Cement & Concrete Composites 15 (1993) 223-229

Efficiency of Fly Ash in Concrete

K. Ganesh Babu & G. Siva Nageswara Rao
Ocean Engineering Centre, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras 600 036, India
(Received 22 August 1992; accepted 21 June 1993)

Abstract w/(c+f) Water cementitious material ratio

of fly ash concrete
Earlier efforts towards an understanding of the effi- w/(c+ kJ) Water cementitious material ratio
ciency of fly ash in concrete has led to the introduc- of fly ash concrete after correc-
tion of rational methods. Based on the results tion with k e
available on some of the more recent pulverised w/( c+ kff + krf)
fuel ashes, the authors evaluated the efficiency of fly = w/(c + kf)
ash in concrete over a wide range of percentage = W/C o Water cementitious material ratio
replacements (15-75%). It was clearly shown that of fly ash concrete equivalent to
the overall efficiency of fly ash cannot be ade- normal concrete after correction
quately predicted using a single efficiency factor at with k e and kp
all percentages of replacements. The overall effi- Aw Difference between water
ciency factor (k ) has been evaluated at all percen- cementitious materials ratio of fly
tages of replacements considering the general ash concrete and normal
efficiency factor (ke) and the percentage efficiency concrete
factor (kp). This study resulted in a quantitative Aw l The effect of ke on water
assessment of the behaviour of fly ash in concrete, cementitious materials ratio
especially for the 28 day compressive strength at Aw 2 The effect of kp on water
different percentages of replacement. cementitious materials ratio

Keywords: Fly ash, utilisation, efficiency, concrete

construction, compressive strength, cement INTRODUCTION
replacement, water-binder ratio.
The use of pozzolans in conjunction with lime
for mortars and concretes has been in practice for
NOTATIONS many centuries. Fly ash as a pozzolanic material
in cement concretes has been in vogue for many
C Cement content of fly ash con- decades. With the increased use of coal in power
crete production the amount of fly ash available
Co Cement content of control assumed staggering proportions and its disposal
concrete particularly with the associated problems of en-
f Fly ash content vironmental pollution has made it necessary to
k Overall efficiency factor of fly look for effective utilisation possibilities. Earlier
ash researchers have adopted three different methods
ke General efficiency factor of fly for the proportioning of fly ash concrete mixes: (i)
ash a simple replacement method, by an equal mass or
kp Percentage efficiency factor of fly volume; (ii) modified replacement method, in
ash which the amount of fly ash replaced is larger than
w Water content the amount of cement reduced so as to get an
w/c O Water cement ratio of normal equivalent 28 days strength (the additional fly ash
concrete component being adjusted in the aggregate pro-
223
Cement & Concrete Composites 0958-9465/94/$7.00 1994 Elsevier Science Limited, England. Printed in
Great Britain
224 K. Ganesh Babu, G. Siva Nageswara Rao
portions); or (iii) by rational methods, in which the
pozzolanic activity of the fly ash is taken into
account. The present state of the art regarding the
use of fly ash in concrete was reported earlier. 1-3
It can be seen that in spite of the numerous
earlier research efforts an exact quantitative
understanding of the contribution of fly ash to the
strength of the concrete was still elusive. However,
it is recognised that the contribution of the fly ash
is not a constant determined solely by its physical
and chemical characteristics like cementitious
compounds, fineness, etc., but can also vary
depending on the nature of cement, water cement
ratio, etc. It is also not known at present what
factors maximise the fly ash contribution. 4
The objective of the present effort is to answer
at least some of the questions raised earlier
through a systematic evaluation of the available
results. In this context, it is important to note that
fly ash being a silicious material will impart
strength to the concrete through its pozzolanic
action, but the pozzolanic reaction being slow fly
ash concretes may not be able to attain an equal
strength as that of the control within 28 days.
Furthermore the ashes of yester years, because of
the process of burning coal and the collection
procedures of a generally much lower efficiency,
resulted in a larger fraction of the coarser parti-
cles apart from a larger proportion of unburnt
coal (reflected through its loss on ignition). In
contrast, the fly ashes available today are resulting
from burning powdered/pulverised coals and
from the improved collection systems like the
electrostatic precipitators of higher efficiency. In
view of the above, only the results of the investiga-
tions during the past about 10 years were chosen
for an evaluation, s-~' All these fly ashes confirm
to the minimum characteristics specified by
ASTM C 618-89 for use as mineral admixtures in
portland cement concrete.~ 7
Early efforts regarding the use of fly ash in
concrete were mostly limited to replacements up
to a maximum of 35%, and the latest ACI Com-
mittee recommendations I also limit the utilisation
to the same extent. This may be due to the
requirement of additional water for wetting the
finer fly ash which in turn increases the water
cement ratio resulting in a reduction of the
strength. However, investigations in recent
years 7,18 have shown that even with low cement
contents, high volume fly ash concretes can pro-
vide an economical material with strengths reach-
ing 60 MPa. Extensive laboratory investigations
indicate that the optimum percentage of fly ash
may be in the range of 55-60%. However, these
high strengths are achieved mostly by the utilisa-
tion of superplasticisers required for a substantial
lowering of the water content and thus water/
cement ratio. The present paper is not considering
this aspect of concretes with chemical admixtures
but is an effort to evaluate only the effect of fly ash
on normal concretes containing ordinary portland
cements cured under normal conditions. Informa-
tion available in literature with fly ash replace-
ments ranging from 15 to 75% has been
considered for an evaluation. Furthermore, differ-
ent researchers have used specimens of varying
sizes and shapes and all these have been con-
verted to their equivalents for a cube of 15 cm size
through accepted guidelines. ~9 At this juncture, it
is important to emphasis once again that the
specific variations in the composition of fly ashes
used by different investigators has not been con-
sidered for evaluation. Also, other parameters like
fineness or even the special production and curing
procedures have not been included in the present
study.
EFFICIENCY CONCEPTS
The efficiency of fly ash is generally defined in
terms of its strength characteristics with the con-
trol concrete as the reference. However, knowing
the improvements in durability due to the addi-
tions of fly ash, it is well recognised that other
characteristics like durability factors can also be
used for such an evaluation, though the exact
methodology of the durability test has to be
clearly defined. Furthermore, it is possible to
define more than one durability factor (sulphate,
chloride, freeze-thaw, etc.) and it would be diffi-
cult to compare or specify such a factor in codal
provisions. Also, it is accepted, in general, that the
strength of concrete is a reasonable indicator of
the durability for at least the normal concretes
without any chemical modifications and the effi-
ciency of fly ash concrete is always defined with
respect to the strength of its control.
The simple replacement and modified replace-
ment methods were not found to be suitable for a
general understanding of the behaviour of fly ash
in concrete. The rational methods were expected
to take into account the characteristic of fly ash
which are known to influence the workability a n d
strength characteristic of concrete. Smith 2 was
one of the first to propose a factor known as
cementing efficiency (k) such that a weight 'f' of
 Efficiency offly ash in concrete
fly ash would be equivalent to a weight 'kf' of
cement. The strength and workability of this con-
crete with fly ash is comparable to that of the
normal concrete with a water cement ratio of [w/
(c + k)9]. Based on the experimental investigations
and the results available, the value of the cement-
ing efficiency factor k was assessed to be 0.25.
This method was seen to be insensitive to the
cement used, curing conditions, etc., apart from
the fact that it was not suitable for richer mixes. 21
Later investigations22 have shown that the fly
ash efficiency factor was a minimum of 0.3 and
this value was also used in the German Concrete
Standard DIN 1045. However, a more recent
evaluation through studies on concretes contain-
ing different cements and fly ashes 23 (fly ash con-
tents up to 28% and with water/cement ratios
varying between 0.5 and 0.65) has shown that a
value of 0.5 is more appropriate for this efficiency
factor. These studies also indicated that with
increasing fly ash content the efficiency of the fly
ash tends to diminish and that the efficiency of fly
ash increases with decreasing water cement ratio.
It was also observed that the significant differ-
ences in the properties of fly ashes used (particu-
larly fineness) influenced the compressive
strengths at 28 days only marginally. It was only at
greater ages the effect of the differing pozzolanic
reactivities of fly ashes were felt. The efficiency of
fly ash also did not show much variation in the
range 20-28% replacements adopted. One
important contribution of this work was that it
defined the consequent reduction in water
cementitious materials ratio of fly ash concrete as
compared to the water cement ratio of the refer-
ence concrete (A w concept) as
={w/(c+ kf)}-{w/(c+ f)}
=(w/c)[1/{1 + k(f/c)}- 1/{1 + (f/c)}]
The above formulation clearly shows that this
reduction depends not only on the size of the effi-
ciency factor (k), but depends additionally on the
water cement ratio and more importantly the fly
ash content of the concrete mix.
EVALUATION OF EFFICIENCY
In principle the evaluation of efficiency was
attempted by what was earlier discussed as the
rational method. 20 The A w concept explained
earlier was used in evaluating the efficiency of fly
225
100
\ A & B - Fly ~ Concrete w.r.t, wl(c,f)
~ C & O - Fly q~h Concrete wr.t. wl(c.ket)
\\ N - Control Concrete w.r.t, wit or
Fly ash Concrete w.r.t, wl(c,kef,kpl)
so
\ ~\j~ Low Vcluene Fly ash
\ / ~ NormGI Concrete
Concrete
~r/~/~ - High Volume Fly ~ Concrete
~ 80 %,
2O ke ~
0
0.20
l
0.30
t
0.40
1
0.50
I
0.60
I
0.70 0.80
I I
0.90 1.00
w/(c*~) or w / ( c . k e f ) or wl(tkel*kpf)
Fig. 1. Conceptual diagram showing the effect of efficiency
factors.
ash. Figure 1 shows the relation between the 28
day compressive strengths of concrete and the
water cementitious materials ratio for normal and
fly ash replaced concretes. As can be seen, lower
replacement levels (may be up to 20%) show
strengths higher than the control concrete while
replacements of higher magnitude result in con-
cretes of lower strengths. ~ and 'B' are the two
typical water cementitious material ratios of con-
cretes at the higher and lower percentages of
replacement, with that of the control concrete
being at 'N' for the same strength. The method
now tries to bring the [w/(c+f)] ratios nearer to
that of the control concrete by applying the
cementitious efficiency of fly ash (k). Now the
figure is replotted to check whether a unique
value of k can help in bringing both 'X and 'B' to
'N'. This means that the correction (Aw) required
can be achieved by the unique cementitious effi-
ciency (k) at all percentages of fly ash replace-
ment. However, this was not possible as the
percentage of replacements were far too different
and the result was that while the high volume
replacements approach the control values due to
this correction the low volume replacements
resulted in a slightly higher conservative estimate.
For this reason the value of k which is generally
applicable for all the replacement percentages is
from henceforth defined as the general efficiency
factor (ke). This means that the points ~ and 'B'
now shift to their revised locations 'C' and 'D' due
to the application of the general efficiency factor
(ke) with the axis as [w/(c+ kJ)]. Thus the original
points ~2 and 'B' have been shifted to 'C' and 'D',
by a distance of A w~. The revised correction now
required (Aw2) was considered to be the effect of
the percentage replacement. To counteract this
226 K. Ganesh Babu, G. Siva Nageswara Rao

effect of the percentage replacement an additional percentages of replacement. It can now be clearly
factor kp has been evaluated for each percentage seen that while some of the concretes with
of replacement in a very similar way. These two replacements up to 25% show strengths higher
corrections together will bring the points W and than the control, while the higher percentage
'B' to 'N' so that the water/cement ratio of the replacements show a reduction corresponding to
control concrete and the water/cementitious the percentage replaced and the [ w/(c+ f)].
material ratio [w/(c+kJ+kvf)] will all be the At this stage, the authors studied the variation
same for any particular strength. of compressive strength with different general
efficiency factors (k~) ranging from 0.2 to 0.8.
From these studies it was observed that at a
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS general efficiency factor of 0.5 the compressive
strengths of fly ash concretes come closest to the
As already stated, the results of different inves- control as shown in Fig. 3 (with the A w~ correc-
tigators 5-16 were compiled from literature for con- tion applied). This resulted in the concretes con-
cretes containing ordinary portland cement with taining replacements up to 35% showing strengths
fly ash replacements ranging from 0 to 75%. Table slightly higher than the corresponding control and
1 presents the characteristics of fly ash and the
different percentages of replacements utilised in
the above studies. In general, it was seen that as 10o -~ *..*_*%.* 75 FA
the replacement percentage and the water cement ~" \,, U " . I I J 67 FA
k',, AA,,U~ 50 FA
ratios increase the strength of concrete decreases. ~ , ao oN,., '~,,:.~"~. 35 ~: FA
However, it was also evident that while concretes
e \\ ~o~. o o oQooo 0 FA
above 70 MPa can be produced with replace-
ments up to 25% fly ash, replacement of about
75% can still lead to concretes of 40 MPa through
suitable adjustments in water/cement ratio and "... " -. .. ,~ ~'-'~..~..

other concrete constituents.

The variation of the 28 day compressive
strength with the parameter [w/(c+f)] for all con-
cretes considered with the different percentage of 0,30 0.40 0.50 0,60 0.70 0,80 0,90 .00
w/(c+O
replacement were presented in Fig.2. The curves
drawn were the best fits for each of the different Fig. 2. Variation of compressive strength with w/(c + f).

Table 1. Details of the fly ash concretes evaluated in the present investigation

Serial Ref. Year Fly ash characteristics L1 % Replacements

number studied
SiOe + AI,_O~+ Fe,O~ CaO SO~

1 5 1981 88.74 7.87 0.41 2'10 35

2 6 1982 94.40 2.20 -- 4.50 25
3 7 1986 (a) 87.52 5.18 0.76 1"36 35
(b) 90"06 1"83 0.57 5"16 35
(c) 91'35 2.21 0.65 5"28 35
4 8 1989 86"50 1.71 0.83 4.34 50, 15
5 9 1989 91"10 1.44 0.16 2'00 67, 50, 35, 25, 15
6 10 1984 76-20 15"30 0.30 0"60 75, 67, 50
7 11 1986 76"20 15.30 0.30 0.60 75, 67, 50
8 12 1986 75-71 13-30 1.16 0-14 35
9 13 1986 56"03 25-76 3.55 0"16 75, 50
10 14 1986 61.76 17.32 3.05 0"36 25
11 15 1989 72"60 12.40 0-80 0-61 50
12 16 1990 63"03 25.30 2.98 0"45 65, 35, 25

ASTM 618-89 Requirements Class C Class F

(Si z + AI203 + Fe203) min % 50.0 70.0
SO3 Max % 5.0 5.0
L1 Max % 6 6
 Efficiency offly ash in concrete 227

loo 1.00
I *.*.lt*.J' 75 S FA
"4~, I,I ~ l J 67 ~ FA oolee 28 Days
k")'~ ~ 50 FA 0,80
'ao el', ~ e.O..,l,~,35 ~ FA
"~.~
\'~,L
=-~.~m.~ 25 ~
~.tx.l~ 15 ~
FA
FA
2 0,60
K~'~ ..... O~ FA

u. 0.40

"~ 0.20
4O

8 ~ -0.0o( 10 20 30 40 ~ 60 70 E~
Percentage Replacement "~...4L_.,____e
~ 20
~_-o.2o!
-0.40

w/(c+k.f)
Fig. 5. Variation of k v with fly ash replacement.
Fig. 3. Variation of strengths after correcting for k~.

100 1.50
|
i~ *..*-**J 75 ~ FA
LIPIlul 67 FA lllll 28 days
a.
~1.25
so ~,'J o.O.,0,e.935 FA
~, ~.q.apa 25 FA +
== ~ ~.~.A.A 15 ~ FA
~',~o a .... o ~ FA II 1 . 0 0 '
so
v

.i
0. 4C
o
0.75

o.5o
._.e
o

"~ 2C
=
0.25
o

0 % ...... 61~ . . . . . . . . . .0.40

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .o.so
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .o.so
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.oo
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.2o
.......... 1.40 1.so 1.8o 2.0o o o.oo o ....... ~'~ ....... h'd ....... L6 ....... ~,'d ....... ~'~ ....... ~'d ....... V'~ ....... ~o
w/(a+k,f+kpf) Percentage Replacement

Fig. 4. Variation of strengths after correcting for ke and kp. Fig. 6. Variation of overall efficiency with fly ash replace-
ment.

those containing replacements between 50 and

75% showing slightly lower strength with respect crete strengths at all the percentages of replace-
to the parameter [w/(c+ kd) ]. Thus it was felt that ment ranging from 15 to 75%. It was clearly
an average value of 0.5 can be assumed for the observed during these evaluations that some of
general efficiency factor (ke). This also agrees well the specific parameters like curing conditions,
with the observations of a recent study discussed addition of admixtures and in certain cases even
earlier. 23 This means that instead of using an over- the type of aggregates and modifications of their
all efficiency factor like the earlier research- proportions have significant effect on the effi-
e r s 2'22'23 the general efficiency factor was kept a ciency of fly ash.
constant for all the percentages of replacement. The variation of kp with the percentage
Now, the differences between the water cement replacement was presented in Fig. 5 and the varia-
ratio including the effect of general efficiency tion of the overall efficiency factor k ( -- k e + kp)
factor and that of control concrete was computed was presented in Fig. 6. It can now be seen that a
(Aw 2) for the individual mixes at various water replacement of about 10% will increase the
cement ratios and the effect of percentage cementitious efficiency up to about 1.25 times for
replacement was calculated through an additional the 28 day cube compressive strength and a
percentage efficiency factor (kp). Considering the replacement of around 20% will not alter the
average of the kp values for the different percen- compressive strength of control concrete at the
tage the variation of compressive strength with corresponding water/cement ratio. Replacements
parameter w/(c+ kd+ krf ) was presented in Fig. in excess of 20% will reduce the compressive
4. It can be clearly seen that this has resulted in a strengths of the concrete continuously and it was
reasonably close agreement with the control con- seen that a 75% replacement resulted in a reduc-
228 K. Ganesh Babu, (7. Siva Nageswara Rao
tion of efficiency of the fly ash to about 35% (0.35
times).
Thus, the proposed method clearly distin-
guishes the effect of fly ash replacement in terms
of the general efficiency factor (ke) and the factor
corresponding to the percentage replacement
effect (kp). It was also shown that while the general
efficiency factor (ke) was a constant (0.5) for the
28 day compressive strength for all percentages of
replacements the factor representing the percen-
tage replacements (kp) varies between 0.75 and
-0.15 resulting in the overall efficiency factor k
varying between 1.25 and 0.35 for replacement
percentages of 10 to 75% of cement by an equiva-
lent weight of fly ash respectively.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CONCLUSIONS
This study, reporting the efficiency of fly ashes in
concrete containing ordinary portland cements
and cured under normal conditions, had led to the
following general conclusions.
1. It was seen that a unique value of the overall
efficiency factor (k) will not be able to pre-
dict the strength behaviour of fly ash con-
cretes at different percentages of
replacement. However, in keeping with the
recent studies reported, a general efficiency
factor (ke) was defined for evaluating the 28
day cube compressive strength. Based on
the results available from different investiga-
tors in recent years this was estimated to be
0.5 for fly ash in concrete at all percentages
of replacement.
2. To evaluate exactly the overall efficiency of
fly ash (k) the authors proposed further a
percentage efficiency factor (kp) through
which the general efficiency factor can be
modified to achieve the total efficiency at
any percentage of replacement. The values
of the percentage efficiency factor were
evaluated and presented for the various per-
centages of replacement.
3. The overall efficiency of fly ash at different
percentages of replacements evaluating has
shown that the maximum efficiency in terms
of compressive strength can be achieved at
around 10% replacement and at 20%
replacement the strength is not very much
affected.
4. It may also be said that estimating the
strength by using an efficiency factor (k or
ke=0.5) will result in conservative values
upto about 40% fly ash replacement as
reported by earlier researchers.
. The results clearly show that the strength of
concrete decreases continuously from 100
to 35% at replacements varying from 20 to
75% respectively.
. Finally, the method presented using both
the general and percentage efficiency factors
is able to predict quantitatively the strength
variation of concrete at different percen-
tages of fly ash replacements and at different
water to ash cementitious materials ratios.
The authors gratefully acknowledge Professor P.
Schiessl, Director, Institut fiir Bauforschung,
RWTH, Aachen for the information made avail-
able and the detail discussions which helped in
narrowing the study to specific aspects. In particu-
lar, it was his views that made us look for the
pozzolanic efficiency at the different percentages
of replacement resulting in the present general
and percentage efficiency factors.
REFERENCES
1. ACI Committee 226, Use of fly ash in concrete. ACI
Mater J., Sep-Oet (1987) 381-409.
2. Berry, E.E. & Malhotra, V.M., Fly ash in concrete,
supplementary cementing materials for concrete, CAN-
MET report, SP 86-8E, 1987, pp. 37-163.
3. Wesche, K. (ed.), Fly ash in concrete, state of the art
report, RILEM TC 67-FAB, 1990.
4. Popovics, S., What do we know about the contribution
of fly ash to the strength of concrete?, in Proc. Second
Int. Conf on Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and Natural
Pozzolanas in Concrete, Vol.I, ACI SP-91, 1986, pp.
313-31.
5. Ravina, D., Efficient utilization of coarse and fine fly ash
in precast concrete by incorporating thermal curing.
A CI J., Sep-Oct ( 1981 ) 194-200.
6. Mehta, P.K. & Gjorv, O.E., Properties of portland
cement concrete containing fly ash and condensed
sifica-fume. Cement Concr. Res., 12 (1982) 587-95.
7. Cabrera, J.G., et aL, Evaluation of the properties of
British pulverised fuel ashes and their influence on the
strength of concrete, in Proc. Second Int. Conf. on Fly
Ash, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete, Vol. I, ACI
SP-91, 1986, pp. 115-44.
8. Thomas, M.D.A., Matthews, J.D. & Haynes, C.A., The
effect of curing on the strength and permeability of PFA
concrete, in Proc. Third Int. Conf. on, Fly Ash, Silica
Fume, Slag and Other Mineral By-Products in Concrete
Vol. I, ACI SP-114, 1989, pp. 191-217.
9. Gopalan, M.K. & Haque, M.N., Mix design for optimal
strength development of fly ash concrete. Cement Concr.
Res., 19 (1989) 634-41.
 Efficiency of fly ash in concrete
10. Haque, M.N., Langan, B.W. & Ward, M.A., High fly ash
concretes. ACIJ., Jan-Feb (1984) 54-60.
11. Haque, M.N., Gopalan, M.K., Joshi, R.C. & Ward, M.A.,
Strength development of inadequately cured high fly ash
content and structural concretes. Cement Concr. Res.,
16 (1986) 363-72.
12. Hooton, R.D., Properties of a high-alkali lignite fly ash in
concrete, in Proc. Second Int. Conf. on Fly Ash, Silica
Fume, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in Concrete, Vol. I,
ACI SP-91, 1986, pp. 333-46.
13. Tse E.W., Lee, D.Y. & Klaiber EW., Fatigue behaviour of
concrete containing fly ash, in Proc. Second Int. Conf. on
Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in
Concrete, Vol. I, ACI SP-91, 1986, pp. 273-90.
14. Gebler, H.S. & Klieger. P., Effect of fly ash on physical
properties of concrete, in Proc. Second Int. Conf. on Fly
Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and Natural Pozzolans in Con-
crete, Vol. I, ACI SP-91, 1986, pp. 1-50.
15. Nasser, K.W. & Lai, P.S.H., Creep and shrinkage of
concrete containing 50% fly ash and superplasticizer, in
Proc. Third CANMET/ACI Int. Conf. on Superplasti-
cizers and Other Chemical Admixtures in Concrete,
(Supplementary papers) 1989, pp. 86-105.
16. Naik, T.R. & Ramme, B.W., Effects of high-lime fly ash
content on water demand, time of set and compressive
229
strength of concrete. A CI J., Nov-Dec ( 1990) 619-26.
17. ASTM C 618-89, Standard specifications for fly ash and
raw or calcined natural pozzolana for use as a mineral
admixture in portland cement concrete, Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, Vol. 04.02, 1989, pp. 296-8.
18. Langley, W.S., Carette, G.G. & Malhotra, V.M., Structu-
ral concrete incorporating high volumes of ASTM Class
F fly ash. ACIJ., Sep-Oct (1989) 507-14.
19. Neville, A.M., Properties of Concrete, 3rd Edition. ELBS
and Pitman Publishing, 1981, pp. 557-63.
20. Smith, I.A., The design of fly ash concretes, in Proc.,
Inst. of Civil Engineers, London, 36(1967)769-90.
21. Munday, G.L.J., Ong, T.L. & Dhir, R.K., Mix propor-
tioning of concrete with PFA: A critical review, in Proc.
First Int. Conf. on Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag and Other
Mineral By-Products in Concrete, Vol. I, ACI SP-79,
Detroit, 1983, pp. 267-88.
22. Wesche, K., Schubert, E & Weber, J.W., Zur Festigkeit
und Dauerhaftigkeit von Beton bei Zusatz yon Stein-
kohlenflugasche, (Strength and durability of concrete
with addition of fly ash), Betonwerk und Fertigteil-Tech-
nik, 50 (1984) 367-74.
23. Schiessl, P. & Hardtl, R., Efficiency of fly ash in concrete
evaluation of ibac test results. Technical Report of Insti-
tut fiir Bauforschung, RWTH, Aachen, 1991.