BEHAVIOUR OF CONCRETE

WITH A SELF CURING AGENT AS

EXTERNAL ADMIXTURES

By : N. RAJYA LAKSHMI
Guide: Sri V.Swamy Srinadh 17NF1D8710
Asst. Professor, UCET M.Tech
(Structures))))
Why to do Self Curing

In self curing concrete, self curing

agents will mitigate the problem
involving the loss of hydration from the
concrete . It solves the problem that the
degree of cement hydration is lowered due
to no curing or improper curing.

2
Need for Self Curing

When the mineral admixtures react completely in a

blended cement system, their demand for curing water
(external or internal) can be much greater than in a
conventional ordinary Portland cement concrete. When
this water is not readily available, significant autogenous
deformation and early-age cracking may result.

3
ABSTRACT
One of the techniques of self curing is by
hydropholic materials. Some of the
hydrophollic materials are:
 1.Paraffin wax
 2.Conplast SP430
 Grade of concrete : M40
 Design mix proportion : 1:1.45:2.95
LITERATURE REVIEW
Jagannadha Kumar, M. Sri kant h, Dr. K. Jagannadha Rao (2012)
Studied that self curing concrete is provided to absorb water from moisture
from air to achieve better hydration of cement in concrete. In this shrinkage
reducing admixture polyethylene glycol (PEG 400) is a self curing compound.
Two types of grades are taken i.e., M20 and M40 grades of concrete. In this
study the self curing agent is added to concrete with 0.5%, 1%, 1.5%, 2% by
weight of cement.

 P. Swamy Naga Rat na Gi ri, G. Rajesh kumar, Maddur u Sri Rama Chand,
Ratish kumar panchartri (2017) _
 Self-curing concrete is one of the special concretes which mitigates insufficient
curing due to a variety of reasons including human negligence, scarcity of
water, inaccessibility or bad quality of water available for curing. In the present
work, polyethylene glycol of different molecular weights are used as self-curing
chemicals in self compacting concretes in optimum dosages during the mixing
stage.
 This has ensured reduction in the evaporation of
water and enhanced the performance of SCC. This
study has clearly brought out the influence of
PEG’s in different grades of concrete.
 Madduru Sri ramachand, Rathish kumar
pancharathi, P Swamy nagaratna giri, Grajesh
kumar (2018)
 The present study investigates the efficiency of
hydrophilic (Polyethylene Glycol-4000) and
hydrophobic (Liquid Paraffin Wax-Light)
chemicals as self curing compounds in SCC. The
parameters of the study include curing
compound and its dosage, curing regime and age
of curing. The studies include water retention
 Materials Used
 The different materials used in the
investigation are:
 Cement
 Fine Aggregate
 Coarse Aggregate.
 Water
 Liquid Paraffin wax (LPW)
 Conplast SP 430
Material tests

 Specific gravity
 Sieve analysis of aggregates
 Workability tests
Physical properties of water

S. No Parameter Values

1. pH 7.10

2. Taste Agreeable

3. Appearance Clear

4. Turbidity (NT Units) 1.75

5. Hardness (mg/l) 250

10
Physical properties of Fine aggregates:

Properties (F.A) Average values

Water absorption 2.52

Fineness modulus 2.80

Specific gravity 2.76

 Tests on Coarse Aggregates:

 Specific gravity.

 Fineness test.

 Water absorption
Physical properties of Coarse aggregates:

Properties Avg. values

Water absorption 2.03

Fineness modulus 6.67

Specific gravity 2.86

DESIGN OF CONCRETE MIX
(As per IS: 10262-2009)

Design stipulations:
1. Grade designation – M 40.
2. Type of exposure – Moderate.
3. workability required at site – 90 to 100 mm slump
value.
Test data for design:
1. Cement used – OPC of 53 Grade.
2. Specific gravity of cement – 3.15.
3. Specific gravity of F.A – 2.76.
4. Specific gravity of C.A – 2.86.
5. Maximum size of aggregate – 20 mm.
6. Fine aggregates fall into – Zone – 3.
MIX PROPOSTION FOR 1 CUM OF
CONCRETE

Mix proportions in work followed

Water : Cement : F.A : C.A

197 : 450 : 586.56 : 1245.65
0.43 : 1 : 1.305 : 2.768
 Tests on Concrete

 Slump cone test

 Compressive strength test.

 Split tensile strength.

 Flexural strength on beams.

Percentages of Slump cone test values in cm
copper slag 10%Limestone 15%Limestone 20%Limestone
powder powder powder
0% 28.6 29.1 28.5
20% 28.8 29.4 28.7
40% 29.5 29.4 29
60% 29.8 29.6 29.8
80% 0 0 0
100% 0 0 0
Slump cone test result
Slump cone test for different mix percentages
slump cone values
35

30 10%LP

25

15%LP
20

15
20%LP

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6

18
 Compressive strength results
• Compressive strength of normal concrete cubes at 7 days = 37.775 N/mm2
• Compressive strength of normal concrete cubes at 28 days = 48.889 N/mm2

Percenta Compressive strength in N/ mm2

ges of 10% Limestone 15%Limestone 20%Limestone
copper powder powder powder
slag 7 days 28 days 7 days 28 days 7 days 28 days

0% 28.51 36.32 29.86 42.16 27.22 39.49

20% 29.98 38.29 32.35 43.84 31.20 36.93
40% 34.86 41.28 36.22 47.48 32.93 39.25
60% 42.90 50.80 44.27 65.19 40.78 46.96
80% 34.85 45.04 38.03 47.76 33.82 41.91
100% 34.66 45.84 36.31 43.57 31.96 40.24
Compressive strength for different mix
percentages
7 Days compressive strength of concrete
50

45
10%
LP
Compressive strength in

40
15%L
P
N/mm2

35
20%L
P
30

25

20
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Percentages of copper slag
 28 Days compressive strength of concrete
70

60 10%
LP
Compressive strength in

50 15%L
P
N/mm2

20%L
40 P

30

20
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Percentages of copper slag
 Split tensile strength results
Split tensile strength for normal concrete cylinder at 28 days= 4.42 N/mm2

Percentages of copper Split tensile strength in N/mm2

slag
10%Limestone powder 15%Limestone powder 20%Limestone powder

0% 2.64 2.77 2.34

20% 2.70 2.92 2.52

40% 3.01 3.23 2.88

60% 3.31 3.72 3.13

80% 4.20 4.75 3.87

100% 3.37 3.83 3.32

Split tensile strength results
28 Days Split tensile strength for different mixes

4.5
Split tensile strength in

4 10%LP
N/mm2

3.5
15%LP

3
20%LP

2.5

2
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

Pecentages of copper slag

 Flexural strength results

Flexural strength of normal concrete beams at 28 days = 5.071 N/mm2

Percentages of Flexural strength in N/ mm2

copper slag 10% Limestone 15% Limestone 20% Limestone
powder powder powder
0% 5.24 5.34 4.82
20% 5.66 5.87 5.37
40% 5.94 6.33 5.71
60% 6.68 7.07 6.50
80% 7.16 7.63 6.75
100% 5.43 4.98 5.77
Flexural strength results
28 Days Flexural strength for different mixes

7
Flexural strength in

10%
LP
N/mm2

6
15%
LP
5
20%
LP
4

3
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Percentages of copper slag

Conclusions
 The percentages of copper slag increases, workability
decreases.
 The compressive strength of concrete increases as
percentages of copper slag increase with 60% and limestone
powder increase with15% and then decreases.
 60% of copper slag with 15% of limestone powder shows
25.05% higher compressive strength than nominal concrete
for 28 days.
 copper slag of 80% with 15% limestone powder shows
33.73% & 6.9% higher than nominal concrete
corresponding flexural and split tensile strength for 28 days.
References:
 1. Chao-Lung Hwang and Jaw-Chang Laiw studied on “properties of concrete using
copper slag as a substitute for fine aggregate”, Special publication, Volume : 114
(1989)1677-1696.
 2. Khalifa S.AI-Jabri, MakotoHisada, Salem K.AI-Oraimi and Abdullah H.AI-sandy
(2009) studied on “copper slag as sand replacement for high performance
concrete, Journal of cement and concrete composites”, Volume 31 (2009) 483-488.
 3. B Ganesh, Ch Bhaskara rao, K Rajesh (2017) studied on “experimental study on
lime stone powder & copper slag strength of concrete with partial replacement of
cement and fine aggregate”, International journal of mechanical engineering and
computer applications, Volume 5 (2017) 2320-6349.
 4. Neethu Susan Mathew, S.Usha (2014) studied on “the effect of copper slag as
partial replacement for fine aggregate in geopolymer concrete”, IOSR Journal of
Mechanical and Civil engineering, PP73-77 (2014) 2278-1684.
 5. James Mohammadi, Warren South studied on “Effect of up to 12% substitution of
clinker with limestone on commercial grade concrete containing supplementary
cementitious materials”, Construction and Building Materials 115 (2016) 555–564.
Thank You