See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250071978

Relationship between strength and

volumetric composition of moist-cured
cellular concrete
Article in Magazine of Concrete Research January 1987
Impact Factor: 0.91 DOI: 10.1680/macr.1987.39.139.115

CITATIONS

READS

24

72

4 authors, including:
Sriravindrarajah Rasiah

Chat-Tim Tam

University of Technology Sydney

National University of Singapore

91 PUBLICATIONS 380 CITATIONS

34 PUBLICATIONS 541 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

SEE PROFILE

Available from: Sriravindrarajah Rasiah

Retrieved on: 15 April 2016

Relationship between strength and

volumetric composition of moist-cured
cellular concrete
c. T. Tam BE, ME, PhD, MICE, FIEM, FIES, MIEAust,
T. Y. Lim BE,MEng,, R. Sri Ravindrarajah BSC (Eng), PhD and
S. L. Lee BSCE, MSE, PhD, FICE,FASCE, FIES
N A T I O N A L ~ J N I V E R S I T YO F S I N G A P O K E : D E P A R T M E N T O FC I V I L

SYNOPSIS
The eflect of the volumetric composition of cellular
concrete, particularly water and air voids, on its compressive strength has been demonstratedtofollow
Feret's general formula. The increase in strength at all
ageswitha
corresponding increase inwaterlcement
ratio (opposite to thatof mortar mixes) as obtained in
the experiment has been shown to be consistentwith
Feret's formula. The inclusion of the degree of hydration in the modified form of Power's gellspace ratio
further improves the correlation withstrength when this
is taken as the parameter.

Introduction
Cellular concrete is essentially an aerated cement
paste or mortar, madeby introducing air or gas in the
form of small bubbles (diameters from0.1 to 1.O mm),
into a plain cement paste or mortar mix during the
mixing process. Thesebubbles are eithergenerated
chemically within the wet mix or are preformed and
then incorporated mechanically intothe mix. They
remainstable and maintain theirshape throughout
the setting process and become discrete air cells in the
cement matrix. Cellular concreteis also called aerated
concrete, gas concrete or foamed concrete by various
manufacturers. It may be broadly divided intotwo
types based on the method of curing used. The first
type covers products that are autoclaved,
i.e. cured
under high pressure steam at temperatures around 180
to 2 10'' C".". This method of curing is generally used
for
making
precast
structural
cellular
concrete
elements. Theother
type consists of moist-cured
*Department of Civil Engineering,
National
Singapore, Kent Ridge, Singapore 051 1.

12

University of

ENGINEERING*

products,includingproductscured
with steam at
atmospheric pressure. They aresometimes cast in situ
and are of a lower strength than autoclaved products
of similar densities. Precast moist-cured products are
used as secondary structural elements because of their
good
thermal
sound
and
insulation
The
difference between these two types of producthas
been discussed by Val~re'~.''in terms of material
composition, physical properties and uses.
Autoclaved cellular concrete in the density range
300 to 1000kg/m3 has been produced commercially
forover
fifty years. Its physical and mechanical
propertieshave
been p ~ b l i s h e d ' ~ ~Its*main
~ ~ ~ . disadvantages lie in the high capital outlay for equipment
and thehigh energy cost of autoclaving in production.
The low cost of moist-cured cellular concrete is an
attractive andviable alternative in many applications.
Except for the notable work on neat cement cellular
concrete by Richard'"', very littlework has been
reported in the literature on the role of water/cement
ratio in relation to cellular concrete.Thispaper
reports onthis particular aspectof a study'"' covering
properties of moist-cured sanded cellular concrete.

Scope of investigation
The investigation covered the following parameters:
(1) density of fresh concrete, 1300 to 2250 kg/m3;
(2) water/cement ratio by weight, 0.60 to 0.80;
(3) sand/cement ratio, 1.58 to 1.73. (Cement content was kept at a constant value of 390 kg/m7.)
Details of materials, mix design and methods of
batching, mixing and testing are reportedelsewhere'"',
and only the effect of the volumetric composition of
each mix on strengthis presented in this paper. Briefly,
the cement used was an ordinary Portlandcement and
thesandwascrushedgranite
fines with agrading

Strength and volumetric composition of moist-cured cellular concrete

T A B L E 1 : Mix quantities of cellular and full density mortar mixes.

Mix
designation*

Volume quantities (m3/m3)

Mass quantities (kgim)

Cement

Water

Sand

Cement

Water

Sand

Air

13-0.60
13-0.70
13-0.75

390
390
390

234
273
293

676
637
617

0.124
0.124
0.124

0.234
0.273
0.293

0.254
0.239
0.232

0.388
0.364
0.351

16-0.60
164.70
16-0.80

390
390
390

234
273
312

976
937
898

0.124
0.124
0.124

0.234
0.273
0.312

0.367
0,352
0.338

0.275
0.251
0.226

19-0.60
19-0.70
19-0.80

390
390
390

234
273
312

0.124
1276
1237
0.124
I l98 0.124

0.234
0.273
0.312

0.480
0.465
0,450

0.162
0.138
0.1 l4

M-0.60
M-0.70
M-0.80

390
390
390

234
273
312

I708
1604
1500

0.124
0.124
0.124

0,234
0.273
0.3 12

0.642
0.603
0.564

*13, 16 and 19 represent densities of 1300. 1600 and 1900kg/m3;

M is mortar mix without any added air;
0.60, 0.70, 0.75, 0.80 is watericement ratio.

bordering between Zone 1 and Zone 2 of the 1973

edition of BS 882(*).A preformed foam was used
throughoutand itsaveragemeasureddensity
was
59 kg/m3. Twelve mixes (Table 1) were tested in the
main series. These are designated as mix, 13-X, 1&X,
19-X and M-X, according to their densities represented

by the first two numbers. The letter M indicates the

plain mortar mix without any added air,with an average density of 2250 kg/m. The letter X indicates the
water/cement
ratio
by weight. The compressive
strength of the mixes was determined from 100 mm
cubes cast in steel moulds, demoulded after about 24

180 days

10 -

28 days

8-

7 days

6-

(3

2
W

F
v)

3 days
42-

21
3

01
0.5

I
0.6

01
0.5

0.7
0.8
WATERKEMENT RATIO

0.9

I
I
I
I
I
0.6
0.7
0.8
WATERlCEMENT RATIO

( b )1600 kg/m3 mixes

( a ) 1300 kg/m3 mixes

20

uc

180 days
28 days

30
(3

7 days

!$
l-

20

3 days

v)

01

0.5

I
0.6

I
I
I
I
0.7
0.8
WATERKEMENT RATIO

(c) 1900 kg/m3 mixes

1 0 0.5

0.6

0.7

0.9

0.8

WATERKEMENT RATIO

(d mortar

mixes

Figure I : Effect of waterlcement ratio, density and age on compressive strength. (Each point is the average of three test specimens.)

13

Magazine of Concrete Research: Vol. 39, No. 138: March 1987

hours and curedin a fog room for 2 days followed by
aircuring in thelaboratoryat
80 f 10% relative
humidity and 27 f 2C till thevariousages
of
testing. The loading rates for the test cubes were:
(1) 15.0N/mmZper min. for the mortar mixes (as
specified in BS 1881 1 3 ) ,
(2) 10.0 N/mm2 per min. for the 1900 kg/m3 mixes,
(3) 5.0 N/mm2 per min. for the 1600 kg/m3 mixes,
and
(4) 2.5 N/mm2 per min. for the 1300 kg/m3 mixes.
Three specimens of each mix were tested at each of
the test ages to provide the average strength reported
herein.

Abrams' formula provides a good correlation

between
strength and water/cement ratio. However, entrapped
air voids caused by lack of compaction, and entrained
air voids also make a significant contribution to the
total volume of voids inconcrete.Hencethemore
generalexpressionformulated
by Feret in1896'17)
including the volume of air is the better alternative.
The strength of many other brittle materials hasbeen
found to be related to their porosity'"'.
FERET'SFORMULA

The
more
expressed as

general formula by Feret may be

S

Compressive strength development

Figure 1 showsthecompressivestrength
of the
various mixes tested at the ages of 3, 7, 28 and 180
days in relation to the water/cement ratio. The mortar
mixes show the expected increase in strength with age
and a decrease in strength with increasingwater/
cement ratio at all ages. However, for the other three
series of cellular mixes, although strength increases
with age as expected, the increase in strength with a
corresponding increase in water/cement ratio is directly
opposite to thatof the mortarmixes. This trend points
to the important effect of the volume of entrained air,
provided by the foam, on strength,in a way similar to
that of capillary voids. Unlike the
mortar mixes, in
which the entrapped air content is only a few percent
by volume, the cellular concrete mixes contain much
higher volumes of combined entrained and entrapped
air. Therole of the air voids and the capillary voids is
examined in more detail in the following sections.

Effect of volumetric composition on strength

K[c/(c +

+ a ) ] " .. . . . . . . . . (2)

where S is the strength, c, W and a are the absolute

volumes of cement, water and air respectively, and K
and n are empirical constants. Thevalue of n = 2 has
been suggested for normal-weight concrete.
In order to apply
Feret's formula to themixes in the
present study, the values of c, W and a are obtained
from the weight of the materials as batched and the
measured density of each fresh mix, D,, as follows:
Sum of the weight of constituents
Sum of the volume of constituents

D,

D,

= (C

+ S ) / ( c + U' + a + S) . . . . (3)

where C , W and S are theweight of cement, water and

sand; and c, W, S and a are the absolute volumes of
cement, water, sand and airrespectively. The measured
density is used in order toinclude any entrapped airin
the mix, and thus the volume of air, a, is the sum of
both the entrained and entrapped air in a mix.
From Equation 3,
(c

+ + a)
W

[(C

+ W + S)/D,]

- S

The value of c is given by CID,, where D, is the density

For ease of control in production, concrete is norof
cement, taken as 3 150 kg/m3. The term(c
W + a)
mally batched by weight. However, concrete being a
may
be
rearranged
into
a
form
analogous
to
water/
composite material, its properties are dependent on
cement
ratio:
the volumetric rather than the gravimetric proportions
of its components. For normal-weight concrete, such
a)/c = [(C
W
S)/CD,]
(W
volumetric representation hasbeen p r o p o ~ e d ~ ' ~ ,In
'~,'~'.
- (sic) - 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
cellularconcrete, the volume of air isof asimilar
magnitude to that of the other components andmust
Table 2gives the value of the term(W + a)/c for the
be included in the formulation.
12 mixes listed in Table 1 and two additional mixes
not included in Table 1 , butreported elsewhere'"',
DUFFABRAMS'FORMULA
computed for each mix from the batch quantities and
It has been reported'''' that, in 1919, Duff Abrams
themeasured density as described above.These 14
established the formula for strength as
values have been matched against the corresponding
measured compressive strength at the age of 28 days.
S = K,/(K,)"" . . . . . . . . . . . . . ( l )
The significance of the term (W, + a)/c is examined in
the next section.
where S is thestrength, W/C representsthewater/
cement ratio (originally taken by volume), and K , and
BASIC PARAMETERS INFLUENCING
KZ are empirical
constants.
Thus
the
strength
STRENGTH
decreases as the water/cement ratioincreases. Voids in
Feret's formula, asexpressed in Equation 2, may be
a normal-weight concrete are mainly dependent on the
initialwater voids, so, when it iswell compacted,
rewritten as

14

Strength and volumetric composition of moist-cured cellular concrete

T A B L E 2 : (Water

+ air)/cement ratio (by volume) and

~~

Mix
designation

28-day strength.

~~~~

w + a
-

Expected order of strength

density range

Within
series

28-day strength
Order*

Within
(N/mm21

Measured

MAIN SERIES MIXES

13- 0.60
13- 0.70
13-0.75

5.25
5.24
5.18

3
2
1

14
13
12

1.81
4.55
5.12

14
13
11

16-0.60
16-0.70
16-0.80

4.44
4.28
4.30

3
1
2

II
9
10

4.4 I
7.84
9.13

12
IO
9

19-0.60
19-0.70
19-0.80

3.70
3.55
3.46

3
2
1

l
6
5

12.69
13.53
16.72

7
6
5

M-0.60
M-0.70
M-0.80

2.1 5
2.3 I
2.60

1
2
3

1
2
3

47.44
41.47
33.06

I
2
4

8
4

33.07

8
3

SUPPLEMENTARY MIXES
19-0.60s
M -0.70s

4.03
2.65

10.56

*Order of strength is ranked in descending order with 1 as highest.

Thus the strength of concrete is seen to be a function of two basic parameters:

(1) the water/cement ratio, w/c, and
(2) the air/cement ratio, ajc.
Both of the ratios are expressed in terms of volumetric ratio. It can be deduced from Equation 5 that
the water/cement ratio is the predominant factor on
strength when the air/cement ratio is very small. This
is the case with normal-weight concrete mixes, plain
mortar mixes and cellular concrete mixes in the higher
density
range.
This
predominance
is gradually
reduced as ajc increases (i.e. when thedensity is
lowered by increasing the volume of entrained air).
There will be a stage at which the two ratios are about
equal, when the predominance changes over from the
water/cement ratio to the air/cement ratio. For the
mixes in the present study, the range of the water/
cementratio by weight is from 0.60 to 0.80, corresponding to a range of water/cement ratio by volume
of I .89 to 2.52. A plot of strength at 28 days versusa / c
(a range from near zero upto about 3.5) for the mixes
in Table 2 and five other mixes not included in Table
2, but reported elsewhere'"), is shown in Figure 2. It is
clearly observedthatthechange-overoccurs
at a / c
values of 2.0 to 2.5, i.e. values similar to the water/
cement ratio by volume of 1.89 to 2.52.
E F F E C T OF I N I T I A L V O L U M E OF W A T E R
AND AIR ON STRENGTH

Inorderto
examine the combined effect of the
waterlcement ( w / c ) andair/cement ( a / c ) ratios by

volume on strength,theinitial
values forany two
mixes inTable 1 may be comparedto theircorresponding 28-day compressivestrength. If thecompressive strength of Mix 1 ( S , )is greater than that of
Mix 2 ( S 2 ) ,i.e.
S , / S * > 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (6)
50
T

Watedcement ratio
0

0.60

0.70

0.80

40

Range of 3 specimens

30

I
U

a:
v)

5 20
m

10

1.5 0 1.0

0.5

2.0
2.5
3.0
AlRiCEMENT RATIO BY VOLUME

: 5

Figure 2: Eflect of airlcement ratio on strength

15

Magazine of Concrete Research: Vol. 39, No. 138: March 1987

then Ferets formula as expressed in Equation 5 leads

to
1

1
W ,/ c

+ al/c

>

1
WJC

+ a2jc

because the constants K and n are the same since the

same materials areused for the mixes. The value of c,
the volume of cement, is also kept constant for all
mixes in Table 1. The subscripts I and 2 are used to
indicate the values for Mix 1 and Mix 2 respectively.
Therefore
W1

+ a, <- + a2 . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)
W2

Thisinequalityindicates
that if the(combined
initial water + air)/cement ratio by volume of Mix 1
is less than that of Mix 2, then the strength of Mix 1
( S , ) will be higher than that of Mix 2 ( S 2 ) .
Table 2 shows the expected ranking of the mixes
tested, based on expression 7, and the ranking based
on the measured 28-day strengths. It can be seen that
expression7correctlypredicts
the relative order of
strengthfor mixes withineach of thefourdensity
groups, except for two cases; Mix 16-0.70 and Mix
16-0.80. It also predicts reasonably well the relative
ranking of strength for all the 14 mixes. In order to
resolve the minor inconsistencies in the ranking, an
additional factor, which is not considered in Ferets
formula, has been introduced. This additional parameter involves the
concept
of gel/space
ratio
proposed by Powers.
POWERS M O D I F I E D GELjSPACE RATIO
FORMULA

Ferets formuladoesnottakeintoaccountthe
change in volumetric composition due to continuing
hydration. In Powers gel/space ratio conceptI8, the
volume of gel formed is expressed in termsof the space
available for gel formation. This gel/space factor has
been shown*to correlate well with the strength of
plain mortar mixes in a form analogous to that
of
Ferets formula as
S

K(

.....

crc+w+a

16

c
W1

K3 a2 c

+ a, > cl2c +

W*

UI

+ a2

+ a, <- + a2 . . . . . . . . . . . . (9)
W2

a2 c

ElC

The degree of hydration of the 14 mixes has been

determined at ages of about six to eight months, using
the method described by Powers and Brownyard),
see Table 3. The cubes were tested in compression and
small samples were taken from the central portions of
the broken cubes for the determination of degrees of
hydration. It is observed that, generally, only in cases
of lower densities (1600 kg/m3 or below) is there a
significant difference (at 95% level) in the degree of
hydration between mixes of different water/cement
ratios within each density group.For these cases,
mixes of higher water/cement ratio by weight show a
higher degree of hydration. Similar observationshave
been reported by Verbeck(*) for cement pastes at all
ages up to 63 years.
The values of ( W + a ) / m reported in Table 4 have
been computedforthe
same 14 mixes in Table 2
together with theirlong-termstrengthdetermined
after 6 to 8 months of air curing. The ranking of the
mixes based on the discussion above is shown in Table
4forthemeasured
compressive strength.Withthe
effect of the degree of hydration included, the relative
order of strength of the mixes within each density group
and of the 14 mixes together is correctly predicted in
all cases.
The compressive strength may be expressed as a
function of the original volumetric ratio of ( W + a)/c as
T A B L E 3 : Degree of hydration (after 6 to 8
months of air curing).
Mix
designation

Degree of hydration, z

Test No. 1

Test No. 2

Test No. 3

Average

0.72
0.8 I
0.86

0.64
0.87
0.87

0.70
0.83
0.85

0.7 I
0.75
-

0.7 1
0.76
0.82

0.77
0.73
0.77

0.76
0.74
0.77

0.79
0.88
0.77

0.80
0.85
0.80

MAIN SERIES MIXES

13-0.60
13 0.70
13-0.75

0.73
0.8 1
0.82

16-0.60
16-0.70
16-0.80

0.69 0.72
0.76 0.76
0.84 0.79

19 0.60
19-0.70
19-0.80

0.78
0.74
0.76

M-0.60
M-0.70
M-0.80

0.79
0.84 0.83
0.82

where K, is a factor representing the increased

volume of the hydrated cementgel relative to the original
volume of cement that has become hydrated, c1 is the
degreeofhydration
andtheother
symbols areas
defined in Equation 2. When c1 = 1, i.e. when all
cementhashydrated,
Powers formulaand Ferets
formula are similar.
When the ranking of the mixes is compared using
Equation 8insteadof Equation 2, for S , > S 2 , the
inequality is of the form

cx,c

where the subscripts 1 and 2 refer to Mix 1 and Mix

2 respectively and the cement content, c, is kept constant for the mixes in Table 1.
This expression may be simplified to:

0.74
0.74
0.79
0.82
0.80

SUPPLEMENTARY MIXES
19 0.60s
M-O.70S

0.76
0.81

0.78
0.85

0.76
0.85

0.77
0.84

Strength and volumetric composition of moist-cured cellular concrete

T A B L E 4: (Water
long-term strength.
Mix
designation

+ air)/(degree of hydration

w f a
ac

x cement) ratio and

Long-term strength*

Expected order of strength

Within
density range

Measured
(Nimm')

Within
series

Order

MAIN SERIES MIXES

13-0.60
13-0.70
13-0.75

3 7.50
2 6.31
l

6.09
3

14
13
11

2.40 14
4.80 13
5.77

11

12
10

4.81
8.95
10.74

16-0.60
16-0.70
16-0.80

6.25
5.25

2 5.63
1

19-0.60
19-0.70
19-0.80

4.87
4.79
4.49

3
2
1

7 14.17
6
5

M-0.60
M-0.70
M-0.80

2.69

1
2 2.72
3 3.26

1
2

8
3

12
IO
9

14.60
17.69

7
6
5

50.43
42.85
34.25

I
2
4

SUPPLEMENTARY MIXES
19-0.60s
M-0.70S

5.24
3.15

12.21
35a

8
3

*Order of strength is ranked in descending order with 1 as highest.

Long-term strength is determined after 6 to 8 months of air curing.

in Equation 5 or of the modified gel/space ratio as

given in Equation 8, in the form:

From thelong-term strength of the 14 mixes shown

in Table4, the valuesof the two empiricalconstants in
Equation 10, Kpand n, are 4490 and 3.36 respectively.
These may be compared to the corresponding values
determined from Equation 2, 4330 and 3.77 respectively. In addition,
the
values
determined
from
Equation 2 using 28-day strength are 5350 and 3.96
respectively. The values of theconstantsfor
these
three cases are summarized in Table 5 together with
their correlation factors. It can be observed that the
values of the constantsdiffer for 28-day strength from
those for long-term strength
even though the same
mixes are used.This is to beexpectedbecausethe
factor (W + a)/c isanalogoustotheconventional
water/cement ratio in relation to strength. A different
curve of the same family is needed to represent the
increased strength values with age for the same initial

mix proportions. However, the inclusionof the degree

of hydration improves the correlation with strength.
In principle, this should also enable the strengthat all
ages to be related by one and thesame equation. Since
the degree of hydration for the various mixes at the
age of 28 days had notbeen determined, thiscannot be
confirmed. Ontheotherhand,
thetwocurvesfor

T A B L E 5 : Regression constants for strength

formulae.

15

IO

days
5350 28 3.96
days 2 4330 180 3.77
180 days

0.9 19
0.926
0.960

X =

3.36

OR Y

ZC

BY VOLUME

4490
Figure 3: Regression curves based on strength formulae.

17

Magazine of Concrete Research: Vol. 39, No. 138: March 1987

long-term strength, one based on initial mix proportions and the otherincluding the degree of hydration,
are not too far apart, as
shown in Figure 3. Nevertheless, the one including the degree of hydration, based
on Equation 10, has a better fit.

6.

7.

8.

Conclusions
(1) Thestrength
ofmoist-curedcellularconcrete
depends on both the water/cement ratio and the air/
cement ratio.
(2) Whenthe volumetriccomposition of airvoids
approachesthat of thewatervoids,thecombined
effect should
be
considered
in determining
the
relationship between these parameters and strength.
(3) In general,Feretsformulabasedontheinitial
volumetriccompositionofcement,waterandair
provides a good relationship with strength.
(4) The relationship is improved when the degree of
hydration is introducedthrough Powersgel/space
ratio concept into modified
a
form of Ferets formula.

9.

IO.

11.

12.

13.
14.

15.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The study was supported in part by theResearch and
DevelopmentAssistanceGrant
No. CjSljOl on Low
Cost Construction Materials of the Ministry of Trade
and Industry, Republic of Singapore, and administered
by the Science Council of Singapore.
REFERENCES
I.

2.

3.

4.

5.

18

and KINNIBURGH, W. The structural use of aerated

concrete. The Structural Engineer. Vol. 39, No. 1, 1961, pp.
1-16.
DUNN, R. H. Precast low density concrete
units. Lightweight
1971. SP-29
concrete. Detroit, American Concrete Institute,
pp. 147-159.
LECATSKI, L. M. Cellular concrete, Signijicanceoftestsand
properties of concrete. Philadelphia,American Society for
Testing and Materials, 1978. SP 169B. pp. 836-851.
LIM, T. Y., SRI RAVINDRARAJAH, R., TAM, c. T . and LEE, S. L.
Some properties of cellular concrete. Proceedings of Tenth
and
Structures.
Conference of Our World in Concrete
Singapore. Singapore, CI-Premier Pte. Ltd., August
1985.
VALORE, R. C., JR. Cellular concretes: Part 1 Composition and
methods of preparation. Journal of the American Concrete
Institute, Proceedings. Vol. 25, No. 9, May1954. pp. 773-796.

16.

17.

18.

SHORT, A.

19.

20

c. JR. Cellular concretes: Part 2 Physical properties. Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Proceedings.
Vol. 25. No. 10, June 1954. pp 817-836.
BROOKS, A. E. (Editor). Proceedings of the First International
Congress on LightweightConcrete. Vol. 1 and 2. London,
Cement and Concrete Association, May 1968.
COMITE EURO-INTERNATIONAL DU BETON. C E B Manual ofautoclaved aerated concrete-design and technology. London, The
Construction Press, 1978. 90 pp.
BUILDING RESEARCHSTATION. Aerated concrete: ?rIUnUfUcfUre
Garston, 1961. Building
Research
and properties;
uses.
Station Digest (2nd Series). No. 16 and No. 17.
RICHARD, T. G. Low temperature behaviour of cellular concrete. Journal of the American Concrete Institute,Proceedings.
Vol. 74, No. 4, April 1977, pp. 173-178.
LIM, T. Y. Properties of cellular concrete. M Eng.Thesis,
National University of Singapore, 1984, 189 pp.
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. 83882: Part 2: 1973, Spec$cation for coarse and fine aggregates from natural sources.
London, 1973.
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. BS I88 I , Methods of testing
concrete. London, 1971.
MILLS, R. H . Five monographs on the hydration of cement,
Transactions of the South African Institute
.f Civil Engineers.
November and December 1965.
HANSEN, T. C. Physicalcomposition
of hardenedPortland
cementpaste, Journal of theAmericanConcreteInstitute.
Proceedings. Vol. 67, No. 5 , May 1970. pp. 404-407.
TAM. c. T. Physical composition of Portland cement paste,
mortar andconcrete-a new method of representation. Journal
of The Institution of Engineers. Malaysia. Vol. 19, December
1975. pp. 15-18.
NEVILLE, A. M. Properties of concrete. ThirdEdition.The
English Language Book Society, Pitman Publishing Limited,
1981.
POWERS, T. c. The physical structure and engineering properties of concrete. Portland Cement Association Reseurch and
Development Bulletin, No. 90. Chicago, July 1958.
POWERS, T. C. AND BROWNYARD, T. L. Studies of the physical
Portland
properties of hardenedPortlandcementpaste.
Cement Association Research and Development Bulletin, No.
22. Chicago, March 1948.
VERBECK, G. Energetics of the hydration of Portland cement.
Proceedings of Fourth International
Symposium
on the
Chemistry of Cement, Washington 1960. pp. 453-465.
VALORE, R.

Contributions to discussion of the above paper should he in the bands

of the Editor not later than 30 September 1987.