A Comparison Between American and British Methods of Mix Design With Suggestions For Improvement

Al-
Al-Qadisiyah Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 9…No. 3 ….2016

….2016
A COMPARISON BETWEEN AMERICAN AND BRITISH

METHODS OF MIX DESIGN WITH SUGGESTIONS FOR
IMPROVEMENT
Dr. Adnan Flayih Hassan Al-Sibahy(1)

(1)
Civil Engineering Department, The University of Al-Qadisiya, Iraq.
Email: [email protected]
Received on 24 January 2016 Accepted on 28 March 2016
Abstract
This paper presents an analytical calculation and experimental investigation to evaluate the American and
British methods usually used for mix design of normal concrete. Six concrete mixes with different target
of mean strength were design using crushed and uncrushed aggregates. A reliable approach has been
suggested to calculate the mix proportions. In order to validate the former approach, an experimental
programme was running to measure the workability aspect and compressive strength of three selected
concrete mixes designed for strength levels of 21.5 MPa, 27.5 MPa and 36.5 MPa at different sample ages
using 108 cubes.
The results obtained showed notable differences between the approaches of American and British
methods adopted to calculate the mix proportions. There was no indication have found in the American
method to distinct between design the concrete mix containing crushed aggregate and that of uncrushed
aggregate. The procedure followed in British method produced concrete mix with higher strength than
that designed according to American method. The experimental results of compressive strength and
workability showed close agreement with the suggested approach for calculation the mix proportions.
Keywords: mix design, compressive strength, workability, aggregate properties.
‫ا‬
‫ا‬ ‫ة ! ا‬# ‫ا‬ ‫ وا‬$ %‫ا‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ت‬ ‫و‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ض ھا ا‬
. .‫ ا‬/ 0 $ ‫ ا‬1‫ و‬/ 0 $ ‫ ا‬2! ‫ام ا‬# 4 ‫و‬ ‫ا‬ , ‫ ت‬# ‫ذات‬ .‫ ت‬. ) ‫ﺻ‬ ُ . ‫( د‬%‫ا‬
@ ‫ب ا? اء‬7 %‫ ھ ا ا‬B‫ ﺻ‬#= ‫?> ا‬%‫ و‬. ‫ ! ا‬#<( 5 ‫ ا‬/ 2 ( ‫ل‬7! ‫ل‬7 ‫ب‬7 ‫ا; اح إ‬
‫ ل و‬$ $ ٢٧.٥،‫ ل‬$ $ ٢١.٥ ‫ارھ‬# ! ‫و ت‬ ‫رة و‬ ‫ ت‬. ‫ث‬BE ‫ ط‬GH %‫ > و و ا‬GI ‫ا‬ ;‫ س‬K (
./ $ ١٠٨ ‫ام‬# , ‫( ر‬S ‫ ل و‬$ $ ٣٦.٥
$ %‫ا‬ [ .5 ‫ ا‬/ # # ‫ وا‬$ %‫ا‬ ‫ ا‬K[ \ ‫@ ا‬Y< ‫ا‬ ‫ظ‬7 ‫ف‬B .‫! ا‬ ‫@ ا‬X < ‫ ت ا‬Y‫أظ‬
‫ا‬ ‫ ا‬K[ \ ‫@ ا‬Y< ‫ ا ا‬. $ 1 ‫او‬ $ ‫اء = ن‬7 ‫ ا‬K[ ‫م‬# ‫ا =م ا‬ ‫ط‬ ! ‫ ا‬K[ ^
_[‫ا‬7 ‫ ت‬Y‫ﺻ ت اظ‬7 , ‫@ ا‬X . $ %‫ا‬ ‫ ا‬K[ Y< 2 (‫ ط ا‬GH ‫ذات و ا‬ . @ < ‫م و‬# ‫ا =م ا‬ ‫ط‬ ^ [
. ‫ا‬ ‫تا ﺻ ! ا‬ ‫>ا‬# ‫ح‬ ‫@ ا‬Y< ‫ و ا‬Y< =
423
Al-
….2016
1. Introduction
Concrete is the most consumption material that will keep its forefront in the construction market
far into the future. The annual concrete demand in the world reached about 1.8 billion tones in
2014 [1]. This massive utilize requires continuous improving the overall properties, methods of
production and diversifying the sources of raw materials [2, 3].
As the concrete is a composite material consisting binder medium and aggregate phases, so
improving of its properties should come up based upon these phases. Nevertheless, the
conflicting behaviour of concrete components restricts most of the improving efforts, where the
aggregate phase is a function of its mineralogy whilst the binder medium is a function of time
[4].
In general, aggregate takes up 75% of the total volume of concrete. Thus, concrete properties are
highly affected by physical properties of its aggregate such as size and shape of particles, surface
texture and grading of the whole aggregate sample. The aggregate shape plays essential role in
determination the workability of concrete due to the differences in surface area caused by
different shapes. On this basis, the available cement paste should be enough to coat the aggregate
surfaces and provided lubrication. Most of the fresh concrete properties, the interaction bond
between aggregate and cement paste of the hardened concrete as well as the energy disbursed in
compaction of concrete are direct effect of aggregate surface texture. A well graded aggregate
can minimize the required quantity of cement paste by a significant amount [5]. To achieve the
optimized grading, there are several methods, such as, grading curve, individual percent retained
curve and combined fineness modulus (fineness modulus of total aggregate) [6].
Obviously, the cement paste is responsible for tying the aggregate particles together and
providing the mechanical strength of concrete. This task normally depends upon the composition
of cement and results of hydration process with time [4, 7].
In order to produce a concrete with high quality, a mix design usually follows up to identify the
suitable quantities of raw materials (cement, sand, gravel and water) which satisfy the criteria of
strength, workability and durability. The raw materials used in concrete vary in a number of
aspects and their properties are difficult to be adjusted truly quantitatively. Therefore, different
strategies were suggested to select the suitable mix proportion of concrete [6, 8]. The elementary
technique of surface/mix suitability factor (MSF) was followed to give a global view for the
percentages of the materials used. Little information required for this technique such as grading
of sand, a verbal description of the appearance of the coarse aggregate and where the concrete to
be used [6]. More recent techniques which have wide application in the field of concrete
constructions are the American and British methods for mix design. These methods take in
consideration the status of raw materials and different requirements for the concrete mix to be
designed. In general, the latter methods have been derived based upon statistical concepts. They
accept that concrete strength tends to be a normally distributed variable and considered in terms
of mean strength and standard deviation rather than an absolute limit [9, 10]. However,
assessment the former methods is needed especially for the locally available materials in Iraq.
In this study a comparison between the American and British methods of mix design has been
made for wide range of concrete strength taken in consideration the variation of coarse aggregate
used. The evaluation of these methods was also investigated throughout an experimental
programme for selected strength targets and modification to site local materials have been
suggested.
424
Al-
….2016
2. Mix design of concrete
2.1 Methodology and procedure

The determination of mix proportion for a normal concrete using ordinary Portland cement
was adopted in this study. This type of concrete has a wide application and represents the
standardize case. The procedures presented by A M Neville [9] and D C Teychenné et al.
[10] were followed for American and British methods respectively. Six concrete mixes with
strength level ranging from 15 MPa to 40 MPa have been designed. For both methods, the
data used were: the value of slump was in the range of (75-100) mm; the concrete was
assumed to be protected from the sulfate attacked and other aggressive solutions. The
maximum aggregate size was 37.5 mm which is suitable for use with the light reinforcement
and the coarse aggregate was in two states: crashed and uncrushed. The properties of sand
were similar to that presented in the experimental programme, Section 3.
Based upon the former data, the determination of mix proportion according to the American
method required the following steps: 1.estimation the mixing water and air content from
Table (1); 2.selection the W/C ratio from Table (2); 3.calculation the cement content;
4.estimation the content of coarse aggregate from Table (3); 5.calculation the content of fine
aggregate; 6. adjustion the field moisture for aggregate.
Table 1: Approximate amounts of mixing water and air content requirements for Non-
Air entrained concrete [9]
Water content (kg/m3)
Slump (mm) Maximum Aggregate size (mm)
9.5 12.5 19 25 37.5 50 75
25-50 207 199 190 179 166 154 130
75-100 228 216 205 193 181 169 145
150-175 243 228 216 202 190 178 160
Entrapped Air
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0.3
(%)
Table 2: Relationship between the “Water/Cement” ratio and compressive strength of

concrete [9]
Compressive strength at " Water/Cement " Ratio (by weight)
28 days ( MPa ) Non-air-entrained concrete Air-entrained concrete
50 0.42 ---
35 0.47 0.39
30 0.54 0.45
25 0.61 0.52
20 0.69 0.60
15 0.79 0.70
Table 3: Volume of coarse Aggregate per unit volume of concrete [9]
Maximum size of Volume of dry-rodded coarse aggregate per unit volume of

aggregate (mm) concrete
425
Al-
….2016
Fineness modulus of fine Aggregate

2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00
9.5 0.50 0.48 0.46 0.44
12.5 0.59 0.57 0.55 0.53
19.0 0.66 0.64 0.62 0.60
25.0 0.71 0.69 0.67 0.65
37.5 0.75 0.73 0.71 0.69
50.0 0.78 0.76 0.74 0.72
75.0 0.82 0.80 0.78 0.76
In terms of the British method, the determination of mix proportions consist the following
procedure: 1.selection the preliminary strength based on the used cement strength class as in
Table 4; 2.slection the W/C ratio from Figure 1; 3.calculation the mixing water depending on
the maximum size of aggregate from Table 5; 4. calculation the cement content; 5.
determination the density of concrete from Figure 2; 6. estimation the ratio of fine aggregate
using Figure 3; 7. calculation the quantity of fine and coarse aggregate; 8. adjustion the field
moisture for aggregate.
Table 4: Approximate compressive strengths (N/mm2) of concrete mixes made with a

free-water/cement ratio of 0.5 [10].
Type of Compressive strengths (N/mm2)
Cement
coarse Age (days)
strength class
aggregate 3 7 28 91
Uncrushed 22 30 42 49
42.5
Crushed 27 36 49 56
Uncrushed 29 37 48 54
52.5
Crushed 34 43 55 61
426
Al-
….2016
90
Starting using data
80 from Table 4
70
Compressive strength (MPa)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Water/ Cement ratio
Figure 1: Relationship between compressive strength and free-water/cement ratio [10].

Table 5: Approximate free-water concrete (kg/m3) required to give various levels of
workability [10].
Slump (mm) 0-10 10-30 30-60 60-180

Vebe time (s) >12 6-12 3-6 0-3
Maximum size
Type of
of aggregate
aggregate
(mm)
Uncrushed 150 180 205 225
10
Crushed 180 205 230 250
Uncrushed 135 160 180 195
20
Crushed 170 190 210 225
Uncrushed 115 140 160 175
40
Crushed 155 175 190 205
427
Al-
….2016
2800
Assumed for uncrushed agg.
2700
Wet density of concrete- kg/m3 Assumed for crushed agg.
2600
Relative density
2500 of agg.
2.9
2400 2.8
2.7
2300
2.6
2.5
2200
2.4
2100
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Free water content - kg/m3
Figure 2: Estimated wet density of fully compacted concrete [10].
80
Slump=0-10 mm (10-30 mm) (30-60 mm) (60-180 mm)
Proportion of fine aggregate-%
70
60 15
50 40
40 60
80
30
100
20
10
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Free water/cement ratio
Figure 3: Recommended proportions of fine aggregate according to percentage passing a

600 µm sieve [10].
2.2 Results of mix design

Appling the procedures mentioned in Section 2.1, the results obtained for six concrete mixes
using crushed and uncrushed coarse aggregate based on both American and British methods are
shown in Figures 4 to 9.
It was noted from previous procedures that the American method specifies a constant value for
the amount of gravel for each strength level, while the amount of sand will vary based on the
428
Al-
….2016
total volume of concrete mix. The same cannot be said for the British method, where both of
gravel and sand have variable values depending on the density of fresh concrete and properties of
the sand used. On this basis, American method ignored the type and nature of the aggregate used,
while British method dealt with this criterion in detail. Subsequently, there were two options to
design the concrete mix in British method, namely with crushed and with uncrushed aggregates.
It can be seen from Figures 4 and 5 that the calculated W/C ratios equivalent to various levels of
compressive strength have clear differences between American and British methods especially at
the lower strength values, then tend to be decreased at higher values. The percentage differences
in W/C ratios were 21.5% and 24.5% for compressive strength values of 15 MPa and 25 MPa
respectively using crushed aggregate. The corresponding percentages for uncrushed aggregate
were 31.5% and 35.5% respectively.
If the values of compressive strength in the American method presented in Table 2 represent the
strength of cylinder (A. M cylinder st.) rather than cubic specimens (A. M cube st.) and the 42.5
strength class of cement (B.M 42.5 st.) in the British method presented in Table 4 replaced by
class of 52.5 (B.M 52.5 st.), the percentage differences in the calculated W/C ratios will be
minimal, as shown in Figures 4 and 5.
0.9
0.8 A.M cube st.

A.M cylinder st.
Water/Cement ratio
B.M 42.5 st.

0.7 B.M 52.5 st.
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
28 days- Compressive strength (MPa)
Figure 4: Compressive strength-W/C ratio relationship for concrete mixes using crushed
aggregate.
429
Al-
….2016
0.9
0.8 A.M cube st.

A.M cylinder st.
Water/Cement ratio
B.M 42.5 st.
0.7 B.M 52.5 st.
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Figure 5: Compressive strength-W/C ratio relationship for concrete mixes using uncrushed
aggregate.
The sand/cement ratio corresponding to the required strength level of concrete exhibited similar
behaviour to that of strength-W/C ratio relationship and ranging from 1.14 to 3.25, as shown in
Figures 6 and 7. It was clearly shown that the sand/cement ratio decreases with an increase of the
concrete strength. This means increase the cement content required to obtain the specified
strength level.
The percentage differences in the sand/cement ratio calculated based on the American method
with those obtained from the British method for concrete mixes of 15 MPa and 25 Mpa 28-days
compressive strengths with crushed aggregate were 21.7% and 30% respectively. The
corresponding percentages for concrete mixes containing uncrushed aggregate were 9.5% and
24.5% respectively.
Applying the assumptions of cylinder strength for the American method and cement strength
class of 52.5 for the British method, the aforementioned percentages will be highly decreased for
the concrete mixes of crushed aggregate, as shown in Figure 6. However, the variation between
the two methods still apparent for the concrete mixes containing uncrushed aggregate, as shown
in Figure 7.
430
Al-
….2016
3.5
A.M cube st.

3.0 A.M cylinder st.
B.M 42.5 st.
Sand/Cement ratio
B.M 52.5 st.

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Figure 6: Compressive strength-Sand/Cement ratio relationship for concrete mixes using

crushed aggregate.
3.5
A.M cube st.

B.M 42.5 st.
Sand/Cement ratio
B.M 52.5 st.

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Figure 7: Compressive strength-Sand/Cement ratio relationship for concrete mixes using

uncrushed aggregate.
The highest variation between the American and British design methods was noted in calculation
the gravel/ cement ratio for the concrete mixes with various level of compressive strength, as
shown in Figure 8. This attitude was lower for the mixes of uncrushed aggregate, as shown in
Figure 9. The ratio of gravel/cement was ranging from 1.93 to 3.25.
431
Al-
….2016
In general, the value of compressive strength has inverse linear relationship to the gravel/cement
ratio. This is due to the higher cement content required to provide cohesion and adhesion
properties for the aggregate particles [8].
Significant converge in the ratio of gravel/ cement for both mix design methods was obtained
when the hypothesis of cylinder strength and 52.5 strength class of cement are applied to
American and British mix design methods respectively, as shown in Figures 8 and 9. This is
indicative for reliable approach to design the concrete mix.
5.0
4.5 A.M cube st.

A.M cylinder st.
B.M 42.5 st.
Gravel/Cement ratio
4.0
B.M 52.5 st.
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Figure 8: Compressive strength-Gravel/Cement ratio relationship for concrete mixes using

crushed aggregate.
5.0
4.5 A.M cube st.

A.M cylinder st.
B.M 42.5 st.
Gravel/Cement ratio
4.0
B.M 52.5 st.
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
432
Al-
….2016
Figure 9: Compressive strength-Gravel/Cement ratio relationship for concrete mixes using

3. Experimental programme
In order to validate the calculated mix proportions, an experimental investigation has been
carried out to measure the compressive strength of twelve concrete mixes; six of them were
designed according to the American method and the other according to the British method. For
each design method, three levels of 28 days compressive strength were adopted (15 MPa, 21
MPa and 30 MPa). The latter were formulated using crushed and uncrushed coarse aggregate. It
is necessary to design the mix to have a mean strength greater than the specified characteristic
strength by an amount termed the margin [10]. Thus:
= +
Eq.1
where = the target mean strength;
= the specified characteristic strength;
= the margin, which is the product of:
= a constant equivalent to the degree of confidence and normally taken as 1.64;
= the standard deviation, for 20 or more results = 4 or can be calculated as follows:
∑( )
=
Eq.2
where = an individual result;
= the number of results;
= the mean of the results.
Applying Eq.1, the target mean strength of the investigated concrete mixes will be 21.5 MPa,
27.5 MPa and 36.5 MPa respectively. For each mix, the fluidity aspect was checked in terms of
the consistency to satisfy the requirements of workability. This was done by measure the
concrete slump according to BS 1986 [11]. The moisture conditions of the aggregate is the major
parameter affected the workability, so the W/C ratio has been adjusted each time to get the
accepted range of slump (75-100) mm. The ratio of water absorbed by aggregate particles was
found to be 1.95% .
3.1 Materials used

Ordinary Portland cement type (Crista) consistent with the requirements of Iraqi Standards
(I.S.S) No.4 – 1984 [12] was used in this study. Locally available sand provided from quarry at
the city of Najaf-Iraq was used as a fine aggregate. It was comply with the Iraqi Standards (I.S.S)
No.45– 1984 [13]. Two types of coarse aggregate were used: crushed and uncrushed. They were
locally available and supplied from Badra quarry. Both of the former coarse aggregates satisfy
the requirements of the Iraqi Standards (I.S.S) No.45– 1984 [13]. Table 6 presents the properties
of cement, fine and coarse aggregates used in this study. On the other hand, Figure 10 shows the
nature of the coarse aggregate particles.
The preparation of specimen moulds, casting of the concrete samples and compaction operations
were performed according to BS EN12390-1, 2 [14, 15]. After 24 hours the samples were taken
433
Al-
….2016
out of their moulds (demoulded), marked and immersed in a basin of water at a temperature of
20 ± 2 ˚C until the date of the test.
3.1 Compressive strength test

The compressive strength of 150 mm cube specimens was measured in correspondence with BS
EN 12390-3 [16] using a digital controlled compression machine with a maximum load capacity
of 2000kN, as shown in Figure 11. A constant loading rate of 0.3 MPa/s was adopted throughout
the test. Load was monitored until specimen failure and the maximum load in kN was recorded.
This test was carried out at curing ages of 3, 7, 28 and 45 days and the average value of three
samples was taken.
Table 6: Properties of cement, fine and coarse aggregates used in this study
Coarse aggregate (Crushed

Ordinary Portland cement Fine aggregate
and Uncrushed)
Proper Test I.S.S Sieve % I.S.S Sieve % I.S.S
ty Result No.45- (mm) Passing No.45- (mm) Passing No.45-
1984 1984 1984 (5-
40)
3 d-st. 16.67 > 15 MPa 10 100 100 37.5 100 100
7 d-st. 23.00 > 23 MPa 4.75 100 90-100 19 54 30-70
C2S 25.0% ----- 2.36 86 60-95 13 23 -----
C3S 52.0% ----- 1.18 69 30-70 9.5 10 10-30
C3A 11.8% ----- 0.60 37 15-34 4.75 0 0-10
C4AF 8.20% ----- 0.30 8 5-20 2.36 0 0-5
----- ----- ----- 0.15 2 0-10 ----- ----- -----
Salts in terms of SO3 0.33 0.5% 0.08 0.1%
(a) (b)
Figure 10: Nature of the coarse aggregate particles used: (a) crushed gravel, (b) uncrushed
gravel
434
Al-
….2016
Figure 11. Digital controlled compression machine

used in compressive strength test
4. Results and discussions
The results obtained of the experimental programme are shown in Figures 12 to 15.
It can be seen that the W/C ratio decreases with an increase of compressive strength for both
designed and measured results. On the other hand, the amount of mixing water required to obtain
the specified slump level (75-100) mm in the experimental approach was higher than that
calculated in the design approach and increases with an increase in the value of the compressive
strength, as shown in Figure 12. This was expected due to the water required to overcome the
interior fraction between the aggregate particles as well as the absorption aspect which depends
on the moisture condition of aggregate. Such behaviour was taken in consideration in both
American and British methods. The quantity of water presented in Tables 1 and 5 refers to the
free water which only contribute in the hydration process of cement and no allowance has been
made for the water absorbed by aggregate particles.
The percentages increase in the measured W/C ratios compared with those calculated based on
the British method for concrete mixes with compressive strength of 21.5 MPa and 36.5 MPa
were 18.2% and 36.8% and based on the American method were 2.2% and 14.5% respectively. If
the ratio of water absorbed by the total weight of aggregate particles (1.95%) is excluded, the
aforementioned ratios for the British method will be 10.3% and 21.7% respectively. The
corresponding ratios according to the American method are (-16.5%) and (-3.8%) respectively.
These results are consistent with the conclusion referred to in Section 2.2 and presented in Figure
4. Lower tendency for water demand was noted for concrete mixes containing uncrushed
aggregate at lower compressive strength. On the other hand, concrete mixes with higher values
of compressive strength exhibited different behaviour, as shown in Figure 13.
435
Al-
….2016
0.9
0.8 A.M Designed

A.M Experimental
Water/Cement ratio
B.M Desinged
0.7 B.M Experimental
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5 35 37.5 40
Figure 12. Water/ Cement ratio for various concrete mixes containing uncrushed aggregate
0.9
A.M Designed
0.8
A.M Experimental
Water/Cement ratio
B.M Desinged
0.7 B.M Experimental
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5 35 37.5 40
Figure 13. Water/ Cement ratio for various concrete mixes containing uncrushed aggregate
Figures 14 and 15 show the results obtained of the compressive strength at different sample age
for various concrete mixes containing both crushed and uncrushed aggregates.
It can be seen that the concrete mixes designed based on both American and British methods for
crushed aggregate satisfied the required strength level at 28 days. A close agreement between the
measured results was observed, as shown in Figure 14. This behaviour confirms the above
explanation for the results obtained of W/C ratio and suggestions for calculation mix proportions
using both American and British methods as presented in Sections 2.2.
436
Al-
….2016
All of the concrete mixes containing uncrushed aggregate exhibited lower compressive strength
than those designed at 28 days and considered being defective in this criterion, as shown in
Figure 15. The progress of compressive strength was unnoticeable. This behaviour was unclear
and may be due to the bad storage of cement used in these mixes which lead to pre-hydration of
cement particles.
In general, the values of compressive strength for the concrete mixes containing both crushed
and uncrushed aggregate and designed according to the British method were higher than those
for American method at early ages (3 and 7days) and at later ages (45 days). This is related to the
design concept adopted by the British method which emphasis on the requirements of durability
[10]. This in turn means increase the value of compressive strength.
The expression suggested by BS EN 1992-1-1 [17] for estimating the compressive strength at
time (t) for concrete of a normal weight from the strength at 28 days age has been evaluated to
investigate its consistency with the obtained compressive strength results of this study. The
expression is as below:
( )= ( )
Eq.3
!
( )= 1− "#
Eq.4
where is the mean compressive strength (MPa) at 28 days; is the age of the concrete
sample in days and is a coefficient whose value depends on the type of cement and is typically
in the range of 0.2-0.38.
Using the results obtained in this study, the calculated results showed that Eq.3 can only be
applied to predict the values of compressive strength for concrete mixes having target mean
strength of 21.5 MPa and 27.5 MPa using with value of 0.29. The concrete mix with mean
strength of 36.5 MPa may be classified as high strength concrete, so the aforementioned
expression needs to be amended to suit such strength level.
437
Al-
….2016
40
Measured compressive strength (MPa) 35
30
25
20
15 A.M 45d B.M 45d

A.M 28d B.M 28d
10 A.M 7d B.M 7d
A.M 3d B.M 3d
5
20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5 35 37.5 40
Design target mean strength of concrete mixes (MPa)
Figure 14. Values of compressive strength for various concrete mixes containing crushed
aggregate
25
Measured compressive strength (MPa)
20
15
10
A.M 45d B.M 45d

5 A.M 28d B.M 28d
A.M 7d B.M 7d
A.M 3d B.M 3d
0
20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5 35 37.5 40
Design target mean strength of concrete mixes (MPa)
Figure 15. Values of compressive strength for various concrete mixes containing
uncrushed aggregate
Taken in consideration the measured results of W/C ratio and compressive strength, a more
precise estimate can be obtained for the of gravel/sand ratio from the following equation [8]:
438
Al-
….2016
&+
$ = 10&' (100 − )) + * 1 − − ,(-' − 1)
&
Eq.5
where
$ is the density (unit weight) of fresh concrete, kg/m3;
-. is the weighted average bulk specific gravity (SSD) of combined fine and coarse aggregate;
this needs to be determined from tests;
) is the air content, %;
* is the cement content, kg/m3;
- is the specific gravity of cement (generally 3.15 for Portland cement);
, is the mixing water requirement, kg/m3;
The volume method is an exact procedure for calculating the required amount of fine aggregate.
Here, the mass of fine aggregate, Af, is given by
1 34
)/ = -/ 01000 − , + + + 10) 5
2 &4
Eq.6
where
) is the coarse aggregate content, kg/m3;
-/ is the bulk specific gravity (SSD) of fine aggregate;
- is the bulk specific gravity (SSD) of coarse aggregate.
Applying Eqs. 5 and 6, the gravel/sand ratio for both American and British methods need to be
amended. This implying increases the gravel/sand ratio for the American method and decreases it
in the British method. Such tend is similar to that suggested in Sections 2.2 If compared with the
equivalent sand/cement and gravel/cement ratios , as shown in Figures 16 and 17.
2.00
1.75
Gravel/ Sand ratio
1.50
A.M cube st.

B.M 42.5 st.
B.M 52.5 st.
1.00
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Figure 16. Compressive strength-Gravel/sand ratio relationship for concrete mixes using
crushed aggregate.
439
Al-
….2016
2.00
1.75
Gravel/ Sand ratio
1.50
A.M cube st.

B.M 42.5 st.
B.M 52.5 st.
1.00
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Figure 17. Compressive strength-Gravel/sand ratio relationship for concrete mixes using
5. Conclusions
This study was undertaken to evaluate the American and British methods for mix design using
both analytical and experimental approaches. The main findings are listed below.
1. The American method disregarded the type of coarse aggregate used in concrete mix, whilst
the British method emphasized on this feature.
2. The British method usually produces a concrete with more strength than that designed by
American method. Such technique has inverse effect on the workability of the fresh concrete.
3. If the strength of cylinder specimens is adopted in the tabulated values of American method
and the lower value of the cement strength class is used in the British method, the differences
in calculation of mix proportions will be minimized.
4. The experimental results of compressive strength and workability showed close agreement
with the suggested approach for calculation the mix proportions.
5. The concrete mixes containing uncrushed aggregate exhibited unclear behaviour in terms of
the compressive strength and need for further attention to explore the correct tendency.
6. The formula suggested by BS EN 1992-1-1 [17] was reliable to estimate the value of
compressive strength at time (t) for the range of normal strength concrete.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the staff of laboratory at the College of Engineering- the
University of Al-Qadisiyiah for their technical assistance. The efforts provided by Mohamed
Abdul Hadi, Safaa Abdul Khathiam, and Muntadher Shihab are greatly appreciated.
440
Al-
….2016
References
[1] Thomas Armstrong. An overview of global cement sector trends, Insights from the Global
Cement Report 10th Edition;2013, Technical Congress FICEM-APCAC.
[2] Mohammed S. Imbabi, Collette Carrigan, Sean McKenna. Trends and developments in green
cement and concrete technology, International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment; 2012:
1, 194–216.
[3] Rishi Gupta. Characterizing material properties of cement-stabilized rammed earth to
construct sustainable insulated walls, Case Studies in Construction Materials 1; 2014:60–68.
[4] Abdelgadir A., Gholamreza F., O. Burkan I., A. Ghani R.,Benoit F., Simon F., Durability of
recycled aggregate concrete designed with equivalent mortar volume method; Cement &
Concrete Composites; 2009, 31: 555–563.
[5] W. B. Ashraf and M. A. Noor. Performance-Evaluation of Concrete Properties for Different
Combined Aggregate Gradation Approaches, Procedia Engineering, 2011; 14: 2627–2634.
[6] Ken W. Day, James Aldred and Barry Hudson. Concrete Mix Design, Quality Control and
Specification; 4th Edition; CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group;2014.
[7] Metwally A.A. Abd Elaty, Mariam Farouk Ghazy. Evaluation of consistency properties of
freshly mixed concrete by cone penetration test, Housing and Building National Research
Center; in press.
[8] Zongjin Li. Advanced Concrete Technology, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2011.
[9] A M Neville. Properties of concrete; 3th Edition, Longman Scientific and Technical.
[10] D. C. Teychenné, R E Franklin, H C Erntroy. Design of normal concrete mixes, 2th Edition,
Building Research Establishment Ltd,1988.
[11] BS EN 12350-2:2009.Testing fresh concrete. Slump-test. British Standards, 2009.
[12] Iraqi Standard No.4-1984, Portland cement, 1984.
[13] Iraqi Standard No.45-1984, Aggregate from natural sources for concrete and building
construction, 1984.
[14] BS EN 12390-1. Testing hardened concrete, Part 1: Shape, dimensions and other
requirements for specimens and moulds. British Standards, 2000.
[15] BS EN 12390-2. Making and curing specimens for strength test. British Standards, 2009.
[16] BS EN 12390-7. Testing hardened concrete, Part 7: Density of hardened concrete. British
Standards, 2009.
[17] BS EN 1992-1-1. Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures: Part 1-1: General rules and
rules for buildings. British Standards, 2004.
441

A Comparison Between American and British Methods of Mix Design With Suggestions For Improvement

Uploaded by

A Comparison Between American and British Methods of Mix Design With Suggestions For Improvement

Uploaded by

Al-

Al-Qadisiyah Journal For Engineering Sciences, Vol. 9…No. 3 ….2016

A COMPARISON BETWEEN AMERICAN AND BRITISH

Dr. Adnan Flayih Hassan Al-Sibahy(1)

Keywords: mix design, compressive strength, workability, aggregate properties.

2. Mix design of concrete

2.1 Methodology and procedure

Table 2: Relationship between the “Water/Cement” ratio and compressive strength of

Table 3: Volume of coarse Aggregate per unit volume of concrete [9]

Maximum size of Volume of dry-rodded coarse aggregate per unit volume of

Fineness modulus of fine Aggregate

Table 4: Approximate compressive strengths (N/mm2) of concrete mixes made with a

Compressive strength (MPa)

Figure 1: Relationship between compressive strength and free-water/cement ratio [10].

Slump (mm) 0-10 10-30 30-60 60-180

Figure 2: Estimated wet density of fully compacted concrete [10].

Free water/cement ratio

Figure 3: Recommended proportions of fine aggregate according to percentage passing a

2.2 Results of mix design

0.8 A.M cube st.

B.M 42.5 st.

0.8 A.M cube st.

A.M cube st.

B.M 52.5 st.

Figure 6: Compressive strength-Sand/Cement ratio relationship for concrete mixes using

A.M cube st.

B.M 52.5 st.

Figure 7: Compressive strength-Sand/Cement ratio relationship for concrete mixes using

4.5 A.M cube st.

Figure 8: Compressive strength-Gravel/Cement ratio relationship for concrete mixes using

4.5 A.M cube st.

Figure 9: Compressive strength-Gravel/Cement ratio relationship for concrete mixes using

3.1 Materials used

3.1 Compressive strength test

Coarse aggregate (Crushed

Figure 11. Digital controlled compression machine

4. Results and discussions

0.8 A.M Designed

Measured compressive strength (MPa) 35

15 A.M 45d B.M 45d

A.M 45d B.M 45d

A.M cube st.

A.M cube st.

You might also like