Lightweight Aggregate Concrete

Alexandria University
Faculty of Engineering
Civil Engineering Department
Lightweight
Concrete
B.Sc. GRADUATION PROJECT
Supervised by
Prof. Dr. Adel Ahmed El Kordy
Dr. Abd El Kader Mohamed Safouh
Project Workgroup
1. Ahmed Mohamed Mahmoud Abd Allah
2. Ahmed Mohamed Reda Abd El Azim Bshr
3. Wael Said Radwan
4. Karim Mohamed Abd El Hafiz
5. Mohamed Amen Amen El Sharkawy
6. Mohamed El Said Saad Azaz
7. Mohamed Ally Abd El Wahab
8. Karim Mansour Farghaly
9. Hassan Hamdy Emam
10. Islam Ahmed Abd El Samie Gafy
11. Amr Mohamed El Kharboutly
12. Moemn Ramadan Mohamed
13. Mohamed Abbas Hafez
14. Ahmed Mohamed El Said Abd El Fattah
15. Mohamed Abou El Abbas Abd El Rady
16. Mohamed Said El Kordy
17. Mohamed Medhat Ally Hassan El Ebyary
18. Hend Ally Yosry Hassan El Salamony
19. Heba Metwaly El Said Metwaly
20. Walla Mustafa El Desoky Mustafa
21. Israa Yousef Aly
22. Ahmed Mohamed Hassan Soliman
23. Rimon Fawzy Aziz
24. Ehab El Dib Salama
25. Gemmy Morris
26. Emad Adel Wassef
27. Ally Fathy Abd El Aal
28. Sherif Abd El Monem El Gendy
Acknowledgments
We all owe so many thanks, first of all to GOD, for blessing all our times and giving us
the patience and enthusiasm to get this project to its final picture. Then, many thanks go
to many people who have really helped us all through the project.
We will mention some, but not all, of those who supported us in our project. Primarily,
we would like to thank Prof. Dr. Adel Ahmed El Kordy and Dr. Abd El Kader Mohamed
Safouh, for his continued support, and unrivaled guidance throughout the project. Many
thanks go to all the material professors for raising our spirits and encouraging us with
our project. We would also like to thank the staff of the materials laboratory who
supplied us with every piece of information they could get their hands on to help us
accomplish our goal.
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE ......................................................................................................... 9
......................................................................................................... 9
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
......................................................................................... 9
2.2.1 Lightweight Aggregate Concrete (LWAC) In Ancient Times ....................................... 9
2.2.2 LWAC in the 19th Century
................................................................................. 11
2.2.3 Production of Leca
.......................................................................................... 13
2.2.4 LWAC In 1950s
............................................................................................. 13
2.3 LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE
........................................................................ 14
2.3.1 Advantages of Light Weight Concretes
................................................................ 14
2.3.2 Disadvantages of Lightweight Concretes .............................................................. 14
2.4 CLASSIFICATION OF LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE
............................................................... 14
2.4.1 Low Density Concretes
.................................................................................... 15
2.4.2 Moderate Strength Concretes
............................................................................ 15
2.4.3 Structural Concretes
........................................................................................ 15
2.5 LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATES
...................................................................................... 16
2.5.1 Production Processes of Lightweight Aggregates ................................................... 17
2.5.2 Properties of Lightweight Aggregates
.................................................................. 20
2.6 PECULIARITIES OF LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE MIX PROPORTIONING ................................... 23
2.6.1 Mix Proportioning of No-Fines LWAC
................................................................ 24
2.6.2 The Steps of the Proportioning Procedure ............................................................ 24
2.7 MANUFACTURE OF LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE
................................................................ 25
2.7.1 Moisture Content of the Lightweight Aggregate ..................................................... 25
2.7.2 Slump and Air Entrained of the Lightweight Aggregate ........................................... 25
2.7.3 Pumped Concrete and its Design
........................................................................ 25
2.8 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE ...................................... 26
2.8.1 Compressive Strength
...................................................................................... 26
2.8.2 Density
......................................................................................................... 27
2.8.3 Modulus Of Elasticity
...................................................................................... 28
2.8.4 Tensile and Flexural Strength
............................................................................ 30
2.8.5 Effect of Sand Replacement
............................................................................... 31
2.8.6 Elastic Compatibility
....................................................................................... 33
2.8.7 Drying Shrinkage
............................................................................................ 33
2.8.8 Creep
........................................................................................................... 33
2.8.9 Thermal Conductivity
...................................................................................... 34
2.9 DURABILITY
............................................................................................................ 35
2.9.1 Permeability in Lightweight Concrete
................................................................. 35
2.9.2 Fire Resistance
.............................................................................................. 36
2.9.3 Chemical Exposure
......................................................................................... 38
CHAPTER III MATERIALS & EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM ..................................................... 42
....................................................................................................... 42
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 MATERIALS
........................................................................................................... 42
3.2.1 Cement
......................................................................................................... 42
3.2.2 Fine Aggregate
.............................................................................................. 43
3.2.3 Coarse Aggregate
........................................................................................... 46
3.2.4 Silica Fume
................................................................................................... 47
3.2.5 Foam
........................................................................................................... 48
3.2.6 Steel
............................................................................................................. 48
3.2.7 Water
........................................................................................................... 49
3.2.8 Admixture
..................................................................................................... 49
3.3 DESIGN OF LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE & MIX PROPORTIONS ................................................ 50

3.3.1 Mix Design
.................................................................................................... 50
3.3.2 Mix Proportion
.............................................................................................. 51
3.4 TEST METHODS:
...................................................................................................... 54
3.4.1 Fresh Concrete
.............................................................................................. 54
3.4.2 Hardened Concrete
......................................................................................... 54
3.5 MIXING
................................................................................................................ 54
3.6 CASTING AND CURING
.............................................................................................. 54
3.7 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
........................................................................................ 55
CHAPTER IV RESULTS & DISCUSSION .................................................................................. 56
4.1 INTRODUCTION
....................................................................................................... 56
4.2 PROPERTIES OF FRESH LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE .............................................. 56
4.2.1 Fresh Unit Weight
........................................................................................... 56
4.2.2 The Slump Test
............................................................................................... 57
4.3 PROPERTIES OF HARDENED LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE ...................................... 57
4.3.1 Hardened Unit Weight
..................................................................................... 57
4.3.2 Cube Compressive Strength
.............................................................................. 59
4.3.3 Splitting Tensile Strength
.................................................................................. 62
4.3.4 Flexural Strength
............................................................................................ 66
4.3.5 Bond Strength
................................................................................................ 69
4.3.6 Static Modulus of Elasticity
............................................................................... 72
............................................................................................ 79
4.3.8 Effect of Silica Fume Presence
........................................................................... 84
CONCLUSION
............................................................................................................ 90
REFERENCES
.............................................................................................................. 91
INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1
Introduction
Portland cement concrete is presently the most widely used manufactured material. The
future of concrete looks even brighter because for most purposes it offers suitable
engineering properties at low cost. Therefore it is desirable that engineers know more
about concrete and the progress in its technologies than about other building materials.
Based 0n unit weight, concrete can be classified into three categories. Concrete
containing natural sand and gravel or crushed-rock aggregates , generally weighing
about 2400 kg/m3 ,is called normal-weight concrete , and is the most commonly used
concrete for structural purposes. For applications where a higher strength to weight ratio
is desired, it is possible to reduce the unit weight of concrete by using certain natural or
manufactured aggregates having lower density. The term light weight concrete is used
for concrete that weighs less than 1800 kg/m3. On the other hand, heavy weight
concrete is used for radiation shielding; this concrete is produced from high density
aggregates, and generally weighs more than 3200 kg/m3. It is not possible here to list
all concrete types. There are numerous modified concretes such as fiber-reinforced
concrete and latex modified concrete.
Lightweight Aggregate Concrete, LWAC, is not a new invention in concrete technology.
It has been known since ancient times, so it is possible to find a good number of
references in connection with the use of LWAC. It was made using natural aggregates
of volcanic origin such as pumice, scoria, etc. Sumerians used this in building Babylon
in the 3rd millennium B.C. the Greeks and the Romans used pumice in building
construction. Some of these magnificent ancient structures still exist, like St. Sofia
Cathedral or Hagia Sofia, in Istanbul, Turkey, built by two engineers, Isidore of Miletus
and Anthemius of Tralles, commissioned by the Emperor Justinian in the 4th century
A.D., the Roman temple, Pantheon, which was erected in the years A.D. 118 to 128; the
prestigious aqueduct, Pont due Gard, built ca. A.D. 14; and the great Roman
amphitheatre, Colosseum, built between A.D. 70 and 82. In addition to building
constructions, the Romans used natural lightweight aggregates and hollow clay vases
for their Opus Caementitium in order to reduce the weight. This was also used in the
construction of the Pyramids during the Mayan period in Mexico.
Light weight aggregate concrete was founded since the ancient times by using natural
aggregates of volcanic origin, but now there are various kinds of lightweight aggregates
which can be either classified into natural materials and synthetic materials, having high
porosity as common feature, which is the prime reason for their low bulk specific gravity.
Some natural materials are specifically processed to provide concrete aggregates.
Expanded clay, shale, or slates are the most common type of lightweight aggregate
used in structural concrete. The raw material is either crushed to the desire size or
ground, palletized and it is then heated to 1000 to 1200.At these temperatures the
material will bloat. Bloating occurs because of rapid generation of gas within the
particle, which cannot readily escape.
INTRODUCTION
Synthetic materials lightweight aggregates are produced by similar techniques. Prelate

slogs or waste glass can be bloated. In the case of prelate, hydrate water in the material
is the source of bloating. Pumice, scoria and tuffs are lavas that have been bloated
naturally. Expanded vermiculite is also bloated by loss of hydrate water.
The shape and structure of lightweight aggregates can be quite variable and will be a
consequence of the processing techniques used in production.
Production Processes of Lightweight Aggregates, The properties of LWAC are related
to the properties of the aggregates used for producing them. This, in turn, depends
upon the type of material and the process used for producing them, as Rotary Kiln,
Sintered Strand, Foaming Bed Reactor, Vertical Shaft Kilnetc
The lightweight aggregate produced in Egypt is called LECA, it was first manufactured
in Denmark by the beginning of 1930's then technical know-how was given to many
countries.
Production of Leca, in Denmark can be looked at as the European birthplace of
expanded clay. A plant was erected in 1939 at Rsnes near Kalundborg, producing
Leca (Expanded Clay Aggregate) in a rotary kiln. The annual production capacity then
was 20,000 m. Later, the plant moved to Hinge, where it now has six constructed kilns,
with a capacity of 1.3 million m 3 per annum. The technical know-how was given too
many countries. There are 35 kilns in operation, worldwide, following the Leca process
with a capacity of six million m. The first German Leca plant started in February, 1956,
near Itzehohe / Mittelholstein.
Lightweight concrete is made with lightweight cellular aggregates so that its unit weight
is approximately two-thirds of the unit weight of concrete made with typical natural
aggregates. Since light weight, and not strength, is the primary objective, the
specifications limit the maximum permissible unit weight of concrete. Also, since highly
porous aggregates tend to reduce concrete strength greatly, the specifications require
28 day compressive strength to ensure that the concrete is of structural quality.
Lightweight concrete is manufactured on account of its low density or lower unit weight
concrete. Structural lightweight concrete is defined as having a 28 day compressive
strength over 2500psi (17.5 MPa). The lightweight concrete provides several
advantages such as a very good thermal insulation and a satisfactory durability, but its
cost which is higher than the normal concrete and the special attention that should be
given to the mixing, handling and placing of LWAC are considered as dis-advantages of
this technology.
INTRODUCTION
The production of lightweight aggregate concrete and normal concrete is similar, after
mix design the ingredients should be mixed according to (ASTMC-94)as in the case of
normal weight concrete, but there are some exceptions which have to be taken into
account for lightweight aggregate concrete. From experience, lightweight aggregate is
not difficult to use. Nevertheless, the problem is the great variation in absorption,
specific gravity, moisture content and gradation of aggregates. Uniform results can be
obtained if the unit weight and slump test are performed frequently.
Production Processes of Lightweight Aggregates, the properties of LWAC, the historical
background of LWAC and so many other related subjects are discussed briefly in
chapter 2.
In chapter 3 (Material and Experimental program) we outline the material which we used
in concrete mixes such as; coarse & fine lightweight aggregates (LECA), sand, cement,
silica fume, foam, curing water and admixtures..etc. The properties of these materials
are also discussed and presented in this chapter. The design of lightweight concrete
mixes and the concrete specimen's preparation are also included. It also includes the
tests carried out on both fresh and hardened concrete. The test parameters and the
experimental program are presented in this chapter.
In chapter 4 we will discuss the results of different tests which were carried out during
our study on both fresh and hardened LWAC. From these results we conduct some
relations and equations which helped us to reach our final conclusions, which are
presented in chapter 5.
LITERATURE REVIEW
2 Chapter 2
Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
concrete. Lightweight aggregate (LWA) is not a new invention. It has been known since
ancient times. Nowadays According to the ACI 213 there are three types of lightweight
aggregate concrete are Low density concretes, Moderate strength concretes and
Structural concretes. This chapter discusses the production and properties of LWA.
Lightweight aggregate concretes are of various types, depending upon the composition
of the mortar matrix and the aggregates used. The properties of the aggregates also
vary significantly depending upon the raw materials used for making them and the
technique adopted to produce them. The following Physical properties are reviewed in
this chapter:
Density and Strength
Elasticity
Shrinkage and Creep
Thermal Conductivity
Elastic compatibility
Tensile and Flexural Strength
Durability in concrete is defined as its ability to resist weathering action, chemical attack,
occurrence of extreme temperature or any other process of deterioration , that is
durable concrete will return its original form, quality serviceability when exposed to its
environment.
2.2 Historical Background

2.2.1 Lightweight Aggregate Concrete (LWAC) In Ancient Times
Lightweight Aggregate Concrete, LWAC, is not a new invention in concrete technology.
It has been known since ancient times, so it is possible to find a good number of
references in connection with the use of LWAC. It was made using natural aggregates
of volcanic origin such as pumice, scoria, etc. Sumerians used this in building Babylon
in the 3 rd millennium B.C. (Figure 2 - 1).The Greeks and the Romans used pumice in
building construction. Some of these magnificent ancient structures still exist, like St.
Sofia Cathedral or Hagia Sofia, in Istanbul, Turkey, built by two engineers, Isidore of
Miletus and Anthemius of Tralles, commissioned by the Emperor Justinian in the 4th
century A.D., the great Roman amphitheatre, Colosseum, built between A.D. 70 and
82(Figure 2 - 3, Figure 2 - 4). In addition to building constructions, the Romans used
natural lightweight aggregates and hollow clay vases for their Opus Caementitium in
order to reduce the weight. This was also used in the construction of the Pyramids
during the Mayan period in Mexico.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Figure 2 - 1 Babylon, Iraq, built by Sumerian
Figure 2 - 2 St. Sofia Cathedral, Hagia Sofia, commissioned by the Emperor Justinian in
the 4th century A.D. in Istanbul, Turkey.
Figure 2 - 3 The great Roman amphitheatre, Colosseum, built
between A.D. 70 and 82.
10
LITERATURE REVIEW
Figure 2 - 4 Pyramids in Mexico, built during the Mayan period

A.D. 624987.
Porous clay bricks were produced long before the Christian era, during Indus Valley
civilization ca. 2500 B.C. These were used in the construction of two cities, MohenjoDaro and Harappa (Figure 2 - 5). It is postulated that these porous bricks were crushed
and used as the lightweight aggregates in the masonry. Although the origin of the
LWAC is difficult to assess, it would not be an exaggeration to say that its roots are from
the ancient period.
Figure 2-5 Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa, 2500 B.C.
2.2.2 LWAC in the 19th Century

With the increase in the demand of LWAC and the unavailability of the aggregates,
technology for producing lightweight aggregates has been developed. In Germany, in
the 19th century, porous clay pieces were produced by quick evaporation of water.
Kukenthal from Braunschweig obtained a patent in 1880. The industrial use of natural
lightweight aggregates in Germany was started in 1845 by Ferdinand Nebel from
Koblenz who produced masonry blocks from pumice, with burnt lime as the binder. In
Iceland, pumice has been used in local building industries since 1928.
11
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.2.2.1 World War I

Structure lightweight Concrete Was Used During World War I .When 14 lightweight
concrete ships where built during a shortage of high-grade plate steel .The United
States fleet corporation planned a shipbuilding program using materials other than steel
.One of these materials was reinforced concrete ,Which had already been used in a
shipbuilding in the Scandinavian Countries. A lightweight concrete ship, the USS.Selma
(Figure 2- 6) , was constructed and lunched in June 1919.The concrete had unit weight
of 1700 kg/m and compressive strength of 350 kg/cm .Because research indicated
that the rotary kiln method could produce more uniform lightweight aggregate.
Figure 2- 6 U.S.S Selma ship

2.2.2.2 World War II
By the World War II expanded shale aggregate was widely used as a construction
material and again it was put to use in ship construction. Whereas the 14 World War I.
ships had been largely experimental, the 104 ships built in World War II saw wide
spread wartime service in battle zones. Twenty-Four of these ships were large seagoing vessels and 80 where sea-going barges of tremendous size. The cargo capacities
ranged from 3,200 to 140,250 tons, this capacity represented about 488,000 tons or the
equivalent in capacity of 46 liberty ships.
The U.S Maritime Commission report of those lightweight concrete ships stated that the
ships exhibited good handling, good performance, and unexpected resistance to near
misses of shells and depth bombs .The Commission also reported that the hulls
appeared to be completely watertight In Service, caring Cargos of wheat and sugar with
no damage and displaying no molding or caking from seepage or sweating. The
Commission also pointed out that certain Cargos like sulphur, which is very destructive
to steel, can be carried usefully in concrete hulls. The Commission predicted that
repairs in service would probably be less costly and less frequent, and that with no
rusting or attack by sea water, the life of the hulls would be longer.
12
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.2.3 Production of Leca

In Denmark can be looked at as the European birthplace of expanded clay. A plant was
erected in 1939 at Rsnes near Kalundborg, producing Leca (Expanded Clay
Aggregate) in a rotary kiln. The annual production capacity then was 20,000 m. Later,
the plant moved to Hinge, where it now has six constructed kilns, with a capacity of 1.3
million m 3 per annum. The technical know-how was given too many countries. There
are 35 kilns in operation, worldwide, following the Leca process with a capacity of six
million m. The first German Leca plant started in February, 1956, near Itzehohe /
Mittelholstein.
2.2.4 LWAC In 1950s

During the 1950 many multistory structure where designed from the foundations up,
taking advantage of reduced dead weight using lightweight concrete. Examples are the
42-story prudential life building in Chicago, which incorporated lightweight concrete
floors, And the 18-story Statler Hilton Hotel in Dallas, Which was designed with a light
weight concrete frame and flat plate floors.
Such structural applications as these stimulated more concentrated research into the
properties of lightweight concrete by several recognized national and international
organizations. Construction of aggregate plants was accelerated and today lightweight
aggregate of structure quality are available in most parts of the United States and
Canada and many other countries. Construction of major structures in nearly all
metropolitan areas of the United States and Canada continued in the 1960s at an
increasing tempo. LWAC In 1970s
In the UK, until the 1970s, there was a fairly wide choice of lightweight aggregates for
making structural lightweight concrete. Among the processed natural materials, there
was regular production on a commercial scale of aggregates like Leca, Aglite
(expanded shale, irregular in shape), and Solite (expanded slate-mainly rounded). Leca
has a low density and, therefore, low strength. Owing to this, it is difficult to achieve a
characteristic concrete strength of 20 N/mm2. Aglite and Solite possess higher density
and have higher strength. These could produce the range of concrete strength suitable
for most types of reinforced and pre-stressed concrete structures, although the
application of Aglite concrete in pre-stressed structures has been scarce. Solite
concrete can achieve high strengthgrade 60 (600 Kg/cm2, cube compressive
strength) or even higherwithout much difficulty and is thus a suitable alternative
component for pre-stressed concrete construction.
By the mid 1970s, however, the number of choices was limited. The production of Solite
ceased because of environmental restrictions. Very soon the manufacture of Aglite also
stopped, mainly for economic reasons. Foamed slag was virtually withdrawn from the
market, although, in its place, a much improved aggregate known as Perlitea
palletized expanded blast furnace slagcame into production. Perlite can produce
medium to high strength concrete within a density range of 1700 to 2000 kg/m3.
However, only a relatively small portion of Perlite is actually used in structural concrete,
the rest goes to the block manufacturing industry. Aggregates produced by sintering
colliery tailings, known as Brag, was also manufactured for a short period, but
production soon ended as the permission for production was not granted.
13
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.3 Lightweight Aggregate Concrete

concrete. Structural lightweight concrete is defined as having a 28 day compressive
strength over 175 kg/cm2.
2.3.1 Advantages of Light Weight Concretes
Provide a very good thermal insulation.

Satisfactory durability.
Sound insulation.
Cheaper unit cost of transport.
2.3.2 Disadvantages of Lightweight Concretes
More expensive than ordinary concretes.

Mixing, handling and placing require more care and attention than
ordinary
concrete.
However for many purposes the advantages of lightweight concrete outweigh its
disadvantages.
2.4 Classification of Lightweight Concrete

There are three broad methods of producing lightweight concrete, and they depend on
1. The formation of air voids by the addition of some substance which causes
foam (Cellular type). In this method, producing lightweight concrete based on
introducing large voids within the concrete (cellular concrete) or mortars.
These air cells can be obtained from the extremely fine voids produced by air
entraining. This type of concrete is known as cellular, aerated, foamed or gas
concrete.
2. The formation of air voids by omitting fine aggregate (Non-fine type). In this
method, obtaining lightweight concrete is by omitting the fine aggregate from the
concrete mix so that many voids will present in the concrete. This concrete is
known by non-fines concrete. Non-fines concrete with gravel aggregate is not
Exact a light weight concrete. In spit its weight is 2/3 the dense concrete, but it is
suitable to be concrete made with other light weight aggregates
(Cellular/aggregates).
3. The presence of air voids in the aggregate (Aggregate type). In this method,
Porous lightweight aggregate have a specific gravity lower than ordinary
aggregate whose specific gravity is approximately The final product is generally
known by the name of light weight aggregate used.
14
LITERATURE REVIEW
Lightweight aggregate concrete classification: can be considered in three different

types, these types are classified according to the approximate of their 28-day
compressive strength and air-dray unit weight Figure 2 - 7
According to the ACI 213 the three types are:
1. Low density concretes.
2. Moderate strength concretes.
3. Structural concretes.
2.4.1 Low Density Concretes

These light concretes are employed chiefly for insulation purposes (heat insulation).
With low unit weights, seldom 800 kg/m3, Compressive strengths are low, ranging
(from 7 to 69 kg/cm2).
2.4.2 Moderate Strength Concretes

The use of these concretes requires a fair degree of compressive strength, thus they
fall between the structural and low density concretes. These concrete are mostly
designated as "fill" concrete, insulation values' are intermediate. Compressive
strengths are approximately (69 to 172.4kg/cm2).
2.4.3 Structural Concretes

Concretes contain aggregates which are on the other end of the scale and which are
made with expanded shales, clays, slates, slags, and pelletized fly ash. Because the
unit weights of structural light weight aggregate concretes are greater than those of
low density concretes, insulation efficiency is lower. However, thermal insulation
values for structural lightweight concrete are mostly better than the normal weight
concrete. Minimum compressive strength is (172.4 kg/cm2), Structural lightweight
aggregates can produce concretes with compressive strengths in excess of (340
kg/cm2), and concretes can be made with strengths greater than (410 kg/cm2).
Figure 2 - 7
15
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5 Lightweight Aggregates

Lightweight aggregate (LWA) can be divided in two categories:
1. Those occurring naturally and are ready to use only with mechanical treatment, i.e.,
crushing and sieving.
2. Those produced by thermal treatment from either naturally occurring materials or
from industrial by-products, waste materials, etc.
1. Natural Aggregates
Volcanic Origin. When lava from a volcano cools down, it produces a spongy wellsintered mass. Since there is an abrupt cooling of the molten mass, the material
freezes. With a sudden cooling of the molten magma, there is no crystallization, and
the material acquires a glassy structure, a process similar to the production of the
glass known as obsidian. It can be called a super cooled liquid, which has no
crystalline phase. It is highly amorphous and has a glassy structure. Lava is a boiling
melt which may contain air and gases, and when it cools down, it freezes to a
spongy porous mass. In other words, it produces lightweight material that is porous
and reactive. This type of material is known as volcanic aggregates, or pumice or
scoria aggregates. The aggregates are produced by mechanical handling of lava,
i.e., crushing, sieving, and grinding.
Organic Aggregates; Palm Oil Shells. The use of agricultural waste as aggregates
for the production of building materials has several practical and economical
advantages. The palm oil industry which is important in many countries, such as
Malaysia, Indonesia, and Nigeria, produces a large amount of waste which can be
utilized in the production of building materials. Palm oil shells are produced in large
quantities by the oil mills and can be used as aggregates in the production of
lightweight concrete. The palm oil shells are hard and are received as crushed
pieces as a result of the process used to release the oil. Palm oil shells have a bulk
density of 620 kg/m 3 and a specific gravity of 1.25. Though still not in commercial
production of LWAC, these are used locally.
There are two big advantages:
1. At present they have no commercial value.
2. Being locally available, the transport cost is nominal.
2. Synthetic Aggregates
Synthetic aggregates are produced by thermal treatment of the materials which have
expansive properties. These materials can be divided in three groups
1. Natural materials, such as Perlite, vermiculite, clay, shale, and slate.
2. Industrial products, such as glass.
3. Industrial by-products, like fly ash, expanded slag cinder, bed ash, etc.
The most common types of lightweight aggregates produced from expansive clays are
known as Leca and Liapor. Those made from fly ash are known as Lytag, etc.
16
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5.1 Production Processes of Lightweight Aggregates

The properties of LWAC are related to the properties of the aggregates used for
producing them. This, in turn, depends upon the type of material and the process used
for producing them.
2.5.1.1 Rotary Kiln
A rotary kiln used for manufacturing LWA is similar to the one used for manufacturing
Portland cement. It consists of a long cylinder lined with refractory bricks and capable of
rotating about its longitudinal axis, which is inclined at an angle of 5 to the horizontal
(Figure 2 - 8). The length of the kiln depends upon the composition of the raw material
to be processed and is usually thirty to sixty meters. The prepared raw material is fed
into the kiln at the higher end, while firing takes place at the lower end. As the material
moves to the heating zone, the temperature of the particles gradually increases and
expansion takes place. Material is then discharged into a rotary cooler, where it is
cooled by blowing cold air.
Figure 2-8 Rotary Kiln
17
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5.1.2 Sintered Strand

The prepared raw material is placed in loose layers, approximately 15300 mm thick, on
a moving sinter strand and carried, under drying and ignition hoods (fired by gas or oil),
in such a manner that burning, initiated at the surface, continues through the full depth
of the bed. The gases formed cause expansion; however, in some cases, the cellular
structure results from the burning of the fuel grains and loss of moisture, and from
fusion of the fine particles of the raw material.
2.5.1.3 Vertical Shaft Kiln

In this process, the prepared raw material is fed into a vertical shaft kiln in batches. A
hot jet of flue gases, entering at the center of the base of the combustion chamber, lifts
the material upwards until the force of the upward jet is dispersed sufficiently to become
less than the force of gravity. Material falls down and rolls to the foot of the combustion
chamber, which is in the shape of a funnel, where the flue gas again forces it upwards.
This process is repeated a number of times over a period of about one minute for each
batch.
2.5.1.4 Cold Bonding
In This Process, Bonding Is Accomplished By The Chemical Reaction Between Lime
And Ash, Which Is Due To The Pozzolanic Character Of The Ashes. Calcium Silicate
Hydrates Are Produced As A Result Of This Reaction. The Production Process Is
Simple. A Mixture Of Ash, Lime, And Water After Mixing, Is Jointly Transported Towards
A Disk Pelletizer, Where Spherical Pellets Are Formed. To Strengthen The Still
Vulnerable Green Pellets, They Are Embedded In A Constant Stream Of Ash And
Transported To Curing Silos. The Energy Released Directly Warms The Pellets To A
Temperature Of 85C. After 15 Hours, They Leave the Silos Ready For Screening.
18
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5.1.5 Foaming Bed Reactor

In this process, used exclusively in the production of foamed blast furnace slag, the slag
is poured onto a foaming bed consisting of a large number of water jets set in a
concrete base. The water converts to steam on contact with the molten material and
penetrates into the body of the material at which point it becomes superheated. Due to
the rapid expansion that takes place, the material bloats to form a cellular structure. An
alternative method includes spraying water onto the molten material when it is being
tapped from the blast furnace, so that the material is cooled rapidly and steam becomes
trapped within. In another method, the molten material is fed into a mill with revolving
paddles and is treated directly with steam. A fluidized bed foaming reactor is shown in
(Figure 2 - 9).
Figure 2 - 9 Fluidized Bed Foaming Reactor
19
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5.2 Properties of Lightweight Aggregates

2.5.2.1 Unit Weight
Unit weight of lightweight aggregate is scientifically lower, due to the cellular structure,
than that normal weight aggregate for the same gradation and particle shape, unit
weight of aggregate is essentially proportional to specific gravity. However, aggregates
of the same specific gravity may have markedly different unit weight, because of
different percentage of voids in the dry-loose, or dry-rodded volumes of aggregates of
different particle shape.
2.5.2.2 Absorption
Lightweight aggregates, due to their cellular structure are capable of absorbing more
water than normal weight aggregate.
2.5.2.3 Bulk Specific Gravity
The specific gravity of lightweight aggregates is lower than that of normal weight
aggregates due to their cellular structure. The bulk specific gravity of lightweight
aggregate also varies with particle size.
The following table shows the previous properties for different types of lightweight
aggregates.
Aggregate
Bulk
Specific
Unit Weight
kg/m^3
Water
Absorption by
Weight %
Pumice
1.25 - 1.65
480 - 880
20 30
Foamed Blast
Slag
1.15 - 2.2
400 - 1200
8 - 15
Expanded Perlite
0.7 - 1.05
~ 160
10 - 30
Expanded
Vermiculite
0.85 - 1.05
~ 160
10 - 30
Expanded Clay
1.1 - 2.1
560 - 960
2 - 15
Sintered Fly Ash
~ 1.7
590 - 770
14 - 24
Saw Dust
0.35 - 0.6
128 - 320
10 - 35
Polystyrene
Foam
0.05
10 - 20
~ 50
20
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5.2.4 Particle Shape and Surface Texture

Lightweight aggregates from different sources or produced by different methods may
differ considerably in particle shape and texture. (Figure 2 - 10) shows the shape of
different types of lightweight aggregates.
Figure 2 - 10
21
LITERATURE REVIEW
Aggregate lexperimental product made from shale expanded in a rotary kiln. The raw
material is crushed and screened to four sizes and these are bloated in the kiln
separately. Particles are rounded, have a relatively smooth and impervious shell. Part of
the material passing the No. 50 sieve is obtained by crushing.
Aggregate 2expanded shale produced in a rotary kiln. The raw material is screened
only for maximum size prior to bloating. The coarser sizes are rounded and have a
smooth shell similar to Aggregate 1. The fine material, passing the No. 4 sieve, is
obtained by crushing the coarser material.
Aggregate 3expanded shale similar to Aggregate 1 in appearance and in method of
manufacture. The raw material is crushed and screened to four sizes. These individual
fractions are passed through separate kilns. All particles are rounded and have a
smooth shell down to and including material retained on the No. 100 sieve.
Aggregate 4expanded clay produced in a rotary kiln. The raw material is passed
through a l-in. screen and into the kiln. Most of the bloated material from the kiln does
not require crushing except to produce additional material passing the No. 50 sieve. The
bloated material is very fine grained, but the individual particles are not rounded and
they do not have a shell.
Aggregate 5expanded slate produced in a rotary kiln. The coarser particles are
angular and porous, but are not as sharp as Aggregates 6 and 7. Material passing the
No. 4 sieve is obtained by crushing.
Aggregate 6expanded slag produced by spraying a controlled amount of water on
molten slag. Most of the sizes are obtained by crushing; all particles are very angular
and have a porous surface texture.
Aggregate 7produced by burning on a sintering grate, carbonaceous shale formed
from anthracite coal processing. All sizes of aggregate are obtained by crushing.
Individual particles are very sharp and angular, have a porous surface texture.
Aggregate 8Elgin sand and gravel, a natural uncrushed material. The gravel is wellrounded, and is about half calcareous and half siliceous material. The sand is
predominately quartz. The aggregate has a good service record in northern Illinois.
Aggregate 9an experimental product made from shale expanded in a rotary kiln. The
material was separated into several size fractions prior to bloating and the finished
product is generally rounded and scaled. This aggregate was used only in the highstrength concrete program.
22
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.6 Peculiarities of Light Weight Concrete Mix Proportioning

The aim of mix proportioning of the concrete is to present a formula or a recipe
according to specifications. The procedure for proportioning is to combine different
concrete ingredients based on their properties to attain the required properties of the
fresh, as well as the hardened concrete. The properties for the concrete are chosen
from the structural design and the requirements of safe and functional structures. There
are requirements which are implicit and expected of good quality concrete, i.e., stability
against segregation of aggregate, insignificant internal water bleeding, homogeneity
after transportation, and compaction.
The production procedure of lightweight aggregate concrete may often be more
complicated than normal weight concrete. For example, it is necessary to take into
consideration the Following:1. The water absorption of the porous aggregate from the fresh cement paste
2. Lightweight aggregate particles have a lower density than the surrounding matrix,
i.e., the cement paste. The absorption of water in the aggregate results in an
increasing stiffness of the fresh concrete with time;
3. The aggregate particles of low density may segregate by flowing to the upper
surface of the concrete.
Varying the density of the particles will also change the density and the strength of the
concrete. There are two methods to design the mix:
1. The absolute Volume method
2. The weight method
In recent studies it was observed that during mixing of lightweight aggregate concrete
the cement paste will penetrate most of the open pores in a surface layer of the
aggregate. The amount of paste penetration depends on the micro structure of the
surface layer of the lightweight concrete. The particle size Distribution of the cement,
and the viscosity of the paste. The particular properties of lightweight aggregate pose
special problems in calculating mix proportions of lightweight concrete. the absolute
volume method, which is basis of the American concrete institute method for
proportioning normal weight concrete, can't be used with confidence for lightweight
concrete .This is due to:1. Variations in Bulk specific gravity of lightweight aggregate
2. changes in lightweight aggregate moisture content
3. difficult to quantify the absorption, penetration of cement paste
23
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.6.1 Mix Proportioning of No-Fines LWAC

The no-fines concrete of lightweight aggregate normally is composed of coarse
lightweight aggregate of fraction from 4 mm and upwards, for example, 4 to 8 or 10 mm.
For no-fines, the fine aggregate is omitted and the concrete consists of cement, water,
and coarse aggregate only. Quite often, there is an addition of a mineral admixture such
as fly ash or slag and a small addition of filler or fine sand to the binder paste, mostly for
economical and technical reasons.
2.6.2 The Steps of the Proportioning Procedure
Preliminary Mix: The amounts of the concrete ingredients are summarized and
specified in weight as well as in volume for 1 m 3 of compacted concrete. It is
preferable to add lightweight aggregates to the mixer by bulk volumes instead of by
weight in case the density varies.
Trial Mix: The first mix of a new composition is a trial mix and the fresh density and
consistency is tested. If the density differs too much from the calculated value, the
composition is checked to see if there is any reason for the divergence in the
calculation or properties of the ingredients. After that, it might be necessary to revise
the composition of the concrete. Normally, the water absorption of the lightweight
aggregate may cause a divergence of the density and the consistency. Too stiff a
concrete mix needs a suitable plasticizer. More trial mixes are done until fresh
concrete with the required properties is obtained. The preliminary testing procedure
is followed by production of cylinders or cubes as specimens for testing, mainly for
density and compressive strength after hardening.
Final Mix: The density and the compressive strength are tested at 28 days
according to the existing standards. After testing, the specimens are dried to
equilibrium in weight at 105C, and the oven-dry density is calculated and noted, as
well as the density of the fresh concrete and the density after storage.
24
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.7 Manufacture of Lightweight Concrete

In principle, the production of lightweight aggregate concrete and normal concrete is
similar, after mix design the ingredients should be mixed according to (ASTMC-94)as in
the case of normal weight concrete, but there are some exceptions which have to be
taken into account for lightweight aggregate concrete. From experience, lightweight
aggregate is not difficult to use. Nevertheless, the problem is the great variation in
absorption, specific gravity, moisture content and gradation of aggregates. Uniform
results can be obtained if the unit weight and slump test are performed frequently.
2.7.1 Moisture Content of the Lightweight Aggregate

The absorption of water by the lightweight aggregate particles is significant in concrete
production. It is, of course, desirable to prevent such absorption during the concreting
process because continuous water absorption by dry light weight aggregates will cause
concrete to segregate and stiffen before placement is completed. So, it is logical to soak
the aggregate before mixing or to ask for delivery of very wet aggregates.
However, when dry cement comes in contact with very wet aggregate particles, a
cement paste layer of low water-to-cement ratio is produced on the surface. This results
in irregularities in the concrete and creates a structure of higher permeability and the
strength of the result concrete is about 5~10% lower than when dry aggregate is used
for the same cement content and workability. Furthermore, the density of concrete
made with saturated aggregates is higher.
2.7.2 Slump and Air Entrained of the Lightweight Aggregate

Workability of freshly made lightweight aggregate concrete requires special attention
because with high consistency mixtures, the aggregate tents to segregate and float on
the surface. To combat this tendency, its necessary to limit the maximum slump and to
entrain air. Approximately (5~7) % air entrainment is generally required to lower the
mixing water requirement while maintaining the desired slump and reduce the tendency
for segregation and bleeding. A slump of (51~76) mm represents a relatively high
workability. A slump greater than (75~102) mm may cause segregation with lightweight
aggregate particles floating to the top. The tendency towards floating of larger particles
of lightweight aggregates maybe improved by adjusting the grading of aggregates
concrete made with lightweight aggregate maybe difficult to place and finish because of
porosity and angularity of the aggregates. The placeability of concrete can be improved
by adding air-entraining agents.
2.7.3 Pumped Concrete and its Design

Pumping of fresh concrete has been widely used and the high pressure during pumping
presses water into the porous lightweight aggregates. Usually, it is necessary to add a
thickening agent to reduce the water movement and, after addition of a proper
plasticizer, the workability is recovered.
25
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.8 Physical Properties of Lightweight Aggregate Concrete

2.8.1 Compressive Strength
Design compressive strength of (210~280) kg/cm2 at 28 days are common for structure
lightweight concrete. Lightweight aggregates with controlled micro-porosity have been
developed to produce (690~760) kg/cm2 lightweight concrete which generally weight
1435 to 1735 kg/cm3.
Compressive strength of lightweight aggregate concrete depends upon the shape of the
particles of lightweight aggregate. The compressive strength of lightweight aggregate
concrete decreases as the Length/Thickness ratio of the particles increase as can be
seen in (Figure 2 11). Concrete made with rounded aggregate has compressive
strength at 28 days of about (60~80) kg/cm2 higher than concrete made with elongated
aggregate (Length/Thickness ratio = 4.00).
Figure 2 - 11 Relationship
between compressive strength of

LWAC & Aggregate shape Factor
The shape of lightweight aggregate affect the stress concentration in the loaded
concrete and this probably account for the difference in compressive between the
concrete made with different aggregate particles shapes.
Zhang and Gjorv found that compressive strength of lightweight aggregate concrete
was not much affect neither by increasing of Cement content, by replacing Cement by
Silica Fume, nor by using natural sand as partial replacement of the lightweight sand.
The results clearly demonstrated that it is the type of lightweight aggregate which is the
primary factor controlling the compressive strength.
26
LITERATURE REVIEW
Most of the concrete mixes essentially stopped gaining strength between ages of 7 and
28 days. This indicates that the compressive strength had probably reached an upper
level for the aggregate and the strength does not benefit very much from a further
improvement of the matrix strength. After 28 days, the concrete fracture generally went
through the aggregate.
The compressive strength of normal weight concrete is generally proportional to the
matrix strength, whereas lightweight aggregate concrete shows a different behavior. It is
not possible to give a general ratio between the compressive strength and matrix
development because lightweight aggregate physical properties vary.
2.8.2 Density
The dry density of compacted concrete made with different aggregates varies from
about (800~2100) kg/cm3 for cube strength ranging from about (70~500) kg/cm2.
The density of the concrete is mainly governed by the particle density of the aggregate
mixture. For many types of aggregates, the particle density decreases with increasing
particle diameter. Also, grading richer in fines or smaller in maximum diameter leads to
greater concrete density and usually higher strength. A relationship between density
and cube compressive strength of lightweight concrete at 28 days, depends on the
particular aggregate used and the amount of normal weight sand as shown in (
Figure2-12) also (Figure 2-13) shows that 28 days compressive strength with
increasing the fresh concrete density.
]
Figure 2-12 Relationship
between the Cube Crushing & Dry Density Of Various Types Of

Concrete At 28 Days
27
LITERATURE REVIEW
Figure 2-13 Relationship
between 28 Days Compressive Strength & Density Of Fresh

Concrete
For concrete made with a high-density aggregate the upper level of strength was
reached after 28 days, while for concrete made with low-density aggregate the upper
level of the strength was reached at an earlier age due to using weaker aggregate.
2.8.3 Modulus of Elasticity

The modulus of elasticity of concrete depends on the relative amounts of paste and
aggregate and the modulus of each constituent. Sand and gravel concrete has a higher
Ec because the moduli of sand and gravel are greater than the moduli of structural
lightweight aggregates. Generally the modulus of elasticity for structural lightweight
concrete is considered to vary between to that of sand and gravel concrete of the
same strength.
The water/cement ratio controls the E-modulus of the cement paste, which ranges from
about 120,000 to 260,000 kg/cm2; furthermore, the lower value can be reduced by airentraining agents. The influence of the aggregate on the E-modulus of the matrix is
illustrated in (Figure 2-14). The stiffness of the matrix increases with the increasing
density of the sand. For the relationship of E-modulus and compressive strength, it has
to be distinguished between matrices with natural sand and LWA (Figure 2-15).
Since the moduli of lightweight aggregate particles are generally lower than those of
natural dense aggregates and the fact that most lightweight aggregate concrete contain
higher cement content it follows that the overall moduli of lightweight aggregate
concretes will be lower than normal weight concrete. It also follows that concrete made
with lightweight coarse and lightweight fine aggregate will be lower than those made
with lightweight coarse aggregate and natural dense fines.
28
LITERATURE REVIEW
Effective of Water/Cement ratio
Figure 2-14
Figure 2-15
Dependence of E-modulus of different matrices on the water/cement ratio

and the share of aggregate.
Relationship between E-modulus and compressive strength of different

matrices.
29
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.8.4 Tensile and Flexural Strength

Splitting tensile strength depends on the type of aggregates used, surface texture and
size of test specimens. The tensile strength of moist cured light weight aggregate
concrete is a function of the compressive strength the curing conditions (air or water
cured) directly affect the tensile strength of lightweight aggregate.
The splitting tensile strength of all lightweight concrete varies from approximately
70~100 % that of the normal weight concrete at equal compressive strength.
There are many works showed that when the compressive strength increased, the
flexural and splitting tensile strength increases (Figure 2-16, Figure 2-17 and Figure 218) show the relationship between the flexural and splitting tensile strength with the
compressive strength for the lightweight concrete compared to that of the normal weight
concrete.
The flexural tensile strength and splitting tensile strength of the lightweight concrete is
less than that of the normal weight concrete for the same compressive strength.
Figure 2-16
Figure 2-17
Figure 2-18
30
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.8.5 Effect of Sand Replacement

Structural lightweight is made with both coarse and fine lightweight aggregates, but it is
common practice to replace all part of the fine fraction with natural sand. As previously
discussed partial or complete replacement of lightweight fines with natural sand
generally provides improvements in the workability and finishability of the plastic
concrete, and also many physical properties of the hardened concrete. This
improvement can be summarized as follows:
Total water requirement decreased with increasing of natural sand content for
complete replacement this decrease ranged from 12 to 24 present compared
with an all lightweight aggregate mix.
The unit weight of concrete increased with increasing sand replacement. For
complete sand replacement the unit weight of the sanded concrete increasing by
factors of 10 to 20 percent above the corresponding all lightweight aggregate
concrete.
Compressive strength and bond strength increased with partial replacement of
lightweight fine aggregates with natural sand
Concrete with total sand replacement has a higher modulus of elasticity than all
lightweight aggregate concrete by 10 to 30 percent, depending on the aggregate
used and the strength level of the mix
Splitting tensile strength of airdried lightweight concrete increased with

increasing natural sand content
Sand replacement reduced drying shrinkage substantially. The reduction for

complete replacement being 15 to 35 percent depending on the aggregate used
and paste content of the mix.
(Figure 2-19) show the effect of sand replacement on the splitting tensile strength ,
modulus of elasticity and drying shrinkage for light weight concrete.
31
LITERATURE REVIEW
Figure 2-19
32
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.8.6 Elastic Compatibility

Concrete can be considered a composite material in which the coarse aggregates act
as a spherical inclusion in an infinite matrix of mortar.
Cracks are often found at the interface between the aggregate and the cement paste. In
normal weight concrete develops large stresses at the interface when there is a large
difference in elastic modulus between the aggregate and the matrix. Surprisingly
enough, in the case of lightweight aggregate concrete, they are not observed. The
primary reason for the lack of bond cracks may be due to the similarity of elastic
modulus of the LWA and the mortar fraction. Stress-strain curves of lightweight
aggregate concretes are typically linear to levels approaching 90% of the failure
strength, indicating the relative compatibility of the constituents and the reduced
occurrences of micro-cracking.
Owens stated that the properties of lightweight aggregate concrete compared to those
of normal weight concrete are improved because the concrete is more homogenous and
the paste of aggregate have more similar mechanical properties.

Drying shrinkage is an important property that affects extent of cracking, prestress loss
and effective tensile strength.
All concrete that made with lightweight aggregate exhibit a higher moisture movement
than the case with normal weight concrete. They have a high drying shrinkage, about 5
~ 40 % higher than the normal weight concrete for concrete made and cured at normal
temperatures
Shrinkage is mainly affected by:
Evaporable water
Quantity and quality of cement paste in the concrete
The types of aggregate used
For equal cement paste content the shrinkage of lightweight aggregate concrete is
usually slightly greater than normal weight concrete.
2.8.8 Creep
Generally higher creep strains are produced in lightweight aggregate concrete than in
normal weight concrete due to lower E-value of aggregate. The basic creep of
lightweight aggregate concrete is approximately 15% higher than the normal weight
concrete.
33
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.8.9 Thermal Conductivity

Lightweight concrete has a smaller thermal conductivity than normal weight concrete.
Thermal conductivity of lightweight aggregate concrete is related to its pore structure or
air-void system. With air as the insulating material, concrete of a higher porosity and a
lower density will have a lower thermal conductivity. The air-pore system in the LWAC
depends upon the binder system and the chemical admixtures used. With the addition
of silica fume and fly ash, thermal conductivity is decreased. The reduction is more
pronounced in the case of FA than SF at 10 and 20% replacement, but at 30%
replacement, it is approximately the same.
The thermal conductivity (K) of structural lightweight concrete is usually between
2.3~4.3 Btu/hr.ft2.(deg F/in) and (K) for normal weight concrete generally between 9~12
Btu/hr.ft2.(deg F/in) for oven-dry concrete. The lower thermal conductivity means that
the lightweight concrete is generally more fire resistant than normal weight concrete.
ASTM C 177, Test Method for Steady-State Heat Flux Measurements and Thermal
Transmission Properties by Means of the Guarded-Hot-Plate Apparatus, is used to
determine values of thermal conductivity. Figure 2-20 shows an approximate
relationship between thermal resistance and density. The thermal conductivity of
concrete increases with the increase of moisture content and density.
Figure 2-20 Relationship between Thermal Conductivity & Density
34
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.9 Durability
Durability in concrete is defined as its ability to resist weathering action, chemical attack,
occurrence of extreme temperature or any other process of deterioration , that is
durable concrete will return its original form, quality serviceability when exposed to its
environment.
2.9.1 Permeability in Lightweight Concrete

Permeability or, more correctly, Penetrability is the principal factor influencing durability.
However, porosity and permeability are not synonymous since size of porous and there
continuity must be taken into consideration. In normal weight concrete the high stiffness
of aggregates as compared to the stiffness of the matter matrix causes large stress
concentration that cause micro cracking at the interface between the aggregate and
matrix. The following Table shows a comparison between normal weight and lightweight
aggregate concrete.
Normal weight Concrete
Lightweight concrete
High compared to the stiffness

of the matter matrix
relatively low
Stiffness of
Aggregates
Micro
cracks
Frequency
Appears at the interface

between matrix and aggregates
Infiltration
of Water
appears between the matrix

and the aggregates
Size of
Aggregates
Water
Cement
ratio
large aggregates increase the

permeability
Appears in the aggregates due

to relatively low stiffness of the
aggregate
lower permeability due to
strong bond and high quality of
the materials
small aggregate decrease
permeability
permeability increase by
increasing water cement ratio
permeability increase by
increasing water cement ratio
N.B:- Lightweight aggregate concrete is not necessarily more permeable than normal
weight concrete since porous lightweight aggregate are surrounded by a matrix which is
less cracked owing to: Low stiffness of the aggregate particle
excellent aggregate Matrix bond
increase hydration of cement
fewer heat of hydration effect
Aggregate type
Leca
Lytag
Liapor
Granite
Water Permeability (10 -12 m2)

5
5
15
85
35
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.9.2 Fire Resistance

The performance of building materials under fire exposure is of significant importance.
One phenomenon that must be considered during fire is the risk of explosive spalling,
which may cause much of the concrete cover to disappear leaving the reinforcing bars
directly exposed to fire. This may happen in a very short time in parts or in all of the
structure.
FIRE TEST OF LIGHTWEIGHT AGGREGATE CONCRETE
Fire endurance tests of four types of concrete were conducted in a gas-oil furnace. The
first type was LWAC, 3L-concrete, developed at the Chalmers University of
Technology with a density of 11001200 kg/m3. The lightweight aggregates used were
Swedish Leca. The second type was the structural LWAC with a density of 1650 kg/m
3 and 15 cm cube compressive strength of 350 kg/cm2. The third type was structural
LWAC modified with chemical admixtures. The fourth type was a high strength LWAC
made with the addition of condensed silica fume. Type one and two lightweight
aggregate concretes were made using LWA, Swedish Leca. A comparison was done
with normal weight concrete made with the addition of a polymer. The densities of
LWAC and normal concrete were 1100 and 2310 kg/m3, respectively. A fire test was
performed on:
2.5 cm thick plates of normal concrete
2.5 cm thick plates of LWAC
5.0 cm thick slab of LWAC
15 cm thick reinforced concrete beam of LWAC.
The test specimens were cured under laboratory conditions, i.e., 40% RH and 20C. A
gas-oil fired furnace with an opening of 2.5 0.3 m2 was used for heating the test
specimens. The tests were performed by one-side and two-side heating. The position of
the test samples in the furnace is shown in (Figure 2-21) and the results are shown in
Figs. 9.6 thru 9.10. The test results revealed that thin plates of normal concrete and
LWAC do not show any spalling when heated from one side
Figure 2-21 Position of the samples in the furnace (a) one-side exposure, (b) two sides
exposure.
Heating the normal concrete plates (Figure 2-22) from two sides resulted in destructive
spalling at about 125175C. In the concretes made with the polymer addition, no
spalling was observed when heated from both sides, even after 30 minutes. Tests
performed on the 5 cm slabs and the LWAC reinforced beam (b h = 0.15 0.3 m 3 )
did not show any damage for 1 hour after heating when the temperature in the middle of
the specimens observed was 850C (Figure 2-23 & Figure 2-24).
36
LITERATURE REVIEW
Figure 2-22 Temperature
curves for (a) one and (b), (c), (d) two-side heated plate(2.5 cm
in thickness) of normal concrete, (b) and (c) show the temperature at which normal
concrete specimens made without a polymer have shown destructive spalling, whereas
(d) made with a polymer has shown no spalling.
Figure 2-23 Temperature curves for two-side fire exposure of the LWAC slab (thickness
50 mm)
37
LITERATURE REVIEW
.
Figure 2-24
Temperature curves for two-side fire exposure of the reinforced LWAC beam
(thickness 150 mm).
2.9.3 Chemical Exposure

Chemical durability is defined as the resistance of concrete against the gases,
chemicals, and temperature variations which interact chemically with the binder
components of the concrete causing deterioration. Lightweight aggregate concrete is
made using different types of cements, mineral admixtures, and aggregates. These
material variations influence the degree and rate of deterioration. The following are
varies types of chemical attacks:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
Acid Resistance
Carbonation and Corrosion
Chloride Ion Penetration
Sulphate resistance
Sea Water Attack
2.9.3.1 Acid Resistance

Concrete is susceptible to acid attack because of its alkaline nature. The components of
the cement paste break down during contact with acids.
Most pronounced is the dissolution of calcium hydroxide which occurs according to the
following reaction:
2 HX + Ca(OH)2 -> CaX2 + 2 H2O
The decomposition of the concrete depends on the porosity of the cement paste, on the
concentration of the acid, the solubility of the acid calcium salts (CaX2) and on the fluid
transport through the concrete. Insoluble calcium salts may precipitate in the voids and
can slow down the attack. Acids such as nitric acid, hydrochloric acid and acetic acid
are very aggressive as their calcium salts are readily soluble and removed from the
attack front. Other acids such as phosphoric acid and humic acid are less harmful as
their calcium salt, due to their low solubility, inhibits the attack by blocking the pathways
within the concrete such as interconnected cracks, voids and porosity. Sulphuric acid is
very damaging to concrete as it combines an acid attack and a sulfate attack.
38
LITERATURE REVIEW
Microscopic appearance
An acid attack is diagnosed primarily by two main features:
1. Absence of calcium hydroxide in the cement paste
2. Surface dissolution of cement paste exposing aggregates
2.9.3.2 Carbonation and Corrosion
Carbonation occurs in concrete because the calcium bearing phases present are
attacked by carbon dioxide of the air and converted to calcium carbonate. Cement paste
contains 25-50 wt% calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2), which mean that the pH of the fresh
cement paste is at least 12.5. The pH of a fully carbonated paste is about 7. The
concrete will carbonate if CO2 from air or from water enters the concrete according to:
Ca(OH)2 + CO 2 CaCO3 + H 2 O
When Ca(OH)2 is removed from the paste hydrated CSH will liberate CaO which will
also carbonate. The rate of carbonation depends on porosity & moisture content of the
concrete. The carbonation process requires the presence of water because CO2
dissolves in water forming H2CO3. If the concrete is too dry (RH <40%) CO2 cannot
dissolve and no carbonation occurs. If on the other hand it is too wet (RH >90%) CO2
cannot enter the concrete and the concrete will not carbonate. Optimal conditions for
carbonation occur at a RH of 50% (range 40-90%).
Normal carbonation results in a decrease of the porosity making the carbonated paste
stronger. Carbonation is therefore an advantage in non-reinforced concrete. However, it
is a disadvantage in reinforced concrete, as pH of carbonated concrete drops to about
7; a value below the passivation threshold of steel.
Carbonation may be recognized in the field by the presence of a discoloured zone in the
surface of the concrete. The colour may vary from light Gray and difficult to recognize to
strong orange and easy to recognize. Carbonation can be visualized by using
phenolphthalein. (Figure 2-25)
Figure 2-25
39
LITERATURE REVIEW
Occasionally concrete may suffer from the so called bi-carbonation process. Bicarbonation may occur in concrete with very high water to cement ratio due to formation
of hydrogen carbonate ions at pH lower than 10. Contrary to normal carbonation, bicarbonation results in an increase in porosity making the concrete soft and friable. Bicarbonation may be recognized by the presence of large "pop-corn" like calcite crystals
and the highly porous paste
2.9.3.3 Chloride Ion Penetration
Chloride ions penetrate concrete and react with calcium hydroxide and calcium
aluminates. With calcium hydroxide, the reaction forms calcium chloride which being
soluble in water. With calcium aluminates, it forms the expansive double salt
C3A.CaCl2.H2O if the concentration of CaCl2 is higher than the surroundings. It leads to
microcrack formation making easy penetration of chloride ions. The chloride penetration
is fast in the beginning, later it slows down.
In the presence of chloride, a basic iron chloride is formed, 3Fe (OH) 2 FeCl2, which
later decomposes and forms FeOH (akaganite). Leaching of salt increases the porosity
and permeability of concrete and weakens the bond between the aggregate and the
cement paste. Consequently, the strength of concrete decreases. An increase in
porosity and permeability accelerates the anodic and cathodic reactions. Excluding all
other factors, chloride alone is not sufficient to initiate steel corrosion.
Due to these reactions, Ca(OH)2 is removed from the vicinity of the reinforcing steel, pH
falls below 11, hydroxide protective films are destroyed, and the anodic process
progresses.
2.9.3.4 Sulphate Resistance
External sulfate attack is a chemical breakdown mechanism where sulfate ions from an
external source attack components of the cement paste. Such attack can occur when
concrete is in contact with sulfate containing water e.g. seawater, swamp water, ground
water or sewage water. The often massive formation of gypsum and ettringite formed
during the external sulfate attack may cause concrete to crack and scale. However,
both laboratory studies and examinations of field concrete show that external sulfate
attack is often manifested, not by expansion or cracking, but by loss of cohesion and
strength.
Microscopic appearance
The microscopic appearance of concrete suffering from external sulfate attack appears
to be quite variable. Some diagnostic features such as
Surface parallel cracks
Presence of gypsum and ettringite
Depletion of calcium hydroxide, and
Decalcification of C-S-H
Are, however, often found associated with external sulfate attack.
40
LITERATURE REVIEW
The above-mentioned features are usually most pronounced near the attacked surface.
Sometimes external sulfate attack causes the paste to expand and gaps around
aggregates are formed. All the features do not necessarily have to be observed to
diagnose an external sulfate attack. The features present depend on many factors such
as the quality of the concrete (including w/c and cement type), exposure time,
temperature, concentration, and chemistry of the ambient water.
There is a general agreement that concrete suffering from external sulfate attack
develops a more and less pronounced mineralogical and chemical zoning which can be
studied in the optical fluorescence microscope and the scanning electron microscope.
ASTM C856 recommends chemical analysis to verify that the sulfate content of the
concrete has been increased over that expected from the concrete constituents in order
to diagnose external sulfate attack.
41
Material & Experimental Program
3 Chapter III
3.1 Introduction
This chapter outlines the properties of material in concrete mixes such as; coarse & fine
lightweight aggregates (LECA), sand, cement, silica fume, foam, mixing, curing water
and admixtures..etc. The design of lightweight concrete mixes and the concrete
specimen's preparation are also included. It also includes the tests carried out on both
fresh and hardened concrete. The test parameters and the experimental program are
presented in this chapter.
3.2 Materials
The properties of different materials used in this study are applied as following:
3.2.1 Cement
One type of cement was used in this study the Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). The
properties of the used cement are given in table (3.1).
Table (3.1) Properties of OPC
OPC
Type of test
Test Results
ESS Limits
No. 373-91
Initial
2 hr 15 min
More than 45 min
Final
3 hr 40 min
Less than 10 hr
3-Days
236
> 180
7-Days
317
> 270
Fineness Modulus %
( Retaining on sieve No 170 )
4%
< 10 %
Soundness (mm)
1.5
< 10
Setting time
hr min
Mortar
compressive strength
(Kg / Cm)
42
3.2.2 Fine Aggregate

Two types of fine aggregate were used throughout this study: One was the fine fractions
of the lightweight aggregate (Fine Leca) which has been delivered from National
Cement Company. The unit weight, specific gravity and absorption after 24-hours of fine
Leca are shown in table (3.2). Sieve analysis results for the fine Leca are shown in table
(3.3) & Figure 3-1.
The second type of fine aggregate was natural siliceous sand which was used as
replacement of the fine lightweight aggregate in concrete mixes. The physical and
mechanical properties of sand are presented in table (3.4). Sieve analysis results for
sand are shown in table (3.5) & Figure 3-2.
Table (3.2) Properties of fine lightweight aggregate (Leca)
Property
Test Results
Compacted
0.71
Loose
0.66
Unit Weight ( t / m )
Specific Gravity Factor
1.0
Water Absorption % after 24-hours
25 %
Fineness Modulus %
4.452
Table (3.3) Sieve analysis of fine lightweight aggregate (Leca)
Sieve No.
% age of passing
100 %
100 %
100 %
99.66 %
46.3 %
16
6.9 %
30
1.43 %
50
0.41 %
100
0.07 %
43
Sieve analysis of fine leca

100
90
% age of passing
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Log D
0.1
10
Figure 3 - 1
Table (3.4) The physical and mechanical properties of sand
Property
Test Results
Compacted
1.793
Loose
1.66
Bulk Specific Gravity
2.6
Fineness Modulus %
2.72
44
Table (3.5) Sieve analysis of sand
Sieve No.
% age of passing
ESS Limits (1109 1971)

Maximum
Minimum
100 %
100
100
100 %
100
100
100 %
100
100
97.96 %
100
89
92.67 %
100
60
16
79.43 %
90
30
30
47.74 %
45
15
50
9.17 %
40
100
1.02 %
15
Sieve analysis of sand

100
90
% age of passing
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Log D
0.1
10
Figure 3-2
45
3.2.3 Coarse Aggregate

The coarse aggregate used in this study was coarse fractions of the lightweight
aggregate (coarse Leca), the maximum size of which was 3/8 inch. The dry unit weight,
specific gravity (SSD) and water absorption tests of the lightweight aggregate (coarse
Leca) were carried out according to ESS specifications and have been presented in
table (3.6). Grading of coarse lightweight aggregate Leca together with the ESS limits
are shown in table (3.7) & Figure 3-3.
Table (3.6) Properties of coarse lightweight aggregate (Leca)
Property
Test Results
Compacted
0.376
Loose
0.36
Specific Gravity Factor
0.714
Water Absorption % after 24-hours
25 %
Table (3.7) sieve analysis of coarse lightweight aggregate (Leca)
Sieve No.
% age of passing
100 %
96.65 %
92.2 %
14.06 %
0%
16
0%
30
0%
50
0%
100
0%
46
Sieve analysis of coarse leca

100
90
% age of passing
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Log D
0
0.1
10
100
Figure 3 - 1
3.2.4 Silica Fume

Silica fume is a by product resulting from the reduction of high-purity quartz with coal or
coke and wood chips in an electric furnace during the manufacture of Ferro-Silicon
alloys and silicon metals. Silica fume in Egypt is produced from the "Ferro Silicon Alloys
Industry" located in Edfo south of Egypt. Bags of powder silica fume product usually
weight 20 Kg. The typical chemical composition of Egyptian silica fume is shown in table
(3.8).
Table (3.8) Typical chemical composition of Egyptian silica fume (last year study)
constituent
SiO2
Fe2O3
Al2O3
MgO
CaO
Na2O
K2O
percent
96
0.7
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.7
47
3.2.5 Foam
Foam is a by product of the petroleum industry. We used it as one of the component of
the last mix in our study. We used it as replacement of 10, 20, 30 and 40 % of the mix
volume. Some physical and mechanical properties of the polystyrene foam which were
obtained from the data sheet are presented in table (3.9).
Table (3.9) The Physical And Mechanical Properties Of The Polystyrene Foam (Data Sheet)
Property
Test method
Test results
Moulded density (kg/m3)
DIN 53420
36
Compressive strength at 10
% compression (Kpa)
DIN 53421
240 -- 305
Flexural strength (Kpa)
DIN 53423
490 -- 590
Tensile strength (Kpa)
DIN 18164
450 -- 600
Shear strength (Kpa)
DIN 53427
220 -- 250
Typical water absorption

after 28 days
DIN 53428
1.15 1.35 %
3.2.6 Steel
High steel grade 400/600 having diameter of 16 mm was used in this study for the bond
strength test. Some of the steel bars tests results are shown in table (3.10)
Table (3.10) The Physical And Mechanical Properties Of The Steel Bars Used In The Study
Bar
no.
Diameter
(mm)
Area
(mm2)
Yield load
(Kg)
Yield stress
(Kg/cm2)
Ultimate load
(kg)
Ultimate stress
(kg/m2)
W
(kg/m)
15.89
198.2
9800
49.44
14650
73.9
1.556
15.897
198.5
9850
49.6
14500
73
1.558
48
3.2.7 Water
Tap water was used in all concrete mixtures and in the curing of all tests specimens.
3.2.8 Admixture
Superplasticizer Type F has been used in all concrete mixes in constant dosage of 1.25
% of the cement weight. This type of admixture was mainly used to achieve water
reducing, increasing the strength for the recommended slump. This type is known as
"sikament 163M" delivered from a local company. Some technical data for the "sikament
163M" are shown in table (3.11).
Table (3.11) The technical data for the "Sikament 163M" (data sheet)
Type
Polymer type dispersion
Color
Brown
Dosage
0.5 % --- 2.5 % by cement weight
Specific gravity
1.2 (kg/liter)
PH value
81
Some advantages of the used admixture (Superplasticizer) are:
Substantial improvement in workability without increased water.

Normal set without retardation.
Accelerate hardening after setting.
Significant increase of early and ultimate strengths.
Especially suitable for concreting at elevated temperature.
Increase water tightness.
Improve surface finish.
Reduced shrinkage and creep
Chloride-free, dose not attack reinforcement.
49
3.3 Design of lightweight concrete & mix proportions

3.3.1 Mix Design
Steps of concrete mix design.
It have been taken cement content of (300,350,400 and 450kg/m3)
While designing the mix, it has been taken into account two characteristics;
1. Workability of concrete in its fresh state
2. Compressive strength and durability of concrete in its hardened state
To achieve the previous characteristics two methods were carried out
1. Weight method
(This method carried out in the mixes from one to eight)
C + C.L + F.L + S + W + A =
Where:
C = wt. of cement
C.L = wt. of coarse leca
F.L = wt. of fine leca
S = wt. of sand
W = wt. of water
A = wt of adm.
= unit weight
For example
Given that:
Cement content = 400
Coarse leca = 350
kg
kg
Water = 130 (by trial)

Percent of sand to fine leca = 40%to60%
Super plasticizer = 5lit (dose =1.25%of cement content)
Unit weight Y= 1.3
Required:
Weight of sand and fine leca
Solution
Unit weight - (cement + coarse leca + water + adm.)=fine leca + sand
1.3 - (0.4 + 0.35 + 0.13 + 0.005) =0.415 F.L+ S =
F.L = 249 kg
S = 166
kg
50
2. Volumetric method
C
S
W
+
+
+ Foam = 1.0
G.c G.s G.w
Where:
C = wt. of cement
W = wt. of water
G.c = 3.15
And
S = wt. of sand
F = Foam = volume of foam in the content
G.s = 2.55
G.w = 1
C : W : S = 1 : 0.4 : 3
For Example:
Given:
Foam=0.3m3
Sol:
C
3C
0.4C
+
+
+ 0.3 = 1
3.15 2.55
1
C = 0.369
S = 1.1018
W = 0.148
Wt. of foam = f*vol of foam
wt. (foam) = 0.0138 ton
and
= 0.046
t/m3
Tables (3.12), (3.13) and (3.14) present the contents of the mix for volumes 1 m3, 0.015 m3 and 0.054 m3
For volume = 1 m3 The contents Table (3.12)
C (kg)
S (kg)
W (lit)
F (kg)
Adm. (lit.)
369
1101.8
148
13.8
The theoretical unit weight is 1.63 t/m3 the experimental unit weight was found 1.54 t/m3
For volume = 0.015 m3 (the trial mix) The contents Table (3.13)
C (kg)
S (kg)
W (lit)
F (kg)
Adm. (lit.)
5.535
15.27
2.22
0.207
0.03
For volume = 0.054 m3 The contents Table (3.14)

C (kg)
18.73
3.3.2
S (kg)
56.19
W (lit)
7.49
F (kg)
.745
Adm. (lit.)
0.108
Mix Proportion
Tables (3.15), (3.16), (3.17) and (3.18) present the mix proportion for the four groups.
This mix proportions are for one cubic miter of concrete
51
Table (3.15) The mix proportions for group 1
Group 1
mix
cement
silica fume
coarse leca
water
fine leca
sand
adm.
foam
unit wt.
300
350
125
221.25
3.75
300
350
150
331.2
82.8
1.22
300
350
130
237.7
158.5
3.75
1.2
300
350
130
182.5
273.25
3.75
1.24
300
350
130
107.25
429
3.75
1.32
300
350
130
666.25
3.75
1.45
255
45
350
130
219.75
146.5
3.75
1.29
255
45
350
150
676.25
3.75
1.48
422
170
1270
10
1.87
Group 2
mix
Cement
(kg)
silica fume
(kg)
coarse leca
(kg)
Water fine leca

(liter)
(kg)
Sand
(kg)
adm. Foam
(liter) (kg)
Unit wt.
(kg/m3)
350
280
160
303
1.15
350
280
160
242.2
60.6
1.12
350
280
145
270.4
180.25
4.37
1.19
350
280
145
220
331
4.37
1.39
350
280
145
130
521
4.37
1.5
350
280
145
751
4.37
1.63
350
52.51
280
145
335.3
180.25
4.37
1.56
350
52.51
280
145
751
4.37
1.61
350
126
347
18.4
1.72
52
Group 3
mix
Cement
(kg)
silica fume
(kg)
coarse leca
(kg)
Water fine leca Sand adm. Foam

(liter)
(kg)
(kg) (liter) (kg)
Unit wt.
(kg/m3)
400
350
140
262
1.16
400
350
140
281.6
70.4
1.25
400
350
130
249
166
1.3
400
350
130
145
251
1.37
400
350
130
123
492
1.5
400
350
135
735
1.625
340
60
350
130
249
166
1.3
340
60
350
150
670
1.575
400
160
1200
40
1.63
Group 4
mix
Cement
(kg)
silica fume
(kg)
coarse leca
(kg)
Water fine leca

(liter)
(kg)
Sand
(kg)
adm. Foam
(liter) (kg)
unit wt.
(kg/m3)
450
347.2
145
216.13
1.16
450
347.2
155
247
49.8
1.26
450
347.2
155
272.3
146.4
5.63
1.37
450
347.2
160
250.2
302.6
5.63
1.52
450
347.2
160
137.47
443.5
5.63
1.54
450
347.2
163.3
751.8
5.63
1.72
382.5
67.5
347.2
155
272.3
146.4
5.63
1.37
382.5
67.5
347.2
165
712.2
5.63
1.67
371.9
148.7
1115.7
4.65
15
1.65
53
3.4 Test methods:

3.4.1 Fresh Concrete
The properties of fresh concrete were measured using the following tests:
Table (3.19) The Tests For Fresh Concrete
Test name
Reference code
Slump test
ECCS 203/2003 part 6
Compaction
Factor
Unit weight
3.4.2 Hardened Concrete

The properties of Hardened concrete were measured using the following tests:
Table (3.20) the tests and Specimen shape for hardened concrete
Test name
Specimen
shape
Reference code
Dimensions (cm)
Compressive strength
Cube
10x10x10
Splitting tensile strength
Cylinder
Flexural strength
Beam
Modulus of elasticity
Cylinder
D=15
L=15
7.5x7.5x30
D=15
L=15
3.5 Mixing
Mixing of concrete ingredients was done with reference to ESS 1658 Part 4-5 using a
mixer that pours concrete by moving around a horizontal axis its capacity is 0.06 cubic
meter. The cement, water saturated coarse and fine aggregate were added into the
mixer and mixed till the uniformity of the mixtures, then the mixing water which was
pre-mixed with the admixture is added to the mixer then the mixing was continued until
the mix is uniform.
3.6 Casting and Curing

The fresh concrete was placed in the previous moulds in two equal layers, each of
which was compacted of a vibrating table. The surface of the concrete was leveled
and the specimens were stored for 24 hours in the lab, then the moulds were erected
and the specimens were immediately immersed in the curing tank till the day of
testing.
54
3.7 Experimental Program
Lightweight
Concrete
Group 1 cement
content= 300
Group 2 cement
content= 350
Group 1 cement
content= 400
Group 1 cement
content= 450
Mixes
0% Sand
20 % Sand
40 % Sand
60 % Sand
80 % Sand
100 % Sand
100 % Fine
Leca
80 % Fine
Leca
60 % Fine
Leca
40 % Fine
Leca
20 % Fine
Leca
20 % Fine
Leca
Foam
15% Silica
Fume
Replacement
100%
Cement
100%
Cement
15% Silica
Fume
Replacement
Tests
Compressive
strength
7 days
Indirect
tensile
strength
Bond
strength
Bending
strength
Modulus of
elasticity
Thermal
properties
Shrinkage
28 days
55
RESULTS AND DISSCUSSION
Chapter IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
In this chapter we will discuss the results of different tests which were carried out during
our study on both fresh and hardened LWAC. From these results we conduct some
relations and equations which helped us to reach our final conclusion.
4.2 PROPERTIES OF FRESH LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE

The results of properties of fresh light weight concrete for different cement content are
given in tables (3.15), (3.16), (3.17) & (3.18). These properties are unit weight and
slump. The slump of all concrete mixes has an average of 11cm.Superplasticizer (typeF admixture) was added to all mixes where the dose was 1.25% of cement weight.
4.2.1 Fresh Unit Weight

The fresh unit weight of light weight concrete is ranged between (1.16 to 1.632). Figure
(4.1) shows the fresh unit weight test results for the same slump. From these results,
the fresh unit weight increases with the increase of the sand replacement percentage
and with increase of cement content
Relation between fresh unit weight & sand %
1.8
1.7
Fresh unit weight (t/m3)
1.6
1.5
C = 400
C = 350
C = 450
C = 300
Expon. (C = 450)
Expon. (C = 400)
Expon. (C = 350)
Expon. (C = 300)
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand %
Figure (4.1)
56
4.2.2 The Slump Test

The slump value for the different concrete mixes has an average of 11cm.This was
achieved by adding the 1.25% dosage of the superplasticizer. The effect of cement
content on the slump is clear, where the water content increases as the cement content
increases. The slump is related with sand percent replacement with fine leca as cement
content=400 in figure (4.2)
Relation between slump & sand %
20
18
16
Slump (cm)
14
12
C = 400
Linear (C = 400)
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand %
Figure (4.2)
4.3 PROPERTIES OF HARDENED LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE

The results of properties of hardened light weight concrete for different cement content
are discussed as follow. These properties are cube compressive strength, static
modulus of elasticity, hardened unit weight, splitting tensile strength and bond test. All
specimens were cured in tap water till the day of testing.
4.3.1 Hardened Unit Weight

Structural light weight concrete is defined as concrete having a 28-day dry unit weight
vary from 1450 to 1850 kg/m3. The relationship between the unit weight and the 28days compressive strength is shown in figure (4.3).From which it could be seen that the
compressive strength increases as the unit weight increases. Results indicates that the
hardened unit weight for LWAC is ranged between (1.12 to 1.632 ton/m3) , and 28-days
compressive strength ranges from (60 to 150 kg/cm2) .
57
Relation between Fcu & hardened unit weight

160
Fcu 28 Days (kg/cm )
140
120
C = 400
100
Linear (C = 400)
80
60
40
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
Unit weight after 28Days
Figure (4.3)
Figure (4.4) shows the relation between the 28-days hardened unit weight and sand
replacement for cement content = 400.It shows that the hardened unit weight increases
as the replacement percentage of fines with sand increases.
Relation between hardened unit weight & sand %
2
Hardened unit weight
1.75
C = 400
Expon. (C = 400)
1.5
1.25
1
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand %
Figure (4.4)
58
4.3.2 Cube Compressive Strength

In this section all the results of cube compressive strength of hardened LWAC for
different cement content and different percentages of sand replacement are discussed.
4.3.2.1 Effect of Sand Replacement and Cement Content
The relations between the cube compressive strength and the percentage of sand
replacement for different cement content are shown in figure (4.5) for 7 days and fig.
(4.6) for 28 days. The relation between compressive strength for 7days and 28 days
shown in figures (4.7.a), (4.7.b), (4.7.c) & (4.7.d). The figures indicates clearly that the
increase of sand replacement increase the cube compressive strength. This is due to a
good quality of concrete, increase in unit weight of concrete leads to increase of the
cube compressive strength. The rate of increase is higher in cement content 400 kg/m3
and lower gradually when the cement content increases. The effect of cement content
on cube compressive strength is noticed where as the increase of cement content leads
to increase of the cube compressive strength.
Relation between Fcu 7days & sand %

200
180
Fcu 7 Days (kg/cm2)
160
140
C = 400
C = 450
C = 350
C = 300
Expon. (C = 450)
Expon. (C = 400)
Expon. (C = 300)
Expon. (C = 350)
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand%
Figure (4.5)
59
Relation between Fcu
28 days & sand
180
160
140
2)
cm
120
C = 400
/kg
(Days
100
C = 350
C = 300
C = 450
Expon . ( C = 300 )
28
Fcu
80
Expon . ( C = 450 )
Expon . ( C = 400 )
Expon . ( C = 350 )
60
40
20
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand%
Figure (4.6)
Relation between Fcu 28 days & Fcu 7days
140
Fcu7 = 1.108 Fcu28 + 1.0527

120
Fcu 7 Days (kg/cm )
100
80
C = 300
Linear (C = 300)
60
40
20
0
15
25
35
45
55
65
75
85
95
105
115
Fcu 28 Days (kg/cm2)
Figure (4.7.a)
60

140
Fcu7 = 0.8975 Fcu28 + 0.5801

120
Fcu 7 Days (kg/cm2)
100
80
C = 350
Linear (C = 350)
60
40
20
0
15
35
55
75
95
115
135
155
Fcu 28 Days (kg/cm )
Figure (4.7.b)
Relation between Fcu 28days & Fcu 7days
120
Fcu
= 0.8324 Fcu28 + 3.8082
100
Fcu 7 Days
80
C = 400
Linear (C = 400)
60
40
20
0
55
65
75
85
95
105
115
Fcu 28 Days
Figure (4.7.c)
61

180
Fcu7 = 0.8225 Fcu28 + 11.503
Fcu 7 Days (kg/cm 2)
160
140
C = 450
Linear (C = 450)
120
100
80
60
55
75
95
115
135
155
175
Fcu 28 Days (kg/cm2)
Figure (4.7.d)
4.3.3 Splitting Tensile Strength

The results of splitting tensile strength of hardened lightweight concrete having different
cement content and different percentages of sand replacement are discussed. Also the
relation between the cube compressive strength and the splitting tensile strength is
given.
Figure (4.8) represents the effect of sand replacement of fines with sand on the splitting
tensile strength for different cement content. The figures show that the splitting tensile
strength increases with the increase of sand replacement percentage. And it's clear that
the increase of cement content leads to increase of the splitting tensile strength this is
due to increase of the cement paste and mechanical bond between coarse aggregate
and cement paste.
62
Relation between Ft & sand %

25
Ft (kg/cm2)
20
C = 400
C = 450
C = 350
C = 300
Expon. (C = 400)
Expon. (C = 450)
Expon. (C = 350)
Expon. (C = 300)
15
10
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand %
Figure (4.8)
4.3.3.2 Relation between Splitting Tensile Strength and Compressive Strength

The compressive strength of concrete is the most important property and usually gives
good indication of the general quality of the concrete. When the compressive strength
increases the splitting tensile strength increases, the relationship between tensile
strength and the cube compressive strength after 28-days is given from the relation
shown in figures (4.9.a), (4.9.b), (4.9.c) & (4.9.d).
63
Relation between Ft & Fcu 28days

15
Ft = 0.0903 Fcu + 2.9905
(kg/cm )
10
Ft
C = 300
Linear (C = 300)
0
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Fcu (kg/cm )
Figure (4.9.a)

15
(kg/cm )
Ft = 0.0517 Fcu + 6.7382
C = 350
Linear (C = 350)
Ft
10
5
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Fcu (kg/cm )
Figure (4.9.b)
64

25
Ft = 0.078 Fcu + 10.173
(kg/cm )
20
Ft
C = 400
Linear (C = 400)
15
10
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Fcu (kg/cm )
Figure (4.9.c)

25
Ft = 0.1087 Fcu + 0.2145
(kg/cm )
20
C = 450
Linear (C = 450)
Ft
15
10
5
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
Fcu (kg/cm )
Figure (4.9.d)
65
4.3.4 Flexural Strength

The test results of flexural strength of hardened LWAC having different cement content
and different percentages of sand replacement are shown below. The relation between
cube compressive strength and the flexural strength is also given below.
Figures (4.10) represent the effect of sand replacement percentages on the flexural
strength for different cement content. This figure shows that flexural strength increases
with increase of sand replacement percentage, and it shows that the flexural strength
increases with the increases of the cement content.
Relation between Fb & Sand %

60
50
40
C = 400
2)
C = 350
cm
/kg
(Fb
C = 450
C = 300
30
Expon . ( C = 450 )
Expon . ( C = 400 )
Expon . ( C = 300 )
Expon . ( C = 350 )
20
10
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand %
Figure (4.10)
66
4.3.4.2 Relation between Flexural Strength and Compressive Strength

Figures (4.11.a), (4.11.b), (4.11.c) & (4.11.d) show the relationship between the flexural
strength and the cube compressive strength after 28-days, from which the equations in
the figures were conducted.
Relation between Fb & Fcu 28days

30
Fb = 0.0758 Fcu + 18.065
(kg/cm 2)
25
Fb
C = 300
Linear (C = 300)
20
15
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
Fcu (kg/cm 2)
Figure (4.11.a)
67

35
Fb = 0.0789 Fcu + 17.698
(kg/cm )
30
C = 350
Linear (C = 350)
Fb
25
20
15
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Fcu (kg/cm 2)
Figure (4.11.b)

40
Fb = 0.2434 Fcu + 1.1018

35
(kg/cm )
30
C = 400
Linear (C = 400)
Fb
25
20
15
10
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Fcu (kg/cm )
Figure (4.11.c)
68

35
Fb = 0.1301 Fcu + 8.4497
C = 450
Linear (C = 450)
25
Fb
(kg/cm 2)
30
20
15
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
Fcu (kg/cm 2)
Figure (4.11.d)
4.3.5 Bond Strength

The test results of bond strength of hardened LWAC having different cement content
and different percentages of sand replacement are given below. The relation between
cube compressive strength and the bond strength is also given.

Figures (4.12) represent the effect of sand replacement percentages on the bond
strength for different cement content. This figure shows that bond strength increases
with increase of sand replacement percentage, and it shows that the bond strength
increases with the increase of the cement content.
69
Relation between Fbond & sand %

80
70
Fbond (kg/cm )
60
C = 400
C = 350
C = 300
C = 450
Expon. (C
Expon. (C
Expon. (C
Expon. (C
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand %
Figure (4.12)
4.3.5.2 Relation between Bond Strength and Compressive Strength

Figures (4.13.a), (4.13.b), (4.13.c) & (4.13.d) show the relationship between the bond
strength and the cube compressive strength after 28-days. From which the equations in
the figures were conducted.
Relation between Fcu 28days & Fbond
30
Fbond (kg/cm2)
Fbond = 0.0724 Fcu + 18.792
25
C = 300
Linear (C = 300)
20
15
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Fcu (kg/cm )
Figure (4.13.a)
70
=
=
=
=
400)
450)
300)
350)

50
Fbond = 0.1582 Fcu + 23.533
Fbond (kg/cm )
45
40
C = 350
Linear (C = 350)
35
30
25
20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Fcu (kg/cm )
Figure (4.13.b)

75
Fbond = 0.3862 Fcu + 17.613

70
Fbond (kg/cm )
65
60
C = 400
Linear (C = 400)
55
50
45
40
35
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Fcu (kg/cm )
Figure (4.13.c)
71

65
Fbond = 0.0611 Fcu + 33.858

60
Fbond (kg/cm 2)
55
50
C = 450
Linear (C = 450)
45
40
35
30
50
70
90
110
130
150
170
190
Fcu (kg/cm 2)
Figure (4.13.d)
4.3.6 Static Modulus of Elasticity

The static modulus of elasticity is of special importance in structural lightweight concrete
constructions. Test results of static modulus of elasticity of hardened concrete having
different sand replacement percentages are discussed as follow. The relation between
stress and strain is shown from figure (4.14.a) to figure (4.14.i) with different mixes: for
the first six mixes the change between %sand and %Fine Leca where we increase sand
% as follow (0,20,40,60,80,100)% and constant cement content=400.
Figure (4.15) shows the effect of sand replacement on static modulus of elasticity of
concrete. The modulus of elasticity increases as the sand replacement percentage
increases.
4.3.6.2 Relation between Static Modulus of Elasticity and Compressive Strength
The modulus of elasticity increases as the cube compressive increases. The
relationship between the static modulus of elasticity and the cube compressive strength
is given in figure (4.16).
72
Relation between stress & strain

MIX 1
0.04
0.035
Stress (t/cm2)
0.03
0.025
0.02
C = 400
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.0005
0.001
0.0015
0.002
0.0025
0.003
0.0035
0.004
Strain
Figure (4.14.a)

MIX 2
0.045
0.04
0.03
Stress (t/cm )
0.035
0.025
C = 400
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.0005
0.001
0.0015
0.002
0.0025
0.003
0.0035
0.004
0.0045
Strain
Figure (4.14.b)
73

MIX 3
0.035
0.03
Stress (t/cm )
0.025
0.02
C = 400
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
0.0008
0.001
0.0012
0.0014
0.0016
0.0018
Strain
Figure (4.14.c)

MIX 4
0.05
0.045
0.04
Stress (t/cm )
0.035
0.03
0.025
C = 400
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.0005
0.001
0.0015
0.002
0.0025
0.003
0.0035
Strain
Figure (4.14.d)
74

MIX5
0.05
0.045
0.04
Stress (t/cm )
0.035
0.03
0.025
C = 400
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.0005
0.001
0.0015
0.002
0.0025
0.003
0.0035
Strain
Figure (4.14.e)

MIX 6
0.05
0.045
0.04
Stress (t/cm )
0.035
0.03
0.025
C = 400
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.0005
0.001
0.0015
0.002
0.0025
Strain
Figure (4.14.f)
75

MIX 7
0.05
0.045
0.04
Stress (t/cm 2 )
0.035
0.03
0.025
C = 400
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.0005
0.001
0.0015
0.002
0.0025
0.003
0.0035
Strain
Figure (4.14.g)
76

MIX 8
0.045
0.04
0.03
Stress (t/cm )
0.035
0.025
C = 400
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
0.0008
0.001
0.0012
0.0014
0.0016
Strain
Figure (4.14.h)

MIX 9
0.06
Stress (t/cm 2 )
0.05
0.04
0.03
C = 400
0.02
0.01
0
0
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
0.0008
0.001
0.0012
0.0014
0.0016
0.0018
0.002
Strain
Figure (4.14.i)
77
Relation between E & sand %

22
21
20
E (t/cm )
19
C= 400
18
Linear (C= 400)
17
16
15
14
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Sand %
Figure (4.15)
Relation between E & Fcu

25
E (t/cm 2 )
20
C = 400
Linear (C = 400)
15
10
60
80
100
120
140
160
Fcu (kg/cm2)
Figure (4.16)
78

Drying shrinkage of LWAC made and cured at normal temperatures ranges from slightly
30% than that of some normal weight concrete, lightweight aggregate usually give
higher shrinkage because it has low modulus of elasticity.
The results of drying shrinkage of hardened LWAC made of different sand replacement
percentage are discussed as follow.
4.3.7.1 Effect of Replacement Percent of Fines with Sand

The effect of sand replacement percentage on the drying shrinkage of hardened LWAC
given in figure (4.17), from which it could be seen that as the sand replacement
percentage increases the drying shrinkage decreases.
Relation between shrinkage &sand %

C = 400 kg
0.0004
0.00035
3 days
Shrinkage
0.0003
7 days
14 days
28 days
Linear (28 days)
0.00025
Linear (14 days)

Linear (7 days)
0.0002
Linear (3 days)
0.00015
0.0001
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sand %
Figure (4.17)
4.3.7.2 Effect of Age

The Age shows an effect on the drying shrinkage for the same percentage of sand
replacement. The drying shrinkage increases with the increase of time. The relation
between drying shrinkage and time is shown from figure (4.18.a) to figure (4.18.h) with
different mixes: for the first six mixes the change between %sand and %fine leca where
we increase sand % as follow (0,20,40,60,80,100)% and constant cement content =
400 kg.
79
Relation between Shrinkage & time

MIX 1
0.0004
0.00035
Shrinkage
0.0003
0.00025
0.0002
0 % sand
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0
10
15
Time
20
25
30
(day)
Figure (4.18.a)

MIX 2
0.0004
0.00035
Shrinkage
0.0003
0.00025
0.0002
20 % sand
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (day)
Figure (4.18.b)
80

MIX 3
0.00035
0.0003
Shrinkage
0.00025
0.0002
40 % sand
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (day)
Figure (4.18.c)

MIX 4
0.00035
0.0003
Shrinkage
0.00025
0.0002
60 % sand
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (day)
Figure (4.18.d)
81

MIX 5
0.00035
0.0003
Shrinkage
0.00025
0.0002
80 % sand
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (day)
Figure (4.18.e)

MIX 6
0.00035
0.0003
Shrinkage
0.00025
0.0002
100 % sand
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (day)
Figure (4.18.f)
82

MIX 7
0.0003
0.00025
Shrinkage
0.0002
40 % sand
15 % silica
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (day)
Figure (4.18.g)

MIX 8
0.0003
0.00025
Shrinkage
0.0002
100 % sand
15 % silica
0.00015
0.0001
0.00005
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
Time (day)
Figure (4.18.h)
83
4.3.8 Effect of Silica Fume Presence

The properties of light weight concrete in presence of silica fume are discussed in this
part. The properties are related to both cement content and sand replacement
percentage as shown below.
4.3.8.1 Effect of Cement Content and Sand Replacement
We used silica fume as a percentage of the cement content in only 2 mixes (40 % & 100
% sand). The relations between the percentage of silica fume and compressive
strength, bond strength, tensile strength, bending strength are discussed. From these
relations, it's clear that the compressive strength, bond strength, tensile strength, and
bending strength increase with the increase of both cement content and sand
replacement percentage.
84
Relation between Fcu 7 days & Cement content

in the presence of silica fume
120
Fcu (kg/cm2)
100
80
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
60
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
40
20
0
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.19.a)

120
Fcu 7 (kg/cm 2)
110
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
100
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
90
80
Linear (100 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
70
Linear (40 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
60
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.19.b)
85

140
Fcu (kg/cm 2)
120
100
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
80
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
60
40
20
0
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.20.a)

150
140
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
Fcu28 (kg/cm2)
130
120
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
110
100
Linear (100 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
90
Linear (40 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
80
70
60
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.20.b)
86
Relation between Fb & Cement content

40
35
Fb (kg/cm 2)
30
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
25
20
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
15
10
5
0
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.21.a)
Relation between Fb & Cement content

Fb (kg/cm2)
40
35
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
30
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
25
Linear (100 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
20
Linear (40 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
15
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.21.b)
87
Relation between Fbond & Cement content

60
Fbond (kg/cm2)
50
40
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
30
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
20
10
0
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.22.a)
Relation between Fbond & Cement content

60
55
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
Fbond (kg/cm 2)
50
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
45
40
Linear (100 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
35
30
Linear (40 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
25
20
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.22.b)
88
Relation between Ft & Cement content

25
Ft (kg/cm 2 )
20
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
15
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
10
0
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.23.a)
Relation between Ft & Cement content

25
23
40 % Sand +
15 % Silica
21
Ft (kg/cm2)
19
100 % Sand +
15 % Silica
17
15
Linear (100 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
13
11
Linear (40 %
Sand + 15 %
Silica)
9
7
5
300
350
400
450
Cement content (kg)
Figure (4.23.b)
89
CONCLUSION
5 Chapter five
Conclusions
We have found some results &conclusions regarding all the experimental work done, as
an example:
The fresh unit weight of light weight concrete is ranged between (1.15 to 1.75).
the fresh unit weight increases with the increase of the sand replacement percentage
and with increase of cement content
The slump value for the different concrete mixes has an average of 12 cm. This was
achieved by adding the 1.25%-2.00% dosage of the super plasticizer.
The compressive strength increases as the unit weight increases. Results indicates
that the hardened unit weight for LWAC is ranged between (1.15 to 1.75 t/m3), and 28days compressive strength ranges from (55 to 170 kg/cm2).
The increase of sand replacement increases the cube compressive strength. This is
due to a good quality of concrete.
The splitting tensile, bond, flexural strength increases with the increase of sand
replacement percentage.
Increase of cement content leads to increase of the splitting tensile strength this is due
to increase of the cement paste and mechanical bond between coarse aggregate and
cement paste.
The modulus of elasticity increases as the sand replacement percentage increases.
Drying shrinkage of LWAC made and cured at normal temperatures ranges from
slightly 30% than that of normal weight concrete, lightweight aggregate usually give
higher shrinkage because it has low modulus of elasticity
As an overall conclusion light weight concrete is in a wards a non structural concrete but
have got low unit weight which Leads to many benefits as decreasing costs, having
good thermal & sound insulation Structural LWAC can be applied in Egypt in-case of the
availability Of the light weight aggregate previously defined in chapter two.
90
REFRENCES
6 References
7
Egyptian Code for design & construction of concrete structure (E.C.C.S 203-2001)
American concrete institute (ACI)
Concrete by Kumar Mehta
Lightweight aggregate concrete by Satish Chandra
Concrete properties by Sandor Popovics
Phd.Dr.Abd el kadr Safouh
CONCRETE Microstructure, Properties and Materials by P. Kumar Mehta & Paulo. Monteiro
91

Lightweight Aggregate Concrete

Cargado por

Información del documento

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Lightweight Aggregate Concrete

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Alexandria University

3.3 DESIGN OF LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE & MIX PROPORTIONS ................................................ 50

Synthetic materials lightweight aggregates are produced by similar techniques. Prelate

2.2 Historical Background

Figure 2 - 1 Babylon, Iraq, built by Sumerian

the 4th century A.D. in Istanbul, Turkey.

Figure 2 - 3 The great Roman amphitheatre, Colosseum, built

between A.D. 70 and 82.

Figure 2 - 4 Pyramids in Mexico, built during the Mayan period

Figure 2-5 Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa, 2500 B.C.

2.2.2 LWAC in the 19th Century

2.2.2.1 World War I

Figure 2- 6 U.S.S Selma ship

2.2.3 Production of Leca

2.2.4 LWAC In 1950s

2.3 Lightweight Aggregate Concrete

2.3.1 Advantages of Light Weight Concretes

Provide a very good thermal insulation.

2.3.2 Disadvantages of Lightweight Concretes

More expensive than ordinary concretes.

2.4 Classification of Lightweight Concrete

Lightweight aggregate concrete classification: can be considered in three different

2.4.1 Low Density Concretes

2.4.2 Moderate Strength Concretes

2.4.3 Structural Concretes

2.5 Lightweight Aggregates

2.5.1 Production Processes of Lightweight Aggregates

Figure 2-8 Rotary Kiln

2.5.1.2 Sintered Strand

2.5.1.3 Vertical Shaft Kiln

2.5.1.5 Foaming Bed Reactor

Figure 2 - 9 Fluidized Bed Foaming Reactor

2.5.2 Properties of Lightweight Aggregates

Sintered Fly Ash

2.5.2.4 Particle Shape and Surface Texture

2.6 Peculiarities of Light Weight Concrete Mix Proportioning

2.6.1 Mix Proportioning of No-Fines LWAC

2.6.2 The Steps of the Proportioning Procedure

2.7 Manufacture of Lightweight Concrete

2.7.1 Moisture Content of the Lightweight Aggregate

2.7.2 Slump and Air Entrained of the Lightweight Aggregate

2.7.3 Pumped Concrete and its Design

2.8 Physical Properties of Lightweight Aggregate Concrete

between compressive strength of

Figure 2-12 Relationship

between the Cube Crushing & Dry Density Of Various Types Of

Figure 2-13 Relationship

between 28 Days Compressive Strength & Density Of Fresh

2.8.3 Modulus of Elasticity

Effective of Water/Cement ratio

Dependence of E-modulus of different matrices on the water/cement ratio

Relationship between E-modulus and compressive strength of different

2.8.4 Tensile and Flexural Strength

2.8.5 Effect of Sand Replacement

Splitting tensile strength of airdried lightweight concrete increased with

Sand replacement reduced drying shrinkage substantially. The reduction for

modulus of elasticity and drying shrinkage for light weight concrete.

2.8.6 Elastic Compatibility

2.8.7 Drying Shrinkage

2.8.9 Thermal Conductivity

Figure 2-20 Relationship between Thermal Conductivity & Density

2.9.1 Permeability in Lightweight Concrete

High compared to the stiffness

Appears at the interface