SRES’s Sanjivani College of Engineering, Kopargaon

Department of Civil Engineering

A project on:

Investigation Of Ferrocement Reinforced Confinement On RC Short

Column

Guided By: - Prof. A. V. Ghogare

Submitted By:-

Mr. Salmuthe Gaurav S. (71903755H)

Mr. Singar Shashwat S. (71903791D)

Mr. Somvanshi Krushna K. (71903795G)

Mr. Singar Prithviraj B. (71903790F)

1
 DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. Salmuthe Gaurav S., Singar Shashwat S., Somvanshi Krushna
K., Singar Prithviraj B. Students of B.E in CIVIL ENGINEERING, SANJIVANI COLLEGE
OF ENGINEERING, KOPARGAON, presented a project on “Investigation On Ferrocement
Reinforced Confinement On RC Short Column” for the award of Bachelor of Engineering in
CIVIL ENGINEERING from SAVITRIBAI PHULE PUNE UNIVERSITY during the
academic year 2021-2022. This report has not been submitted to any other organization and
does not form part of any course undergone by then, for the award of B.E degree.

Prof. A V Ghogare

Guide

Dr. M S Purkar Dr. A. G. Thakur

HOD, Civil Dept. Principal

2
 Acknowledgement

First of all, we are indebted to the Department of Civil Engineering of Sanjivani college of
Engineering for giving us an opportunity to express our efforts to complete this project on this topic.
We are extremely grateful to HOD of Civil Department, Dr.M.S.Purkar Sir, Assistant Professors and
IT resources for their help to the successful completion of our project phase -I. Our heartfelt gratitude
to our seminar guide Prof. A.V. Ghogare Sir, for his valuable suggestions and guidance in the
preparation of this project report. We also express our thanks to friends for all the help and co-ordination
extended in bringing out this project successfully in time. We will be failing in duty if we do not
acknowledge with grateful thanks to the authors of the references and other literatures referred to in this
seminar. Last but not the least; we are very much thankful to our parents who guided us in every step
which we took.

Yours Thankful

Mr. Salmuthe Gaurav S

Mr. Singar Shashwat S

Mr. Somvanshi Krushna K

Mr. Singar Prithviraj B

3
 ABSTRACT

Retrofitting of the existing structures has become a large part of the construction
activity. Columns are the most authoritative structural element in any structure that transfers
the entire loads to the foundation. Slenderness ratio is an important aspect that determines the
load carrying capacity of the columns. In general, the load carrying capacity of the concrete
columns decreases with increase in slenderness ratio. Therefore, the strengthening of deficient
columns is necessary to increase the load carrying capacity, ductility and energy absorption
capacity that can be achieved by external confinement of column. External confinement can be
done by using different materials such as ferrocement, fibre reinforced polymers (FRP), steel
jacketing. Ferrocement confinement is one of the oldest, efficient and cost effective techniques
of re-strengthening of deteriorated and weak columns. Ferrocement is a form of thin wall
reinforced concrete using wire mesh and high strength mortar. Small diameter of wires used as
reinforcement, leads to a higher specific surface, providing homogeneity to the ferrocement.
Closely spaced wires provide more ductility and energy absorption capacity. The structures
confined with ferrocement undergo deformation above elastic point, unlike conventional
concrete structures that undergo brittle failure.

Considering all these points in view, the present study focused on the behaviour of RCC
columns with different slenderness ratios on the unconfined columns and ferrocement confined
columns. Column is confined with two different types wire mesh. Columns were casted with
M30 grade of concrete. Various tests were performed on materials as well as concrete .very
first aim of study is to do comparative study column confined with geoploymer mortar , column
confined with cement mortar and conventional column which can be the alternative option for
strengthening of column .

4
 CONTENTS

1. Introduction ………08
1.1 Ferrocement technology ………10
1.2 Geopolymer …..,….11
2. Literature Review ………12
3. Necessity of study ………18
4. Objectives ………19
5. Methodology ………19
5.1 Exprimental programme ………19
5.2 Materials ………19
5.3 Testing of materials ………20
5.4 Steel design ………25
5.5 Experimental work ………26
5.6 Concrete mix design ………26
5.7 Tests on concrete ………31
6. Case study ………34
7. References ………36

5
 LIST OF FIGURES

Table No. Table Name Page no.

Table. 5.1 Observation table for fineness of cement 20

Table. 5.2 Observation table for consistency of 20

cement
Table 5.3 Observation table for fineness modulus of 21
sand
Table 5.4 Observation table for specific gravity of 22
C.A.
Table 5.5 Observation table for specific gravity of 24
C.A.
Table 5.6 Observation table for aggregate crushing 25
value test
Table 5.7 Observation table for aggregate impact 25
value test
Table 5.8 Observation table for fineness modulus 25
for C.A.
Table 5.9 Test Results for Cement, Fine aagregate 26
and Course aggregates
Table 5.10 Experimental Work 27

Table 5.11 32
Workability Chart

Table 5.12 Test Results for Compressive Strenght of 33

Concrete Blocks
Table 5.13 Test Results for Mortar Blocks 34

6
LIST OF TABLES

Figure no. Name of Figure Page no.

IS Sieve Set
Figure 5.1 21

Vicat Apparatus
Figure 5.2 21

Figure 5.3 Sieve Analysis In TOM Lab 24

Compressive Strength of
Figure 5.4 32
Concrete Block in TOM Lab

Figure 5.5 Casting of Concrete Blocks 34

Figure 5.6 Casting of Mortar Blocks 34

7
 1. INTRODUCTION

Columns are very important structural element of a building, as the column has to with
stand the entire load and transfer it to foundation. The strength as well as ductility is of same
important in a column. Various techniques are applied till date to provide sufficient ductility to
column and still the process is in continuation. The strengthening of reinforced concrete
columns through ferrocement jacketing is a commonly used effective technique because of its
availability of raw material and low cost. Retrofitting with ferrocement confinement is the
oldest and cost-effective technique used to strengthen the concrete structures. The unique
properties of ferrocement such as fire resistant, durability, low selfweight, water proof and crack
resistant make it an ideal material for wider applications.Use of ferrocement also increases the
ductility of columns. Ferrocement is a form of reinforced concrete using closely spaced multiple
layers of mesh and/or small diameter rods completely infiltrated with, or encapsulated, in
mortar. The most common type of reinforcement is steel mesh. Other materials such as selected
organic, natural, or synthetic fibers may be combined with metallic mesh. It is well known fact
that the RC Jacketing technique is one of the efficient techniques for repair and rehabilitation
of the damaged RC columns. Confinement with the ferrocement encasement improves the
ultimate load carrying capacity and increases the axial and lateral deflection of RC column. It
is investigated that in column confined with jacketed specimens shows increase in load carrying
capacity and ductility performance. The external confinement using ferrocement resulted in
enhanced stiffness, ductility, and strength and energy dissipation capacity. The mode of failure
could be changed from brittle shear failure to ductile flexural failure. Increase in the concrete
strength results in reduced displacement ductility and drift capacities for a given curvature
ductility. To achieve the same level of displacement ductility or drift capacity in a high strength
concrete column, the use of a larger amount of confining reinforcement is required. The
relationships between various ductility parameters (curvature ductility, displacement ductility
and drift capacity) are affected by the level of axial load. A Ferro cement shell, with high
particle strength mortar between Ferro cement layers is an effective way of providing additional
confinement 12 of concrete in axial compression and has the advantage over lateral tie
confinement of improving material performance under large deformations. The additional
confinement with the Ferro cement shell improved the ultimate strength, the strain at ultimate
strength and the ductility of concrete increases with the increase of confinement. The ductility
of a structural member is obtained from the idealization of the experimental or theoretical
diagram response. The ductility factor is obtained as the ratio between the ultimate value and

8
the yielding value. The ductility factor in curvatures does not always decrease with the axial
load. It decreases with the strength of concrete, the reinforcement ratio and the relative cover
of the longitudinal reinforcement and it increases with confinement level. Experimental
investigations have shown that under severe conditions columns can fail with different modes
of failure. These failure modes range from: large shear cracks, spalling of cover concrete due
to debonding of longitudinal reinforcement in lap-splice regions at potential plastic hinge areas,
confinement failure leading to buckling of longitudinal bars between widely spaced transverse
reinforcement. The decrease in the design ductility factor can be prevented by controlling the
variability of the actual yield stress versus the nominal yield stress of steels used in seismic
design. The load carrying capacity, ductility and serviceability of unreinforced masonry
columns can substantially be improved if encased by ferrocement. The parameters such as
cement mortar thickness, gage- wire spacing and bond at the interface of ferrocement and brick
columns have effects on overall behavior. The structural design of the vast majority of
reinforced concrete civil engineering structures relies on the inherent ductility of the members
to accommodate changes in load patterns, to absorb energy and to give prior warning of failure.
Most of the rehabilitation works consist of repairing old deteriorating structures, and structures
damaged by earthquakes and natural disasters. Hence the development of cost-effective and
long-lasting construction methods can greatly reduce maintenance requirements, increase life
safety and increase the service life of concrete structures. Ferrocement jacket can be used as
strengthening techniques as well as after ferrocement jacket columns fails in ductile manner.
Many of the existing short columns have poor seismic detailing. Due to short dowels and little
transverse reinforcement, risk of brittle shear failure in such members is very high. Premature
shear 13 failure prevents formation of flexural plastic hinges and decreases ductility capacity.
It is very important to develop efficient techniques to retrofit shear critical columns and increase
their ductility capacity. Wrapping concrete columns with a proper strengthening material can
be an effective solution. Reinforced concrete, steel plates, steel straps and fiberreinforced
polymer, FRP, composites are common retrofit techniques. The main objectives of this
experimental work are to investigate the effectiveness of providing ferromesh as confinement
reinforcement in addition to stirrups & without using stirrups. The results of all on one third-
scale reinforced concrete square columns are compared with each other to study the behavior
of columns, in terms of axial strength, axial and lateral displacement, stressstrain ductility,
cracking pattern and failure modes. Also, OPC is the most used building material in the
construction industry and has a wide application area. During the production of cement, 5–8%
greenhouse gas is released to the atmosphere. Worldwide cement production has grown
9
incredibly in recent years. After fossil fuels and land-use change, it is the third biggest basis of
anthropogenic emissions of CO2 (carbon dioxide). A future challenge to the construction
industry is to use alternative materials to replace cement with industrial by-products. At the
same time, ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) and fly ash, which are industrial by-
products, constitute the environmental pollution due to the storage and disposal problems.
According to the last statistical data, there are 750 million tones fly ash and 500 million tones
blast furnace slag over the world .In order to achieve both strengthening of column and use of
geopolymer in ferrocement confinement for ecofriendly construction The development of
innovative rehabilitation and strengthening technique is required to extend the life expectancy
of many concrete structures .The present study is performed to analyze the various properties
of RC column by using ferrocement confinement with geopolymer mortar, cost effectiveness
and other properties are studied.

1.1 Ferrocement technology and its advantages:

Ferrocement is a composite construction material that consists of closely spaced single or

multiple layers of steel mesh with or without skeletal steel support. This material is either
completely infiltrated by or is encapsulated in mortar ferrocement as RC in the guise of high-
performing, thin elements with reference to the resistance of ferrocement to 14 elongation,
ductility and impact load. This composite material is sometimes referred to as thin-shell
concrete.

Ferrocement was introduced as a construction material in 1848 by Frenchman Joseph

Louis Lambot, who constructed a ferrocement boat. Although this composite material was
created in Europe, it was enhanced further in developing countries owing to its low material
cost and labor-intensive construction procedure. No formwork is required for ferrocement
construction, and it can be constructed as an extremely thin wall. The tools required for
manufacturing ferrocement are also particularly simple. Utilizing this material in construction
is advantageous because of its various improved engineering properties, such as high tensile
and in-plain shear strength, toughness, ductility, crack bridging capability and fatigue and
impact resistance. This material also exhibits unique fire- and corrosion-resistant properties.
The advantages of using ferrocement as a strengthening material are discussed briefly in the
subsequent section.

1.1.1 Advantages of ferrocement as a confinement material over other confinement

materials:

10
1) Ferrocement may be a cost-competitive solution for infrastructure rehabilitation.

2) The use of ferrocement requires minimum skilled labour. This simple requirement there by
enhances the cost-effectiveness of this material over FRP jacketing, which needs highly skilled
labour.

3) No particular measures must be taken to ensure the bond between ferrocement and the
underlying substrate (concrete or masonry).

4) Ferrocement displays significantly higher in-plain shear strength capacity.

5) Ferrocement exhibits a considerably higher moment capacity.

6) The ductility of ferrocement-jacketed columns is higher.

7) The shear strength capacity of ferrocement-confined RC columns that are 15 subjected to

cyclic loading is higher.

8) Fabricated into any desired shape.

1.2 Geopolymer:

Geopolymers are framework structures produced by condensation of tetrahedral

aluminosilicate units, with alkali metal ions balancing the charge associated with tetrahedral
Al. Conventionally, geopolymers are synthesized from a two-part mix, consisting of an alkaline
solution (often soluble silicate) and solid aluminosilicate materials. Geopolymerization occurs
at ambient or slightly elevated temperature, where the leaching of solid aluminosilicate raw
materials in alkaline solutions leads to the transfer of leached species from the solid surfaces
into a growing gel phase, followed by nucleation and condensation of the gel phase to form a
solid binder.

Geopolymers, generally obtained from activation of solid aluminosilicate using

hydroxide or silicates of alkali metals, are inorganic materials whose chemical structure consists
of an aluminosilicate gel where aluminum and silicon are tetrahedrally bonded by sharing of
oxygen atoms.

The improvement and research of geopolymeric materials has been presented since
1930 and the distinctive research papers are accessible in this field

11
1.2.1 Advantages of geopolymer:

1) High compressive strength and tensile strength.

2) Low creep and drying shrinkage.

3) Resistant to heat, cold and chemical.

4) Highly durable

5) Fire proof

6) Eco-friendly

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Abdullah and Takiguchi (2003): investigated the square columns using both square and
circular ferrocement simultaneously under compressive and cyclic loading. For the study three
types of columns were considered. A total of six identical reference RC columns, based on
about 1:3–1:8 scale were constructed. Three columns, designated as CJ-AL10-6L, CJ-AL15-
6L, and CJ-AL20-6L were tested under different axial loads after being strengthened with
circular ferrocement jackets containing six layers of wire mesh. Specimen CJAL15-6/3L,
strengthened with reduced number of layers of wire mesh for the centre portion, was tested to
investigate the behavior and strength of the important practical aspect of

strengthening RC column with ferrocement. Two reference columns, SJ-AL15-4L and

SJAL15-6L, were strengthened with square ferrocement jackets, with four and six layers of
wire mesh, respectively, before tested to their failure to study the effects of different shapes of
jacketing on lateral load–displacement response. Each of the reference columns was reinforced
with 12 deformed D-6 bars distributed evenly around the perimeter of the column cross-section.
Smooth R-2 (diameter¼2mm) bars were used as transverse reinforcement spaced at 50 mm.

A.B.M.A. Kaish et al: investigated effect of Ferro cement jacketing in short square RC column.
Disadvantages of conventional square jacketing system are stated and remedial techniques are
proposed. Those are strengthening all corners and reducing concentration of stresses at corners.

12
Concentration of stresses at corners is reduced by two methods – a) making the middle zone of
each face an effective stress transfer zone and b) making the column corners round. All
specimens were tested under increasing concentrated load. Load 30 carrying capacity of all
retrofitted types of ferrocement jacketed columns is higher than that of the conventional
jacketed column. Failure patterns of specimens were noted. Among all the specimens the
specimen with single layer wire mesh with extra two layers of wire mesh at corner (SCT)
exhibited the best performance. Therefore SCT technique is more feasible

G.J. Xiong (2010): In this paper load carrying capacity and ductility of circular column which
was confined by ferrocement with steel bars experimental study on uniaxial compression
behaviours of concrete columns wrap with three different confining systems, namely bar mat-
mortar (BM), FS, and fibre reinforced polymer (FRP), was carried out. Fifty-one specimens
were produced. The load–strain responses, failure modes, ultimate loads and ductility of various
strengthened columns were investigated. The experiment results showed that the mortar cover
crack spaces of FS columns were basically equal to the wire mesh spacing, leading to the
occurrence of much more cracks compared with that of BM columns. As a result, on the premise
that the concrete compressive strength of the FS columns increased 30% compared with that of
the BM columns, the ductility of the former reached about twice as that of the latter. When the
confined concrete strength of FRP strengthened columns was similar to that of FS strengthened
columns, the ductility, energy absorption capacity and deformation capacity of the former were
obviously lower than those of the latter. The strength ,ductility and energy absorption capacity
of existing concrete column can be simultaneously enhanced significantly by constructing
additional ferrocement cage including steel bar.

Mini Soman, Jebin Mohan (2018): In this study various experiments done on the effectiveness
of ferrocement jacketing for rehabilitation of rc column of square and rectangular shape
particularly. for improvement in effectiveness of confinement corners of column were rounded.
study was carried out on the basis of number of layers of ferrocement mesh and amount of
preloading. Total 20 column were casted and tested which were grouped in A and B group.
Each group included two control columns without jacketing and 8 columns were rehabilitated
with 2 and 3 layers of wrapping. column were preloaded at 70% and 100% of its ultimate
capacity except control column and then observed that the confinement effectiveness and load
carrying capacity of column improves with number of layer of wrapping but reduce with aspect
ratio and preloading rate.

13
Aantoine E. Naaman and Surendra P. Shah(1971): The scope of this investigation was to 35
better understand ferrocement as an engineering materia I and to predict its design properties.
In spite of growing popularity of this mater·ial basic design information is scani'. The influence
of types, sizes, and volumes of wire meshes on elastic, crackina, and ultimate behavior of
ferrocement in uniaxial tension was studied. It was observed that the ultimate strength of
ferrocement is the same as that of mesh alone while its modulus of elasticity can be predicted
from those of mortar and mesh. The specific surface of the reinforcement strongly influenced
the cracking behavior of ferrocement. An analytic relation between crack spacing and the
specific surface of the reinforcement was developed. The relatively large specific surface for
ferrocement may account for the combination of very small width of cracks and high tensile
strength. The ultimate load on ferrocement specimens tested was the same as the load carrying
capacity of the reinforcement in the loading direction. The modulus of elasticity of ferrocement
in tension can be approximately predicted by the law of mixture of composite materials.
Increasing the specific surface of reinforcement increases the stress at the onset of cracking, the
number of cracks to failure, the toughness and the elongation at ultimate load. The maximum
value of elongation and toughness is determined by that of the mesh alone.

M.J. Shannag and S.M. Mourad (2012): The matrix used in ferrocement primarily consists
of mortar made with Portland cement, water, and aggregate, with a sand tocement ratio of about
1–2.5 by weight, and water to cement ratio of about 0.4–0.6 by weight. Recently there has been
a growing trend towards the use of supplementary cementitious materials, such as silica fume,
fly ash, natural pozzolona, and blast furnace slag in the production of composite cements
because of economical, technical and environmental benefits. A high strength cementitious
matrix intended for use in ferrocement applications should meet several performance criteria,
including flowability and strength in addition to impermeability, sulfate resistance, corrosion
protection and in some cases frost durability. The deterioration of existing concrete structures
in many countries necessitates the need for developing cost-effective and long term repair and
retrofit solutions that can be implemented in practice. A practical method of repair should take
into consideration, the amount of damage, the shape of the member, materials of repair,
construction cost, time and practicality. Several repair/retrofit techniques were used for
restoring the load carrying capacity of damaged concrete structural elements. These involve
strengthening beams and columns by epoxy bonding of steel plates, external fixing of high
performance fiber reinforced concrete jackets, or ferrocement laminates, and bonding of fiber
reinforced 26 polymer sheets to existing damaged concrete.

14
A.B.M.A. Kaish et al: investigated effect of Ferro cement jacketing in short square RC column.
Disadvantages of conventional square jacketing system are stated and remedial techniques are
proposed. Those are strengthening all corners and reducing concentration of stresses at corners.
Concentration of stresses at corners is reduced by two methods – a) making the middle zone of
each face an effective stress transfer zone and b) making the column corners round. All
specimens were tested under increasing concentrated load. Load 30 carrying capacity of all
retrofitted types of ferrocement jacketed columns is higher than that of the conventional
jacketed column. Failure patterns of specimens were noted. Among all the specimens the
specimen with single layer wire mesh with extra two layers of wire mesh at corner (SCT)
exhibited the best performance. Therefore SCT technique is more feasible.

Muhammad et.al (2011): a new idea is investigated in this study to reduce the cover spalling
of high-strength concrete columns: installing relatively cheap materials such as household fly
screen and wire mesh in the formwork of RC columns. Three materials were chosen in this
study: fiberglass fly mesh (FGFM), standard aluminium fly mesh (SAFM), 33 and 12:7 × 12:7
galvanized steel wire mesh (S12.7 WM). A total of 16 cylindrical specimens with a length of
925 mm and a diameter of 205 mm were cast and tested under concentric, eccentric, and pure
bending loading. The testing results showed that S12.7 WM significantly improved the load-
carrying capacity under both concentric and eccentric loading but did not significantly increase
the ductility of the columns for each load case. FGFM and SAFM significantly improved the
ductility of columns under concentric loading, but the significance decreased with the increase
in eccentricity.

Mohammed Arif et.al (1999): gives investigation about In-plane tension, compression and
bending tests were conducted on plain mortar and ferrocement specimens with woven and
welded meshes. Tension tests were also carried out on meshes. Bending tests were conducted
using specimens with centre point loading. The objective of the study was to investigate the
behaviour of material reinforced with varying number of mesh layers and orientations and to
evolve a set of elastic and inelastic material properties. It is observed that the conventional
empirical relations based on mortar crushing strength overestimate the mortar modulus. The
elastic moduli obtained using the rule of mixtures compares well with the values evaluated from
the tests on ferrocement specimens. The 45° orientation emerges as the weakest configuration
both in terms of the Young's modulus and ultimate stress because of the lowest volume fraction
of wire mesh in the direction of loading at this orientation.

15
Noor Ahmed Memon et al (2007): investigated the performance of high workability mortar
mix applicable for the casting of thin ferrocement elements by using slag as a cement
replacement and superplasticizer as a water reducing agent. They studied the compressive
strength, density, strength development and water absorption properties of high workability
mortars by incorporating different dosage of slag obtained from local industry as partial
replacement of cement and superplasticizer as water reducing agent. After testing all specimens
they concluded that, high workability mortar 1:2(136-+3% flow) with 50% slag as cement
replacement and 0.1-0.2% superplasticizer exhibit high strength. The application of GGBS as
partial replacement of cement does not show any significant effect on the unit 32 weight. The
mortar with 0.2% superplasticizer and 50% slag showed 80% strength development, which is
little bit greater than that of OPC mortar. All the mortars with slag showed low water absorption
than that of OPC mortar. Lowest value of water absorption obtained was 2.98% in case of
mortar with 50% slag and 0.2% superplasticizer. Curing conditions influence the compressive
strength and strength development of high workability mortar. The mortars cured under wet
condition obtained remarkable higher and consistent strength development compared to the
mortars of same mix proportions cured under air and natural weather conditions. Mortar 1:2
with 50% slag and 0.1% & 0.2% superplasticizer could be considered as suitable mortar for
casting of thin ferrocement elements by method of pouring.

Kondraivendhan and Pradhan (2009): studied effect of ferrocement confinement on

behavior of concrete. The effect of different grades of concrete confined with ferrocement was
studied by keeping all other parameters constant. In this investigation, concrete mixes had been
chosen over a wide range of grades of concrete, namely M25, M30, M35, M40, M45, M50 and
M55. The M25, M30,M35, M40, M45, M50 and M55 have a characteristic compressive
strength of25N/mm2, 30 N/mm2, 35 N/mm2, 40 N/mm2, 45 N/mm2, 50 N/mm2and 55
N/mm2, respectively. A total of 42 cylindrical specimens (21 each for controlled and confined
specimens) with a diameter of 150 mm and a height of 900 mm, three replicates for each grade
of concrete, were cast. Column specimens of size 150mm x 900mm with different grade of
plain cement concrete were casted and then confined with ferrocement. It was found that with
the increase in compressive strength of the concrete significantly improved in lower grades of
concrete such as M25 which showed 78% increase as compared to higher grade of concrete
M55 which resulted in an increase of 45.3%.

Anagha (2017): strengthening of deficient columns incorporating with different methods to

reduce stress concentration at corners. Comparative study is carried out with column jacketed

16
with and without steel fiber in mortar mix. In total, twenty seven reinforced concrete columns
were loaded to ultimate loading. From the experimental investigation it is observed the
improvement in ultimate load carrying capacity of the ferrocement jacketed columns in
comparison to non-jacketed columns. Four techniques and variations in those techniques are
proposed to address the problem.

Singh and Kaushik: studied the effectiveness of ferrocement confinement in repairing

concrete columns. These researchers tested 200 circular and square short concrete columns
under axial compression after confining them in external ferrocement jackets. Singh and
Kaushik studied the effects of wire mesh layers and the strength of core concrete. The results
showed that the jacketed specimens display enhanced strength and ductility. Vertical cracks are
observed in the ferrocement jackets at 80–90% of the ultimate load on these specimens. The
yielding of the horizontal mesh wires is observed as well. On the basis of the failure mode of
ferrocement jackets, the researchers concluded that the concrete cores are subjected to radial
compression in the horizontal direction whereas the ferrocement jackets are subjected to hoop
tension because of axial compression.

V.M. Shinde and J. P. Bhusari: analyzed the Response Of Ferrocement Confinement On

Behavior Of Concrete Short Column In recent years, the repair of unstrengthened and damaged
reinforced concrete member by external bonding such as ferrrocement laminate is increasing
which demands need of investigations on behavior of ferrocement confinements. Significant
amount of work has been carried out on confinement of column with ferrocement laminates
considering change in parameter such as types of meshes with different sizes, concrete grade,
height of column, etc. In this study, use of ferrocement as an external confinement to concrete
specimen is investigated with reference to layers of confinement and orientation of meshes. The
effectiveness of confinement is achieved by comparing the behavior of confined specimen with
that of unconfined specimen. The experimental program consists of testing 30 specimens under
uniaxial compression. Cylindrical specimen of 120mm dia. and 600 mm height were used.
Results show that the confinement of cylindrical specimen can improve the ultimate strength
with single and double layer of mesh compared to unconfined specimen. Ultimate compressive
strength increases with the change in orientation of square mesh from 90º to 45º.

Renjith Raju and Vasudev (2018): investigated effect of ferrocement and frp column
jacketing Reinforced concrete is most widely used construction material. Columns are one of
the important structural elements in the structures. Retrofitting refers to the addition of 37 new

17
technology or features to older systems to restore the required strength. Jacketing construction
is one of the preferred methods of retrofitting. Ferrocement confinement for retrofitting of
structural elements is one of the effective techniques. As because of the notable properties of
ferrocement, wider applications such as fire resistance, low selfweight, water proof, durability,
crack resistance etc makes it an ideal material. Fiber reinforced polymers (FRP) have been
extensively used in order to strengthen concrete columns. The advantages of FRP technique
compared to other similar techniques include of light weight, high strength, good environmental
resistance etc. This paper presents the compilation of the literature review of ferrocement and
FRP jacketing for restrengthening the concrete column. All the casted specimens are tested by
applying load. Axial load, lateral bulging, crack pattern etc of column will be measured for the
effectiveness of all two type jacketing.

3. NECCESITY OF STUDY

The failure of the most important structural elements, i.e., columns, may lead to the total
collapse of frame-structured buildings because they are the only structural elements that convey
the total vertical loads of buildings to the soil. These members can lose their strength and
stiffness due to damages during their service lives. Therefore, repair or reconstruction is
necessary in case of noticeable cracks to ensure that loads are further carried and transmitted to
the soil. Strengthening methods depend on the type of structure and loading. Regarding
structures subjected primarily to static loads, increasing flexural and 39 axial compressive
strength is essential. Regarding structures subjected primarily to dynamic loads, increasing
flexural and shear strength is crucial. Improving column ductility and rearranging column
stiffness can also be achieved with strengthening methods and ferrocement confinement is most
effective method of strengthening of column.

As cement industry produces large amount of carbon dioxide as a byproduct it is

necessary to find alternative to OPC cement also waste materials has its own disposal problems
which can also resolve with the production of geopolymers. materials like fly ash, slags like
ggbs can be effectively used and utilised for the construction. With all this consideration this
needs to study the effect of ferrocement confinement with geopolymer mortar on the various
properties of RC short column.

18
 4. OBJECTIVES:

To investigate change in load carrying capacity of column through external confinement.

To observe and analyze the mode of failure of specimen.

To investigate the effect of ferrocement confinement by replacing cement mortar with

geopolymer mortar.

To analyze trough experiment the economy of construction of column using ferrocement

confinement.

5. METHODOLOGY

5.1 Experimental Programme:

The main object of the present thesis is to study the effect of slenderness ratio on the
load carrying capacity of concrete column confined with ferrocement. In this study, with two
varying properties of column , slenderness ratios and confinement of with ferrocement are
considered. This whole experimental work contains casting of required number of cylindrical
and rectangular short column and confining it with ferrocement and load carrying capacity and
ultimate deflection are observed.

5.2 Materials:

Cement: - OPC 53 grade (Ultratech Cement)

Reinforcement using 6 mm diameter bars for stirrups and 4 numbers 8 mm bars as main
steel for rectangular column.

GI Wire mesh

Course Aggregate: - Crushed stone aggregates of 10mm ad 20mm size in ratio of 1:1
were used for concrete

Fine aggregate :- Natural river sand

Water :- Normal potable

Reinforcement steel :- steel reinforcement bar of 8 mm and 6 mm diameter

Reinforcement in the column consist of bars of diameter 8 mm and 6 mm.

19
 5.3 Testing of materials:
5.3.1 Cement: 53grade Ordinary Portland cement (Chettinad cement) is used throughout the
experimental work. Cement was tested in the laboratory and results are presented below_

a)Fineness Of Cement:

Apparatus:

Standard balance with 100gm. Weighing capacity

IS: 90 micron sieve confirming to IS: 460-1962 and a brush.

Observations and Results:

Table. 5.1 Observation table for fineness of cement

Sr.no. Mass of cement(gm) Mass of residue(gm) Residue (%)

1 100 3.0 3
2 100 2.5 2.5
3 100 2.4 2.4
Fineness Of Cement =2.63%

(Limiting value is less than 10%. Hence Ok.)

b)Consistancy Of Cement:

Apparatus:

Vicat apparatus with plunger 10mm diameter, weighing balance, trowel, measuring glass
250ml, enamel tray (12”x18”) etc.

Observations and Results:

Table. 5.2 Observation table for consistency of cement

Wt.Of Wt.Of Penetration From

Sr.No. Pn=(W2/W1)X100(%)
Cement(W1)(gm) Water(gm) Bottom

1 400 100 25 35
2 400 110 27.5 21

20
3 400 120 30 15
4 400 130 32.5 65
Penetration value from bottom is in between 5 to 7 m

Hence, Standerd Consistancy(Pn)=32.5

c)Initial And Final Setting Time:

Apparatus:

Vicat apparatus, initial & final setting time needle, weighting balance, measuring cylinder

250ml, Trowel, Stopwatch, Tray etc.

Observations and Results:

Initial setting time of given cement sample is 92 minutes and Final setting time is 450 minutes.

(As per IS 269-1976, the initial setting time shall be not less than 30 minutes and final setting
time shall be not greater than 600 minutes.)

Fig. 5.1 IS Sieve Set Fig. 5.2 Vicat Apparatus

21
 5.3.2 Fine Aggregates: Local sand was used (confirming to IS 383:1970) as fine aggregates
in concrete mix and cement mortar.

a)Fineness modulus of Sand:

Weight of sample=500gm.

Table 5.3 Observation table for fineness modulus of sand

IS sieve Mass retained Cumulative mass Cumulative Percentage

Sr. No.
(mm) (gm) retained (gm) % retained passing

1 10 0 0 0 100
2 4.75 216 216 21.6 78.4
3 2.36 120 336 33.6 66.4
4 1.18 294 630 63 37
5 0.600 206 836 83.6 16.4
6 0.300 100 936 93.6 6.4
7 0.150 51 987 98.7 1.3
8 Pan 13 1000 100 0
Average of fineness modulus of the sand/F.A. = 383/100 = 3.83

b)Spacific gravity of the sand:

The ratio of the weight of the given volume of sand to the weight of an equal volume of
water is called specific gravity of sand. Pycnometer bottle method is used to determine specific
gravity of sand.

Table 5.4 Observation table for specific gravity of C.A.

Sr.No. Observations Sample (gm)

1 Weight of sample taken 500

2 Wt. of the oven dry sample 463
3 Wt. of empty pycnometer (W1) 600
4 Wt. of the pycnometer + Dry sample (W2) 1060
5 Wt. of pycnometer + sample + water 1920

22
 6 Wt. of pycnometer + water 1640
Specific Gravity =

W2 – W1

(W2-W1)-(W3-W4)

Spacific Gravity = 2.55

Figure 5.3 Sieve Analysis In TOM Lab

5.3.3 Coarse Aggregates: Locally available crush stone with size 20mm and 10mm
confirming to IS 383:1970 are used.
a) Specific gravity of the aggregate:
Specific gravity of coarse aggregate is determined by density basket method.
Table 5.5 Observation table for specific gravity of C.A.

Sr.No. Observation Sample (kg)

1 Weight of sample 2
2 Weight of CA + Density basket + Water 2.275
3 Weight of empty density basket in water 1.025
4 Weight of saturated surface dry aggregate 2.015
6 Weight of oven dried aggregate 1.965
Observation table for the specific gravity of the aggregate (10mm)

23
Spacific gravity = 2.56

b) Aggregate crushing value test:

The aggregate crushing value test gives a relative measure of the resistance of an
aggregate to crushing under a gradually applied compressive load

Table 5.6 Observation table for aggregate crushing value test

Sr. No. Observations Sample (kg)
1 Wt. Of the sample 3.56
2 Wt. of the sample passing through the 2.36 is sieve 0.875
Average aggregate crushing value = 24.78 %

As ACV less than 30% value used for the wearing and non-wearing surfaces.

c) Aggregate Impact value test:

The Aggregate Impact Value (AIV) of aggregates which provides a relative measure of
the resistance of an aggregate to sudden shock or impact.
Table 5.7 Observation table for aggregate impact value test
Sr. No Observation Sample(gm)
1 Wt. of the sample 540
Wt. of sample passing through 2.36 mm is sieve after
2 50
impact
Average agg. Impact value = 9.25%

As AIV less than 10% the sample exceptionally strong

d) Fineness modulus of the coarse aggregate:

Total mass = 5000
Fineness modulus offers a way to quantify the average size of the aggregate particles in
the concrete mix. The size of the particles, in turn, will greatly affect how easily the
concrete pours and spreads, as well as its strength and durability once cured.
Table 5.8 Observation table for fineness modulus for C.A.
Mass Cumulative
Sr. IS sieve Cumulative Percentage
retained mass retained
No. (mm) % retained passing
(gm) (gm)

24
 1 25 140 140 2.8 97.2
2 20 910 1050 21.1 79.0
3 16 2775 3780 75.6 24.4
4 10 1205 4940 98.8 1.2
5 4.75 65 5000 100 0
6 Pan 0 5000 100 0
Average of fineness modulus of the sand = 3.98

Table 5.9 Test Results for Cement, Fine aagregate and Course aggregates

Material Testing Results

Consistancy of cement Consistancy of cement – 32.5

Fineness of cement Fineness of cement – 2.63%

Cement
Initial setting time – 92 min
Setting time of cement
Final setting time – 450 min

Fine Greding Fineness modulas – 3.83

aggregates Specific gravity Specific gravity – 2.55

Specific gravity Specific gravity – 2.56

Crushing strength Crushing strenght – 24.78%

Course
Aggregate impact value
aggregates Aggregate impact value – 9.25%
test

Fineness modulus Fineness modulus – 3.98

5.4 Steel design:

Grade of steel- Fe 500

Grade of concrete- M30

Dimension of RCC Beam- 150 x 150 x 300 mm square beam/150dia x 300 ht. circular beam

Depth of Neutral Axis- 75mm

25
 Data available- Fck=30 MPa , Fy= 500 MPa , b= 150mm , D= 150mm

Effective cover= 40 mm , Effective depth=100mm

Therefore, providing 4 numbers of 8 mm diameter bars as main reinforcement and 6 mm

stirrups at spacing 150mm c/c.

5.5 Exprimental Work:

The experimental part of the work consists of

1. procuring the materials

2. determining the physical properties and chemical composition
3. designing a M30 mix
4. casting of cubes
5. preparation of formwork
6. casting of columns of size as shown below
Table 5.10 Experimental Work

Confinement Unconfined Confined

Material Cement Mortar Geopolymer Mortar
Layer of Wire
1 Layer 2 Layers 1 Layer 2 Layers
Mesh
Strength to be 28 28 28 7 28
7 days 28 days 7 days 7 days 7 days
Measured In days days days days days
Nos of Sample 3
3 Nos 3 Nos 3 Nos 3 Nos 3 Nos 3 Nos 3 Nos 3 Nos 3 Nos
to be Prepared Nos

5.6 Concrete mix design:

a) Grade designation –M30

b) Type of cement –OPC (Ultratech cement)

c) Maximum nominal size of aggregate -20mm

d) Minimum cement content -320 kg/m³

e) Maximum water-cement ratio-0.40

26
f) Workability -75mm

g) Exposure condition-Severe (for reinforced concrete)

h) Degree of supervision -Good

i) Type of aggregate -Crushed angular aggregate

j) Maximum cement content-450 kg/m³

TEST DATA FOR MATERIALS:

a) Cement used-OPC 53 grade

b) Specific gravity of cement-3.15

c) Specific gravity of:

1) Coarse aggregate- 2.56

2) Fine aggregate -2.55

d) Water absorption:

1) Coarse aggregate-1.5%

2) Fine aggregate-0.75%

3) Free (surface) moisture:Coarse aggregate -NIL

4) Fine aggregate –NIL

1) TARGET STRENGTH FOR MIX PROPORTIONING

f'ck =fck + 1.65 s

Where f'ck = target average compressive strength at

28 days,fck = characteristic compressive strength at
28 days,
and s = standard deviation.

From Table I, standard deviation, s =5 N/mm2

Therefore, target strength =30 + 1.65 x 5 =38.25
N/mm2
2) SELECTION OF WATER-CEMENT RATIO

From Table 5 of IS 456, maximum water-cement ratio

27
= 0.50.Based on experience, adopt water-cement ratio
as 0.40.
0.40 < 0.50, hence O.K

3) SELECTION OF WATER CONTENT

From Table 2 (IS 456-2000),

Maximum water content =186 liter (for 25 to 50 mm slump range) for 20 mm

aggregateEstimated water content for 75 mm slump =186+(3 / 186)x 100 =187.6liter
Adopting water content – 187.6 liter for workable concrete
4) CALCULATION OF CEMENT CONTENT

Water-cement ratio =0.40

Cement content = (187.6/0.40)=375.2 kg/m' =469 kg/m3

From Table 5 of IS 456, minimum cement content for 'severe' exposure condition =
320kg/m3

469 kg/m3 ≤ 450 kg/m3 As per IS 20262-2009

Adopt Cement content =450 kg/m3

5) PROPORTION OF VOLUME OF COARSE AGGREGATE AND
FINE AGGREGATE CONTENT
From Table 3 ,volume of coarse aggregate corresponding to 20 mm size aggregate and fine
aggregate (Zone I) for water-cement ratio of 0.50 =0.60. In the present case water-cement
ratio is 0.40. Therefore volume of coarse aggregate is required to be increased to decrease
the fine aggregate content. As the water-cement ratio is lower by 0.10. the proportion of
volume of coarse aggregate is increased by 0.02 (at the rate of -/+ 0.01 for every ± 0.05
change in water-cement ratio). Therefore, corrected proportion of volume of coarse
aggregate for the water-cement ratio of 0.40 = 0.62.
Therefore, volume of coarse aggregate = 0.62
Volume of fine aggregate content =1 - 0.62 =0.38
6) MIX CALCULATIONS

The mix calculations per unit volume of concrete shall be as

follows:Volume of concrete=1m³
Volume of cement = (Mass of cement / Specific gravity of cement) x (1/1000)

28
 = (450/3.15) x (1/1000)

=0.143m³

Volume of water = (Mass of water / Specific gravity of water) x (1/1000)

=0.1876m³

Volume of all in aggregate=1-(0.143+0.1876) =0.6694m³

Mass of coarse aggregate= e x Volume of CA x Specific gravity of CA x1000

= 0.62x0.6694x2.56x1000 = 1062.47kg

Mass of fine aggregate = e x Volume of fine aggregate x Specific gravity of FAx1000

= 0.38x0.6694x2.55x1000 = 648.64kg

MIX PROPORTIONS :

Cement -450kg/m³

Water -187.6kg/m³
Fine aggregate -648.64 kg/m³

Coarse aggregate -1062.47kg/m³

Water-cement ratio –0.40

Mix Proportion By weight = 1 : 1.44 : 2.36

Trial-II :-

As mix was to dry for casting of specimens revised mix design is as

follow-
Taking water to cement ratio = 0.45
Assuming cement 410 kg for mix
Therefore,
W/C= 0.45

29
 W/410= 0.45
Water content = 410 x 0.45
=184.5 kg
From Table 5 of IS 456, minimum cement content for 'severe' exposure condition = 320
kg/m3
410 kg/m3 > 320 kg/m3, hence, O.K

MIX DESIGN

The mix calculations per unit volume of concrete shall be as

follows:Volume of concrete=1m³
Volume of cement = (Mass of cement / Specific gravity of cement) x (1/1000)

= (410/3.15) x (1/1000)

=0.133m³

Volume of water = (Mass of water / Specific gravity of water) x (1/1000)

=0.1845m³

Volume of all in aggregate=1-(0.133+0.202) =0.665m³

Mass of coarse aggregate= e x Volume of CA x Specific gravity of CA x1000

= 0.62x0.665x2.56x1000 = 1055.88kg

Mass of fine aggregate = e x Volume of fine aggregate x Specific gravity of FAx1000

= 0.38x0.665x2.55x1000 = 644.385kg
MIX PROPORTIONS :

Cement -410kg/m³

Water -184.5kg/m³
Fine aggregate -644.385kg/m³

Coarse aggregate -1055.88kg/m³

Water-cement ratio –0.45

MIX PROPORTION BY WEIGHT = 1: 1.57 : 2.57

30
5.7 Tests on concrete:

WORKABILITY TEST ON CONCRETE BY SLUMP CONE TEST-

The slump test is conducted to measures the consistency of concrete in that specific batch.
Here, consistency of concrete refers to workability or fluidity of freshly made concrete, and
therefore it is a measure of the ease with which concrete flows.

Table 5.11 Workability Chart

Very
Worability Low Medium High
Low

Slump(mm) 0 – 25 25 – 50 50 - 100 100 - 175

workability and Slump value for concrete mix is 85.5 mm hence

workability is medium
COMPRESSION TESTS ON CUBE-
Trial I:-
To determine the compressive strength, cube moulds of size 150x150x150 mm were used.6
cubes were caste. They were cleaned thoroughly using a waste cloth and then properly oiled
along its faces. Concrete was then filled in mould and then compacted using a standard
tamping rod of 60 cm length having a cross sectional area of 22500mm2. Specimens were
tested for compression using CTM and results are as follow

Figure 5.4 Compressive Strength of Concrete Block inTOM Lab

Table 5.12 Test Results for Compressive Strenght of Concrete Blocks

31
 Sr no Date of Date of Weight Load Strength Avg

casting testing (Kg ) (KN) N/mm2 strength

1 8.650 390 17.33
2 11/11/21 18/11/21 8.700 350 15.55 16.36
3 8.670 365 16.22

CEMENT MORTAR MIX:-

1. Type of cement :- OPC

2. Grade of cement:- 53 grade

3. Standard consistency (Pn):-32.5 %

4. Mix proportion :- 1:3

5. Weight of Cement (W1) :-1.170 Kg

6. Weight of fine aggregate :- 3.510 Kg

7. Weight of water :- (Pn/4+3) X ( W1+W2 )/100

= (32.5/4+3) X (1.17+3.510)/100

= 520.65 gm

8. Size of cubes :- 70.7x70.7x70.7mm

Compressive test were performed on cubes and results are as follow:-

Table 5.13 Test Results for Mortar Blocks
Sr no ID Mark Date of Date of Age in Comp Comp. Avg
casting testing days load Strength comp.
(KN) N/mm2 strength
1 A 3 95 19.00
2 B 3 100 20.00 19.00
3 C 11/10/21 14/10/21 3 90 18.08
4 D 7 122 24.40
5 E 18/10/21 7 130 26.00 25.86

32
6 F 7 136 27.20

Figure 5.5 Casting of Concrete Blocks

Figure 5.6 Casting of Mortar Blocks

33
 6. CASE STUDY:

Strengthening Technique of Reinforce Concrete Column for One Storey Vertical Extension: A
Case Study of Civil Engineering Building, KUET, Bangladesh Buildings made in past time are
mainly low-rise buildings. With the rapid development of construction, land becomes more and
more scarce. As a result, construction of new building is quite expensive. The strengthening of
an existing structure is considered to increase existing elements capacity to carry new loads or
to resolve an existing deficiency. The aim of the study was to determine the most effective and
economical strengthening method for RC column among the mentioned methods in perspective
of Bangladesh by cost analysis for one storey vertical extension.

As a case study, “Civil Engineering Building, KUET” was selected. To remodel of the
existing building for one storey vertical extension, the survey works done included four main
steps, making the column layout and identifying the RC Column, detecting the reinforcement
bar for RC column, find out the capacity and additional load for RC column. Initial Load
Carrying Capacity of RC Column Load is tested and results are as follows, Load Carrying
Capacity of Ground Floor Column, P = 124 Kips &Moment Carrying Capacity of Ground Floor
Column, M = 192 Kips – inch. Load Carrying Capacity of First Floor Column, P = 96 Kips
&Moment Carrying Capacity of First Floor Column, M = 192 Kips – inch.

After adding the additional stresses how much load will increase these calculations are
made and checked that whether strengthening of columns is required or not , The additional
loads that will come on structure are as follows. Additional Load on First Floor Column is 26
Kips. Additional Load on Ground Floor Column is 39 Kips. So, The Ground Floor Column and
first floor columns Needs to be Strengthened.

For the strengthening work there are two methods used, i.e conventional RC Concrete
and other is using FRP epoxy rasins . The construction cost by eschmethods is calculated. The
construction cost as follow.

Using RC jacketing Total Cost for Strengthening by RC Jacketing of per square meter
of Surface Area of RCC Column for one Storey Vertical Extension is TK. 300000. And
Persquare Meter Total Cost for FRP strengthening of RC Column for one Storey Vertical
Extension is TK. 3000000.

34
 The total cost per square meter (surface area) for FRP strengthening is approximately
ten times higher than the RC jacketing. For FRP strengthening, installation cost and the
materials needed for are quite high. Due to this the cost needed per column is much greater than
RC jacketing.

In developing countries the labor cost is low but the material is relatively expensive, so
as the cost of FRP. For FRP strengthening, skilled labor also needed which is a limitation for
this type of strengthening. That’s why, total cost required for FRP strengthening was found
approximately ten (10) times higher than the RC jacketing. Due to this limitation and high cost,
the FRP strengthening technique is quite impracticable in Bangladesh, though it shows greater
output result and higher protection to corrosion and provide minimum disturbance to the
existing structure.

Therefore, based on the above discussion it might be concluded column jacketing are
the most economic strengthening method for reinforced concrete column for adding additional
storey to the existing civil engineering building.

35
 7. REFERENCES:

Hafez E. Elyamany, Abd Elmoaty M. Abd Elmoaty, Ahmed M. Elshaboury. “Setting time and
7-day strength of geopolymer mortar with various Binders”, Construction and Building
Materials 187 (2018) pg 974–983.

Şinasi Bingol, Cahit Bilim, Cengiz Duran Atis, Ugur Durak. “Durability Properties of
Geopolymer Mortars Containing Slag” Iranian Journal of Science and Technology,
Transactions of Civil Engineering.

Ramamohana Reddy Bellum, Ruben Nerella, Sri Rama Chand Madduru, Chandra Sekhar
Reddy Indukuri. “Mix Design and Mechanical Properties of Fly Ash and GGBFSSynthesized
Alkali-Activated Concrete (AAC)” Infrastructures 2019, 3, 20 pg 01-11.

Mini Soman, Jebin Mohan. “Rehabilitation of RC columns using ferrocement jacketing”

Construction and Building Materials 181 (2018) pg 156–162.

G.J. Xiong, X.H. Chen, L.Q. Chen, J.Z. Yang, G.Y. Li. “Hybrid modified ferrocement under
sustained load in flowing sulphuric acid solution” Cement & Concrete Composites 26 (2004)
pg81–86. Gordon B. Batso. “Guide for the Design, Construction, and Repair of Ferrocement”
ACI Structural Journal I May-June 1988 pg 325-351.

G.J. Xiong, X.Y. Wu, F.F. Li, Z. Yan. “Load carrying capacity and ductility of circular concrete
columns confined by ferrocement including steel bars” Construction and Building Materials 25
(2011) pg 2263–2268.

Rami A. Hawileh, Jamal A. Abdalla, Fakherdine Fardmanesh, Poya Shahsana, Abdolreza

khalili. “Performance of reinforced concrete beams cast with different percentage of GGBS
replacement to cement” Archives of civil and mechanical engineering 17 (2017) pg 511-519.

Maniarasan S Karuppannan, Chandrasekaran Palanisamy, Mohammed Suhail Mohammed

Farook, Manoj Natarajan. “Study on fly ash and GGBS based oven cured geopolymer concrete”
AIP conference proceedings 2240, 060001 (2020) pg 1-6.

Katsuki Takiguchi, Abdullah.”Shear Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Columns Using

Ferrocement Jacket” ACI Structural Journal/September-October 2001 pg 696-704.

A.B.M.A. Kaish, M. Jamil, S.N. Raman, M.F.M. Zain, Lutfun Nahar. “Ferrocement
composites for strengthening of concrete columns: A review” Construction and Building
Materials 160 (2018) pg 326–340.

36
Mohammad Taghi Kazemi, Reza Morshed. “Seismic shear strengthening of R/C columns with
ferrocement jacket” Cement & Concrete Composites 27 (2005) 834–842.

Hani H. Nassif , Husam Najm. “Experimental and analytical investigation of ferrocement–

concrete composite beams” Cement & Concrete Composites 26 (2004) pg 787–796.

Shamir Sakira, S.N. Ramana, A.B.M.A. Kaish, A.A. Mutalib. “Self-flowing mortar for
ferrocement instrengthening applications” Perspectives in Science (2016) 8, pg 673-676.

Uday Kiran Danda, Himath Kumar Y, Sarath Chandra Kumar B. “Experimental study on
reinforced geopolymer concrete columns using GGBS” Materials Today Proceedings (2020),
pg 1-5.

M.J. Shannag, S.M. Mourad. ”Flowable high strength cementitious matrices for ferrocement
applications” Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012), pg 933–939.

Ajay Kumar Singh. “Strength and Durability Test of Fly Ash and GGBS Based Geopolymer
Concrete” Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Application ISSN : 2248-9622, Vol. 6,
Issue 8, ( Part -1) August 2016, pg 139-142.

A.B.M.A. Kaish, M.R. Alam, M. Jamil, M.F.M. Zain, M.A. Wahed. “Improved ferrocement
jacketing for restrengthening of square RC short column” Construction and Building Materials
36 (2012) pg 228–237.

Baskara Sundararaj J, Dhinesh M, Revathi.T, Rajamane N.P. “Comparative Study on

Durability, Mechanical Strength and Ecology of Ferrocement Made from Geopolymer and
Conventional Portland Cement Mortar” International Journal of ChemTech Research Vol.10
No.10 (2017), pg 270-280.

Subhashree Samantasinghar, Suresh Prasad Singh. “Synthesis of Fly Ash-GGBSBlended

Geopolymer Composits Geotechnical Characterisation and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering 16, pg 83-91.

37
38