CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presents the conceptual literature, research literature, synthesis and

the conceptual framework relevant to the study. These served as a guide and aid in the

course of the study.

CONCEPTUAL LITERATURE

A. Concrete

Concrete is most widely used material for construction. It consists of a binding

medium of cement and water called cement paste, and particles of relatively inert filler

called aggregates and sometimes admixture. Concrete is a building material that was

used by the Romans but in the modern form came into use of Portland cement. The

strength depends on the proportion of cement to the quantity and to the type of the

aggregates used. The hardening caused by the chemical reaction between water and

the cement is called hydration, which continues for a long time, and consequently the

concrete grows stronger with age. (M.L. Gambhir 2015)

The finished product has high compressive strength, but its tensile strength is

very low, approximately one-tenth of its compressive strength. In situations where tensile

stresses are developed the concrete is strengthened by steel bars forming a composite

construction called reinforced cement concrete. The concrete without reinforcement is

called plain concrete or simply concrete. Concrete parts may be precast in a factory or

poured wet on the site to harden, usually inside wooden shuttering, into any desired

shape. (Webster’s Encyclopedia 1990).

Another aspect to be considered other than workability of concrete is proper

cuirng. Curing is the care and maintenance of the concrete from the finish of placing until

the interior temperature of the mass is stabilized. Properly cured concrete allows it to
gain its desired strength and to do this, the right conditions must be made on the

concrete to confirm whether or not it has reached, or is reaching its design strength.

(Antill& Ryan, 1982).

B. Concrete Mix Design

Concrete is the most commonly used material in building construction. It is made

by mixing cement, coarse aggregates, fine aggregates, water, and additives. These

materials are mixed in measured amounts to make concrete that is easy to transport,

place, compact, finish and set and harden to produce a high performance product.

Concrete mix design is a process of designing or proportioning of concrete mix. This

process is a trial and error method which aims to determine the right proportion of

ingredients to achieve the targeted mean strength and to reduce the content of costly

materials in the concrete.

C. Admixtures

Admixtures are introduced in a concrete mix to modify the properties of concrete

in its fresh and hardened states. The properties are commonly modified are: the rate of

hydration or setting time, workability, dispersion and air-entrainment. The commonly

used admixtures are accelerators, retarders, air-entraining agents, plasticizers (water

reducers), super plasticizers and bonding admixtures. A degree of control must be

exercised to ensure proper quantity, as an excess quantity may be detrimental to the

properties of concrete (M.L. Gambhir 2015).

An admixture can be defines as a chemical product which, except in special

cases, is added to the concrete mix in quantities no larger than 5 percent by mass of

cement during mixing or during an additional mixing operation prior to the placing of

concrete, for the purpose of achieving a specific modifications, or modifications, to the

normal properties of concrete.

character, as a distinct from minerals, is their essential feature. Indeed, in American

nomenclature, they are called chemical admixtures but in this book such a qualification

is superfluous because the mineral products incorporated in the mix, almost invariably in

excess of 5 percent of the mass of cement, are referred to as cementitious materials or

as additives.

Admixtures may be used in solid or liquid state. The liquid state is usual because

a liquid can be more rapidly dispersed in a uniform manner during mixing of concrete.

Properly calibrated dispensers are used, the admixture being discharged into the mixing

water, or separately in dilute form but simultaneously with the mixing water, usually

during the latter part of the water feed. Superplasticizers are subject to special methods

of incorporation into the mix. (A.M. Neville 2011).

D. Workability

The diverse requirements of mixability, stability, transportability, placeability,

mobility, compactability and finishability of fresh concrete are collectively referred to as

workability of concrete. The workability of fresh concrete is thus a composite property. It

is difficult to define precisely all the aspects of the workability of concrete in a single

definition. IS:6461 (Part VII) defines workability as that property of freshly mixed

concrete or mortar which determines the ease and homogeneity with which it can be

mixed, placed, compacted and finished. The optimum workability of fresh concrete

varies from situation to situation, e.g. the concrete which can be termed as workable for

pouring into large sections with minimum reinforcement may not be equally workable for

pouring into heavily reinforced thin sections. A concrete may not be workable when

compacted by hand but may be satisfactory when vibration is used.

A number of different empirical tests are available for measuring the workability

of fresh concrete, but none of them is wholly satisfactory. Each test measures only a
particular aspect of it and there is really no unique method, which measures the

workability of concrete in its totality. However, by checking and controlling the uniformity

of the workability, it is easier to ensure a uniform quality of concrete and hence uniform

strength for a particular job. The empirical tests are widely used are: the slump test, the

compacting factor and the flow test. (M.L. Gambhir 2015).

E. Cement

Cement is a fine mineral powder manufactured with very precise processes.

Mixed with water, this powder transforms into a paste that binds and hardens when

submerged in water. Because the composition and fineness of the powder may vary,

cement has different properties depending upon its makeup.

Cement is made by grinding together a mixture of limestone and clay which is

then heated at a temperature of 1,450˚ C. What results is a granular substance called

clinker, a combination of calcium, silicate, alumina and iron oxide.

Concrete mixes having high cement content give rise to increased shrinkage,

creep and cracking. For high strength concrete increase in cement content beyond a

certain value of the order of 550 kg/m 3 of concrete may not increase the concrete

strength. IS:3370( Part-1) stipulates a maximum limit of cement content to 530 kg/m3

F. Compressive Strength

It is the most important property of concrete and is often taken as the index of the

overall quality of concrete. The strength increases with the age as hydration of cement

takes considerable amount of time. The age factors defines as the ratios of strength of

concrete at 7 days, 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 months to the strength of concrete at 28 days are

0.665, 1.0, 1.1, 1.15, 1.2, and 1.24 respectively.

Since there is a significant variability in the compressive strength of concrete, the

concept of characteristic strength has been introduced to provide the designer a

reasonable assurance of a certain minimum strength of the concrete. The characteristic

of test results are expected to fall.

Based on its compressive strength the concrete is designated by different

grades. The grade of concrete is designated by letter M followed by a number, where the

letter M refers to mix and the number to the specified characteristic strength of 150mm

size cubes at 28 days, expressed in MPa. The concrete of grades M10, M15 and M20 is

termed as ordinary concrete and that of grades M25 to M55 as standard concrete and

the concrete grade of M60 and above is termed as high strength concrete. Concrete

grade lower than M10 may be used only for plain concrete constructions, lean concrete,

simple foundations, foundation for masonry walls and other simple or temporary

reinforced concrete construction. (M.L. Gambhir 2015).

G. Flexural Strength

Flexural Strength is when an object formed of a single material, like a wooden

beam or a steel rod is bent, it experiences a range of stresses across its depth. At the

edge of the object on the inside of the bend (concave face) the stress will be at its

maximum compressive stress value. At the outside of the bend (convex face) the stress

will be at its maximum tensile value. These inner and outer edges of the beam or rod are

known as the ‘extreme fibers’. Most materials fail under tensile stress before they fail

under compressive stress, so the maximum tensile stress value that can be sustained

before the beam or rod fails is its flexural strength. The flexural strength would be the

same as the tensile strength if the material were homogeneous. (www.quoracom/what-

is-flexural-strength-1)

H. Snail Shell

Snail shell is the spirally coiled shell of a snail. The soft and flexible body of the

living creature avoid of any skeleton construction, internal or external, is protected by the
hard and lifeless shell. The shell, however, is not permanently connected to the body.

The basis of a snail shell is already laid during embryonic development. A small

embryonic shell, the protoconch is already available to hatching a young snail. An

important part of the snail shells’ success is how their wall is built in different layers each

with a special purpose and each built by different cell layers.

RELATED LITERATURE

The study of Liang and Wang (2013) regarding the use of pulverized oyster

shells as a cementing material when mixed with fly ash and soil found out that pulverized

oyster shells do not improve the compression strength of compacted soil in the

experiment, and the drop of compression strength grows increasingly clear with the

increase of addition. The study did not yield the expected compressive strength increase

in both compacted soil and lime blocks. How to improve the practicality of pulverized

oyster shells in soil stabilization remains to be investigated.

The project study of Ghorpade and Zaid (2014) named “Experimental

Investigation of Snail Shell Ash (SSA) as Partial Replacement of Ordinary Portland

Cement in Concrete I” assessed that the workability in terms of Vee – bee time factor

and compaction factor for the concrete shows that Compaction factor decreases with

increasing Snail Shell Ash replacement while the Vee-bee time factor also decreases

with increasing SSA content and the values falls within the value for normal range of

concrete. The specific gravity of the Snail Shell Ash(SSA) obtained is less than that of

the OPC that it replaced which means a considerable greater volume of cementitious

materials will result from mass replacement. It was observed that the Snail Shell Ash

contains all the main chemical constituents of cement in near per percentage of all the

constituents compared with that of OPC which means it will serve as a suitable

replacement if the right percentage is used. The compressive strength of SSA/OPC

5% when compared to the control mix strength for 0% SSA/OPC replacement for 7 days

curing period. The Compressive Strength further decreases beyond 5% replacement.

The Compressive Strength of SSA/OPC Concrete Cube Specimen show 7.50 %

increase in strength for 5% replacement for 28 days over the control mix of 0%

OPC/SSA replacement. Further replacement of SSA/OPC beyond 5% results in the loss

of strength. In both the cases of Compressive Strength of Concrete Cubes and Split

Tensile strength of Concrete Cylinders, we can notice that the Strength increases for 5

% replacement of OPC with SSA. Beyond 5 % replacement, there is decrease in the

Strength both for Compressive as well as for Split Tensile Strength. So the present

experimental study concludes that 5% replacement can be considered as optimum

Percentage replacement of OPC with SSA.

The project study of Agbede and Manasseh (2014) named “Suitability of

Periwinkle Shell as Partial Replacement for River Gravel in Concrete” assessed that the

Periwinkle shells can be used as a lightweight aggregate in concrete works. Its bulk

density of 515 kg/m^3 resulted in concrete with lower weight hence lower dead loads in

concrete construction. The workability of periwinkle-gravel concrete is reduced with

increasing conventional gravel concrete. Periwinkle-gravel concrete mixes of 0:1, 1:3,

1:1 and 1:3 can be classified as normal weight concrete, those having periwinkle-gravel

ration 1:0 are structural lightweight concrete. The foregoing suggests that the periwinkle

shells can be used as partial replacement for river gravel in normal construction works

especially in places where gravel is in short supply and periwinkle shells are readily

available. This will help in reducing the threat these shells pose to our environment since

their decaying rate is significant.

The study of Adewuyi, Franklin et al. (2015) regarding the use of Mollusc shells

for concrete production for sustainable environment found out that waste management
are effective in shell wastes and applicable to civil construction works. The concrete

having up to 40% periwinkle shells and the one with 10% cockle shells inclusion can be

regarded as normal weight concrete, while higher contents imply lightweight concrete.

The study of Soneye, T. et al. (2016) regarding the use of periwinkle shells as

fine and coarse aggregate in concrete works to lessen the cost of building materials and

improved its quality. The study showed that the periwinkle shells as fine and coarse

aggregates did not pass the grading limits for the shells; however the strength of the

materials proves to be okay and have a better strength.

SYNTHESIS

The previous studies cited have bearing on the present study for they also dealt

with the variable taken into consideration in this study.

The study of Liang and Wang (2013) is related to the present study becuae it is

also used a kind of seafood shell which is the oyster shells The difference between his

study with the present study is that it used shells as cementing material whie the latter

was just partial replacement of sand in the concrete mixture.

Specifically, the study of Ghorpade and Zaid (2014) named “Experimental

Investigation of Snail Shell Ash (SSA) as Partial Replacement of Ordinary Portland

Cement in Concrete I” added information to the researchers. The interest in this

experimental study is generated as a result of the fact that the snail shell being what it is

and with all the properties it possess should be useful for something else.

Their study is different from the present study because the former study focused

on the snail shell as a partial replacement of cement and the evaluation of compressive

of cube compressive strength and the workability in terms of Vee – bee time factor and

compaction factor while the latter focused on the evaluation of compressive and flexural
resistance. The aim of their study is to assess the suitability of Snail Shell Ash (SSA) as

partial replacement for Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) while the latter of the present

study aim to assess the Pulverized Snail Shell as partial replacement to sand.

Specifically, the study of Agbede and Manasseh, (2014) named “ Suitability of

Periwinkle Shell as Partial Replacement for River Gravel in Concrete” added information

to the researchers. The study also focused on reducing the threat these shells pose to

our environment since their decaying rate is significant. The shells can be used as partial

replacement for river gravel in normal construction works especially in places where

gravel is in short supply and periwinkle shells are readily available

Their study is different from the present study, because the former study focused

on the evaluation of periwinkle shells as partial replacement for river gravel in concrete,

while the present study focus only on the fine aggregate additive, and snail shell was

used.

The study of Adewuyi, Franklin et al. (2015) is related to the present study

because it used mollusk shells for concrete mixture. The difference between his study

and the present study is that it used the shells as a coarse and fine aggregates while the

latter was just a partial replacement of fine aggregates.

Specifically, the study of Soneye, et al. (2016) added information to the

researchers. The ratio of the additive materials was based on the total weight of the

specimen. The study also focused on the use of periwinkle shells as fine aggregates.

Their study is different from the present study, because the former study focused

on the evaluation of periwinkle shells as fine and coarse aggregates additives, while the

present study focus only on the fine aggregate additive, and a different snail shell was

used.
 INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

1. Raw 1. Preparation 1. 9 Cylindrical

 Snail Shell 2. 9

Shell  Pulverizing Rectangular

 Cement  Weighing Beam

 Aggregate 2. Mixing of dry Specimen

s ingredients

3. Mixing of

water with

the dry

ingredients

4. Curing of 12

Days

Figure 1 Conceptual Framework