Concrete by Preplaced Aggregate Method Using Silica Fume and Polypropylene Fibres

2022

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3390/ma15061997
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Preplaced aggregate concrete (PAC) is prepared in two steps, with the coarse aggregate being initially laid down in the formwork, after which a specialised grout is injected into it. To enhance the properties of concrete and to reduce the emission of CO2 produced during the production of cement, supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) are used to partially substitute ordinary Portland cement (OPC). In this study, 100 mm × 200 mm (diameter x height) PAC cylinders were cast with 10 per cent of cement being substituted with silica fume; along with that, 1.5% dosage of Macro polypropylene fibres were also introduced into the coarse aggregate matrix. Compressive strength test, splitting tensile strength test, mass loss at 250 °C, and compressive strength at 250 °C were performed on the samples. PAC samples with 10% of cement replaced with Silica Fume (SPAC) were used as control samples. The primary objective of this study was to observe the effect of the addition of Polypropylene fibres to PAC having Silica fume as SCM (FRPAC). The aforementioned tests showed that FRPAC had a lower compressive strength than that of the control mix (SPAC). FRPAC had greater tensile strength than that of NPAC and SPAC. Mass loss at 250 °C was greater in SPAC compared to FRPAC. The compressive strength loss at 250 °C was significantly greater in FRPAC compared to SPAC. FRPAC exhibited a greater strain for the applied stress, and their stress-strain curve showed that FRPAC was more ductile than SPAC.