Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 9 January 2011
Received in revised form 5 September 2011
Accepted 2 October 2011
Available online 24 November 2011
Keywords:
Self-compacting concrete
Waterpowder ratio
Compressive strength
Split tensile strength
Bottom ash
Fly ash
a b s t r a c t
The paper deals inuence of water/powder ratio on strength properties of self-compacting concrete (SCC)
containing coal bottom ash. SCC was made with coal bottom ash as replacement of ne aggregates in
varying percentages of 0%, 10%, 20% and 30% and y ash as replacement of cement in varying percentages
of 1535%. Strength properties tests were carried out at the ages of 28, 90 and 365 days for the various
mixes.
Results indicate the behaviour similar to normal SCC of increase in strength on decrease of waterpowder ratio. A comparison between SCC with various y ash contents and with various replacements of ne
aggregates with bottom ash showed that SCC obtained strength increase on decrease of w/p from 0.439 to
0.414 for 0% bottom ash, 0.500.47 for 10% bottom ash, 0.580.51 for 20% bottom ash and 0.6200.546 for
30% bottom ash. All mixes showed strength gain beyond 28 days and the mixes with 15% and 35% y ash
mixes gained strength of the order of 60 MPa and 40 MPa, respectively at 90 days. However, it was possible to produce SCC with a compressive strength of 4050 MPa with 1535% y ash replacement. The
bottom ash could be used up to 20% keeping in view the decrease of strength of about 1520% (if y
ash percentages with 15% and 20% are not taken into consideration), as they show higher decrease of
strength. Thus, the optimum y ash percentage was 2535% and bottom ash percentage was up to 20%
in the present study.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Self-compacting concrete (SCC) has gained signicant importance in recent years because of the advantages it offers [16].
SCC was developed in Japan [1] in the late 1980s to be mainly used
for highly congested reinforced structures. Recently, this concrete
has gained wide use in many countries for different applications
and structural congurations.
SCC requires a high slump that can easily be achieved by
superplasticizer addition to a concrete mix and special attention
has to be paid to mix proportioning. SCC often contains a large
quantity of powder materials which is required to maintain sufciently low yield stress to provide owability at a plastic viscosity
which is high enough to effectively avoid segregation. As, the use of
a large quantity of cement increases cost and results in greater
temperature rise, the use of mineral admixtures such as y ash,
bottom ash, blast furnace slag, or limestone ller could increase
the slump of the concrete mixture without increasing its cost.
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 1744 225741; fax: +91 1744 238050.
E-mail addresses: paratibha@rediffmail.com (P. Aggarwal), yogesh.24@rediff
mail.com (Y. Aggarwal).
0950-0618/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.035
Fine aggregate
Bottom ash
100
94.25
Percentage Passing
74
99.45
100
84.85
80
76.5
60
40.8
40
20
0
100
6
1000
10000
Table 1
Chemical properties of y ash and bottom ash.
Sr. no.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Constituents
Loss on ignition
Silica (SiO2)
Iron oxide (Fe2 O3)
Alumina (Al2 O3)
Calcium oxide (CaO)
Magnesium oxide (MgO)
Total sulphur (SO3)
Alkalies: (a) Sodium oxide (Na2O)
(b) Potassium oxide (K2O)
wt.%
Fly ash
Bottom ash
4.17
58.55
3.44
28.20
2.23
0.32
0.07
0.58
1.26
5.80
57.76
8.56
21.58
1.58
1.19
0.02
0.14
1.08
2.3. Admixtures
A polycarboxylic ether based superplasticizer complying with ASTM C-494 type
F, with density approximately 1.10 and pH approximately 5.0 was used.
2.4. Aggregates
Locally available natural sand with 4.75 mm maximum size was used as ne
aggregate, and crushed stone as coarse aggregate with 16 mm maximum size,
was used. Both ne aggregate and coarse aggregate conformed to Indian Standard
Specications BIS: 383-1970. The coarse and ne aggregates had a specic gravity
of 2.67, and water absorptions of 0.95% and 0.90%, and neness modulus as 6.86 and
2.32, respectively, as shown in Fig. 1. The bulk density (loose and compacted) was
observed to be 1460 and 1540 kg/m3 for coarse aggregates and 1590 and 1780 kg/
m3 for ne aggregates, respectively.
3. Experimental program
2. Materials used
2.1. Cement
The proportions of the concrete mixtures are summarized in Tables 2a and 2b. Twenty concrete mixtures were tested, with ve
mixes for each percentage of replacement by bottom ash, which
had total powder content to 550 kg/m3 (cement + y ash). Coarse
aggregate content was maintained at 39% by volume (590 kg/m3)
of concrete and ne aggregate content at 45% by volume of mortar
in concrete (910 kg/m3), with air-content being assumed to be 2%.
The various SCC mixes with y ash as 15%, 20%, 25%, 30% and 35%
by weight of total powder content were developed, and their mix
proportions and fresh properties are given in Table 2.
Ordinary Portland cement (Grade 43) with normal consistency 28% and initial
and nal setting times as 75 and 215 min was used. It had specic gravity as 3.15
and 7-day compressive strength as 37 MPa and conformed to BIS: 8112-1989
specications.
75
0% Bottom ash
M01
M02
M03
M04
M05
M101
M102
M103
M104
M105
Cement (kg/m3)
Fly ash (kg/m3)
Fly ash (%)
C.A. (kg/m3)
F.A. (kg/m3)
B.A. (kg/m3)
S.P. (%)
w/p
465
85
15
590
910
1.95
0.41
440
110
20
590
910
2.00
0.41
415
135
25
590
910
1.80
0.42
385
165
30
590
910
1.80
0.43
355
195
35
590
910
1.80
0.44
465
85
15
590
819
91
1.85
0.472.
440
110
20
590
819
91
1.80
0.48
415
135
25
590
819
91
1.50
0.48
385
165
30
590
819
91
1.60
0.49
355
195
35
590
819
91
1.70
0.50
Slump ow
Dia. (mm)
T50cm s
L-box (H2/H1)
U-box (H1H2) (mm)
675
4.5
0.9
20
690
3.0
0.9
10
605
4.5
0.6
50
675
3.0
0.95
15
635
4.0
0.92
20
675
3.5
0.8
25
605
2.5
0.82
20
625
2.2
0.8
65
605
3.5
0.7
50
645
3.8
0.9
30
V-funnel
T10s s
T5min s
Room temp.
Conc temp.
7.5
15
31
30
4.5
5
32
29
7
8.5
32
28
5
9.5
33
29
10
18
32
28
6.6
12.5
29
27
7.5
12.5
32
29
5.2
6.8
33
29.5
8.9
16
30
28
9
18
32
28.5
Table 2b
Mix composition for 20% and 30% bottom ash mixes.
Mix
M201
M202
M203
M204
M205
M301
M302
M303
M304
M305
Cement (kg/m3)
Fly ash (kg/m3)
Fly ash (%)
C.A. (kg/m3)
F.A. (kg/m3)
B.A. (kg/m3)
S.P. (%)
w/p
465
85
15
590
728
182
1.9
0.51
440
110
20
590
728
182
1.3
0.52
415
135
25
590
728
182
1.4
0.54
385
165
30
590
728
182
1.4
0.56
355
195
35
590
728
182
1.6
0.58
465
85
15
590
640
270
1.8
0.55
440
110
20
590
640
270
1.2
0.55
415
135
25
590
640
270
2.0
0.56
385
165
30
590
640
270
1.3
0.61
355
195
35
590
640
270
1.3
0.62
Slump ow
Dia. (mm)
T50cm s
L-box (H2/H1)
U-box(H1-H2) mm
590
6.0
0.95
30
645
3.0
0.95
30
600
1.5
0.6
45
600
2.5
0.9
30
590
2.7
0.8
50
625
2.5
0.82
30
600
3.0
0.7
55
590
2.0
0.6
30
610
1.8
0.87
20
590
4
0.86
40
V-funnel
T10s s
T5min s
Room temp.
Conc temp.
6.5
8.8
32
28
4.5
7.0
30
27
7
7.9
32
28
6.5
12.7
31
28
8
16
32
28
4
6.5
34
28
4.8
5.8
30
27
4.2
9.7
33
30
5.4
9.5
32
29
6.1
10.5
32
28
Compressive Strength
(MPa)
50
40
30
20
10
28
90
365
Age (Days)
Fig. 3. Compressive strength (10% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.
Compressive Strength
(MPa)
50
40
30
20
10
28
90
365
Age (Days)
Fig. 4. Compressive strength (20% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.
Compressive Strength
(MPa)
76
50
40
30
20
10
28
90
365
Age (Days)
Fig. 5. Compressive strength (30% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.
0% Bottom ash
35% fly
35%
flyash
ash
20% fly ash
20%fly
ash
30% fly
30%
flyash
ash
15% fly
15%
flyash
ash
25% fly
25%
flyash
ash
Compressive Strength
(MPa)
70
60
50
40
30
20
28
90
365
Age (Days)
Fig. 2. Compressive strength (0% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.
77
1
28
90
365
Age (days)
Fig. 7. Split tensile strength (10% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.
1
28
90
365
Age (days)
1
90
365
Age (days)
Fig. 6. Split tensile strength (0% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.
28
Fig. 8. Split tensile strength (20% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.
0% Bottom ash
age for all mixes and also with percentages of y ash varying from
35% to 15% at a particular age.
At 20% replacement with bottom ash, strengths were observed
to be in the range of 2329 MPa, 3240 MPa, and 3845 MPa at
28, 90, and 365 days respectively. A gain of strength of about 23%
at 28 days and 18% at 365 days was observed with the decrease
in y ash contents from 35% (M205) to 15% (M201).
For 30% replacement with bottom ash the strength of M301 was
observed to be 25.77 MPa at the age of 28 days. The ndings
regarding the gain of strength at 28 days and 365 days of 41%
and 14%, respectively, with the decrease in y ash contents from
35% (M305) to 15% (M301), are similar to the ones [20], wherein
they concluded that when the bottom ash content was increased,
the decrease in compressive strength could be attributed to the increase in water demand. In normal concrete also, reduction in
strength was observed up to 30% replacement of ne aggregate
with bottom ash.
28-day compressive strength for percentages of y ash (15
35%) and mixes at 10% bottom ash showed 0.314% strength decrease, 1820% strength decrease with 20% bottom ash and 26
38% decrease with 30% bottom ash in comparison to corresponding
mixes with 0% bottom ash. Similarly, 90-day compressive strength
for mixes with 10% bottom ash showed 1521% strength decrease,
1833% strength decrease with 20% bottom ash and 2238% decrease with 30% bottom ash in comparison to corresponding mixes
with 0% bottom ash. Also, 365-day compressive strength for mixes
with 10% bottom ash showed the 720% strength decrease, 1126%
strength decrease with 20% bottom ash and 1632% decrease with
30% bottom ash, in comparison to corresponding mixes with 0%
bottom ash.
1
28
90
365
Age (days)
Fig. 9. Split tensile strength (30% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.
tively. As the percentage of y ash in 10% bottom ash mixes decreased the split tensile strength increased at all ages. The gain
of strength for various mixes was observed to be 55.6% between
28 and 90 days, increasing with increase in cement content. At
20% replacement with bottom ash, strengths were observed to be
in the range of 1.412.12 MPa, and 1.552.26 MPa, 1.82
2.54 MPa at 28, 90, and 365 days respectively, on decrease of y
ash from 35% to 15%. An increase of about 50% strength at 28 days
and 39% at 365 days was observed with the decrease of the y ash
contents from 35% (M205) to 15% (M201). The gain of strength for
various mixes was observed to be between 4.7% and 5.7% between
28 and 90 days, increasing with increase in cement content.
The split tensile strength for M305 with 35% y ash of total
powder content was obtained as 1.27 MPa, 1.48 MPa and
1.69 MPa respectively at the ages of 28, 90, and 365 days,
78
Table 3
Comparison of experimental values of split tensile strength (ft) with the theoretical values predicted by other researchers.
Concrete mix
SCC350
SCC380
SCC410
SCC425
SCC440
SCC460
29.62
30.66
31.47
32.38
33.15
35.19
1.55
1.76
1.83
1.97
2.12
2.40
1.68
1.72
1.75
1.79
1.81
1.89
2.78
2.88
2.96
3.04
3.12
3.31
3.31
3.40
3.47
3.55
3.61
3.78
0.21
0.23
0.23
0.25
0.26
0.28
ft 0:24fc0:6
90-Day Strength
present study
Felekogula et al
Parra et al.2007
Dinakar et al,2007
Sukumar et al,2007
ACI 318
Compressive Strength
(MPa)
Sukumar et al,2007
3.5
ACI 318
Felekoglu et al,2007
Dinakar et al,2007
2.5
2.0
Present Study
1.5
60
40
20
0
Parra et al,2007
0.3
20
25
30
35
40
Fig. 10. Split tensile strength and compressive strength by various authors.
40
20
0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Water/Powder
Fig. 11. Variation of compressive strength with w/p ratio for various percentages of
bottom ash at 28 days.
0.6
0.7
0.8
Fig. 12. Variation of compressive strength with w/p ratio for various percentages of
bottom ash at 90 days.
365-Day Strength
60
0.5
Water/Powder
Compressive Strength
(MPa)
Compressive Strength
(MPa)
0% bottom ash
0.4
45
28-Day Strength
80
1.0
15
100
4.0
3.0
0% bottom ash
0% bottom ash
20% bottom ash
100
80
60
40
20
0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Water/Powder
Fig. 13. Variation of compressive strength with w/p ratio for various percentages of
bottom ash at 365 days.
79
28-Days
90-Days
Equation
Regression coef.
Equation
Regression coef.
Equation
Regression coef.
0
10
20
30
0.65x4.51
0.69x5.16
1.38x4.67
1.99x4.32
0.86
0.82
0.96
0.78
0.62x5.01
0.84x5.27
2.16x4.51
3.73x3.06
0.61
0.76
0.95
0.95
0.96x4.58
2.77x3.80
4.62x3.46
7.55x2.97
0.83
0.84
0.94
0.91
4
3
2
1
0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Fig. 14. Variation of Split tensile strength with w/p ratio for various percentages of
bottom ash at 28 days.
90-Day strength
0% bottom ash
3
2
1
0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Water/Powder
Fig. 15. Variation of split tensile strength with w/p ratio for various percentages of
bottom ash at 90 days.
365-Day Strength
0% bottom ash
20% bottom ash
Water/Powder
0% bottom ash
20% bottom ash
28-Day Strength
aggregates is carried out and y ash [0%, 10%, 30%, 70%, and 85%]
has been used as replacement of cement in SCC mixtures [22]. Similar, observation was made in the mixes developed by Sukumar
et al., where replacement of cement with y ash varied between
25% and 85%. Also, on comparison with mixes developed by Felekoglu et al. [24], where the replacement of cement is carried out by
limestone dust, it can be observed that when the replacement of
ne aggregates is carried out, the results tend to be on the lower
as compared to the results obtained when only replacement of cement with y ash is done.
Many researchers have developed relations for SCC compressive
strength and split tensile strength. In the present investigation,
such a relations for SCC mixes made with varying percentages of
bottom ash has been developed.
365-Days
2
1
0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Water/Powder
Fig. 16. Variation of Split tensile strength with w/p ratio for various percentages of
bottom ash at 365 days.
80
Table 5
Relationship for expected split tensile strength from w/p ratio for various percentages of bottom ash.
Ages
28-Days
90-Days
365-Days
Equation
Regression coef.
Equation
Regression coef.
Equation
Regression coef.
0
10
20
30
0.0086x6.27
0.011x7.032
0.0789x4.89
0.1054x4.85
0.86
0.83
0.92
0.96
0.0124x5.99
0.0234x6.14
0.079x5.0
0.1403x4.45
0.86
0.83
0.92
0.95
0.0551x4.39
0.0387x5.62
0.1071x4.77
0.1565x4.48
0.70
0.76
0.93
0.95
of natural aggregate which often leads to irremediable deterioration of the countryside. Also, Quarrying of aggregates
leads to disturbed surface area, etc., but the articial aggregates from industrial wastes are not only adding extra aggregate sources to the natural and articial aggregate but also
prevent environmental pollution. In addition to above, there
could be some technical and nancial advantages as well as
it can be used as a low-cost replacement material for more
expensive sand in SCC.
References
[1] Ozawa K, Maekawa K, Kunishima M, Okamura H. Performance of concrete
based on the durability design of concrete structures. In: Proc. of the second
East Asia-pacic conference on structural engineering and construction; 1989.
[2] Okamura H. Self-compacting high performance concrete. Concr Int
1997;19(7):504.
[3] Bartos PJM. Self-compacting concrete. Concrete 1999;33(4):914.
[4] Okamura HM, Ouchi M. Self-compacting concrete. J Adv Concr Technol
2003;1(1):515.
[5] Collepardi M, Collepardi S, Ogoumah Olagat JJ, Troli R. Laboratory-test and
lled-experience SCCs. In: Proc. of the 3rd international symposium on self
compacting concrete, Reykjavik, Iceland; 1720 August, 2003. p. 90412.
[6] Bouzoubaa N, Lachemi M. Self-compacting concrete incorporating high
volumes of class F y ash-preliminary results. Cem Concr Res 2001;31:41320.
[7] Memona SA, Shaikh MA, Hassan A. Utilization of rice husk ash as viscosity
modifying agent in self compacting concrete. Constr Build Mater
2011;25:10448.
[8] Gneyisi E, Gesoglu M, zbay E. Strength and drying shrinkage properties of
self-compacting concretes incorporating multi-system blended mineral
admixtures. Constr Build Mater 2010;24:187887.
[9] Sahmaran M, Yaman I, Tokyay M. Transport and mechanical properties of self
consolidating concrete with high volume y ash. Cem Concr Compos
2009;31:99106.
[10] Yahia A, Tanimura M, Shimabukuro A, Shimoyama Y. Effect of rheological
parameters on self compactiblity of concrete containing various mineral
admixtures. In: Proc. of the rst RILEM international symposium on selfcompacting concrete, Stockholm; 1999. p. 52335.
[11] Kurita M, Nomura T. Highly-owable steel ber-reinforced concrete
containing y ash. In: Malhotra VM, editor. Am. Concr. Inst. 1998;SP
178(June):15975.
[12] Kim JK, Han SH, Park YD, Noh JH, Park CL, Kwon YH, Lee SG. Experimental
research on the material properties of super owing concrete. In: Bartos PJM,
Marrs DL, Cleland DJ, editors. Production Methods and Workability of
Concrete, E&FN Spon; 1996. p. 27184.
[13] Miura N, Takeda N, Chikamatsu R, Sogo S. Application of super workable
concrete to reinforced concrete structures with difcult construction
conditions. Proc. ACI SP; 1993;140:16386.
[14] Khurana R, Saccone R. Fly ash in self-compacting concrete. In: Proc. of y ash,
silica fume, slag and natural pozzolans in concrete. ACI SP-199; 2001. p. 259
74.
[15] Nagataki S, Fujiwara H. Self-compacting property of highly-owable concrete.
In: Malhotra VM, editor. Am. Concr. Inst. 1995;SP 154(June):30114.
[16] Khayat KH, Manai K. Les betons autonivlants: proprietes, caracterisation et
applications. Colloque sur les betons autonivlants. Universite de Sherbrooke.
Canada; November 1996. p. 28.
[17] Khayat KH. Optimization and performance of air-entrained, self-consolidating
concrete. ACI Mater J 2000;97(5):52635.
[18] EFNARC (European Federation of national trade associations representing
producers and applicators of specialist building products). Specication and
guidelines for self-compacting concrete. Hampshire, UK; February 2002.
[19] Khayat KH, Paultre P, Tremblay S. Structural performance and in-place
properties of self-consolidating concrete used for casting highly reinforced
columns. ACI Mater J 2001;98(5):3718.
[20] Bai Y, Darcy F, Basheer PAM. Strength and drying shrinkage properties of
concrete containing furnace bottom ash as ne aggregate. Constr Build Mater
2005;19:6917.
81