Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

Investigating the Reliability of Selected

Mix Design Methods for the Production of
Super-Workable Concrete
Kemejika I. Amadi-Oparaeli1, Ichebadu G. Amadi2 and Enwuso A. Igwe3
1,2,3
Department of Civil Engineering
Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

Abstract:- In order to proffer solution to the difficulties Irrespective of the attractive qualities of SCC, one
experienced in achieving a super-workable concrete major drawback of super-workable concrete is its cost of
commonly known as Self Compacting Concrete, four production which relates to the use of high quantity of
mixture design methods were carefully selected and Portland cement. An option to bring down the production
investigated. Three mixes were designed for each cost of super-workable concrete is to bring in mineral
method considered in accordance with their admixtures like fly ash as partial replacement for cement
specifications. The methods considered are: the (Uysal and Sumer 2011). Secondly, it is considered
American Concrete Institute, EFNARC, European challenging to design because of the need to balance the
Project Group and the Optimal Mixture Design (Yu et characteristics of its fresh properties (Sedran and de Larrard
al) methods. The results disclosed that the EFNARC 1999). Numerous efforts have been made to develop an
method is the most reliable method in the production of optimized mixture design method for super-workable
super-workable concrete as it significantly satisfies the concrete, however, no specific mixture design method has
fresh properties of the concrete. been successfully developed to meet all fresh concrete
criteria (Grdic, Despotovic and Toplicic-Curcic, 2008;
Keywords:- Mix Design Methods, Super-Workable BIBM et al. 2005). This study will seek to investigate the
Concrete and Fresh Properties. reliability of different mix design methods to produce SCC.

I. INTRODUCTION II. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

Super-workable concrete commonly called Self-  Materials

Compacting Concrete (SCC) was first discovered in Japan Cement: Hanson Heidelberg Portland cement product
since 1988. Its discovery was a landmark achievement in (CEM I 52,5N) with density of 3029 kg/m3 and in
concrete construction which helped to solve the problem of conforming to BS EN 197-1 was used.
inadequate compaction leading to durability issues of
concrete structures. Also, SCC was a solution to the Aggregate: Fine aggregate obtained within Coventry,
diminishing number of skilled workers which was quite United Kingdom with grain size not greater than 4.75 mm
expensive too (Okamura and Ouchi 2003; Goodier, 2003). and having density of 2670 kg/m3 was used. The coarse
aggregate has grain size not greater than 19 mm and a
SCC also referred to as Self-Consolidating, Self- density of 2525 kg/m3. The particle size distribution graphs
Placing or Self-Leveling Concrete (ACI 2007) is a special can be seen in figure 1.
type of concrete which can flow into form-work corners
and reinforcement gaps only by its self-weight without the Fly ash: Pulverized fuel ash produced in Scotland and
need for external compaction or mechanical vibration, conforming to BS EN ISO 9002:1994, with a density of
whilst recording minimal bleeding and segregation (Umar 2090 kg/m3 was used.
and Al-Tamimi 2011; Su, Hsu and Chai, 2001).
Super-plasticizer: A poly-carboxylate polymer based
The most appealing attributes of Super-workable super-plasticizer (ADVA flow 411) from Grace
concrete are those of its fresh properties, which has to do Construction and in conformity with EN 934-2 and having
with the passing and filling abilities, and the resistance to a recommended dosage of 600 ml- 1200 ml/ 100 kg of
segregation, which leads to health, economic, technological cement was used.
and aesthetic advantages in terms of noise reduction, cost
of labour and smooth finishes (ACI 2007).  Methods
The experiment consists of preparing mixture designs
in line with the standards considered in this study as shown
in Table 1. About 30 litres of concrete was mixed in
accordance with the selected methods to accommodate all
relevant tests.

IJISRT20MAR658 www.ijisrt.com 1245

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
MIX CEMENT ADMIXTURE WATER FINE COARSE HRWRA w/p REMARK
DESIGN AGGRE. AGGR.
METHODS
EFNARC 160-240 ltrs (400 - 600 Max. Rest of mix volume 28 – 0.8 – Self-compatibility
(2002) kg/m3) 200kg/m3 35% by 1.1 by is achieved by trial
vol. vol. mixes
YU et al 30 – 40% of powder - Sand ≤ 33% of ˃0.5% ≤ 0.4 -
(2005) mortar ≤ mix vol. of
0.44 by cement
vol. s/a =
45-50%
BIBM et al 380 – 600 kg/m3 150 – 48 – 55% 750 – - 0.85 – Self-compatibility
(2005) 210 of total 1000kg/m3 1.1 is achievd by trial
kg/m3 aggr. wgt. mixes
ACI (2007) Powder =386 – 457kg/m3; Mortar = 68 – 72% of mix; 28 – 32% - 0.32 – Self-compatibility
Paste =34 – 40% of mix of mix 0.45 by is achieved by trial
vol. mass mix
Table 1:- Mix design methods considered

Fig 1:- Sieve analysis of aggregates

 Concrete mix proportions

The mix ratios for the concrete are shown in Table 2. All concrete mix were prepared in accordance with the specifications
of the mix design methods considered.

MIX DESIGN CEMENT PFA POWDER FINE COARSE WATER SP(k W/P w/p
ID (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) g) (mass) (vol.)
EFNARC (2002)
EFN-M1-40P 330 220 550 850 750 175 7.8 0.32 0.82
EFN-M2-40P 340 240 600 760 750 200 4.6 0.33 0.85
EFN-M3-40P 300 200 500 840 820 158 6.8 0.32 0.81
YU et al (2005)
YU-M1-40P 330 220 580 785 785 165 6.4 0.3
YU-M2-40P 300 200 500 780 790 180 4.4 0.36
YU-M3-40P 300 200 500 790 820 175 5.2 0.35
EUROPEAN PROJECT GROUP (BIBM et al 2005)
BIB-M1-40P 330 220 550 764 788 190 5 0.89
BIB-M2-40P 348 232 520 790 775 175 7.2 0.87
BIB-M3-40P 270 180 450 870 800 172 7.2 0.98
AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE (ACI 2007)
ACI-M1-40P 280 187 467 890 740 155 9.2 0.33
ACI-M2-40P 285 190 475 840 745 185 7.2 0.31
ACI-M3-40P 276 184 460 895 780 161 8.4 0.35
EFN-M1-40P represents 1st mix for EFNARC method with 40% PFA, YU-M2-40P represents 2nd mix for Yu et al method
with 40% PFA, BIB-M3-40P represents 3rd mix for BIBM et al method with 40% PFA and similar to all other mix identities
Table 2:- Concrete mixture proportions for various methods

IJISRT20MAR658 www.ijisrt.com 1246

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
 Tests
The tests carried out are only those relating to the fresh properties which include: Visual Stability Index (VSI), Slump-flow
and T500, V-funnel and L-box tests. These tests were conducted in quick pace as soon as the concrete mixture was ready. The
slump-flow and T500 tests were conducted together, then the V-funnel test preceded the L-box test (Testing SCC 2005). The VSI
test was carried out immediately after the slump flow test using the eye to observe the presence of mortar halos and patty. This is
intended to physically confirm the extent of stability of the concrete mixture. The rating for this test is as shown in Table 3.

Table 3:- Visual Stability Index (VSI) rating for SCC (PCI 2003:30)

T500 and slump flow tests measures the flow rate and flow ability of super-workable concrete in the absence of obstacles.
The tests were conducted in compliance with the EFNARC specification, which is in agreement with BS EN 12350-8:2010. The
recommended ranges for a good filling ability are: 2-5secs for T500 and 650mm-800mm for slump flow. The pictorial view of the
test is shown in Plate 1.

V-funnel test measures viscosity and filling ability of super-workable concrete. It was conducted in compliance with BS EN
12350-8:2010. Plate 2 shows the pictorial view of the test.

L-box text measures the passing ability of super-workable concrete. It was conducted in conformity with BS EN 12350-
8:2010. The ratio of the difference in height of the vertical section (H1) and that of the horizontal section (H2) was taken as the L-
box reading (see Plate 3).

Plate 1: Slump-flow test.

Plate 2: V-funnel test

IJISRT20MAR658 www.ijisrt.com 1247

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Plate 3: L-box test

III. RESULTS

Table 4 shows the results of tests carried out to investigate the fresh properties of super-workable concrete for the mixture
design methods considered. The results are graphically displayed in Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5.

Mix design ID Slump flow (mm) t500 (s) V-funnel (s) L-box (H1/H2) VSI
EFNARC (2002)
EFN-M1-40P 690 2.3 6.6 0.82 0
EFN-M2-40P 720 1.82 5.4 0.92 2
EFN-M3-40P 660 4.65 10.3 0.83 0
Yu et al (2005)
YU-M1-40P 668 2.4 6 0.81 0
YU-M2-40P 635 1.9 5.89 0.71 1
YU-M3-40P 656 3.9 6.11 0.68 0
European Project Group (BIBM et al 2005)
BIB-M1-40P 727.5 2 6.83 0.9 1
BIB-M2-40P 668 2.3 6.89 0.82 0
BIB-M3-40P 574 2.9 5.92 0.66 0
American Concrete Institute (2007)
ACI-M1-40P 612 3.7 9.9 0.68 1
ACI-M2-40P 540 3.3 7.6 0.57 0
ACI-M3-40P 615 2.6 6.8 0.76 1
Table 4:- Test results on fresh properties of super-workable concrete.

Fig 2:- Slump-flow results for the different methods

IJISRT20MAR658 www.ijisrt.com 1248

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Fig 3:- T500 results for the different methods

Fig 4:- V-funnel results for the different methods

Fig 5:- L-box results for the different methods

IJISRT20MAR658 www.ijisrt.com 1249

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
IV. DISCUSSIONS workable concrete produced with this method is more of
the VMA type.
 EFNARC (2002)
Figure 2 shows that all concrete mixtures produced A careful observation of Tables 1 and 4 shows that the
using the EFNARC method achieved a slump-flow within entire mixes designed with powder content less than 480
the standard range; this simply tells that the concrete has a kg/m3 resulted in low slump value.
good filling ability. Also, the V-funnel and T500 results
showed in Figures 3 and 4, falls within the specified range V. CONCLUSIONS
except for mix EFN-M2-40P which reveals slight
segregation, which may be as a result of no VMA in the The following are the conclusions drawn from this
mixture. Figure 5 shows that the L-box results are within study:
the target range, thus indicating a satisfactory passing  The EFNARC mixture design method satisfies all fresh
ability. From Table 4, the VSI rating shows 0 and 1, which properties of Super-workable concrete, and it is flexible
is an indication of good stability, except for mix EFN-M2- and adequate for SCC production.
40P which had slight segregation. Generally, it can be  The mixture design method proposed by BIBM et al
inferred that the EFNARC method is adequate for the satisfies all fresh properties of super-workable concrete,
design of super-workable concrete. but is more convenient for the production of the
combined type concrete, depending on the material
 Optimal mixture design (Yu et al. 2005) properties.
Figures 2, 3 and 4 showed that all concrete mixtures  To achieve a good passing ability of a super-workable
produced with this method are within the target range for concrete using the Yu et al mixture design method, it is
slump-flow, T500 and V-funnel, apart from the mixture advisable to adopt equal percentage of fine and coarse
tagged YU-M2-40P which had a low slump-flow, T500 and aggregates in the mix.
V-funnel values. This can be linked to the low dosage of  The ACI mixture design is difficult to achieve because
super-plasticizer recommended by this method. The of the low paste content recommend by the method.
mixtures within the target ranges signify good filling Hence, it is deemed not suitable for massive concrete
ability. From Figure 5, the second and third mixtures fall work.
outside the specified range, indicating poor passing ability;
this can be ascribed to the high coarse to total aggregate In summary, it can therefore be concluded that the
ratio proposed by this method. From Table 4, VSI test was EFNARC mixture design method is the most suitable in the
satisfied for all mixes. production of super-workable concrete.

 European Project Group (BIBM et al. 2005). REFERENCES

From Figure 2, 3, 4 and 5, the first two mixtures fall
within the target ranges as they show good filling and [1]. ACI 237R-07 (American Concrete Institute) (2007)
passing abilities. The third mix (BIB-M3-40P) only Self-Consolidating Concrete, Farmingthon Hills,
satisfied the T500 test, implying a good viscosity however [online] available from
the filling and passing ability is poor. This could be a <http://www.scribd.com/doc/59020140/ACI-237R-
consequence of low powder content or insufficient 07-Self-Consolidating-Concrete-1> [2 July 2011], 15-
proportioning of super-plasticizer and VMA dosages in the 18.
mix. From Table 4, VSI test was satisfied for all mixes. The [2]. ASTM D422 – 63 (2007) “Standard Test Method for
results also reveal that this method can be suitable for both Particle-Size Analysis of Soils”.
the powder and combined types of super-workable [3]. BIBM., CEMBUREAU., EFCA., EFNARC.,
concrete, but not too suitable for the VMA type. Although, ERMCO. (Self-Compacting Concrete European
the reduced range for water-powder ratio proposed by this Project Group) (2005) The European Guidelines for
method, compared to that of EFNARC method, makes it a Self-Compacting Concrete Specification, Production
little stressful to develop a mix design for the powder type and Use [online] available from
super-workable concrete which requires very low water- <http://www.efnarc.org> [1 June 2011]
powder ratio. [4]. BS EN 12350-8: 2010 ‘Testing fresh concrete’. Part
8: self-compacting concrete – slump-flow test.
 American Concrete Institute (2007) [5]. EFNARC (European Federation of Specialist
Figures 2, 3 and 4 reveals an unsatisfactory slump- Construction Chemicals and Concrete Systems)
flow but high T500 and V-funnel values. This indicates poor (2002) Specification & Guidelines for Self-
filling ability, but a highly viscous SCC mixture. This could Compacting Concrete [online] available from <
be due to insufficient super-plasticizer dosage. From Figure http://www.efnarc.org > [30 May 2011]
5, it is seen that all mixes are below the target range, which [6]. EFNARC (2006) 'Guidelines for viscosity modifying
is indicative of poor passing ability. This may also be admixtures for concrete' [online] available from
attributed to an insufficient super-plasticizer dosage. Table <http://www.efca.info/dowmloads/GuidelinesforVMA
4 reveals a satisfactory VSI results for this method. The (document 180).pdf> [24 July 2011]
range of powder content proposed by this method, when [7]. Goodier, C.I. (2003) 'Development of self-compacting
compared to EFNARC‟s classifications shows that super- concrete'. Structures and Buildings 156, 405-414

IJISRT20MAR658 www.ijisrt.com 1250

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[8]. Grace Construction Product (n.d) Concrete Product
Guide, Products for Improving Concrete
Performances [online] available from
<http://www.uk.graceconstruction.com> [29 June
2019]
[9]. Grdic, Z., Despotovic, I. and Toplicic-Curcic, G.
(2008) ‘Properties of self-compacting concrete with
different types of additives’, Facta universitatis -
series: Architecture and Civil Engineering. National
Library of Serbia, 6(2), 173–177
[10]. Su, N., Hsu, K. C. and Chai, H. W. (2001) ‘A simple
mix design method for self-compacting concrete’,
Cement and Concrete Research. Pergamon, 31(12),
1799–1807
[11]. Okamura, H. and Ouchi, M. (2003) 'Self-Compacting
Concrete'. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology,
Japan Concrete Institute 1, 5-15
[12]. Sedran, T. and de Larrard, F. (1999) 'Optimization of
self-compacting concrete thanks to packing model' in
PRO 42: 1st International RILEM symposium on self-
compacting concrete ed. by Skarendahl, A. and
Peterson, O.
[13]. Testing SCC (2005) 'Guidelines for testing fresh self-
compacting concrete'. European research project:
measurement of properties of fresh self-compacting
concrete.
[14]. Umar, A. and Al Tamimi, A. (2011) 'Influence of
Viscosity Modifying Admixture (VMA) on the
Properties of SCC Produced Using Locally Supplied
Materials in Bahrain'. Jordan Journal of Civil
Engineering 5, 32-49
[15]. Uysal, M. and Sumer, M. (2011) 'Performance of self-
compacting concrete containing different mineral
admixtures'. Construction and building materials 25,
4112-4120
[16]. Yu, Z., Pan, Z., Liu, X. and Liu, Z. (2005) 'Optimal
Mixture Design of High Performance Seslf-
Compacting Concrete'. In PRO 42: 1st International
Symposium on Design, Performance and use of Self-
Consolidating concrete 26-28 May 2005 ed. by Yu,
Z., Shi, C. and Khayat, K.H. Changsha, Husan, China
181-190

IJISRT20MAR658 www.ijisrt.com 1251