(2019) Ting, Rahman, Lau, Ting

Construction and Building Materials 201 (2019) 763–777
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat
Review
Recent development and perspective of lightweight aggregates

based self-compacting concrete
T.Z.H. Ting ⇑, M.E. Rahman, H.H. Lau, M.Z.Y. Ting
Faculty of Engineering and Science, Curtin University, CDT 250, 98009 Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia
h i g h l i g h t s
87 research articles on lightweight self-compacting concrete have been reviewed.

Physical properties of LWA which affect the LWSCC performance are reviewed.
Fresh and hardened properties of LWSCC are reviewed.
Features and limitations of 6 LWSCC mixture methods are presented.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: The utilization of natural and artificial lightweight aggregates in lightweight self-compacting concrete
Received 13 August 2018 (LWSCC) is gaining popularity in research field. Extensive research has been carried out in the past decade
Received in revised form 9 December 2018 all over the world to utilize lightweight aggregates (LWA) in self-compacting concrete (SCC). LWSCC,
Accepted 21 December 2018
which uses renewable aggregates, has great potential to become an alternative material to conventional
Available online 10 January 2019
concrete. The paper is aimed to review the more recent research of physical properties of lightweight
aggregates used in developing mix design of lightweight self-compacting concrete. In design, the mix
Keywords:
proportion of LWSCC is a crucial factor to achieve the desired fresh and hardened concrete properties.
Lightweight self-compacting concrete
(LWSCC)
The methods to develop LWSCC mix design with anticipated fresh and hardened concrete are reviewed.
Lightweight aggregates (LWA) Research shows that the mix design LWSCC is preferably proportioned by aggregates packing concept. In
Workability addition, discussion on the fresh and hardened concrete properties is made and summarized in this
Compressive strength paper. Studies indicate that there is a promising future for the use of lightweight aggregates in SCC as
Tensile splitting strength it shows satisfactory filling ability, passing ability, segregation resistance and compressive strength.
Research gaps recommendations are then identified through this review to further discover lightweight
self-compacting concrete in several aspects, particularly in term of sustainability.
Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 764
1.1. Concrete sustainability problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 764
1.2. Lightweight self-compacting concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 764
1.3. Application of lightweight self-compacting concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 764
1.4. Type of lightweight aggregates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765
1.5. Problems in lightweight self-compacting concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765
1.6. Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765
2. Lightweight aggregates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765
2.1. Specific gravity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765
2.2. Size distribution of LWA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765
2.3. Shape thickness and texture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 766
2.4. Bulk density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 767
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (T.Z.H. Ting).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.12.128
0950-0618/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
764 T.Z.H. Ting et al. / Construction and Building Materials 201 (2019) 763–777
2.5. Water absorption. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 767

2.6. Remark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 767
3. Mix design of LWSCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 768
3.1. Shi and Wu method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 768
3.2. Hwang and Hung method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 768
3.3. Kaffetzekis and Papanicolaou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 769
3.4. Kanadasan and Razak method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 770
3.5. Li et al. method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771
3.6. Nepomuceno et al. method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771
3.7. Remark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771
4. Fresh properties of LWSCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 772
4.1. LWSCC workability criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 772
4.2. Review of previous research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 772
4.3. Remark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773
5. Hardened properties of LWSCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773
5.1. Compressive strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773
5.2. Flexural strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 774
5.3. Tensile strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775
5.4. Modulus of elasticity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775
5.5 Remark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775
6. Prospective and Future challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775
7. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776
Conflict of interest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776
Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776
1. Introduction materials in concrete due to growing of sustainability conscious-

ness [8,9].
1.1. Concrete sustainability problem
1.2. Lightweight self-compacting concrete
Concrete is a very common construction material which has
been widely used throughout the world due to its versatility, avail-
With the advancement of concrete technology, several attempts
ability and economy [1]. According to Samson et al. [2], concrete is
have been made in developing new high performance materials
considered as the most heavily consumed construction materials
that possess the benefits and characteristics of SCC and LWC in
in the world due to its low cost. The more recent statistics shows
the past decades. An innovative concrete, lightweight self-
that there is more than 26.8 billion tonnes of normal concrete
compacting concrete (LWSCC), which possesses the properties of
being produced globally per year [3]. This huge production has
both LWC and SCC has been developed. LWSCC is produced by
caused the construction sector to face the issue of gradual exhaus-
the replacement of NWA with LWA in SCC. According to ACI 213
tion of natural resources as well as the difficulty in accessing them.
[10], the density of structural lightweight concrete must falls
In the aspect of the environmental impact of the concrete produc-
within the range of 1120 kg=m3 to 1920 kg=m3 . Aggregates con-
tion, study shows that it can be reduced through the use of alter-
tribute to the most of the weight of concrete and commonly consti-
native materials [4]. The more common practice is the partial
tute about 60% by volume of SCC [11]. As such, due to the porous
replacement of cement and aggregates alternatives.
structure of LWA, it is able to reduce the density as well as the
Also for the reason of the high demand of concrete in construc-
thermal conductivity of concrete. The use of LWSCC brings about
tion industry, a large amount of normal weight aggregates (NWA)
several benefits such as reduced self-weight, shorter construction
is consumed which has resulted in gradual depletion of natural
period, lower construction cost and elimination of noise emitted
gravel and crushed rock. The situation warrants the urgency to
from vibration machines as well as better heat and sound insula-
intensify the research and development of more sustainable con-
tion due to the voids in LWA [12,13,14]. Since the present con-
struction materials. As such, great opportunity exists to incorpo-
struction industry is experiencing the shortage of skilled workers
rate construction and demolition wastes into concrete mix as
as well as the difficulty in hiring new generation of skilled workers
aggregates in order to improve its resource productivity [4].
[15], LWSCC which is less labour intensive, can be a timely solution
Research has been carried out for utilizing recycled aggregate from
to these shortcomings. In addition, LWSCC, which is very suitable
demolition waste [5,6,7]. The recycle process involves stock piling,
for manufacturing precast units, can be used to promote mechani-
crushing, pre-sizing, sorting, screening and contaminant elimina-
sation or even automation processes in construction industry. The
tion. However, processing of recycled aggregates requires large
assembly of precast building components units on site has made
amount of energy and cause higher carbon dioxide emission. Alter-
the construction methods more straightforward.
natively, other materials such as lightweight aggregates (LWA),
either arising naturally or being generated as by-product from
industrial processing, can be used to replace NWA in the concrete 1.3. Application of lightweight self-compacting concrete
production. This leads to the production of lightweight concrete
(LWC). LWC is commonly produced by replacing the normal LWSCC has been employed as alternative construction materi-
weight aggregates with LWA. Extensive research has been carried als in structural construction such as cable stayed bridge construc-
out to utilize the waste generated as alternative construction tion since 1992 in Japan [16]. Dymond [17] had designed and
T.Z.H. Ting et al. / Construction and Building Materials 201 (2019) 763–777 765
constructed a 20 m pre-stressed beam by using LWSCC while Lah- 2. Lightweight aggregates

kega and Stenah [18] studied the possibility of utilizing LWSCC in
full scale wall. Also, Shi and Yang [19] had utilized LWSCC in the Extensive research has been carried out by many researchers in
application of thin precast C-shaped wall. Hubertova and Hela utilizing lightweight aggregates (LWA) in SCC. Hwang and Hung
[20] made use of LWSCC in the construction of stadium walkway [28] utilized reservoir fine sediment as coarse aggregates in SCC
structural elements. Lately, the use of LWSCC has become popular while Bogas et al. [29] and Hubertová and Hela [30] studied the
in construction and research field. possibility of expanded clay as coarse aggregates. Pumice has been
used as lightweight coarse aggregates and studied by several
1.4. Type of lightweight aggregates researchers under different temperature and mix proportioning
(Özge [31,32,13],Tayfun [33]. Also, Shi and Wu [34] and Lo et al.
Lightweight aggregates can generally be categorized into natu- [35] have utilized expanded shale as LWA for SCC. Moreover, Kana-
ral and artificial types. The common natural LWA are pumice, dia- dasan and Razak [36] used agriculture waste, palm oil clinker, as
tomite, volcanic cinders, scoria and tuff [21,22]. As for the artificial aggregates in SCC. The physical properties of the selected light-
LWA, it can be further categorized into industrial wastes and pro- weight aggregates including pumice, expanded shale and
cessed natural materials [9]. Sintered slate, sintered pulverized fuel expanded clay will be discussed in the following part of the paper.
ash, expanded or foamed blast furnace slag and colliery wastes are The fresh and hardened state properties of LWSCC are highly
more common industrial wastes used as LWAs. In addition, there dependent on the physical properties of LWA used. In this connec-
are also processed natural materials such as shale, expanded clay, tion, specific gravity, size distribution, shape thickness and texture,
slate, vermiculite and perlite which can be used as LWA in manu- bulk density and water absorption characteristic of lightweight
facturing concrete [23]. Numerous researches have been concen- aggregates will be elaborated.
trated on utilizing artificial LWA in developing LWSCC.
2.1. Specific gravity
1.5. Problems in lightweight self-compacting concrete
Specific gravity is defined as the ratio of the material mass to
There are several common issues in developing mix design of the mass of an equal volume of water at the temperature of
LWSCC. As LWA is porous materials and generally irregular in 23 °C. Based on the research done by several researchers, all the
shape, its workability is poor and compressive strength is relatively three types of lightweight aggregate (LWA) have different values
low when compared to gravels. As such, a large amount of cement of specific gravity which are not more than specific gravity of nor-
paste is required for LWSCC to achieve desired workability and tar- mal weight aggregates of 2.4–2.9. The specific gravity values of all
geted compressive strength. Due to the porous structure of LWA, it these three types of aggregate falls within the range of 0.42–1.84 as
has high water absorption capacity which tends to absorb the shown in Table 1.
water during batching, resulting in poor workability. The high The specific gravity for pumice aggregates is within the range of
water absorption of LWA makes it difficult to estimate the required 0.69–1.84. Özge Andiç-Çakır and Hızal [31] reported the lowest
water volume for batching. The common practice to overcome this specific gravity of pumice aggregates is 0.69 while Topçu and
issue is to allow LWA to achieve saturated surface dry (SSD) condi- Uygunoğlu [11] reported the highest specific gravity of 1.84. For
tion before batching [24]. However, care must be taken since dif- expanded shale aggregates, the specific gravity values are in the
ferent type of LWA has different water absorption rate. Excessive range of 1.33–1.35, which are considerably consistent. Expanded
water can increase the risk of bleeding and segregation [25,26]. clay aggregates have the specific gravity of 0.42–1.78.Gopi et al.
Moreover, the densities of lightweight aggregates are generally [37] found the lowest specific gravity of 0.42 of expended clay
lower than those of the mortar matrix and natural aggregates in aggregates while Shanker [38] found the highest of 1.75. This
concrete [11]. Therefore, the difference in density between LWA inconsistency of specific gravity may be due to the situation
and normal weight sand can alter the fresh properties of LWSCC whereby the aggregates are supplied from different sources as well
mixture. The resulting poor self-compaction and segregation of as the different ways they are processed in the industry. By com-
aggregates can severely affect the durability and structural perfor- paring the LWA and NWA (shown in Table 1), the specific gravity
mance of concrete in hardened state [26,27]. Thus, the use of LWA of LWA is 10% to 80% less than that of NWA. Aggregate specific
in SCC is still regarded as new development in concrete technology gravity is important in the calculation of weight-to-volume rela-
and further investigation and study are required. In addition, no tionships and to compute various volume-related quantities such
code of practice or guideline has been published for developing as voids presented in aggregate, and that the voids that must be
mix design of LWSCC. filled by cementitious materials. It affects the resulting workability
and final density of designed LWSCC.
1.6. Objective
2.2. Size distribution of LWA
As LWSCC brings about advantages in many aspects, research to
understand the complicated nature of LWSCC is gaining popularity. Lightweight aggregates (LWA) generally occur in different par-
Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to review the light- ticle shape and size. Sieve analysis or gradation test is a common
weight aggregates (LWA) that have been used in developing light- method for determining the particle size distribution. The particle
weight self-compacting concrete. Identification of the physical size distribution of LWA is crucial in engineering application as it
properties as well as comparisons of LWA are conducted. In addi- can be used to verify the compliance of design requirement, pro-
tion, the effect of using LWA in SCC mixture on fresh and hardened duction control and specifications. Typical particle size distribution
concrete properties will be discussed. The methodology to develop curves of pumice, expanded shale and expanded clay are shown in
LWSCC mix design is reviewed too. In summary, the LWSCC prop- Fig. 1 [39,11]. It is noted that pumice aggregates possess better par-
erties and mix design can be improved significantly upon the ticle distribution curve than expanded shale and expanded clay
review of the currently available literature. aggregates. The use of well graded aggregates in SCC will minimize
Table 1
Physical properties of lightweight aggregates (LWA).
Pumice aggregates
Researchers Size of aggregates Specific Loose bulk Compacted bulk 24 h water absorption
(mm) gravity densityðkg=m3 Þ densityðkg=m3 Þ (%)
Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou 8–16 – 570 1034 –

[52]
Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou 8–16 – – – 25
[32]
Özge Andiç-Çakır and Hızal [31] 4–16 0.69–1.74 330–1010 350–1105 8.25–45.62
Topçu and Uygunoğlu [11] 4–16 1.84 – 739 28.75
Kurt, Kotan, et al. [75] 16 0.92 – – –
Kurt et al. [68] 16 0.92 – – –
T. Uygunoğlu and Topçu [76] 16 1.84 – 739 28.75
Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou 4–16 – 580 1050 25
[52]
Anwar et al. [77] 19 1.13 – – 84.57
ö Andiç-çakır et al. [78] 4–8 – 440 480 25
8–16
Kurt, Gül, et al. [79] 16 0.92 – – –
Expanded shale aggregates
Lotfy et al. (2015b) 4.75–12 1.33 862 – 14
Lachemi et al. [80] 10 1.35 754.6 – 5.4
Lo et al. [35] 10 – 1490 – 4 (1 h)
(Lotfy et al., 2015a) 10 1.33 862 – 14
Wu et al. [81] 20 – – – 4
Shi and Wu [34] – – – – –
Karahan et al. [82] 12 – – – –
Lotfy et al. [39] 4.75–10 1.33 862 – 14
Expanded clay aggregates (LECA)
Lotfy et al. [39] 4.75–10 1.21 621.5 – 16.2
Gopi et al. [37] – 0.42 442 – 39
Abdelaziz [83] 15 1.08 667 – 20.07
Kwasny et al. [27] 4–8 – 1280 – 15
Grabois et al. [12] 12.5 – 956 – 13.95
Floyd et al. [67] 12.5 1.25 – – 15
Juradin et al. [26] 1–8 – – – –
Lotfy et al. [84] 12 1.21 621.5 – 16.2
Cui et al. [85] 5–10 – 670 1175 9.2 (1 h)
Lotfy et al. (2015a) 10 1.21 621.5 16.2
Maghsoudi et al. [86] 4.75–9.5 – – – 18.02
Rajamanickam and Vaiyapuri 12 0.42 – – 38
[87]
Bogas et al. [29] 12.5 – 613 1068 12.3
Mohammadi et al. [65] – 0.45 300 – 40
Corinaldesi and Moriconi [66] 15 1.15 – – 15
Shanker [38] 12 1.78 – 1112 40
the voids which leads to optimum workability and strength. As 2.3. Shape thickness and texture
such, selection of appropriate size distribution of aggregates is
important in designing LWSCC mix design. According to Tviksta [40], the performance of SCC is very sensi-
tive to the characteristics of aggregates. These characteristics
include shape, texture, maximum size, grading and morphology.
100 The shape and size of coarse aggregates have significant influence
90 on the particle packing and aggregate interlocking within the
80 matrix. They are the factors in determining the amount of paste
70 volume to cover all particles. LWAs commonly exist in angular
Passing (%)
60 and flaky shape. Khaleel et al. [41] had studied the effect of maxi-
50 mum aggregate size on flowability of SCC. The authors found that
40 the flowability of SCC decreased with the increase of coarse aggre-
30 gate size. The authors also recommended the use of coarse aggre-
20 gates with maximum 10 mm size as it can produce higher strength
10 SCC than that produced by using coarse aggregates of maximum
0
20 mm size. From the review of LWA of several researchers as sum-
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
marized in Table 1, most of the maximum size of coarse LWA used
Sieve size (mm) in LWSCC is either 12.5 mm or 16 mm. This is to promote a good
Expanded Clay Expanded Shale Pumice interlocking effect between them to enhance the packing charac-
teristics and flowability of SCC which will guarantee the strength
Fig. 1. Particle size distribution of LWA [39],11. of concrete [36] (see Fig. 2).
Fig. 2. Lightweight aggregates: a) Expanded clay, b) Expanded shale, c) Pumice [39].
2.4. Bulk density aggregates is less sensitive to poor curing as the strength may vary
only 6–11%. This is due to the fact that the water present in aggre-
Bulk density of aggregates measures the volume of their solid gate pores is capable of providing internal curing. The sensitivity
aggregate particles as well as the voids between them that they can be reduced when lower water/binder ratio is used. The water
occupy in the concrete. The bulk density is used in the volume present in aggregates is able to reduce plastic shrinkage due to
method of concrete mix proportioning. Many researchers did not unfavourable drying condition and provide internal curing which
provide the compacted bulk density of the LWA aggregates used. allows for more complete hydration of cement [46].
As shown in Table 1, the loose bulk density of LWA from different
sources generally shows variation. The bulk density of expanded
2.6. Remark
clay, expanded shale and pumice aggregates is in the range of
300–1280kg=m3 , 750–1500kg=m3 and 330–1010kg=m3 respec- The mix proportion of LWSCC and its corresponding perfor-
tively. Ahmad et al. [42] stated that aggregates with density within mance in terms of both fresh and hardened states are greatly
the range 700–1400kg=m3 are preferable for structural application. dependent on the physical properties of LWA incorporated. Con-
By comparison, the bulk densities of all these three LWA are 10– cerning the characteristics of LWA such as specific gravity, size gra-
80% lesser than normal weight aggregates. The lightweight charac- dation, shape, texture, and water absorption capacity, they can
teristic of LWA is generally due to its porous characteristics. significantly alter the amount of material used in mix design.
Specific gravity of LWA used can affect the resulting concrete den-
2.5. Water absorption sity. From the review above, it is noted that the specific gravity of
LWA of less than 2.0 is used to produce lightweight concrete in
LWA are generally porous materials which tend to absorb order to produce concrete of density below 1920 kg/m3. Aggregate
water. LWA will absorb and hold more moisture than normal size, gradation and texture can greatly influence the amount of
weight aggregates. As a result, pre-wetting of LWA is required cement paste used to lubricate aggregates in order to achieve
before batching and this practice has been used in manufacturing self-compacting ability as well as to fill in the voids between
lightweight concrete (LWC). Depending on the cellular structure aggregates. Since LWA is generally present as angular and flaky
of LWA, it may also take longer time to achieve saturated surface shape, most of the researchers have limited the maximum coarse
dry (SSD) condition [43]. The 24-hour water absorption of these aggregates size up to 12.5 or 16 mm. This can reduce the
three aggregates is in the range of 5–80%. By comparing these three surface-to-volume ratio in order to minimize the cement used to
LWA, pumice is found to have the highest water absorption capac- achieve better workability and hence lower cost. Moreover, the
ity. LWSCC is sensitive to the water content of LWA as it can alter water absorption of LWA can greatly affect both fresh and hard-
the resulting workability and compressive strength of concrete. ened properties. High water absorption LWA can cause workability
The water/binder ratio of concrete can also be affected by the loss when it is used as dry condition during batching. Saturated
water absorption of LWA [44]. The water absorption capacity of LWA can greatly alter the water to cementitious material ratio
LWA must be specified in order to maintain the consistency of used which will result in poor compressive strength of concrete.
LWSCC. According to Shafigh et al. [45], concrete with porous In the light of considerable influence of water absorption of LWA,
LWA must be pre-wetted and allowed to achieve saturated surface 3.1. Shi and Wu method
dry (SDD) condition in order to prevent either water loss or high
water content before batching. The combination of least void volume for binary aggregate mix-
ture, excess paste theory and ACI 211 [49] has been adopted by Shi
and Wu [34] in proportioning the mix design of LWSCC. The rela-
3. Mix design of LWSCC tionship between void volume or density of combined aggregates
and coarse to fine aggregates volume ratio is determined by using
The mix proportions of LWSCC are crucial in its application as particle packing concept in accordance with ASTM C29/C29M. The
the selected proportions can affect the required properties in fresh least void volume of combined aggregates was found to be 0.5 in
and hardened states. Similar to SCC, LWSCC must attain the desired their study. However, the authors recommended to use coarse to
fresh properties such as filling ability, passing ability and segrega- fine aggregates ratio of 0.6 as it does not increase much void but
tion resistance so as to fulfil the self-compacting requirement. Fill- decrease the density significantly. Excess paste theory is then used
ing ability, which is also known as flow ability, is the capability of to determine the minimum quantity of paste required to fill in the
concrete to flow and fill the formwork completely under its own void among the aggregates, to allow SCC to flow with minimum
weight. Meanwhile, passing ability refers to the capability to flow frictions between aggregates as well as to balance the mixture by
past the confined spaces between steel reinforcement congested the quantity of water retained by the aggregates as illustrated in
area without segregating and clogging within the space of form- Fig. 3. The required volume of excess paste is highly dependent
works. Segregation resistance is the capability to stay homoge- on the characteristics of LWA, such as gradation, shape and surface
neous during the process of transporting, placing and after texture, which can be determined through laboratory tests. The
placing without tendency to bleed and separation of aggregates cement content and water to cement ratio are then determined
from mortar. Similar to any other type of concrete, strength, vol- from ACI 211 [49] based on the designed compressive strength.
ume stability and durability of the hardened LWSCC are important The cement content is fixed at the determined value while excess
in structural applications [47]. The performance of LWSCC is paste is produced from powders including fly ash and glass pow-
greatly influenced by the constituent of raw materials, the dosage der. The workability is then adjusted by varying the SP dosage.
of chemical and mineral admixtures, types of aggregate used, pack- The authors successfully design LWSCC with satisfactory flowabil-
ing density, water to cement ratio (W/C) and design procedures. ity and segregation resistance by using the proposed method.
At the present moment, standardized method for obtaining mix However, the proposed method requires intensive laboratory work
design of SCC does not exist. Many researchers have developed and to obtain the necessary information to proportion mix design.
proposed several design methods for SCC based on scientific theo-
ries and empirical expressions. In the context of SCC, the design
methods can be classified into five categories based on their design 3.2. Hwang and Hung method
principles, which are empirical design method, compressive
strength method, close aggregate packing method, statistical facto- For DMDA, Hwang and Hung [28] developed this method based
rial method and rheology of paste model [48]. However, there is on ACI 318 and the fact that high physical density can produce
limited mix design method has been developed for LWSCC. The optimum physical properties. In DMDA method, the mixture pro-
majority of the available LWSCC mix design methods in literatures portion algorithm is classified into aggregate and paste phase.
are mainly based on close aggregate packing method. Many Aggregate phase comprises lightweight aggregate, normal weight
researchers prefer to develop the mix design of LWSCC by trial fine aggregate and fly ash while cement, slag, water and superplas-
and error method as most of the proposed methods are not suit- ticizer constitute paste phase. Finer particles fill the voids of the
able to be used once the requirement of application is changed. coarse aggregates to minimize the porosity in order to form the
This is commonly done by varying the binder content, binder/ major skeleton of aggregates phase as shown in Fig. 4. This in turn
water ratio, admixture dosage, fine and coarse aggregate ratio. increases the density of solid materials and reduces the content of
The review of LWSCC mix design method will be presented in cement paste as illustrated in Fig. 5. Paste phase is mainly used for
the following section. lubricating aggregates in order to achieve concrete workability.
Fig. 3. Excess Paste Theory [74].

Fig. 4. DMDA method [28].
Fig. 5. Packing density and porosity of concrete mix [28].
This method is suitable for mix proportion design aimed to reduce ratio is used as trial initially. The ratio is then decreased until solid
water and cement content by using the physical packing density of concentration factor is about to decrease. Void ratio versus
aggregate which results in lower permeability of LWSCC. Though, V w =V cm curve will be plotted based on the trials as shown in
this method does not take into account the optimum weight of Fig. 6. Optimum packing and void ratio can be determined from
concrete as long as the optimum properties are obtained. This the curve. The derived mortars from OPP concept must be assessed
may result in high density concrete. The authors recommended for self-compactness through slump-flow and V-funnel test. This
to use high water to binder (w/b) ratio of more than 0.42 to pre- method assumes that the least void volume of mixture corre-
vent autogenous shrinkage of the cement paste due to cement sponds to the optimum flowability in both paste and mortar. For
hydration and pozzolanic reaction. In fact, it is not necessary to concrete phase, the aggregate packing index is first determined
use high w/b ratio when LWA are pre-soaked and achieved satu-
rated surface dry condition (SSD) before casting. The water from
internal pores is able to prevent the autogenous shrinkage. More-
over, in this method, the aggregates packing density can be
enhanced by adding fly ash which fill the voids in LWA. Fly ash
should not be considered as the part of aggregate phase as fly
ash is supplementary cementitious materials.
3.3. Kaffetzekis and Papanicolaou
Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou [32] proposed another LWSCC

mix design method based on optimum packing point (OPP) con-
cept and workability criteria. This method involves the investiga-
tion of paste, mortar and concrete phase of material. Cement
paste and mortar are assessed through wet packing method, which
is used to determine the packing density of cement paste and mor-
tar. This concept involves the determination of total voids and air
voids, as well as the solid concentration factor of a given water
to cementitious materials volumetric ratio (V w =V cm ). High V w =V cm Fig. 6. Total voids versusV w =V cm [32].
from aggregate apparent and particle density. LWSCC is then pro- gradation of aggregate with the use of minimum volume of paste
portioned by modifying the mortar to aggregates void volumetric as shown in Fig. 8. The authors introduced an additional correction
ratio based on the equation derived by Jacobsen and Arntsen lubrication factor (LCF) to particle packing factor (PP) to allow for
[50]. The workability must be assessed using SCC fresh concrete the characteristics of LWA aggregates when aggregates substitu-
test. The authors argue that maximizing packing density should tion is made in LWSCC mix design. The authors highlighted that
be solely used to determine the mix proportion of LWSCC, which the voids produced by flaky and porous structure of POC aggre-
contradicts with the method proposed by Hwang and Hung [28]. gates could be filled and lubricated by the binder paste. The pro-
Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou [51] proposed a semi-automated posed method fixed the fine aggregates ratio at 0.5 and 0.6 to
mix design methodology which was based on the concept of opti- allow wider range of ratios for SCC. The authors studied the cement
mum packing point (OPP) from their previous research and incor- content varied from 380 to 420 kg/m3 and recommended that
porated with statistical analysis. The authors derived a series of 420 kg/m3 could produce the optimum performance SCC. However,
procedures from statistical analysis and previous research works the authors also mentioned that trial has to be carried out to
to proportion the LWSCC mix design based on the target perfor- ensure the required performance. The authors also demonstrated
mance. Three performance parameters, which are 28-day compres- experimentally that the proposed method is able to produce
sive strength (f lcm:cube ), oven-dry density (q) and slump flow (S-F), LWSCC when 100% substitution of LWA is incorporated. PP theory
can be pre-set in the equations from the statistical analysis in order is able to produce LWSCC mix design with minimum void volumes
to determine the required mix proportion. Design parameters relative to the coarse aggregate, water to binder ratio, maximum
including volumetric ratio of LWA (V la ), water to cementitious cementitious materials density as well as the optimum fresh con-
material ratio (W ef =CM) and cementitious material content (CM) crete properties. This theory provides good understanding of the
can be calculated based on the design performances and equations consumption of aggregate and paste volume for a given unit vol-
proposed by Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou [52]. These procedures ume of concrete. The proposed method is also applicable for a vari-
involve specifying the desired performance, calculation of design ety combination of other aggregates. However, the PP factor and
parameters and implementation of OPP procedures as illustrated CLF have to be determined in laboratory if other types of aggre-
in Fig. 7. The authors have validated the design procedure by car- gates and their combinations are used. Besides, the actual perfor-
rying out two LWSCC mix designs and the resulting performance mances of the designed mix must be checked in laboratory.
correlates well with the proposed target. However, this method
is only limited to the use of certain materials such as cement, lime-
stone fillers, silica fume and pumice aggregates. Further laboratory
investigation as stated in previous research [32] has to be carried
out if other materials are used in producing LWSCC.
3.4. Kanadasan and Razak method
Kanadasan and Razak [36] modified the particle packing

method of SCC which was originally proposed by Choi et al. [53]
to allow for the substitution of palm oil clinker (POC) aggregates
in SCC. The substitution can be made on either fine or coarse aggre-
gates at the level of 0% to 100%. It is based on the concept of min-
imizing the void of concrete by using appropriate size and Fig. 8. PP Test Illustration [36].
Fig. 7. Semi-automated LWSCC mix design procedure [52].

3.5. Li et al. method powder content are then determined experimentally in mortar
phase through iterative process until flow capacity and fluidity
Li et al. [54] proposed another LWSCC mix design method based complied to the required rheology. The volume of LWA is then
on the packing and mortar film thickness theory. This method determined by quantifying the ratio between the volume of mortar
determines the sufficient amount of paste to fill the voids between and coarse aggregates and finally the volume of void is defined
aggregates and form a thin layer to overcome the frictions between based on the porosity of LWA. In this method, the effect of low den-
aggregates which is similar to the DMDA proposed by Hwang and sity of LWA was considered by adding extra criteria in mortar rhe-
Hung [28]. The methodology involved two stages, which are the ological study stage. The flow properties in mortar phase must be
optimization of granular skeleton of aggregates and cementitious able to prevent the dynamic and static segregation of LWA. The
material composition. Stage one involves the characterization of authors stated that the dynamic segregation resistance can be eval-
coarse and fine aggregates in terms of bulk density and void vol- uated during workability test while static segregation is evaluated
ume percentage. The authors adopted the method proposed by by visual observation of axially cut cylinders after 24 h of batching.
Shi and Wu [34] to obtain the optimum balance point between The authors noticed that the reference grading curve of NWA is
bulk density or porosity of aggregates and coarse aggregates to applicable to LWA since the LWA used in their research has more
total aggregates ratio (Vg/VTotal). The authors recommended to round and spherical shape compared to NWA. However, the refer-
use coarse to total aggregates ratio of 0.6. The value higher than ence grading curve must be determined in laboratory by using the
0.6 could result in more consumption of paste to fill the void in method proposed by if LWA of different shape index is used.
LWA which could lead to more production cost. A value less than LWSCC can be proportioned based on the required fresh and hard-
0.6 will result in higher density which contradicts the definition ened properties such passing ability, density and compressive
of lightweight concrete. These values are then used to determine strength. The passing ability of designed LWSCC can also be quan-
the optimum coarse to fine aggregates volume ratio with the con- tified by Vm/Vg ratio by using the statistical equation proposed by
sideration of mortar film thickness (MFT). MFT is defined as half Nepomuceno et al. [58] and Nepomuceno et al. [57]. The density of
the average distance between surfaces of coarse aggregate particle. designed mix is highly dependent on Vm/Vg ratio and can be con-
It reflects the dosage and physical properties of coarse aggregates sidered in the equation of this proposed method. The designed
including aggregate grading and stacking porosity. Stage two compressive strength of LWSCC can be quantified by varying W/
involves the optimization of minimum water content required C ratio and Vm/Vg ratio through the statistical equation or design
for binder by using the method proposed by Laboratory Central chart provided. The authors have successfully developed the
des Ponts et Chausses (LCPC). Cement, mineral admixtures water LWSCC mix design with adequate fresh properties and compres-
and filler dosage are then determined based on the minimum sive strength in the range of 35 to 59 MPa by using the proposed
water and the respective material density. The amount of SP methodology. In short, compared to the methodology proposed
dosage needs to be determined through the rheology study of mor- by other researchers, this method is able to proportion the LWSCC
tar in laboratory. Trial batch must be carried out to ensure the mix mix design based on selected passing ability, density and compres-
design can achieve the required performance. The authors high- sive strength requirements.
lighted that the mixing time should not more than 3 min to avoid
segregation. The authors suggested an equation to estimate the dry
density of LWSCC mixture from the proposed design as below: 3.7. Remark
qdry ¼ ms þ mg þ 1:2mcm Although Mazaheripour et al. [59] recommended to apply high

performance concrete mix design method for LWSCC to avoid seg-
where ms is the mass of sand; mg is the mass of coarse aggregates; regation and maintain the strength, the method cannot produce
and mcm is the mass of cementitious materials. From the results of optimum LWSCC mix proportion in terms of fresh and hardened
validation tests, the authors stated that interfacial transition zone properties. The resulting density is not within the upper limit of
(ITZ) between aggregates and paste can be improved and more lightweight concrete in accordance to ASTM. It is clear from the
compacted due to the increase of MFT. The authors have success- research reviewed above that most of the proposed methodologies
fully developed the LWSCC mix design with adequate fresh proper- for proportioning LWSCC mix design are based on close aggregate
ties and compressive strength up to 54 MPa by using the proposed packing principle. Aggregates packing principle is used to deter-
methodology. In short, the proposed method is based on simple mine the least void among the aggregates in order to minimize
design principles and is applicable to other type of LWA. However, the void produced by LWA as well as to determine the optimum
the proposed method is not able to proportion the LWSCC mix coarse to fine aggregates ratio in order to produce the lowest den-
design based on specified workability and compressive strength sity LWSCC. From the literatures above, it is noticed that the coarse
criteria. to fine aggregates ratio used is generally in the range of 0.5 to 0.6
and the ratio of 0.6 is recommended by most of the researchers as
3.6. Nepomuceno et al. method it is the most cost efficient. The paste is then applied to fill the
voids to become LWSCC which can be determined through either
Nepomuceno et al. [55] modified a normal weight SCC mix excess paste theory or rheological study of cement paste or mortar.
design method which was originally proposed by their previous However, intensive laboratory work is required in obtaining the
research [56,57,58] to develop LWSCC mix design. The proposed necessary information. Most of the proposed methodologies is
methodology is based on the rheological study of mortar phase not able to proportion the LWSCC mix design based on required
and combination of it with coarse aggregates in concrete phase. performance such as specified workability and compressive
This methodology involves the characterization of constituent strength criteria. Furthermore, durability requirements such as
materials, determination of volumetric ratio of both fine aggre- shrinkage, creep, physical durability and chemical durability are
gates and coarse aggregates from reference grading curve which not considered in proposed mix design methodology by research-
was originally proposed by Nepomuceno et al. [58], and powder ers. As such, further statistical data analysis is required in order
material to total volume of respective content. Volume ratio of to simplify and produce performance based LWSCC mix design
water to power content and mass ratio of superplasticizer to methodology.
4. Fresh properties of LWSCC Lotfy et al. [63] performed a series of experimental investigation
on the parameters that affect the workability of LWSCC. They stud-
4.1. LWSCC workability criteria ied the effect of water to binder ratio (w/b), superplasticizer dosage
and total binder content on the workability of LWSCC. Expanded
As previously stated, LWSCC must be assessed for filling ability, shale was used as aggregates in LWSCC. From their research out-
passing ability and segregation resistance and they are used to mea- come, the filling ability and passing ability of LWSCC were found
sure the workability of LWSCC. There are several methods for to be improved significantly with the increasing of w/b ratio and
assessing each of these properties. Several publications such as superplasticizer dosage respectively as well as the combination
EFNARC [60] and ACI-237 [61] provide the guidelines to carry out of these two parameters. The improved parameters are indicated
workability test for SCC. The methods to assess the filling ability by the increasing spread of slump flow, reduction of v-funnel flow
are slump flow, T500 ;Kajama box, v-funnel, o-funnel and orimet. time and increasing of L-box ratio. However, with the fixed amount
Assessing the filling ability is the most fundamental test for any of superplasticizer, there is a limit to the improvement of the filling
type of SCC as it can be used to assess the consistency of SCC to meet ability of LWSCC by increasing the content of binder. The increase
the guideline requirements. The test for assessing passing ability in binder content resulted in higher demand of superplasticizer so
are L-box, U-box, J-ring and Kajama box. These tests adopt the con- as to maintain similar filling ability. Similarly, the increase in water
cepts of allowing SCC to pass through a pre-set spacing. This spac- and superplasticizer dosage was found to be able to improve the
ing is the smallest gap whereby SCC can flow continuously to fill the passing ability. However, the increase in binder content would
formwork. Also, segregation resistance can be assessed through affect the passing ability negatively. In contrast, segregation resis-
penetration, sieve segregation, settlement column and visual segre- tance was found to be improved with the increase of binder con-
gation. SCC is mostly prone to segregation during and after placing. tent as it can enhance the packing density of LWSCC mixture.
Segregation is a crucial problem in the casting of vertically tall Nonetheless, poor segregation resistance was resulted as water
structural element as it can lead to the uneven distribution of and superplasticizer dosage increased. They agreed with the
aggregates and mortar in LWSCC. The workability performance research findings of Sonebi et al. [64] that the fresh properties of
requirements of EFNARC [60] for SCC are shown in Table 2. Accord- SCC are significantly affected by water and superplasticizer dosage.
ing to EFNARC [60], these criteria are developed based on the cur- LWSCC exhibit similar behaviour as the normal SCC when influ-
rent knowledge and research. SCC with fresh properties outside enced by water and superplasticizer dosage. In general, the perfor-
these criteria may be acceptable if it is able to perform properly mance of LWSCC workability with respect to filling ability, passing
under the required conditions. Future developments will likely pro- ability and segregation resistance is greatly influenced by water to
duce different requirements for these criteria. For example, these binder ratio, superplasticizer dosage and total binder content.
criteria may be relaxed if the formwork design is very simple or Grabois et al. [12] investigated the effect of steel fibers on the
the spacing between the reinforcement is large. fresh and hardened properties of LWSCC. Expanded clay was used
as aggregates in their research. The addition of steel fibers in
4.2. Review of previous research LWSCC was able to slightly increase the slump flow spread. It is
because steel fibers, which have higher density, provide more
In the past decade, substantial study has been done on the fresh self-weight for SCC to flow under gravity. However, the V-funnel
and hardened properties of LWSCC. Lotfy et al. [62] had studied flow time decreased with the addition of steel fibers due to the
LWSCC with different type of LWA including furnace slag, blockage of steel fibers inside the V-funnel restricted area. They
expanded clay and expanded shale. The authors found that LWSCC demonstrated that the LWSCC with poor flow time were able to
with expanded shale as LWA achieved the best workability with be used for casting the ‘‘U”-shape thin wall panel. The aggregates
respect to filling ability, passing ability and segregation resistance and fibers were found to be homogenously distributed along the
among the three aggregates. Lotfy et al. [62] explained that the fine panel length. The findings in their study provided a new under-
portion of expanded shale aggregates is finer than the other two standing that LWSCC is able to fill the narrow formwork even with
LWA which results in better packing density and less void between the flow time outside the SCC workability requirement as stated in
the aggregates particle, allowing the excess paste in LWSCC to Table 2.
achieve better flowability and segregation resistance. The excess On the other hand, Mohammadi et al. [65] examined the effect
paste required for improving workability highly depends on the of silica fume with 0% to 15% of binder replacement on the proper-
gradation, shape and surface texture of aggregates. They agreed ties of LWSCC workability with expanded clay and perlite as aggre-
the research outcome of Shi and Wu [34]. In short, the workability gates. The flowability and segregation resistance of LWSCC were
of LWSCC is highly dependent on the aggregates packing density found to be improved with the replacement as well as the
and void volume. increased dosage of silica fume. They also concluded that LWSCC
Table 2
SCC workability criteria of EFNARC [60] guidelines.
Workability Test Class Criteria

Filling ability Slump Flow (mm) SF1 550–650
SF2 660–750
SF3 760–850
T500 (s) VS1/VF1 2V Funnel 8
VS2/VF2 2timeðsÞ9 25
Passing ability Step height in J-ring (mm) PA1 Sj 15ð59 mm bar spacingÞ
PA2 Sj 15ð40 mm bar spacingÞ
L-Box 0.8–0.1
U-Box 0–30
Segregation Resistance Sieve segregation (%) SR1 20
SR2 15
with expanded clay as aggregates achieved better workability resistance. As such, the ratio of low adhesive powder content is
compared to LWSCC with perlite as aggregates. crucial in developing LWSCC to prevent bleeding.
Corinaldesi and Moriconi [66] studied the effect of the addition Ardalan et al. [70] investigated the effect of fly ash, pumice and
of synthetic fibers in LWSCC with expanded clay as aggregates and slag as binder partial replacement in LWSCC on retention workabil-
recycled concrete aggregate as partial replacement. It was noticed ity after 50 min. The authors stated that pumice blend require
that the incorporation of fibers is able to improve the filling ability more superplasticizer dosage to achieve target slump flow among
while it had negative effect on the passing ability. Silica fume was the three types of supplementary cementitious materials. Con-
also studied. They observed that addition of small amount of silica versely, fly ash blend requires lesser dosage of SP in order to
fume can result in higher viscosity. Poor flow ability and passing achieve target slump flow. It was explained that the spherical
ability were observed but the segregation resistance was geometry of fly ash particles is able to reduce the fraction resis-
improved. Similar observation was obtained with addition of silica tance of cement particles and enhancement of the mixture fluidity.
fume in LWSCC with synthetic fibers. However, the findings of Among the three types of blend mixture, fly ash blended LWSCC
Corinaldesi and Moriconi [66] had contradicted the findings showed significant slump flow loss after 50 min while pumice
obtained by Mohammadi et al. [65]. blended LWSCC showed the best retention capacity.
A comprehensive study of LWSCC was done by Floyd et al. [67] Law et al. [71] studied the LWSCC incorporated with perlite,
on the effect of cementitious material and aggregate type on the scoria and polystyrene (BTS) as lightweight aggregates. LWSCC
workability of LWSCC. Two types of aggregates, which are with BTS are highly prone to segregation due to their ultra-
expanded clay and expanded shale, were studied by them. They lightweight characteristic. This can be overcome by using higher
found that better visual stability of LWSCC was achieved by binder content which could provide sufficient plastic viscosity to
increasing the cement content. Similar to finding of other research- suspend the aggregates in concrete. The passing ability of LWSCC
ers, the increase in superplasticizer dosage could result in with scoria aggregates decreased with increasing scoria aggregates
improved filling and flowing ability. With the constant amount of replacement. The authors recommended to improve the passing
SP dosage and w/b ratio, the increase of volumetric sand to total ability by increasing the binder content. The author concluded that
aggregate ratio was found to be able to produce better fresh prop- the use of lightweight aggregates at high level replacement to pro-
erties with optimum ratio of 0.51. Also, no significant improve- duce LWSCC could result in adverse effect on workability. Mean-
ment in fresh properties was noted by incorporation of silica while, Aslani et al. [72] studied the effect of partial replacement
fume with 5% and 10% in LWSCC with lower cement content. For of scoria and recycled aggregates in LWSCC. Their mix designs
LWSCC with high cement content, the fresh properties tend to be are similar to that of Law et al. [71]. The authors reported that
improved with only 5% or 10% incorporation. Poorer fresh proper- although recycled aggregates contribute negative influence on
ties were achieved by LWSCC with Type I cement compared to workability of LWSCC, the combination of recycled aggregates
Type III cement. The fresh properties of LWSCC with Type III and scoria aggregates are still able to produce LWSCC that fulfill
cement can be improved by partially replacing binder with fly the criteria of EFNARC [60].
ash as shown in their study. Floyd et al. [67] stated that LWSCC
with expanded shale exhibited better fresh properties compared
4.3. Remark
to expanded clay with the same amount of other mixture content
which agreed with the findings of Lotfy et al. [62]. Also, the authors
The studies presented so far provide evidence that the worka-
changed the coarse aggregates distribution in their study by limit-
bility of LWSCC is highly dependent on the aggregates packing
ing the maximum aggregate size to 12.5 mm. This resulted in bet-
density and void volume. In general, similar to normal SCC, the per-
ter fresh properties. In short, the fresh properties of LWSCC are
formance of LWSCC workability with respect to filling ability, pass-
highly dependent on binder content, SP dosage, type of aggregates
ing ability and segregation resistance is greatly influenced by
used and volumetric sand to total aggregate ratio.
water to binder ratio, superplasticizer dosage and total binder con-
Kurt et al. [68] investigated the effect of fly ash, different water
tent. The inclusion of different types of supplementary materials
to binder ratio and replacement of pumice aggregates with natural
has different effects on LWSCC workability. When silica fume is
aggregates on LWSCC. The filling ability was found to be improved
used, and with increasing replacement level, the segregation resis-
with the increasing of water to binder ratio as well as fly ash
tance of LWSCC is found to be improved while it has negative effect
replacement. Due to the low pozzolanic activities of fly ash, its
on filling and passing ability. The inclusion of fly ash as binary or
increase could retard the bonding of water to mixture and hence
ternary blend can not only improve all the three fresh properties
the loss of workability. However, segregation was observed in their
but also reduce the amount of SP required. In addition, the incorpo-
research when water to binder ratio exceeded the optimum value.
ration of fibers such as steel and synthetic fibers is able to improve
Also, the spreading capability of slump flow was found to be
the filling ability but it causes negative effect on passing ability.
increased with the density increase of LWSCC as the spread and
placement properties of LWSCC were highly dependent on its
own weight. With the increase of pumice aggregates in LWSCC, 5. Hardened properties of LWSCC
the time required to spread 50 cm diameter also increased as well
as the V-funnel flow time. This can be explained by the loss of 5.1. Compressive strength
weight with the replacement of LWA in LWSCC resulted in self-
weight to be less than threshold stress. Since the self-weight was The most important required property of any innovative mate-
below the threshold stress, the authors implied that it could rial is its compressive strength. The compressive strength of con-
increase the tendency of static segregation. crete has great influence on its structural performance. As
Bozkurta and Tasßkin [69] studied the effect of the use of barite, mentioned previously, the compressive strength of LWSCC is sig-
fly ash and pumice as powder on the LWSCC fresh properties. The nificantly affected by the composition of raw materials, the dosage
authors observed that LWSCC with barite powders are the best of chemical and mineral admixtures, types of aggregate used, pack-
among three types of powder in improving the fresh properties ing density and water to binder ratio (W/B).
in terms of flowability and filling ability. However, the authors Substantial research has been done on the compressive strength
reported that the use of barite as power content in LWSCC could of LWSCC with different parameters. Corinaldesi and Moriconi [66]
cause bleeding due to its poor adhesiveness and viscosity studied the effect of addition of synthetic fibers in LWSCC with
expanded clay as aggregates and recycled concrete aggregate as be known if the silica fume replacement is more than 20%. The
partial replacement. In their research, low density LWSCC optimum replacement percentage is also not known.
(1250 kg/m3) with concrete strength of grade 40 at 28-day age Kurt et al. [68] conducted a series of experimental test to inves-
could be achieved by the addition of silica fume which could tigate the effect of fly ash, different water to binder ratio and
enhance the concrete strength development. According to the replacement of pumice aggregates with natural aggregates on
authors, the addition of macrofibers did not compromise the LWSCC. With the increasing percentage of pumice aggregates
degree of concrete compaction of which even could result in more replacement, the compressive strength of LWSCC decreased signif-
viscous concrete. However, the compression strength was found to icantly. This concurred with the findings of Floyd et al. [67] and
be 10% higher than LWSCC without fibers. Similar trends of LWSCC Grabois et al. [12] that the LWA are generally weaker than mortar
compression strength were obtained by using steel fibers or syn- even though the LWA used by both authors are different. Also, Kurt
thetic fibers at high dosage. The addition of fibres such as steel, et al. [68] found the compressive strength decreased with higher
synthetic and macro fibers will increase the compressive strength water content which is generally true. LWSCC with fly ash replace-
of LWSCC. ment gain strength at the slower rate than that those without fly
Lotfy et al. [62] conducted a series of study on the hardened ash replacement at the early stage (e.g. 7 days). Nevertheless, they
properties of LWSCC by using different type of LWA such as furnace achieved almost similar strength at later age (e.g. 90 days). The
slag, expanded clay and expanded shale. The volume ratio of coarse authors attributed the findings to low pozzolanic activity of fly
to fine aggregate of all the mixtures were determined by particle ash at the early stage when its content increased. The replacement
packing procedures in accordance with ASTM C29/C29M. They of fly ash in LWSCC could significantly improve the fresh concrete
had found that LWSCC with expanded shale as LWA achieved the properties but require longer time to gain strength.
highest strength and expanded clay attained the lowest among A comprehensive study was done by Floyd et al. [67] to investi-
the three types of LWA. The authors explained that these were gate the effect of cementitious material and aggregates type on the
attributed to the lower volume of coarse LWA for LWSCC with properties of LWSCC. The LWSCC with expanded clay were found
expanded shale. Expanded shale aggregates achieved superior to fail around the aggregate particle while LWSCC with expanded
packing density which reduce the coarse portion required and shale failed with the fracture of individual particles. The authors
enable more fine particles to fill up the voids in the concrete explained that the smooth surface of expanded shale aggregates
matrix. Lotfy et al. [62] suggested that higher strength LWSCC had caused poor bonding between the aggregates and cement mor-
can be proportioned with relatively low dry density, high aggre- tar. From the failure mode of LWSCC with expanded clay, Floyd
gate packing density and low coarse to total aggregates volume et al. [67] concluded that the compressive strength of LWSCC is
ratio. The authors also noticed that aggregates are the weak point greatly influenced by the strength of LWA. The authors also found
of the concrete matrix in LWSCC as all the failed samples exhibited that water to binder ratio has less significant effect on compressive
aggregate fracture. It is also proven by the studies of Nepomuceno strength of LWSCC designed with high cement content in their par-
et al. [55]. The authors reported that LWSCC attained lower com- ticular research. The authors also observed that it was difficult to
pressive strength when compared to normal SCC with the same estimate the moisture content of wet LWA before concrete casting.
mix proportion. LWSCC achieved compressive strength between The moisture content can cause significant variation in compres-
35 and 57 MPa while SCC achieved 53–87 MPa. As pointed out by sive strength of LWSCC with the given amount of cement content
these researchers, under compressive force, LWSCC fail with the and w/b ratio.
rapture of LWA as they form the weak link in the concrete matrix. Ardalan et al. [70] studied the compressive strength of LWSCC
Lotfy et al. [63] performed a series of experimental investigation with different types of supplementary cementitious material
on the parameters that affect the hardened properties of LWSCC. including fly ash, slag, pumice and silica fume in binary and ternary
The w/b ratio and total binder content were found to be the main blend. The authors stated that the use of fly ash and pumice at high
parameters affecting the LWSCC compressive strength. The LWSCC level replacement could result in significant strength reduction.
strength increased with the decreasing of w/b ratio. The 28-day However, slag with high level replacement showed comparable
compressive strength also increased with the increase of total bin- strength to control mix. Ternary blend of cement, pumice and silica
der content. The amount of superplasticizer dosage was found to fume resulted in increased compressive strength when compared
have no effect on the LWSCC strength. These findings conformed to control mix. The author also noticed that increasing of silica
to the basic knowledge of concrete property. fume content could significantly improve the compressive strength
Grabois et al. [12] observed that their LWSCC mix design was at 28 days.
able to achieve 70% of the 28-day strength in a day. Their mix Law et al. [71] studied the compressive strength of LWSCC
design is suitable for high early strength applications. Also, the incorporated with perlite, scoria and polystyrene (BTS) as light-
incorporation of steel fibers in LWSCC could result in lower com- weight aggregates. Increase in LWA content in LWSCC could result
pressive strength. For failure mode, they noticed that the rupture in decrease in compressive strength. Among the three types of
was occurred through the LWA and yet the interfacial transition LWA, scoria based LWSCC showed less significantly strength
zone was still intact. The authors explained that the mortar was reduction when the LWA content was increased. The authors
stronger than LWA in lightweight concrete which was in confor- reported that the use of BTS in LWSCC could result in weak bond
mity with the findings of Lotfy et al. [62] The use of expanded clay between the binder paste and the aggregates, thereby creating a
aggregates could result in better paste-porous LWA bonding. weak interfacial transition zone and hence reduction in compres-
Mohammadi et al. [65] studied the effect of silica fume on sive strength. Perlite based LWSCC showed most significant
LWSCC containing perlite and expanded clay as LWA. They strength loss when the LWA content was increased. The authors
observed that the LWSCC containing expanded clay as LWA explained the excess pore water in the perlite was released due
achieved higher compressive strength compared to perlite as to crushing during mixing.
LWA. However, the compressive strength differences decreased
when the increase of silica fume replacement. The replacement 5.2. Flexural strength
of silica fume in LWSCC would increase LWSCC compressive
strength. Nevertheless, Mohammadi et al. [65] only studied the sil- Flexural strength is one of the parameters measuring the tensile
ica fume replacement up to 20% of total binder. The result is yet to strength of concrete. No significant improvement on the flexural
strength of LWSCC with the addition of synthetic fibers was Also, the authors observed that the addition of steel fibers would
noticed in the works of Corinaldesi and Moriconi [66]. In the decrease the Young’s modulus of LWSCC. Floyd et al. [67] com-
research done by Lotfy et al. [62], the flexural strength of LWSCC pared the experimental Young’s modulus to the calculated values
with three different types of LWA were found to be 9.8%-10.5% of by using ACI equations. The difference between experimental and
the compressive strength. LWSCC with furnance slag as aggregates calculated values was within 10% and Young’s modulus was
was able to achieve the highest flexural strength among the three over-predicted by ACI equation for high strength LWSCC. The
types of aggregates while LWSCC with expanded clay as aggregates Young’s modulus showed similar values for LWSCC made of
achieved the lowest. The authors mentioned that quality, size, and expanded clay and expanded shale which indicated that these
volume of coarse aggregate would affect the flexural strength of two types of aggregates having similar stiffness. In brief, the use
LWSCC. The authors developed the mathematical correlation of LWA in SCC leads to lower value of elastic modulus. This may
expression of LWSCC flexural strength to compressive strength be due to the weakness of the porous nature of common LWA.
which is quite similar to normal SCC. This is shown as Equation (1).
;0:8482 5.5 Remark
f f ¼ 0:1702f c ð1Þ
Grabois et al. [12] stated the incorporation of steel fibers in In contrary to normal SCC, the compressive strength of LWSCC
LWSCC did not significantly improve the flexural strength. In short, is mainly governed by the homogeneity of the batched concrete.
there is limited research for flexural strength of LWSCC since it is The uniformity and homogeneity of LWSCC are governed by the
not the main interest of the research and its application is not well mixing time and procedure. As highlighted by Li et al. [54], mixing
established. time should not be longer than 3 min in order to avoid segregation.
Longer mixing time can cause LWA to segregate and float at the top
5.3. Tensile strength part of specimen. Consequently, the hardened specimen has unbal-
anced aggregates distribution with more aggregates at top part and
Concrete is generally weak under tension action. The tensile more cement mortar at the bottom part which can result in poor
strength of concrete is commonly used to estimate the load that compressive strength. Well distribution of aggregates throughout
will cause the development of cracking in the member under flex- the matrix of concrete can maximize its compressive strength. It
ural loading. Once the concrete cracks, the concrete behaviour will can be said that the strength variability of LWSCC can be related
be affected [73]. In the research done by Corinaldesi and Moriconi to its aggregates distribution and hence is the function of segrega-
[66], the LWSCC tensile strength did not improve with the addition tion resistance.
of synthetic fibers. By referring to the works done by Lotfy et al. Since the mortar of LWSCC is normally stronger than LWA, the
[62], similar trends were found in tensile splitting strength with compressive strength of LWSCC is also dependent on the strength
compressive strength. LWSCC with expanded shale as LWA and proportion of LWA. The compressive strength of LWSCC is sen-
achieved the highest strength and expanded clay attained the low- sitive to changes in mix component properties and their propor-
est. The authors developed the mathematical correlation expres- tions such as water to binder ratio, binder content and the
sion of LWSCC tensile splitting strength to compressive strength. incorporation of supplementary cementitious materials. These fac-
This is shown as Eq. (2). They compared the accuracy of their equa- tors must be considered properly in mix design in order to achieve
tion for estimating tensile splitting strength from compressive anticipated workability in fresh state and compressive strength in
strength with equations from fib model code and ACI 318. They hardened state. The optimum implementation of supplementary
noticed that the fib code equation extremely underestimated the materials such as fly ash, slag and silica fume can improve com-
tensile splitting strength of lightweight concrete. pressive strength. In addition, the incorporation of fibres such as
;1:33 steel, synthetic and macro fibers will increase compressive
f t ¼ 0:0177f c ð2Þ strength of LWSCC.
The study conducted by Grabois et al. [12], the tensile strength
of LWSCC was determined under direct tensile loading. Tensile 6. Prospective and Future challenges
strength of LWSCC was found to be improved for about 30% with
the addition of steel fibers. They stated that addition of small The recent and present research works provide framework for
amount of steel fibers in LWSCC could improve the tensile strength further investigation and study for utilization of lightweight aggre-
up to the first crack under direct tensile loading. Nevertheless, gates in self-compacting concrete. Future research should concen-
more study concerning the tensile strength of LWSCC is essential trate on the investigations of the followings.
for it to fully replace conventional concrete in any structure.
1. The current methods for developing mix design of lightweight
5.4. Modulus of elasticity self-compacting concrete are complicated and require the vali-
dation through trial laboratory work. Further research is
The modulus of elasticity (E-value) is defined as the ratio required to develop easy and simple guidelines for developing
between normal stress to strain below the proportional limit of a mix design of lightweight self-compacting concrete. One rec-
material. It is used to measure instantaneous elastic deformation ommendation is to carry out statistical analysis of the relation-
which represents the stiffness of materials. According to Neville ship between mix design and performance in terms of fresh and
[22], the E-value of concrete decreased with the use of LWA. The hardened properties.
stiffness of LWA is generally very weak which is proven by a few 2. Most of the current research done on LWSCC is restricted to a
researchers [67,12,62]. Limited research has been done on the elas- few types of lightweight aggregates only. Furthermore, there
tic modulus of LWSCC. In the studies of Grabois et al. [12], the is limited research on the use of other types of lightweight
Young’s modulus of their LWSCC showed linear elastic behaviour aggregates such as sintered slate, sintered pulverized fuel ash,
of up to 60% of total stress. The authors explained that the use of oil palm shell, colliery waste, etc in LWSCC as they have been
expanded clay LWA could improve the bonding between mortar used as LWA in lightweight concrete (LWC). Effort must be
and aggregates which resulted in delay of microcracking process. made to identify more variety of suitable aggregates.
3. There is limited research on the long term durability behaviour Acknowledgement

of LWSCC such as shrinkage, creep, corrosion and bond
strength. Moreover, these properties are not considered in the The authors would like to acknowledge the research funding
mix design methodology. Further research is required in this from Curtin Malaysia Research Institute (CMRI).
area.
4. More study is recommended to understand the tensile strength,
flexural strength, elastic modulus, shear characteristic, and pre-
stressing application of LWSCC. References
5. The use of LWSCC technology at the present moment is
[1] G. Rodriguez de Sensale, I. Rodriguez Viacava, A. Aguado, Simple and rational
restricted to research only. It will be a big challenge to further
methodology for the formulation of self-compacting concrete mixes, J. Mater.
develop and refine this technology to be adopted and widely Civ. Eng. 28 (2) (2015) 04015116.
used in construction industry. [2] G. Samson, A. Phelipot-Mardelé, C. Lanos, A review of thermomechanical
properties of lightweight concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. 69 (4) (2016) 201–216.
[3] S. Senaratne, D. Gerace, O. Mirza, V.W. Tam, W.-H. Kang, The costs and benefits
of combining recycled aggregate with steel fibres as a sustainable, structural
7. Conclusions
material, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 2318–2327.
[4] K.P. Mehta, Reducing the environmental impact of concrete, Concr. Int. 23 (10)
The application of lightweight aggregates in lightweight self- (2001) 61–66.
compacting concrete is reviewed based on recent literatures and [5] Z.H. Duan, C.S. Poon, Properties of recycled aggregate concrete made with
recycled aggregates with different amounts of old adhered mortars, Mater.
the outcome is reported in this paper. The physical properties of Des. 58 (2014) 19–29.
LWA, mix design methodology, fresh and hardened properties of [6] M. Etxeberria, E. Vázquez, A. Marí, M. Barra, Influence of amount of recycled
LWSCC were discussed. From the literature review, the following coarse aggregates and production process on properties of recycled aggregate
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 37 (5) (2007) 735–742.
conclusion can be made. [7] J. Xiao, J. Li, C. Zhang, Mechanical properties of recycled aggregate concrete
under uniaxial loading, Cem. Concr. Res. 35 (6) (2005) 1187–1194.
1. Different LWA exhibit different specific gravity, size gradation, [8] U.J. Alengaram, B.A. Al Muhit, M.Z bin Jumaat, Utilization of oil palm kernel
shell as lightweight aggregate in concrete–a review, Constr. Build. Mater. 38
shape characteristic, bulk density and water absorbability (2013) 161–172.
which lead to different performance of LWSCC. LWA of specific [9] M. Aslam, P. Shafigh, M.Z. Jumaat, Oil-palm by-products as lightweight
gravity less than 2.0 is commonly utilized to manufacture aggregate in concrete mixture: a review, J. Cleaner Prod. 126 (2016) 56–73.
[10] A.C., Guide for structural lightweight-aggregate concrete, 2014.
LWSCC. The maximum LWA sizes are limited to the range of _
[11] I.B. Topçu, T. Uygunoğlu, Effect of aggregate type on properties of hardened
12.5–16 mm. The shape of LWA commonly varies from spheri- self-consolidating lightweight concrete (SCLC), Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (7)
cal to flaky. Different LWA exhibit different water absorption (2010) 1286–1295, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.12.007.
[12] T.M. Grabois, G.C. Cordeiro, R.D. Toledo Filho, Fresh and hardened-state
which varies from 5% to 80%. In this regard, saturated surface
properties of self-compacting lightweight concrete reinforced with steel fibers,
dry condition has to be achieved to reduce water sensitivity. Constr. Build. Mater. 104 (2016) 284–292, https://doi.org/10.1016/
2. The workability of LWSCC depends on the aggregates packing j.conbuildmat.2015.12.060.
density and void volume. Water to binder ratio, superplasticizer [13] C.C. Papanicolaou, M.I. Kaffetzakis, Pumice aggregate self-compacting concrete
(PASCC), in: Proceedings of SCC2010, Montreal, 2010, pp. 1286–1295.
dosage and total binder content have great bearing on the per- [14] B. Vakhshouri, S. Nejadi, Mix design of light-weight self-compacting concrete,
formance of LWSCC workability. The inclusion of different types Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 4 (2016) 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
of supplementary materials has different effects on LWSCC cscm.2015.10.002.
[15] Y.J. Kim, Y.W. Choi, M. Lachemi, Characteristics of self-consolidating concrete
workability. The use of silica fume as well as with its increasing using two types of lightweight coarse aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (1)
replacement level, improve the segregation resistance of LWSCC (2010) 11–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.08.004.
but have negative effect on filling and passing ability. The inclu- [16] H. Ohno, T. Kawai, Y. Kuroda, K. Ozawa, Development of vibration-free high
strength lightweight concrete and its application, in: Paper presented at the
sion of fly ash as binary or ternary blend will not only improve Proceeding of FIP Symposium, 1993.
all the three fresh properties but also reduce the amount of SP [17] B.Z. Dymond, Shear Strength of a PCBT-53 Girder Fabricated with Lightweight,
required. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Self-consolidating
concrete, 2007.
3. The compressive strength of LWSCC is highly dependent on the
[18] O.V.T.N.I. Lahkega, V.B.V.P. Stenah, Evaluation of the strength variation of
strength of LWA as they are weaker than the mortar. Factors normal and lightweight self-compacting concrete in full scale walls, Mater.
such as water to binder ratio, binder content and the incorpora- Tehnol. 45 (6) (2011) 571–577.
[19] C. Shi, X. Yang, Design and application of self-compacting lightweight
tion of supplementary cementitious materials will affect the
concrete, in: Paper presented at the SCC’2005-China: 1st International
compressive strength of LWSCC significantly and they must be Symposium on Design, Performance and Use of Self-Consolidating Concrete,
considered properly in mix design. Optimum inclusion of sup- 2005.
plementary materials such as fly ash, slag and silica fume will [20] M. Hubertova, R. Hela, The effect of metakaolin and silica fume on the
properties of lightweight self consolidating concrete, Spec. Publ. 243 (2007)
improve the compressive strength. Also, fibres such as steel, 35–48.
synthetic and macro fibers will increase the compressive [21] ACI-213, Guide for Structural Lightweight-aggregate Concrete, 2003.
strength of LWSCC [22] A. Neville, Properties of concrete CTP-VVP: Malaysia, 2008.
[23] H. Mahmud, Mix design and mechanical properties of oil palm shell
4. This review enhances the understanding of LWSCC mix design lightweight aggregate concrete: a review, Int. J. Phys. Sci. 5 (14) (2010).
methodology with close aggregate packing method being most [24] L. Domagała, The effect of lightweight aggregate water absorption on the
commonly practised. Close aggregate packing method estab- reduction of water-cement ratio in fresh concrete, Procedia Eng. 108 (2015)
206–213.
lishes the relationship between paste and aggregates. Some [25] F.B. Illidge, Acoustic emission techniques and cyclic load testing load testing
researchers have introduced statistical analysis to simplify for integrity evaluation of self-compacting normal and self-compacting PhD
and improve the design procedures. Close aggregate packing thesis, University of South Carolina, USA, 2010.
[26] S. Juradin, G. Baloević, A. Harapin, Experimental testing of the effects of fine
principle provides clear insight into the understanding of con-
particles on the properties of the self-compacting lightweight concrete, Adv.
sumption of aggregate and paste volume for a given unit vol- Mater. Sci. Eng. 2012 (2012) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/398567.
ume of concrete. [27] J. Kwasny, M. Sonebi, S.E. Taylor, Y. Bai, K. Owens, W. Doherty, Influence of the
type of coarse lightweight aggregate on properties of Semilightweight self-
consolidating concrete, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 24 (12) (2012) 1474–1483, https://
Conflict of interest doi.org/10.1061/(asce)mt.1943-5533.0000527.
[28] C.-L. Hwang, M.-F. Hung, Durability design and performance of self-
consolidating lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 19 (8) (2005) 619–
There is no conflict of interest. 626, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.01.003.
[29] J.A. Bogas, A. Gomes, M.F.C. Pereira, Self-compacting lightweight concrete [59] H. Mazaheripour, S. Ghanbarpour, S. Mirmoradi, I. Hosseinpour, The effect of
produced with expanded clay aggregate, Constr. Build. Mater. 35 (2012) 1013– polypropylene fibers on the properties of fresh and hardened lightweight self-
1022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.111. compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (1) (2011) 351–358.
[30] M. Hubertová, R. Hela, Durability of lightweight expanded clay aggregate [60] A. Efnarc, Specification and Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete: Surrey,
concrete, Procedia Eng. 65 (2013) 2–6, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. EFNARC, Association House, UK, 2002.
proeng.2013.09.002. [61] ACI-237, 237.‘‘ ACI 237R-07–Self-Consolidating Concrete”, American Concrete
[31] Ö. Andiç-Çakır, S. Hızal, Influence of elevated temperatures on the mechanical Institute, 2007.
properties and microstructure of self consolidating lightweight aggregate [62] A. Lotfy, K.M. Hossain, M. Lachemi, Mix design and properties of lightweight
concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 34 (2012) 575–583, https://doi.org/10.1016/ self-consolidating concretes developed with furnace slag, expanded clay and
j.conbuildmat.2012.02.088. expanded shale aggregates, J. Sustainable Cem.-Based Mater. (2015) 1–27.
[32] M.I. Kaffetzakis, C.G. Papanicolaou, Mix Proportioning method for lightweight [63] A. Lotfy, K.M.A. Hossain, M. Lachemi, Lightweight self-consolidating concrete
aggregate SCC (LWASCC) based on the optimum packing point concept, in: with expanded shale aggregates: modelling and optimization, Int. J. Concr.
Innovative Materials and Techniques in Concrete Construction, Springer, 2012, Struct. Mater. 9 (2) (2015) 185–206, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40069-015-
pp. 131–151. 0096-5.
_ Topçu, Thermal expansion of self-consolidating normal and
[33] T. Uygunoğlu, I.B. [64] M. Sonebi, S. Grunewald, J. Walraven, Filling ability and passing ability of self-
lightweight aggregate concrete at elevated temperature, Constr. Build. Mater. consolidating concrete, ACI Mater. J. 104 (2) (2007) 162.
23 (9) (2009) 3063–3069. [65] Y. Mohammadi, S. Mousavi, F. Rostami, A. Danesh, The effect of silica fume on
[34] C. Shi, Y. Wu, Mixture proportioning and properties of self-consolidating the properties of self-compacted lightweight concrete., Curr. World Environ.
lightweight concrete containing glass powder, ACI Mater. J. 102 (5) (2005) 10 (Special-Issue 1) (2015) 381–388, https://doi.org/10.12944/CWE.10.
355–363. Special-Issue1.48.
[35] T. Lo, P. Tang, H. Cui, A. Nadeem, Comparison of workability and mechanical [66] V. Corinaldesi, G. Moriconi, Use of synthetic fibers in self-compacting
properties of self-compacting lightweight concrete and normal self- lightweight aggregate concretes, J. Build. Eng. 4 (2015) 247–254, https://doi.
compacting concrete, Mater. Res. Innovations 11 (1) (2007) 45–50. org/10.1016/j.jobe.2015.10.006.
[36] J. Kanadasan, H.A. Razak, Mix design for self-compacting palm oil clinker [67] R.W. Floyd, W.M. Hale, J.C. Bymaster, Effect of aggregate and cementitious
concrete based on particle packing, Mater. Des. 56 (2014) 9–19, https://doi. material on properties of lightweight self-consolidating concrete for
org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.10.086. prestressed members, Constr. Build. Mater. 85 (2015) 91–99, https://doi.org/
[37] R. Gopi, V. Revathi, D. Kanagaraj, Light expanded clay aggregate and fly ash 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.03.084.
aggregate as self curing agents in self compacting concrete, Asian J. Civ. Eng. [68] M. Kurt, A.C. Aydin, M.S. Gül, R. Gül, T. Kotan, The effect of fly ash to self-
(BHRC) 16 (7) (2015) 1025–1035. compactability of pumice aggregate lightweight concrete, Sadhana 40 (4)
[38] M. Shanker, Experimental investigation on self compacting concrete using (2015) 1343–1359.
light weight aggregates, Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Res. 1 (1) (2016). [69] N. Bozkurta, V. Tasßkin, Design of self compacting lightweight concrete using
[39] A. Lotfy, K.M.A. Hossain, M. Lachemi, Durability properties of lightweight self- acidic pumice with different powder materials, Acta Physica Polonica, A. 132
consolidating concrete developed with three types of aggregates, Constr. Build. (3) (2017).
Mater. 106 (2016) 43–54, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.118. [70] R.B. Ardalan, A. Joshaghani, R.D. Hooton, Workability retention and
[40] L. Tviksta, Guideline for SCC, Brite EuRam, Task 9 (2000) 3–11. compressive strength of self-compacting concrete incorporating pumice
[41] O.R. Khaleel, S.A. Al-Mishhadani, H. Abdul Razak, The effect of coarse aggregate powder and silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 134 (2017) 116–122.
on fresh and hardened properties of self-compacting concrete (SCC), Procedia [71] D.S.Y.W. Law, F. Aslani, G. Ma, Lightweight self-compacting concrete
Eng. 14 (2011) 805–813, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.07.102. incorporating perlite, scoria, and polystyrene aggregates, J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
[42] H. Ahmad, M. Hilton, N. Mohd Noor, Physical properties of local palm oil 30 (8) (2018) 04018178.
clinker and fly ash, 2007. [72] F. Aslani, G. Ma, D.L.Y. Wan, G. Muselin, Development of high-performance
[43] M. Peters, Mechanical properties of Lightweight Aggregate Concrete: self-compacting concrete using waste recycled concrete aggregates and rubber
EuroLightcon, 1999. granules, J. Cleaner Prod. 182 (2018) 553–566.
[44] X. Liu, K.S. Chia, M.-H. Zhang, Water absorption, permeability, and resistance [73] V. Malárics, H. Müller, Evaluation of the splitting tension test for concrete from
to chloride-ion penetration of lightweight aggregate concrete, Constr. Build. a fracture mechanical point of view, in: Proceedings of FraMCos-7. Fracture
Mater. 25 (1) (2011) 335–343. Mechanics of Concrete and Concrete Structures, Korea, 2010, pp. 709–716.
[45] P. Shafigh, M.Z. Jumaat, H.B. Mahmud, N.A.A. Hamid, Lightweight concrete [74] N. Abdizadeh, A. Zekavati, H. Afshin, Mix Design of Structural Self-compacting
made from crushed oil palm shell: tensile strength and effect of initial curing Concrete Using Void-Bulk Density Method, 2009.
on compressive strength, Constr. Build. Mater. 27 (1) (2012) 252–258, https:// [75] M. Kurt, T. Kotan, M.S. Gül, R. Gül, A.C. Aydin, The effect of blast furnace slag on
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.07.051. the self-compactability of pumice aggregate lightweight concrete, Sadhana 41
[46] K. Pierce, Performance of lightweight aggregate in self consolidating concrete. (2) (2016) 253–264.
in: Paper presented at the Masters Abstracts International, 2007. [76] T. Uygunoğlu, I.B. Topçu, Influence of aggregate type on workability of self-
[47] K.P. Sethy, D. Pasla, U. Chandra Sahoo, Utilization of high volume of industrial consolidating lightweight concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. 63 (1) (2011) 1–12,
slag in self compacting concrete, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 581–587, https:// https://doi.org/10.1680/macr.2011.63.1.1.
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.039. [77] M.S. Anwar, A.W. Pramono, V.I. Judarta, A. Manaf, The role of pumice in self-
[48] C. Shi, Z. Wu, K. Lv, L. Wu, A review on mixture design methods for self- compacting lightweight aggregate concrete manufacture, Asian Trans. Basic
compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 84 (2015) 387–398, https://doi.org/ Appl. Sci. (ATBAS) 2 (4) (2012) 14–20.
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.03.079. [78] Ö. Andiç-çakır, E. Yoğurtcu, Sß. Yazıcı, K. Ramyar, Self-compacting lightweight
[49] , A.C., Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions for Structural Lightweight aggregate concrete: design and experimental study, Mag. Concr. Res. 61 (7)
Concrete (ACI .2-91), 1992. (2009) 519–527, https://doi.org/10.1680/macr.2008.00024.
[50] S. Jacobsen, B. Arntsen, Aggregate packing and-void saturation in mortar and [79] M. Kurt, M.S. Gül, R. Gül, A.C. Aydin, T. Kotan, The effect of pumice powder on
concrete proportioning, Mater. Struct. 41 (4) (2008) 703–716. the self-compactability of pumice aggregate lightweight concrete, Constr.
[51] M.I. Kaffetzakis, C.G. Papanicolaou, Lightweight Aggregate Self-Compacting Build. Mater. 103 (2016) 36–46, https://doi.org/10.1016/
Concrete (LWASCC) semi-automated mix design methodology, Constr. Build. j.conbuildmat.2015.11.043.
Mater. 123 (2016) 254–260, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.07.012. [80] M. Lachemi, S. Bae, K.M.A. Hossain, M. Sahmaran, Steel–concrete bond
[52] M.I. Kaffetzakis, C.G. Papanicolaou, Bond behavior of reinforcement in strength of lightweight self-consolidating concrete, Mater. Struct. 42 (7)
lightweight aggregate self-compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 113 (2008) 1015–1023, https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-008-9440-4.
(2016) 641–652, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.081. [81] Z. Wu, Y. Zhang, J. Zheng, Y. Ding, An experimental study on the workability of
[53] Y.W. Choi, Y.J. Kim, H.C. Shin, H.Y. Moon, An experimental research on the self-compacting lightweight concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (5) (2009)
fluidity and mechanical properties of high-strength lightweight self- 2087–2092, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.08.023.
compacting concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 36 (9) (2006) 1595–1602. [82] O. Karahan, K.M.A. Hossain, E. Ozbay, M. Lachemi, E. Sancak, Effect of
[54] J. Li, Y. Chen, C. Wan, A mix-design method for lightweight aggregate self- metakaolin content on the properties self-consolidating lightweight
compacting concrete based on packing and mortar film thickness theories, concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 31 (2012) 320–325, https://doi.org/10.1016/
Constr. Build. Mater. 157 (2017) 621–634. j.conbuildmat.2011.12.112.
[55] M.C. Nepomuceno, L. Pereira-de-Oliveira, S.F. Pereira, Mix design of structural [83] G.E. Abdelaziz, A study on the performance of lightweight self-consolidated
lightweight self-compacting concrete incorporating coarse lightweight concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. 62 (1) (2010) 39.
expanded clay aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 166 (2018) 373–385. [84] A. Lotfy, K.M. Hossain, M. Lachemi, Application of statistical models in
[56] M.C. Nepomuceno, L. Oliveira, S.M.R. Lopes, Methodology for mix design of the proportioning lightweight self-consolidating concrete with expanded clay
mortar phase of self-compacting concrete using different mineral additions in aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 65 (2014) 450–469.
binary blends of powders, Constr. Build. Mater. 26 (1) (2012) 317–326. [85] H. Cui, T. Lo, F. Xing, Properties of self-compacting lightweight concrete, Mater.
[57] M.C. Nepomuceno, L. Pereira-de-Oliveira, S.M.R. Lopes, R.M.C. Franco, Res. Innovations 14 (5) (2010) 392–396.
Maximum coarse aggregate’s volume fraction in self-compacting concrete [86] A. Maghsoudi, S. Mohamadpour, M. Maghsoudi, Mix design and mechanical
for different flow restrictions, Constr. Build. Mater. 113 (2016) 851–856. properties of selfcompacting light weight concrete, Int. J. Civ. Eng. 9 (3) (2011)
[58] M.C. Nepomuceno, L. Pereira-de-Oliveira, S.F. Pereira, Methodology for the mix 230–236.
design of self-compacting concrete using different mineral additions in binary [87] G. Rajamanickam, R. Vaiyapuri, Self compacting self curing concrete with
blends of powders, Constr. Build. Mater. 64 (2014) 82–94, https://doi.org/ lightweight aggregates, Gradevinar 68 (04.) (2016) 279–285.
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.04.021.

(2019) Ting, Rahman, Lau, Ting

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

(2019) Ting, Rahman, Lau, Ting

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(2019) Ting, Rahman, Lau, Ting

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Construction and Building Materials 201 (2019) 763–777

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

Recent development and perspective of lightweight aggregates

87 research articles on lightweight self-compacting concrete have been reviewed.

2.5. Water absorption. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 767

1. Introduction materials in concrete due to growing of sustainability conscious-

constructed a 20 m pre-stressed beam by using LWSCC while Lah- 2. Lightweight aggregates

Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou 8–16 – 570 1034 –

Fig. 2. Lightweight aggregates: a) Expanded clay, b) Expanded shale, c) Pumice [39].

Fig. 3. Excess Paste Theory [74].

Fig. 4. DMDA method [28].

Fig. 5. Packing density and porosity of concrete mix [28].

3.3. Kaffetzekis and Papanicolaou

Kaffetzakis and Papanicolaou [32] proposed another LWSCC

3.4. Kanadasan and Razak method

Kanadasan and Razak [36] modified the particle packing

Fig. 7. Semi-automated LWSCC mix design procedure [52].

qdry ¼ ms þ mg þ 1:2mcm Although Mazaheripour et al. [59] recommended to apply high

Workability Test Class Criteria

3. There is limited research on the long term durability behaviour Acknowledgement

You might also like