See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/327980248

Effect of Partial Replacement of Sand with Limestone Filler on Some

Properties of Normal Concrete

Article in AL-Rafdain Engineering Journal (AREJ) · June 2011

DOI: 10.33899/rengj.2011.27014

CITATIONS READS

19 1,475

1 author:

Rana Burhan Alshahwany

University of Mosul
15 PUBLICATIONS 33 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Rana Burhan Alshahwany on 01 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Alshahwany: Effect of Partial Replacement of Sand with Limestone Filler ------

Effect of Partial Replacement of Sand with Limestone Filler on

Some Properties of Normal Concrete

Rana Burhan Abdurrahman Alshahwany

assistant lecturer
Civil Engg. Dept. / Mosul Univ.

Abstract
In recent years, there is a growing interest in the use of crushed sand obtained
from limestone quarries in some countries where river sand is not widely available.
Besides, the demand for aggregates to produce concrete is still high while natural
resources decrease. The fines content in limestone is usually high (particles with a size of
0.15-0.7 mm) which can affect concrete properties in an either positive or negative way.
Studies on aggregate containing fine materials are vitally important. However, little
work has been done so far on the effect of fines in crushed sand on the properties of
concrete.
This paper examines the influence of limestone filler in sand on concrete
properties, which include workability of fresh concrete (slump test method),
compressive and tensile strength, unit weight, and ultrasonic pulse velocity. Six concrete
mixtures containing different ratios of limestone filler (0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50) % sand
replacement were used while maintaining a constant water/cement ratio. The results
proved that limestone filler replacing sand up to 20% without adversely affecting
concrete strength.

Key words: limestone filler; crushed sand.

‫ﻣﺴﺤﻮق ﺣﺠﺮ اﻟﻜﻠﺲ ﻛﺒﺪﯾﻞ ﺟﺰﺋﻲ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺮﻣﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺑﻌﺾ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﺨﺮﺳﺎﻧﺔ‬
ِ ‫ﺗﺄﺛﯿﺮ‬
‫اﻻﻋﺘﯿﺎدﯾﺔ‬
‫رﻧﺎ ﺑﺮھﺎن ﻋﺒﺪ اﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ اﻟﺸﮭﻮاﻧﻲ‬
‫ﻣﺪرس ﻣﺴﺎﻋﺪ‬
‫ ﻗﺴﻢ اﻟﮭﻨﺪﺳﺔ اﻟﻤﺪﻧﯿﺔ‬- ‫ ﻛﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﮭﻨﺪﺳﺔ‬/‫ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ اﻟﻤﻮﺻﻞ‬

‫اﻟﺨﻼﺻﺔ‬
‫ أﺻﺒﺢ ھﻨﺎﻟﻚ اھﺘﻤﺎم ﻣﺘﺰاﯾ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ ﺑﻌ ﺾ اﻟﺒﻠ ﺪان ﻻﺳ ﺘﺨﺪام ﻣﺴ ﺤﻮق اﻟﺮﻣ ﻞ اﻟﻨ ﺎﺗﺞ ﻣ ﻦ‬،‫ﻓﻲ اﻟﺴﻨﻮات اﻷﺧﯿﺮة‬
‫ إﺿﺎﻓ ًﺔ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻄﻠﺐ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻤﺮ واﻟﻤﺘﺰاﯾﺪ ﺑﻤﺴﺘﻮى ﻋﺎﻟﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ‬،‫ﺳﺤﻖ ﺣﺠﺮ اﻟﻜﻠﺲ ﺣﯿﺚ اﻟﺮﻣﻞ اﻟﻨﮭﺮي ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﺘﻮﻓﺮَ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ واﺳﻊ‬
‫ ﻋﺎدة ﻣﺎ ﺗﻜﻮن ﻧﺴﺒﺔ اﻟﻤﻮاد اﻟﻨﺎﻋﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺤﻮق ﺣﺠ ﺮ‬.‫اﻟﺮﻛﺎم ﻹﻧْ ﺘﺎج اﻟﺨﺮﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﺑﯿﻨﻤﺎ ﻣﺼﺎدر اﻟﻄﺒﯿﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺺ ﻣﺴﺘﻤﺮ‬
‫ ﻣﻠﻢ( و ﯾﻤﻜﻦ أن ﺗﺆﺛﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﺨﺮﺳﺎﻧﺔ ﺑﺼﻮرة اﯾﺠﺎﺑﯿ ﺔ‬0.07-0.15 ‫اﻟﻜﻠﺲ ﻋﺎﻟﯿﺔ )ﺟﺰﯾﺌﺎت ﯾﺘﺮاوح ﻣﻘﺎﺳﮭﺎ ﺑﯿﻦ‬
.‫أو ﺳﻠﺒﯿﺔ‬
‫ﯾﻤﻜﻦ اﻟﻘﻮل ان اﻟﺪراﺳﺎت ﺣﻮل اﻟﺮﻛﺎم اﻟﺤﺎوي ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻮاد ﻧﺎﻋﻤﺔ إﺟﻤﺎﻻً ﻣﮭﻤﺔ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﺣﯿﻮي وﻣﻊ ذﻟﻚ ﻓﺎﻟﻘﻠﯿﻞ ﻣﻦ‬
.‫اﻟﺒﺤﻮث ﺗﻨﺎوﻟﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﯿﺮ اﻟﻤﻮاد اﻟﻨﺎﻋﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺤﻮق اﻟﺮﻣﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﺨﺮﺳﺎﻧﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻀ ﻤﻦ اﻟﺒﺤ ﺚ ﺗ ﺄﺛﯿﺮ ﻣﺴ ﺤﻮق ﺣﺠ ﺮ اﻟﻜﻠ ﺲ ﻓ ﻲ اﻟﺮﻣ ﻞ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺧﺼ ﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﺨﺮﺳ ﺎﻧﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻲ ﺗﻀ ﻤﻨﺖ ﻓﺤ ﺺ ﻗﺎﺑﻠﯿ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻞ ﻟﻠﺨﺮﺳﺎﻧﺔ اﻟﻄﺮﯾﺔ )ﻓﺤﺺ اﻟﮭﻄﻮل( وﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺘﻲ اﻻﻧﻀﻐﺎط واﻟﺸﺪ اﻻﻧﺸﻄﺎري ووﺣﺪة اﻟﻮزن وﺳﺮﻋﺔ اﻟﻤﻮﺟﺎت ﻓﻮق‬
‫اﻟﺼ ﻮﺗﯿﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧ ﻼل ﺻ ﺐ ﺳ ﺘﺔ ﻣﺰﺟ ﺎت ﺧﺮﺳ ﺎﻧﯿﺔ ذات ﻧﺴ ﺐ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔ ﺔ ﻟﻤﺴ ﺤﻮق ﺣﺠ ﺮ اﻟﻜﻠ ﺲ ﺗﻀ ﻤﻨﺖ‬
‫ أﺛﺒﺘﺖ اﻟﻨﺘ ﺎﺋﺞ اﻧ ﮫ ﯾﻤﻜ ﻦ‬.‫ ﻣﺴﺘﺒﺪﻟﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺮﻣﻞ ﻣﻊ اﻟﺤﻔﺎظ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺔ اﻟﻤﺎء إﻟﻰ اﻹﺳﻤﻨﺖ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﺔ‬%(0،10،20،30،40،50)
.‫ وﺑﺪون أي ﺗﺄﺛﯿﺮ ﺳﻠﺒﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‬%20 ‫اﺳﺘﺒﺪال اﻟﺮﻣﻞ ﺑﻤﺴﺤﻮق ﺣﺠﺮ اﻟﻜﻠﺲ ﻟﻐﺎﯾﺔ ﻧﺴﺒﺔ‬

Received: 22– 12 - 2009 Accepted: 27 – 9 - 2010

37
 Al-Rafidain Engineering Vol.19 No.3 June 2011

Introduction
In recent years, there is a growing interest in the use of crushed sand obtained from
limestone quarries in some countries where river sand is not widely available. Besides, the
demand for aggregates to produce concrete is still high while natural resources decrease.
A large amount of material in the size of filler is produced during the course of
crushing the weak limestone, in particular, which may well be used as an aggregate. The
application of these materials is beneficial to improving the concrete so as to decrease air
voids [1].
For many years limestone has been increasingly used in concrete as a coarse
aggregate, filler or as a main cement constituent [2]. It is applied in high performance
concrete as well as in normal or low performance concrete [3,4,5]. Compared to plain
concrete with the same w/c ratio and cement type, concrete with a high limestone filler
content with suitable particle size distribution (PSD) possesses generally improved strength
characteristics.
A certain amount of fines is helpful in concrete for improving cohesiveness and
preventing bleeding. However, excessive quantities of fines tend to increase the water
demand and tend to impair the aggregate-cement paste bond. Crushed rock acts as filler and
helps to reduce the total voids content in concrete. Consequently, this contributes to improve
the quality of concrete. Limestone crusher dust is used as a filler material for cement or
aggregates and might have some beneficial effects on concrete depending on the percentage
replacement and chemical composition of dust [6].
The effect of inclusion of limestone filler in cement on fresh and hardened mortar and
concrete has been a major research topic for many years [2], but little work has been done so
far on the effect of limestone filler in sand on the properties of concrete. This paper reports
the results of an experimental investigation on the influence of limestone filler as partial
replacement of sand on concrete properties.

Aim of study
Crushed limestone is used as a coarse aggregate or a filler material for cement and
aggregates, it might have some beneficial effects on concrete depending on the percentage
replacement, so the objective of the investigation subject of this paper is to study quality
criteria of concrete made of sand with partial replacement of limestone filler with locally
available material. To find out the extent of improvement in concrete properties for different
amounts of limestone filler, proportion of (0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50)% replacement are
considered, concrete properties include workability (slump test) of fresh concrete, unit
weight, ultrasonic pulse velocity, compressive and splitting tensile strength of hardened
concrete are studied.

Experimental details
Materials
Cement
The cement used in this study was obtained from Senjar Cement Plant. The chemical
compositions and physical properties, of the cement used, were determined according to Iraqi
Standard (IQS 5 – 1984)[7] are given in Table(1).

Limestone filler
Crushed limestone filler retained on the sieve No. 200 was used with specific gravity
of 2.61. The chemical compositions was determined and presented in Table (2).

38
 Alshahwany: Effect of Partial Replacement of Sand with Limestone Filler ------

Table(1): Properties of cement

Chemical analysis of cement*
Oxide composition SiO2 Fe2O3 Al2O3 CaO MgO SO3
Content (%) 21.50 2.68 6.2 62.76 2. 80 2.27
IQS No5-1984 17-25 0.5-6.0 3-8 60-67 Max 5 Max 2.8
requirements(%)
Mineralogical components C3S C2S C3A C4AF
Content (%) 40.93 28.78 12.06 7.89
IQS No5-1984 31.3-41.05 28.61-37.9 11.96-12.3 7.72-8.02
requirements(%)
Mechanical properties
Age (days) Compressive strength (MPa) Tensile strength (MPa)
Cement used IQS No5-1984 Cement IQS No5-1984
requirements used requirements
3 19.2 Not less than 16 1.72 Not less than 1.6
7 26.1 Not less than 24 2.55 Not less than 2.4
Physical properties
Setting time (hrs) Initial Final
Cement used IQS No5-1984 Cement used IQS No5-1984
requirements requirements
1.75 Not less than 45 3.50 Not more than 10
min hrs
* Data are given by the manufacturer.

Table (2):Chemical analysis of limestone filler*

Oxide Composition SiO2 Fe2O3 Al2O3 CaO MgO SO3 Losses
Content (%) 1.81 0.27 0.27 50.28 1. 53 0.25 45.59
* Analysis done in Badush Cement Plant.

Aggregate
Coarse aggregate
River rounded gravel comply with the (B.S 882:1992)[8] was used as a coarse
aggregate with max aggregate size 12.5 mm, Fig.(1) shows particle size distribution of coarse
aggregate.
120
Cumulative Passing (%)

)
100
(%
g
in
ss 80
a
p 60
e
vi
t
la 40 Gravel used
u
m Min .Limit
u
C 20
Max . Limit

0
5 10 15 20 25
Sieve size(mm)
Fig.(1): Particle size distribution of coarse aggregate

39
 Al-Rafidain Engineering Vol.19 No.3 June 2011

Fine aggregate
River sand was used as fine aggregate with fineness modulus of 2.81, the results of
the sieve analysis that was carried out in accordance with the (B.S. 882:1992)[8] for the fine
aggregate for sand with partial replacement of limestone filler content include (0, 10, 20, 30,
40, 50)% showed that its grading fits within the limits set out in B.S. 882 , Fig. (2) shows the
particle size distribution of fine aggregate (sand with percentage partial replacement of
limestone filler).
Fineness modulus decrease with limestone filler amount from 2.81 (for the reference
mix) down to 2.11 (for 50% limestone filler content) which represent about 25% decrease
(Table (3)) despite this, the aggregate remains in conforming with BS standards.
120

100
Cumulative passing (%)

80

60

40

20

0
0.15 0.3 0.6 1.18 2.36 5 10
Sieve size (mm)
Limestone 0%(sand used) 10% 20% 30%
filler(%) 40% 50% [Link] limit [Link] limit

Fig.(2): Particle size distribution of fine aggregate(sand with percentage partial

replacement of limestone filler)

Concrete mixes used in investigation

A total of six concrete mixtures were prepared. The first is a reference concrete mix
(control mix), the remaining five mixtures with limestone filler of (10, 20, 30, 40, 50)% sand
replacement. Water to cement ratio is constant at 0.57 throughout the test. The details of
mixes composition are shown in Table (3).

Table (3): Composition of concrete mixtures

Filler Mix proportion (Kg/m3)
addition Cement Aggregate Limestone Water sand with filler
(%) content content filler content content fineness modulus
sand gravel
0 334 668 1202 0 190.4 2.81
10 334 601 1202 66.8 190.4 2.78
20 334 534 1202 133.6 190.4 2.71
30 334 468 1202 200.4 190.4 2.60
40 334 401 1202 267.2 190.4 2.44
50 334 334 1202 334 190.4 2.11

40
 Alshahwany: Effect of Partial Replacement of Sand with Limestone Filler ------

Specimen preparation and testing program

Aggregate, limestone filler and cement were mixed for one minute in a vertical rotating
concrete flow mixer, mixing was continued for a further minute while water was added,
slump test was done according to (ASTM C143)[9] to determine the concrete mixtures
workability then unit weight test was done according to (ASTM C138)[10].
For each mixture, twelve cubical specimens of (100×100×100) mm for the compressive
strength and three cylindrical specimens of (100 ϕ ×200) mm for the splitting tensile strength,
were cast in steel moulds, a vibration table was used to consolidate the concrete. The
specimens prepared were stored under cure conditions until the launch of the experiment.
Compressive strength was determined for 3, 7, 14 and 28 days according to (BS
1881: Part 116)[11].Splitting tensile test and ultrasonic pulse velocity were determined at 28
days according to (ASTM C496) [12]and (ASTM C 597)[13] respectively .

Results and discussion

Influence of limestone filler content on the workability of fresh concrete
The slump test was used to measure workability as a function of limestone filler
content for constant w/c ratio, the effect of limestone filler content on the slump is shown in
Table (4) and Fig.(3) respectively. The slump value seems to decrease with higher percentage
of limestone filler content, this result is related to the relatively high water absorption
capability which is attributed mainly to the large specific surface of limestone filler [14].

Table (4): Slump values of concrete mixtures

Filler addition (%) 0 10 20 30 40 50
Slump(mm) 110 95 75 60 45 30

120

100

80
Slump (mm)

60

40

20

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Limestone filler replacement(%)

Fig.(3): The effect of percentage limestone filler replacement on the slump

Influence of the limestone filler content on the unit weight

Average values of three samples for unit weight are given in Table (5) and Fig.(4)
respectively for each limestone filler proportion. It was observed that by increasing the
limestone filler amount, the unit weight of the mix increases until a certain optimal value of
limestone filler amount depending on the sand particle size distribution which represent 20%
of sand replacement with limestone filler, at this amount of limestone filler the unit weight
increased by 3.8% of its reference value, then a regular decrease for higher filler amount but

41
 Al-Rafidain Engineering Vol.19 No.3 June 2011

still more than the unit weight of control mix; this is interpreted as fine particles of limestone
filler filled spaces between grains of sand (before reaching maximum compactness), thereby
increasing the mass volume of the mix. Once the voids were completely filled, fine particles
then began to occupy the place of sand grains, which decreased the proportion of sand grains,
and consequently the unit weight of the mix [15].

Table (5):Unit weight of concrete mixtures

Filler addition (%) 0 10 20 30 40 50
3
Unit weight (Kg/m ) 2473 2492 2567 2533 2521 2519

2580

2560
unit weight (kg/m3)

2540

2520

2500

2480

2460
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Limestone filler replacement(%)

Fig.(4): The effect of percentage limestone filler replacement on the unit weight

Influence of the limestone filler content on the compressive strength

The compressive strength results of all concrete mixtures at the ages of 3, 7, 14 and 28
days age are illustrated in Table (6) and Fig.(5) respectively. The strength values are the
average of three samples. At the different ages, there is a continuing improvement in the
strength performance of the mixtures containing 10% and 20% limestone filler replacement,
the compressive strength decrease when concrete contain (30,40 and 50)% limestone filler
replacement with sand comparing to control mix.

Table (6):Compressive strength of concrete mixtures at ages of test days

Age (days) Filler addition (%)

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

3 15.9 16.8 18.5 15.7 15.5 15.1
7 25.3 25.9 28.3 25.3 23.1 22.6
14 28.5 30.6 32.5 28 26.8 26
28 33.6 35.6 38.5 33.2 31.0 30.8

42
 Alshahwany: Effect of Partial Replacement of Sand with Limestone Filler ------

45
40

Compressive strength (MPa)

35
30
25
20 0% 10%

15 20% 30%
10
40% 50%
5
0
0 7 14 21 28 35
Age (days)

Fig.(5): The effect of percentage limestone filler replacement on the compressive

strength at ages of test days

The development of relative compressive strength in concrete mixtures at ages of test

days is shown in Fig.(6), relatively little effect of the addition of limestone filler on
development of compressive strength of concrete mixtures at ages of test days corresponding
to reference mix (without the filler).

120
Compressive strength development(%)

control mix 10%

100 20% 30%
40% 50%
80

60

40

20

0
3 7 14 28
Age (days)

Fig.(6): Development of relative compressive strength in various concrete mixtures at

different ages

Average values of three samples for compressive strength at 28 days age are
summarized in Fig.(7) as a function of limestone filler proportion, it can be seen that as filler
content increases, compressive strength also increases up to an optimal value (in this case at
20% limestone filler).
To show the effect of the addition of limestone filler on compressive strength of concrete,
Fig.(8) shows the compressive strength with different addition of the filler as a percentage of
the reference mix (without the filler).

43
 Al-Rafidain Engineering Vol.19 No.3 June 2011

41

Compressive strength (MPa)

39
37
35
33
31
29
27
25
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Limestone filler replacement(%)

Fig.(7):The influence of percentage limestone filler replacement at 28 days age on the

compressive strength
140
strength at 28 days (%)

114.6
Relative of mixtures
strength to control

120 106
100 98.8
100 92.3 91.7
80
60
40
20
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Limestone filler replacement(%)

Fig.(8): Relative compressive strength of concrete mixtures to compressive strength of

control concrete as a function of limestone filler percentage content

As concluded from Fig.(8) is can be seen that 20% limestone filler replacement gives
the best improvement in compressive strength, The increase is found to be 14.6% at 20%
replacement level compared to control concrete. Limestone cannot be considered as an inert
filler, Pera [16] have studied reactions that occur during the hydration of C3S in the presence
of calcium carbonate and have proved that, in cement paste, calcium carbonate has an
accelerator effect on cement hydration and leads to the formation of carbosilicates and
hydrated calcium carboaluminates.
Beyond 20% limestone filler replacement, compressive strength decreases with the
increased filler content, Concrete with 30% of limestone filler showed a decrease in strength
of about 1.2% , the decrease expanded to be 8.3 % at 50 % replacement compared to control
mix. Celik observed that [6], beyond an optimal value of crushed stone dust addition, the
amount of fines increases so much that the cement paste is not able to coat all fine and coarse
particles (i.e. filler as well as sand). This phenomenon weakens the cement-to aggregate bond

44
 Alshahwany: Effect of Partial Replacement of Sand with Limestone Filler ------

and hence leads to a loss in compressive strength for higher filler amounts than the optimal
value.
Influence of the limestone filler content on the splitting tensile strength
Average values of three samples for splitting tensile strength are summarized in
Table(7). Fig.(9) shows the splitting tensile strength as a function of limestone filler
proportion, it can be seen that as filler content increases, splitting tensile strength also
increases up to an optimal value of 20% addition, in a similar behavior to that of the
compressive strength.

Table (7):Splitting tensile strength of concrete mixtures

Filler addition (%) 0 10 20 30 40 50
Splitting tensile strength (MPa) 2.5 2.8 3.2 2.5 2.4 2.3

3.4
Splitting tensile strength(MPa)

3.2

2.8

2.6

2.4

2.2

2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Limestone filler replacement(%)

Fig. (9): The influence of percentage limestone filler replacement on the splitting tensile
strength

140
to control splitting strength at 28 days

128
Relative of mixtures splitting strength

120 112
100 100 96
100 92

80
(%)

60

40

20

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Limestone filler replacement(%)

Fig.(10): Relative splitting tensile strength of concrete mixtures to splitting tensile

strength of control mixture as a function of limestone filler percentage content

45
 Al-Rafidain Engineering Vol.19 No.3 June 2011

To compare the splitting tensile strength of concrete mixtures with added limestone
filler percentages to that of the control mix, Fig.(10) is plotted. As concluded from Fig.(10) it
can be seen that 20% limestone filler replacement give best improvement in splitting tensile
strength, the increase is found to be 28% at 20% replacement level compared to control
concrete, then splitting tensile strength decrease with the an increase of filler content beyond
20% replacement, concrete with 50% limestone filler content showing the highest decrease
in splitting tensile strength of about 8% compared to control mix.

Influence of the limestone filler content on the quality of concrete

Ultrasonic pulse velocity method is considered one of the non-destructive procedures
with more potential to evaluate the quality and the characteristics of concrete. It consists in
measuring the transit time of an ultrasonic pulse through the material[17].
The direct ultrasonic pulse velocity values are measured at 28 days on the
compressive strength samples having a 10cm direct path length using the 55 kHz longitudinal
wave transducers placed in direct array. Fig.(11) shows the arrangement used for the
ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement.

Fig.(11): The arrangement used for the ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement.

Measurements of three samples from each mixture were averaged to obtain the
ultrasonic pulse velocity values as shown in Table(8). Fig. (12) displays ultrasonic pulse
velocity results as a function of limestone filler replacement. With 10% and 20% limestone
filler addition, ultrasonic pulse velocity value notably increase then decrease with limestone
filler amount increase.

3850
Ultrasonic pulce velocity (m/s)

3800

3750

3700

3650

3600
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Limestone filler replacement(%)

Fig. (12): The influence of percentage limestone filler replacement on the ultrasonic
pulse velocity values

46
 Alshahwany: Effect of Partial Replacement of Sand with Limestone Filler ------

One of the main factors that affect the ultrasonic pulse velocity is the nature of the aggregates
as the form and texture , besides, proper graduation of it which affect on the strength of the
aggregate-paste interface. [18].

Table (8):Ultrasonic pulse velocity of concrete mixtures

Filler addition (%) 0 10 20 30 40 50
Ultrasonic pulse velocity(m/s) 3793 3802 3826 3774 3717 3641

According to the classification criterion for concrete based on ultrasonic pulse measurements
of Table (4) [19], the concrete mixtures prepared with limestone filler content would be
classified as good concrete mixtures.

Table (4):Concrete classification based on ultrasonic pulse velocity [19]

Pulse velocity (m/s) Concrete classification
V > 4500 Excellent
4500 > V > 3500 Good
3500 > V > 3000 Questionable
3000 > V > 2000 Poor
V < 2000 Very Poor

Conclusions
Based on the results obtained in this study, and within the limitation of the test
parameters, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. Slump decreases with the increase of limestone filler amount, so water demand increases
slightly with increasing limestone filler content.
2. The compressive strength of concrete increases with the increase in limestone filler
replacement up to an optimal value, concrete made with 20% limestone filler replacement
by sand showed higher compressive strength which increased by 14.6%.
3. Partial replacement of sand by limestone filler increased the splitting tensile strength,
which enhanced to become 28% at 20% limestone filler replacement then decreased with
the increase of limestone filler replacement.
4. With 10% and 20% limestone filler addition, ultrasonic pulse velocity values notably
increased then decreased with limestone filler amount increase.

References
1. Topҫu, I.B.& Uğurlu, A., "Effect of the use of mineral filler on the properties of
concrete", Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 33, 2003, pp. 1071–1075.
2. Lothenbach, B., Saout, G., Gallucci, E.& Scrivener, K.,” Influence of limestone on
the hydration of Portland cements”, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 38,
2008, pp. 848–860.
3. Svermova, L., Sonebi, M.& Bartos, P.J.M., "Influence of mix proportions on
rheology of cement grouts containing limestone powder", Cement and Concrete
Composites, Vol. 25, 2003, pp. 737–749.
4. Yahia, A., Tanimura, M.& Shimoyama, Y., " Rheological properties of highly
flowable mortar containing limestone filler-effect of powder content and W/C
ratio", Cement and Concrete Research, Vol.35, 2005, pp. 532–539.

47
 Al-Rafidain Engineering Vol.19 No.3 June 2011

5. Voglis, N., Kakali, G., Chaniotakis, E.& Tsivilis, S., "Portland-limestone cements.
Their properties and hydration compared to those of other composite cements",
Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 27, 2005, pp. 191–196.
6. Celik ,T& Marar K. ," Effects of crushed stone dust on some properties of
concrete", Cement and Concrete Research, Vol.26, 1996, pp.1121–1130.
7. Iraqi Standard Specification No.5 (1984)," Properties of Ordinary Portland
Cement", Iraq, 1984.
8. BS 882-1992,”Aggregate from Natural Source for Concrete”, British Standard
Institution, 1992.
9. ASTM C143-04, “Slump of Hydraulic-Cement Concrete” , American Society for
Testing and Materials, 2004.
10. ASTM C138-04, “Unit Weight, Yield, and Air Content (Gravimetric) of
Concrete1” , American Society for Testing and Materials, 2004.
11. BS 1881:part116:1983”Testing of Hardened Concrete”, British Standard
Institution, 1983.
12. ASTM C496-04, “Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens”
,American Society for Testing and Materials, 2004.
13. ASTM C597-04, “Pulse Velocity Through Concrete”, American Society for Testing
and Materials, 2004.
14. Bonavetti, V., Donza, H, Mene´ndez, G, Cabrera, O& Irassar, E.F.," Limestone filler
cement in low w/c concrete: A rational use of energy", Cement and Concrete
Research, Vol. 33 ,2003, pp. 865–871.
15. Benachour, Y., Davy, C.A. , Skoczylas, F.& Houari, H., " Effect of a high calcite
filler addition upon microstructural, mechanical, shrinkage and transport
properties of a mortar", Cement and Concrete Research, Vol.38, 2008, pp.727-736.
16. Pera, J., Husson, S.& Guilhot, B.,"Influence of ground limestone on cement
hydratation", Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 21, 1999, pp. 99– 105.
17. Jones, R&, Facaoaru, I, " Recommendation for Testing Concrete by the Ultrasonic
Pulse Method", Materiaux Et Construction, Vol. 2, No.10, 1969.
18. Carcańo, R.S.& Moreno, E.I.," Evaluation of concrete made with crushed
limestone aggregate based on ultrasonic pulse velocity", Construction and Building
Materials Vol.22, 2008, pp. 1225–1231.
19. Neville, A.M., "Properties of concrete", 3rd ed., Burnt Mill , Harlow, Essex,
England ,Longman Scientific & Technical, 1981.

The work was carried out at the college of Engg. University of Mosul

48

View publication stats