Basin / Soil effect

EFFECT OF W/C RATIO ON SELF COMPACTING CONCRETE OF M70 GRADE WITH FLY ASH AND MICRO SILICA AS FILLER MATERIALByE. SRINIVASA RAOUnder the Guidance ofSmt. P. SRI LAKSHMIAssociate ProfessorJNTUH College of EngineeringHyderabad

INTRODUCTION What is Self Compacting Concrete (SCC) ?Defined as: Concrete that is able to flow and consolidate under its own weight, completely fill the formwork even in the presence of dense reinforcement, whilst maintaining homogeneity and without the need for any additional compaction.Why it is needed ?Concrete is a versatile material extensively used in construction applications throughout the world.Properly placed and cured concrete exhibits excellent compressive-force-resisting characteristics and engineers rely on it to perform in a myriad of situations.However, if proper consolidation is not provided, its strength and durability could be questionable.The growing use of concrete in special architectural configurations and closely spaced reinforcing bars have made it very important to produce concrete that ensures proper filling ability, good structural performance and adequate durability.To help alleviate these concerns, Japanese researchers in the late 1980s developed a concrete mixture that deformed under its own weight, thus filling around and encapsulating reinforcing steel without any mechanical consolidation.

Self-Compacting Concrete offers new possibilities and prospects in the context of durability and strength of concrete.As a result of the mix design, some properties of the hardened concrete can be different for SCC in comparison to normal vibrated concrete. Mix design criterions are mostly focused on the type and mixture proportions of the constituents. Adjustment of the water/cement ratio and superplasticizer dosage is one of the main key properties in proportioning of SCC mixtures.

Therefore, it is important to verify the mechanical properties of SCC before using it for practical applications, especially if the present design rules are applicable or if they need some modifications.

Recently, a great native interest had been derived towards self-compacting concrete.

ObjectiveThe aim of the present dissertation is to study the effect of water-cement ratio (referred also as water-binder ratio) on workability and mechanical properties of self-compacting concrete of M70 grade with fly ash and micro silica as filler material.

Discussion Includes:Basic Concepts of SCCReview of LiteratureTest Methods on SCCExperimental InvestigationsResults and DiscussionsConclusionsBasic Concepts of SCCFunctional Requirement of SCCFilling ability The ability of SCC to flow under its own weight into and fill completely all spaces within intricate formwork, containing obstacles, such as reinforcement.Passing ability The ability of SCC to flow through openings approaching the size of the mix coarse aggregate, such as the spaces between steel reinforcing bars, without segregation.Resistance to segregation The ability of SCC to remain homogeneous during transport, placing, and after placement.Constituents of SCCWith regard to its composition, SCC consists of the same components as conventionally vibrated concrete, which areCementAggregatesWaterChemical Admixtures i.e. Superplasticisers and Viscosity Modifying AgentsMineral Admixtures i.e., Fly ash, Silica Fume, GGBFS etc.

Physical and Chemical Process of SCCThe physical process is due to the particles fineness of the supplementary cementing materials that are much smaller than that of the cement, thereby providing densely packed particles between fine aggregates and cement grains, and, hence, the reduction in porosity. The chemical process is due to the activation of the non-crystalline silica, by the calcium hydroxide produced from the hydrating cement to form secondary calcium silicate hydrate that also fills the pore spaces and further reduces the porosity.

Advantages of SCCElimination of problems associated with vibration. Ease of placement results in cost savings through reduced equipment and labour requirement. Improves the quality, durability, and reliability of concrete structures due to better compaction and homogeneity of concrete. Faster construction Improves working conditions and productivity in construction industry. Greater freedom in design.

Disadvantages of SCCMore stringent requirements on the selection of materials . More precise measurement and monitoring of the constituent materials. Requires more trial batches at laboratory as well as at ready-mixed concrete plants.Costlier than conventional concrete based on concrete material cost (exception to placement cost). Lack of globally accepted test standards and mix designsREVIEW OF LITERATUREHajime Okamura et al. (2003) [4] In early 1980s, the problem of the durability of concrete structures was a major topic of interest in Japan.

The creation of durable concrete structures requires adequate compaction by skilled workers.

Lack of uniform and complete compaction as the primary factor responsible for poor performance of concrete structures.

Okamura solved the issue of degrading quality of concrete construction due to lack of compaction by the employment of SCC which is independent of the quality of construction work.

Introduced SCC in the late 1980s.

Early 1990s limited public knowledge about SCC, mainly in the Japanese language.

The prototype of SCC was completed in 1988 with available materials in the market and is shown below.

Self Compacting Concrete (Admixture: Superplasticizer)

AirWPowderSGAirWCSGConventional ConcreteLimited Gravel ContentAppropriate Mortar

50% of Solid Volume

Limited Sand Content

Higher Deformability

Moderate Viscosity

40% of Mortar Volume

Higher Dosage of SP

Lower W/C Ratio

Mechanism for achieving Self Compactability (Okamura & Ozawa)Okamura and Ozawa proposed simple mix design method.The coarse aggregate content in concrete is fixed at 50% of solid volume.The fine aggregate content is fixed at 40% of mortar volume.The water-powder ratio in volume is assumed as 0.9 to 1.0, depending on the properties of the powder.The SP dosage and the final w/b ratio are determined so as to ensure self compactability.Nan Su et al. (2001) [14] Proposed new Mix design method based on experimental investigation carried out in Taiwan. Packing Factor is used to determine the aggregate contents.The volume of fine aggregate is more than coarse aggregate.Simpler, easier for implementation and less-time consuming, requires smaller amount of binders and saves cost as compared to the method developed by JRMCA (Japanese Ready-Mixed Concrete Association).

Soo-Duck Hwang et al. (2006) [24]Studied the suitability of various test methods for workability assessment and proposed performance specifications.70 SCC mixes with w/c ranges of 0.35 and 0.42.For structural applications slump flow ranges of 620 to 720mm, L-box ratio (h2/h1)0.7, J-Ring flow of 600 to 700mm, V-Funnel Flow time 8 sec.Paratibha Aggarwal et al. (2008) [20]Presented the experimental procedure to obtain the SCC mixes based on Japanese Method of mix design.Initially trial mixes, CA 50% by volume of concrete, FA - 40% by volume of mortar with a w/c ratio of 0.90.Later on by reducing the coarse aggregate from 45% to 37% and increasing fine aggregate contents from 40% to 47.5% to attain the required results in all the tests i.e., slump flow, V-funnel and L-Box.

Dr. Hemant Sood et al. (2009) [2]Presented the experimental investigation of SCC using Flyash and Rice husk ash as mineral admixtures and testing rheological properties as per European Standards.

S. Venkateswara Rao et al. (2010) [25]Aims at developing standard and high strength SCC with different sizes of aggregate based on Nan-sus mix design procedure.The variables involved in the study are size of aggregate, dosage of fly ash and grade of concrete.SCC can be developed with all sizes of graded aggregate satisfying the SCC characteristics.Noticed that the fresh properties improved with increase in fly ash percentages. This study illustrated that the optimum dosages of fly ash were 52% addition in case of standard grade SCC and it is 31% addition in case of high strength Self Compacting Concrete.C. Selvamony et al. (2010) [1]Studied the effectiveness of various percentages of mineral admixtures in producing SCC. Okamura's method, based on EFNARC specifications, was adopted for mixed design.In this study, the effect of replacing the cement, coarse aggregate and fine aggregate by limestone powder (LP) with silica fume (SF), quarry dust (QD) and clinkers respectively.At the same constant SP dosage (08%) and mineral additives content (30%), LP showed the better workability.More than 8% replacement of cement by lime stone powder with silica fume showed very significant reduction in the compressive strength. N R Gaywala et al. (2011) [15] Studied the strength properties of SCC when cement is replaced by different proportions of fly ash ranging from 15% to 55% and are compared with M25 concrete. The experimental result shows that the 15% fly ash mix gives the better strength characteristics as compared to the other fly ash mixes.

Prof. Shriram H. Mahure et al. (2013) [22]Aimed to develop Self Compacting Concrete using two industry wastes: cement kiln dust (CKD) and fly ash (FA).CKD was used to replace the cement content by three various percentages (5, 10 and 15%) and fly ash was kept as constant (20%). The fresh properties of SCC follow direct relations with the CKD contents for all grades of concrete.

The compressive strength & flexural strengths increases with increase in CKD contents up to 10%.

The mechanical properties of SCC follow direct relations with the CKD contents for all grades of concrete.REVIEW OF LITERATURE Contd..Summary:The literature review clearly indicates that the SCC having wider research scope and advantages in regard of performance, strength, quality and durability, etc.Proper selection of materials, mix proportions based on various mix design methods, type of mineral and chemical admixtures, test methods and workability specifications are key concerns in the optimization and control testing of self compacting concrete. In most of the test data evaluated that the design methods developed to predict the characteristics of SCC is based on different mix proportions, materials and on experimental work. Therefore investigations are still to be required for making the self compacting concrete as a standard practice concrete from the economical and conventional applications point of view.In this literature Nan Su mix design shows that it is a simpler, easier for implementation and less time consuming and cost effective method. This method is based on the investigation work carried out in Taiwan. Hence in the present investigation work, Nan Su mix design was adopted for Indian conditions and examines the workability characteristics of SCC for different water binder ratios.

TEST METHODS ON SCCTests on Fresh ConcreteSlump-Flow Test The slump-flow and T500 time is the easiest and most familiar test to evaluate the flowability and the flow rate of self-compacting concrete in the absence of obstructions. The diameter of the concrete circle is a measure of the filling ability of concrete. The higher the slump flow value, the greater its ability to fill formwork under its own weight.

V-Funnel Test and V-Funnel at 5 minutesThis test is used to determine the filling ability (flowability) of the concrete. The funnel is filled with about 12 litres of concrete and the time taken for it to flow through the apparatus measured. After this the funnel can be refilled concrete and left for 5 minutes to settle. This test measured the ease of flow of the concrete: shorter flow times indicate greater flowability. After 5 minutes of setting, segregation of concrete will show a less continuous flow with an increase in flow time.

L-Box TestThis test is used to evaluate the fluidity of self-compacting concrete and its ability to pass through steel bars. The L-box consists of a chimney section and a channel section as described by Wu et al. With the L-box, the height of concrete in chimney, h1, the height of concrete in the channel section, h2, and the time for self-compacting concrete to reach 400 mm from three steel bars, T400, can be measured. According to EFNARC , when the ratio of h2 to h1 is larger than 0.8, self compacting concrete has good passing ability.

U-Box TestThis test is used to evaluate to the fluidity of self-compacting concrete and its ability to pass through steel bars. The U-box consists of a vessel that is divided by a middle wall in to two compartments. An opening with a sliding gate is fitted between the two sections. Reinforcing bars with nominal diameter of 13mm are installed at the gate with centre to centre spacing of 50mm. This creates a clear spacing of 35mm between the bars. Tests on Hardened ConcreteCompressive Strength TestSplit Tensile Strength TestFlexural Strength Test

EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONSThe present experimental investigations are focused to study the effect of water-cement ratios on fresh and hardened properties of self compacting concrete of M70 Grade. The Concrete mixes contains different proportions of Fly Ash, Super plasticizers, water binder ratios and constant proportions of Cement, Micro Silica, VMA, Coarse aggregate and Fine aggregate.A total of 5 concrete mixes with different combinations of water/cement ratios i.e., 0.23, 0.24, 0.25, 0.26 and 0.27 were evaluated.Materials UsedCementOrdinary Portland Cement 53 grade (OPC 53-Grade) was used throughout the experimental work. Cement used has been tested for various proportions as per IS: 4031-1988 and found to be confirming to various specifications of IS: 12269-1987.The physical properties of the cement are shown in Table 1.Table 1: Testing of Ordinary Portland Cement as per IS: 4031 - 1988Test ParameterTest ValueIS 12269 :1987RecommendationSpecific Gravity3.01-----Standard Consistency( % of cement by weight)30.0-----Setting Time ( Minutes )(1) Initial(2) Final9620730 (Min.)600 (Max.)Compressive Strength ( MPa )(1) 3 day(2) 7 day(3) 28 day29.438.954.627 (Min.)37 (Min.)53 (Min.)Soundness ( mm )2.010 (Max.)Fine AggregateThe sand used for the experimental program was locally available river sand. The physical properties of the fine aggregate are shown in Table 2.

Coarse AggregateA locally available crushed stone aggregate of maximum nominal size 10 mm was used as coarse aggregate. The physical properties of the coarse aggregate are shown in Table 3. WaterTap water free from deleterious materials is used for casting as well as curing of the specimens.

Fly AshProcured from ACC RMC Limited, Bachupally, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India. Typical oxide composition of Indian fly ash is shown in Table 4. Micro SilicaObtained from Oriental Trexim Pvt. Ltd, Navi Mumbai, India. The typical oxide composition details of micro silica are shown in Table 5.

SuperplasticizerGLENIUM B233 conforming to IS: 9103-1999 and ASTM C494 Types F was used. The details of the superplasticizer used are shown in Table 6.

Viscosity Modifying Agent (VMA)The VMA used in this investigation was GLENIUM STREAM-2 which is a product of BASF construction chemicals. The typical composition details of VMA are shown in Table 7.

MIX PROPORTIONING OF SCCIn the present investigations, Nan Su method of mix design was adopted to design the SCC mix. The parameters that influence the mix proportions are packing factor, fine aggregate-total aggregate ratio and powder content. The packing factor of aggregate is defined as the ratio of mass of aggregate of tightly packed state to that of loosely packed state. The amount of fine aggregates will be more as compared to coarse aggregate from this method of mix which enhances the passing ability through gaps of reinforcement.

This method is simpler, easier for implementation and less time-consuming, requires a smaller amount of binders due to the increased sand content as compared to other mix design methods and hence saves cost. The concrete mix was prepared for different water-binder ratios i.e., 0.23, 0.24, 0.25, 0.26 and 0.27, with a packing factor of 1.12 by maintaining the constant proportions of Cement, Micro Silica, VMA, Coarse aggregate and Fine aggregate. The mix proportions of the concrete used in this study are shown in Table 8. The typical mix design calculation is shown in Table 8A.

Table 8.0: Mix proportions of concrete containing different water-binder ratiosMix ConstituentsMix DesignationM1 (W/C=0.23)M2 (W/C=0.24)M3 (W/C=0.25)M4 (W/C=0.26)M5 (W/C=0.27)Qty.(kg/m3)Prop.Qty.(kg/m3)Prop.Qty.(kg/m3)Prop.Qty.(kg/m3)Prop.Qty.(kg/m3)Prop.Cement57415741574157415741Fly Ash41.000.07134.300.0627.600.0520.900.0414.200.02Micro Silica40.180.0740.180.0740.180.0740.180.0740.180.07Fine Aggregate844.481.47844.481.47844.481.47844.481.47844.481.47Coarse Aggregate805.321.4805.321.4805.321.4805.321.4805.321.4Water to Binder ratio140.680.229143.820.236146.970.244151.180.254153.250.261Super Plasticizers11.070.01810.950.01810.830.01810.710.01810.590.018VMA1.7220.0031.7220.0031.7220.0031.7220.0031.7220.003PREPARATION OF TEST SPECIMENSA total of five batches for each mix based on the above mix proportions have been prepared.The mixing process is done in electrically operated concrete mixer. The predetermined quantities of fine and coarse aggregates are added to the mixer and mixed for thirty seconds. After that the cement, fly ash and micro silica were added to the mixer and mixed together with the aggregates for one minute.

The various amounts of water, superplasticizer and viscosity admixture were added and mixed thoroughly. This process of production was adopted for the whole quantum of work.The mixes immediately after the preparation were used for carrying out the fresh concrete tests i.e., slump flow, V-funnel, L-box, U-box etc.Sufficient number of cubes, cylinders and prisms were casted, cured and tested after the recognized ages to evaluate the properties of hardened concrete.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONSTEST RESULTS ON FRESH CONCRETEThe workability tests i.e., Slump flow test, V-Funnel test, L-Box test and U-Box test results obtained for different water-cement ratios are presented in Table 9.The graphical representations of water-cement ratio vs each of the workability tests are shown in Fig. 1 to Fig. 6.Table 9.0: Test Results on Fresh Concrete and Acceptance Criteria for SCCS. NoMethodUnitWater/Cement RatioEFNARC[3]SpecificationRemarks0.230.240.250.260.271Slump Flow Testmm655660665680700SF1: 550-650SF2: 660-750SF3: 760-850SF22T500sec3.943.883.823.322.50VS1: T500 2VS2: T500 > 2VS23V-Funnelsec8.508.358.107.956.89VF1: 8VF2: 9-25VF24T5minsec11.8910.9210.6610.239.955L-Boxh2/h10.9500.9590.9690.9750.980PA1: > 0.8 (2 rebars)PA2: > 0.8 (3 rebars)PA26U-Boxmm976540-30 [23]OKFig. 1. W/C Ratio vs Slump FlowFig. 2. W/C Ratio vs T500Fig. 3. W/C Ratio vs V-FunnelFig. 4. W/C Ratio vs T5Fig. 5. W/C Ratio vs L-Box RatioFig. 6. W/C Ratio vs U-BoxTEST RESULTS ON HARDENED CONCRETEThe strength tests i.e., compressive strength, split tensile strength and flexural strength test results on hardened concrete at the age of 7 days and 28 days obtained for different water-cement ratios are presented in Table 10.The graphical representations of water-cement ratio vs each of the strength tests are shown in Fig. 7 to Fig. 9.Table 10.0: Test Results on Hardened ConcreteConcrete MixCompressive Strength(N/mm2)Split tensile Strength (N/mm2)Flexural Strength(N/mm2)7days28days7days28days7days28daysM1 (W/C=0.23)61.6482.223.724.095.926.76M2 (W/C=0.24)59.7382.073.634.085.846.52M3 (W/C=0.25)53.1181.623.434.055.726.20M4 (W/C=0.26)52.5381.293.403.995.465.86M5 (W/C=0.27)52.4880.533.373.895.185.69Fig. 7. W/C Ratio vs Compressive StrengthFig. 8. W/C Ratio vs Split Tensile StrengthFig. 9. W/C Ratio vs Flexural StrengthDISCUSSION ON TEST RESULTSBased on the above experimental results, the observations are as follows:Slump flow increases with the increase of water/cement ratio. T500 time, V-funnel time, T5 time and U-box values are decreases with the increase of w/c ratio. L-box value increases with the w/c ratio.All the workability test results are well in comply with the EFNARC specifications of SCC and acceptance criteria are shown in Table 9. Compressive strength, tensile strength and flexural strengths are decreasing as the w/c ratio increases.Marginal increase in the compressive strength at 28 days of concrete as the w/c ratio decreases.Compressive strength and split tensile strength decreases at higher rate for 7 days strength when compared to 28 days strength, whereas it is also observed that flexural strength value decreases at higher rate for 28 days strength when compared to 7 days strength.The variation of % decrease in strengths at 7 days and 28 days with w/c ratios are shown Fig. 10 to Fig. 11.

Fig. 10. W/C Ratio vs % Decrease in Strength at 7 daysFig. 11. W/C Ratio vs % Decrease in Strength at 28 daysCONCLUSIONSAll the mixes used in this study exhibits the good workability characteristics, in accordance with the EFNARC specifications.

Workability characteristics i.e., passing ability, filling ability and segregation resistance of the SCC mixes are linearly increasing with the increase of water-cement ratio.

It is observed that the w/c ratio increases, the compressive strength decreases by 14.9%, split tensile strength decreases by 9.4% and flexural strength decreases by 12.5% at 7 days age of concrete. It is observed that as the w/c ratio increases, the compressive strength decreases by 2.1%, split tensile strength decreases by 4.9% and flexural strength decreases by 15.8% at 28 days age of concrete.

It is observed that compressive strength and split tensile strength decreases at higher rate for 7 days strength when compared to 28 days strength, whereas it is also observed that flexural strength value decreases at higher rate for 28 days strength when compared to 7 days strength.

Therefore from the experimental results, the compressive strength, split tensile strength and flexural strength decreases as the w/c ratio increases.

With these experimental results, all the mixes were able to develop a higher strength concrete without any vibration, with complies all the workability requirements of SCC.

The relation between the strengths and water cement ratios, flow values and water cement ratios are almost linear.

Scope of Future Work:

The present investigation will be extended to the more number of concrete strength ranges and also on the structural elements i.e., beams and slabs etc..

The investigation may be extended to the alkaline and thermal effects.

The investigations may be extended with different proportions and different types of mineral admixtures apart from fly ash and silica fume.

PHOTOGRAPHS

SPECIMENS DURING CASTINGSPECIMENS DURING CASTING

SPECIMENS DURING CURING

SPECIMENS DURING TESTING

SPECIMENS DURING TESTING

SLUMP FLOW TEST

V FUNNEL TESTL-BOX TEST

REFERENCES1.C. Selvamony, M. S. Ravikumar, S. U. Kannan and S. Basil Gnanappa, Development of High Strength Self Compacting Self Curing Concrete using Lime Stone Powder and Clinkers, ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vol. 5, No. 3, March 2010.2.Dr. Hemant Sood, Dr.R.K.Khitoliya and S. S. Pathak, Incorporating European Standards for Testing Self Compacting Concrete in Indian Conditions, International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 6, May 2009, pp. 41-45.3.EFNARC (The European Federation of Specialist Construction Chemicals and Concrete Systems), The European Guidelines for Self Compacting Concrete Specification, Production and Use, SCC 028, May 2005.4.Hajime Okamura, Masahiro Ouchi, Self-Compacting Concrete, Journal of Advanced Technology, Vol. 1, No. 1, April 2003, pp. 5-15. 5.IS: 383-1970, Specification for Coarse and Fine Aggregate from Natural Sources for Concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002.IS: 456-2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete-Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002.7.IS: 516-1959, Methods of Test for Strength of Concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002.8.IS: 2386 (Part-I)-1963, Methods of Test for Aggregate for Concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002. 9.IS: 3812-1981, Specification for Fly Ash for Use as Pozzolana and Admixture, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002. 10.IS: 5816-1999, Method of Test for Splitting Tensile Strength of Concrete Cylinders, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002.11.IS: 9103-1989, Concrete Admixtures-Specification, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002.12.IS: 12269-1987, Ordinary Portland Cement 53 Grade-Specification, Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002.13.Kazim Turk, Mehmet Karatas, and Tahir Gonen, Effect of Fly Ash and Silica Fume on Compressive Strength, Sorptivity and Carbonation of SCC, KSCE (Korean Society of Civil Engineers) Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 17, No. 1/January 2013, pp: 202-209.14.Nan Su, Kung-Chung Hsu, His-Wen Chai A simple mix design method for self-compacting concrete, Cement and Concrete Research 31 (2001), pp. 17991807.15.N. R. Gaywala and D. B. Raijiwala, Self Compacting Concrete: A Concrete of Decade, Journal of Engineering Research and Studies, JERS/Vol. II/ Issue IV/October-December, 2011/213-218.16.Nguyen, T.L.H., Roussel, N. and Coussot, P. Correlation between L-box test and rheological parameters of a homogeneous yield stress fluid, Cement and Concrete Research, 36, 2006, pp. 1789-1796.17.Okamura, H., Self Compacting High Performance Concrete, ACI Concrete International, Vol. 19, No. 7, July 1997, pp. 50-54.18.P. A. Ganeshwaran, Suji, S. Deepashri, Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of Self Compacting Concrete with Manufactured Sand and Fly Ash, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), pp. 60-69.19.PCI (Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute), Interim Guidelines for the use of Self Consolidation Concrete in Precast/Prestressed Member Plants, TR-6-03, April 2003.20.Paratibha Aggarwal, Rafat Siddique,Yogesh Aggarwal, Surinder M Gupta Self-Compacting Concrete- Procedure for Mix Design, Leonardo Electronic Journal of Practices and Technologies, Issue 12, January-June 2008, pp. 15-24.21.Prof. Kishor S. Sable, Prof. Madhuri K. Rathi, Comparison of Self Compacted Concrete with Normal Concrete by Using Different Type of Steel Fibres, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), Vol. 1, Issue 6, August 2012.22.Prof. Shriram H. Mahure, Mayur B. Vanjare, Experimental Investigation On Self Compacting Concrete Using Cement Kiln Dust, International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) Vol. 2 Issue 1, January- 2013.23.Shetty, M.S., (2002), Concrete Technology, Theory and Practice, Chand, S. and Company Limited, Ramnagar, New Delhi 110 055.24.Soo-Duck Hwang, Kamal H. Khayat, and Olivier Bonneau, Performance-Based Specifications of Self-Consolidating Concrete Used in Structural Applications, ACI Materials Journal/March-April 2006, pp. 121-129.25.S. Venkateswara Rao, M. V. Seshagiri Rao and P. Ratihish Kumar, Effect of size of aggregate and fines on standard and high strength self-compacting concrete, Journal of Applied Science Research, 2010, 6(5): 433-442. 26.Wu, Z., Zhang, Y., Zheng, J. and Ding, Y., An experimental study on the workability of self-compacting lightweight concrete, Construction and Building Materials, 23, 2009, pp. 2087-2092.Thank you