COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH AND ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF ROLLER

COMPACTED CONCRETE (RCC) PAVEMENT CONTAINING

PULVERIZED SAND AND FLY ASH
1
CARMEL B. SABADO, 2GERONIDES P. ANCOG
1,2
Civil Engineering Department, Mindanao State University- Iligan Institute of Technology
Email: 1carmelsabado@yahoo.com, 2gerry_ancog@yahoo.com

Abstract— In the Philippines, roller compacted concrete (RCC) is a new engineering material having the same basic ingredients as
the conventional concrete but of different mix proportions. With the used of fly ash as partial replacement of cement in the
construction of RCC pavement not only increased its workability and strength but also attributed RCC in utilizing industrial
residuals and reducing the use of non-renewal resources. This study determined the compressive strength of RCC slab when
compacted by a 68-kg soil compactor and compared theoretical direct costs of RCC from conventional concrete pavement. The
construction of RCC slab was based on the Soil Analogy method suggested by the American Concrete Institute (ACI). Modified
Proctor test was used in determining the maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OPC). Three (3) RCC slabs
(0.91 x.70 x.15 m) were constructed and water cured. A total of 18 core samples were extracted from the 3 slabs, six cores for each
slab. The cores were then tested for compressive strength determination following ASTM C39. The obtained compressive strength of
3 days curing time is 18.44 MPa, while for 28 days curing duration is 27.85 MPa (4039.78 psi). The results of testing the
compressive strength of cored samples were 28-62% higher than the designed strength of portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement.
From 3 days to 28 days of curing, the strength increased to 40.65%. In the estimation of direct costs, 33.53% can be save when using
roller compacted concrete in the construction of pavements, instead of conventional portland cement concrete. Therefore, roller
compacted concrete pavement is an economical and sustainable pavement alternative for portland cement concrete pavement
secondary roads.

Index Terms— Roller Compacted Concrete Pavement, Compressive Strength, Vibratory Compaction, Sustainable Pavement.

I. INTRODUCTION Cementitious Materials

Holcim Type 1 ordinary portland cement and fly ash
Pavement industry is one of the areas where from STEAG Power Plant in Villanueva, Misamis
sustainability must be practiced, maintaining a balance in Oriental, Philippines was used throughout the work.
the economic viability and the environmental and social Presented in Table 1 are the chemical and physical
obligations of a particular pavement project. properties of Class F fly ash.
Manufacturing portland cement is a very intensive
process and emits a significant amount of CO2 in the TABLE 1. LIMITS OF STANDARDS FOR THE
environment. But recently, advances in the technology CHEMICAL COMPOSITION & PHYSICAL
and cement production processes have greatly decreased PROPERTIES OF FLY ASH
these impacts. Furthermore, some modern concrete for
pavements uses less portland cement per cubic unit
compared to the past cement ratio of the same volume,
and thus lowering the carbon footprints discharged to the
environment [11].
RCC is one of these pavements. It has many
sustainability attributes. Low lifecycle economic costs,
the ability to incorporate a high amount of recycled and
industrial byproduct material (RIBM) into the mix, and
high surface reflectivity are few of them. Some of the
specific advantages of RCC from a sustainability
perspective include low initial cost and rapid
construction time compared to conventionally design
concrete pavements of similar structural capacity. With Aggregates
these advantages, it is significant to study RCC in The fine aggregates are natural and pulverized sand.
choosing a better pavement in meeting and providing the Pulverized sand is natural sand that is pulverized using a
needs of the society. ball mill in order to pass thru a No. 50 sieve mesh. While
coarse aggregates are composed of crushed and rounded
II. DETAILS OF EXPERIMENTAL WORK gravels. Aggregates complied to ASTM C-136, C127-01,
2.1 Materials Characteristics and ASTM C 128-01.
Water
The water used both in RCC mixing and curing is locally 2.2 RCC Mix Design Formulation
supplied by Iligan Water Works, Iligan City. Cementitious Content Selection

Proceedings of The IRES 29th International Conference, Singapore, 13th February 2016, ISBN: 978-93-85973-33-8
24
 Compressive Strength and Economic Viability of Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Pavement Containing Pulverized Sand and Fly Ash
For secondary roads, a compressive strength of 20.68
Megapascal (MPa) and a flexural strength ranging from
4.14 to 4.83 MPa are already acceptable [14]. This pre-
determined strength corresponds to 10% to 17% by mass
of dry aggregates [1]. 20.68 MPa was used as a design
compressive strength for this study [14] and it is
calculated as follows in Eq. 1.
Cementitious materials (%) = ( ) x 100 (1)
Where: a = weight of cementitious content
b = weight of oven-dried aggregates
Moisture-Density Curve Development
Two (2) experimental mixtures were used in determining
the actual breaking compressive strength of the RCC
cylinders is found in Table 2. Using the combined
aggregate grading and the chosen cementitious material
content, ASTM D-1557 was performed for the two types
of mixes. For the optimum moisture content, it is
computed as follows:
Moisture Content (%) = ( ) x 100 (2)
Where: a = weight of cementitious content
b = weight of oven-dried aggregates
c = weight of water
TABLE 2. TWO MIXTURES USED FOR
MOISTURE DENSITY CURVE DETERMINATION
RCC Cylindrical Samples
Four (4) cementitious contents were used in making
cylindrical samples specifically, 10%, 12%, 14%, and
16% of the total dry weight of aggregates. Using the
obtained Optimum Moisture Content (OMC) and the
four cementitious contents, cylindrical samples were
made using a vibrating hammer following the ASTM
C1435 [8]. After molding the samples, it was cured by
immersing the cylinder samples in a curing tank for 28
days. These samples were then tested for compressive
strength using a Compressive Testing Machine with a
maximum capacity of 2000 KN following the guidelines
in ASTM C39 [3]. The obtained compressive strengths
are then plotted in a graph together with its respective
cementitious contents. From it, a cementitious content
was selected to meet the required strength.
Proceedings of The IRES 29th International Conference, Singapore, 13th February 2016, ISBN: 978-93-85973-33-8
25
RCC Mixture Proportion Calculation
After selecting the cementitious content and the optimum
moisture content, a final mix proportion was calculated.
Saturated surface-dry (SSD) condition of aggregates was
used in calculating the weight and equivalent volume of
the materials [12].
2.3 RCC Test Slab Construction and Testing
RCC Slab Making
For the purpose of this study, 3 slab molds were
constructed. The inner dimension of each slab was 0.97m
x 0.71m and a thickness of 0.150m. The mixing of RCC
mix was done using a one bagger concrete mixer. To
accomplish 98-100% compaction, two layers of RCC
mix were made. Each layer is 3 inches thick.
Immediately after mixing, fresh RCC mix was placed in
the mold up to ¾ of the total thickness of the slab to
accommodate compaction. Once the 1st layer of RCC
was placed in the mold, internal tamping was performed
to the fresh RCC to induced interior vibration, thus
minimizing the air voids. The vibratory soil compactor
has a total dead weight of 68 kilograms, an effective
compaction area of 0.19m² and a compaction force of
13KN with 5,488 vibrations per minute (VPM) showed
in Figure 1. A compaction pattern was followed to
secure proper distribution of compaction effort all
throughout the slab area [15]. The compaction was done
5 times in each direction alternately to attain the desired
density. Compaction was completed within 15 min. of
spreading and 45 min. from the initial mixing. After the
1st layer was compacted, the remaining half of the slab
was filled with RCC mix and internal tamping was done
to the uncompacted layer, followed by the same
compaction effort exerted on the 1st layer.
Curing and Protection
Immediately after final rolling and compaction, the
surface of the RCC slab was kept continuously moist for
28 days. It was then covered by sheet materials canvass.
Obtaining and Testing for Compressive Strength of the
cored samples
The cored samples were obtained in accordance with
ASTM C42/C 42M [4]. Six (6) cored samples were taken
from each RCC slab representing 3-day, 14-day, and 28-
day curing time. After the cores have been drilled,
surface drill water was wipe off and allowed the
remaining surface moisture to evaporate. In determining
the density of each sample, the cored samples were
weighed and the resulted mass was divided by the
volume of the core calculated from the average diameter
and length. Testing the compressive strength of the core
samples was done following ASTM C39 [3].
2.4 Cost Estimates of RCC Pavement and PCC
Pavement
The theoretical estimated production unit cost of
constructing a 0.15m thick 10-Km RCC pavement and
10-Km conventional PCC pavement was computed. The
estimated production rate for both the RCC and PCC
 Compressive Strength and Economic Viability of Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Pavement Containing Pulverized Sand and Fly Ash
pavement is 34.20 m2/hr. and the average hauling
distance from source of materials to batching plant is 10
Km. The prices of the materials used and the rate of the
equipment were gathered by the researcher in 2014 from
different construction company in the locality of Iligan
City, Philippines.
Fig. 1 Soil Compactor
III. DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS
3.1 Combined Aggregate Gradation
In Table 3 is the combined grading of aggregates for M1
and M2. In the 2nd column, aggregates finer than No.50
sieve mesh is not in the recommended grading limit.
While in the 3rd column, almost all of the aggregates are
within the suggested limit. The larger percentage of fines
is used to fill voids and contribute to compactibility of
the RCC mix [2].
TABLE 3. PERCENT PASSING OF AGGREGATE
GRADATION
3.2 Maximum Moisture Density Curve
The maximum dry density (MDD) and the optimum
moisture content (OMC) were obtained from the plotted
graphs in Figure 2 for the M1 and Figure 3 for the M2.
The MDD is the peak value of the curve, and the vertical
component of that value, is the OMC. From the 2 figures,
MDD of M1 is equal to 2,198 kg/m3 with an OMC of
Proceedings of The IRES 29th International Conference, Singapore, 13th February 2016, ISBN: 978-93-85973-33-8
26
7.3%, while, MDD of M2 is 2,309 kg/m3 and OMC is
6.4%. The MDD of M2 is greater than of M1 due to the
addition of pulverized sand and fly ash in M2. Thus,
making M2 denser than M1.
Fig. 2 Maximum Dry Density Curve of Mix 1 (M1)
Fig. 3 Maximum Dry Density Curve of Mix 2 (M2)
3.3 Compressive Strength
RCC Cylinder Samples
Based on Fig. 4, only 16% cementitious content passed
the design strength of 21 MPa on 28 days. As the % of
cementitious material content increases, the breaking
compressive strength also increases while maintaining
the proportion of the other materials. 16% cementitious
content was used in constructing the RCC slab.
Moreover, it is not economical to use higher than 16% of
cementitious materials due to increase in cement content
in the mix.
RCC Core Samples
In Fig. 5 for 3 days curing, the average breaking
compressive strength was 18.44 MPa (2673.77 psi), for
14 days the strength achieved was 35.97 MPa (5217.25
psi), and for 28 days, the compressive strength was 27.85
MPa (4039.78psi). It is noticeable that the compressive
strength for 3 days curing duration was already high. 14-
day curing duration achieved a higher compressive
strength than 28-day by at least 25.44%. This is due to
the disturbance brought about by core drilling a durable
slab. The coring was done on the 28th day of curing.
 Compressive Strength and Economic Viability of Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Pavement Containing Pulverized Sand and Fly Ash
This time, slab attained a higher strength than the earlier
cored samples. The stronger the concrete, the longer the
time it takes to drill the cylindrical cores out of the slab.
However, it does not indicate that there is strength
reduction on the actual RCC slab. To correct the
disturbance due to drilling, a correction factor introduced
by American Concrete Institute (ACI) was used to
convert the actual in-place strength of the concrete [1].
Fig. 4 Compressive Strength of RCC cylinders cast in Laboratory
using ASTM C 1435
Fig. 5 Compressive Strength of RCC cored cylinders
using 16% by mass of Cementitious Material
3.4 Correction of Compressive Strength of Cored
Samples
ACI formulated a strength correction factor that will
convert the core strength into in-place strengths shown in
an equation below [1].
fc = Fl/d*Fdia*Fmc*Fd *fcore (3)
Where : fc = equivalent in-place strength
fcore = is the obtained core strength
Fl/d = effects of the length-to-diameter ratio
Proceedings of The IRES 29th International Conference, Singapore, 13th February 2016, ISBN: 978-93-85973-33-8
27
Fdia = effects of diameter
Fmc = effects of moisture condition of the core
Fd = effect of damage sustained during drilling
According to ACI (2003), “Core testing is the most
direct method to determine the compressive strength of
concrete in a structure.” Both in the process of obtaining
core specimens and interpreting the strength test results
are confounded by several factors that affect the in-place
strength of the concrete. This is the cause why correction
factors are formulated in the conversion of core strengths
comparable to in-place strength.
TABLE 4 EQUIVALENT IN-PLACE CONCRETE
STRENGTH WITH STRENGTH CORRECTION
FACTORS
The last column is the equivalent in-place compressive
strength in Kilonewton (KN). This equivalent strength
was used to compare the compressive strength of RCC
and portland cement concrete.
3.5 Comparison between RCC Pavement and PCC
Pavement
DPWH (2014) had developed a graph depicting the
compressive breaking strength of concrete at various
ages [14]. A 100% of the designed strength should be
attained on the 28-day. For this experiment, the designed
strength of a Class A concrete is 21 MPa, or 3,000 psi.
Therefore, 60% of 21 MPa is equivalent to 12.6 MPa
while 90% is 18.9 MPa.
Fig. 6 Compressive Strength of Cored RCC vs. Design
Strength from DPWH
 Compressive Strength and Economic Viability of Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Pavement Containing Pulverized Sand and Fly Ash
Fig. 7 Basic Difference in Composition of RCC and PCC
Figure 6 shows the comparison between the attained
strength of RCC with the strength of an ordinary portland
cement concrete based on the standards by the
Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). In
3 days curing duration, the maturity strength of RCC is
38.2% higher than the predicted strength of ordinary
portland cement concrete. While in 14 days maturity,
RCC is 62.2% higher. In 28 days, RCC is 28.05% higher
than the designed compressive strength of PCC. It is
noticeable that in all days of maturity, RCC is higher
than PCC in terms of compressive strength. This result
supports the conclusion of Atis (2004) that concrete with
fly ash attained satisfactory or higher compressive and
tensile strengths when compared with normal portland
cement concrete [10].
As a practice in DPWH, opening to light traffic of a
particular pavement was allowed on the 14-day of
curing, with a corresponding strength of at least 90%
(18.9 MPa) of the design strength. In RCC, it is evident
that on 3-day curing time, RCC obtained 88.4% of the
designed strength, close enough to the required 90%
strength of conventional concrete. The attained early
strength of roller compacted concrete makes it ideal for
opening to light traffic at a very early stage.
In Figure 7, the basic difference in composition of RCC
and PCC is presented. Cement content of RCC is lesser
than that utilized in a Class “A” Portland cement
concrete. The water/cement ratio of RCC is 0.42 while
the PCC is 0.56. Lastly, RCC contains 45% lesser water
than PCC. It is already established in the construction
industry that the lesser water content, the lesser the
water/cement ratio, therefore, the greater the strength of
the concrete. The results of testing the compressive
strength of cored samples of roller compacted concrete at
any duration of curing are higher than the designed
strength of conventional concrete pavement.
3.6 Production Cost Estimates of RCCP vs. PCCP
From the Table 5, 33.53% savings can be made when
using Roller Compacted concrete in the construction of
pavements. A unit production cost for RCC pavement is
Php 696.73, while that of the PCC pavement is Php
977.41. These results validated that of Luhr (2006),
which stated that construction costs of roller compacted
concrete is lower because less labor is employed in
Proceedings of The IRES 29th International Conference, Singapore, 13th February 2016, ISBN: 978-93-85973-33-8
28
placing the concrete, no formwork or finishing is
required, and no need to use reinforcing steel or dowels.
In the table presented below, a substantial amount of
money can be saved when using RCC in constructing
roads and pavement. Though it was only as estimation,
but considering the lesser amount of cement used and
without reinforcing steel bars, construction of RCC
pavement is competitive in terms of production unit cost.
These results and RCC early strength capacity and its
ability to incorporate industrial by-products like fly ash
into the mix substantiated that RCC pavement is a
sustainable and economically viable as an alternative for
portland cement concrete pavement.
TABLE 5 PRODUCTION COST ESTIMATES OF
RCCP VS. PCCP
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to commend the Engineering
Research and Development for Technology- Department
of Science and Technology (ERDT-DOST) for the
research grant.
REFERENCES
[1] ACI Committee 214, (2003). Guide for obtaining cores and
interpreting compressive strength results, ACI 214.4R-03,
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, USA,
16 pp.
[2] Adaska, Wayne. Mix Design & Construction of RCC.
Retrieved December 8, 2012 from
http://www.secement.org/ PDFs/ 2008%20RCC
%20Appl%20 and %20Design %20-%20 Adaska.pdf
[3] ASTM C39/C39M-03. (2003). Standard test method for
compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens.
ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA, DOI:
10.1520/ C0039_C0039M-03.Retrieved from
www.astm.org.
[4] ASTM C42/C 42M Standard test method for obtaining and
testing drilled cores and sawed beams of concrete. ASTM
International. West Conshohocken, PA, DOI: 10.1520/
C0039_C0039M-03.Retrieved from www.astm.org
[5] ASTM C-127-01, (2001). Standard test method for density,
relative density (specific gravity), and absorption of coarse
aggregate. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA,
DOI: 10.1520/C0127-01.Retrieved from www.astm.org.
[6] ASTM C-128-01, (2001). Standard test method for density,
relative density (specific gravity), and absorption of fine
aggregate. astm international. West Conshohocken, PA,
DOI: 10.1520/C0128-01.Retrieved from www.astm.org.
[7] ASTM C-136-01, (2001). Standard test method for sieve
analysis of fine and coarse aggregates. ASTM International.
West Conshohocken, PA, DOI: 10.1520/C0136-
01.Retrieved from www.astm.org.
[8] ASTM C1435 - Standard practice for molding Roller-
Compacted Concrete in cylinder molds using a vibrating
Compressive Strength and Economic Viability of Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) Pavement Containing Pulverized Sand and Fly Ash
hammer. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA, fromhttp://members.cement.org/EBiz55/ProductCatalog/
DOI: 10.1520/C1435_C1435M-14.Retrieved from Product.aspx?ID=1626
www.astm.org. [13] Luhr, D. R. (2006). Aggregates in roller-compacted concrete
[9] ASTM D-1557 – 12. (2012). Standard test methods for pavement. North Carolina: Pavements Program Manager,
laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using modified Portland Cement Association.
effort. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA, DOI: [14] Philippines Department of Public Works and Highways.
10.1520/D1557-12.Retrieved from www.astm.org. (2014). Quality control manual on concrete and steel bridge
[10] Atis, Cengiz Duran, Strength properties of high-volume fly structures 2nd edition. Retrieved from
ash roller compacted and workable concrete, and influence http://www.dpwh.gov.ph/jica/pdf/Quality%20Control%20M
of curing condition. Cement and Concrete Research .35 anual%20on%20Concrete%20and%20Steel%20Bridge%20
(2005) 1112– 1121 Structuers_2nd%20Edition.pdfhttp://www.dpwh.gov.ph/jica
[11] Dam, T.V., Taylor, P., Fick, G., Gress, D., VanGeem, M., /pdf/Quality%20Control%20Manual%20on%20Concrete%2
Lorenz, E. ( 2012), Sustainable concrete pavements: A 0and%20Steel%20Bridge%20Structuers_2nd%20Edition.pd
manual of practice. Final Report/ Manual. National f
Concrete Pavement Technology Center, Iowa State [15] Sarsam, S., Al-Rawi, A., Abdul Rahim, A. (2012).
University, Retrieved Jan. 2, 2013, from Laboratory investigation on roller compaction technique in
http://www.nrmca.org/sustainability/Sustainable%20Concre concrete construction. Journal of Engineering v18 (4).
te% 20Pavement .pdf Retrived September 16, 2013 from
[12] Harrington, D., Abdo, F., Adaska, W., & Hazaree, C. http://www.coeng.uobaghdad.edu.iq/uploads/Juornal/2012/
(2010). Guide for roller-compacted concrete pavements. April/Laboratory%20Investigation%20on%20Roller%20Co
Institute for Transportation, Iowa State University Portland mpaction%20Technique%20in.pdf
Cement Association, Retrieved Jan. 3, 2013,



Proceedings of The IRES 29th International Conference, Singapore, 13th February 2016, ISBN: 978-93-85973-33-8
29