See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/283396596

Experimental Production of Sustainable Lightweight Foamed Concrete

Article · January 2013

DOI: 10.9734/BJAST/2013/4242

CITATIONS READS
55 1,396

1 author:

Olayiwola Richard Alonge

Universiti Sains Malaysia
10 PUBLICATIONS   121 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The research is on Logistics and supply chain of green ready-mix concrete View project

Green logistics and supply chain management of green ready mix concrete View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Olayiwola Richard Alonge on 24 June 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology
3(4): 994-1005, 2013

SCIENCEDOMAIN international
www.sciencedomain.org

Experimental Production of Sustainable

Lightweight Foamed Concrete
Alonge O. Richard1* and Mahyuddin Ramli1
1
School of Housing, Building and Planning, USM, Penang, Malaysia.

Authors’ contributions

This work was carried out in collaboration between all authors. Author AOR designed the
study, performed the experimental and statistical analysis, wrote the protocol, and wrote the
first draft of the manuscript and managed literature searches. Author MR proof read and type
the final draft of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

th
Received 30 March 2013
nd
Research Article Accepted 2 June 2013
th
Published 12 July 2013

ABSTRACT

Lightweight foamed concrete is recently acceptable for use in low strength capacity for
building and civil construction purposes as a result of its peculiar features such as low
thermal conductivity, low self weight and self compacting features hence its high
workability. But it major demerits is its difficulty of high strength development when
compared with normal concrete. The maximum strength achieved so far is less than
3 3
25MPa even at higher density of between 1500kg/m and 1800kg/m . Strength
development of foamed concrete depends largely on some factors which are the
constituents of the base mix, the density of foam and the water cement ratio of the base
mix. This paper studies the base mix parameters to produce a sustainable foamed
concrete by substituting cement which is a source of carbon dioxide, a green house
emission elements, with a cementitious material, fly ash within a range of 10% up to 50%
and water cement ratio of 3.0 was used. Notraite PA-1 was used as foam agent and
prefoamed method was adopted for the production of the foamed concrete. With a target
3
density of 1600kg/m , the compressive strength result of 10.5MPa reveals that a high
strength sustainable foamed concrete structural panel could only be produced with 10%
replacement of cement.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

*Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected];

 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

Keywords: Concrete; sustainable concrete; lightweight foamed concrete; compressive

strength; fly ash.

1. INTRODUCTION

The incessant release of anthropogenic greenhouse gases has being causing climate
changes over some years now and this fact has been established through research studies
that there is global growth of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere. Studies have
shown that production of Portland cement alone accounted for approximately 5% of the total
global carbon dioxide emissions through various human activities. A further study shows that
a tone of concrete produced carbon dioxide of between 0.05 to 0.13 tonnes approximately
ninety-five percent of the total estimated carbon dioxide emissions derived from production
of concrete [1]. Gore [2], considered buildings as one of the largest end consumer of energy.
It was established that building sector accounts for 25 to 40% of final energy demand.

Concrete is considered worldwide as the most important building material and also the most
common materials used in the construction of building or civil engineering structures. The
reason behind this are not farfetched; if concrete is properly and adequately designed and
produced, it possess some valuable, conducive and economic features through its properties
chemically, physically and mechanically, hence its popularity in the world, its durability and
adaptability is worldwide friendly. As a result of its environmental impact also, it remains one
of the most costly materials of construction. Concrete is moldable, affordable highly
resistance to fire attack, easy to work with and readily available. It can be worked upon to
meet up with any specifications or requirements easily modifiable hence term as engineering
materials.

Ordinary concrete has been found to contain about 12% cement and 80% aggregates by
mass [3]. Furthermore, Mehta, [1] explained that mining large quantities of raw materials for
the production of cement such as limestone and clay and fuel such as coal often results in
extensive deforestation or denudation and top soil loss. All these need of vast quantity of
natural resources to produce estimated billions of tons of concrete each year resulted in
great impact on the immediate environment. Apart from the estimated 7% of the global
loading of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the air annually, cement industry through the production
of Portland cement is also considered to be energy intensive. Likewise, quite a large quantity
of water is required for the production of concrete, this is considered burdensome
considering the availability of good fresh water suitable for concrete production [4]. The
continuous use of natural aggregate and the use of cement in the production of concrete
conventionally likewise has negative effect on the environment. This effect on the habitat is
the extraction of aggregates from pits and quarries results in the destruction of the natural
habitats of many organisms and in the disturbance of pre-existing stream flow and water
resources [5]. With all these deficiency of the contemporary concrete, there is needs for the
production of concrete that will be more environmental friendly hence this laboratory
experiment.

Sustainable concrete is a concrete that is more friendly to the environment, that maintain a
state or nature as it is without compromising the unborn generation potentials. It’s a concrete
that possess some if not all the green building index parameters such as energy efficiency,
indoor environmental quality, sustainable site planning and management, water efficiency,
innovation and materials and resources. At least, four out of these parameters must be met
by supposed sustainable concrete. The actual reason for the production of green concrete is
that we need to live most lightly on the earth surface as much as possible. Green concrete

995
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

targets on increasing the resource use of energy efficiency, water and materials efficiency
and at the same time reducing the impact of these various activities on human health well
being and the environment.

Lightweight concrete is a material with low mechanical properties compared to normal

weight contemporary concrete and it was described by Dhir et al. [6], Mellin [7], as a
cementitious material that contains a minimum of 20% by volume of mechanically entrained
foam in the mortar slurry in which air pores are entrapped in the matrix by means of a
suitable foaming agent. Foamed concrete can be manufactured by adding a foaming agent
to a cement based mortar. The foaming agent can be applied and the foam formed through
a gentle but thorough mixing or the foaming agent can be aerated before being added to the
mixture (i.e. prefoaming). A laboratory test conducted on lightweight foamed concrete’s long
and short term properties revealed that the material could be used for structural elements
[8]. The beneficial features among others include low thermal conductivity, which is lesser
3
than 0.5W/mk, low self weight hence lightweight which is of the range of between 400kg/m
3
and 1800kg/m . In term of sustainability features, it’s energy efficient in production and use.
The water efficiency is high compared to normal weight concrete, it is a new innovation and
it does not cause environmental degradation because there is no use of aggregates.

Cementitious material includes among others hydraulic cements and some pozzolans that
complement hydraulic cement behavior or in some instances act same way as hydraulic
cement.

Fly ash is considered to be one of the most widely used cementitious materials and used in
about 50% of ready mixed concrete. Generally, complimentary cementitious material
contributes to both fresh and hardened properties of concrete since their basic chemical
components are similar. Fly ash as one of the cementitious materials can affect concrete as
follows, less water to achieve workability, it may delay the setting time, and strength may be
depressed during the early days but later increase because of fly ash reaction rates are
initially slower but continue longer. It also reduces heat of hydration of concrete, permeability
is reduced and resistance to chloride ion penetration is improved. Fly ash can be class C or
Class F depending on their microstructures. Class F fly ash is generally used in concrete mix
at the dosage of 15% to 25% by mass of the cementitious material while class C fly ash is
generally used at the dosages of 15% to 40% dosage depending on the desired effects on
the concrete [9]. In the same vein, fly ash according to Jones and McCarthy, Kearsley and
Wainwright, [10-13] has been used in various ranges of 30-70% content of cements weight
substitute.

1.1 Benefit of Research

The Universal goals based on agenda 21 established in RIO summit in Brazil is a path to
follow in all industries to make the earth surface free of green house gas emission in which
Carbon dioxide, a constituent of popular hydraulic cement, Portland cement, is a major
causes. Using cementitious materials as a partial substitute of the most used and popular
cement is quite challenging to achieve a good and acceptable strength as compared to the
concrete produced with the popular cement. This research study shall by no means be a
beacon of references for any concrete with high substitute of normal cement hence
sustainable concrete. This in turn, shall help the environment at large in the reduction of
carbon dioxide.

996
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Materials

The cement used in this research study was ordinary Portland cement type I conforming to
ASTM C150 [14] sourced locally and supplied by Tasek Corporation Berhad, the class F fly
ash was supplied by a local supplier, Fosroc Sdn. Bhd. And conformed to ASTM C618 [15].
Fine aggregates was sourced and supplied locally in Penang state of Malaysia. The fine
aggregate was of 300microns and of specific gravity of 2.52 [16]. Portable water supplied by
Penang state water board was used. No chemical additive was used in this experiment. The
foam was produced using a protein based foam agent in ratio of 1:35 dilution in water and a
Portal PM-1 foam generator available at HBP Laboratory of Universiti Sains Malaysia,
3
Penang, Malaysia, was used to generate the foam to a density of 80kg/m . Table 1 and
Table 2 show the details of the constituents of the materials used in this experiment.

Table 1. Physical property of cement, sand and fly ash.

Types of materials Density Specific surface Specific gravity

3 2
in kg/m area(m /kg)
Portland cement(type1)ASTM C 3.15 300 3.16
150.[24]
Fly ash(powder form) 2.3 500 2.06
Fine sand(natural) 2.1 Fineness modulus: 1.65, water absorption

Table 2.Chemical composition of cement and fly ash

Oxide in % Cement Fly ash.

Silicon oxide, 20.55 59.00
Aluminium oxide 4.78 19.58
Ferrous oxide 3.64 7.23
Calcium oxide 63.94 0.54
Magnessium oxide 1.50 4.64
Sulphur oxide 2.77 0.69
Sodium oxide 0.25 0.48
Potassium oxide 0.77 5.95
Chloride oxide 0.0350 0.0114
Loss on ignition 1.24 0.49
Insoluble residue 1.36 -
Free calcium oxide 1.25 -

2.2 Mix Proportion

The mix proportion guideline of ASTM C796 [17] was followed in the laboratory mixing. It is
peculiar to cement slurry that was used and modified to suit the production of the foam
3
concrete used for this study with a targeted 1600kg/m density.

The mixing procedure commences with the cleaning of the laboratory mixer and drained the
excess water, one third of the calculated mixing water was added, then the fine sand
followed by the cement. The materials was allowed to mix for almost 3minutes, then the fly
ash and the remaining water was added, this was allowed to blend together till appreciable

997
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

slurry was achieved. The density of the base mix was then taken in accordance to BS EN
12350 Part I [18] and the slump was also measured as described by Brady et al and
Nambiar and Ramamurthy [19-20]. The preformed foam was then added to the base mix
through the nozzle of the foam generator according to the calculated amount at the flow rate
per seconds. The density of the foam concrete produced was then checked against the
3
target density, 1600kg/m .This is the process that was observed for all the mix proportion
used in this study but with the fly ash as substitute of cement content at 10, 20, 30 and 50%
and the slump target of 200mm and water cement ratio of 0.30, so as to achieve the
objective of this study.

The mixed foam concrete was then casted into cube moulds of 100mm x 100mm sizes and
proper molding was achieve by gently tapping the sides of the molds with a rubber hammer
and not with a hard object that can cause agitation to the concrete in the mould, this is in
accordance to the recommendation of ASTM C796-97 [21]. The samples were mixed under
the ambient temperature of between 27±3ºC and 29±3ºC for the days of the mixing of the
samples.

After each mix, the samples were transferred to the laboratory curing space and covered with
black plastic sheets to prevent direct exposure to wind and climatic conditions especially
evaporation process. The specimen remained under same condition till 24hours later when
the specimens were demoulded and the fresh density of concrete was measured, each
sample marked before separated and transferred to the location where they will be cured
using three different curing systems, which were water curing, moist curing and air curing.
Two samples each for each day of the three types of curing system. This was done so that
proper and adequate comparison can be achieved for accurate or near accurate result. So in
all, six samples were casted for each day’s testing , 7, 14 and 28 days making a total of 18
cube samples per experiment with variable parameter of 10% - 50% fly ash content
substitute for cement.

All the samples remained under same curing condition till dates of testing except the water
and moisture cured that was removes and placed in an oven for 24hrs before testing. The
density was checked before placing in an oven and after placing in an oven. A typical mixing
proportion used was highlighted in Table 3.

Table 3. The mix proportion

Sample id Sand Cement Water Fly Foam Target Actual Slump

(kg) (kg) (kg) ash % density density mm
(kg)
C1600-NF 58.44 29.22 13.15 - 22.94 1600 1680 200
C1600-FA10 54.84 24.68 9.60 2.74 25.11 1600 1670 200
C1600-FA20 54.84 21.94 12.16 5.48 25.11 1600 1670 200
C1600-FA30 59.82 20.94 14.27 8.99 24.09 1600 1670 200
C1600-FA50 58.44 14.61 13.85 14.61 22.22 1600 1680 200

2.3 Laboratory Tests Methods

Each test result is represented by three 100mm cube samples and all tested to determine
their density and compressive strength at various ages of 7, 14 and 28 days after water,
moisture and air curing. After demoulding, samples were placed in their respective curing
position till the test dates except that of the water and moisture curing that was removed a

998
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

day before test and kept in the oven 24hrs before the test. All specimens were tested at
saturated surface dry condition and carried out according to BS 1881 Part 114 [22] and the
compressive strength of all the samples were tested immediately after the determination of
the density according to ASTM C796-97 [23] for each stage.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Saturated Surface Dry Density

Table 4 shows the result of the saturated dry density for all the samples and the
compressive strengths. The result of the saturated density shows that the density of all
samples containing fly ash reduced significantly compared to that of control samples without
fly ash (C1600-NF). And when compared those that contain fly ash it could be observed that
at 28days, the density was increasing relatively to the percentage of the fly ash content
except for the samples that contain 50% content of fly ash, the more the fly ash, the higher
the saturated density. In all this result shows that the presence of fly ash increases the
overall density of the samples and this occurs increasingly over days. This is shown in fig. 1.

The density ratio of the mixed was calculated during the mix and this is done by measured
the fresh density and divided it by the design density with water-solids ratio of the mixes.
Actually the consistency of the wet mix is very important to get the design density. It is
observed that at lower water-solids ratio of the mixes, the density ratio is higher than one.
The base mix is considered too stiff for proper mixing resulted in the breaking of the bubbles
and resulted in density increase. This finding substantiates the findings in earlier studies by
Nambiar and Ramamurthy [24].

Table 4. The density results

3 3 3
Sample Id. Density(kg/m ) Density(kg/m ) Density(kg/m )
7days 14days 28days
C1600-NF 1721 1730 1740
C1600-FA10 1688 1704 1712
C1600-FA20 1673 1735 1739
C1600-FA30 1712 1722 1735
C1600-FA50 1616 1643 1659
Note: This represent the mean results of the three curing system used for the study

3.2 Compressive Strength

The mechanism of fly ash in the mix is based on the pozzolanic property of the cementitious
material hence the reduction in the foam amount used and the consequence reduction in the
pore volume inside the mix and pore uniform distribution. The foam volume likewise
influences the behavior of flow ability. Fly ash as cement replacement produces good binder
and without merging the pore structures together, this result to uniform distribution and
coating on each of the bubbles present [24].

The combination of water and pozzolanic activity of fly ash made fly ash a good binder and
the reactions produce good binder with longer period of curing. The longer period is because
it takes hydration process of fly ash longer period of time to complete.

999
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

As shown in Fig. 1, there is progressive increase of the compressive strength of all the
samples as the days increases but when the compressive strength of all samples that
contain fly ash are compared to that of control samples without fly ash, it could be observed
that the samples without fly ash has higher strength. This can likely be as a result of the
homogenous nature of foamed concrete and the density of the fine sand that is higher than
that of fly ash.

Fig. 1. Shows the compressive strength of samples at test age

Moreso, it was established through studies by Jones and McCarthy [25] that the appropriate
days of testing foam concrete with high fly ash content should be minimum of 56days. And
also the microstructure feature of fly ash is another factor that can affect the strength of the
samples. Meanwhile, the samples without fly ash has the highest compressive strength of
10.5MPa at 28days, this is far lower to the compressive strength of normal concrete of
minimum 25MPa at 28days. Among the samples with fly ash content as reflected by Fig 2,
the sample with fly ash content of 10%, C1600-FA10 has the highest compressive strength
and about 14.3% higher than that of samples that contain 20% fly ash. The samples with
20% fly ash content also has the compressive strength that is higher than that of 30%
content of fly ash, while the samples with 50% content has the lowest as reflected in Fig 2.
The higher strength of this 10% content of fly ash samples may be as a result of the total
amount of the fine aggregates present in the mix as fine aggregates has a higher density
than that of fly ash. The higher the volumes of fly ash present, the lower the strength of the
samples. Any fly ash replacement level in any mix result to an increase in foam volume and
consequently increases the water-solids ratio requirement of the base mix. More so, these
tests were taken at early stage during which the pozzollanic nature of fly ash might have not
been fully maximized. Scientifically, the fine particles of fly ash get absorbed on the
oppositely charged surfaces of cement particles hence disturbed flocculation. This action
leads to the dispersion of cement particles adequately and also trap large amount of water.
Apart from this, the spherical shape cum smooth fly ash particles surface help to minimize
the inter particles friction and thus facilitates mobility. With this, there is water demand
reduction in the mix hence reduction in drying shrinkage which may have being as a result of
amount and quality of cement and water volume in the mix.

1000
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

The lower strength at higher substitute volume of fly ash goes to indicate that there is a
limited limit to which hydraulic cement can be substituted in foam concrete so that the
compressive strength will not be affected. With this indication, then it will be suggested that a
certain limit of probably 20% substitute should be adopted for foamed concrete that is to
achieve structural strength. It can also be deduced that, a sustainable foamed concrete with
a maximum 20% substitute of hydraulic cement can be achieved. This can go a long way to
reduce the carbon dioxide content of foamed concrete hence sustainable. As study by Obla
[26] shows that every ton of cement produced leads to about 0.9tons of carbon dioxide and a
3
typical cubic yard (0.7643m ) of concrete contains about 10% by weight of cement. With this
expression, a sustainable concrete as produced will by no means reduce some certain
percentage of carbon dioxide with substitution of cement by certain percentage of
supplementary cementituous material as fly ash.

3.3 Drying Shrinkage

Dry shrinkage is as a result of loss of adsorbed water from the mix materials. The indication
of this in foamed concrete and aerated concrete generally is based on its peculiar high
porosity and pores specific surface area. The total porosity is between 40%-80% and the
2
specific surface area is around 30m /g as mentioned by Jones and McCathy [10].

The absence of coarse aggregates in foamed concrete base mix made foam concrete to be
prone to high drying shrinkage which is up to 10 times greater than those experienced on
normal weight concrete as confirmed by a study by Jones et al [13]. The shrinkage of
foamed concrete reduces with density. In this study, the shrinkage is found to be lower as a
result of the fine aggregates which restrain shrinkage better than when fly ash or other
cementitious materials was used as filler rather than when use as cement replacement. For,
all the days of test the shrinkage was within the ranges of values as shown in Fig. 2 and this
reduces as the samples grow in ages. A study by McGovern [27] established that shrinkage
of foamed concrete normally occurs within 20days of casting. The effect of fly ash as cement
replacement generally reduces drying shrinkage strain. The result shown in Table 5 reveals
that fly ash as cement replacement reduces shrinkage and this may be connected to some
adamant particles of fly ash in the course of hydration process, i.e remain non reactive in
the process. These non reactive particles cause restraint and influence the pore structure
hence low shrinkage value.

1001
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

Fig. 2 shows the Shrinkage values of the specimen at different tested ages

3.4 Modulus of Elasticity

The modulus of elasticity of the samples was determined according to BS 1881; Part 121[28]
and it was observed to be as a matter of the compressive strength of the foamed concrete.
In this study, it was calculated at the age of 7, 14 and 28days and shown in Fig. 3.This is
found to be higher and it may be due to the interlocking of fine aggregates used in the base
mix. Although, generally it is observed that the modulus of elasticity of foamed concrete is far
lower compared to that of normal weight concrete and this is as a result of the absence of
coarse aggregates in the mix.

Modulus of Elasticity in GPa

12
10
8 Modulus of Elasticity
6 in Mpa 7days
4 city Values 14days
2
0
city Values 28days

Fig. 3 shows the Modulus of Elasticity values

1002
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

3.5 Water Absorption

Essentially, water absorption of foams concrete is influenced by the connection of pores and
voids. This formation is different with the inclusion of fly ash in the mix. According to a study
by Nambiar and Ramamurthy [24], the paste phase is the factor influencing water absorption
and not all pores react to water absorption. The paste phase is the result of the hydration
process that occurs due to reaction of cement with water and the fly ash in the mix. Pores in
some instances also relate to the total volume of foam in a mix. Differences in water
absorption is in response to the densities, low densities result in higher water absorption and
this is because of large volume of pores. Another factor that influences water absorption is
the type of filler and additives. In this experimental study, fly ash as cement replacement
gave lower range of water absorption percentage. This may be as a result of uniform
distribution of pore structures of fly ash present in the mix. Closed cells structures among
particles retard water movement within foamed concrete hence the low level of water
absorption. Table 5 shows the result of the water absorption of the specimens over the
period of test.

Table 5. Water absorption

Samples Water absorption in %

C 1600-NF 0.089-0.097
C 1600-FA10 0.087-0.091
C 1600-FA20 0.069-0.085
C 1600-FA30 0.051-0.054
C 1600-FA50 0.030-0.036

4. CONCLUSIONS

The result of this experimental study of sustainable lightweight foamed concrete production
with various volume of fly ash as substitute of cement reveals the following.

 The saturated surface dry density results shows that the presence of fly ash reduce
the saturated dry density of samples compared to the control samples.
 The Compressive strength was also reducing relatively to the volume of fly ash
present in the samples. The higher the fly ash volume, the lower the compressive
strength.
 That the production of sustainable concrete is possible with the substitution of the
volume of hydraulic cements hence reduce carbon dioxide emission.

COMPETING INTERESTS

All the authors declare that there are no competing interests whatsoever.

REFERENCES

1. Mehta PK. Reducing the environmental impact of concrete. Concrete international.

2001.23(10):61-66.
2. Gore C. Globalization, the international poverty trap and chronic poverty in the least
developed countries; 2003.
3. Neville AM. Properties of concrete; 1995. Longman Scientific & Technical.

1003
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

4. Alonge OR, Mahyuddin RB. A Qualitative Study of Green Building Indexes Rating of
Lightweight Foam Concrete. Journal of Sustainable Development. 2011;4(5):pp188.
5. Winfield M, Taylor A. Replacing the load: The need for an aggregates conservation
strategy for Ontario. Report published by Pembina Institute for Appropriate
Development. 2005;ISBN 0-921719-71-X.
6. Dhir R, Jones M, Nicol L. Development of Structural Grade Foamed Concrete. Final
Report, DETR Research Contract. 1999;39(3):p85.
7. Mellin P, Development of Structural Grade Foamed Concrete. MSc dissertation,
University of Dundee; 1999.
8. Kearsley E. Just foamed concrete–an overview. Specialist techniques and materials
for construction. London: Thomas Telford. 1999;227-37
9. ACI Committee 232. Use of fly ash in concrete. American concrete Institute.
Famington Hills, MI, USA; 2004.
10. Jones M, McCarthy A. Utilising unprocessed low-lime coal fly ash in foamed concrete.
Fuel. 2005;84(11):1398-1409.
11. Kearsley E, Wainwright P. The effect of high fly ash content on the compressive
strength of foamed concrete. Cement and concrete research. 2001;1(1):105-112.
12. Jones M, McCarthy A. Utilising unprocessed low-lime coal fly ash in foamed concrete.
Fuel. 2005;84(11):1398-1409.
13. Jones MR, McCarthy MJ, McCarthy A. Moving fly ash utilization in concrete forward: A
UK Perspective; 2003.
14. ASTM C150. Standard specification for Portland cement, annual book of ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA; 2001. DOI: 10.1520/C0150_C0150M-
11.www.astm.org.
15. ASTM C618-08a. Standard specification for fly ash and raw or calcinated natural
pozzolana for use as a mineral admixture in Portland cement concrete. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA; 1989. DOI: 10.1520/C0618-
08A.www.astm.org.
16. Sach J, Seifert H. Foamed concrete technology: Possibilities for thermal insulation at
high temperatures. in CFI. Ceramic forum international; 1999: Göller.
17. ASTM C796-97. Standard test method for foaming agents for use in producing
cellular concrete using preformed foam. ASTM International. West
Conshohockon,PA,1989,DOI:10.1520/C0033-03.www.astm.org.
18. BS EN 12350 Part I. Testing fresh concrete sampling. British Standards Institution,
London; 2000.
19. Brady K, Watts G, Jones M. Specification for foamed concrete. Highways Agency and
TRL Application Guide AG. 2001;39.
20. Nambiar EKK, Ramamurthy K. Models for strength prediction of foam concrete.
Materials and structures. 2008;41(2):247-254.
21. ASTM C796-97. Standard test method for foaming agents for use in producing cellular
concrete using preformed foam, ASTM International, West Conshohockon, PA; 1989.
DOI:10.1520/C0033-03.www.astm.org.
22. British Standards Institution. 'British standard testing concrete. Part 114: Methods
for determination of density of hardened concrete.' BS 1881: Part 114: 1983, London.
British Standards Institution; 1983.
23. ASTM. Standard test method for foaming agents for use in producing cellular concrete
using preformed foam, in ASTM C 796-97. 1997: Philadelphia.
24. Nambiar E, Ramamurthy K. Influence of filler type on the properties of foam concrete.
Cement and Concrete Composites. 2006;28(5):475-480.
25. Jones M, McCarthy A. Preliminary views on the potential of foamed concrete as a
structural material. Magazine of concrete research. 2005;57(1):21-32.

1004
 British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 3(4): 994-1005, 2013

26. Obla KH. What is Green Concrete? The Indian Concrete Journal. 2009;24:26-28.
27. McGOVERN G. Manufacture and Supply of Ready-Mix Foamed Concrete. in One Day
Awareness Seminar on ‘Foamed Concrete: Properties, Applications and Potential.
University of Dundee, Scotland; 2000.
28. BS1881: Method of determination of static Modulus of Elasticity in Compression,
British Standard Institute, London, BSI; 1985.
________________________________________________________________________
© 2013 Richard and Ramli; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
http://www.sciencedomain.org/review-history.php?iid=226&id=5&aid=1630

1005

View publication stats