CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Sem/Session 2 2018/2019

Name of Experiment CIVIL ENGINEERING LAB 2

(CIVE 2121)
OPEN ENDED CONCRETE LAB SESSION
Date of Experiment 3 / 2 / 2019

Group 1 1. Topa Ahmad 1614275

2. Aiman Afandi bin Masrani 1419721

3. Huda binti Abu Na'aim 1713324

4. Fatin Nazifa binti Mustafa Azizul 1711488

5. Basheer Ahmad Saleem 1617021

Lecturer’s Name DR SITI ASMAHANI BINTI SAAD

Due Date of Submission 3 / 5 / 2019

Lecturer’s Comment(s)

Lecturer’s Stamp and Sign:

Date Received:

SAS 09/2018
1.0 INTRODUCTION

Concrete mix design lab was done to produce concrete mix with the desired engineering
properties. In this experiment, two types of cement replacement materials are used which are
rice husk ash and fly ash with different proportions. Cement replacement materials are special
types of naturally occurring materials or industrial waste products that can be used in concrete
mixes to partially replace some of the portland cement. Surprisingly, concrete with cement
replacement materials can actually be stronger and more durable than concrete with ordinary
portland cement (OPC).

Fly ash is a fine, glass-like powder recovered from gases created by coal-fired electric
power generation. Fly ash is an inexpensive replacement for portland cement used in concrete,
and it can improve strength, segregation, and ease of pumping of the concrete. Fly ash is also
used as an ingredient in brick, block, paving, and structural fills.

Rice husk ash concrete is very much like fly ash concrete in terms of the strength
development. However, there is an exception where rice husk ash is a very active pozzolanic
material, and this is shown during the early ages. Replacing the cement by small amount of
RHA is beneficial to the strength development of the concrete. However, strength reduction is
quite obvious at higher replacement level, because of the water to cement ratio of these mixes
are rather high.
Adding admixtures to concrete mix is somehow crucial to enhance the performance of the
concrete. In this experiment, rice husk ash and fly ash are used as replacement of cement. the
strength for each admixture may vary due to the properties of the admixtures. After curing
process is done, the sample is then undergone strength test to identify which admixtures is
most suitable to be used as cement replacement. Some factors that need to be considered to
replace cement in concrete mix are the concrete compressive and flexural strength, durability,
workability of fresh mixture and also the cost. This experiment is done to investigate the
maximum strength of a particular concrete by varying the percentage of admixtures used in
concrete mixing.

Concrete are tested for two main purposes, for control of quality and to check its compliance
with specifications. The non-destructive testing (NDT) of hardened concrete is carried out to
test the in-situ strength of concrete structures. A few non-destructive tests have been devised
to measure concrete properties without destroying the structures.
In general these non-destructive testing are carried out during and after construction. When
construction is in progress, tests are carried out if there are doubts on the quality of works. It is
also useful in determining the strength before false work could be removed safely or in avoiding

SAS 09/2018
premature loading. Non- destructive testing may be used during service for instance in
rehabilitation and repair works where obvious signs of structural failures like cracks,
deflection, rusting of steel bars were detected.

2.0 OBJECTIVE
Determining the workability, strength and quality between different batches with different
admixtures, different percentages and different curing age

3.0 APPARATUS
A non-porous timber or metal platform, a pair of shovels, a steel hand scoop, measuring
cylinder and a small concrete mixer.

4.0 PROCEDURE
1. The quantities of cement, sand and course aggregate were weighed to make 1:2:4
concrete mixes at water ratio 0.6. (Refer the mix design sheet)
2. The cement and sand were poured into the mixer and were mixed first until uniform.
Then, the course aggregates were poured.
3. One percent of rice husk ash were added and mixed together with the mixture.
4. Water was added into the hole. The mixture was mixed thoroughly for 3 minutes until
the colour was uniform.
5. After that, half of water needed was added in the mixer and was mixed for 1 minute.
Then the mixture was let out using the channel.
6. Hand mixing was done by using shovels. Then, the mixture was tested with slump
test. The slump value was recorded.
7. The mixture was put into the moulds which includes 6 cubes and two beams.
8. The compression test and NDT test were done on 3 of the cubes and the flexural
strength test was done on one of the beams after 7 days. The test result was recorded.
9. After 28 days, the rest of the cubes and beam were tested using the same test.
10. Step 1 to 10 were repeated three times by replacing one percent of rice husk ash with
three percent of rice husk ash, one percent of fly ash and three percent of fly ash
respectively.

SAS 09/2018
5.0 DATA, results and calculations
5.1 Slump Test
Cement replacement materials Superplasticizer Slump (cm)
Rice husk ash 1% 0.50%
1.50
Rice husk ash 3% 0% 11.8
Fly ash 1% 1.00% 12.7
Fly ash 3% 1.00% 14.6

5.2 Compressive and Flexural strength test:

Age: 7 days
Admixtures: 1% Fly Ash

PRODUCT MASS (kg) STRENGTH (Mpa)

CUBE A 8.3 45.17
CUBE B 8.1 43.6
CUBE C 8.15 42.92
BEAM 12.6 2.52

Admixtures: 3% Fly Ash

PRODUCT MASS (kg) STRENGTH (Mpa)
CUBE A 8.3 53.46
CUBE B 8.25 51.51
CUBE C 8.25 51.04
BEAM 12.05 2.26

Admixtures: 1% Rice Husk Ash

PRODUCT MASS (kg) STRENGTH (Mpa)
CUBE A 8.35 50.18
CUBE B 8.3 48.37
CUBE C 8.4 50.34
BEAM 12.1 40.24

SAS 09/2018
Admixtures: 3% Rice Husk Ash
PRODUCT MASS (kg) STRENGTH (Mpa)
CUBE A 8.3 44.16
CUBE B 8.45 42.96
CUBE C 8.35 45.23
BEAM 12.35 2.3

Age: 28 days
Admixtures: 1% Fly Ash
PRODUCT MASS STRENGTH (Mpa)
(kg)
CUBE A 8.25 50.21
CUBE B 8.2 37.25
CUBE C 8 39.22
BEAM 12.45 2.58

Admixtures: 3% Fly Ash

PRODUCT MASS (kg) STRENGTH (Mpa)
CUBE A 8.15 56.73
CUBE B 8.3 54.97
CUBE C 8.3 59.86
BEAM 12.15 2.74

Admixtures: 1% Rice Husk Ash

PRODUCT MASS (kg) STRENGTH (Mpa)
CUBE A 8.3 57.05
CUBE B 8.3 58.19
CUBE C 8.5 52.64
BEAM 12.35 3.2

Admixtures: 3% Rice Husk Ash

PRODUCT MASS (kg) STRENGTH (Mpa)
CUBE A 8.5 53.67
CUBE B 8.3 52.62
CUBE C 7.6 23.12
BEAM 15.5 2.82

SAS 09/2018
Result:
Compressive strength test:
Percentage of DAY 0 DAY 7 DAY 28
admixtures Average compressive strength (MPa)

1%FA 0 43.9 42.23

3% FA 0 52 57.19
1%RHA 0 49.63 55.96
3%RHA 0 44.12 43.14

COMPRESSION STRENGTH VS DAYS

70
COMPRESSION STRENGTH (MPa)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
DAY 0 DAY 7 DAY 28

1%FA 3% FA 1%RHA 3%RHA

Flexural strength test:

Percentage of DAY 0 DAY 7 DAY 28

admixtures Average flexural strength (MPa

1%FA 0 2.52 2.58

3% FA 0 2.26 2.74
1%RHA 0 40.24 3.2
3%RHA 0 2.3 2.82

SAS 09/2018
 FLEXURAL STRENGTH VS DAYS

45

40
FLEXURAL STRENGTH (MPa)

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
DAY 0 1%FA 3% FA DAY 71%RHA 3%RHA DAY 28

5.3 TYPE OF TEST: NON-DESTRUCTIVE TEST (NDT)

A) 1% Rice husk ash
AGE: 7 DAYS
PRODUCT MASS (kg)
CUBE A 8.35
CUBE B 8.3
CUBE C 8.4

PRODUCT FACE PULSE (Hz)

POINT 1 2 5 10
CUBE A 1 36.6 36 36.1 37.5
2 36.8 36 35.1 36.5
CUBE B 1 38.5 37 37.1 38.6
2 36.3 36 36 37.6
CUBE C 1 35.5 35.5 35.3 37
2 35 35.3 48.3 49.6

SAS 09/2018
AGE: 28 DAYS
PRODUCT MASS (kg)
CUBE A 8.30
CUBE B 8.30
CUBE C 8.50

PRODUCT FACE PULSE (Hz)

POINT 1 2 5 10
CUBE A 1 37.2 37.5 36.7 37.8
2 35.0 35.2 34.5 36.0
CUBE B 1 46.8 46.7 46.0 47.0
2 35.5 34.8 35.3 38.0
CUBE C 1 37.8 37.0 37.7 46.5
2 46.2 45.5 45.2 49.2

B) RICE HUSK ASH 3%

AGE; 7 DAYS

PRODUCT MASS (kg)

CUBE A 8.30
CUBE B 8.45
CUBE C 8.35

PRODUCT FACE PULSE (Hz)

POINT 1 2 5 10
CUBE A 1 35.8 36 35.8 37.5
2 35.6 35.6 36 38.1
CUBE B 1 37.3 36.6 37.5 39.5
2 36.3 37.3 37.1 39.1
CUBE C 1 36.3 35.3 34.8 37
2 36.5 36 38 38.6

AGE: 28 DAYS

PRODUCT MASS (kg)

CUBE A 8.50
CUBE B 8.30
CUBE C 7.60

SAS 09/2018
 PRODUCT FACE PULSE (Hz)
POINT 1 2 5 10
CUBE A 1 35.3 35.7 37 38.8
2 36 36.2 35.8 39
CUBE B 1 34.5 34 34.3 34.8
2 33.8 34.7 33.5 35
CUBE C 1 35 35 36.3 37
2 33.8 34 34.2 35.7

C) FLY ASH 1%

AGE: 11 DAYS
PRODUCT MASS (kg)
CUBE A 8.3
CUBE B 8.15
CUBE C 8.15

PRODUCT FACE PULSE (Hz)

POINT 1 2 5 10
CUBE A 1 50.2 40.5 41.2 43
2 36.5 36.3 36.2 38
3 37.8 39.7 41.7 38.7
CUBE B 1 46.7 58.8 48.8 59.2
2 36.2 35.7 36 37.3
3 36.2 36.5 36.2 37.7
CUBE C 1 36.5 36.2 36 38
2 46.8 49.7 48.5 38
3 34.8 35.5 35 37

AGE: 28 DAYS
PRODUCT MASS (kg)
CUBE A 8.25
CUBE B 8.20
CUBE C 8.30

PRODUCT FACE PULSE (Hz)

POINT 1 2 5 10
CUBE A 1 38.5 39.7 38.3 41.3
2 48.5 47.7 47.3 48.8
3 41.8 39 39.5 40.3
CUBE B 1 39.7 36.8 38.5 39.2

SAS 09/2018
 2 38.8 38.5 39.7 40
3 40 39.5 39.7 46.5
CUBE C 1 38.5 38 37.5 38.7
2 47.3 39.8 45.5 49.3
3 39.3 47.2 39.3 48.2

D) FLY ASH 3%

AGE: 11 DAYS
PRODUCT MASS (kg)
CUBE A 8.30
CUBE B 8.25
CUBE C 8.25

PRODUCT FACE PULSE (Hz)

POINT 1 2 5 10
CUBE A 1 46.5 39.8 45.8 48.2
2 35.5 35.8 35.8 38
3 37.8 36.3 37.5 45.8
CUBE B 1 38.8 45 48 44.7
2 35.8 36.5 38 40.8
3 34.7 35.7 35.3 37.2
CUBE C 1 38.7 36.7 45.3 46
2 44.7 48 47.3 48.2
3 35.7 37.5 36.5 37.8

AGE: 28 DAYS
PRODUCT MASS (kg)
CUBE A 8.15
CUBE B 8.30
CUBE C 8.30

PRODUCT FACE PULSE (Hz)

POINT 1 2 5 10
CUBE A 1 43.7 44 44 46.7
2 38 37.7 38.2 45.5
3 37.5 35 44.5 45.5
CUBE B 1 44.7 45.2 45 47.3
2 46.2 45.7 39.3 46.7
3 40.5 47.2 47.3 49.5
CUBE C 1 36.7 36.8 36.8 39.3
2 36.8 46.8 37 39.3
3 55 44.7 55 80.3

SAS 09/2018
RESULTS AND CALCULATIONS

Average=(36.6+36.8)/2=36.1
Velocity=L/T
L=150 mm, 0.15 m
T=36.1 microseconds, 0.0000361 second
L/T=41551.246 m/s, 4.1551 km/sec

a) Rice husk ash 1%

7 days:
Average time:
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A 35.65 35.95 36.4 38.9

CUBE B 37.4 36.5 36.55 38.1
CUBE C 35.25 35.4 41.8 43.3

Velocity (km/sec)
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
4.208 4.172 4.121 3.856
CUBE B
4.011 4.110 4.104 3.937
CUBE C
4.255 4.237 3.589 3.464

28 days:
Average time:
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
36.1 36.35 35.6 36.9
CUBE B
41.15 40.75 40.65 42.5
CUBE C
42 41.25 41.45 47.85

SAS 09/2018
Velocity (km/sec)
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
4.155 4.127 4.213 4.065
CUBE B
3.645 3.681 3.690 3.529
CUBE C
3.571 3.636 3.619 3.135

b) Rice husk ash 3%

7 days:
Average time:
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
35.7 35.8 35.9 37.8
CUBE B
36.8 36.95 37.3 39.3
CUBE C
36.4 35.65 36.4 37.8

Velocity (km/sec):
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
4.202 4.190 4.178 3.968
CUBE B
4.076 4.060 4.021 3.817
CUBE C
4.121 4.208 4.121 3.968

28 days
Average time:
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
35.65 35.95 36.4 38.9
CUBE B
34.15 34.35 33.9 34.9
CUBE C
34.4 34.5 35.25 36.35

SAS 09/2018
Velocity (km/sec):
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
4.208 4.172 4.121 3.856
CUBE B
4.392 4.367 4.425 4.298
CUBE C
4.360 4.348 4.255 4.127

C) Fly ash 1%

11 days
Average time:
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
41.5 38.83 39.7 39.9
CUBE B
39.7 43.67 40.33 44.73
CUBE C
39.367 40.467 39.833 37.667

Velocity (km/sec):
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
3.614 3.863 3.778 3.759
CUBE B
3.778 3.435 3.719 3.353
CUBE C
3.810 3.707 3.766 3.982

28 days
Average time:
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
42.93 42.13 41.70 43.47
CUBE B
39.50 38.27 39.30 41.90
CUBE C
41.70 41.67 40.77 45.40

SAS 09/2018
Velocity (km/sec):
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
3.494 3.560 3.597 3.451
CUBE B
3.797 3.920 3.817 3.580
CUBE C
3.597 3.600 3.679 3.304

D) Fly ash 3%

7 days:
Average time:
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
39.9 37.3 39.7 44
CUBE B
36.4 39.1 40.4 40.9
CUBE C
39.70 40.73 43.03 44.00

Velocity (km/sec):
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
3.759 4.021 3.778 3.409
CUBE B
4.121 3.836 3.713 3.667
CUBE C
3.778 3.683 3.486 3.409

28 days:
Average time:
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
39.7 38.9 42.2 45.9
CUBE B
43.8 46.0 43.9 47.8
CUBE C
42.8 42.8 42.9 53.0

SAS 09/2018
Velocity (km/sec):
PRODUCT 1 HZ 2 Hz 5 Hz 10 Hz

CUBE A
3.778 3.856 3.555 3.268
CUBE B
3.425 3.261 3.417 3.138
CUBE C
3.505 3.505 3.497 2.830

Slump test
Cement replacement materials Superplasticizer Slump (cm)
Rice husk ash 1% 0.50% 1.50
Rice husk ash 3% 0% 11.8
Fly ash 1% 1.00% 12.7
Fly ash 3% 1.00% 14.6

6.0 DISCUSSION
6.1 Slump Test
The first experiment has been done by adding 0.50 percent of superplasticizer. Meanwhile,
the third and fourth experiments are done by adding 1 percent of superplasticizer
respectively. On the other hand, experiment two is done without adding superplasticizer into
the mixture. It can be seen on the result that the slump value for the third and fourth
experiments are significantly higher than the first two experiment. The reason is that the
superplasticizer that was added later acts as water reducer. It improved the workability of the
mixture at the given water cement ratio. However, for the first experiment, the slump value is
low which is 1.5 cm because of errors when calculating the amount of water needed. Thus,
the water cement ratio for the mixture is low compared to the other three mixtures
6.2 Strength Test
After curing process for 7 days and 28 days, the cube samples are tested for compression
strength test while the beam samples are tested for flexural strength test. The average strength
for all admixtures is plotted on a graph. For compression strength on day 7, sample that
contain 3% fly ash in concrete mix stated the highest value followed by 1% rice husk ash
which is 49.63 MPa. The sample with 3% rice husk ash showed the value of 44.12 MPa in
strength while the lowest compression strength value is for the sample that contain 1% fly ash
in the concrete mix.

SAS 09/2018
As for day 28, the sample from 3% fly ash showed the highest value which is 57.19 MPa.
Second on lead is 1% rice husk ash followed by 3% rice husk ash. Sample from 1% fly ash
still stated the lowest strength.
To compare for fly ash admixture, 3% fly ash concrete displayed higher than 1% fly ash
concrete. This is because of the admixture’s benefits which is its reaction with available lime
and alkali in concrete. The reaction produces additional cementitious compounds. The
reaction between admixture and lime is called pozzolanic reaction. The product between both
components would be calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H) which act as binder. So, the more
content of fly ash will contribute to more reactions which will increase the amount of
additional binder. This will enhance fly ash concrete to gain strength over time.
For rice husk ash admixture, 1% content of rice husk ash showed higher strength compared to
3% rice husk ash content in the concrete. Increasing rice husk ash proportion in a mix ratio
will reduce the concrete strength due to partial pozzolanic reaction in the mixture. Pozzolanic
reaction in rice husk ash concrete mix is not fully performed according to insufficient amount
of product from the hydration process.
Overall, fly ash concrete stated higher strength than rice husk ash concrete. This is because of
some properties of the admixtures itself. Fly ash has finer size which is important in affecting
the rate of pozzolanic reaction and the workability of concrete. Meanwhile the replacement of
cement by rice husk ash reduce the concrete strength due to the coarse traits of rice husk ash.
Addition of rice husk ash causes decrease in density and increase in porosity of concrete
which lead to low concrete strength. Fly ash also contain various chemical composition
compare to rice husk ash which is made of calcinated rice husk. Variety of chemical
compositions in finer size tend to enhance concrete strength at a faster rate.
For flexural strength test, the beam sample which contain fly ash and rice husk ash is used.
Generally, rice husk ash concrete beam produces higher flexural strength compare to fly ash
concrete beam. This is because rice husk ash concrete mix contain higher water-cement ratio
than fly ash concrete mix. However, the water-cement ratio for rice husk ash concrete mix is
optimum regarding flexural strength.
As shown in flexural strength graph, the strength of beam of 1% rice husk ash on day 7 is
extremely high. There is an error occur during running the test which the beam is not
positioned at the very center of the machine. Error in measurement of the beam’s center lead
to uneven contribution of load during flexural test.

7.3 NDT
The NDT was conducted by Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Test (UPV), which is to record the
time which wave travels through the object between the transmitters. And this technique is
applied for measurements of composition, strength estimation, homogeneity, elastic modulus
and age. In addition to check presence of defects, crack depth and thickness measurement.

SAS 09/2018
For the first concrete mix with 1% rice husk ash, the cubes which were cured for 7 days
averaged a velocity of 4.001 km/s which means that the concrete has a good quality
according to standards.

As for the cubes which were cured for 28 days, they averaged a velocity of 3.76 km/s,
meaning that the quality of the concrete has dropped, but it is still “good but maybe porous”
with accordance to the standards. The decrease of the ultrasonic pulse velocity does not mean
the decrease of strength, but it could occur for one of two reasons or maybe even both. First
being that, the faulty of the device itself or human error in terms of misuse of the device,
second reason is that the concrete could have been porous.

For the concrete mix with 3% rice husk ash, the results were satisfying since the ultrasonic
pulse velocity increased with curing age, meaning that the properties of the concrete in terms
of quality were the best out of the three batches.

Moving on to the next two batches which has a completely another admixture, fly ash instead
of rice husk ash, having the first and the second batch consisting of 1% and 3% of fly ash
respectively. Unfortunately both batches have given unsatisfactory results, and both of them
went through the same errors as the 1% rice husk batch for possibly the same reasons.
Emphasizing on the 28 days age cubes of 3% fly ash, which produced a poor quality concrete
since the ultrasonic pulse velocity was below 3.5 km/s.

8.0 CONCLUSION
In conclusion, this experiment is held to observe the effects of addition of admixtures
in fresh concrete by testing their strengths. We conducted both destructive and non-
destructive test. Concrete shapes used were cubical and bar shaped. We observed that the
addition of admixtures increased the workability of the fresh concrete. This made both
machine and hand mixing easier. Based on data and results we gained, there are
improvements in strength and we can conclude that the addition of admixtures helps to
improve not only the workability of fresh concrete but also improves the characteristics such
as strength itself. Thus, our objective for this particular experiment is achieved.

SAS 09/2018
As for the strength test, rice husk ash with ideal amount of lime is more preferable than fly
ash. Using rice husk ash can create a more affordable concrete contrasted with Portland
cement. The strength of rice husk ash concrete is also sufficient for basic applications like
brick, mortar, floor creed and settled soil pieces.
And lastly for NDT, observing the four batches, it can be noticed that the former two batches’
quality was better than the latter two. But the overall performance of the experiment were
good despite the minor errors and beginner’s mistakes. Nonetheless, the four batches
achieved a good quality concrete with slight imperfections since it was possible to achieve an
ultrasonic pulse velocity more than 3.5 km/s, with the exception of the one mentioned above
which did not achieve that.

9.0 REFERENCES
1) Ayesha Siddika, Md.Abdullah AlMamun & Md.Hedayet Ali, 15 January 2018,
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, New York, Springer Publication.
2) Chapter 3 - Fly Ash in Portland Cement Concrete,(2017,June), US Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Retrieved from
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/recycling/fach03.cfm
3) 1“Overview of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)”,
https://inspectioneering.com/tag/nondestructive+testing
4) 2 "About NDT - NDT-ED.org." 2014. 20 Aug. 2014, https://www.nde-
ed.org/AboutNDT/aboutndt.htm
5) 3 “Non destructive testing for determining the strength of concrete from”,
https://www.nbmcw.com/tech-articles/concrete

Appendix

SAS 09/2018
SAS 09/2018