Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 20872092

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

An experimental study on the workability of self-compacting lightweight concrete

Zhimin Wu a,*, Yunguo Zhang a, Jianjun Zheng b, Yining Ding a
a b

State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116023, PR China Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Zhejiang University of Technology, Hangzhou 310014, PR China

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
Numerous investigations have been conducted on self-compacting concrete (SCC) and lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC), but there are relatively very few studies on self-compacting lightweight concrete (SCLC). This paper deals mainly with the mix proportion design for SCLC and its workability. By considering the water absorption of lightweight aggregate (LWA), two mix proportions for SCLC are designed by the overall calculation method with xed ne and coarse aggregate contents. The workability of the two types of fresh SCLCs is quantitatively evaluated by the slump ow, V-funnel, Lbox, U-box, wet sieve segregation, and surface settlement tests. The uniformity of distribution of LWAs along the specimen is also evaluated by the column segregation test and the cross-section images. Based on the experimental results, a detailed analysis is conducted. It is found that the two types of fresh SCLCs have good uidity, deformability, lling ability, uniform aggregate distribution and minimum resistance to segregation. It can be concluded that the two mix proportions for SCLC presented in this paper satisfy various requirements for workability and can be used for the design of practical concrete structures. 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 10 January 2008 Received in revised form 31 July 2008 Accepted 26 August 2008 Available online 8 October 2008 Keywords: Self-compacting lightweight concrete Mix proportion design Workability Dynamic text Static test

1. Introduction Self-compacting lightweight aggregate concrete (SCLC) is a kind of high performance concrete developed from self-compacting concrete (SCC). SCLC combines the favorable properties of lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC) and SCC, needs no external vibration, and can spread into place, ll the formwork and encapsulate reinforcement without any bleeding or segregation. As another advantage, SCLC efciently reduces the self-weight of the structure and the on-site noise level and can be used for maintenance and repairs of concrete structures. Workability is a crucial factor that affects the application and physicomechanical properties of SCLC, since SCLC of practical use is required to have high uidity, deformability, good lling ability, and moderate resistance to segregation. To ensure that reinforcement can be encapsulated and that the formwork can be lled completely, a favorable workability is essential for fresh SCLC. In addition, aggregate particles in SCLC are required to have uniform distribution in the specimen and the minimum segregation risk should be maintained during the process of transportation and placement. Various testing and evaluation methods used for SCLC are similar to those used for SCC. Extensive investigations on the work-

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: zyg-ncwu@163.com 0950-0618/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.08.023

ability of SCC have been made in North America and Europe [13]. Khayat et al. reported that the L-box, U-box, and J-ring tests can be used to evaluate the passing ability of SCC and, to a certain extent, the deformability and resistance to segregation [1]. When combined with the slump ow test, the L-box test is very suitable for the quality control of on-site SCC. The visual stability index, wet sieve segregation test, and penetration test are usually used to estimate the resistance of SCC to segregation [4]. Although numerous investigations have been made on SCC and LWAC, there are few studies on SCLC so far. Choi et al. [5] designed the mix proportion for SCLC by adopting a modied method proposed by Su and Miao [6]. The slump ow, V-funnel and U-box tests were then used to evaluate the workability of SCLC. Similarly, Shi and Wu used the slump ow, V-funnel, and L-box tests, and the visual observation method to study the properties of SCLC [7]. Mller and Haist proposed three mix proportions for SCLC and assessed their self-compacting properties by the slump ow, J-ring, V-funnel, and L-box tests. It has been found that, compared with SCC, there is no signicant difference in the mix proportion design except for the aggregate used [8]. According to the current investigations on LWAC and the suggestions of EFNARC 2002 [9], the study on the resistance of SCLC to segregation is insufcient. Most of the current investigations on the resistance to segregation are conducted by the visual observation method and the volume stability of SCLC and the uniformity of distribution of aggregate in SCLC are seldom dealt with. Therefore, it is of great practical significance to further study the workability of SCLC.

2088 2. Materials and mix design 2.1. Materials

Z. Wu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 20872092 Table 2 Physical properties and grading of expanded shale aggregate Apparent density (kg/m3) 1363 24-h water absorption (%) 4 Crush strength (MPa) 6.0 Aggregate volume fraction (%)

An ordinary Portland cement produced in Dalian, China was used in this study. Class I y ash with apparent density of 2.7 g/cm3 was added as a viscous admixture. Sica 3301 polycarboxylate-based high-range water reducer (HRWR) with specic gravity of 1.1 was used to adjust the workability of SCLC. An expanded shale as shown in Fig. 1 was used as coarse aggregate. The maximum aggregate diameter was 20 mm. River sand was used as ne aggregate. The physical properties of the cement and expanded shale are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. 2.2. Mix proportions Considering the water absorption of LWA, the mix proportions for SCLC were determined by the overall calculation method with xed ne and coarse aggregate contents [10,11]. In the experiment, two series of concrete specimens, denoted respectively by SCLC1 and SCLC2, were cast. The coarse and ne volume fractions were 0.520 and 0.206 for SCLC1 and 0.510 and 0.211 for SCLC2, respectively. The water to binder ratio w/b was determined by

<5 mm 16.6

5 10 mm 43.6

10 16 mm 25.7

>16 mm 14.1

3.1. Dynamic stability tests 3.1.1. Slump ow test Since the slump test is not suitable for the analysis of the uidity of SCLC, the slump ow test is adopted. The testing apparatus consists of a normal slump cone and a steel plate with dimensions of 900 900 mm. With this apparatus, the time for SCLC to spread to 500 mm in diameter, T500, and the nal slump ow diameters and D2 in the two orthogonal directions as shown in Fig. 2 can be measured. According to EFNARC [9], for class 1 SCC the slump ow diameter is 550 650 mm and T500 6 2 s; for class 2 SCC the slump ow diameter is 600 750 mm and T500 P 2 s; for class 3 SCC the slump ow diameter is 760 850 mm, but no specication for T500 is given. To further examine how the uidity of SCLC is changed with time, the slump ow was measured at 0, 10, and 30 min, respectively. The results are shown in Table 4. 3.1.2. V-funnel test The apparatus for the V-funnel test is shown in Fig. 3. With this apparatus, the total time for SCLC to ow through the V-funnel, can be measured. The V-funnel ow test is to evaluate the uidity of SCLC and the ability for SCLC to change its path and to pass through a constricted area. According to EFNARC [9], for class 1 SCC TV is smaller than 8 s and for class 2 SCC TV is 9 25 s. The measured values of TV are shown in Table 5. 3.1.3. L-box test The L-box test is used to evaluate the uidity of SCLC and the ability for SCLC to pass through steel bars. The L-box consists of a chimney section and a channel section as shown in Fig. 4. With the L-box, the height of concrete in the chimney, h1, the height of concrete in the channel section, h2, and the time for SCLC to reach 400 mm from three steel bars, T400, can be measured. According to EFNARC [9], when the ratio of h2 to h1 is larger than 0.8, SCC has good passing ability. However, no specication for T400 is given in EFNARC or other codes. In most previous studies on SCC, T400 is used to estimate the ow velocity of SCC. The measured values of h2/h1 were respectively 0.84 and 0.97 for SCLC1 and SCLC2, and the values of T400 are shown in Table 5. 3.1.4. U-box test The U-box test is used to evaluate the lling ability and passing ability of SCLC in congested reinforcement. The main parameter to be measured is the height difference of concrete between the two boxes, Dh. The apparatus for the U-box test is shown in Fig. 5. According to EFNARC [9], when the height difference of concrete is smaller than 30 mm, SCC has good lling and passing ability.

w=b

mw 1 mc f fcu;p =Afce B

where m(w) is the mass of water, m(c+f) is the total mass of cement and y ash, fcu,p is the cube compressive strength of SCLC, is the compressive strength of cement, and A and B are two regression coefcients. According to [12], A = 0.48 and B = 0.52 for crushed aggregate. The volume fraction of water was given by

Vw

V cp V 0 1 fcu;p =Afce B=qc 1 / /qf

where Vcp is the volume fraction of cement paste, V0 is the volume fraction of air, u is the substitution rate of y ash for ordinary Portland cement, and qc and qf are the density of cement and y ash, respectively. The value of u was taken to be equal to 0.30 [6,7]. Thus, the mix proportions for SCLC1 and SCLC2 were determined as shown in Table 3.

3. Workability tests To better evaluate the workability of SCLC, both dynamic and static stability tests are usually required [1,2]. Dynamic stability is concerned with the properties of SCLC during the process of mixing, transportation, and casting, while static stability deals with the properties of SCLC during the period from casting to initial set.

Fig. 1. Expanded shale LWA.

Table 1 Physical properties of cement No. P42.5 MgO (%) 65.0 SO3 (%) 63.5 Specic surface (m2/kg) >290 Percentage retained on 80 lm sieve (%) 63.0 Initial setting time (min) P100 Final setting time (min) 6330 3-Day compressive strength (MPa) P25 28-Day compressive strength (MPa) P46

Z. Wu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 20872092 Table 3 Mix proportions for SCLC1 and SCLC2 No. SCLC1 SCLC2 Cement (kg/m3) 397 425 Fly ash (kg/m3) 170 182 Sand (kg/m3) 780 787 LWA (kg/m3) 416 408 Water (kg/m3) 187 176 HRWR (kg/m3) 6.2 10.9 28-Day compressive strength (MPa) 42.6 50.1

2089

Bulk density (kg/m3) 1879 1920

Fig. 2. Slump ow test.

Fig. 4. L-box test.

Table 4 Variations of T500, D1, and D2 with time No. 0 min T500 (s) SCLC1 SCLC2 5.9 4.2 D1 D2 (mm) 760 740 780 800 10 min T500 (s) 6.0 4.8 D1 D2 (mm) 710 680 780 800 30 min T500 (s) 9.2 6.6 D1 D2 (mm) 680 690 780 770

Fig. 5. U-box test.

3.2. Static stability tests 3.2.1. Wet sieve segregation test The wet sieve segregation test as shown in Fig. 6 was rst developed in France. It can be used to quantitatively evaluate the resistance of SCLC to segregation. The test procedure is as follows. First, 10 l of fresh SCLC is lled in a sealed container. After the sample stands still for 15 min, 5 kg of SCLC is taken out of the container and then poured from a height of 500 mm onto a perforated metal sieve with aperture 5 mm. After 2 min, the mass of SCLC that passes through the sieve is recorded. Finally, the mass percentage of the sample passing through the sieve is calculated as the segregation ratio (SR) of SCLC. Obviously, the smaller the value of SR is, the larger the resistance of SCLC to segregation is. According to EFNARC [9], the value of SR should not exceed 15% for SCC to meet the requirement of resistance to segregation. The measured values of SR are shown in Table 5. 3.2.2. Surface settlement test The surface settlement test is used to measure the rate of settlement at the top surface of SCLC in a plastic stage to evaluate

Fig. 3. V-funnel test.

Table 5 Values of Iseg, SR, TV, T500, and T400 for SCLC1 and SCLC2 No. SCLC1 SCLC2 Iseg (%) 2.9% 4.2% SR (%) 4.4% 5.6% TV (s) 23.3 17.8 T500 (s) 5.9 4.2 T400 (s) 7.5 6.3

The measured height differences of concrete were 6 and 3 mm for SCLC1 and SCLC2, respectively.

2090

Z. Wu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 20872092

Fig. 6. Wet sieve segregation test.

Fig. 8. Column segregation test.

its volume stability. The rate of settlement (expressed as relative settlement per hour) can be expressed as follows [13]

Settlementrate%=h fSt % St5 %=5ming=60min

where St is the settlement value at a given time t (in minutes), St5 is the settlement value at time of t minus 5 min. The apparatus for the surface settlement test is made of a polyvinyl chloride pipe with diameter 200 mm and height 700 mm. A circular polypropylene colophony plate is placed on the top of the polyvinyl chloride pipe to monitor the height change of SCLC as shown in Fig. 7. Hwang et al. found that the volume stability of SCC decreases with the increase of the volume fraction of cement [13]. According to their suggestions, when the settlement rate at 30 min is smaller than 0.16% per hour and the maximum settlement is smaller than 0.5%, SCC has good volume stability. The measured settlement rate at 30 min and maximum settlement after 5.5 h were 0.086% per hour and 0.22% for SCLC1 and 0.080% per hour and 0.16% for SCLC2, respectively. 3.2.3. Uniformity test of coarse aggregate distribution Compared with normal aggregate concrete, LWAs in SCLC are easier to oat up, resulting in segregation. A preferable SCLC should not only have good uidity, deformability, and lling ability, but also have uniform aggregate distribution and minimum resistance to segregation. In this study, the column segregation test was conducted to examine the uniformity of distribution of LWA. As shown in Fig. 8, the circular steel column consists of four short columns with diameter 200 mm and height 165 mm. The fresh SCLC was lled in the circular steel column. After 30 min, the four short columns were removed one by one from the top. The SCLC in each

short column was poured onto a sieve with aperture 5 mm and then washed by water. The mass of coarse aggregate in each short column was nally weighed. The ratio of the mass of coarse aggregate in each short column to the total mass of coarse aggregate in the four short columns are used to evaluate the uniformity of distribution of coarse aggregate. With the four ratios, the coefcient of variation can be calculated as the aggregate segregation index Iseg. Obviously, the smaller the value of Iseg is, the more uniform the distribution of coarse aggregate is. The measured values of Iseg are shown in Table 5. 4. Analysis of experimental results 4.1. Dynamic stability test In this study, the compressive strength and density of SCLC were also measured. The measured 28-day compressive strength and density were 42.6 MPa and 1879 kg/m3 for SCLC1 and 50.1 MPa and 1920 kg/m3 for SCLC2, respectively. Therefore, they are of high-strength lightweight concrete. The variations of T500, D1, and D2 with time are shown in Table 4. As can be seen from Table 4, SCLC1 and SCLC2 have very high uidity. It is also noted that, although T500 increases and the slump ow diameter decreases with the increase of time, they still satisfy the requirements for class 2 SCC. Therefore, SCLC1 and SCLC2 are of high self-compacting ability. The results from the L-box, V-funnel, and U-box tests are shown in Figs. 9 and 10. In Fig. 9, the dashed line denotes the critical value of h2/h1 suggested by EFNARC and the domain of h2/h1 > 0.8 is called the self-ow zone. It can be seen from Fig. 9 that SCLC1

10 8 T 400 [s] 6 4 2 0 0 SCLC1 SCLC2 0. 2 0. 4 0. 6 h 2/h 1 0. 8 1 SFZ

Fig. 7. Surface settlement test.

Fig. 9. Relationship between T400 and h2/h1.

Z. Wu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 20872092

2091

30 25 20 TV [s] 15 10 5 0 0
SCLC1 SCLC2

2 Surface settlement [mm] 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 0 SCLC1 SCLC2 0 1 2 3 Time [h] 4 5 6

SFZ

16 24 h [mm]

32

40

Fig. 10. Relationship between TV and Dh.

Fig. 13. Variation of surface settlement of SCLC with time.

and SCLC2 satisfy the workability requirement for SCC based on the L-box test. In Fig. 10, the domain surrounded by 0 6 Tv 6 2 s and 0 6 Dh 6 30 mm is called the self-ow zone. It can be seen from Fig. 10 that SCLC1 and SCLC2 also satisfy the workability requirement for SCC based on the V-funnel and U-box tests. Therefore, SCLC1 and SCLC2 are of good uidity, deformability, passing ability, and lling ability. 4.2. Static stability test As can be seen from the results on the column segregation test shown in Fig. 11, the minimum and maximum aggregate contents are 23.9% and 25.4% for SCLC1 and 24.1% and 26.5% for SCLC2, respectively. This shows that the distribution of coarse aggregate particles along specimens have good uniformity, which is also conrmed by the cross-section images shown in Fig. 12. The variation of the surface settlement of SCLC with time is shown in Fig. 13. From Fig. 13, it can be seen that the surface settlement basically tends to be stable after 3.5 h, which is consistent

with the nding by Assaad et al. [2]. The measured maximum surface settlement were respectively 0.22% and 0.16% for SCLC1 and SCLC2, both of which are smaller than 0.5%, a critical value suggested by Assaad et al. [2]. Therefore, SCLC1 and SCLC2 have good volume stability. Among these physical quantities shown in Table 5, Iseg and SR are used to evaluate the resistance of SCLC to segregation, and TV, T500, and T400 measure the shear ow velocity of SCLC. It can be seen from Table 5 that, compared with SCLC1, the value of TV, T500, or T400 is smaller for SCLC2. This shows that SCLC2 has smaller shear yield stress and therefore larger shear ow velocity than SCLC1. On the other hand, since the value of Iseg or SR for SCLC2 is larger than that for SCLC1, SCLC1 has larger resistance to segregation. Since the binder content in SCLC2 is larger than that in SCLC1, the shear ow velocity increases but the resistance to segregation decreases with the increase of the binder content. 5. Conclusions In this paper, two mix proportions for SCLC have been presented. Based on various tests, the workability of SCLC and the uniformity of distribution of LWAs along the specimen have been evaluated in a quantitative manner. The conclusions of this study are summarized in the following points: 1. Considering the water absorption of LWA, two mix proportions for SCLC have been designed by the overall calculation method with xed ne and coarse aggregate contents. 2. The good workability of the two types of fresh SCLCs has been demonstrated by the slump ow, V-funnel, L-box, U-box, wet sieve segregation, and surface settlement tests. 3. The good uniformity of distribution of LWAs along the specimen has been veried by the column segregation test and the cross-section images. 4. The shear ow velocity increases but the resistance to segregation decreases with the increase of the binder content. References
[1] Khayat KH, Assaad J, Daczko J. Comparison of eld-oriented test methods to assess dynamic stability of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mater J 2004;101(2):16876. [2] Assaad J, Khayat KH, Daczko J. Evaluation of static stability of selfconsolidating concrete. ACI Mater J 2004;101(3):20715. [3] Ding YN, Liu SG, Zhang Y, Thomas A. The investigation on the workability of bre cocktail reinforced self-compacting high performance concrete. Constr Build Mater 2008;22(7):146270. [4] Bartos P. Testing-SCC toward new European for fresh SCC. In: 1st International Symposium on Design, Performance and Use of Self-Consolidating Concrete. Changsha, China: 2005. p. 2544. [5] Choi YW, Kim YJ, Shin HC, Moon HY. An experimental research on the uidity and mechanical proprieties of high-strength lightweight self-compacting concrete. Cem Concr Res 2006;36(9):1595602.

27 Aaggregate content [%] 26 25 24 23 22 1st SCLC1 SCLC2 2nd 3rd Short columns' No. 4th

Fig. 11. Variation of aggregate content along circular steel column.

Fig. 12. Distribution of coarse aggregates on three cross-sections.

2092

Z. Wu et al. / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 20872092 [10] Chen JK, Wang DM. New mix design method for HPC-overall calculation method. J Chin Ceram Soc 2000;28(2):1948 [in Chinese]. [11] Japanese Ready-Mixed Concrete Association. Manual of producing high uidity (self-compacting) concrete. Japan: Japanese Ready-Mixed Concrete Association; 1998 [in Japanese]. [12] JGJ55-2000. Specication for the mix proportion design of ordinary concrete. China: Ministry of Construction; 2000 [in Chinese]. [13] Hwang SD, Khayat KH, Bonneau O. Performance-based specications of selfconsolidating concrete used in structural applications. ACI Mater J 2006;103(2):1219.

[6] Su N, Miao B. A new method for the mix design of medium strength owing concrete with low cement content. Cem Concr Compos 2003;25(2):21522. [7] Shi CJ, Wu YZ. Mixture proportioning and properties of self-consolidating lightweight concrete containing glass powder. ACI Mater J 2005;102(5): 355363. [8] Mller HS, Haist M. Self-compacting lightweight concrete technology and use. Concr Plant Precast Technol 2002;71(2):2937. [9] European Project Group. Specication and guidelines for self-compacting concrete. UK: EFNARC; 2002.