Mechanical Performance and Durability of RPC
The RPC family includes two types of concrete, designated RPC 200 and RPC 800, which offer interesting implicational possibilities in different areas. Mechanical properties for the two types of RPC are given in Table 4. The high flexural strength of RPC is due to the addition of steel fibres.
Table 5 shows typical mechanical properties of RPC compared to a conventional HPC of compressive strength 80 MPa11. As fracture toughness, which is a measure of energy absorbed per unit volume of material to fracture, is higher for RPC, it exhibits high ductility. Apart from their exceptional mechanical properties, RPCs have an ultra-dense microstructure, giving advantageous waterproofing and durability characteristics. These materials can therefore be used for industrial and nuclear waste storage facilities1.
RPC has ultra-high durability characteristics resulting from its extremely low porosity, low permeability, limited shrinkage and increased corrosion resistance. In comparison to HPC, there is no penetration of liquid and/or gas through RPC4. The characteristics of RPC given in Table 6, enable its use in chemically aggressive environments and where physical wear greatly limits the life of other concretes12.
Table 4: Comparison of RPC 200 and RPC 800
| RPC 200 | RPC 800 |
Pre-setting pressurization | None | 50 MPa |
Heat-treating | 20 to 90°C | 250 to 400°C |
Compressive strength (using quartz sand) | 170 to 230 MPa | 490 to 680 MPa |
Compressive strength (using steel aggregate) | -- | 650 to 810 MPa |
Flexural strength | 30 to 60 MPa | 45 to 141 MPa |
Table 5: Comparison of HPC (80 MPa) and RPC 2009
Property | HPC (80 MPa) |
|
Compressive strength | 80 MPa | 200 MPa |
Flexural strength | 7 MPa | 40 MPa |
Modulus of Elasticity | 40 GPa | 60 GPa |
Fracture Toughness | <10³ J/m² | 30*10³ J/m² |
Table 6: Durability of RPC Compared to HPC10
Abrasive Wear | 2.5 times lower |
Water Absorption | 7 times lower |
Rate of Corrosion | 8 times lower |
Chloride ions diffusion | 25 times lower |
Limitations of RPC
In a typical RPC mixture design, the least costly components of conventional concrete are basically eliminated or replaced by more expensive elements. The fine sand used in RPC becomes equivalent to the coarse aggregate of conventional concrete, the Portland cement plays the role of the fine aggregate and the silica fume that of the cement. The mineral component optimization alone results in a substantial increase in cost over and above that of conventional concrete (5 to 10 times higher than HPC). RPC should be used in areas where substantial weight savings can be realized and where some of the remarkable characteristics of the material can be fully utilized2. Owing to its high durability, RPC can even replace steel in compression members where durability issues are at stake (e.g. in marine condition). Since RPC is in its developing stage, the long-term properties are not known.
Experimental study at IIT Madras
Materials Used
The materials used for the study, their IS specifications and properties have been presented in Table 7.
Mixture Design of RPC and HPC
Table 7: Materials used in the study and their properties
Sl. No. | Sample | Specific Gravity | Particle size range |
1 | Cement, OPC, 53-grade | 3.15 | 31 µm – 7.5 µm |
2 | Micro Silica | 2.2 | 5.3 µm – 1.8 µm |
3 | Quartz Powder | 2.7 | 5.3 µm – 1.3 µm |
4 | Standard sand, grade-1 | 2.65 | 2.36 mm – 0.6 mm |
5 | Standard sand, grade-2 | 2.65 | 0.6 mm – 0.3 mm |
6 | Standard sand, grade-3 | 2.65 | 0.5 mm – 0.15 mm |
7 | Steel fibres (30 mm) | 7.1 | length: 30 mm & dia: 0.4 mm |
8 | Steel fibres (36 mm) | 7.1 | length: 36 mm & dia: 0.5 mm |
9 | 20 mm Aggregate | 2.78 | 25 mm – 10 mm |
10 | 10 mm Aggregate | 2.78 | 12.5 mm – 4.75 mm |
11 | River Sand | 2.61 | 2.36 mm – 0.15 mm |
Table 8: Mixture Proportions of RPC and HPC
Materials | Mixture Proportions | |||
| RPC | RPC-F* | HPC | HPC-F** |
Cement | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Silica fume | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.12 | 0.12 |
Quartz powder | 0.31 | 0.31 | - | - |
Standard sand grade 2 | 1.09 | 1.09 | - | - |
Standard sand grade 3 | 0.58 | 0.58 | - | - |
River Sand | - | - | 2.40 | 2.40 |
20 mm aggregate | - | - | 1.40 | 1.40 |
10 mm aggregate | - | - | 1.50 | 1.50 |
30 mm steel fibres | - | 0.20 | - | - |
36 mm steel fibres | - | - | - | 0.20 |
Admixture (Polyacrylate based) | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.023 | 0.023 |
Water | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.4 | 0.4 |
* Fibre RPC ** Fibre HPC
Workability and density were recorded for the fresh concrete mixtures. Some RPC specimens were heat cured by heating in a water bath at 90°C after setting until the time of testing. Specimens of RPC and HPC were also cured in water at room temperature.
The performance of RPC and HPC was monitored over time with respect to the following parameters:
Compressive Strength (as per IS 51613 on 5 cm cubes for RPC, 10 cm cubes for HPC), Flexural Strength (as per IS 516 on 4 x 4 x 16 cm prisms for RPC, 10 x 10 x 50 cm beams for HPC),
Water Absorption (on 15 cm cubes for both RPC and HPC),
Non destructive water permeability test using Germann Instruments (on 15 cm cubes for both RPC and HPC),
Resistance to Chloride ions Penetration test (on discs of diameter 10 cm and length 5 cm as per ASTM C 120214).
Results
Fresh concrete properties
The workability of RPC mixtures (with and without fibres), measured using the mortar flow table test as per ASTM C10915, was in the range of 120 – 140%. On the other hand, the workability of HPC mixtures (with and without fibres), measured using the slump test as per ASTM C23116, was in the range of 120 – 150 mm. The density of fresh RPC and HPC mixtures was found to be in the range of 2500 – 2650 kg/m3.
Compressive strength
The compressive strength analysis throughout the study shows that RPC has higher compressive strength than HPC, as shown in Fig. 1. Compressive strength at early ages is also very high for RPC. Compressive strength is one of the factors linked with the durability of a material. In the context of nuclear waste containment materials, the compressive strength of RPC is higher than required.
Fig 1: Compressive strength of RPC and HPC
he maximum compressive strength of RPC obtained from this study is as high as 200 MPa, while the maximum strength obtained for HPC is 75 MPa. The incorporation of fibres and use of heat curing was seen to enhance the compressive strength of RPC by 30 – 50%. The incorporation of fibres did not affect the compressive strength of HPC significantly.
Flexural strength
Plain RPC was found to possess marginally higher flexural strength than HPC. Table 9 clearly explains the variation in flexural strength of RPC and HPC with the addition of steel fibres. Here the increase of flexural strength of RPC with the addition of fibres is higher than that of HPC.
Table 9: Flexural strength (as per IS 516) at 28 days (MPa)
RPC | RPC-F | HPC | HPC-F | ||
NC* | HWC** | NC* | HWC** | NC* | NC* |
11 | 12 | 18 | 22 | 8 | 10 |
*Normal Curing **Hot Water Curing
As per literature3, RPC 200 should have an approximate flexural strength of 40 MPa. The reason for low flexural strength obtained in this study could be that the fibres used (30 mm) were long. Fibre reinforced RPC (with appropriate fibres) has the potential to be used in structures without any additional steel reinforcement. This cost reduction in reinforcement can compensate the increase in the cost by the elimination of coarse aggregates in RPC to a little extent.
Water absorption
Fig. 2 presents a comparison of water absorption of RPC and HPC. A common trend of decrease in the water absorption with age is seen here both for RPC and HPC. The percentage of water absorption of RPC, however, is very low compared to that of HPC. This quality of RPC is one among the desired properties of nuclear waste containment materials.
Fig. 2: Water absorption of RPC and HPC
The incorporation of fibres and the use of heat curing is seen to marginally increase the water absorption. The presence of fibres possibly leads to the creation of channels at the interface between the fibre and paste that promote the uptake of water. Heat curing , on the other hand, leads to the development of a more open microstructure (compared to normal curing) that could result in an increased absorption.
Water permeability
The non-destructive assessment of water permeability using the Germann Instruments equipment actually only measures the surface permeability, and not the bulk permeability like in conventional test methods. A comparison of the surface water permeability of RPC and HPC is shown in Fig. 3.
It can be seen from the data that water permeability decreases with age for all mixtures. 28th day water permeability of RPC is negligible when compared to that of HPC (almost 7 times lower). As in the case of water absorption, the use of fibres increases the surface permeability of both types of concrete.
Fig. 3: Surface Water Permeability of RPC and HPC
Resistance to chloride ion penetration
Results of rapid chloride permeability test conducted after 28 days of curing are presented in Table 10. Data indicate that penetration of chloride increases when heat curing is done in concrete. Total charge passed for normal-cured RPC is negligible compared to the other mixtures. Even though heat-cured RPC shows a higher value than normal-cured RPC, in absolute terms, it is still extremely low or even negligible (<100 Coulombs). This property of RPC enhances its suitability for use in nuclear waste containment structures.
The data also indicate that addition of steel fibres leads to an increase in the permeability, possibly due to increase in conductance of the concrete. The HPC mixtures also showed very low permeability, although higher compared to RPC.
Table 10: Rapid Chloride Permeability Test (as per ASTM C 1202)
| RPC | RPC with fibres | HPC | |||
NC* | HWC** | NC* | HWC** | NC* | HWC* | |
Cumulative Charge passed in Coulombs | 4 | 94 | 140 | 400 | 250 | 850 |
ASTM C1202 classification | Negligible | Negligible | Very low | Very low | Very low | Very low |
*Normal Curing **Hot Water Curing
Summary
Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC) is an emerging technology that lends a new dimension to the term ‘high performance concrete’. It has immense potential in construction due to its superior mechanical and durability properties compared to conventional high performance concrete, and could even replace steel in some applications.
The development of RPC is based on the application of some basic principles to achieve enhanced homogeneity, very good workability, high compaction, improved microstructure, and high ductility. RPC has an ultra-dense microstructure, giving advantageous waterproofing and durability characteristics. It could, therefore, be a suitable choice for industrial and nuclear waste storage facilities.
A laboratory investigation comparing RPC and HPC led to the following conclusions: