Synergistic Enhancement of M-40 Grade Concrete: Optimizing Nano Silica and Carbon

Nanotube Proportions for Improved Mechanical Performance

Prof. Mainak Ghosal1,2
1
Chairman, All India Valuers Association, West Bengal Centre
2
PhD Research Scholar, Indian Institute of Engineering Science & Technology, Shibpur
Email: mainakghosal2010@gmail.com

Nanomaterials are a product of one of the truly revolutionary disruptive technologies invented by mankind.
Nanotechnology as it is appropriately called, can synergistically add up to more the value of all products taken
individually including cement concrete through these nanomaterials. This study investigates the mechanical
properties of M-40 Grade concrete enhanced with precise amounts of nanomaterials, specifically Nano Silica
(nS) and Carbon Nanotubes (CNT). We conducted a systematic optimization of nS and CNT by varying their
proportions in increments of 0%, 0.5%, 0.75%, 1.0%, 1.25%, and 1.5% for nS, and 0%, 0.02%, 0.05%, and
0.1% for CNT, relative to the cement weight. The optimization process utilized a standard mortar mix with
ordinary Portland cement, forming cubes of 70.7 mm, maintaining a water cement ratio of 0.5 & cement to
sand ratio of 1:3, and adjusting the water content using the IS codal formula After 28 days of standard curing,
we tested the cubes to determine the optimal nS and CNT levels. These optimized concentrations were then
applied to standard Grade M-40 concrete, as per IS:10262 (2009), to assess their mechanical impact,
confirming the beneficial synergy of the nanomaterials through microstructural characterization.

It is seen that the synergy provided by the nanomaterials can be beneficial for the cement composites if used in
a prudent way which is also proved by its micro structural characterizations.

Keywords: Cement, Concrete, Nano, Optimized, Synergy, Water

I. INTRODUCTION
Elasticity is a way to characterize the mechanical response of the material body for applied stresses that stay
within the stress-strain limit of the body. Modulus of elasticity of concrete is the ratio of stress to strain of the
concrete under the application of loads. Considering the stress-strain curve of the first cycle, the modulus
could be defined as the initial tangent modulus, secant modulus, tangent modulus or chord modulus as shown
in figure 1. The above modulus of elasticity is sometimes termed as static (secant) modulus of elasticity in
comparison with dynamic modulus of elasticity obtained by vibration test of concrete prisms or cylinders.
The latter is approximately equal to the initial tangent modulus and hence greater than the static or secant
modulus. Also, the elastic modulus is defined as the change in stress with an applied strain. Figure 1 is a
graph of stress vs. strain for normal concrete. The slope of the curve is the elastic modulus of the material.
The elastic modulus is the key material property for concrete in both approaches.

Fig. 1. Typical stress-strain curve for concrete

According to IS: 456 the modulus of concrete is 5000√ (fck), MPa, where fck is the characteristic
compressive strength of concrete. Our Paper aims to study the application of nanomaterials i.e. nS and CNT
in enhancing the elastic response of concrete with nano additions when compared with normal standard
control concrete. Previous literatures [2-22] suggest that nano materials have a beneficial effect especially
on the behavior of cement concrete over other materials including fibers.

II. MATERIAL AND METHODS

The materials used were cement-OPC (43 Grade), Fine Aggregate (FA)-River sand conforming to Zone
II of IS: 383 - 1970, Potable water, Admixture (Superplasticizer) - Polycarboxylate Ether and Nano
Materials (viz. Nano Silica & Carbon Nanotubes).

The following Tables (1 & 2) below shows the specific properties of nano silica & carbon nanotubes
used.
TABLE 1. Specific properties of Nano Silica (SiO2) used here
% Specific % Specific
Sample Content(Lit.) Gravity(Lab.) Content(Lab.) Gravity(Lit.)
 14-16% 1.12 21.4% 1.08-1.11
XLP
XTX 30-32% 1.16 40.74% 1.20-1.22
XFXLa 40-43% 1.24 41.935% 1.30-1.32

TABLE 2. Specific properties of Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes used here

Item Description
Diameter 20-40nm
Length 25-45nm
80-85%(a/c Raman
Purity
Spectrometer & SEM
analysis)
Amorphous Carbon 5-8%
Residue(Calcination in Air) 5-6% by Wt.

The following Figures (1 and 2) below shows the XRD images of Nano Silica & Carbon Nanotubes used.

Fig. 2. XRD image of nano silica used.

 Fig. 3. XRD image of Carbon Nano Tubes used.

2.1 Tests on Cement Mortar Composites:

Mortar Cubes of 70.7mmx70.7mmx70.7mm size were casted with 1 part of cement + 3 parts of sand with water added as per the
normal consistency formula of Indian standards,IS:4031,i.e., according to the standard formula P’=(P/4 +3)(1 part Cement+3parts
Sand).Here P’=Quantity of water & P=Consistency of Cement used.i.e. amount of water used to make 300gms cement paste to support a
penetration of 5-7mm in a standard Vicat mould with a Vicat needle. Nano silica were added in various proportions ranging from
0%,0.5%,0.75%,1.0%,1.25%, &1.5%,Carbon Nanotubes in proportions ranging from 0%,0.02%,0.05%, & 1.0% as per literature review
w.r.to cement wt. keeping the w/c ratio fixed at 0.4.The cubes were then ordinary cured under ordinary water at a constant temperature
of (27+ 2)°C and tested for compressive strength and tested at 3 days,7 days,28 days ,90 days,180 days & 365 days as per IS:4031. Three
(03) numbers of cubes were tested for each proportion/day.
2.2 Tests on M-40 Concrete:
Concrete cylinders(150mm Ф x300mm) size were casted with cement, FA, CA & water in proportions as per the mix design
followed by Indian standards for M-40 Grade concrete for 100 mm slump keeping the w/c=0.4.The mix proportions were
cement=400Kg/m3, CA=1293.04 Kg/m3 [CA1(90%)=1163.74 Kg/m3; CA2(10%)=129.3 Kg/m3],
FA=687.54 Kg/m3, water=157 Kg/m3. Nano Silica & Carbon Nanotubes were added in optimized proportions as obtained in result
(I). The cubes were then ordinary cured under water and tested for Modulus of Elasticity tests as per IS: 516 at 28 days. Also is
casted in the same proportions as above and tested for as per IS: 516.
Test Data
a) Sp.Gravity of Cement = 3.08 (as lab experiment suggests).
b) Chemical Admixture = Superplastcizer (Polycarboxylate Ether).
c) Sp.Gravity of (i) CA (for 20mm =2.831 & for 12.5mm=2.845).Avg. Specific Gravity of CA = 0.9x2.845
+ 0.1x2.831 = 2.8436 (ii)FA (River Sand confirming to Zone II, as per Table 4) =2.688
d) Water Absorption (i) CA =3.09, (ii) FA=Nil.
e) Free Surface Moisture (i) CA = 1.716 (ii) FA= 0.3
TABLE 3. Sieve analysis results of coarse aggregates.
% of Different
Analysis of Coarse Aggt. Fractions Remarks
IS Sieve Sizes (mm) Combined Conforming to Table 2 of
I II
Fraction I (12.5mm passing) Fraction II (20mm passing) 100% IS:383 for graded aggregate
90% 10% (I + II) of 20mm nominal size
20 99.44 50.322 0.9x99.44 0.1x50.322 94.5 95-100
10 56.70 1.062 0.9x56.7 0.1x1.062 51 25-55
4.75 -- -- -- -- -- 0 to 10
2.36 -- -- -- -- -- --

TABLE 4. Sieve analysis results of fine aggregates.

Remarks
IS. Sieve Sizes(mm) Weight Retained (gms.) %Weight Retained Cum % Weight Retained % Passing (Conforming to Zone II of
IS:383 for Fine Aggts.
4.75 -- -- -- 100 90-100
2.36 67 6.77 6.77 93.23 75-100
1.18 101 1.20 16.97 83.03 55-90
600µ 277 27.98 44.95 55.05 35-59
300µ 367 37.07 82.02 17.98 0-30
150µ 161 16.26 98.28 1.72 0-10
75µ 17 1.72 100 --
Pan 6 -- -- --
Total Weight taken = 1000 gms.
 III. TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The Test Results shows that:-
1. The mortar compressive strength determined as per IS: 4031 shows a 32.55% increase in strength at 0.75% nS addition at 28 days,
with the rate of strength gain increasing up to 59.8% at 90 days but then falling by 8.4% at 180 days at same optimization. For CNTs
the gain in strength was 38.7% at 28 days but falling to 15.48% at 90 days & 10% at 180 days. However, it is seen that with the
increased addition of nano materials like nano-silica (1%
 by cement wt.) and carbon nanotubes (0.1% by cement wt.) in OPC mortar the long term strength gain increases appreciably (as
per Table 5).
2. IS: 456 states that the modulus of concrete is 5000√ (fck)
= 5000√ (40) = 5000x6.32 = 31622.78MPa. Our test
results is well satisfied by the formula and the Modulus of Elasticity results as per IS: 516 again showed a gain of about 419 %
( for CNT added concrete) and 137 %( for nS added concrete).

TABLE 5. Strength (MPa) of nano-added OPC Mortar (% Increase w.r.t. ordinary cubes).
Avg.7 daycube Avg.90 daycube Avg.180 daycube Avg.365 daycube
Sl %NanoadditionsinCement Avg.28
strength strength strength strength
No. (OPC) (%increase) daycubestrength( (%increase) (%increase) (%increase)
% increase)
1. OPC(0 % nS/CNT) 21.08 31.89 31.20 30.01 30.01
2. OPC(0.5% nS) 23.85(13.14%) 35.51(11.35%) 41.3(32.7%) 27.47(-9.2%) 26.76(-4.29%)
3. OPC(0.75%nS)(optimized) 23.85(13.14%) 42.27(32.55%) 49.85(59.8%) 32.52(8.4%) 31.5(4.96%)
4. OPC(1.0 %nS) 25.07(18.93%) 37.36(17.15%) 42.98(37.7%) 33.68(12.2%) 32.41(8.0%)
5. OPC(1.25% nS) 23.17(9.91%) 30.85(3.26%) 39.45(26.4%) 35.24(17.4%) 31.3(4.29%)
6. OPC(1.5% nS) 23.81(12.95%) 37.79(18.5%) 33.42(7.12%) 31.23(4.07%) 29.12(-2.96%)
7. OPC(0.02% CNT)(optimized) 17.69(-10.4%) 43.75(38.7%) 35.59(15.48%) 30.89(10%) 28.53(-4.93%)
8. OPC(0.05% CNT) 27.19(-16.1%) 34.88(37.2%) 31.85(14.07%) 38.55(3.0%) 41.69(38.92%)
9. OPC(0.1% CNT) 21.69(28.9%) 24.83(9.37%) 31.5(2.08%) 30.16(23.55%) 50.78(69.21%)

Fig. 4. Strength at various stages of Nano Silica added cement composites used.

Fig. 5. Strength at various stages of Carbon Nanotubes added cement composites used.
Fig. 6. Modulus of Elasticity of Nano Silica & Carbon Nanotubes added M-40 Concrete

IV. CONCLUSIONS
1. The results showed that the optimizations for nanomaterials in OPC mortar are nS=0.75%, CNT=0.02% and TiO 2=1.0% for
cement mortar up to 28 days as per Table 4. In the long-term strength, some contradictions were noticed where more addition of
nanomaterials yielded good results.
2. Modulus of Elasticity results showed an abnormal gain of about 419 %( for CNT added concrete) and 137 %( for nS added
concrete) for which the reasons are not clear
3. Further research on micro structural studies is necessary for characterization of nanomaterials in cement and concrete.
 TABLE 6. Modulus of Elasticity (in N/mm2) of Control Concrete & Nano-Silica added concrete at 28 days at w/c Ratio of 0.4.
Type of Concrete Control Concrete[Density=2502.47kg/m3] Nano-Concrete(0.75% nS addition)
Sample1[Density=2519.65kg/m3] Sample2[Density=2455.28kg/m3]
Load Stresss Deflection(mm) Deflection(mm) Deflection(mm)
(Ton) (N/mm2) Longitudinal Lateral Longitudinal Lateral Longitudinal Lateral
Reading Value Reading Value Reading Value Reading Value Reading Value Reading Value
(R) (Rx0.01) (R) (Rx0.002) (R) (Rx0.01) (R) (Rx0.002) (R) (Rx0.01) (R) (Rx0.002)
(net) (mm) (net) (mm) (net) (mm) (net) (mm) (net) (mm) (net) (mm)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 2.83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 5.66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
15 8.49 0.005 0.00005 0 0 0.0049 0.000049 0 0 0.0033 0.000033 0.003 0.000006
20 11.32 0.008 0.00008 0.0085 0.000017 0.0062 0.000062 0.007 0.000014 0.0033 0.000033 0.003 0.000006
25 14.15 0.018 0.00018 0.019 0.000038 0.0083 0.000083 0.008 0.000016 0.0066 0.000066 0.0065 0.000013
30 16.98 0.033 0.00033 0.035 0.000070 0.011 0.00011 0.011 0.000022 0.001 0.0001 0.01 0.000020
35 19.81 0.043 0.00043 0.0455 0.000091 0.015 0.00015 0.015 0.000030 0.0023 0.00023 0.023 0.000046
38 21.508 0.183 0.00183 0.194 0.000388
(Failure)
40 22.64 0.0205 0.000205 0.021 0.000041 0.14 0.0014 0.14 0.00028
45 25.47 0.026 0.00026 0.026 0.000052 0.24 0.0024 0.24 0.00048
48 26.6 0.36 0.0036 0.36 0.00072
(Failure)
50 28.3 0.059 0.00059 0.09 0.00018
55 31.3 0.01 0.001 0.1 0.0002
(Failure)
Modulus of E= S2 – S1 E= S2 – S1 E= S2 – S1
Elasticity ℮2 – ℮1 ℮2 – ℮1 ℮2 – ℮1
(N/mm2) Where, S2 = 0.4x(21.508) with ℮2 to be Where, S2= 0.4x(31.3)with ℮2 to be Where, S2= 0.4x(26.6) with ℮2 to be
determined from Stress-Strain Curve. determined from Stress-Strain Curve. determined from Stress-Strain Curve.
& S1= to be determined from the Stress-Strain & S1= to be determined from the Stress-Strain & S1= to be determined from the Stress-Strain
-6 -6 -6
Curve at an strain[ ℮1] value of 0.5 x 10 for Curve at an strain[ ℮1] value of 0.5 x 10 for Curve at an strain[ ℮1] value of 0.5 x 10 for
all the cases. all the cases. all the cases.
E= 10.868– 5.703 =
E= 8.6032– 5.68 = 53,197.45MPa E= 12.452– 5.688 = 96,136.46MPa 1,56,752.65MPa⃰
0.00855–0.5/1000000 0.0000704–0.5/1000000 0.000033–0.5/1000000
* Subject to Experimental Variations
Average ElasticityNano-Concrete = 1,26,444.56MPa
% incr. in -- +137.69
Elasticity

TABLE 7. Modulus of Elasticity (in N/mm2) of CNT added Concrete added concrete at 28 days at w/c Ratio of 0.4.
Deflection(mm)
Load Stresss Longitudinal Lateral
(Ton) (N/mm2) Reading(R) Value(Rx0.01) Reading(R) Value(Rx0.002)
(net) (mm) (net) (mm)
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 2.83 0 0 0 0
10 5.66 0 0 0 0
15 8.49 0.001 0.00001 0.002 0.000004
20 11.32 0.002 0.00002 0.008 0.000016
25 14.15 0.003 0.00003 0.011 0.000022
30 16.98 0.004 0.00004 0.014 0.000028
35 19.81 0.005 0.00005 0.023 0.000046
40 22.64 0.006 0.00006 0.032 0.000064
45 25.47 0.007 0.00007 0.040 0.00008
50 28.31 0.008 0.00008 0.050 0.0001
55 31.14 0.009 0.00009 0.052 0.000104
60 33.97 0.011 0.00011 0.061 0.000122
65 36.80 0.012 0.00012 0.070 0.000140
70 39.63 0.013 0.00013 0.073 0.000146
75 42.46 0.015 0.00015 0.09 0.00018
80 45.29 0.016 0.00016 0.01 0.0002
85 48.12 0.018 0.00018 0.012 0.00024
90 50.96 0.019 0.00019 0.0132 0.00026
95 53.78(Failure) 0.020 0.00020 0.016 0.00032
100
 E= S2 – S1
℮2 – ℮1
Where, S2 = 0.4x(53.78) with ℮2 to be determined from Stress-Strain Curve.
Modulus of Elasticity -6
& S1= to be determined from the Stress-Strain Curve at an strain[ ℮1] value of 0.5 x 10 for all the cases.
(N/mm2)
E= 21.51– 5.68 = 2,76,589.8MPa
0.000058–0.5/1000000
* Subject to Experimental Variations
% incr. in Elasticity +419.93%

REFERENCES
[1] https://theconstructor.org/concrete/modulus-of-elasticity-of-concrete- factors-affecting-it/5166/.
[2] Zhu, W., Bartos,P.J.M. & Porro, A., Mat. Struct. (2004), 37:649. DOI:101007/BF02483294.
[3] Golafshani,E.M., Rahai,A. and Sebt ,M.H., Construct Build. Mater., 2014, Vol 61, 230-240.
[4] Won ,J.P., Hong ,B.T., Choi,T.J., Lee ,S.J. and Kang ,J.W.,
Compos.Struct., 2012, Vol 94, 1443-1449.
[5] Yoo,D.Y., Lee ,J.H. and Yoon,Y.S., Compos.Struct., 2013, Vol 106, 742-753.
[6] Tokgoz ,S., Dundar,C. and Tanrikulu,A.K., J.Constr.Steel Res., 2014, Vol 74, 98-107.
[7] Marikunte,S., Aldea,C. and Shah,S.P., Adv.Cem.Based Mater., 1997, Vol 5, 100-108.
[8] Shu,X., Graham,R.K.,Huang ,B. and Burdette,E.G.,Mater.Des., 2015, Vol 65, 1222-1228.
[9] Xu,G. and Hannant,D.J., Cem.Concr.Compos., 1991, Vol 3, 95-106.
[10] Uysal,M. and Tanyildizi,H., Construct.Build.Mater., 2012,Vol 27, 404-
414.
[11] Bezerra,E.M., Joaquim,A.P. Jr, Savastano,H., John,V.M. and Agopyan,V.M., Cem.Concr.Compos., 2006, Vol 28, 555-
563.
[12] Sanchez,F. and Ince,C., Compos.Sci.Technol., 2009, Vol 69, 1310-1318.
[13] Musso,S., Tulliani ,J.M., Ferro,G. and Tagliaferro,A.,
Compos.Sci.Technol., 2009. Vol 69, 1985-1990.
[14] Abu Al-Rub,R.K., Ashour,A.I. and Tyson,B.M., Construct.Build.Mater., 2012, Vol 35, 647-655.
[15] Morsy,M.S., Alsayed,S.H. and Aquel,M., Construct. Build.Mater., 2011, Vol 25, 145-149.
[16] Parveen,S., Rana,S. and Fanguerio,R., J.Nanomater., 2013, DOI:10.1155/2013/710175.
[17] Kumar S. et al. ‘Effect of multiwalled carbon nanotubes on mechanical strength of cement paste’. Journal of Materials in
Civil Engineering. 2012; 24(1): 84–91.
[18] Madhavi T.Ch, et al. ‘Effect of Multiwalled carbon nanotubes on mechanical properties of concrete’. International Journal
of Scientific Research. 2013; 2(6): 166–68.
[19] Kulkarni,Vijay R., ‘High Performance Concrete for High-Rise Buildings: Some Crucial Issues’, International Journal of
Research in Engineering and Technology, 2016, DOI: 10.15623/ijret.2016.0532004, 26-33.
[20] Chatterjee, Anjan K., ‘Nanotechnology and Sustainable Concrete: A Unique’, Journal of the Chinese Ceramic Society, 2015,
43(10), 1385- 1395.
[21] Ghosal M, Chakraborty, ‘A Study On Applicability Aspects Of Nano Materials In Cement-Construction’, International
Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 2016, DOI: 10.15623/ijret.2016.0532027, pp 179-187.