11 JANUARY 2011 THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL

Some studies on concrete mix

proportioning following
IS 10262:2009
M.C. Nataraja and Lelin Das
The BIS code IS 10262 on concrete mix design has
been revised and published in December 2009. The
new code is in line with ACI 211 method and provides
provisions for concrete proportioning with mineral and
chemical admixtures. Design of pumpable concrete is
also included in the revision. The concrete mix design
methods practiced in countries such as Britain, India
and USA are based on similar principles and substantial
experiments with locally available materials. Therefore,
the procedures are more or less same with minor
differences. Here is an attempt to present a few mix
designs following IS 10262:2009 that were tested in the
laboratory. The mixes were modifed from the point of
economy while satisfying the design requirements.
Keywords: Aggregates, cement, sand, workability, MSA,
w/c ratio, mix proportioning.
Concrete mix design is a process of specifying the mixture
of ingredients required to meet anticipated properties of
fresh and hardened concrete. Proportioning ingredients
in a concrete mix is a well-established practice around
the world with many countries having their own
methods for doing so.
1-7
Such methods are developed
based on empirical relations, charts, graphs, and tables
developed as outcomes of extensive experiments and
investigations with locally available materials. The
method development therefore is based on trial and
error principles. Some of the well-known concrete mix
design methods are: ACI Mix Design Method, USBR
Mix design practice, British Mix design Method, and
BIS Recommended guidelines. The scope of this study
is to compare the BIS and ACI recommended mix design
guidelines. The major difference in the two codes are
for calculating the aggregates content, cement content,
and water cement (w/c) ratio. In the ACI method,
sand content is calculated after calculating the coarse
aggregate content. In the old BIS method, the process
was the other way around. The order of calculating the
coarse aggregate in the new BIS code is now similar to
the ACI method.
8-11
The results show that old BIS method consumes more
cement when generalised w/c curve is used. Providing
for extra cement is understandable considering the
quality of cement available in the past when the code
was introduced. In addition, availability of limited
research data on cement and concrete at that time would
have dissuaded code writers from experimenting with
reduced cement content.
The w/c ratio is higher in the ACI mix than that in the
old BIS mix.
THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL JANUARY 2011 12
Although, sand content decreases as the strength
requirement increases in both codes, it is lower in the
old BIS mix design than in the ACI mix design.
To form the basis for a mix design, it is important to
develop the w/c curve for the materials actually to be
used rather than arbitrarily using any available curve.
However, in the absence of such data, to start with, the
w/c ratio to be assumed can be based on such available
relationship as already established. Table 5 of IS 456:2000
can also be referred to select the w /c ratio for the frst
trial mix.
12
However, this table gives the limiting value
of w/c ratio based on the exposure condition; therefore,
a suitable lower value should be selected based on the
experience of the mix designer. In other words, one
should be careful in selecting the w/c ratio. Depending
on the frst assumed w/c ratio, the cement content will
vary substantially. For designing M20 concrete for mild
exposure, one can assume w/c as 0.5 or 0.55 to start with,
and with this cement content also changes. Table 1
illustrates the basic data used in the two codes.
Table 1. Basic data used in new BIS and ACI mix
design methods
Parameter BIS
Method
New
ACI
Method
Characteristic compressive strength at 28
days
yes yes
Standard deviation of compressive strength yes yes
Degree of workability Slump Slump
Type and maximum size of aggregates yes yes
Nominal maximum size of coarse aggregates
(NMSA)
yes yes
Dry rodded unit weight of coarse aggregates
(DRUW)
no yes
Fine aggregates (sand) Fineness
modulus
(FM)
Fineness
modulus
(FM)
Specifc gravity of cement, coarse and fne
aggregates
yes yes
Water absorption and moisture content
adjustment
yes yes
Type of construction yes yes
Exposure condition yes yes
Air/Non-air entrainment no yes
Superplasticiser, mineral admixtures yes yes
Salient feature of new BIS approach
(IS 10262:2009)
Table 1 shows that the basic data required in the new
BIS method is very similar to that of the ACI method
of mix design. The new BIS is applicable to ordinary
and standard concrete grades only. The durability
requirements, limitations on w/c ratio and maximum
cement contents are as per IS 456:2000. The requirements
for selecting of w/c ratio, water content and estimations
of coarse aggregate content and fne aggregate content
have been reviewed and modifed. Since the air content
in normal (non-air entrained) concrete is not of much
signifcance and is not a part of IS 456:2000, considering
air content is not in the new procedure.
The BIS method (IS 10262:2009)
This standard provides the guidelines for proportioning
concrete mixes as per the requirements using the concrete
making materials including other supplementary
materials identifed for this purpose. The proportioning
is carried out to achieve specified characteristics
at specified age, workability of fresh concrete and
durability requirements.
Data for mix proportioning
The following data are required for mix proportioning
of a particular grade of concrete:
Grade designation
Type of cement
Maximum nominal size of aggregate (MNSA)
Minimum cement content
Maximum water cement ratio
Workability
Exposure conditions as per Table 4 and Table 5
of IS 456:2000
Maximum temperature of concrete at the time
of placing
Method of transporting and placing
Early age strength requirements, if required
Type of aggregate
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
13 JANUARY 2011 THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL
Maximum cement content and
Whether an admixture is, or is not, to be used and
the type of admixture and the condition of use.
Steps for proportioning
The target average compressive strength ( f
ck
) at 28 days
is determined by using equation 1
f
ck
= f
ck
+k s ......(1)
where,
f
ck
= characteristic compressive strength at 28 days,
s = standard deviation of compressive strength,
t = a statistic, depending upon the accepted proportion of
low results and the number of tests and is taken as 1.65.
The standard deviation is to be established separately
based on the strength data. When suffcient test results
for a particular grade of concrete are not available, the
value of standard deviation given in Table 1 of the
code or from IS 456:2000 may be assumed in the frst
instance.
Selecting individual parameters of mix
proportion
Selecting water cement ratio
The relationship between strength and free water
cement ratio should preferably be established for the
materials actually to be used. In the absence of such
data, the preliminary free water cement ratio by mass
corresponding to the target strength at 28 days may be
selected from the established relationship, if available.
Otherwise, the water cement ratio given in Table 5 of
IS 456:2000 for respective environment exposure
condition may be used as a starting point. The free
water-cement ratio selected should be checked against
the limiting water cement ratio for the requirement of
durability and the lower of the two values should be
adopted.
Note: The supplementary cementitious materials or
mineral admixtures shall also be considered in water
cement ratio calculations in accordance with Table 5 of
IS 456:2000.
Selecting water content
The quantity of maximum mixing water per unit
volume of concrete may be determined from Table 2
of IS 10262:2009. The water content shown there is for
angular coarse aggregate and for 25-50 mm slump range.
It should be adjusted for other conditions such as change
12.
13.
in slump, type of aggregate and use of admixtures as
explained in the code.
Calculating cementitious material content
The cement and supplementary cementitious material
content per unit volume of concrete may be calculated
from the free water cement ratio and the quantity of
water per unit volume of concrete. The cementitious
material content should be checked against the
minimum requirements for durability and the greater of
the two values should be adopted. The maximum cement
content should be in accordance with IS 456:2000.
Estimating coarse aggregate proportion
The approximate values for coarse aggregate volume
are given in Table 3 of IS 10262 for a water cement ratio
of 0.5, which may be suitably adjusted for other water
cement ratios. For producing a more workable concrete
that can fow around congested reinforcing steel, it may
be desirable to reduce the estimated coarse aggregate
content.
Combining different coarse aggregate
fractions
The coarse aggregate used must conform to IS 383.
Coarse aggregates of different sizes may be combined
in suitable proportions to result in an overall grading
conforming to Table 2 of IS 383 for a particular nominal
maximum size of aggregate.
Estimating fne aggregate proportion
The coarse and fne aggregate contents are determined
by fnding out the absolute volume of cementitious
materials, water and the chemical admixture; by
dividing their masses by their respective specifc gravity,
multiplying by 1/1000 and subtracting the result of their
summation from unit volume. The values so obtained
are divided into coarse and fne aggregate fractions by
volume in accordance with coarse aggregate proportions
already determined earlier. The coarse and fne aggregate
contents are then determined by multiplying with their
respective specifc gravities and multiplying by 1000.
Trial mixes
The calculated mix proportions is required to be checked
in trial batches. Workability of the Trial mix No. 1 should
be measured. The mix must be carefully observed to
ensure that it is free from segregation and bleeding. If
the measured workability is different from the stipulated
value, the water and/or admixture content should be
adjusted. With the adjustment, the mix proportions is
THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL JANUARY 2011 14
recalculated keeping the free water cement ratio at the
preselected value, in trial mix Number 2.
In addition, two more trial mixes Number 3 and Number
4 are made with the water content same as trial Number
2 and varying the free water cement ratio by 10 percent
of the preselected value
Mix Numbers 3 and 4 should normally provide suffcient
information including the relationship between
compressive strength and water cement ratio, from
which the mix proportions for feld may be arrived.
The concrete for feld trials can then be made for actual
production.
ACI Method
In 1991, the American Concrete Institute (ACI) published
its guidelines for normal, heavyweight and mass
concrete mix design.
8
Now the Absolute Volume Method
of mix design as described by the ACI Method and the
design steps for mix proportioning as recommended by
ACI Committee 211 are discussed:
13
1. The required (target) average compressive
strength (f
cr
) at 28 days for mix design is
determined by adding up an empirical factor (k)
to the design compressive strength (fc ) as per
equation 4:
f
cr
= f
c
+ k ......(4)
2. The w/c ratio is selected based on the target
strength and the type of concrete (air-entrained
or non air-entrained).
3. Air content, as percentage of the concrete volume,
is estimated depending upon the air-entrained
or non-air-entrained type of concrete, exposure
conditions, and NMSA.
4. Slump, as measure of workability, is selected
depending upon the type of structure and
complexity of the pouring conditions.
5. Water content, is determined based on the
NMSA, type of concrete (air-entrained or non-
air entrained), and specifed slump. Then it is
adjusted for the types of aggregates.
6. Cement content is calculated based on the w/c
ratio and the water content.
7. Coarse aggregates content, as dry rodded
bulk (percentage) of concrete unit volume, is
determined based on the NMSA, and the fneness
modulus of sand.
8. Once the water content, cement content, air
content, and the coarse aggregate content per unit
volume of the concrete is determined, the fne
aggregate (F
agg
) is calculated by subtracting the
absolute volume of the known ingredients from
unit volume of the fresh concrete (in this case,
1 m
3
) as following:
F
agg
=1- Y ......(5)
where, Y = sum of all other ingredients (air, water,
cement and coarse aggregates) in cubic meter
calculated for 1 m
3
of concrete.
9. Finally, water content is adjusted based on the
absorption and the current moisture content of the
coarse and fne aggregates, in account of saturated
surface dry condition of the aggregates.
Similarities between BIS and ACI mix
design process
Both the methods are based on the empirical relations,
which are derived from extensive experiments done
with the locally available materials. Thus, both
methods extensively use tables and graphs during the
design process and follow logical determination of
the ingredients by establishing the targeted strength
for trial batch. Trial batch strength is derived from the
required design strength of the structural concrete and
the statistical analysis to ensure that the mix design
meets or exceeds the design strength. Once the target
strength is established, both methods advance the
process by determining the w/c ratio. It is common
in both the cases that the cement content is calculated
based on the relationships of two parameters: the w/c
ratio and the cement content both derived separately
and independently. These two parameters are checked
against the limiting values in order to ensure the
durability conditions.
Differences between BIS and ACI mix
design process
The following are the major differences between the two
design methods.
Target strength: The BIS method uses equation 1 but
the ACI method uses equation 2 to determine the
target average compressive strength. Although both
the methods utilize the standard deviation to calculate
the target strength, there is a difference in the technique
15 JANUARY 2011 THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL
of calculation. When suffcient data are not available
to establish standard deviation, the ACI method
recommends use of empirical values to determine the
target strength, whereas the old BIS method suggests that
the value of standard deviation be based on the quality
control. In the new BIS method, standard deviation is
to be calculated separately for each grade of concrete
and the procedure for the same is discussed. When
suffcient test results for a particular grade of concrete
are not available, the value of standard deviation given
in Table 1 of the code is assumed for the frst trial mix.
Measure of workability: The old BIS method uses the
compacting factor as a measure of workability, whereas
new BIS and ACI use the slump.
Water to cement (w/c) ratio : In the ACI method, w/c ratio
is determined in combination with the target strength
and the type of concrete (air/non-air entrainment).
Although, old BIS discusses the air entrainment, the
selection of w/c ratio in this method is a sole function of
target strength. Curves for w/c are available for different
cements based in their strengths. Generalised w/c
curve is also proposed. However the new BIS suggests
developing w/c curve based on the type of materials
used in the project or using the w/c values given in
IS 456:2000 based on durability conditions to start
with.
Water content: The old BIS method determines the water
content based on target strength, type of aggregates,
NMSA and compacting factor. Accordingly, tables are
given for medium and high strength concretes. In the
case of the ACI method, water content is dependent on
air-entrainment, types of aggregates, slump, and NMSA.
Therefore, unlike old BIS method, water content can be
determined independent of target strength. However,
the new BIS is similar to ACI method wherein a table
for maximum water content per cubic meter of concrete
for nominal maximum size of aggregate (Clauses 42, A-5
and B-5) is given.
Coarse and fne aggregate content: In the ACI method,
coarse aggregate content is determined without knowing
the absolute volume of fne aggregates. Contrary to the
ACI method, the old BIS method determines the fne
aggregate content, as a percentage of total aggregate
by absolute volume first, and the coarse aggregate
content is determined once the proportion of all other
ingredients are known. In this method, sand grading
zones are used as a governing parameter for sand
content determination, whereas the fneness modulus is
used in the ACI method for selecting the bulk volume of
dry rodded coarse aggregate. The old BIS method does
not utilize the fneness modulus and dry rodded unit
weight of aggregates. However, the new BIS has the
same procedure as the ACI method, wherein the volume
of coarse aggregate per unit volume of total aggregate
for different zones of fne aggregate (Clause 4.4 and A-7)
is calculated based on maximum size of aggregate.
Previous work on proportioning of normal and high
strength concrete using the provisions of draft code
IS 10262 and other methods using cement as well as
supplementary cementitious materials are published
elsewhere.
6,7
Numerical example of the mix design
Design of M20 concrete mix as per IS 10262:2009,
Concrete mix proportioning guidelines (First
revision)
A-1 Design stipulations for proportioning
i. Grade designation : M20
ii. Type of cement : OPC 43 grade confrming to
IS 8112
iii. Maximum nominal size of aggregates : 20 mm
iv. Minimum cement content : 320 kg/m
3
v. Maximum water cement ratio : 0.55
vi. Workability : 75 mm (slump)
vii. Exposure condition : Mild
viii. Degree of supervision : Good
ix. Type of aggregate : Crushed angular aggregate
x. Maximum cement content : 450 kg/m
3
xi. Chemical admixture : Not recommended
A-2 Test data for materials
i. Cement used : OPC 43 grade confrming to IS 8112
ii. Specifc gravity of cement : 3.15
iii. Specifc gravity of
i. Coarse aggregate : 2.68
ii. Fine aggregate : 2.65
iv. Water absorption
i. Coarse aggregate : 0.6 percent
ii. Fine aggregate : 1.0 percent
v. Free (surface) moisture
i. Coarse aggregate : Nil (absorbed moisture full)
ii. Fine aggregate : Nil
vi. Sieve analysis
i. Coarse aggregate: Conforming to Table 2 of IS 383
ii. Fine aggregate: Conforming to Zone I of IS 383
THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL JANUARY 2011 16
A-3 Target strength for mix proportioning
It is given by f'
ck
= f'
ck
+ 1.65 s = 20 + 1.65 x 4 = 26.60
N/mm
2
A-4 Selection of water cement ratio
From Table 5 of IS 456:2000, maximum water cement
ratio = 0.55 (Mild exposure)
Based on experience adopt water cement ratio as 0.50
which is less than 0.55 from durability and hence ok.
A-5 Selection of water content
From Table 2, maximum water content = 186 litres
(for 25 mm 50 mm slump range and for 20 mm
aggregates)
Estimated water content for 75 mm slump = 186 + 3/100
x 186 = 191.6 liters
A-6 Calculation of cement content
Water cement ratio = 0.50
Cement content = 191.6/0.5 = 383 kg/m
3
>
320 kg/m
3
(given)
From Table 5 of IS: 456, minimum cement content for
mild exposure condition = 300 kg/m
3
Hence OK.
A-7 Proportion of volume of coarse aggregate and
fne aggregate content
From Table 3, volume of coarse aggregate corresponding
to 20 mm size aggregate and fne aggregate (Zone I) for
water-cement ratio of 0.50 =0.60
A-8 Mix calculations
The mix calculations per unit volume of concrete shall
be as follows:
Volume of concrete = 1 m
3
Volume of cement = [383.16/3.15] x[1/1000] =0.122 m
3
Volume of water = [192/1] x [1/1000] = 0.192 m
3
Volume of all in aggregates (e) = a (b + c)
= 1 (0.122 + 0.192) = 0.686 m
3
Volume of coarse aggregates
= e x Volume of CA x specifc gravity of CA
= 0.686 x 0.6 x 2.68 x 1000 = 1103 kg
Volume of fne aggregates
= e x Volume of FA x specifc gravity of FA
= 0.686 x 0.4 x 2.65 x 1000 = 727 kg
A-9 Mix proportions for trial number 1
Cement = 383 kg/m
3
Water = 191.6 kg/m
3
Fine aggregate = 727 kg/m
3
Coarse aggregates = 1103 kg/m
3
Water cement ratio = 0.50
Yield =2404.6 kg
Aggregates are used in SSD condition.
Trial mixes
Laboratory results: Slump and compacting factor of the
above mix when tested in laboratory were 90 mm and
0.93 respectively. The slump was slightly more than the
required and hence the mix was accepted without any
modifcation to reduce slump. Six concrete cubes were
cast for compression testing at 7 and 28 days. As per BIS,
two more mixes were worked out having variation of
10 percent of water cement ratio, and keeping water
content constant. All three mixes are presented in Table 2
and the workability results along with 7 and 28-day
results are presented in Table 3.
As mentioned in the code, a graph using these three
water cement ratios and their corresponding strengths
was plotted to work out the mix proportions for the
given target strength for feld application. This is shown
in Figure 1. However, durability requirements was to
be kept in mind. All the three mixes resulted in desired
workability but more strength than required. Here w/c
ratio based on durability requirements controlled the
fnal mix.
Table 3. Workability and compressive strength results
Trial Water /
cement
ratio
Slump
mm
Comp-
acting
factor
7-day
strength
28-day
strength
Obser-
vation
1 0.50 90 0.93 29.6 40.7 Cohesive
mix
2 0.45 70 0.91 34.2 47.6 Cohesive
mix
3 0.55 100 0.91 23.8 34.2 Cohesive
mix
Table 2. Proportions per cubic meter of concrete
Trial Water,
kg
Cement,
kg
Water /
cement,
ratio
Fine
aggregate,
kg
Coarse
aggregate,
kg
Yield,
kg
1 191.6 383 0.50 727 1103 2405
2 191.6 426 0.45 713 1082 2413
3 191.6 348 0.55 739 1121 2400
17 JANUARY 2011 THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL
The compressive strength of the trial mix 1 was
signifcantly more than required and hence uneconomical.
This was due to high cement content and use of high
strength cement. The strength of trial mix II is still higher.
The strength of trial Mix III at 28 days was still slightly
higher than required, having a slightly higher slump.
At this stage of design, as the trial Mix III satisfes all
the requirements, it can be used in the feld. Though
this mix satisfes all requirements, it was found to be
uneconomical as plasticisers and mineral admixtures
were not used to reduce the cement content.
So, one more trial mix was designed to reduce the cement
content and using a locally available plasticiser. Five%
of water was reduced using only 0.5% plasticiser. The
proportion is presented in the Table 4. The strength and
workability results are shown in Table 5.
Table 4. Proportions per cubic metre of concrete
Trial Water
kg
Cement
kg
w/c
ratio
FA
kg
CA
kg
Yield
kg
1-S 180 327 0.55 1151 759 2417
Table 5. Workability and compressive strength results
Trial Water /
cement
ratio
Slump
mm
Comp-
acting
factor
7-day
strength
28-day
strength
Observ-
ation
1-S 0.55 60 0.89 21.6 30.2 Cohesive
mix
Here the strength at 28 days is slightly higher. However,
this mix has resulted in the desired strength and
workability consuming minimum cement. The cement
content is slightly more than the minimum suggested.
Hence, it can be regarded as the fnal design mix for
feld application. It is possible to reduce the cement
further if mineral admixtures such as fy ash or GGBFS
are permitted. This is not tried here. In any case, the
minimum cementitious material content should be
satisfed as required.
Design of M30 concrete mix as per
IS 10262:2009
A-1 Design stipulations for proportioning
1. Grade designation: M30
2. Type of cement: OPC 43 grade confrming to IS 8112
3. Maximum nominal size of aggregates: 20 mm
4. Minimum cement content : 350 kg/m
3
5. Maximum water cement ratio : 0.50
6. Workability : 25 - 50 mm (slump)
7. Exposure condition : Moderate
8. Degree of supervision : Good
9. Type of aggregate : Crushed angular aggregate
10. Maximum cement content : 450 kg/m
3
11. Chemical admixture : Not recommended
The target strength = 30 + 1.65 x 5 = 38.25 N/mm
2
The mix proportion for the trial No. 1 (frst mix) was
as follows.
Mix proportions for trial number 1
Cement = 413 kg/m
3
Water = 186 kg/m
3
Fine aggregate = 706 kg/m
3
Coarse aggregates = 1117 kg/m
3
Water cement ratio = 0.45
Yield =2422 kg
Laboratory results: The laboratory results are shown
in Table 6.
Table 6. Workability and compressive strength results
for M30 mix
Trial Water /
cement
ratio
Slump,
mm
Comp-
acting
factor
7-day
strength
28-day
strength
Observ-
ation
1-S 0.45 35 0.87 36.6 51.2 Cohesive
mix
THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL JANUARY 2011 18
Here the 28-day strength is substantially higher, though
has the desired workability. Hence trial mixes are
needed as explained in the previous design to economize
the mix. However, this is not attempted.
Design of M40 grade pumpable concrete as per
IS 10262:2009 for the following data
A-1 Design stipulations for proportioning
a) Grade designation : M40
b) Type of cement : OPC 43 grade confrming to
IS 8112
c) Maximum nominal size of aggregates : 20 mm,
angular
d) Minimum cement content : 350 kg/m
3
e) Maximum water cement ratio : 0.45
f) Workability : 120 mm (slump)
g) Exposure condition : Severe (for reinforced
concrete)
h) Method of concrete placing : Pumping
i) Degree of supervision : Good
j) Type of aggregate : Crushed angular aggregate
k) Maximum cement content : 450 kg/m
3
l) Chemical admixture type : Superplasticiser (1 % is
recommended to get 25% reduction of water, Sp. Gr.=
1.14)
Here the target strength = 40 + 1.65 x 5
= 48.25 N/mm
2
The mix proportion for the trial No. 1 (frst mix) was
as follows.
Cement = 370 kg/m
3
Water = 148 kg/m
3
Fine aggregate = 852 kg/m
3
Coarse aggregates = 1097 kg/m
3
Chemical admixture = 3.7 kg/m
3
Water cement ratio = 0.40
Yield of concrete = 2467 kg
Laboratory results
Aggregates are used in SSD condition. The workability
in terms of slump and compacting factor were 80 mm
and 0.92 respectively. The compressive strength of
the concrete based on 28-day cube test is presented in
Table 7.
Table 7. Workability and compressive strength results
for M40 mix
Trial w/c
ratio
Slump
mm
Comp-
acting
factor
7-day
strength
28-day
strength
Observ-
ation
1-S-40 0.40
SP=1%
80 0.92 38.2 55.5 Cohesive
mix
Here the slump is less compared to the required slump
of 120 mm. Hence the SP dosage was increased, to get
the desired workability. The 28-day strength is 55.5 MPa
as against the required strength of 48.25 MPa.
Suggestion: Increase the water content marginally such
that w/c = 0.42. Doing that will decrease the strength and
increase workability marginally. However, the dosage
of superplasticiser is increased to 1.5% and the results
of this mix is presented in Table 8.
Table 8. Workability and compressive strength results
for modifed M40 mix
Trial Water /
Cement
ratio
Slump
mm
Comp-
acting
factor
7-day
strength
28-day
strength
Observ-
ation
1-S 0.42
SP=1.5%
110 0.95 36.8 56.2 Cohesive
mix
The 28 day strength of this mix was more than the
required. If required, one more trial can be designed
and tested.
Conclusions
Following conclusions can be drawn based on the
limited study conducted.
The code IS 10262:2009 is drafted in line with
ACI 211.1 code. All modifcations in the code
are encouraging to use available supplementary
materials.
The frst mix may not lead to economical design
and trial mixes may be necessary. The first
mix may yield higher strength as the water
cement ratio is kept below what is required for
durability.
Even the mix with higher w/c ratio will have
substantially higher strength when compared to
the target strength. This mix has to be invariably
used as the mix with lower w/c ratio increases
the strength further. Economy in the mix design
is possible if plasticisers and mineral admixtures
are used.
1.
2.
3.
19 JANUARY 2011 THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL
The procedure of mix proportioning for standard
concretes of low strength range is demonstrated.
Use of M20-M30 concrete is quite common
in many projects and hence these mixes are
considered. M40 pumpable concrete mix is also
demonstrated.
The concept of trial mixes is demonstrated for M20
concrete by way of graphical representation as it is
not covered in the new IS 10262 code. However it
is well demonstrated in the old IS 10262 code.
Further studies are required for using fy ash and
GGBFS in high strength and high performance
pumpable concretes.
References
Nataraja, M.C., Dhang, N and Gupta, A.P., Computer aided concrete mix
proportioning, The Indian Concrete Journal, September 1997, Vol. 71, No. 9,
pp. 487-492.
Nataraja, M.C., Dhang, N and Gupta, A. P., A Simple equation for concrete
mix design curves of IS 10262:1982, The Indian Concrete Journal, February
1999, Vol. 73, No. 2, pp. 111-115.
Nataraja, M.C., Dhang, N. and Gupta, A. P., Computerised Concrete Mixture
Proportioning Based on BIS Method-A Critical Review, Fifth International
Conference on Concrete Technology for Developing Countries, NCCBM, New
Delhi, 17-19 Nov. 99.
Nataraja, M.C and Patil Gopal Reddy, Proportioning of High Strength
Concrete Mixes, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Innovative world
of Concrete, ICI-IWC-93, August 1993, India, Vol. 2, pp. 3-223 to 3-232.
Nataraja, M.C and Anil Kumar T.V., Computerised Fly ash Concrete Mix
Design as per IS: 10262-1982 using Provisions of IS: 456-2000, INCONTEST-
2003, CD-ROM Proceedings of the international seminar on industrial structures,
Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (India), Coimbatore, India.
September 2003, pp 39-40.
Nataraja, M.C and Ramalinga Reddy, B.M, Bavanishankar, S. and Barathraj
Etigi., Mix design and some properties of concrete containing Ground
granulated Blast Furnace Slag, pp. 491-500, II CANMET-ACI International
conference on Concrete Technology for Sustainable Development, Hyderabad,
March 2005.
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Dr. M.C. Nataraja holds a PhD from Indian
Institute of Technology, Kharagpur. Presently,
he is a Professor in the department of civil
engineering at Sri Jayachamarajendra College of
Engineering, Mysore. He has research experience
of 25 years and has published over 100 technical
papers in national and international journals and
conferences. His areas of interest are SFRC, concrete mix
design and controlled low strength materials. He is in the
international technical committee of PROTECT in connection
with international conferences.
Mr. Lelin Das received his BE in Civil Engineering,
M.Tech in Structural Engineering and is pursuing
his PhD at Sri Jayachamarajendra College of
Engineering, Mysore. Presently, he is a Technical
Offcer at Ultratech Cement Ltd. at Mysore.
His research interests include use of marginal
materials in concrete, special concretes and
concrete mix design.
Nataraja, M.C, Lelin Das and N. Richard Sandeep, Comparison of indian
standard draft method and ACI method of concrete mix proportioning,
Second National seminar on Advances in Materials and Structure, IIT, Chennai,
India.
______Standard practice for selecting proportions for normal, heavyweight, and
mass concrete, ACI 211.1-91 (1991), ACI Committee 211, Farmington Hills,
MI.
______Recommended guidelines for concrete mix design, IS 10262:1982, Bureau
of India Standards, New Delhi, India.
______Indian standard concrete mix proportioning - Guidelines, IS 10262:2009,
(First revision Bureau of India Standards, New Delhi, India
______Handbook on concrete mixes (based on Indian Standards), SP: 23-1988,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India
______Code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete (fourth edition), 2000,
IS 456:2000, Bureau of India Standards, New Delhi, India.
Neville, A.M., Concrete Technology, Fourth edition, Pearson Education,
New Delhi.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
We at ICJ offer an opportunity to our readers to contribute articles and
be a part of a big family of ICJ authors.
In particular, we will appreciate receiving contributions on the
following:
Articles bearing on innovative design and construction
Articles dealing with challenging construction problems and how they were solved.
Just a Point of view covering your opinion on any facet of concrete, construction and
civil engineering
All contributions will be reviewed by expert Editorial Committee. Limit your contribution to
about 2000 words only.
Contact: The Editor, The Indian Concrete Journal, ACC Limited, L.B. Shastri Marg, Thane 400 604.
Tel: +91 (22) 33027646 E-mail: editor@icjonline.com

Be an ICJ
Author