Uploaded by IAEME PUBLICATION

DURABILITY STUDIES ON HIGH VOLUME GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE SLAG CONCRETE

advertisement
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 9, Issue 6, June 2018, pp. 1247–1255, Article ID: IJCIET_09_06_141
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=6
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
© IAEME Publication
Scopus Indexed
DURABILITY STUDIES ON HIGH VOLUME
GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE
SLAG CONCRETE
Anand V.R
Research Scholar & Associate Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering,
Shree Madhwa Vadiraja Institute of Technology and Management,
Vishwothama Nagar, Bantakal, Udupi, Karnataka, India
Dr. A.V. Pradeep Kumar
Superannuated Professor and Head,
Department of Civil Engineering,
Jawaharlal Nehru National College of Engineering,
Shivamogga, Karnataka, India
ABSTRACT
This paper reports the effect on the durability aspects of concrete with high
volume cement replacement by GGBS. In this study, GGBS is physically and
chemically characterized and partially replaced for cement in the range of 10% to
70% by weight of cement. The durability properties like Water impermeability,
Sulphate resistance and Acid resistance is determined for high volume GGBS concrete
and compared the performance with controlled concrete. The test results indicated
that inclusion of high volume of GGBS in concrete increases the durability and found
to be beneficial construction material
Key words: GGBS, Compressive strength, Impermeability, Sulphate attack, Acid
attack.
Cite this Article: Anand V.R and Dr. A.V. Pradeep Kumar, Durability Studies on
High Volume Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag Concrete, International Journal
of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(6), 2018, pp. 1247–1255.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=6
1. INTRODUCTION
Concrete a widely used, strong and versatile mouldable construction material consists of a
binding material, aggregates and water. Concrete can be made of different binding materials
but in the present scenario cement concrete is the most preferable concrete all over the world.
Due to globalization and industrialization the infrastructure growth is in the faster rate, which
requires huge amount for the development. Another major problem with the rapid
infrastructure development is the excess usage of the resources as construction materials. One
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1247
[email protected]
Application of Islamic Spiritual Approaches in Treating Problematic Behaviors among Teenagers in Risk
of such overused construction material is cement concrete. Survey indicates that the concrete
is the world’s second most consumed material after water. This shows that the material
consumption for the preparation of concrete is very high, which will directly lead to the over
use of the natural resources, increasing the environment pollution and increase in the cost of
construction.
Literatures reveal that during production of one tonne of cement, about one tonne of CO2
is released to the environment. This indicates that thousands of tons of CO2 are daily released
in the world to the atmosphere which will result in the severe environmental problems. On the
other hand, due to industrialisation and globalisation huge quantity of CO2 is released daily
which also lead to the environmental issues. In addition to this, during production activities in
the industries huge quantity of the waste will be generated, which will create major problem
of disposal. If these wastes are not properly handled then it will contaminate the entire
environment as a result health hazards are observed in the society. In this contrary the Civil
engineers and the researchers are trying very hard to reduce the CO2 emission to the
environment and to use the industrial wastes as a resource construction material to minimise
the disposal problems. Steel industry is one such most important industry which generates
huge quantity of waste. Blast Furnace slag is one of the wastes generated in this industry. In
this paper an attempt is made to use the finely ground Blast furnace slag as a resource material
for the concrete construction. During this period the GGBS is used as partial replacement for
the cement and the properties like strength and durability of concrete is studied.
2. AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE PRESENT INVESTIGATION
2.1. Aim of the Present Investigation
To determine the durability characteristics of the concrete made with high volume GGBS.
2.2. Objective of Present Investigation
For the present study following objectives are setup.

To design and develop M40 grade concrete with minimum cement content

To replace cement content by GGBS with various percentages.

To investigate the influence of GGBS on the compressive strength of concrete

To investigate the influence of GGBS on the durability characteristics of concrete.
3. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME
3.1. Materials
3.1.1. Cement
Ordinary Portland of 43 Grade cement conforming to IS: 8112-2013 is used for the present
study. The properties are determined as per Bureau of Indian standards and the test results are
shown in Table 1.
3.1.2. Ground Granulate Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS)
The waste material from steel industry such as Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag
(GGBS) generated during the melting of molten slag from iron ore is quenched rapidly and
ground into very fine powder form. The results of chemical and physical properties which are
determined is shown in Table 2 and Table 3 respectively.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1248
[email protected]
Anand V.R and Dr. A.V. Pradeep Kumar
Table 1 Physical properties of Cement
Sl. No.
1
2
3
4
5
Properties
Specific Gravity
Normal Consistency
Initial Setting Time
Final Setting Time
Specific Surface area
Values
3.12
31%
75 min
270min
24.3 m2/kg
Requirements as per IS 81122013
About 3.10 to 3.15
About 28% to 35%
Shall not be less than 30 minutes
Shall not be greater than 600
minutes
Minimum 225 m2/kg
Table 2 Chemical Properties of GGBS
Sl. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Properties
7.64
0.45
0.4
0.11
0.008
90
0.35
Requirement as per BS
EN 5167 -1:2006
14.0 (Max)
2.00 (Max)
2.50 (Max)
2.00 (Max)
0.10 (Max)
67 (Min)
3.00 (Max)
76.16
1.34
1.10
66.66 (Min)
>1.0
<1.40
Result
Magnesia Content (%)
Sulphide Sulphur (%)
Sulphite content (%)
Manganese content (%)
Chloride content (%)
Glass content (%)
Loss on Ignition (%)
Chemical Modulus
CaO + MgO +SiO2
(CaO + MgO)/SiO2
CaO / SiO2
Table 3 Physical Properties of GGBS
Sl. No.
1
2
3
4
Properties
Values
2.90
1245
Whitish
383
Specific Gravity
Bulk Density, kg/m3
Colour
Fineness (m2/kg)
3.1.3. Fine Aggregates
River sand which is naturally available is used as fine aggregates for making concrete. The
fine aggregates are confirming to Zone II of IS 383:2016. The physical properties of fine
aggregates are tested as per BIS specifications and the results of the same is listed in Table 4.
Table 4 Physical properties of Fine Aggregates
Sl. No.
Properties
1
Specific Gravity
2
Fineness Modulus
3
Silt Content
Results
2.53
2.4
0.5%
Value as per IS:383 - 2016
Should not be more than
3.0%
3.1.4. Coarse Aggregates
Coarse aggregates of 20 mm and 12.5 mm down size, angular in nature are used for
preparation of concrete. These aggregates are confirming to IS 383:2016. A proportion of
60:40 of 20 mm down size aggregates with 12.5 mm down size aggregates is blended to get a
good gradation. The physical properties of this coarse aggregate are tabulated in Table 5.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1249
[email protected]
Application of Islamic Spiritual Approaches in Treating Problematic Behaviors among Teenagers in Risk
Table 5 Properties of Coarse Aggregates
Sl. No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Properties
Specific Gravity
Fineness Modulus
Flakiness Index
Elongation Index
Impact Value
Crushing Strength
Result
2.70
6.1
16.30%
12.30%
17.52%
14.89%
3.1.5. Water
Potable water is used for the preparation and curing of test specimens.
3.1.6. Hyper Plasticizer
High range water reducing plasticizer called hyper plasticizers is used for the study. The
optimum dosage of hyper plasticizer is determined by conducting Marsh Cone Test and the
results shows that about 0.9% to 1.2% by weight of the mass of cementations material is
required for the various mixes considered during the study. The properties of the hyper
plasticizers as furnished by the supplier are tabulated in Table 6.
Table 6 Properties of Hyper-Plasticizer
Parameters
Results*
Dark Brown Liquid
Sulphonated Naphthalene
Formaldehyde
1.24±[email protected]ºC
Min. 6
44±5
Max. 0.2
Appearance
Base Material
Specific Gravity
pH
Solid Content (%)
Chloride Content (%)
* Furnished by the supplier
3.2. Mix Proportion
A control mix of M40 grade is designed and prepared as per the recommendations of IS
10262:2009. The mix is designed for a workability of 75 mm of slump and for severe
exposure conditions which is achieved during the study by preparing number of trial mixes by
varying cement content. The provisions of Table 5 of IS 456 -2000 are used to fix the
minimum cement content for the control/reference mix. Once the reference mix is achieved
then the cement is replaced by GGBS with varying percentages. The details of reference mix
(RM) and the GGBS concrete (SM) are tabulated in Table 7.
Table 7 Mix proportion details for Control mix and GGBS concrete
Materials
(kg/m3)
Cement
GGBS
Fine
Aggregate
Coarse
Aggregate
[20mm]
Coarse
Aggregate
RM
330
-
SM10
297
33
Concrete Mix Designation
SM20 SM30 SM40 SM50
264
231
198
165
66
99
132
165
SM60
132
198
SM70
99
231
729.41
729.41
729.41
729.41
729.41
729.41
729.41
729.41
795.61
795.61
795.61
795.61
795.61
795.61
795.61
795.61
428.41
428.41
428.41
428.41
428.41
428.41
428.41
428.41
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1250
[email protected]
Anand V.R and Dr. A.V. Pradeep Kumar
[12.5mm
down size]
Water
Water-Binder
Ratio
Optimum
dosage of
Hyperplasticizer, by
weight
132
132
132
132
132
132
132
132
1.1%
1.0%
0.95%
0.9%
0.4
1.2 %
NOTE:
RM – Controlled Mix
SM20 – 20% GGBS replaced concrete
SM40 – 40% GGBS replaced concrete
SM60 – 60% GGBS replaced concrete
SM10 – 10% GGBS replaced concrete
SM30 – 30% GGBS replaced concrete
SM50 – 50% GGBS replaced concrete
SM70 – 70% GGBS replaced concrete
3.3. Specimen Preparation
The cube specimens of 150mm X 150mm X 150mm of 96 numbers are casted to determine
concrete compressive strength of the concrete at 7, 14, 28, 56 and 90days curing period, 72
numbers to determine the Acid Resistance and Sulphate resistance of the concrete at 28, 56
and 90 days. Total 96 cube specimens of 200mm X 200mm X150mm size are casted to
determine water Impermeability of the concretes at 7, 28, 56 and 90 days of curing period. All
the specimens are initially water cured.
3.4. Testing of Concrete Specimens
3.4.1. Compressive Strength Test
The compressive strength test is conducted as per IS 516: 1959 (Reaffirmed 2004). The test is
carried out for reference concrete and the GGBS concretes with different replacement levels
for 7, 14, 28, 56 and 90 days curing period. The results of the test are shown in Table 8.
3.4.2. Concrete Impermeability Test
The concrete impermeability test is conducted as per the DIN specifications on the cubes of
size 200mm X 200mm X 150mm. The test specimens are placed in the permeability apparatus
and water is applied at a pressure of 5 kg/cm2 to a maximum pressure of 7 kg/cm2. The test
specimens are put into a high water pressure for more than 24 hours. Then the specimens are
removed and the depth of penetration of water inside the specimen is determined by breaking
the cube in to two pieces at the center. By knowing the depth of penetration and the duration
for which the specimen undergone the water pressure, the co-efficient of permeability is
determined. This test is performed for the reference concrete specimens and the GGBS
concrete specimens with varying percentages for a curing period of 7, 28, 56 and 90 days. The
results of the impermeability test are tabulated in Table 9.
3.4.3. Sulphate Attack Test
Sulphate attack test is conducted on concrete cube specimens of 150mm X 150mm X 150mm
size. The specimens are first cured in water for 28 days then they are immersed in the 5%
Magnesium Sulphate solution for 28, 62 days. Before placing in the Sulphate solution, the
weight of the specimen is noted. Compressive strength test is carried out the Sulphate
immersed specimens at 28 and 62 days and is compared with the compressive strength results
of concrete specimens cured in water. In addition to this the surface of the cube specimens are
also deeply investigated to find the damages caused due to the Sulphate attack. The
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1251
[email protected]
Application of Islamic Spiritual Approaches in Treating Problematic Behaviors among Teenagers in Risk
compressive strength test results of Magnesium Sulphate cured specimens are tabulated in
Table 10.
Figure 1 Water Impermeability test for concrete
3.4.4. Acid Attack Test
Acid attack test is conducted on the 150mm size cube specimens of reference and GGBS
concretes with various replacement levels. The specimens are initially water cured for 28 days
and then immersed in 5% sulphuric acid solution for 28 and 62 days. The weight of the cube
specimens is noted before placing the specimens in the acid solution. After 28 and 62 days of
immersion the surfaces of the specimens observed and the weight of the specimens are
determined. These specimens are tested for the compressive strength and the difference in the
strength of the concretes is calculated by comparing with the strength test results of water
cured specimens. The Acid attack test results are tabulated in Table 11.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1. Compressive Strength Test
Table 8 Compressive Strength of concrete for different curing periods
Curing Period, Days
Type of concrete
RM
SM10
SM20
SM30
SM40
SM50
SM60
SM70
07
40.00
40.44
42.37
45.04
48.90
47.80
45.00
44.00
28
56
Compressive Strength, N/mm2
48.80
52.80
52.60
57.80
55.80
60.80
62.80
64.40
67.25
69.20
59.74
62.70
55.93
57.80
52.148
56.70
90
53.85
59.80
63.56
68.25
75.69
70.26
64.25
62.25
Table 8 and Figure 3, shows the compressive strength results of reference concrete and
GGBS concretes with different replacement levels for different curing periods. From the table
it is observed that 40% replacement of cement by GGBS will be the optimum content which
can prove beneficial for the concrete constructions. The strength at 7, 28, 56 and 90 days for
the GGBS concrete observed as very much higher than the designed strength. Hence it proves
that at even at higher replacement levels of cement by GGBS, concrete can gain the required
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1252
[email protected]
Anand V.R and Dr. A.V. Pradeep Kumar
compressive strength. This is mainly due to the void filling theory and the pozzolanic
reactions at the early stages of curing.
Figure 3 Compressive strength of concrete at different curing periods
4.2. Concrete Impermeability Test
Table 9 Compressive Strength of concrete for different curing periods
Curing Period, Days
Type of concrete
RM
SM10
SM20
SM30
SM40
SM50
SM60
SM70
07
7.351 X 10-07
3.749 X 10-07
8.115 X 10-08
3.707 X 10-08
1.977 X 10-09
1.436 X 10-09
1.388 X 10-09
8.050 X 10-10
28
56
Coefficient of Permeability, m/s
6.082 X 10-08
3.352 X 10-09
-08
1.708 X 10
9.749 X 10-11
-09
5.094 X 10
4.115 X 10-11
8.306 X 10-10
0.707 X 10-11
-11
8.129 X 10
5.977 X 10-12
-11
7.960 X 10
1.436 X 10-12
5.989 X 10-11
7.388 X 10-13
-12
4.963 X 10
2.293 X 10-13
90
1.230 X 10-09
8.590 X 10-12
3.260 X 10-12
1.624 X 10-13
6.079 X 10-14
4.800 X 10-14
1.356 X 10-14
0.850 X 10-14
From the results of the concrete Impermeability test as shown in the Table 9 it is observed
that as the percentage of the GGBS is increases and as the age of the concrete increases the
concrete becomes impermeable. This is due to the void filling theory and the secondary
hydration process of the GGBS concrete at later stages.
4.3. Sulphate Attack Test
From the test results shown in Table 9, it is observed that the reference concrete is more prone
to the sulphate attack. The strength of about 14.15% and 18.57% reduction in compressive
strength is observed in comparison with the compressive strength of concrete specimens cured
in water of the reference concrete which is submerged in Sulphate solution for 28 and 62 days
respectively. This reduction percentage is gradually decreasing as the replacement level of
cement by GGBS is increasing. This may be because of later stage reaction and the void
filling ability of GGBS
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1253
[email protected]
Application of Islamic Spiritual Approaches in Treating Problematic Behaviors among Teenagers in Risk
Table 10 Sulphate attack test on concrete for different 28 and 62 days curing periods
Compressive Strength, N/mm2
Type of
Concrete
28 days
Water cured
specimens
RM
SM10
SM20
SM30
SM40
SM50
SM60
SM70
52.8
57.8
60.8
64.4
69.2
62.7
57.8
56.7
28 days
Sulphate
solution
cured
specimens
45.33
50.21
53.52
57.68
63.25
58.222
54.444
54.25
62 days
% variation Water cured
specimens
-14.15
-13.13
-11.97
-10.43
-8.60
-7.14
-5.81
-4.32
53.85
59.8
63.56
68.25
75.69
70.26
64.25
62.25
62 days
Sulphate
solution
cured
specimens
43.85
49.232
53.36
59.111
66.111
62.556
58.444
56.25
% variation
-18.57
-17.67
-16.05
-13.39
-12.66
-10.96
-9.04
-9.64
4.4. Acid Attack Test
Table 11 Acid attack test on concrete for different 28 and 62 days curing periods
Compressive Strength, N/mm2
28 days
62 days
Type of
28 days
Sulphuric
62 days
Sulphuric
Concrete Water cured Acid solution % variation Water cured Acid solution % variation
specimens
cured
specimens
cured
specimens
specimens
RM
52.8
32.444
-38.55
53.85
29.556
-45.11
SM10
57.8
36.667
-36.56
59.8
33.556
-43.89
SM20
60.8
40.889
-32.75
63.56
38.778
-38.99
SM30
64.4
43.556
-32.37
68.25
44.556
-34.72
SM40
69.2
47.667
-31.12
75.69
50.667
-33.06
SM50
62.7
43.889
-30.00
70.26
45.00
-35.95
SM60
57.8
40.444
-30.03
64.25
43.23
-32.72
SM70
56.7
40.889
-27.89
62.25
42.12
-32.34
From Table 10, it is observed that the reference concrete is highly prone to the Acid
attack. The surface of the concrete cubes after 62 days of the Acid immersion is completely
eroded and the aggregates are peeping outside the body of the concrete. This is observer in all
the types of concrete where the severity is more on the reference concrete. Nearly 50% on the
loss of compressive strength is observed in the reference concrete after an immersion period
of 62 days. The 70% GGBS concrete shown better performance in comparison with all other
types of concrete considered.
5. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the investigation, the following conclusion are drawn

The GGBS can be utilized as a pozzolanic material and it may find beneficial when used in
high volumes for the structural concrete elements.

The compressive strength of the GGBS concrete is observed as higher than the reference
concrete at all the curing periods for all replacement levels.

From the results it is found that 40 to 50% of cement replacement by GGBS will yield better
strength as compared to controlled concrete.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1254
[email protected]
Anand V.R and Dr. A.V. Pradeep Kumar

As the percentage of the replacement of cement by GGBS increases the concrete becomes
impermeable.

A better resistance to Sulphate and Acid attacks is observed by the GGBS concrete of higher
percentage levels.

Use of GGBS at higher volumes in concrete is found to be beneficial not only for the for the
structural concrete also for the environment. As the replacement levels of cement by GGBS
increases the consumption of cement as well as production of cement can be minimized
which in turn reduces CO2 emission & solves the problem of disposal of waste material. This
makes the industrial waste into a resource material in construction, as a result of which there is
saving in energy and money which makes the construction green.
REFERENCES
[1]
Vinayak Awasare, Prof. M.V Nagendra, “Analysis of Strength Characteristics of GGBS
concrete”, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology, E-ISSN 09763945, Vol V, Issue II, April – June 2014, pp 82 – 84.
[2]
Yogindra O. Patil, Prof P N Patil, Dr. Arun Kumar Dwivedi, “GGBS as partial
replacement of OPC in cement concrete – An experimental Study”, International Journal
of Scientific Research, ISSN: 2277 – 8179, Vol 2, Issue 11, 2013, pp. 55 - 58
[3]
A.H.L. Swaroop, K Venkateshwara Rao, Prof. P Kodandarama Rao, “Durability of
Concrete with Fly ash and GGBS”, International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications, ISSN: 2248- 9622, Vol 3, Issue 4, July – Aug 2013, pp. 285 -289
[4]
E. Rozière A. Loukili, R. El Hachem F. Grondin, “Durability of concrete exposed to
leaching and external sulphate attacks” Cement and Concrete Research, ISSN: 0008 –
8846, Vol Issue 12, December 2009, pp. 1188 -1198
[5]
Sonali K Gadpalliwar, R S Deotale, Abhijeet R, “Partial replacement of cement by GGBS,
RHA and quarry sand in concrete”, ISOR Journal of Mechanical and Civil Engineering,
ISSN: 2278 – 1684, Vol-11, Issue 2, Ver-II, March-April-2014, pp. 784 -794
[6]
Saud Al-Obtaibi, “Durability of concrete incorporated with GGBS activated by waterglass”, Construction and Building Materials, ISSN: 0950 – 0618, Vol 22, Issue 10,
October 2008, pp.2059 -2067.
[7]
AA. Ramezanianpours, Atarodi Msumi, “Durability test on GGBS concrete against
sulphate attack”, Third International Conference on Sustainable Construction Materials
and Technology.
[8]
Rakesh Kumar, P.K. Mehta, P.R. Pal and TP Muhammed Ashiq, Relation among
Mechanical Properties of Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag Concrete . International
Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology , 8(3), 2017, pp. 423-431
[9]
Naveen Kumar B M, Dr. Latha M S, Revanasiddappa Madihalli and Mala N, Strength,
Durability and Toughness of Steel Slag Concrete, International Journal of Civil
Engineering and Technology, 8(10), 2017, pp. 386–394
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
1255
[email protected]
Download
Random flashcards
Radiobiology

39 Cards

Nomads

17 Cards

African nomads

18 Cards

History of Europe

27 Cards

Create flashcards