Muhammad, A; Usman, N and Gambo, N (2022) Effect of binary blended pozzolanic materials on properties of self-compacting concrete. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(7), pp. 1323-1332. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
The mechanism of achieving self-compacting concrete (SCC) leads to either high shrinkage or it affects the mechanical properties of the concrete. Therefore, there is a need for blended pozzolanic materials for the production of SCC to improve its properties. The tests conducted on the fresh SCC were filling ability, passing ability, segregation resistance. While on the hardened SCC were density, compressive strength, tensile strength, water absorption, and ultrasonic pulse velocity test. At a fresh stage, the addition of the blend improved the flow and segregation resistance of the SCC produced. SCC produced with the addition of up to 20% of the blends at 7 days of curing had an 8% higher strength. At 150 days, all the SCC specimens have the same range of strength. The water absorption capacity of SCC with the addition of the blend up to 20% was found to be 12% less than that of the control specimens. Cement replaced with up to 20% blend of RHA and MK can be used to produce SCC with improved early (7 days) and later strength. It is recommended that when SCC is to be produced with a blend of RHA and MK, 20% is the optimum level of cement replacement.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | filling ability; passing ability; self-compacting concrete; slump flow |
| Index terms: | pozzolanic material, tensile strength, mechanical property, density, compressive strength, curing, cement replacement, water absorption |
| Subjects: | material analysis and testing, analytical methods, water management, building materials, concrete and cementitious materials, material properties and characteristics |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Urban Studies, Construction Materials |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here