3D Printable Fiber Concrete FINAL THESIS

EVALUATING THE GREEN STRENGTH OF 3D
PRINTABLE FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE
Muhammad Adeel Zafar (UET/SCET-18F-CE-016)

Ghulam Dastagir (UET/SCET-18F-CE-010)
Sayad Khan (UET/SCET-18F-CE-040)
Babar Ali (UET/SCET-18-CE-0056)
Thesis Supervisor
Engr. Syed Haroon Ali Shah
Thesis Supervisor’s Signature _____________________
“DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

SWEDISH COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY WAH
CANTT”
“Affiliated with University of Engineering & Technology, Taxila”
SESSION 2018-2022
This is to certify that the
Final Year Project Titled
EVALUATING THE GREEN STRENGTH OF 3D

PRINTABLE FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE
Submitted by

Has been accepted towards the partial fulfillment of the requirement for the
award of the degree of Bachelor of Engineering in Civil Engineering
_______________________ __________________________
(Dr. Tariq Ali) (Engr. Syed Haroon Ali Shah)
HOD (CED) Lecturer (CED)
__________________________________
(FYP Committee)
(CED)
I
UNDERTAKING
I hereby certify that the research work entitled “evaluating the green strength of 3d
printable fiber reinforced concrete” is the original work of the group signed below. The
work has not been evaluated elsewhere. Other sources of material have been properly
acknowledged and cited.

II
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
All honor and glory to Almighty Allah, who provides us with the bravery and spirit to
fulfill our task. The final year project and respect for the last of our Holy Prophet
Muhammad (P.B.U.H) Whose Life is a model of guidance and knowledge for the entire
humanity.
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to our supervisor Engr. Syed Haroon Ali
Shah for Continuous support for the completion of the project. Due to his consistent advice
and Supervision, this research work finally achieved its goal. We would also want to
express our gratitude to all of the SCET Lab employees for their assistance in testing and
providing equipment.
In the end, we would like to thank our all teachers and our parents who supported us to
achieve this milestone. We cannot thank them enough.
III
Abstract
A recent development in the construction industry is the 3D printing of concrete. In this
method, a 3D model of the thing is created using software, cut into slices, and then a G-
code is created to move the print head and extrude the concrete. In conventional concrete
construction, we can add additional reinforcement in it during on-site construction but in
3D printed concrete technique whole process is automated, and conventional reinforcement
addition can slow down the printing process and disturb the degree of automation. Green
strength is an important parameter worth investigating in 3D printed concrete, which is
directly related to the buildability of the 3D printed concrete. The main focus of this
research is to design a 3D printable fiber reinforced concrete and evaluation of the green
strength of fiber reinforced concrete at different ages. To study the properties of 3D
printable fiber reinforced concrete, two classes of samples were designed. Class A
represents a controlled mix with zero fiber reinforcement and class B represents the mix
with fiber reinforcement. In this study, a constant percentage (2%) of PPF by volume of
concrete, 40% RHA by weight of cement, and 10% bentonite by weight of cement was
added in fiber reinforced samples. Laboratory testing indicated that Class A samples
without fiber reinforcement were outperformed by Class B samples with fiber
reinforcement. The class A and B sample has a maximum strain of 0.1382 and 0.1502 for
49 KPa and 99 KPa stress which means an increase of 50% with fibers. The maximum
shear strength of class A is 6.56 KPa and the value for class B is 15.35 KPa. The maximum
compressive strength of class A is 16.79KPa and the value for class B is 32.22KPa. Results
indicated that there was a significant increment of 42% in shear strength and 52%
compressive strength due to fibers.
Keywords: FR3DPC, Shear stress, Shear strength, Strain, Compressive strength,

Deformation.
IV
Table of Contents
1 Introduction....................................................................................................................1
1.1 Introduction and Background of the topic:..............................................................1
1.2 Requirements for Printing Process:.........................................................................2
1.3 Printing process:.......................................................................................................3
1.4 Properties of 3D printed concrete:...........................................................................3
1.4.1 Green strength concrete....................................................................................4
1.4.2 Fresh Properties:...............................................................................................4
1.5 Problem statement:...................................................................................................7
1.6 Research Objectives:................................................................................................7
1.7 Organization of the Research Study:.......................................................................7
1.7.1 Chapter 1 (Introduction):..................................................................................8
1.7.2 Chapter 2 (Literature Review):.........................................................................8
1.7.3 Chapter 3 (Methodology):................................................................................8
1.7.4 Chapter 4 (Result and discussions):..................................................................8
1.7.5 Chapter 5 (Conclusions):..................................................................................8
1.7.6 Chapter 6 (Recommendations):........................................................................8
1.7.7 Chapter 6 (References):....................................................................................8
2 Literature review.............................................................................................................9
2.1 Preface of the chapter:.............................................................................................9
2.2 Previous Literature:..................................................................................................9
2.3 Different mixes with different sand-to- binder ratio:.............................................11
2.4 Impact of Polypropylene fibers:.............................................................................13
2.5 Impact of RHA on green strength of 3d Printed concrete:....................................14
3 Methodology And Experimental Program...................................................................15
V
3.1 Preface of the chapter and flow chart:...................................................................15
3.2 Collection of Materials:.........................................................................................16
3.2.1 Primary Materials:..........................................................................................16
3.3 Casting Schedule:...................................................................................................20
3.3.1 Mix Design:....................................................................................................20
3.3.2 Casting of test samples:..................................................................................21
3.4 Test performed:......................................................................................................21
3.4.1 Test on fine aggregates:..................................................................................21
3.4.2 Tests on cement:.............................................................................................22
3.4.3 Test on concrete:.............................................................................................23
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS................................................................................28
4.1 Pre-face of the Chapter:.........................................................................................28
4.2 Unconfined Compressive Strength Test:...............................................................28
4.3 Direct Shear Test:..................................................................................................39
4.4 Shear Strength:.......................................................................................................42
5 Conclusions..................................................................................................................45
5.1 Preface of the Chapter:...........................................................................................45
6 Recommendations........................................................................................................46
6.1 General Recommendations:...................................................................................46
7 References....................................................................................................................47
7.1 Bibliography:.........................................................................................................47
VI
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 3DPC buildings around the world.........................................................................2
Figure 1.2 Schematic of the extrusion-based 3D-printing setup: (1) computer for printing
path (or tool path) design; (2) robot controller; (3) 6-axis robotic arm; (4) storage container
for raw materials (e.g., cement and aggregates); (5) dry mixer; (6) wet mixer......................3
Figure 1.3 Green strength concrete process............................................................................4
Figure 1.4 SRF of 3D printed concrete...................................................................................6
Figure 3.1 Methodology.......................................................................................................15
Figure 3.2 Polypropylene fiber Figure 3.3 Rice husk ash...............................................19
Figure 3.4 Bentonite clay powder Figure 3.5 Superplasticizer.........................................20
Figure 3.6 Initial setting time...............................................................................................22
Figure 3.7 Slump Test..........................................................................................................23
Figure 3.8 Schematic diagram of UUST..............................................................................24
Figure 3.9 UCS Test.............................................................................................................24
Figure 3.10 Schematic diagram of direct shear test..............................................................27
Figure 3.11 Direct shear test sample....................................................................................27
Figure 4.1 Graphical results of unconfined compressive strength test without fiber...........30
Figure 4.2 Graphical results of unconfined compressive strength test with fiber................33
Figure 4.3 Graphical representation of stress vs. strain of unconfined compressive strength
without fiber.........................................................................................................................36
Figure 4.4 Graphical representation of stress vs strain of unconfined compressive strength
with fiber...............................................................................................................................39
Figure 4.5 represents graphical results of shear stress corresponding to the normal stress
without fiber.........................................................................................................................40
Figure 4.6 represents graphical results of shear stress corresponding to the normal stress
with fiber...............................................................................................................................41
Figure 4.7 displaying the strength comparison without and with fiber-reinforced concrete42
Figure 4.8 displaying the strength comparison without and with fiber reinforced concrete 43
VII
List of Table
Table 1 Chemical composition of cement............................................................................16
Table 2 Properties of sand....................................................................................................17
Table 3 Characteristics of water used...................................................................................18
Table 4 Chemical composition of RHA...............................................................................18
Table 5 Characteristics of water used...................................................................................19
Table 6 Mix Design..............................................................................................................20
Table 7 No. of samples for all mix designs..........................................................................21
VIII
Chapter1
1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction and Background of the topic:
A recent development in the construction industry is the 3D printing of concrete. In this
method, a 3D model of the thing is created using software, cut into slices, and then a G-
code is created to move the print head and extrude the concrete. Both the print head's
movements and the nozzle's expulsion of concrete are controlled by computers. Concrete
used in 3D printing is injected, extruded through the nozzle, and accurately laid in
subsequent layers to produce a 3D object. Extruded concrete can support its weight and
maintain its shape without the aid of formwork while adhering to subsequent layers. Other
names for layer-by-layer concrete ejection include concrete admixture fabrication and
concrete ink printing (Rehman & Kim, 2021). The automated procedures that produced a
quicker and more affordable method of manufacturing may account for the success of
industrial growth in different parts of the world. The automation of the concrete
construction industry, however, has not been as extensive or in the same way as that of
other manufacturing sectors. The pre-cast or pre-fabrication building has recently taken the
place of the conventional method of mixing and casting concrete on-site in several
established and recently developed nations. A new method of construction known as 3-
dimensional printing (3D printing) was adopted for this purpose, which was originally
introduced in 1987 as a means of rapid modeling. However, the construction industry can
significantly benefit from further automation in reducing labor and construction time,
enhancing performance, and limiting pollution (Siddika, Mamun, Ferdous, Saha, &
Alyousef, 2020). The technology known as additive manufacturing (AM) was created to
enable the prototype of big and complicated structures. By joining layers of materials, this
technology may create three-dimensional structures and be used to turn scrap and
byproducts into new resources. The automated additive manufacturing (AM) process of 3D
printing creates 3D models from computer-aided design models. To build the things, these
models are broken into a number of 2D layers and deposited using the appropriate printers.
This method has gained more popularity in a variety of fields, including the military,
aerospace, and biomedicine, among others. In 2014, the most innovative application of this
1
technology in concrete construction got underway. Some 3D-printed concrete structures are
presented in figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1 3DPC buildings around the world
1.2 Requirements for Printing Process:

Layer-by-layer deposition, extrusion, and pumping are all processes in the 3D printing
procedure. To meet the technical needs of the printing process, these stages necessitate
unique features from a concrete mix, which are explained in depth in the following
subsection of fresh properties.
Following are the properties which are required for the printing process.
 pumpability of the mix
 Extrudability of the concrete mix
 Flowability of the mix
 Shape retention factor
 Thixotropy open time
2
 Buildability of the mix
1.3 Printing process:

Generally speaking, the two types of 3d printing techniques employed in the construction
business are extrusion-based printing and powder-based printing. In extrusion-based
printing technology, a viscous binder material is precisely added to powder layers (such as
sand) to ensure that the desired item is bound after consecutive layers. A nozzle placed on a
robotic control system is extruding filament made of cementitious material layer by layer
(as shown in figure 2) (Li et al., 2020). In the 3D printing process, a basic design of the
model is made on any 3D modeling software and is given to the computer in STL file
extension, by using slicing software the 3D model is transformed into layers with
dimensions in the form of G-code the controller reads the G-code and gives input to the
printer which then starts printing the material which is coming from the mixer.
Figure 1.2 Schematic of the extrusion-based 3D-printing setup: (1) computer for printing
path (or tool path) design; (2) robot controller; (3) 6-axis robotic arm; (4) storage container
for raw materials (e.g., cement and aggregates); (5) dry mixer; (6) wet mixer
1.4 Properties of 3D printed concrete:

The major properties of 3D printed concrete are fresh or green and hardened properties in
this research we will mainly focus on the green properties of 3D printed concrete.
3
1.4.1 Green strength concrete
Fig 1.3 shows how green strength concrete works
Figure 1.3 Green strength concrete process
There are three major parts of 3d print concrete. In the first stage, we select the materials
and then make a mixed design on different percentages of binding material. In the second
stage, we start the printing process of 3d concrete and make the samples for different
testing. In stage three we study the properties of 3d concrete by applying testing on
specimens and computing the strength. In our research, we did not find the hardened
properties of 3d concrete.
1.4.2 Fresh Properties:

The following are the primary qualities that need to be taken into account since, unlike
traditional cast-in-place concrete, 3D-printed concrete without using foam work is
predicted to have low or zero slumps (Praveena et al., 2021).
1.4.2.1 Pump ability:
Pump ability refers to a mixture's ability to be forced through a pipe. Concrete has typically
been transported from the mixer or hopper to the extruding nozzles using continuous
hollow pumps, positive movement pumps, and ram extruders. If concrete pumping is
paused for a brief period, concrete structuration takes place inside the printer's hose,
4
increasing the pressure needed to restart pumping. The function of concrete's pump ability
during 3D printing is influenced by its mix design. According to Mohan et al., when the
aggregate-binder ratio was changed from 1.0 to 1.4 and 1.8, the amount of pressure needed
to pump printed concrete jumped from 9 to 12 bar and 17 bar, significantly. This indicates
that as the aggregate content rises, so does the pressure needed to pump it. A heterogeneous
substance is a concrete. Due to particle displacement, printed concrete that is pushed
through a pipe separates into two layers known as the lubricating layer and bulk concrete.
Both layers have distinct rheology and the amount of pumping necessary to create printable
concrete relies on the total combined yield stress and plastic viscosity of both layers. The
rheology of the lubricating layer can be measured using a tribometer or a viscometer.
According to Mohan et al., the aggregate-binder ratio affects the plastic viscosity and yield
stress of the lubricating layer formed during the pumping of printable concrete. According
to Matthäus et al., adding limestone reduces the amount of pressure needed to pump
lighter-weight concrete. According to some researchers, concrete vibrations lower its yield
stress and makes concrete pumping easier. The use of coarse aggregate in concrete printing
may be made possible by the integration of such a vibrating system with the hose and
nozzle of a 3D printer. For lowering extrusion pressure, stiff mixes require a greater value
of the critical vibrational velocity while fluid mixes require a lower value. There is little
information on the pumping ability of different printing concrete types, how pumping
affects their rheology, and test procedures for measuring pump ability. In this aspect, more
study is required.
1.4.2.2 Flow ability:
A crucial factor in determining how well fresh materials move in a pumping system is flow
ability. The materials may be transported from the mixer to the printing nozzle with ease if
they have sufficient flow ability. The dynamic yield stress and plastic viscosity are
calculated by the Bingham model, which is frequently used to describe the flow ability of
concrete materials. It is the stable state that follows significant continuous shear.
Continuous shear causes the microstructure to break down, reducing shear stress. Sand and
gravel severely erode the microstructure of concrete and mortar after shearing (Panda &
Tan, 2018).
5
1.4.2.3 Extrudability:
The ability of the material to pump out easily through an extractor without any interruption
or clogging in the pipe flow in 3D-printed cementitious composites. Various scholars have
described this phenomenon in terms of well-known Bingham variables and other flow
characteristics since it is connected to the freshness of the material. These studies show that
very high (static) yield stress materials are challenging to extrude and may produce
interruptions during the process, which is further influenced by the type of pump used. The
yield stress and fluidity of the material are related to flow characteristics interior of the pipe
or intricately formed channel and are influenced by particle size, gradation, surface area,
paste/aggregate volume, and other factors. The capability of new paste to flow through the
printer nozzle as a constant, intact filament is another definition of Extrudability. Good
Extrudability also depends on high flow ability, which makes it easier for the concrete to
pass through the nozzle.
1.4.2.4 Buildability:
Fresh materials need to have adequate buildability to be stiff and adequate after injection to
bear their weight, the weight of the top layers, and the extrusion pressure. Buildability is
the term used to describe the printed material's tendency to deflect under load without
formwork. If not, printed structures are extremely prone to collapsing and cannot reach the
great geometric precision of printed material. Ordinary concrete is always placed in
formwork to eliminate the problem of buildability. Sprayed concrete was used in a
horizontal build test to assess buildability, but not in the current inquiry. There is no
accepted standard for the vertical buildability of concrete in this context. To investigate the
effects of various fresh concrete on the buildability, the height of the filament layers
constructed was used to evaluate the buildability of fresh concrete when the body's
structure had evident damage or collapse (Y. Zhang et al., 2018).
1.4.2.5 Shape Retention:
Shape retention, like extrudability, is an important feature in 3D concrete printing. After
extrusion, the material must preserve its shape per the extruder dimension, which can be
defined by a dimensionless value known as the shape retention factor (SRF). Which is
given in the equation below.
6
Equation 1.4 SRF of 3D printed concrete
To maintain stability under its weight and achieve a high SRF, the material must have
minimal slump characteristics or high yield stress. High yield stress could lead to high
SRF, however, extrusion should be avoided by limiting the stress factor below a certain
level.
1.4.2.6 Thixotropy Open time:
The term "thixotropic open time" (TOT), which is frequently confused with "setting time"
of a material, refers to the period beyond which a material loses its potential to be extruded.
For extrusion-based concrete printing, TOT is always earlier than the material's typical
initial (setting) time. Due to the poly-condensation process in geopolymer chemistry, the
material hardens with time and consequently produces pumping issues, resulting in
discontinuities in the pipe flow. As a result, the TOT of the material must be adjusted per
3D printer capabilities and overall printing time. The time between the first time dry mix
and water made contact and the moment the material became printed is known as the "open
time. It has to do with how to flow ability changes over time. Keep in mind that open time
and material setting time are two different things.
1.5 Problem statement:

In conventional concrete construction, we can add additional reinforcement in it during on-
site construction but in 3D printed concrete technique whole process is automated, and
conventional reinforcement addition can slow down the printing process and disturb the
degree of automation.
Green strength is an important parameter worth investigating in 3D printed concrete, which
is directly related to the build ability of the 3D printed concrete.
1.6 Research Objectives:

The research objectives of this research are given below.
 To design a 3D printable fiber reinforced concrete.
 To evaluate the green strength of fiber reinforced concrete at different ages.
7
1.7 Organization of the Research Study:
There are six primary chapters in this study project. Each chapter has a unique title and
subtitle to convey the author's work. The following describes how the research is
organized.
The thesis contains the following chapters:
1.7.1 Chapter 1 (Introduction):

This chapter's introduction to the research, along with the statement of the problem, goals
of the study, scope, aims, and purpose of this research.
1.7.2 Chapter 2 (Literature Review):

This chapter details earlier academic research investigations on this subject that were
conducted as well as their findings.
1.7.3 Chapter 3 (Methodology):

This chapter offers a flow chart outlining all the stages necessary to conduct the research as
well as the main sources of data gathering. It also discusses the general procedures and
methods used to accomplish this study. Additionally, this chapter offers experimental
practices and examinations that were created following the study's experimental
specifications.
1.7.4 Chapter 4 (Result and discussions):

This chapter includes all of the findings from the data collection, processing, and
visualization from all of the sources, including earlier lab testing on various samples. And
all the graphs are necessary to support the objectives, as well as an explanation of the
outcomes supported by the research.
1.7.5 Chapter 5 (Conclusions):

A broad summary of the findings and the research's conclusions are covered in this chapter.
1.7.6 Chapter 6 (Recommendations):

This chapter also covers suggestions for upcoming researchers.
8
1.7.7 Chapter 6 (References):
To support this research study, references from earlier works of literature are included in
this chapter
Chapter 2
2 Literature review
2.1 Preface of the chapter:
This study's about, prior research on 3D printed concrete, and the effects of various
admixtures, polymers, and fibers on the mechanical, physical, and new properties of 3D
printed concrete are all covered in detail and illustrated in this chapter. In this chapter, the
optimal ratios of various additions, the causes of the enhanced qualities, and various mix
designs are also covered. This part also discusses the present state of scientific
understanding of the subject under inquiry.
2.2 Previous Literature:

The properties of printed cementitious composites in their fresh and hardened phases were
the subject of the first comprehensive investigation in 2012. The authors were successful in
creating a high-performance printable mortar for 3D printing, which served as an initial
direction for further study. Since then, several investigations targeting the specific 3D-
printed cementitious material characteristics have been presented to create printable
materials for free-form constructions (Li et al., 2020).
While 3D-printed cement-based materials are extruded layer by layer without the use of
formwork, cast-in-place concrete is typically temporarily supported by formwork in
traditional construction procedures. After extrusion, the material must explicitly hold its
shape and support further layers. Anisotropic (i.e., direction-dependent) features of the
printed components result from the absence of normal vibratory compaction during the
9
printing operation. So, for the best quality of the printed elements, the printing materials'
fresh and hardened qualities are crucial (Praveena et al., 2021).
The major elements influencing the flow ability of fresh-state cementitious materials are
additives (such as chemical and mineral admixtures and reinforcing fibers) from the
perspective of mix formulation. Superplasticizers and retarders, two chemical admixtures,
are frequently used to better manage the flow ability of freshly printed mixes.
Superplasticizers boost flow, but too many of them drastically limit the ability to build. A
retarder would also be beneficial for maintaining a steady flow inside the printing
apparatus. However, it delays the structural rate of stiffening and consequently, the layer
build-up procedure. Fresh concrete's flow activity can be affected by air-entraining
admixtures, which give hardened durability to concrete at freezing and thawing
temperatures. It has been found that an air content of between 1.5 and 2 percent is
appropriate to maintain flow ability, but too much air content reduces flow ability. It should
be highlighted that most available literature does not take the effect of air-entraining
admixtures on 3-D printable cementitious materials into account (Wolfs, Bos, & Salet,
2018).
To evaluate the mechanical performance of young, 3D-printed concrete between 0 and 90
minutes following material deposition, a mathematical model was created. To achieve the
necessary material properties, an experimental protocol involving direct shear tests (DST)
and unconfined uniaxial compression tests (UUCT) was set up and carried out. The model
was then put to the test against printing experiments. The mathematical analysis is thought
to be appropriate for analyzing the structural behavior of a concrete object during 3D
printing and qualitatively predicting the associated failure mode. However, the model
quantitatively overestimates the object's durability and stability. This is probably because
the specimens were compacted during testing, which led to an overestimation of the
material's characteristics, and because the effect of the printing process' geometrical and
material flaws was ignored. A suitable boundary condition for freshly 3D printed concrete
can be derived from the Mohr-Coulomb theory as employed in the numerical model, that
is, extended with time-dependent evolution of material properties. Within the period of a
normal printing process, it was discovered in this investigation that the cohesiveness was a
linear function of time and the angle of internal friction was independent of age. Finally, it
10
can be said that geotechnical (soil) tests are appropriate for evaluating the characteristics of
young printed concrete (Wolfs et al., 2018).
Due to five key factors, including its minimal cost, the abundance of raw ingredients,
strong compressive strength, reasonable long-term durability, and capacity to remain fluid
until setting, concrete has been extensively used and researched for building. The field of
3D printing is rapidly developing, placing itself as a viable alternative to conventional
manufacturing techniques in situations where complex geometries, high labor costs, or a
high degree of automation are advantageous. According to claims, 3D printing will speed
up design and production, lower the cost of formwork, improve collaborative procedures,
increase communication, allow digitization, and close the existing gaps between
engineering and design. On the other hand, personnel investment in the construction sector
has significantly decreased over the past few decades, which favorably positions 3D
printing technology (Voigt, Malonn, & Shah, 2006).
The impact of polypropylene (PP) fibers on the initial and final characteristics of fiber-
reinforced geopolymer mortars produced in three dimensions are examined in this research.
An improved geopolymer mixture was supplemented with various amounts of PP fibers,
ranging from 0.25 percent to 1.00 percent by volume. All of the samples had acceptable
extrudability and workability. Additionally, the capacity to retain shape in a fresh state was
looked into as a crucial prerequisite for 3D printing. In the hardened stage, the compressive
strength of the printed specimens was examined under three different loading conditions:
longitudinal, vertical, and lateral. Additionally, the samples' flexural strength was evaluated
in both lateral and longitudinal orientations. The strength of the interlayer connection was
also examined. Only when the loading is perpendicular to the interface plane does fiber
insertion appear to positively affect compressive strengths. In comparison to specimens
without fiber or with lesser fiber contents, the use of fiber dosages of 0.75 and 1.00 vol
percent resulted in deflection-hardening behavior of the 3D-printed geopolymer and, as a
result, much greater fracture energy. However, a little decrease in interlayer bond strength
was brought on by an increase in fiber volume (Nematollahi, Behzad, et al., 2018).
2.3 Different mixes with different sand-to-binder ratios:

To produce concrete with a compressive strength of above 100 MPa, a water-binder ratio
of 0.28 was used. To find the best binder content for printing, different doses of super
11
plasticizer, retarder, accelerator, and polypropylene fibers were tested. Various 3DPC
characteristics are examined, including extrude ability, buildability, open time, and shear
strength (Le et al., 2012).
To find the best mix proportions for printing, different dosages of fiber, super plasticizer,
fly ash, bentonite clay, and silica fume was added to the reference mixture, which had a
uniform cement: fine aggregate: coarse aggregate mass ratio of 1:3:1. Additionally
examined are attributes like extrude ability, drop table flow, and setting time. (Rushing et
al., 2019).
Cement, fly ash, silica fume, water, superplasticizer, PP fiber, and natural sand were all
present in equal amounts in the reference mix. The optimal mass ratio replacement of
copper tailing with natural sand was decided based on the concrete's extrude ability,
buildability, open time, and structural build-up behavior (Ma, Li, & Wang, 2018).
The amount of binder, aggregate, water-binder ratio, and superplasticizer in five mixtures
was the same. To get the ideal concentration, silica fume and Nano clay dosages were
changed (Guo, Zhu, Liu, & Xing, 2018).
Cement, fly ash, sand, water, and fiber were all present in equal amounts in the Reference
and Optimum mixtures. Based on concrete's capacity to be extruded and built upon, the
dosage of the superplasticizer was calculated. Based on robustness, the ideal dosage of
Nano-clay, VMA, and silica fume was identified. (Rahul, Santhanam, Meena, & Ghani,
2019)
The young age strength and hardness after extrusion of 3D printing concrete are typically
low- to zero-slump in nature and are dependent on coupled inter-particle friction and
cohesion. These characteristics are time-dependent as a result of thixotropic behavior, even
in the dormant stage before the initial setting time, which marks the acceleration of the
cementing reactions and causes the concrete to harden. According to research, the strength
and apparent modulus of elasticity of the mixes the authors used both rise linearly in the
time up to 90 minutes following deposition (Wolfs, Bos, & Salet, 2019).
To increase the yield stress and form retention capacity of three-dimensionally printed
mixes, more binder, and fine aggregate are used than in traditional concrete mixes and
SCC. Iterative design is used to create printed concrete mixtures. A concrete mix's
suitability for the printing process' requirements (pumping, extrusion, form retention, open
12
time, and buildability) is evaluated step by step. If a concrete mixture is found to comply
with the first condition, it is subsequently examined for compliance with the second
requirement. Otherwise, the ingredients are adjusted, and the performance of the mix is
again assessed. This procedure is repeated until the concrete mixture satisfies all of the
printing operation's requirements (Rehman & Kim, 2021)
Mix design is one of the difficulties in using 3D printing in the construction sector. The
creation of a printable Engineered Cementitious Composite is the subject of this early
investigation (ECC). Various fly ash components were used to replace the cement, and the
compressive strength of slag and silica fume at two replacement levels, 50 and 75 percent.
and the setting time was assessed. The mixtures' flowability is ensured by the flow table
results. were predetermined to be between 19 and 20 cm. The findings show that a 50%
substitution of cement by the strongest material was slag/fly ash. Slag was added, which
reduced the setting time. ECC mixes' strength was increased as a result. The use of fly ash
in place of cement reduced the need for water, enhanced workability, and increased
compressive strength by up to 50% strength. The setting time was prolonged and
compressive strength was decreased by the addition of 10% silica fume (Bakhshi et al.,
2021).
2.4 Impact of Polypropylene fibers:

In this work, Behzad et al. examined the impact of polypropylene (PP) fibers on the initial
and final characteristics of 3D-printed fiber-reinforced geopolymer mortars. The volume
percentage of PP fibers added to the optimized geopolymer mixture ranged from 0.25 to
1.00 percent. All samples showed respectable Extrudability and workability. In addition,
shape retention in the initial condition was investigated as a crucial requirement for 3D
printing. The printed samples' hardened compressive strength was evaluated under three
different loading conditions: longitudinal, perpendicular, and lateral (Nematollahi et al.,
2018). The longitudinal and lateral flexural strength of the specimens was also examined.
Also investigated was the interlayer bond strength. Compressive strengths only seem to
benefit from fiber insertion when loading is vertical to the contact plane. (Rahul et al.,
2019) Preferential fiber arrangement parallel to the extrusion direction is to blame for this.
The fiber's inclusion significantly enhanced the printed samples' flexural performance.
When comparing to specimens without or with lower fiber contents, the 3D-printed
13
geopolymer exhibited deflection-hardening behavior when fiber dosages of 0.75 and 1.00
vol percent were used. As a result, the fracture energy was dramatically enhanced.
However, the interlayer bond strength marginally reduced as fiber volume rose. When
compared to qualities in the fresh condition, printed samples with higher fiber volumes had
better shape-retention capabilities. The results indicate that fiber-reinforced geopolymers
with the necessary qualities can be printed in both the soft and hard phases (Nematollahi et
al., 2018).
The structural constructability of layered things is examined in this work. Three
geopolymer mixtures, three-time gaps, and two layering patterns were investigated through
the use of 18 layered samples and a simulation of the extrusion method process. Through
the use of 9 standard samples, this research also assesses the influence of the layering
procedure on the hardened qualities of build-up materials. Gladstone fly ash, sand, an 8 M
sodium hydroxide solution, and sodium silicate of grade D were the ingredients used.
Sodium silicate to sodium hydroxide had a weight ratio of 1, and fly ash to activators had a
weight ratio of 0.26. Steel fibers made up 0 percent, 1 percent, and 0.5 percent of Mix 1,
Mix 2, and Mix 3, respectively. Through 3-point bending tests, the constructability of
layered specimens and the impact of the layering method were evaluated in terms of
flexural strength. The layering process has a detrimental effect on the mechanical strength
of build-up materials, according to the flexural strength data. Additionally, mix 2 generated
the maximum flexural strength values in both stacked samples and standard specimens.
However, the biggest bond dissociation issues between additional layers were present in
stacked samples made with mix 2. Results for flexural strength were highest for samples
that were most layered and had the fewest time intervals (Al-Qutaifi, Nazari, & Bagheri,
2018).
2.5 Impact of RHA on green strength of 3d Printed concrete:

The mix design of 3D printable concrete distinguishes from conventional concrete since the
printing technology eliminates the requirement for formwork and mandates the ongoing
deposition of layers with structural stability. RHA substitution for Portland cement
improves a mixture's durability as a building ingredient. RHA is employed in this project to
replace 20% of the cement. Early on, the compressive strength and workability reduction of
proposed mixes—with and without RHA—were evaluated and contrasted to new features
14
of commercially available, tested printed mortar. The rheology of mortar has significantly
improved as a result of the usage of RHA at the 3D printing pace needed for large-scale
construction (Muthukrishnan, 2020). The literature on the numerous wastes used to make
combinations for 3D printing is reviewed, together with information on waste generation,
material properties, and the roles played by these materials in enhancing the new properties
necessary for printing concrete. Along with their effects on the environment, variables
affecting the effective utilization of these waste materials in 3D printed concrete are looked
at. The advantages of using industrial waste to increase the durability of 3D printing
concrete are highlighted in this study. It is anticipated that printable concrete compositions
with high concentrations of industrial waste (and chemical admixtures) will be created to
raise the performance measure of this new construction method (Dey, Srinivas, Panda,
Suraneni, & Sitharam, 2022).
Chapter 3
3 Methodology And Experimental Program

3.1 Preface of the chapter and flow chart:
This chapter discusses, the specifications of material used, casting schedule, mix
proportions, methodology, procedure, and code references of tests performed on concrete
and working criteria adopted to achieve the pre-mentioned objectives summarized. The
research methodology is defining the graph below.
15
Material Selection &
Characterization
Selection of OPC (CEM-I),

Mix Design River sand, PP fibers,
and trials RHA, Bt,
Casting of MRSPF MRSP

samples
Fresh Green Strength

Properties (0, 15, 30, 60, 90
minutes)
Setting Time
Uniaxial Compression
(ASTM C403) Strength
(ASTM D2166)
Slump test
(ASTM C143) Direct Shear Strength
(ASTM D3080)
Results & Analysis
Conclusions &
Recommendations
Figure 3.1 Methodology
3.2 Collection of Materials:

3.2.1 Primary Materials:
Following is the detail of the materials used in the experimental program.
3.2.1.1 Ordinary Portland cement:
The substance cement is used extensively in the construction sector. It fulfills its function
as a binder by adhering to several other materials and then joining them. Its use in mortar
and concrete, where it is introduced to the mixture to bind fine aggregate, is prevalent
16
(sand). It serves only as a mortar for masonry projects involving fines. BESTWAY Cement
was purchased from the local WAH CANTT market with the properties listed in the table
below.
Table 1 Chemical composition of cement
Sr. No Chemical Percentage

1 AL2O3 5.56
2 Cao 62.30
3 C3a 9.07
4 SiO2 20.75
5 SO3 2.55
6 I.R 0.68
7 L.S.F 0.90
8 MgO 1.48
9 Fe2O3 3.34
10 L.O.I 1.1
3.2.1.2 Sand:
In this study, we used locally available sand which is free of organic materials and silt, etc.
The sand we used in this study passed it from a 200# sieve. As per ASTM C 136 – 04
sieve analysis of sand was determined, and fineness modulus was found. The results of
the sieve analysis of the fine aggregate are then to be compared with the requirement of
the ASTM C 33 – 04. The specific gravity of the fine aggregate and the water
absorption percentage were also concluded according to the ASTM C 128 – 04.
Table 2 Properties of sand
Fineness Modulus 2.60

Specific Gravity 2.70
Moisture Content (%) 1.0
Absorption (%) 1.23
17
3.2.1.3 Superplasticizer:
The Chemrite 303 SP we used in this study brought SP from Imporient Chemicals
Rawalpindi. The density of the superplasticizer is 1.06 ± 0.01Kg/Lit. We are using
Chemrite 303 SP which is used for producing high-quality concrete in application ready-
mix design concrete, hot weather concreting, etc. it provides advantages like desired levels
of slump retention, increased strength, avoid honeycombing in concrete.
3.2.1.4 Bentonite clay powder:
The clay powder we used in this study, was brought bentonite clay from City Scientific
Rawalpindi. The density of bentonite clay is 2400kg/m. The bentonite we used in this study
passed it from a 200# sieve. Bentonite is an environmentally favorable choice for
pozzolanic. Bentonite has a great deal of potential for usage as pozzolanic in the concrete
building sector, both technically and financially. Bentonite can be used as a partial
alternative for cement in concrete to generate low-cost concrete without sacrificing the
material's strength.
3.2.1.5 Polypropylene Fiber:
We purchased PP Fiber from Imporient Chemical in Rawalpindi for the PPF we utilized in
this study. The PP fiber is 12mm long. Additionally, the incorporation of polypropylene
fiber in 3D printable concrete aids in the material's ability to keep its shape when printed in
a new condition. Additionally, it should be mentioned that polypropylene fibers have
hydrophobic properties that guard against being moistened by cement paste. Concrete's
water need is unaffected by polypropylene fiber's hydrophobic properties.
Table 3 Characteristics of Pp fiber used
Tensile Flexural Filament Chop Elongation at Acid

strength strength diameter length break
18
at break
(Mpa)
(Mpa) (µm) (mm) (%) Resistance
30-40
40-55 15-30 12 100-600 High
3.2.1.6 Rice Husk Ash:

Rice husk ash is produced by burning the outer covering of rice. It contains enough amount
of silica. This can be used in concrete to modify its properties. Rice husk is a very common
waste material in Pakistan. RHA is chosen for this study because it is concluded from the
literature review that it will enhance the properties. The most important property of cement
is its binding nature which provides strength. The rice husk ash used in the research; was
rich with silica (the properties of RHA will be discussed in the next chapters). We brought
RHA from City Scientific Rawalpindi. The density of RHA is 150kg/m3. The RHA we
used in this study passed it from the 200# sieve.
Table 4 Chemical composition of RHA
SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3(%) SO3 Cao Na2O LOI Others

(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
91.5 0.15 0.06 1.29 0.48 0.27 3.1 3.15
3.2.1.7 Water:
Normal tap water available in the concrete laboratory of Swedish College of Engineering
and Technology Wah Cantt, good for drinking, was used in this research. The source was
kept the same throughout the project to ensure consistency in results.
Table 5 Characteristics of water used
19
Source pH Hardness Chloride Sulfate
(CaCo3 ¿ (mg/l) ( SO 4, ppm)
Tap water used 7 300 240 45
Max allowable limit 6.5 – 8.5 500 250 400

by WHO guidelines
Figure 3.2 Polypropylene fiber Figure 3.3 Rice husk ash
20
Figure 3.6 Bentonite clay powder Figure 3.5 Superplasticizer
3.3 Casting Schedule:

3.3.1 Mix Design:
To study the properties of 3D printable fiber reinforced concrete, a constant percentage
(2%) of PPF was added by the total volume of concrete, 40% by a binder of RHA, and 10%
bentonite by the binder and we used 0.008% SP by weight of the binder. For fresh concrete
properties, we conducted a slump test and for destructive testing, a uniaxial compressive
strength test and direct shear strength test are conducted at different ages.
RHA = Rice husk ash
Bt = Bentonite
S = sand
W = water
B = Binder (cement + RHA + BT)
SP = Superplasticizer
Table 6 Mix design
Sr. No Mix Cement RHA/B Bt/B W/B S/B SP (% Wt Fibers

design of binder) (%) by
volume
1 MRSP 0.5 0.4 0.10 0.33 0.25 0.0125 0
1 MRSPF 0.5 0.4 0.10 0.33 0.25 0.0125 2.00
21
3.3.2 The casting of test samples:
For the Uniaxial Unconfined Compression Test specimen dimension were designed
according to ASTM D2166. We are using a cylinder of diameter d= 2inch and height h=
4inch.
For the Direct Shear Test, specimen dimensions were designed according to ASTM D3080.
And we use the apparatus specimen for the casting of the sample. The sampler size is 6cm
wide and 2cm in thickness.
Tests are performed at different concrete ages like15 min, 30 min, 60 min, and 90 min and
for each concrete age, 3 samples are prepared for testing. similarly, we used a control mix
design in which the proportion of materials is the same as in our original mix design except
for fibers percentage, in the control mix design we do not use fibers. So first, we cast our
samples using control mix design and applied test methodology on them, then we cast our
samples using mix design proportions and perform test methodology on them. In the end,
we will compare both results.
Table 7 No. of samples for all mixed design
Sr. No. Unconfined Direct Shear Test

Compression Test (ASTM D3080)
(ASTM d2166)
1 Age [min] 15,30,60,90 minutes 15,30,60,90 minutes
2 No samples per age 3 3
3 Total no of samples for 24 24
control mix +mix design
3.4 Test performed:
Following tests were performed on cement and concrete
3.4.1 Test on fine aggregates:

3.4.1.1 Sieve Analysis (ASTM-C136):
Lawrancepur sand is used that is available in the nearby local markets as fine aggregates.
The Fineness modulus of sand is 2.60, the specific gravity of 2.70, and water absorption of
22
1.23%. The results of sieve analysis are performed by passing the fine aggregates by sieve
200#.
3.4.2 Tests on cement:

3.4.2.1 Standard Consistency Test:
A consistency test was performed on cement according to ASTM C403 specifications. For
this take 300g of cement and place it in a bowl or tray. The standard consistency of cement
is found at 28%.
3.4.2.2 Setting Time Test (ASTM C191):

Setting time test was performed on cement according to ASTM C191 specifications. For
this take 400g of cement and place it in a bowl or tray. We found the initial setting time
was 1 hour and the final setting time was 8 hours and 32 minutes.
Figure 3.7 Initial setting time test
23
3.4.3 Test on concrete:
3.4.3.1 Slump Test:
For selecting a suitable w/c ratio and superplasticizer we performed a slump test. In
different studies, it is known that for 3d concrete technology we must achieve a true slump
or zero slumps. For the slump test size of a cylinder, the diameter was 4 inches, and the
height of 8 inches we used. The value of the slump was 1 inch.
Figure 3.8 Slump Test
3.4.3.2 Setting Time Test of Concrete (ASTM C403):

By measuring the penetrating resistance of mortar that has been sieved from the concrete
mixture, this test method determines when concrete with a slump greater than zero will be
set. Only when tests of the mortar fraction will offer the necessary information should this
test method be used. The setting time of concrete of mix design MRSP was obtained 2
hours, 45 minutes, and mix design MRSPF were obtained 2 hours.
3.4.3.3 Uniaxial Unconfined Compressive Strength Test (ASTM D2166):
To determine the shear strength of soil, the Uniaxial Unconfined Compression test is
utilized. It is the simplest, least complicated, and most affordable test. The maximum load
per unit area during the execution of a test is regarded to be the unconfined compression
24
strength. Concrete cylinders with a diameter of 2 inches and a height of 4 inches were used
to create the concrete specimens for reinforcement with PPFR concrete. On a testing
machine, the compression tests of the unconfined PPFR concrete cylinders were carried out
at a fixed rate of axial deformation of 0.2 mm/min. The stress-strain curves were used to
calculate the compressive strength, axial strain, and work till failure.
Figure 3.9 Schematic diagram of UUST
Figure 3.10 UCS Test at the start
25
Figure 3.11 UCS Test after failure (15 mints)
Figure 3.12 UCS Test after 30 mints
26
27
3.4.3.4 Direct Shear Test (ASTM D3080):
On cylindrical specimens, direct shear tests (DST) were carried out. According to ASTM
D3080, the specimen dimensions were created. The specimen height h = 40 mm was
achieved by stacking two flat plates with circular openings that were each 70 mm in
diameter.
Figure 3.15 Schematic diagram of direct shear test
Figure 3.16 Direct shear test sample
28
Chapter 4
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Pre-face of the Chapter:
To evaluate the effects of using RHA and PPF on the properties of fresh concrete like
unconfined compressive strength test and direct shear test were performed on 2 different
concrete mixes at different age times like 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 60 minutes, and 90
minutes. In this chapter analysis of test results is discussed and summarized thoroughly.
4.2 Unconfined Compressive Strength Test:

Table 4.1 Results of unconfined compressive strength test without fibers
Mix design MRSP
Age (15 minutes) Age (30 minutes) Age (60 minutes) Age (90 minutes)
Load (kN) Deforma Load Deformat Load Deform Load (kN) Defor
tion (kN) ion (mm) (kN) ation mation
(mm) (mm) (mm)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.000392 0.3 0.001177 0.3 0.00157 0.3 0.002354 0.3
0.000687 0.6 0.00206 0.6 0.002158 0.6 0.002845 0.6
0.001373 0.9 0.002256 0.9 0.002551 0.9 0.003335 0.9
0.00206 1.2 0.002453 1.2 0.002845 1.2 0.003826 1.2
0.002551 1.5 0.002649 1.5 0.003237 1.5 0.004316 1.5
0.003041 1.8 0.002845 1.8 0.00363 1.8 0.004905 1.8
0.003532 2.1 0.003041 2.1 0.004022 2.1 0.005396 2.1
0.003924 2.4 0.003237 2.4 0.004807 2.4 0.005984 2.4
0.004316 2.7 0.003335 2.7 0.005297 2.7 0.007161 2.7
0.004807 3 0.003532 3 0.005592 3 0.00824 3
0.005199 3.3 0.003728 3.3 0.005886 3.3 0.008731 3.3
0.00569 3.6 0.003924 3.6 0.006278 3.6 0.00932 3.6
29
0.006082 3.9 0.004022 3.9 0.007161 3.9 0.009908 3.9
0.006573 4.2 0.00412 4.2 0.007946 4.2 0.010791 4.2
0.006965 4.5 0.004218 4.5 0.008927 4.5 0.011674 4.5
0.007554 4.8 0.004316 4.8 0.009418 4.8 0.012459 4.8
0.008731 5.1 0.004415 5.1 0.010202 5.1 0.013244 5.1
0.007946 5.4 0.004513 5.4 0.010399 5.4 0.014028 5.4
0.007259 5.7 0.004709 5.7 0.010693 5.7 0.014911 5.7
0.007259 5.7 0.005003 6 0.011085 6 0.015696 6
0.00725 5.7 0.005199 6.3 0.011478 6.3 0.016481 6.3
0.007259 5.7 0.005396 6.6 0.01187 6.6 0.017266 6.6
0.007259 5.7 0.005592 6.9 0.012263 6.9 0.01805 6.9
0.007259 5.7 0.005886 7.2 0.012655 7.2 0.018933 7.2
0.007259 5.7 0.006573 7.5 0.013047 7.5 0.019816 7.5
0.007259 5.7 0.006867 7.8 0.01344 7.8 0.020503 7.8
0.007259 5.7 0.007161 8.1 0.013734 8.1 0.021386 8.1
0.007259 5.7 0.007358 8.4 0.014028 8.4 0.022171 8.4
0.007259 5.7 0.00775 8.7 0.014323 8.7 0.023054 8.7
0.007259 5.7 0.007946 9 0.014617 9 0.02374 9
0.007259 5.7 0.008142 9.3 0.014911 9.3 0.024427 9.3
0.007259 5.7 0.008339 9.6 0.015107 9.6 0.025408 9.6
0.007259 5.7 0.008535 9.9 0.015402 9.9 0.025898 9.9
0.007259 5.7 0.008829 10.2 0.015598 10.2 0.026683 10.2
0.007259 5.7 0.009221 10.5 0.016088 10.5 0.02737 10.5
0.007259 5.7 0.009614 10.8 0.016677 10.8 0.028057 10.8
0.007259 5.7 0.010497 11.1 0.017462 11.1 0.028841 11.1
0.007259 5.7 0.01138 11.4 0.018247 11.4 0.029528 11.4
0.007259 5.7 0.011772 11.7 0.019031 11.7 0.030215 11.7
30
0.007259 5.7 0.012557 12 0.01962 12 0.030902 12
0.007259 5.7 0.013342 12.3 0.020111 12.3 0.031392 12.3
0.007259 5.7 0.012655 12.6 0.020699 12.6 0.032079 12.6
0.007259 5.7 0.010791 12.9 0.021386 12.9 0.032569 12.9
0.007259 5.7 0.010791 12.9 0.022171 13.2 0.033158 13.2
0.007259 5.7 0.010791 12.9 0.021582 13.5 0.032373 13.5
0.007259 5.7 0.010791 12.9 0.020993 13.8 0.031588 13.8
0.007259 5.7 0.010791 12.9 0.020993 13.8 0.031 14.1
Representative load-deformation curves as measured during the compression test are

shown in Fig. 4.1, for each age 15 min, 30 min, 60 min, and 90 mint tested, where no
confining pressure is applied. The results are taken from the average values of specimens.
Fig 4.1 shows results without the use of polypropylene fiber and Fig 4.2 shows results with
the use of polypropylene fiber. From Fig 4.1 and 4.2 it is understandably perceived that the
properties like mechanical behavior of garden-fresh concrete changes as the load are started
applying and it is almost changed linearly for all ages. After getting peak strength of fresh
concrete the load increment started to decrease as deformation got higher. This behavior of
concrete is assigned to occurring the horizontal deformation and failure behavior.
31
Mix design MRSP
0.035
0.03
0.025
Load (KN)
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0 6 2 8 4 3 6 2 8 4 6 6 2 8 4 9 6 2 8 4 2 6 2 8
0. 1. 1. 2. 3. 4. 4. 5. 6. 7. 7. 8. 9. 10. 10. 11. 1 12. 13. 13.
Axial Deformation (mm)
15min 30min 60min 90min
Figure 4.1 Graphical results of unconfined compressive strength test without fiber
Table 4.2 Results of unconfined compressive strength test with fibers

Mix design MRSPF
Load (kN) Deforma Load Deformat Load Deform Load (kN) Defor
tion (kN) ion (mm) (kN) ation mation
(mm) (mm) (mm)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.002256 0.3 0.00206 0.3 0.002845 0.3 0.004022 0.3
0.002747 0.6 0.005101 0.6 0.003434 0.6 0.006475 0.6
0.003041 0.9 0.006377 0.9 0.003924 0.9 0.008731 0.9
0.003335 1.2 0.007161 1.2 0.004415 1.2 0.010399 1.2
0.00363 1.5 0.00824 1.5 0.004807 1.5 0.01187 1.5
0.003924 1.8 0.009614 1.8 0.005297 1.8 0.013636 1.8
0.004218 2.1 0.010497 2.1 0.005886 2.1 0.015009 2.1
0.004316 2.4 0.011282 2.4 0.006573 2.4 0.016579 2.4
32
0.004709 2.7 0.012066 2.7 0.007652 2.7 0.018149 2.7
0.004905 3 0.012851 3 0.008339 3 0.020111 3
0.005199 3.3 0.013538 3.3 0.009123 3.3 0.021092 3.3
0.005494 3.6 0.014126 3.6 0.00981 3.6 0.022759 3.6
0.00569 3.9 0.014813 3.9 0.010497 3.9 0.024133 3.9
0.005984 4.2 0.0155 4.2 0.011183 4.2 0.025702 4.2
0.006278 4.5 0.016187 4.5 0.011772 4.5 0.027468 4.5
0.006573 4.8 0.016775 4.8 0.012459 4.8 0.02943 4.82
0.007161 5.1 0.01756 5.1 0.01344 5.1 0.031098 5.1
0.007848 5.4 0.017854 5.4 0.013734 5.4 0.032667 5.4
0.008339 5.7 0.018541 5.7 0.014421 5.7 0.034629 5.7
0.008731 6 0.01913 6 0.015107 6 0.03561 6
0.009123 6.3 0.01962 6.3 0.015696 6.3 0.037769 6.3
0.009516 6.6 0.020209 6.6 0.016383 6.6 0.039534 6.6
0.00981 6.9 0.020699 6.9 0.016971 6.9 0.041006 6.9
0.010202 7.2 0.02119 7.2 0.01756 7.2 0.042674 7.2
0.010595 7.5 0.02168 7.5 0.01805 7.5 0.044243 7.52
0.010889 7.8 0.022171 7.8 0.018639 7.8 0.045911 7.8
0.011183 8.1 0.022661 8.1 0.019228 8.1 0.047382 8.1
0.011576 8.4 0.023054 8.4 0.019816 8.4 0.048854 8.4
0.01187 8.7 0.023446 8.7 0.020307 8.7 0.050325 8.7
0.012164 9 0.023936 9 0.020797 9 0.051699 9
0.011772 9.3 0.023446 9.3 0.021288 9.3 0.053072 9.3
0.011674 9.6 0.022857 9.6 0.02168 9.6 0.054544 9.6
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.022171 9.9 0.055917 9.9
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.022563 10.2 0.057487 10.2
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.022857 10.5 0.058762 10.5
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.023348 10.8 0.060037 10.8
33
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.024133 11.1 0.061116 11.1
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.024819 11.4 0.06249 11.4
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.025506 11.7 0.063471 11.7
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.026291 12 0.065433 12
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.027174 12.3 0.064648 12.3
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.028057 12.6 0.063569 12.6
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.029921 12.9 0.062686 12.9
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.030803 13.2 0.062686 12.9
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.03149 13.5 0.062686 12.9
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.032275 13.8 0.062686 12.9
0.011674 9.6 0.022073 9.9 0.032962 14.1 0.062686 12.9
0.08
Mix design MRSPF
0.06
Load (KN)
0.04
0.02
0
0 6 2 8 4 3 6 2 8 4 6 6 2 8 4 9 6 2 8 4 12 2.6 3.2 3.8 4.4 15
0. 1. 1. 2. 3. 4. 4. 5. 6. 7. 7. 8. 9. 10. 10. 11. 1 1 1 1
Axial Deformation (mm)
Figure 4.2 Graphical results of unconfined compressive strength test with fiber
Fig 4.2 shows the results with the addition of Polypropylene fiber. Representative load-
deformation curves as measured during the compression test are shown in Fig. 4.2, for each
age 15 min, 30 min, 60 min, and 90 mint tested, where no confining pressure is applied.
34
The results are taken from the average values of specimens. From Fig 4.2 it is
understandably perceived that the properties like mechanical behavior of garden-fresh
concrete changes as the load are started applying and it is almost changed linearly for all
ages. The effect of fiber in fresh concrete represented 130% peak load. After getting peak
strength of fresh concrete the load increment started to decrease as deformation got higher.
This behavior of concrete is assigned to occurring the horizontal deformation and failure
behavior.
35
Table 4.3 Results of stress vs strain of unconfined compressive strength test without fibers
Mix design MRSP
Stress Strain Stress Strain Stress Strain Stress Strain
(kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0.676852 0.003 2.030557 0.003005 2.70741 0.003005 4.061114 0.003005
1.180921 0.006 3.542763 0.006011 3.711466 0.006011 4.892387 0.006011
2.354701 0.009 3.868437 0.009016 4.373016 0.009016 5.718559 0.009016
3.521339 0.012 4.192071 0.012022 4.862802 0.012022 6.53963 0.012022
4.346491 0.015 4.513664 0.015027 5.516701 0.015027 7.355601 0.015027
5.166542 0.018 4.833217 0.018032 6.166518 0.018032 8.333133 0.018032
5.981492 0.021 5.15073 0.021038 6.812255 0.021038 9.138391 0.021038
6.625699 0.024 5.466202 0.024043 8.116482 0.024043 10.10419 0.024043
7.265825 0.027 5.614501 0.027049 8.917149 0.027049 12.05466 0.027049
8.066493 0.030 5.926403 0.030054 9.383471 0.030054 13.82827 0.030054
8.697948 0.033 6.236264 0.03306 9.846733 0.03306 14.60599 0.03306
9.488924 0.036 6.544085 0.036065 10.47054 0.036065 15.5422 0.036065
10.11171 0.039 6.686774 0.03907 11.90572 0.03907 16.4723 0.03907
10.89299 0.042 6.828442 0.042076 13.16914 0.042076 17.88402 0.042076
11.5071 0.045 6.96909 0.045081 14.74854 0.045081 19.28655 0.045081
12.44026 0.048 7.108718 0.048087 15.50993 0.048087 20.51835 0.048087
14.3336 0.051 7.247326 0.051092 16.74938 0.051092 21.74198 0.051092
13.00387 0.054 7.384914 0.054097 17.01741 0.054097 22.95745 0.054097
11.84233 0.057 7.681513 0.057103 17.44344 0.057103 24.32479 0.057103
11.84233 0.057 8.135593 0.060108 18.02592 0.060108 25.52343 0.060108
11.84233 0.057 8.427601 0.063114 18.60433 0.063114 26.71391 0.063114
11.84233 0.057 8.717569 0.066119 19.17865 0.066119 27.89622 0.066119
11.84233 0.057 9.005496 0.069124 19.7489 0.069124 29.07037 0.069124
36
11.84233 0.057 9.448865 0.07213 20.31506 0.07213 30.39385 0.07213
11.84233 0.057 10.51706 0.075135 20.87714 0.075135 31.70814 0.075135
11.84233 0.057 10.95226 0.078141 21.43514 0.078141 32.70033 0.078141
11.84233 0.057 11.38441 0.081146 21.83311 0.081146 33.99728 0.081146
11.84233 0.057 11.65805 0.084151 22.22802 0.084151 35.1296 0.084151
11.84233 0.057 12.23952 0.087157 22.61987 0.087157 36.4087 0.087157
11.84233 0.057 12.50806 0.090162 23.00866 0.090162 37.36977 0.090162
11.84233 0.057 12.77457 0.093168 23.39439 0.093168 38.32371 0.093168
11.84233 0.057 13.03903 0.096173 23.62366 0.096173 39.7307 0.096173
11.84233 0.057 13.30146 0.099179 24.00378 0.099179 40.36304 0.099179
11.84233 0.057 13.71422 0.102184 24.22845 0.102184 41.44741 0.102184
11.84233 0.057 14.27579 0.105189 24.9067 0.105189 42.37176 0.105189
11.84233 0.057 14.83328 0.108195 25.7312 0.108195 43.28897 0.108195
11.84233 0.057 16.14094 0.1112 26.85129 0.1112 44.34988 0.1112
11.84233 0.057 17.43942 0.114206 27.96321 0.114206 45.25229 0.114206
11.84233 0.057 17.97957 0.117211 29.06697 0.117211 46.14757 0.117211
11.84233 0.057 19.11292 0.120216 29.86394 0.120216 47.0357 0.120216
11.84233 0.057 20.2381 0.123222 30.50597 0.123222 47.61907 0.123222
11.84233 0.057 19.13064 0.126227 31.29119 0.126227 48.49394 0.126227
11.84233 0.057 16.25684 0.129233 32.21809 0.129233 49.06608 0.129233
11.84233 0.057 16.25684 0.129233 33.28513 0.132238 49.78041 0.132238
11.84233 0.057 16.25684 0.129233 32.28923 0.135243 48.43385 0.135243
11.84233 0.057 16.25684 0.129233 31.29946 0.138249 47.09545 0.138249
37
Mix design MRSP
60
50
40
Stress (Kpa)
30
20
10
0
0 9 8 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2
00 .01 .02 036 045 054 063 072 081 090 099 108 117 126 135
0. 0 0 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
Strain
Figure 4.3 Graphical representation of stress vs. strain of unconfined compressive strength without
fiber
Graphical representation of stress-strain is shown in Fig 4.3 without the use of fiber and in
Fig 4.4 with the use of polypropylene fiber for each concrete age of 15 min, 30 min, 60
min, and 90 min. Average stress-strain correspondence is determined. Fig. 4.3 gives an
outline of the average stress-strain correlation for every concrete age, understandably
showing a notable increase of both strength and stiffness in time. The unconfined
compressive strength is defined for each test as the maximum occurring stress after area
correction and is summarized in Tables 4.3 and 4.4.
38
Table 4.4 Results of stress vs strain of unconfined compressive strength test with fibers
Mix design MRSPF
Stress Strain Stress Strain Stress Strain Stress Strain
(kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
0 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 0
3.891901 0.003 3.553475 0.003005 4.90718 0.003005 6.937737 0.003005
4.723684 0.006 8.772556 0.006011 5.904605 0.006011 11.1344 0.006011
5.213981 0.009 10.93254 0.009016 6.727717 0.009016 14.96917 0.009016
5.701216 0.012 12.24085 0.012022 7.545727 0.012022 17.77438 0.012022
6.185392 0.015 14.04251 0.015027 8.191464 0.015027 20.2279 0.015027
6.666506 0.018 16.33294 0.018032 8.999783 0.018032 23.16611 0.018032
7.14456 0.021 17.77832 0.021038 9.969154 0.021038 25.42134 0.021038
7.288269 0.024 19.04889 0.024043 11.09805 0.024043 27.99358 0.024043
7.926355 0.027 20.31128 0.027049 12.88033 0.027049 30.54949 0.027049
8.231115 0.030 21.56552 0.030054 13.9929 0.030054 33.74757 0.030054
8.697948 0.033 22.64749 0.03306 15.26244 0.03306 35.28413 0.03306
9.161719 0.036 23.55871 0.036065 16.36021 0.036065 37.95569 0.036065
9.459339 0.039 24.6269 0.03907 17.45085 0.03907 40.12064 0.03907
9.917499 0.042 25.68795 0.042076 18.53434 0.042076 42.59647 0.042076
10.3726 0.045 26.74186 0.045081 19.44862 0.045081 45.38012 0.045081
10.82464 0.048 27.62706 0.048087 20.51835 0.048087 48.45833 0.048287
11.75677 0.051 28.82825 0.051092 22.06408 0.051092 51.05339 0.051092
12.85693 0.053 29.21857 0.054097 22.47582 0.054097 53.46035 0.054097
13.61713 0.056 30.24596 0.057103 23.52463 0.057103 56.49113 0.057103
14.21254 0.059 31.10668 0.060108 24.5663 0.060108 57.90628 0.060108
14.80387 0.062 31.80227 0.063114 25.44181 0.063114 61.21937 0.063114
15.39111 0.065 32.65126 0.066119 26.46971 0.066119 63.87601 0.066119
15.81612 0.068 33.33614 0.069124 27.33247 0.069124 66.04031 0.069124
39
16.39572 0.071 34.01591 0.07213 28.18911 0.07213 68.50427 0.07213
16.97123 0.074 34.69059 0.075135 28.88266 0.075135 70.77858 0.075336
17.38603 0.077 35.36016 0.078141 29.72757 0.078141 73.2237 0.078141
17.79778 0.080 36.02464 0.081146 30.56636 0.081146 75.32424 0.081146
18.36207 0.083 36.52857 0.084151 31.39903 0.084151 77.40948 0.084151
18.76718 0.086 37.02842 0.087157 32.07064 0.087157 79.47942 0.087157
19.16923 0.089 37.67861 0.090162 32.73716 0.090162 81.37963 0.090162
18.48966 0.092 36.7846 0.093168 33.39857 0.093168 83.26556 0.093168
18.27488 0.095 35.74229 0.096173 33.90148 0.096173 85.29061 0.096173
18.27488 0.095 34.40032 0.099179 34.55321 0.099179 87.14746 0.099179
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 35.04745 0.102184 89.2948 0.102184
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 35.38574 0.105189 90.9702 0.105189
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 36.02369 0.108195 92.63234 0.108195
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 37.10908 0.1112 93.97951 0.1112
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 38.03598 0.114206 95.76648 0.114206
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 38.95574 0.117211 96.93986 0.117211
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 40.01767 0.120216 99.59622 0.120216
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 41.22026 0.123222 98.06552 0.123222
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 42.41366 0.126227 96.09808 0.126227
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 45.07577 0.129233 94.43743 0.129233
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 46.24571 0.132238 94.43743 0.129233
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 47.11292 0.135243 94.43743 0.129233
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 48.11926 0.138249 94.43743 0.129233
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 48.97168 0.141254 94.43743 0.129233
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 49.96221 0.14426 94.43743 0.129233
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 48.48418 0.147265 94.43743 0.129233
18.27488 0.095 33.54325 0.102184 47.01533 0.15027 94.43743 0.129233
40
Mix design MRSPF
120
100
80
Stress (Kpa)
60
40
20
0
0 9 8 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3
00 .01 .02 036 045 054 063 072 081 090 099 108 117 126 135 144
0. 0 0 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
Strain
Figure 4.4 Graphical representation of stress vs strain of unconfined compressive strength with
fiber
Graphical representation of stress-strain is shown in Fig 4.4 with the use of polypropylene
fiber for each concrete age of 15 min, 30 min, 60 min, and 90 min. Average stress-strain
correspondence is determined. Fig. 4.4 gives an outline of the average stress-strain
correlation for every concrete age, understandably showing a notable increase of both
strength and stiffness in time. With the use of fiber, it is noticed that a 50% increase in
strength with time. The unconfined compressive strength is defined for each test as the
maximum occurring stress after area correction and is summarized in Table 4.4.
4.3 Direct Shear Test:

As expected according to the Mohr-Coulomb theory, the addition of a vertical normal load
increases the shear strength. Fig. 4.5 and 4.6 shows the relationship between the maximum
shear stresses and the corresponding normal stresses for concrete age 15 min, 30 min, 60
min, and 90 min.
41
Table 4.5 shows the results of shear stress corresponding to the normal stress without fiber.
Mix design MRSP
Normal Shear Normal Shear Normal Shear Normal Shear
Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress
(kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
3.33 0.0365 3.33 0.047 3.33 0.0848 3.33 0.0979
6.1 0.0417 6.1 0.0522 6.1 0.0913 6.1 0.1109
8.8 0.0496 8.8 0.0574 8.8 0.0979 8.8 0.1201
Shear stress vs Normal stress graphs without fiber

(Direct Shear Test)
0.35 0.1201
0.1109
0.3 0.0979
Shear stress(kpa)
0.25
0.0979 90min
0.2 0.0913 60min
0.0848
30min
0.15 15min
0.0574
0.047 0.0522
0.1
0.0417 0.0496
0.05 0.0365
0
3.33 6.1 8.8
Normal stress (kpa)
Figure 4.5 represents graphical results of shear stress corresponding to the normal stress without
fiber
Fig 4.5 represents the results of the direct shear test without the use of fiber in fresh
concrete. At constant normal stress of 3.33 kPa, the shear stress is increased as age is
getting older, and the shear stress is getting higher. At age 90 min the shear strength is the
highest corresponding to normal stress. As we increase the normal stress the shear stress
increases linearly and is directly proportional to the normal stress.
42
Table 4.6 shows the results of shear stress corresponding to the normal stress with fiber.
Mix design MRSPF
Normal Shear Normal Shear Normal Shear Normal Shear
Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress Stress
(kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
3.33 0.052 3.33 0.072 3.33 0.124 3.33 0.1566
6.1 0.063 6.1 0.082 6.1 0.1436 6.1 0.1697
8.8 0.071 8.8 0.0901 8.8 0.1541 8.8 0.1958
Shear stress vs normal stress graphs with fiber

(Direct Shear test)
0.6
0.1958
0.5 0.1697
0.1566
Shear stress (kpa)
0.4
0.1541
0.1436
0.3 0.124
0.2 0.082 0.0901

0.072
0.1 0.063 0.071
0.052
0
3.33 6.1 8.8
Normal stress (kpa)
Figure 4.6 represents graphical results of shear stress corresponding to the normal stress with fiber
Fig 4.6 represents the results of the direct shear test with the use of fiber in fresh concrete
at the same normal stresses. At constant normal stress of 3.33 kPa, the shear stress is
increased as age is getting older, and the shear stress is getting higher. At age 90 min the
shear strength is the highest corresponding to normal stress. As we increase the normal
stress the shear stress increases linearly and is directly proportional to the normal stress. By
43
use of fiber, it is clearly shown that the shear stress got a higher value by corresponding to
the same normal stress that we applied for fresh concrete without fiber.
4.4 Shear Strength:

Strength differences between fiber reinforced concrete and without fiber are shown in Fig
4.7.
Table 4.7 shows the results of shear strength with fiber and without fiber
Shear Strength difference between without fiber and with fiber reinforced concrete
Time Without fiber strength With fiber strength
(min) (kPa) (kPa)
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
15 1.072 1.938 2.782 1.803 3.267 4.6941
30 1.188 2.142 3.072 2.00 3.609 5.177
60 1.376 2.456 3.519 4.006 7.247 10.46
90 2.548 4.579 6.568 5.896 10.688 15.358
16 Comparison of strength with fiber and without fiber

14
12
Strength (kPa)
10 T1
T2
8 T3
T1 Fiber
6
T2 Fiber
4 T3 Fiber
0
15 30 Time (min) 60 90
Figure 4.7 displays the strength comparison without and with fiber-reinforced concrete
44
Three different trials are done to find the strength of fresh concrete with and without fiber-
reinforced concrete. When we compared the results of concrete at age 15 min, the strength
we got is half of the strength we got with fibers. But we take into consideration the effect
of age on strength, and we compare the results of age 90 min of fiber and without fiber
reinforced concrete. The results have shown that the strength of fiber reinforced is greater
than the twice strength without fiber. Same at all ages the strength of concrete with the use
of fiber is higher than the strength of concrete without fiber.
Table 4.8 shows the results of compressive strength with fiber and without fiber
Compressive Strength difference between without fiber and with fiber reinforced
concrete
Time (min) Without fiber strength With fiber strength
(kPa) (kPa)
15 4.33 6.1
30 6.55 11.77
60 11.72 16.61
90 16.79 32.22
Strength Comparison
32.22
35
30
Strength (kPa)
25
16.61 16.79
20
11.77 11.72
15
6.1 6.55
10 4.33
5
0
15 30 60 90
Time (min)
Strength without Fiber Strength with Fiber
Figure 4.8 displays the strength comparison without and with fiber-reinforced concrete
45
Fig 4.8 represents the shear strength of fresh concrete with and without fiber reinforced
concrete. When we compared the results of concrete at age 15 min, the strength we got is
half of the strength we got with fibers. But we take into consideration the effect of age on
strength, and we compare the results of age 90 min of fiber and without fiber reinforced
concrete. The results have shown that the strength of fiber reinforced is almost the twice
strength without fiber. Same at all ages the strength of concrete with the use of fiber is
higher than the strength of concrete without fiber.
46
Chapter 5
5 Conclusions
5.1 Preface of the Chapter:
In this chapter, all the conclusions of this research and lab testing are explained. This
chapter includes a summary of the results discussed in chapter four.
 For samples without fiber incorporation, a maximum strain is 0.1382, stress is
achieved at different ages of 15 30 60, and 90 minutes at 11.84, 20.23, 33.28, and
49 KPa stress respectively.
 For samples with fiber incorporation, a maximum strain is 0.1502, stress is
observed at different ages of 15 30 60, and 90 minutes at 19, 33, 49, and 99 KPa
stress respectively.
 For samples without fiber incorporation, maximum shear strength of 2.782, 3.072,
3.519, and 6.568KPa is achieved at different ages of 15 30 60, and 90 minutes.
 For samples with fiber incorporation, maximum shear strength of 4.69, 5.177,10.46,
and 15.358KPa is achieved at different ages of 15 30 60, and 90 minutes.
 The maximum compressive strength of samples without fiber incorporation is
maximum at 90 minutes’ age which is 16.79KPa.
 The maximum compressive strength when fibers are incorporated in the mix is
maximum at 90 minutes of age which is 32.22KPa.
 Compressive strength results indicate that there is an increase of almost 48% in
strength when fibers are incorporated as compared to samples without fibers.
 Finally, it’s concluded that Geotechnical tests are suitable to assess the properties of
early-age printable concrete.
 In this study, load carrying capacity, compressive strength, and shear strength were
found to be a linear function of time.
 Also, it is included that the polypropylene fiber reinforcement in concrete would
increase the green strength of concrete by about 40-60% time to normal concrete.
o
47
Chapter 6
6 Recommendations
6.1 General Recommendations:
 The research is carried out on a limited number of samples due to time constraints;
the number of samples can be increased if the time constraints are not critical.
 The study is carried out on samples of early age i.e. 15, 30, 60, and 90 minutes
strengths, there is a potential gap for future researchers to study the effect of RHA
on the aging of 3d printable concrete and its hardened properties i.e., 7 days 28 days
56 day and 90 days’ strength parameters can be studied.
 There were some human and systematic errors including compression testing
machines, these errors can be minimized using better testing equipment.
 A blend of other agricultural wastes can also be used alongside RHA and other
geopolymers.
48
Chapter 7
7 References
7.1 Bibliography:
Al-Qutaifi, S., Nazari, A., & Bagheri, A. (2018). Mechanical properties of layered
geopolymer structures applicable in concrete 3D printing. Construction and
Building Materials, 176, 690-699.
Dey, D., Srinivas, D., Panda, B., Suraneni, P., & Sitharam, T. (2022). Use of industrial
waste materials for 3D printing of sustainable concrete: A review. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 130749.
Guo, Z., Zhu, Q., Liu, C., & Xing, Z. (2018). Preparation of Ca-Al-Fe deicing salt and
modified with sodium methyl silicate for reducing the influence of concrete
structure. Construction and Building Materials, 172, 263-271.
Le, T. T., Austin, S. A., Lim, S., Buswell, R. A., Gibb, A. G., & Thorpe, T. (2012). Mix
design and fresh properties for high-performance printing concrete. Materials and
structures, 45(8), 1221-1232.
Li, Z., Hojati, M., Wu, Z., Piasente, J., Ashrafi, N., Duarte, J. P., . . . Radlińska, A. (2020).
Fresh and hardened properties of extrusion-based 3D-printed cementitious
materials: a review. Sustainability, 12(14), 5628.
Ma, G., Li, Z., & Wang, L. (2018). Printable properties of cementitious material containing
copper tailings for extrusion-based 3D printing. Construction and Building
Materials, 162, 613-627.
Muthukrishnan, S. (2020). Fresh properties of cementitious materials containing rice husk
ash for construction 3D printing.
Nematollahi, B., Vijay, P., Sanjayan, J., Nazari, A., Xia, M., Naidu Nerella, V., &
Mechtcherine, V. (2018). Effect of Polypropylene Fiber Addition on Properties of
Geopolymers Made by 3D Printing for Digital Construction. Materials, 11(12),
2352.
Panda, B., & Tan, M. J. (2018). Experimental study on mix proportion and fresh properties
of fly ash-based geopolymer for 3D concrete printing. Ceramics International,
44(9), 10258-10265.
49
Praveena, B., Lokesh, N., Buradi, A., Santhosh, N., Praveena, B., & Vignesh, R. (2021). A
comprehensive review of emerging additive manufacturing (3D printing
technology): Methods, materials, applications, challenges, trends, and future
potential. Materials Today: Proceedings.
Rahul, A., Santhanam, M., Meena, H., & Ghani, Z. (2019). 3D printable concrete: Mixture
design and test methods. Cement and concrete composites, 97, 13-23.
Rehman, A. U., & Kim, J.-H. (2021). 3D concrete printing: A systematic review of
rheology, mix designs, mechanical, microstructural, and durability characteristics.
Materials, 14(14), 3800.
Rushing, T. S., Stynoski, P. B., Barna, L. A., Al-Chaar, G. K., Burroughs, J. F., Shannon, J.
D., . . . Case, M. P. (2019). Investigation of concrete mixtures for additive
construction 3D Concrete Printing Technology (pp. 137-160): Elsevier.
Siddika, A., Mamun, M. A. A., Ferdous, W., Saha, A. K., & Alyousef, R. (2020). 3D-
printed concrete: Applications, performance, and challenges. Journal of Sustainable
Cement-Based Materials, 9(3), 127-164.
Voigt, T., Malonn, T., & Shah, S. P. (2006). Green and early age compressive strength of
extruded cement mortar was monitored with compression tests and ultrasonic
techniques. Cement and Concrete Research, 36(5), 858-867.
Wolfs, R., Bos, F., & Salet, T. (2018). Early age mechanical behavior of 3D printed
concrete: Numerical modeling and experimental testing. Cement and Concrete
Research, 106, 103-116.
Wolfs, R., Bos, F., & Salet, T. (2019). Triaxial compression testing on early age concrete
for numerical analysis of 3D concrete printing. Cement and concrete composites,
104, 103344.
Zhang, C., Nerella, V. N., Krishna, A., Wang, S., Zhang, Y., Mechtcherine, V., & Banthia,
N. (2021). Mix design concepts for 3D printable concrete: A review. Cement and
concrete composites, 122, 104155.
Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Liu, G., Yang, Y., Wu, M., & Pang, B. (2018). Fresh properties of a
novel 3D printing concrete ink. Construction and Building Materials, 174, 263-271.
50
Bakhshi, Amir, Reza Sedghi, and Maryam Hojati. "A Preliminary Study on the Mix Design
of 3D-Printable Engineered Cementitious Composite." Tran-SET 2021. Reston, VA:
American Society of Civil Engineers, 2021. 199-211.
51

3D Printable Fiber Concrete FINAL THESIS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

3D Printable Fiber Concrete FINAL THESIS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EVALUATING THE GREEN STRENGTH OF 3D

PRINTABLE FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE

Muhammad Adeel Zafar (UET/SCET-18F-CE-016)

Thesis Supervisor’s Signature _____________________

“DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

EVALUATING THE GREEN STRENGTH OF 3D

Muhammad Adeel Zafar (UET/SCET-18F-CE-016)

Muhammad Adeel Zafar (UET/SCET-18F-CE-016)

Keywords: FR3DPC, Shear stress, Shear strength, Strain, Compressive strength,

1.1 Introduction and Background of the topic:..............................................................1

1.2 Requirements for Printing Process:.........................................................................2

1.3 Printing process:.......................................................................................................3

1.4 Properties of 3D printed concrete:...........................................................................3

1.4.1 Green strength concrete....................................................................................4

1.4.2 Fresh Properties:...............................................................................................4

1.5 Problem statement:...................................................................................................7

1.6 Research Objectives:................................................................................................7

1.7 Organization of the Research Study:.......................................................................7

1.7.1 Chapter 1 (Introduction):..................................................................................8

1.7.2 Chapter 2 (Literature Review):.........................................................................8

1.7.3 Chapter 3 (Methodology):................................................................................8

1.7.4 Chapter 4 (Result and discussions):..................................................................8

1.7.5 Chapter 5 (Conclusions):..................................................................................8

1.7.6 Chapter 6 (Recommendations):........................................................................8

1.7.7 Chapter 6 (References):....................................................................................8

2.1 Preface of the chapter:.............................................................................................9

2.2 Previous Literature:..................................................................................................9

2.3 Different mixes with different sand-to- binder ratio:.............................................11

2.4 Impact of Polypropylene fibers:.............................................................................13

2.5 Impact of RHA on green strength of 3d Printed concrete:....................................14

3 Methodology And Experimental Program...................................................................15

3.2 Collection of Materials:.........................................................................................16

3.2.1 Primary Materials:..........................................................................................16

3.3 Casting Schedule:...................................................................................................20

3.3.1 Mix Design:....................................................................................................20

3.3.2 Casting of test samples:..................................................................................21

3.4 Test performed:......................................................................................................21

3.4.1 Test on fine aggregates:..................................................................................21

3.4.2 Tests on cement:.............................................................................................22

3.4.3 Test on concrete:.............................................................................................23

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS................................................................................28

4.1 Pre-face of the Chapter:.........................................................................................28

4.2 Unconfined Compressive Strength Test:...............................................................28

4.3 Direct Shear Test:..................................................................................................39

4.4 Shear Strength:.......................................................................................................42

5.1 Preface of the Chapter:...........................................................................................45

6.1 General Recommendations:...................................................................................46

Figure 1.1 3DPC buildings around the world

1.2 Requirements for Printing Process:

1.3 Printing process:

1.4 Properties of 3D printed concrete:

Figure 1.3 Green strength concrete process

1.4.2 Fresh Properties:

1.5 Problem statement:

1.6 Research Objectives:

1.7.1 Chapter 1 (Introduction):

1.7.2 Chapter 2 (Literature Review):

1.7.3 Chapter 3 (Methodology):

1.7.4 Chapter 4 (Result and discussions):

1.7.5 Chapter 5 (Conclusions):

1.7.6 Chapter 6 (Recommendations):

2.2 Previous Literature:

2.3 Different mixes with different sand-to-binder ratios: