The maximum percentage of fly ash to

replace part of original Portland cement

(OPC) in producing high strength concrete
Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 1903, 030012 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5011519
Published Online: 14 November 2017

Harun Mallisa, and Gidion Turuallo

ARTICLES YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

High stenghth concrete with high cement substitution by adding fly ash, CaCO3, silica sand,
and superplasticizer
AIP Conference Proceedings 1818, 020068 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4976932

Comparative study of solid waste management system based on building types in Palembang
city
AIP Conference Proceedings 1903, 040001 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5011520

Compressive strength of concrete by partial replacement of cement with metakaolin

AIP Conference Proceedings 1859, 020059 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4990212

AIP Conference Proceedings 1903, 030012 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5011519 1903, 030012

© 2017 Author(s).
 The Maximum Percentage of Fly Ash to Replace Part of
Original Portland Cement (OPC) in Producing High
Strength Concrete

Harun Mallisa a) and Gidion Turuallo b)

Lecturer in Civil Engineering Department, Tadulako University Palu, 94118, Indonesia

a)
Corresponding author: harun_mallisa@yahoo.co.id
b)
turuallo@yahoo.co.uk

Abstract. This research investigates the maximum percent of fly ash to replace part of Orginal Portland Cement (OPC)
in producing high strength concrete. Many researchers have found that the incorporation of industrial by-products such as
fly ash as in producing concrete can improve properties in both fresh and hardened state of concrete. The water-binder
ratio was used 0.30. The used sand was medium sand with the maximum size of coarse aggregate was 20 mm. The
cement was Type I, which was Bosowa Cement produced by PT Bosowa. The percentages of fly ash to the total of a
binder, which were used in this research, were 0, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30%; while the super platicizer used was typed
Naptha 511P. The results showed that the replacement cement up to 25 % of the total weight of binder resulted
compressive strength higher than the minimum strength at one day of high-strength concrete.

INTRODUCTION
ASTM C 616-03 [1] and ACI-232.2R-33 [2] defined fly ash as the finely material with the size of 10 to 100
micron, which is a by-product of coal combustion and is widely used as a cementitious and pozzolanic ingredient;
either as a blended cement or as separately batched material in the concrete mix. Furthermore, based on the bulk
chemical composition, ASTM C 616-03 [1] classified fly ash into two types, Class C and Class F. Class F fly ash
has pozzolanic properties, while class C has both pozzolanic and cementations properties. Class F fly ash should
contain lime less than 10% and a combination of Silicon (SiO2), Aluminum (Al2O3) and Iron (Fe2O3) should be
higher than 70% of the total weight of fly ash. The use of fly ash in concrete as a partial replacement of cement can
give technical advantages such as improved workability, strength, and durability of concrete [3-5].
In the 1950s, high strength concrete was defined as concrete with a compressive strength of 34 MPa (5000 psi) at
28-days. The value then improved to become between 41 and 52 MPa (6000 and 7500 psi) at 28-days in 1960’s.
Furthermore, in the early 1970s, commercially concrete was produced with the strength of 62 MPa (9000 psi) at 28-
days. Recently, concrete with using cementitious and pozzolanic materials such as fly ash, ground granulated blast
furnace slag (ggbs), silica fume, etc., could reach compressive strength of 138 MPa (20000 psi) [6]. As the definition
of high strength concrete changed over the years, the ACI Committee 363 and Portland Cement Association (PCA)
[6, 7] then defined high strength concrete as the concrete, which have achieved a compressive strength of 41 MPa
(6000 psi) or greater at 28- days.
Poon et al.[8] reported that the effect of fly ash, when it used to replace a part of cement in a concrete mix to the
strength of concrete with lower water-binder ratio was better than that of concrete with a higher water-binder ratio.
Furthermore, they concluded that replacing a part of cement by fly ash for concrete with lower water-binder ratio
could result concrete with strength was higher than that of concrete with Portland cement only. In 1998, Naik and
Ramme [9] recommended the use of fly ash in concrete, when the early age strength was considered and was not
considered, were up to 40% and 60% respectively.

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Construction and Building Engineering (ICONBUILD) 2017
AIP Conf. Proc. 1903, 030012-1–030012-5; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5011519
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1591-1/$30.00

030012-1
 HIGH STRENGTH CONCRETE WITH FLY ASH
Class F fly ash has been widely used as a partial replacement of cement in both normal and high strength
concrete. Many researchers reported that the setting time of fly ash concrete cured at the standard curing temperature
(200C) increased when compared to the concrete with cement only; depends on the level and chemical composition
of fly ash that was used to replace cement [10-14]. In 1994, Metha [15] reported, when concrete cured at standard
curing temperature; the pozzolanic reaction of fly ash in concrete appeared to begin at 11-days after mixing and the
significant influence on the strength development of concrete was likely to start after 28-days. As the result, the
strength development of fly ash concrete at the early ages is lower than that of concrete with Portland cement only.
However, Ravina [16] found that the strength development of fly ash concrete at early age that was cured at elevated
temperature was similar to that of Portland cement only. Furthermore, Turuallo and Mallisa [14] reported that the
strength of fly ash concrete at early ages with lower water-binder ratios, which were cured at a hot temperature i.e.
average above 250C, were similar to that of concretes with PCC only. An elevated curing temperature could reduce
the activation energy of fly ash concrete mix, which was needed to begin the hydration reaction of fly ash in
concrete [17, 18]. It is believed that this is due to the higher rate of pozzolanic reactions as the higher curing
temperature. Many studies [19-21] reported that use large quantities of fly ash in concrete may be related to with a
significant increase in strength development when concrete is cured at elevated temperatures.
In hydration process, the reaction of fly ash is a secondary reaction. The Ca(OH)2, which is resulted from cement
hydration, reacts with silica (S) in fly ash with the available water to form additional calcium silicate hydrate (C-S-
H), which develops strength of the concrete as the reaction below [19, 20, 22]:

Cement reaction: C3S + H C-S-H + Ca(OH)2 (1)

Pozzolanic reaction: Ca(OH)2 + S C-S-H (2)

Silicate from fly ash

EXPERIMENTAL WORKS

Materials
A single batch of sand, coarse aggregate, OPC cement produced by PT Semen Bosowa, and fly ash were used
throughout the experimental work. The superplatisicier was Type Naptha 511P and the fly ash was taken from
power generating (PLTU) Mpanau Palu with chemical composition shown in Table 1
Table 1. Chemical composisitin of fly ash from PLTU Mpanau Palu.
Chemical compounds Percentage by weight
SiO2 51,55
Fe2O3 25,54
Al2O3 17,26
CaO 2,09
K2O 1,23
TiO2 0,95
MnO 0,48
Others 0,90

The fly ash is characterized as fly ash Class F. The specific gravity of the fly ash is 2.377. The absorption,
density, and sieve analysis of both coarse and fine aggregates were measured in the laboratory. The sand was fine
sand taken from Palu River and the coarse aggregate was a crushed aggregate taken from Donggala, Palu with a
nominal size ranging from 5 to 20 mm. The sand was in air dry conditions; therefore, some water was added for
absorption to meet its saturated service dry (SSD) condition; similar for the coarse aggregate. The cement was
produced by PT Semen Bosowa, which was OPC Type I cement with the specific gravity of 3.1.

030012-2
 Mix Proportion and Mixing
The water total used in mixes was calculated by allowing some water for absorption for both sand and coarse
aggregate to the water, which was needed for hydration. Furthermore, reducing some water for the use of
superplasticizer should be considered. The percentage of superplasticizer used in the mix was 1.2, which was
determined by trial mixes to find out the suitable percentage of the superplasticizer for achieving the slump target.
Table 2. Mix proportions of concrete
Weight of materials per m3 concrete (kg)
Materials Percentage of fly ash (%), w/b = 0.3
0 10 15 20 25 30
OPC 437.7 393.9 372.0 350.2 328.3 306.4
Fly ash - 43.8 65.7 87.5 109.4 151.3
Sand 689.9 689.9 689.9 689.9 689.9 689.9
Coarse Aggregate 1256 1256 1256 1256 1256 1256
Water 126.7 126.7 126.7 126.7 126.7 126.7
Superplasticier 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.119

The materials were added to with order: initially about half of the total of coarse aggregate put in the mixer, then
fine aggregate, then the remainder of the coarse aggregate. The mixer was then started for 15 to 30 seconds. About
half of the water total then added, and the mixing was continued for two to three minutes. All cementitious then
added and the mixing was continued for 15 to 30 seconds. The remaining water then added and the mixing was
continued for two and three minutes.

Specimens
The specimens were a concrete cube with the size of 150mm x 150mm x 150mm. Three cubes of each mix were
prepared for each testing age to measure strength development of the concrete. The concrete cubes were well
compacted using a vibrating table. All the cubes were left on the table by covering them with damp hessian. After
one day, they were demoulded and transferred into a water tank, which was placed in a room temperature (25 0C).
The specimens were tested at 3, 7, 21 and 28-days.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The percentage of superplaticizer Naptha 511P used in mixes was 1.2% by the total weight of the binder. The
results of slump test showed that the higher the percentage fly ash in concrete the lower value of slump obtained. It
is believed as the result of fly ash is finer than Portland cement, therefore, it absorbed more water.
The strengths development of concrete against to the percentages of fly ash in concrete for each testing day are
plotted to find out the effect of fly ash levels in concrete to the strength development of concrete as shown in Fig.1
below.
Percentage fly ash to total binder (%)
0 10 15 20 25 30

40
Compressive strength (MPa)

50

60

70

80

3-days
90 7-days
21-days
28-days
100

FIGURE 1. Strength of concrete (MPa) vs. percentage fly as at each testing (days)

030012-3
 The figure above shows that at an early age (3-days), the highest strength of concretes results from concrete with
OPC only (46.04 MPa). The strength of OPC concrete are 2.12% and 11.10% higher than that of fly ash concretes
with 10 % (45.07 MPa) and 30 % fly ash (40.93 MPa) respectively. Generally, the strength development of fly ash
concretes are continuously slower than that of OPC only up to 21-days.
Unlikely with the normal strength fly ash concrete, the strength development of high strength fly ash concrete are
seemed to be started at an earlier age (three-days after casting the concrete), which is commonly started three weeks
after casting for the normal strength fly ash concrete. It is believed as the result of the mixes of high strength
concrete contains more cement than that of in normal strength concrete. The hydration of cement is an exothermic
reaction producing heat as shown in Equation1 above. The higher early age temperatures developed within the
concrete due to the heat hydration of cement, appear to be sufficient in supplying the activation energy that is the
minimum energy required to start a chemical reaction. The energy produced in cement reaction is needed for the
pozzolanic reaction of fly ash to react earlier. Therefore, the hydration reaction of fly ash in high-strength concrete is
started earlier than that of in normal strength concrete with a lower heat hydration produced by cement hydration
only.
Figure 2. presents the relationship between strengths development of concrete to the concrete ages. It is clearly
shown in the figure that the strength development of OPC concrete is higher until age 7-days compares to that of
concrete with all levels of fly ash replacement.
Age (days)
3 7 21 28
30

40
Compressive strength (MPa)

50

60

70

80 OPC
10FA
15FA
90 20FA
25FA
30FA
100

FIGURE 2. Strength of concrete (MPa) vs. age (days)

The strength development of OPC concrete up to 7-days is significantly higher than that of all fly ash concretes.
The strength of OPC concrete at the age reaches 88.53% of its 28-days strength, while the strength of concrete with
30% fly ash is 75.32%. At age 21-days, the percentage of the strength of all mixes to the strength of OPC at 28-days
varies between 84.73% and 94.50% for concretes with 30% and 25% fly ash respectively. Furthermore, the strength
of concretes with fly ash up to 25% at 28-days is similar to that of strength with OPC only. Even, the strength of
25% fly ash (86.62 MPa) is a little bit higher than that of OPC concrete (84.09 MPa), which is about 3.01% higher.
However, the replacement cement with 30% fly ash gives strength 78.93 MPa or 6.13% lower than that of strength
with OPC only at the same age. In addition, the strengths of all fly ash concrete at 28-days are seemed to be
continuously developed at later ages, as some researchers reported.

CONCLUSION
The results of this research can be concluded that the maximum percentage of fly ash to replace a part of cement
in the high-strength concrete mix to obtain the strength, which is equivalent to the strength of concrete with OPC
only is 25%. The strength of concrete with 25% fly ash (86.62 MPa) at age 28-days is slightly higher than that of
strength of OPC only (84.09 MPa). The use of fly ash of 30% as the replacement of cement gives a strength (78.93
MPa) lower than that of OPC only strength.

030012-4
 REFERENCES
1. ASTM-C618-03, Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in
Concrete, 2004, ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
2. ACI-232.2R-33, Use of Fly Ash in Concrete, 2002, ACI Committee: Washington, USA.
3. A. Bilodeau, V.K. Sivasundaram. ACI materials journal 91(1), p. 3-12 (1994).
4. M.-H. Zhang, A. Bilodeau, V.M. Malhotra, K.S. Kim, and J.-C. Kim. Materials Journal 96(2), p. 181-189
(1999).
5. A. Bilodeau. and V.M. Malhotra. ACI Materials Journal 97(1), p. 41-48 (2000).
6. ACI-363R-92, State-of-the-art report on high-strength concrete, ACI Committee 363: Washington DC, USA.
p. 1-55, 1997
7. Portland-Cement-Association, High Strength Concrete. Concrete Technology Today 15(1): p. 1-8, 1994
8. C.S. Poon, L. Lam, and Y.L. Wo. Cement and Concrete Research 30, p. 447-455 (2000).
9. T.R. Naik. and B.W. Ramme. ACI materials journal 86(2), p. 111-116 (1998).
10. D. Ravina. and P.K. Mehta. Cement and Concrete Research 16(2), p. 227-238 (1986).
11. V. Sivasundaram, G.G. Carette, and V.M. Malhotra. ACI Special Publication SP-114 1, p. 45-71 (1989).
12. R.C. Joshi and R.P. Lohtia, Fly ash in concrete: production, properties and uses. Taylor & Francis 1997: Taylor
& Francis.
13. T.R. Naik and S.S. Singh. ACI materials journal 94(5), p. 355-360 (1997).
14. G. Turuallo and H. Mallisa. Sustainable Development: Early Age Strength of HSC Using Fly Ash to Replace
Part of Cement. in Sriwijaya International Conference on Engineering, Science and Technology (SICEST).
2016. Bangka Island, Indonesia: Faculty of Engineering, Sriwijaya University.
15. P.K. Mehta. International Concrete Special Publication 144, p. 1-30 (1994).
16. D. Ravina. International Concrete 78(3), p. 194-200 (1981).
17. G. Turuallo. International Journal of Technology 5, p. 327-336 (2015).
18. G. Turuallo, “Early age strength development of ggbs concrete cured under different temperatures”. PhD
Thesis, Liverpool University: Liverpool, UK, 2013
19. R. Siddique, Waste materials and by-products in concrete (Springer Verlag. 2007).
20. R. Siddique and M.I. Khan, Supplementary cementing materials (Springer Verlag, 2011).
21. R.N. Swamy, S.A.R. Ali, and D.D. Theodorakopoulos. International Concrete 80(5), p. 414-423 (1983).
22. J.B. Newman and B.S. Choo. Elsevier Science & Technology I (2003).

030012-5