International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 8, Issue 4, April 2017, pp. 2246–2254, Article ID: IJCIET_08_04_254 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=4 ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316 © IAEME Publication
Scopus Indexed
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON PROPERTIES OF GRANITE WASTE IN SELF COMPACTING HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE M. Manikandan Research Scholar, Department of Civil Engineering, St. Peter’s University, Chennai, India Dr. T. Felixkala Professor and Head, Department of Civil Engineering, Dr. M.G.R. Educational and Research Institute University, Chennai, India ABSTRACT Granite waste is obtained as a by-product during sawing, shaping, and cutting of granite and it was characterized from a chemical and physical point of view in order to use in mortar and concrete, especially for self-compacting mixtures. Since a raw material is abundantly available as a waste in industries, it can be considered to replace fine aggregate, in the other, especially to replace sand. The effect of using granite powder and granules as constituents of fines in mortar or concrete by partially reducing quantities of cement as well as other conventional fines in self compacting concrete. This study emphasizes on the use of granite waste to substitute sand (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%). The study looks to strengthen the concrete further by marginally replacing cement with 7.5% silica fume, 10% fly ash, 10% blast furnace slag, and 1% super-plasticizer. The test will conducted for Fresh Concrete test in Slump-Flow test, L-Box test, V- Funnel test and Hardened concrete test in Compressive Strength, Flexural Strength, and Split Tensile Strength are compared for different proportions of granite waste at different curing periods on hardened concrete specimens. The test results as highest strength has been achieved in GP25 %. The Granite powder as an additive together with admixtures also improves the strength of concrete. Key words: self compacting concrete, Fresh Properties and hardened concrete test. Cite this Article: M. Manikandan and Dr. T. Felixkala, Experimental Study on Properties of Granite Waste in Self Compacting High Performance Concrete. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(4), 2017, pp. 2246– 2254. http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=8&IType=4
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
2246
[email protected]
Experimental Study on Properties of Granite Waste in Self Compacting High Performance Concrete
1. INTRODUCTION Current scenario in the building industry shows increased construction of large and complex structures, which often leads to difficult concreting conditions .when large quantity of heavy reinforcement is to be placed in reinforced concrete members it is fully compared without voids or honeycombs .vibrating concrete in congested locations may cause some risk to labour and there are always doubts about the strength of concrete placed in such locations. One solution for the achievement strength of concrete structures independent of the quality of construction work is the employment of self compacting concrete (SCC). SCC is that concrete which is able to flow under its own weight and completely fill the formwork without segregation, even in the presence of dense reinforcement ,without the need of any vibration whilst maintaining homogeneity. Self compacting concrete (SCC) is a new kind of high performance concrete (HPC) with excellent deformability and segregation resistance .the major steps in the production of SCC are designing an appropriate mix proportion and evaluating the properties of the concrete obtained. Ever since the first report of the development of SCC in Japan in 1988 by Ozawa et al using super plasticizer and viscosity agent and in 1992 ,they again indentified the factors controlling self compatibility and found that the water powder ratio governs the self compatibility(1). Present- day self – compacting concrete can be classified as an advanced construction material. As the name suggests, it does not require to be vibrated to achieve full compaction. This offers many benefits and advantages over conventional concrete. These included an improved quality of concrete and reduction of on – site repairs, faster construction and improvement of health and safety is also achieved through elimination of handling of vibrators and a substantial reduction of environmental noise loading on and around a site. Self – compacting concrete (SCC) is a fluid mixture, which is suitable for placing difficult conditions and also in congested reinforcement, without vibration. In principle, a self compacting or self – consolidating concrete must have a fluidity that allows self – compaction without external energy remain homogeneous in a form during and after the placing process and flow easily through reinforcement. Self – consolidating concrete has recently been used in the pre – cast industry and in some commercial applications, however the relatively high material cost still hinders the wide spread use of such specialty concrete in various segments of the construction industry, including commercial and residential construction. Compared with conventional concrete of similar mechanical properties, the material cost of SCC is more due to the relatively high demand of Cementation materials and chemical admixtures including high – range water reducing admixtures (HRWRA) and viscosity enhancing admixtures (VEA). Typically, the content in Cementation materials can vary between 525 and 575 Kg/m3 for SCC targeted for the filling of highly restricted areas and for repair applications. Such applications require low aggregate volume to facilitate flow among restricted spacing without blockage and ensure the filling of the formwork without consolidation. The incorporation of high volumes of finely ground powder materials is necessary to enhance cohesiveness and increase the paste volume required for successful casting of SCC. Proper selection of finely ground materials can enhance the packing density of solid particles and enable the reduction of water or HRWRA demand required to achieve high deformability. It can also reduce viscosity for a given consistency; especially in the case of SCC made with relatively low Water – Binder ratio. Reducing the free water can decrease the VEA dosage necessary for stability. High binder content typically includes substitutions of cement with 20 to 40% fly ash or GGBS and, in some cases low contents of micro silica employed. The cost of SCC can be reduced through the selection of adequate concrete - making materials and admixture constituents, including partial substitutions of cement and supplementary Cementations materials by readily available fillers. Regardless of its binder composition, SCC is http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
2247
[email protected]
M. Manikandan and Dr. T. Felixkala
characterized by its low yield value to secure high deformability, and moderate viscosity to provide uniform suspension of solid particles, both during casting and thereafter until setting. The mixture proportioning of SCC to simultaneously meet the various performance requirements at minimum cost involves the optimization of several mixture constituents that have a marked influence on performance. This process is quite complex and can be simplified by understanding the relative significance of various mixture parameters on key properties of SCC. This includes deformability, passing ability, filling capacity and segregation resistance. As with any new technology, there was clearly a learning curve to overcome, and refinement of the materials and mix proportions used took care to finally achieve optimum performance. In Japan, self – compacting concretes are divided into three different types according to the composition of the mortar:
Powder type
Viscosity – modifying agent (stabilizer) type
Combination type
For the powder type, a high proportion of fines produce the necessary mortar volume, while in the stabilizer type, fines content can be in the range admissible for vibrated concrete. The viscosity required to inhibit segregation will then be adjusted by using a stabilizer (kosmatka et al., 2002). The combination type is created by adding a small amount of stabilizer to the powder type to balance the moisture fluctuations in the manufacturing process.
2. MATERIALS USED Cement: Ordinary Portland cement (53 Grade) was used and its properties are
Specific gravity of cement
- 3.15
Initial setting time of cement
- 45 min
Final setting time of cement
- 360min
Consistency
- 36%
Fine Aggregate: River sand and Granite powder (maximum size 4.75) was used and its properties are
Specific gravity of FA & GP
- 2.63 & 2.58
Water absorption
- 1.25%
Coarse Aggregate: Natural crushed stone (size – 12.5mm) was used and its properties are
Specific gravity of CA - 2.68
Water absorption
- 0.55%
Both fine aggregate and coarse aggregate are conformed to Indian Standard Specifications IS: 383 – 1970. Fly ash:
Class C fly ash was used and specific gravity is 2.15.
Silica fume:
Specific gravity is 2.25
Ground Granulated Blast Furnace slag:
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
2248
[email protected]
Experimental Study on Properties of Granite Waste in Self Compacting High Performance Concrete
Specific gravity of (GGBS) : 2.95
Superplasticizer: Master Glenium Sky 8233 is an admixture of a new generation based on VMA and polycarboxylate ether superplasticizer was used as per code EN 934-2
Mix Design for M60 Grade of SCC: The mix design done as per code IS 10262:2009 and given Table. Table 1 Mix Design For M60 Grade of SCC Weight in Kg per m3 of concrete Super Fly Silica Coarse Cemen Slag Plasticiz Ash Fume Water Aggrega t (10%) er (10%) (7.5%) te (1%) GP0 394 55 41 55 5 143 915 GP25 394 55 41 55 5 143 915 GP50 394 55 41 55 5 143 915 GP75 394 55 41 55 5 143 915 GP100 394 55 41 55 5 143 915 NA 550 143 915 CC 550 143 915 Note: GP-Granite Powder, NA-Nominal Aggregate, CC-Control Concrete.
Mix Designatio n
Fine Aggregate Granite power
Sand
0 224.75 449.50 674.25 899 915 -
899 674.25 449.50 224.75 0 0 899
3. TEST METHOD FOR FRESH AND HARDENED PROPERTIES OF SCC SLUMP Flow Test Slump flow is one of the most commonly used SCC tests at the current time. This test involves the use of slump cone used with conventional concretes as described in ASTM C 143(2002).The main difference between the slump flow test and ASTM C 143 is that the slump flow test measures the “spread” or “flow” of the concrete sample once the cone is lifted rather than the traditional “slump” (drop in height) of the concrete sample.
L-Box Test The L-box value is the ratio of levels of concrete at each end of the box after the test is complete at each end of the box after the test is complete. The L-box consists of a “chimney “section and a “trough “section after the test is complete, the level of concrete in the chimney is recorded as H1,the level of concrete in the trough is recorded as H2.The L-box value(also referred to as the “L-box ratio”, “blocking value”, or “blocking ratio”)is simply H2/H1.Typical acceptable values for the L-box value are in the range of 0.8 to 1.0.If the concrete was perfectly level after the test is complete, the L-box value would be equal to 1.0.Conversely,if the concrete was too stiff to flow to the end of the trough the L-box value would be equal to zero.
V-Funnel Test and – Funnel Test at T5 Minutes V-funnel test is used to determine the filling ability (flow ability) of the concrete with a maximum aggregate size of 20 mm. The funnel is filled with about 12 litres of concrete and the time taken for it to flow through the apparatus is measured .After this the funnel can be refilled concrete and left for 5 minutes to settle .If the concrete shows segregation then the flow time will increase significantly.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
2249
[email protected]
M. Manikandan and Dr. T. Felixkala Table 1 Acceptance criteria for SCC S. No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Method
Unit
Slump flow test T50 cm slump flow V-funnel test V-funnel at T5 minutes L-box test
Mm Sec Sec Sec H2/H1
Typical range of values Minimum Maximum 650 800 2 5 6 12 6 15 0.8 1.0
Compressive Strength Test Mechanical behavior of concrete was studies for M60 grade of SCC; Cubes Specimens 150 x 150 mm were casted and cured 7, 14, 28, 56 days and the result obtained are reported.
Split Tensile Strength Test Mechanical behavior of concrete was studies for M60 grade of SCC; Cylinder Specimens 150mm diameter x 200 mm height were casted and cured 7, 14, 28, 56 days and the result obtained are reported.
Flexural Strength Test Mechanical behavior of concrete was studies for M60 grade of SCC; Beam Specimens 100mm x 100 mm x 500 were casted and cured 7, 14, 28, 56 days and the result obtained are reported.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Fresh Concrete Properties Table 2 Slump Flow Test Mix Trial 1 Trial 2 GP 0 670 660 GP 25 660 680 GP 50 660 650 GP 75 650 690 GP 100 680 700 Note: Flow ability of SCC should be 650 to 800 MM
Trial 3 640 690 680 670 650
Average 656.67 676.67 663.33 670.00 676.67
Slump Flow Test Slump Flow mm
680
676.67
675
676.67 670
670 665
663.33
660
656.67
655 650 645 GP 0
GP 25
GP 50
GP 75
GP 100
Figure 1 Slump Flow Compare with Different Mix Designation
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
2250
[email protected]
Experimental Study on Properties of Granite Waste in Self Compacting High Performance Concrete Table 3 L - Box Text Mix Trial 1 Trial 2 GP 0 1.1 1.1 GP 25 1.2 1.3 GP 50 0.9 0.9 GP 75 0.7 0.8 GP 100 0.8 0.9 Note: L- Box value should be 0.8 to 1.0 cm/sec
Trial 3 1.3 1.3 0.8 0.6 0.8
Average 1.17 1.27 0.87 0.70 0.83
L-Box Test L-Box in cm/sec
1.4 1.2
1.27
1.17
1
0.87
0.8
0.83
0.7
0.6 0.4 0.2 0 GP 0
GP 25
GP 50
GP 75
GP 100
Figure 2 L - Box Compare with Different Mix Designation Table 4 V – Funnel Test and Funnel Test at T5 Minutes Initial in sec T5 min in sec Mix Trial Trial Trial 2 Average Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 1 3 GP 0 11 11 13 11.67 20 21 19 GP 25 12 13 11 12.00 21 22 21 GP 50 11 12 11 11.33 18 17 19 GP 75 11 10 10 10.33 16 15 15 GP 100 10 9 9 9.33 16 18 17 Note: V funnel value should be 6-12 sec for initial and 6 - 15 sec for T-5 min
Average 20.00 21.33 18.00 15.33 17.00
V-Funnel test 25
21.33
20
20
18 15.33
15
12
11.67
10
17 Mix Initial in sec
11.33
10.33
9.33
Mix Initial in sec
5 0 GP 0
GP 25
GP 50
GP 75
GP 100
Figure 3 V – Funnel Test and Funnel Test at T5 Minutes. Compare with Different Mix Designation
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
2251
[email protected]
M. Manikandan and Dr. T. Felixkala
Hardened Concrete Properties Table 5 Strength of various mixes
Compressive Strength in N/mm2
Mix GP 0 GP 25 GP 50 GP 75 GP 100 CC100
7 Days 36.6 41.18 33.72 33.02 33.1 33.18
14 Days 42.22 58.52 44.3 44.44 40.02 37.64
28 Days 57.63 63.26 53.04 55.74 45.49 52.2
56 Days 63.85 69.85 56.74 58.22 51.85 61.29
Compressive Strength 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
7 Days
14 Days
28 Days
56 Days
GP 0
36.6
42.22
57.63
63.85
GP 25
41.18
58.52
63.26
69.85
GP 50
33.72
44.3
53.04
56.74
GP 75
33.02
44.44
55.74
58.22
GP 100
33.1
40.02
45.49
51.85
CC100
33.18
37.64
52.2
61.29
Figure 4 Variation of compressive strength (N/mm2) with days of curing at 26o C curing temperature Table 6 Split tensile strength of various mixes Mix GP 0 GP 25 GP 50 GP 75 GP 100 CC 100
7 days 1.49 2.40 1.89 1.69 1.58 1.9
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
14 days 3.28 3.89 3.70 3.49 3.58 2.66
2252
28 days 5.06 5.60 5.21 5.20 5.10 4.17
56 days 6.48 6.90 6.80 5.62 5.48 5.62
[email protected]
Experimental Study on Properties of Granite Waste in Self Compacting High Performance Concrete
Split Tensile Strength in N/mm2
Split Tensile Strength 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
7 days
14 days
28 days
56 days
GP 0
1.49
3.28
5.06
6.48
GP 25
2.4
3.89
5.6
6.9
GP 50
1.89
3.7
5.21
6.8
GP 75
1.69
3.49
5.2
5.62
GP 100
1.58
3.58
5.1
5.48
CC 100
1.9
2.66
4.17
5.62
Figure 5 Variation of Split Tensile strength (N/mm2) with days of curing at 26o C curing temperature Table 7 Flexural strength of various mixes Mix GP 0 GP 25 GP 50 GP 75 GP 100 CC100
7 days 3.49 3.89 3.27 3.18 3.16 3.19
14 days 4.70 4.90 4.48 4.32 4.28 4.22
28 days 6.40 6.62 6.58 6.14 5.98 5.99
56 days 8.90 9.40 8.21 8.18 8.90 8.04
Flexural Strength in N/mm2
Flexural Strength 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 7 days
14 days
28 days
56 days
GP 0
3.49
4.7
6.4
8.9
GP 25
3.89
4.9
6.62
9.4
GP 50
3.27
4.48
6.58
8.21
GP 75
3.18
4.32
6.14
8.18
GP 100
3.16
4.28
5.98
8.9
CC100
3.19
4.22
5.99
8.04
Figure 2 Variation of Flexural strength (N/mm2) with days of curing at 26o C curing temperature
5. CONCLUSION In this study, the performance concrete made with granite powder which is fine aggregate and partial replacement of cement with 7.5% Silica fume, 10% fly ash, 10% slag and 1% super
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
2253
[email protected]
M. Manikandan and Dr. T. Felixkala
plasticiser subjected to water curing is conducted for finding the characteristic mechanical properties such as compressive strength, split tensile, strength and flexural strength of concrete mixtures at 7, 14, 28, and 56 days of curing for 0.38 water-cement ratio. The test results show clearly that granite powder as a partial sand replacement has beneficial effects of the mechanical properties of high performance concrete. On the whole of 6 mixtures, the concrete with 25% of granite powder (GP25) was found to be superior when compared to other mixtures as well as GP0 and CC100 for all operating conditions.
REFERENCES [1]
Bartos P.J. M, “Measurement of Key properties of fresh self compacting concrete”, Proceeding of CENSTAR Workshop on measurement, Testing and Standardization. Future needs in the field of construction materials, pairs, June 2000, university of Paisley, Paisley, Scotland, UK.
[2]
Bouzoubaa. N, and Lachmi.M, “Self-compacting concrete incorporating high volumes of class F fly ash, preliminary results” Cement and Concrete research, Vol.31, No.3,PP. 413420, March 2001.
[3]
Brain Poulson, EFNARC, Secretary General, “Specifications and guide lines for self compacting concrete”, Feb 2002.
[4]
Campion.J.M. and Jost.P, “Self-compacting: Expanding the possibility of concrete design and placement”. Concrete international, Vol 22, no4, PP, 31-34, April 2000.
[5]
Chaina, Ferraris: journal of research NISY Gaithersburg, Sep /Oct 1999. Measurement of the rheological properties of high performance concrete: state of the art report.
[6]
Emborg.M., “Mixing and Transport”, Final report of Task 8.1, Brite-Eu Ram Project no. Be 96-3801/Contract BRPR-CT 96-0366, Non-confidential information, 2000.
[7]
Frank Dehn, KlansHolschhemachen and Dirk weib-Self compacting concrete (SCC), time development of the material properties & the bond behavior.
[8]
S. Girish, R. V. Ranganath and JagadishVengala, influence of powder and paste on flow properties of SCC construction and building materials 24, 2010, pp 2481- 2488
[9]
Hajime Okamura and Masahiro Ochi “Self-Compacting Concrete” journal of advanced concrete technology Vol.1, No 1.5-15. April 2003.
[10]
IS 269-1989, Indian standard specification for ordinary Portland cement, 33 grade, 4th revision, 1st reprint, June 1991, BIS 19901
[11]
IS 383-1970, Specification for coarse and fine aggregate for natural sources for concrete, second revision, 9th reprint, 1993.
[12]
IS 2386-1963 (All parts), Methods of tests for aggregate of concrete.
[13]
IS 3812-1981, Indian standard specification for fly ash for use as pozzolona and admixture, 1st revision, bureau of Indian standard, New Delhi, June 1981.
[14]
IS 10262-1982, recommended guide lines for concrete mix design, 4th reprint, 1996.
[15]
Khayat.K.h, pautre.P and Tremblay.S, “Structural performance and in place properties of self compact concrete used for casting highly reinforced columns”, ACI materials journals, Vol.98,No.5,pp.371-378,Sep-Oct 2001.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
2254
[email protected]
