 2.00 4.43
A15 372.00 93% 346 7% 26.04 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 48 14.48 19.22 24.96 27.74 16.85 18.13 5.33 5.24 3.50 4.09 2.39 4.59
A16 372.00 92% 342.2 8% 29.76 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 45 11.15 14.80 19.22 21.36 16.54 18.00 5.35 5.25 3.07 3.59 1.85 4.36
A17 372.00 91% 338.5 9% 33.48 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 49 11.57 15.36 19.94 22.16 16.58 18.02 5.35 5.25 3.13 3.66 1.92 4.39
A18 372.00 90% 334.8 10% 37.20 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 50 11.93 15.84 20.58 22.86 16.61 18.03 5.35 5.25 3.18 3.78 1.98 4.42
A19 372.00 89% 331.1 11% 40.92 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 52 12.82 15.63 20.04 22.26 16.58 18.02 5.35 5.25 3.13 3.73 1.93 4.40
A20 372.00 88% 327.4 12% 44.64 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 51 12.93 15.76 20.20 22.45 16.59 18.02 5.35 5.25 3.15 3.74 1.95 4.40
A21 372.00 87% 323.6 13% 48.36 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 46 11.57 14.10 18.07 20.08 16.48 17.97 5.36 5.26 2.98 3.54 1.75 4.32
A22 372.00 86% 319.9 14% 52.08 100% 743 700 467 1.00 148.80 0.40 48 11.70 14.26 18.28 20.31 16.49 17.98 5.36 5.25 2.99 3.56 1.77 4.32
A23 372.00 96% 357.1 4% 14.88 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 42 13.32 16.23 20.81 23.13 16.63 17.71 5.35 5.27 3.19 3.80 2.01 3.87
A24 372.00 95% 353.4 5% 18.60 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 40 13.39 16.32 20.93 23.25 16.64 18.22 5.35 5.24 3.20 3.81 2.02 4.74
A25 372.00 94% 349.7 6% 22.32 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 43 12.66 17.64 22.61 25.13 16.73 18.26 5.34 5.24 3.33 3.96 2.18 4.81
A26 372.00 93% 346 7% 26.04 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 44 15.20 21.17 27.14 30.15 16.97 18.36 5.32 5.23 3.65 4.34 2.60 4.99
A27 372.00 92% 342.2 8% 29.76 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 41 11.70 16.30 20.89 23.21 16.63 18.22 5.35 5.24 3.20 3.81 2.02 4.74
A28 372.00 91% 338.5 9% 33.48 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 45 12.14 16.91 21.68 24.09 16.68 18.24 5.34 5.24 3.26 3.88 2.09 4.77
A29 372.00 90% 334.8 10% 37.20 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 45 12.52 17.44 22.37 24.85 16.71 18.25 5.34 5.24 3.31 3.94 2.15 4.80
A30 372.00 89% 331.1 11% 40.92 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 47 12.20 16.99 21.78 24.20 16.68 18.24 5.34 5.24 3.27 3.89 2.10 4.78
A31 372.00 88% 327.4 12% 44.64 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 46 12.30 17.13 21.96 24.40 16.69 18.24 5.34 5.24 3.28 3.90 2.12 4.78
A32 372.00 87% 323.6 13% 48.36 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 42 11.00 15.32 19.64 21.83 16.57 18.19 5.35 5.24 3.10 3.69 1.90 4.69
100
A33 372.00 86% 319.9 14% 52.08 100% 743 700 467 1.00 111.60 0.30 44 11.13 15.50 19.87 22.08 16.58 18.19 5.35 5.24 3.12 3.71 1.92 4.70
Cement FA SP Slump
SF1 392.58 94% 370.4 6% 22.22 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 50 13.14 19.58 25.76 28.62 16.89 17.88 5.33 5.26 3.55 4.26 2.45 4.16
SF2 391.48 92% 362.5 8% 29.00 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 55 12.03 17.93 23.60 26.22 16.77 17.83 5.34 5.26 3.40 4.08 2.25 4.07
SF3 390.06 90% 354.6 10% 35.46 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 50 14.17 21.12 27.79 30.88 17.00 17.93 5.32 5.26 3.69 4.43 2.64 4.24
SF4 388.33 88% 346.7 12% 41.61 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 50 12.16 18.12 23.84 26.49 16.79 17.83 5.34 5.26 3.42 4.10 2.28 4.08
SF5 386.28 86% 338.8 14% 47.44 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 50 11.48 17.11 22.51 25.01 16.71 17.80 5.34 5.27 3.32 3.99 2.15 4.03
SF6 392.58 94% 370.4 6% 22.22 100% 716 687 458 1.00 157.03 0.40 50 15.11 22.51 29.62 32.91 17.10 18.24 5.32 5.24 3.81 4.57 2.81 4.78
SF7 391.48 92% 362.5 8% 29.00 100% 716 687 458 1.00 156.59 0.40 55 13.84 22.52 27.14 30.15 16.96 18.18 5.32 5.24 3.65 4.38 2.58 4.68
SF8 390.06 90% 354.6 10% 35.46 100% 716 687 458 1.00 156.02 0.40 50 17.58 26.53 31.96 35.51 17.22 18.29 5.31 5.23 3.96 4.75 3.02 4.87
SF9 388.33 88% 346.7 12% 41.61 100% 716 687 458 1.00 155.33 0.40 50 15.08 22.76 27.42 30.46 16.98 18.19 5.32 5.24 3.67 4.40 2.61 4.69
SF10 386.28 86% 338.8 14% 47.44 100% 716 687 458 1.00 154.51 0.40 50 14.24 21.48 25.89 28.76 16.90 18.15 5.33 5.24 3.56 4.27 2.47 4.63
SF11 392.58 94% 370.4 6% 22.22 100% 716 687 458 1.00 117.77 0.30 50 17.71 26.72 32.20 35.78 17.23 18.48 5.31 5.22 3.97 4.77 3.05 5.19
SF12 391.48 92% 362.5 8% 29.00 100% 716 687 458 1.00 117.44 0.30 55 16.22 24.48 29.50 32.78 17.09 18.42 5.32 5.22 3.80 4.56 2.80 5.09
SF13 390.06 90% 354.6 10% 35.46 100% 716 687 458 1.00 117.02 0.30 50 19.11 28.83 34.74 38.60 17.37 18.54 5.30 5.22 4.13 4.91 3.28 5.30
SF14 388.33 88% 346.7 12% 41.61 100% 716 687 458 1.00 116.50 0.30 50 16.39 24.74 29.80 33.11 17.11 18.43 5.31 5.22 3.82 4.55 2.83 5.10
SF15 386.28 86% 338.8 14% 47.44 100% 716 687 458 1.00 115.88 0.30 50 15.47 23.35 28.14 31.26 17.02 18.39 5.32 5.23 3.71 4.42 2.67 5.03
MK1 392.58 94% 370.4 6% 22.22 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 62 15.58 20.03 27.82 27.82 16.85 17.86 5.33 5.26 3.50 4.24 2.39 4.13
MK2 391.48 92% 362.5 8% 29.00 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 59 14.16 18.21 25.29 25.29 16.73 17.81 5.34 5.27 3.34 4.04 2.18 4.04
MK3 390.06 90% 354.6 10% 35.46 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 63 16.58 21.31 29.60 29.60 16.94 17.90 5.33 5.26 3.61 4.37 2.53 4.19
MK4 388.33 88% 346.7 12% 41.61 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 64 18.82 24.19 33.60 33.60 17.13 17.98 5.31 5.25 3.85 4.66 2.87 4.33
MK5 386.28 86% 338.8 14% 47.44 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200.00 0.50 61 16.07 20.66 28.70 28.70 16.89 17.88 5.33 5.26 3.56 4.30 2.46 4.16
MK6 392.58 94% 370.4 6% 22.22 100% 716 687 458 1.00 157.03 0.40 65 15.58 20.03 27.82 30.60 16.98 18.27 5.32 5.23 3.67 4.45 2.62 4.83
MK7 391.48 92% 362.5 8% 29.00 100% 716 687 458 1.00 156.59 0.40 67 14.16 18.21 25.29 27.82 16.85 18.21 5.33 5.24 3.50 4.24 2.39 4.72
MK8 390.06 90% 354.6 10% 35.46 100% 716 687 458 1.00 156.02 0.40 69 16.58 21.02 29.60 32.56 17.08 18.31 5.32 5.23 3.79 4.59 2.78 4.90
MK9 388.33 88% 346.7 12% 41.61 100% 716 687 458 1.00 155.33 0.40 68 18.82 23.86 33.60 36.96 17.29 18.41 5.30 5.23 4.04 4.89 3.14 5.07
MK10 386.28 86% 338.8 14% 47.44 100% 716 687 458 1.00 154.51 0.40 62 16.07 20.38 28.70 31.57 17.03 18.29 5.32 5.23 3.73 4.44 2.70 4.87
MK11 392.58 94% 370.4 6% 22.22 100% 716 687 458 1.00 117.77 0.30 64 15.58 19.75 27.82 33.38 17.12 18.49 5.31 5.22 3.84 4.57 2.85 5.20
MK12 391.48 92% 362.5 8% 29.00 100% 716 687 458 1.00 117.44 0.30 56 14.16 17.96 25.29 30.35 16.97 18.42 5.32 5.22 3.66 4.35 2.60 5.09
MK13 390.06 90% 354.6 10% 35.46 100% 716 687 458 1.00 117.02 0.30 54 16.58 21.02 29.60 35.52 17.22 18.53 5.31 5.22 3.96 4.71 3.03 5.28
MK14 388.33 88% 346.7 12% 41.61 100% 716 687 458 1.00 116.50 0.30 57 18.82 23.86 33.60 40.32 17.45 18.64 5.29 5.21 4.22 5.02 3.42 5.46
MK15 386.28 86% 338.8 14% 47.44 100% 716 687 458 1.00 115.88 0.30 58 16.07 20.38 28.70 34.44 17.17 18.51 5.31 5.22 3.90 4.64 2.94 5.24
101
Table 4.4 Summary of Results Obtained From Experimental Investigation of Ternary Mix
Total Cementionus Materials CA Water Comp. Strength Rebound Hammer Flextural Strength Split Tensile
Cement FA SP Slump UPV (Km/S)
Test ID Binder Fly Ash (FA) Alccofine (A) 20 mm 10 mm (W/C) W/B ( N/mm2 ) ( N/mm2 ) ( N/mm2 ) Strength ( N/mm2 )
% Kg. % Kg. % Kg. % Kg. Kg Kg % Liters mm 7 14 28 56 28 56 28 56 28 56 28 56
FA-A 1 394 74% 291.6 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 75 26.48 34.42 44.13 49.04 17.768 36.863 5.35 5.27 4.45 4.69 5.44 5.85
FA-A 2 394 69% 271.9 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 70 27.44 35.68 45.74 50.82 17.786 37.240 5.34 5.27 4.53 4.78 5.58 6.00
FA-A 3 394 64% 252.2 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 65 24.47 31.81 40.79 45.32 17.731 36.047 5.35 5.27 4.28 4.51 5.15 5.54
FA-A 4 394 73% 287.6 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 55 25.99 35.09 43.32 48.13 17.759 36.669 5.35 5.27 4.41 4.65 5.37 5.78
FA-A 5 394 68% 267.9 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 50 26.85 36.25 44.76 49.73 17.775 37.011 5.35 5.27 4.48 4.72 5.50 5.91
FA-A 6 394 63% 248.2 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 45 27.67 37.35 46.12 51.24 17.790 37.327 5.34 5.27 4.55 4.80 5.61 6.03
FA-A 7 394 72% 283.7 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 55 28.86 38.96 48.10 53.45 17.812 37.776 5.34 5.27 4.65 4.90 5.78 6.21
FA-A 8 394 67% 264 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 45 30.44 41.09 50.73 56.36 17.841 38.351 5.34 5.26 4.77 5.03 5.99 6.44
FA-A 9 394 62% 244.3 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 45 28.52 38.50 47.53 52.82 17.806 37.649 5.34 5.27 4.62 4.87 5.73 6.16
FA-A 10 394 74% 291.6 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 60 30.96 41.11 50.75 56.39 18.114 38.356 5.34 5.25 4.77 5.03 5.99 6.45
FA-A 11 394 69% 271.9 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 65 32.09 42.60 52.60 58.44 18.135 38.748 5.33 5.24 4.86 5.12 6.14 6.61
FA-A 12 394 64% 252.2 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 60 28.61 37.99 46.90 52.12 18.071 37.507 5.34 5.25 4.59 4.84 5.68 6.10
FA-A 13 394 73% 287.6 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 50 30.39 40.35 49.82 55.35 18.104 38.154 5.34 5.25 4.73 4.98 5.92 6.36
FA-A 14 394 68% 267.9 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 40 31.40 40.15 51.47 57.19 18.122 38.510 5.33 5.24 4.81 5.07 6.05 6.51
FA-A 15 394 63% 248.2 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 40 32.35 41.90 53.03 58.93 18.139 38.839 5.33 5.24 4.88 5.14 6.18 6.64
FA-A 16 394 72% 283.7 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 40 33.74 43.70 55.32 61.46 18.165 39.306 5.33 5.24 4.98 5.25 6.36 6.84
FA-A 17 394 67% 264 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 45 35.59 46.09 58.34 64.82 18.198 39.905 5.32 5.24 5.12 5.39 6.60 7.10
FA-A 18 394 62% 244.3 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 55 33.34 43.18 54.66 60.74 18.157 39.174 5.33 5.24 4.95 5.22 6.31 6.79
FA-A 19 394 74% 291.6 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 35 35.00 45.32 57.37 63.75 18.345 39.716 5.32 5.23 5.07 5.35 6.52 7.02
FA-A 20 394 69% 271.9 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 45 35.68 46.97 59.46 66.07 18.367 40.121 5.32 5.23 5.17 5.45 6.69 7.19
FA-A 21 394 64% 252.2 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 50 30.75 41.89 53.02 58.91 18.298 38.836 5.33 5.23 4.88 5.14 6.18 6.64
FA-A 22 394 73% 287.6 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 30 32.66 43.93 56.31 62.57 18.333 39.507 5.33 5.23 5.03 5.30 6.44 6.93
FA-A 23 394 68% 267.9 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 35 33.75 45.38 58.18 64.65 18.353 39.875 5.32 5.23 5.11 5.39 6.59 7.08
FA-A 24 394 63% 248.2 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 30 34.77 49.76 59.95 66.61 18.372 40.215 5.32 5.23 5.19 5.47 6.72 7.23
FA-A 25 394 72% 283.7 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 40 36.27 51.90 62.53 69.48 18.400 40.700 5.31 5.23 5.30 5.58 6.92 7.44
FA-A 26 394 67% 264 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 45 38.25 54.74 65.95 73.27 18.436 41.319 5.31 5.22 5.44 5.74 7.18 7.72
FA-A 27 394 62% 244.3 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 35 35.84 51.29 61.79 68.66 18.392 40.563 5.32 5.23 5.27 5.55 6.87 7.38
102
Test ID Binder Fly Ash (FA) Silica Fum (SF) 20 mm 10 mm (W/C) W/B ( N/mm2 ) ( N/mm2 ) ( N/mm2 ) Strength ( N/mm2 )
FA-SF 1 394 71% 279.7 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 70 29.50 38.35 49.16 54.62 17.756 43.702 5.35 5.27 4.84 5.10 5.06 6.08
FA-SF 2 394 66% 260 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 55 28.30 37.42 47.97 53.30 17.744 43.388 5.35 5.27 4.78 5.04 4.98 5.35
FA-SF 3 394 61% 240.3 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 65 26.41 34.91 44.76 49.73 17.713 42.508 5.36 5.27 4.62 4.87 4.76 5.03
FA-SF 4 394 70% 275.8 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 30.34 39.60 51.43 57.14 17.778 44.287 5.35 5.27 4.95 5.22 5.21 5.70
FA-SF 5 394 65% 256.1 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 32.91 42.94 55.77 61.97 17.820 45.359 5.34 5.27 5.15 5.43 5.50 6.13
FA-SF 6 394 60% 236.4 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 28.23 36.84 47.84 53.16 17.743 43.353 5.35 5.27 4.77 5.03 4.97 5.34
FA-SF 7 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 36.72 47.92 62.23 69.14 17.882 46.849 5.33 5.26 5.44 5.74 5.91 6.77
FA-SF 8 394 64% 252.2 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 32.67 41.93 54.45 60.50 17.807 45.040 5.34 5.27 5.09 5.37 5.41 6.00
FA-SF 9 394 59% 232.5 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 23.67 32.55 42.27 46.97 17.689 41.798 5.36 5.27 4.49 4.73 4.58 4.77
FA-SF 10 394 75% 295.5 15% 59.1 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 27.93 37.09 45.79 50.88 17.723 42.796 5.36 5.27 4.67 4.92 4.83 5.13
FA-SF 11 394 74% 291.6 15% 59.1 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 30.08 39.94 49.31 54.79 17.757 43.741 5.35 5.27 4.85 5.11 5.07 5.48
FA-SF 12 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 200 0.5 40 32.24 42.81 52.86 58.73 17.792 44.646 5.34 5.27 5.02 5.29 5.31 5.84
FA-SF 13 394 71% 279.7 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 55 32.99 43.80 54.08 60.09 18.100 44.948 5.34 5.25 5.07 5.35 5.39 5.96
FA-SF 14 394 66% 260 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 50 32.19 41.16 52.77 58.63 18.087 44.625 5.34 5.25 5.01 5.28 5.30 5.83
FA-SF 15 394 61% 240.3 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 55 30.03 41.35 49.23 54.70 18.051 43.720 5.35 5.25 4.84 5.10 5.07 5.48
FA-SF 16 394 70% 275.8 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 50 34.51 47.52 56.57 62.86 18.125 45.550 5.34 5.24 5.19 5.47 5.55 6.21
FA-SF 17 394 65% 256.1 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 50 37.42 51.53 61.35 68.16 18.174 46.652 5.33 5.24 5.40 5.70 5.86 6.68
FA-SF 18 394 60% 236.4 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 60 32.10 44.21 52.63 58.48 18.085 44.589 5.34 5.25 5.01 5.28 5.29 5.82
FA-SF 19 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 40 41.76 57.50 68.45 76.06 18.245 48.184 5.32 5.24 5.71 6.02 6.30 7.37
FA-SF 20 394 64% 252.2 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 60 34.14 50.32 59.90 66.55 18.159 46.324 5.33 5.24 5.34 5.63 5.77 6.54
FA-SF 21 394 59% 232.5 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 50 26.97 36.73 46.50 51.66 18.023 42.990 5.35 5.25 4.71 4.96 4.88 5.20
FA-SF 22 394 75% 295.5 15% 59.1 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 40 29.22 39.29 50.37 55.97 18.062 44.016 5.35 5.25 4.90 5.16 5.14 5.59
FA-SF 23 394 74% 291.6 15% 59.1 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 50 31.46 43.40 54.24 60.27 18.102 44.989 5.34 5.25 5.08 5.36 5.40 5.98
FA-SF 24 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 158 0.4 55 33.72 48.26 58.14 64.60 18.141 45.919 5.34 5.24 5.26 5.55 5.65 6.36
FA-SF 25 394 71% 279.7 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 45 35.64 51.01 61.45 68.28 18.329 46.675 5.33 5.23 5.41 5.70 5.86 6.69
FA-SF 26 394 66% 260 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 45 34.78 49.77 59.97 66.63 18.315 46.340 5.33 5.23 5.34 5.63 5.77 6.54
FA-SF 27 394 61% 240.3 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 45 32.45 46.43 55.94 62.16 18.276 45.400 5.34 5.23 5.16 5.44 5.51 6.15
FA-SF 28 394 70% 275.8 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 40 38.57 53.36 64.29 71.43 18.357 47.300 5.33 5.23 5.53 5.83 6.04 6.97
FA-SF 29 394 65% 256.1 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 45 41.83 57.86 69.71 77.46 18.409 48.445 5.32 5.23 5.76 6.07 6.37 7.50
FA-SF 30 394 60% 236.4 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 40 35.88 49.64 59.81 66.45 18.313 46.303 5.33 5.23 5.34 5.62 5.76 6.53
FA-SF 31 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 45 46.67 64.56 77.79 86.43 18.487 50.036 5.30 5.22 6.09 6.41 6.85 8.28
FA-SF 32 394 64% 252.2 25% 98.5 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 50 40.84 56.50 68.07 75.63 18.393 48.104 5.32 5.23 5.69 6.00 6.27 7.34
103
FA-SF 33 394 59% 232.5 30% 118.2 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 40 31.70 43.86 52.84 58.71 18.245 44.642 5.34 5.24 5.02 5.29 5.31 5.84
FA-SF 34 394 75% 295.5 15% 59.1 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 40 34.34 47.51 57.24 63.60 18.288 45.708 5.34 5.23 5.22 5.50 5.59 6.28
FA-SF 35 394 74% 291.6 15% 59.1 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 40 36.98 49.93 61.64 68.49 18.331 46.718 5.33 5.23 5.42 5.71 5.88 6.71
FA-SF 36 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 0% 0 100% 716 687 458 1.00 118 0.3 40 39.64 53.52 66.07 73.41 18.374 47.683 5.32 5.23 5.61 5.91 6.15 7.14
Test ID Binder Fly Ash (FA) Metakolin (M) 20 mm 10 mm (W/C) W/B ( N/mm2 ) ( N/mm2 ) ( N/mm2 ) Strength ( N/mm2 )
FA-MK 1 394 70% 275.8 20% 78.8 10% 39.4 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 50 22.96 34.44 44.15 49.06 17.768 41.309 5.35 5.27 4.39 4.62 4.14 4.50
FA-MK 2 394 65% 256.1 25% 98.5 10% 39.4 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 55 24.17 36.25 46.48 51.64 17.794 41.935 5.34 5.27 4.50 4.74 4.27 4.83
FA-MK 3 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 45 25.13 39.63 48.33 53.66 17.926 44.834 5.32 5.26 4.59 4.80 4.44 4.95
FA-MK 4 394 64% 252.2 25% 98.5 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 50 25.43 40.09 48.89 54.33 17.821 42.563 5.34 5.27 4.62 4.86 4.68 4.99
FA-MK 5 394 59% 232.5 30% 118.2 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 40 24.31 38.34 46.76 51.95 17.797 42.010 5.34 5.27 4.51 4.76 4.39 4.85
FA-MK 6 394 68% 267.9 20% 78.8 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 50 25.36 39.98 48.76 54.18 17.819 42.530 5.34 5.27 4.61 4.86 4.68 4.98
FA-MK 7 394 63% 248.2 25% 98.5 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 50 24.84 39.16 47.76 53.07 17.808 42.272 5.34 5.27 4.56 4.81 4.85 4.91
FA-MK 8 394 58% 228.5 30% 118.2 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 50 26.48 41.75 50.92 56.57 17.843 43.072 5.34 5.26 4.71 4.96 4.60 5.11
FA-MK 9 394 67% 264 20% 78.8 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 50 23.94 37.75 46.04 51.16 17.789 41.820 5.34 5.27 4.48 4.72 4.32 4.80
FA-MK 10 394 62% 244.3 25% 98.5 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 40 23.29 36.73 44.79 49.77 17.776 41.485 5.35 5.27 4.42 4.66 4.25 4.72
FA-MK 11 394 57% 224.6 30% 118.2 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 197 0.5 40 28.18 39.85 48.59 53.99 17.818 42.486 5.34 5.27 4.60 4.85 4.47 4.97
FA-MK 12 394 70% 275.8 20% 78.8 10% 39.4 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 50 29.45 41.63 50.77 56.41 18.114 43.036 5.34 5.25 4.70 4.96 4.59 5.11
FA-MK 13 394 65% 256.1 25% 98.5 10% 39.4 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 50 31.00 43.83 53.45 59.38 18.144 43.688 5.33 5.24 4.83 5.09 4.75 5.27
FA-MK 14 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 50 32.11 42.63 55.36 61.32 18.295 46.708 5.31 5.23 4.91 5.16 4.85 5.37
FA-MK 15 394 64% 252.2 25% 98.5 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 50 32.61 43.30 56.23 62.48 18.175 44.343 5.33 5.24 4.95 5.22 4.90 5.44
FA-MK 16 394 59% 232.5 30% 118.2 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 50 31.19 41.40 53.77 59.75 18.148 43.766 5.33 5.24 4.84 5.10 4.76 5.29
FA-MK 17 394 68% 267.9 20% 78.8 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 45 32.52 43.18 56.08 62.31 18.173 44.308 5.33 5.24 4.94 5.21 4.89 5.43
FA-MK 18 394 63% 248.2 25% 98.5 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 50 31.86 42.29 54.92 61.03 18.160 44.039 5.33 5.24 4.89 5.16 4.83 5.36
FA-MK 19 394 58% 228.5 30% 118.2 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 45 33.96 45.09 58.55 65.06 18.200 44.873 5.32 5.24 5.05 5.32 5.03 5.59
FA-MK 20 394 67% 264 20% 78.8 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 45 30.71 40.77 52.95 58.83 18.138 43.568 5.33 5.24 4.80 5.06 4.72 5.24
FA-MK 21 394 62% 244.3 25% 98.5 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 45 29.88 39.66 51.51 57.24 18.123 43.219 5.33 5.24 4.74 4.99 4.64 5.15
FA-MK 22 394 57% 224.6 30% 118.2 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 158 0.4 50 32.41 43.03 55.88 62.09 18.171 44.262 5.33 5.24 4.93 5.20 4.88 5.42
FA-MK 23 394 70% 275.8 20% 78.8 10% 39.4 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 45 33.29 45.92 57.40 63.77 18.114 44.611 5.32 5.25 5.00 5.27 4.96 5.52
FA-MK 24 394 65% 256.1 25% 98.5 10% 39.4 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 45 35.04 50.15 60.42 67.13 18.144 45.287 5.32 5.24 5.13 5.41 5.13 5.70
FA-MK 25 394 69% 271.9 20% 78.8 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 45 36.15 51.73 62.33 68.96 18.295 48.417 5.29 5.23 5.21 5.50 5.23 5.78
FA-MK 26 394 64% 252.2 25% 98.5 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 40 36.87 52.76 63.56 70.63 18.175 45.965 5.31 5.24 5.26 5.55 5.29 5.88
FA-MK 27 394 59% 232.5 30% 118.2 11% 43.34 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 45 35.26 49.84 60.79 67.54 18.148 45.367 5.32 5.24 5.15 5.42 5.15 5.72
FA-MK 28 394 68% 267.9 20% 78.8 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 45 37.40 51.98 63.39 70.43 18.173 45.929 5.31 5.24 5.25 5.54 5.28 5.87
FA-MK 29 394 63% 248.2 25% 98.5 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 40 36.63 50.91 62.09 68.99 18.160 45.650 5.32 5.24 5.20 5.48 5.22 5.80
FA-MK 30 394 58% 228.5 30% 118.2 12% 47.28 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 40 39.05 54.28 66.19 73.55 18.200 46.514 5.31 5.24 5.37 5.66 5.43 6.03
FA-MK 31 394 67% 264 20% 78.8 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 45 35.31 49.08 59.85 66.50 18.138 45.162 5.32 5.24 5.11 5.38 5.10 5.66
104
FA-MK 32 394 62% 244.3 25% 98.5 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 40 34.36 47.75 58.23 64.70 18.123 44.800 5.32 5.24 5.04 5.31 5.01 5.57
FA-MK 33 394 57% 224.6 30% 118.2 13% 51.22 100% 712 689 460 1.00 118 0.3 40 37.27 51.80 63.17 70.19 18.171 45.882 5.31 5.24 5.25 5.53 5.27 5.86
Table 4.5 Summary of Results Obtained From Experimental Investigation of Durability Properties
Cementionus Materials RCPT Sorptivity Acc (weight loss

Cement 0.5 Chloride Attack Test Sea Water Attack Test
Total Fly Ash Alccofine (coulombs) (mm/min ) %agex10-2)
Test ID W/B
Binder Strength Weight Strength Weight
% % % 28 56 28 56 28 56
loss loss loss loss
FA-A 1 394 74% 20% 6% 0.5 3754.00 2199.70 0.266 0.1990 63.71 51.36 6.23% 7.03% 5.97% 13.23%
FA-A 2 394 69% 25% 6% 0.5 3396.20 1841.90 0.257 0.1900 61.91 49.56 6.05% 6.85% 5.79% 13.05%
FA-A 3 394 64% 30% 6% 0.5 3164.70 1610.40 0.253 0.1860 59.21 46.86 5.96% 6.76% 5.70% 12.96%
FA-A 4 394 73% 20% 7% 0.5 3279.60 1725.30 0.263 0.1960 58.36 48.36 5.92% 6.72% 5.66% 12.92%
FA-A 5 394 68% 25% 7% 0.5 3160.10 1605.80 0.249 0.1820 56.87 46.87 5.86% 6.66% 5.56% 9.57%
FA-A 6 394 63% 30% 7% 0.5 2948.90 1394.60 0.237 0.1700 54.58 44.58 5.77% 6.57% 5.47% 9.48%
FA-A 7 394 72% 20% 8% 0.5 3067.70 1513.40 0.264 0.1970 53.56 43.56 5.33% 6.13% 5.03% 9.04%
FA-A 8 394 67% 25% 8% 0.5 2834.40 1280.10 0.250 0.1830 52.88 42.88 5.21% 6.06% 4.91% 8.92%
FA-A 9 394 62% 30% 8% 0.5 2599.60 1045.30 0.217 0.1500 53.36 40.36 5.09% 5.94% 4.79% 8.80%
FA-A 10 394 74% 20% 6% 0.4 3017.70 1463.40 0.256 0.1890 51.79 38.79 4.99% 5.84% 4.69% 8.59%
FA-A 11 394 69% 25% 6% 0.4 2837.70 1283.40 0.229 0.1620 49.58 36.58 4.96% 5.82% 4.66% 8.56%
FA-A 12 394 64% 30% 6% 0.4 2673.70 1119.40 0.191 0.1240 43.59 30.59 4.88% 5.73% 4.74% 8.63%
FA-A 13 394 73% 20% 7% 0.4 2831.40 1277.10 0.257 0.1900 43.21 30.21 4.78% 5.63% 4.64% 8.53%
FA-A 14 394 68% 25% 7% 0.4 2684.90 1130.60 0.207 0.1400 37.96 29.67 4.66% 5.51% 4.52% 8.41%
FA-A 15 394 63% 30% 7% 0.4 2435.70 881.40 0.161 0.0940 36.75 28.46 4.56% 5.41% 4.42% 8.31%
FA-A 16 394 72% 20% 8% 0.4 2678.90 1124.60 0.187 0.1200 37.77 29.48 4.12% 4.97% 3.98% 7.76%
FA-A 17 394 67% 25% 8% 0.4 2410.90 856.60 0.161 0.0940 36.75 28.47 3.94% 4.79% 3.80% 7.58%
FA-A 18 394 62% 30% 8% 0.4 2227.70 673.40 0.137 0.0700 33.95 25.66 3.87% 4.72% 3.73% 7.51%
FA-A 19 394 74% 20% 6% 0.3 2810.70 1256.40 0.167 0.1000 38.75 30.46 3.64% 4.17% 3.30% 7.09%
FA-A 20 394 69% 25% 6% 0.3 2599.20 1044.90 0.153 0.0860 37.27 28.98 3.33% 3.78% 2.99% 6.78%
FA-A 21 394 64% 30% 6% 0.3 2314.70 760.40 0.146 0.0790 37.74 26.50 3.35% 3.80% 3.01% 6.80%
FA-A 22 394 73% 20% 7% 0.3 2512.40 958.10 0.177 0.1100 37.59 26.36 3.25% 3.70% 2.91% 6.02%
FA-A 23 394 68% 25% 7% 0.3 2340.60 786.30 0.149 0.0820 35.09 23.85 3.01% 3.47% 2.67% 5.78%
FA-A 24 394 63% 30% 7% 0.3 2107.00 552.70 0.118 0.0510 33.12 21.89 2.97% 3.42% 2.71% 5.82%
FA-A 25 394 72% 20% 8% 0.3 2355.50 801.20 0.158 0.0910 33.84 22.60 2.77% 3.22% 2.51% 5.62%
FA-A 26 394 67% 25% 8% 0.3 2187.70 633.40 0.119 0.0520 31.69 20.46 2.57% 3.02% 2.31% 5.42%
105
FA-A 27 394 62% 30% 8% 0.3 1911.20 356.90 0.105 0.0380 28.76 17.52 2.33% 2.78% 2.07% 5.18%
Cement 0.5
Chloride Attack Test Sea Water Attack Test
Total Fly Ash Silica Fume (coulombs) (mm/min ) %agex10-2)
Test ID W/B
% % % 28 56 28 56 28 56
loss loss loss loss
FA-SF 1 394 71% 20% 9% 0.5 4037.29 2382.24 0.453 0.21 113.18 63.706 6.93% 7.48% 6.77% 14.07%
FA-SF 2 394 66% 25% 9% 0.5 3786.83 2131.78 0.444 0.20 111.39 61.912 6.75% 7.30% 6.59% 13.89%
FA-SF 3 394 61% 30% 9% 0.5 3624.78 1969.73 0.440 0.20 108.68 59.206 6.66% 7.21% 6.50% 13.80%
FA-SF 4 394 70% 20% 10% 0.5 3705.21 2050.16 0.450 0.21 107.84 58.359 6.62% 7.12% 6.46% 13.72%
FA-SF 5 394 65% 25% 10% 0.5 3621.56 1749.34 0.361 0.19 104.10 56.865 6.56% 7.06% 6.36% 10.37%
FA-SF 6 394 60% 30% 10% 0.5 3390.39 1601.50 0.349 0.18 101.82 54.58 6.47% 6.97% 6.24% 10.24%
FA-SF 7 394 69% 20% 11% 0.5 3473.55 1684.66 0.376 0.20 100.80 53.56 6.03% 6.53% 5.80% 9.80%
FA-SF 8 394 64% 25% 11% 0.5 3310.24 1388.57 0.350 0.19 100.12 52.8796 5.85% 6.46% 5.68% 9.68%
FA-SF 9 394 59% 30% 11% 0.5 3145.88 1224.21 0.317 0.16 96.61 53.358 5.73% 6.34% 5.56% 9.50%
FA-SF 13 394 71% 20% 9% 0.4 3438.55 1516.88 0.356 0.19 95.04 51.789 5.63% 6.24% 5.41% 9.28%
FA-SF 14 394 66% 25% 9% 0.4 3312.55 1390.88 0.329 0.17 92.84 49.58 5.61% 6.21% 5.39% 9.22%
FA-SF 15 394 61% 30% 9% 0.4 3197.75 1276.08 0.291 0.13 86.84 43.587 5.52% 6.13% 5.46% 9.30%
FA-SF 16 394 70% 20% 10% 0.4 3046.24 1386.47 0.344 0.19 86.47 43.214 5.42% 6.03% 5.36% 9.20%
FA-SF 17 394 65% 25% 10% 0.4 2943.69 1283.92 0.294 0.14 76.64 37.958 5.30% 5.91% 5.21% 9.02%
FA-SF 18 394 60% 30% 10% 0.4 2769.25 883.16 0.248 0.10 75.43 36.746 5.17% 5.81% 5.11% 8.92%
FA-SF 19 394 69% 20% 11% 0.4 2939.49 1053.40 0.274 0.12 76.45 37.768 4.73% 5.35% 4.67% 8.37%
FA-SF 20 394 64% 25% 11% 0.4 2751.89 865.80 0.248 0.10 75.44 36.7538 4.55% 5.17% 4.49% 8.19%
FA-SF 21 394 59% 30% 11% 0.4 2401.49 737.56 0.224 0.07 72.63 33.945 4.48% 5.10% 4.42% 8.12%
FA-SF 25 394 71% 20% 9% 0.3 2809.59 1145.66 0.210 0.10 74.31 38.746 4.25% 4.54% 3.98% 7.69%
FA-SF 26 394 66% 25% 9% 0.3 2661.54 997.61 0.196 0.09 72.83 37.266 3.94% 4.12% 3.67% 7.38%
FA-SF 27 394 61% 30% 9% 0.3 2462.39 798.46 0.189 0.08 73.30 37.735 3.96% 4.14% 3.69% 7.40%
FA-SF 28 394 70% 20% 10% 0.3 2600.78 950.67 0.220 0.11 73.16 37.594 3.86% 4.03% 3.58% 6.61%
FA-SF 29 394 65% 25% 10% 0.3 2340.10 830.41 0.192 0.09 70.66 35.089 3.62% 3.80% 3.35% 6.38%
FA-SF 30 394 60% 30% 10% 0.3 2176.58 666.89 0.139 0.05 60.12 33.122 3.57% 3.73% 3.33% 6.39%
FA-SF 31 394 69% 20% 11% 0.3 2350.53 840.84 0.179 0.09 60.84 33.835 3.37% 3.53% 3.13% 6.19%
FA-SF 32 394 64% 25% 11% 0.3 2233.07 723.38 0.140 0.05 58.69 31.693 3.17% 3.33% 2.93% 5.99%
106
FA-SF 33 394 59% 30% 11% 0.3 2039.52 529.83 0.126 0.04 55.76 28.755 2.93% 3.09% 2.69% 5.75%
Cement 0.5 Chloride Attack Test Sea Water Attack Test
Total Fly Ash Metakolin (coulombs) (mm/min ) %agex10-2)
Test ID W/B
% % % 28 56 28 56 28 56
loss loss loss loss
FA-MK 3 394 69% 20% 11% 0.5 3701.94 2283.33 0.476 0.2320 124.44 73.71 7.59% 8.00% 7.49% 15.87%
FA-MK 4 394 64% 25% 11% 0.5 3487.26 2068.65 0.467 0.2230 122.65 71.91 7.41% 7.82% 7.31% 15.69%
FA-MK 5 394 59% 30% 11% 0.5 3348.36 1929.75 0.463 0.2190 119.94 69.21 7.32% 7.73% 7.22% 15.60%
FA-MK 6 394 68% 20% 12% 0.5 3417.30 1998.69 0.473 0.2290 119.09 68.36 7.18% 7.65% 7.18% 15.50%
FA-MK 7 394 63% 25% 12% 0.5 3315.60 1740.85 0.385 0.2130 114.36 66.87 7.12% 7.59% 7.08% 12.15%
FA-MK 8 394 58% 30% 12% 0.5 3117.47 1586.04 0.370 0.1979 112.08 62.87 7.03% 7.49% 6.96% 12.02%
FA-MK 9 394 67% 20% 13% 0.5 3188.75 1657.32 0.397 0.2249 111.06 61.85 6.59% 7.02% 6.49% 11.58%
FA-MK 10 394 62% 25% 13% 0.5 3048.77 1403.53 0.370 0.2109 110.37 61.17 6.41% 6.95% 6.37% 11.46%
FA-MK 11 394 57% 30% 13% 0.5 2907.89 1262.65 0.337 0.1760 106.87 61.65 6.33% 6.83% 6.25% 11.28%
FA-MK 14 394 69% 20% 11% 0.4 3158.75 1513.51 0.376 0.2150 105.30 60.08 6.23% 6.73% 6.11% 11.06%
FA-MK 15 394 64% 25% 11% 0.4 3032.75 1405.51 0.347 0.1880 101.89 56.57 6.20% 6.71% 6.08% 11.00%
FA-MK 16 394 59% 30% 11% 0.4 2934.35 1287.31 0.309 0.1500 95.90 50.58 6.12% 6.62% 6.15% 10.98%
FA-MK 17 394 68% 20% 12% 0.4 2804.48 1381.93 0.362 0.2135 95.52 50.20 5.92% 6.52% 5.95% 10.88%
FA-MK 18 394 63% 25% 12% 0.4 2716.58 1294.03 0.312 0.1635 85.70 44.95 5.80% 6.40% 5.80% 10.70%
FA-MK 19 394 58% 30% 12% 0.4 2567.06 950.52 0.266 0.1175 84.49 43.74 5.67% 6.30% 5.70% 10.60%
FA-MK 20 394 67% 20% 13% 0.4 2712.98 1096.44 0.292 0.1435 85.44 44.76 5.23% 5.82% 5.26% 10.05%
FA-MK 21 394 62% 25% 13% 0.4 2528.18 935.64 0.266 0.1175 84.42 42.01 4.98% 5.64% 5.08% 9.87%
FA-MK 22 394 57% 30% 13% 0.4 2227.83 801.61 0.242 0.0933 81.62 39.20 4.91% 5.57% 4.96% 9.80%
FA-MK 25 394 69% 20% 11% 0.3 2577.63 1151.41 0.224 0.1209 83.30 44.00 4.68% 5.01% 4.52% 9.37%
FA-MK 26 394 64% 25% 11% 0.3 2450.73 1024.51 0.210 0.1069 81.82 42.52 4.37% 4.59% 4.21% 9.06%
FA-MK 27 394 59% 30% 11% 0.3 2280.03 853.81 0.203 0.0999 81.83 42.76 4.39% 4.61% 4.23% 8.95%
FA-MK 28 394 68% 20% 12% 0.3 2398.65 984.28 0.234 0.1309 81.69 42.62 4.26% 4.50% 4.08% 8.17%
FA-MK 29 394 63% 25% 12% 0.3 2157.21 881.20 0.206 0.1029 79.18 40.11 4.02% 4.27% 3.84% 7.94%
FA-MK 30 394 58% 30% 12% 0.3 2017.05 717.04 0.151 0.0689 68.65 38.15 3.97% 4.10% 3.83% 7.95%
FA-MK 31 394 67% 20% 13% 0.3 2166.15 866.14 0.191 0.1089 69.36 38.73 3.67% 3.90% 3.52% 7.45%
107
FA-MK 32 394 62% 25% 13% 0.3 2065.47 765.46 0.152 0.0699 67.22 36.59 3.47% 3.70% 3.32% 7.25%
FA-MK 33 394 57% 30% 13% 0.3 1899.57 599.56 0.138 0.0559 64.28 33.65 3.22% 3.46% 3.07% 7.01%
5. DEVELOPMENT OF EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS

AND VALIDATION
5.1 OVERVIEW
Quick and rapid determination of strength properties of high performance concrete is the
current need of construction industry to avoid delay in project. This need can be fulfilled
by either simple testing procedures or simple empirical correlations. These empirical
correlations are to be developed by identifying the appropriate parameters, which has
major dependency. Therefore, developments of empirical correlations are executed by
huge laboratory investigations and were performed as discussed in the Chapter 4.
Therefore, in this chapter based on the laboratory investigations, empirical correlations
were developed by simple and multivariate parametric regression analysis using MS-Excel
tool.
The empirical correlations are developed by multivariate parametric regression analysis

based on the fundamental principle of Gauss-Markov theorem. The regression analysis is
carried out by using affine transformation. Empirical correlations are developed by MS-
Excel and “IBM SPSS Statistics 16.0" software. The most significant assignment of this
research work is development of empirical correlations for estimating strength parameters
prior to the defined scope of the work. The empirical correlations are developed based on
the three significant criteria they are
 Type of supplementary cementitious material
 Variation in water/binder ratio
 Non-destructive testing of concrete
Thus based on the above defined criteria the developed empirical correlations were
clustered in to five phases as discussed below:
This assignment was done by dividing the entire work in four phases as follows:
Phase-I : Development of empirical correlations for estimating the compressive,

flexural and split tensile strength using supplementary cementitious materials and
water/binder ratio for designed binary mix.
108
Phase-II: Development of empirical correlations for estimating the compressive,

flexural and split tensile strength using supplementary cementitious materials and
water/binder ratio for designed ternary mix.
Phase-III: Development of empirical correlations for estimating the compressive,
flexural and split tensile strength of high performance concrete incorporating
supplementary cementitious materials from Rebound Hammer and Ultrasonic Pulse
Velocity Method (UPV) for designed binary mix.
Phase-IV: Development of empirical correlations for estimating the compressive,
flexural and split tensile strength of high performance concrete incorporating
Velocity Method (UPV) for designed Ternary mix.
Each strength parameter has given a unique symbol in order to distinguish the strength
properties. for example, in fCK the subscript signifies the compressive strength of HPC.
Whereas, for the independent variables like RHA, SF indicates the Rice Husk Ash and
Silica Fume respectively. Similarly for the other parameters the detailed description which
explains symbol for each parameter is provided in the list of abbreviations and symbols.
5.2 EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS FOR BINARY MIX INCORPORATING

SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS
Initially based on the laboratory investigations the empirical correlations were developed
using MS excel and SPSS 16.0 software for estimating the strength parameters such as
Compressive, Flexural and split tensile strength by using supplementary cementitious
materials and water/binder ratio from binary mix as shown in table 5.1 and 5.2. The actual
data obtained from the laboratory investigations and the predicted data obtained from the
empirical relations have been correlated and the corresponding correlation value is
presented as shown in table 5.1 and 5.2.
5.2.1 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM RICE HUSK ASH &

CEMENT PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, Rice Husk Ash & cement
proportion and W/B ratio is determined from multivariate regression analysis of results
obtained from experimental investigation is expressed by following equation.
f’c (28 days) = -0.28219*RHA + 0.933085*CEMENT - 56.5674*W/B RATIO
f’c (56 days) = -0.01275*RHA + 0.934944*CEMENT - 58.4893*W/B RATIO
109
A plot between actual and predicted value of 28/56 days compressive strength is shown in
figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Compressive Strength of
Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
5.2.2 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH &

A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, Fly Ash & cement
f’c (28 days) = 0.177305*FLY ASH + 0.453579*CEMENT - 323.017*W/B RATIO
f’c (56 days) = 0.177677*FLY ASH + 0.5246*CEMENT - 35.4411*W/B RATIO
figure 5.2.
Figure 5.2 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Compressive Strength
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
110
5.2.3 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM ALCCOFINE &

A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, Alccofine & cement
f’c (28 days) = 0.126821*ALCCOFINE + 0.300313*CEMENT - 21.7882*W/B
f’c(56 days) = 0.140912*ALCCOFINE + 0.333681*CEMENT - 24.2091*W/B
figure 5.3.
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
5.2.4 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM SILICA FUMES &

A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, Silica Fume & cement
f’c (28 days) = 0.084422*SILICA FUME + 0.438872*CEMENT - 30.8745*W/B
f’c (56 days) = 0.093802*SILICA FUME + 0.487635*CEMENT - 34.305*W/B
figure 5.4.
111
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as SCM
5.2.5 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM METAKAOLINE &

A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, Metakaoline & cement
f’c (28 days) = 0.07348*METAKAOLINE + 0.041014*CEMENT - 1.70486*W/B
f’c (56 days) = 0.933495*METAKAOLINE + 0.379645*CEMENT - 29.002*W/B
figure 5.5.
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
112
5.2.6 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM RICE HUSK ASH &

A relation between 28 days flexural strength of HPC, Rice Husk Ash & cement proportion
and W/B ratio is determined from multivariate regression analysis of results obtained from
experimental investigation is expressed by following equation.
fcr(28 days) = -0.014198*RHA + 0.069192*CEMENT - 2.55082*W/B RATIO
fcr(56 days) = -0.013785*RHA + 0.075727*CEMENT - 2.31187*W/B RATIO
A plot between actual and predicted value of 28/56 days flexural strength is shown in
figure 5.6.
Figure 5.6 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Flexural Strength
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
5.2.7 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH & CEMENT
PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28 days flexural strength of HPC, Fly Ash & cement proportion and
W/B ratio is determined from multivariate regression analysis of results obtained from
fcr (28 days) = 0.029831*FLY ASH + 0.49241*CEMENT - 2.25213*W/B RATIO
fcr (56 days) = 0.037668*FLY ASH + 0.059024*CEMENT - 3.27475*W/B RATIO
figure 5.7.
113
5.2.8 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM ALCCOFINE & CEMENT
PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28 days flexural strength of HPC, Alccofine & cement proportion and
W/B ratio is determined from multivariate regression analysis of results obtained from
fcr (28 days) = 0.025679*ALCCOFINE + 0.039158*CEMENT - 1.72321*W/B
fcr (56 days) = 0.034098*ALCCOFINE + 0.04719*CEMENT - 2.3426*W/B
figure 5.8.
114
5.2.9 PREDICTION OF 28 DAYS FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM SILICA FUMES &

A relation between 28 days flexural strength of HPC, silica fumes & cement proportion
Fcr (28 days) = 0.023846*SILICA FUME + 0.047548*CEMENT – 2.05171*W/B
fcr (56 days) = 0.026384*SILICA FUME + 0.056701*CEMENT – 2.34545*W/B
figure 5.9.
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fumes as SCM
5.2.10 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM METAKAOLINE &

A relation between 28/56 days flexural strength of HPC, Metakaoline & cement
fcr (28 days) = 0.07348*METAKAOLINE + 0.041014*CEMENT - 1.70486*W/B
fcr (56 days) = 0.084604*METAKAOLINE + 0.048023*CEMENT - 1.67154*W/B
figure 5.10.
115
5.2.11 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM RICE HUSK ASH &
CEMENTS PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28/56 days split tensile strength of HPC, Rice Husk Ash & cement
fsp (28 days) = 0.038721*RICE HUSK ASH + 0.015772*CEMENT
- 5.376445*W/B RATIO
fsp (56days) = 0.019973* RICE HUSK ASH + 0.018363*CEMENT
- 5.595395*W/B RATIO
A plot between actual and predicted value of 28/56 days split tensile strength is shown in
figure 5.11.
Figure 5.11 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Split Tensile Strength
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
116
5.2.12 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH &

A relation between 28 days split tensile strength of HPC, Fly Ash & cement proportion
fsp (28 days) = 0.017106*FLY ASH + 0.042657*CEMENT - 2.96141*W/B RATIO
fsp (56 days) = 0.057058*FLY ASH + 0.06781*CEMENT - 4.92506*W/B RATIO
figure 5.12.
5.2.13 PREDICTION OF 28 DAYS SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM ALCCOFINE

& CEMENTS PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28 days split tensile strength of HPC, Alccofine & cement proportion
fsp (28 days) = 0.012391*ALCCOFINE + 0.028533*CEMENT - 2.0295*W/B
fsp (56 days) = 0.087516*ALCCOFINE + 0.058818*CEMENT - 4.69902*W/B
figure 5.13.
117
5.2.14 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM SILICA FUMES &

A relation between 28 days split tensile strength of HPC, Silica Fume & cements
fsp (28 days) = 0.008558*SILICA FUME + 0.041244*CEMENT - 2.84602*W/B
fsp (56 days) = 0.054456*SILICA FUME + 0.068602*CEMENT - 5.14189*W/B
figure 5.14.
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as SCM
118
5.2.15 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM METAKAOLINE &

A relation between 28 days split tensile strength of HPC, Metakaoline & cement
fsp (28 days) = 0.078172*METAKAOLINE + 0.032278*CEMENT - 2.40355*W/B
fsp (56 days) = 0.0879112*METAKAOLINE + 0.067287*CEMENT - 5.42013*W/B
A plot between actual and predicted value of 28 days split tensile strength is shown in
figure 5.15.
119
Table 5.1 Proposed Correlation Equations for 28 Days Strength of Binary Mix
Incorporating Supplementary Cementatious Materials
Development
R2 for Model
R2 for Model
Proposed Correlation Equations
Dependent
Validation
Model No.
Variable
for 28 Days Strength of Binary
Independent
Mix Incorporating
Variable
Supplementary Cementitious
Materials
f’c = -0.28219*RHA +
1 f’c RHA C W/B 0.933085*CEMENT - 56.5674*W/B 0.9854 0.9325
RATIO
f’c = 0.177305*FLY ASH +
2 f’c FA C W/B 0.453579*CEMENT - 323.017*W/B 0.99 0.8384
RATIO
f’c = 0.126821*ALCCOFINE +
3 f’c A C W/B 0.99 0.7906
0.300313*CEMENT - 21.7882*W/B
f’c = 0.084422*SILICA FUME +
4 f’c SF C W/B 0.99 0.8963
0.438872*CEMENT - 30.8745*W/B
f’c = 0.840146*METAKAOLINE +
5 f’c M C W/B 0.99 0.9763
0.341681*CEMENT - 26.1018*W/B
fcr = -0.014198*RHA +
6 fcr RHA C W/B 0.069192*CEMENT - 2.55082*W/B 0.99 0.9367
RATIO
fcr = 0.029831*FLY ASH +
7 fcr FA C W/B 0.49241*CEMENT - 2.25213*W/B 0.99 0.8387
RATIO
fcr = 0.025679*ALCCOFINE +
8 fcr A C W/B 0.99 0.8466
0.039158*CEMENT - 1.72321*W/B
fcr = 0.023846*SILICA FUME +
9 fcr SF C W/B 0.99 0.9238
0.047548*CEMENT - 2.05171*W/B
fcr = 0.07348*METAKAOLINE +
10 fcr M C W/B 0.99 0.9763
0.041014*CEMENT - 1.70486*W/B
fsp = 0.038721*RHA +
11 fsp RHA C W/B 0.015772*CEMENT - 0.99 0.9234
5.376445*W/B RATIO
fsp = 0.017106*FLY
12 fsp FA C W/B ASH+0.042657*CEMENT - 0.99 0.8385
2.96141*W/B RATIO
fsp = 0.012391*ALCCOFINE
13 fsp A C W/B 0.99 0.7978
+0.028533*CEMENT-2.0295*W/B
fsp = 0.008558*SILICA FUME +
14 fsp SF C W/B 0.99 0.9236
0.041244*CEMENT - 2.84602*W/B
fsp = 0.078172*METAKAOLINE +
15 fsp M C W/B 0.99 0.9895
0.032278*CEMENT - 2.40355*W/B
120
Incorporating Supplementary Cementitious Materials
R2 for Model
R2 for Model
Devlopment
Dependent
Validation
Model No.
Proposed Correlation Equations for
Variable
Independent 56 Days Strength of Binary Mix
Variable Incorporating Supplementary
Cementitious Materials
f’c = -0.01275*RHA +
1 f’c RHA C W/B 0.934944*CEMENT - 58.4893*W/B 0.99 0.8967
RATIO
f’c = 0.177677*FLY ASH +
2 f’c FA C W/B 0.5246*CEMENT - 35.4411*W/B 0.99 0.8444
RATIO
f’c = 0.140912*ALCCOFINE +
3 f’c A C W/B 0.99 0.8018
0.333681*CEMENT - 24.2091*W/B
f’c = 0.093802*SILICA FUME +
4 f’c SF C W/B 0.99 0.9235
0.487635*CEMENT - 34.305*W/B
fc' = 0.933495*METAKAOLINE +
5 f’c M C W/B 0.99 0.665
0.379645*CEMENT - 29.002*W/B
fcr = -0.013785*RHA +
6 fcr RHA C W/B 0.075727*CEMENT - 2.31187*W/B 0.99 0.9003
RATIO
fcr = 0.037668*FLY ASH +
7 fcr FA C W/B 0.059024*CEMENT - 3.27475*W/B 0.99 0.9111
RATIO
fcr = 0.034098*ALCCOFINE +
8 fcr A C W/B 0.99 0.8247
0.04719*CEMENT - 2.3426*W/B
fcr = 0.026384*SILICA FUME +
9 fcr SF C W/B 0.99 0.918
0.056701*CEMENT- 2.34545*W/B
fcr = 0.084604*METAKAOLINE +
10 fcr M C W/B 0.99 0.9569
0.048023*CEMENT - 1.67154*W/B
fsp = 0.019973*RHA +
11 fsp RHA C W/B 0.018363*CEMENT - 5.595395*W/B 0.99 0.9939
RATIO
fsp = 0.057058*FLY ASH +
12 fsp FA C W/B 0.06781*CEMENT - 4.92506*W/B 0.99 0.9765
RATIO
fsp = 0.087516*ALCCOFINE
13 fsp A C W/B 0.99 0.9173
+0.058818*CEMENT - 4.69902*W/B
fsp = 0.054456*SILICA FUME +
14 fsp SF C W/B 0.99 0.9574
0.068602*CEMENT - 5.14189*W/B
fsp = 0.0879112*METAKAOLINE +
15 fsp M C W/B 0.99 0.9291
0.067287*CEMENT - 5.42013*W/B
121
5.3 EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS FOR TERNARY MIX INCORPORATING

SUPPLEMENTARY CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS
Initially based on the laboratory investigations the empirical correlations were developed
using MS excel and SPSS 16.0 software for estimating the strength parameters such as
compressive, flexural and split tensile strength by using supplementary cementitious
materials and water/binder ratio from ternary mix as shown in table 5.3and 5.4 The actual
data obtained from the laboratory investigations and the predicted data obtained from the
empirical relations have been correlated and the corresponding correlation value is
presented as shown in table 5.3 and 5.4.
5.3.1 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH,

ALCCOFINE & CEMENTS PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Alccofine &
cement proportion and W/B ratio is determined from multivariate regression analysis of
results obtained from experimental investigation is expressed by following equation.
f'c (28 days) = 59.204748*CEMENT + 56.658156*FLY ASH + 368.87429*ALOCOFINE
- 69.39853*W/B RATIO
f'c (56 days) = 65.783*CEMENT + 62.953*FLY ASH + 409.860*ALCCOFINE
- 77.109*W/B RATIO
figure 5.16.
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Alccofine as SCM
122
5.3.2 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH, SILICA

FUMES & CEMENTS PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Silica Fumes &
f'c (28 days) = 62.57*CEMENT + 37.60*FLY ASH + 305.51*SILICA FUME - 63.51*W/B
RATIO
f'c (56 days) = 69.533*CEMENT + 41.788*FLY ASH + 339.461*SILICA FUME -
70.569*W/B RATIO
figure 5.17.
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Silica Fumes as SCM
5.3.3 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH,

METAKAOLINE & CEMENTS PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Metakaoline &
f'c (28 days) = 76.20*CEMENT + 95.41*FLY ASH + 89.71*METAKAOLINE -
69.81*W/B RATIO
f'c (56 days) = 101.637*CEMENT + 87.937*FLY ASH + 56.071*METAKAOLINE
- 77.582*W/B RATIO
figure 5.18.
123
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Metakaoline as SCM
5.3.4 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH, ALCCOFINE &

A relation between 28/56 days flexural strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Alccofine & cement
fcr (28 days) = 5.16*CEMENT + 5.02*FLY ASH + 19.37*6ALCCOFINE
– 3.20*W/B RATIO
fcr (56 days) = 5.448*CEMENT + 5.297*FLY ASH + 20.425*ALCCOFINE
- 3.380*W/B RATIO
figure 5.19.
124
5.3.5 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH, SILICA FUMES

& CEMENTS PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28 days flexural strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Silica Fumes & cement
fcr (28 days) = 5.513*CEMENT + 4.321*FLY ASH + 16.154*SILICA FUME
- 2.909*W/B RATIO
fcr (56 days) = 5.812*CEMENT + 4.555*FLY ASH + 17.027*SILICA FUME
- 3.067*W/B RATIO
figure 5.20.
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Silica Fume as SCM
5.3.6 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH,

A relation between 28/56 days flexural strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Metakaoline & cement
fcr (28 days) = 5.846*CEMENT + 6.687*FLY ASH + 6.377*METAKAOLINE
- 3.117*W/B RATIO
fcr (56 days) = 6.830*CEMENT + 6.314*FLY ASH + 4.956*METAKAOLINE
-3.255*W/B RATIO
125
A plot between actual and predicted value of 28 days flexural strength is shown in figure
5.21.
5.3.7 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH,

ALCCOFINE & CEMENTS PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28/56 days split tensile strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Alccofine & cement
fsp (28 days) = 6.681*CEMENT + 6.44853751051755FLY ASH + 31.525*ALCCOFINE
-5.593*W/B RATIO
fsp (56 days) = 7.185*CEMENT + 6.934*FLY ASH + 33.903*ALCCOFINE - 6.014*W/B
RATIO
figure 5.22.
126
5.3.8 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH, SILICA

FUMES & CEMENTS PROPORTION AND W/B RATIO
A relation between 28/56 days split tensile strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Silica Fumes &
cements proportion and W/B ratio is determined from multivariate regression analysis of
fsp (28 days) = 5.987*CEMENT + 4.325*FLY ASH + 21.232*SILICA FUME
- 4.108*W/B RATIO
fSP (56 days) = 6.824*CEMENT + 4.331*FLY ASH + 30.672*SILICA FUME
-6.288*W/B RATIO
figure 5.23.
of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Silica Fume as SCM
5.3.9 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM FLY ASH,

A relation between 28/56 days split tensile strength of HPC, Fly Ash, Metakaoline &
fsp (28 days) = 5.879*CEMENT + 6.764*FLY ASH + 6.984*METAKAOLINE
-3.496*W/B RATIO
fsp (56 days) = 6.659*CEMENT + 7.866*FLY ASH + 7.486*METAKAOLINE
-4.297*W/B RATIO
figure 5.24.
127
128
Table 5.3 Proposed Correlation Equations for 28 Days Strength of Ternary Mix
R2 for Model
R2 for Model
Devlopment
Dependent
Validation
Model No.
Variable
Independent 28 Days Strength of Ternary Mix
f'c = 59.204748*CEMENT +
56.658156*FLY ASH +
1 f’c FA A C W/B 0.99 0.8985
368.87429*ALOCOFINE -
69.39853*W/B RATIO
f'c = 62.57*CEMENT + 37.60*FLY

2 f’c FA SF C W/B ASH + 305.51*SILICA FUME - 0.99 0.8673
63.51*W/B RATIO
f'c = 76.20*CEMENT + 95.41*FLY

3 f’c FA M C W/B ASH + 89.71*METAKAOLINE - 0.99 0.8913
69.81*W/B RATIO
fcr = 5.16*CEMENT + 5.02*FLY

4 fcr FA A C W/B ASH + 19.37*6ALCCOFINE – 0.99 0.8993
3.20*W/B RATIO

5 fcr FA SF C W/B ASH + 16.154*SILICA FUME - 0.99 0.893
2.909*W/B RATIO

6 fcr FA M C W/B ASH + 6.377*METAKAOLINE - 0.99 0.8992
3.117*W/B RATIO
fsp = 6.681*CEMENT +
6.44853751051755FLY ASH +
7 fsp FA A C W/B 0.99 0.8992
31.525*ALCCOFINE -5.593*W/B
RATIO
fsp = 5.987*CEMENT + 4.325*FLY
8 fsp FA SF C W/B ASH + 21.232*SILICA FUME - 0.99 0.8404
4.108*W/B RATIO

9 fsp FA M C W/B ASH + 6.984*METAKAOLINE - 0.99 0.792
3.496*W/B RATIO
129
R2 for Model
R2 for Model
Devlopment
Dependent
Validation
Model No.
Variable
f'c = 65.783*CEMENT + 62.953*FLY
1 f’c FA A C W/B ASH + 409.860*ALCCOFINE 0.99 0.8985

- 77.109*W/B RATIO
f'c = 69.533*CEMENT + 41.788*FLY
2 f’c FA SF C W/B ASH + 339.461*SILICA FUME - 0.99 0.8914

70.569*W/B RATIO
f'c = 101.637*CEMENT + 87.937*FLY
3 f’c FA M C W/B ASH + 56.071*METAKAOLINE 0.99 0.8356

- 77.582*W/B RATIO
4 fcr FA A C W/B ASH + 20.425*ALCCOFINE 0.99 0.8993

- 3.380*W/B RATIO
5 fcr FA SF C W/B ASH + 17.027*SILICA FUME 0.99 0.8438

- 3.067*W/B RATIO
fcr=6.830*CEMENT + 6.314*FLY
ASH + 4.956*METAKAOLINE
6 fcr FA M C W/B -3.255*W/B RATIO 0.99 0.8992
7 fsp FA A C W/B ASH + 33.903*ALCCOFINE - 0.99 0.8992

6.014*W/B RATIO
fSP = 6.824*CEMENT + 4.331*FLY
8 fsp FA SF C W/B ASH + 30.672*SILICA FUME 0.99 0.8462

-6.288*W/B RATIO
9 fsp FA M C W/B ASH + 7.486*METAKAOLINE 0.99 0.8943

-4.297*W/B RATIO
130
5.4 EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS STRENGTH PARAMETER PREDATION

FROM RH AND UPV FOR BINARY MIX INCORPORATING SUPPLEMENTARY
CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS
Development of empirical correlations for estimating the compressive, flexural and split
tensile strength of high performance concrete incorporating supplementary cementitious
materials from rebound hammer and ultrasonic pulse velocity method (UPV) for designed
binary mix.
5.4.1 PREDICTION OF COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH FROM NDT METHOD FOR

MIX INCORPORATING RICE HUSK ASH AND CEMENT
A relation between 28/56 days compressive strength of HPC, rebound hammer value
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Rice Husk Ash and
cement is determined from multivariate regression analysis of results obtained from
f'c (28 days) = 1.78726*RH - 6.94256*UPV
f'c (56 days) = 1.806524*RH - 7.17275*UPV
figure 5.25.
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
131

MIX INCORPORATING FLY ASH AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash and cement is
determined from multivariate regression analysis of results obtained from experimental
investigation is expressed by following equation.
f'c (28 days) = 1.5933*RH - 4.59076*UPV
f'c (56 days) = 1.559071*RH - 6.94256*UPV
A plot between actual and predicted value of 28 days compressive strength is shown in
figure 5.26.
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM

MIX INCORPORATING ALCCOFINE AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Alccofine and cement
is determined from multivariate regression analysis of results obtained from experimental
f'c (28 days) = 1.518182*RH - 4.45832*UPV
f'c (56 days) = 1.529396*RH - 4.52484*UPV
figure 5.27.
132
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM

MIX INCORPORATING SILICA FUME AND CEMENT
A relation between 28 days compressive strength of HPC, rebound hammer value

(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Silica Fume and
f'c (28 days) = 1.556928*RH - 4.7055*UPV
f'c (56 days) = 1.573609*RH - 4.82573*UPV
figure 5.28.
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fume as SCM
133

MIX INCORPORATING METAKAOLINE AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Metakaoline and
f'c (28 days) =1.562312*RH - 4.74327*UPV
f'c (56 days) = 1.57982*RH - 4.8724*UPV
figure 5.29.
(NDT Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
5.4.6 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM NDT METHOD FOR MIX

INCORPORATING RICE HUSK ASH AND CEMENT
A relation between 28/56 days flexural strength of HPC, rebound hammer value (N/mm2)
and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Rice Husk Ash and cement is
fcr (28 days) = 1.447016*RH - 4.12767*UPV
fcr (56 days) = 1.450212*RH - 4.13925*UPV
figure 5.30.
134
Figure 5.30 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Flexural Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM

INCORPORATING FLY ASH AND CEMENT
and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash and cement is
fcr (28 days)= 1.438041*RH - 4.09681*UPV
fcr (56 days) = 1.440449*RH - 4.10484*UPV
figure 5.31.
Figure 5.31 Actual and Predicted Values of 28 Days Flexural Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
135

INCORPORATING ALCCOFINE AND CEMENT
and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Alccofine ash and cement is
fcr (28 days)=1.436532*RH - 4.09185*UPV
fcr (56 days) = 1.439092*RH - 4.10029*UPV
figure 5.32.
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM

INCORPORATING SILICA FUME AND CEMENT
and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Silica Fume and cement is
fcr (28 days) = 1.439074*RH - 4.10024*UPV
fcr (56 days) = 1.442425*RH - 4.11158*UPV
figure 5.33.
136
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fumes as SCM
5.4.10 PREDICTION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH FROM NDT METHOD FOR

and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Metakaoline and cement is
fcr (28 days) = 1.439372*RH - 4.10123*UPV
fcr (56 days) = 1.442877*RH - 4.11314*UPV
figure 5.34.
Figure 5.34Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Flexural Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
137
5.4.11 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM NDT METHOD FOR

MIX INCORPORATING RICE HUSK ASH AND CEMENT
A relation between 28/56 days split tensile strength of HPC, rebound hammer value
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Rice Husk Ash and
fsp (28 days) = 1.440069*RH - 4.10352*UPV
fsp (56 days) = 1.440746*RH - 4.10581*UPV
figure 5.35.
Figure 5.35 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Split Tensile Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk Ash as SCM
5.4.12 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM NDT METHOD

FOR MIX INCORPORATING FLY ASH AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash and cement is
fsp (28 days) = 1.43299*RH - 4.08047*UPV
fsp (56 days) = 1.442607*RH - 4.11218*UPV
figure 5.36.
138
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash as SCM
5.4.13 PREDICTION OF SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH FROM NDT METHOD

FOR MIX INCORPORATING ALCCOFINE AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Alccofine ash and
fsp (28 days) = 1.431146*RH - 4.0747*UPV
fsp (56 days) = 1.441198*RH- 4.10734*UPV
figure 5.37.
Figure 5.37Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Split Tensile Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine as SCM
139

MIX INCORPORATING SILICA FUME AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s)for mix incorporating Silica Fume and
fsp (28 days) = 1.434403*RH - 4.08496*UPV
fsp (56 days) = 1.44326*RH - 4.11443*UPV
A plot between actual and predicted value of 28 days split tensile strength is shown in
figure 5.38.
Figure 5.38Actual and predicted Values of 28 Days Split Tensile Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Silica Fumes As SCM

(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Metakaoline and
fsp (28 days) = 1.434839*RH - 4.08635*UPV
fsp (56 days) = 1.443635*RH - 4.11571UPV
figure 5.39.
140
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Metakaoline as SCM
141
Incorporating Supplementary Cementitious Materials From RH & UPV
Development
R2 for Model
R2 for Model
Dependent
Validation
Model No.
Variable
Independent
Mix Incorporating
Variable
Materials From RH & UPV
1 f’c RHA C W/B f'c = 1.78726*RH - 6.94256*UPV 0.96 0.9999
2 f’c FA C W/B f'c =1.5933*RH - 4.59076*UPV 0.97 0.9961
3 f’c A C W/B f'c = 1.518182*RH - 4.45832*UPV 0.95 0.9999
4 f’c SF C W/B f'c =1.556928*RH - 4.7055*UPV 0.96 0.9999
5 f’c M C W/B f'c = 1.562312*RH - 4.74327*UPV 0.95 0.9999
6 fcr RHA C W/B fcr = 1.447016*RH - 4.12767*UPV 0.95 0.9896
7 fcr FA C W/B fcr = 1.438041*RH - 4.09681*UPV 0.95 0.9994
8 fcr A C W/B fcr = 1.436532*RH - 4.09185*UPV 0.96 0.9969
9 fcr SF C W/B fcr =1.439074*RH-4.10024*UPV 0.97 0.9899
10 fcr M C W/B fcr =1.439372*RH-4.10123*UPV 0.95 0.9989
11 fsp RHA C W/B fsp = 1.440069*RH-4.10352*UPV 0.96 0.9999
12 fsp FA C W/B fsp = 1.43299*RH - 4.08047*UPV 0.95 0.9998
13 fsp A C W/B fsp = 1.431146*RH - 4.0747*UPV 0.97 0.9993
14 fsp SF C W/B fsp = 1.434403*RH - 4.08496*UPV 0.97 0.9982
15 fsp M C W/B fsp = 1.434839*RH - 4.08635*UPV 0.96 0.9982
142
Incorporating Supplementary Cementitious Materials From RH & UPV
Development
R2 for Model
R2 for Model
Dependent
Validation
Model No.
Variable
Independent
Mix Incorporating
Variable
Materials From RH & UPV
1 f’c RHA C W/B f'c = 1.806524*RH - 7.17275*UPV 0.99 0.9893
2 f’c FA C W/B f'c = 1.559071*RH - 6.94256*UPV 0.99 0.9962
3 f’c A C W/B f'c = 1.529396*RH - 4.52484*UPV 0.99 0.9999
4 f’c SF C W/B f'c = 1.573609*RH - 4.82573*UPV 0.99 0.9999
5 f’c M C W/B f'c = 1.57982*RH - 4.8724*UPV 0.95 0.9875
6 fcr RHA C W/B fcr = 1.450212*RH - 4.13925*UPV 0.99 0.9896
7 fcr FA C W/B fcr = 1.440449*RH - 4.10484*UPV 0.99 0.9958
8 fcr A C W/B fcr = 1.439092*RH - 4.10029*UPV 0.99 0.999
9 fcr SF C W/B fcr = 1.442425*RH - 4.11158*UPV 0.99 0.9998
10 fcr M C W/B fcr = 1.442877*RH - 4.11314*UPV 0.95 0.9974
11 fsp RHA C W/B fsp = 1.440746*RH - 4.10581*UPV 0.99 0.9999
12 fsp FA C W/B fsp = 1.442607*RH - 4.11218*UPV 0.99 0.9992
13 fsp A C W/B fsp = 1.441198*RH - 4.10734*UPV 0.99 0.9999
14 fsp SF C W/B fsp = 1.44326*RH - 4.11443*UPV 0.99 0.9953
15 fsp M C W/B fsp = 1.443635*RH - 4.11571UPV 0.95 0.9984
143
5.5 EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS STRENGTH PARAMETER PREDICTION FROM

RH AND UPV FOR TERNARY MIX INCORPORATING SUPPLEMENTARY
CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS
Development of empirical correlations for estimating the compressive, flexural and split
tensile strength of high performance concrete incorporating supplementary cementitious
materials from rebound hammer and ultrasonic pulse velocity Method (UPV) for designed
Ternary mix.

MIX INCORPORATING FLY ASH, ALCCOFINE AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Alccofine
and cement is determined from multivariate regression analysis of results obtained from
f'c (28 days) = 1.541051*RH - 4.59853*UPV
f'c (56 days) = 1.55539*RH - 4.6945*UPV
figure 5.40.
Figure 5.40 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Compressive Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Alccofine as SCM

MIX INCORPORATING FLY ASH, SILICA FUMES AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Silica Fumes
144
f'c (28 days) =1.536386*RH - 4.56763*UPV
f'c (56 days) = 1.550052*RH - 4.65673*UPV
figure 5.41.
Figure 5.41 Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Compressive Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Silica Fumes as SCM

MIX INCORPORATING FLY ASH, METAKAOLINE AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Metakaoline
f'c (28 days) = 1.551701*RH - 4.6685*UPV
f'c (56 days) = 1.567576*RH - 4.78*UPV
figure 5.42.
145
Figure 5.42 Actual and Predicted Value of 28/56 Days Compressive Strength (NDT
Method) of Concrete Mix Incorporating Fly Ash & Metakaoline as SCM

INCORPORATING FLY ASH, ALCCOFINE AND CEMENT
and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Alccofine and cement
is determined from multivariate regression analysis of results obtained from experimental
fcr (28 days) = 1.438117*RH - 4.09706*UPV
fcr (56 days) = 1.44126*RH - 4.1076*UPV
figure 5.43.
Figure 5.43Actual and Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Flexural Strength (NDT
146

INCORPORATING FLY ASH, SILICA FUMES AND CEMENT
and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Silica Fumes and
fcr (28 days) = 1.437773*RH - 4.09592*UPV
fcr (56 days) = 1.440917*RH - 4.10642*UPV
figure 5.44.

INCORPORATING FLY ASH, METAKAOLINE AND CEMENT
and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Metakaoline and
fcr (28 days) = 1.438738*RH - 4.09912*UPV
fcr (56 days) = 1.441762*RH - 4.1093*UPV
figure 5.45.
147
Figure 5.45 Actual And Predicted Values of 28/56 Days Flexural Strength (NDT

MIX INCORPORATING FLY ASH, ALCCOFINE AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Alccofine
fsp (28 days) = 1.433088*RH - 4.08078*UPV
fsp (56 days) = 1.442637*RH - 4.11228*UPV
figure 5.46.
148

MIX INCORPORATING FLY ASH, SILICA FUMES AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Silica Fumes
fsp (28 days) = 1.432693*RH - 4.07952*UPV
fsp (56 days) = 1.442507*RH - 4.11183*UPV
figure 5.47.

MIX INCORPORATING FLY ASH, METAKAOLINE AND CEMENT
(N/mm2) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (Km/s) for mix incorporating Fly Ash, Metakaoline
fsp (28 days) = 1.433976*RH - 4.08359*UPV
fsp (56 days) = 1.442091*RH - 4.11043*UPV
figure 5.48.
149
Figure 5.48Actual and Predicted Value of 28/56 Days Split Tensile Strength (NDT
Incorporating Supplementary Cementitious Materials From Using RH & UPV
Devlopment
Dependent
Validation
Model No.

Variable
Model
Model
R2 for
R2 for
1 f’c FA A C W/B f'c = 1.541051*RH - 4.59853*UPV 0.95 0.9989
2 f’c FA SF C W/B f'c = 1.536386*RH - 4.56763*UPV 0.99 0.9999
3 f’c FA M C W/B f'c = 1.551701*RH - 4.6685*UPV 0.95 0.9987
4 fcr FA A C W/B fcr = 1.438117*RH - 4.09706*UPV 0.99 0.9966
5 fcr FA SF C W/B fcr = 1.437773*RH - 4.09592*UPV 0.95 0.9974
6 fcr FA M C W/B fcr = 1.438738*RH - 4.09912*UPV 0.99 0.9999
7 fsp FA A C W/B fsp = 1.433088*RH - 4.08078*UPV 0.99 0.9989
8 fsp FA SF C W/B fsp = 1.432693*RH - 4.07952*UPV 0.95 0.9992
9 fsp FA M C W/B fsp = 1.433976*RH - 4.08359*UPV 0.99 0.9934
150
Incorporating Supplementary Cementitious Materials From Using RH & UPV
R2 for Model
R2 for Model
Devlopment
Dependent
Validation
Model No.

Variable Independent 56 Days Strength of Ternary Mix
1 f’c FA A C W/B f'c = 1.55539*RH - 4.6945*UPV 0.99 0.9983
2 f’c FA SF C W/B f'c = 1.550052*RH - 4.65673*UPV 0.95 0.9999
3 f’c FA M C W/B f'c = 1.567576*RH - 4.78*UPV 0.99 0.9987
4 fcr FA A C W/B fcr = 1.44126*RH - 4.1076*UPV 0.99 0.9982
5 fcr FA SF C W/B fcr = 1.440917*RH - 4.10642*UPV 0.99 0.9959
6 fcr FA M C W/B fcr = 1.441762*RH - 4.1093*UPV 0.99 0.999
7 fsp FA A C W/B fsp = 1.442637*RH - 4.11228*UPV 0.99 0.9992
8 fsp FA SF C W/B fsp = 1.442507*RH - 4.11183*UPV 0.99 0.9991
9 fsp FA M C W/B fsp = 1.442091*RH - 4.11043*UPV 0.99 0.996
Thus based on the developed empirical correlations a comprehensive software tool is

developed using VISUAL BASIC software in order to facilitate the analysis for the
structural evaluation of HPC and decision making process during pre and post
construction phases of building construction. The details of the developed software are
discussed in Chapter 6.
151
6. DEVELOPMENT OF VB PLATFORM
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Quick and rapid assessment of strength properties is only possible by keeping away
complex calculations which may be responsible for the erroneous results. This may be
only possible with automation of developed empirical correlations.
Therefore, in this study the developed empirical correlations as discussed in the chapter 7
is integrated into one single platform in four different modules by developing a
comprehensive tool for the assessment of strength properties.
6.2 VB PLATFORM
The developed empirical correlations were integrated into single platform by developing
comprehensive tool for estimation of strength parameters. The tool was developed with the
help of IT professionals in a Visual Basic (VB) platform which serves as quick and rapid
assessment tool.
The VB platform includes four modules such as
i. Health Analysis of High Performance Concrete for Binary mix from SCM
ii. Health Analysis of High Performance Concrete for Ternary mix from SCM
iii. Health Analysis of High Performance Concrete for Binary mix from NDT
iv. Health Analysis of High Performance Concrete for Ternary mix from NDT
The detailed working principle and the flow charts along with the data input range is
defined for the each module and is discussed in the subsequent sections.
Table 6.1 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Rice Husk Ash as SCM
Parametrs Lower Limit Upper Limit
28 days Compressive Strength ( N/mm2 ) 50.13 70.41
28 days Rebound Hammer ( N/mm2 ) 34.09 47.88
28 days UPV (Km/S) 5.24 5.30
56 days UPV (Km/S) 5.24 5.29
28 days Flexural Strength ( N/mm2 ) 4.96 5.87
28 days Split Tensile Strength ( N/mm2 ) 3.23 4.62
152
Table 6.2 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Fly Ash as SCM
Parameters Lower Limit Upper Limit
28 days UPV (Km/S) 5.31 5.35
56 days UPV (Km/S) 5.23 5.27
Table 6.3 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Alccofine as SCM
28 days UPV (Km/S) 5.32 5.37
56 days UPV (Km/S) 5.23 5.30
Table 6.4 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Silica Fume as SCM
Parametrs Lower Limit Upper Limit
28 days UPV (Km/S) 5.32 5.37
56 days UPV (Km/S) 5.23 5.30
153
Table 6.5 Input Data Range for Binary Mix for Metakaoline as SCM
28 days UPV (Km/S) 5.32 5.37
56 days UPV (Km/S) 5.23 5.30
Table 6.6 Input Data Range for Ternary Mix for Alccofine and Fly Ash as SCM
28 days UPV (Km/S) 5.31 5.35
56 days UPV (Km/S) 5.22 5.27
Table 6.7 Input Data Range for Ternary Mix for Silica Fume and Fly Ash as SCM
28 days UPV (Km/S) 5.30 5.36
56 days UPV (Km/S) 5.22 5.27
154
Table 6.8 Input Data Range for Ternary Mix for Metakaoline and Fly Ash as SCM
2
28 days Compressive Strength ( N/mm ) 44.15 66.19
2
28 days Rebound Hammer ( N/mm ) 17.77 18.30
2
56 days Rebound Hammer ( N/mm ) 41.31 48.42
28 days UPV (Km/S) 5.29 5.35
56 days UPV (Km/S) 5.23 5.27
2
28 days Flexural Strength ( N/mm ) 4.39 5.37
2
56 days Flexural Strength ( N/mm ) 4.62 5.66
2
28 days Split Tensile Strength ( N/mm ) 4.14 5.43
6.3 SCREEN SHOTS OF DEVELOPED VB MODEL
155
156
157
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 CONCLUSIONS
The objective of this study is to evaluate the Structural strength of high performance
concrete by utilizing green and pozzolanic material as supplementary cementitious
material and potential use of non-destructive testing devices for in-situ strength parameters
of HPC during and after construction. To assess this series of laboratory tests were
conducted on various concrete mixes incorporating Fly Ash, Alccofine, Silica Fume, Rice
Husk Ash and Metakaoline as SCM. About 7,520 concrete specimens were analyzed of
different for different mix proportions. This research study primarily focused on the
development of empirical correlations for estimating the 28 & 56 days compressive
strength, flexural strength and split tensile strength for diverse range of water/binder ratio
for binary and ternary concrete mixes. Detailed laboratory investigations are performed
covering almost all available supplementary cementitious materials nearby area of Gujarat
state of India. In this research an attempt has been made to produce high performance
concrete with commonly used ingredients such as cement, sand and coarse aggregates,
which are locally available along with supplementary cementitious materials. To establish
an empirical model, the following experimental set up was planned and meticulously
executed.
 Workability
 Compressive strength of cubes
 Split strength test for cubes and cylinders
 Flexural strength of concrete
 Rebound hammer
 UPV
Other than then these durability parameters like rapid chloride penetration test (RCPT),
sorptivity test, chloride resistance test, accelerated corrosion test and sea water attack test
is conducted on various ternary mixes.
The results of the statistical analysis show that good correlation do exist between the
performance measures (compressive strength, split tensile strength and flexural strength)
158
and the SCM used and NDT test results. The relations obtained from statistical analysis,
were linear for some models and non-linear for others. All regression models had an
adjusted R2, and a significance level between 0.8, and 0.999, respectively. The result of
this study suggests that these empirical correlations can be reliably used to predict the
compressive strength, split tensile strength and flexural strength.
Laboratory investigations are performed covering the almost all aspects of high
performance concrete. The major experimental outcomes of this thesis as follows;
i. Compressive strength testing of various mix proportions by considering all

available supplementary cementitious materials, it was depicted that for binary
mix incorporating rice husk ash has given good results as compare to others.
The compressive strength of concrete is increased with increase in Alccofine
content up to 8% & Silica content up to 11%. It was observed that there is
possibility of production of concrete having compressive strength more than
70 MPa from ternary mix incorporating Alccofine or Silica Fume as SCM.
The optimum proportion is obtained from combination of 12% of Metakaoline,
30% Fly Ash and 0.3W/B ratio based on experimental investigation. The
utilization Metakaoline in binary and ternary mix has shown substantial
improvement in strength and durability characteristics of HPC.
ii. As discussed in previous chapters 4, it was observed that there is considerable
improvement in flexural and split tensile behaviour of concrete mix having
SCM.
iii. It was observed that there is significant improvement in durability measure for
high performance concrete. High durable concrete achieved through the use of
supplementary cementitious materials will decrease the maintenance cost of
structure. Thus life cycle cost will decrease.
Detailed laboratory investigations are performed covering the almost all aspects of high
performance concrete. The major work summaries data analysis of this thesis as follows;
i. Conventional high performance concrete was modified by incorporating Fly

Ash, Alccofine, Silica Fume, Rice Husk Ash and Metakaoline as SCM. The
modifications will minimize the CO2 emission and make concrete
environmental friendly.
159
ii. Empirical correlations are developed by carrying out multivariate linear

parametric regression analysis using MS excel tool for estimating concrete
strength parameters such as 28 & 56 days compressive strength, flexural
strength and split tensile strength for diverse range of water/binder ratio for
binary and ternary concrete mixes of SCM’s.
iii. Empirical correlations are developed by carrying out multivariate linear
parametric regression analysis using MS excel tool for estimating concrete
strength parameters such as 28 & 56 days compressive strength, flexural
strength and split tensile strength from non-destructive testing devices like
rebound hammer and ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) Test for diverse range of
water/binder ratio for binary and ternary concrete mixes of SCM’s.
iv. Durability parameters like rapid chloride penetration test (RCPT), sorptivity
test, chloride resistance test, accelerated corrosion test and sea water attack test
is conducted for diverse range of water/binder ratio for ternary concrete mixes
of SCM’s.
v. Developed empirical correlations are validated to analyse the reliability and
accuracy of output results.
vi. The empirical correlations developed during research have wide variety of
applications such as :
 Empirical correlations developed for estimating the concrete strength
parameters (compressive strength, split tensile strength and flexural
strength) from SCM proportions and W/B ratio can be used for the instant
in-situ strength assessment of HPC.
parameters (i.e. compressive strength, split tensile strength and flexural
strength) from non-destructive testing can be used for the post
construction strength assessment for commonly adopted and advanced
mineral admixtures used by construction industry.
 Developed empirical correlations for estimating the concrete strength
parameters can be used in defining project management strategies of
construction of building incorporating HPC.
 These empirical correlations can be employed for development of mix
proportion of high performance concrete.
160

parameters can be used in the defining the desired/optimum strength
requirements with different SCM proportions of the HPC and for the
preliminary cost estimates during pre-construction phase.
vii. The developed empirical correlations are integrated into a single platform by
developing a comprehensive tool using Visual Basic software which behaves
as a quick decision making tool for a policy makers, concessionaires, designers
and quality control engineers.
7.2 FUTURE SCOPE OF RESEARCH WORK
i. The correlations developed in this study were developed Fly Ash, Alccofine,
Silica Fume, Rice Husk Ash and Metakaoline only. It is recommended that
these correlations should be other mineral admixtures like Marble dust, red
mud or any other material available in other parts of India.
ii. Future study should investigate the other durability properties by incorporating
these SCM’s.
iii. Empirical correlations can be developed for prediction of durability
characteristics for diverse range of water/binder ratio for binary and ternary
concrete mixes of SCM’s
iv. This study recommends that use laboratory tests to determine the suitability of
these mineral admixtures in self-compacting concrete also.
v. It will also recommend that conduct a comprehensive laboratory testing of
concrete mixes with of these mineral admixtures incorporating light weight
aggregates.
161
REFERENCES
1 AASHTO T277, ―Standard Method of Test for Rapid Determination of the

Chloride Permeability of Concrete‖
2 ACI Committee 116,(1967) "Cement and Concrete Terminology," Publication
SP-19, pp. 24
3 Aitcin. P. C., Haddad.G., and Morin. R., (2004) "Controlling Plastic and
Autogenous Shrinkage in High-Performance Concrete Structures by an Early
Water Curing." ACI Special Publication 220.
4 Alaa M. R., (2012) ―Alkali-activated metakaolin: A short guide for civil
Engineer – An overview‖, Construction and Building Materials 41, 751–765.
5 Amudhavalli. N. K., and Jeena M., (2012) ―Effect of Silica Fume on Strength
and Durability Parameters Of Concrete‖, International Journal of Engineering
Sciences & Emerging Technologies, Vol-3,No -1, pp.28-35.
6 Andrew J. M., Jason H. I., Maria C.G.J., (2007) ―Alkali silica reactivity of
agglomerated silica fume‖, Cement and Concrete Research 37, 166–174
7 ASTM C 618-99, "Standard Specification for Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined
Natural Pozzolan for Use as a Mineral Admixture in Portland Cement Concrete",
Jul. 1999
8 ASTM C 876-99, (1999) "Standard, Test method for half-cell potentials of
uncoated reinforcing steel in concrete" West Conshohocken, PA, American
Society for Testing and Materials.
9 ASTM C1202, ―Standard Test Method for Electrical Indication of Concrete’s
Ability to Resist Chloride Ion Penetration‖
10 ASTM C33-03 (2004) ―Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates‖
11 ASTM D 422 (2002) ―Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils‖,
Annual Book of ASTM Standards
12 Bala M. S., Mohan G. G., Santhi A.S. (2010) ―Behaviour Of Class C and Class
F Fly Ash in High Volume Fly Ash Concrete‖, ACECON pp:639-644.
13 Basu. P.C., Saraswati,S., (2006)―Are existing IS Codes Suitable for Engineering
of HVFAC?‖, The Indian Concrete Journal, Vol.-80, No.-10, pp.17-21.
14 Beulah M., Prahallada M. C., (2012) ―Effect of Replacement Of Cement By
Metakalion on The Properties of High Performance Concrete Subjected To
Hydrochloric Acid Attack‖, IJERA, Vol-2, No- 6 , pp.033-038.
162
15 Bhanja. S., Sengupta B., (2004.) ―Influence of silica fume on the tensile strength
of concrete‖, Cement and Concrete Research 35, Pg no 743–747.
16 Bhattacharjee B, Mishra A, Rai H S,(2011) ―Specifications for High
Performance Concrete in India‖, Proceedings of the International UKIERI
Concrete Congress, New Delhi, India, pp. 1-12.
17 Brunauer, Stephen, and Copeland L. E. (1964) "The chemistry of
concrete." Scientific American, Pg No.80-92.
18 Brundtland, Gro Harlem. (1987) "World commission on environment and
development." Our common future: 8-9.
19 BS 8110-1. (1997) "Structural use of concrete Part 1: Code of practice of design
and construction", British Standards Institution
20 Cahit And Okan, (2008) ―The Compressive Strength of Ground Granulated Blast
Furnace Slag Concrete‖ Advances In Egg. Software Journal, Vol.40.
21 Chanakya A., (2012) ―Effects Due to Replacement of Ingredients of Concrete‖,
pp. 1-338.
22 Desai S N, Patil H S., (2011) ―Utilization of Industrial Waste in Mortar and
Concrete‖ Proseedings of the International UKIERI Concrete Congress, New
Delhi, India, pp. 131-142 March 8-10.
23 Dinakar P. (2010) ―Effect of Ultra-fine slag on the fresh and hardened properties
of ultra-high strength concrete‖ ACECON pp:527-532,
24 Donald B., (2006) ―The Durability of Concrete Containing High Levels of Fly
Ash‖, The University of New Brunswick,
25 Eires, Rute, et al. (2006) "New eco-friendly hybrid composite materials for civil
construction." Construction and Building Materials.
26 El-HadjKadri, Roger D., (2009) ―Hydration Heat Kinetics Of Concrete With
Silica Fume‖, Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 3388–3392, June
18.
27 EN, BS. 206-1 (2000). "Concrete–Part 1: Specification, Performance, Production
and Conformity." British Standards Institution.
28 Erdem, Tahir K. and Önder K., (2008) "Use of binary and ternary blends in high
strength concrete." Construction and Building Materials 22.7: 1477-1483.
29 Ferreira., Liu., Nilsson and Odd E. Gjorv, (2010) ―Blast-Furnace Slag Cement
for Concrete Durability in Marine Environment‖ Jordan Journal of Civil Egg,
30 Gandage A. S., Kalantri A., Dixit B., (2010) ―Study of the Properties of
Concrete with Processed Fly Ash‖ ACECON pp:607-613.
31 Gastaldini, A. L. G., et al. (2010) "Influence of curing time on the chloride
163
penetration resistance of concrete containing rice husk ash: A technical and
economical feasibility study." Cement and Concrete Composites 32.10: 783-793.
32 Gopalakrishnan. S., (2005) ―Demonstration of Utilizing High Volume Fly Ash
Based Concrete For Structural Applications‖, Structural Engineering Research
Centre, Chennai.
33 Hall C. and Raymond Yau. (1987) "Water movement in porous building
materials—IX. The water absorption and sorptivity of concretes."Building and
Environment 22.1: 77-82.
34 Harald J., (2012) "How to make Conceret More Sustainable‖, ICI Journal Vol.-
13, No.-1,pp.28-39.
35 Indian Standard Code IS 10262:2009 "Concrete mix proportioning guide lines".
36 Indian Standard Code IS 1199: 1959 "Methods of sampling and analysis of
concrete".
37 Indian Standard Code IS 456-2000, ―Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced
Concrete‖.
38 Indian Standard Code IS 516:1959 "Method of test for strength of concrete".
39 Indian Standard Code IS 5816 (1999): "Method of Test Splitting Tensile
Strength of Concrete".
40 Indian Standard Code IS: 12269, "Specifications for 53 Grade Ordinary Portland
Cement".
41 Indian Standard Code IS: 2386, "Methods of test for Aggregates for Concrete",
reprinted 1997.
Cement".
43 Indian Standard Code IS: 383 (1970): "Specification for Coarse and Fine
Aggregates From Natural Sources For Concrete".
Cement".
45 Ji Y., Jong H. C., (2003) ―Effects of densified silica fume on microstructure and
compressive strength of blended cement pastes‖, Cement and Concrete Research
33 (2003) 1543–1548, March 24.
46 Juenger M.C.G., Ostertag C.P, (2004) ―Alkali–silica reactivity of large silica
fume-derived particles‖, Cement and Concrete Research 34.
47 Karim, M. R., et al. (2012) "Strength of Mortar and Concrete as Influenced by
Rice Husk Ash: A Review." World Applied Sciences Journal 19.10: 1501-1513.
48 Khatib,.J.M., (2007) ―Metakaolin Concrete at a Low Water to Binder Ratio‖ ,
164
Construction and Building Materials, vol.- 22, pp. 1691–1700.
49 Khatri, R. P., Vute S., and Walter G., (1995) "Effect of different supplementary
cementitious materials on mechanical properties of high performance
concrete." Cement and Concrete Research 25.1: 209-220.
50 Kiachehr B., Omid F., (2012) ―The effects of pozzolanic binders and
polypropylene fibers on durability of SCC to magnesium sulfate attack‖,
Construction and Building Materials 38 (2013) 64–71, August 9.
51 Kulkari.,Vijay R.,Pathak.,S.R. (2013) ―Laboratory Investigations for Assessing
Chloride Ion Permeability of Medium Strength Concrete Mixes‖ The Indian
Concrete Journal, Vol.-87, No.-1, pp.9-18.
52 Kulkarni,Vijay., (2011) "Why Performance‐based Specifications for Concrete‖
ICI Journal Vol.-12,No.-2,pp.1-9.
53 Lea, Frederick M. (1970) "The chemistry of cement and concrete." Cement and
Concrete Research 34.
54 Madandoust R. , Sobhani.J., Ashoori. P., (2013) ―Concrete Made With Zeolite
And Metakaolin: A Comparison on The Strength And Durability Properties‖,
Asian Journal Of Civil Engineering (BHRC) Vol. 14, No. 4 (2013) Pages 533-
543.
55 Mahdi V, Farhad P., Mohammad S., Sara Khani, (2012) ―Comparing A Natural
Pozzolan, Zeolite, To Metakaolin And Silica Fume In Terms Of Their Effect on
The Durability Characteristics of Concrete: A Laboratory Study‖,Construction
and Building Materials 41 (2013) 879–888.
57 Maiti. S.C., Agarwal., Raj K.K., (2006) ―Concrete Mix Proportioning‖ The
Indian Concrete Journal, Vol.-80, No.-12, pp.23-26.
58 Maiti.S.C. and Agarwal.R. K., (2009) ―Concrete and its quality‖ The Indian
Concrete Journal, Vol.-83, No.-09, pp.20-27.
56 Malhotra, V.M and P.K. Mehta. (1996) ―Pozzolanic and Cementitious
Materials,‖ Overseas Publishers, pp 191
59 Matejka.V., Matejkova. P., Kovar P., Vlcek J., Prikryl J., et al. (2012)
―Metakaolinite/Tio2composite: Photoactive Admixture For Building Materials
Based On Portland Cement Binder‖, Construction and Building Materials, pp.
38-44.
60 Mattur., Gopinatha., & Shridhar (2009) ―Strength And Durability of High-
Volume Fly-ash Self-Compacting Concrete‖ ICI Journal.
61 Mccarthy., M J, Dhir., R K, Newlands., M D, Singh S P, (2011) ―Combining
Durability and Sustainability in Material Selection for Concrete‖, Proceedings of
165
the International UKIERI Concrete Congress, New Delhi, India, pp. 277-291.
62 Md.JahirAlam, (2009) ―Possible Use of Fly Ash Generated From Barapukeria
Power Plant for Sustainability‖, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology,
Bangladesh.
63 Mehta.P.K., (2003) ―High-Performance, High-Volume Fly Ash Concrete For
Sustainable Development‖ Journal of Concrete International, Vol-3.
64 Memona., Radin., Zainc., (2002) ―Effects of Mineral and Chemical Admixtures
on High-Strength Concrete In Seawater‖, Cement & Concrete Journal,
65 Mishra A, Babu Narayan K S, Yaragal S C, Desai S N (2011) ―Value Added Use
of Waste Materials in Concrete‖, Proseedings of the International UKIERI
Concrete Congress, New Delhi, India, pp. 61-75.
66 Moriconi, G. "Recyclable materials in concrete technology: sustainability and
durability. (2007.) " Sustainable Construction Materials and Technologies, Proc.
Special Sessions of First inter. conf. on sustainable Construction Materials and
Technologies, Coventry, UK.
68 Muhamad I., (2009) ―Effect of Mineral Admixtures On High Strength Concrete
Made With Locally Available Materials‖ Jordan Journal of Civil Egg, Vol- 3.
67 Muhammad Burhan Sharif (Ph.D.-CIVIL), (2011) ―Development Of Strength
And Durability of Concrete Incorporating Local Metakaolin‖, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of engineering and technology, Lahore, Pakistan
pp. 1-167.
69 Mukherjee, Abhijit, and Sudip N B., (1997) "Artificial neural networks in
prediction of mechanical behavior of concrete at high temperature." Nuclear
engineering and design 178.1: 1-11.
70 Mulick. A. M., (2007) "Performance of Concrete with Binary and Ternary
Cement Blends‖, The Indian Concrete Journal, Vol.-81, No.-1,pp.15-22.
71 Mullick A.K., (2007) ―Performance of Concrete With Binary And Ternary
Cement Blends‖, ICJ Journal.
72 Muthu. K. U., Ramaiah. M. S., (2008) ―Emerging Trends in Concrete
Technology and Structural Concrete‖, ICCBT2008, PP.17-34.
73 Nair, Deepa G.,Jagadish K. S., and Alex F., (2006) "Reactive pozzolanas from
rice husk ash: an alternative to cement for rural housing." Cement and Concrete
Research 36.6: 1062-1071.
74 Narasimhan M C, Nayak G, Ajith B T, Rao M K (2011) ―Development of
alternative binders to Portland cement concrete using flyash and blast furnace
slag : some experiences‖ Proceedings of the International UKIERI Concrete
166
Congress, New Delhi, India, pp. 43-60 March 8-10.
75 Nataraja. M. C., Das Lelin, (2010) ―Cocneret Mix Proprtioning as per IS
10262:2009-Comparision with IS 10262:1982 and ACI 211.1-91‖, The Indian
Concrete Journal, Vol.-84, No.-10,pp.64-70.
76 Neville, Adam. (1995) "Chloride attack of reinforced concrete: an
overview." Materials and Structures 28.2 : 63-70.
77 Oner A., & S. Akyuz., (2007) ―Study On Optimum Usage Of GGBS For
Compressive Strength Of Concrete‖, Faculty of Engineering, Kocaeli University
, Turkey.
78 Pathik A., Rao., Vyasa.A.N., Pai B V B., Dordi C., (2010) ―Micro technology for
High Performance Concrete‖, Roving National Seminar On Concrete
Sustainability Through Innovation Materials And Techniques, Bengular, Jaipur,
Nagpur And Kolkata, pp.64-69.
79 Patil.B. B, Kumbhar.P. D., (2012) ―Strength and Durability Properties of High
Performance Concrete incorporating High Reactivity Metakaolin‖ International
Journal of Modern Engineering Research (IJMER), Vol.-2, No-.3, pp-1099-1104.
80 Pazhani.K., Jeyaraj.R (2010) ―Study on Durability of High Performance
Concrete With Industrial Wastes‖, Department of Civil Engineering, Anna
University, Chennai, India.
81 Pofale A.D., Deo S.V. (2010) ―Replacement of Natural Sand by Fly Ash in
Concrete‖, ACECON pp:657-665,
82 Popovics, Sandor. "Concrete Materials: Properties, Specifications and Testings".
William Andrew
83 Raharjo. D, Subakti. A, Tavio, (2013) ―Mixed Concrete Optimization Using Fly
Ash, Silica Fume and Iron Slag on the SSC’s Compressive Strength‖, Procedia
Engineering 54 (2013) 827 – 839.
84 Ramachandran, Vangi S., Feldman.R. F., and Beaudoin.J. J., (1981) "Concrete
science." Handbook of Analytical Techniques in Concrete Science and
Technology: 1-62.
85 Ranka A I., Mehta Prakash V., (2010) ―Durability Of Cement Based Building
Materials With Water Soluble Nanotechnology Silanes For Waterproofing‖,
ACECON pp: 785-788.
86 Rashad A. M. (2013) "Alkali-activated metakaolin: A short guide for civil
Engineer–An overview." Construction and Building Materials 41 : 751-765.
87 Rodríguez de S, Gemma. (2006) "Strength development of concrete with rice-
husk ash." Cement and Concrete Composites 28.2: 158-160.
167
88 Roongta., Dewangan., Dr. Usha., (2004) ―Addition of Fly-Ash Beyond BIS
Limit In Portland Pozzolana Cement‖, R&D Work For Cleaner Environment,
89 Safiuddin, Md. (2008) " Development of self-consolidating high performance
concrete incorporating rice husk ash", Diss. University of Waterloo,
90 Saravanakumar. P., and Dhinakaran. G., (2010) ―Effect of Acidic Water on
Strength, Durability and Corrosion of Concrete‖, Journal of Civil Engineering
Research and Practice, Vol-7, No-2, pp.1 – 10.
91 Sheng., Wan. & Chen., (2008) ―Influence of GGBFS And Fly Ash On
Compressive Strength of High Performance Concrete‖, Construction & Building
Material, Vol.23.
92 Spadea, G., F. Bencardino, and R. N. Swamy. (1998) "Structural behavior of
composite RC beams with externally bonded CFRP." Journal of Composites for
Construction 2.3: 132-137.
93 Suvarnalatha K., Seshagiri R, Srinivasa R. V, (2012) ―Estimation of GGBS and
HVFA Strength Efficiencies in Concrete with Age‖, International Journal of
Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT) , Vol-2, No-2, pp.221-225.
94 Tatem, Andrew J., et al. (2003) "Increasing the spatial resolution of agricultural
land cover maps using a Hopfield neural network." International Journal of
Geographical Information Science 17.7: 647-672.
95 Thomas, Michael D.A, and Phil B. B., (1999) "Modelling chloride diffusion in
concrete: effect of fly ash and slag." Cement and Concrete Research 29.4 : 487-
495.
96 Ulrik N. A., and J.M. Monteiro. (1993) "Concrete: a three phase material."
Cement and Concrete Research 23.1: 147-151.
97 Vaishali. and Ghorpade. G., (2011) ―Chloride Ion Permeability Studies of
Metakaolin Based High Performance Concrete‖, IJEST Journal, Vol-3, No-2.
98 Vanita A,(2008) ―Concrete Durability Through High Volume Fly Ash
Concrete‖, Research Scholar, CED, NIT, Haryana, India,
99 Vatsal P, Niraj S., (2013) ―A Survey of High Performance Concrete
Developments in Civil Engineering Field‖, Open Journal of Civil Engineering,
Vol.-3, N0.-2,pp. 69-79.
100 Venu M and Rao. P. N., ―High Performance Concrete With GGBS And ROBO
Sand‖, International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, Vol-2, No-
10, 2010.
101 Wesche, Karlhans, ed. (1991) "Fly ash in concrete: properties and performance",
Vol. 7., Taylor & Francis.
168
102 Yijin., Shiqiong., Jian and Yingli, (2008) ―The Effect of Fly Ash On the
Fluidity of Cement Paste, Mortar and Concrete‖, Central South University, PRC
Journal, .
103 Yunsheng Xu, Chung D.D.L., (2000) ―Improving silica fume cement by using
silane‖, Cement and Concrete Research 30 (2000) 1305± 1311.
104 Zain, M. F. M., et al. (2011) "Production of rice husk ash for use in concrete as a
supplementary cementitious material." Construction and building materials 25.2:
798-805.
169
PAPERS PUBLISHED
INTERNATIONAL JOURNALS
1 Patel, P. J., and H. S. Patel. "Effect on Compressive and Flexural Strength of
High-Performance Concrete Incorporating Alccofine and Fly Ash." International
Journal (2013).
2 Patel, P. J. and H. S. Patel. "Effect of Coarse Aggregate Characteristics on
Strength Properties of High Performance Concrete using Mineral and Chemical
Admixtures." International Journal of Civil Engineering (2013).
3 Patel, P. J. and H.S. Patel. “Study On Durability of High Performance Concrete
With Alccofine and Fly Ash” International Journal of Advanced Engineering
Research and Studies Vol. II/ Issue III/April-June (2013)
4 Patel, P. J. et al “Study on effect of Alccofine & Fly Ash Addition on the
Mechanical Properties of High Performance Concrete” International Journal for
Scientific Research & Development Vol. 1, Issue 3, (2013)
5 Patel, P. J. et al “Study on Effect of Alccofine & Fly Ash Addition on the
Durability Properties of High Performance Concrete” International Journal for
Scientific Research & Development Vol. 1, Issue 3, (2013)
NATIONAL CONFERENCE
1 Patel, P. J. and HS Patel. “Durability Performance of Alccofine and Fly Ash in
High Performance Concrete” UFA-2013 organized by SVNIT, Surat
2 Patel, P. J. et al. “The Role of Aggregate on Strength of Concrete” in NCATCE-
2013 organized by Saffrony Inst. of Technology, Mehsana.
3 Patel, P. J. and J. A. Desai “A Review-Cement Concrete Using Waste Material”
in Technical Research advance in civil engineering-2011 organized by LDRP,
Gandhinagar
170
APPENDIX - I
Sample Summary Output of Multivariate Parametric Regression Analysis
Phase-I : Development of empirical correlations for estimating the Compressive,

Flexural and split tensile strength using supplementary cementitious materials and
Phase-II: Development of empirical correlations for estimating the Compressive,

water/binder ratio for designed Ternary Mix.
Phase-III: Development of empirical correlations for estimating the Compressive,

Flexural and split tensile strength of High performance concrete incorporating
Velocity Method (UPV) for designed binary mix.
Phase-IV: Development of empirical correlations for estimating the Compressive,

Flexural and split tensile strength of High performance concrete incorporating
Velocity Method (UPV) for designed Ternary mix.
171
For Compressive Strength
SUMMARY OUTPUT
RHA Residual Plot
Regression Statistics
4
Multiple R 0.999675
R Square 0.999349 2
Adjusted R Square
0.888094 0
Standard Error
1.788497 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Residuals
-2
Observations 12
-4
RHA
ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F CEMENT Residual Plot
Regression 3 44212.11 14737.37 4607.27 2.75E-13 4
Residual 9 28.78848 3.19872
2
Total 12 44240.89
0
86 88 90 92 94 96
Residuals
Coefficients
Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95%Upper 95%
Lower 95.0%
Upper 95.0% -2
Intercept 0 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A

-4
RHA -0.28219 0.170432 -1.65571 0.132163 -0.66773 0.103358 -0.66773 0.103358 CEMENT
CEMENT 0.933085 0.029972 31.13153 1.79E-10 0.865283 1.000887 0.865283 1.000887
W/B -56.5674 6.281552 -9.00533 8.5E-06 -70.7773 -42.3576 -70.7773 -42.3576
W/B Residual Plot
fc' (28 days)=-0.28219*RHA+0.933085*CEMENT-56.5674*W/B RATIO 4
RESIDUAL OUTPUT PROBABILITY OUTPUT 2
Actual fc' Predicted fc' 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Residuals
Observation
Predicted fc'Residuals
Standard Residuals Percentile fc' 63.38 65.736553
-2
1 65.73655 -2.35655 -1.52145 4.166667 50.12727 64.01 62.698375
2 62.69837 1.311625 0.84682 12.5 53.12727 58.44 59.660196 -4
W/B
3 59.6602 -1.2202 -0.78779 20.83333 55.14 55.14 56.622017
4 56.62202 -1.48202 -0.95683 29.16667 57.61818 69.718 70.261947
5 70.26195 -0.54395 -0.35119 37.5 58.19091 70.411 67.223768 Normal Probability Plot
6 67.22377 3.187232 2.057761 45.83333 58.44 64.284 64.185589 80
7 64.18559 0.098411 0.063536 54.16667 60.654 60.654 61.147411
60
8 61.14741 -0.49341 -0.31856 62.5 63.38 57.61818182 58.948463
fc'
40
9 58.94846 -1.33028 -0.85886 70.83333 64.01 58.19090909 55.910284
20
10 55.91028 2.280625 1.472431 79.16667 64.284 53.12727273 52.872106
11 52.87211 0.255167 0.164743 87.5 69.718 50.12727273 49.833927 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
12 49.83393 0.293346 0.189392 95.83333 70.411
Sample Percentile
Phase-I : Development of empirical correlations for estimating the Compressive,
172
For Flexural Strength
SUMMARY OUTPUT
Regression Statistics RHA Residual Plot

Multiple R 0.999923
0.2
R Square 0.999846
Adjusted R Square
0.8887 0
Standard Error
0.078027 0 5 10 15
Residuals
Observations 12 -0.2
RHA
ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 3 355.2445 118.4148 19450.06 8.69E-16 CEMENT Residual Plot
Residual 9 0.054793 0.006088 0.2
Total 12 355.2993 0.1
0
Coefficients
Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95%Upper 95%
Lower 95.0%
Upper 95.0% 88 90 92 94 96
Residuals -0.1 86
-0.2
RHA 0.014198 0.007435 1.909529 0.088528 -0.00262 0.031018 -0.00262 0.031018 CEMENT
CEMENT 0.069192 0.001308 52.91548 1.54E-12 0.066234 0.07215 0.066234 0.07215
W/B -2.55082 0.274045 -9.30803 6.48E-06 -3.17075 -1.93088 -3.17075 -1.93088
W/B Residual Plot
fcr=-0.014198*RHA+0.069192*CEMENT-2.55082*W/B RATIO
0.2
RESIDUAL OUTPUT PROBABILITY OUTPUT

0
Actual fcr Predicted fcr 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Residuals
Observation
Predicted fcrResiduals
Standard Residuals Percentile fcr 5.572808986 5.674953982 -0.2
W/B
1 5.674954 -0.10214 -1.51162 4.166667 4.956043 5.600437483 5.537468506
2 5.537469 0.062969 0.931866 12.5 5.102192 5.351224159 5.39998303
3 5.399983 -0.04876 -0.72157 20.83333 5.197942 5.1979419 5.262497554
4 5.262498 -0.06456 -0.95535 29.16667 5.313465 5.844811374 5.879019248
Normal Probability Plot
5 5.879019 -0.03421 -0.50624 37.5 5.339808 5.873788386 5.741533772 6
6 5.741534 0.132255 1.957211 45.83333 5.351224 5.612411247 5.604048296 5.5
fcr
7 5.604048 0.008363 0.123762 54.16667 5.451647 5.451647457 5.46656282 5

8 5.466563 -0.01492 -0.22073 62.5 5.572809 5.313464886 5.368856083 4.5
9 5.368856 -0.05539 -0.81972 70.83333 5.600437 5.339807623 5.231370607 0 50 100 150
10 5.231371 0.108437 1.604739 79.16667 5.612411 5.102192042 5.093885131 Sample Percentile
11 5.093885 0.008307 0.122932 87.5 5.844811 4.956043143 4.956399655
12 4.9564 -0.00036 -0.00528 95.83333 5.873788
173
For Split Tensile Strength
SUMMARY OUTPUT
Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.999819
R Square 0.999639
Adjusted R Square
0.916245
Standard Error
0.099511
Observations 15
ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 3 328.6783 109.5594 11063.92 2.05E-19
Residual 12 0.118829 0.009902
Total 15 328.7971
Coefficients
Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95%Upper 95%Lower 95.0%
Upper 95.0%
SF 0.054456 0.008276 6.580063 2.61E-05 0.036425 0.072488 0.036425 0.072488
CEMENT 0.068602 0.001573 43.6009 1.38E-14 0.065174 0.07203 0.065174 0.07203
W/B -5.14189 0.314681 -16.34 1.46E-09 -5.82752 -4.45626 -5.82752 -4.45626
fsp (56 days)=0.054456*SILICA FUME+0.068602*CEMENT-5.14189*W/B
RESIDUAL OUTPUT PROBABILITY OUTPUT Actual fsp Predicted fsp

4.155775 4.20436982
ObservationPredicted Residuals
Standard Residuals Percentile 4.06963 4.17607889
1 4.20437 -0.0486 -0.54598 3.333333 4.02611 4.236696 4.14778796
2 4.176079 -0.10645 -1.19598 10 4.06963 4.079333 4.11949703
3 4.147788 0.088908 0.998905 16.66667 4.079333 4.02611 4.0912061
4 4.119497 -0.04016 -0.45126 23.33333 4.155775 4.779141 4.71855841
5 4.091206 -0.0651 -0.73137 30 4.236696 4.680075 4.69026748
6 4.718558 0.060582 0.680662 36.66667 4.630027 4.8722 4.66197655
7 4.690267 -0.01019 -0.11452 43.33333 4.680075 4.691233 4.63368562
8 4.661977 0.210223 2.361923 50 4.691233 4.630027 4.6053947
9 4.633686 0.057547 0.646559 56.66667 4.779141 5.194718 5.232747
10 4.605395 0.024632 0.276751 63.33333 4.8722 5.087038 5.20445607
11 5.232747 -0.03803 -0.42726 70 5.032638 5.29587 5.17616514
12 5.204456 -0.11742 -1.31923 76.66667 5.087038 5.099166 5.14787421
13 5.176165 0.119704 1.344915 83.33333 5.099166 5.032638 5.11958329
14 5.147874 -0.04871 -0.54725 90 5.194718
15 5.119583 -0.08695 -0.97686 96.66667 5.29587
174

Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“HEALTH ANALYSIS OF HIGH PERFORMANCE

CONCRETE BY USING WASTE MATERIAL”

GANPAT UNIVERSITY, KHERVA

Under the Guidance of

I hereby declare that:

1. The electronic version of my thesis submitted herewith in CDROM which is in PDF

9. If in the opinion of the University my thesis contains patentable or copyrightable

Mr. Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel

Date: 25th February, 2014

Dr. H.S. Patel

Date: 25th February, 2014

Dr. H.S. Patel

Date: 25th February, 2014

External Examiner Internal Examiner

Piyushkumar Jayantilal Patel

Manufacturing of high performance concrete, which is majorly used as building material

Key words: High Performance Concrete, Supplementary Cementitious Material, Waste

3. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

5. DEVELOPMENT OF EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS AND VALIDATION

7. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

PAPERS PUBLISHED 170

Figure 4.2 Numbers of Samples For Experimental Investigation 39

Figure 4.3 General Model of a Process (Montgomery, 2009) 40

Figure 4.4 Drum Mixer Used In Experimental Investigation 41

Figure 4.5 Curing of Samples In Water Tank 42

Figure 4.6 Slump Test In Laboratory 43

Figure 4.7 Flow Test In Laboratory 44

Figure 4.17 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice Husk 50

Figure 4.44 Rapid Chloride Permeability Test Results of Concrete Mix 74

Figure 4.48 Accelerated Electrolytic Corrosion Results of Concrete Mix 77

Figure 4.52 Sorptivity Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating Alccofine 81

Figure 4.56 Chloride Resistance Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating 83

Figure 4.63 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete Mix Incorporating Rice 89

Figure 4.72 Rebound Hammer Test Results of Concrete Mix Incorporating 93

1.1 RESEARCH BACKGROUND

1.1.1 CONCRETE AND ENVIRONMENT

1.1.2 SUSTAINABILITY AND CONCRETE INDUSTRY

1987)18. Therefore, sustainable development is disturbed with protecting the world’s

1.1.3 HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE

It is mistaken to bestow that supplementary cementitious materials were used in the

With this background, a comprehensive experimental investigation was carried out to

1.1.4 RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE

1.1.5 STUDY CONTRIBUTION

1.1.6 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

 To determine the effect of mechanical and durability characteristics of HPC by

 To develop multi-variate parametric regression models for estimating the

1.1.7 SCOPE OF RESEARCH WORK

2.1 HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE

Muthu,K. U., M. S. Ramaiah (2008)72 Self-Compacting Concrete technology is widely

Patel.,Vatsal,Shah., Niraj(2013)99 effect of Mineral and Chemical Admixtures used to

Mccarthy M J, Dhir R K, Newlands M D and Singh S P (2011)61 it is noted that some of

Bhattacharjee B, Mishra A and Rai H S (2011)16 an investigation on slump retention was

2.2 UTILIZATION OF FLY ASH IN HPC

The worldwide production of coal combustion products is estimated to be about 1300

Design requirements related to mechanical characteristics will be perfectly fulfilled

P. Kumar Mehta.(2003)63 took Class F Fly Ash, OPC Cement replacement is 15 to 60 %

Saravanakumar. P., and Dhinakaran. G. (2010)90 effect of NaCl concentration on

2.3 UTILIZATION OF METAKAOLINE IN CONCRETE

V. Matejka, P. Matejkova, P. Kovar, J. Vlcek, J. Prikryl, P.Cervenka, Z. Lacny and

Mahdi Valipour, FarhadPargar, Mohammad Shekarchi and Sara Khani (2012)55Pozzolans

R. Madandoust, J. Sobhani, and P. Ashoori (2013)54 a different behaviour could be seen

Patil.B. B, and P. D. Kumbhar (2012)79 , the compressive strength of concrete increases

2.4 UTILIZATION OF RICE HUSK ASH IN CONCRETE

Apparently, for an incinerator temperature up to 700°C, the silica is in amorphous form