International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 1, January-2015 440
ISSN 2229-5518
Use of Waste by-products In Concrete with
Bacteria
Ravindranatha, Mohit Goyal, P.Krishna Chaitanya, Nikhil Awasthy
ABSTRACT-The major problem the construction industry concurs with is the high maintenance cost of the concrete. Various natural processes such as weathering, faults, land subsidence, earthquake, changes in moisture and temperature, have the tendency to create cracks in concrete. Therefore, to counter these effects, it has become necessary to come up with ways which will not only help in counteracting but also in improving the quality of concrete. In the present experiment, cement was partially replaced with Fly Ash and GGBS and Bacillus Pasteurii was used as an admixture. GGBS and Fly Ash, when used with this bacterium resulted in the increase of the strength characteristics of cement.
Keywords: Fly-Ash concrete, GGBS concrete, Bacillus Pasteurii, Admixture-Bacteria, partial replacement etc
—————————— ——————————
Nowadays in the construction industry conventional use of materials is either costly, not easily available or is harmful for nature in one way or the other. Not only that even in other industries there is high production of wastes and other by-products which can be used in preparation of concrete and hence saving the use of natural resources.
Concrete has different properties and it has some limitations as it is weak in tension and has less ductility and less resistance to cracking. The primary reason for the cracking of concrete can be attributed to porosity in texture (microscopic level) of structural members which allows moisture and water to seep into the concrete members and hence, leads to corrosion of steel reinforcements. Although, here exists a variety of waterproofing agents and surface treatments like the water repellants such as silanes or siloxanes which are used to enhance the durability of concrete structure, they suffer from various limitations like incompatibility, susceptibility to UV radiations and are also expensive.
A technique was proposed in remediating cracks and
fissures in concrete by microbiologically inducing calcite
precipitation. We add Microbes like Bacillus Pasteurii in
the GGBS as admixture and this can induce the precipitates of calcite. It can increase the durability performance of concrete with increase in the
————————————————
• Ravindranatha is currently serving as the Assistant Professor in Manipal
University, India,
• Mohit Goyal is currently pursuing bachelors degree program in Civil
engineering in Manipal University, India, PH-9886526685. E-mail:
• Nikhil Awasthy is currently pursuing bachelors degree program in Civil engineering in Manipal University, India, PH-8867626444. E-mail:
• P. Krishna Chaitanya is currently pursuing bachelors degree program in
Civil engineering in Manipal University, India, PH-9886658737. E-mail:
krishna02chaitanya@gmail.com
concentration of bacteria. [1] Moreover, this calcite layer can also improve the impermeability of the specimen, thus increasing its resistance to alkaline, sulphate and freeze-thaw attack.[2]Also, use of bacteria Pasteurii results in increase of compressive strength in fly ash concrete and has self healing effect by filling in the pores with bacteria cells.[3] Addition of bacteria can increase compressive strength up to 16.94% at 7th day, 17.3% at
28th day and 17.6% at 56th day.[4] Also lead to significant improvement in the split tensile strength.[5]
Fly ash, also known as flue-ash is a byproduct from coal based thermal power plant. Owing to its pozzolanic properties, fly ash can be used as a replacement for some of the Portland cement content of concrete[6] Also, Fly ash can add to the concrete’s final strength and increase its chemical resistance and durability. Fly ash offers environmental advantages; it also improves the performance and quality of concrete. Fly ash affects the plastic properties of concrete by improving workability, reducing water demand, reducing segregation and bleeding, and lowering heat of hydration. Fly ash increases strength, reduces permeability, reduces corrosion of reinforcing steel, and increases sulphate resistance. Fly ash reaches its maximum strength more slowly than concrete made with only Portland cement. The techniques for working with this type of concrete are standard for the industry and will not impact the budget of a job.
GGBS or Ground Granulated Blast Furnace slag is a
byproduct of steel industry. GGBS can be used to
improve strength, greatly reduce permeability, increase
durability and performance in aggressive environment. Moreover, to achieve greatest strength at most favorable cost benefit ratio, it has been observed that optimum proportion of slag appears to be 50% or less of the total cementitious material.
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 1, January-2015 441
ISSN 2229-5518
Ordinary Portland Cement- 43 grade complying with IS:
12269-1987 was used for the preparation of concrete, the
properties of which are in accordance with Indian
standard code.
Fine aggregate used in the experiments were locally available river sand with specific gravity 2.76 and fineness modulus 2.91. Also, quarried and crushed granite stones of maximum size 20mm were used as coarse aggregate of which, specific gravity and fineness modulus was found to be 2.8 and 7.19 respectively.
Slump flow test was performed as per IS: 1199-
1959(Clause 5.1). Compressive strength test, Flexural Strength test were carried out at an interval of 3, 7, 14, 28 and 56 days in accordance with the guidelines mentioned in IS: 516-1959. Moreover, Split Tensile Strength was also carried out according to IS 5816-1976.
The mix design of the concrete specimen were prepared in accordance to the guidelines mentioned in IS 10262-
2009. Ordinary concrete specimen mixes were designed using cement, water, coarse aggregate and fine aggregate only. Further, concrete specimen mixes were also designed separately by partial replacement of cement with Fly Ash or Ground Granulated. Table 1 gives the different combination of mixes used in the experiment.
extracted from the bacterial colonies with the help of inoculation loop from the Petri dish. This bacterium was then transferred to conical flask, shaken well and plugged back again (inoculation). After inoculation the flasks were shaken overnight in a rotary shaker and the liquid inside turns turbid, thus, indicating the presence of bacteria.
The entire research has been divided into 3 experiments based on the bacterial solution which was used for the experiment. The outcomes of the compressive strength test, flexural strength test and split tensile strength on the different specimen of the experiment have been mentioned. Also, bacteria solution was added for both the mixes for fly ash and GGBS.
In this mix, the bacterial solution of 1800 ml was used, i.e. each concrete specimen received 40ml each. The results of the compressive strength test, flexural strength test and split tensile strength are mentioned in Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4.
Initially, 25 grams of LB broth (Luria Bertani Broth Miller) was added in 1 liter of distilled water and mixed well so that no solid particles could be seen. The flasks were plugged with cotton and covered with paper before tying it with a rubber band so that it could be sterilized by boiling up to 100 degree Celsius. The bacteria were
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 1, January-2015 442
ISSN 2229-5518
In this mix, the bacterial solution of 2250 ml was used, i.e. each concrete specimen received 50ml each. The results of the compressive strength test, flexural strength test and split tensile strength are mentioned in Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7
In this mix, the bacterial solution of 2700 ml was used, i.e. each concrete specimen received 60ml each. The results of the compressive strength test, flexural strength test and split tensile strength are mentioned in Figure 8, Figure 9 and Figure 10.
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 1, January-2015 443
ISSN 2229-5518
` FIGURE 10: SPLIT TENSILE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS PERFORMED ON DIFFERENT MIXES
From the results of the three experiments, we can observe that the concrete containing GGBS and the normal concrete can resist maximum and minimum compressive strength respectively out of the three different mixes. It can also be observed that concrete containing GGBS achieves maximum split tensile strength and flexural strength when 40 ml and 50 ml bacterial solution was used but loses this trend after 14 days with 60ml bacterial solution when flexural strength test was performed. Also, 50ml bacterial solution proves to be effective in increasing the split tensile strength, compressive strength and flexural strength of the specimen as compared to 40ml and 60 ml bacterial solution. Finally, it can be observed that the strength increases with days.
The test results show a significant improvement in strength. The strengths obtained from different concrete mixes states that it is very sustainable and durable material and can be used as a suitable replacement for ordinary Portland cement. The slump achieved was
100mm. There was significant improvement of
compressive strength with more than 15% in fly ash and
20% in GGBS. Finally, there is a further scope of research
as this experiment is concentrated on M25 concrete.
Effect of bacteria on higher grade of concrete with and
without use of different mineral admixtures (silica fume,
metakeolin etc) should be designed and its compatibility, durability and performance should be studied.
REFERENCE
[1] Ramachandran S.K, Ramakrishnan V. and Bang S.S (2001),”Remediation of concrete using microorganisms.” American Concrete Institute Materials J., 98, 3-9.
[2] Achal V., Mukherjee A., Basu P.C, and Reddy M.S. (2009) “Strain improvement of sporosarcina Pasteurii for enhanced urease and calcite production.” Journal of industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, 36, 981-988.
[3] Navneet Chahal, Rafat Siddique, Anita Rojar (2012) “Influence of bacteria on the compressive strength, water absorption and rapid chloride permeability of fly ash concrete.” Construction and Building Materials, 28, 351-356.
[4] Abhijit sing Parmar, Ankit Patel, Vismay Shah, Sandeep Khorasiya, Dipan Patel (2013),” Improvement on the concrete cracks by using Bacillus Pasteurii.” International Journal for Scientific Research & Development, Vol 1, Issue 1.
[5] Sunil Pratap Reddy, Seshagiri Raob M.V., Aparnac P. and Sasikalac Ch. (2010), “Performance of standard grade bacterial concrete.” Asian journal of civil engineering (building and housing), Vol 11, no.1, 43-55.
[6] Scott, Allan N., Thomas, Michael D. A. (January– February 2007). "Evaluation of Fly Ash from Co- Combustion of Coal and Petroleum Coke for Use in Concrete". ACI Materials Journal (American Concrete Institute) 104 (1): 62–70.
[7] Virginie Wiktor, Henk M. Jonkers (2011).” Quantification of crack healing in novel bacteria based self healing concrete” Cement & Concrete Composites, 33, 763-770.
[8] Kim Van Tittelboom, Nele De Belie, Willem De Muynck
and Willy Verstraete (2010) “ Use of bacteria to repair cracks in concrete” Cement and Concrete Research, 40 (2010). 157-166.
[9] Achal V., Mukherjee A. and Reddy M.S. (2010) “Microbial Concrete: A way to enhance the Durability of Building Structures” Journal Materials for Civil Engg.
[10] Achal V., Mukherjee A., Basu P.C, and Reddy M.S (2009) “Lactose mother liquor as an alternative nutrient source for microbial concrete production by Sporosarcina Pasteurii.” Journal of industrial Microbiology and biotechnology, 36, 433-438.
[11] Ghosh P., Mandal S., Chattopadhyay B.D., Pal S.(2005),” Use of microorganism to improve the strength of cement motor” Cement and Concrete research, 35, 1980-1983.
[12] Nemati M. and Voordouw G. (2003).”Modification of porous media permeability, using calcium carbonate produced anzymatically in situ.” Enzyme Microbial Technology, 33, 635-642.
[13] Claisse P.A., Elsayad H.A, and Shaaban I.G. (1997), “Absorption and sorptivity of cover concrete.” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 9, 105-110.
[14] IS 2386(Part 1)-1963,’Methods of Tests for aggregate for concrete-Particle size and shape’, - Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[15] IS 2386 (Part 3)-1963,’ Methods of Test for aggregate for concrete-Specific Gravity, Density, Voids, Absorption and Bulking’, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[16] IS 456-2000,’ Plain and Reinforced Concrete- Code of
Practice’, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[17] IS 516-1959,’ Methods of Tests for Strength of Concrete’, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[18] IS 10262-2009,’ Concrete Mix Proportioning- Guidelines’, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org