Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 General study
Most of the Structures such as deck slab of bridge, highway and airfield pavements are often
exposed to repetitive (fluctuating) loads by moving traffic, which cause a structure to failure at a
load level below its static capacity. Thus, fatigue loads (repeated loads) should be taken into
consideration in the design of concrete structures.
Reactive powder concrete (RPC) is a new type of concrete material. Compared with
conventional concrete, RPC has ultra-high strength, high toughness and high durability.
Combining the technical benefits and in-place costs, RPC was found to meet the prerequisites of
value engineering particularly in airport and high pavements, in bridge deck overlays, curtain
walls, sewer pipes, cavitation and erosion resistance structures such as spillways, sluiceways,
bridge piers and navigation locks, precast concrete products, earthquake resistance structures,
missile silos and energy dessipaters.
Rational design of concrete structures requires an accurate knowledge of concrete properties
under anticipated loading conditions. A large volume of information is available on behavior of
RPC under static loading conditions. However, relatively limited information is available on
behavior of RPC subjected to dynamic loadings.
In many applications, particularly in pavements and bridge deck overlays, the flexural fatigue
strength and endurance limit are important design parameters because these structures are
designed on the basis of fatigue load cycles. Plain concrete has fatigue endurance limit of 50 to
55 percent of its static flexural strength. In RPC using the same cross section as plain concrete
could result in longer life span or high load capacity or both. In this present work an attempt has
been made to evaluate the fatigue behavior of the new steel and polypropylene fibers reinforced
RPC. Hence, the study of effects of repeated loads on RPC are to be studied in particular.


1.2 Fatigue
Structures that are subjected to repeated loads are susceptible to failure due to fatigue. Fatigue is
a process of progressive permanent internal changes in the materials that occur under the actions
of cyclic loadings. These changes can cause progressive growth of cracks present in the concrete
system and eventual failure of structures when high levels of cyclic loads applied for short times
or low levels of loads are applied for long times.
Many concrete structures such as highway pavements, highway bridges, railroad bridges, airport
pavements and bridges, marine structure, etc. are subjected to dynamic loads. Fatigue strength
data of concrete and other materials that are used in these structures for obtaining their safe,
effective and economical design are needed. A low cycle fatigue is important for structures
subjected to earthquake loads.
Although fatigue research began almost one hundred years ago, there is still lack of
understanding concerning the nature of fracture mechanism in cementitious composite materials
due to fatigue. This is partly due to complex nature of structure of such materials and their
properties are influenced greatly by a large number of parameters. Fatigue behavior of concrete
is also influenced by several parameters such as type of loadings, stress level, rate of loading,
material properties, environmental conditions, etc. The concrete properties are dependent upon
the variables such as water-to-cement ratio, cement content, air content, curing technique, age,
admixture content, etc.

1.2.1 Terms Related to Fatigue

The following are the most common terms used in fatigue analysis of materials.
1. Maximum stress (f
max
): It is the maximum value of stress cycle, tensile stress being
considered positive and compressive stress negative.
2. Minimum stress (f
min
): It is the lowest value of stress cycle, tensile stress being
considered positive and compressive stress negative.
3. Stress level (S): This is defined as ratio of maximum stress in stress cycle to static
flexure stress.
4. Stress ratio (R): This is defined as ratio of minimum stress to maximum stress in stress
cycle.
5. Mean stress (f
m
): It is defined as an average value of the maximum and minimum stresses
in a stress cycle, that is, f
m
= 1/2 (f
max
+ f
min
).
6. Fatigue life (N): It is defined as the number of cycles which could be withstood for a
given experimental condition.
7. Fatigue strength (f): It is defined as the intensity of cyclic stress that can be withstood for
a given number of cycles.
8. Endurance limit or Fatigue limit (f
e
): It is defined as the intensity of cyclic stress that can
be withstood for a given number of cycles.

1.3 Objectives of the present study.
The main objectives of the study are:
To evaluate the fatigue performance of RPC by conducting flexural fatigue tests on
beams subjected to repeated cyclic loading.
To evaluate the fatigue performance of RPC with replacement of steel fibers by different
percentages of polypropylene fibers conducting flexural fatigue tests on beams subjected
to repeated cyclic loading.
Linear regression model is developed for prediction of fatigue life and the failure stress.





Chapter 3
EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

3.1 Introduction
In order to investigate the behavior of RPC under repeated cyclic loading, several
experimental works have been undertaken. Details of materials employed, mix proportions,
mixing sequences, design of experiments, specimen preparation, experimental tests and
apparatus used will be presented in this chapter. In general, the experimental programme is
mainly to produce, to find out the optimal composition for producing RPC using local available
materials.
3.2 Details of RPC Materials
In this experiment, the constituents used in the RPC mixtures are different from the
conventional concrete mixtures, which include ordinary Portland cement, silica fume, silica sand,
quartz powder, superplasticizer, steel fibers, polypropylene fibers and water. Details of each
constituent are recapitulated as follows.
3.2.1 Ordinary Portland Cement
The cement used throughout the experiments is Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) (Table
3.1) that complies with IS: 12269-1987 and has a 28-day mortar compressive strength of 53
MPa. The density is 3120 kg/m
3
and the fineness is 3390 cm
2
/g. The initial and final setting
times are 30 minutes and 565 minutes respectively. The chemical composition is given in Table
3.1 and confirms to IS: 4032-1985.
3.2.2 Silica fume
Silica fume 920 D from Elkem India Ltd. (Table 3.2) that complies with ASTM C 1240
95a and IS:15388-2003 is used for the present study. The silica fume is extremely fine with
particle size of 0.1 m. It exists in grey powder form that contains latently reactive silicon
dioxide and no chlorides or other potentially corrosive substances. The dry bulk density is 0.65 +
0.1 kg. The maximum dosage recommended in literature is about 30 % of cement content by
weight. For optimum results in concrete, it was suggested to use in conjunction with
Polycarbocilyic ether superplasticizer from its range.
Table 3.1 Properties of 53 Grade OPC
Sl. No. Particulars Test Results IS 12269 Req.
Chemical Properties:
1
CaO 0.7SO
3
2.8 SiO
2
+ 1.2Al
2
O
3
+ 0.65 Fe
2
O
3
Lime Saturation Factor (%)
0.86
0.80 Min

1.02 Max
2 TriCalcium silicate (C
3
S) 45.38% -
3 DiCalcium silicate (C
2
S) 27.06% -
4 TriCalcium aluminate (C
3
A) 7.04% -
5 Tetra Calcium Aluminoferrate (C
4
AF)
(C
4
AF
13.44% -
6 Al
2
O
3
/ Fe
2
O
3
Alumina Iron Ratio (%) 1.29 0.66 Min
7 Insoluble Residue (% by mass) 1.36 3.00 Max
8 Magnesia (% by mass) 0.86 6.00 Max
9 Sulphuric Anhydride (% by mass) 2.12 3.00 Max
10 Total Loss on Ignition (% by mass) 2.97 4.00 Max
11 Total Chlorides (% by mass) 0.003 0.10 Max
12 Performance Improver: Limestone (%) 2.00 Not Specified
Physical Properties:
13 Fineness (Specific surface) 303 m
2
/kg 225 m
2
/kg Min
14
Soundness test



a. By Le Chatelier

0.8 mm

10.0 mm Max

b. By Autoclave 0.048 % 0.8 % Max
15
Compressive strength

a. 3 days

42.0 MPa

27.0 MPa Min

b. 7 days

54.7 MPa

37.0 MPa Min

c. 28 days 71.0 MPa 53.0 MPa Min
16 Specific gravity 3.15 Not Specified
17 Particle Size Range 31 m 7.5 m

m m m m
Not Specified
Manufacturer: UltraTech Cement Ltd

Table 3.2 Physical and chemical properties of silica fume
Sl. No. Properties Silica fume
1 Form Ultra fine amorphous powder
2 Colour Grey
3 Specific gravity 2.2
4 Bulk Density 700 kg/m
3
Densified
5 Specific surface 25 m
2
/g
6 Particle size ~15m
7 Sio
2
90%
8 H
2
O 1%
9 Make Elkem

3.2.3 Silica Sand
The all of mixes were produced using silica sand which replaced the coarse aggregate
from conventional concrete. The silica sand was brought from Mangalore Karnataka. It is
yellowish-white high purity silica sand. The particle sizes used in the experiments is 90 m
600 m
3.2.4 Quartz Powder
The crushed quartz used in the experiments is white powdered quartz flour which acts as
additive for cement and sand particles and in turn increasing the density. The quartz flour is
brought from Bangalore, India. The particle size ranged from 10 m to 45 m is employed. The
specific gravity of quartz powder is 2.6.
3.2.5 Superplasticizer
The very low w/b (cement + silica fume) ratio used in RPC is only possible with the use of
superplasticizer (SP) to obtain its workability. In this research, the second generation of super
plasticizer called glenium B-233 and ASTP G - 199 surtec from BASF India Ltd. were used. The
superplasticizer are an extremely high water-reducing agent that meets the requirements for
IS:9103-1999. Descriptions are provided in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3 Properties of Super Plasticizer
Sl. No. Properties Glenium B-233 ASTP G-199
1 Type of S.P. Polycarboxylic ether Polycarboxylate polymer
2 Appearance Light brown Dark yellow
3 Density 1.09 1.12
4 pH Value 8 6
5 Sp.Gravity 1.1 1.2
6 Solid content 30% 40%
7
Recommended
dosage
0.5 to 1.5% 0.3 to 1.2%

3.3 Particle Size Distribution of RPC Materials
Table 3.4 Particle size distribution for Sand
Sieve (mm) Mass (g) % retained
Cumulative %
retained
% passing
4.75 0 0.0 0.0 100.0
2.18 8 0.4 0.4 99.6
1.75 14 0.7 1.1 98.9
1.00 18 0.9 2.0 98.0
0.60 51 2.6 4.6 95.5
0.50 60 3.0 7.6 92.5
0.30 710 35.5 43.1 57.0
0.25 695 34.8 77.8 22.2
0.15 395 19.8 97.6 2.5
0.09 42 2.1 99.7 0.4
0.063 7 0.4 100.0 0.0
Pan 0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Total mass 2000 gm


Table 3.6 Particle size distribution for Quartz powder
Sieve (mm) Mass (g) % retained
Cumulative %
retained
% passing
0.09 0 0 0 100
0.075 25.20 25.24 25.24 74.76
0.063 54.65 54.73 79.97 20.03
pan 20.00 20.03 100.00 0.00

Table 3.5 Particle size distribution for Cement
Sieve
(mm)
Mass
(g)
%
retained
Cumulative
% retained
%
passing
0.15 - - - 100
0.09 3.53 3.53 3.53 96.47
0.075 45.61 45.66 49.19 50.81
0.063 43.99 44.04 93.23 6.77
pan 6.76 6.77 100.00 0.00


Fig
ure
3.1
Par
ticl
e
siz
e
dist
rib
uti
on
gra
ph

Th
e
par
ticl
e
siz
e
dist
rib
uti
on of cement, sand and quartz powder is shown in the figure 3.1. The size of cement particle
ranges from 60 - 200 m, the size of quartz powder is ranges from 80 - 150 m and that of sand
is ranging from 90 m to 4.0 mm. From the figure 3.1 it is clear that quartz powder will fill the
void space between cement particles and sand particles.
3.5 Production Process of RPC
This research aims to study the production process utilizing local available materials in
India. RPC was produced under laboratory conditions, with the least complicated process. Since
the properties of RPC are dependent on the type and quality of the materials used, concreting
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e

p
a
s
s
i
n
g

Particle size (mm)
Particle size distribution graph
Sand
Cement
Quartz
Powder
practice, curing conditions, workmanship, etc., RPC mixes developed in one place may not be
applicable to another place where the local conditions are not quite the same. Therefore,
contextual information needs to be considered in the production of RPC. So far, there is no
guideline on how RPC could be produced in India and in world. The production process of RPC
in this research is based on some previous works by other researchers, as well as our trial-and-
error approaches.
3.5.1 Brief Production Guidelines
A set of brief production guidelines proposed for producing RPC using local available
materials in this study is summarized in the following:
A. Constituent materials and Content used
A 1 Cement
Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) that complies with IS:12269-1987 is to be used for the
production of RPC. Cement with low or zero C
3
A content is preferred as it would affect
the performance of RPC. The cement content normally used for the production of RPC is
700 1000 kg/m
3
.
A 2 Mineral Additive
A 2.1 Silica fume
Silica fume that complies with IS:15388-2003 can be used. It is the smallest particle with
the average particle size of 0.1 m. For production of RPC, silica fume content is
normally 15-35% of the weight of cement.
A 2.2 Quartz Powder
Local white crushed quartz flour with particle size ranges from 10 m to 45 m is
employed which helps to reduce bleeding and segregation, and modify the CaO/SiO2
ratio of the binder. The content is generally 20-30% of the weight of cement.
A 3 Aggregate (Silica sand)
Local silica sand with high purity of silica with average particles size ranges from 150
m and 600 m is used. It is dimensionally the largest granular material in RPC mix.
Silica sand constitutes the largest percentage in RPC mix, which is about 1.4 times the
weight of cement.
A 4 Water
Water for mixing and curing concrete shall be clean, fresh water taken from the public
supply.
A 5 Chemical admixture
A chemical admixture is defined as a constituent material of concrete other than
cementitious materials, mineral additives, aggregates and water. The admixtures shall
comply and be used in accordance with the suppliers recommendation. For production
of RPC, superplasticizer which possesses extremely high water-reducing abilities that
meets the requirements for superplasticising admixtures according to IS:9103-1999
should be used. Any chemical admixtures containing chlorides are prohibited. Large
quantities between 3 and 3.5% by weight of binder are generally added to the RPC mix.
B. Maximum Water-to Binder Ratio
The water-to-binder ratio of the RPC minimum shall obtained 0.14.
C. Mixing Procedures
C 1 Dry mixing powders (including cement, silica fume, quartz powder and silica sand)
for about 3 minutes with a low speed of about 140 rpm.
C 2 Addition of sixty percentage volume of water containing half amount of
superplasticizer, and mix for about 3 minutes with a higher speed of about 285 rpm.
C 3 Addition of the remaining water and superplasticizer, and mixed for about 10
minutes with a higher speed of about 285 rpm.
D. Curing
Water curing is the most convenient, practical and economical method in curing concrete.
Temperature of water at 27 + 1C is normally applied.
To achieve higher compressive strength of RPC at early edge accelerated curing at 65
0
C
and 90
0
C is useful.

3.5.2 Observation
Applying the above production guidelines for producing RPC, some observations are
made during concrete mixing. A long mixing time is required for the RPC mixes for ensuring
that dry-balled particles have become plastic-flowable. The mixing process for the RPC takes
about 15 to 20 minutes to complete. The extended mixing time was necessary to fully disperse
silica fume, break up any agglomerated particles, and allow superplasticizer for developing its
full potential.. This also implies that RPC requires long mixing time because it contains only
very fine materials. It is suggested that mixers with a high speed are recommended to break up
any agglomerated particles so as to get a homogeneous and cohesive mix, as well as shorten the
mixing time.
3.5.3 Observations during the production of RPC
3.5.3.1 Observations during compaction
Since RPC requires the use of very low w/b ratio and very high cementitious materials content,
the RPC mixes are generally thick, sticky and viscous. Compaction on such a low workability
concrete or mortar would be a problem. For w/b ratio as low as 0.14, compaction by vibration
table would not be applicable as there is not enough water content for proper compaction to take
place. Hand tamping using a tamping rod would be the only choice. However, hand tamping
done by different people would not be the same as the force that each of them uses would be
different. The void content in the bulk of particles in the paste may vary greatly from good
compaction to bad compaction. This may seriously affect the performance of RPC. Adding more
superplasticizer can increase the workability. However, there is a limit to the dosage of
superplasticizer that can be added. Overdosage of superplasticizer can lead to chemical
incompatibility problems and excessive retardation of the setting time (Kwan, 2003). It is
therefore necessary to find out an optimal mix that can make compaction easy.
3.5.3.2 Industrialization problems
(a) High costs
Production of RPC places more stringent requirements on material selection and
optimization of composite materials than conventional concrete. In a typical RPC mix design, the
least costly components of conventional concrete (coarse and fine aggregates) have been
replaced by more expensive materials (Silica sand and quartz powder). Silica fume is also
incorporated in RPC. Requirements of RPC for high quality raw materials result in a substantial
increase in cost over that of conventional concrete (about 3 to 4 times higher). Moreover, the
entire mixing time for RPC takes about 15 minutes which is much longer than that of
conventional concrete which takes only about 5 minutes; and the setting time for RPC is longer
because of the use of high dosage of superplasticizer. This lengthens the entire construction
period and thus increases the cost.
On the other hand, a very high speed mixer is needed to effectively break down those fine
particles, which also leads to high consumption of energy and cost. RPC, due to its high cost,
will not replace ordinary concrete where the conventional concrete can economically meet the
performance criteria (Dauriac, 1997). Though RPC has the potential to structurally compete with
steel, the high production costs of RPC may hinder the construction industry from accepting such
products.

(b) Lack of standards and code of practice
The state of knowledge of RPC is very low in the Indian construction industry. This new
concrete technology has not been acknowledged and vigorously researched locally, resulting in a
problem as the knowledge must be transferred to those doing the work so that the advancement
becomes a state of the practice involvement through research, development and technology
transfer stages is a key to the successful application of new concrete technology in routine design
and practice.
Since the mechanical properties of RPC are different from those of normal strength
concrete (NSC), the existing design codes which are only applicable to structures made of NSC,
need to be modified. For the full implementation of RPC, it would be a long term process and
may require many years of effort. Other barriers which may hinder the construction industry
from implementation of
RPC may include:
Inadequate research
No awareness of need for RPC
The production process to complicated
May got opposition from construction industries and market due to high cost


Chapter 4
MIX DESIGN OF RPC
The reactive powder concrete mixtures with different dosage of silica fume, and with
quartz powder are designed for different w/b ratio. Table 4.1 provides the details of the RPC mix
design which are based on some published recommended compositions (Richard and Cheyrezy,
1995; Cheyrezy et al., 1995; Washer et al., 2004; Shaheen and Shrive,2006). The RPC mixes are
produced using mortar mixer with a speed of about 140-285 revolutions per minute (rpm). The
mix design obtained using mix design procedure of high performance concrete given by
P.C.Aitcin [24].
The volume of cement content like 900 kg/m
3
are considered in the present study. The
Silica fume content of 15 - 20 % by weight of cement was considered. Quartz powder of 10 - 20
% by volume of cement was added to the mixes. The superplasticizer of 4 % by volume of
cement was added to the mixes. The water binder ratio of 0.22 was selected for the mixes.
The details of mix design are are given below:
Table 4.1 Properties of raw material
Sl.No. Material Specific gravity
1 Cement 3.15
2 Silica fume 2.2
3 Quartz Powder 2.6
4 Quartz sand 2.6
5 Super Plasticizer 1.1 to 1.2
6 Water 1



The two different types of fibers used with different percentage in Control RPC as shown below
Table 4.2 percentage of fibers used in RPC
Types of
fibers
Percentage of fibers used
Control RPC RPC RPCPP1 RPCPP2 RPCPP3
Steel fibers
0 2% volume
of concrete
0 0 0
Polypropylene
fibers
0 0 0.2% by
weight of
cement
0.275% by
weight of
cement
0.35% by
weight of
cement

Trial 1: Cement - 900 kg/m
3
and Silica fume - 20 % [without quartz powder]
Cement = 900 kg/m
3
Silica fume = 180 kg/m
3
Water binder = 0.18 % = 194.4 ltr
Super plasticizer = 2 % = 18 ltr
Volume of cement = 900/3.15 1/1000 = 0.285 Cum
Volume of Silica fume = 180/2.2 1/1000 = 0.081 Cum
Volume of water = 0.194 Cum
Volume of super plasticizer = 0.018 Cum
Volume of sand = [1 - (0.285 + 0.081 + 0.194 + 0.018)]
= 0.422
= 0.422 2.6 1000
= 1097.2 kg
Extra water for SSD condition = 2 % = (216+23)
= 240 ml
Table 4.3 Material proportion for 1 kg of Cement
Cement Silica fume Sand Water Superplastisizer
1 0.20 1.219 0.240 0.018

With quartz powder
Volume of quartz powder = 360/2.6 = 0.138 Cum
Volume of sand = 1 - (0.285 + 0.081 + 0.194 + 0.018 + 0.138)
= 1 - 0.716 = 0.284 2.6 1000
= 738.4/900
= 0.820 1200
= 984 gm















Chapter 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Static Compressive Strength
Standard 150x150x150 mm cubes were tested for 28 days compressive strength in accordance
with I.S. 516-1959 using Servo controlled compression testing machine of 3000 kN capacity.
The maximum compressive load on the specimen was recorded as that load at which the
specimen failed to take any further increase in load. The compressive strength was calculated by
dividing the maximum compressive load obtained by area on which the load was applied.
Average of three samples was taken as the representative value of compressive strength of each
batch of concrete. The values of compressive strengths obtained are shown in Table 5.1. Fig 5.1
shows the testing facility.
Table 5.1 Average Static Compressive Strength Test Results
Batch
No.
28 day compressive strength of concrete (Mpa)
Control
RPC
RPC RPCPP1 RPCPP2 RPCPP3
1 144.6
2 118.4
3 124.8
Average 129.26


Fig. 5.1 Testing of Concrete Cube
5.1 Static Flexural Strength
To obtain the maximum and the minimum load limits for the fatigue tests, it was obligatory to
estimate the static flexural strength of concrete mixes. Standard 100x100x500 mm beam
specimens were tested for static flexural strength after of 28 days of curing under three-point
loading arrangement using a 500 kN closed-loop servo-controlled actuator. Static flexural
strength tests were carried out to determine the static flexural strength of all mixes prior to its
fatigue testing because once a specimen fails under fatigue loading, it is rather impossible to
determine the static flexural strength. The load was applied at the rate of 0.5 mm/minute. Three
specimens from a particular batch of concrete were tested and maximum load was noted from the
load-deflection curve. The rest of the specimens from a particular batch of concrete were tested
in flexural fatigue with the maximum and minimum loads in fatigue tests being determined from
the static flexural strength so obtained. Static flexural strength test results for the mixes under
study are presented in Table 5.2. The static flexural strength of RPC 29.5 Mpa .
Table 5.2 Average Static Flexural Strength Test Results
Batch
No.
28 day compressive strength of concrete (Mpa)
Control RPC RPC RPCPP1 RPCPP2 RPCPP3
1 29.5
2 33.4
3
Average 31.45

5.3 Flexural Fatigue Analysis
After the static flexural strength of a particular batch was set up, remaining specimens were from
the same batch were tested in flexural fatigue. The fatigue parameters include static flexural
strength, stress level, stress ratio and loading frequency. The load cycle characteristic value or
stress ratio R is expressed as R= fmin/fmax, where fmin and fmax refer to the minimum and
maximum fatigue stress. The stress level S is expressed as fmax/fr, where fr is the static
flexural strength. The fatigue tests were performed with stress level ranging from 0.5 to 0.3 and
at constant stress ratio value of 0.1. The test was carried out in load control mode using a
continuous sinusoidal waveform with a loading frequency of 2 Hz. The test was continued until
the failure of limit was encountered. In this study, fatigue limit is defined as when either the
testing specimen fails or two million cycles limit reached without failure.
Table 5.3 Fatigue Life data obtained experimentally for Mixes under study
Stress Levels
(S)
Mix
Control RPC RPC RPCPP1 RPCPP2 RPCPP3
0.3
2000000
0.4
2000000
0.5
1202000

From the fatigue test data obtained for the different types concretes under investigation S-N
curves are developed using linear regression models, considering log normal distribution. The
linear regression model is of the form (y = ax + c) in which stress ratio (S) is taken on Y-axis and
Log (N) values are taken on the X-axis.

Figure 5.2 Relationship between stress ratio (R) and Log (N)









y = -0.6783x + 4.6243
R = 0.75
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
6.05 6.1 6.15 6.2 6.25 6.3 6.35
S
t
r
e
s
s

L
e
v
e
l


(
S
)

Number of cycles (N)
RPC
RPC
Linear (RPC)
Chapter 6
CONCLUSIONS
1. The maximum compressive strength of 129.26 MPa is achieved with cement
content of 900 kg/m
3
with water binder ratio of 0.22.
The numbers of cycles increases as stress level decreases from 0.5 to 0.3.