MASINDE MULIRO UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT (SEBE)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

INVESTIGATING THE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

CHARACTERISTICS OF CONCRETE MADE FROM
COWDUNG ASH BLENDED CEMENT

BY:
KIPLANGAT ALLAN KIRUI - CSE/0040/12
CALVINE ADHIAMBO OPEYO - CSE/0029/13

SUPERVISOR: Dr. B. SABUNI

Research Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Award of Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil and Structural Engineering at
Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology

August 2018
 DECLARATION
We, K.A. Kirui and C.A. Opeyo do declare that this report is our original work and to the best of
our knowledge, it has not been submitted for any degree award in any University or Institution.

Sign: ______________________________________________ Date: ____________

Kiplangat Allan Kirui CSE/0040/12
Sign: ______________________________________________ Date: ____________
Calvine A. Opeyo CSE/0029/13

CERTIFICATION
I have read this report and approve it for examination
Sign: _______________________________________________Date___________________
Dr. B. SABUNI

i
 ABSTRACT
This project reports on an investigation into the use of cow dung ash (CDA) as a Supplementary
Cementitious Material (SCMs) in concrete. A total of 63 cubes was casted and cured in water for
7, 14 and 28 days then tested for comprehensive strength.
The use of partial replacement of cement by cow dung ash favored the concrete production due
to its advantages in improving some of the properties of concrete. The investigation was carried
out for M25 grade concrete maintaining the water/cement ratio of 0.55 throughout the project.
The report presents the influence of CDA on properties of concrete. The experiment consisted of
partially replaced cement with CDA, using 0%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12% and 14% with a level of
significance of 2% starting from 4%. The mixture was prepared, conducted the experiments and
the subsequent analysis of test results and various conclusions were made.
The tests carried out were: consistency, setting time (initial and final) of the paste, sieve analysis
of both coarse and fine aggregates, slump of the fresh concrete and the comprehensive strength
of each cube.

Key Words: Concrete, Coarse and Fine Aggregates, Cow Dung Ash (CDA), Cement,
Compressive strength, Sieve Analysis, Setting Time and slump Test.

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Our sincere gratitude goes to our supervisor Dr. B. Sabuni for her immense support,
encouragement, positive criticism and guidance during the report writing without whom this work
could not have been realized. We also thank our Civil Engineering staff members and our
colleagues who guided and assisted us identification of this research proposal and during
laboratory tests.

iii
DEDICATION
We dedicate this research work to our parents, mentors and siblings who continually gave us moral
and financial support to undertake our studies. You have indeed helped us come this far, that’s
why we say ‘God Bless You’.

iv
Table of Contents
DECLARATION ........................................................................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................................. ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................................................... iii
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................................. iv
List of Figures and Tables............................................................................................................................. 1
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... 1
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ 2
1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1 Background Information............................................................................................................ 3
1.2 Problem Statement...................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Objectives..................................................................................................................................... 6
1.3.1 Main objective ...................................................................................................................... 6
1.3.2 Specific objectives................................................................................................................. 6
1.4 Justification ................................................................................................................................. 7
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................ 12
3.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 12
SAMPLE COLLECTION, PREPARATION AND ASSESSMENT................................................ 12
3.2 MATERIALS ............................................................................................................................ 13
3.2.1 Cement: .............................................................................................................................. 13
3.2.2 Aggregate: .......................................................................................................................... 13
3.2.3 Fine Aggregate: ................................................................................................................. 13
3.2.4 Coarse aggregate ............................................................................................................... 13
3.2.5 Cow Dung Ash:.................................................................................................................. 13
3.2.6 Water .................................................................................................................................. 15
3.2.7 General overview of concrete as a construction material .............................................. 15
3.3 MATERIAL TESTING ............................................................................................................ 15
3.3.1 Sieve Test on Aggregates (BS 812: Part 103.1: 1985.).................................................... 15
3.3.2 Mix Design ......................................................................................................................... 19
3.3.3 Making Test Cubes from Fresh Concrete (Bs 1881: Part 108:1983) ............................ 19
3.3.4 Slump Test ......................................................................................................................... 20
3.3.4.1 SAMPLING ........................................................................................................................... 21

i
 3.3.5 PROCEDURE FOR MAKING TEST CUBES .............................................................. 23
3.3.6 Determination of Compressive Strength (BS 1881: Part 116: 1983) ................................ 24
3.3.7 Determination of Standard Consistency of Cement .............................................................. 26
5. Vicat Mould ................................................................................................................................... 27
Procedure for Standard Consistency of Cement ................................................................................ 27
Observations and Calculations ............................................................................................................ 28
Points to be Noted ................................................................................................................................. 28
Results .................................................................................................................................................... 28
Percentage of water content for standard consistency = % ..................................................................... 28
3.3.8 Initial and Final Setting Time .......................................................................................... 28
Apparatus .................................................................................................................................................. 29
Measuring instruments ..................................................................................................................... 29
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................... 29
(c)Final Setting Time ........................................................................................................................ 30
CHAPTER 4: EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ........................................................ 31
4.1 SIEVE ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................... 31
4.1.1 Sieve Analysis for Pure River Sand. ................................................................................ 31
4.1.2 Sieve Analysis for Coarse aggregate ................................................................................ 32
4.1.3 General discussion............................................................................................................. 33
4.2 WORKABILITY............................................................................................................................. 34
4.2 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ................................................................................................ 35
4.2.1 General Discussion ............................................................................................................ 41
4.3 Consistency ................................................................................................................................ 41
Observations and Calculations ............................................................................................................ 43
4.4 Initial and Final Setting Time .................................................................................................. 45
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations ........................................................................................... 53
5.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 53
5.2 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 53
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................... 54
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................ 57
Appendix 1: PROPOSED PROJECT BUDGET ........................................................................................ 57
Appendix 2: WORKPLAN ......................................................................................................................... 58
Appendix 3: Slump test ............................................................................................................................... 58

ii
Appendix 4: 7-Day Comparative strengths ................................................................................................. 59
Appendix 5: 14-Day Comparative strengths. .............................................................................................. 59
Appendix 6: 28-Day Comparative strengths. .............................................................................................. 60

iii
List of Figures and Tables
List of Figures
Figure 1: Cow Dung Ash (T. Omoniyi et al., 2014) Figure 2: Freshly Colle1cted Cow Dung .......... 14
Figure 3: Expected Grading curve for pure river sand. ............................................................................... 18
Figure 4: Batched mix ready for mixing ..................................................................................................... 19
Figure 5: Coarse Aggregates ....................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 6: Types of slump ............................................................................................................................ 22
Figure 7: Slump Height ............................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 8: Mould Filling and Cube Preparation ........................................................................................... 24
Figure 9: Failure Patterns for Cubes ........................................................................................................... 26
Figure 10: Vicat Apparatus ......................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 11: Testing Initial and Final Setting Times ..................................................................................... 30
Figure 12: Grading curve for pure river sand ............................................................................................. 31
Figure 13: Grading Curve for Coarse Aggregates ...................................................................................... 32
Figure 14: Graphical Representation of Slump Height (mm) ..................................................................... 35
Figure 15: 7-Day Comparative strengths .................................................................................................... 37
Figure 16: 14-Day Comparative strengths .................................................................................................. 38
Figure 17: 28-Day Comparative strengths. ................................................................................................. 40
Figure 18: Compressive Strengths for Different CDA Replacements ........................................................ 40
Figure 19: Initial and Final Setting Times .................................................................................................. 52

1
 List of Tables
Table 1: Chemical properties of procured Cow Dung Ash (Smith and Wheeler, 1979). ............................ 14
Table 2: Chemical properties of procured Cow Dung Ash (Smith and Wheeler, 1979). ............................ 14
Table 3: Mass Test Portions for Sieve Analysis ......................................................................................... 17
Table 4: Sieve Analysis of Pure River Sand ............................................................................................... 18
Table 5: Slump test representation for all ratios ......................................................................................... 22
Table 6: Format for compressive strength results ....................................................................................... 25
Table 7: Format for Consistency Test ......................................................................................................... 28
Table 8: Measuring instruments.................................................................................................................. 29
Table 9: Sieve analysis for Fine Aggregates ............................................................................................... 31
Table 10: Sieve analysis of coarse aggregate.............................................................................................. 32
Table 11: ASTM Grading Requirements for Fine Aggregates ................................................................... 33
Table 12: ASTM Grading Requirements for coarse Aggregates ................................................................ 33
Table 13: Slump Height. ............................................................................................................................. 34
Table 14: 7-day Compressive Strength ....................................................................................................... 36
Table 15: 14-day comparative strength....................................................................................................... 38
Table 16: 28-day comparative strength....................................................................................................... 39
Table 17: Consistency Test Results for 0% CDA ....................................................................................... 41
Table 18: Consistency Test Results for 4% CDA ....................................................................................... 41
Table 19: Consistency Test Results for 6% CDA ....................................................................................... 42
Table 20: Consistency Test Results for 8% CDA ....................................................................................... 42
Table 21: Consistency Test Results for 10% CDA ..................................................................................... 42
Table 22: Consistency Test Results for 12% CDA ..................................................................................... 43
Table 23: Consistency Test Results for 14% CDA ..................................................................................... 43
Table 24: Summary of the consistency amount .......................................................................................... 43
Table 25: Initial and Final Setting Time for 0% CDA ................................................................................ 45
Table 26: Initial and Final Setting Time for 4% CDA ............................................................................... 46
Table 27: Initial and Final Setting Time for 6% CDA ............................................................................... 47
Table 28: Initial and Final Setting Time for 8% CDA ............................................................................... 48
Table 29: Initial and Final Setting Time for 10% CDA ............................................................................. 49
Table 30: Initial and Final Setting Time for 12% CDA ............................................................................. 50
Table 31: Initial and Final Setting Time for 14% CDA ............................................................................. 51
Table 32: Setting Times and Slump of OPC/CDA Paste respectively .......................................................... 52

2
1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Information

Concrete is one of the most widely used construction material worldwide and there is an increase
in the production of concrete to meet the ever-increasing demand for housing and other
infrastructure. Cement, which is the main binder in the production of concrete, mortar, sandcrete
blocks and other cement products, is very expensive particularly in developing countries (Samuel
Awoyinfa, 2013, March .21; Omoniyi et al., 2014). The exorbitant and steadily increasing cost of
cement has made concrete, mortar, sandcrete blocks and other cement products expensive and
consequently increasing the cost of construction of houses and other infrastructure that uses
cement.
Besides the exorbitant cost of cement, its production requires very high temperatures of about
1500 which requires enormous amount of energy which is expensive to attain and maintain. The
activities of cement producing companies have depleted the natural environment and huge
amount of poisonous gases such as CO2, NOx, etc. are released into the atmosphere causing
environmental pollution. These gases are also responsible for depletion of the ozone layer which
is responsible for global warming (Shalini, A, Prem, V and Dahiya, R.P, 2006). All the
aforementioned challenges have necessitated the need to intensify the search for supplementary
cementitious materials (SCMs) for utilization as partial substitute for cement. Several notable
researchers have proven that the utilization of SCMs like Sawdust Ash (SDA), Rice husk Ash
(RHA) as partial replacement of cement in concrete and mortar is successful (Elinwa, A.U, 2003;
Matawal, D.S and Duna, S.,2002). The use of SCMs has also been established as one way of
reducing the amount of CO2 emissions and embodied energy usage associated with in cement
production (Unites States Environmental Protection Agency, 2010; Malhotra, 1999)
Cowdung is the undigested residue of plant matter which has passed through the animals (cow)
gut. It has been reported that the cow dung cakes are rich in nitrogen, calcium, carbon, potassium
and phosphorus (Asawalam, D.O and Unwudike, S.U, 2011; Rayaprolu and Raju, 2012). A full
grown well fed cow produces between 10-15kg of cow dung per day which contains about 28%
water in its fresh state and 34% ash when calcined (Olusegun, A.A and Sam, S.A, 2012). The
world cattle population is estimated at 1.4 billion (Food and Agricultural Organisation, 2010).
Kenya has an estimated cow population of 17.5 million and is expected to produce an estimated
289,000 tonnes of cowdung per day (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, 2009). In many parts
of the world, cowdung is pre-dominantly used as green manure for farming. It is also used with
adobe in brick production, insect repellant and more recently used to produce biogas for
electricity and heat generation. It can be duly noted that despite its application in the
aforementioned areas, its production outweighs the usage.
The use of concrete as a construction material, durability, handling and strength forms a huge
proportion of design methodology. It is during the design stage that crucial choices are made on
what materials to use and the size of members in order to achieve a desired strength. This clearly

3
points out the fact that the best opportunity to influence time and cost of the project is during the
design phase and hence the need to use cheap, locally available and lighter materials that can
achieve the desired strength.
In this study, cement was replaced by cow dung ash (CDA) by 0%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12% and
14%. The use of cow dung ash produced light concrete which was cheap and save on costs of
producing concrete which eventually reduces the cost of housing to local Kenyans and reduce
environmental pollution by reducing the quantity of cement required in construction.
The resulting concrete is expected to have advantages for instance;

• Durability and low cost

This therefore shows that there are substantial merits in this research which is summarized as
follows;

❖ Enables structural concrete to be more available by cheap production while utilizing cow
dung which is mostly available especially in agricultural regions;
❖ Light weight concrete to be more available for use in construction hence reduced design
loads;
❖ The blended material is likely to be cheaper than pure cement.

4
 1.2 Problem Statement
A developing country like Kenya seeking to improve its inadequate infrastructure is faced with
many challenges which include high cost of cement, diminishing national income due to the
global economic recession, rising debt profile, decreasing foreign aid and high cost of building
materials such as cement. In order to improve its infrastructure, cement (binder) and related
materials are needed. Concrete is the most widely used construction material in civil engineering
industry because of its high structural strength and stability. The demand for cement in concrete
industries has been on the rise over the years in order to meet the infrastructural needs of a
growing population, rapid industrialization and urbanization. The production of cement poses
environmental risks due to emission of gaseous pollutants e.g Carbon dioxide (CO2) and
Nitrogen Oxides (e.g. NO) which has led to environmental degradation. As such, there is need
for the concrete industry to look for supplementary cementitious material (SCMs) in order to
reduce the carbon dioxide emission which is harmful to environment.

5
1.3 Objectives

1.3.1 Main objective

To investigate the compressive strength characteristics of concrete made from cow dung ash
blended cement.

1.3.2 Specific objectives

❖ To examine the effectiveness of using CDA as partial replacement of cement by
studying its strength parameters.
❖ To investigate the compressive strength of concrete blended with Cow Dung Ash (CDA)
to that of normal concrete.
❖ To investigate the workability of concrete made from CDA blended cement to that of
normal concrete.

6
1.4 Justification
Adoption of new construction materials and utilization of the locally available resources is a way
of reducing construction cost and subsequently reducing the demand for cement by the
construction industry therefore reducing the amount of poisonous gas emission to the
environment. Cow dung is readily available in most parts of Kenya for instance in Kefinco,
Kakamega County. This study tries to establish the practicality and investigate the performance
of using Cow dung ash (CDA) blended cement in concrete.

7
 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Research on Cow Dung Ash (CDA) has generally been carried out with a view of utilizing the
materials in construction. Studies on the alternative materials have however been done in
different parts of the world. This chapter presents the literature on a small review of the
terminology and also the past studies on cow dung ash (CDA) and glass fibre.
T. Omoniyi et al. (2014) reports on an investigation into the use of cow dung ash (CDA) as
Supplementary Cementitious Material in concrete. Cement was replaced with cow dung ash up
to 30% at 5% interval. The slump cone test and initial and final Setting time was carried out on
the fresh cement with cow dung ash in different proportion. The result of setting times indicates
that as the percentage of cow dung ash increases, the initial and final setting time increases
respectively. It indicates the Cow dung ash acts as a set retarder in concrete. The workability of
concrete decreases as the cow dung ash content in cement of concrete increases.
K.S.Ramesh et al. (2015) has done an experimental study on replacement of cement with fly ash
and also replacement of sand with m sand. Based on the research. The fly ash can be used as
supplementary cementitious construction material but decisions are to be taken by engineers. The
entire experimental data shows that the addition of the industrial wastes improves the physical
and mechanical properties. These results are of great importance because this kind of innovative
concrete requires large amount of fine particles. Due to its high fines of fly ash provides very
effective in assuring very good cohesiveness of concrete.
R. D. Padhye et al. (2016) studied the Cement Replacement by Fly Ash in Concrete. Different
grades of concrete mixes with varying percentage of fly ash content were prepared and the
effects of fly ash on mechanical properties of fresh and hardened concrete have been
investigated. The compressive strength of concrete was measured for 7, 28 and 45 days and
compaction factor is taken as a measure of workability. Compressive strength of concrete at
different proportions of cement being replaced by fly ash has been checked and results have been
found effective and applicable. Hence, a comparative study is done and use of fly ash as a
cement replacement in concrete can be analyzed and compared.
O. Y. Ojedokun et al. (2014) studied the use of cow dung ash as partial replacement in cement
of concrete. The experiments were intended to study the effects of concrete by the adding of
Cow Dung Ash in various proportions by weight of cement in concrete respectively. It also
involves determining the initial and final setting time, Bulk Density and Workability of concrete
using Cow Dung Ash in various proportions. The Compressive strength test results show the
10% cow dung ash replacement exhibits nearly better results compared to normal concrete.
Dr. S. L Patil, J. N. Kale and S. Suman (2012) found that the consistency of cement
has increased with the addition of Fly Ash from (32% for 0%) to (48% for 50%).The initial
setting time has increased from 155 minutes for 0% fly ash to 250 minutes for 50% fly ash. The
workability of cement concrete mix has increased from 25 mm (For 0% fly ash) to120 mm (For
25% fly ash). After 90 days of curing the concrete containing 10% of fly ash, related to cement

8
mass, gained a compressive strength about 6% higher than the concrete without addition for
Ordinary Portland cement.
Utsev, J. T. and Taku, J. K. (2012) found that the partial replacement of binding material by
Coconut Shell Ash [CSA] has increased the setting times with increase inthe amount of CSA i.e.,
the initial setting time increased from 1 hour 5 minutes at 0% replacement to 3 hours 26 minutes
at 30% replacement while the final setting time increased from 1 hour 26 minutes at
0%replacement to 4 hours 22 minutes at 30% replacement.
K. A. Mujedu, S. A. Adebara, I. O. Lamidi (2014) found that partial replacement of
cement by Corn Cob Ash [CCA], the compressive strength of the concrete cubes always
increases with curing ages and decreased with increased amount of the percentage of CCA and
suggested that CCA up to 10% replacement of Ordinary Portland cement in concrete would be
acceptable to enjoy maximum benefit of strength gain.
Godwin A. Akeke et al (2013) found that rice husk ash could be substituted for OPC
at up to 25% in the production of concrete with no loss in workability or strength and suggested
that it is good for the structural concrete at 10% replacement level.
S. Barathanand and B. Gobinath (2013) is used wood ash as partial replacement of cement
and found that the compressive strength of cement increases significantly over hydration time.
The compressive strength of 20% WA sample shows more strength at4 weeks than the OPC
sample. The water requirement increased with the increase with WA addition, 20% WA sample
shows higher degree of hydration and compressive strength than OPC.
M.R. Karim et al (2012) is used rice husk as partial replacement to cement and found
that the 90 days compressive strength of concrete with RHA up to 40% was higher than the
corresponding strength of concrete without RHA.
Sooraj V.M. (2012) found that the Palm Oil Fuel Ash [POFA] is an excellent
pozzolanic material and can be used as an alternative cement replacement in concrete
and suggested that 20% replacement of POFA could be the optimum level for the
production of concrete.
D. Gowsika et al (2014) found that partial replacement of cement by 5% Egg shell
powder + 10% Micro silica replacement in cement yields higher Split Tensile strength
as compared to other compositions.
Jitender Kumar Dhaka1, Surendra Roy (2015), they both research on the topic about
Utilization of fly ash and cow dung ash as partial replacement of cement in concrete. The
consumption of cement in concrete industries has been increasing day by day to fulfill the
pressing needs of infrastructure due to growing population, industrialization and urbanization.
Two sets of cubes of M20 grade for the rock and brick as coarse aggregate were prepared
separately. These sets were prepared using different proportions of cement, fly ash and cow dung
ash. The compressive strengths of all the cubes were determined using a Universal Testing
Machine.
T. S. Abdulkadir et al (2014) found that partial replacement of binding material by
Sugar Cane Bagasse Ash [SCBA] and the compressive strength of the concrete cubes for all the
mix ratios increased with curing age and decreased as the SCBA content increased. He

9
recommended that SCBA can be used as partial replacement of cementin concrete production up
to 20%. For environmental sustainability, SCBA can beutilized for the production of lightweight,
durable and cheap concrete.From the above observations, it is necessitated the need to intensify
the search forsupplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) for utilization as partial substitute
for cement. Several notable researchers have proven that the utilization of SCMs like
Sawdust Ash (SDA), Rice husk Ash (RHA) and wood ash as partial replacement of cement in
concrete and mortar is successful. The use of SCMs has also been established as one way of
reducing the amount of COR2R emissions and embodied energy usage associated with in cement
production. Concrete mixtures with high Portland cement contents are susceptible to cracking
and increased heat generation. These effects can be controlled to a certain degree by using
supplementary cementitious materials [Md. Moinul Islam & Md. Saiful Islam, 2010]. Hence, an
attempt has been made to find the compressive strength of concrete by partially
replacing the cement with cow dung ash.
P. Thej Kumar, R. Harshini Reddy and DVS Bhagavanulu (2015), they conveyed about
project on the topic ―A study on the replacement of cement in concrete by using cow dung ash.
Cement was partially replaced with four percentages (5%, 10%, 15%, and 16%) of cow dung ash
by weight. Consistency limits and chemical composition of ordinary Portland cement (OPC),
cow dung ash and OPC mixed with cow dung ash were determined. The compressive strengths
of the mortar and concrete specimens were determined at 7, 14 and 28 days respectively. Test
results indicated that the consistency limits increased up to an optimum content and decreased
further with the increase in the % of CDA in cement. The compressive strength is increased
when the cement is replaced by 5% of CDA and decreased with the increase in the cow dung ash
content. Hence, it is concluded that the 5% cement can be replaced with CDA in mortar. The
compressive strength of the concrete is reduced with the increase in CDA and in strength
increase with the increase in curing days. As observed in mortar, 5% of cow dung may be used
as a partial replacement to cement in concrete. This study observed that during hydration, the
Calcium Hydroxide (CH) produced reacts with the silica from CDA over time to form the more
stable Calcium Silicate Hydrates(C-S-H) which can be responsible for the appreciable strength
gain. It has been reported by several researchers that incorporation of pozzolanic materials into
cement reduces the CH formation (which promotes micro cracking) and enhances formation of
C-S-H, which promotes later strength gain.
Magudeaswaran,Hilal …. (IJ0SER) May– 2018 (p)-2249-254 presents the result on the study
for the use of Cow Dung Ash (CDA) as partial replacement of cement in production of concrete.
This replacement was designed to study the effects of adding Cow Dung Ash (CDA) in various
percentages by weight (6%, 8%, 10%, 12% and 14%) of cement. To strengthen the CDA
concrete and making it more durable 0.5% glass fibre is being added, as it is an economically
strong material, have excellent flexural strength, crack resistance and can also be used as an
alternate material for concrete construction. The M25 mix design for the proposed concrete mix
is calculated. Results showed that up to 8% replacement of cement by cow dung ash there was an
increase in compressive strength. They finally resulted that The replacement of cement with cow
dung ash 6% and 8% leads to increase in compressive strength whereas the percentage
replacement of 10% leads to decrease in compressive strength.
This proposal will present the study on the use of Cow Dung Ash (CDA) as partial replacement
of cement in the production of concrete. This replacement is designed to study the effects of
adding Cow Dung Ash (CDA) in various percentages by weight (0%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12%

10
and 14%) of cement. The M25 mix design for the proposed concrete mix will be calculated and
prepared.

11
 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 INTRODUCTION
Research methodology is aimed at giving the procedures of achieving objectives of the project.
The objectives and methods used to achieve them are as follows:
a) To investigate the compression strength of concrete made using Cow Dung Ash (CDA)
blended cement as partial replacement of cement in different proportions. Cubes were
prepared using these proportions then crushed using Compression Testing Machine and the
results compared with that of 100% cement.

b) To investigate changes in strength of concrete as cement is replaced with blended cow dung
ash in diverse percentages. A number of cubes will be prepared using different proportions
of the cow dung ash blended cement. They will then be crushed at different days with their
strengths noted for comparison.

c) To observe the effect of the cow dung ash blended cement proportions on the workability
of concrete. This will be achieved by determining the slump test of different ratios from
0% blend replacement to 14% replacement.

d) To determine the particle size distribution of the aggregates and compare with the required
standards. This will also done for the fine and coarse aggregates. This test is necessary for
determining the suitability of the material for use in construction as required by the
standards.

SAMPLE COLLECTION, PREPARATION AND ASSESSMENT

The cement, coarse aggregates and fine aggregates were obtained from the different sources. Cow
dung material was obtained from Kefinco, Kakamega County, while coarse aggregates and fine
aggregates were sourced from vendors at Bhukungu Stadium. Weight batching was done for
different percentage replacement.
The main highlights of the methodology will include:
• Collection, drying and burning of cow dung cakes.
• Grading of aggregates according to BS 882.
• Determination of the water absorption for the aggregates.
• Determination of a mix design for the control mix having zero replacement of cement.
• Substitution (by mass) of different proportions of cement in the control mix with cow
dung ash blended cement.
• Establishing the properties of the cured concrete specimen at 7 days, 14 days and 28
days of curing.

12
3.2 MATERIALS
The material used in this study included Ordinary Portland Cement, fine aggregates, coarse
aggregates, cow dung ash and water.

3.2.1 Cement:
Cement is a binder material, which is used to bind the other material together. Bamburi brand of
Ordinary Portland cement (OPC) of 42.5 grade conforming to IS 12269-1987 will be used. The
main benefit is the faster rate of development of strength. The specific gravity of cement is 3.15
and fineness modulus of cement is 225m2/kg.

3.2.2 Aggregate:
After cement, the aggregate is the basic material used in any concrete to comprise the body of
concrete for increasing the strength to the material quantity, and to minimize the consequential
volume change of concrete. The fine and coarse aggregates generally occupy 60% to 75% of
concrete volume and strongly influence the concrete’s freshly mixed and hardened properties,
mixture proportions and economy.

3.2.3 Fine Aggregate:

Fine aggregates are basically sand. Fine aggregates are the materials that pass through 4.75 mm
IS sieve. River sand used for the study was obtained from the vendors at Bukhungu Stadium,
Kakamega. The sand should be free from deleterious materials and falls within zone 2 of BS
882(1979) classification chart with a bulk density of 1528kg/m3 and a specific gravity 2.62. The
tests such as specific gravity and gradation will be carried out to determine the physical
properties of fine aggregate.

3.2.4 Coarse aggregate

Locally available crushed stone aggregate of 20 mm size was used throughout the experimental
study. The tests such as specific gravity and gradation were carried out to determine the physical
properties of coarse aggregate. The coarse aggregates were chosen by shape as per IS 2386(Part
I) 1963, surface texture characteristics of aggregate is classified as in IS 383-1970.
The natural sand with specific gravity is 2.65 and fineness modulus of 2.89 and the crushed
aggregates of 20mm size with specific gravity of 2.75 was used.

3.2.5 Cow Dung Ash:

The cow dung that was used for this study was collected from four (4) different cow excreta
points within Kakamega County. It was then be sundried, pulverized and calcined by controlled
burning. After cooling, the resultant ash was grinded into finer particles using mortar and pestle
and then sieved using a 212μm sieve.

13
Figure 1: Cow Dung Ash (T. Omoniyi et al., 2014) Figure 2: Freshly Colle1cted Cow Dung

Chemical Properties of Cow Dung

Cow dung is a nitrogen rich material, potassium, phosphorous and calcium (Smith and Wheeler,
1979). Cow dung has a relatively high carbon to the nitrogen ratio. Chemical composition of the
cow dung revealed that there is no difference in the organic matter (OM), nitrogen (N) and
manganese (Mn).

Table 1: Chemical properties of procured Cow Dung Ash (Smith and Wheeler, 1979).

Oxide Composition Percentage Composition

Cow Dung Ash (CDA) Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC)
SiO2 65.7655 20.26
Al2O3 4.4575 6.30
Fe2O3 3.1625 3.26
CaO 12.98975 65.51
MgO 2.01775 0.96
SO3 0.9405 0.69
K2O 2.83375 0.88
Na2O 0.511 0.89
P2O5 1.38275 0.25
Mn2O3 0.59925 0.21
TiO2 0.36875 0.24
CaCO3 23.18225 -
SiO2+Al2O3+Fe2O3 73.3855 29.82

Table 2: Chemical properties of procured Cow Dung Ash (Smith and Wheeler, 1979).

CONTENT PERCENTAGE
calcium(Ca), 10.8
phosphorus (P), 8.0
zinc (Zn) 84.1
copper (Cu) 21.7

14
Physical Properties of Cow Dung
a) Low carbon content
b) It has large ash content
c) It has low volatile content after burning

3.2.6 Water
This is the least expensive but most important ingredient of concrete. The water which was used
for making concrete was clean and free from harmful impurities such as oil, alkali, acid, etc. Pipe
borne water fit for drinking was preferably used for the study and as such no test was conducted
on the water.

3.2.7 General overview of concrete as a construction material

Concrete is a non-homogenous manufactured stone composed of graded, granular inert materials

which are held together by the action cementitious materials and water. Concrete behaves very
well when subjected to compressive forces but rapture suddenly when small tension forces are
applied. Cement mixes mostly in plain or reinforced concrete and has the ability to form a paste
when mixed with water. The paste hardens with passage of time, holding all the larger inert
particles together in a common bond. Manufactured cement must conform to certain
specifications of the Kenyan standards. When the material is so manufactured it is classified as
Portland cement and concrete made using this material is called Portland Cement Concrete
(PCC). In general, Portland cement is manufactured using definite proportions of various
calcareous materials which are burned to form clinkers are pulverized to a powder like form
which then becomes cement. There are various types of cement, Ordinary Portland cement
(OPC) being is common and mainly used in general concrete construction.

3.3 MATERIAL TESTING

Experimental study design was employed. The main research method was laboratory research.
Samples of concrete mixes containing varying percentages of Cow Dung Ash (CDA) was made
and subjected to the appropriate tests to determine the optimum percentages that will produce a
mix with good engineering strength limits.

3.3.1 Sieve Test on Aggregates (BS 812: Part 103.1: 1985.)

Sieve Analysis- Also called gradation test. It is the operation of determining the distribution of
aggregate (i.e. fine and coarse aggregates) particles by size within a given sample.
Gradation of aggregates was obtained by dividing samples of material using standard sieves
according to the standard procedures required by BS 812; Part2, 1996: Methods of Sampling and
Testing of Coarse Aggregates, Sands and Fillers. The standard sieves that will be used for
gradation test of coarse aggregates include; 2.36, 4.75, 6.3, 10, 14, 20 and 28 mm, while fine

15
materials were analyzed using standard sieves of sizes 0.075, 0.108, 0.21, 0.30, 0.60, 1.18, 2.36,
4.75 and 10 mm.
The main purpose of grading is to determine the compliance with the design and the production
requirements to perform its intended purpose and specified use in mix design. In the first instance,
grading is of importance only in so far as it affects workability, because strength is independent of
the grading. However, high strength requires a maximum compaction with a reasonable amount
of work, which can only be achieved with a sufficiently workable mix. In fact, there are no ideal
grading requirements because of the main influencing factors on workability are; the surface area
of the aggregate which determines the amount of water necessary to wet all the solids, the relative
volume occupied by the aggregate, the tendency to segregate and the amount of fines in the mix.
It has also been reported that compressive strength of fully compacted concrete with a given
water/cement ratio is independent of the grading of the aggregates. Hence grading is of importance
only as far as it affects workability (Neville, 1981).

Objectives
I. To determine the particle size distribution of specified aggregates and fillers.
II. To draw grading curves for the specified aggregates.
Dry sieving was performed on the aggregates (fine and coarse) to ensure that they were free from
particles which could cause agglomeration.

Functions of Sieve Analysis.

• Sieve analysis was performed on both aggregates sizes to in order to check their gradation.
This gradation gives an indirect measure of the workability and average particle size.
• Well graded coarse aggregates of large size will reduce shrinkage of concrete by 50%.
Apparatus
i. A balance accurate to 0.5g.
ii. Test sieves
iii. Lids and receivers.
iv. Metal trays.
v. Scoop.
vi. Sieve brushes.
Sieve sizes:
Coarse aggregates: 2.36mm, 4.75mm, 6.3mm, 10mm, 14mm, 20mm and 28 mm
Fine aggregates: 0.075mm, 0.108mm, 0.21mm, 0.30mm, 0.60mm, 1.18mm, 2.36mm, 4.75mm and
10.0 mm.

16
Sample Preparation
• The sample was reduced to produce a test proportion as shown in the table below
• The test portion was sun-dried and weighed.
Table 3: Mass Test Portions for Sieve Analysis

Maximum particle size Minimum mass of test portion

(mm) (kg)
63 20
50 15
0 10
28 5
20 2
14 1
10 0.5
5 0.2
3 0.2
<3 0.1
Procedure
1. Test sieves were assembled with the receiver at the bottom in increasing order from bottom
to top. The dried sample was placed on the coarsest sieve and covered with a lid.

2. The sieves were thoroughly shaken manually for a sufficient time to separate the sample
into different size fractions.

3. The sieves were removed one by one starting with the largest aperture sizes and each sieve
shaken manually ensuring that no material is lost. All the material which passed each sieve
was returned into the column before continuing with the operation with that sieve.

4. The retained material on the sieve with the largest aperture size was weighed and its weight
recorded with its corresponding sieve size.

5. The same operation was carried out for successive sieves in the column and their weights
recorded.

6. The screened material that remained in the pan was weighed and its weight recorded.

Calculations
1. The mass retained and passing on each sieve was calculated as a percentage of the original
dry mass (M1).

2. The cumulative percentage of the original dry mass passing each sieve down to the
smallest aperture sieve was calculated.

17
 3. Grading as a curve on a semi-logarithmic chart for example as shown below:
Table 4: Sieve Analysis of Pure River Sand

Sieve size Retained Total Retained Mass, % % Envelope

(mm) mass (gm) gm Retained Passing Min(%) Max (%)

10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100 100

4.8 11.4 11.4 1.1 98.9 89 100

2.4 51.6 51.6 5.2 93.7 60 100

1.0 200 200 20.0 73.7 30 98

0.5 349.4 349.4 34.9 38.8 15 85

0.30 261.9 261.9 26.2 12.6 5 70

0.21 89.3 89.3 8.9 3.6 0 40

0.106 16.6 16.6 1.7 2.0 0 15

0.075 12.9 12.9 1.3 0.7 0 0

Passing 6.9 6.9 0.7 0.0

Total weight 1000.0 1000

100.0
GRADING CURVE
80.0
% Passing

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0
0.0 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Sieve size mm

Figure 3: Expected Grading curve for pure river sand.

18
3.3.2 Mix Design
Mix design will be calculated as per IS 10262:2009 specifications. The concrete mix of M25
grade concrete is adopted with a water cement ratio of 0.5. Concrete specimens will be prepared
by varying the percentage of replacement of cement in concrete with cow dung ash (0%, 4%,
6%, 8%, 10%, 12% and 14%)

3.3.3 Making Test Cubes from Fresh Concrete (Bs 1881: Part 108:1983)
The basic size of test cubes were 100mm for concrete with the maximum aggregate size not
exceeding 20mm.

Apparatus
The following apparatus is required:
a) Sampling tray.
b) Scoop.
c) Plasterer’s steel float.
d) Compacting bar weighing 1.8kg, 380mm long and a ramming face 25mm square.
e) Vibrating table or internal (poker) vibrator.
f) Mould of cast iron, with removable base plate. The depth of the mould and the distance
between the two opposite internal side faces, of nominal size 100mm.
g) Square-mouthed shovel.

Mixing and sampling fresh concrete

This Section describes the methods for the preparation of materials and the batching, mixing and
sampling of concrete in the laboratory.

Batching
The quantity of concrete in each batch was at least 10% more than that required for the proposed
test. For each batch, the cement, aggregate and water were weighed to an accuracy of 0.5 g.

Figure 4: Batched mix ready for mixing

19
Figure 5: Coarse Aggregates

Hand mixing

The concrete batch was mixed on a wheelbarrow with a shovel, using the following procedure:

i. The cement and fine aggregate were mixed dry until the mixture was uniform.
ii. The coarse aggregate was added and mixed dry with the cement and fine aggregate until
the coarse aggregate was uniformly distributed throughout the batch.
iii. The water was then added and the whole mixed for at least three minutes and until the
concrete appeared to be homogeneous.

The sample of fresh concrete was obtained from the laboratory made batch which had been
thoroughly mixed before moulding. From each sample of fresh concrete 2 test cubes specimens
were made.

3.3.4 Slump Test

This Section describes the method of determining the slump of concrete made with aggregate
having a nominal maximum size not exceeding 40 mm.

Slump Test is a non-destructive test for concrete consistency, and can also be used to check
variations between consistencies. It is therefore defined as ease or difficulty with which the
concrete can be handled, transported or placed.
Slump test is sensitive to changes in the consistency of concrete which correspond to designed
slumps between 20 mm and 175 mm. Beyond these extremes the measurement of slump can be
unsuitable and other methods of determining the consistency should be considered.
Objective
To determine slump of fresh concrete mix.
APPARATUS

The following apparatus is required:

20
 a) A standard mould (frustum of a cone) complying with BS 1881 – 102: 1983.

b) A standard tamping rod.

c) A standard flat base plate preferably steel.

d) Standard graduated steel rule from 0 to 300mm at 5mm intervals.

e) A scoop approximately 100mm wide.

f) Square-mouthed shovel.

3.3.4.1 SAMPLING
The sample of fresh concrete shall be obtained in accordance with the procedure given in Section
1 of this Standard.

PROCEDURE

1) The internal surface of the slump cone was cleaned and damped but free from
superfluous moisture before the test commenced.
2) The slump cone was placed on a smooth, horizontal, rigid and non-absorbent surface free
from vibration and shock.
3) The slump cone was held firmly against the surface below. It was then filled in three
layers of approximately equal depth and each layer tamped uniformly to its full depth
with 25 strokes of the tamping rod.
4) During the tamping of the first layer, the tamping rod was made sure not to forcibly strike
the surface below.
5) The concrete was heaped above the slump cone before the top layer is tamped. After the
top layer had been tamped, the concrete was levelled to the top of the slump cone by a
sawing and rolling motion of the tamping rod.
6) The slump cone was then removed by raising it vertically, slowly and carefully, in two to
five seconds, in such a manner as to impart minimum lateral or torsional movement to the
concrete.
7) Immediately after removal of the mould the slump of the unsupported concrete was
measured and recorded by determining the difference between the height of the slump
cone and the highest point of the specimen tested.

21
Table 5: Slump test representation for all ratios

CDA Replacement (%) Slump (mm)

0
4
6
8
10
12
14

Expression Expected of Results

The test will only valid if it yields a true slump, this being a slump in which the concrete remains
substantially intact and symmetrical as shown in Figure 4(a). If the specimen shears, as shown in
Figure 4(b), another sample shall be taken and the procedure repeated. The slump shall be recorded
to the nearest 5 mm.

Figure 6: Types of slump

Types of Concrete Slump Test Results

1) True Slump – True slump is the only slump that can be measured in the test. The
measurement is taken between the top of the cone and the top of the concrete after the
cone has been removed as shown in figure-1.
2) Zero Slump – Zero slump is the indication of very low water-cement ratio, which
results in dry mixes. These type of concrete is generally used for road construction.

22
 3) Collapsed Slump – This is an indication that the water-cement ratio is too high, i.e.
concrete mix is too wet or it is a high workability mix, for which a slump test is not
appropriate.
4) Shear Slump – The shear slump indicates that the result is incomplete, and concrete to
be retested

Figure 7: Slump Height

3.3.5 PROCEDURE FOR MAKING TEST CUBES

3.3.5.1 Filling the Mould
1. The mould was placed on a rigid horizontal surface and filled with concrete in such a way
as to remove as much entrapped air as possible without significantly reducing the amount
of entrained air (if present) and to produce full compaction of the concrete with neither
excessive segregation nor laitance.
2. The concrete was placed in the mould in layers approximately 50 mm deep and each layer
compacted by using the compacting bar. The excess concrete above the upper edge of the
mould was removed using steel trowels or floats and carefully level the surface.
3. After the top layer had been compacted, it was levelled to the top of the mould with a steel
float, and the outside of the mould wiped clean avoiding getting overfilled.
4. During the compaction of each layer with the compacting bar, the strokes were distributed
in a uniform manner over the surface of the concrete and each layer compacted to its full
depth.
5. The minimum number of strokes per layer was 25 strokes per layer for 100 mm cubes.

23
Figure 8: Mould Filling and Cube Preparation

Curing Test Specimens

Curing may be defined as the procedures used for promoting the hydration of cement, and consists
of a control of temperature and of the moisture movement from and into the concrete. The objective
of curing is to keep concrete as nearly saturated as possible, until the originally water-filled space
in the fresh cement paste is filled to the desired extent by the products of hydration of cement. The
temperature during curing also controls the rate of progress of the reactions of hydration and
consequently affects the development of strength of concrete. The cubes will placed in a curing
tank at room temperature (20 0C) for the specified period of time. Curing of concrete specimens
(cubes) is done so as to enable the concrete gain strength for testing at 7days, 14days and 28days.
This is important as a change in the strength shows how time is a factor in it. The cubes in this
experimental research will be cured for 7days, 14days and 28days.

3.3.6 Determination of Compressive Strength (BS 1881: Part 116: 1983)

Objective
Concrete strength vary from project to project which usually in the range of 15MPa-50MPa which
is the base for every concrete design.
Apparatus
(a) A balance. 10Kg capacity, readable and accurate to 1g.
(b) Compression testing machine.

24
 (c) Auxiliary platens.

Procedure
1. Each specimen was measured as received or saturated.
2. The cube dimensions between the centers of the three pairs of opposing faces shall be
measured with a caliper or other means which provide the same accuracy of measurement
and recorded to the nearest 0.1 millimeter.
3. The density of each specimen was determined.
4. The bearing surfaces of the testing machine were wiped clean and any loose grit or other
extraneous material removed from the surfaces of the cube in contact with the platens.
5. The cube was carefully centered on the lower platen keeping the troweled surface vertical.
The load was ensured to be applied to two opposite cast faces of the cube.
6. The load was then applied steadily and without shock such that the stress increased at a
rate within the range (0.6 ± 0.2) MPa/s until no greater load can be sustained. The
maximum load applied to the cube was recorded.

CALCULATION AND EXPRESSION OF RESULTS

• The cross-sectional area of the cube was calculated from the measured dimensions. The
compressive strength of the cube was achieved by dividing the maximum load by the cross-
sectional area. The density of the specimen was calculated using the measured dimensions.
• The average of the test results for the two specimens of the same size and dimension, made
from the same sample of fresh concrete was calculated. This value was reported as the
compressive strength of the test sample.

The following format was adopted:

Table 6: Format for compressive strength results

Cube Cube Mass Density Test Date Date Age of Cube Average
mark size (g) (g/cm3) load made tested cube(days) strength strength
(N/mm2) (N/mm2)

25
Figure 9: Failure Patterns for Cubes

3.3.7 Determination of Standard Consistency of Cement

The standard consistency of cement is that consistency, which permit the vicat plunger to
penetrate to a point 5 to 7mm from the bottom of the vicat mould when tested. Procedure
to determine the quantity of water required to produce a cement paste of standard consistency is
described below.

3.3.7.1 Objective
To find out the water content required to produce a cement paste of standard consistency as per
IS: 4031 (Part 4) – 1988.

3.3.7.2 Apparatus for Standard Consistency

1. Vicat Apparatus
The vicat apparatus consists of a frame having a movable rod with a cap at one end and at the
other end any one of the following attachment, which are interchangeable:

1. Needle for determining the initial setting time

2. Needle for determining the final setting time
3. Plunger for determining the standard consistency

2. Plunger for Standard Consistency

It is of polished brass 10 ± 0.05mm in diameter with a projection at the upper end for insertion
into the movable rod. The lower end is flat.

3. Movable Rod
Movable rod carries an indicator which moves over a graduated scale attached to the frame
(certain models have an additional attachment of dash pot, which facilitates lowering of movable
rod slowly).

26
4. Graduated Scale
Graduated scale is 40mm in length and the smallest division of scale is 1mm.

5. Vicat Mould

Single mould
The vicat mould is in the foam of a frustum of a cone having an internal diameter of 60+/-0.5mm
at the top, 70 +/- 0.5mm at the bottom and height 40 +/_ 0.5mm.

Figure 10: Vicat Apparatus

Procedure for Standard Consistency of Cement

1. The vicat apparatus was kept on a level base (when using vicat apparatus with dashpot,
the bearing movable rod was kept to its highest position and pinned. The top of the
dashpot was unscrewed. The dashpot was half filled with oil and the top screwed. The
plunger was worked a number of times.
2. The plunger was attached for determining standard consistency to the movable rod and
the plunger worked a number of times.
3. 400g of cement was taken in a pan and the quantity of water weighed in a beaker.
4. A paste was prepared with the water added to cement. A stopwatch was started at the
time of adding water to cement.
5. The vicat mould was kept on a non-porous plate and the cement paste filled in it.
6. After completely filling the mould, it was slightly shaken to expel the air. The surface of
the paste was smoothened making it level with the top of the moulder. The cement paste
thus prepared is the test block.
7. The test block was placed resting on the non porous plate under the movable rod, bearing
the needle.

27
 8. The plunger was lowered gently to touch the surface of the cement paste and quickly
released.
9. This operation was done immediately after filling the mould.
10. Trial test specimens were prepared with varying percentages of water until plunger
penetrates to a point 5 to 7mm from the bottom of the vicat mould, which is read on the
scale. Express the water required as percentage by weight of the dry cement.

Observations and Calculations

1. Weight of cement taken (g) =_________
2. Initial percentage of water added to cement = _________
3. Quantity of water added to cement =_________

Table 7: Format for Consistency Test

SL. NO. QUANTITY OF WATER READING

ADDED (mm)
(g)
1
2
3
4
5
6

(𝑸𝒖𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒘𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝟓−𝟕 𝒎𝒎 𝒑𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏

Standard Consistency of Cement = ×100
𝑾𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒄𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕)

Points to be Noted
1. The time of gauging should not be less than 3 minutes and not more than 5 minutes.
Gauging time is the time elapsing from the time of adding water to the dry cement until
commencing to fill the mould.
2. The test should be conducted at room temperature 27oC +/- 2oC
3. There should be no vibration on the working table.
4. The plunger should be cleaned during every repetition.

Results
Percentage of water content for standard consistency = %

3.3.8 Initial and Final Setting Time

Vicat apparatus with 1mm square needle was used for the initial setting time test and another
needle with annular attachment was used for final setting time test of Ordinary Portland cement.
In this study, 400 gm of cement was mixed with 0.85 times the percentage of water as

28
determined in the consistency test. The time required to penetrate the needle to a depth of 5 mm
from the bottom of the mould was noted as initial setting time and the time required to make an
impression on the test block was noted as final setting time.

Initial setting time is that time period between the time water is added to cement and time at
which 1 mm square section needle fails to penetrate the cement paste, placed in the Vicat’s
mould 5 mm to 7 mm from the bottom of the mould.
Final setting time is that time period between the time water is added to cement and the time at
which 1 mm needle makes an impression on the paste in the mould but 5 mm attachment does
not make any impression.

Apparatus

Measuring instruments

Table 8: Measuring instruments

Name Capacity / Range / Size Accuracy / Least Count

Vicat apparatus Should be made as per IS:5513 —
Weighing Balance 1000 g 1g
Measuring cylinder 100 ml 1 ml
Stop watch 30 min. 0.2 sec

Other apparatus
➢ Glass plate
➢ Enamel tray
➢ Trowel

Procedure

(a)Test Block Preparation

1. Before commencing setting time test, consistency test was done to obtain the water
required to give the paste normal consistency (P).
2. 400 g of cement was taken and a neat cement paste was prepared with 0.85P of water by
weight of cement.
3. Gauge time was kept between 3 to 5 minutes. The stop watch was started at the instant
when the water is added to the cement. This time was recorded as (t1).
4. The Vicat mould was filled while resting on a glass plate, with the cement paste gauged
as above. The mould completely filled and smoothened off the surface of the paste
making it level with the top of the mould. The cement block thus prepared is called test
block.

29
(b)Initial Setting Time

1. The test block was confined in the mould and resting on the non-porous plate, under the
rod bearing the needle.
2. The needle gently lowered until it came in contact with the surface of test block and
quick released, allowing it to penetrate into the test block.
3. In the beginning the needle completely pierced the test block. This procedure was
repeated i.e. quickly releasing the needle after every 15 minutes till the needle fails to
pierce the block for about 5mm measured from the bottom of the mould. This time was
noted as t2

(c)Final Setting Time

1. For determining the final setting time, the needle of the Vicat’s apparatus was replaced
by the needle with an annular attachment.
2. The cement was considered finally set when upon applying the final setting needle gently
to the surface of the test block; the needle makes an impression thereon, while the
attachment fails to do so. This time was recorded as (t3).

Figure 11: Testing Initial and Final Setting Times

30
CHAPTER 4: EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 SIEVE ANALYSIS
4.1.1 Sieve Analysis for Pure River Sand.

Table 9: Sieve analysis for Fine Aggregates

Retained Total Envelope

Sieve size % %
mass Retained Max
(mm) Retained Passing
(gm) Mass, gm Min(%) (%)

10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100 100

4.8 10.9 10.9 1.1 98.9 95 100
2.4 51.8 62.7 5.2 93.7 80 100
1.0 205.0 267.7 20.5 73.7 50 100
0.5 351.7 619.4 34.9 38.8 25 85
0.30 263.9 883.3 26.4 12.6 10 30
0.21 87.3 970.6 8.7 3.6 2 10
0.106 16.3 986.9 1.6 2.0 0 5
0.075 11.7 998.6 1.2 0.7
Passing 1.4 1.4 0.2 0.0
Total
weight 1000.0 1000
Weight of river sand used was 1000 gms.

100.0 GRADING CURVE

80.0
% Passing

60.0
Agg. grading
40.0 LOWE LIMIT

20.0 UPPER LIMIT

0.0
0.0 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Sieve size mm
Figure 12: Grading curve for pure river sand

The grading for the sand indicates that the material is medium graded according to BS 882.
From the graph above, the pure river sand falls in the middle of the lower and upper limits hence
it shows its good properties for use in the production of concrete.

31
 4.1.2 Sieve Analysis for Coarse aggregate

Table 10: Sieve analysis of coarse aggregate

Envelope
Total %
Sieve size Retained %
Retained
(mm) mass Passing Max
Mass, gm Retained
(gm) Min(%) (%)

28.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100 100

20.0 321.4 321.4 24.7 75.3 90 100

14.0 528.4 849.8 40.6 34.6 40 80

10.0 358.2 1208.0 27.6 7.1 30 60

6.3 82.8 1290.8 6.4 0.7 0 10

4.75 9.2 1300.0 0.7 0.0

Passing 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total
weight 1300.0 1300

100.0
GRADING CURVE
80.0
% Passing

60.0
Agg. grading
40.0 LOWE LIMIT
UPPER LIMIT
20.0

0.0
0.0 0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Sieve size mm

Figure 13: Grading Curve for Coarse Aggregates

The above grading curve indicates that the coarse aggregates is medially graded since the particle
size distribution curve falls within the lower limit and the upper limit of the standard envelop
limits. This indicates that the material crushing process was an appropriate gauge for control of

32
the resulting particle sizes. The required standard envelop follows the norms of the given location
and standards required by the quality assurance standards governing the practice of engineering
4.1.3 General discussion
Grading mainly indicates the sizes of the aggregates and in which quantities they are present. There
are some limiting values for every sieve provided by ASTM or BS, in which these limiting values
are used to get the final answer. This is achieved by taking into account the minimum and the
maximum values provided by ASTM and the plotting them on the grading curve.
Sieve analysis was done using the standard test sieves compliant to BS 410:1976. Fine and coarse
aggregate should be well graded from coarse to fine and should conform to the following grading
requirements:

Table 11: ASTM Grading Requirements for Fine Aggregates

Sieve size(mm) Cumulative % passing

minimum maximum
10 100 100
4.75 95 100
2.36 80 100
1.00 50 100
0.500 25 85
0.300 10 30
0.150 2 10
0.075

Table 12: ASTM Grading Requirements for coarse Aggregates

Sieve size(mm) Cumulative % passing

minimum maximum
28 100 100
20 95 100
14 80 100
10 50 100
6.3 25 85
4.75 10 30

33
The test results on river sand showed that the sand was within the grading requirements. The fine
aggregates curve was at the middle of the Upper Limit and Lower limit as depicted in Graph 2
above. Coarse aggregates particles were also found to be well distributed as shown in Graph 3
above. The coarse aggregates fitted to the graded aggregates, 20mm to 5mm according to Table 3
BS 882:1992.

4.2 WORKABILITY
The difference in workability was measured with w/c ratio (0.55) for pure cement partially
replaced cement. Slump measured for 100% pure cement, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12% and 14% CDA
replacements were 22.0, 20.0, 16.0, 18.0, 16.0, 12.0 and 14.0 respectively.
Table 13: Slump Height.

Percentage of Blend (%) SLUMP(mm)

0 22.0
4 20.0
6 16.0
8 18.0
10 16.0
12 12.0
14 14.0

34
 Slump Height (mm)
25

20

15

10

0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%

Slump Height (mm)

Figure 14: Graphical Representation of Slump Height (mm)

Graph 5: Slump Test

The results of the slump test carried out on concrete with varying percentage of cow dung ash
(CDA) as cement replacement are presented in Table 11 while Graph 4 and Graph 5 shows the
plot of slump height versus cow dung ash replacement. All the slump values were the true Slump
type and suitable for concrete works. The results shows that the slump decreases with increase in
the amount of Cow dung ash (CDA),which indicates that more water is required to maintain the
same consistency as the CDA content increases.
This implies that cow dung ash absorbs more water than Portland cement when added to the
concrete mix.
4.2 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Concrete cubes of sizes 100mm*100mm*100mm were tested for crushing strength. The
specimens were placed centrally on the base plate of the machine and load was applied gradually
at a constant rate of 10KN/cm2/s till the specimen fail. The maximum load was noted for each
test. The crushing strength is the ration of failure load to the area of cross-section of specimen.
The compressive strength of concrete mixes by replacing Nguvu cement with CDA at 0%, 4%,
6%, 8%, 10%, 12% and 14% was investigated. The test was carried out on specimens at 7days,
14days and 28days and the results presented as below:

35
Table 14: 7-day Compressive Strength

%CDA Sample Mass (g) Density Maximum Strength Average % strength

No (g/cm3) load(kN) (N/mm2) strength gained
(N/mm2)
1. 2463.1 2.4631 165.342 16.5342
0 2. 2394.7 2.3947 160.521 16.0521 16.16183 64.64733
3. 2455.8 2.4558 158.992 15.8992
1. 2214.6 2.2146 100.453 10.0453
4 2. 2506.8 2.5068 106.675 10.6675 10.94493 43.77973
3. 2453.4 2.4534 121.22 12.122
1. 2555.6 2.5556 123.891 12.3891
6 2. 2547.5 2.5475 122.661 12.2661 12.05883 48.23533
3. 2499.5 2.4995 115.213 11.5213
1. 2474.7 2.4747 132.453 13.2453
8 2. 2442.6 2.4426 145.19 14.519 14.26583 57.06333
3. 2453.7 2.4537 150.332 15.0332
1. 2309.1 2.3091 175.675 17.5675
10 2. 2380.4 2.3804 178.328 17.8328 17.81097 71.24387
3. 2407.6 2.4076 180.326 18.0326
1. 2511.6 2.5116 144.675 14.4675
12 2. 2546.9 2.5469 139.997 13.9997 13.5075 54.03
3. 2534.8 2.5348 120.553 12.0553
1 2488.5 2.4885 100.449 10.0449
14 2 2523.6 2.5236 123.692 12.3692 11.28443 45.13773
3 2499.1 2.4991 114.392 11.4392

36
 Average comp. strength (N/mm2)
20
18 17.81097
16 16.16183
14 14.26583
comp..strength

13.5075
12 12.05883
10.94493 11.28443
10
8
6
4
2
0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%
Blend content

Figure 15: 7-Day Comparative strengths

The 7-day compressive strength for the mixes varied with an increasing trend as the blend
percentage was increased. It increased from 10.94493N/mm2 for 4% CDA replacement to
17.81097N/mm2 for 10% CDA replacement. However, there was a notable decrease to 13.5075
N/mm2 for 12% replacement and 11.18443N/mm2 for 14%.

37
Table 15: 14-day comparative strength

%CDA Sample Mass (g) Density Maximum Strength Average % strength

No (g/cm3) load(kN) (N/mm2) strength gained
(N/mm2)
1. 2463.1 2.4631 190.345 19.0345
0 2. 2394.7 2.3947 198.325 19.8325 19.4848 77.9392
3. 2455.8 2.4558 195.874 19.5874
1. 2214.6 2.2146 165.239 16.5239
4 2. 2506.8 2.5068 178.376 17.8376 15.88697 63.54787
3. 2453.4 2.4534 132.994 13.2994
1. 2555.6 2.5556 189.342 18.9342
6 2. 2547.5 2.5475 190.4332 19.04332 18.59547 74.38189
3. 2499.5 2.4995 178.089 17.8089
1. 2474.7 2.4747 200.432 20.0432
8 2. 2442.6 2.4426 199.528 19.9528 19.98793 79.95173
3. 2453.7 2.4537 199.678 19.9678
1. 2309.1 2.3091 205.439 20.5439
10 2. 2380.4 2.3804 200.889 20.0889 20.61703 82.46813
3. 2407.6 2.4076 212.183 21.2183
1. 2511.6 2.5116 187.345 18.7345
12 2. 2546.9 2.5469 177.108 17.7108 16.60417 66.41667
3. 2534.8 2.5348 133.672 13.3672
1 2488.5 2.4885 156.376 15.6376
14 2 2523.6 2.5236 135.407 13.5407 13.73373 54.93493
3 2499.1 2.4991 120.229 12.0229

Average comp. strength (N/mm2)

25

20 19.4848 19.98793 20.61703

18.59547
comp..strength

15.88697 16.60417
15
13.73373
10 Average comp. strength
(N/mm2)
5

0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%
Blend content

Figure 16: 14-Day Comparative strengths

38
The 14-day compressive strength for the mixes was determined with an increasing trend with an
increase in blend replacement. The strength increased from 15.88697 N/mm2 for 4% replacement
to 20.61703N/mm2 replacement for 10% replacement. The compressive strength for 0%
replacement (100% pure cement) was found to be 19.4848N/mm2. Generally, there was an increase
in the compressive strength for all the replacements. This was clearly a proof of the theory that
compressive strength of concrete increases with time.

Table 16: 28-day comparative strength

%CDA Sample Mass (g) Density Maximum Strength Average % strength

No (g/cm3) load(kN) (N/mm2) strength gained
(N/mm2)
0 1. 2463.1 2.4631 234.128 23.4128
2. 2394.7 2.3947 208.408 20.8408 21.92777 87.71106667
3. 2455.8 2.4558 215.297 21.5297
4 1. 2214.6 2.2146 174.229 17.4229
2. 2506.8 2.5068 165.283 16.5283 17.29437 69.17746667
3. 2453.4 2.4534 179.319 17.9319
6 1. 2555.6 2.5556 190.285 19.0285
2. 2547.5 2.5475 194.562 19.4562 19.41597 77.66386667
3. 2499.5 2.4995 197.632 19.7632
8 1. 2474.7 2.4747 201.876 20.1876
2. 2442.6 2.4426 208.357 20.8357 20.3444 81.3776
3. 2453.7 2.4537 200.099 20.0099
10 1. 2309.1 2.3091 220.296 22.0296
2. 2380.4 2.3804 225.769 22.5769 22.55057 90.20226667
3. 2407.6 2.4076 230.452 23.0452
12 1. 2511.6 2.5116 192.687 19.2687
2. 2546.9 2.5469 189.804 18.9804 19.11633 76.46533333
3. 2534.8 2.5348 190.999 19.0999
14 1 2488.5 2.4885 170.319 17.0319
2 2523.6 2.5236 168.439 16.8439 16.95773 67.83093333
3 2499.1 2.4991 169.974 16.9974

39
 Average comp. strength (N/mm2)
25
21.92777 22.55057
20 20.3444
19.41597 19.11633
17.29437
comp..strength

16.95773
15

10

0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%
Blend content

Figure 17: 28-Day Comparative strengths.

The 28-day compressive strength for the mixes was found to be related to the results for the 21-
day strength. There was an increase in the strengths from 17.29437N/mm2 for 4% replacement to
22.55057N/mm2 replacement for 10% replacement. The compressive strength for 0% CDA
replacement (100% cement) was found to be 21.92777N/mm2. It was discovered that the
compressive strengths for all the replacements had increased from the previous 14-day test hence
an increase in strength with time.

As shown in the graphs for 7days, 14days and 28days, it was observed that the compressive
strength of concrete increases with an increase in CDA content up to 10% replacement and
thereafter decreases with increase in the CDA replacement content. Therefore, the maximum
strength was observed to occur at 10% CDA replacement.

Comparative Compressive Strengths (N/mm2)

25

0%
20
4%
15 6%
8%
10
10%
5 12%
14%
0
7days 14days 28days

Figure 18: Compressive Strengths for Different CDA Replacements

40
 4.2.1 General Discussion
As shown in the graph for 7, 14 and 28 and as in Graph 12, it is observed that the compressive
strength of concrete first drops at 4% then increases with subsequent percentages until 10%
where it starts dropping with increasing replacement of cow dung ash in cement. The maximum
strength occurs at 10% of ash in concrete at 7days, 14days and 28days and was more than the
conventional concrete.
The result of compressive strength test on the OPC/CDA blended cement concrete is presented in
Tables 12, 13 and 14 and shown in Figures 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. The result reveals that the
compressive strength increases as the CDA content increases from 4% to a maximum at 10%
beyond which, it starts dropping. For instance, 10% CDA gave 71%, 83% and 90% of the
compressive strength of the design strength at the end of 7, 14 and 28days of curing respectively.

4.3 Consistency

Table 17: Consistency Test Results for 0% CDA

SL. NO. QUANTITY OF READING

WATER ADDED (mm)
(g)
1 100 20
2 104 17
3 108 12
4 112 8
5 116 9
6 120 6

Table 18: Consistency Test Results for 4% CDA

SL. NO. QUANTITY OF READING

WATER ADDED (mm)
(g)
1 100 35
2 115 20
3 120 15
4 125 8
5 127 9
6 128 5

41
Table 19: Consistency Test Results for 6% CDA

SL. NO. QUANTITY OF READING

WATER ADDED (mm)
(g)
1 100 35
2 115 20
3 120 15
4 125 10
5 130 8
6 135 6

Table 20: Consistency Test Results for 8% CDA

SL. NO. QUANTITY OF READING

WATER ADDED (mm)
(g)
1 100 40
2 115 35
3 120 20
4 130 21
5 135 15
6 140 5

Table 21: Consistency Test Results for 10% CDA

SL. NO. QUANTITY OF READING

WATER ADDED (mm)
(g)
1 100 40
2 115 36
3 120 28
4 130 18
5 135 10
6 140 6

42
Table 22: Consistency Test Results for 12% CDA

SL. NO. QUANTITY OF READING

WATER ADDED (mm)
(g)
1 100 40
2 115 38
3 120 30
4 135 20
5 145 19
6 150 7

Table 23: Consistency Test Results for 14% CDA

SL. NO. QUANTITY OF READING

WATER ADDED (mm)
(g)
1 100 40
2 125 30
3 135 27
4 145 23
5 155 12
6 160 6

Table 24: Summary of the consistency amount

%CDA Quantity of water Standard consistency READING

Replacement added (g) (%) (mm)
0 120 30 6
4 128 32 5
6 135 34 6
8 140 35 5
10 140 35 6
12 150 37.5 7
14 160 40 6

Observations and Calculations

1. Weight of cement taken (g) = 400g

2. Initial percentage of water added to cement = 25%
3. Quantity of water added to cement =100g

43
 (𝑸𝒖𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒘𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝟓−𝟕 𝒎𝒎 𝒑𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏
Standard Consistency of Cement = ×100
𝑾𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝒄𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕)

𝟏𝟐𝟎
Standard Consistency of Cement = ×100 = 30%
𝟒𝟎𝟎

Discussion

44
 4.4 Initial and Final Setting Time

Table 25: Initial and Final Setting Time for 0% CDA

Time (minutes) Initial setting time Final setting time

Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

15
30 40 30
45 40 30
60 38 19
75 40 21
90 37 19
105 36 17
120 36 16
135 34 12
150 29 9
165 24 9
180 16 7
195 8 0
120 7 0
135 0 0

45
Table 26: Initial and Final Setting Time for 4% CDA

Time (minutes) Initial setting time Final setting time

Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

15 40
30 40 30
45 38 30
60 40 29
75 38 27
90 38 29
105 37 25
120 36 24
135 34 19
150 31 11
165 31 7
180 30 3
195 29 2
210 26 0

46
Table 27: Initial and Final Setting Time for 6% CDA

Time (minutes) Initial setting time Final setting time

Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

15 40 30
30 38 30
45 40 29
60 39 25
75 38 28
90 37 21
105 40 22
120 36 18
135 37 13
150 33 10
165 30 11
180 33 9
195 29 2
210 30 0
225 27 0

47
Table 28: Initial and Final Setting Time for 8% CDA

Time (minutes) Initial setting time Final setting time

Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

15
30 40 30
45 40 29
60 40 28
75 40 24
90 40 21
105 38 25
120 38 18
135 36 20
150 33 19
165 31 12
180 30 9
195 29 6
210 26 4
225 24 0

48
Table 29: Initial and Final Setting Time for 10% CDA

Time (minutes) Initial setting time Final setting time

Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

15
30 40 30
45 40 30
60 40 29
75 40 25
90 40 24
105 38 20
120 38 22
135 34 16
150 31 11
165 31 10
180 30 7
195 29 4
210 26 5
225 24 0
240 21 0

49
Table 30: Initial and Final Setting Time for 12% CDA

Time (minutes) Initial setting time Final setting time

Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

15
30 40 30
45 40 30
60 39 27
75 38 22
90 40 25
105 40 17
120 38 13
135 38 8
150 36 11
165 34 10
180 37 4
195 36 7
210 35 5
225 24 3
240 21 0

50
Table 31: Initial and Final Setting Time for 14% CDA

Time (minutes) Initial setting time Final setting time

Penetration (mm) Penetration (mm)

15
30 40 30
45 40 30
60 40 30
75 40 28
90 39 29
105 38 30
120 38 27
135 37 27
150 38 23
165 36 22
180 36 20
195 35 14
210 26 15
225 24 12
240 21 7
255 20 9
270 18 0

51
Table 32: Setting Times and Slump of OPC/CDA Paste respectively

Setting Times Retardation Relative To

MIX ID Slump(mm) (Mins) Control (Mins)
Initial Final Initial Final
CDA - 0 22 135 195 0 0
CDA - 4 20 135 210 0 15
CDA - 6 16 150 210 15 15
CDA - 8 18 150 225 15 30
CDA - 10 16 135 225 30 30
CDA - 12 12 165 240 30 45
CDA - 14 14 195 265 60 70

Setting Times
300

250

200

150

100

50

0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%

Initial Setting Time Final Setting Time Series 3

Figure 19: Initial and Final Setting Times

52
 Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations
5.1 Conclusion
The results of this study reveals that cow dung ash (CDA) can be effectively used as
supplementary cementing materials in concrete
1) The compressive strength of concrete increases with the increasing percentage
replacement of cow dung ash from 4% up to 10% beyond which, it starts dropping at
all stages.
2) Workability is reduced with increase in the CDA replacement in concrete; hence
vibration of concrete made with CDA/OPC blend is required or the use of a super
plasticizer to achieve the desired workability.
3) Compressive strength of CDA/OPC blended concrete decreases as CDA content
increases and increases with curing age.
4) For this study, a replacement of no more than 10% can be considered for the
production of strong and quality concrete.
5) Cement replacement of 8% and 10% concrete with CDA showed no statistically
significant loss in strength compared to the control sample.

5.2 Recommendations
The research work on pozzolanic materials is still limited. But it promises a great scope for
future studies. Following aspects are considered for future study and investigation.
1. Optimizing the combination of cow dung ash and fly ash as replacement in
cement to be studied for better strength result.
2. The sustainability of using cow dung ash, fly ash and combination in concrete
pavements can be studied for better strength.

53
 REFERENCES
[1] Asawalam, D.O and Unwudike, S.U (2011). Complementary Use of Cow Dung and Mineral
Fertilizer: Effect on Soil Properties, Growth, Nutrient Uptake and Yield of Sweet Potato (Ipomea
batatas). Publication of Nasarawa State University, Keffi, Vol.7. No 1. Pp.36-48
[2] Bharath Kumar B S, Jyothi P N (2015), “Comparison of Mechanical Properties of Al-5%Si
Alloy Reinforced with Cow dung ash and Rice husk ash” International Journal of Latest
Research in Engineering and Technology (IJLRET) ISSN: 2454-5031(Online), Volume 1 Issue
4ǁSeptember 2015 ǁ PP 55-58.
[3] Deshmukh S.H,Bhusari J.P,Zende A.M, “Effect, of glass fibres on ordinary portand cement
concrete”, IOSR Journal of Engineering, June 2012.
[4] D.Gowsika, S.Sarankokila and K.Sargunan (2014), Experimental investigation on
egg shell powder as partial replacement with cement in concrete, International Journal
of Engineering Trends and Technology, Vol. 14, pp 65-68.
[5] Duna Samson, Omoniyi Tope Moses “Investigating the Pozzolanic Potentials of Cowdung
Ash in Cement Paste and Mortars” Civil and Environmental Research, ISSN 2224-5790, Vol.6,
No.8, 2014.
[6] Dr. S. L Patil, J. N. Kale and S. Suman (2012), Fly ash concrete: A technical
analysis for compressive strength, International Journal of Advanced Engineering
Research and Studies, Vol. 2, pp 128-129
[7] Elinwa, A.U (2003). Timber Ash as Pozzolana in concrete. Unpublished Doctoral
dissertation, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi.
[8] Food and Agricultural Organisation (2010). Livestockcattle (Jule, 20th) Retrieved From:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/017/i3138e/i3138e07.pdf
[9] Godwin A. Akeke, Maurice E. Ephraim, Akobo, I.Z.S and Joseph O. Ukpata
(2013), Structural properties of rice husk ash concrete, International Journal of
Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vol. 3, pp 57-62.
[10] Jitender Kumar Dhaka, Surendra Roy “Utilization of fly ash and cow dung ash as partial replacement
of cement in concrete” International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering, vol.6, 2015.

[11] Jayeshkumar Pitroda, L. B. Zala, F.S. Umrigar (2012), “experimental investigations on

partial replacement of cement with fly ash in design mix concrete” pitroda et al., international
journal of advanced engineering technology E-ISSN 0976-3945, IJAET/vol.iii/ issue iv/oct.-dec.,
2012/126-129.
[12] K. A. Mujedu, S. A. Adebara, I. O. Lamidi (2014), The use of corn cob ash and
saw dust ssh as cement replacement in concrete works, The International Journal of
Engineering and Science (IJES), Vol. 3, pp 22-28
[13] K.S.Ramesh, T.Subramani (2015), “Experimental Study On Partial Replacement Of Cement
With Fly Ash And Complete Replacement Of Sand With M sand” International Journal of

54
Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM), ISSN 2319 – 4847, Volume
4, Issue 5, May 2015.
[14] Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2009). Retrieved From.
https://www.knbs.or.ke/livestock-population
[15] Magudeaswaran,Hilal …. (IJ0SER) May– 2018. Development of Eco Brick and Concrete
with the partially replacement of cow dung (p)-249-254
[16] Malhotra, V.M. (1999), Making concrete greener with fly ash, Indian Concrete
Journal, pp 609 – 614.
[17] Marek Harsdorff (2012). “The Economics of cowdung: Creating green jobs in the dairy
industry in India “(Tech. Report).International labour Organization, India.
[18] Matawal, D.S and Duna, S. (2002). Properties of Mortar Produced using Rice husk Ash as
Partial Replacement of Cement. Journal of Civil Engineering Publications. Vol 5. No 4. pp 35-
43
[19] M.R. Karim, M.F.M. Zain, M. Jamil, F.C. Lai and M.N. Islam (2012), Strength of
mortar and concrete as influenced by rice husk ash, World Applied Sciences Journal,
Vol. 19, pp 1501-1513.
[20] Ojedokun, O. Y., Adeniran, A. A., Raheem, S. B. and Aderinto, S. J “ Cow dung ash as
partial replacement of cementing material in the production of concrete”, British Journal of
Applied Science & Technology,vol.4(24), pp 3445-3454,2014.
[21] Omoniyi, T., Duna, S. and Mohammed, A., “Compressive strength characteristic of cow
dung ash blended cement concrete” International Journal of Scientific &Engineering
Research,vol.5, pp 770-776,2014.
[22] Omoniyi Tope Moses, Duna Samson (2014), “investigating the pozzolanic potentials of cow
dung ash in cement paste and mortars” Civil and Environmental Research ISSN 2224-5790
(Paper) ISSN 2225-0514 (Online)Vol.6, No.8, 2014.
[23] PavanKumar,V.S., & PoluRaju,P. (2012). “Incorporation of cowdung ash to Mortar and
concrete”. International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications.2 (3), 580-585.
[24] Rayaprolu, V. S. R. P. K. and Raju, P. P, “Incorporation of cow dung ash to mortar and
concrete” International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, vol.2, pp. 580-585,
2012.
[25] S. Barathanand and B. Gobinath (2013), Evaluation of wood ash as a partial
replacement to cement, International Journal of Science, Engineering and
Technology Research (IJSETR) Vol. 2, pp 2009-2013.
[26] Samuel Awoyinfa (2013, March .21) “cement prices still defies law of supply and demand”
Punch Newspapers’. Retrieved from http://www.punchng.com>home>feature
[27] Shalini, A, Prem,V and Dahiya, R.P(2006). Application of a system dynamics approach for
assessment and mitigation of CO2 emissions from cement industry.Journal of Environmental
Management, 79(2006 Pages 383-398.
[28] Smith and Wheeler (1979) Nutritional and economic value of animal excreta, journal of
animal, science, 48 pp: 144-156

55
[29] Sooraj V.M. (2012), Effect of palm oil fuel ash (POFA) on strength properties of
concrete, International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Vol. 3, pp
691-698.
[30] T. S. Abdulkadir, D.O. Oyejobi and A. Lawal (2014): Evaluation of sugarcane
bagasse ash as a replacement for cement in concrete works, ACTA TEHNICA
CORVINIENSIS Fascicule 3, Bulletin of Engineering, pp 71-76..
[31] Unites States Environmental Protection Agency (2010). Available and emerging
technologies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the Portland cement industry.
[32] Utsev, J. T., Taku, J. K. (2012), Coconut shell ash as partial replacement of
ordinary portland cement in concrete production, International Journal of Scientific &
Technology Research, Vol. 1, pp 86-89.
[33] V.S.R. Pavan Kumar. Rayaprolu, P.Polu Raju (2012), “Incorporation of Cow dung Ash to
Mortar and Concrete” International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA)
ISSN: 2248-9622 Vol. 2, Issue 3, May-Jun 2012, pp. 580-585

56
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: PROPOSED PROJECT BUDGET
ITEM TASK AMOUNT SUB-TOTAL
(Ksh.) (Ksh.)
1 Preliminaries 500 500
2 Purchase of materials:
1 bag of cement @Ksh.750 750
2 wheelbarrows of coarse aggregates 600
2 wheelbarrows of fine aggregates 600
Cow Dung 500 2,450
3 Transportation fee during sample collection 2,000 2,000

4 Laboratory work 500 1,500

Data processing 500
Stationary 500
5 Internet 1,500 1,500
6 Communication (airtime) 1,000 1,000
7 Report Typing, printing and Binding 1,000 1,000

8 Contingencies 2,000 2,000

GRAND TOTAL 11,950

57
 Appendix 2: WORKPLAN
project activity February March April May June July August
Problem Identification
Literature review
Proposal development and
presentation
Purchase and sourcing of
material
Laboratory practical
Data collection and analysis
Data compilation and report
Final report correction and
submission.

Appendix 3: Slump test

Slump Height (mm)
25

20

15

10

0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%
Slump Height (mm)

58
Appendix 4: 7-Day Comparative strengths
Average comp. strength (N/mm2)
20
17.81097
18 16.16183
16 14.26583
13.5075
14
comp..strength

12.05883
10.94493 11.28443
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%
Blend content

Appendix 5: 14-Day Comparative strengths.

Average comp. strength (N/mm2)
25

19.4848 19.98793 20.61703

20 18.59547
15.88697 16.60417
comp..strength

15 13.73373

10 Average comp. strength (N/mm2)

0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%
Blend content

59
Appendix 6: 28-Day Comparative strengths.
Average comp. strength (N/mm2)
25 22.55057
21.92777
20.3444
19.41597 19.11633
20
17.29437 16.95773
comp..strength

15

10

0
0% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14%
Blend content

60