See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271139184

A STUDY ON READY MIXED CONCRETE USING INDEPENDENT SAMPLE T-TEST

THROUGH SPSS SOFTWARE IN CHAROTAR REGION OF CENTRAL
GUJARATJournal of International Academic Research for Multidisci...

Article · December 2013

CITATIONS READS
3 2,490

4 authors, including:

Ashish H. Makwana Dr. Jayeshkumar Pitroda

Ambika Arts Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College
63 PUBLICATIONS   111 CITATIONS    304 PUBLICATIONS   913 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jaydev JAGMOHANDAS Bhavsar

Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College
58 PUBLICATIONS   97 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Feasibility Report on Recycle and Reuse of Wind Turbine Blade Waste View project

Risk Management View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ashish H. Makwana on 21 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ISSN 2320 -5083

Journal of International
Academic Research for Multidisciplinary
A Scholarly, Peer Reviewed, Monthly, Open Access, Online Research Journal

Impact Factor – 1.393

VOLUME 1 ISSUE 11 DECEMBER 2013

A GLOBAL SOCIETY FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

www.jiarm.com
A GREEN PUBLISHING HOUSE
Editorial Board

Dr. Kari Jabbour, Ph.D Er. R. Bhuvanewari Devi M. Tech, MCIHT

Curriculum Developer, Highway Engineer, Infrastructure,
American College of Technology, Ramboll, Abu Dhabi, UAE
Missouri, USA.
Sanda Maican, Ph.D.
Er.Chandramohan, M.S Senior Researcher,
System Specialist - OGP Department of Ecology, Taxonomy and Nature Conservation
ABB Australia Pvt. Ltd., Australia. Institute of Biology of the Romanian Academy,
Bucharest, Romania
Dr. S.K. Singh
Chief Scientist Dr. Reynalda B. Garcia
Advanced Materials Technology Department Professor, Graduate School &
Institute of Minerals & Materials Technology College of Education, Arts and Sciences
Bhubaneswar, India Lyceum of the Philippines University
Philippines
Dr. Jake M. Laguador
Director, Research and Statistics Center, Dr.Damarla Bala Venkata Ramana
Lyceum of the Philippines University, Senior Scientist
Philippines. Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture (CRIDA)
Hyderabad, A.P, India
Prof. Dr. Sharath Babu, LLM Ph.D
Dean. Faculty of Law, PROF. Dr.S.V.Kshirsagar, M.B.B.S,M.S
Karnatak University Dharwad, Head - Department of Anatomy,
Karnataka, India Bidar Institute of Medical Sciences,
Karnataka, India.
Dr.S.M Kadri, MBBS, MPH/ICHD,
FFP Fellow, Public Health Foundation of India Dr Asifa Nazir, M.B.B.S, MD,
Epidemiologist Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, Assistant Professor, Dept of Microbiology
Kashmir, India Government Medical College, Srinagar, India.

Dr.Bhumika Talwar, BDS Dr.AmitaPuri, Ph.D

Research Officer Officiating Principal
State Institute of Health & Family Welfare Army Inst. Of Education
Jaipur, India New Delhi, India

Dr. Tej Pratap Mall Ph.D Dr. Shobana Nelasco Ph.D

Head, Postgraduate Department of Botany, Associate Professor,
Kisan P.G. College, Bahraich, India. Fellow of Indian Council of Social Science
Research (On Deputation},
Dr. Arup Kanti Konar, Ph.D Department of Economics,
Associate Professor of Economics Achhruram, Bharathidasan University, Trichirappalli. India
Memorial College,
SKB University, Jhalda,Purulia, M. Suresh Kumar, PHD
West Bengal. India Assistant Manager,
Godrej Security Solution,
Dr. S.Raja Ph.D India.
Research Associate,
Madras Research Center of CMFR , Dr.T.Chandrasekarayya,Ph.D
Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Assistant Professor,
Chennai, India Dept Of Population Studies & Social Work,
S.V.University, Tirupati, India.
Dr. Vijay Pithadia, Ph.D,
Director - Sri Aurobindo Institute of Management
Rajkot, India.
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

A STUDY ON READY MIXED CONCRETE USING INDEPENDENT SAMPLE T-TEST

THROUGH SPSS SOFTWARE IN CHAROTAR REGION OF CENTRAL GUJARAT

CHIRAG R. PARMAR*
ASHISH H. MAKWANA**
JAYESHKUMAR PITRODA***
JAYDEV J. BHAVSAR****

*Final Year B. E. Civil Engg., B.V.M. Engg. College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India
**Final Year M.E. C. E. & M., B.V.M. Engg. College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India
***Assistant Professor & Research Scholar, Dept. of Civil Engg. B.V.M. Engg. College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India
****Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engg. B.V.M. Engg. College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Gujarat, India

ABSTRACT
The Indian Construction industry has been traditionally labour oriented. The pace of
mechanization in the past was very slow due to the availability of cheap and abundant labour,
lack of capital investment and highly fragmented nature of the construction sector. The Ready
Mixed Concrete is a dynamic resource for the construction industry, which must periodically
re-evaluate its position in relation to the economy, the nation, local industry, and especially
with the customer. Highly-developed economies bring changes in market conditions. A
change which has been occurring is the change from a product to a service-related market.
This change occurs earlier in mass consumer products and lags behind in more static products
like those in the construction industry. This conversion from product to service is taking
place now in the construction industry. The Ready Mixed Concrete Industry has traditionally
made its profit for Infrastructural development. Objective of this research paper is to prove
that Ready Mixed Concrete utilization is beneficial compare to Conventional Mixed Concrete
in Charotar Region of Central Gujarat. During this research work various factors interrelated
to Ready Mixed Concrete are being identified and converted into questionnaire to carry out
surveys. Software like Microsoft Excel and SPSS Statistics (Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences) are adopted to evaluate the responses collected from the people by Independent-
Samples T Test.

KEYWORDS: Ready Mixed Concrete, Construction Industry, Market Conditions,

Infrastructural Development, Management

INTRODUCTION
Ready Mixed Concrete (RMC) is a ready-to-use concrete, with predetermined mixture of
cement, aggregates, additives and water. It is manufactured in a centrally located factory
(Batching plant) according to a set recipe or as per specifications of the client. It is then

292
www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

delivered to the client’s worksite, often in special trucks (Transit mixer) capable of mixing
the ingredients of the concrete. This results in a precise mixture, allowing specialty concrete
mixtures to be developed and implemented on construction sites.
RMC is preferred to on-site concrete mixing because of the precision of the mixture and
reduced worksite confusion. It facilitates speedy construction through programmed delivery
at site and mechanized operation with consequent economy. It also decreases labour, site
supervising cost and project time, thereby resulting in savings, proper control and economy in
the use of raw materials. It assures consistent quality through accurate computerized control
of aggregates and water as per mix designs. It minimizes cement wastage due to bulk
handling and there is no dust problem and therefore, pollution-free.
Ready Mixed Concrete is a modern technique of production of concrete in large quantities
away from the actual site of placing. It is very useful in cities where demand of concrete is
very high and construction sites are in congested areas, where mixing on site is not possible.
The Supervisory and labour costs associated with production of RMC is less, and the quality
of concrete is high. It is suitable for huge industrial and residential projects where time plays
a vital role.

Fig. 1: Modern Ready Mixed Concrete Plant

(Source: Dharti RMC Pvt Ltd., Anand-Sojitra Road, Near Sunav, At & Po. Sunav, Ta.
Petlad, Dist. Anand)
LITERATURE REVIEW
This method of mixing concrete was first invented and patented by Germans more than 100
years ago in 1903. But for a few years this method did not become popular as there was no
suitable method of transporting the concrete to construction sites. The first commercial
delivery of concrete was made in 1913 in Baltimore, USA using a small drum type transit
mixer and the first ready mix concrete plant was set up at Heathrow airport site in London in 1931.
The Ready mix concrete business in India is still in its infancy; where as in developed
countries, nearly 80% of cement consumption is in the form of ready mix concrete and 20%
in the form of recast. In India, ready mix concrete accounts for less than 5% of consumption,

293
www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

and as much as 82% of cement consumption is in the form of site-mixed concrete. While
70% of cement produced in a developed country like Japan is used by RMC business, in
India, only around 2% of total cement production is used by RMC.At the present, the cost
differential between Ready-mixed concrete and site mixed concrete is proving major
constraint in its growth. This problem will be resolved with the increasing awareness about
the advantages of RMC by the end consumers.
ABOUTINDEPENDENT SAMPLE T-TEST
The Independent-Samples T Test procedure compares means for two or more groups of
cases. Ideally, for this test, the subjects should be randomly assigned to two groups, so that
any difference in response is due to the treatment and not to other factors. This is not the case
if you compare average income for males and females. A person is not randomly assigned to
be a male or female. In such situations, you should ensure that differences in other factors are
not masking or enhancing a significant difference in means. Differences in average income
may be influenced by factors such as education. In the calculation of Independent-samples T
TEST, replacing calculated value greater than null hypothesis value with a plus sign and each
small value less then null hypothesis value with a minus sign.
Null hypothesis (H0) - Ready Mixed Concrete utilization is beneficial compare to
Conventional Mixed Concrete in Charotar Region of Central Gujarat. (α 0.05)
Alternative hypothesis (H1) - Ready Mixed Concrete utilization is not beneficial compare to
Conventional Mixed Concrete in Charotar Region of Central Gujarat. (α> 0.05)
INDEPENDENT-SAMPLES T TEST DEFINE GROUPS
For numeric grouping variables, define the two groups for the T test by specifying two values
or a cut point:
 Use specified values: Enter a value for Group 1 and another value for Group 2. Cases
with any other values are excluded from the analysis. Numbers need not be integers
(for example, 6.25 and 12.5 are valid).
 Cutpoint: Enter a number that splits the values of the grouping variable into two sets.
All cases with values that are less than the cutpoint form one group, and cases with
values that are greater than or equal to the cutpoint form the other group.
For string grouping variables, enter a string for Group 1 and another value for Group 2, such
as yes and no. Cases with other strings are excluded from the analysis.

294
www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

INDEPENDENT-SAMPLES T TEST OPTIONS

Confidence Interval: By default, a 95% confidence interval for the difference in means is
displayed. Enter a value between 1 and 99 to request a different confidence level.
Missing Values: When you test several variables, and data are missing for one or more
variables, you can tell the procedure which cases to include (or exclude).
 Exclude cases analysis by analysis. Each t test uses all cases that have valid data for
the tested variables. Sample sizes may vary from test to test.
 Exclude cases list wise. Each t test uses only cases that have valid data for all
variables that are used in the requested t tests. The sample size is constant across tests.
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Table 1: Independent-Samples T Test
Level of Values of Criterion details Result Hypothesis
significance
(α)
Calculated Tabulated

PART1: a] Material and Equipment cost; b] Staff and their Salary; c] Labours and their wages; d]
Ready Mixed Concrete Plant with capital Investment and Production; e] various concrete grade cost”
- Data analysis and interpretation regarding RMC Plant Manager point of view:
1: Cost of OPC per Ton
0.05 0.572 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis Cannot Accepted
if (Calculated)> 1.313, the be
value of for 29-1= 28 rejected
degree of freedom
2: Cost of Sand (per Ton)
0.05 2.299 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Not
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be Accepted
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
3: Cost of Aggregate (10 mm) per Ton
0.05 1.664 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.313, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
4: Cost of Aggregate (20 mm) per Ton
0.05 0.278 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
5: Cost of Fly ash (per Ton)
0.05 0.385 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom

295
www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

6: Cost of Superticizer (per lit.)

0.05 0.634 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis Cannot Accepted
if (Calculated)> 1.313, the be
value of for 29-1= 28 rejected
degree of freedom
7: No. of Technical staff of RMC Plant
0.05 0.350 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
8: Salary of One Technical Person (per month) working at RMC plant
0.05 0.572 1.701Reject the null hypothesis Cannot Accepted
if (Calculated)> 1.701, the be
value of for 29-1= 28 rejected
degree of freedom
9: No. of Labours required for RMC plant
0.05 0.438 1.701
Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
10: Wages of One Labour (per day) of RMC plant
0.05 0.253 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
11: Size of transit mixer used for RMC delivery to customer’s construction site
0.05 0.784 1.701
Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
12: Maximum distance required for RMC delivery to customer’s construction site
0.05 0.819 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
> 1.701, the be
value of for 29-1= 28 rejected
degree of freedom
13: Owning cost of RMC transit mixture
0.05 0.185 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
14: Operating cost of RMC transit mixture (capacity 8 cum.) per 25 km
0.05 0.319 1.701Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.313, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
15: Cost of pump used for placing of RMC

296
www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

0.05 1.007 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis rejected Accepted

if (Calculated)> 1.701, the
value of for 29-1= 28
degree of freedom
16: Approx. production of RMC per day
0.05 0.766 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
17: Capital investment of RMC plant
0.05 0.226 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
18: Cost of M 10 grade RMC per cum.
0.05 0.014 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
19: Cost of M 15 grade RMC per cum
0.05 0.626 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.313, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
20: Cost of M 20 grade RMC per cum.
0.05 0.677 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
21: Cost of M 25 grade RMC per cum.
0.05 0.021 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
22: Cost of M 30 grade RMC per cum.
0.008 1.644 2.547 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
PART 2: “a] Delivery; b] Quality; c] Quantity; d] Testing; e] Supervision; f] Placement of RMC; g]
Application and Availability of RMC”:Data analysis and interpretation regarding Contractor
and Consultant point of view
23: Get RMC Delivery in proper time
0.05 0.599 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom

297
www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

24: Get RMC in better Quality

0.05 0.467 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
25: Get RMC in required Quantity
0.05 2.036 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Not
(Calculated)> 1.313, the value be Accepted
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
26: Testing of RMC
0.05 0.009 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
27: Supervision necessary at the time of placing of RMC
0.05 0.106 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
28: Problem while placing RMC in the Formwork
0.05 0.129 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.313, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
29: Any type of action preferred when RMC hardened before Placing
0.05 1.448 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
30: Possible to use RMC for small projects
0.05 0.739 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.313, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
31: Possible to use RMC in under water construction work
0.05 0.100 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
32: Type of response get from RMC plant Manager
0.05 0.500 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
33: Uniform size of aggregate used in RMC

298
www.jiarm.com
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

0.006 1.339 2.669 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted

(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of or 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
34: Wastage produced of RMC at the time of placing
0.05 0.395 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.313, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
35: Change in quality of RMC when mixing admixture
0.05 0.022 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom
36: Availability of RMC in Charotar region
0.05 0.493 1.701 Reject the null hypothesis if Cannot Accepted
(Calculated)> 1.701, the value be
of for 29-1= 28 degree of rejected
freedom

CONCLUSIONS
Following conclusions are drawn of Ready Mixed Concrete by Independent - Samples T Test:
 In Independent-Samples T Test, 3 Categories (Ready Mixed Concrete plant manager,
Contractor, Consultant) are considered as a grouping variable and after the analysis
concluded that 94.44% variables are accepted at ≤ 5% level of significance (糠) and
5.56% variables are not accepted.
 So, Hypothesis (Ready Mixed Concrete utilization is beneficial compare to
Conventional Mixed Concrete in Charotar Region of Central Gujarat.) is successfully
proved by Independent-Samples T Test.

REFERENCES
1. A K Jain, India, “Ready-Mixed Concrete growth prospects in India”, Grasim Industries
Ltd,27th Conference on OUR WORLD IN CONCRETE & STRUCTURES: 29 - 30 August
2002, Singapore.
2. A.R.Santhkumar, “Concrete Technology”, Oxford higher education.
3. Ashish H. Makwana, Prof. Jayeshkumar Pitroda, “A Study on Region wise Price Variation of
Construction Raw Materials using Frequency Analysis through SPSS Software”, International
Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), Impact Factor 0.537, ISSN: 2231-
5381, Volume 4, Issue 7, July 2013, Pg. 3233 – 3242.
4. Bharat G. Bhudiya, Sanjay S. Narola, Ashish H. Makwana, Jayeshkumar Pitroda,
“Assessment on Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Blocks using Frequency Analysis through
SPSS software in Charotar Region of Central Gujarat”, Journal of International Academic

299
www.jiarm.com
 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESEARCH FOR MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 11, December 2013

Research for Multidisciplinary (JIARM), Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN: 2320-5083, Volume 1,
Issue 10, November 2013, Pg. 367 – 386.
5. Concrete Basics, http://www.cement.org/basics/concreteproducts_readymix.asp
6. Darsh Belani, Ashish H. Makwana, Jayeshkumar Pitroda, “A study of evaluation Criterias for
Renewable Energy Resources using Frequency Analysis through SPSS software”, Journal of
International Academic Research for Multidisciplinary (JIARM), Impact Factor 1.393, ISSN:
2320-5083, Volume 1, Issue 10, November 2013, Pg. 350 – 366.
7. Dhrumil S. Chokshi, Ashish H. Makwana, Jayeshkumar Pitroda, “A Preliminary Study on
Importances of Fly-ash Bricks and Clay Bricks in Construction Industry through SPSS
software”, International Journal of Civil, Structural, Environmental and Infrastructure
Engineering Research and Development (IJCSEIERD), Impact Factor 5.4829, ISSN(P):
2249-6866; ISSN(E): 2249-7978, Vol. 3, Issue 5, December 2013, 125-132, © TJPRC Pvt.
Ltd. 5.
8. Hitesh D. Bambhava, Prof. Jayeshkumar Pitroda, Prof. Jaydev J. Bhavsar, “A Comparative
Study On Bamboo Scaffolding And Metal Scaffolding In Construction Industry Using
Statistical Methods”, International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT),
Impact Factor 0.537, ISSN: 2231-5381, Volume 4, Issue 6, June 2013, Pg. 2330 – 2337.
9. John Albinger and Jaime Moreno, “Ready-Mixed Concrete”, American Concrete Institute,
Advancing concrete knowledge, Volume 97, Pages: 323-326.
10. Independent-Samples T Test, IBM SPSS
Statisticshttp://pic.dhe.ibm.com/infocenter/spssstat/v20r0m0/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.ibm.sp
ss.statistics.help%2Fidh_ttin.htm
11. IS 4926 - 2003, Indian Standard, Ready mixed concrete – Code of Practice (Second
Revision), BIS, New Delhi.
12. M.S. Shetty, “Concrete Technology”, Theory and Practice, S.Chand- New Delhi.
13. Cement & Ready-mix concrete, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ready-mix_concrete
14. P. Ganesh Prabhu, D. Ambika, “Study on Behaviour of Workers in Construction Industry to
Improve Production Efficiency”, International Journal of Civil, Structural, Environmental and
Infrastructure Engineering Research and Development (IJCSEIERD), Impact Factor 5.4829,
ISSN 2249-6866 Vol. 3, Issue 1, Mar 2013, 59-66, © TJPRC Pvt Ltd. 5.
15. Ready mix concrete plant in Kerala, Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation
(KSIDC), September 2012
http://www.emergingkerala2012.org/pdf/Manufacturing,%20Engg%20&%20Automotive/1.%
20Project%20Profile-ReadymixConcrete%20Plant.pdf
16. Richard A Johnson, “Miller & Freund’s Probability and Statistics for Engineers”, Seventh
Edition, Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi-110 001, 2005

300
www.jiarm.com

View publication stats