1 An Observation on Potential Alkali Silica Reactivity of Natural

2 Aggregate in Myanmar
3
4
5 Pyae Phyo Kyaw1, Thynn Thynn Htut2,*
1)
6 Quality Control Department, Tetlann Concrete Co., Ltd.,
2)
7 Building Department, Taisei Myanmar Co., Ltd.
8 No. 32, The Tokyo Enterprise Building, 6 ½ Mile, Hlaing Tsp, Yangon, Myanmar
9 *E-mail: thynnhtut@taiseimyanmar.com
10
11
12 Most aggregate used in concrete are almost chemically inactive, however,
13 mineral constituents of some aggregates react with alkali hydroxide, which
14 originate mainly from the portland cement. The chemical reaction, internally
15 occurred alkali–silica reaction (ASR) in either concrete or mortar under certain
16 condition, e.g. high humidity and sea saline water, may result deleterious
17 expansion of concrete or mortar. The prior evaluation of alkali-aggregate
18 reactivity by reliable test is required for the utilization of natural aggregate in
19 concrete for assurance on longer service life of the structures.
20 The objective of this study is to identify the potential alkali–silica reactivity of
21 several aggregate which marketable in Yangon region, Myanmar. To achieve
22 this objective, four number of fine aggregate quarry which is operated to
23 produce river sand was selected and investigated. In addition, three numbers
24 of coarse aggregate quarry were also chosen to investigate potential alkali–
25 silica reactivity.
26 Four samples of river sand, one sample of river shingle and three sample of
27 crush stone were collected from the mentioned quarries and the accelerated Bar
28 Mortar test were conducted on these samples to assess the potential alkali–
29 silica reactivity. According to ASTM C 1260 suggested method, three Bar
30 Mortar tests were performed on each sample. Based on the obtained results, it
31 was found that four samples of all seven samples were considered as non-
32 reactive due to their average expansion rates which are less than 0.1%. Two
33 sample which was collected from Wan Be Inn and Ohn Chaw quarry are
34 considered as moderately reactive which average expansion rate between 0.1%
35 and 0.2%. Only one sample taken from Kamaryut quarry is concluded as
36 reactive with average expansion rate of 0.3429% which is more than 0.2%.
37
38 1. Introduction
39
40 Generally, alkali–silica reaction (ASR) is considered as an internal chemical reaction between
41 the alkaline components in the cement and active silica–silicate based mineral constituents of some
42 aggregates. The use of aggregates susceptible of ASR in concrete can cause a severe degradation of
43 the concrete structures because of several reasons e.g. high humidity and sea saline water. [1]. Map
44 like crack are appear when concrete is suffered from ASR. [2] Many researches have stated that ASR
45 is generated due to combine action of existence of a significant quantity of reactive silica in aggregates,
46 having critical level of alkalis (sodium and potassium) in pore solution of concrete and water or
47 moisture from external source. Utilization of potentially alkali–silica reactive aggregates needs to
48 conduct reliable tests for evaluating their alkali–silica reactivity.[3,4]
49 Generally, it is considered that aggregates from the quarries in Yangon area are not reactive. The
50 portion of aggregate quarry which may have potential reactive aggregates need to be identified. Hence,
51 the research study undertaken has following aims and objectives:
52 · To identify the potential alkali–silica reactivity of several aggregate available in Yangon region,
53 Myanmar
54 · To identify Coarse aggregate which meet criteria of AASHTO.

1
 1 To achieve this objective, four number of fine aggregate quarry which is operated to produce
2 river sand was selected to investigate alkali–silica reactivity of sand. In addition, three numbers of
3 coarse aggregate quarry were also chosen for the same purpose. Aggregate sample are collected from
4 the mentioned quarry and an extensive laboratory tests: accelerated Bar Mortar test was conducted on
5 these samples to assess the potential alkali–silica reactivity.
6
7 2. Fine and Coarse Aggregate Quarry
8
9 The selected quarry for evaluation of alkali-silica reactivity of aggregate are listed on Table
10 1. The aggregate manufactured from those quarries are mainly supplied to construction industry in
11 Yangon region.
12
13 Table 1 List of sand and coarse aggregate quarry
14
Sr.
Quarry Name Material Name of River Region Township
No
1 Wartayar River sand Hlaing River Yangon Shwe Pyi Thar
Yangon River
2 Thilawa River sand Yangon Thanlyin
Estuary
3 Kamayut River and Yangon River Yangon Kamayut

4 Wan Be Inn River sand Sittaung River Mon state Thein Za Yat

5 Mi Kyaung Ye River shingle Ayeyarwaddy Bago Pyay

6 Ohn Chaw Crush stone Mandalay Ohn Chaw

7 Moke Pa Lin Crush stone Mon state Moke Pa Lin

15
16
17 3. Evaluation of Alkali-Silica Reactivity
18 3.1 Sample Collection
19
Kamayut
Thilawa Wan Be Inn

Ohn Chaw Moke Pa Lin

Fig 1. Aggregate Samples

2
 1 The aggregate samples are collected from the quarry stated in Table 1. and those samples are
2 shown in Fig 1. The coarse aggregate is crushed and the crushed aggregate is poured onto the sieves
3 to separate them into their various sizes. Then it is washed each size with a water spray over the sieve
4 to remove adhering dust and fine particles from the Aggregate. Each portion is placed into the oven at
5 105 Degree Celsius and allow to dry overnight. Each such portion is individually stored in a clean
6 container provided with a tight-fitting cover. Just before casting, combine the aggregate is combined
7 in the following grading requirements as in table 2 for aggregate with relative density ≥2.45 g/cm3.
8
9 Table 2 Grain Size Distribution for Mortar Bar [5]
10
Sieve Size
Mass (%) Mass (g)
Passing Retained on
4.75mm 2.36 mm 10 99
2.36mm 1.18 mm 25 247.5
1.18mm 600 µm 25 247.5
600µm 300 µm 25 247.5
300µm 150 µm 15 148.5
11
12 3.2 Moulding Mortar Bar
13 Portland cement that meet the requirements of Specification C 150 is used. Remove lumps are
14 removed and cement are passed through an 850 -µm sieve before use. Then, aggregate and cement are
15 mix with a mixing bowl. The moulds are filled up with two approximately equal layers, each layer
16 being compacted with the tamper. The mortar are placed into the corners, around with gage studs and
17 along the surface of the moulds with the tamper until a homogeneous specimen is obtained.
18
19 3.3 NaOH Solution Preparation
20 Initially, using a weighing balance with weigh 40g of NaOH pellets and dissolved in 900ml of
21 distilled water. Then, it pours the solution into a 1000ml volumetric flask and fill up the solution to
22 the point with more distilled water.
23
24 3.4 Conditioning
25 The temperature of moulding room and dry materials are maintained be between 20 °C and
26 27.5 °C. Also, the moist room and closet are controlled to be 23°C±1.7°C. The relative humidity of
27 the moulding room is keep at 50%. The specimens are stored in the storage oven that controlled
28 temperature at 80 ± 2 °C.
29

Fig 2. Mortar Bar Mould Fig 3. Storage Oven

30

3
 1 3.5 Initial Storage and Reading
2 Each mould is placed in the moist cabinet immediately after moulds have been filled. The
3 specimens are keep in the moulds for 24 ± 2 h. The specimens are removed from the moulds and,
4 while they are being protected from loss of moisture, properly identify and make an initial comparatory
5 reading. The initial and all subsequent readings to the nearest 0.002 mm are make and recorded. The
6 specimens are placed in a storage container with sufficient tap water to totally immerse them. The
7 container is sealed and placed in an oven at 80.0 ± 2.0°C (176 ± 3.6°F) for a period of 24 hours. The
8 container is removed from the oven one at a time and the surfaces of mortar bar are dried with a towel
9 paying particular attention to the two metal gage studs. The zero reading of each bar is made
10 immediately after drying, and read as soon as the bar is in position. As specified in ASTM C-1260, the
11 process of drying and reading is completed within 15 ± 5 s of removing the specimen from the water.
12 After comparatory readings on the remainder of the bars, all specimens made with each aggregate
13 sample are placed in a container with sufficient 1N NaOH, at 80.0 ± 2.0°C (176 ± 3.6°F) for the
14 samples to be totally immersed. The container is sealed and returned to the oven. The subsequent
15 comparator readings of the specimens are made periodically, with at least three intermediate readings,
16 for 14 days after the zero reading, at approximately the same time each day. If readings are continued
17 beyond the 14-day period, take at least one reading per week.
18
19 3.6 Calculation of Percent Expansion
20 The difference between the zero comparatory reading of the specimen and the reading at each
21 period to the nearest 0.001 % of the effective gage length is calculated and record as the expansion of
22 the specimen for that period. The average expansion of the three specimens of a given cement-
23 aggregate combination to the nearest 0.01 % as the expansion for the combination for a given period
24 is recorded. The expansion (En) of each mortar bar from the following equations.
௅೙ ି௅మ
25 ‫ܧ‬௡ ൌ  ൈ ͳͲͲ
ଶହ଴
26 and, if required, the value of thermal expansion
‫ܮ‬ଶ െ ‫ܮ‬ଵ
27 ܶ‫ ܧ‬ൌ ൈ ͳͲͲ
ʹͷͲ
28 En = expansion at the time n days, after immersion in the NaOH solution at 80°C in percent [%]
29 TE = thermal expansion after heating to 80°C in the water bath [%]
30 Ln = comparator reading at time n days after immersion of mortar bars in the 1M NaOH solution [mm]
31 L1 = Initial comparator reading [mm]
32 L2 = comparator reading after heating to 80°C in the water bath [mm]
33
34 4. Results and Discussion
35 4.1 Aggregate Reactivity Classification
36 Aggregate reactivity is classified based on the 16 days expansion values in accordance with Table
37 3, which tabulates the requirements of ASTM Standard Specification.
38
39 Table 3 Aggregate reactivity classification [6]
Mortar Bar Expansion (%) in 1N NaOH (80%) Classification
Less than 1% Non-reactive
Less than 2% Reactive
More than 2% Moderate reactive
Individual results shall not differ from the mean by more than 15%.
40
41 4.2 Experimental Results
42 Fig. 3 shows expansion of mortar bar incorporated with fine aggregate from War Ta Yar Quarry.
43 The expansion curves for WTA-1, WTA-2 and WTA-3 are in the same trend. The expansion rate are
44 very small and it become stable after age of 14 days. All specimens have under 0.03 % in expansion
45 for 16 days.

4
 1 Expansion of mortat bar (War Ta Yar-sand) Expansion of mortar bar (Thilawar-sand)
0.003 0.09
0.08
0.0025
0.07
0.002 0.06
Expansion [%]

Expansion [%]
0.05
0.0015
0.04
WTA-1 TLW-1
0.001 0.03
WTA-2 TLW-2
0.02
0.0005 WTA-3 TLW-3
0.01
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Age of Mortar Bar [days] Age of Mortar Bar [days]

Fig 3. Expansion of mortar bar (Wartayar) Fig 4. Expansion of mortar bar (Thilawa)
2
3 In figure 4, the expansion of mortar bar composed of sand from Thilawar quarry show less
4 expansion in early of experiment. Afterward, sudden increase in expansion is happen started from 6
5 days till the age of 16 days. The expansion of all specimen at the age 16 days don’t reach 1%.
6 Expansion of specimen by Wan Be Inn aggregate is shown in Fig. 6. Expansion curve for all of
7 mortar bars: WBL-1, WBL-2 and WBL-3 gradually increase from the beginning of experiment to test
8 on 12 days. After that moment, the expansion rate doesn’t increase and become stable until end of
9 experiment.
10 Expansion of mortar bar (Kamaryut-sand) Expansion of mortar bar (Wam Be Inn-sand)
0.4 0.2
0.18
0.35
0.16
0.3
0.14
Expansion [%]
Expansion [%]

0.25 0.12

0.2 0.1
0.08 WBI-1
0.15 KMT-1
0.06
KMT-2 WBI-2
0.1
0.04
KMT-3 WBI-3
0.05 0.02

0 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Age of Mortar Bar [days] Age of Mortar Bar [days]

Fig 5. Expansion of mortar bar (Kamayut) Fig 6. Expansion of mortar bar (Wan Be Inn)
11
12 Expansion of mortar bar (Mi Kyaung Ye-River shingle) Expansion of mortar bar (Ohn Chaw-crush stone)
0.045 0.14
0.04
0.12
0.035
0.1
0.03
Expansion [%]

Expansion [%]

0.025 0.08
MKY- 1
0.02 0.06
MKY-2 OHC-1
0.015
0.04 OHC-2
0.01 MKY-3

0.005 0.02 OHC-3

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Age of Mortar Bar [days] Age of Mortar Bar [days]

Fig 7. Expansion of mortar bar (Mi Kyaung Ye) Fig 8. Expansion of mortar bar (Ohn Chaw)
13
14
15 Expansion of mortar bar made with river shingle from Mi Kyaung Ye quarry is shown in Fig 7.
16 Expansion % at the age of 6 days abundantly grow up for all mortar bar reach 0.03% expansion. Mortar
17 bar No.2 (MKY-2) shows shrinkage at age 8days, while the other show expansion. It may because of
18 delay in expansion reading and place mortar bar at outside room temperature beyond the specified
19 measured time, so that, it lead loosing heat form mortar bar. At the age 10 and 12 all specimen exhibit
20 expansion and MKY-1 and MKY-3 reach 0.035% expansion. Afterward, MKY-02 has great increase
21 in expansion at the age of 14 days and it subsequently goes stable at the end of experiment; 16 days in
22 age of mortar bar. The tendency of expansion curves for all: MKY-1, MKY-2 and MKY-3 are the
23 same. It can be said that the results are reliable.

5
 1 Expansion of mortar bar made up of aggregate from Ohn Chaw Quarry is displayed in Fig.8. In
2 its experiment, all mortar bar: OHC-1, OHC-2, and OHC-3 are in the same tendency in expansion
3 form the beginning of experiment till end of experiment.
4 As shown in Fig. 9, expansion % of mortar made up of sand from Moke Pa Lin quarry increase
5 with a great extent until age of 8 days counted from the start of experiment. After 10 days, MPL-1
6 shows convex trend in expansion while MPL-2 shows concave trend expansion. It can be seen that
7 cupped hand shape curve during 10 and 16 days. It may because of electricity cut-off barrier during
8 experiment. On the other hands, highest expansion % of MPL-3 is 0.045% at the age of 16 days and
9 the others are 0.04% at the same age.
10
11 Expansion of mortar bar (Mote Palin-crush strone)
0.05 Non-reactive Zone Moderately Reactive Zone Reactive Zone
Conclusion
0.045 Mi Kyaung Ye Ohn Chaw War Ta Yar
0.04 Mote Palin Kamaryut Thilawar
0.035 Wam Be Inn
Expansion [%]

0.03 0.4
0.025
0.02 MPL-1 0.3

Expansion [%]
0.015
MPL-2
0.01
MPL-3 0.2
0.005
0
0.1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Age of Mortar Bar [days]
0
2 6 8 10 12 14 16
Age of Mortar Bar [days]

Fig 10. Compared Mortar Bar Expansion and

Fig 9. Expansion of mortar bar (Moke Pa Lin)
ASR Reactivity Range
12
13 4.3 Compared Mortar Bar Expansion and ASR Reactivity Range
14 It can be clearly seen at Fig.10 that the average expansion rate for Wartayar sand throughout the
15 experiment is very low. So that, fine aggregate from War Ta Yar quarry can be deduced that non-
16 reactive aggregate.
17 An average expansion of Thilawa sand doesn’t reach ASTM’s limit for moderately reactive zone
18 until end of experiment. So that, sand from Thilawar sand can be said as non-reactive aggregate.
19 In Fig 10, the average expansion curve for Kamaryut sand pass through moderately reactive zone
20 and it reach reactive zone at age of 12 days. Then, expansion rate significantly increases till the end of
21 experiment: last test on age of 16 days. It is clear that sand from Kamaryut quarry is reactive aggregate.
22 The average expansion of Wan Be Inn sand at 16 days is 0.184% and that is very close to reach
23 ASTM’s reactive zone. It can be said that aggregate from Wan Be Inn quarry is moderately reactive
24 based on the current result.
25 Average expansion % of MKY-1, 2 and 3 are presented in Fig.10 incorporate with aggregate
26 reactivity classification in accordance with ASTM C-1260. ASTM C-1260 classified that 0 to 1% of
27 expansion of mortar bar at 16 days is non-reactive. So that it can be deduced that river shingle from
28 Mi Kyaung Ye quarry is non-reactive.
29 The specimen made of aggregate from Ohn Chaw quarry show significant increase in expansion
30 form the start to 10 days and those reach 0.1% expansion at the age of 10 days. The average curve of
31 expansion rate stay lower region of moderately reactive zone in Fig. 5.4. So that, it is concluded that
32 crush aggregate from Ohn Chaw quarry is moderately reactive.
33 For the mortar bar made up of Moke Pa Lin aggregate, it can be concluded that aggregate form
34 Moke Pa Lin quarry is non-reactive due to the average of expansion for MPL-1, 2 and 3 shown in
35 Fig10 stay at the middle of ASTM C-1260 non-reactive zone.
36
37 5. Conclusion
38
39 In order to identify potential alkali silica reactivity of fine and coarse aggregate, seven number of
40 aggregate quarry located in Myanmar was selected and studied. In the study area, three types of
41 aggregate were observed in which main rock type is naturally found in the study area. To investigate

6
 1 potential alkali silica reactivity, seven samples consisted of three rock types were collected and
2 transferred to the laboratory. Then mortar bars for accelerated mortar bar method prepared. Further,
3 after sample preparation, three Bar Mortar tests were conducted on each sample so, in total 21 bar
4 Mortar test were performed in the laboratory. From the above discussion, the apparent reason for not
5 expecting potential alkali-silica reactivity in Myanmar is the low alkali content of the cements
6 produced and distributed all over the country. But, after testing in aggregate, both Ohn Chaw and
7 Wambaein showed between 0.1% and 0.2% and therefore, they are considered to be moderate reactive.
8 Aggregates from the source of Mi Kyaung Ye, Watayar, Motepalin and Thilawa showed an expansion
9 below 0.1 percent and can be considered as non-reactive. As stated previously, Kamaryut is 0.3429%
10 more than 0.2% which can cause deleterious ASR only with potentially reactive aggregates.
11
12 References
13 [1]. Berra, M., Alkali-silica reactivity criteria for concrete aggregates. Mater. Struct. Materials
14 and Structures, 38(277), 373-380.2005.
15 [2]. Farny, James A., and Beatrix Kerkhoff. Concrete Technology: Diagnosis and Control of
16 Alkali-Aggregate Reactions in Concrete. No. PCA R&D Serial No. 2071b. 2007.
17 [3]. Rajabipour, F., Giannini, E., Dunant, C., Ideker, J. H., & Thomas, M. D. Alkali–silica
18 reaction: Current understanding of the reaction mechanisms and the knowledge gaps. Cement
19 and Concrete Research, 76, 130-146.2015.
20 [4]. Owsiak, Z. Alkali–aggregate reaction in concrete containing high-alkali cement and granite
21 aggregate. Cement and Concrete Research, 34(1), 7-11.2004.
22 [5]. ASTM standard C 1260, 2014, “Standard Test Method for Potential Alkali Reactivity of
23 Aggregates (Mortar-Bar Method)” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014,
24 DOI: 10.1520/C1260-14, www.astm.org.
25 [6]. Thomas, M. D., Fournier, B., Folliard, K. J., & Ahlstrom, G. (n.d.). Selecting measures to
26 prevent deleterious alkali-silica reaction in concrete: Rationale for the AASHTO PP65
27 prescriptive approach.
28