SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017

Use of M-Sand as a Replacement of Cement and

Fine Aggregate
R Lakshmi Priyanka1B.Ravi Kiran2G V L N Murthy3
1 M.Tech student (149F1D8721), Nova Engineering college, Eluru
2 Assistant professor, Department of civil engineering, Nova Engineering college, Eluru
3 Assistant professor, Department of civil engineering, Sri Vasavi Engineering college, Tadepalligudem

ABSTRACT
M-Sand is crushed aggregates produced from hard granite stone which is cubically shaped with rounded edges.
Concrete industry now will have to go for crushed sand or what is called manufactured sand (M-SAND). The use of
M-Sand as a replacement of cementious component in concrete depends on several factors i.e. the design strength,
workability, water demand and finally the cost. There is optimum cement content beyond which little or no
additional strength is achieved by increase in the cement content. So, by maintaining the optimum cement content in
the concrete and decreasing it’s content by blending it with materials such as stone dust, fly ash, silica fume,
Metakaoline, GGBS or combinations of these materials. In the present work, an experimental investigation was
carried out, replacing cement with 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35% of M-Sand and replacing fine aggregate
with 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 100% of M-Sand. In M30 grades of concrete, the test results are compared
with conventional concrete.

INTRODUCTION in cost. So we are investigating to replace cement with

Concrete commonly used structural material
for all types of construction. Communities aroundthe
world rely on concrete as a safe, strong and simple
building material. It is used in all types ofconstruction,
from domestic work to multi-storey office blocks and
shopping complexes.In the recent times its use in
constructionhas been increased considerably thus the
cities and towns are virtually becoming
concretejungles. The demand is likely to increase in
the future to match the growing population, housing,
transportation and other amenities.
Due to the recent spurt in construction activity brought
on by the current economic boom,the cost of
construction has been increasing by up to 15% every
year, a major factor for thisescalation in costs is the
price of raw materials like cement, steel, timber,
aggregates etc. As conventional natural resources are
being depleted, the costs of these materials are
increasing.
Already investigations have been made by partial
replacement of fly ash, marble powderand blast
furnace slag in place of cement. Studies have been
revealed that fly ash concrete haveless strength when
compared to conventional concrete, but with the use of
super plasticizers inaddition will not only compensate
deficiency in its strength, but also modifies its
properties.
Partial replacement of cement with marble powder is
allowed upto 10%. As cement is thecostliest ingredient
in the concrete, so it will be economical to replace
cement other thanaggregates when they are compared
stonedust as it resembles cement in fineness, colour,
and water absorbing properties.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Extensive research works both at National and
International level has been done on the useof various
admixtures in mortars and concrete’s with a common
goal.
 To combat the environmental hazards from the
industrial wastes.
 To modify the properties of traditional concrete to
the desired level suitable to the specific
circumstances.
 To conserve the natural resources used in the
production of construction materials.
 To bring down the increasing cost economics of
cement, building blocks and high strength
concrete.
 To combat the scarcity of traditional ordinary
Portland cement and bricks.
 Of late, to rehabilitate the existing structures
which are deteriorated over a period of time etc.
1.”Flexural behavior of high strength stone dust
concrete”. V. Bhikshma, R. Kishore &N.H.M. Raju
[1] concluded stone dust material can be used as
partial or full replacementof river sand as fine
aggregate without altering the strength, workability or
settingcharacteristics of concrete. They presented the
results of tests on cubes (150×150×150mm) and under
reinforced concrete beams (150×230×1500 mm) in

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 112

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
order to obtain the flexural behavior of under
reinforced RC beams. A total of 24 cubes and 10
beams weretested for direct compression and flexure
at 28 days. Stone dust is useful as fine aggregatein
RCC and PCC, Masonry blocks construction, Road
formation, Landscaping, Precast structural elements
like RCC ventilators, Jallies, Rings for wells, Flower
pots and Waterstorage tubs, Back fill material in
reinforced earth work construction, Filter media in
sandfilters, and Lining of drains .
2.” Influence of fine stone dust on high strength
concrete”. V. Syam Prakash*,Dhanya Krishnan, G.
Jeenu [2] conducted a study on the mechanical
properties and behavior of high strength concrete and
mortar using fine stone dust, the residue produced
during the production of manufactured sand. they
concluded that Tests on mechanical properties ofhigh
strength concrete mixes with various percentages of
additives indicate that 60% of addition of fine stone
dust is optimum to produce high strength concrete
without muchreduction in strength.
3.“Experimental Study on Partial Replacement of
Cement by Neutralized Red Mud in Concrete”. A. B.
Sawant, M. B. Kumthekar, V. V. Diwan, K. G.
Hiraskar[3] made an attempt to check the effectiveness
of neutralized red mud as a partial replacement of
portland cement. After testing of 5 blended cement
samples (5% to 25 % replacement of
Cement by NRM) with an increment of 5 %, they
concluded that the optimum use ofNRM is 15% as a
partial replacement of cement by NRM.
4.”Experimental study on Use of stone powder in
concrete and mortar as an alternative ofsand”. H. M.
A. Mahzuz1, A. A. M. Ahmed2 and M. A. Yusuf3 [4]
.The study focuses on todetermine the relative
performance of concrete by using powder sand. From
laboratory experiments, it was revealed that concrete
made of stone powder and stone chip gainedabout
15% higher strength than that of the concrete made of
normal sand and brick chip.
MATERIALS USED
1. Cement
2. Aggregates
Fine Aggregate
Coarse Aggregate
3. M-Sand
M-SAND
M-sand is crushed aggregates produced from hard
granite stone which is cubically shaped with grounded
edges, washed and graded with consistency to be used
as a substitute of river sand. Manufactured Sand is a
sand produced from crushing of granite stones in
required grading to be used for construction purposes
as a replacement for river sand. M-sand having major
chemical constituents as
silica (70.74%),
Aluminium dioxide (20.67%),
ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org
Ferric oxide(2.28%)
 Magnesium oxide (1.57%).
Size of fine M-sand passing through
75 micron.
Properties of M-SAND
1. The manufactured sand has required
gradation of fines, physical properties such as
shape, smooth surface textures and
consistency which makes it the best sand
suitable for construction.
2. These physical properties of sand
Provides greater strength to the concrete by
reducing segregation, bleeding,
honeycombing, voids and capillary.
3. Thus required grade of sand for the given
purpose helps the concrete fill voids
between coarse aggregates and makes
concrete more compact and dense, thus
increasing the strength ofconcrete.
4. The saturated water absorption and porosity
of mixes containing optimum percentage of
M-sand are lower compared to those mixes
without M-sand.
5. The rate of penetration of water in to
the pores in concrete is comparatively less in
the case ofconcrete mixes with optimum
percentage of M-sand. Thus the use of M-
san resulted in a practically impermeable
concrete.
6. Cusher stone dust containing mainly of sio2
does not show cementitious property in the
presence of water. However, it can exhibit
significant cementitious property when
reacting with the byproduct of cement
hydration at high temperature.
EXPERIMENTAL SET UP
Cement
Physical Properties of ordinary Portland cement of
KCP-53 Grade
s.no Property Test results
1 Normal consistency 33%
2 Specific gravity 2.98
3 Initial setting time 100min
4 Final setting time 160 min
5 Fineness of cement 98%
M-SAND
Specific Gravity of M-SAND= 2.82
Fine aggregate
Specific Gravity of SAND =2.98
Fineness modulus of sand= 3.71
Coarse aggregate
Specific Gravity of coarse aggregate
Page 113
 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
=2.83
Fineness modulus of coarse aggregate
= 8.53
CONCRETE MIX DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
The process of selecting suitable ingredients
of concrete and determining their relativeamounts with
the objective of producing a concrete of the required,
strength, durability, andworkability as economically as
possible, is termed the concrete mix design. The cost
of concrete is made up of the cost of materials, plant
and labour. The variations in the cost of materials
arisefrom the fact that the cement is several times
costly than the aggregate, thus the aim is to produceas
lean a mix as possible. From technical point of view
the rich mixes may lead to high shrinkageand cracking
in the structural concrete, and to evolution of high heat
of hydration in mass concrete which may cause
cracking.
The actual cost of concrete is related to the
cost of materials required for producing a minimum
mean strength called characteristic strength that is
specified by the designer of the structure. This
depends on the quality control measures, but there is
no doubt that the quality control adds to the cost of
concrete. The extent of quality control is often an
economic compromise, and depends on the size and
type of job. The cost of labour depends on the
workability of mix, e.g., a concrete mix of inadequate
workability may result in a high cost of labour to
obtain a degree of compaction with available
equipment.
FACTORS AFFECTING THE CHOICE OF MIX
PROPORTIONS
The various factors affecting the mix design are:
1. Compressive strength
It is one of the most important properties of concrete
and influences many other describable properties of
the hardened concrete. The mean compressive strength
required at a specific age, usually 28 days, determines
the nominal water-cement ratio of the mix. The other
factor affecting the strength of concrete at a given age
and cured at a prescribed temperature is the degree of
compaction.
2. Workability
The degree of workability depends on 3 factors
1. These are the size of the section to
be concreted.
2. The amount of reinforcement.
3. The method of compaction to be
used
3. Durability
The durability of concrete is its resistance to
the aggressive environmental conditions.High strength
concrete is generally more durable than low strength
concrete. In the situationswhen the high strength is not
necessary but the conditions of exposure are such that
ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org
highdurability is vital, the durability requirement will
determine the water-cement ratio to be used.
4. Maximum nominal size of aggregate
In general, larger the maximum size of
aggregate, smaller is the cement requirement for a
particular water-cement ratio, because the workability
of concrete increases with increase in maximum size
of the aggregate. However, the compressive strength
tends to increase with the decrease in size of
aggregate.
IS 456:2000 and IS 1343:1980 recommend that the
nominal size of the aggregate shouldbe as large as
possible.
5. Grading and Type Of Aggregate
The grading of aggregate influences the mix
proportions for a specified workability andwater-
cement ratio. Coarser the grading leaner will be mix
which can be used. Very lean mix isnot desirable since
it does not contain enough finer material to make the
concrete cohesive.The type of aggregate influences
strongly the aggregate-cement ratio for the
desiredworkability and stipulated water cement ratio.
An important feature of a satisfactory aggregate is the
uniformity of the grading which can be achieved by
mixing different size fractions.
6. Quality Control
The degree of control can be estimated
statistically by the variations in test results.
Thevariation in strength results from the variations in
the properties of the mix ingredients and lackof control
of accuracy in batching, mixing, placing, curing and
testing. The lower the differencebetween the mean and
minimum strengths of the mix lower will be the
cement-content required.The factor controlling this
difference is termed as quality control.
MIXDESIGNFOR“M30”GRADE
The bureau of Indian standards,
recommended a set of procedure for design of concrete
mix mainly based on the work done in national
laboratories. The mix design procedures are covered in
IS: 10262-2009. Those methods can be applied for
both medium strength and high strengthconcrete. The
following mixes are designed are based on Indian
standard recommended methodof concrete mix design
IS: 10262-2009.
MIX PROPORTION
Cement =330kg/m3
Water =132kg/m3
Fine aggregate =873 kg/m3
Coarse aggregate =1237 kg/m3
Chemical admixture =7 kg/m3
Water-cement ratio =0.40
Page 114
 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
40
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH VALUES 30
FORREPLACEMENT OF CEMENT BY M-
SAND 20
10
3-Days Compressive Strength Results
0
Cement replacement with Compressive 0 5 10 15 20 25
S.No
M sand by (%)(mix) strength (Mpa)
1 0 20.4
2 5 18.89 28-Days Compressive Strength Results
3 10 20.44 Cement
4 15 18.67 replacement Compressive
S.No
5 20 16.00 with M sand by strength (Mpa)
6 25 14.22 (%)(mix)
7 30 12.44 1 0 39.11
8 35 11.56 2 5 38.00
3 10 39.56
4 15 32.00
3 Days Compressive Strength
5 20 31.11
30 6 25 26.67
20 7 30 24.00
8 35 22.22
10
0 28-Days Compressive Strength
0 5 10 15 20 25

7-Days Compressive Strength Results

Cement replacement with Compressive
S.No
M sand by (%)(mix) strength (Mpa)
1 0 28.89
2 5 28.00
3 10 29.78
4 15 24.67
5 20 24.44 Compressive Strength Results For Replacement of
6 25 21.11 Cement by M-Sand
7 30 18.00
8 35 16.00 Cement
Replacement with
Stone 3 days 7 days 28days
7 Days Compressive strength
dust by (%)(Mix)

0 20.44 28.89 39.11

5 18.89 28.00 38.00
10 20.44 29.78 39.56
15 18.67 24.67 32.00
20 16.00 24.44 31.11
25 14.22 21.11 26.67
30 12.44 18.00 24.00
35 11.56 16.00 22.22

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 115

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017

Comparision of Compressive strengths for M30 7-Days Compressive Strength Results

F.A Replacement
Compressive
with Msand
SNO Strength(Mpa)
by (%)(Mix)

1 0 27.77
2 10 15.55
3 20 23.77
4 30 23.11
5 40 29.33
6 50 22.44
7 60 20.00
8 100 15.11

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Compressive Strength Values For Replacement Of

F.A By M-Sand

3-Days Compressive Strength Results

F.A Replacement
Compressive
with Msand
SNO Strength(Mpa)
by (%)(Mix)
28-Days Compressive Strength Results
1 0 17.77
2 10 18.22 F.A Replacement with
Compressive
3 20 22 Msand
SNO Strength(Mpa)
4 30 24.44 by (%)(Mix)
5 40 25.77
6 50 20 1 0 31.77
7 60 19.33 2 10 26
8 100 6.47 3 20 28.88
4 30 36.66
3-Days Compressive Strength 5 40 43.11
6 50 28.22
7 60 27.11
8 100 14.66

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 116

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
Compared to compressive strengths of 5%,
28-Days Compressive 10% of addition of M-sand, the
compressivestrength of 15%, 20%, 25%,
Strength 30%, 35% fly ash concrete has been
60
decreased.
Whereas comparing to traditional concrete,
40 compressive strength of 10% has
beenroughly same.
20 Hence for economical view 10% is preferable
and it is suggested.
0 From the above study we conclude that the
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 100 compressive strength of the concrete
cubeshas maintained up to 40% when F.A is
replaced by M-sand.
Compared to compressive strengths of 10%,
Compressive Strength Results For Replacement of 20% of addition of M-sand, thecompressive
F.A by M-Sand strength of 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, fly ash
concrete has been decreased.
Cement Replacement Whereas comparing to traditional concrete,
with Stone compressive strength of 40% has
3 days 7 days 28days beenroughly same.
dust by (%)(Mix)
Hence for economical view 40% is preferable
0 17.77 27.77 31.77 and it is suggested.
10 18.22 28.00 39.56
20 22 23.77 28.88 REFERENCES
30 24.44 23.11 28.88
1) ”Flexural behaviour of high strength stone dust concrete”. V.
40 25.77 29.33 43.11 Bhikshma, R.Kishore & N.H.M.Raju Department of Civil
50 20 22.44 28.22 Engineering, University College of Engineering, Osmania
60 19.33 20.00 27.11 University, Hyderabad, India.Challenges, Opportunities and
Solutions in Structural
100 6.47 15.11 14.66 2) Engineering and Construction – Ghafoori (ed.) © 2010 Taylor
& Francis Group, London,ISBN 978-0-415-56809-8
Comparision of Compressive strengths for M30
3) Influence of fine stonedust on high strength concrete”. V.
Syam Prakash*,Dhanya Krishnan, G. Jeenu, College of
50 Engineering, Trivandrum, Kerala, India-August 2007.
45
4) Experimental Study on Partial Replacement of Cement by
40 Neutralized Red Mud in Concrete”.
35 A. B. Sawant, M. B. Kumthekar, V. V. Diwan, K. G. Hiraskar.
30 International Journal of Engineering and Advanced
Technology (IJEAT) ISSN: 2249 –8958,Volume-2,Issue-
25 1,October2012.
20 5) ”Experimental study on Use of stone powder in concrete and
15 mortar as an alternative of sand”. H. M. A. Mahzuz1, A. A. M.
Ahmed2 and M. A. Yusuf3. Department of Civil and
10 Environmental Engineering, Shahjalal University of science
and Technology, Bangladesh1 ,Department of Civil
5 Engineering, Leading University, Sylhet, Bangladesh2 and
0 Civil Engineering Department, University of Information
Technology and sciences, Chittagong, Bangladesh3,
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 100 December,2010.

6) Experimental investigation on partial replacement of cement

CONCLUSIONS
From the above study we conclude that the
compressive strength of the concrete cubes
has maintained up to 10% when cement is
replaced by M-sand.
with flyash in design mix concrete”.Prof. Jayeshkumar
Pitroda1, Dr. L.B.Zala2, Dr.F.S.Umrigar3 Assistant Professor
& Research Scholar1, Head & Professor2, Civil Engineering
Department, B.V.M.Engineering College, Vallabh
Vidhyanagar-Gujarat – India , Principal3, B.V.M. Engineering
College, Vallabh Vidhyanagar – Gujarat – India.
7) Sawdust Ash (SDA) as Partial Replacement of Cement”.
C.Marthong Lecturer, Civil Engineering Department, Shillong

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 117

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering (SSRG-IJCE) – volume 4 Issue 5 – May 2017
Polytechnic, Shillong Shillong, Meghalaya, India
.International Journal of Engineering Research and
Applications (IJERA) ISSN: 2248-9622 , Vol. 2, Issue4, July-
August 2012, pp.1980-1985

8) ”Investigation on Compressive strength of concrete with rice

husk ash as partial replacement of ordinary Portland cement”.
Maurice E.Ephraim, Godwin A. Akeke and Joseph O. Ukpata.
Department of Civil Engineering, Rivers State University of
Science and Technology Port Harcourt, Nigeria-2012

9) Partial Replacement of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) with

Bambara Groundnut Shell Ash (BGSA) in Concrete”. B. A.
Alabadan, M. A. Olutoye, M. S. Abolarin and M. Zakariya–
June,2005.

10) “Partial replacement of cement with marble dust powder”.

Prof. P.A. Shirulea, Ataur Rahmanb , Rakesh D. Guptac. Dept.
Of Civil Engineering, SSBT’s COET, Bambhori, Jalgaon,
Maharashtra. International Journal of Advanced Engineering
Research and Studies -2012.

11) “The effect of the using waste marble dust as fine sand on the
mechanical properties of the concrete”. Bahar Demirel,
Department of Construction, Faculty of Technical Education,
Firat University, Elazig, 23119, Turkey

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 118