Experimental Study on Strength Gaining Characteristics of...

KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering (2013) 17(4):1-8

DOI 10.1007/s12205-013-0236-x

− 1 −

www.springer.com/12205

Structural Engineering

Experimental Study on Strength Gaining Characteristics

of Composite Cement Concrete

Md. Alhaz Uddin*, Mohammed Jameel**, Habibur Rahman Sobuz***,

and Md. Shahinul Islam****

Received May 13, 2012/Revised July 11, 2012/Accepted August 19, 2012

···································································································································································································································

Abstract

This study deals with experimental investigation of strength gaining characteristics of concrete made with Portland CompositeCement (PCC) and Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). Compressive strength of concrete is often considered as a measure todetermine the rate of strength gain of concrete with age and different cement composition. Strength developments of five concretetypes have been investigated in terms of cement content and curing duration. Experimental observations on 495 specimens revealthat the early age strength of PCC concrete is lower than that of OPC concrete. Based on the test results, lack of proper pozzolanicreaction in the presence of fly ash in PCC concrete strength is lower at early age. The pozzolanic activity of fly ash also contributes tothe strength gain at later stages of continuous curing. This study also concludes that drying ambient conditions reduce the strengthpotential of PCC concrete as the secondary (pozzolanic) reaction fails to contribute to the development of strength.

Keywords: strength gain, cement composition, curing time, compressive strength, pozzolanic reaction

···································································································································································································································

1. Introduction

The strength of concrete is one of the most important engineering

properties of construction materials. There are many factors

affecting the rate of strength gain of concrete. Concrete is

composed of cement as well as other cementitious materials such

as fly ash, slag, coarse aggregate, fine aggregate, water, and

chemical admixtures. In building construction sector, there is a

common complain that concrete does not gain target strength

within specified period (28 days). A decision should be taken at

the time (28 days) to remove formwork depend on the rate of

strength gain of the concrete considering safety, economy and

quality. Freiesleben and Pedersen (1977) reported that the rate of

strength gain of concrete depends on temperature. In view of,

Saul (1951) and Kim et al. (1998) investigation the strength gain

of concrete is subjected to combined effect of curing time and

temperature during hardening process. They found that the

concrete gain strength at early-age subjected to a high temperature.

In an experimental study, Price (1951) and Zhutovsky and

Kovler (2012) pointed out that due to the first 2 hrs of curing at

high temperature concrete gain a higher strength at early stage.

Strength development in concrete at early stage due to effect of

curing temperature was reported by Klieger (1958) and Toe et al.

(2010). Strength at any given age and rate of strength gain of

mortars and concretes containing fly ash will depend on the

pozzolanic reactivity of the fly ash (Jansen et al., 2012; Wongkeo

et al., 2012), the richness of the mix, the character and grading of

the aggregate, the water content of the mix and the curing

conditions (Brue et al., 2012; El-Nemr, 2011; Hobbs, 1983).

Sometimes dying ambient disorders significantly reduce the

strength potential of concrete made with PCC for secondary

(pozzolanic) reaction fails to contribute to gain of strength

(Mahasneh and Shawabkeh, 2004; Razak and Sajedi, 2011; Sata

et al., 2012).

Incorporation of fly ash in concrete improves workability and

thereby reduces the water requirement with respect to the

conventional concrete. Among numerous other beneficial

effects are reduced bleeding, reduced segregation, reduced

permeability, increased plasticity, lowered heat of hydration

(Shafiq 2011), and increased setting times (ACI, 1987;

Mahasneh and Shawabkeh, 2004). A critical drawback of the

use of fly ash in concrete is that the rate of strength gain of fly

ash concrete is slower but it is sustained for longer periods than

the rate of the strength increase of Portland cement concrete

*Ph.D. Candidate, School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, 5005, Australia (Corre-

sponding Author, E-mail: [email protected])

**Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (E-mail: [email protected])

***Ph.D. Candidate, School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, 5005, Australia (E-mail:

[email protected])

****Researcher, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Bangladesh (E-mail: [email protected])

Md. Alhaz Uddin, Mohammed Jameel, Habibur Rahman Sobuz, and Md. Shahinul Islam

− 2 − KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering

(Chindaprasirt et al., 2005; Hwang et al., 2004). Kaosar (2006)

has made a study on brick aggregate concrete with varying

amount of fly ash content where fly ash were added directly at

the time of mixing. Then compressive strength and two types

of durability test such as chloride resistance (Florea and

Brouwers, 2012) and sulfate resistance tests have been

performed to evaluate the effects of fly ash on strength and

durability of brick aggregate concrete (Ahmadi and Shekarchi,

2010; Golestanifar and Ahangari, 2011). Cement manufacturing

companies of Bangladesh have been using fly ash in cement to

minimize the rising production cost of cement. These fly ash

containing cement are available in the market named as

“Portland Composite Cement”. It is observed that the

proportions of different ingredients of PCCs are varied among

the different cement manufacturing companies. Thus, it is

necessary to investigate the strength gaining property of

concrete made with PCC both at early and later ages.

In this study, strength development of five different composition

cement types has been investigated in terms of different

curing condition. In the framework of experimental study

during 365 days; mortars have been prepared with different

composition cement such as clinker, fly ash, gypsum, slag

and limestone which kept at two different curing conditions.

It is found that PCC concrete has shown lower early age

strength than OPC whereas, at later ages both of the concrete

is providing approximately similar strength characteristics

due to continuous curing conditions and well performed

pozzolanic reaction activities.

2. Materials and Methods

This experimental study represents a general scenario of the

strength gain characteristics of concrete made with PCC and

OPC both at earlier and later ages. All properties of concrete

ingredients are kept constant and cement type is varying with

different composition. The work is performed using locally

available materials such as stone chips, sand (Coarse Sand) and

cement (Portland composite and ordinary Portland). The

concrete have been cured in two different ways, one set of

concrete specimens have been cured continuously until they are

tested while the other set of concrete specimens have been cured

only 14 days under water to know effect of continuous curing

over 14 days curing (Zhao et al., 2012).

2.1 Materials Properties

2.1.1 Properties of Aggregate

Aggregate act as an inert filler in concrete providing improved

volume stability. Locally available coarse sand has been used for

this project as fine aggregate. The physical properties of fine

aggregate are shown in Table 1. Crushed stone has been used in

this project as coarse aggregate whose physical properties are

also shown in Table 1.

The gradations of fine and coarse aggregates have been

obtained by sieve analysis (Fig. 1), according to standard ASTM

C 136. A suitable gradation of an aggregate in PCC and OPC

mixture is important in order to secure strength gain of the

concrete mix (Celik et al., 2008; Sharifi, 2012). The fineness

modulus of fine and coarse aggregate are obtained from sieve

analysis is 2.73 and 6.74 respectively.

2.1.2 Properties of Cement

Cement is a cementitious material in concrete mixture. The

properties of concrete ingredients (coarse aggregate, fine aggregate,

water) have been kept constant, only the cement type has been

changed. In this project PCC of four different types and one

ordinary (ASTM Type I) Portland cement (OPC) have been used

in making concrete. Specific gravity of OPC is 3.15. The

chemical compositions and cement ingredient of different type

are shown in Table 2 and Table 3 respectively.

Table 1. Physical Properties of Fine and Coarse Aggregate

Properties Local sand Crushed stone

Maximum aggregate size, mm 2.36 19

Bulk Specific gravity 2.56 2.71

Absorption capacity, % 1.21 0.45

Unit weight, kg/m3 - 1556

Fineness modulus 2.73 6.74

Fig. 1. Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregate

Table 2. Chemical Composition of PCC and OPC

Constituent PCC OPC

SiO2 20.60 19.24

Al2O3 4.74 4.78

Fe2O3 3.28 2.90

CaO 64.82 64.05

MgO 1.84 1.65

SO3 2.4 3.36

Na2O 0.21 0.25

K2O 0.38 0.81

LOI 1.73 2.96

Experimental Study on Strength Gaining Characteristics of Composite Cement Concrete

Vol. 17, No. 4 / May 2013 − 3 −

Table 3. Proportions of ingredients in cements

IngredientPCC OPC

Type-A (%) Type-B (%) Type-C (%) Type-D (%) Type-E (%)

Clinker 66.4 74.53 72.32 87.56 96.47

Gypsum 3.36 3.21 2.90 1.77 3.53

Slag, Fly Ash, Limestone 30.24 22.26 24.78 10.67 -

Table 4. Amount of Ingredients Required for Making Concrete

Target strength MPa Slump, (mm) Cement, Kg/m3 Water, Kg/m3 Fine aggregate, Kg/m3 Coarse aggregate, Kg/m3

17.24 (76-101) 476.74 357.46 1460.53 1798.11

27.58 (25-51) 581.55 331.21 1442.77 1798.11

41.37 (25-51) 807.95 331.21 1255.94 1798.11

Table 5. w/c Ratio of Concrete Mixtures

28 day compressive strength (MPa)

Non air Entrained

Air Entrained

17.24 0.75 0.67

27.58 0.57 0.48

41.37 0.41 ---

Fig. 2. Preparing of Concrete Specimens: (a) Casting, (b) Compacting on Vibration Table

Fig. 3. Placing of Concrete Specimens into the Curing Tank

2.2 Mixture Compositions

According to ACI mix design method, the required quantity of

cement, sand, fine aggregate and coarse aggregate have been

mixed for target strength of 17.24 MPa, 27.58 MPa and 41.37

MPa (Table 4). Concrete mixtures have been proportioned using

w/c ratios (Table 5) in air entrained and non-air entrained

condition. Slump value of mixtures was different according to

target strength as shown in Table 4.

2.2.1 Preparation of Test Specimens

Concrete specimen have been casted for the target strength of

17.24 MPa, 27.58 MPa and 41.37 MPa using PCC of four

different types and one OPC. The steel molds (cylindrical in

shape with 100 mm diameter and 200 mm height) have been

used for casting of all specimens and then, compacted using a

vibrating table (Fig. 2). After that, leaving the molded concrete

specimens in place of hardening for a period of 24 h, and then de-

molded. The total 495 numbers of concrete specimens have been

prepared according to different curing condition (continuously

curing and only 14 days curing). In this project PCC of four different

compositions and one OPC have been used in making concrete for

target strength of 17.24 MPa, 27.58 MPa and 41.37 MPa.

2.2.2 Curing of Specimens

Concrete specimens have been cured in two different ways,

one set of concrete specimens have been cured continuously

until testing while the other set of concrete specimens have been



Fig. 4. Compressive Strength Test: (a) Applying Load on the Concrete Cylinder by Compression Test Machine, (b) Failure Surface of the

Crushed Concrete Cylinder

Fig. 5. Comparison of Compressive Strength Gain with Age of

Concrete Made with Various Cement for 17.24 MPa





cured only 14 days under water in the laboratory. These 14 days

cured specimens have been kept in air until testing. A curing tank

has been constructed for curing the concrete specimens properly

(Fig. 3). The temperature of the curing water varies from 20 to

25oC and relative humidity 55 to 75%.

2.3 Testing Procedure

The rate of strength gain with age of concrete is determined in

accordance with ASTM C39 (1996). Compressive strength is

one of the most important and useful properties of concrete. It

usually gives an overall picture of the quality of concrete because

it is directly related to the structure of the hardened cement paste

(Ozturk and Baradan, 2011; Woo et al., 2011). Compressive

strength test (Fig. 4) of moist cured concrete specimens has been

carried out after removal from moist storage. The compressive

strength of concrete cylinders has been tested at 3, 7, 14, 28, 90,

180, 365 days of concrete.

3. Test Results and Discussion

3.1 Relative Strength Gain

PCC and OPC concrete shows different characteristics in

strength development at early and later ages. Figs. 5-7 shows the

variation of strength gain characteristics of concrete at early and

later ages with cement type at continuous curing condition that

have been designed for target strengths of 17.24 MPa, 27.58

MPa and 41.37 MPa respectively.

It can be seen from Fig. 5 that the relative strength gain of PCC

and OPC concrete for target strength of 17.24 MPa. As seen

from Fig. 5, the compressive strength increases in all specimens

with time. The percentage of target compressive strength gain at

early ages (3 days, 7 days, 14 days) of PCC concrete is lower

than that of OPC concrete but at later ages (180 days) is almost

same. The only exception is found in case of cement type-D


Vol. 17, No. 4 / May 2013 − 5 −

where the percentage of target compressive strength gain of

concrete at early age (3 days) is higher than other kinds (type-A,

type-B, type-C), since type-D contains highest percentage of

clinker 87.56% thus lower percentage of fly ash whereas cement

type A and C contain 66.4% and 72.32% clinker respectively

and type-B contains 74.53% clinker. Fig. 5 also shows that the

strength gain curve fitting for all cement composition of target

strength 17.24 MPa. The best cement composition is fc

(OPC)E =

0.0322Ln(t) + 14.372 with R² = 0.6191 and worst cement

composition is fc (PCC)B = 0.0421Ln(t) + 10.617 with R² =

0.706; where fc is compressive strength in MPa, t is age of

specimen in days, and R2 is the coefficient of correlation.

The relative strength gain of concrete for target strength of

27.58 MPa for PCC and OPC which is shown in Fig. 6. It can be

seen from Fig. 6 that PCC concrete have gained 15 percent less

strength at 14 days of age than that of OPC conrete. But at the

later age, they have gained similar percentage of target strength

at continuous curing condition. The only exception is found in

case of cement type-D where the percentage of target compressive

strength gain of concrete at early age (3 days) is higher than PCC

concrete of cement types (type-A, type-B, type-C) since type-D

contains higher percentage of clinker thus lower percentage of

fly ash. Fig. 6 also shows that the strength gain curve fitting for

all cement composition of target strength 27.58 MPa. The best

cement composition is fc (OPC)E = 0.0448Ln(t) + 19.406 with R²

= 0.5551 and worst cement composition is fc (PCC)C =

0.0542Ln(t) + 16.005 with R² = 0.6267; where fc is compressive

strength in MPa, t is age of specimen in days, and R2 is the

coefficient of correlation.

The relative strength gain of PCC and OPC concrete for target

strength of 41.37 MPa is shown in Fig. 7. It is found that PCC

concrete gains 15 to 20 percent less strength at early ages (3

days, 7 days, 14 days) than OPC concrete. But at later ages (180

days), PCC have gained only 5 percent less strength than of OPC

concrete at continuous curing condition. Fig. 7 also shows that

the strength gain curve fitting for all cement composition of

target strength 41.37 MPa. The best cement composition is fc

(OPC)E = 0.0383Ln(t) + 32.657 with R² = 0.5288 and worst

cement composition is fc (PCC)B = 0.0573Ln(t) + 25.057 with R²

= 0.6242; where fc is compressive strength in MPa, t is age of

specimen in days, and R2 is the coefficient of correlation.

3.2 Development of Compressive Strength of Concrete at

Early Ages

Figure 8 shows that PCC concrete type A, B, C and D for

target strength of 17.24 MPa has gained 55 to 60 percent and 80

to 85 percent of target strength at 7 days and 28 days of age at

continuous curing condition. At 14 days curing condition, it has

gained 80 percent of its target strength at 28 days of age. On the

other hand, OPC concrete type E has gained 75 percent and 100

percent of the target strength at 7 days and 28 days of age of

concrete at continuous curing condition and 95 percent of target

strength at 28 days of age at 14 days curing condition.


target strength of 27.58 MPa has gained 50 to 60 percent and

80 percent of target strength at 7 days and 28 days of age at

continuous curing condition. At 14 days curing condition, it

has gained 75 to 80 percent of its target strength at 28 days of

age. On the other hand, OPC concrete type E has gained 60

percent and 95 percent of the target strength at 7 days and 28

days of age of concrete at continuous curing condition and 90

Fig. 8. Variation of Target Strength at 7 and 28 days with Cement

type for 17.24 MPa Target Strength







percent of target strength at 28 days of age at 14 days curing

condition.


target strength of 41.37 MPa has gained 55 to 60 percent and 80

percent of target strength at 7 days and 28 days of age at

continuous curing condition. At 14 days curing condition, it has

gained 75 to 80 percent of its target strength at 28 days of age.

On the other hand, OPC concrete type E has gained 70 percent

and 95 percent of the target strength at 7 and 28 days of age of

concrete at continuous curing condition and 90 percent of target

strength at 28 days of age at 14 days curing condition.

3.3 Time Required to Gain Full Target Strength

The time required to gain the full target strength of PCC and

OPC concrete have been estimated when they are cured at

continuous curing condition. Fig. 11 shows the time required

by concrete made with PCC relative to OPC to gain full target

strengths of 17.24 MPa, 27.58 MPa and 41.37 MPa

respectively. It is found that PCC concrete for target strengths

of 17.24 MPa, 27.58 MPa and 41.37 MPa required 50 to 70

days, 80 to 100 days and 180 to 200 days respectively to gain

full target strength. At the same condition, OPC concrete for

target strengths of 17.24 MPa, 27.58 MPa and 41.37 MPa

required 30 days, 40 days and 90 days respectively to gain full

target strength.

3.4 Effect of Curing on Strength Development of Concrete

Concrete properties are significantly influenced by curing

since it greatly effects the hydration of cement. A proper curing

maintains a suitably warm and moist environment for the

development of hydration products and thus reduces the porosity in

hydrated cement paste and increases the density of microstructure

in concrete.

Table 6 shows that PCC concrete specimens have gained full

target strength (17.24 MPa) within 90 days at 14 days curing

condition. Concrete specimens have gained 120 to 140 percent

of target strength after 365 days for 14 days curing and

Table 6. Compressive Strength Gain with Age of Concrete for 17.24 MPa

Cement Type Curing condition% of Compressive strength

28 days 90 days 180 days 365 days

A(PCC)14 days curing 084.72 101.04 113.6 119.52

Continuous curing 087.56 102.92 121.32 132.4

B(PCC)14 days curing 083.56 104.76 113.72 119.2


C(PCC)14 days curing 084.68 108.96 117.92 124.28


D(PCC)14 days curing 087.64 110.2 118.2 123.2


E(OPC)14 days curing 101 115.92 122.08 126.72





A(PCC)14 days curing 78.175 087.625 090.675 092.85


B(PCC)14 days curing 74.15 090.35 097.225 098.7


C(PCC)14 days curing 79.65 096.325 101.55 104.1


D(PCC)14 days curing 83.55 096.7 103.55 105.55


E(OPC)14 days curing 94.4 101.2 107.125 109.8


Fig. 11. Time Required for Gaining Full Target Strength at Different

Cement type at cOntinuous Curing Condition


Vol. 17, No. 4 / May 2013 − 7 −

continuous curing condition. OPC concrete have gained 140

percent and 125 percent of target strength at continuous curing

and 14 days curing condition respectively after 365 days.

Table 7 shows that PCC concrete specimens have gained full

target strength (27.58 MPa) within 180 days at 14 days curing

condition. Concrete specimens have gained 110 to 120 percent

and 95 to 105 percent of target strength after 365 days at

continuous curing and 14 days curing condition respectively.

OPC concrete have gained 120 percent and 110 percent of target

strength at continuous curing and 14 days curing condition

respectively after 365 days.

Table 8 shows that PCC concrete specimens have failed to gain

full target strength (41.37 MPa) within 365 days at 14 days

curing condition. Concrete specimens have gained 100 percent

and 90 percent of target strength after 365 days at continuous

curing and 14 days curing condition respectively. OPC concrete

have gained 105 percent and 95 percent of target strength at

continuous curing and 14 days curing condition respectively

after 365 days. It is suggested that adequate curing at early ages

as well as later ages is essential to continue the pozzolanic

reaction in concrete which contribute to the development of

strength of concrete made with PCC.

4. Conclusions

This experimental study has investigated the strength gain

characteristics of five different composition cement types in

terms of different curing conditions. The compressive strength

gain at early ages of Portland cement concrete is lower than that

of ordinary Portland cement concrete. Lack of proper Pozzolanic

reaction in the presence of fly ash in PCC concrete strength is

lower at early age. The pozzolanic activity of fly ash also

contributes to the strength gain at later stages of continuous

curing. But at later ages, the strength of PCC concrete and OPC

is almost same to continuous curing. At continuous curing

condition, PCC concrete for the target strengths of 17.24 MPa,

27.58 MPa, and 41.37 MPa requires 50 to 70 days, 80 to 100

days and 180 to 200 days respectively to gain full target strength

and at 14 days curing condition, it requires 90 days and 180 days

to gain the target strength of 17.24 MPa and 27.58 MPa

respectively. But it fails to gain the target strength of 41.37 MPa

in 365days at 14 days curing condition. The compressive

strength of five different compositions cement increased with

increasing curing time. Adequate curing at early ages as well as

at later ages is essential in the strength development of PCC

concrete. It can be concluded that drying ambient conditions

reduce the strength potential of PCC concrete as the secondary

(pozzolanic) reaction fails to contribute to the development of

strength. This characteristics of strength development can

significantly increase the use of PCC in construction of mass

concrete to be used in water related structure.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Civil Engineering Department

of Bangladesh University of Engineering & Technology and the

grant RG093-10AET provided by University of Malaya.

References

ACI Committee (1987). “Use of fly ash in concrete.” American

Concrete Institute Materials J., pp. 381-409.

Ahmadi, B. and Shekarchi, M. (2010). “Use of natural zeolite as a

supplementary cementitious material.” Cem. Concr. Comp., Vol. 32,

No. 2, pp. 134-141.

Brue, F., Davy, C. A., Skoczylas, F., Burlion, N., and Bourbon, X.

(2012). “Effect of temperature on the water retention properties of

two high performance concretes.” Cem. Concr. Res., Vol. 42, No. 2,

pp. 384-396.

Celik, O., Damci, E., and Piskin, S. (2008). “Characterization of fly ash

and it effect on the compressive strength properties of Portland

cement.” Indian J. of Eng. & Materials Sci., Vol. 15, No. 5, pp. 433-

440.

Chindaprasirt, P., Jaturapitakkul, C. H., and Sinsiri, T. (2005). “Effect of

Fly Fineness on Compressive Strength and Pore Size of Blended

Cement Paste.” Cem. Concr. Comp., Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 425-428.

El-Nemr, K. F. (2011). “Effect of different curing systems on the

mechanical and physico-chemical properties of acrylonitrile butadiene

rubber vulcanizates.” Materials & Design, Vol. 32, No. 6, pp. 3361-

3369.




A(PCC)14 days curing 82.37 088.58 090.63 089.75


B(PCC)14 days curing 75.12 085.02 089.08 090.87


C(PCC)14 days curing 80.27 090.48 092.88 094.35


D(PCC)14 days curing 85.48 092.02 094.05 095.20


E(OPC)14 days curing 91.00 094.43 097.10 097.92




Florea, M. V. A. and Brouwers, H. J. H. (2012). “Chloride binding

related to hydration products Part I: Ordinary portland cement.”

Cem. Concr. Res., Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 282-290.

Freiesleben, H. P. and Pedersen, E. J. (1977). “Maturity computer for

controlled curing and hardening of concrete.” Nordisk Betong, Vol.

No. 1, pp. 21-25.

Golestanifar, M. and Ahangari, K. (2011). “Decision on coarse aggregates

borrow sources of concrete.” KSCE J. of Civil Eng., Vol. 15, No. 6,

pp. 965-973.

Hobbs, D. W. (1983). “Influence of Fly Ash upon the Workability and

Early Strength of Concrete.” Presented at proceedings of the

CANMET/ACI First international conference on the use of fly ash,

silica fume, slag and other mineral by-products in concrete, Vol. 79,

pp. 289-306.

Hwang, K., Noguchi, T., and Tomosawa, F. (2004). “Prediction model

of compressive strength development of fly-ash concrete.” Cem.

Concr. Res., Vol. 34, No. 12, pp. 2269-2276.

Jansen, D., Neubauer, J., Goetz-Neunhoeffer, F., Haerzschel, R., and

Hergeth, W.-D. (2012). “Change in reaction kinetics of a portland

cement caused by a superplasticizer — Calculation of heat flow

curves from XRD data.” Cem. Concr. Res., Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 327–

332.

Kaoser, A. R. (2006). Study on strength and durability of brick aggregate

concrete with fly ash, Bangladesh University of Engineering and

Technology, Dhaka.

Kim, J. K., Moon, Y. H., and Eo, S. H. (1998). “Compressive strength

development of concrete with different curing time and temperature.”

Cem.Concr. Res., Vol. 28, No. 12, pp. 1761-1773.

Klieger, P. (1958). “Effect of Mixing and Curing Temperatures on

Concrete Strength.” ACI J. Proc., Vol. 54, No. 12, pp. 1063-1081.

Mahasneh, B. Z. and Shawabkeh, R. A. (2004). “Compressive Strength

and Permeability of Sand-Cement-Clay Composite and Application

for Heavy Metals Stabilization.” American J. of Applied Sci., Vol. 1,

No. 4, pp. 01-04.

Ozturk, A. U. and Baradan, B. (2011). “Effects of admixture type and

dosage on microstructural and mechanical properties of cement

mortars.” KSCE J. of Civil Eng., Vol. 15, No. 7, pp. 1237-1243.

Price, W. H. (1951). “Factors affecting concrrete strength.” J. American

Concrete Institute, Vol. 47, pp. 417-432.

Razak, H. A. and Sajedi, F. (2011). “The effect of heat treatment on the

compressive strength of cement-slag mortars.” Materials & Design,

Vol. 32, Nos. 8-9, pp. 4618-4628.

Sata, V., Tangpagasit, J., Jaturapitakkul, C., and Chindaprasirt, P. (2012).

“Effect of W/B ratios on pozzolanic reaction of biomass ashes in

Portland cement matrix.” Cem. Concr. Comp., Vol. 34, No. 1, pp.

94-100.

Saul, A. G. A. (1951). “Principles underlying the steam curing of

concrete at atmospheric pressure.” Magazine of Conc. Res., Vol. 2,

No. 6, pp. 127-140.

Shafiq, N. (2011). “Degree of hydration and compressive strength of

conditioned samples made of normal and blended cement system.”

KSCE J. of Civil Eng., Vol. 15, No. 7, pp. 1253-1257.

Sharifi, Y. (2012). “Structural performance of self-consolidating concrete

used in reinforced concrete beams.” KSCE J. of Civil Eng., Vol. 16,

No. 4, pp. 618-626.

Teo, D. C. L., Mannan, M. A., and Kurian, V. J. (2010). “Durability of

lightweight concrete OPS concrete under different curing conditions.”

Materials and Structures, Vol. 43, pp. 1-13.

Wongkeo, W., Thongsanitgarn, P., and Chaipanich, A. (2012). “Compressive

strength and drying shrinkage of fly ash-bottom ash-silica fume

multi-blended cement mortars.” Materials & Design, Vol. 36, pp.

655-662.

Woo, S. K., Song, Y. C., and Won, J.-P. (2011). “Enhanced durability

performance of face slab concrete in Concrete-Faced Rock-filled

Dam using fly ash and PVA fibre.” KSCE J. of Civil Eng., Vol. 15,

No. 5, pp. 875-882.

Zhao, H., Sun, W., Wu, X., and Gao, B. (2012). “Effect of initial water-

curing period and curing condition on the properties of self-

compacting concrete.” Materials & Design, Vol. 35, pp. 194-200.

Zhutovsky, S. and Kovler, K. (2012). “Effect of internal curing on

durability-related properties of high performance concrete.” Cem.

Concr. Res., Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 20-26.

Experimental Study on Strength Gaining Characteristics of...

Documents

Transcript of Experimental Study on Strength Gaining Characteristics of...