2nd International Conference on Advances in Science & Technology (ICAST-2019)

K. J. Somaiya Institute of Engineering & Information Technology, University of Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Effect on Key Properties of Self-Compacting

Concrete Produced by using Cementitious materials,
Ultrafine Concrete Additives and Fourth Generation
Super-Plasticizers
Girish B. Mahajan Suresh K.Ukarande
Anjuman-I- Islam’s Kalsekar Technical K.J.Somaiya Institute of Engineering &
Campus Technology, Panvel Information Technology
University of Mumbai, India Sion,Mumbai
[email protected] University of Mumbai, India
[email protected]

Abstract—Self-compacting concrete (SCC) is a flowing

concrete that does not require vibration and, indeed, should
not be vibrated. Many researchers have adopted different SCC offers:
methods for achieving compatibility of SCC till the date.High • Health and safety benefits as no
flow-ability is vital criteria for the application of SCC in vibration is required.
construction practices. In this experimental program, high • Faster construction times.
grade SCC mixes were established & evaluated the • Increased workability and ease of
properties of fresh concrete as well as hardened concrete. flow around heavy reinforcement.
M-70 grade at 45 days is targeted with initial strength 3 days
(40%) & 28 days (80%). i.e 60 N/mm 2 at 28 days. Mixes were • Excellent durability.
prepared by using combinations of cementitious materials – • Having no need for vibrating
OPC & PFA, hycrete, Metakaolin and fourth Generation equipment spares workers from
Super-plasticizers admixture pure Polycarboxylate ether exposure to vibration. No vibration
(PCE base). First of all, optimized percentage doses of equipment also means quieter
hycrete were fixed and same percentage was used for next construction sites.
trials. Criteria for percentage of optimization for hycrete is
mainly based on cohesiveness, flow, retention & the
Till the date, many attempts have been made for
strength parameters of initial i.e 3/7 days & 28/45 days.
Water to binder ratio and chemical admixture dosage were improving the properties of SCC by using different
kept constant i.e 0.26 & 0.65% respectively, for all trials. blends of cementitious materials. Findings of few
Initial flow of SCC was observed along with flow at 60 researches are mentioned further.
minutes, 90 minutes & 120 minutes intervals.The primary Self-compacting concrete containing 10% fly ash
aim of this study is to investigate the effect on key content and 3% superplasticiser was produced with
properties of Self compacting concrete by four different a range of w/c between 0.28 and 0.38 that satisfied
types of cementitious materials ((blended concrete) such as the requirements of filling ability, passing ability and
OPC & PFA, hycrete, Metakaolin and fourth Generation the segregation resistance[1]The compressive
Super-plasticizers admixture pure Polycarboxylate ether
strength of self compacting Concrete decreases with
(PCE base). This paper has highlighted the effects on
properties of fresh SCC such as flowability with desired
the increase in percentage of fly ash and increases
retention as well as hardened properties like Compressive with the increase in percentage of silicafume[2]. The
strength. In this study our main focus is to investigate the SCC mixes containing GGBS and that containing
effect on flow ability & retention period as well as SF as powder material tested for their fresh
compressive strength for initial & later age phase of properties as per EFNARC guidelines,have satisfied
concrete. The results shows overall improvement in the norms laid down by EFNARC[3]The latest trend
workability, minimum two hours retention period, targeted in concrete research is to use industrial by-products
gain in early age as well as later age compressive strength
in preparing the concrete mixes. The addition of
of SCC was observed. Early age desired strength is
essentially required for stripping of modern forms like GGBS and FA as mineral additives in SCC is a step
Aluminum shuttering & later age strength is essential for that would gainfully employ these two otherwise
desired concrete grade. waste products whose disposal is an issue in itself [4]
Addition of flyash in SCC increases filling
Keywords—Self compacting Concrete (SCC), andpassing ability of concrete, whereas rice husk
Polycarboxylate ether (PCE), Ordinary Portland Cement ashimparts viscosity to concrete improving
(OPC), Pulverised Fly Ash (PFA) segregationresistance of concrete mix[5]. There is no
standard method for evaluating a unified SCC
I. INTRODUCTION workability and rheological properties. The effect
Self-compacting concrete (SCC) is a flowing concrete and mechanism of silica fume on SCC is more
that does not require vibration and, indeed, should not complex than fly ash. It is better to use different
be vibrated. It uses super plasticizers and stabilizers to mineral admixture to carry out the SCC workability
significantly increase the ease and rate of flow. It more than single fly ash[6]When self compacting
achieves compaction into every part of the mould or concrete becomes so widely used that it is seen as
formwork simply by means of its own weight without any the “Standard Concrete” rather than “Special
segregation of the course aggregates. Concrete”[7].Self-compacting concrete(SCC)
possesses enhanced qualities and improves
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3372119
http://ssrn.com/link/2019-ICAST.html
 2nd International Conference on Advances in Science & Technology (ICAST-2019)
K. J. Somaiya Institute of Engineering & Information Technology, University of Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

productivity and working conditions due to elimination of vii) Crushed Sand viii) Coarse Aggregates ix)
compaction[8]Test results show that 15% replacement Water
of cement using raw rice husk ash produced grade 40 3.2. Mix Design
concrete[9] As perEFNARC guidelines (8.4), there is no
The maximum compressive strength for self compacting standard method of mix design, applicable for
concrete can be obtained by addition of 15% of fly ash designing SCCmixes. However Concrete
in mix as compared to addition of 25%, 35%, 45% and Technologists & ready mixed concrete
55% cement replacement by fly ash[10] To improve the Professionals have developed their own mix
concrete composites and its quality with an economical proportioning methods. In this study also, such
approach there is a need of some material to reused[11] proportioning has been implemented for
Self-Compacting Concrete with a similar water cement preparing SCC mixes. For fresh plastic stage
or cement binder ratio will usually have a slightly higher concrete, EFNARC guidelines also have been
strength compared with traditional vibrated concrete followed. As ultrafine additive was new material,
[12]The maximum Expected compressive strength, Split
its compatibility with all other ingredients was
tensile strength for self-compacting concrete can be observed by conducting first three trials by
obtained by addition of 20% of fly ash, 10% of Silica varying its percentage in concrete mix. Optimized
Fume & 10% Rice Husk Ash mix as compared to % content of additive was then finalized & same
addition of 5% & 15% of cement replacement by Rice was used for further all trials. It was finalized on
Husk Ash [13]In spite of its short history, self-compacting the basis of flow, early age as well as later age
(or – consolidating) concrete has confirmed itself as a strength of sample. Thereafter for all further
revolutionary step forward in concrete technology[14] trials, following parameters were kept constant.
SCC with 15% replacement of cement with fly ash Water to binder ratio - 0.26 Aggregate to
showed good results both in compression and split Cement ratio - 2.49 Admixture dosage -
tensile[15]Use of fly ash in production of SCC is 0.65%
nowadays highly extensive. From the experimental •Trial Mix no.1 – Four blend–OPC+PFA+
investigation it is clear that cement can be replaced with Metakaolin+ hycrete (1.14%)
15%of flyash effectively in SCC, therebyreducing the •Trial Mix no.2 – Four blend –OPC+PFA+
consumption of cement, which in turn reduces the Metakaolin+ hycrete (1.52 %)
cost[16] SCC with 15% replacement of cement with fly •Trial Mix no.3 – Four blend –OPC+PFA+
ash showed good results both incompression and split Metakaolin+ hycrete (1.82%)
tensile.[16] It was concluded that at 5% replacement On the basis of slump flow & early age & later
(powder content of 530kg/m3) of micro silica the mix age compressive strength, hycrete 1.52% of
shows good workability and compressive strength. With total cementitious material(Trial no.2) was
further increase in replacement percentage the observed best amongst three trials &therefore
compressive strength decreases gradually. It can be for further all trials same content of additive
concluded that the SCC with micro silica can be used in was used in mixes.
the construction sector[17] There is no standard method • Trial Mix no.4 -- Metakaolin without hycrete
for SCC mix design and many academic institutions, • Trial Mix no.5 -- Microsilica (Elkem) with
admixture, readymixed, precast and contracting hycrete
companies have developed their own mix proportioning • Trial Mix no.6 -- Microsilica (Local) with
methods.[18] hycrete
• Trial Mix no 7 – Microsilica(Elkem) without
II. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE hycrete
Though much more research work has been done for • Trial Mix no.8 -- Microsilica(Local) without
improving the properties of SCC, it is observed that hycrete
the self- compacting Concrete is still lacking in
achieving desirable requirements such as high flow
3.3 Tests Conducted
ability, high early age strength, high deformability,
dense particle packing of aggregate & cement Slump flow tests were performed to asses flow
particles & better compatibility with modern shuttering parameter at initial stage, 30min., 60min., 90
like aluminum shuttering. This research aims at not min. & 120 min.
only improve the flow ability of self-compacting Compressive strength tests have been
concrete along with retention but also to gain early as performed for assessing compressive strength
well as later age compressive strength. This study of various mixes at the age of 3days, 7days,
surely helps to promote application of SCC in 28days & 45days.
construction practices to great extent. 3.3.1 Slump Flow Test
This is most commonly used test for assessment
III. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME of filling ability of self compacting concrete.
Slump flow test is used assess the horizontal
3.1. Materials free flow of self compacting concrete in the
i) Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) ---53 grade absence of obstructions.
ii) Pulverized Fly-Ash 3.3.1.1 Procedure: -
iii) Metakaoline 1) Position the slum cone at the center of the
iv) Micro silica leveled flow table.
v) Ultrafine Concrete additive – Hycrete 2) Pour the concrete with a scoop from top
vi) Admixture (PCE) PolyCarboxylate Ether without tamping to fill the slump cone
completely. Strike off excess concrete.
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3372119
http://ssrn.com/link/2019-ICAST.html
 2nd International Conference on Advances in Science & Technology (ICAST-2019)
K. J. Somaiya Institute of Engineering & Information Technology, University of Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

3) Lift the cone vertically without any jerks and allow • The specimen should be removed from the
the concrete to flow freely. water 30 minutes prior to the testing.
4) Note the time required for the concrete to cover 50 • The specimen should be in dry condition
cm. diameter spread circle.T50 is the time required before conducting the testing.
for the concrete to cover 50 cm. diam.spread circle • The Cube weight should not be less than 8.1
from the time the slump cone is lifted. Kgs
5) Measure the diameters of spread circle from two
perpendicular directions, after concrete stops flowing.
Average of two diameters is initial slumpflow of
concrete.
6) Measure the diameters of spread circle at
60min.90min.&120min. The permissible range of
values for slump flow are 600 to 750mm. & T50 time is
2 to 5 seconds

Fig.2 Compressive strength Test

3.3.2.3 Testing
• Now place the concrete cubes into the testing
machine. (centrally)
• The cubes should be placed correctly on the
machine plate (check the circle marks on the
machine). Carefully align the specimen with
the spherically seated plate.

Fig.1 Measurement of flow • The load will be applied to the specimen

3.3.2 Compressive strength test axially.
The compressive strength of any material is defined as • Now slowly apply the load at the rate of
the resistance to failure under the action of 140kg/cm2 per minute till the cube collapse.
compressive forces. Especially for concrete, • The maximum load at which the specimen
compressive strength is an important parameter to breaks is taken as a compressive load.
determine the performance of the material during
service conditions.
The compressive strength of concrete is the most 3.3.2.4 Calculation
common performance measurement used by engineers Compressive Strength of concrete=Maximum
when designing buildings and other structures. compressive load / Cross Sectional Area
3.3.2.1 Cube Casting Table no.1 shows workability/slump flows (mm) &
compressive strength (Mpa)of first three trials.
• Measure the dry proportion of ingredients
Flows are measured initially and at 60min.90min.
(Cement, Sand & Coarse Aggregate, admixtures)
&120min.Table also shows compressive strengths
as per the design requirements. The Ingredients
assessed at 3, 7, 28, 35 & 45days. As per design,
should be sufficient enough to cast test cubes
for total 100% cementitious,OPC =70.1%
• Thoroughly mix the dry ingredients to obtain the Pulverised fly ash =24.6% Metakaolin + hycrete=
uniform mixture 5.3%
• Add design quantity of water to the dry proportion • Trial no.1 – Four blend :–OPC+PFA+
(water-cement ratio) and mix well to obtain Metakaolin+ hycrete (1.14%)
uniform texture • Trial no.2 – Four blend :–OPC+PFA+
• Fill the concrete to the mould with the help of Metakaolin+ hycrete (1.52%)
vibrator for thorough compaction • Trial no.3 – Four blend :–OPC+PFA+
Metakaolin+ hycrete (1.82%)
• Finish the top of the concrete by trowel & tapped
On the basis of slump flow & early age & later age
well till the cement slurry comes to the top of the
compressive strength, hycrete1.52% of total
cubes.
cementitious was found suitable.
3.3.2.2 Curing
• After some time the mould should be covered Trial no.4 - Metakaolin without hycrete ---- gained
with red gunny bag and put undisturbed for 24 early strength, target strength & later age strength
hours at a temperature of 27 ° Celsius ± 2 by 62.12% of target strength, 100% of target
• After 24 hours remove the specimen from the strength & 115% of target strength at 3, 28 & 45
mould. days respectively.
• Keep the specimen submerged under fresh water
at 27 ° Celsius. The specimen should be kept for
7 or 28 days. Every 7 days the water should be
renewed. IV RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3372119

http://ssrn.com/link/2019-ICAST.html
 2nd International Conference on Advances in Science & Technology (ICAST-2019)
K. J. Somaiya Institute of Engineering & Information Technology, University of Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Table.1 Workability/flow values & Compressive strength values of Trial no.1, 2 & 3
Trial No Flow (mm) Compressive Strength (Mpa)
Target Target
Initial 60 min 90 min 120 min
68.25 78.25
3 Days 7 Days 28 Days 35 Days 45 Days
27.23 44.83 61.42 67.98 69.98
1 700 620 590 470 39.90 65.68 89.99 99.60 102.53
34.80 57.29 78.49 86.88 89.43

32.03 47.88 69.37 73.78 80.78

2 680 590 550 440 46.93 70.15 101.64 108.10 118.36
40.93 61.19 88.65 94.29 103.23

34.5 45.97 67.50 71.5 78.75

3 645 530 420 350 50.55 67.36 98.90 104.76 115.38
44.09 58.75 86.26 91.37 100.64

90.00

Compresive Strength (MPa)

80.78 78.75
Trial no.5:-- Micro silica (Elkem) with hycrete ---- 80.00
gained early strength, target strength & later age 69.98 69.37 67.50
strength by 56.84 % of target strength,105.2 % of 70.00 61.42
target strength & 111.68 % of target strength at 3, 60.00
28 & 45days respectively. 44.83 47.88 45.97
50.00
Trial no.6:--- Micro silica (Local) with hycrete ---- 40.00 32.03 34.50
gained early strength, target strength & later age 27.23
30.00
strength by 53.29% of target strength,92.83% of
20.00
target strength & 100.36 % of target strength at 3,
28 & 45days respectively. 10.00
0.00
Trial no.7 – Micro silica(Elkem) without hycrete ---- Trial 1 Trial 2 Trail 3
gained early strength, target strength & later age 3 Days
by strength 60.35% of target strength,112.52 % of Age of Concrete (3,7,28 & 45 Days) 7 Days
target strength & 117.50% of target strength at 3, 28 Days
28 & 45days respectively.
Fig. 4 Compressive Strength of Trial no.1, 2 & 3 at 3,7,28 &
Trial no.8 - Micro silica(Local) without hycrete ----
45th day
gained early strength, target strength & later age
by strength 59.34 % of target strength,112.82 % of
target strength & 117.21 % of target strength at 3, Workability Results M-60:SCC - Four Blend:
28 & 45days respectively 800 (M-70 - 45days)
680
800 700
Workability/ Flow in mm

710 600 600 590

680
700 600 550
645
620
Workability/ Flow in mm

590 590
600 500 470
550 440
530

500 470 400

440
420
300
400 349 300

300 200

200 100

100 0
Trial 4 Trial 2
0 3 Days
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trail 3 Retention in mins 7 Days
28 Days
Initial Time
45 Days
60 Mins
90 Mins Poly. (3 Days)
Retention in min 120 Mins
Poly. (Initial Time) Fig.5 Flow of Metakaoline without & with Hycrete

Fig.3 Workability/Flow of Trial no.1, 2 & 3

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3372119

http://ssrn.com/link/2019-ICAST.html
 2nd International Conference on Advances in Science & Technology (ICAST-2019)
K. J. Somaiya Institute of Engineering & Information Technology, University of Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Cube Results M-60:SCC - Four Blend: Workability Results M-60:SCC - Four Blend:
800
(M-70 - 45days) (M-70 - 45days)
Compresive Strength (MPa)

680 680
90.00 700 650
635
80.78 600600 600 610 600
78.50 590
80.00 600 550 550 550
68.20 69.37 500 500
70.00 490
500 470
440 450
430
410
60.00 53.17
47.88 400
50.00 42.40 300 300
300 250
40.00
32.03
30.00 200

20.00 100

10.00 0
Trial 4 Trial 2 Trial 7 Trial 5 Trial 8 Trial 6
0.00
Initial Time
Trial 4 Trial 2 3 Days
Retention in min 60 Mins
7 Days 90 Mins
Age of Concrete 28 Days 120 Mins
(3,7,28 & 45 Days) 45 Days
Poly. (3 Days)
Fig.9 Comparison in Flow of Metakaoline, Metakaolinewith
Fig.6 Comp. Strength of Metakaoline without & with Hycrete hycrete,Microsilica(Elkem),Microsilica(Elkem) with
hycrete,Microsilica (local)Microsilica (local)with hycrete

Cube Results M-60:SCC - Four Blend: (M-70 -

800
90.00
80.78
45days)
78.50 80.20 80.00
680 76.80 76.21 77.00
Workability/ Flow in mm

700 650 Compresive Strength (MPa) 80.00 71.80

635 68.20 69.37 68.50
600 610 600 70.00 63.36
600 550 550
500 500 60.00 53.17 52.00 53.00
490 51.10 49.20
500 47.88
450 50.00 42.40
430 41.60 40.90
410 38.80
36.37
400 40.00 32.03
300 30.00
300 250
20.00
200 10.00

100 0.00
Trial 4 Trial 2 Trial 7 Trial 5 Trial 8 Trial 6
3 Days
0 Age of Concrete 7 Days
Trial 7 Trial 5 Trial 8 Trial 6 (3,7,28 & 45 Days) 28 Days
45 Days
Initial Time
Retention in min 60 mins
Fig.10 Comparison in Comp.strength of Metakaoline,
90 Mins
120 Mins Metakaoline with hycrete,Microsilica(Elkem),Microsilica
Fig.7 Flow of Micro silica(Elkem & local) without/with Hycrete (Elkem)with hycrete,Microsilica(local)Microsilica(local)with
hycrete

Cube Results M-60:SCC - Four Blend: (M-70 -

45days) Workability Results M-60:SCC - Four Blend:
90.00 800
80.20 80.00 (M-70 - 45days)
Compresive Strength (MPa)

76.80 76.21 77.00 680

80.00 700 650
71.80
68.50 590 600 600
70.00 63.36 600 550 550 550
490 500
60.00 53.00 500 440 450
52.00 51.10 49.20
50.00 400
41.60 40.90
38.80
40.00 36.37
300

30.00 200

20.00 100

10.00 0
Trial 2 Trial 5 Trial 6
0.00 Initial Time
Trial 7 Trial 5 Trial 8 Trial 6 Retention in min 60 Mins
90 Mins
3 Days
120 Mins
Age of Concrete 7 Days
(3,7,28 & 45 Days) 28 Days
Fig.11 Comparison in flow of Metakaoline with hycrete,
45 Days
Microsilica (Elkem) with hycrete, Microsilica (local)with
Fig.8 Comp.Strength of Micro silica(Elkem &local)without/with
hycrete
Hycrete

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3372119

http://ssrn.com/link/2019-ICAST.html
 2nd International Conference on Advances in Science & Technology (ICAST-2019)
K. J. Somaiya Institute of Engineering & Information Technology, University of Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Cube Results M-60:SCC - Four Blend: (M-70 - 45days) inherent property of Microsilica as strength
90.00
80.78 enhancer.
80.00 76.21
Compresive Strength (MPa)

71.80
69.37 68.50 7) Hycrete was found desirably good at early age
70.00 63.36

60.00 strength which facilitates early stripping of

53.00
47.88 49.20
50.00 formwork like aluminum shuttering.
38.80
40.00 36.37
32.03 8) Flowability of SCC produced by blend of
30.00
Metakaoline, Microsilica & Hycrete was found
20.00

10.00
exceptionally good.
0.00 9) Optimum dose of Hycrete in combination with
Trial 2 Trial 5 Trial 6
Age of Concrete
3 Days Metakaoline & Microsilica proved better in flow
7 Days
(3,7,28 & 45 Days) 28 Days
45 Days
with desirable retention period even of two

Fig.12 Comparison inComp. Strength of Metakaoline with hours.

hycrete, Microsilica( Elkem) with hycrete, Microsilica 10) Mix of Metakaoline&Hycrete has attained
(local)with hycrete
desirably good compressive strength at early
V CONCLUSION age & at later age too which is highly desired in
1)The principle criterion for optimization of Hycrete
construction practices.
was purely based on plastic stage properties i.e
In overall, such blended concrete has been
workability & retention period of two hours. The
proved best in workability as well as
secondary criterion was 28 & 45 days strength with
compressive strength aspects.
blended mix. It was observed that dose of 10 Kg
per m3 of Hycrete (i.e1.52% of total cementitious REFERENCES
material) was found to be excellent, with
[1] Ahmed Fathi, Nasir Shafiq, Muhd. Fadhil Nuruddin&Ali
Metakaoline & other basic cementitious materials. Elheber (2013) “Assessment of Fresh and Hardened
Properties of Concrete made with Fly ash as Mineral
2)The results shows that the above percentage Admixture”International Journal of Current Engineering and
Technology March 2013 Vol.no.1,Page no.158-163.
improved the mix in terms of flow-ablility &
[2] A.Dinesh, Harini.S, Jasmine Jeba.P, Jincy.J, ShaguftaJaved
enhance the properties of SCC, along with (March 2017)’Experimental study on self compacting
Concrete ‘International Journal of Engineering Sciences &
desirable retention period of two hours. Research Technology Research Gate Publication,Page no.42
3)Addition of Hycrete in the basic mix improves the – 48

properties of flowability, retention period in the [3] B.H.V.Pai, M. Nandy, A. Krishnamurthy, P.K.Sarkar, C.
Pramukh Ganapathy ( April 2014) Experimental study on self
mixes of Metakaoline & Microsilica (Elkem & compacting Concrete containing Industrial by-Products’’
European Scientific Journal,Vol.10, Page no.292-300
Local).
[4] BiswadeepBharali (September 2015) ‘Experimental study on
4)Same improvement was observed in the Strength Self Compacting Concrete (SSC) using GGBS & Flyash’
“International Journal Of Core Engineering & Management
criteria for strength gaining in initial & Final stage (IJCEM)Volume 2, Issue 6,Page no.1-11
with Metakaoline & Hycrete, when compared with [5] Dr.HemantSood, Dr.R.K.Khitoliya and S. S. Pathak
(May2009) ‘Incorporating European Standards for TestingSelf
only Metakaoline mix. Compacting Concrete in Indian Conditions, International
Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering, Vol.1,No.6, Page
5) There was reduction in the initial phase of no.41-45
strength gaining, i.e 3 & 7 Days in mix with
[6] GUO Gui-xiang,Duan Hong-jun (July 2015) ‘Summary of Self-
Hycrete & Microsilica, but still enhancement in the compacting Concrete Workability’’ International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications’’ Vol. 5, Issue 7, (Part
7 to 28 days strength gaining. Ultimate strength of - 2) July 2015, pp.138-142

28 & 45 days, were found to be at par or just [7] Hajime Okamura, Masahiro Ouchi (April 2003)‘Journal of
Advanced Concrete Technology’’ Vol. 5,Issue 7,(Part -2)Page
marginal dropped if compared with Microsilica no.138-142
(Elkem & Local) with or without Hycrete. [8] Krishna Murthy.N, Narasimha Rao A.V, Ramana Reddy I
.Vand Vijaya sekharReddy.M,(September 2012) ‘’Mix Design
6)Mix of Microsilica & Hycrete has been proved Procedure for Self Compacting Concrete’’
better than mix of Metakaoline & Hycrete in [9] Md.NorAtan, Hanizam Awang,’The Compressive and flexural
attaining higher compressive strength, due to strengths of Self compacting Concrete’’ Journal of

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3372119

http://ssrn.com/link/2019-ICAST.html
 2nd International Conference on Advances in Science & Technology (ICAST-2019)
K. J. Somaiya Institute of Engineering & Information Technology, University of Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Engineering Science and Technology ‘’Vol. 6, No. 6 (2011) [14] Rajdip Paul and Debashis Bhattacharya, (April,2015)‘’Self
720 - 732 Compacting Concrete –A Review, International Journal of
Development Research Vol. 5, Issue, 04, pp. 4262-4264
[10] N.R.Gaywala,D.B.Raijiwala,(Dec.2011)’’Self Compacting [15] Rakesh Kumar D, (2015) ‘’Self-Compacted Concrete Mix
Concrete -A concrete of next decade, Journal of Engineering Design and its Comparison with Conventional Concrete (M-
Research and Studies Vol.II. Page no.214-218 40)’’ Journal of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Volume 5
• Issue 3
[11] Pratik Deshmukh (2013) ‘’Strengthening of Self Compacting
Concrete Using Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag [16] Sakthi Ganesh G, ( June 2017)’’ Mechanical and Durability
(GGBS) for Cost Efficiency’’International Journal of Science Properties of Self Compacting Concrete’’ International
and Research (IJSR),Page no. 694-698 Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) –
Volume 48 No. 4 Page no.193-199
[12] Rahul Sikka and Arvind Dewangan (Sept.2014)
‘’Determination of compressive strength difference between [17] T.Jeevitha, Dr S.Krishnamoorthi, G.S.Rampradheep (April
conventional concrete and recycled aggregate concrete’’ 2014) ‘Study on Strength properties of Self Compacting
International Journal of Current Research and Academic concrete with Micro silica’ International Journal of Innovative
Review,Vol.2 P.n.275-280 Research in Science, Engineering and Technology,Page
no.11239 -11244
[13] Rajasekaran. D, Aravind Prabu.S, Karthik.S
(2017)’’Comparison of the Performance of Self Compacting [18] EFNARC –Specifications &guidelines for Self Compacting
Concrete’’ International Journal of ChemTech Research, Concrete (February 2002)
Vol.10 No.11, pp 95-101

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3372119

http://ssrn.com/link/2019-ICAST.html