UTILIZATION OF MARBLE AND GRANITE POWDERS AS GREEN ...

UTILIZATION OF MARBLE AND GRANITE POWDERS AS

GREEN BUILDING MATERIALS IN CONCRETE

ANUJ

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI

NEW DELHI, INDIA

FEBRUARY 2015

UTILIZATION OF MARBLE AND GRANITE POWDERS AS

GREEN BUILDING MATERIALS IN CONCRETE

by

ANUJ

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Submitted

in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

to the

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI

NEW DELHI, INDIA

February, 2015

i

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Utilization of Marble and Granite Powders as

Green Building Materials in Concrete” being submitted by Mr. Anuj to the Indian Institute of

Technology Delhi for the award of degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Civil Engineering is a

record of bona fide research work carried out by him under my supervision. The thesis work,

in my opinion, has reached the requisite standard of fulfilling the requirement of the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy.

The results contained in this thesis have not been submitted, in part or full, to any other

university or institute for the award of any other degree or diploma.

(Dr. Supratic Gupta)

Assistant Professor,

Department of Civil Engineering,

Date: 24/02/2015 Indian Institute of Technology Delhi,

New Delhi New Delhi, India

iii

ACKLOWLEDGEMENTS

The author expresses his deepest sense of gratitude to his supervisor Dr. Supratic Gupta

for providing him the opportunity and guidance throughout this research project. His devotion

and support helped in all the time of research and writing of this thesis. He shall ever remain

grateful to him for all the inspiration.

The author would like to thank the members of Student Research Committee of Civil

Engineering Department, IIT Delhi: Prof. K. G. Sharma, Dr. G. S. Benipal, and Prof. S. V.

Veeravalli, for their encouragement, insightful comments, and correct guidance to provide the

direction for completion of this thesis. Sincere thanks also goes to Prof. Bishwajit

Bhattacharjee, Dr. Shashank Bishnoi and Prof. A. K. Nema for their valuable support and

critical suggestion.

The author thankfully acknowledges the time devoted and assistance rendered by his

fellow Ph. D. student, Mr. Khuito Murumi. He had relentlessly worked and shared his valuable

time in providing inputs and suggestions for the thesis and bringing it to present shape. The

author would also like to thank B. Tech. students - Mr. Jyoti Shanker Pandey and Mr. Anshu

Bansal and M. Tech. students - Mr. S. Ramakrishnan and Mr. Vimete Pusa who worked with

him during their study at IIT Delhi and significantly contributed to the knowledge required for

the study. The author also like to thank Mr. Goutam Barai, Mr. Pradeep Singh Negi, Late

Mr. Avinesh Kumar, Mr. Navneet Kumar and other staff of concrete lab, IIT Delhi.

He acknowledges M/s UltraTech Cement Limited for permitting him for this

opportunity and to pursue this research. Specifically thanks to Mr. Rajeeb Kumar for his

encouragement and support. Hearty thanks for all well-wishers who have directly or indirectly

encouraged for the completion of this work.

iv

Thanks are due to the financial support received from BMTPC through Ministry of

Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Govt. of India, under Project No. RP01971 titled,

“Study on environmental impacts of disposal of marble slurry/ marble dust and investigations

on its use in concrete,” jointly under Prof. A. K. Nema and Dr. Supratic Gupta.

Last but not the least; the author would like to thank his family: his wife Dr. Alka and

kids Ms. Bhaavya and Master Somaay; his parents Dr. Ramesh Chand Maheshwari and

Mrs. Asha Maheshwari; brothers and their families for their constant encouragement,

understanding and moral support.

(ANUJ)

Department of Civil Engineering,

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi

New Delhi, India

v

DEDICATION

The author dedicates this research work and thesis to his ever-loving parents Dr. Ramesh Chand Maheshwari and Mrs. Asha Maheshwari

vii

ABSTRACT

India is now in a stage where construction of roads, bridges, ports, factories, residential and

commercial buildings, etc. is taking place at very rapid pace and will continue in coming decades as most

of the cities will start building their metro construction. Concrete industry is one industry that is very

important for any developing country where large amount of material is consumed. The materials are

being utilized in a fast pace. Any other new material that can be used in concrete would decrease the pace

of consumption of the materials making the construction little more sustainable.

On the other hand, marble and granite are in great demand as finishing material. A large amount

of extraction waste is being created. A large amount of powder slurry is also being generated due to sawing

and polishing processes. This powder slurry has very consistent particle size distribution and has particle

size of the order on cement and fly ash.

To study the environmental effect due to the wastage created by marble and granite industries,

the author visited Kishangarh, Makrana and Rajsmand in Rajasthan for marble and Khamam in Andhra

Pradesh for granite. It was observed that the environmental problems in Khamam were more severe as it

was more unorganised compared to the situation in Rajasthan. In both the cases, the amount of waste

generation is too large and the situation is waiting for an environmental chaos. Rizzo et al. [94] had

reported that these fine materials could percolate into the soil and create soil and water-related pollution

with grave consequences.

The author presented and estimation of the marble and granite reserve as reported by Indian

Bureau of Mines [89-90], and estimated the production of the marble slurry based on production of marble

slabs. Based on the cement consumption reported by Cement Manufacturers’ Association [9], author

showed that it is possible to consume the slurry produced. Carrying out cost benefit, there would be direct

financial benefit. Other indirect benefits that the country should recognize are the environmental benefits

of such utilization and decrease of consumption of fine and coarse aggregates and thereby provide tax

benefits.

Various researchers have attempted utilization of marble and granite powders. Some talked of

cement replacement whereas most talked sand replacement. A few work has been done on utilization of

viii

granite powder. Initial research work consistently reported lower strength on utilization of these materials.

These problems were solved by proper estimation of water in in the mix in this thesis.

This thesis presents a scientific study about the utilization of this marble and granite in normal

and self-compacting concrete. Determination of SSD condition, its specific gravity, and moisture content

are important. The methodology presented in this thesis can consistently achieve the design strength.

The most important contribution of this thesis are:

a) It established a procedure of utilization of these fine materials such that it can consistently

achieve strength of concrete similar to the composition without them. This is done by doing

proper water correction. Till date various researchers have done research to utilize these

powder materials in concrete and have confusing results. None of these researchers talked

about water correction. With this single important realization, one would be able to properly

design concrete with marble and granite powders without compromising the strength of

concrete.

b) It has been shown that it is abundantly available with uniform and consistent material

property in various parts of India and can be used in concrete to decrease the consumption of

other material thereby making the construction process sustainable.

Other contributions are:

c) Marble and granite powders, being fine of the order of cement and fly ash, can significantly

contribute to the fines and create a cohesive mix.

d) Marble and granite powders can be consumed to the order of 200 kg/m3 for high strength and

to the order of 360 kg/m3 for normal concrete, contributing to 8% to 15% of the volume of

concrete respectively.

e) Plasticizer demand depends on total powder content including cementitious materials and

marble/granite powder used in the concrete mix.

ix

Contents

Certificate i

Acknowledgements iii

Dedication v

Abstract vii

Contents ix

List of Figures xiii

List of Tables xxiii

Symbols and Notations xxix

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.0 General 1

1.1 Objective and scope of the work 3

1.2 Contents of the thesis 4

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.0 General 7

2.1 Effectiveness of fly ash (k-value) 7

2.2 Normal concrete and self-compacting concrete 11

2.3 Initial experiment with marble and granite powders 14

2.4 Utilization of marble and granite wastes in literature 15

2.5 Conclusion 18

Chapter 3: EQUIPMENT, SETUP AND EXPERIMENTS 19

3.0 General 19

3.1 Storage of material 19

3.2 Material property determination 19

3.3 Mixers 20

x

3.4 Workability 21

3.5 Curing 29

3.6 Mechanical properties at hardened stage 30

Chapter 4: MATERIAL PROPERTIES 31

4.0 General 31

4.1 Water 32

4.2 Fine and coarse aggregates 32

4.3 Chemical admixtures 33

4.4 Cement 36

4.5 Fly ash 37

4.6 Microsilica 41

4.7 Marble and granite stones 42

4.8 Marble and granite powders 44

4.9 Shape, particle size and distribution 46

4.10 Specific gravity, water absorption and preparation of material for

marble and granite powders 50

4.11 Conclusion 50

Chapter 5: AVAILABILITY AND UTILIZATION 51

5.0 General 51

5.1 Availability and production of marble and granite 52

5.2 Production system and waste generation 57

5.2.1 Mining and transportation 57

5.2.2 Processing of marble and granite 57

5.3 Waste handling 63

5.4 Environmental impact 63

5.5 Slurry generation and potential consumption in concrete 65

5.6 Cost benefit of utilization of marble and granite powders 67

5.7 Conclusion 69

xi

Chapter 6: IMPORTANCE OF MOISTURE CORECTION IN

FINE POWDER MATERIALS FOR CONCRETE 71

6.0 General 71

6.1 Water absorption at SSD condition and specific gravity 73

6.2 Formulation for SSD condition, specific gravity, moisture content

and water correction 75

6.3 SSD condition, specific gravity, moisture content 77

6.3.1 Cone method as per ASTM C128 – 07a 77

6.3.2 Blotting paper method 78

6.4 A sequence of events to understand the importance of water correction 81

6.5 Mix design and results 83

6.6 Conclusion 88

Chapter 7: MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE

WITH MARBLE AND GRANITE POWDERS 89

7.0 Introduction 89

7.1 Role of w/c ratio 90

7.2 Strength relationships 92

7.3 Utilization of marble and granite powders in concrete in literature 94

7.4 Mix design and results for normal concrete 108

Chapter 8: WORKABILITY, RHEOLOGY AND OTHER

IMPORTANT ISSUES 145

8.0 General 145

8.1 Effect of particle shape and size on workability 147

8.2 Utilization of marble and granite powders 150

8.3 Experimental details and plan for SCC 154

8.4 Rheological properties and discussions 156

8.5 Admixture dosage 165

8.6 Role of fines 169

8.7 Relationship between T500 Vft and viscosity 170

xii

8.8 Relationship between T500, Vft and viscosity, and admixture dosage with flow 172

8.9 Reconfirmation experiments 181

8.10 Particle size distribution of different mixes 182

8.11 Picture story of utilization of marble and granite powders 189

8.12 Conclusion 189

Chapter 9: CONCLUSION 191

REFERENCES 197

Biodata 209

xiii

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 Comparison of k-values predicted 10

Fig. 2.2 Mix proportion of SCC (top) vs. conventional concrete (bottom) 11

Fig. 2.3 Trends in usage of s/a over the past 20 years 11

Fig. 2.4 Effect of admixture dosing on workability 11

Fig. 3.1 Laboratory scale concrete mixers

Fig. 3.1 (a) Tilting drum type mixer 21

Fig. 3.1 (b) Pan type mixer 21

Fig. 3.2 Different types of tests for workability

Fig. 3.2 (a) Slump test - concrete 21

Fig. 3.2 (b) Mini slump cone - Mortar 21

Fig. 3.2 (c) Flow table 21

Fig. 3.3 Schematic diagram of equipment for SCC

Fig. 3.3 (a) Flow Table showing T500 23

Fig. 3.3 (b) V Funnel 23

Fig. 3.3 (c) L Box 23

Fig. 3.3 (d) U Tube 23

Fig. 3.4 Tests for SCC 24

Fig.3.5 Static segregation column test apparatus for SCC 25

Fig. 3.6 Different types of rheometers 25

Fig. 3.7 BT2 rheometer 26

Fig. 3.8 Typical readings of BT2 rheometer 26

Fig.3.9 Temperature and precipitation variations in New Delhi (typical) 29

Fig 3.10 Open curing tank 30

Fig. 3.11 Compression testing machines

Fig. 3.11 (a) Load-controlled 30

Fig. 3.11 (b) Servo-controlled 30

xiv

Fig. 4.1 Percentage passing and limits for aggregates 34

Fig. 4.2 Images showing shapes of different materials

Fig. 4.2 (a) 20 mm aggregate 47

Fig. 4.2 (b) 10 mm aggregate 47

Fig. 4.2 (c) sand 47

Fig. 4.2 (d) Microsilica in uncondensed form (Elkem) 47

Fig. 4.2 (e) Microsilica in uncondensed form 47

Fig. 4.2 (f) Cement 48

Fig. 4.2 (g) Fly ash 48

Fig. 4.2 (h) Granite powder 48

Fig. 4.2 (i) Marble powder 48

Fig. 4.3 Particle size distribution of fine materials used 49

Fig. 5.1 Marble distribution and production in India 55

Fig. 5.2 Granite distribution and production in India 56

Fig. 5.3 Schematic diagram of slab cutting from solid block 58

Fig. 5.4 Production process of marble slabs and waste generation

Fig. 5.4 (a) Blocks extraction site 59

Fig. 5.4 (b) Blocks transport to processing unit 59

Fig. 5.4 (c) Plate and rotary cutting saw 59

Fig. 5.4 (d) Finished product 60

Fig. 5.4 (e) Settling tank 60

Fig. 5.4 (f) Dumping ground 60

Fig. 5.4 (g) Slurry disposal site 60

Fig. 5.4(h) Pre-production waste 60

Fig. 5.4 (i) Post-production waste 60

Fig. 5.4 (j) Disposal of marble slurry in designated marble slurry ponds 61

xv

Fig. 5.5 Production process of granite slabs and waste generation

Fig. 5.5 (a) Blocks extraction site 61

Fig. 5.5 (b) Blocks at processing unit 61

Fig. 5.5 (c) Rotary cutting saw 62

Fig. 5.5 (d) Polishing 62

Fig. 5.5 (e) Finished product 62

Fig. 5.5 (f) Settling tank 62

Fig. 5.5 (g) Road side dumped waste blocks 62

Fig. 5.5 (h) Road side dumped slurry 62

Fig. 6.1 Different moisture content conditions of particles

Fig. 6.1 (a) Moisture on surface 73

Fig. 6.1 (b) SSD condition 73

Fig. 6.1 (c) Air dry 73

Fig. 6.2 Cone method as per ASTM C128 – 07a [58] 78

Fig. 6.3 Moisture content vs. specific gravity 79

Fig. 6.4 Compressive strength vs. w/b ratio for marble powder concrete 87

Fig. 6.5 Compressive strength vs. w/b ratio for granite powder concrete 87

Fig. 7.1 Comparison of Murumi and Gupta results against Popovics’/Kaplan’s 92

Fig. 7.2 Strength relationships as per EN and IS codes 94

Fig. 7.3 28 days compressive strength vs. w/b 97



Fig. 7.6 Compressive strength variation with w/b

Fig. 7.6 (a) 7 days compressive strength vs. w/b 115

Fig. 7.6 (b) 28 days compressive strength vs. w/b 116

Fig. 7.6 (c) Compressive strength vs. w/b for all mixes 116

xvi

Fig. 7.7 Flexural strength vs. w/b

Fig. 7.7 (a) 7 days flexural strength vs. w/b 117

Fig. 7.7 (b) 28 days flexural strength vs. w/b 117

Fig. 7.7 (c) Flexural strength vs. w/b for all mixes 118

Fig. 7.8 Split tensile strength vs. w/b

Fig. 7.8 (a) 7 days split tensile strength vs. w/b 118

Fig. 7.8 (b) 7 days split tensile strength vs. w/b 119

Fig. 7.8 (c) Split tensile strength vs. w/b for all mixes 119

Fig. 7.9 Flexural strength vs. split tensile strength

Fig. 7.9 (a) 7 days flexural strength vs. split tensile strength 120

Fig. 7.9 (b) 28 days flexural strength vs. split tensile strength 120

Fig. 7.9 (c) Flexural strength vs. split tensile strength for all mixes 121

Fig. 7.10 Flexural strength vs. compressive strength

Fig. 7.10 (a) 7 days flexural strength vs. compressive strength 121

Fig. 7.10 (b) 28 days flexural strength vs. compressive strength 122

Fig. 7.10 (c) Flexural strength vs. compressive strength for all mixes 122

Fig. 7.11 Split tensile strength vs. compressive strength

Fig. 7.11 (a) 7 days split tensile strength vs. compressive strength 123

Fig. 7.11 (b) 28 days split tensile strength vs. compressive strength 123

Fig. 7.11 (c) Split tensile strength vs. compressive strength for all mixes 124

Fig. 7.12 Compressive strength vs. w/b






xvii














Fig. 7.16 (c) Flexural strength vs. compressive strength for all mixes 134





Fig. 7.18 Compressive strength vs. w/b








xviii












Fig. 7.22 (c) Flexural strength vs. Compressive strength for all mixes 143





Fig. 8.1 Admixture dosage demand

Fig. 8.1(a) Weight basis 149

Fig. 8.1(b) Percentage basis 149

Fig. 8.2 Possible utilization of Marble/Granite Powder in Concrete 151

Fig. 8.3 Utilization of Cement, Fly Ash and Marble/Granite Powder in Concrete

Fig. 8.3 (a) 0% FA 153

Fig. 8.3 (b) 20% FA 153

Fig. 8.3 (c) 30% FA 153

Fig. 8.3 (d) 40% FA 154

xix

Fig. 8.4 Utilization of Cement, Fly Ash and Marble/Granite Powder in

Concrete by Alyamac and Ince 154

Fig. 8.5 SCC classifications and applications 158

Fig. 8.6 Admixture dosage vs. Vft for SCC mixes

Fig. 8.6 (a) Granite powder concrete 166

Fig. 8.6 (b) Marble powder concrete 166

Fig. 8.6 (c) Higher fly ash concrete 166

Fig. 8.6 (d) Higher sand concrete 166

Fig 8.7 Admixture dosage vs. Vft boundary for SCC mixes 167

Fig 8.8 T500 vs. Vft for SCC mixes 173

Fig 8.9 Viscosity vs. Vft for SCC mixes 173

Fig. 8.10 Variation of T500 with flow





Fig. 8.11 Variation of Vft with flow





Fig. 8.12 Relationship between intercept of Vft vs. flow graph and w/b 178

Fig. 8.13 Relationship between positive slope of Vft vs. flow graph and w/b 178

Fig 8.14 Viscosity vs. flow for SCC mixes



xx



Fig 8.15 Admixture dosage vs. flow for SCC mixes





Fig. 8.16 Particle size distribution for SCC group 1 and group 6 183

Fig. 8.17 Particle size distribution for normal concrete 183

Fig. 8.18 SCC with marble and granite powders

Fig. 8.18 (a) Oven-dried marble powder 184

Fig. 8.18 (b) Oven-dried granite powder 184

Fig. 8.18 (c) Marble in paste form 185

Fig. 8.18 (d) Granite in paste form 185

Fig. 8.18 (e) SCC at flow of 640 mm 186

Fig. 8.18 (f) SCC at flow of 690 mm 186

Fig. 8.18 (g) SCC inside mixer 187

Fig. 8.18 (h) L-box test with 3 rebars 187

Fig. 8.18 (i) V-funnel test 188

Fig. 8.18 (j) BT2 rheometer test 188

xxi

List of Tables

Table 2.1 k-values for fly ash in EU member states 9

Table 3.1 Experiments and standards related to material property determination 20

Table 3.2 Classification used in specification of SCC 24

Table 3.3 Standards and specimen size for mechanical properties of concrete 29

Table 4.1 Test results of water used in experiment 32

Table 4.2 Sieve analysis results of coarse and fine aggregates used 34

Table 4.3 Physical properties of fine aggregate used 35

Table 4.4 Physical properties of coarse aggregate used 35

Table 4.5 Main compounds of Portland cement used 38

Table 4.6 Physical and chemical properties of cement (OPC 53) used 38

Table 4.7 Physical requirements for fly ash as per IS 3812: 2013 40

Table 4.8 Chemical requirements for fly ash as per IS 3812: 2013 40

Table 4.9 Physical and chemical properties of fly ash used 41

Table 4.10 Physical and chemical properties of microsilica used 41

Table 4.11 Chemical properties of marble 43

Table 4.12 Physical properties of marble 43

Table 4.13 Physical properties of granite 44

Table 4.14 Classification of granite 44

Table 4.15 Chemical properties of marble powder used 45

Table 4.16 Chemical properties of granite powder used 45

Table 4:17 Particle size under diameter of fine materials 48

Table 4.18 Particle size distribution as percentage passing 49

Table 5.1 Marble deposit in India 53

Table 5.2 Granite deposit in India 53

xxii

Table 5.3 State wise production of marble and granite in India 54

Table 5.4 Year-wise production of marble and granite in India 54

Table 5.5 Marble/granite wasted due to sawing 58

Table 5.6 Reserves, production and potential slurry consumption 67

Table 5.7 Cost benefit due to plasticizer, fly ash and marble/granite powders 68

Table 6.1 Typical example of moisture correction in sand 77

Table 6.2 Specific gravity calculation 79

Table 6.3 Water content at SSD and specific gravity by blotting paper method 80

Table 6.4 Sample calculation for correction of mix design for marble powder 83

Table 6.5 Mix design for higher granite powder

Table 6.5 (a) Uncorrected w/b ratio 84

Table 6.5 (b) Corrected w/b ratio and strength results 84

Table 6.6 Mix design for higher marble powder

Table 6.6 (a) Uncorrected w/b ratio 85

Table 6.6 (b) Corrected w/b ratio and strength results 86

Table 7.1 (a) Strength properties as per EN 1992-1-1 93

Table 7.1 (b) Strength properties as per IS456 93

Table 7.2 (a) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Vaidevi et al. 97

Table 7.2 (b) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Shelke et al. 97

Table 7.2 (c) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Corinaldesi et al. 98

Table 7.2 (d) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Awol 98

Table 7.2 (e) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Demirel et al. 98

Table 7.2 (f) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Hameed et al. 99

Table 7.2 (g) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Hameed et al. SCC mixes 99

Table 7.2 (h) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Hunger et al. 99

xxiii

Table 7.3 (a) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Almeida et al. 102

Table 7.3 (b) Mix design data and 28 days compressive strength for Belaidi et al. 102

Table 7.3 (c) Mix design with marble powder and 28days compressive strength

for Alyamac and Ince. 103

Table 7.3 (d) Mix design with marble powder and 28days compressive strength

for Alyamac and Ince. 104

Table 7.3 (e) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Guneyisi et al. 104

Table 7.3 (f) Mix design and 28 days compressive strength for Topcu et al. 104

Table 7.4 (a) Mix design with marble powder and 28days compressive strength

for Williams and Felix. 105

Table 7.4 (b) Mix design with marble powder and 28days compressive strength

for Divakar. 105

Table 7.4 (c) Mix design with marble powder and 28days compressive strength

for Elmoaty. 106

Table 7.4 (d) Mix design with marble powder and 28days compressive strength

for Pandey 106

Table 7.4 (e) Mix design with granite powder and 28days compressive strength

for Bansal 107

Table 7.5 Mix design with lower granite powder usage

Table 7.5 (a) Mix design details in kg/m3 110

Table 7.5 (b) Strength data 110

Table 7.6 Mix design with lower marble powder usage



xxiv

Table 7.7 Mix design with higher granite powder usage



Table 7.8 Mix design with higher marble powder usage



Table 7.9 Mix design for control mixes



Table 7.10 Mix design for SCC mixes


Table 7.10 (b) Strength data for SCC mixes 126

Table 8.1 Admixture dosage demand


Table 8.1 (b) Casting details 148

Table 8.2 Different possible combinations of powder content in concrete 151

Table 8.3 Possible marble/granite powder utilization in concrete 151

Table 8.4 Classes for SCC according to EFNARC

Table 8.4 (a) Slump flow classes 158

Table 8.4 (b) Viscosity classes 158

Table 8.4 (c) Passing ability classes (L-box) 158

Table 8.5 Rheological properties of granite powder concrete 159

Table 8.6 Rheological properties of marble powder concrete 160

Table 8.7 Rheological properties of higher fly ash concrete 161

Table 8.8 Rheological properties of higher sand concrete 162

xxv

Table 8.9 Limiting values of Vft and T500 (in s) 162

Table 8.10 EFNARC limits for four groups of SCC 163

Table 8.11 Slope and intercept values of Vft vs. flow graphs 164

Table: 8.12 Details of reconfirmation casting with marble powder 182

Table: 8.13 Details of reconfirmation casting with granite powder 182

xxvi

Symbols and Notations

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

ASTM Int’l American Society for Testing and Materials International

BS British Standards

d10 10% of the particles in the tested sample are smaller than



EN European Standards

flow The average diameter of SCC on flow table during slump test (in mm)

f% Percentage replacement of cement by fly ash

G Granite powder

IS Indian Standards

k-value Efficiency factor of fly ash at 28 days

M Marble powder

MPa Mega-Pascal

NC Normal Concrete, that is, non-SCC

NS Naphthalene Sulfonate

OPC Ordinary Portland Cement

PCE Polycarboxylic Ether

s/a Weight of sand to total aggregate ratio

SCC Self-compacting concrete

SEM Scanning electron microscope

S.G. Specific gravity

SSD Saturated surface dry

T500 Time for SCC to reach an average diameter of 500 mm on flow table (in s)

xxvii

V Viscosity of SCC (reading from BT2 rheometer)

VMA Viscosity Modifying Agent

Vft V-funnel time (in s)

w/b water to binder ratio, where binder is the sum of all cementitious materials

Yield stress Yield stress of SCC (reading from BT2 rheometer)

UTILIZATION OF MARBLE AND GRANITE POWDERS AS GREEN ...

Documents

Transcript of UTILIZATION OF MARBLE AND GRANITE POWDERS AS GREEN ...