Volume-5 Issue-2

  • Version
  • Download 42
  • File Size 4.00 KB
  • File Count 1
  • Create Date December 11, 2017
  • Last Updated February 20, 2018

Volume-5 Issue-2

Download Abstract Book

S. No

Volume-5 Issue-2, February 2018, ISSN: 2319–6386 (Online)
Published By: Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering & Sciences Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Page No.



 Gaoussou Cissé, Nyomboi Timothy, James Wambua Kaluli, Taleb Omar

Paper Title:

Effect of Limestone Filler and Waste Ceramic Tile Aggregates on the Workability of Self-Compacting Concrete

Abstract: During the period between 1990 to 2017, self-compacting concrete (SCC) has been developed to reduce workmanship errors and improve the durability of the concrete. Despite many benefits of the self-compacting concrete, its cost still remains high, due to the high proportion of the cement required. To mitigate this issue many researchers urged the use of mineral additions as partial replacement of the cement. On the other hand, the management of the solid waste is a global concern in every country nowadays. The fact that there currently lacks a universally acceptable strategy for recycling ceramic waste is significant. The physical and chemical properties of the waste ceramic make it suitable for the concrete production. This study assessed the effect of partial replacement of the cement the limestone filler (LF) at 0%, 10%, 15%, 20%, and 25% and replacement of the natural coarse aggregate with the waste ceramic tiles aggregates (WCTA) at 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% within the validity range of self-compacting concrete properties at the fresh state. Sika Viscocrete 3088 was used to assess the saturation dosage of the superplasticizer. The flowability, viscosity, passing ability and resistance to segregation of self-compacting concrete containing the limestone filler and waste ceramic tile aggregates were assessed. The results showed that the saturation dosage of the superplasticizer Sika Viscocrete 3088 is 0.07% in solid content. Furthermore, high proportion of waste ceramic tile aggregates (75%) with optimum percentage of limestone filler (20%) satisfy the properties of SCC in the fresh state.

Keywords: Limestone Filler, Self-Compacting Concrete, Superplasticizer, Waste Ceramic Tile Aggregates, Workability.


  1. Belaidi and A. Brixi, “Etude de l’influence des additions et des adjuvants sur les propriétés aux états frais et durci des bétons,” Tlemcen, Algeria, 2014, p. 139.
  2. M. Krachaï, M. A. Bouabdallah, H. A. Belhadi and K. Hamou, “Influence de la Pouzzolane de Béni-Saf sur les performances mécaniques des bétons autoplaçants,” 1st International conference on Sustainable Built Environment Infrastructures in Developing Countries ENSET, Oran, Algeria, 2009.
  3. SNBPE, “NF EN 206/CN,” Paris, 2015, p. 24.
  4. Taleb, F. Ghomari, M. A. Boukli-Hacene, E. Kadri and H. Soualhi, “Formulation and Rheology of Eco-Self-Compacting Concrete (Eco-SCC),” Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, vol. 31, no. 3, 2016, pp. 272-296.
  5. Daniyal and S. Ahmad, “Application of Waste Ceramic Tile Aggregates in Concrete,” International Journal of Innovation Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 4, no. 12, 2015, pp. 12808-12815.
  6. M. Portier, “Les évolutions normatives et la nouvelle norme NF EN 206/CN,” Paris, 2014, p. 23.
  7. Laboratoire Centrale des Ponts et Chaussées (LCPC), “Essai de compacité des fractions granulaires à la table à secousses,” Paris, 2014, p. 13.





Rishath Sabrin, Mohammad Al Amin Siddique

Paper Title:

Evaluation of Seismic Behavior of RC Frame Retrofitted with Different Configuration of FRP

Abstract: For the requirement/need of retrofitting, in recent years, Fiber Reinforced Polymers (FRP) become engineer’s choice to increase strength and ductility of reinforced concrete (RC) beams, columns and beam-column joints because of its’ light weight, higher strength, and ease of applications to the existing members. To attain better performance, better configuration of retrofitting should be selected. In this paper, nonlinear static pushover analysis has been carried out with the commercial software ETABS v.9.6.0 to investigate seismic performance criteria i.e. ductility, over-strength, response modification factor of moment resisting RC frames retrofitted with different level of FRP additions and compared with the bare frame. From the analyses in general, both the load carrying capacity and displacement at failure is enhanced. In comparison to the bare frame, inter-story drift index at any floor level of the retrofitted frame is decreased for the same level of base shear capacity. Proper retrofitting scheme can be adopted from the analysis as per the requirement criteria of the project/design engineer.

Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP), Pushover analysis, Response Modification Factor, Retrofitting


  1. Choi, J. West & K. Soudki, “Analysis of the flexural behavoir of partially bonded FRP strengthened concrete beam”, Journal of Composites for Construction, vol. 12(4), 2008, pp. 375-386.
  2. Martin & A. Lamanna, “The performance of mechanically fastened FRP strengthened concrete beams in flexure”, Journal of Composites for Construction (ASCE), vol. 12(3), 2008, pp. 257-265.
  3. Abdelrahman, & R. El-Hacha, “Behavior of Large-Scale Concrete Columns Wrapped with CFRP and SFRP Sheets”, Journal of Composites for Construction, vol. 16(4), 2012, pp. 430-439.
  4. Sezen, “Repair and strengthening of reinforced concrete beam-column joints with fiber-reinforced polymer composites”, Journal of Composites for Construction, vol. 16(5), 2012, pp. 499–506.
  5. Gajdosova, & J. Bilcik, “Full-scale testing of CFRP-strengthened slender reinforced concrete columns”, Journal of Composites for Construction, vol. 17(2), 2013, pp. 239-248.
  6. Alferjani, A. A. Samad, B. S Elrawaff, N. Mohamad, M. Hilton, & A. A. Saiah, “Use of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer laminate for strengthening reinforced concrete beams in shear”, International Refereed Journal of Engineering and Science (IRJES), vol. 2(2), 2013, pp. 45-53.
  7. IBC-2006. 2006, International Code Council, International Building Code, Falls Church, VA.
  8. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2000, Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. FEMA 356, Washington (DC).
  9. ATC-40. Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete building. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, 1996.
  10. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2005, Improvement of nonlinear static seismic analysis procedures. Washington (DC): FEMA 440.
  11. BNBC-93. Bangladesh National Building Code, Housing & Building Research Institute and Bangladesh Standards & Testing Institution, Dhaka, Bangladesh,
  12. ACI-318. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary. Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute, 2002.
  13. Park & R. Dai, “Ductility of doubly reinforced concrete beam section”, ACI Structural Journal, vol. 85(2), 1988, pp. 217-225.
  14. Maghsoudi, A. & Sharifi, Y. “Ductility of high strength concrete heavily steel reinforced members”, Transaction A: Civil Engineering, 16(4), 2009, pp. 297-307.
  15. Inel, & H. B. Ozmen, “Effects of plastic hinge properties in nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete buildings”, Engineering Structures, vol. 28(11), 2006, pp. 1494-1502.
  16. Golghate, V. Baradiya, & A. Sharma, “Pushover analysis of 4 storey's reinforced concrete building”, International Journal of Latest Trends in Engineering and Technology (IJLTET),2(3), 2013, pp. 80-84.
  17. Kent, & R. Park, “Flexural members with confined concrete”, Journal of the Structral Division, Proc. of the American Society of Civil Engineers, vol. 97(ST7), 1971, pp. 1969-1990.
  18. Sabrin, M. A. A. Siddique, M. K. Sohel, “Seismic assessment of existing RC frames by pushover analysis (submitted for publication)”, Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, submitted for publication.
  19. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). NEHRP provisions for the seismic rehabilitation of building. FEMA 273 and 274, Washington (DC), 1997.