ais 2009

7/27/2019 ais 2009

1/9

11JANUARY 2011 The IndIan ConCreTe Journal

Some studies on concrete mix

proportioning following

IS 10262:2009

M.C. Nataraja and Lelin Das

The BIS code IS 10262 on concrete mix design hasbeen revised and published in December 2009. Thenew code is in line with ACI 211 method and providesprovisions for concrete proportioning with mineral andchemical admixtures. Design of pumpable concrete isalso included in the revision. The concrete mix design

methods practiced in countries such as Britain, Indiaand USA are based on similar principles and substantialexperiments with locally available materials. Therefore,the procedures are more or less same with minordifferences. Here is an attempt to present a few mixdesigns following IS 10262:2009 that were tested in thelaboratory. The mixes were modied from the point ofeconomy while satisfying the design requirements.

Keywords: Aggregates, cement, sand, workability, MSA,w/c ratio, mix proportioning.

Concrete mix design is a process of specifying the mixtureof ingredients required to meet anticipated properties offresh and hardened concrete. Proportioning ingredientsin a concrete mix is a well-established practice aroundthe world with many countries having their ownmethods for doing so.1-7 Such methods are developedbased on empirical relations, charts, graphs, and tablesdeveloped as outcomes of extensive experiments and

investigations with locally available materials. Themethod development therefore is based on trial anderror principles. Some of the well-known concrete mixdesign methods are: ACI Mix Design Method, USBRMix design practice, British Mix design Method, andBIS Recommended guidelines. The scope of this studyis to compare the BIS and ACI recommended mix design

guidelines. The major difference in the two codes arefor calculating the aggregates content, cement content,and water cement (w/c) ratio. In the ACI method,sand content is calculated after calculating the coarseaggregate content. In the old BIS method, the processwas the other way around. The order of calculating thecoarse aggregate in the new BIS code is now similar tothe ACI method.8-11

The results show that old BIS method consumes morecement when generalised w/c curve is used. Providingfor extra cement is understandable considering thequality of cement available in the past when the code

was introduced. In addition, availability of limitedresearch data on cement and concrete at that time wouldhave dissuaded code writers from experimenting withreduced cement content.

The w/c ratio is higher in the ACI mix than that in theold BIS mix.

7/27/2019 ais 2009

2/9

The IndIan ConCreTe Journal JANUARY 201112

Although, sand content decreases as the strengthrequirement increases in both codes, it is lower in theold BIS mix design than in the ACI mix design.

To form the basis for a mix design, it is important todevelop the w/c curve for the materials actually to beused rather than arbitrarily using any available curve.

However, in the absence of such data, to start with, thew/c ratio to be assumed can be based on such availablerelationship as already established. Table 5 of IS 456:2000can also be referred to select the w /c ratio for the rsttrial mix.12 However, this table gives the limiting valueof w/c ratio based on the exposure condition; therefore,a suitable lower value should be selected based on theexperience of the mix designer. In other words, oneshould be careful in selecting the w/c ratio. Dependingon the rst assumed w/c ratio, the cement content willvary substantially. For designing M20 concrete for mildexposure, one can assume w/c as 0.5 or 0.55 to start with,and with this cement content also changes. Table 1

illustrates the basic data used in the two codes.

Table 1. Basic data used in new BIS and ACI mixdesign methods

Parameter BISMethod

New

ACIMethod

Characteristic compressive strength at 28days

yes yes

Standard deviation of compressive strength yes yes

Degree of workability Slump Slump

Type and maximum size of aggregates yes yes

Nominal maximum size of coarse aggregates(NMSA)

yes yes

Dry rodded unit weight of coarse aggregates(DRUW)

no yes

Fine aggregates (sand) Finenessmodulus

(FM)

Finenessmodulus

(FM)

Specic gravity of cement, coarse and neaggregates

yes yes

Water absorption and moisture contentadjustment

yes yes

Type of construction yes yes

Exposure condition yes yes

Air/Non-air entrainment no yes

Superplasticiser, mineral admixtures yes yes

Sit ft f w BIS ppc

(IS 10262:2009)Table 1 shows that the basic data required in the newBIS method is very similar to that of the ACI methodof mix design. The new BIS is applicable to ordinaryand standard concrete grades only. The durability

requirements, limitations on w/c ratio and maximumcement contents are as per IS 456:2000. The requirementsfor selecting of w/c ratio, water content and estimationsof coarse aggregate content and ne aggregate contenthave been reviewed and modied. Since the air contentin normal (non-air entrained) concrete is not of muchsignicance and is not a part of IS 456:2000, consideringair content is not in the new procedure.

T BIS mt (IS 10262:2009)This standard provides the guidelines for proportioningconcrete mixes as per the requirements using the concretemaking materials including other supplementary

materials identied for this purpose. The proportioningis carried out to achieve specified characteristicsat specified age, workability of fresh concrete anddurability requirements.

dt f mix pptiigThe following data are required for mix proportioningof a particular grade of concrete:

Grade designation

Type of cement

Maximum nominal size of aggregate (MNSA)

Minimum cement content

Maximum water cement ratio

Workability

Exposure conditions as per Table 4 and Table 5of IS 456:2000

Maximum temperature of concrete at the time

of placing

Method of transporting and placing

Early age strength requirements, if required

Type of aggregate

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

7/27/2019 ais 2009

3/9


Maximum cement content and

Whether an admixture is, or is not, to be used andthe type of admixture and the condition of use.

Stps f pptiigThe target average compressive strength (fck) at 28 days

is determined by using equation 1

fck =fck +k s ......(1)

where,

fck= characteristic compressive strength at 28 days,

s = standard deviation of compressive strength,

t = a statistic, depending upon the accepted proportion oflow results and the number of tests and is taken as 1.65.The standard deviation is to be established separatelybased on the strength data. When sufcient test resultsfor a particular grade of concrete are not available, the

value of standard deviation given in Table 1 of thecode or from IS 456:2000 may be assumed in the rstinstance.

Sctig iivi pmts f mix

ppti

Selecting water cement ratio

The relationship between strength and free watercement ratio should preferably be established for thematerials actually to be used. In the absence of suchdata, the preliminary free water cement ratio by masscorresponding to the target strength at 28 days may be

selected from the established relationship, if available.Otherwise, the water cement ratio given in Table 5 ofIS 456:2000 for respective environment exposurecondition may be used as a starting point. The freewater-cement ratio selected should be checked againstthe limiting water cement ratio for the requirement ofdurability and the lower of the two values should beadopted.

Note: The supplementary cementitious materials ormineral admixtures shall also be considered in watercement ratio calculations in accordance with Table 5 ofIS 456:2000.

Selecting water content

The quantity of maximum mixing water per unitvolume of concrete may be determined from Table 2of IS 10262:2009. The water content shown there is forangular coarse aggregate and for 25-50 mm slump range.It should be adjusted for other conditions such as change

12.

13.

in slump, type of aggregate and use of admixtures asexplained in the code.

Cctig cmtitis mti ctt

The cement and supplementary cementitious materialcontent per unit volume of concrete may be calculatedfrom the free water cement ratio and the quantity of

water per unit volume of concrete. The cementitiousmaterial content should be checked against theminimum requirements for durability and the greater ofthe two values should be adopted. The maximum cementcontent should be in accordance with IS 456:2000.

estimtig cs gggt ppti

The approximate values for coarse aggregate volumeare given in Table 3 of IS 10262 for a water cement ratioof 0.5, which may be suitably adjusted for other watercement ratios. For producing a more workable concretethat can ow around congested reinforcing steel, it may

be desirable to reduce the estimated coarse aggregatecontent.

Cmbiig ifft cs gggt

fctis

The coarse aggregate used must conform to IS 383.Coarse aggregates of different sizes may be combinedin suitable proportions to result in an overall gradingconforming to Table 2 of IS 383 for a particular nominalmaximum size of aggregate.

Estimating fne aggregate proportion

The coarse and ne aggregate contents are determinedby nding out the absolute volume of cementitiousmaterials, water and the chemical admixture; bydividing their masses by their respective specic gravity,multiplying by 1/1000 and subtracting the result of theirsummation from unit volume. The values so obtainedare divided into coarse and ne aggregate fractions byvolume in accordance with coarse aggregate proportionsalready determined earlier. The coarse and ne aggregatecontents are then determined by multiplying with theirrespective specic gravities and multiplying by 1000.

Ti mixs

The calculated mix proportions is required to be checkedin trial batches. Workability of the Trial mix No. 1 shouldbe measured. The mix must be carefully observed toensure that it is free from segregation and bleeding. Ifthe measured workability is different from the stipulatedvalue, the water and/or admixture content should beadjusted. With the adjustment, the mix proportions is

7/27/2019 ais 2009

4/9


recalculated keeping the free water cement ratio at thepreselected value, in trial mix Number 2.

In addition, two more trial mixes Number 3 and Number4 are made with the water content same as trial Number2 and varying the free water cement ratio by 10 percentof the preselected value

Mix Numbers 3 and 4 should normally provide sufcientinformation including the relationship betweencompressive strength and water cement ratio, fromwhich the mix proportions for eld may be arrived.The concrete for eld trials can then be made for actualproduction.

aCI MtIn 1991, the American Concrete Institute (ACI) publishedits guidelines for normal, heavyweight and massconcrete mix design.8 Now the Absolute Volume Methodof mix design as described by the ACI Method and thedesign steps for mix proportioning as recommended byACI Committee 211 are discussed:13

1. The required (target) average compressivestrength (f cr) at 28 days for mix design isdetermined by adding up an empirical factor (k)to the design compressive strength (fc ) as perequation 4:

fcr=fc + k ......(4)

2. The w/c ratio is selected based on the targetstrength and the type of concrete (air-entrainedor non air-entrained).

3. Air content, as percentage of the concrete volume,is estimated depending upon the air-entrainedor non-air-entrained type of concrete, exposureconditions, and NMSA.

4. Slump, as measure of workability, is selecteddepending upon the type of structure andcomplexity of the pouring conditions.

5. Water content, is determined based on theNMSA, type of concrete (air-entrained or non-air entrained), and specied slump. Then it isadjusted for the types of aggregates.

6. Cement content is calculated based on the w/cratio and the water content.

7. Coarse aggregates content, as dry roddedbulk (percentage) of concrete unit volume, is

determined based on the NMSA, and the nenessmodulus of sand.

8. Once the water content, cement content, aircontent, and the coarse aggregate content per unitvolume of the concrete is determined, the neaggregate (Fagg) is calculated by subtracting the

absolute volume of the known ingredients fromunit volume of the fresh concrete (in this case,1 m3) as following:

Fagg =1- Y ......(5)

where, Y= sum of all other ingredients (air, water,cement and coarse aggregates) in cubic metercalculated for 1 m3 of concrete.

9. Finally, water content is adjusted based on theabsorption and the current moisture content of thecoarse and ne aggregates, in account of saturatedsurface dry condition of the aggregates.

Simiitis btw BIS aCI mix

sig pcssBoth the methods are based on the empirical relations,which are derived from extensive experiments donewith the locally available materials. Thus, bothmethods extensively use tables and graphs during thedesign process and follow logical determination ofthe ingredients by establishing the targeted strengthfor trial batch. Trial batch strength is derived from therequired design strength of the structural concrete andthe statistical analysis to ensure that the mix designmeets or exceeds the design strength. Once the targetstrength is established, both methods advance theprocess by determining the w/c ratio. It is commonin both the cases that the cement content is calculatedbased on the relationships of two parameters: the w/cratio and the cement content both derived separatelyand independently. These two parameters are checkedagainst the limiting values in order to ensure thedurability conditions.

diffcs btw BIS aCI mix

sig pcssThe following are the major differences between the twodesign methods.

Target strength: The BIS method uses equation 1 butthe ACI method uses equation 2 to determine thetarget average compressive strength. Although boththe methods utilize the standard deviation to calculatethe target strength, there is a difference in the technique

7/27/2019 ais 2009

5/9


of calculation. When sufcient data are not availableto establish standard deviation, the ACI methodrecommends use of empirical values to determine thetarget strength, whereas the old BIS method suggests thatthe value of standard deviation be based on the qualitycontrol. In the new BIS method, standard deviation isto be calculated separately for each grade of concrete

and the procedure for the same is discussed. Whensufcient test results for a particular grade of concreteare not available, the value of standard deviation givenin Table 1 of the code is assumed for the rst trial mix.

Measure of workability: The old BIS method uses thecompacting factor as a measure of workability, whereasnew BIS and ACI use the slump.

Water to cement (w/c) ratio : In the ACI method, w/c ratiois determined in combination with the target strengthand the type of concrete (air/non-air entrainment).Although, old BIS discusses the air entrainment, the

selection of w/c ratio in this method is a sole function oftarget strength. Curves for w/c are available for differentcements based in their strengths. Generalised w/ccurve is also proposed. However the new BIS suggestsdeveloping w/c curve based on the type of materialsused in the project or using the w/c values given inIS 456:2000 based on durability conditions to startwith.

Water content: The old BIS method determines the watercontent based on target strength, type of aggregates,NMSA and compacting factor. Accordingly, tables aregiven for medium and high strength concretes. In the

case of the ACI method, water content is dependent onair-entrainment, types of aggregates, slump, and NMSA.Therefore, unlike old BIS method, water content can bedetermined independent of target strength. However,the new BIS is similar to ACI method wherein a tablefor maximum water content per cubic meter of concretefor nominal maximum size of aggregate (Clauses 42, A-5and B-5) is given.

Coarse and ne aggregate content: In the ACI method,coarse aggregate content is determined without knowingthe absolute volume of ne aggregates. Contrary to theACI method, the old BIS method determines the neaggregate content, as a percentage of total aggregateby absolute volume first, and the coarse aggregatecontent is determined once the proportion of all otheringredients are known. In this method, sand gradingzones are used as a governing parameter for sandcontent determination, whereas the neness modulus isused in the ACI method for selecting the bulk volume of

dry rodded coarse aggregate. The old BIS method doesnot utilize the neness modulus and dry rodded unitweight of aggregates. However, the new BIS has thesame procedure as the ACI method, wherein the volumeof coarse aggregate per unit volume of total aggregatefor different zones of ne aggregate (Clause 4.4 and A-7)is calculated based on maximum size of aggregate.

Previous work on proportioning of normal and highstrength concrete using the provisions of draft codeIS 10262 and other methods using cement as well assupplementary cementitious materials are publishedelsewhere.6,7

nmic xmp f t mix sigDesign of M20 concrete mix as per IS 10262:2009,Concrete mix proportioning guidelines (Firstrevision)

A-1 Design stipulations for proportioning

i. Grade designation : M20ii. Type of cement : OPC 43 grade conrming toIS 8112

iii. Maximum nominal size of aggregates : 20 mm

iv. Minimum cement content : 320 kg/m3

v. Maximum water cement ratio : 0.55

vi. Workability : 75 mm (slump)

vii. Exposure condition : Mild

viii. Degree of supervision : Good

ix. Type of aggregate : Crushed angular aggregate

x. Maximum cement content : 450 kg/m3

xi. Chemical admixture : Not recommended

A-2 Test data for materials

i. Cement used : OPC 43 grade conrming to IS 8112

ii. Specic gravity of cement : 3.15

iii. Specic gravity of

i. Coarse aggregate : 2.68

ii. Fine aggregate : 2.65

iv. Water absorption

i. Coarse aggregate : 0.6 percent

ii. Fine aggregate : 1.0 percent

v. Free (surface) moisture

i. Coarse aggregate : Nil (absorbed moisture full)

ii. Fine aggregate : Nil

vi. Sieve analysis

i. Coarse aggregate: Conforming to Table 2 of IS 383

ii. Fine aggregate: Conforming to Zone I of IS 383

7/27/2019 ais 2009

6/9


A-3 Target strength for mix proportioning

It is given by f'ck =f'ck + 1.65 s = 20 + 1.65 x 4 = 26.60N/mm2

A-4 Selection of water cement ratio

From Table 5 of IS 456:2000, maximum water cementratio = 0.55 (Mild exposure)

Based on experience adopt water cement ratio as 0.50which is less than 0.55 from durability and hence ok.

A-5 Selection of water content

From Table 2, maximum water content = 186 litres(for 25 mm 50 mm slump range and for 20 mmaggregates)

Estimated water content for 75 mm slump = 186 + 3/100x 186 = 191.6 liters

A-6 Calculation of cement content

Water cement ratio = 0.50

Cement content = 191.6/0.5 = 383 kg/m3 >320 kg/m3 (given)

From Table 5 of IS: 456, minimum cement content formild exposure condition = 300 kg/m3

Hence OK.

A-7 Proportion of volume of coarse aggregate andne aggregate content

From Table 3, volume of coarse aggregate correspondingto 20 mm size aggregate and ne aggregate (Zone I) forwater-cement ratio of 0.50 =0.60

A-8 Mix calculations

The mix calculations per unit volume of concrete shallbe as follows:

Volume of concrete = 1 m3

Volume of cement = [383.16/3.15] x[1/1000]=0.122 m3

Volume of water = [192/1] x [1/1000] = 0.192 m3

Volume of all in aggregates (e) = a (b + c)= 1 (0.122 + 0.192) = 0.686 m3

Volume of coarse aggregates= e x Volume of CA x specic gravity of CA

= 0.686 x 0.6 x 2.68 x 1000 = 1103 kg

Volume of ne aggregates= e x Volume of FA x specic gravity of FA

= 0.686 x 0.4 x 2.65 x 1000 = 727 kg

A-9 Mix proportions for trial number 1

Cement = 383 kg/m3

Water = 191.6 kg/m3

Fine aggregate = 727 kg/m3

Coarse aggregates = 1103 kg/m3


Yield =2404.6 kg

Aggregates are used in SSD condition.

Ti mixsLaboratory results: Slump and compacting factor of theabove mix when tested in laboratory were 90 mm and0.93 respectively. The slump was slightly more than therequired and hence the mix was accepted without anymodication to reduce slump. Six concrete cubes werecast for compression testing at 7 and 28 days. As per BIS,two more mixes were worked out having variation of 10 percent of water cement ratio, and keeping watercontent constant. All three mixes are presented in Table 2and the workability results along with 7 and 28-dayresults are presented in Table 3.

As mentioned in the code, a graph using these threewater cement ratios and their corresponding strengthswas plotted to work out the mix proportions for the

given target strength for eld application. This is shownin Figure 1. However, durability requirements was tobe kept in mind. All the three mixes resulted in desiredworkability but more strength than required. Here w/cratio based on durability requirements controlled thenal mix.

Table 3. Workability and compressive strength results

Trial Water / cement

ratio

Slumpmm

Comp-actingfactor

7-daystrength

28-daystrength

Obser-vation

1 0.50 90 0.93 29.6 40.7 Cohesivemix

2 0.45 70 0.91 34.2 47.6 Cohesivemix

3 0.55 100 0.91 23.8 34.2 Cohesivemix

Table 2. Proportions per cubic meter of concrete

Trial Water,kg

Cement,kg

Water /cement,

ratio

Fineaggregate,

kg

Coarseaggregate,

kg

Yield,kg

1 191.6 383 0.50 727 1103 2405

2 191.6 426 0.45 713 1082 2413

3 191.6 348 0.55 739 1121 2400

7/27/2019 ais 2009

7/9


The compressive strength of the trial mix 1 wassignicantly more than required and hence uneconomical.This was due to high cement content and use of highstrength cement. The strength of trial mix II is still higher.The strength of trial Mix III at 28 days was still slightlyhigher than required, having a slightly higher slump.At this stage of design, as the trial Mix III satises allthe requirements, it can be used in the eld. Thoughthis mix satises all requirements, it was found to beuneconomical as plasticisers and mineral admixtureswere not used to reduce the cement content.

So, one more trial mix was designed to reduce the cementcontent and using a locally available plasticiser. Five%of water was reduced using only 0.5% plasticiser. Theproportion is presented in the Table 4. The strength andworkability results are shown in Table 5.

Table 4. Proportions per cubic metre of concrete

Trial Waterkg

Cementkg

w/cratio

FAkg

CAkg

Yieldkg

1-S 180 327 0.55 1151 759 2417

Table 5. Workability and compressive strength results


ratio

Slumpmm

Comp-actingfactor

7-daystrength

28-daystrength

Observ-ation

1-S 0.55 60 0.89 21.6 30.2 Cohesivemix

Here the strength at 28 days is slightly higher. However,this mix has resulted in the desired strength andworkability consuming minimum cement. The cementcontent is slightly more than the minimum suggested.Hence, it can be regarded as the nal design mix foreld application. It is possible to reduce the cementfurther if mineral admixtures such as y ash or GGBFS

are permitted. This is not tried here. In any case, theminimum cementitious material content should besatised as required.

dsig f M30 cct mix s p

IS 10262:2009

A-1 Design stipulations for proportioning

1. Grade designation: M30

2. Type of cement: OPC 43 grade conrming to IS 8112

3. Maximum nominal size of aggregates: 20 mm

4. Minimum cement content : 350 kg/m3

5. Maximum water cement ratio : 0.506. Workability : 25 - 50 mm (slump)

7. Exposure condition : Moderate

8. Degree of supervision : Good

9. Type of aggregate : Crushed angular aggregate

10. Maximum cement content : 450 kg/m3

11. Chemical admixture : Not recommended

The target strength = 30 + 1.65 x 5 = 38.25 N/mm2

The mix proportion for the trial No. 1 (rst mix) wasas follows.

Mix proportions for trial number 1

Cement = 413 kg/m3

Water = 186 kg/m3




Yield =2422 kg

Laboratory results: The laboratory results are shownin Table 6.

Table 6. Workability and compressive strength resultsfor M30 mix


ratio

Slump,mm

Comp-actingfactor

7-daystrength

28-daystrength

Observ-ation

1-S 0.45 35 0.87 36.6 51.2 Cohesivemix

7/27/2019 ais 2009

8/9


Here the 28-day strength is substantially higher, thoughhas the desired workability. Hence trial mixes areneeded as explained in the previous design to economizethe mix. However, this is not attempted.

Design of M40 grade pumpable concrete as perIS 10262:2009 for the following data

A-1 Design stipulations for proportioninga) Grade designation : M40

b) Type of cement : OPC 43 grade conrming toIS 8112

c) Maximum nominal size of aggregates : 20 mm,angular

d) Minimum cement content : 350 kg/m3

e) Maximum water cement ratio : 0.45

f) Workability : 120 mm (slump)

g) Exposure condition : Severe (for reinforced

concrete)h) Method of concrete placing : Pumping

i) Degree of supervision : Good

j) Type of aggregate : Crushed angular aggregate

k) Maximum cement content : 450 kg/m3

l) Chemical admixture type : Superplasticiser (1 % isrecommended to get 25% reduction of water, Sp. Gr.=1.14)

Here the target strength = 40 + 1.65 x 5= 48.25 N/mm2

The mix proportion for the trial No. 1 (rst mix) wasas follows.

Cement = 370 kg/m3

Water = 148 kg/m3



Chemical admixture = 3.7 kg/m3


Yield of concrete = 2467 kg

lbty stsAggregates are used in SSD condition. The workabilityin terms of slump and compacting factor were 80 mmand 0.92 respectively. The compressive strength ofthe concrete based on 28-day cube test is presented inTable 7.

Table 7. Workability and compressive strength resultsfor M40 mix

Trial w/cratio

Slumpmm

Comp-actingfactor

7-daystrength

28-daystrength

Observ-ation

1-S-40 0.40SP=1%

80 0.92 38.2 55.5 Cohesivemix

Here the slump is less compared to the required slumpof 120 mm. Hence the SP dosage was increased, to getthe desired workability. The 28-day strength is 55.5 MPaas against the required strength of 48.25 MPa.

Suggestion: Increase the water content marginally suchthat w/c = 0.42. Doing that will decrease the strength andincrease workability marginally. However, the dosageof superplasticiser is increased to 1.5% and the resultsof this mix is presented in Table 8.

Table 8. Workability and compressive strength resultsfor modied M40 mix

Trial Water / Cement

ratio

Slumpmm

Comp-actingfactor

7-daystrength

28-daystrength

Observ-ation

1-S 0.42SP=1.5%

110 0.95 36.8 56.2 Cohesivemix

The 28 day strength of this mix was more than therequired. If required, one more trial can be designedand tested.

Ccsis

Following conclusions can be drawn based on thelimited study conducted.

The code IS 10262:2009 is drafted in line withACI 211.1 code. All modications in the codeare encouraging to use available supplementarymaterials.

The rst mix may not lead to economical designand trial mixes may be necessary. The firstmix may yield higher strength as the watercement ratio is kept below what is required fordurability.

Even the mix with higher w/c ratio will havesubstantially higher strength when compared tothe target strength. This mix has to be invariablyused as the mix with lower w/c ratio increasesthe strength further. Economy in the mix designis possible if plasticisers and mineral admixturesare used.

1.

2.

3.

7/27/2019 ais 2009

9/9


The procedure of mix proportioning for standardconcretes of low strength range is demonstrated.Use of M20-M30 concrete is quite commonin many projects and hence these mixes areconsidered. M40 pumpable concrete mix is alsodemonstrated.

The concept of trial mixes is demonstrated for M20

concrete by way of graphical representation as it isnot covered in the new IS 10262 code. However itis well demonstrated in the old IS 10262 code.

Further studies are required for using y ash andGGBFS in high strength and high performancepumpable concretes.

rfcsNataraja, M.C., Dhang, N and Gupta, A.P., Computer aided concrete mixproportioning, The Indian Concrete Journal, September 1997, Vol. 71, No. 9,pp. 487-492.

Nataraja, M.C., Dhang, N and Gupta, A. P., A Simple equation for concretemix design curves of IS 10262:1982, The Indian Concrete Journal, February

1999, Vol. 73, No. 2, pp. 111-115.Nataraja, M.C., Dhang, N. and Gupta, A. P., Computerised Concrete MixtureProportioning Based on BIS Method-A Critical Review, Fifth InternationalConference on Concrete Technology for Developing Countries, NCCBM, NewDelhi, 17-19 Nov. 99.

Nataraja, M.C and Patil Gopal Reddy, Proportioning of High StrengthConcrete Mixes, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Innovative worldof Concrete, ICI-IWC-93, August 1993, India, Vol. 2, pp. 3-223 to 3-232.

Nataraja, M.C and Anil Kumar T.V., Computerised Fly ash Concrete MixDesign as per IS: 10262-1982 using Provisions of IS: 456-2000, INCONTEST-2003, CD-ROM Proceedings of the international seminar on industrial structures,Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (India), Coimbatore, India.September 2003, pp 39-40.

Nataraja, M.C and Ramalinga Reddy, B.M, Bavanishankar, S. and BarathrajEtigi., Mix design and some properties of concrete containing Groundgranulated Blast Furnace Slag, pp. 491-500, II CANMET-ACI Internationalconference on Concrete Technology for Sustainable Development, Hyderabad,

March 2005.

4.

5.

6.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Dr. M.C. Nataraja holds a PhD from IndianInstitute of Technology, Kharagpur. Presently,he is a Professor in the department of civilengineering at Sri Jayachamarajendra College ofEngineering, Mysore. He has research experienceof 25 years and has published over 100 technicalpapers in national and international journals and

conferences. His areas of interest are SFRC, concrete mixdesign and controlled low strength materials. He is in theinternational technical committee of PROTECT in connectionwith international conferences.

Mr. Lelin Das received his BE in Civil Engineering,M.Tech in Structural Engineering and is pursuinghis PhD at Sri Jayachamarajendra College ofEngineering, Mysore. Presently, he is a TechnicalOfcer at Ultratech Cement Ltd. at Mysore.

His research interests include use of marginalmaterials in concrete, special concretes andconcrete mix design.

Nataraja, M.C, Lelin Das and N. Richard Sandeep, Comparison of indianstandard draft method and ACI method of concrete mix proportioning,Second National seminar on Advances in Materials and Structure, IIT, Chennai,India.

______Standard practice for selecting proportions for normal, heavyweight, andmass concrete, ACI 211.1-91 (1991), ACI Committee 211, Farmington Hills,MI.

______Recommended guidelines for concrete mix design, IS 10262:1982, Bureauof India Standards, New Delhi, India.

______Indian standard concrete mix proportioning - Guidelines, IS 10262:2009,(First revision Bureau of India Standards, New Delhi, India

______Handbook on concrete mixes (based on Indian Standards) , SP: 23-1988,Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India

______Code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete (fourth edition), 2000,IS 456:2000, Bureau of India Standards, New Delhi, India.

Neville, A.M., Concrete Technology, Fourth edition, Pearson Education,New Delhi.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

We at ICJ offer an opportunity to our readers to contribute articles and

be a part of a big family of ICJ authors.

In particular, we will appreciate receiving contributions on the

following:

Articles bearing on innovative design and construction

Articles dealing with challenging construction problems and how they were solved.

Just a Point of view covering your opinion on any facet of concrete, construction and

civil engineering

All contributions will be reviewed by expert Editorial Committee. Limit your contribution to

about 2000 words only.

Contact: The Editor, The Indian Concrete Journal, ACC Limited, L.B. Shastri Marg, Thane 400 604.

Tel: +91 (22) 33027646 E-mail: [email protected]

Be an ICJ

Author

ais 2009

Documents

Transcript of ais 2009