Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Inuence of water/powder ratio on strength properties of self-compacting

concrete containing coal y ash and bottom ash
Rafat Siddique a, Paratibha Aggarwal b,, Yogesh Aggarwal b
a
b

Civil Engineering Department, Thapar University, Patiala 147 004, India

Civil Engineering Department, National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra, India

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

A research [7] was aimed at evaluating the usage of Rice Husk

Ash (RHA) as viscosity modifying agent in SCC, and to study the relative costs of the materials used in SCC. Test results substantiate the
feasibility to develop low cost SCC using RHA. In the fresh state of
concrete, the different mixes of concrete have slump ow in the
range of 595795 mm, L-box ratio ranging from 0 (stucked) to 1
and ow time ranging from 2.2 to 29.3 s. The compressive strengths
developed by the SCC mixes with RHA were comparable to the control concrete. Cost analysis showed that the cost of ingredients of
specic SCC mix is 42.47% less than that of control concrete. A study
[8] investigated compressive strength and particularly drying
shrinkage properties of self-compacting concretes containing binary, ternary, and quaternary blends of Portland cement, y ash
(FA), ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS), silica fume
(SF), and metakaolin (MK). Based on the ndings of this study, the
following conclusions may be drawn: There was a marked reduction in the compressive strength of the concretes with increasing
FA content while the concretes having GGBFS had comparable
strength values to that of the control concrete. The SF and MK concretes, on the other hand, had consistently higher compressive
strength than the control concrete. The negative effect of FA on
the compressive strength was relatively diminished with the ternary and quaternary use of mineral admixtures. According to the

R. Siddique et al. / Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

GLM-ANOVA result, FA appeared to be most effective factor on the

compressive strength; however, the effect of GGBFS appeared to be
insignicant. The contribution of FA, MK, and SF were 26.7%, 12.7%,
and 9.7%, respectively.
An investigation [9] presented the transport and mechanical
properties of self consolidating concrete that contained high percentages of low-lime and high-lime y ash (FA). Self consolidating
concretes (SCCs) containing ve different contents of high-lime FA
and low-lime FA as a replacement of cement were examined along
with a control SCC mixture without any FA for comparison. The
fresh properties of the SCCs were observed through, slump ow
time and diameter, V-funnel ow time, L-box height ratio, and segregation ratio. The hardened properties included the compressive
strength, split tensile strength, drying shrinkage and transport
properties (absorption, sorptivity and rapid chloride permeability
tests) up to 365 days. Test results conformed that it was possible
to produce SCC with a 70% of cement replacement by both types
of FA. The use of high volumes of FA in SCC not only improved
the workability and transport properties but also made it possible
to produce concretes between 33 and 40 MPa compressive
strength at 28 days, which exceeds the nominal compressive
strength for normal concrete (30 MPa).
Previous studies have shown that the use of mineral admixtures
such as y ash and blast furnace slag could increase the slump of
the concrete mixture without increasing its cost, while reducing
the dosage of superplasticizer needed to obtain similar slump ow
compared to concrete made with Portland cement only [10]. Also,
the use of y ash improves rheological properties and reduces the
cracking potential of concrete as it lowers the heat of hydration of
the cement [11]. Kim et al. [12] studied the properties of super
owing concrete containing y ash and reported that the replacement of cement by 30% (40% for only one mixture) y ash resulted
in excellent workability and owability. Other researchers [13]
evaluated the inuence of supplementary cementitious materials
on workability and concluded that the replacement of cement by
30% of y ash can signicantly improve rheological properties.
The use of y ash reduces the demand for cement, ne llers and
sand [14], which are required in high quantities in SCC. Moreover,
the incorporation of y ash also reduces the need for viscosityenhancing chemical admixtures.
The objective of this paper is to measure the fresh properties
and strength properties like compressive and split tensile strength
at the ages of 28, 90 and 365 days for the various mixes, incorporating bottom ash as partial replacement of ne aggregates in varying percentages of 10%, 20% and 30% and y ash as replacement of
cement in varying percentages of 1535% along with the effect of
water/powder ratio on the strengths.

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

Sieve Size (microns)

Fig. 1. Grading curves for ne aggregates (sand and bottom ash).

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

The properties of y ash and bottom ash conform to IS: 3812-2003.

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

3.1. Mixture proportions

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.

2.2. Fly ash and coal bottom ash

Class F Fly ash obtained from Panipat Thermal Power Station, Panipat, Haryana with specic gravity 2.13, was used. In addition to y ash, there are vast amounts
of substandard (coarse) bottom ash that can be utilized in the concrete industry.
Coal bottom ash was also obtained from Panipat Thermal Power Station, Panipat,
Haryana. Specic gravity of bottom ash was 1.93 and neness modulus was observed to be 1.6, as shown in Fig. 1, with bulk density loose and compacted as
776 and 948 kg/m3, respectively. The chemical properties of y ash and bottom
ash are presented in Table 1.

3.2. Preparation, and casting of specimens

For these mix proportions, required quantities of materials were
weighed and mixing of cement and y ash in dry state and coarse

75

R. Siddique et al. / Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

Table 2a
Mix composition for 0% and 10% bottom ash mixes.
Mix

0% Bottom ash

10% 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

20% Bottom ash

30% Bottom ash

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

and ne aggregates were mixed dry separately. Add half of the

mixing water to coarse and ne aggregates and mix for 3 min. Mixer is stopped and left covered for 15 min, then cement and y ash
added evenly over the aggregate and mixed for 30 s. Add remaining
water over next 30 s and then mixing continued for 3 min after
adding all the materials together in a mixer to obtain homogeneous mix. The casting immediately followed mixing, after carrying out the tests for fresh properties. The top surface of the
specimens was scraped to remove excess material and achieve
smooth nish. The specimens were removed from moulds after
24 h and cured in water till testing. The cubes of size 150 mm were
cast for determination of compressive strength and 150  300 mm
cylinders for split tensile strength. All test measurements were taken as the average of three readings for strength tests.
3.3. Testing of the specimens
3.3.1. Properties of fresh concrete and strength
For determining the self-compactibility properties (slump ow,
T50cm time, V-funnel ow times, L-box blocking ratio, U-box difference in height) tests were performed. All fresh test measurements

were duplicated and the average of measurements was given. In

order to reduce the effect of workability loss on variability of test
results, fresh state properties of mixes were determined within a
period of 30 min after mixing. The order of testing was as below,
respectively.
1.
2.
3.
4.

Slump ow test and measurement of T50cm time;

V-funnel ow tests at 10 s T10s and 5 min T5min;
L-box test;
U-box test

The slump ow represents the mean diameter of the mass of

concrete after release of a standard slump cone; the diameter is
measured in two perpendicular directions. According to Nagataki
and Fujiwara [15] a slump ow ranging from 500 to 700 mm is
considered as the slump required for a concrete to be self-compacted. At more than 700 mm the concrete might segregate, and
at less than 500 mm the concrete is considered to have insufcient
ow to pass through highly congested reinforcement. The stability
of SCC mixtures was evaluated through the V-shaped funnel test.
According to Khayat and Manai [16], a funnel test ow time less

R. Siddique et al. / Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

4.1. Properties of fresh concrete

The slump ow test judges the capability of concrete to deform
under its own weight against the friction of the surface with no restraint present. A slump ow value ranging from 500 to 700 mm
for a concrete to be self-compacting was suggested [15]. At slump
ow >700 mm, the concrete might segregate, and at <500 mm, the
concrete might have insufcient ow to pass through highly congested reinforcement. All the mixes in the study conform to the
above range since the slump ow of SCC mixes is in the range of
590675 mm. The slump ow time of the concrete, to reach diameter (500 mm) for all mixes was less than 6 s. In addition to the
slump ow test, V-funnel test was also performed to assess the
owability and stability of the SCC. V-funnel time, which is less
than 6 s, is recommended for concrete to qualify as a SCC [17].
As per EFNARC [18], time ranging from 6 to 12 s is considered adequate for a SCC. The V-funnel ow times were in the range of 4
10 s. Test results indicate that all SCC mixes meet the requirements
of allowable ow time. Maximum size of coarse aggregate was
kept as 16 mm in order to avoid blocking effect in the L-box. The
gap between rebars in L-box test was 35 mm. The L-box ratio
(H2/H1) for the mixes was above 0.6. U-box difference in height
of concrete in two compartments was in the range of 1065 mm.
Although all the mixes satised the workability criteria for SCC
mix, the best workability properties were obtained for all mixes
with 0% bottom ash. For 10% bottom ash, the mix with 30% y
ash showed decrease in workability. With increase in bottom ash
content to 20%, the mixes at 15%, and 35% y ash showed comparatively less workability. Finally, for 30% bottom ash, the mixes with
y ash content 20%, 30% and 35% showed decrease in workability
as compared to other mixes. Thus, it was observed that the best
combination for lling ability, passing ability and segregation
resistance taking into consideration the slump ow values, V-funnel, L-box and U-box workability characteristics was for 0% bottom
ash mixes for all y ash contents and in the presence of 20% bottom
ash with 2025% y ash.

Compressive Strength
(MPa)

4. Results and discussion

10% Bottom ash

35% fly ash

20% fly ash

30% fly ash

15% fly ash

25% fly ash

50
40
30
20
10
28

90

365

Age (Days)
Fig. 3. Compressive strength (10% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.

20% Bottom ash

Compressive Strength
(MPa)

than 6 s is recommended for a concrete to qualify for an SCC. For

each mixture, the compressive strength was determined on three
cubes, and split tensile strength test on three cylinders at 28, 90,
and 365 days, as per IS 516:1959.

35% fly ash

30% fly ash

20% fly ash

15% fly ash

25% fly ash

50
40
30
20
10
28

90

365

Age (Days)
Fig. 4. Compressive strength (20% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.

30% Bottom ash

Compressive Strength
(MPa)

76

35% fly ash

20% fly ash

30% fly ash

15% fly ash

25% fly ash

50
40
30
20
10
28

90

365

Age (Days)
Fig. 5. Compressive strength (30% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.

4.2. Compressive strength

The compressive strength for different mixes with bottom ash
percentages varying from 0% to 30% is shown in Figs. 25, respec-

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.

tively. The results show that difference of compressive strength of

various mixes depend on the bottom ash content in the mix. The
SCCs without bottom ash developed compressive strengths ranging from 30 to 35, 40 to 60, 43 to 65 MPa at 28, 90 and 365 days,
respectively which is the compressive strength commonly used
for normal construction applications. It was observed that the
strength gain at 90 days and 365 days was within the limits corresponding to the amount of cement content used in the SCC mixes.
The strength of M02 at 28 days and at 90 days was observed to be
sufciently higher than that reported in literature [19].
At 10% replacement of ne aggregates with bottom ash,
strengths were observed to be in the range of 2535 MPa, 33
47 MPa, and 4049 MPa at 28, 90, and 365 days, respectively. A
gain of strength of about 37% at 28 days and 21% at 365 days (as
compared to 18% and 40% for 0% bottom ash) was observed with
the decrease in y ash contents from 35% (M105) to 15% (M101).
The gain of strength for 15% and 20% y ash contents was higher
as compared to other mixes in regards to 0% bottom ash mixes.
As observed from Fig. 3, the strength was found to increase with

77

R. Siddique et al. / Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

35% fly ash

20% fly ash

30% fly ash

15% fly ash

25% fly ash

Split Tensile Strength

(MPa)

Split Tensile Strength

(MPa)

30% fly ash

20% fly ash

15% fly ash

25% fly ash

1
28

90

365

Age (days)
Fig. 7. Split tensile strength (10% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.

20% Bottom ash

35% fly ash

30% fly ash

20% fly ash

15% fly ash

25% fly ash

1
28

90

365

Age (days)

1
90

365

Age (days)
Fig. 6. Split tensile strength (0% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.

30% Bottom ash

35% fly ash

30% fly ash

20% fly ash

15% fly ash

25% fly ash

Split Tensile Strength

(MPa)

Tensile strength is one of the most important fundamental

properties of concrete. An accurate prediction of tensile strength
of concrete will help in mitigating cracking problems, improve
shear strength prediction and minimise the failure of concrete in
tension due to inadequate methods of tensile strength prediction.
Split tensile strength developed for mixes with bottom ash percentages varying from 0% to 30% is shown in Figs. 69, respectively,
with 0% bottom ash varied from 1.55 to 2.40, and 1.762.68, 2.12
2.96 MPa at 28, 90, and 365 days. The gain of split tensile strength
for various mixes was observed to be between 4.3% and 5% at 28
and 90 days, increasing with increase in cement content. The tensile strength values were observed to be between 4.3% and 6.8% of
compressive strength.
At 10% replacement of ne aggregates with bottom ash,
strengths were observed to be in the range of 1.482.26 MPa,
1.692.40 MPa 1.972.82 MPa at 28, 90 days and 365 days, respec-

28

35% fly ash

Fig. 8. Split tensile strength (20% bottom ash) at various y ash contents.

4.3. Split tensile strength

0% Bottom ash

10% Bottom ash

Split Tensile Strength

(MPa)

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

R. Siddique et al. / Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

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

28 Days compressive strength,

fc (MPa)

Ratios based on experimental values ft/(fc)0.6

Split tensile strength ft (MPa)

Exp.

29.62
30.66
31.47
32.38
33.15
35.19

Theoretical values as per references

1.55
1.76
1.83
1.97
2.12
2.40

Parra et al. [21]

Dinakar et al. [22]

Sukumar et al. [23]

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

Average values = 0.24.

respectively. With the increase in cement content the strength of

M301 increased gradually to 1.90 MPa at 28 days. An increase of
about 50% strength at 28 days and 34% at 365 days was observed
with the decrease of the y ash contents from 35% (M305) and
15% (M301). The mixes at 10% bottom ash showed 3.58% strength
decrease, 916% strength decrease with 20% bottom ash and 18
20% decrease with 30% bottom ash at 28 days. At more advanced
age (90 days), 410% strength decrease at 10% bottom ash, 12
18% strength decrease with 20% bottom ash, and 1623% decrease
with 30% bottom ash was observed and 48.5% strength decrease
for 10% bottom ash, 816% strength decrease with 20% bottom
ash and 1523% decrease with 30% bottom ash at 365 days in comparison to corresponding mixes with 0% bottom ash.
Table 3 shows the computations of ratios of split tensile
strength (ft) to the compressive strength (fc0.6) of the experimental

values of present investigation and the theoretical values of split

tensile strength (ft) based on expressions proposed by earlier
investigators (1821). An average value so obtained for different
SCC mixes has been found to be 0.24. This, in general form, would
give an expression a

ft 0:24fc0:6

Further, a comparison of experimental results has been made

with those of other authors and shown in Fig. 10. The split tensile
results are observed to be close to the results of Parra et al. [21]
maybe because the researchers have also conducted the experiments within the range of w/p of 0.45 and 0.65, with SCC mixes
containing crushed limestone aggregates. In the investigations carried out [22,23], it is observed that no replacement of ne

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)

Split Tensile 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.

10% bottom ash

20% bottom ash

30% bottom ash

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

Compressive Strength (MPa)

28-Day Strength

30% bottom ash

80

1.0
15

10% bottom ash

20% bottom ash

100

4.0

3.0

0% bottom ash

0% bottom ash
20% bottom ash

10% bottom ash

30% 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

R. Siddique et al. / Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

Table 4
Relationship for expected compressive strength from w/p ratio for various percentages of bottom ash.
Ages

28-Days

90-Days

Bottom ash (%)

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

4.3.1. Theoretical expressions for split tensile strength

4.5. Inuence of water/powder ratio on split tensile strength

The inuence of water/powder ratio on split tensile strength of
SCC mixes with various percentages of replacement of ne aggregate bottom ash at various ages is presented in Figs. 1416. The
split tensile strength also decreased with an increase in water/
powder ratio. The water/powder ratio (w/p) by weight has the
most prominent effect on the strength of SCC. A comparison between SCC mixes with different y ash contents and at different

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

10% bottom ash

20% bottom ash

30% bottom ash

Split Tensile Strength

(MPa)

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

10% bottom ash

30% bottom ash

Split Tensile Strength

(MPa)

Figs. 1113 show the compressive strength of SCC mixes versus

the waterpowder ratio (w/p) with different bottom ash contents
at ages of 28, 90 and 365 days. The relation between 28-day, 90day and 365-day compressive strength and waterpowder ratio
for mixes without bottom ash and with various percentages is given in Table 4. It is observed that the results obtained from the
present study, provide a good t for most of the cases (R2 value
above 0.8).
Although factors such as content of ne and coarse aggregate,
material proportions, and curing age can affect the compressive
strength of SCC, the water-to-powder ratio (w/p) by weight is the
most prominent determinant of compressive strength [22]. 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. The trend of compressive strength on increase of water/powder ratio at various ages is clearly visible in various gures and it is
observed to be same for various ages i.e. 28-d, 90-d and 365-d, also
that increase of water/powder ratio decreased the compressive
strength for all percentages of bottom ash at all ages.

10% bottom ash

30% bottom ash

Water/Powder

ft = 0.18 fc2/3 MPa (Parra et al. [21])

ft = 0.094 fc MPa (Dinakar et al. [22])
ft = 0.0843 fc + 0.818 (Sukumar et al. [23])
4.4. Inuence of waterpowder ratio on compressive strength

0% bottom ash
20% bottom ash

28-Day Strength

Split Tensile Strength

(MPa)

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

R. Siddique et al. / Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

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

Bottom ash (%)

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

replacements of ne aggregates by bottom ash showed that SCC

mixes obtained split tensile strength increase on decrease of
water/powder ratio from 0.44 to 0.41 with 0% bottom ash, 0.50
0.47 with 10% bottom ash, and 0.580.51 with 20% bottom ash
and 0.6200.546 for 30% bottom ash. Figs. 1416 clearly indicate
the trend shown by split tensile strength with increase of water/
powder ratio. It was observed that increase of water-to-powder ratio decreased the split tensile strength for all percentages of bottom ash at all ages. The relation between 28-day, 90-day and
365-day split tensile strength and waterpowder ratio for mixes
without bottom ash and with various percentages is given in Table
5. It is observed that the results obtained from the present study,
provide a good t for most of the cases (R2 value above 0.8), as
in the case of compressive strength.
5. Conclusions
(i) The present investigation has shown that it is possible to
design an SCC incorporating y ash and bottom ash on various percentages. The SCCs having y ash and bottom ash
showed all fresh properties with in the ranges specied for
the mix to be SCC mix.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The compressive strength and split tensile strength
increased with a decrease in the percentage of the y ash
and the water-to-cementitious materials ratio. Increase in
bottom ash content resulted in decrease in compressive
strength and split tensile strength with reference to mix
with 0% bottom ash for a specic age for particular y ash
content. Compressive and split tensile strength of SCC mixes
was found to increase with age for all mixes with varying
percentages of y ash and bottom ash. Increase in bottom
ash decreased the split tensile strength with reference to
mix with 0% bottom ash for a specic age for particular y
ash content.
(iv) A comparison between SCC with various y ash contents and
at various levels of replacements of ne aggregates by bottom ash showed that SCC obtained strength increase on
decrease of w/p from 0.44 to 0.41 for 0%, 0.500.47 for
10%, and 0.580.51 for 20% bottom ash.
(v) The economical SCC could be achieved with sufcient
strength as the conventional concrete. Based on the materials used in this study, the results suggested that it is technically feasible to utilize bottom ash as a part of paste content
in the production of SCC. Besides environmental benets
such as reduction in the continued and expanding extraction

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.

R. Siddique et al. / Construction and Building Materials 29 (2012) 7381

[21] Parra C, Valeuende M, Benlloch J. Mechanical properties of self-compacting
concrete. In: Proc. 5th international RILEM symposium on self-compacting
concrete. Ghent, Belgium; 35 September, 2007. p. 64550.
[22] Dinakar P, Babu KG, Santhanam M. Mechanical properties of high volume y
ash self-compacting concretes. In: Proc. 5th international RILEM symposium
on self-compacting concrete. Ghent, Belgium; 35 September, 2007. p. 6517.

81

[23] Sukumar B, Nagamani K, Raghavan RS. Evaluation of strength at early ages of

self-compacting concrete with high volume y ash. Constr Build Mater
2008;22(7):1394401.
[24] Felekoglu B, Trkel S, Baradan B. Effect of water/cement ratio on the fresh and
hardened properties of self-compacting concrete. Build Environ
2007;42:1795802.