Authors: Y.G.S Nagaraju, Thanniru Malyadri, K S Sudheer
DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2023.53593
Certificate: View Certificate
The rapid growth of construction technology and the increasing rate of construction have raised concerns about the depletion of natural resources, particularly sand extracted from river beds. The excessive utilization of sand has led to environmental issues and a decline in its availability. Moreover, conventional concrete derived from sand exhibits low tensile strength and limited resistance to cracking.In response, researchers and scientists have been exploring alternative materials that are environmentally friendly, as well as admixtures that enhance concrete properties. Quarry dust has emerged as a promising substitute for sand, possessing similar characteristics to those obtained from stone beds. Additionally, nylon fiber has been identified as a suitable admixture to improve the tensile strength of concrete.This project aims to partially replace sand with quarry dust at varying percentages (10%, 20%, and 30% of sand content) and incorporate 6mm nylon fiber at a dosage of 0.1% by weight of cement. The study focuses on concrete grade M25, subjected to different concentrations (1%, 2%, and 3%) of hydrochloric acid (HCL) during the curing period of 7, 14, and 28 days. The fiber reinforced concrete (FRC) specimens cured in water are compared with those cured in varying concentrations of HCL. The evaluation of concrete properties includes compressive strength tests at 7, 14, and 28 days of curing, as well as a flexural strength test conducted after 28 days of curing.
I. INTRODUCTION
This project focuses on investigating the performance of quarry dust and nylon fiber reinforced concrete (FRC) in the presence of hydrochloric acid (HCL) in various concentrations. By partially replacing sand with quarry dust at different percentages and incorporating nylon fiber into the concrete mix, the study aims to assess the impact on the concrete's mechanical properties. Compressive strength tests will be conducted at different curing periods, and a flexural strength test will be performed after a designated curing duration.
The objective of this research is to explore the potential of using quarry dust as an alternative material and nylon fiber as an admixture to enhance the properties of concrete. The study also aims to evaluate the response of the fiber reinforced concrete when exposed to HCL, simulating an acidic environment. The findings will provide valuable insights into the suitability of these materials and their performance in acidinduced conditions, contributing to the development of sustainable and durable construction practices.
II. METHODOLOGY
III. MATERIALS USED
A. Effect of Acid on Concrete
Concrete is vulnerable to acid attack due to its alkaline nature. When in contact with acids, the compounds in the cement paste break down. One notable reaction is the dissolution of Calcium hydroxide, which can occur based on the concentration of the acid and the porosity of the cement paste. The solubility of acid calcium salts (CaX2) in the paste affects the decomposition of the concrete. Some calcium salts may precipitate in the voids, slowing down the attack. Acids like H2SO4, nitric acid, hydrochloric acid, and acetic acid are particularly aggressive as their calcium salts readily dissolve and are removed during the attack. Sulphuric acid poses a significant threat as it combines both acid and sulphate attacks, while hydrochloric acid has a milder effect, and sodium carbonate (Na2CO3) has a negligible impact.
B. Hydrochloric Acid (HCL) Attack
Although not commonly encountered in natural environments, hydrochloric acid can cause damage to concrete in industrial settings. The effects of HCL on concrete are diverse. Leaching processes lead to changes in mineralogy, resulting in strength loss. Corrosion caused by HCL poses a risk to the structural integrity of concrete, especially when subjected to tensile or bending loads. The loss of flexural strength in highstrength concrete is more significant compared to normalstrength concrete, indicating that sensitivity to HCL corrosion increases with higher concentrations.
Concrete damaged by HCL experiences dissolution, leading to the formation of soluble salts and subsequent leaching of the concrete. This process raises the pH of the acidic solution. Hydrolysis reactions take place, such as 2HX + Ca(OH)2 → CaX2 + 2H2O (where X represents the negative ion of the acid). As a result, Si, Al, and Fe gels are produced. The external surface of the concrete sample may appear yellow, while the inner surface may appear brown due to variations in the amount of Fe(OH)3. Researchers have observed that the hydrochloric acid attack primarily occurs in the layers separating different areas of the concrete structure. These findings are supported by concrete demolition results.
C. Fiber Reinforced Concrete (FRC)
Plain concrete is known for its low tensile strength, lack of ductility, and susceptibility to cracking. Internal micro cracks are naturally present in concrete, and its weak tensile strength leads to the propagation of these micro cracks, ultimately resulting in brittle fractures. Structural cracks can even develop in plain cement concrete prior to any applied load, particularly due to factors like drying shrinkage or volume changes.
To address these limitations, the concept of fiber reinforced concrete (FRC) has been introduced. FRC involves incorporating small, closely spaced, and uniformly dispersed fibers into the concrete mix. These fibers serve as crack arrestors, enhancing the static and dynamic properties of the concrete. By reinforcing the matrix, FRC improves tensile strength, ductility, and resistance to cracking.
IV. TESTS TO BE CONDUCTED
V. RESULTS
A. Observations And Calculations
7days compressive strength test results for convention concrete cubes
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressi ve strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8200 
22500 
3375000 
2.429 
517 
23.76 
22.44 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8210 
22500 
3375000 
2.432 
525.6 
21.73 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
7970 
22500 
3375000 
2.343 
532.8 
21.23 
14days compressive strength test results for convention concrete cubes
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8250 
22500 
3375000 
2.444 
650 
25.32 
24.12 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8460 
22500 
3375000 
2.506 
540 
22.26 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8260 
22500 
3375000 
2.447 
850 
24.88 
28days compressive strength test results for convention concrete cubes
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8160 
22500 
3375000 
2.417 
690 
27.31 
28.89 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8110 
22500 
3375000 
2.402 
650 
29.83 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8180 
22500 
3375000 
2.423 
780 
29.53 
7days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8070 
22500 
3375000 
2.391 
540 
23.85 
23.67 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8098 
22500 
3375000 
2.399 
490 
22.53 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8014 
22500 
3375000 
2.374 
480 
24.63 
14days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8143 
22500 
3375000 
2.412 
570 
26.68 
26.74 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8156 
22500 
3375000 
2.416 
490 
26.15 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8150 
22500 
3375000 
2.414 
500 
27.39 
28days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8190 
22500 
3375000 
2.426 
600 
30.48 
31.58 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8178 
22500 
3375000 
2.423 
690 
32.87 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8189 
22500 
3375000 
2.426 
640 
31.39 
7days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
7955 
22500 
3375000 
2.357 
560 
24.68 
24.32 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8015 
22500 
3375000 
2.378 
580 
25.93 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8125 
22500 
3375000 
2.407 
620 
27.35 
14days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8010 
22500 
3375000 
2.373 
650 
28.85 
28.17 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.398 
670 
29.51 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8105 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
590 
26.15 
28days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8010 
22500 
3375000 
2.373 
700 
30.96 
32.33 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8050 
22500 
3375000 
2.385 
750 
33.89 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8160 
22500 
3375000 
2.417 
720 
32.14 
7days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8010 
22500 
3375000 
2.373 
530 
23.76 
23.76 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.393 
560 
24.89 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8105 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
510 
22.64 
14days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8065 
22500 
3375000 
2.389 
580 
25.82 
26.93 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8164 
22500 
3375000 
2.418 
630 
27.49 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8160 
22500 
3375000 
2.417 
610 
27.48 
28days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC water curing
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.389 
670 
29.61 
29.36 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8105 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
700 
31.24 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8110 
22500 
3375000 
2.402 
610 
27.24 
7days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC & 1%HCl with water
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8005 
22500 
3375000 
2.371 
370 
19.63 
20.98 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.398 
400 
21.71 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8155 
22500 
3375000 
2.416 
450 
21.6 
14days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC &1%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8100 
22500 
3375000 
2.400 
540 
22.91 
24.26 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8165 
22500 
3375000 
2.419 
490 
24.99 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8145 
22500 
3375000 
2.428 
480 
24.88 
28days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC &1%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.398 
600 
26.6 3 
27.98 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8105 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
530 
28.71 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8195 
22500 
3375000 
2.428 
630 
28.6 
7days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &1%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
7995 
22500 
3375000 
2.368 
570 
22.7 
21.21 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8015 
22500 
3375000 
2.374 
440 
19.37 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8045 
22500 
3375000 
2.383 
480 
21.56 
14days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &1%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8015 
22500 
3375000 
2.374 
630 
27.78 
26.88 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8055 
22500 
3375000 
2.386 
590 
26.33 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8105 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
600 
26.54 
28days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &1%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8100 
22500 
3375000 
2.400 
720 
31.78 
30.86 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8100 
22500 
3375000 
2.400 
640 
28.68 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8105 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
730 
32.14 
7days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &1%HC
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
7900 
22500 
3375000 
2.346 
490 
21.48 
20.73 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
7980 
22500 
3375000 
2.364 
430 
19.41 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8200 
22500 
3375000 
2.429 
480 
21.30 
14days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &1%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
7990 
22500 
3375000 
2.367 
500 
21.98 
23.55 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8199 
22500 
3375000 
2.429 
570 
25.49 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
7800 
22500 
3375000 
2.311 
520 
23.18 
28days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &1%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8020 
22500 
3375000 
2.376 
570 
25.41 
27.77 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8040 
22500 
3375000 
2.382 
690 
30.67 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8120 
22500 
3375000 
2.405 
610 
27.24 
7days compressive strength test results for 10%FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8103 
22500 
3375000 
2.400 
320 
14.11 
15.73 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8090 
22500 
3375000 
2.397 
380 
16.61 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8117 
22500 
3375000 
2.405 
360 
16.48 
14days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
Size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8048 
22500 
3375000 
2.384 
510 
22.63 
21.86 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8123 
22500 
3375000 
2.423 
470 
20.79 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.425 
500 
22.16 
28days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC &2%HC
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8165 
22500 
3375000 
2.419 
590 
25.95 
25.17 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8178 
22500 
3375000 
2423 
500 
22.16 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8185 
22500 
3375000 
2.425 
620 
27.41 
28days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8165 
22500 
3375000 
2.419 
590 
25.95 
25.17 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8178 
22500 
3375000 
2.423 
500 
22.16 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8185 
22500 
3375000 
2.425 
620 
27.41 
7days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8055 
22500 
3375000 
2.386 
440 
19.63 
18.32 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8090 
22500 
3375000 
2.397 
410 
18.17 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8120 
22500 
3375000 
2.405 
380 
17.17 
14days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8090 
22500 
3375000 
2.397 
550 
24.57 
24.63 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8015 
22500 
3375000 
2.378 
600 
26.49 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8110 
22500 
3375000 
2.402 
520 
22.16 
28days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8106 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
660 
229.31 
28.63 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8050 
22500 
3375000 
2.385 
680 
30.21 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8160 
22500 
3375000 
2.417 
600 
26.38 
7days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
7095 
22500 
3375000 
2.102 
450 
19.36 
18.11 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8025 
22500 
3375000 
2.377 
420 
18.37 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.398 
360 
16.11 
14days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8125 
22500 
3375000 
2.407 
490 
21.74 
23.17 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8070 
22500 
3375000 
2.391 
580 
25.56 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8005 
22500 
3375000 
2.372 
500 
22.21 
28days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &2%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8145 
22500 
3375000 
2.413 
610 
27.23 
26.37 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8060 
22500 
3375000 
2.388 
570 
25.33 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8010 
22500 
3375000 
2.373 
600 
26.56 
7days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8160 
22500 
3375000 
2.417 
300 
13.39 
15.11 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8195 
22500 
3375000 
2.428 
370 
16.38 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8190 
22500 
3375000 
2.426 
350 
15.55 
14days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8155 
22500 
3375000 
2.416 
490 
21.63 
21.32 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8160 
22500 
3375000 
2.417 
460 
20.48 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8150 
22500 
3375000 
2.414 
500 
21.86 
28days compressive strength test results for 10% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8150 
22500 
3375000 
2.414 
520 
23.21 
23.16 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8170 
22500 
3375000 
2.420 
480 
21.49 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8190 
22500 
3375000 
2.426 
560 
24.78 
7days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8015 
22500 
3375000 
2.374 
420 
18.48 
17.62 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.398 
370 
16.21 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8160 
22500 
3375000 
2.417 
410 
18.17 
14days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8105 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
510 
22.54 
23.66 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8150 
22500 
3375000 
2.414 
580 
25.73 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8175 
22500 
3375000 
2.422 
520 
22.71 
28days compressive strength test results for 20% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8055 
22500 
3375000 
2.386 
530 
23.57 
24.21 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8110 
22500 
3375000 
2.402 
600 
26.64 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8155 
22500 
3375000 
2.416 
500 
22.41 
7days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
7955 
22500 
3375000 
2.368 
380 
16.86 
16.87 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8105 
22500 
3375000 
2.401 
400 
17.36 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8165 
22500 
3375000 
2.419 
370 
16.4 
14days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8010 
22500 
3375000 
2.373 
500 
22.59 
22.14 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8090 
22500 
3375000 
2.397 
520 
22.86 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8160 
22500 
3375000 
2.417 
470 
20.97 
28days compressive strength test results for 30% FRC &3%HCl
Trai l no 
size of cube in mm 
Weight of cube in gms 
Area mm2 
Volume cm3 
Density g/cc 
Load KN 
Compressiv e strength N/mm2 
Avg. strength N/mm2 
1 
150 X 150 X 150 
8050 
22500 
3375000 
2.385 
460 
20.49 
23.55 
2 
150 X 150 X 150 
8095 
22500 
3375000 
2.398 
580 
25.98 

3 
150 X 150 X 150 
8110 
22500 
3375000 
2.402 
540 
24.18 
2. Flexural Strength Test results
The following flexural strength test results of normal and fibre reinforced concrete with 10%,20% and 30% replacement of quarry with fine aggregate with water and acid curing of 1%,2% and 3% concentration in water of 28 days curing.
Normal concrete with 10%, 20% and 30% of quarry dust replaced with sand under water curing
S.No 
% of quarry dust 
Size of Beam In mm 
Load KN 
Flexural strength in N/mm2 
1 
0% 
100 x 100 x 500 
5.2 
2.6 
2 
10% 
100 x100 x 500 
4.7 
2.35 
3 
20% 
100 x100 x 500 
4.4 
2.2 
4 
30% 
100 x100 x 500 
3.2 
1.6 
Fibre Reinforced Concrete with 10%, 20% and 30% of quarry dust replaced with sand under water curing
S.No 
% of quarry dust 
Size of Beam In mm 
Load KN 
Flexural strength in N/mm2 
1 
0% 
100 x 100 x 500 
8.8 
4.4 
2 
10% 
100 x100 x 500 
7.8 
3.9 
3 
20% 
100 x100 x 500 
6.3 
3.15 
4 
30% 
100 x100 x 500 
4.8 
2.4 
Fibre Reinforced Concrete with 10%, 20% and 30% of quarry dust replaced with sand under acid curing of 1% concentration in water
S.No 
% of quarry dust 
Size of Beam In mm 
Load KN 
Flexural strength in N/mm2 
1 
0% 
100 x100 x 500 
7.2 
3.6 
2 
10% 
100 x100 x 500 
7.0 
3.5 
3 
20% 
100 x100 x 500 
5.9 
2.95 
4 
30% 
100 x100 x 500 
4.8 
2.4 
Fibre Reinforced Concrete with 10%, 20% and 30% of quarry dust replaced with sand under acid curing of 2% concentration in water
S.No 
% of quarry dust 
Size of Beam In mm 
Load KN 
Flexural strength in N/mm2 
1 
0% 
100 x100 x 500 
5.9 
2.95 
2 
10% 
100 x100 x 500 
6.2 
3.1 
3 
20% 
100 x100 x 500 
4.7 
2.35 
4 
30% 
100 x100 x 500 
4.3 
2.15 
Fibre Reinforced Concrete with 10%, 20% and 30% of quarry dust replaced with sand under acid curing of 3% concentration in water
S.No 
% of quarry dust 
Size of Beam In mm 
Load KN 
Flexural strength in N/mm2 
1 
0% 
100 x100 x 500 
4.6 
2.3 
2 
10% 
100 x100 x 500 
4.2 
2.1 
3 
20% 
100 x100 x 500 
3.7 
1.85 
4 
30% 
100 x100 x 500 
2.9 
1.45 
1) The strength of Fiber Reinforced Concrete (FRC) decreases with increasing acid concentration. For example, at 1% acid concentration, the strength is 17.48 N/mm², while at 2% concentration, it is 15.73 N/mm². At high concentrations (3%), the loss of strength exceeds 30%. 2) Optimum results are obtained in both water curing and HCL exposure at different concentrations when 20% of stone dust is replaced with sand in normal and FRC concrete. 3) The weight of concrete decreases with increasing acid concentration. 4) Incorporating pozzolanic materials can help reduce concrete weight loss. 5) Pozzolanic mineral additives, such as fly ash, impact the durability of cement against acid attack. 6) Silica fume improves compressive strength, reduces porosity, and enhances concrete\\\'s resistance to severe HCL attack. 7) Partial replacement of fine aggregate with quarry dust increases the strength of concrete. 8) Quarry dust is a suitable and costeffective replacement for sand, considering the scarcity and rising costs of natural fine aggregate. 9) FRC exhibits higher flexural strength compared to normal concrete, although flexural strength decreases with increasing quarry dust replacement and HCl concentration. 10) FRC cured with HCl up to 2% shows greater flexural strength compared to normal concrete cured with water. 11) FRC demonstrates resistance to flexural strength loss in acidic environments, making it suitable for concrete structures exposed to acids. 12) Adding 0.1% nylon fiber with quarry dust replacing fine aggregate improves strength compared to conventional concrete. The use of a chemical admixture, such as SBR latex, further enhances the strength. 13) Conventional concrete with full replacement of fine aggregate by quarry dust shows a 30% increase in strength at 28 days. 14) The tensile strength of M30 grade concrete increases by 8% when 0.1% nylon fiber is added with a chemical admixture at 28 days compared to conventional concrete. In conclusion, the addition of 0.1% nylon fiber with quarry dust as a partial replacement for fine aggregate can be successfully used in construction applications, providing enhanced strength and durability.
[1] Amit Rai1, Dr. Y.P Joshi, “Applications and Properties of Fibre Reinforced Concrete”, Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, Vol. 4, Issue 5 (Version 1), pp.123131, May 2014. [2] Jaya saxena , prof. Anil saxena 2“Enhancement the strength of conventional concrete by using nylon fiber”.(IJES) – Vol 5,Issue(Feb 2015). [3] E.Siva Subramanian, V.R. Vaishnave, V.T.S.Vignesh “Experimental Investigation Of Concrete Composite Using Nylon Fiber”.(IJESRT) ISSN: 4.116 DEC 2016. [4] A.Ravichandran, K.Suguna And P.N. Ragunath. “Strength Modeling of HighConcrete with Hybrid Reinforcement” ISSN 15469239. . [5] MR. Mehul, J.Patel, MRS.S.M. Kulkarni “Effect Of Polypropylene Fibre On The High Strength Concrete” (JIKARCE) ISSN 09756744 NOV (2012) To OCT (2013) VOL 2. [6] IS 2386 (Part 3) 1963, Indian Standard Code of Practice for methods of test for aggregates for concrete. Gambhir M. L., (1998), “Concrete Technology”, second edition, Tata McGrawHill Publishing Co. Ltd., New Delhi. [7] M.Shanmugaraja, “Strength and Durability of Fibre Reinforced Quarry Dust Concrete”, International Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology, Volume 6 Issue 2 December 2015. [8] Prakash Rao, D S and Giridhar kumar, V, “Investigation on concrete with stone crusher dust as fine aggregate”, The Indian Concrete Journal, Vol 78, No 7, pp. 4550, 2004. [9] Q.S. Ghausuddin · S.S. Koranne, “Evaluation of soil quarry dust mixtures reinforced with polypropylene fibers”, Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, January 2011. [10] R. Ilangovana , N. Mahendrana, “Strength and Durability Properties of Concrete Containing Quarry Rock Dust as Fine Aggregate”, ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Vol 3, No. 5, October 2008. [11] Saravanakumar Jagannathan, Selvaraj Rangasamy & Karthikeyan Kumarasamy, “An Experimental Investigation on Nylon Fibre (Textile Waste) Reinforced Concrete”’, International Journal of Recent Research and Applied Studies, Volume 3, Issue 1(15) January 2016. [12] Hydrochloric acid handbook from OXY CHEM accidental Chemical Corporation. [13] IS 122691987 specifications for 53 grade Ordinary Portland Cement. [14] IS 3831970 specifications for course and fine aggregate. [15] IS 4562000 Indian standard plain and reinforced concrete code of practice. [16] IS 5161959 Indian standard methods of tests for strength of concrete. [17] IS 102622009 Indian standard concrete mix proportioning – guidelines. [18] Concrete technology by M.s. shetty. [19] Concrete technology by M.L.Gambhir [20] Penfei Haung, Yiwang Bao, Yan Yao (2005). Influence of HCl corrosion on the mechanical properties of concrete. Cement and Concrete Research 35 584589. [21] Paiva H, Velosa A, Cachim P, Ferreira V M (2012). Effect of metakaolin dispersion on the fresh and hardened state properties of concrete Cement and Concrete research 42 607612. [22] Gerald Ernst, Matthias Vogler, Christian Huhne and Raimund Rolfes, ?Multiscale progressive failure analysis of textile composites?,Composites science and technology, 2010, pp. 6172. [23] S.A kanalli, Ramu palankar, Bharat kumar, Praveen kumar, Prakash S.K “Comparitive study of polymerFiber reinforced concrete with conventional concrete pavement” in IJRET, 2014 [24] Shivakumara and Prakasha M, Characteristic studies on the mechanical properties of quarry dust addition in conventional concrete, Journal of Civil Engineering and Construction Technology Vol. 2(10), pp. 218235, ISSN 21412634 ©2011 Academic Journals, October 2011. [25] Sudhira S.K and Satone S.R, junie. 2013, effect of quarry dust as partial Replacement of sand in concrete, Indian Streams Research Journal, ISSN: 22307850, Volume 3, Issue. 5, June. 2013. [26] Nilli M, Ehsani A, and Shabaani K, Influence of Nano Sio2 and Microsilica on Concrete Performance, January 2010. [27] “Newsfibres add much needed protection to prestigious tunnelling projects”. Way back. Archive. Org.20070927. Retrieved 20180205. [28] Anzar Hamid Mir (2015) “Replacement of Natural sand with efficient alternatives Recent advances in concrete technology” Vol.5, (Part 3)
Copyright © 2023 Y.G.S Nagaraju, Thanniru Malyadri, K S Sudheer. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Paper Id : IJRASET53593
Publish Date : 20230602
ISSN : 23219653
Publisher Name : IJRASET
DOI Link : Click Here