International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 9, Issue 5, May 2018, pp. 575–583, Article ID: IJCIET_09_05_061

Available online at http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=9&Issue=5
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON M30 GRADE

CONCRETE WITH PARTIAL REPLACEMENT
OF CEMENT WITH EGG SHELL POWDER
Dr. Ch. Kannam Naidu
Civil Engineering Department, VIIT, Duvvada, Andhra Pradesh, India

Dr. Ch. Vasudeva Rao

Civil Engineering Department, AITAM, Tekkali, Andhra Pradesh, India

Dr. G. Venkata Rao

Civil Engineering Department, VIIT, Duvvada, Andhra Pradesh, India

A.Y.D.T. Akhilesh
Civil Engineering Department, VIIT, Duvvada, Andhra Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT
An experimental study, on M30 grade concrete after partial replacement of cement
with Egg Shell Powder (ESP), has been done to reduce the cost of concrete without
affecting its compressive strength. The study reveals that the use of ESP, which has been
collected from poultry industries, as a good replacement for Ordinary Portland Cement
(OPC) in M30 Grade concrete as it has been given good results. The reason behind
choosing the ESP as partial replacement since it has nearly same chemical composition
as that of limestone. In this study M30 grade concrete cubes have been casted according
to IS 10262:2009 by replacing the cement with the ESP at 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, and
25% by its weight as partial replacement. The compressive strength of the casted cubes
have been determined after 7 and 28 days moist curing and compared with the
characteristic strength conventional concrete. The results reveal that at 10% ESP
replacement the strength is higher than conventional concrete and indicates that 10%
ESP is an optimum content for maximum strength. Among the products like Rice Husk
Ash, Fly Ash, Silica Fumes etc. the Egg Shells are also known to have good prospects in
minimizing the usage of cement.
Keywords: M30 grade concrete, Egg Shell Powder, Ordinary Portland Cement, IS
10262:2009, Partial Replacement

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 575 editor@iaeme.com

 Experimental Study On M30 Grade Concrete With Partial Replacement Of Cement With Egg
Shell Powder

Cite this Article: Dr. Ch. Kannam Naidu, Dr. Ch. Vasudeva Rao, Dr. G. Venkata Rao
and A.Y.D.T. Akhilesh, Experimental Study On M30 Grade Concrete With Partial
Replacement Of Cement With Egg Shell Powder, International Journal of Civil
Engineering and Technology, 9(5), 2018, pp. 575–583.
http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJCIET?Volume=9&Issue=5

1. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays concrete is mostly used material in constructions like buildings, roads etc. The
concrete is made with the materials include cement, fine aggregate and coarse aggregate.
Presently huge demand is there for cement and day by day the cost of the cement is also
increasing. Of course it is a well-known fact that during manufacturing of the cement lots of
carbon dioxide is released and affecting living animals. The utilization of cement can be
minimized by partial replacement of Egg Shell Powder with cement in making concrete.
Presently India has become the third largest egg producer in the world reported by Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) Statistics Division. Calcium rich Egg Shell has almost
similar chemical composition of lime stone so it can be used as binder material in making the
concrete.
The ASTM International C150 allowed up to a 5 % mass fraction of limestone
incorporation in Ordinary Portland Cement in 2004 (ASTM Annual Book of Standards ,
2004). But the performance of Portland cement does not affect for 5% of limestone
incorporation (Hawkins et al. 2003). Even higher limestone percentage can also be used at
lower w/c ratios in concrete (Bentz et al. 2009). The cement is substituted with limestone
powder makes sense in concretes reducing carbon dioxide emissions and saving money and
energy (Bonavetti, V et al. 2003). Instead of limestone, as it is in downfall trend in extraction,
identifying similar material from waste is a better idea. Around 250,000 tons of egg shell is
produced yearly universal by the food processing manufacturing only. Out of that 10000 -
11000 tons of egg shell is being produced yearly by egg mainframes and makers in India (O.
Amu et al. 2005). Majority of the egg shell waste is disposed in landfills without any
pretreatment since it is normally useless and finally creates serious eco problems (J. J.
Beaudoin and R. F. Feldman, 1979). The treatment and operation of bio-waste has been
burdened in our society for ecological and economic angles (IS 10262:2009, Bureau of Indian
Standards). Egg Shell powder can be used as a stabilizing material for improving properties
of soil (Amu et al. 2005). Egg Shell Powder can be used as soil stabilizer for subgrade of a
road construction (Olarewaju et al. 2011). Egg Shell Powder can be an excellent alternative
material for reuse and waste recycling practices (Freire and Holanda, 2006). Egg Shell consist
93.70% calcium carbonate .20% organic matter, 1.30% magnesium carbonate, and 0.8%
calcium phosphate (Winton, A. L. 2003). Calcium trioxocarbonate (IV) is an important
constituent of Egg Shell Powder (AASHTO, 1986). Fly ash, rice husk ash and eggshell
powder have been used as partial replacement for cement and it has been confirmed that the
trio when mixed together with the cement somewhat has equal strength with that of
conventional concrete mixes (Jayasankar et al. 2010). Eggshell ash was used as an admixture
to cement with a center of attention on the setting time and it has been recognized as a good
accelerator as of extra calcium oxide provided by the addition of eggshell powder (Mtallib,
M.O.A. and Rabiu, A. 2009). Egg Shell Powder was also satisfied the requirements for initial
and final setting times of cement (BS 12, 1991). This experimental study is very needy to the
new researchers as there are only very few experimental studies have been carried out on M30
Grade Concrete mixes.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 576 editor@iaeme.com

 Dr. Ch. Kannam Naidu, Dr. Ch. Vasudeva Rao, Dr. G. Venkata Rao and A.Y.D.T. Akhilesh

2. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

The materials which were used in this study have been procured from local sources. C53
grade Ordinary Portland Cement meeting the requirements of both the IS: 12269 and ASTM
C 642-82 type-I have been used (IS: 12269. 1987; ASTM C 642–82, 1995). The laboratory
tests were conducted for cement include Fineness (3%), Specific Gravity (3.1444), Normal
Consistency (34%), Initial setting Time (30 min) and Final setting Time (30 min).
The Egg shells were collected from nearby sources includes hotels, canteens and so on.
The shells were cleaned in normal water and dried in hot sun light for an hour. Later the shells
were again dried in oven at temperature of 1800 C for 24 hours. Then the shells were crushed,
grinded and sieved through 90 μm sieve. The Egg Shell Powder which was passed through 90
μm sieve has been used for partial replacement. Figure 1.1, shows Egg Shell Powder and its
chemical composition is shown in Table 1.1

Figure 1.1 The Egg Shell Powder

Table 1.1 Chemical composition of Egg Shell Powder

S.No Oxide Contents Percentage (%)
1 CaO 50.7
2 SiO2 0.09
3 Al2O3 0.03
4 MgO 0.01
5 Fe2O3 0.02
6 Na2O 0.19
7 P2O5 0.24
8 SrO 0.13
9 NiO 0.001
10 SO3 0.57
11 Cl 0.219
Crushed granite of maximum size 20 mm was used as coarse aggregate (IS: 2386-1983).
The specific gravity of coarse aggregate is 2.768. Natural river sand passing through 4.75 mm
sieve and retained on the 75 µm sieve was used (IS: 2386-1983). The specific gravity of fine
aggregate is 2.65.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 577 editor@iaeme.com

 Experimental Study On M30 Grade Concrete With Partial Replacement Of Cement With Egg
Shell Powder

Flow Chart

2.1. Mix Design Calculations

STEP 1:Stipulations for Proportioning STEP 2:Test Data for Materials
Grade designation M30 Cement used OPC 53 Grade
Type of cement OPC 53 Grade Specific gravity of cement 3.144
Maximum nominal size of Specific gravity of coarse
20 mm 2.78
aggregate Aggregate
Specific gravity of fine
Minimum cement content 360 kg/m3 2.65
Aggregate
Water absorption of coarse
Maximum water-cement ratio 0.45 1.2%
aggregate
Water absorption of fine
Slump Workability 75 mm 26.1%
aggregate
Surface moisture of coarse
Exposure condition Severe Nil
aggregate
Surface moisture of fine
Degree of supervision Good Nil
aggregate
Type of aggregate Angular Sieve analysis
Fine aggregates: Conforming to grading zone Il of
Maximum cement content 425.73 kg/m3 Table 4 of IS383.
STEP 3:Target Strength For Mix Proportioning STEP 4:Selection Of Water-Cement Ratio
f’ck = fck + 1.65 S From Table 5 of IS 456
where Maximum water-cement ratio = 0.45
f’ck = target average compressive strength at Based on experience,
28 days Adopt water-cement ratio as 0.45
fck = characteristic compressive strength at 28 days STEP 6:Calculation of Cement Content
S = standard deviation, 5 N/mm2
(From Table 1 of IS :10262, 2009) Water-cement ratio = 0.45
f’ck = 30 + ( 1.65 x 5) =31.6 N/mm2 Therefore
STEP 5:Selection of Water Content Cement content = 191/0.45
= 424.44 kg/Cu.M
From IS: 456-2000 Table No.2
From Table 5 of IS 456,
Maximum water content=186 liters
Minimum cement content for 'severe exposure condition
(25 - 50 mm Slump)
is 320 kgm3.
For 20 mm aggregate
Since 424.44 kg/cu m > 320 kg/cu m.
Estimated water content for 50 mm slump
Hence, Ok.
= 186 + (3/100 x 186)
Therefore adopt minimum cement content of 320 kg/cu
= 191 liters
m.
Adopt 191 liters of water content.
STEP 7:Proportion of Volume of Coarse Aggregate and Fine Aggregate Content
From Table 3 of IS:10262, volume of coarse aggregate corresponding to 20 mm size aggregate and fine
aggregate (zone-II) for water-cement ratio of 0.50 is 0.62.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 578 editor@iaeme.com

 Dr. Ch. Kannam Naidu, Dr. Ch. Vasudeva Rao, Dr. G. Venkata Rao and A.Y.D.T. Akhilesh

In the present case water-cement ratio is 0.45. Therefore volume of coarse aggregate is required to be increased
to decrease the fine aggregate content
As the water cement ratio is lower by 0.10 The proportion of volume of coarse aggregate is increased by 0.02 (at
the rate of -/+ 0.01 for every -/+ 0.05 change in water-cement ratio).
Therefore corrected proportion of volume of coarse aggregate for the water-cement ratio of 0.45 is 0.63.
Therefore, Volume of fine aggregate =1 - 0.63 = 0. 37
STEP 8:Mix Calculations
The mix per unit volume of concrete shall be as follows:
Volume of concrete = 1 cu m
Volume of cement= (mass cement/ specific gravity of cement x (I/1000)
= (424.44/3.144)*(1/1000).
= 0.135 m 3
Volume of water = mass of water/ specific gravity of water)x(1/1000)
= 191.58/1000
= 0.191 cu m
Volume of aggregate = [1-(0.1915+0.135)]
= 0.6735 cu m
Mass of coarse aggregate = d x vol. of CA x Sp g of CA x 1000
= 0.673x 0.63x2.768x 1000
= 1174.5 kg.
Mass of fine aggregate = d x vol. of FA x Sp.gr.of F.A x1000
= 0.6735 x0.37x2.65x1000
= 660.36 kg
STEP 9: Actual Mix Proportion
Cement: Fine aggregate: Coarse aggregate: Water.
425.7 : 660.36 : 1174.4: 191.58
Therefore
Mix Ratio is
1 : 1.553 :2.7585 : 0.45
Mix Calculations for 1 Cube
Cube Area = 0.15 x 0.15 x 0.15
= 3.375x 10 -3
For 30% wastage = A rea*(30/100)
= 1.0125x 10 -3
-3
Total concrete required = 4.3875 x 10 .
Cement = 1.87 kg
Coarse aggregate = 5.15 kg
60% of 20 mm = 3.09 kg
40% of 10 mm = 2.06 kg
Fine aggregate = 2.9 kg
Water = 0.84 liters

Table 1.2 Percentages of Egg Shell Powder as Partial Replacement with Cement
% of partial replacement
S.No of Egg Shell powder with Mix Proportion
cement
1 0 C100-E0
2 5 C95-E5
3 10 C90-E10
4 15 C85-E15
5 20 C80-E20
6 25 C75-E25
C: Cement and E: Egg Shell Powder

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 579 editor@iaeme.com

 Experimental Study On M30 Grade Concrete With Partial Replacement Of Cement With Egg
Shell Powder

2.2. Results and Discussions

Totally 36 cubes were casted out of which 18 cubes were cured for 7 days to test compressive
strength at 7 days and remaining 18 cubes were cured for 28 days to test compressive
strength at 28 days. The Table 1.3 shows the 7 days compressive strength details. Table 1.4
shows the 28 days compressive strength details.

Table 1.3 Compressive Strength details of 18 cubes after 7 days curing

% of ESP Compressive Strength Average Compressive

No of Cubes Load (KN)
Replacement (N/mm2 ) Strength (N/mm 2 )

462 20.53
0 3 413 18.35 20.29
495 22.00
509 22.62
5 3 562 24.97 23.49
551 24.48
529 23.51
10 3 505 22.44 23.55
556 24.71
489 21.73
15 3 568 25.24 22.71
492 21.86
490 21.77
20 3 472 21.00 21.00
445 20.22
390 17.33
25 3 375 16.57 17.17
396 17.60

Figure 1.2 Compressive strengths at 7 days versus percentage of ESP replacement

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 580 editor@iaeme.com

 Dr. Ch. Kannam Naidu, Dr. Ch. Vasudeva Rao, Dr. G. Venkata Rao and A.Y.D.T. Akhilesh

Table 1.4 Compressive Strength details of 18 cubes after 28 days curing

% of ESP Compressive Average Compressive

No of Cubes Load (KN)
Replacement Strength (N/mm 2 ) Strength (N/mm 2 )

693 31.29
0 3 704 29.64 30.57
667 36.71
826 30.26
5 3 681 33.64 33.54
757 37.46
843 35.51
10 3 799 32.49 35.15
731 30.80
693 29.68
15 3 668 29.87 30.11
672 29.87
629 27.95
20 3 614 27.30 28.35
608 27.00
468 20.80
25 3 502 22.30 21.58
487 21.56

Figure 1.3 Compressive strengths at 28 days versus percentage of ESP Replacement

Above results and graphs reveal that at 10% of partial replacement of ESP the
compressive strength is maximum and even more than characteristic compressive strength of
concrete. And also further the compressive strengths of concrete were increased from 0 to 10
% of partial replacement of ESP and decreased up to 25% of of partial replacement of ESP.
The Table 1.5 shows the details of compressive strength with respect to mix proportions.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 581 editor@iaeme.com

 Experimental Study On M30 Grade Concrete With Partial Replacement Of Cement With Egg
Shell Powder

Table 1.5 The compressive Strength details with respect to Mix Proportion

7 days Compressive 28 days Compressive

S.No Mix Proportion
Strength (N/mm2 ) Strength (N/mm2 )

1 C100-E0 20.29 30.57

2 C95-E5 23.49 33.54

3 C90-E10 23.55 35.15
4 C85-E15 22.71 30.11
5 C80-E20 21.00 28.35

6 C75-E25 17.17 21.58

C: Cement and E: ESP

3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The compressive strength of concrete increases to 11.8% of characteristic strength of
concrete at 28 days with 5% of partial replacement of ESP
2. The compressive strength of concrete increases to 17.2% of characteristic strength of
concrete at 28 days with 10% of partial replacement of ESP
3. The study reveals that the 10% partial replacement of ESP with cement makes
concrete use is economical without affecting the strength
It is recommended that replace cement with 10% of ESP so that there is increase in
compressive strength of concrete with reduction in use of cement. It is clear that for 100 bags
of cement, 10 bags of cement can be saved at 10% partial replacement of ESP with cement.

REFERENCES
[1] AASHTO (1986); “Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of
Sampling and Testing 14th Edition”, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials Washington D. C
[2] A. J. Olarewaju, M. O. Balogun and S. O. Akinlolu (2011) Suitability of Eggshell
Stabilized Lateritic Soil as Subgrade Material for Road Construction, EJGE, 16: 899-908.
[3] Amu, O.O., A.B. Fajobi and B.O. Oke (2005) Effect of eggshell powder on the stabilizing
potential of lime on an expansive clay soil, Res. J.Agric. & Biol. Sci, 1: 80–84.
[4] ASTM Annual Book of Standards (2004) Cement; Lime; Gypsum, West Conshohocken
PA, Vol. 04.01
[5] ASTM C 642–82 (1995) Test method for specific gravity, 403 absorption and voids in
hardened concrete. Annual book of ASTM standards, vol. 04.02.
[6] Bonavetti, V., Donza, H., Menédez, G., Cabrera, O and Irassar, E.F (2003) Limestone
Filler Cement in Low w/c Concrete: A Rational Use of Energy, Cement and Concrete
Research, 33: 865-871.
[7] BS 12 (1991); “Specifications of Portland Cement”, British Standards Institute, London
[8] Dale P. Bentz, Edgardo F. Irassar, Brooks Bucher and W. Jason Weiss (2009) Limestone
Fillers to Conserve Cement in Low w/cm Concretes: An Analysis Based on Powers’
Model, Concrete International, 31 (11) and (12): 41-46 and 35-39.
[9] Freire M.N., and Holanda J. N. F., (2006), Characterization of avian eggshell waste
aiming its use in a ceramic wall tile paste, Journal of Ceramica, Vol. 52, pp. 240-244.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 582 editor@iaeme.com

 Dr. Ch. Kannam Naidu, Dr. Ch. Vasudeva Rao, Dr. G. Venkata Rao and A.Y.D.T. Akhilesh

[10] Hawkins, P., Tennis, P. and Detwiler, R (2003) The use of limestone in Portland cement: a
state-of-the-art review, EB227, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL, 44.
[11] IS 10262:2009, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India
[12] IS: 12269 (1987) Specification for 53 grade ordinary Portland cement.
[13] IS: 2386-1983 Methods of Test for Aggregates for Concrete. (Part I To VIII)
[14] Jayasankar, R.; Mahindran, N. and Ilangovan, R (2010); “Studies on Concrete Using Fly
Ash, Rice Husk Ash and Egg Shell Powder”, International Journal of Civil and Structural
Engineering, Integrated Publishing Services. ISSN 0976-4399, Vol. 1, No 3, pp 362-372.
[15] J. J. Beaudoin and R. F. Feldman, International Journal of Material Science, 14,
1681(1979).
[16] Mtallib, M.O.A. and Rabiu, A. (2009); “Effects of Egg Shells Ash on The Setting
[17] Time of Cement” , Nigerian Journal of Technology, University of Nigeria Nsukka,. ISSN
1115-8443, Vol.28, No.2, pp. 29-38.
[18] O. Amu, A. B. Fajobi and B. O. Oke, Journal of Agriculture and Biological Science, 1,
80(2005).
[19] Winton, A. L. (2003); “Poultry Eggs”, Agrobios Publishers, Behind Nasrani Cinema,
India
[20] Ravi Kumar T, Naresh T, Mohammad M J, Sai Kumar K, Manasa K, Vinay Srinadh N,
Ravi Kiran K and Yogasri Rani N, Replacement of Sand with Granite Waste in
Conventional Concrete Grade M30. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 8(5), 2017, pp. 206–216.
[21] K.Pardhasaradhi and K.Vamsi Krishna, Role of Parameters on Mechanical Properties of
Fly Ash Based M30 Geopolymer Concrete & Silica Fume Concrete. International Journal
of Civil Engineering and Technology, 8(6), 2017, pp. 534–542.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJCIET 583 editor@iaeme.com