DR.

AMBEDKAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF CEMENT AND SAND

IN CONCRETE BY HIGH VOLUME FLY ASH

2008
 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

PARTIAL REPLACEMENT OF CEMENT AND SAND

IN CONCRETE BY HIGH VOLUME FLY ASH

ABSTRACT
Cement production accounts for 15% of Carbon-di-oxide production globally and increased demand
for sand has led to excess sand farming illegally since there is lack of law enforcement with regard to
it. Adding to the problems is the generation of Fly Ash which is nothing but the remains of coal after
burning in the thermal power plants. There are vast areas of land dedicated to storage of a by-product
of the thermal power plant, the High volume fly ash which happens to be an environmentally
hazardous material requiring large amounts of funds and natural resources for its management and
disposal.

The objective of our project is to help our environment without hampering the infrastructure growth
by:

1. Decreasing demand for cement

2. Decreasing demand for Fine Aggregate (Sand)
3. Providing an alternate solid waste recycling system for a Hazardous waste material (Fly ash)
4. Improving overall Economics of the construction by decreasing costs.

By combining the above mentioned into one, which is, by partial mass replacement of Cement and
sand in Concrete by High Volume Fly Ash, we should be able to provide one common solution for the
above mentioned problems. Theoretically, we must be able to achieve the objectives since:

1. Fly ash is a pozzolanic material which can be used to impart strength to cement by partially
replacing mortar components of concrete thereby creating a demand for fly ash.
2. Since Fly ash is added to concrete, it will not require special storage, management or disposal
methods thus eliminating additional costs. Fly ash generated can be directly transported to the
place of construction.
3. Since Fly ash is virtually a waste material, it currently has no commercial value and its
addition will bring down the costs of the Cement and Sand Quantities it can effectively
replace.

The experimental results have shown that up to a certain percentage , we are able to replace cement
and sand by high volume fly ash and still attain strengths of over 40MPa , although higher
percentages of replacement lead to 105-110% of the designed strengths , there was considerable
reduction in costs related to that. Hence for lesser important works which are not responsible for any
public danger directly or indirectly, use of High Volume Fly ash can be economically beneficial.

Keywords: High Volume fly Ash (HVFA), superplasticiser, compressive strength, tensile strength,
flexural strength, pozzolana, cementitious.

1

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

INTRODUCTION

At present the annual release of coal ash in India about 120 million tonnes and is expected to reach
more than 150 million tonnes by 2005 AD as around 13 million tonnes of coal ash is increased every
year. The thermal power station at Raichur releases about 1.78 million tonnes of ash annually.

The coal ash is about of two types, fly ash and pond ash. The term fly ash is used owing to
lightweight nature, which is taken out by electro precipitator directly from silo hoppers. Out of huge
amount of fly ash emitted from power plants about 40percent is being used for cements, ceramics and
bricks and in filling of roads of low lands. It has become inevitable to dispose this fly ash as a water
slurry and store in ash ponds, where it is subjected to weathering and avoid losses and air pollution.
The fly ash, which is stored in ash ponds, is known by the term “wet fly ash” or “pond ash”.

The fly ash released during burning process of coal in thermal power plants disperses in air, which
enters into the surrounding environment and known to pollute the surrounding area. Fly ash thus
entered the environment deposits on leaves of trees, crop plants which in turn results in low returns to
the farmers. The fly ash also affects the health of human and livestock causing cancer, breathing
problem by entering into the respiratory tract of human beings and animals and skin diseases resulting
in decreased work force.

In reference to the report of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the U.S.A., Greenhouse gases
are accumulating in the earth’s atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing global mean
surface temperatures and sub-surface ocean temperatures to rise. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions,
currently at 21 billion tonnes, are projected to rise exponentially and raise earth’s temperature by 3 to
5 degree Celsius over the current century. Developed countries have agreed to stabilize the GHG
emissions to about 6% below the 1990 level by the year 2012 under the Kyoto Protocol.

With huge backlog of infrastructure construction being taken up by the Indian Government, the
demand for cement is likely to rise sharply in the coming years. This is where cement replacement
could be tried by using material enabling a dual benefit. Firstly, minimizing the damage to
environment can be achieved by minimizing the CO2 emission by reducing cement consumption.
Secondly, by using certain waste material, which is thrown away otherwise, deteriorating
environment, in place of cement can be utilised.
Earlier in India, there was no arrangement for segregating as well as collecting dry fly ash at various
“Thermal Power Plants”. But now Govt of India has made it compulsory to provide electro-static
precipitator (ESP) at all the new as well as old plants.
High quality fly ash conforming to the requirements of IS 3812 is available from different thermal
power plants of National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) and other state electricity board power
plants. The quality & consistency of fly ash depends upon the source of coal, pulverization method
and boiler at the thermal power plant. As long as, these three parameters are the same, the quality of
fly ash will be consistent.

Disposal of fly ash is a major environmental issue. If buried in the ground, every ton of fly ash
requires one square meter of land. Between 2002 and 2010, fly ash availability in India is expected to
be more than double to about 200 million tonnes. Land filling this quantity would render a large area
of land permanently unusable. That is why it is a good idea to use fly ash in cement for concrete
making. It is not an idea simply to dispose fly ash. Scientists have produced a mass of evidence to
prove that mixture of fly ash in cement in given proportions results in better bonding qualities,

2

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

strength, finish, etc. It also makes a lot of economic sense to both the clients and construction
contractors.

The infrastructure sector cannot without function without the presence of concrete and concrete is
incomplete without sand. The recent growth of demand for infrastructure has increased the demand
for sand. The projects in Karnataka depend upon lake and dry river beds for sand, but the increased
demand has been very pivotal in illegal sand farming across Karnataka and lack of proper legislation
and law enforcement have led to a large number of people to exploit this natural resource. Sand forms
an inseparable part of fresh water and river bed ecosystem and its removal is resulting in large scale
destruction of the ecosystem.

Recently, many High Volume Fly Ash based materials have been developed for construction
purposes. HVFA being a pozzolanic (cementitious) has often been referred to as a mineral admixture
to concrete and has been proved to have many advantageous properties. Its fine spherical shape
requires lesser water than cement.

Unfortunately though, this is not sufficient when some amount of sand has to be replaced by fly ash.
Fly ash being a ‘dough’ like material absorbs some volume of water as soon as it is added and thus
results in reduced workability and probable shortage of water for hydration of cement. To counteract
this situation, after the materials were weighed and taken for mixing according to design proportions,
only during addition of water an extra volume of water had to be added. Since no technical guidelines
exist on this regard, the addition of water had to be found out by trial and error basis and a water
content in excess of 3-4% (w/c ratio 0.36-0.37) was found to be satisfactory to achieve the desired
results.

Addition of HVFA brings about a lot of advantages to the concrete. Some of the major advantageous
being :

1. Lesser dead (self) Loads.

Since fly ash has a very low specific gravity(2.12) compared to sand(2.6) and
cement(3.12) , its addition brings down the overall self weight of the structural
member
2. Increased resistance to chemical and atmospheric attacks.

Fly ash is basically a inert material evolving form combustion of coal, it only reacts
to form a pozzolanic material once it is exposed to lime which is excreted due to
excess content in cement during hydration.
3. Increased Workability.

Due to its finer structure, it is able to distribute water molecules evenly around itself
and avoids ‘flocculation’ of the water thus leading to better workability and even
distribution of water.
4. Higher Setting time.

HVFA does not develop strength on its own or in presence of moisture alone. When
an excess amount of lime present in cement is not used in the hydration process it is
used up by the HVFA molecules thus forming a cementitious material.

3

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

5. Low heat of hydration rate.

Since there is slight time difference between setting of concrete and that of HVFA,
the rate of heat of hydration is low since the heat evolved is distributed over a certain
period of time leading to lesser water losses.
6. Lesser permeable concrete

Post Hydration, HVFA being used up all the lime in excess forms a uniform, well
spread material which fills up all the pores in the concrete leaving it pore-free (non
porous, non permeable)
7. Increased protection for reinforcement.

After hydration, HVFA forms a non-reactive, inert compound which has low
permeability. Due to this property, there is very little chance that external
atmospheric agents come in contact with the reinforcements thus increasing their
efficiency..

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

The main aim of this experimental program is to study the effect of addition of Fly ash as a
replacement to cement and Sand in concrete and whether such an addition would be useful both
technically and financially. The important strength properties such as compressive strength, tensile
strength and flexural strength were found and important workability properties for the concrete in the
measure as a percentage of flow were found out with the following combination of cement and sand
replacement. To avoid the errors in the proportions, weigh batching of materials were adopted.

Replacement as % of Mass of Cement Sand

Combination 1 20 % 20 %
Combination 2 20 % 30 %
Combination 3 20 % 40 %
Combination 4 30 % 20 %
Combination 5 30 % 30 %
Combination 6 30 % 40 %

Example :

For Combination 1 : HVFA Concrete : ( For every 1 kg of cement)

Cement : Fly Ash Fine Aggregate : Fly Ash

Water Coarse Aggregate
( 0.8 : 0.2 ) ( 0.8 : 0.2)
0.37 litres 0.8 kg 0.2 kg 0.604 kg 0.151 kg 2.315 kg

4

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

MATERIALS AND PROCEDURE

Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) and locally available aggregates (fine and coarse) we used in the
experimentation. The specific gravity of both fine and coarse aggregates was found to be 2.6. The fine
aggregate is conforming to Zone III of IS code specifications. HVFA was procured from two
locations. HVFA used to replace cement was procured from Raichur Power Station, Karnataka,
collected from the top 3 precipitators (4, 5 and 6) and that to replace sand was procured from Neyvile
Power Station, Tamil Nadu.

The dosage of superplasticiser used in the experimentation was based on manufacturer’s

specifications and was sufficient to provide results on PCC in the laboratory and hence used in HVFA
concrete. The mix design was carried according to IS-102621 (1984) corresponding to M40 grade
concrete and the design proportions are as follows:

Material Proportion Type/Make/Remarks

Cement 1 43 grade – OPC
Fine Aggregate 0.755 Locally procured
Coarse Aggregate 2.315 Locally procured
Fly Ash As per different Combinations High Volume (Raichur, Neyveli)
Water 0.37 -
Superplasticiser 1% by Weight of Cement Naphthalene Based (FOSROC)

For better distribution, the required quantities of Water and superplasticiser were diluted with each
other before addition into the rotary mixer. To avoid loss of fly ash and cement during dry mix, to the
mixer, first Coarse and fine aggregates, were added , agitated for 20 seconds and then the water-
superplasticiser solution was added. After 20-30 seconds of rotation , the fly ash and cement
quantities were added and Homogenously mixed for 3 minutes. To this concrete, workability test of
the flow table was conducted for various combinations. The homogenously mixed concrete were
placed in different pre oiled moulds in 3 layers each while compacting each layer 25 times with a
tamping rod. After the consolidation, the top layer was given a smooth finish and the moulds were
covered with wet gunny bags. The concrete casting were de-moulded after 12hrs and to avoid the risk
of comparatively slow setting fly ash, the concrete specimen were subjected to continuous and
consistent Hay-stack curing. These specimens were weighed and tested at two stages of curing, that is
at the end of 14 days of curing and 28 days of curing.

Specimen specifications

Compressive Strength
(Cubes)
150mm X 150mm X 150mm
Tensile Strength
(Split Tensile Cylinders)
150mm dia , 300 mm length
Flexural Strength
(Mid span loading)
(Beams , 400 mm effective
span)
100mm X 100 mm X 500 mm

5

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

Workability

To study the workability of the HVFAC concrete, the flow table test for the various combinations of
concrete was conducted and the results are tabulated as below

Material / Spread Spread Spread Workability

Initial Dia Avg Spread Change in
Replacement Dia Dia 2 Dia 3 as a% of
(mm) Dia (mm) Dia (mm)
Combination 1(mm) (mm) (mm) Initial Dia
PCC 65 165 165 170 166.666667 101.666667 156.410256
Cement 20%
65 130 110 110 116.666667 51.6666667 79.4871795
- Sand 20 %
Cement 20%
65 98 76 85 86.3333333 21.3333333 32.8205128
- Sand 30 %
Cement 20%
65 94 86 84 88 23 35.3846154
- Sand 40 %
Cement 30%
65 110 100 90 100 35 53.8461538
- Sand 20 %
Cement 30%
65 78 73 82 77.6666667 12.6666667 19.4871795
- Sand 30 %
Cement 30%
65 76 72 74 74 9 13.8461538
- Sand 40 %

180
160 Workability as a % of Initial Dia
140
120
100
80
60
40 Workability as a% of Initial Dia
20
0
PCC Cement Cement Cement Cement Cement Cement
20% - 20% - 20% - 30% - 30% - 30% -
Sand 20 Sand 30 Sand 40 Sand 20 Sand 30 Sand 40
% % % % % %

The decrease in workability was found out due to the increase in fly-ash content as a partial
replacement to ‘sand’. To counteract this, the water/cement ratio was increased to 0.37, while keeping
the proportions of cement, aggregates and fly ash as per design. This water/cement ratio was obtained
by the method of trial and error basis and W/C ratio of 0.37 resulted in similar workability values as
in the case of PCC.

6

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

TEST RESULTS

1. Table1 shows the compressive strengths of the various combinations of concrete with partial
replacement by Fly ash after 14 days curing period

Table1
Compressive Strength (MPa) Compressive Strength (MPa)
Replacement Combination
14 day 28 day
PCC 58.6 64.83
Cement 20% - Sand 20 % 42.5 47.96
Cement 20% - Sand 30 % 47.4 48.1048
Cement 20% - Sand 40 % 44.48 54.35
Cement 30% - Sand 20 % 42 45.78
Cement 30% - Sand 30 % 40.69 43.68
Cement 30% - Sand 40 % 45.63 54.35

2. Table2 shows the Split tensile strengths of the various combinations of concrete with partial
replacement by Fly ash after 14 days curing period

Table 2
Split tensile Strength (MPa) Split tensile Strength (MPa)
Replacement Combination
14 day 28 day
PCC 3.746 3.81
Cement 20% - Sand 20 % 3.53 3.59
Cement 20% - Sand 30 % 3.41 3.43
Cement 20% - Sand 40 % 3.33 3.41
Cement 30% - Sand 20 % 2.916 3.4
Cement 30% - Sand 30 % 3.0545 3.39
Cement 30% - Sand 40 % 3.04 3.26

3. Table3 shows the flexural strengths of the various combinations of concrete with partial
replacement by Fly ash after 14 days curing period

Table 3
Flexural Strength (MPa) Flexural Strength (MPa)
Replacement Combination
14 day 28 day
PCC 4.7088 5.31
Cement 20% - Sand 20 % 4.55 4.838
Cement 20% - Sand 30 % 4.36 4.838
Cement 20% - Sand 40 % 4.248 5.31
Cement 30% - Sand 20 % 4.13 5.192
Cement 30% - Sand 30 % 4.366 4.482
Cement 30% - Sand 40 % 4.13 4.368

7

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

THE FOLLOWING TABLE SHOWS THE 14 DAY STRENGTHS OF VARIOUS HVFAC CONCRETE WITH ITS
DENSITY.
Material / Density Compressive Split Tensile Flexural
Replacement Strength (MPa) Strength (MPa)
Combination (kg/m3) Strength (MPa)
2451.852
PCC 58.6 3.746 4.7088
Cement 20% - 2401.185
42.5 3.53 4.55
Sand 20 %
Cement 20% - 2402.667
47.4 3.41 4.36
Sand 30 %
Cement 20% - 2229.63
44.48 3.33 4.248
Sand 40 %
Cement 30% - 2270.815
42 2.916 4.13
Sand 20 %
Cement 30% - 2286.07
40.69 3.0545 4.366
Sand 30 %
Cement 30% - 2301.33
45.63 3.04 4.13
Sand 40 %

70

60

50 Split Tensile
40 Strength
Flexural Strength
30

20 Compressive
Strength
10 Design Compressive
Strength
0
PCC Comb 1 Comb 2 Comb 3 Comb 4 Comb 5 Comb 6

8

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

THE FOLLOWING TABLE SHOWS THE 28 DAY STRENGTHS OF VARIOUS HVFAC CONCRETE WITH ITS
DENSITY.
Material / Density Compressive Split Tensile Flexural
Replacement Strength (MPa) Strength (MPa)
Combination (kg/m3) Strength (MPa)
2451.852 64.83 3.81
PCC 5.31
Cement 20% - 2401.185 47.96 3.59 4.838
Sand 20 %
Cement 20% - 2402.667 48.1048 3.43 4.838
Sand 30 %
Cement 20% - 2229.63 54.35 3.41 5.31
Sand 40 %
Cement 30% - 2270.815 45.78 3.4 5.192
Sand 20 %
Cement 30% - 2286.07 43.68 3.39 4.482
Sand 30 %
Cement 30% - 2301.33 54.35 3.26 4.368
Sand 40 %

70 Compressive
60 Strength

50 Split Tensile
Strength
40
30 Flexural strength
20
10 Design
Compressive
0 Strength
PCC Comb 1 Comb 2 Comb 3 Comb 4 Comb 5 Comb 6

9

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

Discussions on Test Results

From the above tables and graphs, we can observe that High Volume Fly ash can be used in Concrete
as a partial replacement for Cement and sand and yet achieve strengths well above 40 MPa. Although
majority of the combinations show strengths at 14 day curing impressively, the compressive strengths
decreased for increasing amount of Fly Ash in it. For some of the combinations (30%-30% , first
number standing for replacement of cement and second number denoting replacement of sand) , when
the strength achieved were just about the designed strengths, we can also observe that we can achieve
100percent of strengths while eliminating 21%-23% of the costs.

Although in some of these cases strengths achieved were less than the designed strengths, every
practical engineer would go against concrete which underperforms. So there is a method to
counteract this while still achieving economic objectives.

For this economic analysis, we have used the above obtained results and have used that model to
predict that of concretes of lesser strengths. Majority of the mass concreting done nowadays is of
either M20 or M30 Grade Concrete. Since the highest replacement within design strength limits
permissible was for concrete where Fly Ash was able to replace 30 percent of Cement and 40 % of
sand and was yet able to achieve cost reduction by upto 21.2%, this combination of concrete can be
used for practical purposes.

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Since one of the major objectives of the project is to decrease the costs of the construction, rate
analysis of the High Volume Fly Ash Concrete (HVFAC) was carried out for different combinations.
Since usage of fly ash is a relatively new concept, the specified or estimated rates of Fly ash for
transportation purposes were not available and hence considered as zero. Here the rates for labour are
not considered since they do not vary for the same type of concrete.

Rate analysis (Material Costs only)

Water Cement Fine Aggregate Coarse Aggregate
0.33 1 0.755 2.315

1. Cement (43 grade OPC)– Rs 260/- per bag

2. Sand – Rs 450/- per m3
3. Coarse aggregate – Rs 850/- per m3
4. Superplasticiser (FOSROC – CONPLAST P-430) – Rs 525/- for 5 Litre can = Rs 0.105 /
ml

10

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

Table of Price wise comparison of Different Mixes of concrete with different

Fly ash replacement combinations.
Note :

1. All prices in Rupees per cubic meter

2. Figures indicated in brackets are the percentage of savings as compared to PCC
costs

Design Strength M20 M25 M30 M35 M40

PCC Rs 2778/- Rs 2807/- Rs 3134/- Rs 3295/- Rs 4430/-

Cement 20% - Rs 2386/- Rs 2408/- Rs 2669/- Rs 2835/- Rs 3812/-
Sand 20 % (14.11%) (14.21%) (14.83%) (13.96%) (13.95%)
Cement 20% - Rs 2371/- Rs 2394/- Rs 2655/- Rs 2822/- Rs 3800/-
Sand 30 % (14.65%) (14.71%) (15.28%) (14.35%) (14.22%)
Cement 20% - Rs 2355/- Rs 2378/- Rs 2641/- Rs 2809/- Rs 3787/-
Sand 40 % (15.22%) (15.28%) (15.73%) (14.74%) (14.51%)
Cement 30% - Rs 2206/- Rs 2225/- Rs 2451/- Rs 2594/- Rs 3517/-
Sand 20 % (20.6%) (20.73%) (21.79%) (21.27%) (20.60%)
Cement 30% - Rs 2190/- Rs 2209/- Rs 2437/- Rs 2580/- Rs 3504/-
Sand 30 % (21.16%) (21.30%) (22.23%) (21.69%) (20.90%)
Cement 30% - Rs 2175/- Rs 2194/- Rs 2423/- Rs 2567/- Rs 3491/-
Sand 40 % (21.70%) (21.83%) (22.68%) (22.09%) (21.20%)

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
PCC Cement 20% Cement 20% Cement 20% Cement 30% Cement 30% Cement 30%
- Sand 20 % - Sand 30 % - Sand 40 % - Sand 20 % - Sand 30 % - Sand 40 %

M20 M25 M30 M35 M40

11

 Dr.A.I.T- C.E.D

CONCLUSIONS
From the above graph, we can often observe that by adopting higher strengths while designing, we
can eliminate the risk of HVFA Concrete not attaining the required strength while eliminating a
percentage of costs. For example, the price of Combination-2 of M25 Concrete (Rs 2394/- per m3) is
lesser than that of M20-PCC (Rs 2778/- per m3) which results in a decreased cost of Rs 384/- (13.8%
reduction in costs).

Thus we can achieve the objective of effectively replacing Cement and fine aggregate by high volume
fly ash and also provide a safe and productive way to recycle an environmentally hazardous waste all
the while decreasing costs related to the concreting in PCC as well as RCC structures.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The team would like to thank Dr.C.Nanjunda Swamy, Prof and Head, Dept of Civil Engg,
Dr.Ambedkar Institute of Technology,Bangalore for providing us with a platform to carry out this
project, Prof.T.Chandrasekharaiah ,for the invaluable guidance given during the course of the project
and for being the motivation which kept us going all the way. Thanks are due to Mr.S.Bhavani
Shankar,Mr.Suresh Chandra,Mr.Basavaraj Jakkappanavar, Dept of Civil Engg, Dr.Ambedkar Institute
of Technology for giving us valuable information over the course of the project. Our utmost thanks to
Dr.Amarnath, Prof and Head Dept of Civil Engg, University Vishweshwaraiah college of
Engineering,Bangalore and Dr.R.V.Ranganath, Prof and Head Dept of Civil Engg,B.M.S College of
Engineering for providing us with vital data before the start of the project and for providing us with
all the precautions and procedures during the course of the project.

I dedicate this project in utmost gratitude and sincerity to my mentor, my support and my guide-
beacon, Mr. K.V Ravi Shankar, my father.

References:

1. IS 10262 -1982 – Recommended Guideline for Concrete Mix Design , Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi

2. IS 5816- 1999 – Methods of Tests for Concrete , Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

3. “Concrete Technology, Theory and Practice”, by M.S Shetty.

4. “Estimation and Costing for Civil Engineering” , by B.N.Dutta

5. ‘www.hvfac.com” and all reports and materials provided in the website for reference and
CANMET research Data.

Submitted by:

MANJU KIRAN.R,
8th Semester, Dept of Civil Engineering, Dr.Ambedkar Institute of Technology.

12