International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)

ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

Floating Concrete by using Light Weight

Aggregates and Air Entraining Agent
Mukesh D. Ghadge Vaibhav D. Kamble
Civil Engineering Dept Civil Engineering Dept
Gharda Institute of Technology,lavel Gharda Institute of Technology,Lavel
Maharashtra, India Maharashtra,India

Abstract This Project deals with the development of Floating II.MATERIALS USED
type of concrete by using lightweight aggregate (Pumice stone) Cement Portland Pozzolona cement
and Aluminium powder as an air entraining agent. There are
many types of lightweight concrete which can be produced Aggregate Pumice Stones 10 to 20 mm
either by using lightweight aggregate or by using an air
entraining agent. In this study we have worked on combination Sand - Standard
of above mentioned types. This concrete is a non-structural
concrete. In this study, comparison has be made between plain Other- pumice powder
cement concrete and lightweight concrete having different
proportion of Aggregate size and fix quantity of Aluminum
Admixtures Aluminium Powder
content (i.e. 2%) by the weight of cement has been taken into
account. It helps to increase volume of concrete and hence
reduce the weight. Water Tap water

Keywords: Floating concrete, Pumice stone, Aluminium powder Mixed Procedure Mixer mixing
,Fly ash, Density, Compressive strength.
Compaction Table Vibration
I.INTRODUCTION
The present day world is witnessing construction of very Curing practice - Moist curing by pounding
challenging and difficult civil engineering structures.
Researchers all over the world are attempting to develop Cube size 15cm15cm15cm
low density or lightweight concrete by using different Testing of cubes Compressive test after 28 days.
admixtures in concrete up to certain proportions. This study
deals with the development of Floating concrete by using III. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
lightweight aggregate (Pumice stone) and Aluminum TESTING OF MATERIALS
powder as an air entraining agent. Floating concrete is made Cement
by introducing air or gas into concrete slurry, so that when Standard Consistency Test
the mix sets and hardens, uniform cellular structure is Result of Standard Consistency Test is the percentage by
formed. Thus it is a mixture of water, cement and finely weight with respect to cement to produce standard
crushed sand. We mix fine powder of Aluminum to the consistency is 34%
slurry and it reacts with the calcium hydroxide present in it Fineness Test
thus producing hydrogen gas. This hydrogen gas when Data:-
contained in the slurry mix gives the cellular structure and Weight of cement taken (A) =100 gm.
thus makes the concrete lighter than the conventional Weight of cement retained on 90 I.S. Sieve (B) = 05 gm.
concrete. Pumice stone is a lightweight aggregate of low Calculation:-
specific gravity. It is a highly porous material with a high Fineness = (B/A) 100
water absorption percentage. In this we do not use the = 05%
conventional aggregate and replace it by the pumice I.S. requirement for fineness = less than 10%
stone.Pumice is the specimen of highly Porous rocks having Fineness = 05%
density approximately 500-600 Kg/m3. Pumice is produced Fineness value is less than 10%. Hence it could be be used
when super-heated, highly pressurized rock is violently in our study.
ejected from volcano. The unusual foamy configuration of Setting Time
pumice happens because of simultaneous rapid cooling & Weight of cement = 300 gm.
rapid depressurization. Pumice has an average porosity of Water content = 0.85 P. Where P = Standard Consistency
60-80% and initially floats on water. = 0.85 34%
= 28.9% of cement
= (28.9100) 300 gm.
= 86.7 gm.
= 86.7 ml

IJERTV4IS080338 www.ijert.org 193

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

Initial Setting time:- RESULTS: After 28 days of cube testing

I.S. requirement = more than 30 minutes (as per I.S 4031- Sp.No. Wt. (kg) Density Avg Load Avg.
1968) Strength
(kg/m3) Density (KN)
Strength
Initial setting time = 40 minutes (kg/m3) (N/mm2)
Final Setting time:- (N/mm2)
When the test block has attend such hardness that the
needle does not pierce through the block more than 0.5 mm, 1 4.84 1434 262 11.64
that time is known as final setting time. 2 4.90 1452 1438 284 9.20 10.29
I.S. requirement = less than 600 minutes (as per I.S. 4031-
1968) 3 4.82 1428 228 10.13
Final setting time = 262 minutes Sample 3: 3 cubes
Cement: 7.5 kg
Aluminium Powder:- Pumice powder: 3.5 kg
Crushed sand: 3 kg
The test is carried out for checking of how many
percentage of volume of concrete is increased by using Pumice stone: M1 (10 to 20 mm): 7.5 kg
aluminium powder. We have casted one specimen of size 15
cm15cm10cm. It has been observed that after 24 hours M2 (4.75 to 10 mm): 3 kg
height of specimen increased by 2.5 cm.
Water: 6.2 kg.
Therefore increased in volume = (15 1512.5) (15
1510)= 562.50 cm3
Admixture: Aluminum powder 2%
% Volume increased = (562.50 2250) 100 = 25.0 % RESULTS: After 28 days of cube testing
Sp. Wt. Density Avg Load Avg. comp
Tests on a light weight aggregates by using pumice stone as No. (kg) (kg/m3) Density (KN)
Strength
a light weight aggregate: Strength
(kg/m3) (N/mm2
) (N/mm2)
For this study, we got pumice stone as big as 50 mm size. 1 4.14 1227 167 7.42
So we crushed it to the size of 20 mm & less. The mix 1232.6
2 4.26 1262 197 8.76 8.15
6
design for the first sample is decided based on the studies, 3 4.08 1209 186 8.27
and then further samples were made by changing some
proportions in previous ones. Sample 4: 3 cubes
Sample1: 3 cubes Cement: 6 kg
Cement: 19.15 kg
Pumice powder: 3 kg
Crushed sand: 24.32 kg Pumice stone: M1 (10 to 20 mm): 6 kg
Pumice stone (< 20 mm): 9 kg M2 (4.75 to 10 mm): 4 kg
Water: 10.53 kg Water: 5.8 kg.
Admixture: Aluminum powder 2% Admixture: Aluminium powder 2%
RESULTS: After 28 days of cube testing
Sp. Wt. Densit Avg Load Avg.
RESULTS: 28 days cube testing
Strength
No. (kg) y Density (KN) compSt Sp.No. Wt. Density Avg Load Avg.
(N/mm2) Strength
(kg/m3) (kg/m3) rength( (kg) (kg/m3) Density (KN) comp
N/mm2) (kg/m3) (N/mm2)
Strength
1 5.86 1736 287 12.76
2 5.80 1719 1724.66 267 11.86 11.60 (N/mm2)
3 5.80 1719 246 10.19 1 3.82 1132 111 4.93
2 3.94 1167 1141.66 155 6.89 5.52
Sample 2: 3 cubes 3 3.80 1126 107 4.76

Cement: 9 kg Sample 5: 3 cubes

Cement: 6 kg
Pumice powder: 1.8 kg
Crushed sand: 3 kg Pumice powder: 3 kg
Pumice stone: M1 (10 to 20 mm): 9.6 kg Pumice stone: M1 (10 to 20 mm): 6 kg
M2 (4.75 to 10 mm): 2.4 kg M2 (4.75 to 10 mm): 4 kg
Water: 5.4 kg Water: 5.8 kg.
Admixture: Aluminum powder 2%
Admixture: Aluminum powder 2%

IJERTV4IS080338 www.ijert.org 194

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

RESULTS: 28 days cube testing desired but its finishing was not good. It happens because of
Sp. Wt. Density Avg Load Avg. the large sized aggregate. So we have decided to eliminate
Strength large size aggregate completely from concrete & also
No. (kg) (kg/m3) Density (KN)
Strength
(kg/m3) (N/mm2) replace 30% cement by fly ash to achieve economy.
(N/mm2) Sample 5 gives lightweight concrete having average
1 4 895 65 2.89
compressive strength 3.21 N/mm2and average density
902.66 kg/m3. Which is less than the density of water hence
2 2.98 883 902.66 68 3.02 3.21 the concrete cube floating on the water. Figure 3 shows the
3 3.14 930 84 3.73 cube floating on water. It was light as desired but its
Sample 6: 3 cubes finishing was not good. It happens because of the large sized
aggregate. So we have decided to eliminate large size
Cement: 6 kg aggregate completely from concrete & also replace 30%
cement by fly ash to achieve economy.
Pumice powder: 3 kg
Pumice stone: M1 (10 to 20 mm): 6 kg
Pumice stone: M1 (10 to 20 mm): 6 kg
M2 (4.75 to 10 mm): 4 kg
Water: 5.8 kg.
Admixture: Aluminum powder 2%

RESULTS: 28 days cube testing

Sp.N Wt. Density Avg Load Avg.
Strength
o. (kg) (kg/m3) Density (KN)
Strength
(kg/m3) (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
1 3.84 1137 202 8.97
2 3.65 1081 1102.66 196 8.71 8.61
3 3.68 1090 184 8.17

IV.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

sample1 gives average compressive strength 11.60 N/mm2,
which is good for lightweight concrete. Also it gives
average density 1724.66 kg/m3, but we have to reduce the Fig.1: Cube showing rough surface
density of concrete to nearly equals to density of water, so it
is to be required that reduce the quantity of crush sand and Sample 6 gives lightweight concrete having surface flat &
thats why we reduced the quantity of crushed sand and also smooth and showing a good finish. Its average density
replaced it with pumice sand passing through IS sieve of 1102.66 kg/m3 and average compressive strength 8.61
size 4.75 mm. in next sample. Also we used two fractions of N/mm2. From the above results it seems that the
Aggregate i.e. M1 (10mm to 20 mm) and M2 (4.75 mm to compressive strength is increased even if the density is
10 mm). nearly same as the previous sample. So this sample is
sample 2 gives the improved results having average density perfect for the mix proportion.
1438 kg/m3 and average compressive strength 10.29
N/mm2, but average density of concrete is not nearly equals
to the density of water. Also the quantity of cement is high,
so we discussed this situation with our guide. He told us
that if you reduce the quantity of cement it will help us to
reduce the density as well as to achieve economy.
Therefore in next sample we reduced the cement quantity
and increased the pumice sand.
sample 3 gives the improved results having average density
1232.66 kg/m3 and average compressive strength 8.15
N/mm2. We reduced the quantity of cement in this sample,
but average density of concrete is still not nearly equals to
the density of water. Therefore in next sample we again
reduced the cement quantity and increased the pumice sand.
Sample 4 gives lightweight concrete having average
compressive strength 5.52 N/mm2and average density
1141.66 kg/m3, which is nearly equal to the density of water
hence the concrete may be float on the water. It was light as Fig.2: Cube showing smooth surface

IJERTV4IS080338 www.ijert.org 195

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

Density
2000

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800 Density

600

400

200

Fig.3: Cube floating on water

Graph 2: Average density of Different Samples

V. CONCLUSION
Compressive Strength In this study, the influences of aggregate types and the
amount on the compressive strength of concrete were
investigated. Using different aggregate proportions (pumice)
14 and five different lightweight concrete mixtures were
produced with a satisfied strength. The result of the
12 investigation showed that aggregate size and proportion
influenced the unit weight and compressive strength of
10 concrete. Moreover, the result showed that it is possible to
produce a Floating and satisfied strength concrete by using
8 pumice as aggregate. It was also seen that, using light
weight aggregate in the concrete mixture can reduce the
6 dead load but decreases the concrete strength. However for
the sample 6 it is Reverse, because this proportion gives
4 compressive strength 8.61 N/mm2, which is good for the
light weight concrete having density 1102.66 kg/m3. From
2 cost analysis it is proved that the cost of our project is less
than that of brick masonry. The study showed that using
0 pumice aggregate as a commixture enable to produce
different strength grade lightweight concrete with different
unit weight. These concrete does not satisfies the strength
requirements for load bearing structural elements. In this
study only strength and unit weight were considered, other
properties including carbonation and drying shrinkage,
thermal conductivity and sound insulation properties can be
Graph 1: Average Compressive Strength of Different investigated as a further study.
Samples

IJERTV4IS080338 www.ijert.org 196

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)
 International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT)
ISSN: 2278-0181
Vol. 4 Issue 08, August-2015

VI. REFERENCES

1) Dhawal Desai, Development of Light Weight Concrete, Civil

Engineering Portal, 2014.
2) T. Parhizkar, M. Najimi and A.R. Pourkhorshidi, (Application of
pumice aggregate in structural lightweight concrete, Asian journal
of civil engineering (building and housing) VOL. 13, NO. 1 (2012)
PAGES 43-54.
3) N. Sivalinga Rao, Y.Radha Ratna Kumari, V. Bhaskar Desai, B.L.P.
Swami, Fibre Reinforced Light Weight Aggregate (Natural
PumiceStone) Concrete,International Journal of Scientific &
Engineering Research Volume 4, Issue 5, May-2013 ISSN 2229-
5518.
4) Lakshmi Kumar Minapu1, M K M V Ratnam2, Dr. U Rangaraju,
(Experimental Study on Light Weight AggregateConcrete with
Pumice Stone, Silica Fume and Fly Ash as a Partial Replacement
of Coarse Aggregate), International Journal of Innovative
Research in Science, Engineering and Technology Vol. 3, Issue 12.
5) Kl1, C. D. Atis, A. Teymen, O. Karahan and Kamuran Ar (2009),
(The effects of scoria and pumice aggregates on the strengths and
unit weights of lightweight concrete ), Scientific Research and Essay
Vol.4 (10), pp. 961-965.

IJERTV4IS080338 www.ijert.org 197

(This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.)