Materials Today: Proceedings 26 (2020) 796–803

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

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

Influence of water binder ratio on strength and acid resistance of

concrete made up of mineral admixture as supplementary cementitious
material
Sanjukta Sahoo a,⇑, Trupti Ranjan Mahapatra b, Neha Priyadarshini c, Sanchita Mahapatra c, Sital Naik c,
Sanjib Jaypuria d
a
Department of Civil Engineering, KIIT Polytechnique, KIIT (deemed to be university), Bhubaneswar, Odisha 751024, India
b
Department of Production Engineering, Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology (VSSUT), Burla 768018, India
c
Department of Civil Engineering, Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology (VSSUT), Burla 768018, India
d
Mechanical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur 721302, India

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

Article history: Mineral admixture concrete is proved to be beneficial to enhance strength and resistance of concrete
Received 28 November 2019 against aggressive chemical environment. However, water binder (w/b) ratio is the major responsible fac-
Accepted 3 January 2020 tor to govern all the concrete material properties. So, for a strong and durable concrete, it is imperative to
Available online 24 January 2020
design a proper mix with suitable w/b ratio. The present study investigates the effects of w/b ratio on the
compressive strength and acid resistance property of mineral admixture incorporated concrete. Fly ash
Keywords: (FA) and crusher dust (CD) were used in concrete as partial cement replacement at the level of 20%,
Mineral admixture
40%, and 60% to cast concrete cube of size (150  150  150) mm3 using three w/b ratios of 0.35, 0.38
Water binder ratio
Compressive strength
and 0.4. The fresh concrete properties, the compressive strength of the different types of concrete sam-
Acid resistance ples at 365 days of water curing and the acid (5% H2SO4) resistance of those water cured concrete samples
GRA after 365 days of acid exposure have been investigated to study the impact of w/b on the strength and
RSM acid resistance properties of concrete. Full factorial DOE with ANOVA was conducted to determine the
significance of the concrete type and w/b ratio on strength and strength loss of concrete under acid expo-
sure. In addition, the Grey relational Analysis and the Response Surface Methodology (RSM) have been
also used to find the impact of w/b ratio towards simultaneous optimization of strength and % strength
loss on acid exposure to concrete.
Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 10th International Con-
ference of Materials Processing and Characterization.

1. Introduction To develop a sustainable infra-structure, the manufacturing of

Concrete is the most versatile material that eliminates all other
building materials for its very high strength, longevity, easy avail-
ability and favorable cost. Its demand is exponentially increasing
with the fast growing population. Its major challenges are the
aggressive environments where it comes in contact with different
kind of harmful agents, thus affecting its material properties and
deteriorating the strength and durability. Due to huge develop-
ment of industrial sector, often concrete comes in contact with salt,
sulphate, acid and many kinds of toxic materials in day to day life.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sanjuktafkp@kiit.ac.in (S. Sahoo).
strong and durable concrete to resist the adverse surrounding con-
ditions is the major target these days. Ground water, sewage pipe
lines, acid rain and the various industrial atmospheres are the
major source of acid attack to concrete [1,2]. Mostly in acid prone
areas concrete loses its material properties very fast in which
reduced strength is a common issue [3–6]. The pore water present
in concrete materials is very alkaline in nature with a very high pH
value of 12.5–14. When it comes in contact with any strong or
weak acid, it starts reacting with the Ca(OH)2 and C-S-H gel of
the binder paste to form dissolved ions leading to dissolution of
materials called acidolysis. The acids form some insoluble salts set-
tled in the pore water causing expansive pressure and cracks. And
some acids give rise to complex compounds by producing higher

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.01.028
2214-7853/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 10th International Conference of Materials Processing and Characterization.
 S. Sahoo et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 26 (2020) 796–803
concentrated ions that leads to continuous dissolution of materials
called as complexolysis. Thus the penetration of acidic solution
inside the pores of the concrete material leads to decalcification
of C-S-H gel resulting in weakening the concrete strength. Sul-
phuric acid is the most dangerous among all types of acid as it
attacks combining with sulphate attack [4,7].
The principal factors affecting the rate and severity of acid
attack are the cement content (C3A and Ca(OH)2 content), the w/
c ratio of the mixture and the permeability of the concrete. Both
C3A and Ca(OH)2 are the responsible reactive agents for the harm-
ful chemical reactions. As reported in many research works, the
concrete made up of only ordinary Portland cement as binder were
inadequate to provide sufficient resistance to Sulphuric acid attack
due to its plentily available calcium content [8–10]. To reduce the
amount of reactive agents (C3A and Ca(OH)2) of the cement and
restricting the harmful expansive chemical reactions, the cement
content of the concrete needs to be decreased, by adding various
secondary supplementary cementing materials. In this regard, a
number of pozzolanic materials called as mineral admixture were
introduced in concrete to enhance the acid resistance. Among them
fly ash (FA), Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS), Silica
Fume (SF), Rice Husk Ash (RHA), Palm Oil Fuel Ash (POFA), Bagasse
Ash (BA), Metakaolin (MK) etc. are the mostly adopted mineral
admixtures. The use of mineral admixture in concrete was found
to increase the concrete’s resistance against the harmful effects
of acids [11–14]. The sulphate resistance of fly ash concrete
(FAC) with 10% and 17% replacement level was found considerable
high that compared to control concrete (CC) for 1 year exposure in
15% magnesium sulphate (MgSO4) solution. It performed very low
expansion, strength loss and weight loss that compared to CC
under continuous and interrupted immersion [15]. Also with
replacement level of 15, 20 and 25%, FA concrete showed the low-
est expansion and the highest strength for a cement content of 333,
374 and 416 kg/m3 in strong acidic environment [16]. Though a
considerable amount of work have been done on the type and level
of replacement of mineral admixture that influencing concrete’s
behaviour, the study on the impact of w/b ratio of the mixture that
affecting the acid resistance properties of concrete is hardly found.
The most significant factor that governs the strength and durabil-
ity characteristics of any types of concrete is the w/b ratio. Slightly
high or less amount of water causes bleeding thus microscopic pores
and shrinkage cracks in the concrete affecting its material properties
[17,18]. So the w/b ratio needs to be suitably designed to achieve the
target strength and the desired material properties, it is responsible
for the reaction of concrete with aggressive chemical. Among few
studies based on w/b ratio, Thilagavathi et al. 2007 [19], reported
metakaolin added concrete performed better compressive strength
for higher w/b ratios (0.4 & 0.5) whereas FA added concrete gained
very high strength with lower w/b ratios (0.32 & 0.35). In contrast,
Malla in 2007 in his PhD work, investigated that FA added concrete
gives less compressive strength than that of conventional concrete
for all w/b ratios whereas silica fume addition in concrete enhanced
its strength with respect to CC with the same replacement level [20].
A statistical influence study has also reported that the mineral con-
tent in concrete present the highest significance followed by water/
binder ratio, mineral admixture type and lastly the compressive
strength [21]. However, most of the work in the published litera-
tures confined to specific w/b ratio. A more focused study of influ-
encing parameters in concrete mixtures with mineral admixture is
scarce, especially concerning mechanical strength and durability
with different w/b ratio. Mathematical tools such as ANOVA, GA
and RSM are more helpful towards the analysis of huge numbers
of data and for the detailed study of the investigation with accuracy
[18,22–24].
This paper study the effect of w/b ratio on the compressive
strength and Sulphuric acid resistance of admixture concrete in
797
different level of cement replacements. For this investigation,
seven types of concrete have been made using two types of admix-
tures such as FA and crusher dust in three replacement levels of
20%, 40% and 60%. Three different w/b ratios of 0.35, 0.38 and 0.4
have been considered to all the cast concrete samples. As it is well
established that, concrete displays significant strength with
increased water curing age, hence, in this study, the 365 days
water cured concrete are considered for the acid resistance tests
with a long acid exposure period of 365 days. In addition the full
factorial DOE with ANOVA test has been conducted to study the
significance of w/b in detail. The grey relational analysis along with
RSM method also has been furnished for determination of opti-
mized w/b ratio for high compressive strength and low % strength
loss of concrete in acid exposure with more accuracy.
2. Experimentation
2.1. Material acquisition and properties study
The materials considered in the present experimental investiga-
tion are the Ordinary Portland cement (43 grade as per IS: 8114-
1978), crushed granite as coarse aggregate (20 mm), river sand as
fine aggregate, structure-203, a poly-carboxylic based super plasti-
cizer and normal tap water. The low calcium FA (ASTM Class F) col-
lected from Kaniha, NTPC, Odisha and the fine crusher dust powder
locally collected from Khandagiri site, Bhubaneswar have been
used as mineral admixture. In addition, a concentrated sulphuric
acid (H2SO4) of 98% purity and density of 1.84 g/cc is used for the
acid curing purpose. The required material properties of cement,
coarse aggregates and fine aggregates were determined in the lab-
oratory as per the relevant codes of practice before casting the con-
crete samples as displayed in the Tables 1 and 2.
2.2. Mixture preparation and fresh properties study
In this investigation, three different water/binder ratios (w/b) of
0.35, 0.38 and 0.4 and super plasticizer content of 0.2% was used
for all the mixtures. The fresh concrete properties such as slump
value, concrete temperature and concrete density for all the vari-
eties of mixtures were measured as per Indian Standard Specifica-
tions IS: 1199-1159. The mixture proportions and fresh concrete
properties of the seven types of concrete for the three w/b ratios
are presented in the Tables 3–5.
2.3. Casting, curing and testing of specimens
M30 grade concrete cubes of size 15 mm  15 mm  15 mm
were cast made up zero cement replacement (CC), 20%, 40% and
60% of cement replacement by fly ash (FAC20, FAC40 and FAC60),
and with the same level of replacement by crusher dust (CDC20,
Table 1
Physical properties of Portland cement.
Test Parameters Result Requirement as
per IS 8112-1989
Fineness (retained on 90 micron sieve) 7.3 10 max
Normal consistency (%) 30
Vicat time of setting (min)-Initial 114 30 min
Vicat time of setting (min)-final 318 600 max
Compressive strength (MPa)
3 days 25.2 23 min
7 days 36.4 33 min
28 days 44.9 43 min
Specific gravity 3.2
798 S. Sahoo et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 26 (2020) 796–803

Table 2
Physical properties of aggregates.
Property Fine aggregates Coarse aggregates
Specific gravity 2.57 2.71
Fineness modulus 2.21 6.56
Water absorption (%) 0.64 0.83
Unit weight (kg/m3) 1676 1620
CDC40 and CDC60) in accordance with IS: 516-1959. A total num-
ber of 154 concrete cubes were cast for the purpose of compressive
strength testing after the required water curing and acid curing
periods. They were allowed to keep in room temperature for 24 h
with approximate relative humidity of 98%. The cubes were
demoulded after 24 h of casting and cured in normal water for
allowing a long water curing period of 365 days for sufficient
strength gaining of the concrete. All the concrete samples were
taken out of water after 365 days of curing and allowed for com-
pressive strength test. An automatic compressive testing machine
of 2000 KN capacity (CTM Digital) was used at the loading rate of
0.2–0.4 N/mm2/s as per IS: 516-1959 for the testing purpose. For
each strength measurement, three specimens were considered to
find the mean strength value. For the acid resistance test, the rest
cubes were allowed to submerge in 5% concentrated sulphuric acid
solution (5% H2SO4) for a chemical exposure period of 365 days.
After the required acid exposure, the concrete cubes were taken
out of the chemical container and tested for their residual com-
pressive strength in the same manner. The corresponding strength
and strength loss of all types of concrete cubes after acid attack
were observed for the required investigation. Fig. 1 shows the pho-
tograph of the concrete mixture, casting and curing of concrete
specimens in water and acid.
3. Results and discussion
The experimental results of fresh properties of concretes are
presented in the Tables 3–5. Fig. 2(a) represents the compressive
strength value of the concrete specimens after 365 days of water
curing. Fig. 2(b) displays the compressive strength value of
365 days water cured concrete specimens after long term acid
exposure period of 365 days. The % strength loss values of the con-
crete specimens after 365 days of acid exposure are also presented
in Fig. 2(c). The discussion of the results has been given below ana-
lyzing the behavior of different types of concrete to its strength and
strength loss in water and acid curing with varied w/b ratios.
3.1. Effect of water binder (w/b) ratio on compressive strength of
various types of concrete
From the compressive strength test results as displays in Fig. 2
(a), it is observed that all the types of concrete showed individual
strength gaining behavior with respect to increasing w/b values. CC
displayed good compressive strength value at the higher w/b ratio
(0.4) followed by the w/b of 0.38 and 0.35. However, FAC displayed
highest strength value at the lowest w/b (0.35) followed by the w/
b = 0.38 and 0.4, respectively. It is worthy to note that all the three
types of FA concrete gained very high strength value at 0.35 and
0.38 of w/b in comparison to w/b = 0.4. Also, the concrete having
40% FA content displayed the greatest strength value than that of
concrete having 20% and 60% FA content. However, in both the
replacement level of 20% and 40%, the FA concrete performed much
better strength value than that of CC at the entire three w/bratio.
At the highest w/b (0.4), the concrete with increasing FA replace-
ment performed poor compressive strength in comparison to CC.
For crusher dust concrete, the increasing content of crusher dust
(CD) displayed the decreasing compressive strength in the entire
three w/b ratio. It is interesting to note that CDC does not followed
the similar pattern of strength gaining for increasing w/b values as
observed in case of CC and FAC and showed the best compressive
strength value at the medium w/c (0.38). It is also seen that the
20% CD content contributed good compressive strength to the con-
crete in comparison to CC at higher w/b values. However, the
strength value with increasing content of CD in concrete is found
to be poor.
3.2. Effect of water binder (w/b) ratio on acid resistance of various
types of concrete
The effect of w/b ratios on strength loss and % strength loss is
displayed in the Fig. 2(b) and (c). When the compressive strength
loss (%) values of the concrete specimen after 365 days of water
curing and subsequent exposure to acid environment for 365 days
were analyzed it is observed that all the concrete suffered strength
loss in acid curing. However, the CC and CDC60 suffered the most
and the FA concrete suffered the least showing appreciable
strength value after the long term acid attack of one year. The
20% FAC displayed the highest and the 60% CDC displayed the low-
est acid resistance to strength loss in comparison to all other con-
crete. FA 20%, FA 40% and CD 20% concrete have shown very good
acid resistance behavior as compared to CC over the entire three w/
b ratio values. With respect to w/b ratio, CC, FAC and CDC displayed
better resistance to acid at w/b = 0.4, 0.35 and 0.38, respectively.
3.3. Significance study of results through ANOVA test
Significance test through full factorial DOE and ANOVA has been
carried out in this study for all the specimens under acid exposure
to obtain the inference regarding the effects of type of concrete and
w/b ratio on concrete’s strength and % strength loss behavior in
acid. In addition, the residual plots for the compressive strength
and strength loss of all types of concrete in acid also have been pre-
sented. The ANOVA test results have been summarized in Tables 6
and 7. Table 6 displays the ANOVA for compressive strength of all
types of concrete in acid. The P-value is found to be 0.000 for type
of concrete which is less than 0.05 and it signifies that the type of
concrete is strongly correlated with the compressive strength and

Table 3
Mixture proportions and fresh concrete properties for w/b = 0.35.

Constituents CC FAC20 FAC40 FAC60 CDC20 CDC40 CDC60

Fly ash (%) 0 20 40 60 20 40 60
Cement, C (kg/m3) 370 296 222 148 296 222 148
Fly ash, FA (kg/m3) 0 74 148 222 74 148 222
Water, W (kg/m3) 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6
Fine aggregate (kg/m3) 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34
Coarse aggregates (kg/m3) 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5
Super plasticizer (l/m3) 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Slump (mm) 96 101 117 124 132 151 140
Concrete temperature 28 27 26 26 25 26 25
Concrete density (kg/m3) 2420 2388 2373 2380 2370 2390 2400
 S. Sahoo et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 26 (2020) 796–803 799

Table 4
Mixture proportions and fresh concrete properties for w/b = 0.38.

Constituents CC FAC20 FAC40 FAC60 CDC20 CDC40 CDC60

Fly ash (%) 0 20 40 60 20 40 60
Cement, C (kg/m3) 370 296 222 148 296 222 148
Fly ash, FA (kg/m3) 0 74 148 222 74 148 222
Water, W (kg/m3) 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6
Fine aggregate (kg/m3) 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34
Coarse aggregates (kg/m3) 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5
Super plasticizer (l/m3) 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Slump (mm) 98 105 120 127 138 157 148
Concrete temperature 29 28 27 27 26 26 25
Concrete density (kg/m3) 2420 2400 2383 2387 2390 2392 2405

Table 5
Mixture proportions and fresh concrete properties for w/b = 0.4.

Constituents CC FAC20 FAC40 FAC60 CDC20 CDC40 CDC60

Fly ash (%) 0 20 40 60 20 40 60
Cement, C (kg/m3) 370 296 222 148 296 222 148
Fly ash, FA (kg/m3) 0 74 148 222 74 148 222
Water, W (kg/m3) 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6 140.6
Fine aggregate (kg/m3) 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34 807.34
Coarse aggregates (kg/m3) 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5 1171.5
Super plasticizer (l/m3) 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68
Slump (mm) 101 107 121 124 128 147 152
Concrete temperature 28 27 27 25 26 27 25
Concrete density (kg/m3) 2424 2409 2387 2382 2380 2390 2400

Fig. 1. (a) Concrete mixture (b) Casting, (c) Curing in water, (d) Curing in 5% H2SO4.

the developed model is valid for prediction of responses. Also the
P-value for w/b is 0.048, which signifies the effectiveness w/b ratio
on compressive strength. The (R2) value from regression is also
found as 90.29% which is greater than 85%, hence indicating strong
impact of both the input with compressive strength. The residual
plots for compressive strength in acid are given in Fig. 3, in which
the first graph indicates normal probability plot, and it is seen from
the graph that the residuals are closer to the centre line. The close-
ness of residuals to the line signifies a valid result. The random dis-
tribution of residuals along either side of centerline in residuals
versus fitted curve indicates a precise way to signify the results
that the type of concrete and w/b ratio both strongly affect the
compressive strength of concrete in acid. Further, both histogram
plot and residual versus observation plot also indicates statistical
validity of the model. Therefore, the developed model is statisti-
cally adequate for making prediction of compressive strength from
the available process variables.
Similarly, from Table 7 that displays the ANOVA for % strength
loss of all types of concrete in acid, we can found the P-value as
0.000 for type of concrete and 0.011 for w/b ratio which is less than
0.05 in both the cases. It clearly signifies that the types of concrete
as well as the w/b ratio both have strong influence on %loss of
strength of concrete. In this analysis for regression, the (R2) was
found as 93.21% which is also indicating the strong significance
of both type of concrete and w/b ratio on % strength loss in con-
crete under acid exposure. In the residual plots for % strength loss
in acid shown in Fig. 4 also supports the significance of the results.
All residual plots shown in Fig. 4 has satisfied the criteria of model
validity from statistical point of view, which infers that the predic-
tion of percentage strength loss from the input parameters can be
made with high level of accuracy.
3.4. Grey relational analysis of the strength and strength loss% value of
concrete under acid exposure
Grey relational analysis of the compressive strength and
strength loss% of all types of concrete has been furnished to get
the optimized combination of the concrete out of all w/b ratio con-
sidered in the test. To maximizing the compressive strength and
minimizing the strength loss under acid exposure the analysis
has been conducted. The data pertaining to Table 8 offers the grey
relational grades corresponding to the experimental results. From
the data furnished, it can be inferred that out of the entire three
w/b ratio, 0.35 offers the simultaneous optimization of the strength
and acid resistance. The maximum value of compressive strength
and minimum value of percentage strength loss was found to be
67.23 MPa and 3.26%, respectively for the FAC 40 concrete at w/b
ratio value of 0.35, which is evident from the highlighted portion
of Table 8.
800 S. Sahoo et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 26 (2020) 796–803

Fig. 2. (a) Compressive strength (MPa) of concrete specimens at 365 days of water curing; (b) Compressive strength (MPa) of concrete specimens after 365 days of acid
exposure; (c) Strength loss% of concrete specimens after 365 days acid exposure.

Table 6
ANOVA table for compressive strength of concrete in acid.

Source DF SS MS F P
Type of concrete 6 3321.5 553.58 17.29 0.000 P  0.05 Significant
w/b ratio 2 248.9 124.46 3.89 0.048
Residual Error 12 384.1 32.01
Total 20 3954.5
S = 5.65791 R-Sq = 90.29%

Table 7
ANOVA table for strength loss% of concrete in acid.

Source DF SS MS F P
Type of concrete 6 4531.1 755.18 25.25 0.000 P  0.05 Significant
w/b ratio 2 399.0 199.48 6.67 0.011
Residual Error 12 358.9 29.91
Total 20 5288.9
S = 5.46914 R-Sq = 93.21%
 S. Sahoo et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 26 (2020) 796–803 801

Fig. 3. Residual plots for compressive strength in Acid.

Fig. 4. Residual plots for compressive strength loss% in Acid.

3.5. Optimized plot in response surface methodology (RSM)
Maximization of compressive strength and minimization of %
strength with respect to type of concrete and w/b ratio is consid-
ered as the objective of the study, which is multi objective opti-
mization formulation. Therefore, composite desirability approach
has been adopted for solving the same. In this manner, the opti-
mized process variables are found to be 3.54 and 0.36 for type of
concrete and w/b ratio value, respectively. However, type of con-
crete is a categorical factor, so to deal with revised version of desir-
ability optimization is conducted by fixing the type of concrete as
3. The update composite desirability optimization plot is shown in
Fig. 5. The obtained optimized value for type of concrete and w/b is
FAC40 and 0.366, respectively. The optimum value for percentage
strength loss is found to be 5.19%, whereas compressive strength
is found to be 56.95 MPa. The validation of this multi objective for-
mulation is in good agreement with he obtained composite desir-
ability value of 0.86, which is close to unity.
3.6. Discussion of the results
From the above analysis of results, it is found that the CC dis-
played good strength in water but suffered high strength loss in
acid. In contrast, the FA concrete gained the highest strength in
water and also displayed very good resistance to acid. Also, the rate
of strength loss was very less in case of FA concrete. For the CDC,
802 S. Sahoo et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 26 (2020) 796–803

Table 8
Grey Relational Analysis (Variation with w/b ratio).

w/b ratio Type of Concrete Compressive Strength Strength Loss % Normalization DS grc grg Order
0.35 CC 38.33 47.3 0.430 0.000 0.570 1.000 0.467 0.333 0.400 17
FAC20 59.57 7.74 0.849 0.880 0.151 0.120 0.768 0.806 0.787 3
FAC40 67.23 3.86 1.000 0.966 0.000 0.034 1.000 0.936 0.968 1
FAC60 42.9 14.68 0.520 0.725 0.480 0.275 0.510 0.645 0.578 8
CDC20 47.81 6.88 0.617 0.899 0.383 0.101 0.566 0.831 0.699 7
CDC40 32.54 22.91 0.315 0.542 0.685 0.458 0.422 0.522 0.472 14
CDC60 17.37 46.83 0.016 0.010 0.984 0.990 0.337 0.336 0.336 21
0.38 CC 40.28 43.74 0.468 0.079 0.532 0.921 0.485 0.352 0.418 16
FAC20 57.12 6.48 0.800 0.908 0.200 0.092 0.715 0.844 0.779 4
FAC40 63.71 2.32 0.931 1.000 0.069 0.000 0.878 1.000 0.939 2
FAC60 40.82 16.32 0.479 0.689 0.521 0.311 0.490 0.616 0.553 9
CDC20 51.65 4.54 0.692 0.951 0.308 0.049 0.619 0.910 0.765 5
CDC40 33.72 22.73 0.339 0.546 0.661 0.454 0.430 0.524 0.477 13
CDC60 21.83 39.18 0.104 0.181 0.896 0.819 0.358 0.379 0.369 19
0.4 CC 41.34 43.93 0.489 0.075 0.511 0.925 0.495 0.351 0.423 15
FAC20 43.77 26.47 0.537 0.463 0.463 0.537 0.519 0.482 0.501 10
FAC40 40.83 24.57 0.479 0.505 0.521 0.495 0.490 0.503 0.496 12
FAC60 37.71 21.94 0.417 0.564 0.583 0.436 0.462 0.534 0.498 11
CDC20 50.28 6.81 0.665 0.900 0.335 0.100 0.599 0.834 0.716 6
CDC40 25.9 36.36 0.184 0.243 0.816 0.757 0.380 0.398 0.389 18
CDC60 16.57 46.1 0.000 0.027 1.000 0.973 0.333 0.339 0.336 20

reactive agent content was reduced by the cement replacement,

hence less susceptible to acidic reaction. Further, it consumed
the free lime (Ca(OH)2) to give rise secondary hydration products
(extra C-S-H gel) contributing for additional strength gain to con-
crete along with the filling the micro-pores and fine cracks of con-
crete with new hydration products (the extra C-S-H gel) making it
tight and impermeable. Thus, the harmful ions are restricted for
diffuse in to the concrete materials. The poor result CDC in high
level replacement may be interpreted as for low pozzolanic nature
of the material, it failed to engage all the reactive agent of the
cement, thus lost the bonding properties of materials and suffered
very high strength loss in acid. The 0.35 w/b ratio was found as the
most suitable for FA concrete for the optimized results. As water is
the major ingredients of strength development and all types of
reactions so it controls the amount of pore water formation, C-S-
H gel formations, secondary hydration reaction and the gaining
of strength and thus density of materials making it permeable or
impermeable. Thus it affects a lot in reaction of the concrete mate-
rials with surrounding ions.

4. Conclusion

The above experiments concludes that the FA at 20% and 40%

Fig. 5. Composite desirability plots for compressive strength of concrete in acid.
though it gained good strength in low replacement level but with
increasing CD content, its strength starts declining. A very poor
resistance to acid with fast deterioration was observed in CDC for
high replacement level. In case of the CC, the hydration of C3S
occurs normally in the first few days causing substantial strength
development in concrete and subsequently the strength develop-
ment is controlled by the hydration of C2S which is a very slow pro-
cess. Hence, in case of the CC the strength gaining process
diminishes after a certain period of curing age. Further, as CC con-
tains very high amount of C3A and Ca(OH)2, both the reactive agent
makes the concrete favorable to attracts more acidic ions due to
the formation of gypsum and ettringite. Therefore, high rate of
strength reduction was noticed in case of CC. In case of FAC, the
replacement level contributed very high compressive strength to
the concrete particularly at the lower w/b ratio of 0.35 and 0.38.
The CDC displayed better compressive strength than that of CC,
only in the 20% replacement level. With the increasing content of
CD in concrete, the strength value decreased in a faster rate in
the entire three w/b ratios. CC displayed better compressive
strength at the high w/b ratio of 0.4 where as that of FAC displayed
at the lowest w/b of 0.35 and CDC at 0.38. It is observed that all the
type of concrete suffered strength loss in 365 days of long acid
exposure period, irrespective of all the values of w/b ratio under
consideration. However, the rate of strength loss was much faster
in CC, CDC 40 and CDC 60 than that of other types of concrete.
The FAC displayed very good resistance to acid attack showing con-
siderable amount of compressive strength after 1 year of acid cur-
ing period. From the full factorial DOE and ANOVA study, it was
observed that the P value for both the found less than 0.5 that indi-
cate the significance of the types of concrete and w/b ratio have
strong correlation with both the compressive strength and %
strength loss of concrete in acid environment. Further, the gray
 S. Sahoo et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings 26 (2020) 796–803
analysis report presented the optimized combination of concrete
and w/b ratio (FAC40 and w/b = 0.35) for the maximum strength
and minimum % strength loss in acid environment. In addition,
from the RSM desirability plots for the % strength loss, the opti-
mized w/b ratio was found as 0.3662. It was concluded from all
the observations that w/b ratio controls the compressive strength
and strength loss of concrete in acid significantly. However it also
strongly depends on the type of concrete and level of replacement
of cement in concrete.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] H.L. Kong, J.G. Orbison, ACI Mat. J. 84 (3) (1987) 407–412.
[2] J. Daczko, D. Johnson, S. Amey, Mater. Perform. 36 (1) (1997) 51–56.
[3] P.K. Mehta, Conc. Int., Farmington Hills, Michigan, 2000, pp. 57–61.
[4] V. Zivica, A. Bajza, Constr. Build. Mat. 15 (8) (2001) 331–340.
[5] M. Regourd, Mat. Struct. (1981) 130–137.
803
[6] K. He, H. Yang, Z.B. Lu, F.F. Jia, E.P. Wang, Q.X. Dong, J. Wuhan Univ. Tech.
Mater. Sci. Ed. 29 (3) (2014) 498–503.
[7] P. Hewlett, M. Liska, Lea’s Chemistry of Cement and Concrete, Fifth ed.,
Butterworth-Heinemann, 2019.
[8] C. Shi, J.A. Stegemann, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (2000) 803–808.
[9] K.E. Attiogbe, H.S. Rizkallah, ACI Mat. J. 85 (6) (1988) 481–488.
[10] N.I. Fattuhi, B.P. Hughes, Mag. Conc. Res. 40 (144) (1988) 159–166.
[11] S. Goyal, M. Kumar, D.S. Sidhu, B. Bhattacharjee, J. Adv. Conc. Tech. 7 (2) (2009)
273–283.
[12] S. Sahoo, B.B. Das, S. Mustakim, J. Mater. Civil Eng. ASCE 29 (3) (2017).
[13] S. Sahoo, B.B. Das, A.K. Rath, B.B. Kar, Ind. J. Sci. Tech. 8 (19) (2015) 72266.
[14] S. Sahoo, IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. (2018) 338.
[15] M. Sumer, Constr. Build. Mater. 34 (2012) 531–536.
[16] N. Ghafoori, M. Najimi, H. Diawara, M.S. Islam, Constr. Build. Mater. 78 (2015)
85–91.
[17] F.A. Oluokun, ACI Mat. J. 91 (4) (1994) 362–371.
[18] B. Simsek, Y. Tansel, E.H. Simsek, Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 41 (2016) 1435–2145.
[19] S. Thilagavathi, G. Dhinakaran, J.V. Ramana, J. Civil Eng. Res. Pract. 4 (2007) 2.
[20] K. Mala, K.K. Jain, A.K. Mullick, P.K. Singh, Synopsis of PhD Thesis, Department
of Civil Engineering, Jaypee University of Engineering and Technology,
Raghogarh, Guna (Madhya Pradesh), India, 2014.
[21] G.C. Isaia, P. Furquim, A.L.G. Gastaldini, Constr. Build. Mat. 36 (2012) 597–603.
[22] H. Hasani, S.A. Tabatabaei, G. Amiri, J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 7 (2) (2012) 81–86.
[23] I.A. Khuri, A.J. Cornell, Response Surfaces: Designs and Analyses, second ed.,
Marcel Dekker Inc., NY, 1996, p. 29.
[24] MINITAB R17 Support, Internet: http://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/
17/topic-library/modelling statistics/doe/responsesurface-designs/what-is-a-
response-surface-design/