Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Behaviour of reinforced concrete beams with 50 percentage fly ash
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Behaviour of reinforced concrete beams with 50 percentage fly ash

210
views

Published on


0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
210
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
35
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print), INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print)ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online)Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), pp. 36-48 IJCIET© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.aspJournal Impact Factor (2013): 5.3277 (Calculated by GISI) © IAEMEwww.jifactor.com BEHAVIOUR OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS WITH 50 PERCENTAGE FLY ASH 1 2 3 4 5 P.S.Joanna , Jessy Rooby , Angeline Prabhavathy , R.Preetha , C.Sivathanu Pillai 1 Civil Engineering Department, Hindustan University,Padur- 603103, India. 2 Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Hindustan University,Padur- 603103, India. 3 Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Hindustan University, Padur-603103, India. 4 Scientific Officer,Civil Engineering Division,Indira Ghandhi Centre for Atomic Research,Kalpakkam- 603 102, India. 5 Associate Director,Civil Engineering Division,Indira Ghandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam- 603 102, India. ABSTRACT Fly ash has emerged as novel engineering materials which lead to global sustainable development and lowest possible environmental impact with considerable promise as binders in the manufacture of concrete. In this paper, the results of laboratory investigation conducted on the structural behavior of reinforced concrete beam with high volume of low calcium (class F) fly ash are presented. Experimental investigation included testing of nine reinforced concrete beams with and without fly ash. Portland cement was replaced with 50% fly ash and Conplast SP430 was used as superplastisizer for the casting of beams. Data presented include the load-deflection characteristics, cracking behavior, ductility indices, moment- curvature and end rotations of the reinforced concrete beams with and without fly ash when tested at 28 days, 56 days and 75 days. The investigation revealed that there is a significant improvement in flexural strength of reinforced fly ash concrete beams beyond 28 days. Key Words: Ordinary Portland Cement, Reinforced Fly Ash concrete beams, ductility, moment- curvature. 36
  • 2. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME1. INTRODUCTION The Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) is one of the main ingredients used for theproduction of concrete and has no alternative in the construction industry. Unfortunately,production of cement involves emission of large amounts of carbon-dioxide gas in to theatmosphere, a major contributor for green house effect and the global warming. Hence it isinevitable either to search for another material or partly replace it by some other material. Flyash is one such pozzolanic material which can be used in concrete as partial replacement ofcement. Jiang and Malhotra (2000) found that the incorporation of 50% fly ash in concretegives good compressive strength at 91 days. Gopalakrishnan et al. (2001) showed that the flyash concretes have superior durability properties. Rafat Siddique (2004) studied thecompressive strength and flexural strength of High Volume Class-F Fly Ash concrete andfound that there is a significant improvement of strength properties beyond 28 days. Theyalso found that the strength of concrete with 40%, 45% and 50% fly ash content, even at 28days is sufficient enough for use in reinforced cement concrete construction. Khatib (2008)found that the concrete with 60% fly ash replacement for cement can produce selfcompacting concrete with adequate strength. Dakshina Murthy and Sudheer Reddy (2010)found that fly ash replacement up to 30% in concrete gives good improvement in flexuralstrength at 28 days. Sunilaa et al. (2011) found that the addition of 40% fly ash gives betterresistance against shear at 28 days. Extensive research has been done on the compressive strength and flexural strength ofHigh Volume Fly Ash Concrete (HVFAC). Hence in this investigation, behavior ofReinforced Concrete (RC) beams with HVFAC was carried out. 50% of cement was replacedwith fly ash and Conplast (SP430) was used as superplastisizer for the casting of beams. Atotal of nine reinforced concrete beams with and without fly ash were cast and tested. Out ofthe nine specimens, four controlled specimens were cast without fly ash and the other fivespecimens were cast with 50% fly ash. Data presented include the deflection characteristics,cracking behavior, ductility indices, moment-curvature and end rotations of the specimens.2. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS2.1 Materials and mix proportions In the current investigation 50% of cement was replaced with Fly Ash in the castingof RC beams. The materials used in the mix were Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC), riversand, low calcium Fly Ash (Class F), aggregate and potable water. Conplast (SP430)superplastisizer was incorporated in the mix to increase the workability. Beams were madewith M30 grade concrete. Water-cement ratio of 0.45 and 0.75% Conplast superplastisizerwere used for reinforced OPC concrete beams. Water/cement & Fly ash ratio of 0.45 and1.5% Conplast superplastisizer were used for 50% fly ash concrete beams. Fe 500 grade steelwas used for longitudinal reinforcement and for stirrups.2.2 Test beam details Nine numbers of reinforced concrete beams with and without fly ash were cast andtested in the loading frame. The span of the beam was 2500 mm and of size 150mm x250mm. The specimens were designed as per IS: 456-2000. Out of the nine specimens tested, 37
  • 3. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEMEfour specimens were cast without fly ash and four specimens were cast with 50% fly ash.Two specimens were cast in each series. Four specimens were tested at 28th day, fourspecimens were tested at 56th day and one specimen was tested at 75th day from the date ofcasting. Reinforcement details for the beam and the details of the specimens tested are givenin Table 1. A five lettered designation is given to the specimens. First 2 letters represents thebeam with Conplast superplastisizer, 3rd one % of fly ash added, 4th one identity of specimenin a particular series as two specimens were tested in each series and the last one indicates theday on which the specimen is being tested. Table 1: Test beam details SL.No. Beam Testing Reinforcement in beams Number of Longitudinal Stirrups Beams Nos. and Nos. and Diameter Spacing (days) size at top size at (mm) (mm) bottom 1 CB0% 1-28 2 CB0% 2-28 28 2#10 2#12 + 1#16 8 120 3 CB50% 1-28 4 CB50% 2-28 5 CB0% 1-56 56 2#10 2#12 + 1#16 8 120 6 CB0% 2-56 7 CB50% 1-56 8 CB50% 2-56 9 CB50% 1-75 75 2#10 2#12 + 1#16 8 1203. TEST SET-UP The testing was carried out in a loading frame of 400 kN capacity. TML strain gaugewas fixed at the mid span of the tension bar and then protected using coating tape to avoidaccidental damage during pouring of concrete. Strain gauges were also attached to theconcrete surface in the central region of the beam to measure the strain at different depths.The top surface of the beam was instrumented with strain gauge to measure the concretecompressive strains in the pure bending region. Linear Voltage Displacement Transducers(LVDTs) were used for measuring deflections at several locations, one at mid span, twodirectly below the loading points and two near the end supports as shown in the Figure 1.Strain gauges and LVDTs were connected to a data logger from which the readings werecaptured by a computer at every load intervals until failure of the beam occurred. The beamswere subjected to two-point loads under a load control mode. The development of crackswere observed and the crack widths were measured using a hand-held microscope with anoptical magnification of X50 and a sensitivity of 0.02 mm. Figure 2 shows the test set-up. 38
  • 4. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME Strain Gauge TCS (Extreme fibre concrete strain) 25 mm FCS1 10 mm 25 mm FCS2 10 mm 25 mm FCS3 10 mm Hydraulic Jack FCS4 10 mm 50 mm Load Cell CSS ( Center Steel Strain) Steel Support DL2 DL1 DC DR1 DR2 LVDT Figure 1: Position of LVDTs and Strain gauges Figure 2: Test set-up 39
  • 5. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME4. TEST RESULTS4.1. General observations Vertical flexural cracks were observed in the constant-moment region and final failureoccurred due to crushing of the compression concrete with significant amount of ultimatedeflection. When the maximum load was reached, the concrete cover on the compressionzone started to fall for the beams with and without fly ash. Figure 3. shows the failure patternof the test specimens. Crack formations were marked on the beam at every load interval at thetension steel level. Initial cracking was formed at 17% and 20% of ultimate load for beamswith and without fly ash respectively at 28 days and it is 16% and 20.4% at 56 days. Initialcrack for fly ash concrete beam at 75 days is 18.6% of ultimate load. It was noticed that thefirst crack always appears close to the mid span of the beam. The cracks formed on thesurface of the beams were mostly vertical, suggesting flexural failure of the beams. The crackwidths at service loads for fly ash concrete beams ranged between 0.18mm to 0.2mm and thisis within the maximum allowable value as stipulated by IS: 456-2000 for durabilityrequirements. (a) CB0% 1-28 (b) CB50% 1-28 Figure 3: Failure Pattern of the beams with 50% fly ash and without fly ash4.2. Load-Deflection curve The experimental load-deflection curves of the RC beams with 50% fly ash andwithout fly ash when tested at 28th day, 56th day and 75th day are shown in Figure 4 Figure 5and Figure 6 respectively. The average ultimate loads for both the reinforced OPC concretebeams and 50% fly ash concrete beams are 182 kN & 152 kN respectively at 28th day and it is186 kN & 168 kN respectively at 56th day. The ultimate load for fly ash concrete beam at 75thday is found to be 197 kN. Though the ultimate loads for the fly ash concrete beam is 16%and 9.6% less than the OPC beams at 28th day and 56th day respectively, its ultimate loadincreases at 75th day. The average span-deflection ratios under the design service loads for thereinforced concrete fly ash beams are 290 at 28th day 258 at 56th day and 251 at 75th day,which are within allowable limit as per IS: 456-2000. 40
  • 6. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME 200 200 180 180 160 160 140 140 DR1 120 120 DC Load(kN) Load (kN) DR2 100 100 DR1 DL1 80 DR2 80 60 DL1 60 DL2 DL2 40 40 DC 20 20 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Deflection (mm) Deflection (mm) (a) CB0% 1-28 (b) CB0% 2-28 160 160 140 140 120 120 100 100 DC DC Load(kN) 80 80Load (kN) DR1 DR1 60 DL1 60 DL1 40 DR2 40 DR2 20 DL2 DL2 20 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Deflection (mm) Deflection (mm) (c) CB50% 1-28 (d) CB50% 2-28 Figure 4: Load- Deflection curves for the beams tested at 28 days 41
  • 7. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME 200 200 180 180 160 160 140 140 DC DC Load (kN) 120 120 Load (kN) 100 DR1 100 DR1 80 80 DR2 DR2 60 60 40 DL1 40 DL1 20 DL2 20 DL2 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Deflection (mm) Deflection (mm) (a) CB0% 1-56 (b) CB0% 2-56 180 180 160 160 140 140 120 120 Load (kN) DC DC Load (kN) 100 100 DR1 DR1 80 80 DR2 60 DL1 60 DL1 40 DR2 40 20 20 DL2 DL2 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Deflection (mm) Deflection (mm) (c) CB50% 1-56 (d) CB50% 2-56 Figure 5: Load- Deflection curves for the beams tested at 56 days 200 180 160 140 DC Load (kN) 120 100 DR1 80 DL1 60 DR2 40 20 DL2 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Deflection (mm) (e) CB50% 1-75 Figure 6: Load- Deflection curves for the beam tested at 75 days 42
  • 8. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME4.3. Displacement Ductility Displacement ductility is the ratio of ultimate to first yield deflection. In general highductility ratios indicate that a structural member is capable of undergoing large deflectionsprior to failure. The average displacement ductility for fly ash concrete beams and OPCconcrete beams are 4.8 & 5.8 respectively when tested at 56th day. The displacement ductilityfor fly ash concrete beams increases at 75 days. Table 2 shows the ductility of beams. Thusthe fly ash concrete beams shows adequate displacement ductility and can be considered forstructural members subjected to large displacement such as sudden forces caused byearthquake. Table 2: Displacement ductility of beams Beam Deflection at yield (mm) Max. deflection Displacement ductility Specification (mm) CB0% 1-28 4.8 20.0 4.17 CB0% 2-28 5.4 27.5 5.09 CB50% 1-28 5.0 19.3 3.86 CB50% 2-28 5.0 22.2 4.44 CB0% 1-56 4.6 24.6 5.34 CB0% 2-56 3.5 22.0 6.28 CB50% 1-56 5.0 21.6 4.32 CB50% 2-56 4.0 20.5 5.13 CB50% 2-75 4.3 27.0 6.304.4. End rotation The moment-end rotation curves of fly ash concrete beams and OPC concrete beamsare presented in Figure 7 when tested at 28,56 and 75 days respectively. It was observed thatthe average end rotations of the fly ash concrete beams and OPC concrete beams at ultimateloads are 1.70 & 1.80 respectively when tested at 56 days and it is 20 at 75 days. Thus the endrotations of the beams with fly ash are comparable with OPC concrete beams. 80 80 70 70 Moment (kN.m)Moment (kN.m) 60 60 50 50 CB0% 1-56 CB0% 1-28 40 40 CB0% 2-56 CB0% 2-28 30 30 CB50% 1-56 CB50% 1-28 20 20 CB50% 2-56 CB50% 2-28 10 10 CB50% 1-75 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0 1 2 3 End rotation (0) End rotation (o) Figure 7: Moment-Rotation curves for beams tested at 28, 56 and 75 days 43
  • 9. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME4.5. Concrete and steel strain The concrete and steel strains were measured at every load increments. The straindistribution for the concrete and steel at 28th day 56th day and 75th day are presented in Figure8 and Figure 9 respectively. The measured concrete strains at the top surface and steel strainsat ultimate load varied from 2167x10-6 to 3073 x10-6 and 12342x10-6 to 15320 x10-6respectively for OPC beams and it is from 2919 x10-6 to 3816 x10-6 and 9385 x10-6 to 25986x10-6 respectively for fly ash concrete beams when tested at 28th days. These results alsoshow that fly ash concrete is able to achieve its full strain capacity under flexural loading.Figure 10.and Figure 11.shows the comparison of concrete strain at top surface and steelstrains for all beams at 28 and 56 and 75 days. 200 200 180 180 160 160 140 FCS1 FCS1 140 Load (kN) 120 TCS FCS2 Load (KN 120 100 FCS2 100 FCS4 80 FCS4 80 FCS3 60 60 FCS3 TCS 40 40 20 CSS CSS 20 0 0 -20000 -15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 -30000 -20000 -10000 0 10000 Strain (x10-6) Strain (x10-6) (a) CB0% 1-28 (b) CB0% 2-28 160 160 140 140 120 TCS 120 TCS 100 Load (kN) Load(kN) 100 FCS1 FCS1 80 FCS2 80 FCS2 60 FCS3 60 FCS3 40 FCS4 40 FCS4 20 20 CSS CSS 0 0 -30000 -20000 -10000 0 10000 -15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 Strain (x10-6) Strain (x10-6 ) (c) CB50% 1-28 (d) CB50% 2-28 Figure 8: Load- Strain curves for beams tested at 28 days 44
  • 10. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME 200 200 180 180 160 160 TCS 140 FCS1 140 Load (kN) Load(kN) 120 FCS1 120 FCS2 100 100 FCS2 FCS3 80 80 60 FCS3 60 TCS 40 FCS4 40 FCS4 20 20 CSS CSS 0 0 -25000 -20000 -15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 -20000 -15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 Strain (x10-6) Strain (x10-6) (a) CB0% 1-56 (b) CB0% 2-56 200 180 160 150 TCS 140 FCS1 Load (kN) FCS1 120 FCS2 Load (kN) 100 100 FCS2 FCS3 80 FCS3 60 FCS4 50 FCS4 40 TCS CSS 20 CSS 0 0 -10000 -5000 0 5000 -20000 -15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 Strain (x10-6) Strain (X10-6) (c) CB50% 1-56 (d) CB50% 2-56 200 180 160 140 FCS1 Load(kN) 120 FCS2 100 80 FCS3 60 TCS 40 CSS 20 0 -20000 -15000 -10000 -5000 0 5000 Strain(x10-6) (d) CB50% 1-75 Figure 9: Load- Strain curves for beams tested at 56 days and 75 days 45
  • 11. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEME 200 200 180 180 160 160 140 140 Load (kN) 120 120 Load (kN) 100 100 80 80 60 60 40 40 20 20 0 0 -25000 -20000 -15000 -10000 -5000 -6 0 5000 -30000-25000-20000-15000-10000 -5000-6 0 5000 10000 Strain (x10 ) Strain (x10 ) CB0% 1-TCS CB0% 1-CSS CB0% 2-TCS CB0% 1-TCS-56 CB0% 1-CSS-56 CB0% 2-TCS-56 CB0% 2-CSS-56 CB50% 1-TCS-56 CB50% 1-CSS-56 CB50% 2-TCS-56 CB50% 2-CSS-56 CB0% 2-CSS CB50% 1-TCS CB50% 1-CSS CB50% 1-TCS-75 CB50% 1-CSS-75 a) Steel and Concrete Strain at 28 days a) Steel and Concrete Strain at 28 & 56 days Figure 10: Comparison of Steel and Concrete Strain at 28, 56 and 75 days4.6. Moment-curvature: Moment-Curvature diagrams were generated for all the beams based on the concretestrain and steel strain. The moment-curvature of the beams at 28, 56 and 75 days is shown infigure 11. Thus the curvature of the beams with fly ash is comparable with OPC concretebeams. Table 3 shows the overall performance of the OPC Concrete beams and ReinforcedFly Ash Concrete beams. 80 70 70 60 60 Moment (kN-m) 50 50 Moment (kN-m) CB0% 1-56 CB0% -28 40 40 CB0% 2-56 CBO% 2-28 30 CB50% 1-56 CB50% 1-28 30 CB50% 2-56 20 CB50% 2-28 20 CB50% 1-75 10 10 0 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 50 100 150 Curvature (x10-6) Curvature (x10-6) Figure 11: Moment- Curvature for beams tested at 28, 56 and 75 days 46
  • 12. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEMETable 3: Performance details of reinforced fly ash concrete beams and OPC concrete beams Beam Max. Deflection Max. Strain in Displace Strain Load Deflection designation Load at max. Moment concrete ment in steel at first at service (kN) Load (kN.m) at max. ductility crack loads (mm) load (kN) (mm)CB0% 1-28 177.5 20.0 65.1 0.0012 4.17 0.0103 32.92 7.1CB0% 2-28 186.8 27.5 68.5 0.0023 5.09 0.0253 36.20 8.0CB50% 1-28 151.1 19.3 55.4 0.0029 3.86 0.0042 29.30 7.2CB50% 2-28 153.5 22.2 56.3 0.0036 4.44 0.0041 22.80 8.0CB0% 1-56 182.2 28.6 66.8 0.0005 5.34 0.0111 36.80 7.8CB0% 2-56 189.7 22.0 69.6 0.0016 6.28 0.0131 38.85 9.9CB50% 1-56 166.6 21.6 61.1 0.0035 4.32 0.0049 29.00 8.9CB50% 2-56 169.3 20.5 62.1 0.0021 5.13 0.0113 23.60 9.7CB50% 1-75 197.2 27.0 72.3 0.0018 6.30 0.0031 32.60 8.85. CONCLUSIONS The following observations and conclusions can be made on the basis of theexperiments conducted on the nine RC beam specimens. From the experimentalinvestigation, it is generally observed that the flexural behavior of RC beams with 50% flyash is comparable to that of OPC concrete beams. 1. The ultimate moment capacity of fly ash concrete beam is 16% less than the ordinary concrete beam when tested at 28th day. But its moment capacity increases with age. It increases by 23% at 75th day than at 28th day. 2. The deflections under the design service loads for fly ash concrete beams were within the allowable limit provided by IS: 456-2000. 3. Reinforced fly ash concrete beams with 50% fly ash showed displacement ductility in the range of 4 to 6 which is adequate for structural members subjected to large displacement such as sudden forces caused by earthquake. 4. The crack widths at service loads for fly ash concrete beams ranged between 0.18mm to 0.2mm and this is within the maximum allowable value as stipulated by IS: 456-2000 for durability requirements. 5. Results of this investigation suggest that concrete with 50% fly ash replacement for cement could be used for RC beams.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This project is funded by Department of Atomic Energy, under Board of Research inNuclear Science(BRNS) research grant No. 2011/36/05-BRNS/308.The experiments werecarried out in the research laboratories of Hindustan University, Tamil Nadu, India. 47
  • 13. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 4, Issue 2, March - April (2013), © IAEMEREFERENCES[1]. Jiang .L.H and Malhotra .V.M (2000), “Reduction in water demand of non-air-entrained concrete incorporating large volumes of fly ash”, Cement and Concrete Research,Vol.30, pp. 1785- 1789.[2]. Rafat Siddique (2004), “Performance characteristics of high volume Class-F fly ashconcrete”, Cement and Concrete Research, 34, pp. 487-493.[3]. Khatib .J.M (2008), “Performance of Self-Compacting Concrete Containing Fly Ash”,Construction and Building Materials, 22, pp. 1963-1971.[4]. Dakshina Murthy and Sudheer Reddy (2010), “Moment-Curvature Characteristics ofordinary grade Fly Ash Concrete beams”, International Journal of Civil and structuralEngineering, Vol.1, No 3.[5]. Sunilaa George., et. al. (2011), “Experimental study on shear behavior of activated flyash concrete beams, Journal of structural engineering, Vol.37, No.6.[6]. P.A. Ganeshwaran, Suji and S. Deepashri, “Evaluation of Mechanical Properties ofSelf Compacting Concrete with Manufactured Sand and Fly Ash” International Journal ofCivil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 60 - 69, ISSN Print:0976 – 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6316, Published by IAEME.[7]. Aravindkumar.B.Harwalkar and Dr.S.S.Awanti, “Fatigue Behavior of High VolumeFly Ash Concrete Under Constant Amplitude and Compound Loading” International Journalof Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012, pp. 404 - 414, ISSNPrint: 0976 – 6308, ISSN Online: 0976 – 6316, Published by IAEME. 48