EVALUATION OF CEMENTING EFFICIENCIES

OF GROUND GRANULATED BLAST FURNACE

SLAG AND FLY ASH BLENDED
HIGH PERFORMANCE CONCRETE
Dr.V Srinivasa Reddy
Professor of Civil Engineering
GRIET, Hyderabad
email:vempada@gmail.com
Abstract - Research work till date suggests that GGBS and FA
improve many of the performance characteristics of the hardened
concrete such as strength, workability, permeability, durability and
corrosion resistance. From the present investigations it is found that
the compressive strength of GGBS and FA depends both on the age
and the percentage of replacement level. It is felt that efficiency
concept can be used to understand the behavior of GGBS and FA
on the properties of concrete. The present work proposes to report
the results of an experimental study, conducted to evaluate the
strengths of hardened concrete, by partially replacing the cement
by various percentages of ground granulated blast furnace slag and
fly ash for M 80 grades of concrete at different ages. The optimum
FA and GGBS substitute content can be found based on the
experimentally evaluated compressive strengths at different
percentages of replacements of FA and GGBS for various grades at
7, 28, and 90 days. This investigation is an effort to understand the
effect of binary, ternary and quaternary blends of fly ash, Ground
Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS) and silica fume with
cement on the strength characteristics of HPC. Fly ash and GGBS
are used as cement replacement materials in various combinations
at 0, 10, 20 and 30 percent individually or by combination to a
maximum of 30 percent. Silica fume is used as an additional
material for each combination at 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5 percent
1.
by weight of cement. The compressive strength is evaluated to find
the optimum proportion of mineral admixtures in binary, ternary
and quaternary blends.
Keywords- ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS), fly ash 2.
(FA), Quaternary blends, strength efficiency factor, high performance
3.
concrete.
1.

INTRODUCTION

The main drawback of the production of cement is the emission

of huge amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that leads
to global warming. Hence, there is a need to minimize the use of
cement by using Supplementary Cementitious Materials like fly
ash, Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS), silica
fume, metakaolin, rice husk ash etc. One of the major thrust
areas of research in concrete has been in the use of these
supplementary cementing materials or mineral admixtures to
produce high performance concrete (HPC). The materials
obtained through industrial wastes like fly ash, GGBS and silica
fume are pozzolanic in character and develop cementing

M Bhagyasree
Post Graduate Student
Department of Civil Engineering
GRIET, Hyderabad
properties in a way similar to ordinary Portland cement when
they come in contact with free lime due to hydration of cement.
Their use in concrete, to replace cement partially, conserves
cement and power, improves strength, durability and helps in
protecting the environment. Thus, the production of HPC with
these supplementary materials is highly recommended by the
researchers. In many field applications, concrete is required to
meet certain specific performance requirements besides high
strength. For pre-stressed concrete bridges, off-shore structures,
highway, and airport pavements and in machine foundations, the
concrete should possess high fatigue strength. For nuclear
containers exposed to very high temperatures, the concrete must
have high resistance to thermal cracking. The need for the
requirement of high mechanical and durability properties has
made the researchers to find out an appropriate technology
through research and the HPC was the outcome.
2.

OBJECTIVES OF THE PRESENT STUDY

The objectives of the present study can be summarized as

follows:
To study the effect of mineral admixtures like fly ash, GGBS and
silica fume in binary, ternary and quaternary cementitious
system on the compressive strength.
To determine the optimum mix proportion of M 80 grade binary
and ternary blended concrete.
To propose a modified mix design procedure for HPC by
considering the efficiency of mineral admixtures.
3.

OPTIMIZATION OF MIX PROPORTIONS

In developing the concrete mix for HPC, it is important to select

proper ingredients, evaluate among different material for
optimum usage. The ingredients used for this investigation were
cement, fine aggregate, coarse aggregate, water, chemical
admixture (superplasticizer) and mineral admixtures like fly ash,
GGBS and silica fume. Design of HPC mixes involves the
determination of proportion of the constituents; so that resultant
composition produces a mix which will possess specified
properties in fresh and hardened state. To obtain the special
combinations of performance and uniformity requirements, a

near optimum mix proportion of HPC is very important.

However, there are no specified guide lines available on the mix
proportion of HPC. Required mix proportions are therefore
obtained by trial and error method that is based on the existing
data. And the other method is based on the specifications for the
conventional concrete mixtures. The Indian Standard (IS) mix
design procedure of normal strength concrete is not suitable for
design of HPC using admixtures. The American Concrete
Institute (ACI) mix design method available for high strength
concrete considers only the use of fly ash and superplasticizer.
Since there is no specific method of mix design found suitable
for HPC by incorporating all these mineral admixtures like fly
ash, GGBS and silica fume, a simplified preliminary mix design
procedure was formulated by combining the IS method, ACI
method of mix design for high strength concrete and the
available literatures. Mix proportions were arrived for various
combinations of admixtures by considering fly ash and GGBS as

cement replacement material and silica fume as an addition as

shown in Table 1 for M 80 grade of HPC at a w/b ratio of 0.30
based on the above formulated mix design procedure. Fly ash
and GGBS were used as cement replacement materials in
various combinations at zero, 10, 20 and 30 percent individually
or by combination to a maximum of 30 percent. Silica fume was
used as an additional material for each combination at zero, 2.5,
5, 7.5, 10 and 12.5 percent by weight of cement. It is noted that
due to replacement of cement by mineral admixtures the fine
aggregate content was reduced. Hence it was decided to
incorporate the silica fume as an addition and assumed that the
silica fume particles due to its micro nature fills the space
between the cement and other mineral admixture particles. The
dosage of superplasticizer was adjusted to get a slump range of
50 -75 mm. The quantities of different materials requirements
per m3 of concrete for the various mixes are given in Table 2.

TABLE 1- MIX PROPORTION DETAILS

Blending
System

Binary

Ternary

Quaternary

Cement
100
90
80
70
90
80
70
100
90
80
70
90
80
70
80
70
70
70
70
80

Percentage of Binding Materials

Cement Replacement by
Fly Ash
GGBS
0
0
10
0
20
0
30
0
0
10
0
20
0
30
0
0
10
0
20
0
30
0
0
10
0
20
0
30
10
10
10
20
20
10
10
20
20
10
10
10
Total Number of Mix Combinations =60

Addition of
Silica Fume
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5

2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5

0
0
0
2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5

TABLE 2- QUANTITIES OF MATERIALS REQUIRED FOR DIFFERENT COMBINATIONS OF ADMIXTURES

S. No.

Mix Description

Cement (kg)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

S0F0G0
S0F0G10
S0F0G20
S0F0G30
S0F10G0
S0F10G10
S0F10G20
S0F20G0
S0F20G10
S0F30G0
S2.5F0G0
S2.5F0G10
S2.5F0G20
S2.5F0G30
S2.5F10G0
S2.5F10G10
S2.5F10G20
S2.5F20G0
S2.5F20G10
S2.5F30G0
S5F0G0
S5F0G10
S5F0G20
S5F0G30
S5F10G0
S5F10G10
S5F10G20
S5F20G0
S5F20G10
S5F30G0
S7.5F0G0
S7.5F0G10
S7.5F0G20
S7.5F0G30
S7.5F10G0
S7.5F10G10
S7.5F10G20
S7.5F20G0
S7.5F20G10
S7.5F30G0
S10F0G0
S10F0G10
S10F0G20
S10F0G30
S10F10G0
S10F10G10
S10F10G20
S10F20G0
S10F20G10
S10F30G0
S12.5F0G0
S12.5F0G10
S12.5F0G20
S12.5F0G30
S12.5F10G0
S12.5F10G10
S12.5F10G20
S12.5F20G0
S12.5F20G10
S12.5F30G0

583.0
524.7
466.4
408.1
524.7
466.4
408.1
466.4
466.4
530.7
583.0
524.7
466.4
408.1
524.7
466.4
408.1
466.4
466.4
530.7
583.0
524.7
466.4
408.1
524.7
466.4
408.1
466.4
466.4
530.7
583.0
524.7
466.4
408.1
524.7
466.4
408.1
466.4
466.4
530.7
583.0
524.7
466.4
408.1
524.7
466.4
408.1
466.4
466.4
530.7
583.0
524.7
466.4
408.1
524.7
466.4
408.1
466.4
466.4
530.7

Silica Fume (kg)

Admixtures
Fly Ash (kg)
0

58.3
116.6
174.9
0

14.6

58.3
116.6
174.9
0

29.2

58.3
116.6
174.9
0

43.7
58.3
116.6
174.9
0

58.3
58.3
116.6
174.9
0

72.9
58.3
116.6
174.9

GGBS (kg)
0
58.3
116.6
174.9
0
58.3
116.6
0
58.3
0
0
58.3
116.6
174.9
0
58.3
116.6
0
58.3
0
0
58.3
116.6
174.9
0
58.3
116.6
0
58.3
0
0
58.3
116.6
174.9
0
58.3
116.6
0
58.3
0
0
58.3
116.6
174.9
0
58.3
116.6
0
58.3
0
0
58.3
116.6
174.9
0
58.3
116.6
0
58.3
0

Fine
Aggregate
522
469
415
362
447
393
340
371
318
295
522
469
415
362
447
393
340
371
318
295
522
469
415
362
447
393
340
371
318
295
522
469
415
362
447
393
340
371
318
295
522
469
415
362
447
393
340
371
318
295
522
469
415
362
447
393
340
371
318
295

Note 1: S = Silica Fume, F = Fly Ash, G = GGBS

Note 2: In all the mixes the coarse aggregate content is 1235 kg
for one cubic metre of concrete.
Concrete mix design procedure described here is more rational
as it considered the effects of many properties of concrete
ingredients, which are not considered in many conventional mix
design methods. A simplified mix design procedure for HPC was
formulated by combining BIS and ACI code methods of mix
design and available literature on HPC. The trial mixes cast with
the preliminary mix design have given the target strengths.
4.

PROPOSED MIX DESIGN PROCEDURE

To design the HPC mixes considering the efficiency factors of

mineral admixtures, the following procedure is proposed.
Step 1- Target mean strength (fck1): To obtain target mean
strength, the following equation is suggested as per ACI 318 for
the specified characteristic strength (fck) more than 35 MPa.
fck1 = fck + 10
Step 2- Selection of Maximum Size Aggregate: The maximum
size of the coarse aggregate can be selected for HPC as 12.5
mm.
Step 3- Estimation of Free Water Content: The water content to
obtain the desired workability (slump) depends on maximum
size, particle shape, and grading of aggregate, and amount of
superplasticizer and its characteristics. For the set of ingredients,
the operating water content can be selected, and the optimum
dosage of superplasticizer can be obtained by trial and error.
Step 4- Selection of w/b Ratio: Based on the previous literature,
the following w/b ratios are recommended as shown in Table
below.
fck1

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

w/b

0.32

0.30

0.29

0.28

0.275

0.26

0.250

0.24

0.235

Step 5 -Calculation of Binder Content: The binder or

cementitious content per unit volume (m3) of concrete can be
calculated from the water binder ratio and the quantity of water
content per unit volume of concrete.
After deciding the replacement levels of mineral admixtures, the
quantity of cement required can be calculated by considering the
efficiency factor of each mineral admixture. Then, cement
content (Wc)
Wc = Wb (1 - KFRF - KSRS)
where, Wc = Weight of cement
Wb = Weight of binder
KF = Efficiency factor for fly ash
RF = Replacement level of fly ash
KS = Efficiency factor for GGBS
RS = Replacement level of GGBS

Step 6- Determination of Coarse Aggregate Content: The coarse

aggregate content was taken from the following Table below
suggested by Aitcin (1998) according to the shape of the
aggregates.
Coarse aggregate

Elongated
or flat

Average

Cubic

Rounded

Coarse aggregate
dosage (kg/m3)

950-1000

1000-1050

1050-1100

1100-1150

Step 7 Determination of Fine Aggregate Content: By knowing

the weight of cement, mineral admixtures, water, coarse
aggregate, solid content in superplasticizer and the percentage
air content, the absolute volume of fine aggregate in litres per
unit volume of concrete (m3) is obtained by absolute volume
method by the Equation.

where,
Vw = Volume of water in litres
Vfa = Volume of fine aggregate in litres
WSF = Weight of silica fume in kg
WF = Weight of fly ash in kg
WS = Weight of GGBS in kg
WCA = Weight of coarse aggregate in kg
WSP = Weight of superplasticizer in kg
SC = Specific gravity of cement
SSF = Specific gravity of silica fume
SF = Specific gravity of fly ash
SS = Specific gravity of GGBS
SCA = Specific gravity of coarse aggregate
SSP = Specific gravity of superplasticizer
Vair content = Volume of Air Content in litres
Then the fine aggregate content per obtained by multiplying the
absolute volume specific gravity of the fine aggregate. Unit
volume of concrete is of fine aggregate and the specific gravity
of the fine aggregate.
Step 8 Moisture Adjustments: The actual quantities of coarse
aggregate, fine aggregate and water content are calculated after
allowing necessary corrections for water absorption and free
(surface) moisture content of aggregates. The volume of water
included in the liquid superplasticizer is calculated and
subtracted from the initial mixing water.
Based on this proposed procedure, mixes of grade M 80 can be
designed using different combinations of admixtures.
5. STRENGTH STUDIES OF
OPTIMIZED BLENDED CONCRETE MIXES
The compressive strength results at the various ages such as 7,
28 and 90 days for different cement replacement levels with Fly
Ash and GGBS with Silica Fume as an addition are presented in
Tables 3.

TABLE 3- COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS OF DIFFERENT COMBINATIONS OF ADMIXTURES

S. No.

Mix Description

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

S0F0G0
S0F0G10
S0F0G20
S0F0G30
S0F10G0
S0F10G10
S0F10G20
S0F20G0
S0F20G10
S0F30G0
S2.5F0G0
S2.5F0G10
S2.5F0G20
S2.5F0G30
S2.5F10G0
S2.5F10G10
S2.5F10G20
S2.5F20G0
S2.5F20G10
S2.5F30G0
S5F0G0
S5F0G10
S5F0G20
S5F0G30
S5F10G0
S5F10G10
S5F10G20
S5F20G0
S5F20G10
S5F30G0
S7.5F0G0
S7.5F0G10
S7.5F0G20
S7.5F0G30
S7.5F10G0
S7.5F10G10
S7.5F10G20
S7.5F20G0
S7.5F20G10
S7.5F30G0
S10F0G0
S10F0G10
S10F0G20
S10F0G30
S10F10G0
S10F10G10
S10F10G20
S10F20G0
S10F20G10
S10F30G0
S12.5F0G0
S12.5F0G10
S12.5F0G20
S12.5F0G30
S12.5F10G0
S12.5F10G10
S12.5F10G20
S12.5F20G0
S12.5F20G10
S12.5F30G0

7 days
55.86
55.50
51.33
48.77
50.42
53.33
55.13
51.33
54.49
51.40
60.12
56.83
58.21
53.63
54.66
58.92
55.17
54.81
55.00
51.74
65.38
59.67
63.22
57.48
56.54
64.06
54.36
57.74
54.49
52.09
66.40
62.44
64.54
59.67
57.74
65.08
55.60
58.43
55.51
52.60
68.08
64.90
65.38
61.69
58.18
66.22
54.36
60.83
57.06
54.91
64.67
63.70
62.33
59.67
55.67
63.34
52.94
57.91
52.34
51.91

Compressive Strength
28 days
74.90
70.68
73.38
69.67
67.00
75.92
70.33
71.47
76.96
74.00
74.43
73.22
74.00
73.20
64.50
80.60
67.10
73.22
79.84
75.20
74.70
75.00
77.00
75.22
63.60
83.40
68.21
73.30
81.00
75.00
76.40
75.40
79.40
76.00
63.33
85.20
67.67
73.70
82.50
75.50
77.70
77.36
80.62
76.50
65.67
86.33
68.21
74.60
81.89
76.70
75.29
73.80
75.70
73.00
63.33
80.90
67.67
68.00
77.80
72.30

90 days
82.66
83.86
86.21
85.43
83.45
86.40
85.10
86.83
85.06
84.91
84.43
87.02
88.41
86.22
86.56
87.39
88.45
87.48
88.34
87.96
85.10
86.41
88.63
87.27
86.12
88.56
87.34
88.21
87.90
86.35
89.88
90.28
93.07
92.23
90.12
93.00
92.88
94.21
93.25
92.00
91.67
94.97
100.17
99.11
95.87
104.22
102.07
100.20
99.89
99.96
87.32
92.37
96.88
93.19
93.22
99.67
97.92
98.55
98.32
97.20

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

From Tables-3 the following observations are made for binary,

ternary and quaternary blends.
Due to the addition of fly ash the compressive strength of
concrete at 7th day and 28th day was decreased compared to
the control mix, whereas at 90th day the compressive strength
was increased. Maximum strength was achieved at the
replacement level of 20 percent with fly ash. Due to the less
presence of reactive silica and slow pozzolanic reaction, the
initial strength of fly ash concrete was lower than that of
concrete without fly ash and due to continued pozzolanic
reactivity, the fly ash concrete have developed greater strength
at later ages which was more than that of the concrete without
fly ash.
The same tendency was observed in concrete with GGBS as
cement replacement material. Maximum strength was achieved
at 20 percent cement replacement level with GGBS. The reason
for such behaviour of concrete with GGBS might be the same
as that of the concrete with fly ash.
It was observed that the maximum compressive strength has
been obtained for mixes with 10 percent silica fume as an
addition at all ages. It was also observed that the rate of
increase of compressive strength was more at the early ages due
to rapid reaction of silica fume with calcium hydroxide and the
formation of C-S-H gel. The compressive strength development
is due to the pozzolanic reaction and filler effects of silica
fume. In the pozzolanic reaction, the silica fume reacts with
calcium hydroxide and produces more C-S-H gel, which is the
source of strength of hardened concrete, to bind the aggregates
together. If the silica fume percentage in the concrete is
increased gradually, it reaches a point called an optimum point,
where silica fume content is exactly what is required for
reacting with the calcium hydroxide present or it may be the
reason because of more and dense C-S-H gel acts as an
impervious layer which prevents the water to enter through it
and thereby preventing further hydration. Therefore excess
silica fume added beyond this limit remains as it is, since there
would not be any calcium hydroxide to react with free silica
fume in concrete, does not act as binder, and hence will cause a
reduction in strength.
The addition of silica fume in fly ash concrete improves the
compressive strength at all ages. The rate of increase is more at
the early ages up to 28 days and moderate after 28 days. The
concrete mixtures at 20 percent cement replacement by fly ash
with 10 percent addition of silica fume showed the highest
compressive strength increase of 17.5 % among all the mixes in
this combination at 90 days. It was observed that the
compressive strength of fly ash concrete decreases beyond the
addition of 10 percent of silica fume.
The addition of silica fume in GGBS concrete increases the
compressive strength at all ages. The compressive strength of
concrete decreases at 7th day due to the replacement of cement
by GGBS whereas at other higher ages the strength was
increased. The concrete mixtures with 20 percent GGBS as
cement replacement material with 10 percent silica fume as an
addition showed the maximum increase in compressive strength
among all the mixes. The percentage increase in compressive
strength was 14.6 %, 7.1 %and 17.5 % at 7, 28 and 90 days
respectively.
It was observed that the combination of fly ash and GGBS in
concrete causes the compressive strength to be obviously lower
than that of the control concrete at 7 days and 28days and this
reducing effect is more obvious with more fly ash and GGBS

7.

content. However, at 90 days compression strength, the results

of fly ash and GGBS concrete are obviously higher than that of
control concrete. This confirms that the early compressive
strength of fly ash and GGBS concretes are lower than that of
control concrete due to slower reactivity, but later the
compressive strength development rate is faster than control
concrete.
It was observed that the HPC with admixtures in quaternary
blends performed better than the concrete with ternary system
of blending.
The mix S10F10G10 (SF10%+FA10%+GGBS10%+OPC)
yields with maximum compressive strength at all ages.
6.

1.

2.

3.
4.
5.

6.
7.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on experimental investigations, the following

observations are made:
The addition of fly ash and GGBS in concrete decreases the
compressive strength at 7 and 28 days, but improves the
compressive strength at later ages at 90 days due to their slow
pozzolanic reaction. The behaviour of fly ash concrete and
GGBS concrete with regard to compressive strength was almost
the same.
The maximum compressive strength of fly ash concrete and
GGBS concrete was observed at a cement replacement of 20
percent. The addition of silica fume increases the compressive
strength of concrete at all ages. The rate of increase of
compressive strength is more at the early ages (7 days) due to
the faster rate of hydration and less at the later ages.
For the HPC with blending of fly ash and GGBS in ternary
system, the maximum compressive strength was obtained at 20
percent replacement of cement.
The optimum addition of silica fume was found to be 10
percent by the weight of binder.
The ultimate maximum compressive strength was obtained for
the mix with the combination of 10 percent fly ash and 10
percent GGBS at a total cement replacement level of 20 percent
along with the addition of 10 percent of silica fume.
The optimum combinations of admixtures were found to be in
the mix S10F10G10 (SF10%+FA10%+GGBS10%+OPC), from
strength characteristics.
There is an increase in total binder content as the effective w/b
ratio decreases. However, as the mineral admixture content
increases, the requirement of cement reduces. Thus, it is
possible to effectively utilize the cement by adopting the lower
w/b ratio with higher mineral admixtures content.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1]. Kadri E.H. and Duval R. (2001), Effect of silica fume on the heat of hydration
of high performance concrete, ACI, International conference, sp 199-36, pp.
635-664.
[2]. Khan M.I., Lyssdale C.J. (2002), Strength, Permeability and carbonation of
high performance concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 32, pp. 123131.
[3]. Malhotra V.M. and Mehta P.K. (1996), Pozzolanic and Cementitious
Materials-Advances in Concrete Technology, Vol. 1, Overseas Publishers
Association.
[4]. Mehta P.K. and Aitcin P.C. (1990), Principles underlying production of high
performance concrete, Cement and Aggregates, Research Vol. 12, No. 20,
winter, pp. 70-78.
[5]. Meusel J.W. and Rose J.H. (1983), Production of Granulated Blast Furnace
Slag at Sparrows Point, and the Workability and strength Potential of Concrete
Incorporating the Slag, Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and other Mineral ByProducts in concrete, SP-79, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, pp. 867-890.

[6]. Newman John and Choo B.S. (2003), Advanced Concrete Technology,
Constituent Materials, ELSEVIER Butterworth-Heinemann, An imprint of
Elsevier, Oxford.
[7]. Rougeron P., Aitcin, P.C. (1990), Optimisation of the composition of high
performance concrete, Cement, Concrete and Aggregate research, Vol. 16, No.
2, pp. 115-24.
[8]. Scali M.J., Chin D. and Berke N.S. (1987), Effect of Micro silica and Fly Ash
on the Microstructure and Permeability of Concrete, Proceedings of the 9th

International Conference on Cement Microscopy, Reno, International Cement

Microscopy Association, Duncanville, Texas, pp. 375-387.
[9]. Smith I.A. (1967), The design of fly ash concretes, Proc. Inst. Civil Eng.
London, Vol. 36, pp. 769-90.
[10]. Thomas M.D.A., Shehata M.H., Shashiprakash S.G., Hopkins D.S. and Cail K.
(1999), Use of ternary cementitious systems containing silica fume and fly ash
in concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 29, pp:1207-1214.