J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8:103-114 Original Article
DOI : 10.34118/jbms.v8i2.1487
ISSN 2353-0057, EISSN : 2600-6936
Empirical Equation for Concrete Made With PPC or OPC with Fly Ash
by Accelerated Mix Design Method
Ojha P N, Suresh Kumar, Manish Mandre, Piyush Mittal, Brijesh Singh*, Arora V V
National Council for Cement and Building Materials, India
* Corresponding Author: brijeshsehwagiitr96@gmail.com
Received: 11-08-2021
Accepted: 02-11-2021
Abstract. Assessment of 28 days strength from accelerated strength (1 day) can be
extremely helpful. Early prediction of 28 days compressive strength is required basically for
two purposes. First, to finalize the concrete mix proportions in the laboratory and secondly,
for quality control purpose during construction. Through this concept designers can easily
identify the uncalculated errors during mix design or variations in materials and exposure
conditions etc. and take necessary correction and modification measures to attain the
desired strengths at 28 days. As per IS: 9013 methodology to predict the 28 days strength of
concrete from accelerated cured strength are indicated only for normal/control concrete. In
the past few year focus has shifted from Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) to Portland
Pozzolana Cement (PPC). Fly ash is also being used widely at sites as replacement of OPC.
However, there is no such guideline available by which the assessment of 28 days strength of
Indian fly ash concrete can be made from accelerated strength tests. In the present study an
attempt has been made to predict the expected 28 days compressive strength of concrete
having PPC or OPC with fly ash using accelerated temperature regime methods. The
experimental study includes the use of 2 brands of PPC, 5 brands of OPC and 2 sources of fly
ash for replacement of OPC ranging from 20% to 45 %. Two temperature regimes 900C and
820C were used for accelerated curing. The samples were cured for 7.5 hours and 20hours
respectively in each regime for expected 28 day compressive strength. The mathematical
equations to estimate the 28 days compressive strength of concrete, cured at 900C for 7.5
hours for mixes having PPC, OPC mixed with fly ash 20% to 35% is fexp28 = 1.223 facs +2.024.
The mathematical equations to estimate the 28 days compressive strength of concrete, cured
at 900C for 7.5 hours for mixes having PPC, OPC mixed with fly ash more than 35% and up to
45% is fexp28 = 0.993 facs + 6.044.
Keywords: Mix Design, Accelerated Method, PPC, Compressive Strength, Mathematical Equation.
1. Introduction
According to Indian Standard acceptance and rejection of any type of concrete should be done by
determining 28 days compressive strength (IS- 456, 2000). It was observed that normal
concrete achieve its potential strength within this time period. But for fly ash concrete, 28 days
strength does not yield its potential strength as its rate of strength development is significantly
slower compared to normal concrete. Potential strength of fly ash concrete may develop at 90
days or even after 180 days (Tokyay, 1999). It is also known that the strength of normally cured
concrete at 28 days is considered for structural design. This time difference may lead to loss of
valuable time and money. Accelerated curing of normal concrete by warm water method and
boiling water method provided by IS:9013 (1978) are helpful to predict 28 days strength of
control concrete with respect to accelerated cured strength by means of correlation between
accelerated strength and normal curing strength. For the prediction of 28 days strength of fly
ash concretes no such correlation is available. In this current paper provides some strength
prediction models have been proposed (Jayanta and Jaydeep, 2016).
mailto:brijeshsehwagiitr96@gmail.com
104 Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114
Construction projects go through time overrun and cost overrun, due to delay in decision
making in appropriate time frame. Many activities are involved in execution of a project.
Finalization of concrete mix proportions is the most important activity. Usually 28 days moist
cured compressive strength test results are required to finalize concrete mix proportions
(Udoeyo et al., 2010). The guidelines and procedures given in IS 9013: 1978 which is based on
elevated temperature curing method helps in early decision making about mix proportions
within 48 to 72 hours when mix has OPC as cementing material.
In past few years, focus has shifted from OPC to a wider application of blended cement such as
PPC, PSC etc. Many industrial by products are being used as supplementary cementitious
materials and fly ash is one of them. Fly ash is used in two ways, one in cement industry as part
of cement itself i.e. as PPC and another as part replacement of OPC during concrete mix design.
However no empirical formula or guidelines are available for predicting 28 days moist cured
compressive strength concrete having PPC or OPC with fly ash as binder (Nikitha and
Kameswara, 2019).
It is well established that an increase in curing temperature increases the rate of hydration of
cement. The increase in rate of hydration reaction and strength development of OPC, at elevated
curing temperature is also well documented in existing literatures (Shelke and Gadve, 2013).
The use of fly ash and other supplementary cementitious material is increasing not only due to
an economic and sustainability point of view but also these materials improve the rheology of
concrete and other engineering properties of hardened concrete. However the rate of strength
gain in OPC with fly ash concrete is slower than in concrete with OPC only (Bhanja and Pan,
2013; Jayadevan et al., 2014).
Fly ash is used in concrete mix generally to reduce the heat of hydration but because of this
there is reduction in early strength development of concrete. Many parameters affect the
strength of concrete such as quantum of fly ash, quality and quantity of binder material,
aggregate size, curing regime, chemical effect, concrete grade used and mix proportions.
Hydration itself is affected by the temperature (Khan et al., 2019; Krishna et al., 2010). To
accelerate the strength gain at early age and to relate it to the 28-days compressive strength,
proper trend lines and calibration curves are needed. For the accelerated curing of concrete,
different methods and techniques have been classified earlier also such as maturity methods,
curing in oven, curing in heated water and expanded polystyrene molds method (Amritkar and
More, 2015, Shah and BhavnaShah, 2011). In such scenario, there is need to develop the
mathematical equations to determine strength of concrete which will generate confidence to the
construction fraternity for use of concrete made with blended cement by using accelerated
curing method.
A number of methods of accelerated and early age testing of cubes have been developed that
allow early prediction to be made of strength development at later ages. Indian standard IS:
9013 covers two methods. In warm water method the concrete specimens are cured at elevated
temperature of 55±20C for 19 hours 50minutes and in boiling water method the concrete
specimens are cured at elevated temperature of 1000C for 3.5h±5minutes. Expected 28 days
compressive strength is calculated by empirical formula given in the code. It is found that the
above two methods are useful for prediction of expected 28 days compressive strength when
concrete is made using OPC.
BS 1881(1983) covers three methods of accelerated curing, under which the concrete specimens
are cured at elevated temperature of 350C, 550C and 820C for 24hours ±15minutes, 20hours
±10minutes, and 14hours ±15minutes respectively.
Similarly ASTM C-684 (ACI 214.1R, 1987; ASTM C 684, 1999) covers 4 procedures for estimation
of 28 days compressive strength. In warm water method concrete specimens are cured at
elevated temperature of 350C for 23.5hours ±30minutes, in boiling water method at 1000C for
Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114 105
3.5hours ±5minutes, in Autogenous method at 21±60C for 48hours ±15minutes and in high
temperature and pressure method, the concrete specimens are cured at 1500C & 10.3±0.2 MPa
pressure for 5 hours ±5 minutes.
Canadian standard CSA A23.1 (1970) has an establish procedure, which is independent of
cement type, mix proportion and admixture type. In this method, the concrete specimens are
cured at elevated temperature of 1000C for 16 hours once the concrete is finally set after casting.
The methods given in BS: 1881 & ASTM C 684 recommend, to develop appropriate correlation
using accelerated compressive strength and actual 28 days compressive strength for the
materials and mix used. They do not provide any general empirical relationship to predict the
expected 28 days compressive strength.
NCB has conducted this experimental study to develop a simple empirical relationship between
accelerated compressive strength and 28 days moist cured compressive strength of concrete
cubes. The objective of this research is to develop guidelines to determine the expected 28 days
compressive strength of concrete having PPC or OPC with fly ash as cementitious material using
accelerated curing. The developed method can also be used at site for quality control purposes.
2. Materials
2.1. Cement
Five brands of OPC-43 grade cements designated as OPC-I, OPC-II, OPC-III, OPC-IV and OPC-V
conforming to IS: 269 (2015) and two brands of PPC designated as PPC-I & PPC-II conforming to
IS: 1489 (2015) were used for the experimental work. All the cements were tested as per IS:
4031 and IS: 4032. The test results of physical and chemical analysis are given in Table-1.
2.2. Flyash
Two flyash samples from different sources designated as Fly ash 1 and Fly ash 2 were used in
the experimental work. The fly ash samples were tested as per IS: 1727: 1967 and the results
were conforming to IS 3812 (2013). The tests results are given in Table-2.
Table 1. Test results of cement sample Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) and Portland Pozzolana Cement
(PPC)
S.No. Properties OPC1 OPC2 OPC3 OPC4 OPC5 PPC1 PPC2
1 Blain’s fineness, (m2/kg) 282 355 292 336 306 379 358
2 Setting time, (in minutes)
Initial
Final
230
280
115
180
160
215
120
195
160
210
135
205
140
210
3 Compressive Strength (N/mm2)
3 days
7 days
28 days
34.5
45.0
55.5
36.5
44.5
55.0
31.5
41.0
47.5
35.5
45.0
53.5
39.5
49.0
60.0
30.0
41.5
55.5
27.5
39.0
53.5
4 Soundness by Autoclave,
% Le Chatelier Exp (mm)
0.01
1.50
0.05
0.50
0.09
1.0
0.04
1.0
0.01
1.0
0.07
2.00
0.08
2.00
5 Specific Gravity 3.15 3.15 3.15 3.15 3.15 2.85 2.87
Table 2. Test results of fly ash sample
Sl No. Properties Fly ash Source 1 Fly ash Source 2
1 Blain’s fineness, m2/kg 403 329
2 Specific Gravity 2.20 2.20
3 Lime Reactivity, N/mm2 8.0 4.92
106 Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114
2.3. Coarse Aggregate:
Crushed angular coarse aggregate with 20mm maximum size were used in the experimental
work. The coarse aggregates were tested as per IS: 2386 and were found to conform to IS: 383
(2016). The test results are given in Table - 3
2.4. Fine Aggregate
The fine aggregate from natural source i.e. river sand conforming to Zone-I was used in the
experimental work. The fine aggregate was tested as per IS: 2386 and were found to conform to
IS: 383 (2016). The test results are given in Table-4
Table 3. Test results of coarse aggregate sample
Sl No. Test Carried out Results Obtained For 20 mm Results Obtained For 10 mm
1 Specific gravity 2.79 2.81
2 Water absorption % 0.60 0.40
3 Abrasion Value % 25.00 30.00
4 Crushing value % 25.00 25.00
5 Impact value % 16.00 20.00
6 Flakiness index % 17.00 21.00
7 Elongation index % 14.00 13.00
8 Soundness (Na2SO4) % 0.30 1.20
9 Grading Percentage Passing
Sieve Size 20mm 10mm
40 mm 100.00
20 mm 98.00 -
12.5 mm - 100.00
10 mm 1.00 68.00
4.75 mm 0 2.00
2.36 mm - 0.00
Table 4. Test results of fine aggregate sample (Natural)
Sl No. Test Carried out Results Obtained
1 Specific gravity 2.63
2 Water absorption, % 1.0
3 Silt wet Sieving % 2.0
4
Grading
Sieve Size Percentage Passing
10 mm 100
4.75 mm 74
2.36 mm 54
1.18 mm 38
600 micron 22
300 micron 8
150 micron 4
2.5. Chemical Admixture
Superplasticizer (Normal type) conforming to IS: 9103 (1999) was used in the experimental
work.
Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114 107
3. Experimental programme
3.1. Initial Trials
To get the early age compressive strength through accelerated curing, some initial trials were
conducted. The mix proportions used for initial trials are given in Table-5A & Table-5B. The
following parameters were fixed for initial trials:
Three temperature regimes for accelerated curing were selected for initial trials
i. Boiling water with time duration of 3.5h, 5.5 h and 7.5 hours.
ii. Hot water at 900C temperature with time duration of 3.5h, 5.5h and 7.5hours.
iii. Hot water at 820C temperature with time duration of 16h, 18h, 20h, 22h and
24hours.
One brand of OPC and fly ash from one source were used.
Two brands of PPC were used.
25% OPC cement was replaced with fly ash (by weight of total cementitious materials).
Water-cement/cementitious ratio was kept 0.50, 0.45 and 0.40.
Table 5.A. Mix proportion used for initial trials using PPC
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
W/c ratio 0.50 0.45 0.40
Water 165 165 165
Cement 330 367 412
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.30 3.70 4.10
Fine Aggregate(Kg/cum) 829 804 723
Coarse Aggregate (Kg/cum)
20mm 672 665 690
10mm 451 446 463
Table 5.B. Mix proportion used for initial trials using OPC mixed with 25% flyash
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
Water/cementitious ratio 0.50 0.45 0.40
Water 165 165 165
Cement 248 275 309
Fly ash (25% as replacement) 82 92 103
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.30 3.70 4.10
Fine Aggregate(Kg/cum) 829 796 750
Coarse Aggregate (Kg/cum)
20mm 672 671 673
10mm 451 451 452
Based on initial trials, the results of the two methods were found encouraging:
Accelerated curing in hot water at 900C and time duration of 7.5 hrs.
Accelerated curing in hot water at 820C for longer duration of 20 hrs.
3.2. Detailed Trials
The detailed trials were carried out by fixing following parameters for accelerated curing.
Accelerated curing in hot water at 900C and time duration of 7.5 hrs.
Accelerated curing in hot water at 820C for longer duration of 20 hrs.
108 Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114
Five brands of OPC and flyash from two sources were used.
Two brands of PPC were used.
Fly ash, ranging from 20% to 45% was added (as replacement of OPC) by weight of
cementitious materials.
Water cement/cementitious ratio were kept ranging from 0.35 to 0.55.
The mix proportions used for detailed trials are given in Table-6A to Table-6G.
Detail trials
The detail trials were carried out with two brands of PPC and five brands of OPC. Two sources of
fly ash were used with 20% to 45% replacement in increment of 5%. Five water-cementitious
ratios were selected from 0.35 to 0.55 for detail trials. Normal type chemical admixture @1 % by
weight of cementitious material was used for all the trials.
With 5 OPC, 2 sources of fly ash and 6 replacement levels of OPC by fly ash (20% to 45%) a total
300 nos. of samples (one sample comprising 3 cube specimens of 150 mm size) were cast at
various water cementitious ratios ranging from 0.55 to 0.35. Similarly with 2 PPC, 10 samples
were cast at same water cement ratios for accelerated curing under each temperature regime i.e.
310 nos. of samples were cast for regime I & 310 nos. of samples were cast for regime II.
Corresponding to accelerated cured samples, 310 nos. of samples were also cast and tested for
determination of 28 days compressive strength of moist cured samples.
When accelerated curing was done the following procedures were followed:
All specimens were cured at 27C and more than 90% humidity for first 24 hours.
All accelerated curing specimens were kept in open case after de-molding in accelerated
curing tank. When accelerated curing was completed as given regime I and regime II
above, they were cured at 27C for two hours. Then compressive strength was
determined as per procedure given in IS: 516.
Corresponding to each temperature regime, the specimens were also kept for moist curing at
27+2C for 28 days and after 28 days compressive strength was determined as per procedure
given in IS :516.
Table 6A. Mix proportions used for detailed trials using PPC cement
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
W/c ratio 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35
Water 165 165 165 165 165
Cement 300 330 367 412 471
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.00 3.30 3.70 4.10 4.70
Fine Aggregates (Kg/cum) 861 829 804 723 674
Coarse Aggregates (Kg/cum)
20mm 669 672 665 690 685
10mm 449 451 446 463 460
Table 6A. Mix proportions used for detailed trials using OPC mixed with 20 % fly ash
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
Water/cementitious ratio 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35
Water 165 165 165 165 165
Cement 240 264 293 330 377
Fly ash (20% as replacement) 60 66 73 83 94
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.00 3.30 3.70 4.10 4.70
Fine Aggregates (Kg/cum) 863 831 798 753 704
Coarse Aggregates (Kg/cum)
20mm 671 674 673 675 672
10mm 451 452 452 453 451
Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114 109
Table 6C. Mix proportions used for detailed trials using OPC mixed with 25 % fly ash
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
Water/cementitious ratio 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35
Water 165 165 165 165 165
Cement 225 247 275 310 353
Fly ash (25% as replacement) 75 83 92 103 118
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.00 3.30 3.70 4.10 4.70
Fine Aggregates (Kg/cum) 861 829 795 750 700
Coarse Aggregates (Kg/cum)
20mm 669 671 671 672 668
10mm 449 451 450 451 449
Table 6D. Mix proportions used for detailed trials using OPC mixed with 30 % fly ash
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
Water/cementitious ratio 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35
Water 165 165 165 165 165
Cement 210 231 257 289 330
Fly ash (30% as replacement) 90 99 110 124 141
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.00 3.30 3.70 4.10 4.70
Fine Aggregates (Kg/cum) 858 826 792 746 697
Coarse Aggregate (Kg/cum)
20mm 667 669 668 669 665
10mm 448 449 449 450 447
Table 6E. Mix proportions used for detailed trials using OPC mixed with 35 % fly ash
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
Water/cementitious ratio 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35
Water 165 165 165 165 165
Cement 195 214 239 269 306
Fly ash (35% as replacement) 105 116 128 144 165
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.00 3.30 3.70 4.10 4.70
Fine Aggregate(Kg/cum) 856 824 789 743 693
Coarse Aggregate (Kg/cum)
20mm 666 667 666 667 662
10mm 447 448 447 448 444
Table 6F. Mix proportions used for detailed trials using OPC mixed with 40 % fly ash
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
Water/cementitious ratio 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35
Water 165 165 165 165 165
Cement 180 198 220 248 282
Fly ash (40% as replacement) 120 132 147 165 189
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.00 3.30 3.70 4.10 4.70
Fine Aggregate(Kg/cum) 853 821 786 740 690
Coarse Aggregate (Kg/cum)
20mm 664 665 664 664 659
10mm 446 447 446 446 442
Table 6G. Mix proportions used for detailed trials using OPC mixed with 45 % fly ash
Mix Constituents ( kg) For One Cubic Meter
Water/cementitious ratio 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35
Water 165 165 165 165 165
Cement 165 181 202 227 259
Fly ash (45% as replacement) 135 149 165 186 212
Chemical Admixture(Kg/cum) 3.00 3.30 3.70 4.10 4.70
Fine Aggregate(Kg/cum) 851 818 784 737 687
Coarse Aggregate (Kg/cum)
20mm 662 663 661 661 656
10mm 444 445 444 444 440
110 Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114
3.3. Specimen Cast and Curing
150mm cube specimens were cast for compressive strength. The specimens were kept at 27 +
20C and relative humidity more than 90% for 24 hours initially. For accelerated curing the
specimens were submerged in hot water immediately after demoulding in open cage, at different
temperature regimes and for different time duration. After the completion of accelerated curing
specimens were taken out from hot water and were kept in water at 27 + 20C for 1½ hour. The
specimens were tested for accelerated compressive strength after 1 ½ hour as per IS 516. For 28
days’ compressive strength, the specimens were kept in water at 27 + 20C for curing up to 28
days.
4. Methodology adopted to develop empirical relationship
Following steps were followed for the development of empirical relationship between
accelerated compressive strength and 28 days moist cured compressive strength:
i. All the trial results of accelerated compressive strength and 28 day compressive
strengths are tabulated and standard deviation is calculated.
ii. Two categories of data sets corresponding to each temperature regime are taken for
analysis of the trial results as given below.
Category 1: Hot water at 900C for 7.5 hours
a) 20-35% fly ash replacement at 900C and 7.5hours
b) 40-45% fly ash replacement at 900C and 7.5hours
Category 2: Hot water at 820C for 20 hours
a) 20-35% fly ash replacement at 820 C and 20hours
b) 40-45% fly ash replacement at 820C and 20hours
iii. Best fit line is plotted and expected 28 days strength is calculated by this best fit line
equation.
iv. Upper and lower control limits were fixed as per criteria given below and the points
above/below upper/lower limits were treated as outliers
Criteria for fixing outliers:
a. Mean ± Se (Standard Error) X 2.5 (considering 98 % confidence level)
b. Mean ± 15%
(both the criteria were nearly matching)
It was seen that total outliers were less than 10% of total data.
v. Data beyond the upper limit and lower limit was eliminated.
vi. The best fit line was plotted again by adopting the same procedure as given in step no.
(iii) & (iv).
vii. In the case of hot water procedure using temperature regime of 900C for 7.5 hours, the
best fit line was lowered by 8% to bring more than 90% data above this line as shown in
Fig.1 and Fig. 2.
viii. In the case of hot water procedure using temperature regime of 820C for 20 hours, the
best fit line was lowered by 10% to bring more than 90% data above this line as shown
in Fig.3 and Fig. 4.
Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114 111
ix. The line (after lower down) where less than 10 % data remain below is adopted for
calculating the expected 28 days compressive strength.
The validation of equation was done for temperature regime 900C for 7.5 hours only as the best
fit line was lower down 8 % only in comparison to 10% in the case of temperature regime of
820C for 20 hours, to bring more than 90% results above best fit line plotted.
Fig. 1. Proposed 90˚C 7.5 hours graph for PPC and OPC + Flyash (15% to <35%)
Fig. 2. Proposed 90˚C 7.5 hours graph for PPC and OPC + Flyash (>35% to 45%)
112 Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114
Fig. 3. 82˚C 20h graph for PPC Cement and OPC + flyash (20% to <35%)
Fig. 4. 820C 20h graph for PPC and OPC + Flyash (>35%-45%)
5. Conclusions
Early prediction of 28 days compressive strength results through existing codal provision is not
possible for concrete mixes having Pozzolana like fly ash, due to the effect of their physical and
chemical properties on the rate of strength gain. Based on validation of developed relationships,
it is concluded that for PPC and at different replacement level of OPC by flyash (20% to 45%),
the elevated temperature curing regime i.e. 900C for 7.5 hours can be adopted for prediction of
expected 28 days compressive strength.
Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114 113
However, since the rate of strength development differs with the level of flyash replacement and
therefore, for the following two cases, two separate empirical relationships can be adopted:
a. For the mixes made with PPC and OPC with flyash up to 35%
b. For the mixes made with OPC and flyash more than 35% up to 45%.
Mathematical equations for early prediction of 28 days compressive strength of concrete
are proposed separately for the mixes having PPC cement, OPC mixed with fly ash (20% to 35%)
and the mixes having OPC mixed with fly ash more than 35% and up to 45%. These
mathematical equations give the confident level around 90%.
The mathematical equations to estimate the 28 days compressive strength of concrete,
cured at 900C for 7.5 hours for mixes having PPC, OPC mixed with fly ash 20% to 35% is-
fexp28 = 1.223 facs +2.024
and mixes having OPC mixed with fly ash more than 35% and up to 45% is-
fexp28 = 0.993 facs + 6.044
Where: fexp28 = Expected 28 days’ compressive strength of concrete in N/mm2
facs = Accelerated compressive strength in N/mm2
6. References
ACI 214.1R (1987). Use of Accelerated Strength testing, ACI manual of Concrete practice.
Amritkar, S., & More, N. (2015). Statistical Modeling To Forecast The Strength Of Concrete Using
Accelerated Curing, International Journal Of Research In Engineering And Technology, 4, 11.
ASTM C 684 (1999). Standard Test Method for Making, Accelerated Curing and Testing Concrete
Compression Test Specimens
Bhanja, S., & Pan, S. (2013). Modified Water cement ratio law for fly ash concrete‖ The Indian Concrete
Journal, 87, 21-28.
BS 1881(1983). Part 112 , Methods of Accelerated Curing of Test Cubes, British Standards.
CSA A23.1 (1970). Accelerating the curing of cylinders and determining their compressive strength
Canadian Standards Agency.
IS- 456 (2000). Indian standard code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete, Fourth Revision, IS:
456-2000, Bureau of Indian standards, New Delhi.
IS- 9013 (1978). Method of making curing and determining compressive strength of accelerated cured
concrete test specimens.
IS: 1489 (2015). Part 1, Specification for Portland Pozzolana Cement (fly ash based), Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
IS: 269 (2015). Ordinary Portland Cement - Specification, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
IS: 3812 (2013). Part 1, Specification for pulverized fuel ash, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
IS: 383 (2016). Specification for coarse and fine aggregates from natural sources for concrete, Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.
IS: 9103 (1999). Specification for Concrete admixture, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Jayadevan, V., Valsalakumary, V. R., & Sufeera, O. B. (2014). Reliability of accelerated curing techniques for
speedy design of concrete mixes—An appraisal of IS 9013: 1978 code. Indian Concrete Journal, 57-
60.
114 Ojha et al., J. Build. Mater. Struct. (2021) 8: 103-114
Jayanta, N. C., & Jaydeep C. (2016). Development of Strength Prediction Models of 28 days Fly Ash
Concrete Strength by Accelerated Curing Method, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering
Research, 7(4), 83-86.
Khan, M. A., Chowdhry, M. A., Javed, A., Ahmed, M. L., & Kanwal, H. (2019). Strength prediction model for
accelerated cured fly-ash based concrete. Mehran University Research Journal of Engineering &
Technology, 38(4), 1057-1066.
Krishna, R., Kumar, R. P., & Khan, A. M. (2010). A study on the influence of curing on the strength of a
standard grade concrete mix. Facta Universitatis-Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering, 8(1), 23-
34.
Nikitha, P. & Kameswara R. B. (2019). Accelerated Method of Concrete Mix Proportioning by Incorporating
Fly Ash and Silica Fume, International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 7(6C2).
Shah, P., & BhavnaShah, S. (2011). Development of Mathematical Model to Predict Early Age Strength for
Blended Cement through Accelerated Curing. In Published: National Conference on Recent Trends in
Engineering & Technology on May.
Shelke, N. L., & Gadve, S., (2013). Prediction of compressive strength using Accelerated Curing”,
International Journal of Pure & Applied Research in Engineering & Technology, 8(1), 90-99.
Tokyay, M. (1999). Strength prediction of fly ash concretes by accelerated testing. Cement and concrete
research, 29(11), 1737-1741.
Udoeyo, F. F., Brooks, R., Udo-Inyang, P., & Nsan, R. O. (2010). Early prediction of laterized concrete
strength by accelerated testing. IJRRAS, 5(1), 10. 1345-1353.