Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023) 106235

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Building Engineering

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

Effects of modified binders on flowability of grout and properties

of preplaced aggregate concrete
Kunal Krishna Das a, b, Eddie Siu-Shu Lam a, Jeong Gook Jang b,*
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Hong Kong, China
b
Division of Architecture and Urban Design, Urban Sciences Institute, Incheon National University, 119 Academy-ro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, 22012,
Republic of Korea

A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords:
Preplaced aggregate concrete In preplaced aggregate concrete (PAC), it is important yet complex to achieve a grout with high
Ground granulated blast furnace slag flowability and bleed resistance simultaneously. Supplementary cementitious materials, typically
Silica fume incorporated to impart desired properties to concrete and to complement economic and envi-
Sand ronmental benefits, may uniquely alter the properties of PAC to that of conventional concrete.
Flowability Therefore, comprehensive knowledge of incorporating supplementary cementitious materials,
considering alterations in their flowability and constituent materials to improve the overall
performance of PAC is essential. The present study investigates the properties of PAC, incorpo-
rating ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) and silica fume (SF) as partial replacement of
cement at 0–40% and 0–10%, respectively. Different proportions of GGBS and SF were consid-
ered, where, flowability and superplasticizer dosage were varied with and without incorporating
sand. Grout properties were evaluated in terms of flowability and compressive strength and PAC
properties were evaluated in terms of mechanical strength, durability, and dimensional stability.
The findings revealed that the combination of GGBS and SF in grout displayed suitable flowability
and acceptable strength. Removal of sand from grout improved the properties of grout while
deteriorating the properties of PAC. PAC produced using grout with 10% SF and sand to binder
ratio of 0.5, exhibiting effluX time of less than 20 s, displayed the highest compressive strength.
GGBS and SF significantly improved chloride ion penetration of PAC with the drawback of
increased drying shrinkage. Nevertheless, all PAC mi Xes could still be classified as low shrinkage
concrete. PAC produced with 40% GGBS and 10% SF exhibited comparable compressive strength
and enhanced resistance to chloride ion penetration to that of PAC without GGBS/SF.

1. Introduction
Preplaced aggregate concrete (PAC) is produced by first pre-placing coarse aggregates into formwork and then filling in the voids
between the coarse aggregates with suitable grouts. As the coarse aggregates are preplaced, they occupy nearly 60% –70% of the total
volume, leaving 30%–40% of the voids to be filled by grout [1]. High coarse aggregate content in PAC reduces the consumption of
cement [2], thereby reducing the shrinkage and heat of hydration [1,3], making it suitable for application to mass construction [4].
Over the years, PAC has been applied in underwater construction, restoration and rehabilitation of structures, large-scale concrete
structures, and structures that requires dense steel reinforcements with complications in applying compaction or vibration [5,6]. In

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J.G. Jang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.106235
Received 25 September 2022; Received in revised form 10 February 2023; Accepted 2 March 2023
Available online 5 March 2023
2352-7102/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

recent years, the feasibility of applying PAC to concrete-filled steel tubes was investigated by Lv et al. [7] with the aims of lowering
the consumption of cement, increasing stiffness, and reducing shrinkage.
Advances in PAC inspired the use of rocks as coarse aggregates with grout being replaced by self-consolidating concrete. This is
known as rock-filled concrete [8]. Rock-filled concrete gained wide acceptance in China, especially in the past decade [9–11]. It has
been applied in more than 60 hydraulic engineering projects, such as the Changkeng third reservoir project in Guangdong, Shihe
reservoir project in Hebei, Maopohe hydropower project in Yunnan, etc. [12]. In recent studies, alkali activated grout was used to
replace the traditional cement sand grout to produce PAC with environmental benefits [13,14]. Also, fibres were incorporated to
improve the flexural properties of PAC [6,15,16]. As fibres were miXed with the coarse aggregates and not with the grout, the
complexities associated with workability were eliminated.
Grouting in PAC is usually conducted by pumping process or gravity process. In the pumping process, the grout is pumped from the
base of the formwork through a network of pipes until it rises to the desired depth. In the gravity process, the grout is poured on the
upper face of the coarse aggregates and is allowed to penetrate through the coarse aggregate skeleton under the action of gravity
[1,6]. The minimum size of coarse aggregate is a key factor in selecting the appropriate grouting process [6]. While the gravity
process can be successfully applied for larger sized coarse aggregates, the pumping process is recommended when smaller sized
coarse aggregates (less than 20 mm) are employed [17]. The necessity of complex equipment for pumping leads to an upscale of
resources, as well as underutilization of PAC [18,19]. Reducing the reliance on sophisticated pumping equipment for efficient
production of PAC is important for its wider application.
The influence of binding grout along with its flowability affects the compressive strength of PAC [14]. Thus, the flowability of
grouts is a vital factor in forming a monolith with the preplaced coarse aggregate and producing quality PAC [20]. ACI 304.1 [21]
recommends an effluX time of 22 ± 2 s for walls and structural repairs, 18–26 s for massive sections and underwater constructions, and 35–
40 s for high strength PAC. In addition to the above considerations, an earlier study suggests that the size of coarse aggregates has a
significant effect on the required effluX time and that the grouting process (i.e. via gravity or pumping) may also influence the
required effluX time [17].
The use of supplementary cementitious materials for partial replacement of cement reduces the weight of cement in concrete in
addition to imparting desirable properties to it [22]. Fly ash has been successfully used to improve the properties of PAC [4,23–28].
ACI 304.1 [21] recommends partial replacement of cement by fly ash of up to 33%, as it reduces the heat of hydration significantly.
Nowek et al. [23] found 10% and 6% partial replacement of cement by fly ash and SF, respectively, to be the optimum percentages of
replacement in PAC. PAC incorporating SF displayed superior physical properties to those of fly ash. Abdelgader and El-Baden [29]
recommended using SF in combination with a superplasticizer to improve the compressive strength of PAC. Najjar et al. [26]
observed that while SF increases the mechanical strength of PAC, it reduces the workability of the grout. The detrimental effect of
SF on the flowability of grout hinders its application to PAC. While some studies, including those noted above, on the incorporation
of GGBS [4] and SF [26,29,30] in PAC have been conducted, its durability along with dimensional stability has yet to be explored. In
PAC, as both fresh and hardened properties of grout significantly influence the mechanical properties of PAC produced, a balance
between flow- ability and strength of grout is essential to exploit the full potential of the resources being used. GGBS and SF have
been used in mortar [31], conventional concrete [32], and self-compacting concrete [33]. However, in PAC, as the coarse aggregates
do not take part in the miXing process and the production technique of PAC is distinct from that of other concrete, properties
exhibited by grout/mortar may not necessarily reflect the overall performance of PAC. Further, it must be noted that the production of
quality PAC also depends on the filling ability of the grout, rather than on external or internal compaction of the overall concrete
matriX, making it unique to that of other concrete. In conventional concrete, partial replacement of cement by GGBS improves the
ultimate strength, cohesive charac- teristics [34], and resistance to chloride ion penetration [35]. Partially replacing cement with SF
enhances the strength [36] and durability [37] of concrete. The utilization of GGBS and SF is considered the economical and
environmentally-friendly approach to improving the properties of concrete [38]. Further, given that the production of cement alone
accounts for the third-largest anthro- pogenic emissions of CO2 [39], utilization of industrial by-products such as GGBS and SF in
PAC is attractive to reduce the carbon footprint, along with other environmental and economic benefits.
In this study, an experimental investigation was conducted to determine the effect of incorporating GGBS and/or adding SF as
partial replacement of cement. The sand to binder ratio (S/B) was varied between 0.00 and 0.50. Grouts with assessment of the
flowability to form PAC was evaluated at a constant superplasticizer (SP) dosage and at regulated efflu X time. To develop a user-
friendly approach, grouting was performed via the gravity process. The influence of mi X proportions of grout and the grout proper-
ties on mechanical properties, durability, and dimensional stability of PAC was evaluated.

Table 1
Chemical composition of cement, GGBS, and SF.

Material MgO Al2O3 SiO2 P2O5 SO3 K2O CaO TiO2 MnO Fe2O3

Cement 0.95 5.25 20.48 – 1.90 0.40 65.00 – – 3.82

GGBS 6.88 16.90 31.70 0.09 2.45 0.51 40.1 0.80 0.28 0.27
SF 2.25 0.48 90.3 0.19 0.61 2.94 0.99 – 0.14 1.24

2
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

2. Experimental program
2.1. Materials
Type I ordinary Portland cement conforming to ASTM C 150 [40] was used. The mean particle size of cement, determined using
a laser diffraction particle size analyser (LS13 320), was 17.5 μm. Locally available GGBS and SF were employed. Chemical
compositions of cement, GGBS, and SF were analysed by X-ray fluorescence and are shown in Table 1. PolycarboXylate-type
polymer-based SP (ADVA 109) was applied. River sand with a specific gravity of 2.65, complying to Grade 3, ACI 304.1 [21], was
used as fine aggregates. The particle size distribution of cement, GGBS, SF, and sand is shown in Fig. 1. Singly graded crushed
granite of siliceous mineralogy passing through a 20 mm sieve and retained on a 14 mm sieve was used as coarse aggregates. This
range of coarse aggregates was selected to ensure efficient penetrability of grout through the coarse aggregate skeleton via the
gravity process. The maximum size of coarse aggregates was limited to less than a quarter of the diameter of the cylindrical moulds
that were used. The measured void content of coarse aggregates is 38% and this refers to the voids between the coarse aggregates
to be later occupied by grout.

2.2. Mix proportion of grout

For conventional concrete, the suitable range for the replacement of cement by GGBS and SF varies between 30% –60% [41–44] and
5%–10% [43,45,46], respectively. However, these ranges of values may not be apt for producing PAC as along with the mechanical
properties, the fresh properties of grout are also a key parameter. For filling the voids between the preplaced aggregates, it is important
yet complex to produce grout with high flowability and bleed resistance simultaneously. Therefore a preliminary investigation was
conducted to determine suitable limits for partially replacing cement by GGBS and SF.
Based on a previous study [17], S/B=0.50 and W/B 0.37 = were applied to form grouts with and without adding GGBS and SF.
Properties of grout, i.e. effluX time and compressive strength, were used to optimize the ratios for GGBS and SF. Bleeding of grout
was ensured to be well within the permissible limits. To ascertain the desired GGBS to binder ratio (GGBS/B) and silica fume to binder
ratio (SF/B), samples were prepared through trial and error. For grout with partial replacement of cement by GGBS above 40%, the
compressive strength of grout decreased significantly (by more than 30%). Hence, the replacement of cement by GGBS was limited
to 40%. For grout with partial replacement of cement by SF above 10%, flowability was reduced. With 10% SF as partial replacement
of cement, it was difficult to achieve an effluX time smaller than 20 s. Hence, the SF/B ratio was not increased further. Therefore, based
on the above, cement was partially replaced by GGBS and SF at 0–40% and 0–10%, respectively. MiX proportions of grout
constituting different combinations of GGBS and/or SF were considered.
Table 2 shows the miX proportion of grout. Three sets of miXes were prepared. For Set 1, the flowability of grout was evaluated at
a SP dosage of 0.5%, whereas for Set 2, the efflu X time was regulated to less than 20 s by modifying the SP dosage. Set 3 was a
modification of Set 2 with the S/B ratio reduced to zero. As for the miX IDs, S1, S2, and S3 represent Set 1, Set 2, and Set 3,
respectively, and this is followed by an alphabet (e.g. S1–C) where A, B, C, D and, E represents different proportions of GGBS and
SF in the miX.

2.3. Testing of grouts

Table 3 shows the testing schedule of grout. Grouts were subjected to bleeding tests as per ASTM C 940 [ 47] and were all well
within the permissible limits, i.e. bleeding less than 2% after 120 min. Grout consistency was determined by the flow cone test in
terms of effluX time to ASTM C 939 [48]. A smaller effluX time results in a higher flowability. Cubes with 50 mm sides were
prepared to determine the compressive strength of the grout at 7, 28, and 56 days as per ASTM C 942 [49].

2.4. Testing of PAC

Cylinders and prisms were produced via the gravity process, i.e. first filling the moulds with coarse aggregates followed by
applying grout from above. Table 3 shows the tests and schedule of PAC. Mechanical properties were assessed by a compression test
and a splitting tensile test. Durability was assessed by a chloride ion penetration test, and dimensional stability was evaluated by a
drying shrinkage test. Cylinders of 100 × mm 200 mm in size were prepared to determine the 28 days’ compressive strength and
splitting tensile strength as per ASTM C 39 [50] and ASTM C 496 [51], respectively. Subsequently, 50 mm thick slices were cut to
size from cylinders to determine the chloride ion penetration to ASTM C 1202 [52] at 28 days. In addition, 75 mm × 75 mm X 285
mm prisms

100
Cement
GGBS
Cummulative volume (%)

80 SF
Sand

60

40

20

0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

3
K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)
Particle size (µm)

Fig. 1. Particle size distribution of cement, GGBS, SF, and sand.

4
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

Table 2
MiX proportion of grout.
Set MiX ID GGBS/B SF/B S/B Materials in percentage in dry miX (%)

C GGBS SF S
Set 1 S1-A 0.00 0.00 0.50 50.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
S1–B 0.40 0.00 0.50 30.00 20.00 0.00 50.00
S1–C 0.00 0.10 0.50 45.00 0.00 5.00 50.00
S1-D 0.20 0.05 0.50 37.50 10.00 2.50 50.00
S1-E 0.40 0.10 0.50 25.00 20.00 5.00 50.00
Set 2 S2-A 0.00 0.00 0.50 50.00 0.00 0.00 50.00
S2–B 0.40 0.00 0.50 30.00 20.00 0.00 50.00
S2–C 0.00 0.10 0.50 45.00 0.00 5.00 50.00
S2-D 0.20 0.05 0.50 37.50 10.00 2.50 50.00
S2-E 0.40 0.10 0.50 25.00 20.00 5.00 50.00
Set 3 S3-A 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
S3–B 0.40 0.00 0.00 60.00 40.00 0.00 0.00
S3–C 0.00 0.10 0.00 90.00 0.00 10.00 0.00
S3-D 0.20 0.05 0.00 75.00 20.00 5.00 0.00
S3-E 0.40 0.10 0.00 50.00 40.00 10.00 0.00

Table 3
Testing schedule.

Materials Property Test Standard Schedule

Grout Fresh Bleeding ASTM C 940 Immediately after miXing

Grout consistency ASTM C 939 Immediately after miXing
Mechanical Compressive strength ASTM C 942 7, 28, and 56 days
PAC Mechanical Compressive strength ASTM C 39 28 days
Splitting tensile ASTM C 496 28 days
Durability Chloride ion penetration ASTM C 1202 28 days
Dimensional stability Drying shrinkage BS ISO 1920-8 Over a period of 90 days

were prepared to determine the drying shrinkage of PAC as per BS ISO 1920-8 [53]. For all the above mentioned testing procedures, a
minimum of three specimens were considered.

3. Results and discussions

3.1. Grout properties
Table 4 shows the properties of grout. For Set 1, the effluX time decreased with the incorporation of GGBS and increased greatly
with the incorporation of SF. A decrease in efflu X time by 22% was observed between mi X ID S1-A (without GGBS or SF) and S1–B (40%
GGBS), while an 81% increase in effluX time was observed between miX ID S1-A and S1–C (10% SF). The former could be ascribed to
the lubricating effect of GGBS while the latter could be attributed to the fine particle size of SF, which increases the overall water
demand. According to Johari et al. [54], GGBS improves workability by improving particle dispersion. Smooth and dense surface
characteristics of GGBS particles lead to the absorption of less water during miXing. MiXes incorporating both GGBS and SF
displayed effluX time within a suitable range, i.e. closer to 22 ± 2 s which is recommended by ACI 304.1 [21] for application to
walls and

Table 4
EffluX time of fresh grout.

MiX ID SP dosage @ wt. of B (%)

EffluX time (Sec.)

S1-A 0.50 20.18

S1–B 0.50 15.58
S1–C 0.50 36.66
S1-D 0.50 23.56
S1-E 0.50 22.05
S2-A 0.58 19.15
S2–B 0.42 17.35
S2–C 1.50 20.25
S2-D 1.00 18.58
S2-E 0.82 19.01
S3-A 0.50 17.22
S3–B 0.30 16.03
S3–C 0.80 19.19
S3-D 0.62 18.98
S3-E 0.50 18.37

5
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

structural repairs. MiX ID S1-E, incorporating GGBS and SF at their highest levels, displayed an efflu X time similar to that of mi X ID
S1-A, which was devoid of any GGBS or SF. For Set 2 and Set 3, the flowability of grout varied in a similar fashion. However, as the
effluX time was controlled within a constant range to less than 20 s in these sets, the SP dosage was adjusted to maintain the
required effluX time. Compared to Set 2, the flowability of grout was significantly improved in Set 3. The decrease in flowability with
an increase in sand content was due to the angular and rough surface area of sand, which traps free paste between interlocking
particles and thereby increases the viscosity of the mi X [25]. When subjected to shear stress, as sand particles do not deform, the
shear rate within sand remains zero. To obtain a certain shear rate in the whole composite, the shear rate in paste is higher
compared to pure cement paste [55]. This shear rate results in higher stress and resistance to flow in the paste, increasing the
effluX time of grout.
Compressive strength of grout at 7 days, 28 days, and 56 days is shown in Fig. 2. GGBS reduces the compressive strength of
grout at 28 days. This could be attributed to the significant reduction of cement content in the grout. Incorporation of SF improves
the 28 days’ compressive strength of grout due to the increase in the pozzolanic reaction between SiO 2 in SF and Ca(OH)2 from the
hydration products [56]. Table 5 shows the strength development of grout from 7 days to 28 days and 28 days to 56 days. Mi Xes
incorporating GGBS displayed slower strength development from 7 days to 28 days, with significant strength development from 28
days to 56 days. This could be attributed to latent-hydraulic reaction and the longer period required for the formation of calcium
hydroXide in cement grout incorporating GGBS [42]. On the other hand, miXes incorporating SF exhibited significant strength
development from 7 days to 28 days, with insignificant strength development from 28 days to 56 days.
Based on the above, GGBS reduces the 28 days’ compressive strength but enhances the flowability of grout whereas SF improves the
28 days’ compressive strength but reduces the flowability of grout. By combining GGBS and SF, they complement each other, pro-
ducing grouts with acceptable compressive strength and suitable flowability. This indicates that industrial by-products such as
GGBS and SF can be optimized to achieve acceptable flowability and strength. Grout miXes with equivalent GGBS and SF
replacements in Set 1 and Set 2 displayed comparable compressive strengths despite different flowability. To improve the flowability
of the grout, the S/B ratio was reduced to zero in Set 3. MiXes from Set 3 displayed a higher compressive strength than miXes from Set 2.
This was attributed to the higher binder content in the miXes without sand.

3.2. PAC properties

3.2.1. Compressive strength
Table 6 shows the compressive strength of PAC. E Xcept for miX ID S1–C (fiXed SP dosage, 10% SF), SF enhances the compressive
strength of PAC at 28 days. SF eliminates weak links between paste and aggregates at the interfacial transition zone by forming a
homogenous and dense microstructure at the interfacial region, thereby strengthening the binder-aggregate bond [57]. The
reduction of the compressive strength in miX ID S1–C could be attributed to the decrease in flowability of grout by the fine particle
size of SF and this caused inefficient filling of voids in PAC, leaving behind honeycombs. Fig. 3 shows the presence of honeycombs
in the interior and exterior surface of miX ID S1–C in comparison to miX ID S1-A (fiXed SP dosage, without GGBS or SF). GGBS
reduces the compressive strength of PAC at 28 days. PAC with 40% GGBS exhibited the lowest compressive strength in each set. The
reduction in the compressive strength could be ascribed to the slow reactivity of GGBS and high dilution levels due to the high
replacement of cement by GGBS [54]. Nevertheless, PAC incorporating 40% GGBS and 10% SF exhibited comparable compressive
strength to that of PAC without any GGBS or SF. This was attributed to the combined effect of enhanced compressive strength due
to the presence of SF and improved flowability due to the presence of GGBS. This suggests that GGBS and SF can be successfully
used to replace up to half of the cement in the binder without compromising the compressive strength.
Comparing Set 1 and Set 2, except for miX ID S1–C and S2–C (miXes with 10% SF), PAC with equivalent grout miX proportion
displayed comparable compressive strength, which is ascribed to suitable effluX time. The reduction in compressive strength by 18%
between miX ID S2–C and S1–C was ascribed to the increase in effluX time from 20.25 s to 36.66 s, (shown in Table 4), leading to
inefficient penetrability of the grout, as discussed earlier. This indicates the necessity to ensure grout with suitable flowability in
addition to strength. Hence, it is essential to regulate the effluX time within a suitable range when specifying a miX proportion for grout.
Comparing Set 3 with Set 1 and Set 2, with the exclusion of sand, the compressive strength of PAC decreases. This is in contrast to
the compressive strength of grout, which increases with the exclusion of sand. This indicates that sand plays a unique role in the

100 7 days28 days

Compressive strength (MPa)

80

60

40

20

Mix ID

Fig. 2. Compressive strength of grout at 7 days, 28 days, and 56 days.

6
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

Table 5
Strength development of grout.
MiX ID Strength development (%)

7–28 days 28–56 days

S1-A 26.05 1.02

S2-A 36.16 1.88
S3-A 19.08 5.65
S1–B 7.14 22.36
S2–B 7.24 20.02
S3–B 6.88 32.21
S1–C 27.17 2.45
S2–C 22.55 2.52
S3–C 25.72 0.67
S1-D 10.84 8.98
S2-D 9.85 10.17
S3-D 16.17 8.57
S1-E 20.23 11.65
S2-E 13.92 11.66
S3-E 16.46 9.60

Table 6
Compressive strength, compatibility factor and splitting tensile strength of PAC.

MiX ID Compressive strength (MPa) Compatibility factor (α) Splitting tensile strength (MPa)

S1-A 42.78 0.51 3.76

S1–B 28.58 0.44 2.98
S1–C 39.24 0.45 3.58
S1-D 33.04 0.48 3.21
S1-E 40.13 0.51 3.91
S2-A 43.01 0.54 3.88
S2–B 31.92 0.51 3.17
S2–C 48.02 0.56 4.15
S2-D 35.11 0.50 3.51
S2-E 42.62 0.55 4.05
S3-A 34.90 0.42 3.11
S3–B 30.13 0.45 2.75
S3–C 39.91 0.45 3.42
S3-D 33.89 0.44 3.05
S3-E 36.98 0.43 3.08

strength development of grout and PAC. Although exclusion of sand improved the flowability and compressive strength of grout, the
compatibility of grout with the coarse aggregate skeleton, together forming a composite concrete, was inadequate. This could be
explained by the packing theory of intermittent grading. According to Furnas [58], the amounts of successive sizes of constituent
materials in a system depend on the voids in the coarsest size of the aggregate present. A large void content indicates larger amount
of fines to fill them. To secure efficient packing, a system of intermittent grading (gap grading) was applied. The solution of
intermittent grading was given graphically, and the results obtained were plotted as curves for maximum possible voids ranging
between 30% and 60% for two to four component sizes. The type of curve for maximum packing density was determined by voids in
the bed of uniformly packed material and the ratio of the size limits of the system.
In this case, miX ID S2-A and S3-A (miXes without GGBS or SF) were considered as a three-component (containing cement, sand, and
coarse aggregates) and two-component (containing cement and coarse aggregates) sizes, respectively. Since the efflu X time of grouts
for both miXes was regulated to less than 20 s, the penetrability of grout through the coarse aggregates was similar. In this study, the
void content of coarse aggregates was 38%. The ratio of smallest to largest particle size was 0.000875, where the smallest and the
largest size were the size of cement (0.0175 mm) and coarse aggregates (20 mm), respectively. Fig. 4 shows computed possible
minimum voids in the bed of two and three component sizes for internal voids in the bed of uniformly sized material of 40% [ 58]. It
indicates that the possible minimum voids of concrete for the three-component system are lower than that of the two-component
system. This suggests that a denser structure is produced in the presence of sand, resulting in higher compressive strength.
Fig. 5 shows the compressive strength of grout and PAC along with the factor alpha (α). A compatibility factor α (shown in Eq. (1)),
the ratio between compressive strength of grout and PAC, was used to express the compatibility of grout with the skeleton of coarse
aggregates forming the PAC. α determines the efficiency of grout in imparting mechanical properties to the PAC. Grouts with high
compressive strength and a high α imply high PAC compressive strength. Comparing Set 1 and Set 2, PAC with effluX time regulated
to less than 20 s (Set 2) displayed smaller variation of α. α for Set 3 was lower than that of Set 2, signifying the influence of sand on
the compressive strength of PAC. For instance, while miX ID S3–C (without sand, 10% SF) displayed a higher grout compressive
strength than that of miX ID S2–C (with sand, 10% SF), it produced a smaller α and the PAC compressive strength was 18% lower.
Although an increase in binder content improves the compressive strength of grout, it does not necessarily increase the
compressive strength of

7
K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

Exterior Interior

Exterior Interior

Honeycombs
Honeycombs

40 mm

Fig. 3. Interior and exterior surface of (a) S1-A and (b) S1–C.

40
2-Component3-Component

30
Voids (%)

20

10

0
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1

Ratio of the smallest to the largest size

Fig. 4. Computed possible minimum voids in bed of two and three component sizes if internal voids in bed of uniformly si zed material are 40% [58].

100 1.00
Grout PAC
Compressive strength (MPa)

80 0.80

60 0.60

40 0.40

20 0.20

0 0.00

Mix ID

Fig. 5. Compressive strength of grout and PAC, and compatibility factor, alpha (α).

8
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

PAC. The above is in agreement with Abdelgader [5].

PAC compressive strength
Alpha (α)
Grout compressive strength
= (1)
3.2.2. Splitting tensile strength
Table 6 shows the splitting tensile strength of the PAC. With the incorporation of GGBS, splitting tensile strength of the PAC de-
creases. This can be attributed to high replacement ratio of cement by GGBS. Similar to compressive strength, except for miX ID S1–
C (without sand, 10% SF), PAC incorporating SF displayed an increase in splitting tensile strength, ascribed to a high pozzolanic
reaction in the presence of SF. This exception could be related to the high effluX time of grout, resulting in inefficient penetrability of
the grout through the coarse aggregate skeleton, and this reflects the significance of regulating the effluX time of grouts within a
suitable range, i.
e. less than 20 s in this case. The PAC with 40% GGBS and 10% SF displayed comparable splitting tensile strength to that of the PAC
without any GGBS or SF, owing to the combined effect of improved strength and enhanced flowability due to SF and GGBS,
respectively.
Abdelgader and Elgalhud [59] suggested that variation of the S/B ratio did not have a significant impact on the splitting tensile
strength of PAC at a high W/B ratio (0.4–0.6). This was ascribed to a weak grout matri X due to excessive free water that leads to
bleeding, resulting in the formation of capillary voids in the interface and underneath the coarse aggregates [25]. However, the
effect of variation of sand on the splitting tensile strength was observed to be distinct at low W/B ratios [25]. In Set 3, with a
reduction of the S/B ratio to 0.00, the splitting tensile strength of PAC decreases. This could be ascribed to the high energy required
to overcome the resistance in crack propagation and crack growth due to larger and angular shapes of sand particles.
Fig. 6 shows the relationship between the splitting tensile strength and compressive strength of the PAC. Most of the splitting tensile
strength values are in close pro Ximity to the results yielded by the equation used for predicting the splitting tensile strength of con-
ventional concrete, given by ACI 318 [60]. This indicates that the relationship between splitting tensile strength and compressive
strength in PAC follows a similar trend to that of conventional concrete and that the equation given by ACI 318 [ 60] for
conventional concrete can be used to predict the splitting tensile strength of PAC.

3.2.3. Chloride ion penetration

Fig. 7 shows the chloride ion penetration of PAC. Classification of chloride ion penetrability ranging from “very low” to
“moderate”
[52] is indicated in the figure. PAC containing both GGBS and SF at their highest levels displayed “very low” to “low” chloride ion
penetrability. This could be attributed to the high replacement of cement by GGBS and SF. The results are consistent with those of
Cheng et al. [61] and Poon et al. [37] for conventional concrete. GGBS in concrete improves the pore structure by introducing an
additional C–S–H gel in the paste, forming a denser microstructure and thereby reducing the porosity [ 61]. SF in concrete acts as
micro-fillers and densifies the miX, reducing chloride ion penetration [37]. It further enhances the microstructure of concrete by
accelerating the hydration rate and improving the packing density [29].
The PAC employing grout mi Xes from Set 2 displayed a higher resistance to chloride ion penetration than that of Set 1, especially for
10% SF (miX ID S2–C and S1–C), indicating that suitable flowability of grout produces a PAC with improved resistance to chloride
ion penetration. High flowability of grout results in inefficient filling of voids between the coarse aggregates, reducing honeycombs
and thereby reducing the permeability in the PAC.
Comparing Set 2 and Set 3, miX ID S2–C (10% SF) and S2-E (40% GGBS and 10% SF) displayed “very low” chloride ion pene-
trability, whereas miX ID S3–C (10% SF) and S3-E (40% GGBS and 10% SF) displayed “low” chloride ion penetrability, indicating
that miXes incorporating sand provide greater resistance to chloride ion penetration. This was further evidenced by mi X ID S3-A
(cement water grout), which showed the highest coulombs of charge passed. This could be attributed to an increase in the water and
binder content per cross-sectioned area with the removal of sand. Mi X ID S3-E, constituting the same cement content as that of mi X ID S1-
A and S2-A, displayed a higher resistance to chloride ion penetration. This indicates that replacing sand with a binder comprising
GGBS and SF enhances the durability of the PAC.

3.2.4. Drying shrinkage

Fig. 8 demonstrates the variation in drying shrinkage against the age of PAC for Set 1 (Fig. 8 (a)), Set 2 (Fig. 8 (b)), and Set 3 (Fig.
8

4.5
10% line
Splitting tensile strength (MPa)

4.1
ACI 318

3.7
10% line

3.3

2.9

2.5
25 30 35 40 45 50
Compressive strength (MPa)

9
K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

Fig. 6. Relationship between the splitting tensile strength and compressive strength of PAC.

1
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

Fig. 7. Chloride ion penetration test results of PAC.

0 20 40 60 80 100
0 0 20 40 60 80 100
0
S1-A
S1-B S2-A
S1-C S2-B
-100 -100 S2-C
S1-D
S1-E S2-D
Micro-strain

S2-E
Micro-strain
-200 -200

-300 -300

-400 -400

-500
-500
Days Days

0 20 40 60 80 100
0
S3-A
S3-B
-100 S3-C
S3-D
Micro-strain

S3-E
-200

-300

-400

-500
Days

Fig. 8. Drying shrinkage of PAC.

(c)). By adding GGBS and SF, the drying shrinkage of the PAC increased. The finer pore structure of GGBS in the mi X lowers the relative
humidity and increases the degree of self-desiccation in the cement paste [62]. The incorporation of GGBS results in a denser miX
with fine capillary pores. This increases the capillary pore water pressure, which leads to higher shrinkage strains [63]. SF exhibited
higher drying shrinkage than that of GGBS and more than twofold greater drying shrinkage than that of PAC without any GGBS or
SF. The increase in drying shrinkage due to the incorporation of SF could be attributed to the introduction of a high pozzolanic reaction
and the pore size refinement mechanism of SF [64]. With the incorporation of SF, a large amount of C–S–H is formed, which in turn
holds a large amount of gel water. As drying shrinkage occurs due to the expulsion of gel water from concrete, the large amount of
gel water released by concrete incorporating SF results in higher drying shrinkage [65].
Drying shrinkage of the PAC increased with the removal of sand in Set 3. At 30 days, an increase in drying shrinkage by 48%,
35%, 20%, 8%, and 14% were observed between miX ID S2-A and S3-A, S2–B and S3–B, S2–C and S3–C, S2-D and S3-D, and S2-E
and S3-E, respectively. The increases in drying shrinkage were attributed to the increased binder and water content in Set 3, due to

1
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)
exclusion of

1
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

sand. With higher binder and water content, shrinkage increases as the water and binder represent the shrinkage phase, whereas
sand remains inert.
Based on Emmons [66], shrinkage lower than 500 μm at 30 days is classified as low shrinkage. Fu et al. [67] proposed a shrinkage
limit of 450 microstrain at 28 days to ensure satisfactory resistance to cracking. Therefore, even though the drying shrinkage increases
with the incorporation of GGBS and/or SF, or the removal of sand, the drying shrinkage of all PAC mi Xes was well within the acceptable
limit. This suggests that the strength and/or durability of PAC can be improved with a compromise of the drying shrinkage within
an acceptable limit.

4. Discussion
Three sets of miXes were produced, where, cement was partially replaced by GGBS and SF at 0 –40% and 0–10% by weight of the
binder, respectively. For Set 1, the SP dosage was maintained at 0.5% by weight of the binder, whereas for Set 2, the efflu X time was
regulated to less than 20 s by modifying the SP dosage. Set 3 was a modification of Set 2 with the S/B ratio reduced to zero. E Xper-
imental results demonstrated that, for Set 1, partial replacement of cement by GGBS improved the flowability of grout by 23% with a
reduction in 28 days compressive strength of grout by 24%, whereas, partial replacement of cement by SF slightly improved the 28
days compressive strength of grout with a reduction in the flowability of grout by 81%.
As to the PAC properties, comparing mi Xes between Set 1 and Set 2, with flowability regulated to less than 20 s, efficient pene-
trability of the grout through the coarse aggregate skeleton was ensured resulting in improved PAC properties. This was evident
from miX ID S1–C and S2–C (10% SF), where the compressive strength, flexural strength, and resistance to chloride ion penetration
improved by 22%, 16%, and 60%, respectively.
For Set 2, GGBS reduced the compressive strength of PAC by 25% whereas SF increased the compressive strength of PAC by
12%. PAC produced with 40% GGBS and 10% SF (mi X ID S2-E) displayed a comparable compressive strength to that of PAC
produced without any GGBS or SF (miX ID S2-A). This could be attributed to the combined effect of enhanced strength
development due to the presence of SF and improved flowability due to the incorporation of GGBS. This suggests that GGBS and SF
can be successfully used to produce PAC without any compromise in their mechanical properties. GGBS and SF enhance the resistance
to chloride ion penetration by 17% and 76%, respectively. PAC produced using 40% GGBS and 10% SF (miX ID S2-E) displays
improved resistance to chloride ion penetration by 79%, ascribing to high cement replacements. In terms of drying shrinkage, GGBS
increases the drying shrinkage of PAC by 33% and SF increases the drying shrinkage of PAC by 92%, at 30 days. MiXes incorporating
10% SF (miX IDs S1–C, S2–C, and S3–C) displayed the highest drying shrinkage in their respective sets. However, the drying
shrinkage values for all the PAC mi Xes were well within the acceptable limit (less than 500 μm), encouraging enhancement in
strength and durability with a compromise in drying shrinkage within an acceptable limit.
While the exclusion of sand from the grout (comparing mi X ID S2-A and S3-A) improves the flowability and strength of grout, it
reduces the compressive strength, flexural strength and resistance to chloride ion penetration of PAC by 19%, 20%, and 55%,
respectively. The drying shrinkage of PAC increased by 48% at 30 days. This was attributed to the improved packing density of PAC
in the presence of sand.

5. Conclusions
The present study investigated the properties of PAC, incorporating GGBS and SF as partial replacement of cement. Cement was
partially replaced by GGBS and SF at 0–40% and 0–10% by weight of binder, respectively. The sand to binder ratio was varied
between
0.0 and 0.50. The main conclusions drawn from the study are as follows.
1) Partial replacement of cement by GGBS enhanced the flowability with a reduction in the compressive strength of grout, whereas
partial replacement of cement by SF improved the compressive strength with a reduction in the flowability of grout. By
combining GGBS and SF, they complement each other, producing grouts with acceptable compressive strength and suitable
flowability.
2) PAC produced with the effluX time of grout regulated to less than 20 s displayed enhanced properties compared to PAC
produced with the SP dosage of grout maintained at a constant rate.
3) Removal of sand (S/B=0) improves the flowability and compressive strength of grout but reduces the compressive strength of PAC,
indicating that the influence of sand on PAC is unique to that of grout.
4) PAC with 40% GGBS and 10% SF exhibits comparable, if not higher, compressive and splitting tensile strength to that of PAC
without any supplementary cementitious materials.
5) Inclusion of GGBS and SF enhances the resistance to chloride ion penetration of PAC. PAC produced using 40% GGBS and 10%
SF displayed “very low” to “low” chloride ion penetrability. Removal of sand decreases the resistance to chloride ion penetration
in the PAC.
6) Incorporation of GGBS and SF increases the drying shrinkage of PAC, with SF exhibiting higher influence. PAC with sand displayed
lower drying shrinkage than that of PAC without sand. However, drying shrinkage values of all specimens were within the
acceptable limit.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Kunal Krishna Das: Conceptualization; Methodology; Investigation; Data Curation; Writing- original draft; Writing-review and
editing. Eddie Siu-Shu Lam: Methodology; Visualization, Supervision, Conceptualization, Project administration, Writing-review &

1
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

editing. Jeong Gook Jang: Conceptualization; Methodology; Resources; Funding acquisition; Project administration; Supervision;
Writing-review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

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

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No.
2021R1C1C1013864). Also, the authors wish to express their gratitude for the financial support provided by The Hong Kong Poly-
technic University. The authors are thankful for the technical support provided by the laboratories of the Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

References
[1] M.F. Najjar, A.M. Soliman, M.L. Nehdi, Critical overview of two-stage concrete: properties and applications, Construct. Build. Mater. 62 (2014) 47–58, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.03.021.
[2] A. Stempkowska, T. Gawenda, Z. Naziemiec, K.A. Ostrowski, D. Saramak, A. Surowiak, Impact of the geometrical parameters of dolomite coarse aggregate on
the thermal and mechanic properties of preplaced aggregate concrete, Materials 13 (2020) 1–16, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13194358.
[3] M. Tuyan, L.V. Zhang, M.L. Nehdi, Development of sustainable preplaced aggregate concrete with alkali-activated slag grout, Construct. Build. Mater. 263
(2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120227.
[4] R. Bayer, Use of Preplaced Aggregate Concrete for Mass Concrete Applications, Middle East Technical University, 2004.
[5] H.S. Abdelgader, Effect of the quantity of sand on the compressive strength of two-stage concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. 48 (1996) 353–360, https://doi.org/
10.1680/macr.1996.48.177.353.
[6] N. Prasad, G. Murali, EXploring the impact performance of functionally-graded preplaced aggregate concrete incorporating steel and polypropylene fibres,
J. Build. Eng. 35 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.102077.
[7] J. Lv, T. Zhou, Q. Du, K. Li, L. Jin, Research on the bond behavior of preplaced aggregate concrete-filled steel tube columns, Materials 13 (2020), https://doi.
org/10.3390/ma13020300.
[8] M. Huang, H. Zhou, F. Jin, Rock-fill concrete, a new type of concrete, in: Proceeding Int. Fib Symp., 2008, pp. 1047–1049.
[9] B. Wang, F. Jin, H. Zhou, D. Huang, N. Liu, W. Wang, Y. Wang, Pilot study on vibrated rock-filled concrete, J. Adv. Concr. Technol. 17 (2019) 559–570, https://
doi.org/10.3151/jact.17.559.
[10] H. Wei, G. Zhang, F. Sun, M. Wang, W. Li, J. Xu, EXperimental research on the properties of rock-filled concrete, Appl. Sci. 9 (2019), https://doi.org/10.3390/
app9183767.
[11] Y. Cheng, S. Liu, B. Zhu, R. Liu, Y. Wang, Preparation of preplaced aggregate concrete and experimental study on its strength, Construct. Build. Mater. 229
(2019), 116847, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.116847.
[12] X. An, Q. Wu, F. Jin, M. Huang, H. Zhou, C. Chen, C. Liu, Rock-filled concrete, the new norm of SCC in hydraulic engineering in China, Cem. Concr. Compos. 54
(2014) 89–99, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2014.08.001.
[13] J. Lv, T. Zhou, Q. Du, K. Li, L. Jin, Research on the bond behavior of preplaced, Materials 2 (2020) 300.
[14] S. Siddique, H. Kim, H. Son, J.G. Jang, Characteristics of preplaced aggregate concrete fabricated with alkali-activated slag/fly ash cements, Materials 14 (2021)
1–17, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14030591.
[15] M.L. Nehdi, M.F. Najjar, A.M. Soliman, T.M. Azabi, Novel steel fibre-reinforced preplaced aggregate concrete with superior mechanical performance, Cem.
Concr. Compos. 82 (2017) 242–251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.07.002.
[16] H. Mohammadhosseini, M.M. Tahir, A. Alaskar, H. Alabduljabbar, R. Alyousef, Enhancement of strength and transport properties of a novel preplaced aggregate
fiber reinforced concrete by adding waste polypropylene carpet fibers, J. Build. Eng. 27 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101003.
[17] K.K. Das, E.S.S. Lam, Feasibility of producing two-stage (preplaced aggregate) concrete by gravity process, Struct. Concr. 21 (2019) 1157–1163, https://doi.org/
10.1002/suco.201900356.
[18] H.S. Abdelgader, J. Go´rski, Influence of grout proportions on modulus of elasticity of two-stage concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. 54 (2002) 251–255, https://doi.org/
10.1680/MACR.2002.54.4.251.
[19] A. Nowek, P. Kaszubski, H.S. Abdelgader, J. Go´rski, Effect of admiXtures on fresh grout and two-stage (pre-placed aggregate) concrete, Struct. Concr. 8 (2007)
17–23, https://doi.org/10.1680/stco.2007.8.1.17.
[20] H.S. Abdelgader, M. Kurpin´ska, M. Amran, Effect of slag coal ash and foamed glass on the mechanical properties of two-stage concrete, Mater. Today Proc. 58
(2022) 1091–1097, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.01.139.
[21] ACI 304.1, Guide for the Use of Preplaced Aggregate Concrete for Structural and Mass Concrete Applications, Am. Concr. Institute, ACI Comm., 2005.
[22] S. Samad, A. Shah, Role of binary cement including Supplementary Cementitious Material (SCM), in production of environmentally sustainable concrete: a
critical review, Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 6 (2017) 663–674, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2017.07.003.
[23] A. Nowek, P. Kaszubski, H.S. Abdelgader, J. Go´rski, Effect of admiXtures on fresh grout and two-stage (pre-placed aggregate) concrete, Struct. Concr. 8 (2007)
17–23, https://doi.org/10.1680/stco.2007.8.1.17.
[24] M. Vieira, A. Bettencourt, A. Camelo, J. Ferreira, Self-compacting Mortar for Mass Concrete Application with PAC Technology, SCC2010, Montreal, 2010.
[25] M. Coo, T. Pheeraphan, Effect of sand, fly ash, and coarse aggregate gradation on preplaced aggregate concrete studied through factorial design, Construct.
Build. Mater. (2015) 812–821.
[26] M.F. Najjar, Innovating Two-Stage Concrete with Improved Rheological, Mechanical and Durability Properties, The University of Western Ontario, 2016.
[27] M. Coo, T. Pheeraphan, Effect of sand, fly ash and limestone powder on preplaced aggregate concrete mechanical properties and reinforced beam shear capacity,
Construct. Build. Mater. 120 (2016) 581–592, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.05.128.
[28] M.L. Nehdi, M.F. Najjar, A.M. Soliman, T.M. Azabi, Novel steel fibre-reinforced preplaced aggregate concrete with superior mechanical performance, Cem.
Concr. Compos. 82 (2017) 242–251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.07.002.
[29] H.S. Abdelgader, A.S. El-Baden, Effect of silica fume on two-stage concrete strength, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. (2015), https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-
899X/96/1/012043.
[30] J. O’Malley, H.S. Abdelgader, Investigation into viability of using two-stage (pre-placed aggregate) concrete in Irish setting, Front. Architect. Civ. Eng. China 4
(2010) 127–132, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-010-0007-4.

1
 K.K. Das et Journal of Building Engineering 68 (2023)

[31] N. Dave, A.K. Misra, A. Srivastava, S.K. Kaushik, EXperimental analysis of strength and durability properties of quaternary cement binder and mortar, Construct.
Build. Mater. 107 (2016) 117–124, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.195.
[32] E. Ganjian, H.S. Pouya, The effect of Persian Gulf tidal zone exposure on durability of miXes containing silica fume and blast furnace slag, Construct. Build.
Mater. 23 (2009) 644–652, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.02.009.
[33] A. Mohan, K.M. Mini, Strength and durability studies of SCC incorporating silica fume and ultra fine GGBS, Construct. Build. Mater. 171 (2018) 919–
928, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.03.186.
[34] ACI 233R, Ground Granulated Blast-Furnace Slag as a Cementitious Constituent in Concrete, Am. Concr. Institute, ACI Comm., 1995.
[35] H. Yildirim, T. Ilica, O. Sengul, Effect of cement type on the resistance of concrete against chloride penetration, Construct. Build. Mater. 25 (2011) 1282–1288,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.09.023.
[36] H.A. Toutanji, Tahar el-korchi, the influence of silica fume on the compressive, Cement Concr. Res. 25 (1995) 1591–1602.
[37] C.S. Poon, S.C. Kou, L. Lam, Compressive strength, chloride diffusivity and pore structure of high performance metakaolin and silica fume concrete, Construct.
Build. Mater. 20 (2006) 858–865, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.07.001.
[38] L.A. Qureshi, B. Ali, A. Ali, Combined effects of supplementary cementitious materials (silica fume, GGBS, fly ash and rice husk ash) and steel fiber on the
hardened properties of recycled aggregate concrete, Construct. Build. Mater. 263 (2020), 120636, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120636.
[39] M. Tuyan, L.V. Zhang, M.L. Nehdi, Development of sustainable alkali-activated slag grout for preplaced aggregate concrete, J. Clean. Prod. 277 (2020), https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123488.
[40] ASTM C 150, Standard Specification for Portland Cement, Annu. B. ASTM Stand., 2017.
[41] J.M. Khatib, J.J. Hibbert, Selected engineering properties of concrete incorporating slag and metakaolin, Construct. Build. Mater. 19 (2005) 460–472, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2004.07.017.
[42] A. Oner, S. Akyuz, An experimental study on optimum usage of GGBS for the compressive strength of concrete, Cem. Concr. Compos. 29 (2007) 505–514,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2007.01.001.
[43] V.B.R. Suda, P.S. Rao, EXperimental investigation on optimum usage of Micro silica and GGBS for the strength characteristics of concrete, Mater. Today Proc. 27
(2020) 805–811, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.12.354.
[44] Y. Kim, A. Hanif, M. Usman, M.J. Munir, S.M.S. Kazmi, S. Kim, Slag waste incorporation in high early strength concrete as cement replacement: environmental
impact and influence on hydration & durability attributes, J. Clean. Prod. 172 (2018) 3056–3065, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.105.
[45] V. Srivastava, R. Kumar, V.C. Agarwal, P.K. Mehta, Effect of silica fume on workability and compressive strength of OPC concrete, J. Environ. Nanotechnol. 3
(2014) 32–35, https://doi.org/10.13074/jent.2014.09.143086.
[46] G. Inan Sezer, Compressive strength and sulfate resistance of limestone and/or silica fume mortars, Construct. Build. Mater. 26 (2012) 613–618, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.06.064.
[47] ASTM C 940-R03, Standard Test Method for EXpansion and Bleeding of Freshly MiXed Grout for Preplaced-Aggregate Concrete in the Laboratory, Annu. B.
ASTM Stand., 2016.
[48] ASTM C 939, Standard Test Method for Flow of Grout for Preplaced Aggregate Concrete (Flow Cone Method), Annu. B. ASTM Stand., 2002.
[49] ASTM C 942, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Grouts for Preplaced-Aggregate Concrete in the Laboratory, Annu. B. ASTM Stand., 2008.
[50] ASTM C 39, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens, Annu. B. ASTM Stand., 2005.
[51] ASTM C 496, Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens, Annu. B. ASTM Stand., 2011.
[52] ASTM C 1202, Standard Test Method for Electrical Indication of Concrete’s Ability to Resist Chloride Ion Penetration, Annu. B. ASTM Stand., 2012.
[53] BS ISO 1920-8, Determination of drying shrinkage of concrete for samples prepared in the field or in the laboratory, Br. Stand. Inst. (2009).
[54] M. Johari, J. Brooks, S. Kabir, Influence of supplementary cementitious materials on engineering properties of high strength concrete, Construct. Build. Mater.
(2011) 2639–2648, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.12.013.
[55] J. Hu, A Study of Effects of Aggregate on Concrete Rheology, Iowa State University, 2005.
[56] M.F. Najjar, A.M. Soliman, M.L. Nehdi, Two-stage concrete made with single, binary and ternary binders, Mater. Struct. Constr. 49 (2016) 317–327, https://doi.
org/10.1617/s11527-014-0499-9.
[57] M.I. Khan, R. Siddique, Utilization of silica fume in concrete: review of durability properties, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 57 (2011) 30–35,
https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.09.016.
[58] C.C. Furnas, Grading aggregates: I—mathematical relations for beds of broken solids of maximum density, Ind. Eng. Chem. 23 (1931) 1052–1058, https://doi.
org/10.1021/IE50261A017.
[59] H.S. Abdelgader, A.A. Elgalhud, Effect of grout proportions on strength of two-stage concrete, Struct. Concr. 9 (2008) 163–170, https://doi.org/10.1680/
stco.2008.9.3.163.
[60] ACI 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, Am. Concr. Institute, ACI Comm., 1999.
[61] A. Cheng, R. Huang, J. Wu, C. Chen, Influence of GGBS on durability and corrosion behavior of reinforced concrete, Mater. Chem. Phys. 93 (2005) 404–411.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0254058405002257.
[62] P. Lura, Autogenous Deformation and Internal Curing of Concrete, Technical University Delft, Delft, 2003. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=8827153.
[63] S. Saluja, K. Kaur, S. Goyal, B. Bhattacharjee, Assessing the effect of GGBS content and aggregate characteristics on drying shrinkage of roller compacted
concrete, Construct. Build. Mater. 201 (2019) 72–80, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.12.179.
[64] G.A. Rao, Long-term drying shrinkage of mortar - influence of silica fume and size of fine aggregate, Cement Concr. Res. (2001) 171–175.
[65] L. Varghese, V. Kanta Rao, L. Parameswaran, Effect of nanosilica on drying shrinkage and creep properties of cement concrete, Adv. Mater. Process. (2017)
56–60, https://doi.org/10.5185/amp.2017/113.
[66] P. Emmons, Concrete Repair and Maintenance Illustrated: Problem Analysis; Repair Strategy; Techniques, Company, M: R.S. Means, Kingston, 1992.
[67] T. Fu, T. Deboodt, J.H. Ideker, Development of shrinkage limit specification for high performance concrete used in bridge decks, Cem. Concr. Compos. 72 (2016)
17–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2016.05.015.