Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 29

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1Background of the Study

Since the discovery of cement back in 16th century, cement like material is widely used

around the world. And in 1824, when Portland Cement was patented, it became the number

one construction material used. Cement has been the revolutionary in construction world.

Concrete, is a composite material composed of fine and coarse aggregate bonded

together with a fluid cement (cement paste) that hardens over time—most frequently a

lime-based cement binder, such as Portland cement, but sometimes with other hydraulic

cements, such as a calcium aluminate cement, is the core strength of any structure today.

In some construction, concrete paste is done on site, and some came from mixing

plants. In this plants, the mixture is more accurate and reliable since they use technology

on preparing the mixture. On the other hand, on-site preparation is little bit more inaccurate

due to human error, thus produces some irregularities on concrete compressive strength.

Depending on the usage, concrete is prepared on different ways and proportions.

Strength of concrete is dependent on the mixture of course aggregate, fine aggregate and

cement powder. Different mixtures define the grade of the concrete; this grade will indicate

the compressive strength of concrete. On larger scale construction concrete is mix is

obtained through laboratories since it demands a higher strength. Whilst on smaller

construction, an already made concrete mix is suggested.


Example of such given grade are M5, M7.5, and more. One of the grade of concrete

is M25, or the Mixture with 25 mPa compressive strength. M25 is prepared with the

proportion of 1:1:2. This type of concrete belongs to the standard group of concrete, and

mostly used on small scale construction which requires larger compressive strength.

To fully understand these grades of concrete, the researchers conducted a

STRENGTH ANALYSIS OF CONCRETE CUBE USING DIFFERENT

CONCRETE MIXTURE.

1.2Statement of the Problem

This study aims to fully understand the 1:1:2 concrete mix proportion, its strength and

other properties. Furthermore, the researcher sought to answer the following question:

1. Is the 1:1:2 concrete mix proportion acceptable in construction as concrete

mixture in terms

1.1 Compressive Strength.

1.2 Slump test.

2. Does the concrete proportion of 1:1:2 meet the minimum strength

requirement by the specification in terms of Aggregate Size Proportion?

2.1 S1 for sand, ¾ for Gravel

2.2 S1 for Sand, G1 for gravel

2.3 Mix sand and gravel (using correlation factor)

1.3Significance of the Study


This study aims to help the following group or community:

Contractor. This study provides data and analysis that will be helpful to the

contractors and firms. The results can be used as basis on deciding on what type of

mix proportion to be used.

Government. In this country where industrialization is still going big, this type of

study is more helpful and can provide ideas on setting standard about the type of

mixture to be used.

End User. The end users will be the one who will suffer if the construction fails,

thus this study will be a helpful in ensuring the strength of the structure during and

after its construction.

Future Researchers. Above all group or people, future researcher will benefit most

because this study aims to start a better understanding of this type concrete in the

continuous growth of construction industry. Thus furthermore research is advised.

1.4Scope and Limitations

This study is limited only on the strength analysis of different concrete mix, its effect

to the compressive strength, slump, and cost. The variations of proportions of concrete

mix that greatly affect the compressive strength of a concrete cube is discussed together

with its slump and cost.


The researchers performed this study during the academic year 2018-2019, at

Cabanatuan City and Sta. Rosa, Nueva Ecija. The researchers finished the study in four

months or 120 days from August 2018 to December 2018.

1.5Definition of Terms

Aggregate

Cement

Coarse Aggregate

Concrete

Compressive strength

Fine Aggregate

Slump

Universal Testing Machine

Workability
CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

RELATED LITERATURES

Cement

A cement is a binder, a substance used for construction that sets, hardens, and

adheres to other materials to bind them together. Cement is seldom used on its own, but

rather to bind sand and gravel (aggregate) together. Cement mixed with fine aggregate

produces mortar for masonry, or with sand and gravel, produces concrete.

Cements used in construction are usually inorganic, often lime or calcium silicate

based, and can be characterized as either hydraulic or non-hydraulic, depending on the

ability of the cement to set in the presence of water (see hydraulic and non-hydraulic lime

plaster).

Non-hydraulic cement does not set in wet conditions or under water. Rather, it sets

as it dries and reacts with carbon dioxide in the air. It is resistant to attack by chemicals

after setting.

Hydraulic cements (e.g., Portland cement) set and become adhesive due to a

chemical reaction between the dry ingredients and water. The chemical reaction results in

mineral hydrates that are not very water-soluble and so are quite durable in water and safe

from chemical attack. This allows setting in wet conditions or under water and further

protects the hardened material from chemical attack. The chemical process for hydraulic
cement found by ancient Romans used volcanic ash (pozzolana) with added lime (calcium

oxide).

The word "cement" can be traced back to the Roman term opus caementicium, used

to describe masonry resembling modern concrete that was made from crushed rock with

burnt lime as binder. The volcanic ash and pulverized brick supplements that were added

to the burnt lime, to obtain a hydraulic binder, were later referred to as cementum,

cimentum, cäment, and cement. In modern times, organic polymers are sometimes used as

cements in concrete.

CONCRETE

Concrete, usually Portland cement concrete, is a composite material composed of

fine and coarse aggregate bonded together with a fluid cement (cement paste) that hardens

over time—most frequently a lime-based cement binder, such as Portland cement, but

sometimes with other hydraulic cements, such as a calcium aluminate cement. It is

distinguished from other, concementitious types of concrete all binding some form of

aggregate together, including asphalt concrete with a bitumen binder, which is frequently

used for road surfaces, and polymer concretes that use polymers as a binder.

When aggregate is mixed together with dry Portland cement and water, the mixture

forms a fluid slurry that is easily poured and molded into shape. The cement reacts

chemically with the water and other ingredients to form a hard matrix that binds the

materials together into a durable stone-like material that has many uses. Often, additives

(such as pozzolans or superplasticizers) are included in the mixture to improve the physical
properties of the wet mix or the finished material. Most concrete is poured with reinforcing

materials (such as rebar) embedded to provide tensile strength, yielding reinforced

concrete.

Famous concrete structures include the Hoover Dam, the Panama Canal and the

Roman Pantheon. The earliest large-scale users of concrete technology were the ancient

Romans, and concrete was widely used in the Roman Empire. The Colosseum in Rome

was built largely of concrete, and the concrete dome of the Pantheon is the world's largest

unreinforced concrete dome. Today, large concrete structures (for example, dams and

multi-storey car parks) are usually made with reinforced concrete.

After the Roman Empire collapsed, use of concrete became rare until the

technology was redeveloped in the mid-18th century. Worldwide, concrete has overtaken

steel in tonnage of material used.


RELATED STUDIES

Dr. S.K Verna and Ravinder Singh did a comparative study of M20 and M25 grade

of concrete by ACI, DOE and BIS Methods. The following figures are the result of their

study.
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF M25 and M20 CONCRETE

BASE ON DIFFERENT DESIGN METHOD

Compression Test

The compressive strength based on cubic specimen which is being used is analyzed

for both curing period of 7 and 28 days. The size of edge of cube under testing was 150

mm which was under continuous load of 14Mpa/min.

Observations

For the grade M20, the comparison was laid all cubical specimens of concrete based

on different design methods and it was observed that all achieved target mean strength. The

design method as per DOE method attributed to highest compressive strength and

performance more than the target strength. The ACI and BIS showed same set of passed

test with approximately same results. Overall all achieved the targeted strength.

For the grade M25, ACI was unable to reach the threshold targeted strength. The DOE and

BIS methods attained the threshold value of strength. The redesigning was done for ACI

method with increased amount of cement and found the results achievable which leads to

a conclusion that ACI required more cement that other test methods. Overall the results

obtained from DOE methods were quite impressive among the listed test methods.

Flexure test of beams


The flexural strength of different samples was tested after 7 and 28 days of curing.

The beam was tested on a flexural testing machine at loading rate 1kn/m. The ultimate

flexural strength of the beams designed with different mix design methods is tabulated

below
Observations

From experimental investigations, it was observed that flexure strength at

concrete designed as per DOE method increased with time and is highest among the

methods used after 28 days curing. After 28 days of curing both DOE and ACI methods

attain a higher amount of flexural strength than rest of the methods. The BIS method

achieved the least flexural strength even then it meets the minimal requirements of flexural

strength. For M25 grade of concrete the BIS method delivered the best results in terms of

flexural strength. Even DOE method exhibit much higher flexural strength than the ACI

method which was designed with an increased amount of cement to meet the minimum

requirements of strength.

Conclusions

Comparing the proportions of ingredients obtained by different mix design

methods, it was observed that the DOE method uses the least amount of FA whereas, these

are highest in ACI method. DOE method is using also a higher ratio of FA than BIS method

providing a better packing of aggregates. The highest amount of aggregates is used in BIS

method and least is in ACI method. For compressive strength of both M20and M25 grades

the DOE and BIS methods are more adaptable. The Flexure strength of beams (M20)

designed as per DOE method increased with time and is highest among the methods used

after 28 days of curing. Although, after 28 days of curing both BIS and DOE methods attain
a higher amount of flexural strength than rest two methods. After analyzing the outcomes

of split tensile test of concrete it was observed that for M20 grade, the concrete designed

with BIS method owns maximum split tensile strength. The split tensile strength of DOE

and ACI method has a marginal difference. For M25 grade the BIS method shows a vast

increment in the split tensile strength as compared to M20 and achieved highest strength

among the rest of the methods Overall behavior of M20 in terms of mechanical properties

of concrete were observed much better than that of the M25. Even the performance of

concrete designed as per ACI method was admirable for this grade of concrete

REF: International Journal of Scientific Research and Management (IJSRM)

||Volume||5||Issue||07||Pages||6377-6383||2017||

Website: www.ijsrm.in ISSN (e): 2321-3418

Index Copernicus value (2015): 57.47 DOI: 10.18535/ijsrm/v5i7.72

Slump Test

ASTM C 143, Chapter 4.1 state that “This test method is intended to provide the

user with a procedure to determine slump of plastic hydraulic-cement concretes.” Note

4-1 states that “This test method was originally developed to provide a technique to

monitor the consistency of unhardened concrete. Under laboratory conditions, with strict

control of all concrete materials, the slump is generally found to increase proportionally

with the water content of a given concrete mixture, and thus to be inversely related to
concrete strength. Under field conditions, however, such a strength relationship is not

clearly and consistently shown. Care should therefore be taken in relating slump results

obtained under field conditions to strength.”

Chapter 4, Note 2 states that “Concretes having slumps less than 1⁄2 in. [15 mm]

may not be adequately plastic and concretes having slumps greater than about 9 in.

[230 mm] may not be adequately cohesive for this test to have significance. Caution

should be exercised in interpreting such results.”

Compressive Strength

National building codes of the Philippines, 5.03 Plain Concrete. “(a) General.

Plain concrete, other than fill, shall have a minimum ultimate compressive strength at

28 days of 140 kilograms per square centimeter (2000 pounds per square inch) and

material proportioning, and placing shall conform to the requirement of this Chapter.

Concrete made with light-weight aggregate may be used with strength less than 140

kilograms per square centimeter (2000 pounds per square inch) if it has been shown by

tests or experience have sufficient strength and durability.”


CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

The researchers conducted the study with the following materials, design mixture

and formulas. To be able to widen the study, the researchers used three (3) design mixture

with different aggregate composition.

3.1 MATERIALS

3.1.1 Cement

Cement used in this study is an ordinary commercially available Portland

Cement.

3.1.2 Gravel

3/4” and G1 round gravels where used as course aggregate. Also under

consideration, mixed aggregate was also used to add another subject on this study.

3.1.3 Sand

The primarily fine aggregate used for the study is graded as S1, the

researchers also considered the use of mixed aggregate as one of the variables.

3.1.4 Water

Potable water is used as water for the cement mixture.


3.2 FORMULAS

3.2.1 Total Volume VT

𝑉𝑡 = 𝑆 3

3.2.2 Volume of Fine Aggregate VS

𝑉𝑠 = 𝑉𝑜𝑙 𝑇 𝑥 𝐾𝑠

𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒; 𝐾𝑠 = 0.50 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑

𝐾𝑠 = 0.54 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑

3.2.3 Volume of Coarse Aggregate Vg

𝑉𝑔 = 𝑉𝑜𝑙 𝑇 𝑥 𝐾𝑔

𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒; 𝐾𝑔 = 0.60 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑

𝐾𝑔 = 0.70 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑟𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑑

3.2.4 Cement

#𝐶𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 𝑉𝑜𝑙 𝑇 𝑥 𝐾𝑐

3.2.5 Water Cement Ratio

𝑊𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
𝑊𝐶𝑅 =
𝑊𝑐𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡

𝑉𝑜𝑙 𝑇(1:1:2)
#𝑀𝑜𝑙𝑑 =
𝑆𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑀𝑜𝑙𝑑
3.3 Design Mixture

As stated this study uses a design mix of 1:1:2 with three (3) different aggregate

composition. Same type of cement is used, aggregates where commercially

manufactured.

Table 3.1 Design Mixture

Sample Description Wcement Vsand Vgravel Wwater WCR

(kg) (m3) (m3) (kg)

1 ¾ Gravel 5 0.003375 .00675 2.6 .52

2 G1:S1 5 0.003375 .00675 2.6 .52

3 Mixed 5 0.003375 .00675 2.6 .52

3.4 Test Sample Procedure

Samples were prepared using the design mixture stated, a proportion of 1:1:2 is kept

constant together with the water cement ratio of 0.52 along the whole process. After the

samples were prepared, a Slump Tested was conducted to each sample to ensure better

workability of the concrete paste, a 50 to 100 millimeters of slump were desired the

researchers.

Each sample was poured in a cubic mold with sides of 150 mm and left for 24 hours

for the concrete to solidify. Samples then removed from the mold and were cured for 14

days in water and then drained for three days.


The samples were tested in terms of workability, using slump test and compressive

strengths using the Universal Testing Machine.


CHAPTER FOUR

Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

This chapter contains all the data gathered necessary for the accomplishment of this

paper. This also includes the interpretation and analysis of the data.

This study aims to analyze the major aspects in different concrete mixture

proportions, specifically, its slump and compressive strength where vital in this study.

Three samples were created and each sample has a proportion of 1:1:2, each also has three

different aggregate composition. Three fourth inch rounded and G1 round were used as

coarse aggregate while S1 is used as fine aggregate. The researchers also considered the

use of mix aggregate as one of the variable.

The following tables and figures where gathered and analyze by the researchers.

4.1 Data Gathered

4.1.1 Compressive Strength

The compressive were determined using the Universal Testing Machine and

compared to the required strength given by the Specification with accordance to

aggregate size proportion.

Table 4.1

Compressive Strength 28 days


Sample Actual Design Correlation Required Fracture

Description Strength Strength Factor Strength Type

14 days PSI 14th day PSI

PSI

¾” : S1 3379 3000 87% 2610 CP

G1 : S1 3331 3000 87% 2610 CP

Mixed 2914 3000 87% 2610 CS

With accordance to the researcher’s testing procedure, each sample was

loaded and tested using Universal Testing Machine. The purpose of this test is to

obtain the mechanical properties of each sample.

Table 4.1 represent the gathered data using Universal Testing Machine and

its comparison to the required strength. The 3000 psi design strength (designed for

28 days of curing) was correlated using a correlation factor of 87% which represent

the strength required for 14-day curing.

The first sample which had an aggregate composition of ¾” gravel and S1,

reached 3379 psi of compressive strength on its 14th day. While the required

strength for this span of curing is only 2610 psi of compressive strength, thus this

sample which also has the highest compressive strength among the samples passed

the required compressive strength. This sample also has a fracture of CP which

represents a better type of fracture.


The second and third sample which, respectively, gained 3331 psi and

29114 psi of compressive strength also passed the correlated compressive strength

of 2610. Each sample also has a fracture type of CP and CS respectively.

Compressive Strengths
3500

3000
compressive Strength (psi)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0
SAMPLE NO. 1 SAMPLE NO. 2 SAMPLE NO. 3

Sample No. 1 Sample No. 2 Sample No. 3


Compressive Strength 3379 3331 2914
Required Compressive strength on 28
3000 3000 3000
days
Correlated Compressive Strength 2610 2610 2610

Compressive Strength Required Compressive strength on 28 days Correlated Compressive Strength

Chart 4.1

Chart 4.1 is a visual representation of the difference in compressive strength

due to variation of aggregate included in the mixture also it shows the difference
between the design compressive strength and the correlated 14 day cured

compressive strength. This data was obtained using the universal testing machine.

National building codes of the Philippines, 5.03 Plain Concrete. “(a)

General. Plain concrete, other than fill, shall have a minimum ultimate

compressive strength at 28 days of 140 kilograms per square centimeter (2000

pounds per square inch) and material proportioning, and placing shall conform

to the requirement of this Chapter. Concrete made with light-weight aggregate

may be used with strength less than 140 kilograms per square centimeter (2000

pounds per square inch) if it has been shown by tests or experience have

sufficient strength and durability.”

Thus, with accordance to the required compressive strength stated

in the National Building Code of the Philippines of 2000 psi, these type of mixtures

is suitable for construction here in the Philippines. In fact, these type of mixture is

strong enough as per the code.

4.1.2 Slump Test

Slump test was conducted on each sample to determine its workability

before casting it on the mold. Each sample were again prepared and mixed then

using slump cone and tampering rod, the following data were observed. The

researchers aim to produce slump values within range of 50 mm to 100 mm and a

true slump.
Table 4.2

Slump Test

Slump Required

Description (Fresh Slump Slump Type of

Sample Concrete) Value Value Slump

(mm) (mm)

1 ¾” : S1 50-100 50 True

2 G1:S1 50-100 50 True

3 Mixed 50-100 50 True

Figure 4.1 Type of Slump with Accordance to ASTM C 143

ASTM C 143, Chapter 4.1 state that “This test method is intended to provide the

user with a procedure to determine slump of plastic hydraulic-cement concretes.” Note

4-1 states that “This test method was originally developed to provide a technique to

monitor the consistency of unhardened concrete. Under laboratory conditions, with strict
control of all concrete materials, the slump is generally found to increase proportionally

with the water content of a given concrete mixture, and thus to be inversely related to

concrete strength. Under field conditions, however, such a strength relationship is not

clearly and consistently shown. Care should therefore be taken in relating slump results

obtained under field conditions to strength.”

Chapter 4, Note 2 states that “Concretes having slumps less than 1⁄2 in. [15 mm]

may not be adequately plastic and concretes having slumps greater than about 9 in.

[230 mm] may not be adequately cohesive for this test to have significance. Caution

should be exercised in interpreting such results.”

Table 4.2 represent the value determined using slump test. On the first sample,

which has a ¾” gravel and S1 as aggregates, a slump value of 50 mm is obtained which

passed the required value of 50 mm to 100mm. On the other hand, it also gained a true

slump which is the most required slump type. This results passed the workability test

conducted on the first mixture.

Considering the other two sample, sample number 2 and 3 also has the same value

observed in sample number 1 which means these samples also passed the test conducted.
ANALYSIS ON SLUMP
Slump (mm) 100 mm

120
100 100 100
100

80

60 50 50 50

40

20

0
SAMPLE NO. 1 SAMPLE NO. 2 SAMPLE NO. 3

Chart 4.2

Chart 4.2 focuses on describing the uniformity of slump of each sample. These

result were desired by the researcher to have better workability and consistency on the

concrete mixture.
CHAPTER FIVE

Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1 SUMMARY

The whole strength of any structure is dependent on how each individual member will

carry the strength. Mostly, concrete is one of the most common part of any structure, and

its strength is crucial.

Concrete is a mixture of coarse and fine aggregates and binding material,

commonly binding material used is Portland cement concrete. The compressive strength of

concrete is dependent to its mixture proportion and also to its contents. Aggregate size and

type is very important in any concrete mixture. Also its proportion determine its strength,

such is grade of concrete. Concrete grade like M25, with mix proportion of 1:1:2 is

commonly used to midrise construction, these type of standard concrete has a theoretical

compressive strength of 25 mPa.

This study aims to analyze the compressive strength and slump of concrete mixture

proportion of 1:1:2 with three different aggregate composition. The researchers also use a

0.52 Water-Cement Ratio. The first sample has an aggregate combination of ¾” inch gravel

and S1, the next sample is a G1:S1 composition, and the last sample is a mixed aggregate

concrete mixture. These mixtures passed the slump test as desired by the researchers, a true

slump is the goal of the researchers during this test.

Upon passing the slump test, each sample is placed in a 150 millimeters cube.

Samples were cured for 14 days since this is the crucial part of curing of concrete. In 14
days curing, difference in mechanical properties will be observable and will be more

significant to the studies. After cured, samples were drained for another three days.

To determine its compressive strength, each is loaded on a Universal Testing

Machine. Upon achieving the result of various test done on the sample, the following were

the judgement of the researchers in this study:

5.1.1 Slump Test

With Water-Cement Ratio of 0.52, each sample yielded an approximately

50 mm drop on concrete. This slump value is a better value since this type of

concrete paste is not adequately plastic and not adequately cohesive. Also these

slump is within range stated by the researcher of 50 to 100 millimeters. Thus, this

type of mixture, together with water-cement ratio stated by the researcher is suitable

on construction.

5.1.2 Compressive Strength

Based upon the result of the universal testing machine, each sample has a

greater compressive strength than that of the required by the National Building

Code of the Philippines. Specifically, the first sample has a 3379 psi of compressive

strength, the second has 3331 psi and the last has 2914 psi of compressive strength.

These strengths are above the required for the construction which is 2000 psi for

plain concrete.
5.2 Conclusions

Based on the summary of findings, and upon analyzation of the researchers, the

following were concluded from this study;

1. Concrete mix proportion of 1:1:2 with ¾ inch gravel and S1 aggregates has a

compressive strength that is not afar of 1:2:3 mixtures with 3379 psi at fourteen

days of curing. Considering the curing time is much lower than that of the specified,

it produces enough compressive strength for concrete works.

Due to the variation in aggregate composition, the compressive strength of

each samples has different compressive strength. But, the test sample with

combination of G1 and S1 as aggregate is not that far from the result of sample

number one. Thus, the researcher conclude that this may because the size

proportion between the coarse and fine aggregate is still controlled.

On the other hand, the compressive strength of the third sample drop to 2914

psi which has a difference of almost 400 psi to the other first two concrete cube.

Because of this, the researchers were convinced that the reason on the variation of

compressive strength is the control on size proportion of fine and coarse aggregate,

considering that all sample has the same volume, same amount of cement and also

same water to cement ratio.

Based on the slump test on each samples, all samples yielded the same

slump value of 50 mm, this value is on the range stated by the researcher of 50 mm
to 100 mm, also this values were also in the range stated by ASTM C 143 of 15

mm to 230 mm to be workable.

Nonetheless, this values represent that these type of mixture proportion,

1:1:2, with three aggregate composition passes the required to be used in the

construction.

2. Using the correlation factor of 87% for concrete cured on 14th day and required

design compressive strength of 3000 psi on its 28th day of curing, each sample’s

compressive strength was recorded and compared to the required by the

specification with accordance of Aggregate Size Proportion.

With accordance to these specifications, each sample passed the design

requirement in terms of Aggregate size proportion. Therefore, the researchers

concluded that this aggregate proportion of ¾ inch gravel with S1, G1 with S1 and

mixed aggregates meets the required strength as specified in terms of Aggregate

Size Proportion.

5.3 Recommendation

The following recommendations were offered by the researchers to achieve better

understanding for the future researches;

 The use of crushed gravel can help to determine the variation on

compressive strength due to aggregate size proportion.


 A 28th day cured concrete will be more helpful in understanding the effect

of different concrete mixture proportion.

 The use of high and advance technology is highly recommended to provide

more accuracy in measurements.

 In the gathering of data, precision and accuracy is advised.

 The use of constant system of units will be more comprehensive, thus, the

researchers promote the use of metric or English units only.