Dave, N; Guduru, R; Misra, A K and Sharma, A K (2022) Experimental evaluation of bond behavior in controlled, binary and quaternary concretes developed using scms. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 20(6), pp. 1430-1448. ISSN 1726-0531
Abstract
Purpose: The consumption of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) has increased enormously in the construction industry. These SCMs are often waste materials or industrial by-products. This study aims to investigate the bond strength using reinforcing bars in Normal Strength Concrete (M20 grade) and High Strength Concrete (M40 grade), developed using SCMs and data was compared with concrete prepared with ordinary portland cement (OPC). The findings of the study will help in reducing the dependency on OPC and promote the utilization of waste materials in Construction. Design/methodology/approach: In the present study, the bond behavior between the steel bars and the concrete was investigated in controlled, binary and quaternary concretes of M20 and M40 grades. Following the conventional procedures, samples were prepared and mechanical tests conducted (as per IS:2770–1 code for M20 and M40 grade concrete structures), which showed an improvement in the bond strength depending on the extent of overall calcium and silica content in these composite mixtures, and thus reflected the importance of vigilant utilization of used industrial waste in the OPC as a replacement without exceeding silica content beyond certain percentages for enhanced structural properties. Findings: Experimental evaluation of bond behavior results showed a brittle nature for the controlled (OPC) concrete mixtures. While binary and quaternary concrete was able to resist the load-carrying capacity under large deformations and prevented the split cracking and disintegration of the concretes. Among different variations in the chemistry, for both M20 and M40 grades, the maximum bond strengths were observed for 10% Metakaolin + 10% Silica Fume + 30% Fly Ash + 50% OPC composition and this could be attributed to the fineness of the additives, better packing and enhanced calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-H). Originality/value: Quaternary concrete may be a future option in place of OPC concrete. Very limited data is available related to the bond strength of quaternary concrete. Experimental analysis on quaternary concrete shows that its use in construction can reduce both construction cost and a burden on natural raw materials used to make OPC.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | binary concrete; bond behavior; building technology; built environment research; materials performance; quaternary concrete; scms |
| Index terms: | industrial waste, materials performance, construction cost, waste material, composite, fly ash, concrete structure, option, disintegration, construction industry, metakaolin, ordinary Portland cement, building technology, deformation, replacement, built environment research, consumption, silica fume, methodology, variation |
| Subjects: | structural engineering, research methods, material properties and characteristics, contractual condition, research management, decision analysis, industry analysis, waste management, engineering systems, consumer economics, materials science, building materials, environmental science, financial and cost management, material degradation and durability |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Research Practice, Construction Materials, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Sustainability, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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