Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

DOI 10.1617/s11527-012-9864-8

Influence of mixing procedure and mixer type on fresh

and hardened properties of concrete: a review
J. Dils G. De Schutter V. Boel

Received: 8 December 2011 / Accepted: 17 April 2012 / Published online: 10 May 2012
 RILEM 2012

Abstract Mixing concrete is not yet a fully understood issue, with many parameters having an influence
on the resulting fresh and hardened concrete properties. Even for the same composition, a somewhat
different microstructure can be obtained by changing
the mixing procedure and the mixer type. A mixing
procedure can differ in mixing time, mixing speed, air
pressure in the mixing pan, addition time of the
superplasticizer, temperature, etc. The concrete industry shows a great interest in controlling these influences in order to produce a concrete of which the
mechanical, rheological and durability properties are
well known. In this overview, different concrete
mixers, mixing times, mixing speeds, different addition times of the superplasticizer and a different air
pressure in the mixing pan will be examined. A review
of existing literature is presented, as well as some new
experimental results.
Keywords Concrete mixers  Mixing time 
Mixing speed  Air pressure  Temperature 
Addition time of SP
J. Dils (&)  G. De Schutter
Magnel Laboratory for Concrete Research,
Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium
e-mail: jeroen.dils@ugent.be
V. Boel
Department of Construction, Faculty of Applied
Engineering Sciences, University College Ghent,
9000 Ghent, Belgium

1 Introduction
For the concrete industry and concrete research
institutes it is of importance to determine the quality
of the concrete produced. In many cases the concept of
mixer efficiency is used to qualify how well a mixer
produces a uniform concrete from its constituents [11].
According to RILEM [2] a mixer is efficient if it
distributes all the constituents uniformly in the container without favoring one or the other. Therefore, in
evaluating the mixer efficiency, properties such as
segregation and aggregate grading throughout the
mixture should be monitored. DIN EN 206-1 [9]
propose three classes: ordinary, performance or highperformance mixers. Each class is defined by the
obtained variability of four main parameters (waterto-fine ratio, fine content, coarse aggregate content, air
content). Several samples are taken from the mixer
and for each parameter the average and standard
deviation is calculated. The coefficient of variation
gives a measure of the homogeneity of the concrete
produced. Nold [18] shows that an intensive mixer
with a rotating pan has the lowest variation coefficient
in comparison with the other mixers. In order to
increase the efficiency of a mixer, a study of the main
parameters is of great value. Another way to indicate
the efficiency of a mixer is followed by Williams et al.
[24] and Yang and Jennings [25]. The structure left in
a paste after mixing can be evaluated by the plastic
viscosity, the hysteresis area or the peak stress which is
obtained by a simple rheometer test. This remaining

1674

structure also gives an indication of the efficiency of

the mixer. The more agglomerates remain in a paste
after mixing, the less efficient the mixer is.

2 Concrete mixers
Concrete mixers can be divided in two main groups: a
batch mixers and continuous mixers. A batch mixer
can produce one batch at the time and has to be
emptied completely after each mix. Two main types
can be distinguished. A drum mixer has a horizontal or
inclined axis of rotation. It has fixed blades to lift the
materials as the drum rotates. The rotation speed of the
drum can be controlled and sometimes the inclination
of the axis also. The pan mixer, with a vertical axis of
rotation has a cylindrical pan (fixed or rotating) which
contains the concrete. One or two blades rotate inside
the pan to mix the materials, while another blade
scrapes the wall of the pan. The shapes of the blades
Fig. 1 Various
configurations for pan
mixers. The arrows indicate
the direction of rotation of
the pan, blades, and scraper
[11]

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

and the axes of rotation can vary. If the pan is fixed, the
scraper must move to push the concrete towards the
blades. A continuous mixer produces concrete at a
constant rate. The materials are continuously fed into
the mixer at the same rate as the concrete is
discharged. Screw type blades rotating in the middle
of the drum. Interesting research towards the efficiency of this type of mixer can be found in the work of
Yubakami et al. [26].
At the Magnel Laboratory, a planetary mixer
(Fig. 1e) and an intensive mixer (Fig. 2) are commonly used, to produce conventional vibrated concrete (CVC), self-compacting concrete (SCC) and
ultra high performance concrete (UHPC). The Eirich
mixer, of which the principle was invented in 1924,
separates the materials transport from the actual
mixing process. A rotating pan transports the
material to be mixed and an eccentrically mounted
tool performs the mixing function. This principle
gives some advantages compared to the planetary
mixer [18]:

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

1675

selected and the mixing quality is almost independent

of the filling level.

3 Mixing time
According to Beitzel [1] the optimal mixing time of a
pan mixer varies between 30 and 180 s. Schiessl et al.
[20] relate the mixing time to a certain stabilisation
time, which depends on the composition of the
concrete and the mixing speed applied during the
procedure. They characterize the mixing time by three
phases (Fig. 3).

Fig. 2 Intensive mixer (75 l)

In the intensive mixer there is no scraping of the

material over walls and bottom. Because the
mixing pan transports the materials to the mixing
tool, there is no speed differences between the pan
wall/bottom and the materials. In the mixer with
inclined pan there is one bottom/wall scraper
where friction may occur. Near the scraper, the
particle velocities are quite low, and independent
from the speed of the rotor tool. The rotor can work
at any speed without increasing friction, and wear
near the scraper.
The added quantities of admixtures can often be
reduced because of the better mixing process. The
same can be said about the amount of cement and
water, which can be reduced without lowering the
consistency in comparison with the planetary
mixer.

Besides the better mixing principle, many parameters

can be varied to investigate their influence on the
properties of the concrete. The tool speed can be
adjusted over a wide range and the mixing time is
independent of the mixer size. Therefore the energy
input into the product is specifically adjustable to the
product. The sense of rotation of the rotor can be

Phase 1 Dispersion: Water is distributed in the

mix. Due to the surface tension of the water and the
capillary pressure inside the water, the forces
between the particles increase and a significant
increase of the power is needed to distribute the
water and superplasticizer. The slump flow
increases as the distribution improves. The evolution of this improvement in a concrete truck can be
seen in Fig. 4. The concentration of superplasticizer in the cementwater solution increases with
the mixing time [5].
Phase 2 Optimum: The power decreases towards a
plateau were the components are homogeneously
mixed and the superplasticizer is fully distributed.
The slump flow reaches its maximum.
Phase 3 Overmixing: For UHPC the slump flow
remains rather constant after reaching the optimum. For SCC on the other hand the slump flow
decreases due to the number of fine particles in the
mix that is raised by abrasion of the coarse

Fig. 3 Effect of the mixing time on the power and the slump
flow [14]

1676

Fig. 4 Influence of hauling time on concentration of HRWRA

[5]

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

Fig. 5 Particle size distribution of SCC at different hauling

times [5]

aggregate. As a consequence new surfaces are

produced for reaction, increasing the demand of
superplasticizer and reducing the slump flow.
Diawara and Ghafoori [5] also encountered this
phenomenon by investigating the change in particle size distribution with a laser diffractometer in
function of the mixing time. It can be seen from
Fig. 5 that the volume of fine particles ranging
from 1 to 250 lm increased as the hauling time
increased.
The main purpose of this interpretation is to limit the
actual mixing time (Fig. 6) for SCC (4 min) and
UHPC (12 min). As a consequence the rate of
concrete production will become more competitive to
that of CVC and an important financial disadvantage
for high performances concrete types will be diminished. Figure 7 shows that with an intensive mixer a
similar interpretation for CVC is possible. The workability also rises till an optimum and decreases due to
overmixing. From these figures it can be seen that the
composition of the concrete plays an important role.
For each type a specific optimal mixing time exists,
called the stabilisation time.
The stabilisation time is calculated based on the timepower curve. According to Mazanec et al. [17] the
normalized power can be divided into two regions,
namely before and after peak power. The first region can
be fit by a linear function and the second by an
exponential function. According to Chopin et al. [3]
only the last region is of importance (Fig. 8) and can be
fitted mathematically by a similar exponential function.
Mazanec et al. [17] note that when the slope of
Fig. 8 has a value of approximately -0.004 the
mixture has reached an optimal workability and this

Fig. 6 Effect of the mixing time on the slump flow for SCC
[14]

after a minimal mixing time and a constant mixing

speed (Fig. 9). The time corresponding with this slope
is called the stabilisation time ts. This argumentation
can not only be used for SCC and UHPC but also for
CVC. Own results, of which some are presented in
Fig. 7, indicate a stabilisation time for CVC between
45 and 70 s, depending on the water-to-cement ratio.
The influence of the concrete composition on the
stabilisation time can be taken into account by
the relative concentration of solids ///max, which is
the ratio of the actual concentration of solids in a
concrete mix / to the maximum possible concentration of solids /max obtained at the maximum packing
density of the particles [17]. The higher this value, the
more energy the mixer needs to properly disperse all
the components (Fig. 10). Altering the mass fractions
of each component can change the mixing time with

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

Fig. 7 Effect of the mixing time on the slump for CVC [7]

1677

Fig. 10 Influence of the composition on the stabilisation

time ts [17]

otherwise have filled the gaps is used to reduce the

friction between the particles. The spherical form of
the silica fume particles has the same effect and
thereby shortens the stabilisation time [17].
Chopin et al. [4] use the stabilisation time to predict
the mean compressive strength of their mixture after a
certain mixing time. When ts and the mean compressive strength after extended mixing fc1 is known, fc
can be calculated at the desired mixing time by Eq. (1).

 
ts
fc tm fc1 1  a
1
tm
Fig. 8 Experimental and mathematical power curve [3]

Fig. 9 Calculation of the stabilisation time [3]

several minutes. With an increase of the amount of

silica fume a shorter mixing time can be obtained. This
is explained by the gaps between the coarser cement
and quartz particles which are filled by more small
silica fume particles. The water which would

a is a coefficient that depends on the mixer efficiency.

The slightly higher strengths that are found for
tm = 600 s are explained by the better homogenization of the constituents. This depends again on the
efficiency of the mixer, as mentioned in Sect. 2. When
the standard deviation of the compressive strength for
a mixing time tm is taken into account, Chopin et al. [4]
conclude that the increase in strength is not significant
for short mixing periods. Research in the Magnel
Laboratory led to the same conclusion [6]. Takahashi
et al. [22] also made this observation for grouting
mortars, although the early compressive strength
increased after a mixing time of 7 min. Chopin et al.
[4] also investigated the influence of the mixer
capacity on the stabilisation time of different mixtures.
Figure 11 illustrates that, a shorter mixing time is
required for a higher mixer capacity. This conclusion
is correct for a planetary mixer, but normally not for an
intensive mixer, where the stabilisation time is independent of the mixer capacity.

1678

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

Fig. 11 Mean stabilisation time as a function of mixer capacity

(non-intensive mixer types) [4]

4 Mixing speed
The tool speed also influences the mixing process and
thus the stabilisation time. Martinek [15] writes in
1984 that the most favorable mixing effect in a
cylindrical dual-shaft mixer, is obtained at tip speeds
of 1.5 up to 1.6 m/s. Geiker et al. [13] claim that for the
same SCC composition a longer mixing time is needed
to obtain equilibrium, when a lower mixing speed is
used.
Mazanec et al. [17] investigated the influence of the
mixing speed on the stabilisation time. The ultra-high
performance reference concrete, used in their investigation, reached a maximum power after 34 s at a
speed of 2.9 m/s and 48 s at a speed of 1.4 m/s. The
times needed to reach stabilisation of the mix after the
peak power were 150 and 142 s at 1.4 and 2.9 m/s.
Based on this result they optimized their mixing
procedure by mixing at high speed in the beginning in
order to distribute the water and the superplasticizer
rapidly (mixer). After the peak power, the mixing is
continued at low speed until the stabilisation time is
reached (transport). They also derived an Eq. (2) to
calculate the stabilisation time for their reference
UHPC mixture based on the applied mixing speed and
relative concentration of solids, ///max.
tm  ts

13:1  v0:114
1  1:0046  //

Fig. 12 Slump flow in function of the number of rotations [6]

a capacity of 5 l. In both mixers the same circumferential speed at the tip of the vanes is used and the
conversion from concrete to mortar is done by
the CEM-method [21]. Hereby a comparison between
the two material levels is possible. Figure 12 shows
that for a high water-to-cement ratio an increase in the
number of rotations has no essential influence on the
slump flow. For lower water-to-cement ratios an
optimum is reached. When the number of rotations
is higher than this optimum, the workability drops due
to overmixing (Fig. 3). A water-to-cement ratio of
W/C = 0.40 seems to be less susceptible to overmixing than a water-to-cement ratio of W/C = 0.46. This
slump loss is also confirmed by the research of Vickers
et al. [23].
A self-compacting mortar, shown in Fig. 13 is
apparently less sensitive to an increase in the number
of rotations. Only at a higher amount of rotations, the

max

Dils et al. [6] have been investigating the influence

of the number of rotations on the workability of SCC
and self-compacting mortar (Figs. 12, 13). For concrete an intensive mixer with a capacity of 75 l is used,
while the mortar is prepared in an intensive mixer with

Fig. 13 Mini slump flow in function of the number of rotations

[6]

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

1679

mixer is able to break down the finer sand grains and

thus to reduce the workability as explained in Sect. 3.
Because the corresponding points in Figs. 12 and 13
represent the same amount of energy, it may be
concluded that when an optimal mixing time and
mixing speed is determined for concrete, the same
time and speed may be used for mortars.

5 Mixing sequence, material selection

and temperature
At the Magnel Laboratory for concrete research the
components (fine and coarse aggregates, fillers) are
discharged by a mobile scale into the mixing pan of the
intensive mixer (Fig. 14). This means that the mixing
sequence can not be varied with these elements. The
only thing that may be of interest is the manner and the
timing of addition of the superplasticizer. According
to Flatt and Houst [12] plasticizing admixture added
directly to the mixing water may be intermixed with
the early hydration products. If the addition of
plasticizer is delayed a few minutes, a major improvement of the plasticizing effect is observed. Figure 15
shows that this remark holds true for self-compacting
mortars with high water-to-cement ratio and thus with
a smaller amount of superplasticizer. Namely, an
interference with the hydration products will be felt
more by a SCC mixture with less superplasticizer [6].
Mazanec and Schiessl [16] also claim that for each
cement there is an optimal addition time, depending on
the SO3 content of the cement. The superplasticizer
can be added earlier for cements with a high content,
because for such cements more superplasticizer will
Fig. 14 Mixing sequence
Laboratory Magnel for
concrete research

Fig. 15 Influence of addition method of SP on the workability

of a self-compacting mortar (method 1: SP and water are mixed
in advance, method 2: first water and directly after SP, method 3:
first water, mixing 30 s, addition SP [6])

be available for later adsorption on newly formed

hydration products and silica fume.
Another effect of the addition time can be seen in
Fig. 16, where the apparent viscosity is larger for
mixtures with a direct addition of SP than with a
delayed addition. The differences decrease by increasing the amount of plasticizing admixture. The same
can be said about the thixotropy, static and dynamic
yield stress [10].
The type of superplasticizer also has an influence on
the addition time [16]. A superplasticizer with higher
anionic charge and molecular mass, with a longer
main chain, a higher density of side chains in the main
chain and shorter side chains, should be more mobile.
The reason is the fact that the motion of the
superplasticizer is restricted by long side chains and
low side chain densities. The superplasticizer will be
faster adsorbed so that less superplasticizer is

1680

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

Fig. 16 Apparent viscosity

at 40 s-1 from the upwards
shear rate ramp as a function
of SP dosage prepared by
direct (a) and delayed
(b) addition of SP [10]

available for adsorption, for example on silica fume, at

a later stage. Such a superplasticizer has an earlier
addition time but results in a lower workability after a
certain time.
The type of cement also plays an important role
towards the workability of a certain mixture [16].
Cement with a lower C3A content and Blaine fineness
gives a more fluid mixture (Fig. 17). The reason is that
the degree of adsorption of SP, and thus the required
dosage, increases with the C3A content and fineness.
Another parameter that needs attention is the
environmental temperature. Cement pastes undergo a
change in flow behavior at different temperatures
(Fig. 18) [10]. It can be observed that, while viscosity
(slope of the flow curve) is substantially affected by
temperature, values of the yield stress (ordinate at zero
shear rate) show little variation, especially in the case

Fig. 18 Influence of different temperatures on the flow curve

(upwards flow curves are depicted in solid lines and symbols;
downwards flow curves are depicted in dashed lines and empty
symbols [10])

of upwards flow curves. Research of Takahashi et al.

[22] (Fig. 19) shows some inconsistent results with
Fig. 18. Here the workability of mortars is also
affected by temperature, but by lowering the temperature during mixing a higher slump flow is obtained
after a mixing time of 7 min.

6 Influence of the pressure in the mixing pan

Fig. 17 Paste flow after 3.5 min in dependence of superplasticizer (PCE 1) dosage for different Portland cements [16]

Concrete plants and laboratories are typically not able

to fully control the air while mixing. It is know that air
bubbles introduced in the concrete can affect the
compressive strength, change the workability and

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

1681

mixer (75 l), although less pronounced (Fig. 21). The

air content decreases from 6.7 % for 1,024 mbar to
4.6 % for 55.6 mbar. The compressive strength in
latter case was determined on cubes with side 15 cm.
Mazanec and Schiessl [16] also show that a reduced
pressure during the last minute of mixing considerably
improves the workability of the mortar due to the
reduction in air content. The decrease of air content
leads to an increase in slump flow due to a decrease of
the yield stress [27] (Fig. 22). This phenomenon is
also noticed in the research program at the Magnel
Laboratory. Using the larger mixer, it is found to be
less pronounced than for the smaller mixer (Fig. 23),
even though the air content decrease from 6.7 to
4.6 % [8].
Fig. 19 Influence of temperature on the slump flow of mortars
[22]

decrease the durability. Therefore it is of interest to

investigate the influence of the pressure in the mixing
pan. In order to do so, two intensive vacuum mixer
with capacity of 5 and 75 l are used in the Magnel
Laboratory. Both mixers have the possibilities to alter
the pressure from normal air pressure (about
1,013 mbar) to about 50 mbar. Figure 20 shows an
increase in compressive strength for UHPC, prepared
in the 5 l mixer, when the pressure is lowered from
1,000 to 50 mbar [8, 19]. The lower air content and
higher density decrease the number of defects and
increase the strength of the mortar. This effect is
similar for UHPC mixtures prepared in the larger

Fig. 20 Effect of pressure in a 5 l mixer on density and

compressive strength [19]

Fig. 21 Effect of pressure in a 75 l mixer on the compressive

strength of UHPC [8]

Fig. 22 Air void and flow of mortar in dependence of applied

pressure [10]

1682

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

Fig. 23 Concrete slump flow in dependence of applied pressure

[8]

Furthermore the properties of fresh and hardened

concrete can also be affected by the duration of the
reduced pressure. Mazanec and Schiessl [16] conclude
that after 30 s it was possible to reduce the volume of
air voids in the UHPC mix to 1 %, using a 5 l intensive
mixer. Extending the duration yielded only a small
increase in compressive strength. The mortar flow
increased to a maximum around 60 s.

7 Conclusions
During mixing of concrete, several parameters influence the resulting fresh and hardened concrete properties. Based on available literature, a review has been
presented, as well as some newly obtained experimental data. The following summary can be given:

Intensive mixers operate following an improved

mixing principle, making them more suitable to
mix high performance concretes such as UHPC
and SCC. Research, determined a shorter mixing
time for all types of concrete in case of intensive
mixers.
The use of a stabilisation time to determine the
optimal mixing time and workability has proven
useful. The stabilisation time is mainly influenced
by the relative concentration of solids ///max and
the mixing speed.
A higher mixing speed can be used to reduce the
mixing time. However, an excessive speed can
lead to overmixing. This is especially the case for
SCC, for which a sensitive increase in speed can
have a large influence on the workability.

A delayed addition of the superplasticizer, leads to

an improved workability, especially when a low
water-to-cement ratio is used. A similar conclusion
can be made when a cement with a low C3Acontent and Blaine fineness is used.
Vacuum mixing can lead to improved concrete
properties. Preliminary results however revealed a
lower influence of a reduced air pressure in a 75 l
intensive vacuum mixer in comparison with a 5 l
intensive vacuum mixer. Further research is
ongoing.

Acknowledgments The financial support of the Hercules

Foundation and of the Fund for Scientific Research Flanders is
greatly acknowledged.

References
1. Beitzel H (1982) Bedeutung der Mischzeit fur Konstruktion
und Einsatz von Betonmischern. BMT 29 heft 5:S.230
S.234
2. Charonnat Y, Beitzel H (1997) RILEM TC 150 ECM:
efficiency of concrete mixers; report: efficiency of concrete
mixers towards qualification of mixers. Mater Struct (Suppl
196) 30:2832
3. Chopin D, De Larrard F, Cazacliu B (2004) Why do HPC
and SCC require a longer mixing time? Cem Concr Res
34:22372243
4. Chopin D, Cazacliu B, De Larrard F et al (2007) Monitoring
of concrete homogenisation with the power consumption
curve. Mater Struct 40:897907
5. Diawara H, Ghafoori N (2011) Influence of hauling time on
fresh properties of self-consolidating concrete. ACI Mater J
108:244251
6. Dils et al (2011) Mixing procedure for self-compacting
cementitious materials (in Dutch). Unpublished work
7. Dils et al (2011) Influence of the mixing procedure on the
properties of traditional cementitious materials (in Dutch).
Unpublished work
8. Dils J, De Schutter G, Boel V (2012) Influence of vacuum
mixing on the mechanical properties of UHPC. In: International symposium on ultra high performance concrete,
Kassel, 79 March 2012, pp 241248
9. DIN EN 206-1 (2002) Produktionskontrolle, BetonKalender 2002, Erganzungsband, Verlag Ernst &Shn,
Weinheim, S.233
10. Ferna`ndez-Altable V, Casanova I (2006) Influence of mixing sequence and superplasticiser dosage on the rheological
response of cement pastes at different temperatures. Cem
Concr Res 36:12221230
11. Ferraris CF (2001) Concrete mixing methods and concrete
mixers: state of the art. J Res Nat Inst Stand Technol
106:391399
12. Flatt R, Houst YF (2001) A simplified view on chemical
effects perturbing the action of superplasticizers. Cem
Concr Res 31:11691176

Materials and Structures (2012) 45:16731683

13. Geiker MR, Ekstrand JP, Hansen R (2007) Effect of mixing
on properties of SCC. In: Fifth international RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete, vol 1, pp 231238
14. Lowke D, Schiessl P (2005) Effect of mixing energy on
fresh properties of SCC. In: Proceedings of the 4th international RILEM symposium on self-compacting concrete,
Chicago, USA
15. Martinek R (1984) Doppelwellen trogmischer in Chargenund kontinuierlicher Bauweise. BMT 31Heft 4 ? 5S:
147154
16. Mazanec O, Schiessl P (2008) improvement of UHPC
properties through an optimized mixing procedure. In: 8th
International symposium on utilization of high-strength and
high-performance concrete, Tokyo, Japan, 2729 October
2008, pp 307313
17. Mazanec O, Lowke D, Schiessl P (2009) Mixing of high
performance concrete: effect of concrete composition and
mixing intensity on mixing time. Mater Struct 43(3):
357365
18. Nold P (2006) Mischen von beton: was muss man beachten,
um betonegleichmassig gut aufzubereiten? Bayerische
bauakademie
19. Schachinger I, Schubert J, Mazanec O (2004) Effect of
mixing and placement methods on fresh and hardened ultra
high performance concrete (UHPC). In: Proceedings of the
international symposium on ultra high performance concrete, 1315 September 2004, pp 575586
20. Schiessl P, Mazanec O, Lowke K (2007) SCC and UHPCeffect of mixing technology on fresh concrete properties. In:
Advances in construction materials part VI, pp 513522

1683
21. Schwartzentruber A, Catherine C (2000) La methode du
mortier de betonequivalent (MBE)-Un nouveloutildaide a`
la formulation des betons adjuvants. Mater Struct 33:
475482
22. Takahashi K, Bier TA, Westphal T (2011) Effects of mixing
energy on technological properties and hydration kinetics of
grouting mortars. Cem Concr Res 41:11671176
23. Vickers TM Jr, Farrington SA, Bury JR, Brower LE (2005)
Influence of dispersant structure and mixing speed on concrete slump retention. Cem Concr Res 35:18821890
24. Williams DA, Saak WA, Jennings HM (1999) The influence
of mixing on the rheology of fresh cement paste. Cem Concr
Res 29:14911496
25. Yang M, Jennings HM (1995) Influences of mixing methods
on the microstructure and rheological behavior of cement
paste. Materials, Sciences and Engineering and Civil
Engineering, Northwestern University, Illinois
26. Yubakami A, Hashimoto C et al (2011) Development of biaxial forced mixing type mixer having high mixing efficiency for high performance concrete with help of a visualization technique. In: 9th International symposium on
high performance concrete
27. Zain MFM, Saifuddin M, Yusof KM (1999) A study on the
properties of freshly mixed high performance concrete.
Cem Concr Res 29:14271432