Prof M.G.Vanza, Prof P.I.Modi, P.A.Chaudhari M.E./ International Journal of EngineeringResearch and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.comVol. 3, Issue 3, May-Jun 2013, pp.794-797794 | P a g eParametric study of grout mix design using admixture1Prof M.G.Vanza, 2Prof P.I.Modi, 3P.A.Chaudhari M.E.1Associate professor , Applied Mechanics Department , L.D.College of engg. A’bad2Assistant professor , Applied Mechanics Department , L.D.College of engg. A’bad3 (CASAD) studentABSTRACTThis paper is part of the dissertation workin which an experimental investigation is carriedout to study the performance of the grout mixturessubjected to different types of curing regimes.Different grout mixtures have been designedvarying the water/solids ratio and the dosage of theadmixtures. The grout mixtures were then tested tostudy the mechanical property i.e Compressivestrength of the various grout mixes thus designedand subjected to two different curing regimes i.eAir curing and water curing (full immersioncuring).Index Terms—Water solids ratio, water cementratio, curing regime1. INTRODUCTIONGrout is a cementitious material primarilycomposed of Portland cement, fine aggregates ,possibly coarse aggregates and in some cases lime.These ingredients are combined with sufficientamount of water to prodouce a fluid, flowablemixture.Grout is neither a concrete nor a mortar.The big difference between concrete, mortar orgrout is their plasticity or fluidity in the initialstage. Grout although having the same ingredientsas that of concrete has a fluidity or plasticity fargreater than that of normal concrete. This amountof fluidity is required to allow the grout to flowthrough the grout space. The latter being dependentupon the purpose for which the grout is used i.emasonry units, tile joints, annual spaces in pipejoints, surrounding the reinforcement bars todevelop a good bond between the reinforcementbars and masonry units etc. Different types of groutare used currently. These include cement, cementand sand, cement clay, slag-cement, fly ash-cementand epoxy resin grout.In the present experimental work grout mixture hasbeen prepared using Fly Ash as a partial substitutefor Portland cement and full substitute for sand. Flyash contributes to the use of recycled materials andbesides improving the strength the fine sphericalproperties of fly ash enhance the flow andpumpability properties of grout.2. Experimental ProgramA . Raw Material Used:The raw materials that were used toprepare the various grout mixes are mentionedbelow:Cement- Ordinary Portlant cement (OPC) of 53grade was used to prepare the fluid based groutconfirming to IS:12269:1987.Fly Ash- Class F fly ash with low calcium obtainedfrom the wanakbori Thermal Power Station,Gujarat was used a partial replacement to cementand full replacement for sand..Water- The normal tap water was used for themixing and curing of the grout.Admixture- SUPER P RA20 R in fluid form wasused by varying its dosage in percentage by weightof cement. It is brown liquid base on sulfonatedNaphthalene it confirms to IS Code 9103:1999.B . Proportions:-Individual quantities of the ingredients involvedwere calculated by designing the grout mix. Thevarying parameters included the Water / solids ratioand the dosage of the admixtures. The water solidsratio is the ratio of the water to the total weight ofsolids i.e (cement + fly ash). The cement: fly ashratio was taken as 1:4. Five different grout mixtureswere prepared for five different water/solids ratio i.e0.3,0.35,0.4,0.45 & 0.5. Dosage of admixture inpercentage by weight of cement was taken as 0.5%,0.75%,1.0% & 1.25%.C . Mix Procedure:-First the OPC and fly ash were dry mixed in a cleandry pan for about 3 minutes until they were blendeduniformly and intimately. All the lumps of fly ashwere properly broken down by hands so that itresults into a uniform mix. Then the tap watermeasured on the base of water/solids ratio wasadded to the dry mix along with the measuredquantity of the admixture. Grout was again mixedthoroughly by help of trowel to get a uniformlycoloured mix. The mixed grout was then filled intothe cube moulds of size 7.07 cm. All the mouldsbefore filling were oiled with the greasing agent.The edges of the moulds were tamped so that anyair bubbles are forced out. When filling the mould,sufficient material was used so that mould isslightly over filled. The extra material was then
Prof M.G.Vanza, Prof P.I.Modi, P.A.Chaudhari M.E./ International Journal of EngineeringResearch and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.comVol. 3, Issue 3, May-Jun 2013, pp.794-797795 | P a g estriked off with the edge of the trowel. After 24hours, the cubes were carefully stripped off from themoulds to be subjected to different curingconditions and then tested at 7 days.D . Curing & Testing :-The curing conditions adopted in this experimentalprogram were(i) Type-I : Air curing until the time of testing thecubes(ii)Type- II :Full immersion curing i.e continuouswater curing(iii)Type-III : 4 hrs air drying after the cubes weretaken out from curing tank.These cubes were then loaded in the Compressiontesting machine and were loaded until failure. Thecompressive strength for each batch of grout mixwas recorded.4. RESULTS & OBSERVATION TABLEFigures 1 to 5 represent the average compressivestrength of the cubes of the grout mix for varieddosage of admixtures and three different curingregimes as mentioned above.Table -1 : Cement :Fly ash = 1:4 Water/solid =0.30Dosage ofAdmixtureCompressive strength of grout mixAfter 7 day (in N/mm²)Type-IcuringType-IIcuringType-IIIcuring0.50% 6.94 6.20 6.670.75% 6.94 6.27 6.771.00% 7.94 6.87 7.541.25% 8.87 8.14 8.77Fig-1 : % Admixture to comp.strength graph forW/S = 0.3Table-2 : Cement :Fly ash =1:4 Water/solid =0.35Dosage ofAdmixtureCompressive strength of grout mix After7 day (in N/mm²)Type-IcuringType-2curingType-3curing0.50% 3.30 2.80 3.030.75% 2.93 2.52 2.851.00% 3.30 2.97 3.171.25% 4.13 3.20 3.80Fig-2: % Admixture to comp.strength graph forW/S= 0.35Table-3 : Cement: Fly ash = 1: 4 Water/solid = 0.4Dosage ofAdmixtureCompressive strength of grout mix After 7 day(in N/mm²)Type-I curing Type-2 curing Type-3 curing0.50% 2.42 2.17 2.250.75% 2.60 2.20 2.231.00% 2.20 1.88 1.971.25% 2.40 2.00 2.33Fig-3: % Admixture to comp.strength graph forW/S= 0.40
Prof M.G.Vanza, Prof P.I.Modi, P.A.Chaudhari M.E./ International Journal of EngineeringResearch and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.comVol. 3, Issue 3, May-Jun 2013, pp.794-797796 | P a g eTable-4 : Cement : Fly ash=1:4 Water/Solid =0.45Dosage ofAdmixtureCompressive strength of grout mix After 7day (in N/mm²)Type-IcuringType-2curingType-3curing0.50% 2.47 1.87 1.950.75%2.43 1.85 2.301.00% 2.43 2.03 2.181.25% 2.13 1.85 2.00Fig-4: % Admixture to comp.strength graph forW/S= 0.45Table-5 : Cement : Fly ash=1:4 Water/Solid =0.50Dosage ofAdmixtureCompressive strength of grout mix After 7day (in N/mm²)Type-IcuringType-2curingType-3curing0.50% 2.70 2.43 2.600.75% 2.37 1.87 2.071.00% 2.23 1.87 2.001.25% 1.97 1.57 1.70Fig-5: % Admixture to comp.strength graph forW/S= 0.505. CONCLUSIONS:Figures 1 to 5 shows the 7-day initial compressivestrength of the samples subjected to different curingconditions. From the values calculated and thegraphs following conclusions shall be derived(1) Compressive strength of grout mix increaseswith decrease in water/Solid ratio for all types ofcuring conditions.(2) For water/solid ratio of 0.3 and 0.35compressive strength increases with increase indosage of admixture for all types of curingconditions.(3) For water/solid ratio of 0.4 onwardscompressive strength shows the mixed trend.(4) Average compressive strength of grout mix indescending order is found as belowType I > Type III > Type II.The initial increase in temperatureaccelerates the hydration process and hence giveshigher strength. Where else in case of water curing,the excess of water present in the pores weaken thespecimen and results into less strength.REFERENCES:. “Response of Grout Compressive Strengthto increasing replacement of Portlandcement with Class F Fly ash and GroundGranulated Blast Furnace Slag” by RobertCrookston Godfrey, Department of Civiland Environmental Engineering, BrighamYoung University, August 2012.. “High Volume Fly Ash Maosnry Grout”by Fernando S.Fonseca and Kurt Siggard,Structure Magazine, May 2012.. “Masonry Grout” by The InternationalMasonry Institute, August 2009.. “Mix design and Quality ControlProcedures for High Mobility CementBased Grouts” by M.Chuaqui andD.A.Bruce, Research Paper.. “Effect of Slag Content to cement grout onthe compressive strength development intropical weather environment” by S,k.Lim,F.Zakariya and M.W.Hussain,Z.Abd.Hamid, R.Muhamad, Proceedings of the6thAsia –Pacific Structural Engineeringand Construction Conference (APSEC2006) ,5-6thSeptember 2006, KualaLumpur, Malaysia.. “Effect of Admixtures on the Behaviour ofCement Grouts” by Jose B.T., Lovely.K.M., Sridharan. A. & Abraham. B.M.(2000). IGC 2000.. “Effect of Admixtures on the Properties ofCement-bentonite Grouts” by LovelyK.M., Jose B.T., Sridharan. A. &
Prof M.G.Vanza, Prof P.I.Modi, P.A.Chaudhari M.E./ International Journal of EngineeringResearch and Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 www.ijera.comVol. 3, Issue 3, May-Jun 2013, pp.794-797797 | P a g eAbraham B.M. (1996). 2nd Int. Con. onGround Improvement Techniques,Singapore, Oct. 1998.. “Grouting Theory and Practice” byNonveiller E., (1989). Elsevier,Amsterdam.. “Slag-cement-bentonite Slurry Walls” byOpdyke S.M. & Evans. J.C. (2005). J.Geotechnical and GeoenviromentalEngineering, Vol. 131, No. 6, 673–681.. “Grouting Technology in Tunneling andDam Construction” by Shroff, A.V. andShah, D.L. (1992) IBH Publication Co.,New Delhi.