Sulphate Resistance Of Ternary Blended Fiber Reinforced Concrete

Sulphate Resistance Of Ternary Blended Fiber Reinforced Concrete
1
Department of Civil Engineering, GNIT
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
According to the U.S Geographic Service in 2006, approximately 7.5 cubic kilometers of concrete
is produced every year, and thus, it is the most used human made construction material in the
world. It is interesting to note that the word ‘concrete’ comes from the Latin word ‘concretus’
which means compact or condensed. This material is generally highly durable and can be made to
possess superior mechanical properties, such as high compressive and flexural strengths. It is
typically made out of Portland cement, supplementary cementitious material, Water, aggregates,
and depending on its application and the requirements of a specific project, different types of
chemical and mineral additives may be used in its production.
It is difficult to point out another material of construction which is versatile as concrete.it is well
known that plain concrete is not good to sulphate resistance.
Most of the soils contain some sulphate in the form of calcium, sodium, potassium and magnesium.
Higher concentration of sulphate in ground water are generally due to the presence of magnesium
and alkali sulphates. Sea water contains the sodium, magnesium and calcium sulphate in the
dissolved form
When it comes to resistance to different types of chemicals, the durability of concrete is quite
influenced by its manufacturing process (curing methods, finishing, etc.) and the materials that are
used. Moreover, if sufficient research and studies have not been previously performed, the
produced concrete may not meet the durability parameters for specific environmental conditions
and subsequently, the result of its application may be disastrous.
Although most concrete structures have considerable long life expectancies, there are also a
significant number of infrastructures in the world, such as wastewater systems, underground

2
structures, coastal works which are constantly under corrosion from different types of chemicals,
such as sulphates like magnesium sulphate. Unfortunately, this continuous invasion and ingression
of sulphate ions into concrete can ultimately lead to serious damages to structures, which will
consequently result in costly repairs or in some cases, complete replacement of the Whole
structure.
Concrete exposed to sulfate solutions can be attacked and may suffer deterioration to an extent
dependent on the concrete constituents, the quality of the concrete in place and the type and
concentration of the sulphate. Knowledge of the sulphate-resisting characteristics of concrete is
necessary so that the appropriate steps can be taken to minimize the deterioration of concrete
exposed to sulfate solutions.
Other protection systems, such as coatings and liners, can be used to protect the concrete surface
from diffusion of sulphate ions into concrete and subsequently, serious damage. The problem
with the coatings is that they are costly and must be applied with great skill and accuracy. Thus,
avoiding any uncovered areas that may be susceptible to the ingression of sulphate ions, which
would cause further degradation is crucial. It has been proven that liners are effective in
corrosion protection and frequently used in the past, but they have some limitations depending
on the diameter and design of the sanitary utilities. The problem with liners is that the installation
must be done very carefully with great accuracy;
Otherwise, they can be completely useless. As depicted in Figure 1.1, liners may also delaminate
and grow thin over time, which result in huge expenses in repairs and restorations (Ramsburg
2004).

3
Figure 1. Delaminated liners of a sewer manhole (Ramsburg 2004).
Sulfate Attack on Concrete
Occurrence – Naturally occurring sulfates of sodium, potassium, calcium or magnesium are
sometimes found in soil or dissolved in ground water or present in aggregates (eg pyrite). Sulfate
may be present in industrial effluents and wastes such as in industries associated with the
manufacture of chemicals, batteries, aluminium and in the mining industry. The water used in
cooling towers may also contain sulfates because of the gradual build-up of sulfates from
evaporation.
Mechanism – There are two chemical reactions involved in sulfate attack on concrete:
1 Reaction of the sulfate with calcium hydroxide liberated during the hydration of the cement,
forming calcium sulfate (gypsum).
2 Reaction of the calcium sulfate with the hydrated calcium aluminate, forming calcium
sulphoaluminate (ettringite).

4
Both of these reactions result in an increase in the volume of solids which is the cause of expansion
and disruption of concretes exposed to sulfate solutions.
It should be pointed out that sulfates and chemicals in general rarely, if ever, attack concrete if
they are in a solid or dry form. To result in significant attack on concrete, sulfates must be in
solution and above some minimum concentration.
The severity of sulfate attack on concrete depends on the following:
 Type of sulfate; magnesium and ammonium sulfates are the most-damaging to concrete.
 Concentration of the sulfate; the present of more-soluble sulfates is more damaging to
concrete.
 Whether the sulfate solution is stagnant or flowing; severity of the attack increases in the
case of flowing waters. Thus the nature of the contact between the sulfate and the concrete
is important. More intensive attack takes place on concrete which is exposed to cycles of
wetting and drying than on concrete which is fully and continuously submerged in the
solution.
 Pressure; severity of the attack increases because pressures tend to force the sulfate
solution into the concrete.
 Temperature; as with any chemical reaction, the rate of the reaction increases with
temperature.
 Presence of other ions; other ions present in the sulfate solution affect the severity of the
attack.
A typical example is seawater which contains sulfates and chlorides. It is generally found that the
presence of chloride ions alters the extent and nature of the chemical reaction so that less expansion
is produced in concrete due to the sulfates in seawater. As can be seen, the intensity of the sulfate
attack is a complex question which is influenced by many factors. In practice, however, it is
difficult to consider all the factors involved and in most cases, the severity of the attack is related
mainly to the sulfate concentration and the means for combating it are specified accordingly.

5
Factors Affecting Sulfate Resistance of Concrete:
Sulfate attack on concrete will take place when the sulfate solution penetrates the concrete and
chemically reacts with its constituents, mainly the cement matrix. Thus, factors affecting sulfate
resistance of concrete are not only those influencing the chemical reaction with the cement matrix,
but also those influencing the permeability and the overall quality of the concrete.
Producing concrete which has good resistance against sulphate attack can also be a solution. This
goal can be achieved by using different kinds of supplementary cementing materials, chemical
admixtures and mineral additives. Afterwards, the concrete specimens can be tested by using
different methods in research labs to evaluate their performances in terms of strength, mass loss,
appearance, etc.
It should be noted that the performance of concrete mixtures in the lab do not necessarily mean
that they would behave the same way in the field as there are a wide range of parameters that can
play crucial roles on concrete performance, such as the presence of other kinds of aggressive
chemicals which may not be used in experimental procedures in a lab.

6
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
1. Effect of replacement of Cement by Micro silica – in Sulphate resistance of concrete (WPFRC)
Concrete – An experimental investigation-by Prahallada M. C1, Prakash K.B2. The maximum
replacement of microsilica is of 10% for M30 grade Concrete.
2. Experimental -Investigations of Mechanical properties on Micro silica (Silica Fume) and Fly
Ash as Partial Cement Replacement of sulphate resistance Concrete –by-Magudeaswaran P1,
Eswaramoorthi P2. Due to use of the micro silica in a OPC concrete the life of that Concrete
is increase 4-5 times than the OPC concrete.
3. Dikeon JT, "Fly Ash Increases Resistance of Concrete to Sulphate Attack", United States
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Reduced expansion of concretes containing
30% fly ash and improved sulphate resistance afforded by fly ash use.
4. Dunstan ER, "A Spec Odyssey – Sulphate Resistant Concrete for the 80's", United States
Department of the Interior, Water and Power Resources Service, March, 1980.Flyash reduces
the susceptibility of concrete to attack by Magnesium sulphate by removal of Ca(OH)2.
5. Franklin eric kujur, Vikas Srivastava, V.C. Agarwal, Denis and Ahsan Ali (2014) “Stone dust
as partial replacement of fine aggregate in concrete”, Journal of academia and industrial
research, volume 3, issue 3, pp 148-151. Optimum replacement level of natural river sand with
stone dust is 60%. However, strength of concrete made using stone dust is higher at every
replacement level than the referral concrete.
6. Suribabu, U.Rangaraju, M. Ravindra Krishna (2015) "Behaviour of Concrete on Replacement
of Sand with Quaries Stone Dust as Fine Aggregate", IJIRSET, Vol. 4, Issue 1, pp 18503-
18510. Concrete acquires maximum increase in compressive strength at 60% sand

7
replacement. The percentage of increase in strength with respect to control concrete is 24.04
& 6.10 in M30 and M35 respectively.
7. ACI Committee 544, State-of-The-Art Report on Fiber Reinforced Concrete, ACI 544 1.R-
96.The compressive strength, split tensile strength, flexural strength and modulus of elasticity
increase with the addition of fiber content as compared with conventional concrete.
8. Peng Zhang and Qingfu Li (2013) ‘Fracture Properties of Polypropylene Fiber Reinforced
Concrete Containing Fly Ash and Silica Fume’, Research Journal of Applied Sciences,
Engineering and Technology 5(2): 665-670, 2013.The durability of concrete improves and
addition of polypropylene fibers greatly improves the fracture parameters of concrete .

8
CHAPTER 3
OBJECTIVE
1. To Know the effect of replacement of cement with Flyash and Micro Silica for Sulphate
Resistance
2. To study the effect of replacement of Sand with Stone Dust for Sulphate Resistance.
3. To evaluate Tensile strength of sulphate attacked concrete by adding Recron Polypropylene
Fiber
4. To evaluate the compressive strength of high grade concrete by exposing it to magnesium
sulphate environment for 8 weeks
5. To study and evaluate the weight loss of concrete that contains ternary blends of Portland
cement, micro silica and flyash and Recron fiber by immersing in magnesium sulphate solution
about 8 weeks

9
CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY
Putting full stop to the conventional concrete by using different supplementary cementitious
materials like fly ash and micro silica and also with addition of fiber which helps in resisting
sulphate attack on concrete
Total 36 cubes (150*150*150 mm) of M30 and M35 are made and compressive strength is
measured for 18 cubes at different ages of 3,7,28 days.
18 cubes are immersed in the 5% concentration of Magnesium Sulphate solution and calculate
the weights, compressive strength
And 21 rectangular prisms are of dimension (50*10*10cm) and 3 prisms are tested against
tensile strength at the age of 3 ,7 ,28 days of curing and remaining 18 are immersed in the
5%magnesium sulphate solution and evaluate the weight loss, change in dimension and tensile
strength at age of 15 ,30, 60 days

10
CHAPTER 5
Experimental investigations:
5.1 STUDY ON MATERIALS:
5.1.1 Cement:
53 grade OPC cement is used in this project. The various tests results are represented in the table1
5.1.2 Fly ash:
It constitutes 30% weight of cement. Normally fly ash is produced from coal and ignite fired plant.
Both the fuels leave around 30 to 45% of their weight as waste material in the form of ash. In the
present investigations fly ash from National Thermal Power Corporation RAMAGUNDAM is
used. Due to spherical shape of flyash particles, it can increase workability of cement while
reducing water demand. Puzzoloana character of flyash helps to produce high rate of hydration
and resistance to sulphate attack.
Two kinds of Fly ash are produced from the combustion of coal:
 Class C -High, more than 10% ,calcium content produced from sub-bituminous coal
 Class F –Low ,less than 10% ,calcium content produced from bituminous coal
Fly ash shall confirm to Grade 1 or Grade 2 of IS 3812-1981.

11
Figure 1 FLYASH
5.1.3 MICRO SILICA:
It constitutes 10% of weight of cement. Silica fume is the by-product of silicon metal and
ferrosilicon alloys. This product, which is also known as micro silica, is famous for its great
fineness and high silica content. Silica fume has a very high surface area and from a pozzolanic
point of view, is very active. It has been many years since this product was used for the first time
in concrete and it has successfully enhanced the properties of concrete, such as strength, abrasion
and microstructure. It should be noted that in terms of resistance to sulphate ions penetrations,
silica fume will significantly improve the concrete performance. However, when it comes to
concrete resistance to sulphates, there are different opinions about the effectiveness of this type of
SCM. For example, Durning et al. (1991) reported that silica fume would improve the resistance
of concrete against a 5% magnesium sulphate solution by refining the pore structure and reducing
the amount of Ca(OH)2. They also found that the C-S-H formed in the concrete which contains
silica fume is more stable in low pH conditions.

12
Figure 2 MICRO SILICA

13
TABLE: 5.1 Components of cement, flyash, Micro silica
Comparison of chemical and physical characteristics
Property
Portland
Cement
Siliceous
(ASTM C618
Class F)
Fly Ash
Calcareous
(ASTM C618
Class C)
Fly Ash
Slag
Cement
Silica
Fume
SiO2 content
(%)
21.9 52 35 35 85–97
Al2O3 content
(%)
6.9 23 18 12 —
Fe2O3 content
(%)
3 11 6 1 —
CaO content
(%)
63 5 21 40 < 1
MgO content
(%)
2.5 — — — —
SO3 content (%) 1.7 — — — —
Specific surface
(m2
/kg)
370 420 420 400
15,000–
30,000
Specific gravity 3.15 2.38 2.65 2.94 2.22

14
5.1.4 STONE DUST:
It constitutes 60% of fine aggregate. . Stone crusher dust, which is available abundantly from
crusher units at a low cost in many areas, provides a viable alternative for river sand in concrete.
The investigations indicate that stone crusher dust has a good potential as fine aggregate in
concrete construction. Use of Stone crusher dust does not only reduces the cost of construction
but also helps reduce the impact on the environment by consuming the material generally
considered as waste product with few applications. The investigations indicated that stone
crusher dust has potential as fine aggregate in concrete structures with a reduction in the cost
of concrete by about 20 percent compared to conventional concrete. Crusher dust not only
reduces the cost of construction but also the impact on environment by consuming the material
generally considered as a waste product with few applications. Every year 200-400 tons of stone
dust is generated by stone cutting plants and is dumped as waste. It produces good improvement
in the strength properties, abrasion and durability of concrete.
5.1.5 River Sand:
It constitutes 40% in fine aggregate .River sand available in the local market is used. The
aggregate is tested for its physical requirements such as gradation, fineness modulus, specific
gravity and bulk density in accordance with IS 2386.
5.1.6 Coarse Aggregate:
Coarse aggregates of size 20mm &12.5 mm procured from the local crushing plants is used
throughout the investigations. The aggregates are tested for its Physical requirements such as
gradation, fineness modulus, specific gravity, bulk density etc. in accordance with IS 2386.
5.1.7 Recron Polypropylene Fiber:
Recron polypropylene fiber acts as a "secondary reinforcement" in concrete which arrests cracks,
increases resistance to impact/abrasion & greatly improves quality of construction in walls,

15
foundations, tanks, roads and pre-cast products like blocks, pipes, tiles, manhole covers, and
more.The raw material of polypropylene is derived from monomeric C3H6 which is purely
hydrocarbon. Its mode of polymerization, its high molecular weight and the way it is processed
into fibers combine to give polypropylene fibers very useful properties. There is a sterically regular
atomic arrangement in the polymer molecule and high crystallinity. Due to regular structure, it is
known as isotactic polypropylene.Chemical inertness makes the fibers resistant to most chemicals.
Any chemical that will not attack the concrete constituents will have no effect on the fiber either
in contact with more aggressive chemicals, the concrete will always deteriorate first.The
hydrophobic surface not being wet by cement paste helps to prevent chopped fibers from balling
effect during mixing like other fibers.The water demand is nil for polypropylene fibers.The
orientation leaves the film weak in the lateral direction which facilitates fibrillations. The cement
matrix can therefore penetrate in the mesh structure between the individual fibrils and create a
mechanical bond between matrix and fiber. Recron polypropylene fiber prevents the micro
shrinkage cracks developed during hydration, making the structure/plaster/component inherently
stronger. Further, when the loads imposedonconcreteapproachthatoffailure, cracks will propagate,
sometimes rapidly. Addition of Recron polypropylene fiber to concrete and plaster arrests cracking
caused by volume change (expansion and contraction), simply because 1 kg of Recron 3s offers
millions of fibres which support mortar/concreteinalldirections.
In the past several years, an increasing number of constructions have been taken place
with concrete containing polypropylene fibres such as foundation piles, prestressed piles, piers,
highways, industrial floors, bridge decks, facing panels, flotation units for walkways,
heavyweight coatings for underwater pipe etc. This has also been used for controlling shrinkage
& temperature cracking.
Due to enhance performances and effective cost-benefit ratio, the use of polypropylene
fibers is often recommended for concrete structures recently. PFRC is easy to place, compact,
finish, pump and it reduces the rebound effect in sprayed concrete applications by increasing
cohesiveness of wet concrete. Being wholly synthetic there is no corrosion risk. PFRC shows
improved impact resistance as compared to conventionally reinforced brittle concrete. The use of

16
PFRC provides a safer working environment and improves abrasion resistance in concrete floors
by controlling the bleeding while the concrete is in plastic stage. The possibility of increased
tensile strength and impact resistance offers potential reductions in the weight and thickness of
structural components and should also reduce the damage resulting from shipping and handling.
Figure: 3 Recron Polypropylene Fiber
SPECIFICATIONS OF RECRON POLYPROPYLENE FIBER
PROPERTY VALUE
Cut length
Tensile Strength
Melting Point
Dosage Rate
6mm or12mm
4000-6000 kg/cm2
>250 °C
Concrete :
Use CT 2024 (12mm) at 900 g/m3

17
CHAPTER 6
6.1.1 Test Results of Cement:
TABLE: 6.1.1
6.1.2 Test Results of Fly ash:
TABLE: 6.1.2
S.NO PROPERTY TEST RESULTS IS STANDARDS
1 Normal consistency 31.5% 50%
2 Specific gravity 1.95 1.9-2.8
3 Fineness 6.5%
6.1.3 Test Results of Micro Silica
TABLE: 6.1.3
1 Normal consistency 30.5% 32%
2 Specific gravity 2.2 2.2-2.3
3 Fineness 5.5
1 Normal Consistency 27.5%
2 Initial Setting Time 50 min > 30 min
3 Final Setting Time 250 min < 600 min
4 Specific Gravity 2.95 3.15
5 Soundness(Le-Chateliers method) 3mm 10 mm Maximum

18
6.1.4 Test Results of Stone Dust:
TABLE: 6.1.4
S.no Property Results
1 Sieve Analysis Zone III
2 Bulking of Sand by Volume Method 33.3%
3 Specific gravity 2.53
4 Bulk Density 1613 kg/m3
6.1.5 Test Results on River Sand:
TABLE: 6.1.5
S.no Property Results
1 Sieve Analysis Zone III
2 Bulking of Sand by Volume Method 33.3%
4 Bulk Density 1613 kg/m3
6.1.6 Test Results on Coarse Aggregate:
TABLE: 6.1.6
S.no Property Result
1 Crushing Strength 28%
2 Elongation Index 16%
3 Flakiness Index 18.01%
4 Impact Test 30%

19
6.1.7 COMPOSITION OF MATERIALS:
CEMENT:
Flyash : 30%
Micro Silica : 10%
FINE AGGREGATE:
Stone Dust : 60%
River Sand : 40%
COARSE AGGREGATE:
20 mm Passing & 12.5mm retain: 60%
12.5mm passing &10mm retain : 40%
RECRON POLYPROPYLENE FIBER:
900 grams/m3 of concrete

20
6.2 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH RESULTS OF VARIOUS CONCERTE
MIXES
6.2.1 Compressive Strengths of M30 Grade concrete before immersing in MgSO4
solution:
TABLE: 6.2.1
M30
(0.43:1:13:2.63)
Compressive strength (N/mm2)
3 Days 7 Days 28 Days
Normal 15.12 26.46 37.8
Replacement of cement and
sand
16.32 27.74 40.8
sand and addition of fiber
17.77 31.1 44.44
GRAPH: 1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
normal replacement of
cement and sand
replacement of
cement sand and fiber
COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH(N/mm2)
DAYS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF VARIOUS M30 CONCRETE MIXES
BEFORE IMMERSING IN MgSO4 SOLUTION
3 days
7 days
28 days

21
6.2.2 Compressive Strengths of M35 Grade concrete before immersing in MgSO4
solution:
TABLE: 6.2.2
M35
(0.38:1:1.03:1.84)
3 Days 7 Days 28 Days
Normal 19.45 29.4 43.24
Replacement of cement
and sand
20.99 30.82 46.66
Replacement of cement
and sand and addition of
fiber
22.85 34.55 50.82
GRAPH:2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
NORMAL REPLACEMENT OF
CEMENT AND
SAND
REPLACEMENT OF
CEMENT,SAND AND
ADDITION OF FIBER
DAYS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF VARIOUS M35
CONCRETE MIXES BEFORE IMMERSING IN MgSO4
SOLUTION
3 days
7 days
28 days

22
6.2.3 Compressive strength of M30 various mixes after immersion in MgSO4
Solution:
TABLE: 6.2.3
M30
(0.43:1:13:2.63)
30Days 45Days 60 Days
Normal 37.8 36.5 36
sand
40.8 40 39.8
44.4 44.4 44.3
GRAPH: 3
36.5 36 36
40 39.8 39.8
44.4 44.3 44.3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
30 days 45 days 60 days
DAYS
VARIATION IN COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF M30
CUBES AFTER IMMERSION IN MGSO4 SOLUTION
normal
replacement of cement and
sand
replacement of cement sand
and fiber

23
6.2.4 Compressive strength of M35 concrete of various mixes after immersion
in MgSO4 solution:
TABLE: 6.2.4
M35
(0.38:1:1.03:1.84)
Normal 43.24 43.2 41.2
sand
46.66 46 45.5
50.82 50.82 50.76
GRAPH: 4
43.2 41.2 41.2
46 45.5 45.5
50.82 50.76 50.76
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
30 days 45 days 60 dayd
DAYS
VARIATION IN COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF M35 CUBES
AFTER IMMERSION IN MgSO4 SOLUTION
normal
sand
and fiber

24
6.2.5 Variation of Compressive strength of M30 concrete cubes in terms of
percentages after immersion in MgSO4 Solution:
TABLE: 6.2.5
GRAPH: 5
-3.4
-0.08 -4.7
-1.96
-2.4
-2.4
0
-0.22
-0.22
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
30 days 45days 60 days
COMPRESSIVESTRENGTHin%
DAYS
Variation interms of percentages of compressive
strength of Various mixes of M30 after immersing in
MgSO4 Solution
Normal
sand
Replacement of cement,sand
and addition of fiber
Grade of
Concrete
Type of
Concrete
Compressive Strength in %
M30
Normal -3.4% -4.7% -4.7%
Replacement of
cement and
sand
-1.96% -2.4% -2.4%
Replacement of
cement, sand
and addition of
fiber
0% -0.22% -0.22%

25
6.2.6Variation in compressive strength of M35 cubes of various mixes in terms of
percentages:
TABLE: 6.2.6
GRAPH: 6
-0.9
-0.08 -4.7
-1.4
-2.4
-2.4
0 -0.1
-0.22
-5
-4.5
-4
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
COMPRESSIVESTRENGTHin%
DAYS
Variation interms of percentages of compressive
strength of Various mixes of M35 after immersion in
MgSO4 solution
Normal
Replacement of cement and sand
Replacement of cement,sand and
addition of fiber
Grade of
Concrete
Type of Concrete Compressive strength in %
M35
Normal -0.09% -4.7% -4.7%
Replacement of
cement and sand
-1.4% -2.4% -2.4%
Replacement of
cement, sand and
addition of fiber
0% -0.1% -0.1%

26
6.3 TENSILE STRENGTH RESULTS:
6.3.1 Tensile Strength of various mixes of M30 rectangular prisms
TABLE: 6.3.1
Grade of
concrete
Type Tensile strength at 28 days
(N/mm2)
M30
Normal 4.15
Replacement of cement and sand 4.7
Replacement of cement& sand and
addition of Fiber
5.75
GRAPH: 7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
NORMAL REPLACEMENT OF
CEMENT AND SAND
REPLACEMENT OF
CEMENT,SAND AND
ADDITION OF FIBER
TENSILESTRENGTH(N/mm2)
DAYS
TENSILE STRENGTH OF VARIOUS M30
CONCRETE MIXES
28 days

27
6.3.2 Tensile strength of various mixes of M30 after immersion in MgSO4:
TABLE: 6.3.2
GRAPH: 8
4.15 4.1 4
4.7 4.7 4.69
5.75 5.75 5.7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
30 days 45 days 60 dayd
DAYS
VARIATION IN TENSILE STRENGTH OF M3O AFTER
IMMERSION IN MGSO4 SOLUTION
normal
replacement of cement
and sand
replacement of cement
sand and fiber
Grade of
Concrete
Type of Concrete Tensile Strength in %
M30
Normal 4.15 4.1 4
Replacement of
cement and sand
4.7 4.7 4.69
Replacement of
cement, sand and
addition of fiber
5.75 5.75 5.7

28
6.3.3 Variation interms of % Tensile strength of M30 after immersion in MgSO4 :
TABLE: 6.3.3
GRAPH: 9
-1.2
-0.08 -3.6
0
-0.21
-0.21
0 -0.1
-0.17
-4
-3.5
-3
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
Tensilestrengthin%
DAYS
Variation interms of percentages of Tensile Strength
of Various mixes of M30
Normal
sand
Grade of
Concrete
Type of Concrete Tensile Strength in %
M30
Normal -1.2% -3.6% -3.6%
Replacement of
cement and sand
0% -0.212% -0.212%
Replacement of
cement, sand and
addition of fiber
0% -0.17% -0.17%

29
6.4 DURABILITY TEST RESULTS:
WEIGHT RESULTS OF VARIOUS CONCRETE MIXES:
6.4.1 Weights of M30 concrete CUBES Before & after Immersion in MgSO4
TABLE:6.4.1
GRAPH: 10
8.06 8.06
8.03
7.82 7.82 7.81 7.8
7.78 7.78 7.78 7.77
7.6
7.65
7.7
7.75
7.8
7.85
7.9
7.95
8
8.05
8.1
0 days 15 days 30 days 45 days
WEIGHT(KG)
DAYS
Change In Weight(Kg) In M30 Cubes Of Various Mixes after
Immersing In MgSO4 Solution
normal
replacement of
cement and sand
replacement of
cement sand and fiber
WEIGHT(Kg)
Grade of
concrete
Type of Concrete 0
days
30
days
45
days
60
days
M30
Normal 8.06 8.06 7.98 7.95
Replacement of
cement and sand
7.82 7.81 7.77 7.76
Replacement of
cement and sand and
addition of fiber
7.78 7.78 7.78 7.75

30
6.4.2 Weights of M30 concrete percentage before and after immersing in MgSo4
solution
TABLE: 6.4.2
GRAPH: 11
0
-0.08
-1.3
-0.12
-0.6
-0.8
0 0
-0.35
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
WEIGHTSin%
DAYS
Change in Weights in Percentage of M30 cubes after
immersion in MgSO4 Solution
Normal
addition of fiber
Grade of
concrete
Type of concrete 30 days 45 days 60 days
M30
Normal 0% -0.90% -1.30%
Replacement Of Cement and
Sand
-0.12% -0.60% -0.80%
Replacement Of Cement, Sand
and addition of Fiber
0% 0% -0.38%

31
6.4.3Weights of M35 CUBES before & after Immersion in MgSO4
Solution:
TABLE: 6.4.3
GRAPH: 12
8.4 8.39 8.35
8.3
7.96 7.94 7.92 7.9
7.86 7.86 7.84 7.82
7.4
7.6
7.8
8
8.2
8.4
8.6
WEIGHT(Kg)
DAYS
CHANGE IN WEIGHT(Kg) IN M35 CUBES OF VARIOUS AFTER
MgSO4 SOLUTION
normal
sand
and fiber
WEIGHT(kg)
Grade of
concrete
Type of concrete 0
days
30
days
45
days
60
days
M35
Normal 8.4 8.39 8.35 8.3
Replacement of
cement and sand
7.96 7.94 7.92 7.9
Replacement of
cement and sand
addition of fiber
7.86 7.86 7.84 7.84

32
6.4.4 Weights of M35 Concrete percentage before and after immersing in
MgSo4 solution:
TABLE: 6.4.4
Grade of
concrete
Type of Concrete 30 days 45 days 60 days
M35
Normal -0.10% -0.59% -1.1%
Replacement Of
Cement and Sand
-0.25% -0.50% -0.75%
Replacement Of
Cement, Sand and
addition of Fiber
0% -0.25% -0.25%
GRAPH: 13
-0.1
-0.08
-1.1
-0.25
-0.5
-0.75
0
-0.25
-0.35
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
WEIGHTSin%
DAYS
Change in Weights in percentage of M35 CUBES
Normal
sand

33
6.4.5 Weights of M30 Rectangular Prisms before & After Immersion in
MgSO4 Solution:
TABLE: 6.4.5
Grade of
concrete
Type of concrete Weight(kg)
0
days
30
days
45
days
60
days
M30
Normal 12.08 12.08 12.07 12.04
Replacement of
cement and sand
12.02 12.025 12.025 12.00
Replacement of
cement and sand
addition of fiber
12.00 12.00 11.99 11.98
GRAPH: 14
12.08 12.08
12.07
12.04
12.03
12.02 12.02
12
12 12
11.99
11.98
11.92
11.94
11.96
11.98
12
12.02
12.04
12.06
12.08
12.1
WEIGHT(Kg)
DAYS
CHANGE IN WEIGHT IN M30 RECTANGULAR PRISMS OF VARIOUS
MIXES AFTER IMMERSION IN MgSO4 SOLUTION
normal
replacement of
cement and sand
replacement of
cement sand and
fiber

34
6.4.6 Weights of M30 Concrete percentage of rectangular prisms before and
after immersing in MgSo4 solution:
TABLE: 6.4.6
Grade of
concrete
Type of Concrete 30 days 45 days 60 days
M30
Normal 0% -0.08% -0.33%
Replacement of
Cement and Sand
-0.083% -0.083% -0.24%
Replacement of
Cement, Sand and
addition of Fiber
0% -0.08% -0.16%
GRAPH: 15
0
-0.08
-0.33
-0.083
-0.083
-0.24
0
-0.08
-0.16
-0.35
-0.3
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
WEIGHTin%
DAYS
Change in Weights in Percentage of M30
Rectangular Prisms after immersion in MgSO4
solution
Normal
addition of fiber

35
6.5 RATE ANALYSIS FOR M30& M35 GRADES OF VARIOUS
MIXES
6.5.1 For M30 grade (1:1.13:2.63)
Normal :
Cement: 1.54×1/4.67=0.31
1.54×1/4.67×1440 =449kg
=8.99bags
Dust: 1.54×1.13/4.67 =0.406cum
1.54×1.13/4.67×1450 =588.82kg
Concrete: 1.54×2.63/4.67 = 0.8215
= 1232.31kg
40% 10mm 1232.31×40/100
=492kg
60% 12.5mm 740kg
Replacement:
Cement: 1.54 ×1/4.67 =0.31cum
1.54×1/4.67×1440 =449kg
10%microsilica 449×10/100=44.9
30% flyash 449×30/100 =134.7kg
Cement 269.4kg
Dust =1.54×1.13/4.67 =0.406cum
=1.54×1.13/4.67×1450 =585.8kg

36
Concrete: 1.54×2.63/4.67 =0.8215cum
= 1232.31kg
10mm 40% 492kg
12.5mm 60% 740kg
6.5.2 For M35 grade (1:1.03:1.84):
Normal :
Cement: 1.54×1/3.87=0.316cum
1.54×1/3.87×1440 =443.53kg
=8.87bags
Dust: 1.5×1.03/3.87 =0.317cum
=460.01kg
Concrete: 1.5×1.84/3.87 =0.874cum
= 1312.11kg
40% 10mm 1312×40/100
=525kg
60% 12.5mm 787.15kg
Replacement:
Cement: 1.54×1/3.87 =0.316cum
1.54×1/3.87×1440 =443.53kg
10%microsilica 443×10/100=44.93kg
30% flyash 443×30/100 =132.9kg
Cement 266.3kg
Dust =1.54×1.03/4.87 =0.317cum
=460.01kg

37
Concrete: 1.5×1.84/3.87 =0.874cum
10mm 40% 525kg
12.5mm 60% 78.7kg

38
6.5.3 Comparison of Cost Among Normal, Replacement of Cement and Sand
and Replacement of Cement, Sand and addition of Fiber of M30 and M35
Grades of Concrete:
FOR M30 GRADE OF CONCRETE:
TABLE: 6.5.3
Quantity Description Rate Per Amount
0.316cum Cement (443.53) 2800 1cum 124.6
0.317cum dust 420 1cum 133.14
0.309cum Concrete for
10mm
750 1cum 261.75
12.5mm
600 1cum 314.4
0.06cum Mason 1st
class 500 Each 64.5
0.014cum Mason 2nd
class 400 Each 126
1.8cum mazdoor 120 Each 216
1.4cum Women mazdoor 120 Each 168
Sunderies - - 5
TABLE: 6.5.3.1
0.0316 Microsilica(44.3kg) 700 1cum 90
0.0945 Flyash(132.9kg) 600 1cum 200
0.189 Cement(266.3kg) 2800 1cum 745
0.317 Dust 400 1cum 127
0.349 Concrete for 10mm 750 1cum 261
0.524 Concrete for 12.5mm 600 1cum 314.4
0.06 Mason 1st
class 500 each 64
0.14 Mason 2nd
class 450 each 126
1.5 mazdoor 120 each 216
1.4 Women mazdoor 120 each 168
Sunderies - - 3
fiber 300 1cum 300
2534.79/cum
2615/cum

39
6.5.4 FOR M35 GRADE OF CONCRETE:
TABLE: 6.5.4
0.31cum Cement (449kg) 2800 1cum 1257.2
0.46cum Dust(588kg) 400 1cum 1747
10mm
750 1cum 243.75
12.5mm
600 1cum 294
0.06cum Mason 1st
class 500 each 64
0.014cum Mason 2nd
class 450 each 126
1.8cum Man mazdoor 120 each 216
1.4cum Women mazdoor 120 each 168
- Sunderies - - 5
2548.65/cum
TABLE: 6.5.4.1
0.031 Microsilica
(44.9kg)
700 1cum 88
0.093 Flyash (134.7kg) 600 1cum 202
0.186 Cement(269.4kg) 2800 1cum 756
0.406 Dust 400 1cum 174.7
0.328 Concrete for
10mm
750 1cum 243.75
0.49 Concrete for
12.5mm
600 1cum 294
0.06 Mason 1st
class 500 each 64
0.14 Mason 2nd
class 450 each 126
1.8 Man mazdoor 120 each 216
1.4 Women mazdoor 120 each 168
Sunderies - - 2
fiber 300 1cum 300
2634/cum

40
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION:
Fly ash 30% and micro silica(10% ) replacement of cement and 60% replacement of fine
aggregate (sand) with stone dust and addition of recron polypropylene fiber in the concrete
showed result in resistance of sulphate attack on the concrete in in terms of Durability and strength
properties of concrete.
STRENGTH PROPERIES:
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH:
Before Immersion In MgSO4 Solution:
For both the grades of concrete (M30&M35) Compressive Strength increases from Normal,to
Replacement Of Cement and Sand as 7.9%&7.9% respectively and for Replacement Of Cement
and Sand and addition of Fibe as 17.4% &17.3% respectively.
After Immersion In MgSO4 Solution:
For both the grades of concrete M30&M35 Compressive Strength variation declines from Normal
to Replacement of Cement and Sand as 2.4%& 2.4% respectively and Replacement of Cement,
Sand and addition of Fiber as 0.22 % & 0.1% respectively

41
TENSILE STRENGTH:
Before Immersion In MgSO4 Solution:
For M30 grade of concrete tensile strength increases from Normal to Replacement of Cement
and Sand as 13.2%, Replacement of Cement And Sand and addition of Fiber as 38.5%.
After Immersion In MgSO4 Solution:
For M30 grade of concrete Tensile Strength variation declines from Normal, Replacement of
Cement and Sand as 0.212% & Replacement of Cement, Sand addition of Fiber as 0.17%
DURABILITY:
Measured in terms of weight, for both the grades of concrete M30&M35 the percentage variation
of weight loss decreased from Normal to Replacement of cement and sand as 0.8% &
0.38%,respectively and to Replacement of cement, sand and addition of Fiber as 0.75%&0.25%
respectively.
COST:
For M30 grade of concrete the cost increment from normal to replacement of cement,sand and
fiber as 3.1% only
For M35 grade of concrete the cost increment from normal to replacement of cement,sand and
fiber as 3.2% only. So it is Economical

42
REFERENCES
(1) Prahallada M, Prakash K an experimental investigation on ‘Effect of replacement of
Cement by Micro silica – in Sulphate resistance of concrete’.
(2) Magudeaswaran, Eswaramoorthi Investigations of Mechanical properties on Micro silica
(Silica Fume) and Fly Ash as Partial Cement Replacement of sulphate resistance Concrete.
(3) Dikeon JT, "Fly Ash Increases Resistance of Concrete to Sulphate Attack", United States,
1975.
(4) Dunstan ER, "A Spec Odyssey – Sulphate Resistant Concrete for the 80's", United
States, 1980.
(5) Franklin eric kujur, Vikas Srivastava, V.C. Agarwal, Denis and Ahsan Ali (2014) “Stone
dust as partial replacement of fine aggregate in concrete’’.
(6) A. Suribabu, U.Rangaraju, M. Ravindra Krishna (2015) "Behaviour of Concrete on
Replacement of Sand with Quarries Stone Dust as Fine Aggregate".
(7) Peng Zhang and Qing Fu Li (2013) ‘Fracture Properties of Polypropylene Fiber
Reinforced Concrete Containing Fly Ash and Silica Fume’.
(8) Sulphate Attack on Concrete. Fly Ash Technical Notes No. 2, Ash Development
Association of Australia, 1995.
(9) ACI Committee 544, State-of-The-Art Report on Fiber Reinforced Concrete, ACI 544 1.R-
96
(10) Monteny, De Belie, and Taerwe. "Resistance of different concrete mixtures to sulfuric
Acid. “Materials & Structures 36, no. 4 (2003): 242-249.
(11) Durning, T.A., and C. Hicks. "Using micro silica to increase concrete's resistance to
Aggressive chemicals." Concrete International 13, no. 3 (1991): 42-48.
(12) Almeida I.R. (1991) Resistance of high strength concrete to sulphate attack: soaking
and drying test. Concrete durability. In ACI SP‐100. American Concrete Institute, pp.
1073–1092.

43
ANNEXURE: 1
Concrete mix design for mix-M30
1. Design specification
Characteristic strength required 30N/mm2
At 28 days
Maximum size of aggregate 20mm
Degree of workability 0.90(compaction factor)
Degree of quality control GOOD
Type of exposure MILD
2 . Test data for materials
Cement used OPC (53 Grade)
Specific gravity of cement 3.15
Specific gravity of coarse aggregate 2.63
Specific gravity of fine aggregate 2.56
3 . Target mean strength
For tolerance factor 1.65 and using the table 1 of IS 10262-1962, the target mean strength for
specified characteristic cube strength is
fck= fck +t×s
=30+1.65×5
=38.25N/mm2
4 Selection of water cement ratio
From fig 1 of IS 10262-1982, the free water content ratio required for the target mean strength
of 38.25N/mm2 is 0.45
5. Selection of water and sand contents
From table 4 of IS 10262-1982 for 20mm nominal maximum size of aggregates and sand
conforming zone III, water content per cubic meter of cement is 186Kgs and sand content as percentage
of total aggregate by absolute volume =35%

44
For change in values in W/C ratio compacting factor and sand belonging to zone III the following
adjustments is required
Change in condition Adjustments required
Water content
percentage
Percentage sand for
Total aggregates
For decrease or increase in
W/C ratio (0.60-0.47
=0.17)
=0.17/0.05 *1
=3.4%
0 -3.4
For increase in
Compaction factor
(0.90-0.80=0.10)
+3 0
For sand conforming to
Zone III
0 -1.5
3 -4.9
Therefore required sand content as a percentage of total aggregates by absolute volume
=35-4.9
=30.1%
Required water content
=186+86×3/100
=191.6Kgs
6. Determination of cement content
Water cement ratio = 0.43
Water content = 191.6
Cement content = 446Kg/m3
7. Determination of fine and coarse aggregates
From table 3 of IS 10262-1982 ,for the specified maximum size of aggregate of 20mm, the
amount of entrapped air in wet concrete is 2% Taking this into account and applying equations from 3.5.1

45
0.98 = [191.6 +446/3.15 +fa/0.301×2.6]×1/1000
fa = 507 Kg/m3
Volume of coarse aggregate
0.98 = [191.6 +446/3.15 +ca /(1-0.301)×2.6]×1/1000
Ca =1176 Kg/m3
W : C : fa : ca =191.6 : 446 : 507 : 1176
=0.42: 1: 1.13:2.63

46
ANNEXURE: 2
Concrete mix design for mix-M35
1. Design specification
Characteristic strength required 35N/mm2
At 28 days
Maximum size of aggregate 20mm
Degree of workability 0.90(compaction factor)
Degree of quality control GOOD
Type of exposure MILD
2 . Test data for materials
Cement used OPC (53 Grade)
Specific gravity of cement 3.15
Specific gravity of coarse aggregate 2.63
Specific gravity of fine aggregate 2.56
3 . Target mean strength
For tolerance factor 1.65 and using the table 1 of IS 10262-1962, the target mean strength for
specified characteristic cube strength is
fck= fck +t×s
=35+1.65×6.3
=45.39N/mm2
4 Selection of water cement ratio
From fig 1 of IS 10262-1982, the free water content ratio required for the target mean strength
of 45.39N/mm2 is 0.39
5. Selection of water and sand contents
From table 4 of IS 10262-1982 for 20mm nominal maximum size of aggregates and sand conforming
zone III ,water content per cubic meter of cement is 202.5Kgs and sand content as percentage of total
aggregate by absolute volume =38.75%

47
For change in values in W/C ratio compacting factor and sand belonging to zone III the following
adjustments is required
Change in condition Adjustments required
Water content
Percentage
Percentage sand for
Total aggregates
For decrease or increase in
W/C ratio (0.45-0.39
=0.06)
=0.06/0.05 *1
=1.2%
0 -1.2
For increase in
Compaction factor
(0.90-0.80=0.10)
+3 0
For sand conforming to
Zone III
0 -1.5
3 -2.7
Therefore required sand content as a percentage of total aggregates by absolute volume
=38.75-2.7
=36.05%
Required water content
=202.5+202.5×3/100
=208.57Kgs
6. Determination of cement content
Water cement ratio = 0.39
Water content = 208.57
Cement content = 534.80Kg/m3
7. Determination of fine and coarse aggregates
From table 3 of IS 10262-1982 ,for the specified maximum size of aggregate of 20mm, the
amount of entrapped air in wet concrete is 2% Taking this into account and applying equations from 3.5.1

48
0.98 = [208.57 +534.80/3.15 +fa/0.3605×2.6]×1/1000
fa = 555.97 Kg/m3
Volume of coarse aggregate
0.98 = [208.57 +534.80/3.15 +ca/ (1-0.3605)×2.6]×1/1000
Ca =986.25 Kg/m3
W: C: fa : ca =208.57 : 534.80 : 555.97 : 986.25
=0.38: 1: 1.03:1.84

Sulphate Resistance Of Ternary Blended Fiber Reinforced Concrete

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Sulphate Resistance Of Ternary Blended Fiber Reinforced Concrete

Similar to Sulphate Resistance Of Ternary Blended Fiber Reinforced Concrete (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Sulphate Resistance Of Ternary Blended Fiber Reinforced Concrete