Abstract- Self-Compacting Concrete (SCC) is an advanced type of concrete that has the ability to flow under its own weight, completely fill the formwork, and achieve full compaction without the need for external vibration. The present study focuses on the development and performance evaluation of SCC using different mineral admixtures. The main objective of this research is to investigate the effect of mineral admixtures such as Fly Ash, Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBS), Silica Fume, and Marble Powder on the fresh and hardened properties of concrete. The mix design for SCC was carried out based on IS 10262:2009 guidelines for M50 grade concrete. Different mixes were prepared by partially replacing cement with various combinations of mineral admixtures. Fresh concrete tests such as slump flow, L-box test, and J-ring test were conducted as per EFNARC guidelines to evaluate the workability, passing ability, and segregation resistance of SCC. Hardened concrete properties were studied through compressive strength tests at 7, 14, and 28 days. In addition to material testing, beam specimens were cast and tested under two-point loading to study the structural performance of SCC in comparison with conventional concrete. The results indicated that SCC mixes exhibited excellent flowability without segregation and satisfied all EFNARC requirements. The compressive strength of SCC was found to be higher than that of conventional concrete, with the combination of Fly Ash and Silica Fume showing the best performance. The load-deflection behavior of SCC beams demonstrated lower deflection and higher stiffness, indicating improved structural efficiency. The study concludes that the use of mineral admixtures significantly enhances the performance of SCC in terms of workability, strength, and durability. SCC proves to be an effective and sustainable alternative to conventional concrete, especially in structures with congested reinforcement and complex geometry.
Motikar et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: