Mechanical Properties of Light Weight Agg

European Union Brite EuRam III
Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete
EuroLightCon Economic Design and Construction with Light Weight Aggregate Concrete
Document BE96-3942/R23, June 2000
Project funded by the European Union under the Industrial & Materials Technologies Programme (Brite-EuRam III) Contract BRPR-CT97-0381, Project BE96-3942
The European Union Brite EuRam III

Document BE96-3942/R23, June 2000 Contract BRPR-CT97-0381, Project BE96-3942
Although the project consortium does its best to ensure that any information given is accurate, no liability or responsibility of any kind (including liability for negligence) is accepted in this respect by the project consortium, the authors/editors and those who contributed to the report. Acknowledgements This report is a deliverable of Task 4: Light Weight Aggregate Concrete Properties. This report was prepared by Marie-Louise Peters (Smals R&D). The research within this activity is combined with the research of Activity 3.2.1: Grading and composition of the aggregate, Report BE3942/R7, March 2000. Both reports can be read together. Information Information regarding the report Marie-Louise Peters, Smals R&D, De Nieuwe Erven 12, NL-5431 NT Cuijk, The Netherlands Tel: +31 0485 322 445, e-mail: smals.rd@wxs.nl Information regarding the project in general: Jan P.G. Mijnsbergen, CUR, PO Box 420, NL-2800 AK Gouda, the Netherlands Tel: +31 182 540620, e-mail: jan.mijnsbergen@cur.nl Information on the project and the partners on the Internet: http://www.sintef.no/bygg/sement/elcon
ISBN 90 376 0198 7
The European Union Brite EuRam III

Document BE96-3942/R23, June 2000 Contract BRPR-CT97-0381, Project BE96-3942
Selmer ASA, NO SINTEF, The Foundation of Scientific and Industrial Research at the Norwegian Institute of Technology, NO NTNU, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO ExClay International, NO Beton Son B.V., NL B.V. VASIM, NL CUR, Centre for Civil Engineering Research and Codes, NL Smals B.V., NL Delft University of Technology, NL IceConsult, Lnuhnnun hf., IS The Icelandic Building Research Institute, IS Taywood Engineering Limited, GB Lias-Franken Leichtbaustoffe GmbH & Co KG, DE Dragados y Construcciones S.A., ES Eindhoven University of Technology, NL Spanbeton B.V., NL
Table of Contents
PREFACE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General 1.2 Objective 1.3 Framework of the research 1.4 Technical content 1.5 Content report 2 REFERENCE MIXTURES 2.1 General 2.2 Matrix 2.3 Aggregate 2.3.1 General 2.3.2 Summary properties LWA 2.3.3 Particle size distribution of reference mixtures 2.4 Characteristics of mixtures 3 MECHANICAL PROPERTIES 3.1 General 3.2 Water absorption 3.3 Particle and bulk density 3.4 Crushing resistance 3.5 Particle shape and surface zone 3.6 Estimation of strength 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 General 4.2 Density after demoulding 4.3 Cube compressive strength 4.4 Strength/density ratio 4.5 Ratio between flexural and compressive strength 4.6 Ratio between tensile splitting strength and cube compressive strength 4.7 Ratio between E-value and cube compressive strength 5 CONCLUSIONS AND COMMENTS 5.1 Conclusions 5.2 Comments 6 REFERENCES 7 NOMENCLATURE 8 APPENDIX 1: LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST METHODS 8.1 Mixing procedure 8.2 Vibrating of the mixtures 7 10 11 11 11 11 12 12 13 13 13 14 14 15 17 18 19 19 19 21 23 23 24 25 25 25 26 29 31 32 33 35 35 36 37 38 40 40 40
BE96-3942 EuroLightCon
8.3 8.4 9 9.1 10
Casting and curing specimen Used standards APPENDIX 2: INFORMATION NEW MATERIALS VASIM (NL) Material sources APPENDIX 3: PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
40 41 42 42 43
PREFACE
The lower density and higher insulating capacity are the most obvious characteristics of LightWeight Aggregate Concrete (LWAC) by which it distinguishes itself from ordinary Normal Weight Concrete (NWC). However, these are by no means the only characteristics, which justify the increasing attention for this (construction) material. If that were the case most of the design, production and execution rules would apply for LWAC as for normal weight concrete, without any amendments. LightWeight Aggregate (LWA) and LightWeight Aggregate Concrete are not new materials. LWAC has been known since the early days of the Roman Empire: both the Colosseum and the Pantheon were partly constructed with materials that can be characterised as lightweight aggregate concrete (aggregates of crushed lava, crushed brick and pumice). In the United States, over 100 World War II ships were built in LWAC, ranging in capacity from 3000 to 140000 tons and their successful performance led, at that time, to an extended use of structural LWAC in buildings and bridges. It is the objective of the EuroLightCon-project to develop a reliable and cost effective design and construction methodology for structural concrete with LWA. The project addresses LWA manufactured from geological sources (clay, pumice etc.) as well as from waste/secondary materials (fly-ash etc.). The methodology shall enable the European concrete and construction i ndustry to enhance its capabilities in terms of cost-effective and environmentally friendly construction, combining the building of lightweight structures with the utilisation of secondary aggregate sources. The major research tasks are: Lightweight aggregates: The identification and evaluation of new and unexploited sources specifically addressing the environmental issue by utilising alternative materials from waste. Further the development of more generally applicable classification and quality assurance systems for aggregates and aggregate production. Lightweight aggregate concrete production: The development of a mix design methodology to account for all relevant materials and concrete production and in-use properties. This will include assessment of test methods and quality assurance for production. Lightweight aggregate concrete properties: The establishing of basic materials relations, the influence of materials characteristics on mechanical properties and durability. Lightweight aggregate concrete structures: The development of design criteria and -rules with special emphasis on high performance structures. The identification of new areas for applic ation. The project is being carried out in five technical tasks and a task for co-ordination/management and dissemination and exploitation. The objectives of all technical tasks are summarised below. Starting point of the project, the project baseline, are the results of international research work combined with the experience of the partners in the project whilst using LWAC. This subject is dealt with in the first task.
Tasks 2-5 address the respective research tasks as mentioned above: the LWA itself, production of LWAC, properties of LWAC and LWAC structures. Sixteen partners from six European countries, representing aggregate manufacturers and suppliers, contractors, consultants research organisations and universities are involved in the E uroLightCon-project. In addition, the project established co-operation with national clusters and European working groups on guidelines and standards to increase the benefit, dissemination and exploitation. At the time the project is being performed, a Working Group under the international concrete association fib (the former CEB and FIP) is preparing an addendum to the CEB-FIP Model Code 1990, to make the Model Code applic able for LWAC. Basis for this work is a state -of-the-art report referring mainly to European and North-American Standards and Codes. Partners in the project are also active in the fib Working Group. General information on the EuroLightCon-project, including links to the individual project partners, is available through the web site of the project: http://www.sintef.no/bygg/sement/elcon/ At the time of publication of this report, following EuroLightCon-reports have been published: R1 Definitions and International Consensus Report. April 1998 R1a LightWeight Aggregates Datasheets. Update September 1998 R2 LWAC Material Properties State-of-the-Art. December 1998 R3 Chloride penetration into concrete with lightweight aggregates. March 1999 R4 Methods for testing fresh lightweight aggregate concrete, December 1999 R5 A rational mix design method for lightweight aggregate concrete using typical UK materials, January 2000 R6 Properties of Lytag-based concrete mixtures strength class B15-B55, January 2000 R7 Grading and composition of the aggregate, March 2000 R8 Properties of lightweight concretes containing Lytag and Liapor, March 2000 R9 Technical and economic mixture optimisation of high strength lightweig ht aggregate concrete, March 2000 R10 Paste optimisation based on flow properties and compressive strength, March 2000 R11 Pumping of LWAC based on expanded clay in Europe, March 2000 R12 Applicability of the particle -matrix model to LWAC, March 2000 R13 Large-scale chloride penetration test on LWAC-beams exposed to thermal and hygral cycles, March 2000 R14 Structural LWAC. Specification and guideline for materials and production, June 200 R15 Light Weight Aggregates, June 200 R16 In-situ tests on existing lightweight aggregate concrete structures, June 200 R17 Properties of LWAC made with natural lightweight aggregates, June 2000 R18 Durability of LWAC made with natural lightweight aggregates, June 2000 R19 Evaluation of the early age cracking of lightweight aggregate concrete, June 2000 R20 The effect of the moisture history on the water absorption of lightweight aggregates, June 2000 R21 Stability and pumpability of lightweight aggregate concrete. Test methods, June 2000 R22 The economic potential of lightweight aggregate concrete in c.i.p. concrete bridges, June 2000 R23 Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete, June 2000
R24 R25 R26 R27 R28 R29 R30 R31 R32 R33 R34 R35 R36 R37 R38 R39 R40 R41 R42 R43
Prefabricated bridges, June 2000 Chemical stability, wear resistance and freeze-thaw resistance of lightweight aggregate concrete, June 2000 Recycling lightweight aggregate concrete, June 2000 Mechanical properties of LWAC compared with both NWC and HSC, June 2000 Prestressed beams loaded with shear force and/or torsional moment, June 2000 A prestressed steel-LWAconcrete bridge system under fatigue loading Creep properties of LWAC, June 2000 Long-term effects in LWAC: Strength under sustained loading; Shrinkage of High Strength LWAC, June 2000 Tensile strength as design parameter, June 2000 Structural and economical comparison of bridges made of inverted T-beams with topping, June 2000 Fatigue of normal weight concrete and lightweight concrete, June 2000 Composite models for short- and long-term strength and deformation propertie s of LWAC, June 2000 High strength LWAC in construction elements, June 2000 Comparison of bridges made of NWC and LWAC. Part 1: Steel concrete composite bridges, June 2000 Comparing high strength LWAC and HSC with the aid of a computer model, June 2000 Proposal for a Recommendation on design rules for high strength LWAC, June 2000 Comparison of bridges made of NWC and LWAC. Part 2: Bridges made of box beams post-tensioned in transversal direction, June 2000 LWA concrete under fatigue loading. A literature survey and a number of conducted fatigue tests, June 2000 The shear capacity of prestressed beams, June 2000 A prestressed steel-LWA concrete bridge system under fatigue loading, June 2000
SUMMARY
The objective of the research described in this report is to examine the influence of replacing normal weight aggregate (NWA) by lightweight aggregate (LWA) . To achieve this objective two reference mixtures have been made (REF I and REF II). Both mixtures are ready-mixed-concrete. REF II is the same as REF I with the exception of using pumice sand, size 0 -1mm and pumice, size 0 -3mm in stead of sand 250m-500 m and sand 125m-250m. Also the water/cement ratio (w/c) and the water/binder ratio (w/b) is different. REF I has a nominal w/c-ratio of 0.60 and a nominal w/b-ratio of 0.4. In these two reference mixtures NWA has been replaced by LWA in steps of 20% per volume. The used LWA are: Leca 670 and Leca 800 (Norway), Liapor 3 and Liapor 8 (Germany), Lytag (The Netherlands), Pumice (Iceland) and six new materials from BV Vasim (The Netherlands). The grading of the aggregate has always been the same, because the NWA, size 4-8mm and 812mm, was replaced by LWA in the sizes 4-8mm and 8-12mm. Of each mixture two samples of 40 litre concrete is made and the following properties have been determined: cube compressive strength development, flexural strength, modulus of elasticity (E-value) and the tensile splitting strength. The following conclusions can be drawn (considering this type of reference mixture with the mentioned nominal w/c of 0.60): The higher the density of the LWAC mixture, the higher the strength With the exception of Liapor 3 and Pumice, the compressive strength increases with the amount of replacement of NWA by LWA. This increase is probably due to the water absorption of the LWA. The effective w/c is lower and the strength will be higher. To determine if there really is a linear trend more research is needed. The steps of replacement should be smaller, the LWA should be sealed (if it were possible), segregation of the LWA and the effective water content of the LWAC mixtures should be controlled. The strength development will continue after 28 days due to the internal water tank of the LWA. Tests with prism compressive strength showed an increase of 10 N/mm2 between 28 days and 92 days. The best density/strength ratio is achieved in the case of this particular reference mixture, when 100% Liapor 8, 80% Lytag and 80% Leca 800 is used. The ratio between the tensile splitting strength and the cube compressive strength is linear. The higher the strength the higher the tensile splitting strength. The biggest problem that emerged during this research was the water absorption of the different LWA. In all the mixtures the amount of water that was added to the mixture is kept constant. As a consequence of this the effective water content will decrease with increasing replacement percentage of NWA by LWA. More research is needed to determine the effective water absorption by LWA in a concrete mixture. In the Dutch Code, VBC 1990, a relation is given for the cube compressive strength and the tensile splitting strength in the case of NWC. This curve lies lower than the results found in this study, but the angle of inclination is the same. More research is needed to give an indication of this relation in the case of LWAC.
10
1 1.1
INTRODUCTION General
This report describes the research within Activity 4.2.3: Mechanical properties of Lightweight Aggregate Concrete. The mechanical properties will be determined on concrete mixtures with different kind of lightweight aggregate (LWA) such as Lytag from The Netherlands, Liapor from Germany, Leca from Norway, Pumice from Iceland and new developed materials from Vasim BV from The Netherlands. This research is combined with the research of Activity 3.1.2: Grading and composition of the aggregate. A report of this research is available (DocumentBE96-3942/TG3/4, April 1999). The mixtures of this activity have been used to further examine the mechanical properties of these mixtures. In this chapter the objectives of Activity 4.2.3 will be presented in section 1.2. Section 1.3 and 1.4 will describe the framework and the technical content of the research, respectively. Finally, section 1.5 will give a short introduction of this report.
1.2
Objective
The main research task of Task 4 is to establish basic materials relations and the influence of materials characteristics on mechanical properties and durability. This research establishes a part of this task regarding the materials relations and the influence of materials characteristics on mechanical properties. The main objective of this research is to examine the influence of replacing normal weight aggregate (NWA) by different kinds of lightweight aggregate (LWA) on hardened concrete. Within this objective the combination of LWA and NWA will be determined with the best combination of results regarding compressive strength, flexural strength, tensile splitting strength, workability and demoulding density of the LWAC.
1.3
Framework of the research
To determine the influence of replacing NWA by LWA two reference mixtures have been made: REF I: a ready-mixed concrete mixture, often used in practice in the Netherlands, a nominal water/cement ratio (w/c) of 0.60. REF II: a ready-mixed concrete mixture, same mixture as REF I but with the use of pumice sand size 0-1 mm and pumice size 0-3mm. Nominal w/c of 0.40. The components and the properties of these mixtures are presented in chapter 2 of this report. In these reference mixtures the particle size distribution is kept constant. In this particle size distribution, the NWA, size 4-12mm, has been replaced by LWA in steps of 20% per volume (20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100%). The LWA used are: Liapor 3 and Liapor 8 (Germany), Leca 670 and Leca 800 (Norway), Lytag (The Netherlands), Pumice (Iceland) and
11
six new materials from Vasim BV (The Netherlands). The LWA is used oven dry (24 hours in a oven with a temperature of 105C) or surface dry (after 24 hours saturated, with removed absorbed surface water).
1.4
Technical content
Of every mixture two samples have been made: Sample 1: 12 cubes (100x100x100mm3 ) and 6 cubes (150x150x150mm3 ); Sample 2: 3 cylinders (150x300mm3 ) and 6 beams (100x100x500mm3 ). From these samples specimen were made to determine the workability and the mechanical properties of LWAC. This report describes mainly the mechanical properties of LWAC. The technical content of the research within Activity 4.2.3 contains determination of: Compressive strength development (fcm,cube): on cubes 150x150x150mm3 after: 28 days; on cubes 100x100x100mm3 after: 1 day, 3 days, 7 days and 28 days; Flexural strength (fct,fl): on prisms 100x100x500mm3 after 28 days; Modulus of elasticity (E-value); on cylinders 150x300mm3 after 28 days; Tensile splitting strength (fctm,sp): on cubes 150x150x150mm3 after 28 days. Relation between density and compressive strength: density after demoulding and compressive strength after 28 days; Relation between compressive strength and flexural strength: after 28 days; Relation between compressive strength and tensile splitting strength: after 28 days; Relation between compressive strength and modulus of elasticity: after 28 days.
1.5
Content report
In chapter 2 the characteristics of the reference mixtures are presented. Chapter 3 describes the mechanical properties, which includes the influence of the properties of the LWA, such as water absorption, particle and bulk density, crushing resistance and particle shape and surface area, on the mechanical properties. An estimation of the strength is also given at the end of this chapter. Chapter 4 describes and discusses the results, including density after demoulding, cube compressive strength, tensile splitting strength, flexural strength and modulus of elasticity. In chapter 5 the conclusions of this research are drawn. And finally, in chapter 6, the quality assurance is written. This includes all the highlights of the experimental research as well as a number of remarks.
12
2 2.1
REFERENCE MIXTURES General
The research within Activity 3.1.2 and Activity 4.2.3 is combined. Within Activity 3.1.2 reference mixtures are designed, using the computer model Europack, version 1.1, copyright 1995. This computer model determines a grading of the aggregate with an optimum in packing density. Chapter 2 of this report will only give a summary of the characteristics of these reference mixtures. More details and the selection of the reference mixtures will be found in the report of Activity 3.1.2 (document BE96-3942/TG3/4, April 1999).
2.2
Matrix
A ready-mixed concrete mixture has been selected as reference mixture (REF I). This mixture has often been used in practice in The Netherlands. To reduce the density and the w/c ratio, another reference mixture has been made (REF II). In this mixture pumice sand, size 0-1 mm, and pumice sand, size 0-3mm, has been used. The components of the matrix are the same as in REF I. The characteristics of these components are given in Table 1. Table 1: Characteristics of components of the matrix of reference mixtures REF I and REF II
Material Cem I; 42,5R Fly-ash *** Betomix 240 (plasticizer) Origin Buderus (NL) Geertruidenberg (NL) Cuijk (NL) Masterbuilders (NL) SiO 2 17.7 55.6 Chemical analysis [m/m %] Al2O3 CaO MgO SO3 5.9 62.9 0,9 2.9 23.3 5.3 1.9 Cl 0.01 0.01 [kg/m3] 3150 2280 1000 1140
Cement Additive Water Admixture
Melamine/sulphonate
Data about the matrix composition of the two mixtures are given in Table 2. REF I has a nominal water/cement ratio (w/c) of 0.60 and a nominal water/binder ratio (w/b) of 0.54 (in conformity with prEN 206: k=0.4). REF II has a nominal w/c of 0.40 and a nominal w/b of 0.36. Table 2: Matrix composition of references mixtures REF I and REF II
REF I [kg/m3] 165 276 69 0,9% REF II [kg/m3] 172 429 107 0,9%
Water Cem I;42,5R Fly-ash Betomix 240
13
2.3
2.3.1
Aggregate
General
Smals can deliver sand and gravel with a specific particle size distribution. Eight different sand and gravel grain sizes can be used to compose such a specific particle size distribution. In this research these grain sizes are used to compose a grading with an optimum in packing. This optimum is calculated with the computer program Europack. The used sand and gravel grainsizes are: fine aggregate: sand, size 0.125-0.250mm sand, size 0.250-0.500mm sand, size 0-2mm (SZ 1794) coarse aggregate: gravel, size 2-5mm gravel, size 2-4mm gravel, size 4-8mm gravel, size 8-12mm gravel, size 12-16mm To design mixtures of LWAC, different LWA had to be selected. LWA used in this research are: Expanded clay: Leca 670 (Norsk Leca) Leca 800 (Norsk Leca) Liapor 3 (Lias-Franken: Liapor-Plant Pautzfeld) Liapor 8 (Lias-Franken: Liapor-Plant Pautzveld) Based on fly-ash: Lytag (Vasim) Natural: Pumice (Iceland: Hekla) New materials of Vasim (Appendix 1): Material-source number: 1A this report refers to this material as Vasim 1. Material-source number: 5/7B this report refers to this material as Vasim 5/7b. Material-source number: 3 this report refers to this material as Vasim 3. Material-source number: 5 this report refers to this material as Vasim 5. Material-source number: 7 this report refers to this material as Vasim 7. Material-source number: 8 this report refers to this material as Vasim 8. Material-source number: 9 this report refers to this material as Vasim 9. The particle size distributions of the NWA and LWA are given in Appendix 3. Comparing NWA and LWA, a lot of properties differ. The properties that differ the most are: water absorption, bulk and particle density, void volume and crushing resistance. In section 2.3.2 a summary of these properties for each LWA is given. As already mentioned, more details can be found in the report of Activity 3.1.2 (document BE96-3942/TG3/4, April 1999). Section 2.3.3 describes the grading of the reference mixtures.
14
2.3.2
Summary properties LWA
In Table 3 the properties of the different LWA, used in this research, are summarised. The standards which are used are listed in Appendix 1. Looking at the characteristics, there is a relationship between particle density and bulk density, and between particle density and crushing resistance. These relationships are discussed in the report of Activity 3.1.2 (Document BE96-3942/TG3/4, April 1999). In this report only the groups with similar properties are given: Group 1: Liapor 3 and Pumice; Group 2: Leca 670 and Vasim 5/7b; Group 3: Liapor 8, Lytag and Leca 800; Group 4: Vasim 1. When LWA of one group is used in a concrete mixture, there should be conformity in results concerning workability and mechanical properties of the concrete. For example, the compressive strength of concrete with Liapor 3 and concrete with Pumice (both are LWA of group 1) should be more or less the same.
15
Table 3: Properties LWA.

Material Leca 670 Grainsize 15 min. 8.8 7.3 6.4 19.0 18.9 22.3 7.4 5.6 5.6 *** *** *** 36.3 39.0 *** *** 15.6 17.0 *** *** 16.0 16.0 16.0 Water absorption [%] 30 min. 60 min. 24 hours *** 9.7 13.9 *** 8.6 11.1 6.5 13.5 *** 19.3 22.1 27.5 *** 24.8 34.1 *** 24.5 31.0 *** 8.4 13.1 *** 7.6 12.3 *** 7.0 11.7 15.0 15.5 18.0 *** *** *** *** *** *** 36.3 66.0 *** 39.0 *** *** *** 29.6 *** *** 33.0 *** 19.6 22.0 22.0 17.0 17.2 17.2 *** 32.0 *** *** 31.5 *** 16.0 16.4 16.8 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 7 days 19.6 18.0 16.9 28.0 36.4 *** 19.4 *** *** 21.0 *** *** 190,0* 76.1 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Density [kg/m3] Particle Bulk 1149 701 1123 670 1386 810 622 374 541 300 *** 1309 803 1502 805 *** *** 1386 790 1386 802 464 311 577 383 655 299 1531 956 1595 940 1225 712 1337 720 1213 855 1242 805 1404 805 1337 769 1351 760 Void volume Uncompacted Compacted 39.0 34.4 40.4 36.7 41.6 36.6 39.9 36.4 44.6 41.7 *** *** 38.7 34.6 46.4 42.4 *** 38,3 43.0 36.8 42.1 36.3 32.9 24.1 50.1 43.9 54.4 48.2 37.6 31.2 41.1 34.9 41.9 34.7 46.1 40.7 29.5 32.7 35.2 29.9 43.0 35.0 42.5 38.9 43.8 37.8 Crushing resistance [N/mm2] 6.3 *** 10.3 1.8 *** *** *** *** *** 4.5 *** 1.4 *** *** 5.2 *** *** *** 7.0 *** *** *** ***
16
4-8mm 8-12mm Leca 800 4-8mm Liapor 3 4-8mm 8-12mm 12-16mm Liapor 8 4-8mm 8-12mm 12-16mm Lytag 4-8mm 8-12mm Pumice 4-8mm 8-12mm 12-16mm Vasim 1 4-8mm 8-12mm Vasim 3 4-8mm 6-12mm Vasim 5/7b 4-8mm 8-12mm Vasim 7 4-12mm Vasim 8 4-12mm Vasim 9 4-12mm
*** These values are not determined. * The water absorption of pumice, size 8-12mm, is more than 100%, which means that there is more mass of water absorbed than dry mass. Used standards: Water absorption Density Void volume Crushing resistance
prEN 1097-6 prEN 1097-6 prEN 1097-3 prEN 13055-1
2.3.3
Particle size distribution of reference mixtures
A particle size distribution with an optimum in packing density is composed with the computer program Europack (version 1.1, copyright 1995). In the report of Activity 3.1.2 (Document BE96-3942/TG3/4, April 1999) this composition is described. In this report only the calculated particle size distribution is given. fine aggregate: sand, size 0.125-0.250mm sand, size 0.250-0.500mm sand, size 0-2mm (SZ 1794) coarse aggregate: gravel, size 2-5mm gravel, size 2-4mm gravel, size 4-8mm gravel, size 8-12mm gravel, size 12-16mm 5.2% 5.3% 25.0% 15.8% 5.8% 11.5% 17.3% 22.6%
The particle size distribution curve is given in figure 1. This particle size distribution is in conformity with the Dutch standard NEN 5950. This particle size distribution is also, when using these particular grain sizes of sand and gravel, the partic le size distribution with an optimum packing density (packing degree is 0.763). The NWA, size 4-8mm and 8 -12mm, was replaced by all the different LWA, mentioned in paragraph 4.3.1, per volume in increments of 20% (20, 40, 60, 80, 100%). The grading will be more or less the same. It will always be between the A-curve and the B-curve of figure 1.
Curves conform NEN 5950

0 12 20 26 20,4 36 42 54,4 24 30,8 40 19,4 26 0,5 5
Sieve residue [%]
40 51 60 66,5 80 82 92 93,8 97 80 80,1 88 92,5 68 69,1
38 44 51,6 58 64,2 79 64
Reference Curve A Curve B Curve C
100
99,7
120 0,125 0,250 0,500 1 2 4 5,6 8 11,2 16
Sieve [mm]
Figure 1: Particle size distribution with an optimum packing density of mixtures.
17
2.4
Characteristics of mixtures
In Table 4 the characteristics of the two mixtures REF I and REF II are given. Only the gravel in size 4-8mm and 8-12mm will be replaced by Leca 670, Leca 800, Liapor 3, Liapor 8, Lytag, Pumice and six new materials, developed by Vasim BV (NL) in steps of 20% per volume (20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100%). Table 4: Composition of reference mixtures. Materials REF I REF II Fine and coarse aggregate 0-2mm 0.250-0.500mm 0.125-0.250mm Pumice 0-1mm Pumice 0-3mm 2-5mm 2-4 mm 4-8 mm 8-12 mm 12-16 mm 25.0% 5.3% 5.2% *** *** 15.8% 5.8% 11.5% 8.8% 22.6% *** *** 5.2% 25.0 % 5.3% 15.8% 5.8% 11.5% 8.8% 22.6% 100% 32.7% 4.3% 44.3% 51.4% 3.1% 1.6%
Total aggregate: 100% Void volume Particles < 125 m Vsa Vst FMsa FMst MATRIX Water Cem I; 42,5R Fly-ash Betomix 240 Volume percentage matrix -value W/c (nominal) W/b (nominal, k=0.4)
Vsa Vst FM sa FM st -value ***
24.0% 0.3% 48.3% 51.4% 3.1% 1.6%
165 kg 276 kg 69 kg 2.5 kg 28% 0.51 0.60 0.54
172 kg 429 kg 107 kg 3.9 kg 35% *** 0.40 0.36
volume % of particles size 0.125-4mm volume % of particles size > 4mm Fineness modulus of particles size 0.125mm-4mm Fineness modulus of particles size > 4mm Flow-resistance-value These values are not determined.
18
3 3.1
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES General
LWA has properties that differ from NWA. This has an effect on the mechanical properties of the concrete. Some of these factors are: water absorption; particle and bulk density; crushing resistance; particle shape and surface zone. In the following sections these factors will be described in relation to the mechanical properties of LWAC.
3.2
Water absorption
The most important factor mentioned above is water absorption. Because of this water absorption the effective w/c ratio will decrease and inside the LWA a water tank will be found. This water absorption makes it possible that hydration continues relatively long, namely when at later ages initially absorbed water is transported to the hydrating paste. It is not clear how much water in the mixture will be absorbed by the LWA. Water absorption in a completely water environment or in a concrete mixture is totally different. There is also a difference in water absorption in a water tank or in a rotating pan-mixer. Some tests have been made with different LWA to determine the difference in water absorption in a water tank and in a rotating pan-mixer, filled with water. Liapor 3 and Pumice, i.e. both LWA with a lot of pores, had a water absorption after 15 minutes in a water tank of 18.6% and 36.3%, respectively. But in a rotating pan-mixer filled with water these values were 26.1% and 27.5%, respectively. Tests with dense LWA, for instance Liapor 8 and Leca 800, showed that this difference was about 0%. When mixing LWAC, there should be a correction of the mixing water because of this water absorption by LWA. An approximate estimation of this correction can be made on the basis of the 30 minutes water absorption value. Research at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology showed that this correction should be based on the 1 hour water absorption value in the case Leca is used. In this research, no correction of the water content has been made for water absorption by the LWA. In all mixtures the same amount of mixing water was added, viz. 165 kg/m3 . Since different types of LWA were used, each type having characteristic water absorption, the effective water/cement ratios of the mixtures was different. This, of coarse, complicates the interpretation of the test results. Since all the aggregates used in this research were oven-dried before mixing and the absorption characteristics of the different aggregates are known (see data sheets), it is possible to estimate the effective water/cement ratio as a function of the replacement percentage of the NWA by LWA (see later in this paragraph). In all the mixtures the NWA, size 4-8mm and 8-12mm, will be replaced by the different LWA. A mixture consists of 280 litre matrix and 720 litre aggregate. This 720 litre aggregate weighs,
19
in the case of NWA, 720x2.645kg/l=1904.4 kg. The volume of the fractions 4-8mm and 812mm is: (11.5%+17.3?%) x 720 litres = 207.36 litres. The NWA fractions 4-8mm and 8-12mm are replaced by LWA in steps of 20%. In Table 5 the amount of LWA is presented for each replacement percentage in kg per m3 . Table 5: Amount of LWA in kg per 1 m3 concrete
m/m 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Leca 670 33.207 66.400 99.600 132.800 166.038 Leca 800 40.515 81.031 121.546 162.063 202.578 Liapor 3 17.013 34.026 51.039 68.052 85.066 Liapor 8 41.100 82.201 123.300 164.400 205.501 Lytag 40.515 81.031 121.546 162.063 202.578 Pumice 16.516 33.032 49.548 66.065 82.580 Vasim 1 44.695 89.391 134.087 178.783 223.478 Vasim 5/7b 36.043 72.086 108.129 144.172 180.215
Looking at the water absorption after different periods of time (15 min, 30 min, 60 min and 7days), an effective w/c ratio in the different mixtures would hold as presented in figures 2 and 3. For each type of LWA the effective w/c-ratio decreases when more NWA is replaced by LWA. Hypothetically the lower the w/c -ratio, the dryer the mixture and the higher the compressive strength. But if the mixture is too dry it will be difficult to compact it and thus the strength will decrease.
Effective w/c-ratio (waterabsorption after 15 min)
0,60 0,59 0,58 0,57 0,56 0,55 0,54 0,53 20%
Effective w/c-ratio (waterabsorption after 30 min)

0,60 0,58 Effective w/c-ratio
Leca 670 Leca 800 Liapor 3 Liapor 8
Effective w/c-ratio
0,56 0,54 0,52 0,50 0,48 20%
Leca 800 Liapor 3 Pumice Vasim I
40%
60% Replaced NWA with LWA
80%
100%
40%
80%
100%
Figure 2: Effective w/c-ratio due to water absorption after 15 min and 30 min.
Effective w/c-ratio (water absorption after 60 min)
0,60
Effective w/c-ratio (after 7 days)
0,60 0,58 Effective w/c-ratio 0,56 0,54 0,52 0,50 0,48 20% 40% 60% Replaced NDA by LWA 80% 100% Leca 670 Leca 800 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Lytag Pumice
0,55 Effective w/c-ratio Leca 670 Leca 800 0,50 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Lytag 0,45 Pumice Vasim I 0,40 Vasim II
0,35 20%
40%
80%
100%
Figure 3: Effective w/c-ratio due to water absorption after 60 min and 7 days. As mentioned earlier already it is not clear how much water the LWA will absorb in a mixture. Because of water absorption of the LWA, the effective w/c-ratio will decrease and the strength of the hardened concrete will be higher. This should be considered when analysing the data. It seems reasonable to assume that the water absorption after 60 min. gives the best approximation of the w/c ratio at the time of setting and is closest to the effective w/c ratio.
20
3.3
Particle and bulk density
Looking at the particle density of the different LWA, Liapor 3 and Pumice have the lowest value. Because of this low density, the mixtures with these LWA will have problems when the concrete will be compacted. Segregation will occur and the LWA will float on the surface of the fresh concrete. Due to this segregation the strength will be lower. The particle and bulk density are given in figure 4.
Particle and bulk density [kg/m3]
1800
1600
1563
1400
1386
1406
1386 1281 1228
1404 1337 1351
1200
1136
Density [kg/m3]
1000
948 810 830 716 582 Particle Bulk 769 760
804
796
805
800 686 600 565
400
337
331
200
0 Leca 670 Leca 800 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Lytag Pumice Vasim 1 Vasim 3 Vasim 5/7b Vasim 7 Vasim 8 Vasim 9
Lightweight aggregate
Figure 4: Particle and bulk density per LWA
Theoretical density
2450 2400 2350 2300 Theoretical density [kg/m3] 2250 2200 2150 2100 2050 2000 1950 Leca 670 Leca 800 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Lytag Pumice Vasim 1 Vasim 3 Vasim 5/7b Vasim 7 Vasim 8 Vasim 9
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Figure 5: Theoretical density of mixtures with different kind of LWA.
21
The density of the particles also has an effect on the density of the different mixtures. The lower the particle density, the lower the density of the mixture will be. The theoretical density of the concrete mixtures with different LWA is given in figure 5. This decrease is strongly correlated with the percentage of the NWA that is has been replaced. In figure 6 the theoretical density of the concrete mixtures is given per percentage of replacement. When replacing 20% of the NWA it doesnt matter which LWA is used, the density will be more or less the same and probably there will not be much difference in strength.
Theoretical density
2450 2400 2350 2300 2250 2200 2150 2100 2050 2000 1950 Leca 670 Leca 800 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Lytag Pumice Vasim 1 Vasim 3 Vasim 5/7b Vasim 7 Vasim 8 Vasim 9
Theoretical density [kg/m3]
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Figure 6: Theoretical density per replacement of the NWA
When more than 20% of the NWA is replaced, the difference between Liapor 3 and Pumice and the other LWA is bigger. With the exception of Liapor 3 and Pumice, the different LWA have, at a certain percentage of replacement, the same density. The strength of the concrete with these materials should also be more or less the same.
22
3.4
Crushing resistance
Strength and stiffness of aggregate particles have an effect on the strength of the concrete. Weaker particles require stronger mortars and thus higher cement contents. There is a difference in fracture path between NWA and LWA when they are used in concrete. Figure 7 shows this difference.
Lightweight aggregate Normal weight aggregate Figure 7 Fracture path of lightweight and normal weight aggregate In the case of LWA the fracture path travels through the particle. In the case of NWA this fracture path travels around the particle. In LWAC, the matrix will be the stronger than the LWA. The LWAC will collapse through the LWA-particles. In NWC, the particles will be stronger than the matrix and the fracture path will go around the NWA, i.e. through the matrix. According to the standard prEN 13055-1:1997, there is no simple relationship between the crushing resistance of LWA and the properties of the concrete. The test results of the crushing resistance should be considered as an internal production control. Liapor 3 and Pumice have the lowest strength (1,5N/mm2 ). With the exception of Liapor 8 and Leca 8 (10 N/mm2 ), the crushing resistance of the different LWA is 5 N/mm2 . Because of this difference it could be expected that Pumice and Liapor 3 will not give high strengths. More information about aggregate strength can be found in the report: LWAC Material Properties, State-of-the-Art (Document BE96-3942/R2, December 1998), section 2.3.3: Aggregate strength.
3.5
Particle shape and surface zone
When the surface of the particle is porous, the matrix will penetrate into the pores of the particle. Because of this penetration into the surface of the particle, the matrix will be firmly attached to the particle. This will result in a stronger bond between the aggregate and the matrix. Research in Norway by Sintef showed that, in the case of Leca, only water was penetrated in the LWA and not, for instance, cement or fly-ash.
23
Particles <125m attached to the LWA-particles have an influence on the need of mixing water. The more particles <125m, the more water is needed. These particles <125 m have also an effect on the effectiveness of a plasticizer. The more particles <125 m, the better the effect of plasticizer.
3.6
Estimation of strength
Looking at the properties of the different LWA mentioned in the sections above, it is possible to give an estimation of the strength. Because of the water absorption of the LWA, the w/c -ratio will increase the more NWA is replaced by LWA. The lower the w/c -ratio, the higher the strength. The density decreases when more NWA is replaced by LWA. The lower the density, probably the lower the strength. The crushing resistance of LWA is very low compared to NWA. The more NWA is replaced the lower the strength. For each property a trend curve can be made. It is not known how much the different curves increase or decrease. It is only an indication what could happen depending on what kind of LWA is used and which property will dominate.
Strength W/c-ratio
Density Crushing resistance Segregation
Replaced NWA by LWA Figure 8: Trend curves, indicating strength depending on material properties. Depending on what kind of LWA is used the trend curve will increase or decrease. For each different LWA one of the factors will dominate. Density and segregation will probably predominate in the case of Liapor 3 and Pumice and the strength will decrease the more NWA is replaced by LWA.
24
4 4.1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION General
Two reference mixtures have been made. In these reference mixtures the NWA has been r eplaced by LWA in steps of 20% per volume. Of these mixtures the following properties are determined: Density after demoulding; Cube compressive strength on cubes 100x100x100mm3 and 150x150x150mm3 ; Tensile splitting strength on cubes 150x150x150mm3 ; Flexural strength on prisms 100x100x500mm3 ; Modulus of elasticity on cylinders 150x300mm3 . These properties will be presented and discussed in the following sections.
4.2
Density after demoulding
Conform prEN 206 the definition of LWAC is: Concrete having an oven-dry density of not less than 800 kg/m3 and not more than 2100 kg/m3 . It is produced using lightweight aggregate for all or part of the total aggregate. In this research the density after demoulding is determined. For
Density after demoulding
2350 2300
2270 2250 2250 2250 2220 2180 2170 2270 2260 2240 2210 2210 2170 2140 2230 2310 2290 2290 2260 2310 2280 2280 2280 2250 2220 2260 2220 2200 2170 2160 2240 2230 2190 2230 2190 2190
2250 Density after demoulding [kg/m3] 2200
2230
2220 2190 2180
2160
2150 2100 2050 2000 1950 1900 1850
2140 2120 2090
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
2030
Leca 670 Leca 800
Liapor 3
Liapor 8
Lytag
Pumice
Vasim 1
Vasim 3
Vasim 5/7b
Vasim 7
Vasim 8
Vasim 9
Figure 9: Density after demoulding, Concrete with different LWA-percentages some mixtures with different kind of LWA the oven-dry density was measured. The difference between oven-dry density and demoulding density was about 100 to 150 kg/m3 . All the values in figure 9 can be subtracted with this value. In the graphs it can be seen that, if 20% of NWA (fractions 4-8 mm and 8-12 mm) is replaced by LWA, the difference in density between REF I
25
and the mixtures with LWA is about 40 kg/m3 . When 100% is replaced, the average difference is about 170 kg/m3 , depending on what kind of LWA is used. Some mixtures appear to have a relatively high density and can not be considered as LWAC. This should be borne in mind when looking at the results of the compressive strength tests.
4.3
Cube compressive strength
Two sizes of cubes are made. Size 100x100x100mm3 and 150x150x1503mm3 . Cube compressive strength after 28 days is determined on both sizes. Looking at the results the values of the cube compressive strength determined on cubes 100x100x100mm3 are higher than on cubes 150x150x150mm3 . This mean value of the conversion factor is: 0,981 .
Ratio between cubes 100x100x100mm3 and 150x150x150mm3

1,2
1,0
0,8
Ratio
0,6
0,4
0,2
0,0 0,0 10,0 20,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 60,0 Compressive strength on cubes 100x100x100mm3 [N/mm2]
Figure 10: Ratio between compressive strength measured on cubes 100x100x100mm3 and on cubes 150x150x150mm3 After multiplying the results of the cube compressive strength on cubes 100x100x100mm3 with their own conversion factor, the strength development as presented in figure 10 i s obtained. In this graph all the results are presented.
26
The strength development of Liapor 3 and Pumice are the lowest. Lytag has the best results. The difference between the lowest and the highest compressive strength is about 20N/mm2 . Due to the internal water tank of the LWA, the strength development after 28 days will continue. This strength gain might be limited, however, by the strength of the aggregate. Tests showed that the compressive strength on prisms after 92 days was about 10 N/mm2 higher than after 28 days. The more water is absorbed initially by the LWA, the longer the hydration process may continue. The hypothesis that the strength increases (due to water absorption in the initial stage of mixing) the more NWA is replaced by LWA could be true. At least with the kind of concrete mixtures and with the w/c ratios considered in this test series.
27
Cube compressive strength [N/mm2]
28
60,0 50,0 40,0 30,0 20,0 10,0
Strength development of mixtures REF I
Leca 670 Leca 800 Liapor 3 Liapor 8
Lytag Pumice Vasim I REF I
0,0 0 5 10 15 Days 20 25 30
Figure 11: Strength development of lightweight aggregate concrete as function of time.
In figure 12 the cube compressive strength after 28 days on cubes 150x150x150mm3 is presented as function of the replacement percentage.
60
Leca 670 50 Leca 800 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Lytag
40
Pumice Vasim 1
30
20
10
0 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%
Replaced NWA by LWA
Graphic 12: Cube compressive strength after 28 days on cubes 150x150x150mm3 as function of replacement percentage Liapor 3 and Pumice give a decreasing trend. Probably due to the low particle density and segregation of these LWA when the concrete is compacted. The trend of mixtures with Leca 670 seems to be almost horizontal. Leca 800, Liapor 8, Lytag and Vasim 1 seems to have an increasing trend. At each replacement percentage Lytag gives the best results concerning compressive strength. To investigate if there really is a linear trend, more research is needed. In this additional research the steps of replacement of NWA by LWA should be smaller, the LWA should be sealed (if possible), and segregation and the effective water content in a mixture should be controlled.
4.4
Strength/density ratio
The relation between the density after demoulding and the cube compressive strength determined on cubes 150x150x150mm3 after 28 days is presented in figure 13. The trend seems to be linear, although the correlation is very low. The higher the density, the higher the strength. In figure 14 the density/strength ratio is presented per LWA. The lower this value, the better it is. All the mixtures, with exception of Liapor 3 and Pumice, have a better density/strength ratio than REF I. The best results were obtained by using 100% Liapor 8, 80% Leca 800 and 80% Lytag. The decrease in density compared to REF I is, in those cases, about 110 kg/m3 .
29
60,0
50,0
40,0
30,0 y = 0,0471x - 60,604 2 R = 0,1924 20,0
10,0
0,0 2000
2050
2100
2150
2200
2250
2300
2350
Density after demoulding [kg/m3]
Graphic 13: Ratio between cube compressive strength and density after demoulding.
80
70
Ratio density after demoulding / fc;28
60
50
40
Leca 670 Leca 800 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Lytag Pumice Vasim 1 Vasim 3 Vasim 5/7b Ref I
30
20
10
0 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Replaced NWA by LWA
Graphic 14: Ratio between density after demoulding and cube compressive strength after 28 days.
30
4.5
Ratio between flexural and compressive strength
The flexural strength is determined on prisms 100x100x500mm3 conform prEN 12359; April 1996. A two-point loading is used. The results of the concrete mixtures with Leca 670, Liapor , Liapor 8, Pumice and Vasim 1 are listed in Table 6. Table 6: Flexural strength on prisms: 100x100x500mm3 [N/mm2 ]
Replacement of NWA 20% LWA 40% LWA 60% LWA 80% LWA 100% LWA
*** Values are not determined.
Leca 670 5.5 6.0 6.2 6.9 5.9
Liapor 3 6.6 5.4 4.3 5.0 5.2
Liapor 8 *** 4.1 *** 3.9 ***
Pumice *** 4.1 4.2 2.9 3.1
Vasim 1 4.5 4.1 3.7 *** 5.0
The ratio between flexural strength and cube compressive strength is given in figure 15. The values are taken from concrete mixtures with increased replacement percentage of NWA by LWA.
9,0
8,0
Flexural strength (100x100x500mm3) [N/mm2]
7,0
6,0 Leca 670 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Pumice Vasim 1 3,0
5,0
4,0
2,0
1,0
0,0 0,0 10,0 20,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 60,0
Cube compressive strength (150x150x150mm3) [N/mm2]
Graphic 15: Ratio between cube compressive strength and flexural strength. Looking at the results, there seems to be no relation between flexural strength and cube compressive strength. The flexural strength is 7.6%-19.0% of the compressive strength.
31
4.6
Ratio between tensile splitting strength and cube compressive strength
The tensile splitting strength is determined on cubes 150x150x150mm3 after 28 days. The Dutch code VBC 1990 gives equations by means of which the tensile splitting strength can be derived from the cube compressive strength. For NWC this equation is:
f ctm, sp = 1.05 + 0.05f ck,cube
(4.1)
in which fctm,sp is the mean splitting tensile strength. In Fig. 16 the measurement points are presented together with the curve representing equatio n (4.1). It appears that for LWAC equation (4.1) underestimates the mean tensile splitting strength. Table 7: Mean tensile splitting strength [N/mm2 ] at 28 days (cubes 150x150x150mm3 )
Replacement % of NWA 20% LWA 40% LWA 60% LWA 80% LWA 100% LWA
Leca 670 3.60 3.30 3.47 4.00 ***
Leca 800 *** 3.75 3.45 3.70 ***
Liapor 3 3.40 3.80 *** 3.15 3.15
Liapor 8 *** 4.20 *** 3.90 ***
Lytag *** *** *** 4.60 3.70
Pumice *** 4.10 3.10 2.95 3.15
5,00
4,50
Tensile splitting strength [N/mm2]
4,00
3,50
3,00
Leca 670 Leca 800 Liapor 3
2,50
Liapor 8 Lytag Pumice
2,00
Vasim I fct=1,05+0,05f'ck
1,50
1,00
0,50
0,00 0,0 10,0 20,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 60,0
Figure 16: Relation between characte ristic cube compressive strength and mean tensile splitting strength at 28 days
32
In CUR report 173, the relation between the tensile splitting strength and the characteristic cube compressive strength is also determined for Lytag, Aardelite, Liapor and gravel. With the exception of Liapor, all the experimental results were below the curve given in CUR report 173. In other words, CUR report 173 overestimates the tensile strength of LWAC. This difference is probably due to the shape of the specimen used in different experimental test series. In CUR report 173, specimen are used with a rectangular shape. Specimens used in this research are cubes. Conform CUR Recommendation 39, the value of fctm,sp found with equation (4.1) should be multiplied with:
k1 = 0.4 + 0.6 2300
(4.2)
where is the oven dry density. Unfortunately only the density after demoulding is determined in this research. When using the density after demoulding in eq. (6.2), the value of k 1 hardly deviates from 1. From a large number of measurements it was found that the oven dry density is about 100 to 150 kg/m3 lower than the density after demoulding. Using this information for estimating the oven-dry density, the value of k1 could be determined with eq. (4.2). Only a small improvement was obtained. More research is needed to determine the relationship between tensile strength and compressive strength of LWAC.
4.7
Ratio between E-value and cube compressive strength
The modulus of elasticity is determined on cylinders 150mmx300mm conform ASTM C 46994. According to the Dutch concrete code VBC 1990 the relationship between the modulus
40000
35000
30000
25000
E-value [N/mm2]
20000
Leca 670 Liapor 3 Liapor 8 Pumice Ec=22250+fck
15000
10000
5000
0 0,0 5,0 10,0 15,0 20,0 25,0 30,0 35,0 40,0 45,0 50,0
Cube compressive strength after 28 days [N/mm2]
Graph 17: Relation between compressive strength and modulus of elasticity.
33
Table 8: E-modulus LWAC, measured on cylinders 150mmx300mm.

Replacement NWA 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Leca 670 20930 22634 20425 20485 19935 Leca 800 *** *** *** *** *** Liapor 3 22442 21796 20728 18946 17289 Liapor 8 *** 22092 *** *** *** Lytag *** *** *** *** *** Pumice *** *** 18759 *** ***
of elasticity and the cube compressive strength is given by the equation: Ec=22250+250f ck,cube (4.3)
This equation holds for NWC. In CUR report 173 a modification of this equation has been proposed in order to make it applicable for LWAC made with Lytag, Liapor and Aardelite. In CUR Recommendation 39, the modulus of elasticity for LWAC is determined by multiplying the values obtained with eq. (4.3) with the factor k2 . For this factor it was proposed:
k2 = 2300
1,5
(4.4)
By multiplying the values obtained with eq. (4.3) with appropriate k2 -values, theoretical values for the modulus of elasticity are obtained between the function of Ec=22250+250f ck,cube and the measured values, both presented in Fig. 17. The difference in results is probably due to the difference in compacting the concrete in the cube moulds and in the cylinder moulds. When compacting the cylinders, segregation occurred. More research is needed to establish a reliable relationship between the strength and modulus of elasticity of LWAC.
34
CONCLUSIONS and COMMENTS
A number of experimental test series was performed with the aim to investigate the effect of partial replacement of a part of the NWA by different types of LWA. Only the particle fractions 4-8 mm and 8-12 mm were replaced, and this in subsequent steps of 20%. In all the mixtures the added water content was kept constant. In the experiments emphasis was on measuring the demoulding density, the cube compressive strength, the tensile splitting strength and the modulus of elasticity. Results were compared with clauses given in the Dutch Concrete Code VBC 1990 and with ad-hoc recommendations especially dealing with LWAC, i.e. CUR Recommendation 39.
5.1
Conclusions
The following tentative conclusions can be drawn (considering the used reference mixture with this the indicated w/c): Density-strength relationship The higher the density of the LWAC-mixture the higher the strength. The best density/strength ratio would occur, in the case of this particular reference mixture, when 100% Liapor 8, 80% Lytag and 80% Leca 800 is used. Effect of partial replacement of NWA (fractions 4-8 mm and 8-12 mm) by LWA There seems to be, with the exception of Liapor 3 and Pumice, an increasing trend in cube compressive strength if a higher percentage of the NWA (fractions 4-8 mm and 8-12 mm) is replaced by LWA. With the exception of Liapor 3 and Pumice, the more NWA is replaced by LWA, the higher the strength. This increase is probably due to the water absorption of the LWA in the initial stage, resulting in a lower effective w/c ratio. At later ages the initially absorbed may become available for continuing hydration. To determine if there really is a linear trend between replacement percentage and strength, more research is needed. Segregation of the LWA and the effective water content of the LWAC mixtures should be controlled . Late strength development The strength development will continue after 28 days due to the internal water tank, provided by the (partly saturated) LWA. Compressive strength tests performed on prisms revealed an increase of 10 N/mm2 between 28 days and 92 days. Splitting tensile strength versus compressive strength The ratio between the tensile splitting strength and the cube compressive strength is linear. The higher the strength, the higher the tensile splitting strength. For NWC the Dutch code VBC 1990 gives a relation between the tensile strength and the cube compressive strength. If applied to LWAC, this relationship appears to underestimate the measured tensile strength.
35
Like the Dutch code VBC 1990, also the CUR Recommendation 39 underestimates the measured tensile strength, even though this recommendation deals especially with LWAC. CUR Recommendation 39, however, is certainly an improvement compared with the VBC 1990. More research is needed to give a more accurate indication of the relationship between tensile strength and compressive strength when dealing with LWAC. Modulus of elasticity versus compressive strength The modulus of elasticit y of LWAC was found to be less than predicted with the relationship proposed in the Dutch code VBC 1990 (valid for NWC) and also less than predicted with the CUR Recommendation 39 on LWAC. More research is needed to give a reliable relationship between the modulus of elasticity and the cube compressive strength of LWAC.
5.2
Comments
The following comments highlight some of the experiences gained during this research project. The biggest problem, which occurred during this research, is the water absorption of the different LWA. In all the mixtures the amount of mixing water is kept constant. Since different types of aggregate have different absorption characteristics, the effective water/cement ratio must have been different in the tests considered in this research project. More research is needed to determine the effective water absorption by LWA in a concrete mixture. Tests with mixing LWA in a pan-mixer showed that none of LWA particles was crushed in this mixer. Testing confirmed that there is a difference in water absorption by LWA in static a vessel and in a pan-mixer. LWA with a higher porosity, like Liapor 3 and Pumice, had a water absorption in pure water after 15 minutes of 18.6% and 36.3%, respectively. But in the rotating mixer filled with water, the water absorption after 15 minutes was 26.1% and 27.5%, respectively. The water absorption of Liapor 8, in this case, was about zero. The compaction of LWAC has a big influence on the strength of the concrete. Tests, with increased vibrating time and increased frequency, showed that the best compressive strength was yielded when the LWAC was vibrated at a frequency of 50Hz during 120 seconds if plastic moulds (150x150x150mm3 ) were used. When steel moulds (100x100x500mm3 ) were used, the best compressive strength was obtained when the frequency was 65Hz and the vibrating time was 180 seconds.
36
REFERENCES
Lydon, F.W. Concrete Mix Design, 2nd edition, Applied science publishers, 1982 Nordic concrete research, proceedings nordic concrete research, Espoo, Finland 1996 A.M. Neville Properties of concrete, fourth edition Ernst Mrtsell Modellering av del materialenes betydning for betongens konsistens, NTH 1996: 12, Trondheim Ernst Mrtsell, Sverre Smeplass, Tor arne Hammer, Magne Maage Flowcyl - How to determine the flow properties of the matrix phase of high performance concrete, Proc 4th International Symposium on utilisation of High Strength / High Performance concrete, May 1996, Paris J.L. Clarke Structural lightweight aggregate concrete, 1993, Bla ckie Academie & Professional Ludmila Dolar-Mantuani, Ph.D., P.E., F.G.A.C. Handbook of Concrete Aggregates, 1983, (ISBN:0-8155-0951-0) Andrew Short, William Kinnniburgh Lightweight Concrete, third edition, 1978, (ISBN: 0-85334-734-4) Ken W. Day Concrete Mix Design, Quality Control and Specification. 1995 Rilem Technical Comittee 26-GM granular materials. P. Bartos fresh concrete properties and tests, 1992. Elsevier science publishers BV Yves Malier High performance concrete - from material to structure, 1992
37
7
LWA LWAC NWA NWC REF I REF II SZ 1794
NOMENCLATURE
Lightweight aggregate Lightweight aggregate concrete Normal weight aggregate Normal weight concrete Reference mixture I Reference mixture II Standard sand of Smals, the first two numbers refer to the amount of percentage on sieve 1mm, the last two numbers refer to the amount of percentage on sieve 250m water/binder ratio water/cement ratio tensile splitting strength mean tensile splitting strength flexural strength characteristic cube compressive strength density Comit Euro-international du Bton Comit Europen de Normalisation Cost Time Resources (form) European Standard Fderation Internationale du Bton Fderation Internationale de la Prcontrainte
w/b w/c fct,sp fctm,sp fct,fl fck,cube CEB CEN CTR EN FIB FIP
38
39
8 8.1
APPENDIX 1: LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST METHODS Mixing procedure
Every mixture has been made with the same mixing procedure: 1. mix pan and mixer blades were dampened prior to the mixing; 2. coarse NWA was added to the mix pan; 3. coarse LWA was added to the mix pan; 4. fine NWA was added to the mix pan; 5. fine LWA was added to the mix pan; 6. mixture was mixed for 60 seconds; 7. cement and fly ash was added to the mixture; 8. mixture was mixed for 60 seconds; 9. 2/3 of the water was added to the rotating mix pan; 10. plasticizer and 1/3 of the water was added to rotating mix pan; 11. mixture was mixed for 5 minutes. Total mixing time: 7 minutes. A forced action pan mixer was used for all the mixtures.
8.2
Vibrating of the mixtures
The vibration time and frequency is kept constant using a vibrating table: until the surface of the concrete is smooth and glassy and no air no air bubbles appeared to the surface of the concrete in the mould; 3 plastic moulds (150x150x150mm3 ) with concrete were vibrated together on the vibrating table during 120 seconds with a frequency of 50 Hz; 6 steel moulds (100x100x100mm3 ) with concrete were vibrated together on the vibrating table during 180 seconds with a frequency of 65 Hz; 2 steel moulds (100x100x500mm3 ) with concrete were vibrated together on the vibrating table during 180 seconds with a frequency of 65 Hz; 3 steel cylindrical moulds (150x300mm3 ) with concrete were vibrated together on the vibrating table during 180 seconds with a frequency of 65 Hz;
8.3
Casting and curing specimen
All moulds were oiled prior to use and were free from dust and dirt. After filling the moulds with fresh concrete, the surfaces were finished with a trowel and covered with plastic. After 24 hours, the specimens were demoulded and the density of the specimen was determined. Finally the specimen were put in plastic bags and placed in a climate-room with a temperature of 20C (2C) and a humidity of 97%.
40
8.4
Used standards
The following standards have been used: NEN 3543; October 1982: Coarse lightweight aggregate for lightweight concrete. NEN 5950; September 1995: Regulations for concrete. Technology (VBT 1995) Requirements, productions and inspection. NEN 5957; November 1988: Concrete Determination of the consistency of fresh concrete Flow test. NEN 6720; September 1995: TGB 1990. Regulations for concrete. Structural requirements and calculation methods. prEN September 1996: lightweight aggregates. Part 1: Lightweight aggregates for concrete and mortar prEN 206; April 1997: Concrete-Performance, production and conformity. prEN 933-1; November 1992: Tests for geometrical properties of aggregates- Part 1: Determination of particle size distribution Granulometric analysis (sieving method) prEN 1097-6: February 1997: Tests for mechanical and physical properties of aggregates Part 6: Determination of particle density and waterabsorption prEN 1097-8; April 1997: Tests for mechanical and physical properties of aggregates. Part 8: determination of the polished stone value. prEN 12350; March 1996: Testing concrete - Determination of consistency of fresh concreteVebe test. prEN 12357; April 1996: Testing concrete - Determination of consistency of fresh concrete Degree of compactability. prEN 12359; April 1996: Testing concrete - Determination of flexural strength of test specimens. prEN 12362; April 1996: Testing concrete - Determination of tensile splitting strength of test specimens. prEN 12363; April 1996: Testing concrete -Determination of density of hardened concrete prEN 12382; April 1996: Testing concrete - Determination of consistency of fresh concrete Slump test. prEN 12394; April 1996: Testing concrete - Determination of compressive strength of test specimens prEN 12395; April 1996: Testing concrete - Determination of air content of fresh concrete Pressure methods
41
APPENDIX 2: INFORMATION NEW MATERIALS VASIM (NL)
(source: Vasim BV (NL))
9.1
Material sources
coal-fired power station Burned silt of sewage works Portland 52,5 300 litres/ton B = Cold bounded See workoutline Mixture (dry-weight) 45% 45% 10%
Number 1A Fly-ash Fly-ash Cement Palletising-water Production method Status
Number 5/7b Fly-ash Fines Silt - moisture Cement Palletising-water Production method Status
coal-fired power station Pumice Quarries/seagravel 60% each Portland 52,5 --- litres/ton B = Cold bounded See workoutline
Mixture (dry-weight) 21% 43% 15% 21%
Production method Vasim 3 Vasim 7 Vasim 8 Vasim 9 Fly-ash: coal-fired power station Fly-ash: bio-mass conversion Fly-ash: coal-fired power station Silt: quarries/seagravel Fly-ash: coal-fired power station Silt: recycled concrete Fly-ash: coal-fired power station Silt: drinking water treatment works Sintered Sintered Sintered / cold bounded Sintered / cold bounderd
42
10
APPENDIX 3: PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
43
Cumulative on sieve [%]
44
Particle size distribution of sand and gravel

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
80 90 100
2-5mm SZ 1794 0,250-0,500mm 0,125-0,250mm 2-4mm 4-8mm 2-8mm 8-12mm 12-16mm residue 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0,125mm 100 100 99 98 100 100 100 100 100 0,250mm 96 92 88 46 100 100 100 100 100 0,500mm 96 60 21 3 100 100 100 100 100 1mm 96 21 1 0 100 100 100 100 100 2mm 92 5 0 0 98 99 84 100 100 C4 52 0 0 0 16 97 66 100 100 C8 1 0 0 0 0 7 4 85 99 C16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Sieves
Figure 1: Particle size distribution of sand and gravel.
Lytag, 4-8mm Lytag 6-12mm
Particle size distribution of LWA

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
residue 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0,125mm 100 100 99 100 100 100 100 0,250mm 100 100 98 100 100 100 100 0,500mm 100 99 97 100 100 100 100 1mm 99 99 97 100 100 100 100 2mm 99 99 97 100 100 100 100 C4 92 96 94 90 87 100 94 C8 1 65 0 0 0 68 0 C16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Leca 670, 4-8mm Leca 670, 8-12mm Leca 800, 3-6mm Leca 800, 6-12mm Liapor 8, 4-8mm
Sieves
Figure 2: Particle size distribution of Lytag, Leca 670, Leca 800, and Liapor 3.
45
46

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
70 80 90 100
Liapor 3, 4-8mm Liapor 3, 8-16mm Pumice, 4-8mm Pumice, 8-12mm Pumice, 12-16mm Pumice, 0-2mm Pumice, 0-1mm residue 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0,125mm 100 100 100 100 100 95 86 0,250mm 100 100 100 100 100 81 80 0,500mm 100 100 100 100 100 61 65 1mm 100 100 100 100 100 37 28 2mm 100 100 100 100 100 12 1 C4 98 100 94 100 100 3 0 C8 3 100 0 97 100 0 0 C16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sieves
Figure 3: Particle size distribution of Liapor 8 and Pumice.
Vasim 1 Vasim 3 Vasim 7 Vasim 8 Vasim 9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
residue 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 0,125mm 95 99 100 99 99 98 99 0,250mm 91 99 100 98 99 98 99 0,500mm 86 98 100 98 99 98 99 1mm 82 98 100 98 99 98 99 2mm 77 98 98 98 99 98 99 C4 73 95 98 98 98 97 98 C8 37 6 56 90 71 65 59 C16 9 0 16 0 0 0 0
Vasim 5/7b, 4-8mm Vasim 5/7b, 6-12mm
Sieves
Figure 4: Particle size distribution of new materials from BV Vasim (the Netherlands).
47
48

Mechanical Properties of Light Weight Agg

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Mechanical Properties of Light Weight Agg

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

European Union Brite EuRam III

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

The European Union Brite EuRam III

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Document BE96-3942/R23, June 2000 Contract BRPR-CT97-0381, Project BE96-3942

ISBN 90 376 0198 7

The European Union Brite EuRam III

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Document BE96-3942/R23, June 2000 Contract BRPR-CT97-0381, Project BE96-3942

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

8.3 8.4 9 9.1 10

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Framework of the research

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

REFERENCE MIXTURES General

Cement Additive Water Admixture

Water Cem I;42,5R Fly-ash Betomix 240

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Summary properties LWA

Table 3: Properties LWA.

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

prEN 1097-6 prEN 1097-6 prEN 1097-3 prEN 13055-1

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Particle size distribution of reference mixtures

Curves conform NEN 5950

Sieve residue [%]

40 51 60 66,5 80 82 92 93,8 97 80 80,1 88 92,5 68 69,1

Reference Curve A Curve B Curve C

120 0,125 0,250 0,500 1 2 4 5,6 8 11,2 16

Figure 1: Particle size distribution with an optimum packing density of mixtures.

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

24.0% 0.3% 48.3% 51.4% 3.1% 1.6%

165 kg 276 kg 69 kg 2.5 kg 28% 0.51 0.60 0.54

172 kg 429 kg 107 kg 3.9 kg 35% *** 0.40 0.36

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

MECHANICAL PROPERTIES General

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Effective w/c-ratio (waterabsorption after 30 min)

0,56 0,54 0,52 0,50 0,48 20%

Leca 800 Liapor 3 Pumice Vasim I

60% Replaced NWA with LWA

60% Replaced NWA with LWA

Effective w/c-ratio (after 7 days)

60% Replaced NWA with LWA

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Particle and bulk density

1386 1281 1228

1404 1337 1351

948 810 830 716 582 Particle Bulk 769 760

800 686 600 565

Figure 4: Particle and bulk density per LWA

20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Figure 5: Theoretical density of mixtures with different kind of LWA.

Mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete

Theoretical density [kg/m3]

Liapor 8 * 4.1 * 3.9 ***

Leca 800 * 3.75 3.45 3.70 *

Liapor 8 * 4.20 * 3.90 ***

Lytag * * *** 4.60 3.70