Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Construction Materials

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

Research article

Performance-based experimental study into quality zones of

lightweight concrete using pumice aggregates
Muhtar 1
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Muhammadiyah Jember, Jember, 68121, Indonesia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The quality and performance of concrete depends on the material used. Lightweight concrete is
Lightweight concrete usually formed from aggregates with lightweight specific gravity, such as pumice. This study aims
Pumice aggregate to identify the zone of quality and performance of concrete when partially replacing coarse
Concrete quality
aggregate (NA) with pumice coarse aggregate (PA). The performance parameters studied include
unit weight, compressive strength, elastic modulus, tensile strength, and rupture modulus.
Geochemical analysis and porosity of aggregate were carried out using SEM and X-RD. The
percentage variation of pumice aggregate is 0 %PA, 25 %PA, 50 %PA, 75 %PA, and 100 %PA.
Quality zones based on observations of the behaviour and mechanical properties of concrete are
determined. The results show that concrete using PA consists of two quality zones, namely the
brittle zone for concrete with PA above 50 % and the ductile zone for concrete with PA below
50%. Formulas to calculate the elastic modulus and the rupture modulus are proposed. Utilisation
of pumice as lightweight concrete aggregate to get better lightweight concrete performance must
be selective.

1. Introduction

The continued use of normal concrete materials in building construction is having a major impact on environmental quality. C
minerals such as andesite stone, limestone, sand, kaolin, phosphate, gypsum, manganese, and others are the result of industrial ex­
cavations managed by the community. Persistent mineral C mining will cause environmental damage. The use of concrete materials
from renewable energy sources is highly recommended to prevent more severe environmental damage. Concrete materials such as
natural sand, coarse aggregate excavated C, and steel, have dominated until now. Innovations in the use of alternative concrete
materials, such as industrial waste, unused volcanic rock, and constituents sourced from nature, need to be increased, and research is
needed. For example research on concrete materials from volcanic rocks scoria and pumice as aggregates [1–12]. Other examples are
research on volcanic rocks scoria and pumice as powder and fly ash as cement replacement materials [13–18]. The performance and
quality of concrete are highly dependent on its constituent materials, one of which is aggregate. Aggregate has an important role
because it functions as a filler of 60–80 % of the volume of concrete. Lightweight aggregate (LWA) such as pumice is very useful for the
precast concrete industry. However, lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC) tends to be more brittle than normal-weight aggregate
concrete (NWAC) [19]. The main problem is determining the limit on the percentage of aggregate pumice so that LWAC still has
acceptable performance and quality.

E-mail address: muhtar@unmuhjember.ac.id.

1
Orcid ID: 0000-0002-5734-2728

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2023.e01960
Received 27 December 2022; Received in revised form 23 February 2023; Accepted 24 February 2023
Available online 26 February 2023
2214-5095/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Nomenclature

LWA Lightweight Aggregate.

NWAC Normal Weight Aggregate Concrete.
LWAC Lightweight Aggregate Concrete.
NA Coarse Aggregate or Normal Coarse Aggregate.
PA Pumice Coarse Aggregate.
SEM Scanning Electron Microscopy.
EDX Energy Dispersive X-Ray.
X-RD X-ray Powder Diffraction.
NC Normal Concrete.
PAC Pumice Aggregate Concrete.
ACI American Concrete Institute.
TS Turkish Standard.
EN European Norm.
CEB Comité Euro-International du Béton.
IS Indian Standard.
SNI Standar Nasional Indonesia.
AS/NZS Australian Standard / New Zealand Standard.
ASTM American Standard Testing and Material.

Cui et al. [5] conducted a study on the effect of lightweight aggregates on the mechanical properties and brittleness of lightweight
concrete, and concluded that a higher volume of LWA resulted in increased brittle failure. An increase in the volume of LWA content is
accompanied by a decrease in the maximum stress (peak stress) and the elastic modulus. LWAC is more brittle than NWAC for the same
level of strength. Rahai et al. [6] conducted a study on the effects of volume variation, LWA lightweight aggregate gradation, and
cement: sand ratio (S/C) on the compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of lightweight concrete. Their results show that volume
fraction and LWA gradation are the two main parameters that affect the compressive strength of concrete – more so than the ratio of
sand and cement. Karthika et al. [1] conducted a study on lightweight concrete using pumice aggregate and concluded that increasing
the percentage of pumice aggregate reduces the density of concrete, producing lightweight concrete. Replacement of 50 % normal
aggregate with pumice aggregate produces optimum performance in concrete. Suseno et al. [8] in their research made lightweight
concrete using pumice and scoria as fine aggregate and coarse aggregate for lightweight concrete structures. The resulting compressive
strength is up to 30 MPa, and the self-weight of concrete with scoria and pumice aggregates is lower than that of the control specimens.
Rashad [9] reveals that although the use of pumice in concrete is advantageous, the aggregate of pumice in the matrix reduces
mechanical strength and workability, while increasing drying shrinkage and water absorption, thus necessitating methods to reduce
the negative impact of pumice aggregate on the concrete matrix. It should be noted that there are very numerous and varied types of
pumice, and thus further research is required, based on the area of origin of the pumice. Pumice and scoria produced from volcanic
activity also have the potential to be developed as lightweight concrete coarse aggregates; the abundant volume of these materials in
mountain lava flows needs to be utilised optimally. Han and Xiang [20] write that, compared to traditional concrete, concrete made
entirely with lightweight aggregates exhibits a marked reduction in mechanical properties, and is unsuitable for use as a structural
element. Based on some of the conclusions of the researchers, a greater percentage of pumice aggregate in concrete can reduce per­
formance and increase the tendency to brittleness. The most important factor to note is how the mechanical properties of concrete with
pumice aggregate match the expected and acceptable quality. It is very important to establish the limit on the percentage of pumice
coarse aggregate (PA) in the concrete mixture in order to produce good quality concrete according to the required code.
This study aims to determine the LWAC quality zone under the influence of PA through observing the performance of lightweight
concrete, including tests on stress-strain, crack pattern, compressive strength, tensile strength, modulus of elasticity, and modulus of
rupture. So this study hypothesises that there is a limit to how far coarse aggregate (NA) can be replaced with PA that can make
concrete ductile or brittle. To answer this hypothesis, an experimental study of the performance of concrete with pumice aggregates
was carried out using SEM and X-RD, assessing compressive strength, elastic modulus, tensile strength, rupture modulus, chemical
analysis, and porosity analysis. Both ductile and brittle behaviour were observed by measuring strain and compressive strength in the
concrete. In addition, this study proposes formulas for elasticity modulus and fracture modulus. Partial replacement of normal coarse
aggregate with coarse pumice aggregate was carried out with five variations, namely 25 %, 50 %, 75 % and 100 % pumice aggregate,
while 0 % pumice aggregate served as a control. The pumice stone used comes from East Java, Indonesia.

2. Review of literature

2.1. The formula of the elasticity modulus

The modulus of elasticity is a parameter measuring the resistance of a material as it experiences elastic deformation when a force is
applied. Several researchers have shown that the LWAC elastic modulus is smaller than the NWAC elastic modulus. The mechanical

2
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

properties and mineral composition of the LWA content greatly affect the size of the compressive strength and elastic modulus of
LWAC. The compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of concrete are highly dependent on the quality of the constituent materials.
The better the quality of concrete material used, the higher the value of the compressive strength and modulus of elasticity. PA
aggregate hardness and density greatly affect the compressive stress and concrete stiffness [21]. The high porosity of the pumice
aggregate causes stress concentrations to occur at the cavity boundaries and increases deformation [22]. The calculation of elastic
modulus is calculated at the peak stress limit and the stress drop after the peak stress is not calculated [23]. Innovation to improve the
modulus of elasticity and other mechanical properties of concrete is very important; for example, the use of additive materials [24] can
produce lightweight concrete that displays optimum performance. Kazanskaya et al. [25] conducted research on the application of
super-sulphated binder cement to produce lightweight concrete and concluded that the modulus of elasticity increased compared to
using CEM 32.5.
The elastic modulus equation is very important to address. The analysis and calculation of the elastic modulus of LWAC and NWAC
in this study were based on previous codes and literature. The literature review aims to prove the accuracy of the data and equations
that will be proposed using several codes and previous studies. Some of the codes used as a reference for the modulus of elasticity
equation include those from ACI 318 [26], TS 500 [27], EN 1992–1–1 [28], CEB-FIP [29] and IS 456–2000 [30], while the comparison
equations from previous studies include Yildirim and Sengul [31], Bellum et al. [32] and Saridemir [33].
ACI 318 [26] recommends a formula for concrete elastic modulus taking into account the concrete unit weight, as shown in Eq. (1).
√̅̅̅̅
(1)
′
Ec = 0.043w1.5
c fc

where Ec is the static modulus of elasticity in MPa,wc is the unit weight of concrete in kg/m3, andf c is the specified compressive strength
′

in MPa. The relationship between the elastic modulus and the compressive strength of concrete is given by the Turkish Standard TS 500
[27] shown in Eq. (2), as follows:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅
Ecj = 3250 fckj + 14000 (2)

where fckj and Ecj are the characteristic cylinder compressive strength in MPa and static modulus of elasticity of concrete in MPa,
respectively; the equation of this relationship is given for high-strength concrete and low-strength concrete. Eurocode recommends an
equation for the modulus of elasticity of concrete in EN 1992–1–1 [28], as in Eq. (3), as follows:
[ ]0.3
(fcm )
Ecm = 22 (3)
10

where Ecm is the static elastic modulus of concrete in MPa and fcm is the average compressive strength of the cylinder in MPa. According
to the CEB-FIP [29] code, the modulus of elasticity equation for normal weight concrete is as Eq. (4), as follows:
( )13
fc
Ec = 0.85x2.15x104 (4)
10

where Ec is the static modulus of elasticity of concrete at 28 days in MPa and fc is the average compressive strength at 28 days in MPa.
According to the IS 456–2000 [30] code, the equation of modulus of elasticity for normal weight concrete is Eq. (5), as follows:
√̅̅̅̅̅
Ec = 5000 fck (5)

where Ec is the short-term static modulus of elasticity in MPa and fck is the characteristic cylinder compressive strength.
Some of the equations proposed for the elastic modulus from previous researchers include Yildirim and Sengul [31], who
recommend a modulus of elasticity equation based on the results of substandard concretes obtained in Eq. (6), as follows:
√̅̅̅̅
(6)
′
Ec = 6.6 f c − 2.7

where Ec is the static modulus of elasticity in GPa andf c is the compressive strength in MPa. Bellum et al. [32] propose a modulus of
′

elasticity equation for geopolymer concrete with coarse aggregate from crushed granite and normal fine aggregate, as in Eq. (7):

Ec = 3282xf 0.5
c (7)

where Ec is the static modulus of elasticity in MPa and fc is the compressive strength in MPa. Saridemir [33] recommends the equation
of modulus of elasticity of high-strength concrete (HSC) containing silica fume content, and pumice with different levels, proposing Eq.
(8) as follows:
√̅̅̅̅
Ec = 8.64x 3 fc (8)

where the modulus of elasticity (Ec) is in GPa and the compressive strength (fc) is in MPa.

3
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

2.2. The formula of the rupture modulus

Empirical equations and statistical regression approaches for predicting the rupture modulus have been proposed by many re­
searchers, in addition to the rupture modulus equations that have been presented by many codes. However, the value of the modulus of
rupture of concrete from aggregate materials having specific mechanical properties needs to be developed. If the mechanical properties
of the concrete material are increased, the modulus of rupture and tensile strength will automatically increase [34]. The equation of
the modulus of rupture from several codes is the main control.
SNI 2847–2013 [35] and ACI 318–1989 [26] recommend the equation of the modulus of rupture as shown in Eq. (9).
√̅̅̅̅
(9)
′
fr = 0.623λ f c

where fr is the rupture modulus,f c is the compressive strength, and the value of λ ranges from 0.75 to 1, depending on the density of the
′

concrete. The other reference equation for estimating the modulus of rupture of lightweight concrete with pumice aggregate is taken
from ACI-435R-2003 [36], the AS/NZS Code [37], the Canadian Code [38], and the Euro Code EN 1992–1–1 [28]. The relationship
between the modulus of rupture vs. the compressive strength of concrete recommended by ACI-435R-2003 [36] is shown in Eq. (10) ,
as follows:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
(10)
′
fr = 0.013 wc f c

where fr andf c are modulus of rupture in MPa, compressive strength in MPa and wc is the unit weight of concrete in kg/m3. The AS/NZS
′

Code [37] recommends an equation for the modulus of rupture of concrete such as Eq. (11), as follows:
√̅̅̅̅
(11)
′
fr = 0.36 f c

where fr andf c are the modulus of rupture in MPa and compressive strength in MPa, respectively. According to the Canadian Code [38],
′

the modulus of rupture equation for concrete is as Eq. (12), as follows:

√̅̅̅̅
(12)
′
fr = 0.3 f c

where: fr andf c are modulus of rupture in MPa and compressive strength in MPa, respectively. According to Euro Code EN 1992-1-1
′

[28], the modulus of rupture equation for concrete is as Eq. (13), as follows:

(13)
(2/3)
fctm = 0.30f ck

where fctm and fck are mean tensile strength in MPa and characteristic cube compressive strength in MPa, respectively.

3. Materials and methods

3.1. Materials

Research begins by collecting research materials – cement, fine aggregate, and coarse aggregate. The cement used is Portland
Pozzolana Cement (PPC). The fine aggregate used is sand derived from sediments from the watershed of Mount Semeru, Lumajang,
East Java, Indonesia. The fine aggregate has a maximum particle size of 4.75 mm. Coarse aggregate consists of two types, namely NA
and PA, with a maximum particle size of 20 mm, as shown in Figs. 1 and 2. Pumice as the basic material for making PA comes from the

Fig. 1. Milled coarse aggregate (NA).

4
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Situbondo area, East Java. The properties of fine aggregate are shown in Table 1. The aggregate used meets the requirements of ASTM
C 33 [39]. The properties of the coarse aggregate are shown in Table 2 for NA, and Table 3 for PA.

3.2. Concrete mix design

The design of the control concrete mixture is based on ACI 211.1–91 [40] and the concrete mixes using pumice aggregate are based
on ACI 211.2-98 [41]. The maximum water-cement factor is set at 0.52, with the slump value set at 25–100 mm. The concrete mix
composition in this study was a ratio of 1 Portland Pozzolana cement (PPC): 1.82 fine aggregate: 2.60 coarse aggregate: 0.52 water.
The composition of the concrete mixture with partial replacement of normal aggregate with pumice aggregate is shown in Table 4.

3.3. Geochemical analysis of aggregate

3.3.1. The analysis of SEM and EDX

The testing method for NA and PA aggregate samples using SEM was carried out taking the following steps: (1) NA and PA ag­
gregates were cut into small pieces; (2) the surface of the sample was cleaned and polished to make it clean and neat; (3) the sample
was installed on the machine; (4) test results data were analysed. Analysis of the chemical element composition of NA and PA ag­
gregates was carried out by mashing the samples into fine particles. Then a sample was placed under a high-energy electron beam
which produces simulations and information about the sample material. This method also reveals the actual morphology of the ag­
gregates and samples. The chemical elements of the aggregate were also confirmed through EDX analysis using the SEM tool brand FEI
inspect S50, with an accelerating voltage of 20 kV.
Meanwhile, to determine the total porosity of NA and PA, the microstructure of the aggregates was identified through the SEM test.
Micrograph results of normal aggregate and pumice are then analysed using the Image-J software program to determine the size and
pore area of each. SEM micrographic analysis of aggregate samples comprises three stages: the first is image preparation, including
setting the scale and units; the second is the image threshold stage, which is the segmentation stage for particle colour, pore, and
background colour; and the third stage is aggregate particle analysis, which determines the percentage porosity value of NA and PA.

3.3.2. X-ray diffractometer (X-RD)

The X-RD test is carried out using the powder method, where the aggregate sample is crushed into a powder form, and all the crystal
planes of the powder are oriented so as to diffract X-rays. A schematic of how X-ray diffraction works is shown in Fig. 3.

3.4. Fresh concrete and concrete

3.4.1. Fresh concrete

The slump test method on fresh concrete follows ASTM C 143 [42]. Casting fresh concrete using PA is the same as casting con­
ventional concrete. There is one difference in the treatment before placing concrete, namely, the pumice aggregate must be wetted.
Large porosity and water absorption values in PA can cause water shortages during casting. Pumice aggregate has to be completely
saturated, and then allowed to stand to allow excess water to drain, and to ensure that water reaches inner cavities. In addition, wetting
the pumice aggregate is aimed at preventing aggregate drying quickly, thus reducing post-casting cracking and shrinkage. Adding
water gradually during casting is a way to overcome water shortages during the concrete hydration process. After the casting of the test
object, maintenance is carried out until it is 28 days old. In the early stages, the specimens were stored for 24 h; the mould was
disassembled, they were soaked in water for about 15 days, then removed and covered with gunny sacks. Treatment of cast specimens
was carried out to ensure that the hydration process was perfect.

3.4.2. Concrete
Testing the performance of NWAC and LWAC is carried out in stages, including testing compressive strength, modulus of elasticity,
unit weight, split tensile strength, and analysis of the test-results data. The test of compressive strength and modulus of elasticity is

Fig. 2. Pumice stone; (a) Process of grinding; (b) Pumice stone before grinding; (c) Pumice stone after grinding.

5
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Table 1
The properties of fine aggregate.
Properties Results

Sieve analysis 3.16

Specific gravity 2.41
Water absorption 1.55 %

Table 2
The properties of coarse aggregate (NA).
Properties Results

Sieve analysis 3.79

Specific gravity 2.55
Water absorption 0.80 %
Bulk density Loose bulk density 1.27 g/cm3
Rodded bulk density 1.18 g/cm3
Crushing strength 23.50 %

based on ASTM C-39 [43] and ASTM C 469 [44]. Testing of unit weight of concrete is based on ASTM C 138 [45]. The test procedure for
split tensile strength of concrete cylinders is based on ASTM C-496 [46]. The cylindrical mould test object has a diameter of 150 mm
and a height of 300 mm. Testing of concrete cylindrical specimens is carried out after the specimens are 28 days old. In addition, an
analysis of the effect of pumice aggregate on concrete quality is carried out. Analysis of concrete quality zones, based on concrete
performance, is carried out through stress-strain relationships and concrete cracking patterns, with supporting analyses of geochemical
make-up, porosity, slump test, compressive strength, elasticity modulus, unit weight, and rupture modulus. Then a formula is proposed
to calculate the elasticity modulus (Ec) and the rupture modulus (fr) of concrete with pumice aggregate, and the conclusion.

4. Experiments

The experimental study into the quality zone of lightweight concrete using pumice aggregate consists of several experimental
programmes, including testing the mechanical and geochemical properties of the aggregate, testing the workability of fresh concrete,
and testing the mechanical performance of lightweight concrete. Tests for the mechanical properties of aggregates are shown in
Tables 1–3. Geochemical tests of aggregates consist of the analysis of microstructure, chemical composition, and aggregate mineral
composition. The scheme for the experimental study programme of the lightweight concrete quality zone with pumice aggregate is
shown in Fig. 4.
There are five variations of partial replacement of NA with pumice, namely 0 %, 25 %, 50 %, 75 % and 100 % pumice aggregate.
Variation of 0 % PA is the object of the control test from NWAC. Variations 25 % PA, 50 % PA, 75 % PA, and 100 % PA are test objects
from LWAC. Testing the properties and performance of NWAC and LWAC concrete consisted of compressive strength, elastic modulus,
split tensile strength, and unit weight tests. The tests for compressive strength, elastic modulus, and split tensile strength were carried
out using a universal testing machine (UTM). The number of test objects and the design of performance tests of NWAC and LWAC are

Table 3
The properties of pumice coarse aggregate (PA).
Properties Results

Sieve analysis 6.20

Specific gravity 1.47
Water absorption 1.72 %
Bulk density Loose bulk density 0.48 g/cm3
Rodded bulk density 0.45 g/cm3
Crushing strength 51.29 %

Table 4
Mix proportion of concrete using different pumice coarse aggregate (PA).
Type of Concrete Mixed proportion PPC Fine aggregate Coarse aggregate (NA) Pumice coarse aggregate (PA) Water

kg/m3

NC-0 % PA 1: 1.82: 2.60: 0: 0.52 394 716 1030 0 205

PAC-25 % PA 1: 1.82: 1.95: 0.65: 0.52 394 716 772.5 257.5 205
PAC-50 % PA 1: 1.82: 1.30: 1.30: 0.52 394 716 515 515 205
PAC-75 % PA 1: 1.82: 0.65: 1.95: 0.52 394 716 257.5 772.5 205
PAC-100 % PA 1: 1.82: 0: 2.60: 0.52 394 716 0 1030 205

6
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Fig. 3. The arrangement of tools and the workings of X-ray diffraction.

shown in Table 5.

5. Results

5.1. Geochemical analysis of aggregate

5.1.1. The analysis of SEM and EDX

After testing the mechanical properties of the aggregates – with results shown in Tables 1–3 – geochemical tests and analysis were
carried out. Geochemical analysis of pumice aggregate was carried out through SEM, EDX, and X-RD tests. The mineral structure and
porosity of normal aggregate and pumice aggregate were analysed using an SEM and EDX microscope, while X-RD was employed to
identify the mineral composition and chemical element analysis of NA and PA. Meanwhile, the Image-J software program was used to
find the total area of aggregate porosity.
Fig. 5(a) shows the SEM micrograph of NA magnified 1000 times. The focal point for observing normal aggregate porosity is shown

Fig. 4. The experimental programme of lightweight concrete performance test.

7
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Table 5
Design of performance test of NWAC and LWAC.
Concrete type / Specimen group Test type and quantity of test specimens

Compressive strength Modulus of elasticity Unit weight Tensile strength

pcs

NWCA NC-0 % PA 7 7 7 2
LWAC PAC-25 % PA 7 7 7 2
PAC-50 % PA 7 7 7 2
PAC-75 % PA 7 7 7 2
PAC-100 % PA 7 7 7 2

in Fig. 5(a) and magnified 2500 times, as shown in Fig. 5(b). Normal aggregate pore area analysis was performed using the Image-J
software program. Fig. 5(c) shows the SEM micrograph of NA after an image threshold process using the Image-J software program to
determine the total pore area. Pores in normal aggregate are shown in black and particles of the normal aggregate itself are shown in
white. The analysis of normal aggregate surface porosity using the Image-J software program returned a porosity percentage of
12.39%.
Fig. 6(a) shows the SEM micrograph PA magnified 1000 times. The focal point for observing the porosity of the PA is shown in Fig. 6
(a) and magnified 2500 times, as shown in Fig. 6(b). Fig. 6(c) shows the SEM micrograph of PA after the image threshold process using
the Image-J software program to determine the total pore area. Pumice aggregate porosity is shown in black and pumice aggregate
particles are shown in white. The results of the analysis of the surface porosity of PA using the Image-J software program obtained a
porosity percentage of 38.57%.
Fig. 7 and Table 6 show the composition of the chemical elements contained in the PA based on the EDX results. The chemical
elements contained in PA are almost the same as in NA, but there are differences in the amount of iron (Fe), with NA having almost
twice as much Fe as PA. This iron gives NA a higher specific gravity and hardness than PA. Based on the results of the EDX, the elements

Fig. 5. The SEM micrograph of NA aggregate: (a) magnified 1000 times; (b) magnified 2500 times; and (c) threshold results using the Image-J
software program magnified 2500 times.

8
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

in the highest proportions in PA are O and Si, followed by Al, C, Fe, Ca, Mg, K, Na, and Cl. The most abundant element in Pumice is O at
43.49%, with Si at 27.32%. Pumice aggregates are igneous rocks outside (extrusive) because they are formed from magma that cools
quickly and freezes. The process of forming pumice aggregates occurs when acidic magma rises to the surface and suddenly comes into
contact with air.

5.1.2. X-ray diffractometer (X-RD)

From the results of the X-RD test, a graph is obtained to display information on the crystal structure of the material, as shown in
Fig. 8 for the NA and PA. The graphs in Fig. 8 illustrate the mineral composition contained in NA and PA, as set out in Tables 7 and 8. X-
RD tests on NA return a mineral composition or compound dominated by 46 % andesine (Ca, Na)(Al, Si)4O8, which is the main
compound of silicate minerals Si. Percentages of other compounds found in NA include: albite low Na(AISi3O8), 29 %; enstatite ferroan
(Mg, Fe)SiO3, 15%; and diopside subcalcic (Ca/(Ca+Mg)), 10 %.
The results of the X-RD test on PA show the composition of minerals or compounds dominated by feldspar (KAl­
Si3O8–NaAlSi3O8–CaAl2Si2O8), at 59%, and anorthite sodian (Na, Cl)(Al, Si)2Si2O8, at 41 %. Feldspar crystallises from the magma of
intrusive and extrusive igneous rocks in the form of veins. Feldspars are usually found in various types of metamorphic and sedi­
mentary rocks. Rocks that are mostly composed of calcium plagioclase feldspar are also called anorthosites. The physical character­
istics of the mineral anorthite are white and grey colours, with a glass lustre, brittle tenacity, and translucent-opaque with one-way
cleavage. Anorthite has a conchoidal fracture with a hardness of 6–6.5. Anorthite is a mineral belonging to the plagioclase group, with
a chemical composition of approximately 90 % calcium and 10 % sodium. Anorthite is a mineral widely found in basic igneous rocks
such as gabbro and basalt, and metamorphic rocks. The graph of X-RD results on PA is shown in Fig. 8, and the mineral composition of
PA X-RD results is shown in Table 8.

5.2. Fresh concrete

Table 9 shows the test results of the effect on slump value of replacing NA with PA. The higher the percentage of replacement of

Fig. 6. The SEM micrograph of PA aggregate: (a) magnified 1000 times; (b) magnified 2500 times; and (c) threshold results using the Image-J
software program magnified 2500 times.

9
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Fig. 7. Graph of the chemical element composition of NA and PA based on the results of energy dispersive x-ray.

Table 6
The chemical element composition of NA and PA.
Coarse aggregate (NA) Pumice coarse aggregate (PA)

Element wt. % at. % Element wt. % at. %

C 02.02 03.77 C 07.18 11.99

O 37.73 52.76 O 43.49 54.55
Na 02.89 02.81 Na 00.85 00.74
Mg 01.64 01.51 Mg 01.59 01.31
Al 10.13 08.40 Al 11.20 08.33
Si 28.42 22.63 Si 27.32 19.52
Cl 00.23 00.15 Cl 00.60 00.34
K 01.98 01.13 K 01.05 00.54
Ca 05.43 03.03 Ca 01.82 00.91
Fe 09.53 03.82 Fe 04.90 01.76
Matrix Correction ZAF Matrix Correction ZAF

normal aggregate with pumice coarse aggregate, the lower the slump value. This shows that the water absorption of coarse aggregate
from pumice decreases the slump value of fresh concrete.

5.3. Concrete test results

Fig. 9 shows the relationship between the type of concrete and unit weight. It can be seen that the percentage of pumice aggregate is
highly influential on the unit weight of the concrete; the greater the aggregate pumice content, the lower the unit weight of the
concrete. According to ACI 213R-87 [47], structural lightweight concrete must have a compressive strength of more than 17.2 MPa
and an air-dry unit weight of less than 1850 kg/m3, although it sometimes allows unit weights in the field of up to 1900 kg/m3. From
Fig. 9, the unit weight (wc) of lightweight concrete using aggregate pumice of 25 %, 50 %, 75 % and 100 % shows a match with ACI
213R-87, namely 1927.04 kg/m3, 1657.23 kg/m3, 1593.71 kg/m3 and 1551.57 kg/m3 respectively, as shown in Table 10. However,
the results of the compressive strength test do not meet ACI regulations for lightweight structural concrete, as the compressive test
results for concrete cylinders with pumice aggregates were obtained in a row of 14.85 MPa for the type of concrete PAC-25 %PA,
12.73 MPa for PAC-50 %PA, 8.21 MPa for PAC-75 %PA, and 7.92 MPa for PAC-100 %PA, as shown in Fig. 10 and Table 11. In
addition, the effect of replacing normal aggregate with pumice aggregate causes a decrease in tensile strength split in concrete,
decreased by 13 %, 35 %, 48 %, and 55 % respectively from the control concrete for the percentage of pumice aggregate of 25 %, 50 %,
75 % and 100 %. As the percentage of replacement of normal aggregate with pumice aggregate in concrete increases, split tensile
strength and concrete rupture modulus decrease. It can be concluded that the effect of replacing normal aggregate with pumice
aggregate can reduce the mechanical properties of concrete, such as unit weight shown in Fig. 9 and Table 10, compressive strength in
Fig. 10 and Table 11, the modulus of elasticity in Fig. 11 and Table 11, and split tensile strength in Fig. 12 and Table 12.

10
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Fig. 8. Graph of X-RD test results for NA and PA.

Table 7
The mineral composition of NA.
Minerals Percentage

Andesine 46 %
Enstatite, ferroan 15 %
Albite low 29 %
Diopside, subcalcic 10 %

Table 8
The mineral composition of PA.
Minerals Percentage

Unnamed feldspar 59 %
Anorthite, sodian 41 %

6. Discussion

6.1. The mechanical and geochemical properties of PA

Pumice aggregates are lightweight because they have a light specific gravity. Lightweight aggregate in concrete is the weakest
component, and analysis of the physical properties of lightweight aggregates such as grain shape, porosity, and specific gravity are

11
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Table 9
Slump test on concrete.
Type of concrete Slump value (mm)

NC-0 % PA 90
PAC-25 % PA 80
PAC-50 % PA 60
PAC-75 % PA 45
PAC-100 % PA 40

Fig. 9. The relationship between concrete type and unit weight.

therefore very important. The value of pumice aggregate density is related to the density of the pumice’s constituent materials.
Aggregate porosity greatly affects the level of density of concrete – high aggregate porosity will cause it to be low. Low concrete density
results in low compressive strength and modulus of elasticity [5].
The test using SEM – scanning electron microscope – analyses the results of scanning electrons from solid objects. The SEM test
output is an enlarged image of the electron signal, so that the differences between test objects – including those from different materials
– can be detected due to their different electron arrangements. SEM test results for normal aggregate and pumice aggregate can be seen

Table 10
Unit weight of concrete.
Concrete type Average of unit weight, wc (kg/m3)

NC-0 % PA 2278.30
PAC-25 % PA 1927.04
PAC-50 % PA 1657.23
PAC-75 % PA 1593.71
PAC-100 % PA 1551.57

Fig. 10. The relationship between concrete type and compressive strength.

12
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Table 11
Compressive strength and elasticity modulus test on concrete.
Type of concrete Average of compressive strength (MPa) Average of modulus of elasticity (x103 MPa)

NC-0 % PA 21.50 15.53

PAC-25 % PA 14.85 12.51
PAC-50 % PA 12.73 9.69
PAC-75 % PA 8.21 8.58
PAC-100 % PA 7.92 7.67

Fig. 11. The relationship between the type of concrete and modulus of elasticity.

Fig. 12. The relationship between the type of concrete and tensile strength.

Table 12
Test results of concrete tensile strength.
Type of concrete Average of the concrete tensile strength (MPa)

NC-0 % PA 2.22
PAC-25 % PA 1.93
PAC-50 % PA 1.44
PAC-75 % PA 1.15
PAC-100 % PA 1.01

in Figs. 5 and 6. These images show that PA has a greater porosity than NA. The pores are formed in a very fast cooling process. The
large pores cause PA to have a lower specific gravity than NA. PA has pores that are spread unevenly, and these are formed by gas and
air bubbles. Pumice aggregate has a vesicular texture with varying hole or pore sizes that are related to one another.
The results of SEM micrography analyses of NA and PA show that the porosity of PA is higher than that of NA, so the density of
pumice aggregate will automatically be lower. The PA porosity was found to be 38.57 % higher than that of NA, with a value of 12.39
%. Based on the results of the analysis of the porosity of PA using SEM and Image-J software, it is very important to research the quality
zone and performance of lightweight concrete using PA.
Based on the results of EDX, the composition of chemical elements in NA shows those with the highest proportions as O and Si,

13
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

followed by Al, Fe, Ca, Na, C, K, Mg, and Cl, as displayed in Fig. 7 and Table 6. The most abundant chemical elements in NA are O at
37.73 % and Si at 28.42%. When correlated with SEM image results, it is concluded that the main constituents of NA used in this study
are igneous rocks with rhombohedral minerals, such as Andesine, Enstatite, Ferroan, Albite low, and Subcalcic diopside. Elements of
Sodium, Magnesium, and Aluminium were also found in lower concentrations. The concentration of magnesium (<2%) in NA indicates
that the rhombohedral mineral that is read on SEM is calcite, and the dolomitisation process has not occurred. The characteristics of
this type of igneous rock are physical hardness and solid shape.
It can be concluded that NA has lower porosity and higher density than PA. Normal aggregate has a larger iron element – almost
twice that of PA – so it has a higher specific gravity and hardness than PA. NA in this study is an igneous rock with a composition of less
than 2 % magnesium, in a hard and solid physical form. Meanwhile, PA in this study is an extrusive igneous rock with quite high
porosity and low density.

6.2. Effect of PA on the workability of concrete

Fig. 13 graphs the relationship between aggregate turnover percentage vs. slump value, where the graph shows a linear fit between
the percentage of normal aggregate turnover and the slump value, with a correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.9694. Wetting the pumice
aggregate beforehand plays an important role in controlling the water-cement factor in the concrete mix. The slump test suggests that
aggregates with high water absorption values can cause problems in controlling their moisture content, making it difficult to determine
the proper moisture content of the concrete mix. Therefore, the resulting water weight composition in the concrete mix composition
plan is made flexible and given in stages. The slump test is repeated until the planned slump value is reached.
High water absorption by pumice aggregate in the early stages of mixing can cause balling of the cement and loss of slump [17]. To
prevent cement balling with an accompanying decrease in slump value, the pumice aggregate must be water-saturated or surface dry
before placing the concrete sample. Wetting the pumice aggregate first is the right solution to prevent aggregate drying on-site, and to
reduce shrinkage cracks [1]. Gündüz [17] in his research concludes that the lighter the mixture due to the addition of pumice
aggregate, the lower the work due to gravity, and the smaller the slump value. Low aggregate density will also cause low concrete
density. In addition, a decrease in slump and an increase in air content in the concrete mix can also be caused by the low density and
high porosity of pumice [18]. The slowing of the dramatic decline in slump values can also be due to the high water absorption of the
porous pumice [15].

6.3. Effect of PA on concrete performance and quality

To compare the different stress-strain curves, and to test the effect of pumice aggregate, analysis is carried out based on the
maximum stress (peak stress) and maximum strain (peak strain). Decreases in stress after peak stress are not taken into account,
because the descending part of the stress-strain curve does not accurately reflect the material properties as they are affected by the test
conditions [5,23]. Fig. 14 shows the relationship between compressive stress vs. strain in concrete, where the compressive stress and
strain in normal concrete NC-0 %PA are much greater than that in concrete with pumice aggregate. The maximum compressive stress
and strain in concrete using pumice aggregate varies according to the volume content of the pumice aggregate. The peak stress or
maximum compressive strength in concrete with pumice aggregate decreased by 30.93 % for PAC-25 %PA, 40.79 % for PAC-50 %PA,
61.81 % for PAC-75 %PA, and 63.16 % for PAC-100 %PA when compared to the peak stress in normal concrete NC-0 %PA, as shown in
Table 11.
At the time of maximum compressive strength or peak stress, the strain in concrete with PA remains almost the same for all
aggregate replacement percentages. Meanwhile, the concrete stress decreases, and the strain tends to be stable. The peak stress and
elastic modulus decrease with increasing volume content of lightweight aggregate [5]. Likewise, the stiffness of pumice aggregate
concrete (PAC) is lower than that of normal concrete (NC). If we take a horizontal line of 0.4 fc, as shown in Fig. 14, it will be seen that
the stiffness (EPAC-0 %PA) parameter for NC is greater than the stiffness of concrete (EPAC-100 %PA) with PA. The stress-strain curve ideally

Fig. 13. The relationship between the percentage of aggregate replacement vs. slump.

14
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

consists of two phases, pre-peak and post-peak. The pre-peak phase of the curve is the phase of increasing linear stress with increasing
strain and ductility in the concrete. The post-peak phase of the curve is characterised by a rapid decrease in stress and strain or
brittleness in the concrete. It can be concluded that the pre-failure stage of the curve is sufficient to represent the behaviour and
stress-strain characteristics of concrete with pumice aggregate, in line with reference sources [5]. The curve for PAC is more linear than
the curve for NC, so the ductility and stiffness values of concrete can be represented by the linearity of the concrete curves for PAC and
NC concrete.
Fig. 15 shows the relationship between the type of concrete and stress and strain. The relationship between aggregate replacement
percentage and maximum stress and strain is used as a basis for determining the quality zone of concrete with pumice aggregate. Brittle
concrete with lightweight pumice aggregates is seen from the viewpoint of performance and ability to absorb given load energy. Partial
replacement of normal aggregate with pumice aggregate produces two zones of lightweight concrete mechanical properties, as shown
in Fig. 15. The first is the ductile zone, indicated by a rapid increase in stress followed by a gradual increase in strain. This occurs in
concrete with a percentage replacement of normal aggregate with pumice aggregate below 50 %. The second is the brittle zone,
characterised by low energy absorption; when the load is applied or the load is continuously increased, there is a rapid increase in
strain and a significant decrease in stress. This occurs in concrete with a percentage of replacement of normal aggregate with pumice
aggregate above 50%. Concrete with a percentage of pumice aggregate above 50 % tends to be brittle, both in terms of performance
and fracture behaviour, as shown in Fig. 18(c)–(e). Concrete stress continues to decrease and strain continues to increase, due to the
high porosity content, which causes a lot of stress concentration at the cavity boundaries and causes deformation to continue to in­
crease [22].
The decrease in stress followed by an increase in strain in the brittle zone is caused by a high percentage of pumice aggregate in the
concrete, where the pumice aggregate has a crushed percentage of 51.29 %, according to the Los Angeles abrasion test results as shown
in Table 3. In addition, the SEM results show that the PA has a higher porosity value and lower density than the NA. The PA porosity
was found to be 38.57 % higher than the normal aggregate porosity with a value of 12.39 %. The effect of high pumice aggregate
porosity is to increase the air content and voids in the concrete, reduce self-weight, and reduce the area of contact so that the concrete
stress becomes low. Hossain [18] concludes that the increase in air content in the concrete mixture could also be caused by the low
density and high porosity of the pumice stone. However, more in-depth research is needed, because the existing literature concludes
that directly comparing the parameters of concrete’s brittleness based on its ultimate strength is very difficult. This is because the
stress-strain curve behaves differently depending on the relative strength of the concrete [5]. A maximum percentage of 50 % for the
replacement of NA with PA in lightweight concrete is proposed in order to obtain acceptable performance and mechanical properties.
The hardness and density of pumice aggregate greatly affect the decrease in compressive stress and stiffness of lightweight concrete, as
suggested in the available literature [21].
In addition, the elemental iron (Fe) aggregate is also a factor in the superior performance and higher unit weight of normal
concrete. From the chemical element test results, it is found that the content of elemental iron (Fe) in pumice aggregates is much lower
than in normal aggregates, as shown in Table 6. In addition, in normal concrete, the modulus of elasticity of normal aggregate from
crushed stone is higher than the cement paste matrix [31]. The higher porosity value of the pumice aggregate causes the interface area
of the pumice aggregate with cement paste to be much smaller than the interface area for normal aggregate – the interfacial area for
normal aggregate is much denser than that for pumice aggregate. In addition, the low hardness index, coupled with the high porosity of
the pumice aggregate, lowers concrete performance. The reduced strength of the interfacial bond of aggregate with the cement paste is
one result of the high porosity of pumice aggregate. A percentage of PA content above 50 % causes the concrete to enter the brittle
zone, or a low level of stiffness, as shown in Fig. 15.
Figs. 16 and 17 show the relationship between type of concrete vs. modulus of elasticity and split tensile strength. Concrete
performance factors such as elasticity modulus and rupture modulus using pumice aggregate (PA) tend to decrease. Likewise, the unit
weight of concrete tends to decrease as the percentage of pumice aggregate increases [1]. However, reducing the unit weight of
concrete is highly beneficial for lightweight concrete structures, as long as the performance of the concrete is considered seriously to be
acceptable. The decreased performance of lightweight concrete using pumice aggregate is due to several reasons, including high
porosity and lower hardness compared to normal aggregate.
Fig. 18(a)–(e) show the patterns of cracking and failure of concrete test results with NA and PA specimens. Using pumice aggregate
below 50 % (the ductile zone) produces a conical crack pattern as in Fig. 18(a) and (b), showing the density of the cylindrical test object
as evenly distributed, with pressure well distributed in the concrete forming matrix. The main factor in the occurrence of conical
fracture patterns, or conical fracture patterns in normal concrete, is the interface bond strength of the cement paste with the aggregate
particles, plus the high hardness of the NA. The normal aggregate content in the NC-0 %PA and PAC-25 %PA specimens had a sig­
nificant effect in increasing the mechanical performance of the specimens. The crack pattern and collapse of concrete using pumice
aggregate above 50 % (the brittle zone) are shown in Fig. 18(c)–(e). Specimens with the codes PAC-50 %PA, PAC-75 %PA and PAC-100
%PA comprise concrete using pumice aggregates of 50 %, 75 % and 100 %, respectively. The results of the study show that the crack
and failure patterns are almost the same; the crack pattern is parallel to the load direction, so is categorised as a columnar crack
pattern. This is due to the low hardness index and the large porosity of the PA. The load is not distributed evenly, and the cracks do not
spread and follow the weak points of the concrete-forming matrix. The low hardness, the weak bond strength between the cement paste
interfaces with an aggregate surface, and the large percentage of pumice aggregate in the concrete are the main factors in the
occurrence of columnar crack patterns and porous concrete in the cylinder specimens. Replacement of normal aggregate with pumice
aggregate above 50 % causes “columnar collapse” and the concrete enters the brittle zone. According to the references, a higher
volume of light aggregate results in a more brittle failure, and the strength of concrete with light aggregate is relatively brittle
compared to normal concrete [5]. However, lightweight concrete with pumice aggregate has the advantage of a low unit weight which

15
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Fig. 14. The relationship between compressive strength and strain.

Fig. 15. The relationship between the concrete type and stress and strain.

Fig. 16. The relationship between concrete type and compressive strength and elasticity modulus.

can be utilised for non-structural wall panels. Meanwhile, the solution to obtaining mechanical properties in the form of compressive
strength above 17.2 MPa, according to ACI 213R-87 [47], is to treat materials and employ additives. For example, replacing 30 %
aggregate with expanded clay sand can increase the impact strength by 22 % compared to control concrete [24]. One solution to stress
concentrations in the concrete matrix is to use super sulphated binders. The use of super sulphated binder can increase the structure’s
resistance to internal stress [25].

16
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Fig. 17. The relationship of concrete type and modulus of elasticity and unit weight.

Fig. 18. The fracture of concrete: (a) NC-0 %PA; (b) PAC-25 %PA; (c) PAC-50 %PA; (d) PAC-75 %PA; (e) PAC-100 %PA.

6.4. Models proposed for the formula of the elasticity modulus

Giving a load to the concrete, followed by an increase in compressive strength, automatically makes the cement paste matrix with
the surface of the aggregate particles in the concrete stronger and denser. The strength, density, and high elasticity of the aggregate and
cement paste matrix result in a high modulus of elasticity in the concrete. Aggregate volume content is one of the important factors
affecting the properties of concrete [31]. Figs. 10 and 11 show how the compressive strength and elasticity modulus of concrete
decrease linearly with increasing pumice aggregate percentage. This is due to the high porosity and the low hardness index of the PA.
However, to make it easier to determine the value of the elastic modulus of lightweight concrete with pumice aggregate, an equation is
needed. The calculation of the elastic modulus for all test objects is based on ACI-318 [26], as shown in Eq. (1). Fig. 19 shows that the
linear curve of the relationship between elastic modulus and compressive strength is positively correlated and linear, with a

17
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

termination coefficient R2 = 0.9985. From the regression analysis, an equation can be proposed for the value of the modulus of
elasticity of lightweight concrete with pumice aggregates, as follows with Eq. (14):
√̅̅̅̅
(14)
′ ′ ′
Ec− PAC = 4144 f c − 3904f c ≤ 12(Brittle zone)and12 ≤ f c ≤ 22(Ductile zone)

where Ec-PAC is the elasticity modulus with pumice aggregate andf c is the characteristic compressive strength. The elasticity modulus Ec-
′

with PA, as shown in Eq. (14), is divided into two zones, namely the brittle zone for f c ≤ 12 MPa and the ductile zone for 12 ≤ ..
′
PAC
≤ 22 MPa.
To obtain an acceptable equation for the modulus of elasticity of concrete with pumice aggregate, a comparison of the equations
with several references and codes is shown in Fig. 20 and Table 13. The reference equations for estimating the compressive strength
and modulus of elasticity of concrete are taken from Yildirim and Sengul [31] and Bellum et al. [32], while the codes are taken from TS
500 [27], ACI 318 [26], EN 1992–1–1 [28], CEB-FIP [29], and IS 456–2000 [30].
The aim of comparing the modulus of elasticity equations for concrete made from materials other than pumice aggregate is to
determine the accuracy and acceptability of the equations. The elastic modulus equation for this study and the equations of Bellum
et al. [32] and ACI 318 [26] are similar. The values of the elastic modulus in calculations based on the equation proposed by Bellum
et al. [32] differ by an average of 11 % – as do this study’s results. Fig. 20 shows that the slope of the regression line is similar and that
the two equations appear to give similar results, as shown in Table 13. Likewise, the results of calculations based on the ACI 318 [26]
standard give similar results, but the slope of the curves is slightly different, due to differentiating factors, especially the unit weight
(Wc) on NC-0 %PA-type concrete. Calculations on the concrete types PAC-25 %PA, PAC-50 %PA, PAC-75 %PA, and PAC-100 %PA
show similar results, as shown in Table 13. Meanwhile, when compared with the equation proposed by Yildirim et al. [31], there is
quite a distance, around 45 %, almost the same as the difference in calculation results based on the equation given by code TS 500 [27]
and EN 1992–1–1 [28]. This is reasonable because the bases for the initial calculation were code TS 500 [27] and EN 1992–1–1 [28].
When viewed from the slope of the curve there is also a difference. This indicates a difference in the treatment of the test material and
the employment of additives.

6.5. Models proposed for the formula of the rupture modulus

Fig. 21 shows the effect of pumice aggregate on the rupture modulus. The percentage of pumice aggregate volume in concrete has a
significant effect on decreasing the modulus of rupture. The higher the percentage of aggregate volume, the faster the concrete reaches
its maximum peak stress, and the faster it collapses. From the results of SEM and hardness tests, pumice aggregates have high porosity,
low density, and lower hardness than normal aggregates, thus causing low mechanical properties, including the modulus of rupture. As
the percentage of replacement of normal aggregate with pumice aggregate in concrete increases, split tensile strength and concrete
rupture modulus decrease, in line with the available literature [12]. Abbasi and Tayyib [34] state that the mechanical properties are
enhanced as density increases, at the same time as the modulus of rupture and split tensile strength rise. This is indicated by a linear
appropriate between the percentage of normal aggregate replacement with the modulus of rupture, with a correlation coefficient (R2)
of 0.9401. The calculation of the modulus of rupture in lightweight concrete with pumice aggregate is based on the compressive
strength of concrete using the formula recommended by SNI 2847–2013 [35] and ACI 318–1989 [26], as shown in Eq. (9).
Fig. 22 shows a comparison of equation models of test results of the modulus of rupture with several codes, where the curve of the
relationship rupture modulus with compressive strength is linear and positively correlated with a termination coefficient of R2
= 0.9797 for the modulus of rupture based on compressive strength, and R2 = 0.948 for the modulus of rupture based on split tensile
strength. From the results of the regression analysis, the equation for the modulus of rupture value as shown in Eq. (15) for the modulus
of rupture based on compressive strength, and Eq. (16) for the modulus of rupture based on split tensile strength, are proposed.

Fig. 19. The relationship between elastic modulus and compressive strength.

18
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Fig. 20. Comparison of the test results of the elastic modulus model with several references and codes.

Table 13
The modulus of elasticity model from several references and codes.
Type of Modulus of Elasticity (x103 N/mm2)
concrete
Turkish Standard TS ACI European CEB- IS Bellum Yildirim and Saridemir This
500 [27] 318 EN 1992–1-1 FIP 456–2000 et al. Sengul [31] [33] study
[26] [28] [29] [30] [32]

NC-0 % PA 29.07 21.79 27.68 23.59 23.18 15.22 27.90 24.02 15.31
PAC-25 % PA 26.52 14.02 24.77 20.85 19.27 12.65 22.73 21.24 12.07
PAC-50 % PA 25.60 10.35 23.65 19.81 17.84 11.71 20.85 20.17 10.88
PAC-75 % PA 23.31 7.84 20.74 17.11 14.33 9.40 16.21 17.43 7.97
PAC-100 % 23.15 7.40 20.51 16.91 14.07 9.24 15.87 17.22 7.76
PA

Fig. 21. Effect of pumice aggregate percentage on the modulus of rupture.

√̅̅̅̅
(15)
′ ′ ′
fr = 0.634 f c − 0.5f c ≤ 12(Brittle zone)and12 ≤ f c ≤ 22(Ductile zone)

√̅̅̅̅
(16)
′ ′ ′
fr = 0.6624 f c − 0.8f c ≤ 12(Brittle zone)and12 ≤ f c ≤ 22(Ductile zone)

The rupture modulus (fr) of lightweight concrete with pumice aggregate is divided into two zones, namely the brittle zone for­
f c ≤ 12 MPa and the ductile zone for 12 ≤f c ≤ 22 MPa.
′ ′

To obtain an acceptable modulus of rupture equation for lightweight concrete with pumice aggregate, a comparison of the
equations with several codes was carried out, as shown in Table 14 and Fig. 22.
Comparison of the value of the modulus of rupture from the test results with the results of calculations based on equations from
various codes shows almost the same value, especially calculations based on ACI 435R-2003 [36] and the AS/NZS Code [37], as shown
in Fig. 22. Calculations based on the ACI 435R-2003 [36] formula produce a slightly higher modulus of rupture, while calculations

19
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

Fig. 22. Comparison of the equation model of test results of the modulus of rupture with several codes.

based on formulas from the AS/NZS Code [37] and Canadian Code [38] return slightly lower results than those based on the formula
proposed in this study. The slope of the regression line from the proposed formulas and formulas from various codes is almost the same.
A slightly different slope of the curve occurs in the regression line results from the formula ACI 435R-2003 [36] and the Euro Code
[28]. This is because the aggregate pumice factor is not the same in every country. Differences in the pumice formation process,
chemical composition, mineral composition, and porosity, including the unit weight (wc) of the pumice aggregate, greatly affect the
compressive strength and rupture modulus of concrete. Henceforth, cross-country development research is needed with various kinds
of pumice aggregates from various countries as a representation of the proposed formula in general. Users of pumice aggregate for
lightweight concrete mixtures must pay attention to the percentage to avoid concrete with unanticipated brittle zones. The replace­
ment of normal aggregate with pumice aggregate for lightweight concrete is proposed to be no more than 50%, so that the performance
of lightweight concrete is acceptable and enters the ductile concrete zone.

7. Conclusions

Based on the concrete performance test, geochemical analysis, and porosity analysis of PA, conclusions are drawn as follows:

(1) Lightweight concrete using PA produces two concrete quality zones, namely the brittle zone for concrete with PA above 50 %
and the ductile zone for concrete with PA below 50 %.
(2) The performance of lightweight concrete using PA is lower than that of concrete using NA. The compressive strength of LWAC
using PA decreased by 30.93 %, 40.79 %, 61.81 %, and 63.16 % and the tensile strength of LWAC using PA decreased by 13 %,
35 %, 48 %, and 55 % respectively from the control concrete for PA percentages of 25 %, 50 %, 75 %, and 100 %.
(3) The formula for calculating elastic modulus (Ec) is proposed for LWAC using PA aggregates as follows:
√̅̅̅̅
′
Ec = 4144 f c − 3904

The formula for calculating rupture modulus (fr) based on compressive strength is proposed for LWAC using PA ag­
gregates as follows:
√̅̅̅̅
′
fr = 0.634 f c − 0.5

The formula for calculating rupture modulus (fr) based on split tensile strength is proposed for LWAC using PA ag­
gregates as follows:

Table 14
The modulus of rupture model from codes and this study.
Type of concrete Modulus of rupture, fr (MPa)

This study ACI 435R-2003 AS/NZS Code Canadian Code Euro Code
SNI 2847–2013[35] and [36] [37] [38] [28]
ACI 318–1989[26]

NC-0 % PA 2.44 2.88 1.67 1.39 0.51

PAC-25 % PA 2.03 2.20 1.39 1.16 0.47
PAC-50 % PA 1.66 1.89 1.28 1.07 0.38
PAC-75 % PA 1.33 1.49 1.03 0.86 0.33
PAC-100 % PA 1.31 1.44 1.01 0.84 0.30

20
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

√̅̅̅̅
′
fr = 0.6624 f c − 0.8

(4) The performance of lightweight concrete with PA is highly dependent on the hardness, density, and porosity of the pumice. The
utilisation of pumice as lightweight concrete aggregate must be selective in order to attain better lightweight concrete
performance.
(5) The replacement of NA with PA for lightweight concrete is proposed for a maximum of 50%, so that the performance of
lightweight concrete is acceptable and enters the ductile concrete zone. The use of PA above 50 % is recommended to add
additive material to improve the performance of LWAC and it is very important to carry out further research on replacing NA
aggregates with PA above 50 % using additive materials.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data Availability

Data will be made available on request.

Acknowledgments

This research is fully supported by the Internal Funding Programme, Institute for Research and Community Service, at the Uni­
versity of Muhammadiyah Jember, Jember, Indonesia.

References

[1] R.B. Karthika, V. Vidyapriya, K.V.N. Sri, K.M.G. Beaula, R. Harini, M. Sriram, Experimental study on lightweight concrete using pumice aggregate, Mater. Today
Proc. 43 (2021) 1606–1613, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.762.
[2] H.Tamai Hariyadi, Enhancing the performance of porous concrete by utilizing the pumice aggregate, Procedia Eng. 125 (2015) 732–738, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.proeng.2015.11.116.
[3] M.J. Shannag, A. Charif, S. Dghaither, Developing structural lightweight concrete using volcanic scoria available in Saudi Arabia, Arab J. Sci. Eng. 39 (2014)
3525–3534, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-014-1019-5.
[4] M.A. Sultan, A. Gaus, R. Hakim, Imran, Review of the flexural strength of lightweight concrete beam using pumice stone as of substitution partial coarse
aggregate, GEOMATE J. 21 (2021) 154–159. 〈https://geomatejournal.com/geomate/article/view/80〉.
[5] H.Z. Cui, T.Y. Lo, S.A. Memon, W. Xu, Effect of lightweight aggregates on the mechanical properties and brittleness of lightweight aggregate concrete, Constr.
Build. Mater. 35 (2012) 149–158, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.02.053.
[6] A. Rahai, A. Dolati, E. Kamel, H. Babaizadeh, Studying the effect of various parameters on mechanical properties of lightweight aggregate concrete using
MANOVA, Mater. Struct. 48 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-014-0317-4.
[7] H. Suseno, Suitability of medium-K basaltic andesite pumice and scoria as coarse aggregates on structural lightweight concrete, Int. J. Eng. Technol. 9 (2017)
3318–3329.
[8] H. Suseno, M.N. Wijaya, L. Susanti, Potential use of kelud volcano eruptive deposits, Indonesia as aggregates of Green structural lightweight concrete, AIP Conf.
Proc. 2447 (2021) 30002, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0072633.
[9] A.M. Rashad, A short manual on natural pumice as a lightweight aggregate, J. Build. Eng. 25 (2019), 100802, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100802.
[10] T. Žižlavský, M. Vyšvařil, Effect of natural lightweight aggregate on fresh state properties of lime mortars, in: A.I.P. Conf Proc, 2021: p. 20018. https://doi.org/
10.1063/5.0041828.
[11] S.George Rajeswari, Experimental study of light weight concrete by partial replacement of coarse aggregate using pumice aggregate, Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res.
(IJSER). 4 (2016) 50–53.
[12] H.K. Adai Al-Farttoosi, O.A. Abdulrazzaq, H.K. Hussain, Mechanical Properties of Light Weight Aggregate Concrete Using Pumice as a Coarse Aggregate, in: I.O.
P. Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng, 2021: p. 012106. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757–899X/1090/1/012106.
[13] N. Kabay, M.M. Tufekci, A.B. Kizilkanat, D. Oktay, Properties of concrete with pumice powder and fly ash as cement replacement materials, Constr. Build.
Mater. 85 (2015) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.03.026.
[14] A.S. Alqarni, A comprehensive review on properties of sustainable concrete using volcanic pumice powder ash as a supplementary cementitious material,
Constr. Build. Mater. 323 (2022), 126533, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.126533.
[15] H.A. Mboya, K.N. Njau, A.L. Mrema, C.K. King’ondu, Influence of scoria and pumice on key performance indicators of Portland cement concrete, Constr. Build.
Mater. 197 (2019) 444–453, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.11.228.
[16] F. Rahman, W. Adil, M. Raheel, M. Saberian, J. Li, T. Maqsood, Experimental investigation of high replacement of cement by pumice in cement mortar: A
mechanical, durability and microstructural study, J. Build. Eng. 49 (2022), 104037, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104037.
[17] L. Gündüz, The effects of pumice aggregate/cement ratios on the low-strength concrete properties, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (2008) 721–728, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.01.030.
[18] K.M.A. Hossain, S. Ahmed, M. Lachemi, Lightweight concrete incorporating pumice based blended cement and aggregate: mechanical and durability
characteristics, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2011) 1186–1195, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.09.036.
[19] L. Domagała, Modification of properties of structural lightweight concrete with steel fibres, J. Civ. Eng. Man 17 (2011) 36–44, https://doi.org/10.3846/
13923730.2011.553923.
[20] B. Han, T.-Y. Xiang, Axial compressive stress-strain relation and Poisson effect of structural lightweight aggregate concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 146 (2017)
338–343, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.101.
[21] J.M. Chi, R. Huang, C.C. Yang, J.J. Chang, Effect of aggregate properties on the strength and stiffness of lightweight concrete, Cem. Concr. Compos. 25 (2003)
197–205, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-9465(02)00020-3.
[22] M. van den Heever, A. du Plessis, J. Kruger, G. van Zijl, Evaluating the effects of porosity on the mechanical properties of extrusion-based 3D printed concrete,
Cem. Concr. Res. 153 (2022), 106695, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2021.106695.

21
Muhtar Case Studies in Construction Materials 18 (2023) e01960

[23] W.F. Chen, Concrete plasticity: macro- and microapproaches, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 35 (1993) 1097–1109, https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7403(93)90058-3.
[24] A. Kharitonov, M. Korobkova, O. Smirnova, The influence of low-hard dispersed additives on impact strength of concrete, Procedia Eng. 108 (2015) 239–244,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.06.143.
[25] L.F. Kazanskaya, O.M. Smirnova, Á. Palomo, I. Menendez Pidal, M. Romana, Supersulfated cement applied to produce lightweight concrete, Materials 14
(2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14020403.
[26] ACI 318-, Building code requirements for structural concrete. Farmington Hills, Mich, Am. Concr. Inst. (1989) 1989.
[27] TS 500, Requirements for design and construction of reinforced concrete structures, Turkish Institute of Standards, 2002.
[28] EN 1992–1-1, Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures – Part 1–1, General rules and rules for buildings, European Standard Norme Europeenne Europaische
Norm, 1992.
[29] CEB-FIP Model Code, Comite Euro-International Du Beton, 1990.
[30] IS 456–2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete (Fourth Revision) - Code of Practice is an Indian Standard code of practice for general structural use of plain and
reinforced concrete, 2007.
[31] H. Yıldırım, O. Sengul, Modulus of elasticity of substandard and normal concretes, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (2011) 1645–1652, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2010.10.009.
[32] R.R. Bellum, K. Muniraj, S.R.C. Madduru, Investigation on modulus of elasticity of fly ash-ground granulated blast furnace slag blended geopolymer concrete,
Mater. Today Proc. 27 (2020) 718–723, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.299.
[33] M. Sarıdemir, Effect of silica fume and ground pumice on compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of high strength concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 49
(2013) 484–489, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.08.091.
[34] A.F. Abbasi, A.J. Al-Tayyib, Effect of hot weather on modulus of rupture and splitting tensile strength of concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 15 (1985) 233–244, https://
doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(85)90034-1.
[35] SNI 2847-2013, Structural Concrete Requirements for Buildings. ICS 91.080.40, BSN, Indonesia, 2013.
[36] ACI-435R-2003, Control of Deflection in Concrete Structures. American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, USA, 2003.
[37] AS/NZS 4456.15, Masonry units, segmental pavers and flags - Methods of test which details test procedures covering the performance parameters set out in NZS
4456. Determining lateral modulus of rupture. New Zealand Concrete Masonry Association Inc, 2017.
[38] A23.3 CC, Design of Concrete Structures. Mississauga, ON, Canada: Canadian Standards Association, 2004.
[39] ASTM C-33, Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 1999.
[40] ACI 211.1–91, Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions for Normal, Heavyweight and Mass Concrete. Detroit, American Concrete Institute, 1991.
[41] ACI 211.2–98, Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions for Structural Lightweight Concrete. American Concrete Institute, 1998.
[42] ASTM C-143, Standard Test Method for Slump of Hydraulic-Cement Concrete 1, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 2003.
[43] ASTM C-39, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 2003.
[44] ASTM C-469, Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson’s Ratio of Concrete in Compression 1, ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
2002.
[45] ASTM C-138, Designation: C 138/C 138M-01a Standard Test Method for Density (Unit Weight), Yield, and Air Content (Gravimetric) of Concrete 1, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, 2000.
[46] ASTM C-496, Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 2004.
[47] ACI 213R-87, Guide for Structural Lightweight Aggregate Concrete. American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, USA, 1987.

22