International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences

Int. j. adv. appl. sci.

EISSN: 2313-3724

Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Volume 4, Issue 8  (August 2017), Pages:  50-55

Title:  Pavement construction using self-compacting concrete: Mechanical properties

Author(s):  Busari Ayobami 1, *, Akinmusuru Joseph 1, Dahunsi Bamidele 2, Ofuyatan Tokunbo 1, Ngene Ben 1

Affiliation(s):

1Department of Civil Engineering, Covenant University, Ota Ogun State, Nigeria
2Department of Civil Engineering, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria

https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2017.08.008

Full Text - PDF          XML

Abstract:

This experimental study assessed the strength properties of some selected Portland limestone cement for self-compacting concrete in pavement construction. Self-compacting concrete offers many advantages in the construction world but its utilization in pavement construction is low. To achieve the aim of this research, four brands of grades (42.5 and 32.5) of the cement were used. Cement brands A, B, C and D were used in SCC samples tagged as SCC 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively. To this end, rheological tests were carried out using the L-Box, V-Funnel and slump cone. Additionally, mechanical properties (compressive, split tensile and flexural strength) of the hardened concrete were evaluated. The compressive and flexural tests were determined at 3, 7, 14, 21 and 28, 56 and 91 days of curing. SCC 4 with Brand D showed the highest strength at 3 days but had the lowest at 28 days and 91 days. However, SCC 1 with brand A showed the highest strength at maturity. Additionally, the result showed that the percentage difference in the compressive strength of the SCC 1 and the other mixes were 27.6%, 27.7% and 40.7% while 18.1%, 27.5% and 42.1% increment was recorded for the flexural strength of SCC 1, SCC 2, and SCC 3 respectively. However, SCC 4 had the best rheological properties, though the lowest strength. A positive strong correlation was recorded for the mechanical properties of the SCC mixtures. Moreover, the relationship between the mechanical properties and age followed a logarithmic trend with R2 value that ranges from 0.86 to 0.977 which established the robustness. Ultimately, the result revealed that SCC 1 with brand A proved to be the most suitable for SCC in rigid pavement construction. 

© 2017 The Authors. Published by IASE.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Keywords: Pavement, Cement brand, Cement grade, Strength grouping, Flexural, Compressive rheology

Article History: Received 3 February 2017, Received in revised form 8 July 2017, Accepted 8 July 2017

Digital Object Identifier: 

https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2017.08.008

Citation:

Ayobami B, Joseph A, Bamidele D,  Tokunbo O, and Ben N (2017). Pavement construction using self-compacting concrete: Mechanical properties. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(8): 50-55

http://www.science-gate.com/IJAAS/V4I8/Ayobami.html

References:

  1. Adewole KK, Olutoge FA, and Habib H (2014). Effect of nigerian portland-limestone cement grades on concrete compressive strength. International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering, 8(11): 1199-1202.
  2. ASTM (2011). C1194-03-Standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia, USA.
  3. ASTM (2013). C 1621/C 1621M-Standard test method for passing ability of self-consolidating concrete. American Society for Testing and Materials, WSDOT Materials Manual, Pennsylvania, USA.
  4. BS EN 197-1 (2011). Cement Part 1: Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for common cements, British Standards Institute. Available online at: http://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail/?pid=000000000030331489
  5. EFNARC (2002). Specification and Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete. European Federation of National Associations Representing for Concrete, Farnham, UK.
  6. EFNARC (2006). Guidelines for viscosity modifying admixtures for concrete. European Federation of National Associations Representing for Concrete, Farnham, UK
  7. FAA (2014). AC 150/5370-10G-Airport construction standards. Federal Aviation Administration, Part 6-Rigid Pavement, Item P-501 Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) Pavement. Available online at: https://www.faa.gov/airports/engineering/construction_standards/#content
  8. Gambhir ML (2005). Concrete technology. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New Delhi, India.
  9. Hawkins P, Tennis PD, and Detwiler RJ (2003). The use of limestone in Portland cement: A State-of-the-Art review. Portland Cement Association, Skokie, USA.
  10. Hodhod H and Abdeen, MA (2010). Experimental comparative and numerical predictive studies on strength evaluation of cement types: Effect of specimen shape and type of sand. Engineering, 2(8): 559-572. https://doi.org/10.4236/eng.2010.28072
  11. IPRF (2003). Best practices for airport Portland cement concrete pavement construction (rigid airport pavement). Innovative Pavement Research Foundation, Report IPRF-01-G-002-1.
  12. IS (1988). Methods of physical tests for hydraulic cement, Part 5: Determination of initial and final setting times. Bureau of Indian Standard No. 4031-5. Available online at: https://law.resource.org/pub/in/bis/S03/is.4031.5.1988.pdf
  13. Khayat KH and Assaad J (2002). Air-void stability in self-consolidating concrete. ACI Materials Journal, 99(4): 408-416.
  14. Kurita M and Nomura T (1998). Highly-flowable steel fiber-reinforced concrete containing fly ash. Special Publication, 178: 159-176.
  15. Mathur R, Misra AK, and Goel P (2014). Strength of concrete vs grades of cement. Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
  16. MCAAT (2009). Flexural strength of concrete (The modulus of rupture test). Mohawk College of Applied Arts and Technology, Building and Construction Sciences Department. Available online at: http://docplayer.net/23216898-Flexural-strength-of-concrete-the-modulus-of-rupture-test.html
  17. Naik TR (2008). Sustainability of concrete construction. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 13(2): 98-103. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0680(2008)13:2(98)
  18.  Ozawa K, Sakata N, and Okamura H (1995). Evaluation of self-compactibility of fresh concrete using the funnel test. Concrete Library of JSCE, 25: 59-75.
  19.  Ramadan KZ and Haddad RH (2017). Self-healing of overloaded self-compacting concrete of rigid pavement. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering, 21(1): 63-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2015.1090931
  20. Sahana R (2013). Setting time compressive strength and microstructure of geopolymer paste. In the International Conference on Energy and Environment, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 2(1): 311-316.
  21. Sahu A and Mishra SP (2015). Analysis for strength in different types of cement available in Chhattisgarh. International Journal for Scientific Research & Development, 3(9): 709-714
  22. Tande SN and Mohite PB (2007). Applications of self-compacting concrete. In the 32nd International Conference on Concrete and Structure. Organized by CI PREMIER PTE LTD, Singapore. Available online at: http://cipremier.com/100032055
  23. Thomas J and Pasko Jr (1998).Concrete pavements - past, present, and future. Public Roads: Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology, 62(1): 7-15.
  24. Wright PH (1996). Highway engineering. John Wiley and Sons, New Jersey, USA. Available online at: http://worldcat.org/isbn/0471826243