BURJ KHALIFA-

The Tallest Tower in the World

(Previously known as Burj Dubai)

MODIFICATION OF THE MIX DESIGNED FOR THE

HORIZONTAL MEMBERS OF THE UPPER LEVELS OF
THE TOWER

V. Manilal
vmanilal@yahoo.com

-1-
 MODIFICATION OF THE MIX DESIGNED FOR THE
HORIZONTAL MEMBERS OF THE UPPER LEVELS OF
THE TOWER
(C50/14)
The report on trial mixes, volume two, dated 15th March 2005 incorporates the details of
the mix C50/14 designed for the horizontal members of the upper levels of the Tower.
The original mix was trialed with NSF based chemical admixture. The general
requirements then specified are summarized below.

Requirements
Items
Level Situation Spec. – 03300 Samsung JV
Water /cementitious ratio : Max. 0.38
Cementitious content : Min. 350 kg/m3
General
Fly ash content: Max. 30%
Micro silica content : 5% ~ 10 %
Water absorption: Max. 1.5%
Water permeability: Max. 10mm
Durability
Rapid chloride permeability: Max. 1,200 coulombs
Initial surface absorption: Max. 0.15 ml/m2/s
450+/-75
At pump Max. 230mm
230+/-30
Flow
400+/-75
At point of deposit Max. 200mm
230+/-30mm
At time of mixing Max. 310C Max. 260C
Temperature All levels
At time of placing Max. 330C Max. 280C
24 hours - 14 MPa
CCS All levels
28 days Min. 50 MPa Min. 50 MPa
E- modulus All levels 28 days
Drying 28 days Max.0.025% Max. 0.04%
All levels
shrinkage 1 year Max. 0.05% -

Soluble chloride
Max. 0.30% by weight of cement in hardened concrete.
ion

The specification has not changed since then but the mix needs to be modified because
of reasons.

Purpose of Modification

There are two main reasons for the modification of the mix:

1. Compatibility of the admixture with that of the mix of vertical elements, and
2. Minimizing the drying shrinkage.

1. Admixture compatibility

The concrete mix for the vertical members is hyper plasticized with PC admixture and
as mentioned earlier the mix for horizontal member was designed with NSF based super
plasticizer. These two types of admixtures are not compatible to each other and cause
flash set upon contact. Hence the use of same pump pipe line for both mixes is not

-2-
practically possible during placing. The use of same generic type of admixture can solve
the problem.

2. Drying shrinkage

The maximum drying shrinkage specified in spec.03300 is 0.025% at 28 days and

0.050% at one year. Samsung has a more relaxed specification of 0.040% at 28 days.
The original mix exhibited a shrinkage value of -0.0508% at 28 days, apparently above
the limits of both specifications. Hence a revised mix with minimized shrinkage is in
need. Slight reduction in total cement content and water/cement ratio will do the job
and hence the new design.

Trial Mix

A new mix was designed jointly by Unimix Technical Team and Mr.G.D.Kim of Samsung
and trialed the mix in the laboratory for verification of concrete properties both in the
fresh and hardened states. A full scale production sized trial was organized on the 1 st of
November 2005 and was witnessed by representatives of Hyder, IVTA, Samsung and
Unimix. Fresh concrete properties were checked and specimens were made to check
hardened properties.

Comparison of Mix Designs

The previous and new mix designs are compared below.

Properties/Materials Previous Mix New Mix Difference

Grade C50 C50 Nil
Max. Agg. Size 14mm 14mm Nil
w/c ratio 0.38 0.37 -0.1
Water 171 163 -8.0
Cement 338 330 -8.0
Pfa 112 110 -2.0
M. Silica 25 25 0.0
14mm Agg 554 587 +33
10mm Agg 298 298 0.0
0-5mm W. sand 511 525 +14
D.sand 341 341 0.0
Admixture Type NSF (SP 491 & PC (Glenium Different generic
SP 430) 110UNR) type
Dosage -1 6.13 3.2 Not comparable
Dosage-2 3.25 0.0 Not comparable

The C50/20 mix designed of the horizontal members of the lower levels incorporates
Glenium 110UN, a PC admixture manufactured by Degussa. Where as the new design
of C50/14 contains Glenium 110UNR, a modified version of Glenium 110UN which
gives more working life for the mix.

The new mix has low water and total cement content and the volumetric reduction due
to this is compensated with and increase in aggregate content. But care has taken not

-3-
to increase the finer part of the coarse aggregate (10mm) and the finer part of fine
aggregate (dune sand).

Test Results

The test results of laboratory trial mix and that of plant trial mix are tabulated below.

Setting time
Slump flow (mm) Temp.0C Comp. strength (MPa)
Trial (h:m)
0’ 30’ 60’ 90’ 0’ 60’ Initial Final 24h 2D 3D 5D 7D 28D
Lab 680 650 585 515 27.0 28.0 10:10 12:25 19.5 33.5 39.0 45.0 59.5 82.0

Plant 675 610 575 525 23.0 25.0 9:15 11:15 19.0 33.0 35.5 43.5 44.5 67.0

Comparison of Test Results (Previous and New Designs)

The test results of both the fresh and hardened concrete of previous and new mixes are
compared and summarized in the table below.

Properties Previous design New design

0’ 510 675
30’ 435 610
Flow value (mm)
60’ 430 575
90’ 410 525
0’ 250 265
30’ 230 260
Slump value (mm)
60’ 220 255
90’ 215 250
0’ 27 23
30’ 28 23
Temp.0C
60’ 28 25
90’ 29 26
Air content (%) 1.2 1.0
Bleeding (%) Nil Nil
Initial 8:18 9:15
Setting time (h:m)
Final 9:40 11:15
24hr 20.5 19.0
3 days 30.0 33.0
2 days 34.0 35.5
Comp. strength
5 days 44.0 43.5
(MPa)
7 days 45.5 44.5
14 days 56.5 54.5
28 days 66.0 67.0
W.A. (%) 1.65 1.5
W.P (mm) 8.0 4
Durability @ 28 days
RCP (coulombs) 1106 749
ISAT 0.02 0.03
Splitting Tensile Strength (MPa) 3.75 3.77
7 Days -0.0344 -0.022
14 days -0.0432 Not checked
Drying shrinkage (%)
21 days -0.0464 Not checked
28 days -0.0508 -0.031
Sulphate (%) 0.38 0.34
Chemical tests
Chloride (%) 0.004 0.01

-4-
 Properties Previous design New design
2 days 28,613 29,303
3 days 30,165 35,164
Elastic modulus
5 days 31,544 37,060
(Mpa)
7 days 34,819 38,784
28 days 39,300 41,886

Discussion

The test results are analyzed and discussed under different titles, like workability,
compressive strength, elastic modulus and drying shrinkage.

1. Workability

As expected, the new mix exhibited a high degree of workability since it is admixtured
with polycarboxylic ester based hyper plasticizer where as the previous design contains
NSF based super plasticizer. The results are plotted graphically below.

800

700

600
Slump & Flow value (mm)

500
Previous design flow
New design flow
400
Previous design slump
New design slump
300

200

100

0
0’ 30’ 60’ 90’

Time (min)

2. Compressive Strength

In fact, there is not much difference in compressive strengths of both mixes, even
though the w/c ratio of the new mix is less than that of the previous mix. But as the
w/c ratio is reduced, the total cement content also reduced which in turn compromised
in almost equal compressive strength results.

-5-
 80

70

60
Comp.Strength (MPa)

50

Previous design
40
New design

30

20

10

0
24hr 3 days 2 days 5 days 7 days 14 days 28 days

Age

2. Elastic Modulus

The elastic modulus of the new mix is noticeably higher than that of the previous
design. But as this mix is designed for the horizontal members of the tower like slabs
and beams, the specification provides no elastic modulus requirement. The major
factors affecting elastic modulus are the strength of the paste phase, the stiffness of the
embedded aggregate, their relative volume concentrations and their interface
characteristics. The greater the volume concentration of the stiffer phase (usually the
aggregate), the greater the concrete elastic modulus will be (Fulton’s Concrete
Technology PCI-1994). The previous mix had a total aggregate volume of 639L and the
new mix have 656L of aggregates and hence higher the elastic modulus.

45,000

40,000

35,000

30,000
E-Modulus (MPa)

25,000 Previous design

20,000 New design

15,000

10,000

5,000

0
2 days 3 days 5 days 7 days 28 days

Age

-6-
3. Drying Shrinkage

The new design exhibited less shrinkage than that of the previous design at the age of 7
days. This low shrinkage can be attributed to low water/cement ratio and low paste
volume and higher aggregate concentration of the new mix compared to the previous
one. The graphical representation is not complete as only one result is available at the
moment. Not much literature is available to analyze the influence of admixture on
drying shrinkage.

0
7 Days 14 days 21 days 28 days
-0.01
Drying Shrinkage (%)

-0.02

Previous design
-0.03
New design

-0.04

-0.05

-0.06

Age

Conclusion

The new mix design could fulfill the purpose of modification of the previous design. The
new design plasticized with PC admixture is compatible with the other companion mix
designed for vertical members. The new design could produce almost the same strength
as the previous mix did. The new design has a higher elastic modulus and a lower
drying shrinkage than that of the previous one.

Response to IVTA Comments

Ref. Comments on Material Certification COC/142 dated 29/11/05

1. Technical data sheet for Glenium 110UNR is attached here with. Glenium
110UNR is a modified version of Glenium 110UN: modified for better workability
retention, as the mix is designed for the highest levels of the Tower.

2. A reduction in free water of approximately 4 L/m³ is considerable when the

admixtures are individually analyzed. But the fact is that, the previous mix
design is totally redesigned volumetrically and is clearly depicted under the title
Concrete Mix Composition.

3. The new mix achieved a shrinkage value of 310 microstrain at 28 days.

4. The new mix has lower paste content and hence mortar than the previous mix
had but the trial mixes exhibited very good workability. Pumpability of the mix
to the highest levels is to be experienced at field. Unimix is still searching for a
proper rheometer which is suitable for our mixes designed for the project.

-7-
5. The previous mix design was coded as BD Mix-9, but Revision- 01. The new
mix design also coded as BD Mix-9 but Revision-02. Some may anticipate some
sort of confusion, but it is not true. When the new mix with PC admix gets
approved by the consultants, the previous mix with NSF admix can be deleted
and can be replaced with the new PC mix under the same code.

6. The compressive strength, elastic modulus and durability test reports are
attached here with and the results are satisfactory.

7. We do report the shape indices and grading values regularly to the crusher
authority for their quality control. We believe the crusher authorities will do the
needful.

End ……………………….

-8-