Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 619–624

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

A study on the properties of fresh self-consolidating glass concrete (SCGC)

Her-Yung Wang *, Wen-Liang Huang
Department of Civil Engineering, National Kaohsiung University of Applied Sciences, Kaohsiung 807, Taiwan, ROC

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The Taiwanese production of TFT–LCD front-panels comprises a global share of 43%, the highest produc-
Received 4 March 2009 tion rate in the world. Inevitably, a large amount of waste is produced in the fabrication process. How to
Received in revised form 18 August 2009 deal with waste LCD glass is an important work. In this study, the water-to-binder ratios were 0.28, 0.32,
Accepted 19 August 2009
and 0.36, and four kinds of sand replaced by glass were used at volume with replacement ratios of 0%,
Available online 6 October 2009
10%, 20%, and 30%. Fly ash, blast furnace slag and superplasticizer were added and blended by means
of a simple SCC mixing design method. The objective is to recycle waste LCD glasses in SCC. Results
Keywords:
showed that the slump flow of self-compacting glass concrete (SCGC) increased with higher glass sand
Waste LCD glass
Self-compacting glass concrete (SCGC)
replacement. This is mainly because waste LCD glass is hydrophobic, an increase in efficient water con-
Fresh property tent resulting content. V-funnel testing and U-test indicated that, when the glass sand replacement
increases, the time required to flow and pass through the space between the steel bars increases, mainly
because the unit weight is reduced. The air content and unit weight would be raised with glass sand con-
tents decreasing. Hence, the partial replacement of sand by waste LCD glass can meet JAPAN SOCIETY OF
CIVIL EGINEERS (JSCE) SCC R2 property standards.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Self-consolidating concrete (SCC) is a new type of high-perfor-
mance concrete characterized by its ability to flow under its own
weight and achieve good consolidation without any mechanical
vibration. Appropriate estimates of the maximum lateral pressure
exerted on formwork and its rate of drop with time until cancella-
tion are important to reduce formwork costs and facilitate the
scheduling of concrete placement [1]. Due to the differences in
mixture design, placement and consolidation techniques, the
strength and durability of SCC may be different than those of nor-
mal concrete and thus require thorough investigation [2]. The en-
hanced cohesion can ensure a better suspension of solid particles
in the fresh concrete and, therefore, good deformability and filling
capability during the spreading of fresh concrete around various
obstacles [3–5]. Because SCC has a nice filling ability, it can reduce
the honey comb produced in construction and get high quality
structures.
The global TFT–LCD market share of Taiwan has reached 43%,
ranking number one in the world, thus making Taiwan the ‘‘key
manufacturer of global flat panel displays” [6]. With such a great
rise of output, the manufacturing process leads to considerable
amounts of waste materials, such as waste LC glass from defective
goods and leftovers. Hence, the proper disposal of waste LC glass is
an urgent issue. The use of recycled waste glasses in Portland ce-
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 7 3814526x5237; fax: +886 7 3961321.
E-mail address: wangho@cc.kuas.edu.tw (H.-Y. Wang).
ment and concrete has attracted much interest worldwide due to
increased disposal costs and environmental concerns. Thus, glass
can be used as a cement replacement in Portland cement concrete
[7–13]. Many studies have focused on the uses of waste glasses as
aggregates for cement concrete or as cement replacements
[10,11,14,15]. The proper composition ratio of waste LCD glass to
sand in early-high-strength waste glass controlled low strength
materials concrete (WGCLSM) can be determined by using differ-
ent amounts of glass sand [13,16]. Waste glass has replaced fine
aggregate glass up to 20% in masonry blocks [17]. Chen et al.
(2006) investigated the properties of concretes containing various
waste E-glass particle contents [18]. Concrete with glass aggre-
gates requires higher water content than conventional aggregates
to reach the same workability [19]. In some studies, the use of
the waste glasses as aggregates did not have a marked effect on
the workability of concrete, but it did decrease the slump, air con-
tent and fresh unit weight [20,21]. The slump of concrete generally
increases with an increasing percentage of replacement glass sand
[22]. Glass contains large amounts of silicon and calcium and is
theoretically a Portland material. Its physical properties (e.g., den-
sity, compressive strength, elasticity modulus, thermal expansion
coefficient and thermal conductivity coefficient) are very close to
those of concrete. Thus, it is feasible to crush waste glass and
add it to concrete as aggregate. The use of crushed waste glass as
a coarse aggregate in concrete generally decreases the slump, air
content and density of fresh concrete [20,23].
The compressive, flexural and indirect tensile strengths as well
as Schmidt hardness decrease in proportion with an increase in

0950-0618/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.08.047
620 H.-Y. Wang, W.-L. Huang / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 619–624

waste glass aggregates. The strength noticeably decreases when Table 3

the glass content is more than 20% [24]. Glass is hydrophobic; Aggregate and glass sand physical properties.

added to concrete, it can reduce water absorption and drying Items Coarse Fine Glass Regulatory
shrink age [25]. The deleterious alkali-silica reaction (ASR) has aggregate aggregate sand
been a major concern with such concrete [26]. Meyer et al. [25] re- Particle density (g/cm3) 2.62 2.57 2.45 ASTM C128
port some of the possible measures to mitigate ASR. These include ASTM C127
grinding glasses to a particle size less than 300 lm, using mineral Water absorption (%) 0.7 1.2 0.4 ASTM C128
ASTM C127
admixtures, using alkali-resistant glass, sealing concrete to keep it Fineness modulus (FM) 5.02 3.22 3.37 ASTM C136
dry or using low alkali cement [27]. Dmax (mm) 125 23.6 11.8 ASTM C136
LCD waste glass regeneration and resource recovery in Taiwan Soil content (%) 0.5 1.3 ASTM C117
is an urgent issue [28]. After considering safety and cost-effective- Unit weight (kg/m3) 1530 1820 680 ASTM C29
ness; we selected waste liquid crystal glass as the regenerating
building material in this study. We crushed it, selected glass sand
passing a No. 4 sieve to replace common sand, and blended it into
Table 4
self-compacting glass concrete (SCGC) in order to study its engi- Basic properties of superplasticizer.
neering properties, ensure that the finished concrete is qualified
Items Standards quality Testing results Regulatory
to engineering specification, and enhance resource recovery of
regenerated waste material. Density (25 ± 1 °C) 0.938–1.146 1.046 ASTM C494
pH (25 ± 1 °C) 5.4–7.4 6.5
Solid element (%) 16.6–18.4 17.3 ASTM C494
2. Experimental plan Chlorine (ppm) <2400 114.6

2.1. Materials and mixture

The cement, fly ash, and slag used in this study are local materials in compliance
with specifications in CNS61, CNS3036, and CNS12549, respectively. Particulate
waste glass sand, able to pass through a No. 8 sieve, was provided by Chi Mei Opto-
electronics. The chemical properties of the cement, fly ash, slag, and glass sand are
shown in Table 1. Gradations of coarse and fine aggregates to waste glass are shown
in Table 2. The physical properties of the aggregate and glass sand are shown in Ta-
ble 3, and the Type 1000 superplasticizer that complies with the ASTM C494 type G
admixture is described in Table 4.
In this study, the water-to-binder ratios were 0.28, 0.32, and 0.36, and four
kinds of glass sand were added at volume replacement ratios of 0%, 10%, 20%, and
30%. Fly ash, water-quenched slag and superplasticizer were added and blended
by means of a simple SCC mixing design method. The SCGC mixture proportions
are shown in Table 5.
2.2. Experimental methods
2.3. Proportion design analysis
Table 5 shows the SCC proportions. The unit cementing material can be ob-
tained by W/B and mixing water consumption. Excessive cementing material may
lead to increased hydration heat, shrinking cracks or slump loss. However, in the
case of SCC, inadequate cementing material may result in liquidity problems in
the fresh concrete. Hence, the amount of cementing material in this study was
514–661 kg/m3, with cement partially replaced by fly ash and slag. The mixing
water consumption was adjusted to 185 kg/m3 according to the test results. Be-
cause the waste LCD glass is hydrophobic with a smooth surface, a large amount
of adhesive paste is required to promote the waste LCD glass sand. However, exces-
sive water may lead to concrete separation and the deposition of aggregates. The
water consumption must be carefully controlled when mixing the concrete. The
use of a strong paste agent increases with decreasing W/B, and the SP in this study
is 1.57% of the cement. When the W/B increases, the solidity and passing time are
reduced.

In this study, a slump flow test was conducted on all fresh concrete groups. A 3. Results and analysis
flowability test and U-test were performed on SCC [29]. The JCES R2 self-compact-
ing concrete capability criterion was adopted, as shown in Table 6. The high flow 3.1. Properties of waste glass
concrete slump flow test was as per CNS14842. The self-compacting concrete obsta-
cle passage test was as per CNS14840; the self-compacting concrete flowability and
segregation resistance tests were as per CNS14841. The unit weight and air content Waste liquid crystal glass sand has a smooth surface with edges
test were as per CNS11151; the Setting time test were as per ASTM C403. and corners. The glass sand shown in Fig. 1, shows a micrograph of
the glass sand with the SEM and OM; the fineness modulus of the
Table 1 liquid crystal glass sand investigated here was 3.37, and the SSD
Cement, fly ash, slag, and glass sand chemical properties (%).
specific weight was 2.45. Several basic properties are described
Properties Cement Fly ash Slag LCD glass in the Table 3. Among the waste liquid crystal glasses, the SiO2 ra-
SiO2 20.74 48.26 35.47 62.48 tio was the highest, at about 62.48%, and it can act as a high Si
Al2O3 4.65 38.23 13.71 16.76 material, followed by Al2O3, Fe2O3, CaO, and K2O. Their chemical
Fe2O3 3.10 4.58 0.33 9.41 compositions are shown in Table 1. The results of the toxic chem-
CaO 62.85 2.84 41.00 2.70
ical leaching procedure (TCLP) test are shown in Table 7. Toxic
K2O 1.16 1.37
Na2O 0.21 0.64 chemical leaching levels are far less than the statutory criteria;
SO3 2.36 0.75 thus, the hazardous industrial waste certified standard is met.
LoI 2.11 5.38 0.95
S 0.47 3.2. Slump flow
MgO 3.43 2.92 6.60 0.20
TiO2 1.42 0.01
P2O5 0.01 As shown in Figs. 2 and 3 and Table 8, the workability of high
flow concrete will increate with the binder amount increased.

Table 2
Glass sand and coarse/fine aggregate sieve analysis.

Mesh (mm) 4.75 2.36 1.18 0.59 0.297 0.149 0.075 Plate
Fine aggregates (%) 99.4 85.3 58.1 32.3 3.1 0.2 0.0 0.0
Glass aggregates (%) 100 99.9 35.6 16.4 8.0 2.7 0.7 0.0
Mesh (mm) 75 50 37.5 25 12.5 9.5 4.75 Plate
Coarse aggregates (%) 100 100 100 100 82.0 54.0 7.0 0
 H.-Y. Wang, W.-L. Huang / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 619–624 621

Table 5
Mixture proportions of SCGC.

W/B No. Substation (%) Binding materials (kg/m3) Aggregate (kg/m3) Water content (kg/m3)
Cement Fly ash Slag Coarse aggregate Sand Glass sand Water SP
2.8 SC28G0 0 463 132 66 786 850 185 7.2
SC28G10 10 463 132 66 786 765 74 185 7.2
SC28G20 20 463 132 66 786 680 159 185 7.2
SC28G30 30 463 132 66 786 595 238 185 7.2
3.2 SC32G0 0 420 116 58 786 850 185 6.5
SC32G10 10 420 116 58 786 765 74 185 6.5
SC32G20 20 420 116 58 786 680 159 185 6.5
SC32G30 30 420 116 58 786 595 238 185 6.5
3.6 SC362G0 0 360 103 51 786 850 185 5.7
SC36G10 10 360 103 51 786 765 74 185 5.7
SC36G20 20 360 103 51 786 680 159 185 5.7
SC36G30 30 360 103 51 786 595 238 185 5.7

Table 6
JSCE R2 acceptance criteria for SCC R2 [30].

Self-compacting Structure conditions U-test (mm) V-funnel (s) T50 time (s) Coarse aggregate Coarse aggregate
concrete capability absolute rate
Steel bar minimum Steel bar Slump flow (mm)
criterion volume (m3/m3)
spacing (mm) (kg/m2)
R2 60–200 100–350 550–700 >300 7–20 3–15 0.30–0.33 0.57

Slump flow was over 570 mm with various SCGC water-to-binder
ratios, and with increasing glass replacement, the slump flow
showed a distinct tendency to increase. At W/B = 0.28 and a glass
replacement of 10–30%, the slump flow increased 20–100 mm;
when W/B = 032–0.36, the slump flow decreased slightly, In the
lower slump flow in the case of W/B = 0.32–0.36 is due to the lower
paste volume of this mixture. The higher slump flow at higher glass
replacement ratios could be also due to the higher compactness of
concrete granular skeleton. Because the glass sand is finer than the
sand, it can fill better the porosity of the coarse aggregates, and
glass sand has a low water absorption and smooth surface.
increasing glass sand because the SCGC unit weight is less than
that of SCC after replacing part of the sand with waste liquid crys-
tal glass, thus decreasing the unit weight. Hence, the compacting
effect cannot be attained by its dead weight. As a result, the V-fun-
nel test time was 6–10 s longer than that of the control group.
However, the results still met the flowability standard time.
3.4. U-test
The U-test is used to determine the capability of the concrete to
rapidly pass rebar space and self-fill stencil among structures. By

3.3. V-funnel test

Table 7
V-funnel test measures the time required for concrete to flow TCLP in LCD glass (mg/L).
down through a funnel so as to evaluate cementing paste viscosity
Component As Cd Cr Cr6+ Hg Pb Se
in concrete and resistance to material segregation. Time will be
counted with the V-funnel opened, and ended when the concrete LCD glasses 0.001 ND ND ND ND ND 0.0031
Regulatory 5.0 1.0 5.0 2.5 0.2 5.0 1.0
in V-fund out, the second is V-funnel value. Table 8 and Fig. 4 show
that at initial mixing, the passing time becomes prolonged with Remark: ND: not detected.

Fig. 1. (1) OM and (2) SEM picture of the waste LCD glass.
622 H.-Y. Wang, W.-L. Huang / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 619–624

Fig. 2. The appearance of slump flow for SCGC.

an increase in waste liquid crystal glass replacement does not

900 affect self-compacting concrete passing through rebar space. In
W/B = 0.28 W/B = 0.32 W/B = 0.36
800 the case of 30% replacement at various water-to-binder ratios,
excessive residual water led to segregation. When W/B increases,
700
the solidity and passing time are increases.
600
Slump flow (mm)

500 3.5. Unit weight and air content

400 As shown in Table 8 and Figs. 6 and 7, when the glass sand
300 replacement amount is increased with various W/B, the concrete
unit weight is reduced because the glass sand unit weight is lower
200
than that of general sand, thus leading to a reduction in the con-
100 crete unit weight. As glass sand has a lower density than general
0 sand, when glass sand is added into the concrete with the same
0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 weight as general sand, the concrete with glass sand is more con-
Glass sand content (%) solidated with reduced air content. The lower air content at high
glass replacement is due to the fact that the SCC mixtures with
Fig. 3. Slump flow for SCGC.
high replacement are flutier.

using its own weight to pass the connecting tube the filling height 3.6. Setting time
and time. As shown in Table 8 and Fig. 5, SCGC at various water-to-
binder ratios could reach the maximum value of the JCES SCC R2 As shown in Table 8 and Fig. 8, with increasing glass sand
self-compacting concrete U-test, which is 340 mm, indicating that replacement for the case of three different W/B ratios, the setting

Table 8
Property of fresh SCGC.

W/B No. Slump flow V-funnel (s) U-test Unit weight Air content (%) Setting time
(mm) (kg/m3)
(s) (mm) Initial set (min) Final set (min)
0.28 SC28G0 680 5 5 340 2410 2.9 310 870
SC28G10 720 6 6 340 2395 2.8 350 890
SC28G20 770 7 8 340 2380 2.6 390 920
SC28G30 810 10 10 340 2369 2 410 955
0.32 SC32G0 610 4 7 340 2393 2.8 490 970
SC32G10 620 6 8 340 2380 2.7 520 1020
SC32G20 680 7 10 340 2374 2.5 565 1045
SC32G30 750 9 12 340 2363 1.9 600 1065
0.36 SC36G0 555 4 8 340 2380 2.5 615 1200
SC36G10 570 5 11 340 2369 2.3 690 1250
SC36G20 630 5.5 13 340 2353 2.1 730 1295
SC36G30 660 7 14 340 2347 1.3 750 1340
 H.-Y. Wang, W.-L. Huang / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 619–624 623

3.0
10 W/B = 0.28
2.8
W/B = 0.32
9
W/B = 0.36 2.6
V-funnel time (sec)

Air content (%)

8 2.4
2.2
7
2.0
6
1.8 W/B = 0.28
5 1.6 W/B = 0.32
W/B = 0.36
1.4
4
1.2
0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30
Glass sand content (%) Glass sand content (%)
Fig. 4. V-funnel test of SCGC. Fig. 7. Air content of SCGC.

Initial set Final set

Glass sand content (%)
30 20 10 0 1400 W/B = 0.28 W/B = 0.32 W/B = 0.36

1200
SC36
1000
Setting time (min)
800

600
SC32
400

200

0
SC28 0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30
Glass snad content (%)

Fig. 8. Setting time of SCGC.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
U-test (sec) Therefore, with increasing glass sand replacement and W/B, the
efficient water content of the concrete increases, and the concrete
Fig. 5. U-test of SCGC.
setting time increases as well.

4. Conclusions
W/B = 0.28
W/B = 0.32 1. When adding waste LCD glass sand to concrete, the concrete
2400
W/B = 0.36 weight can be reduced to lower than the load of the structural
Unit weight (kg/m )

basis because the waste LCD glass sand has a lower density than
3

fine aggregates. Due to the hydrophobic nature of LCD glass, it

can reduce the water consumption while maintaining certain
2350 workability when applied in concrete.
2. With increasing replacement by LCD glass, the slump and
slump flow increase and peak when the waste LCD glass
replacement amounts to 30%. This is mainly because the waste
LCD glass sand is hydrophobic, resulting in excessive water to
increase the slump flow.
2300 3. The V-funnel test and U-test show that, with increasing replace-
0 10 20 30 ment of general sand by waste LCD glass sand, the time to fall
Glass sand content (%)
into and penetrate space in between steel bars also increases.
Fig. 6. Unit weight of SCGC. Due to the partial replacement of sand by waste LCD glass sand,
it complies with the R2 SCC property standards.
time. This verifies the findings of Terro (2006) [22]. When W/B is 4. With increasing waste LCD glass sand replacement and reduced
0.32, the initial setting and final setting time are 490–600 min W/B, the SCGC unit weight and air content are reduced, while
and 970–1065 min, respectively. When W/B is 0.36, the initial the setting time increases.
and final setting times are 615–750 min and 1200–1340 min, 5. Due to the partial replacement 30% below of sand by waste LCD
respectively. This is mainly because glass sand is hydrophobic. glass sand, it complies with the JSCE R2 SCC property standards.
624 H.-Y. Wang, W.-L. Huang / Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010) 619–624
References
[1] Joseph A, Khayat Kamal H. Kinetics of formwork pressure drops of self-
consolidating concrete containing various types and contents of binder. Cem
Concr Res 2005;35(8):1522–30.
[2] Nehdi M, Bassuoni M, Benefits limitations and research needs of self-
compacting concrete technology in the Arabian Gulf: a holistic view. In: The
annual concrete technology and corrosion protection conference, Dubai, UAE;
2004. p. 12.
[3] Esfahani MR, Lachemi M, Kianoush MR. Top-bar effect of steel bars in self-
consolidating concrete (SCC). Cem Concr Compos 2008;30(1):52–60.
[4] Okamura H, Ozawa K. Mix design for self-compacting concrete. Concr Libr JSCE
1995;25(June):107–20.
[5] Ozawa K, Sakata N, Okamura H. Evaluation of self-compact ability of fresh
concrete using the funnel test. Concr Libr JSCE 1995;25(June):59–75.
[6] Tseng CC. Competitiveness analysis of display panel industry in Taiwan and
Korea (II). Qual Mag 2009;45(2):48–52.
[7] Wang HY. A study of the effects of LCD glass sand on the properties of concrete.
Waste Manage 2009;29(1):335–41.
[8] Chen G, Lee H, Young KL, Yue PL, Wong A, Tao T, et al. Glass recycling in cement
production – an innovative approach. Waste Manage 2002;22(7):747–53.
[9] Terro MJ. Properties of concrete made with recycled crushed glass at elevated
temperatures. Build Environ 2006;41(5):633–9.
[10] Shayan A, Xu A. Performance of powder as pozzolanic materials in concrete
slabs. Cem Concr Res 2006;36(3):457–68.
[11] Byars EA, Morales-Hernandez B, Zhu HY. Waste glass as concrete aggregate
and pozzolan. Concrete 2004;38(1):41–4.
[12] Shi C, Wu Y, Riefler C, Wang H. Characteristics and pozzolanic reactivity of
glass powders. Cem Concr Res 2005;35(5):987–93.
[13] Xie Z, Xi Y. Use of recycled glass as raw materials in the manufacture of
Portland cement. Mater Struct 2002;35(8):510–5.
[14] Dhir R, Dyer T, Tano A, Cui Y. Towards maximizing the value and sustainable
use of glass. Concrete 2004;38(1):38–40.
[15] Corinaldesi V, Gnappi G, Montenero A. Reuse of ground waste glass as
aggregate for mortars. Waste Manage 2005;25(2):197–201.
[16] Wang HY, Chen JS. Study of thin film transition liquid crystal display (TFT–
LCD) optical waste glass applied in early-high-strength controlled low
strength materials concrete. J Comput Concr 2008;5(5):491–501.
[17] Jin W, Meyer C, Baxter S. Glass crete-concrete with glass aggregate. ACI Mater J
2000;97(2):208–13.
[18] Chen CH, Huang R, Wu JK, Yang CC. Waste E-glass particles used in
cementations mixtures. Cem Concr Res 2006;36(3):449–56.
[19] Pollery C, Cramer SM, De La Cruz RV. Potential for using waste glass in Portland
cement concrete. J Mater Civ Eng 1998;10(4):210–9.
[20] Topcu IB, Canbaz M. Properties of concrete containing waste glass. Cem Concr
Res 2004;34(2):267–74.
[21] Poon CS, Chan D. Effects of contaminants on the properties of concrete paving
blocks prepared with recycled concrete aggregates. Construct Build Mater
2007;21(1):164–75.
[22] Terro Mohamad J. Properties of concrete made with recycled crushed glass at
elevated temperatures. Build Environ 2006;41(5):633–9.
[23] Poon Chi-Sun, Chan Dixon. Effects of contaminants on the properties of
concrete paving blocks prepared with recycled concrete aggregates. Construct
Build Mater 2007;21(1):164–75.
[24] Tzeng HH. Feasibility study on mixing waste liquid crystal glass in concrete.
Master’s Thesis, Graduate Institute of Civil Engineering and Disaster
Prevention Technology, National Kaohsiung University of Technology,
Kaohsiung; 2005.
[25] Meyer C, Egosi N, Andela C. Concrete with waste glass as aggregate. Recycling
and Re-use of glass cullet. In: Proceedings of the international symposium
concrete technology unit of ASCE and University of Dundee; March 2001. p.
19–20.
[26] Lam CS, Poon CS, Chan D. Enhancing the performance of pre-cast concrete
blocks by incorporating waste glass – ASR consideration. Cem Concr Compos
2007;29(8):616–25.
[27] Wang AQ, Zhang CZ, Tang MS, Zhang NS. ASR in mortar bars containing silica
glass in combination with high alkali and high fly ash contents. Cem Concr
Compos 1999;21(5–6):375–81.
[28] Wang HY, Chen JS, Wang SY, Chen ZC, Chen FL. A study on the mix proportion
and properties of waste LCD glass applied in controlled low strength materials
concrete (CLSM). In: TCI 2007 concrete technology conference and exhibition,
Taiwan Concrete Institute; 2007. p. N-5.
[29] Lachemi M, Hossain KM, Lambros V, Bouzoubaa N. Development of cost-
effective self-consolidating concrete incorporation fly ash, cement slag or
viscosity modifying admixtures. ACI Mater J 2003;100(5):419–25.
[30] Liao ZC, Luo CY, You WH. Behavior of self-compacting concrete member.
Taipei: Taiwan Construction Research Institute; 2000. p. 43–57.