Floating Concrete Research Paper

© 2019 JETIR May 2019, Volume 6, Issue 5 www.jetir.org (ISSN-2349-5162)
JETIR1905800 Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research (JETIR) www.jetir.org 546
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON FLOATING
CONCRETE WITH THERMOCOL
1
Sagar R. Kaptan, 2
Dr. Jayeshkumar Pitroda, 3
Dr. Vihangraj Kulkarni
1
Final Year M. Tech Student, 2
Associate Professor, 3
Associate Professor
1
Construction Engineering and Management, Civil Engineering Department
1
BVM Engineering College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India
Abstract: Unlike the conventional concrete of Portland cement (with a density of around 2400 kg / m3
); Floating concrete
contains lightweight aggregates and some admixtures that lighten the composite. Floating concrete is useful to minimize the
structure's dead load and thus reduce the project's overall cost. With conventional concrete making materials, expanded
polystyrene (EPS) beads (Thermocol beads) can be used to produce floating concrete with a wide range of performance
characteristics. EPS is used since at least the 1950s in engineering applications. It's as light as about one hundredth of that soil's
density. Use thermocol beads to produce lightweight concrete with unit weight ranging from 600 to 1000 kg / m3
. As its density is
lower than that of water (1000 kg / m3
), the concrete can float in water in its hardened state. The heat-insulating properties are
good because the lightweight the concrete, the lower the thermal conductivity. This research contains an alternative compound
including thermocol as binding material in place of the fine aggregates of floating concrete, pumice stones and aluminum powder
used to make floating concrete, assess the mechanical features of fresh concrete and hardened floating concrete through tests like
slum tests (for workability), density tests, compressive strength test and water absorption test. In this study the floating concrete is
made of pumice stone and thermocol. Fine powder of aluminum is used as a admixture for the formation of gas. A grade chosen
for the investigation was M20 for conventional concrete and floating concrete. The study includes casting and testing the
compressive strength, density tests, and water absorption tests for floating concrete and traditional concrete specimens at 7 and 28
days of age respectively. In this study, therefore, fine aggregate is replaced in different proportions by thermocol which is 0%
EPS, 5% EPS, 10% EPS, 15% EPS and 20% EPS in floating concrete, and its feasibility study is to be conducted.
Keywords - Expended Polystyrene Beads, Floating concrete, Light weight concrete, Thermocol, Thermal Insulation
Property.
I.INTRODUCTION
A floating concrete structure is a solid body made of reinforced concrete and an inner chamber chain filled with
impermeable material that is lightweight. Thermocol and pumice stone are used in this technique to prepare the light weight
concrete and density is reduced to achieve maximum efficiency, while the structure's self-weight is minimized thereby reducing
the dead structure load. The construction industry faces the challenges and problems everywhere. Water covers two-thirds of the
world's surface. Therefore, it is not surprising that in recent decades there has been a lot of activity with concrete in the sea. The
conventional concrete's disadvantage is the high self-weight concrete, where the density ranges from 2200 to 2600 kg / m3
. In this
technique, the concrete's self-weight is reduced to achieve the concrete's efficiency as a structural material. The light weight
concrete has a density of between 300 and 1850 kg / m3
, which helps reduce the structure's dead weight.
The world of today is witnessing the construction of very challenging and difficult structures of civil engineering.
Researchers around the world are trying to develop low density or lightweight concrete by using up to certain proportions of
different concrete admixtures. Using foaming chemicals (Thermocol) and Pumice stone separately to develop floating concrete.
In the former, the cement slurry is made of cement and water and this slurry is then introduced into the air to form a uniform
cellular structure when the mixture sets and hardens. This is the mixture of cement-water and sand, then thermocol is added to
this slurry, which gives the cellular structure, making the concrete lighter than the conventional cement. Mixed with water and air
from a generator, the foam is created using a foaming chemical. The foaming chemicals used must be capable of producing air
bubbles with high stability, resistant to mixing, placing and hardening physical and chemical processes. Poly Carboxylate Ether is
the chemical we used to generate foam. A lightweight aggregate of low specific gravity is present in the later Pumice. It is a very
porous material with a high percentage of water absorption. We are not using the conventional aggregate in this and are replacing
it with the pumice stone. Pumice is a highly porous rock specimen with a density of about 500-600 kg / m3
. Pumice is produced
when it is violently ejected from the volcano by superheated, highly pressurized rock. Pumice is available in different sizes. Due
to simultaneous rapid cooling & rapid depressurization, the unusual foamy pumice configuration occurs. Pumice has an average
60-80 percent porosity and floats on water in the beginning.
II. EXPERIMENTAL MATERIALS
The materials used during the present research are Cement, Fine aggregate, Pumice stone, Thermocol beads, Aluminium
powder and Water.

2.1Cement
Cement is the binder materials that can be used in mortar, concrete to bind the other materials. Lime, silica, alumina and iron
oxide are the raw materials used for the manufacture of cement. Cement is available in the types and grade variety. In the
construction industry, Portland cement is the most widely used type of cement. Cements are usually used to fill the gaps between
the aggregate of fine and course. The cement is generally both adhesive and cohesive. Figure 1 shows the ordinary Portland
cement. The investigation used an ordinary 53 grade Portland cement confirming IS-12269:2013, available locally in a market.
Portland cement's physical properties and chemical composition are given respectively in Table 1 and Table 2
Fig. 1 Ordinary Portland Cement
Table 1: Physical properties of 53 grade Ordinary Portland Cement
Physical properties IS-12269:2013 Specifications
Normal Consistency -
Initial setting time (minutes) 30 (min)
Final setting time (minutes) 600 (max)
Fineness, m2
/kg 225 (min)
Specific Gravity 3.15
Soundness (mm) 10
Minimum Compressive strength, N/mm2
3 days 27
7 days 37
28 days 53
Table 2: Chemical Properties of 53 grade Ordinary Portland Cement
Chemical properties IS-12269:2013 Specifications
Loss on ignition,
percent by mass, Max
4.0
Insoluble residue,
4.0
Magnesia,
6.0
Total sulphur content,
Percent by mass, Max
3.5
Chloride content,
Percent by mass, Max
0.1
Alkali content 0.05
2.2 Fine Aggregate
The sand is usually used in concrete as a fine aggregate. Sand is the natural materials that are made up of finely divided rocks
and particles of minerals. The aggregate passing through the IS sieve of 4.75 mm is known as fine aggregates. It helps to lower
the shrinkage. The sand was obtained locally and met the IS: 383-1970 Indian standard specifications in the experimental
program. The sand was first sieved through a sieve of 4.75 mm to remove any particles larger than 4.75 mm and then washed to
remove the dust. Table 3 shows Physical properties of Fine aggregate. The Fine aggregate is shown in Figure 2.
Table 3 Physical properties of Fine aggregate
Sr. No. Property Values
1 Source Bodeli, Gujarat
2 Specific Gravity 2.66
3 Fineness modulus 3.16

Fig. 2 Fine Aggregate
2.3 Pumice Stone
Pumice is a type of volcanic rock formed by the violent expulsion of lava from a volcano with extremely high water and gas
levels. As explained by the Mineral Information Institute, when the gases escape the rock gets frothy. The result is a very light,
flourishing material as the rock gets hardened. Pumice is used primarily for the production of lightweight construction materials
such as concrete. The chemical composition of Pumice is obsidian or volcanic like glass. The walls of this rock are very thin,
translucent, extrusive and igneous. Table 4 shows the properties of Pumice stone. The pumice stone is shown in figure 3.
Fig. 3 Pumice Stone
Table 4 Properties of Pumice Stone
Sr. No. Properties Value
1 Specific gravity 0.95
2 Unit weight 950 kg/m3
3 Acoustic Performance It can be used for acoustic solutions, as an effective sound barrier
4 Earthquake Resistant Improves earthquake resistance
5 Insulation Higher thermal insulation
2.4 Thermocol beads
Expanded polystyrene (EPS) is a lightweight cellular plastic material that contains about 98 percent air and 2 percent
polystyrene of fine spherical particles. It has a closed cell structure that is unable to absorb water. It therefore has good sound,
thermal and impact resistance characteristics. EPS is a highly resistant inertial material for alkalis, methanol, ethanol silicone oils,
halide, oxidative and reduction agents. However, it has limited resistance to paraffin oil, vegetable oils, diesel foel and Vaseline
that may attack polystyrene foam after long-lasting contact. Polystyrene material is subjected to a slight deterioration of its
mechanical properties as the temperature increases to its' glass transition temperature' (Tg) ranging from 71 ° C to 77 ° C. But
when burned, the toxicity level of EPS is no higher than that of wood; similar toxic gas, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide are
produced. Table 5 shows the properties of thermocol beads. The thermocol beads are shown in figure 4.

Table 5 Properties of Thermocol beads
Fig. 4 Thermocol beads
2.5 Admixtures
As a gas forming admixture, aluminum fine powder is used. In the concrete, it generates fluffiness just like baking soda in a
cake. This admixture reacts chemically when added to the mortar or concrete mixture with hydroxides present in the cement &
form minute hydrogen gas bubbles of the size ranging from 0.1 to 1 mm across the cement water. The accelerating admixture
used to shorten the mix setting time is Calcium Chloride (CaCl). Table 6 shows the properties of Aluminum powder.
Table 6 Properties of Aluminium Powder
2.6 Water
Ordinary drinking water available locally was used for casting and curing of all specimen of this research. Water is an
important ingredient of floating concrete which is actually participates in the chemical reaction with cement.
No. Properties Value
1 Density range 15-30 kg/m
2 Compressive strength 0.8-1.6 kg/cm
3 Tensile strength 3-6 kg/cm
4 Melting range 100-200 C
5 Thermal conductivity Low
6 Sound absorption High
7 Moisture absorption Low
No. Properties Value
1 Molecular formula Al
2 Form Powder
3 Colour Silver
4 Melting Point 660 °C (1220 °F)
5 Boiling Point 2467 °C (4473 °F)
6 Density 2.7 g/ml at 25 °C
7 Odour Odourless

III. DESIGN MIX
The following mix design for floating concrete was used in the present research work.
Table 7 Mix Proportion of M20 grade Concrete
3.1 Mix Notation
The following table 8 shows the notation for different concrete mixes.
Table 8 Mix Notation
A1 Normal Concrete
B1 Floating Concrete (w/c = 0.5)
C1 0% Replacement of Fine aggregate by EPS
IV. EXPERIMENTAL METHODOLOGY
In this study the floating concrete is made of pumice stone and thermocol. Fine powder of aluminum is used as a admixture for
the formation of gas. A grade chosen for the investigation was M20 for conventional concrete and floating concrete. The study
includes casting and testing the compressive strength, density tests, and water absorption tests for floating concrete and traditional
concrete specimens at 7 and 28 days of age respectively. In this study, therefore, fine aggregate is replaced in different
proportions by thermocol which is 0% EPS, 5% EPS, 10% EPS, 15% EPS and 20% EPS in floating concrete, and its feasibility
study is to be conducted.
4.1Compressive Strength Test (IS: 516-1959)
For compression test, specimen of size 150mm*150mm*150mm were casted and tested in compression testing machine with
reference of the test procedure given in IS: 516-1959. Equation for finding out compression test is given below,
Compressive strength (N/mm2) = P⁄∆
Where, P= Failure load of specimen
Δ= Area of specimen (mm2)
Fig. 5 Compressive strength test
Proportion Water Cement Sand Pumice stone (20mm) Aluminium Powder
By Weight
(kg/m3
)
136.53 278.84 834.81 158.6 9.6
Volume 0.50 1 2.86 1.27

4.2 Water Absorption Test [IS: 2185 (Part I) – 2005]
Standard size concrete blocks shall be completely immersed in clean water at room temperature for 24 hours. All
concrete blocks shall be dried in a ventilated oven at 100 to 150 0
C for not less than 24 hours.
Absorption, percent = (W1-W2)/W2 * 100
Where, W1 = wet mass of unit (kg)
W2 = dry mass of unit (kg)
4.3 Density
Concrete density is one of the major structural behaviour parameters. The concrete density is a unit weight measurement.
As the concrete density increases, the dead load on the structure. A normal weight weighs 2400 kg of concrete per cubic meter.
Concrete’s density depending on the type of aggregate quantity and density, the amount of trapped air (and trapped air), and the
content of water and cement. Density is just a ratio of mass to volume. Perhaps the easiest and most accurate way of calculating
the density of concrete is to measure and weigh some in a container of known volume. These strength tests can be performed in a
laboratory at 24 hours, 7 days, and 28 days to predict potential downturns in strength (or lower density). This is very important
given all the concrete projects of high strength (bridges, high rises, dams).
V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULT AND DISCUSSION
From following different test result shown below:
a) Compressive strength test results:
Following table 9 shows compressive strength at 7 and 28 days.
Table 9 compressive strength at 7 and 28 days
Concrete
Mixes
Average
Compressive Strength (N/mm2
)
7 Days 28 Days
Conventional Concrete
A1 13.92 19.77
Floating Concrete
B1 (w/c=0.3) 8.51 12.19
B2 (w/c=0.4) 7.15 10.70
B3 (w/c=0.5) 6.35 9.57
Replacement of fine aggregate by EPS
C1 ( 0% EPS) 7.89 12.21
C2 ( 5% EPS) 7.45 11.43
C3 ( 10% EPS) 7.34 10.97
C4 ( 15% EPS) 7.13 9.79
C5 ( 20% EPS) 6.78 8.29
In B batch of Floating Concrete mix B1 with w/c ratio 0.5 shows 12.19 N/mm2
compressive strength and Conventional
Concrete A mix shows 19.77 N/mm2
both after 28 days. In C Batch of Floating Concrete mixes with replacement of Fine
aggregate by EPS, C1 mix shows 12.21 N/mm2
compressive strength and Conventional Concrete A mix shows 19.77 N/mm2
both
after 28 days.
Following figure 6 shows the Compressive Strength for M20 mixes: Conventional Concrete and Floating concrte with
replacement of Fine aggregate by EPS in different proportions at 7 and 28 days.

Figure 6 Compressive Strength Results for M20 Concrete Mixes : Conventional Concrete and
Floating Concrete with replacement of Fine aggregate by EPS in different proportions at 7
and 28 days
b) Water Absorption Test Results:
Following table 10 shows the results of percentage water content absorbed in cubes for the water absorption test done on
concrete cubes at 28 days for M20 concrete mixes: Conventional Concrete and Floating Concrete with replacement of Fine
aggregate by EPS in different proportions at 28 days.
Table 10 Water Absorption Test Results for M20 Concrete Mixes:
Conventional Concrete and Floating Concrete with replacement of Fine
Aggregate by EPS in different proportions at 28 days.
Concrete
Mixes
Oven
Dry
Weight
(W1)
(Kg)
24 hour
saturation
Weight
(W2)
(K)
Percentage water
absorbed
(W2-W1/W1)x 100
A1 8.41 8.62 2.49
B1 4.90 5.04 2.85
B2 4.20 4.32 2.93
B3 3.12 3.22 3.09
C1 3.78 3.87 2.46
C2 3.69 3.79 2.70
C3 3.61 3.72 2.94
C4 3.36 3.47 3.16
C5 3.17 3.29 3.77
Following figure 7 shows percentage water absorbed in M20 concrete mixes Conventional concrete and Floating
Concrete with replacement of Fine aggregate by EPS in different proportions at 28 days.
13.92
8.51
7.15
6.35
7.89
7.45
7.34
7.13
6.78
19.77
12.19
10.7
9.57
12.21
11.43
10.97
9.97
8.29
0
5
10
15
20
25
A1 B1 B2 B3 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
CompressiveStrength(N/mm2)
M20 concrete Mix: Conventional Concrete and Floating Concrete with
Different Proportions
7 Days 28 Days

Figure 7 Percentage Water Absorbed for M20 Concrete Mixes: Conventional Concrete and
Floating Concrete with replacement of Fine aggregate by EPS in different proportions at 28
days.
From above figure7, it can be said that for Floating Concrete mix B percentage water absorbed was increases with
decrease in w/c ratio and for Floating Concrete mix C percentage water absorbed was increases with increase in EPS beads
content up to 20%.
VI.COST COMPARISON
Cost of various materials which used in experimental investigation as per Table 11 and cost of various floating concrete
mixes show in Table 12.
Table 11 Material cost per kg
Materials Rupees per kg
Cement 6.00 ₹
Fine aggregate 0.60 ₹
Coarse aggregate 0.65 ₹
Pumice stone 20.00 ₹
Aluminium powder 45.00 ₹
Table 12 Cost per m3
for floating concrete mixes
Floating Concrete Mixes Rupees per m3
A1 3305.87 ₹
B1 5932.80 ₹
B2 6173.80 ₹
B3 6334.18 ₹
C1 5777.00 ₹
C2 5751.00 ₹
C3 5727.10 ₹
C4 5702.70 ₹
C5 5677.00 ₹
Following figure 8 shows the rates for M20 Concrete Mixes: Conventional Concrete and Floating Concrete with
different proportion for 1 m3
concrete.
2.49
2.85 2.93
3.09
2.46
2.7
2.94
3.16
3.77
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
A1 B1 B2 B3 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
%WaterAbsorbed
M20 concrete Mixes: Conventional Concrete and Floating Concrete with
Different Proportions
% Water Absorbed

Figure 8 Cost of Concrete for 1 m3
M20 Concrete Mix: Conventional Concrete and Floating
Concrete with Different Proportions
From above figure 8, it can be said that Floating Concrete mixes M20 with different proportion have higher rates for 1
m3
concrete with compared to standard A (M20) concrete mix. Floating concrete rates decrease with an increase in Fine aggregate
replacement by EPS in different proportions compared to conventional concrete.
VII. CONCLUSION
Based on experimental investigations concerning Slump Test, Compressive Strength, Density test and Water Absorption test for
Floating Concrete with different proportions mixes made by Replacement of fine aggregate in different proportions, the following
conclusions are drawn out for different parameters:
1. Compressive strength of Floating Concrete was decreasing by replacement of Fine aggregate in different proportion for
Floating Concrete mixes as compared to Conventional Concrete.
2. In B batch of Floating Concrete mix B1 with w/c ratio 0.5 shows 12.19 N/mm2
compressive strength and Conventional
Concrete A mix shows 19.77 N/mm2
both after 28 days. In C Batch of Floating Concrete mixes with replacement of Fine
aggregate by EPS, C1 mix shows 12.21 N/mm2
compressive strength and Conventional Concrete A mix shows 19.77
N/mm2
both after 28 days.
3. It was seen that the use of lightweight aggregate in the concrete mixture can reduce the dead load but decreases the
concrete strength.
4. All Floating Concrete mixes which are made with replacement of Fine aggregate by EPS in different proportion gives
lower compressive strength as compared to conventional concrete. It can be used in load-bearing concrete blocks, subfloor
systems and floating marine structures due to its lightweight property.
5. Percentage Water Absorption of Floating Concrete was increasing by increase in replacement of Fine aggregate by EPS
beads in different proportion for Floating Concrete mixes as compared to Conventional Concrete Mix. The Higher Water
Absorption was observed in Floating Concrete compared to Ordinary Portland Cement Concrete.
6. In B batch of Floating Concrete mixes with w/c ratio 0.5 shows 2.85% water absorption and Conventional Concrete A mix
shows 2.49 % water absorption both after 28 days. In C Batch of Floating Concrete mixes with 5% replacement of Fine
aggregate by EPS beads shows 2.7% water absorption and Conventional Concrete A mix shows 2.49% water absorption
both after 28 days.
7. The Water Absorption of Floating Concrete showed higher water absorption when compared to Ordinary Portland Cement
Concrete for M20 grade concrete. All Floating Concrete mixes which are made with different proportion gives desirable
percentage of Water Absorption Test results.
8. Floating Concrete mixes with different proportion have higher rates for 1 m3
concrete with compared to conventional A
(M20) concrete mix.
9. Rates of Floating Concrete decreases with increase in replacement of Fine aggregate by EPS in different proportions in
compared to Conventional Concrete.
10. Based on the cost calculations, it can be concluded that Floating concrete is Costlier than a conventional concrete.
Acknowledgment:
I am extremely thankful for their motivation, kind support and valuable research guidance to Prof. (Dr.) I. N. Patel, Principal,
BVM Engineering College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, Dr. Jayeshkumar R. Pitroda, Associate Professor, PG Coordinator
Construction Engineering and Management, Civil Engineering Department, BVM Engineering College, Vallabh Vidyanagar,
Gujarat, Dr. Vihangraj Kulkarni, Associate professor, HOD, Civil Engineering Department, Government Engineering College,
Banswara, Rajasthan.
3305.87
5932.8 6173.8 6334.18
5777 5751 5727.1 5702.7 5677.7
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
A1 B1 B2 B3 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
Costofconcretefor1m3
M20 concrete Mixes: Conventional Concrete and Floating Concrete with
different proportions
Cost of Concrete for 1 m3

References:
[1] Abhijit Mandlik, Tarun Sarthak Sood, Shekhar Karade Sangran Naik, Amruta Kulkarni, (2015), “Lightweight Concrete
Using EPS”, International Journal of Science and Research, Volume 4 Issue 3, Page: 2007-2010.
[2] Daneti Saradhi Babu, K. Ganesh Babu, Wee Tiong-Huan, “Effect of polystyrene aggregate size on strength and moisture
migration characteristics of lightweight concrete”, ELSEVIER, Cement & Concrete Composites 28 (2006) 520-527.
[3] Hemant K. Sarje, Amol S. Autade, “Study of Performance of Lightweight Concrete", International Journal of Latest
Trends in Engineering and Technology (IJLTET), ISSN: 2278-621X, Vol. 4, Issue 4, November 2014.
[4] Jay Bankim Shah, Sagar Patel, “Light Weight Concrete using Expended Polystyrene Beads and Plastic Beads”,
International journal of pure and applied research in engineering and technology, ISSN:2319-507X, Volume 3(10): 43-
48,2015.
[5] K. Ganesh Babu, D. SaradhiBabu, " Behaviour of lightweight expanded polystyrene concrete containing silica fume”,
Cement and Concrete Research 33 (2003), 755–762.
[6] Lakshmi Kumar Minapu1, M K M V Ratnam, Dr. U Rangaraju, “Experimental Study on Light Weight Aggregate
Concrete with Pumice Stone, Silica Fume and Fly Ash as a Partial Replacement of Coarse Aggregate”, International
Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 3(12).
[7] Malik Mehran Manzoor, Abhishek Gupta, Rukhsana Gani, Ankush Tanta, “Floating Concrete by using Light Weight
Aggregates (Pumice Stones) and Air Entraining Agent”, International journal of science and engineering development
research, ISSN: 2455-2631, Volume 3, Issue 6, June 2018.
[8] Nikhil S. Chavan, Dhiraj Yadav, Shrikant Gadhe, Dnyandeep Bachipale, Shweta Kale, Mahesh V. Tatikonda,
“Mechanical Properties of Floating Concrete by using Expended Polystyrene Beads as Replacement of Aggregates”,
International Research journal of engineering and technology, e-ISSN:2395-0056, p-ISSN:2395-0072, Volume: 05,
Issue: 05, May 2018.
[9] N. Sivalinga Rao, Y.Radha Ratna Kumari, V. Bhaskar Desai, B.L.P. Swami, (2013)“Fibre Reinforced Light Weight
Aggregate (Natural PumiceStone) Concrete”,International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Vol 4,(5),pp
2229- 5518.
[10] Rayees Ahmad Ganie, “Floating Concrete by using Pumice Stone and Foaming Chemical”, International journal of civil
engineering, e-ISSN: 1694-2280, p-ISSN: 1694-2396, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2017.
[11] Roshan Gawale, Shubham Mishra, Harshal Sambare, Jidhnesh Kothari, Assistant Prof. Monali Patil, "Lightweight
concrete by using EPS beads", International journal of innovative research in science and engineering, ISSN:2454-9665,
Vol. No.2, Issue 03, March 2016.
[12] Roshan Peter, Anantha Kumar, “Experimental Investigation of Floating Concrete Structure using Light Weight (Natural
Pumice Stone) Aggregate”, World journal of engineering research and technology, ISSN: 2454-695X, Vol. 2, Issue 2,
118-129, 2016.
[13] Thousif Khan, Ibrahim Killedar, Sharu Malik H N, Muhathasheem R F, Jagannatha G M, Dr. Shivakumara B, “An
Experimental Study on Floating Concrete Using Light Weight Material”, International Research Journal of Engineering
and Technology, e-ISSN: 2395-0056, p-ISSN: 2395-0072, Volume: 05, Issue: 05, May 2018.
[14] Tamut, Rajendra Prabhu, Katta Venkataramana and Subhash C Yaragal, “Partial Replacement Of Coarse Aggregates By
Expanded Polystyrene Beads In Concrete”, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, Volume 3,
Issue 2, Feb 2014, eISSN: 2319-1163, pISSN: 2321-7308.
[15] T. Parhizkar, M. Najimi and A.R. Pourkhorshidi, (2012) “(Application of Pumice aggregate in structural lightweight
concrete”, Asian journal of civil engineering (building and housing) Vol. 13, No. 1 pp 43-54.
[16] Yuvraj Chavda, Shilpa Kewate, “Use of vermiculite for light weight floating concrete” , International journal of
Scientific & Engineering Research, ISSN 2229-5518, Volume 6, issue 12, Dec 2015

Authors Biography:
Sagar Kaptan received his Bachelor of Engineering Degree in Civil Engineering from Government
Engineering College Bharuch, Gujarat Technological University in 2017. At present he is pursuing his
Master’s degree in Construction Engineering and Management (Final year) from Birla Vishvakarma
Mahavidyalaya Engineering College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Anand, Gujarat. He is also working on Parametric
studies on floating concrete with using thermocol.
Dr. Jayeshkumar Pitroda received his Bachelor of Engineering Degree in Civil Engineering from Birla
Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College, Sardar Patel University (Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat-
India) in 2000. In 2009 he received his master’s degree in Construction Engineering and Management from
Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Sardar Patel University (Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat-India). In 2015 he
received his Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) Degree in Civil Engineering from Sardar Patel University (Vallabh
Vidyanagar, Gujarat-India). He has joined Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College as a faculty
in 2009, where he is a lecturer of Civil Engineering Department and at present working as Associate Professor
from February 2018having a total experience of 19 years in the field of Research, Designing and Education.
At present holding charge of PG Coordinator Construction Engineering and Management. He is guiding M.E. /
M. Tech (Construction Engineering and Management/ Construction Project Management/ Environmental
Engineering) thesis work in the field of Civil / Construction Engineering/ Environmental Engineering. He is
also guiding Ph.D. students (Civil Engineering). He has published many papers in National / International
Conferences and Journals. He has published nine Research Books in the field of Civil Engineering, Rural
Road Construction, National Highways Construction, Utilization of Industrial Waste, Fly Ash Bricks,
Construction Engineering and Management, Eco-friendly Construction.
Dr. Vihangraj V. Kulkarni received his Bachelor of Engineering Degree in Civil Engineering from
Government College of Engineering, Aurangabad in 2009. In 2012 he received his master’s degree in
Environmental Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, India. In 2018 he received his
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) Degree in Civil Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati,
India. He has joined Civil Engineering Department at Government Engineering College Banswara, Rajasthan.
He is guiding M. Tech. thesis work in the field of Civil / Construction Engineering/ Environmental
Engineering. He has published 17 papers in National / International Conferences and Journals. He has
published one Research Books in the field of Civil Engineering, “Utilization of Fly ash in construction
industries: The way forward”.

Floating Concrete Research Paper

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Floating Concrete Research Paper

More from Sagar Kaptan

Recently uploaded

Floating Concrete Research Paper