Reactive Powder Concrete

(http://www.theconcreteportal.com/reac_pow.html)

Introduction

Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC) is a developing composite material that will allow the
concrete industry to optimize material use, generate economic benefits, and build structures
that are strong, durable, and sensitive to environment. A comparison of the physical,
mechanical, and durability properties of RPC and HPC (High Performance Concrete) shows
that RPC possesses better strength (both compressive and flexural) and lower permeability
compared to HPC. This page reviews the available literature on RPC, and also presents the
results of laboratory investigations comparing RPC with HPC. Specific benefits and potential
applications of RPC have also been described.

High-Performance Concrete (HPC) is not just a simple mixture of cement, water, and
aggregates. It contains mineral components and chemical admixtures having very specific
characteristics, which give specific properties to the concrete. The development of HPC results
from the materialization of a new science of concrete, a new science of admixtures and the use
of advanced scientific equipments to monitor concrete microstructure.

HPC has achieved the maximum compressive strength in its existing form of microstructure.
However, at such a level of strength, the coarse aggregate becomes the weakest link in concrete.
In order to increase the compressive strength of concrete even further, the only way is to
remove the coarse aggregate. This philosophy has been employed in Reactive Powder Concrete
(RPC)1.

Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC) was developed in France in the early 1990s and the world’s
first Reactive Powder Concrete structure, the Sherbrooke Bridge in Canada, was erected in July
1997. Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC) is an ultra high-strength and high ductility
cementitious composite with advanced mechanical and physical properties. It consists of a
special concrete where the microstructure is optimized by precise gradation of all particles in
the mix to yield maximum density. It uses extensively the pozzolanic properties of highly
refined silica fume and optimization of the Portland cement chemistry to produce the highest
strength hydrates1.

The concept of reactive powder concrete was first developed by P. Richard and M. Cheyrezy
and RPC was first produced in the early 1990s by researchers at Bouygues’ laboratory in
France2. A field application of RPC was done on the Pedestrian/Bikeway Bridge in the city of
Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada3. RPC was nominated for the 1999 Nova Awards from the
Construction Innovation Forum. RPC has been used successfully for isolation and containment
of nuclear wastes in Europe due to its excellent impermeability4.

The requirements for HPC used for the nuclear waste containment structures of Indian Nuclear
Power Plants are normal compressive strength, moderate E value, uniform density, good
workability, and high durability5. There is a need to evaluate RPC regarding its strength and
durability to suggest its use for nuclear waste containment structures in Indian context.
Composition of Reactive Powder Concrete

RPC is composed of very fine powders (cement, sand, quartz powder and silica fume), steel
fibres (optional) and superplasticizer. The superplasticizer, used at its optimal dosage,
decreases the water to cement ratio (w/c) while improving the workability of the concrete. A
very dense matrix is achieved by optimizing the granular packing of the dry fine powders. This
compactness gives RPC ultra-high strength and durability6. Reactive Powder Concretes have
compressive strengths ranging from 200 MPa to 800 MPa.

Richard and Cheyrezy1 indicate the following principles for developing RPC:

1. Elimination of coarse aggregates for enhancement of homogeneity

2. Utilization of the pozzolanic properties of silica fume
3. Optimization of the granular mixture for the enhancement of compacted density
4. The optimal usage of superplasticizer to reduce w/c and improve workability
5. Application of pressure (before and during setting) to improve compaction
6. Post-set heat-treatment for the enhancement of the microstructure
7. Addition of small-sized steel fibres to improve ductility

Table 1 lists salient properties of RPC, along with suggestions on how to achieve them.

Table 1: Properties of RPC enhancing its homogeneity and strength

Types of
Property of Recommended
Description failure
RPC Values
eliminated
Coarse aggregates
are replaced by
fine sand, with a
Mechanical,
Reduction in reduction in the Maximum size of
Chemical &
aggregate size of the fine sand is 600 µm
Thermo-
size coarsest
mechanical
aggregate by a
factor of about 50.
Improved
mechanical Disturbance
Enhanced Young’s modulus
properties of the of the
mechanical values in 50 GPa –
paste by the mechanical
properties 75 Gpa range
addition of silica stress field.
fume
Volume of the
paste is at least
Reduction in By any
Limitation of 20% greater than
aggregate to external
sand content the voids index of
matrix ratio source (e.g.,
non-compacted
formwork).
sand.
Table 2 describes the different ingredients of RPC and their selection parameters. The mixture
design of RPC primarily involves the creation of a dense granular skeleton. Optimization of
the granular mixture can be achieved either by the use of packing models7 or by particle size
distribution software, such as LISA8 [developed by Elkem ASA Materials]. For RPC mixture
design an experimental method has been preferred thus far.

Table 2: Selection Parameters for RPC components

Selection Particle
Components Function Types
Parameters Size
Good
hardness 150 µm
Give Natural,
Sand Readily to
strength, Crushed
available and 600 µm
Aggregate
low cost.
C3 S : 60%; Binding
C2S : 22%; material, 1 µm OPC,
Cement C3A : 3.8%; Production to Medium
C4AF: 7.4%. of primary 100 µm fineness
(optimum) hydrates
Max.
reactivity 5 µm
Quartz Powder fineness during to Crystalline
heat- 25 µm
treating
Filling the
voids, Procured
Enhance from
Very less 0.1 µm
rheology, Ferrosilicon
Silica fume quantity of to
Production industry
impurities 1 µm
of (highly
secondary refined)
hydrates
L : 13 –
25 mm
Good aspect Improve
Steel fibres Ø : 0.15 Straight
ratio ductility
– 0.2
mm
Less
Polyacrylate
Superplasticizer retarding Reduce w/c _
based
characteristic
Table 3 presents various mixture proportions for RPC obtained from available literature1,3,9,10

Table 3: RPC mixture designs from literature

P. Richard and M. S. A. V. S.
Cheyrezy1 Bouygues3 Matte9 Staquet10
[1995] [1997] [1999] [2000]
Non 12 mm 25 mm
Fibred Fibred
fibred fibres fibres
Portland
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cement
Silica fume 0.25 0.23 0.25 0.23 0.324 0.325 0.324
Sand 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.423 1.43 1.43
Quartz Powder -- 0.39 -- 0.39 0.296 0.3 0.3
Superplasticizer 0.016 0.019 0.016 0.019 0.027 0.018 0.021
Steel fibre -- -- 0.175 0.175 0.268 0.275 0.218
Water 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.19 0.282 0.2 0.23
Compacting
-- -- -- -- -- -- --
pressure
Heat treatment
20ºC 90ºC 20ºC 90ºC 90ºC 90ºC 90ºC
temperature

The major parameter that decides the quality of the mixture is its water demand (quantity of
water for minimum flow of concrete). In fact, the voids index of the mixture is related to the
sum of water demand and entrapped air. After selecting a mixture design according to
minimum water demand, optimum water content is analyzed using the parameter relative
density (d0/dS). Here d0 and dS represent the density of the concrete and the compacted density
of the mixture (no water or air) respectively. Relative density indicates the level of packing of
the concrete and its maximum value is one. For RPC, the mixture design should be such that
the packing density is maximized.

Microstructure enhancement of RPC is done by heat curing. Heat curing is performed by

simply heating (normally at 90°C) the concrete at normal pressure after it has set properly. This
considerably accelerates the pozzolanic reaction, while modifying the microstructure of the
hydrates that have formed1. Pre-setting pressurization has also been suggested as a means of
achieving high strength1.

The high strength of RPC makes it highly brittle. Steel fibres are generally added to RPC to
enhance its ductility. Straight steel fibres used typically are about 13 mm long, with a diameter
of 0.15 mm. The fibres are introduced into the mixture at a ratio of between 1.5 and 3% by
volume1. The cost-effective optimal dosage is equivalent to a ratio of 2% by volume, or about
155 kg/m3.
Mechanical Performance and Durability of RPC

The RPC family includes two types of concrete, designated RPC 200 and RPC 800, which offer
interesting implicational possibilities in different areas. Mechanical properties for the two types
of RPC are given in Table 4. The high flexural strength of RPC is due to the addition of steel
fibres.

Table 5 shows typical mechanical properties of RPC compared to a conventional HPC of

compressive strength 80 MPa11. As fracture toughness, which is a measure of energy absorbed
per unit volume of material to fracture, is higher for RPC, it exhibits high ductility. Apart from
their exceptional mechanical properties, RPCs have an ultra-dense microstructure, giving
advantageous waterproofing and durability characteristics. These materials can therefore be
used for industrial and nuclear waste storage facilities1.

RPC has ultra-high durability characteristics resulting from its extremely low porosity, low
permeability, limited shrinkage and increased corrosion resistance. In comparison to HPC,
there is no penetration of liquid and/or gas through RPC4. The characteristics of RPC given in
Table 6, enable its use in chemically aggressive environments and where physical wear greatly
limits the life of other concretes12.

Table 4: Comparison of RPC 200 and RPC 800

RPC 200 RPC 800

Pre-setting pressurization None 50 MPa
Heat-treating 20 to 90°C 250 to 400°C
Compressive strength (using quartz 170 to 230 490 to 680
sand) MPa MPa
Compressive strength (using steel 650 to 810
--
aggregate) MPa
45 to 141
Flexural strength 30 to 60 MPa
MPa

Table 5: Comparison of HPC (80 MPa) and RPC 2009

Property HPC (80 MPa)

RPC 200
Compressive strength 80 MPa 200 MPa
Flexural strength 7 MPa 40 MPa
Modulus of Elasticity 40 GPa 60 GPa
Fracture Toughness <10³ J/m² 30*10³ J/m²

Table 6: Durability of RPC Compared to HPC10

Abrasive Wear 2.5 times lower

Water Absorption 7 times lower
 Rate of Corrosion 8 times lower
Chloride ions diffusion 25 times lower

Limitations of RPC

In a typical RPC mixture design, the least costly components of conventional concrete are
basically eliminated or replaced by more expensive elements. The fine sand used in RPC
becomes equivalent to the coarse aggregate of conventional concrete, the Portland cement plays
the role of the fine aggregate and the silica fume that of the cement. The mineral component
optimization alone results in a substantial increase in cost over and above that of conventional
concrete (5 to 10 times higher than HPC). RPC should be used in areas where substantial weight
savings can be realized and where some of the remarkable characteristics of the material can
be fully utilized2. Owing to its high durability, RPC can even replace steel in compression
members where durability issues are at stake (e.g. in marine condition). Since RPC is in its
developing stage, the long-term properties are not known.

Experimental study at IIT Madras

Materials Used

The materials used for the study, their IS specifications and properties have been presented in
Table 7.

Mixture Design of RPC and HPC

 Considerable numbers of trial mixtures were prepared to obtain good RPC and HPC
mixture proportions.
 Particle size optimization software, LISA8 [developed by Elkem ASA Materials] was
used for the preparation of RPC and HPC trial mixtures.
 Various mixture proportions obtained from the available literature were also studied.
 The selection of best mixture proportions was on the basis of good workability and
ideal mixing time.
 Finalized mixture proportions of RPC and HPC are shown in Table 8.

Table 7: Materials used in the study and their properties

Sl. Specific
Sample Particle size range
No. Gravity
Cement, OPC, 53-
1 grade 3.15 31 µm – 7.5 µm
[IS. 12269 – 1987]
Micro Silica
2 [ASTM C1240 – 2.2 5.3 µm – 1.8 µm
97b]
3 Quartz Powder 2.7 5.3 µm – 1.3 µm
Standard sand,
4 grade-1 2.65 2.36 mm – 0.6 mm
[IS. 650 – 1991]
 Standard sand,
5 grade-2 2.65 0.6 mm – 0.3 mm
[IS. 650 – 1991]
Standard sand,
6 grade-3 2.65 0.5 mm – 0.15 mm
[IS. 650 – 1991]
Steel fibres (30 mm) length: 30 mm & dia:
7 7.1
[ASTM A 820 – 96] 0.4 mm
Steel fibres (36 mm) length: 36 mm & dia:
8 7.1
[ASTM A 820 – 96] 0.5 mm
20 mm Aggregate
9 2.78 25 mm – 10 mm
[IS. 383 – 1970]
10 mm Aggregate
10 2.78 12.5 mm – 4.75 mm
[IS. 383 – 1970]
River Sand
11 2.61 2.36 mm – 0.15 mm
[IS. 383 – 1970]

Table 8: Mixture Proportions of RPC and HPC

Materials Mixture Proportions

RPC RPC-F* HPC HPC-F**
Cement 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Silica fume 0.25 0.25 0.12 0.12
Quartz powder 0.31 0.31 - -
Standard sand grade 2 1.09 1.09 - -
Standard sand grade 3 0.58 0.58 - -
River Sand - - 2.40 2.40
20 mm aggregate - - 1.40 1.40
10 mm aggregate - - 1.50 1.50
30 mm steel fibres - 0.20 - -
36 mm steel fibres - - - 0.20
Admixture (Polyacrylate based) 0.03 0.03 0.023 0.023
Water 0.25 0.25 0.4 0.4

* Fibre RPC ** Fibre HPC

Workability and density were recorded for the fresh concrete mixtures. Some RPC specimens
were heat cured by heating in a water bath at 90°C after setting until the time of testing.
Specimens of RPC and HPC were also cured in water at room temperature.

The performance of RPC and HPC was monitored over time with respect to the following
parameters:
Compressive Strength (as per IS 51613 on 5 cm cubes for RPC, 10 cm cubes for HPC), Flexural
Strength (as per IS 516 on 4 x 4 x 16 cm prisms for RPC, 10 x 10 x 50 cm beams for HPC),
Water Absorption (on 15 cm cubes for both RPC and HPC),
Non destructive water permeability test using Germann Instruments (on 15 cm cubes for both
RPC and HPC),
Resistance to Chloride ions Penetration test (on discs of diameter 10 cm and length 5 cm as per
ASTM C 120214).

Results

Fresh concrete properties

The workability of RPC mixtures (with and without fibres), measured using the mortar flow
table test as per ASTM C10915, was in the range of 120 – 140%. On the other hand, the
workability of HPC mixtures (with and without fibres), measured using the slump test as per
ASTM C23116, was in the range of 120 – 150 mm. The density of fresh RPC and HPC mixtures
was found to be in the range of 2500 – 2650 kg/m3.

Compressive strength

The compressive strength analysis throughout the study shows that RPC has higher
compressive strength than HPC, as shown in Fig. 1. Compressive strength at early ages is also
very high for RPC. Compressive strength is one of the factors linked with the durability of a
material. In the context of nuclear waste containment materials, the compressive strength of
RPC is higher than required.

Fig 1: Compressive strength of RPC and HPC

The maximum compressive strength of RPC obtained from this study is as high as 200 MPa,
while the maximum strength obtained for HPC is 75 MPa. The incorporation of fibres and use
of heat curing was seen to enhance the compressive strength of RPC by 30 – 50%. The
incorporation of fibres did not affect the compressive strength of HPC significantly.
Flexural strength

Plain RPC was found to possess marginally higher flexural strength than HPC. Table 9 clearly
explains the variation in flexural strength of RPC and HPC with the addition of steel fibres.
Here the increase of flexural strength of RPC with the addition of fibres is higher than that of
HPC.

Table 9: Flexural strength (as per IS 516) at 28 days (MPa)

RPC RPC-F HPC HPC-F

NC* HWC** NC* HWC** NC* NC*
11 12 18 22 8 10

*Normal Curing **Hot Water Curing

As per literature3, RPC 200 should have an approximate flexural strength of 40 MPa. The
reason for low flexural strength obtained in this study could be that the fibres used (30 mm)
were long. Fibre reinforced RPC (with appropriate fibres) has the potential to be used in
structures without any additional steel reinforcement. This cost reduction in reinforcement can
compensate the increase in the cost by the elimination of coarse aggregates in RPC to a little
extent.

Water absorption

Fig. 2 presents a comparison of water absorption of RPC and HPC. A common trend of
decrease in the water absorption with age is seen here both for RPC and HPC. The percentage
of water absorption of RPC, however, is very low compared to that of HPC. This quality of
RPC is one among the desired properties of nuclear waste containment materials.
 Fig. 2: Water absorption of RPC and HPC

The incorporation of fibres and the use of heat curing is seen to marginally increase the water
absorption. The presence of fibres possibly leads to the creation of channels at the interface
between the fibre and paste that promote the uptake of water. Heat curing , on the other hand,
leads to the development of a more open microstructure (compared to normal curing) that could
result in an increased absorption.

Water permeability

The non-destructive assessment of water permeability using the Germann Instruments

equipment actually only measures the surface permeability, and not the bulk permeability like
in conventional test methods. A comparison of the surface water permeability of RPC and HPC
is shown in Fig. 3.

It can be seen from the data that water permeability decreases with age for all mixtures. 28 th
day water permeability of RPC is negligible when compared to that of HPC (almost 7 times
lower). As in the case of water absorption, the use of fibres increases the surface permeability
of both types of concrete.

Fig. 3: Surface Water Permeability of RPC and HPC

Resistance to chloride ion penetration

Results of rapid chloride permeability test conducted after 28 days of curing are presented in
Table 10. Data indicate that penetration of chloride increases when heat curing is done in
concrete. Total charge passed for normal-cured RPC is negligible compared to the other
mixtures. Even though heat-cured RPC shows a higher value than normal-cured RPC, in
absolute terms, it is still extremely low or even negligible (<100 Coulombs). This property of
RPC enhances its suitability for use in nuclear waste containment structures.
The data also indicate that addition of steel fibres leads to an increase in the permeability,
possibly due to increase in conductance of the concrete. The HPC mixtures also showed very
low permeability, although higher compared to RPC.

Table 10: Rapid Chloride Permeability Test (as per ASTM C 1202)

RPC with
RPC HPC
fibres
NC* HWC** NC* HWC** NC* HWC*
Cumulative 4
Charge passed (less than 94 140 400 250 850
in Coulombs 10)
ASTM C1202 Very Very Very Very
Negligible Negligible
classification low low low low

*Normal Curing **Hot Water Curing

Summary

Reactive Powder Concrete (RPC) is an emerging technology that lends a new dimension to the
term ‘high performance concrete’. It has immense potential in construction due to its superior
mechanical and durability properties compared to conventional high performance concrete, and
could even replace steel in some applications.

The development of RPC is based on the application of some basic principles to achieve
enhanced homogeneity, very good workability, high compaction, improved microstructure,
and high ductility. RPC has an ultra-dense microstructure, giving advantageous waterproofing
and durability characteristics. It could, therefore, be a suitable choice for industrial and nuclear
waste storage facilities.

A laboratory investigation comparing RPC and HPC led to the following conclusions:

 A maximum compressive strength of 198 MPa was obtained. This is in the RPC 200
range (175 MPa – 225 MPa).
 The maximum flexural strength of RPC obtained was 22 MPa, lower than the values
quoted in literature (~ 40 MPa). A possible reason for this could be the higher length of
fibres used in this study.
 A comparison of the measurements of the physical, mechanical, and durability
properties of RPC and HPC shows that RPC possesses better strength (both
compressive and flexural) and lower permeability compared to HPC.
 The extremely low levels of water and chloride ion permeability indicate the potential
of RPC as a good material for storage of nuclear waste. However, RPC needs to be
studied with respect to its resistance to the penetration of heavy metals and other toxic
wastes emanating from nuclear plants (such as Cesium 137 ion in alkaline medium) to
qualify for use in nuclear waste containment structures.

References
 1. Richard P, and Cheyrezy M, “Composition of Reactive Powder Concrete”,
Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 25, No.7, (1995), pp. 1501 – 1511.
2. Aitcin P.C, “Cements of yesterday and today Concrete of tomorrow”, Cement
and Concrete Research, Vol. 30, (2000), pp 1349 - 1359.
3. Blais P. Y, and Couture M, “Precast, Prestressed Pedestrian Bridge - World’s
first reactive powder concrete structure”, PCI Journal, Vol. 44, (1999), pp. 60 -
71.
4. Dauriac C, “Special Concrete may give steel stiff competition, Building with
Cincrete”, The Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce, May 9, 1997.
5. Basu P.C, “Performance Requirements of HPC for Indian NPP Structures”, The
Indian Concrete Journal, Sep. 1999, pp. 539 – 546.
6. Bonneau O, Vernet C, Moranville M, and Aitcin P. C, “Characterization of the
granular packing and percolation threshold of reactive powder concrete”,
Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 30 (2000) pp. 1861 – 1867.
7. Goltermann P, Johansen V, and Palbol L, “Packing of Aggregates: An
Alternative Tool to Determine the Optimal Aggregate Mix”, ACI Materials
Journal, Sep-Oct. 1997, pp. 435 – 443.
8. Elkem AS website – http://www.silicafume.net/
9. Matte V and Moranville M, “Durability of Reactive Powder Composites:
Influence of Silica Fume on the leaching properties of very low water/binder
pastes”, Cement and Concrete Composites, 21 (1999) pp. 1 - 9.
10. Staquet S, and Espion B, “Influence of Cement and Silica Fume Type on
Compressive Strength of Reactive Powder Concrete”, 6th International
Symposium on HPC, University of Brussels, Belgium, (2000), pp. 1 – 14.
11. Bickley J. A, and Mitchell D, “A State-of-the-Art Review of High Performance
Concrete Structures Built in Canada: 1990-2000”, (2001), pp. 96 – 102.
12. HDR Engineering Website on Reactive Powder Concrete, Last modified Nov.
1999, http://www.hdrinc.com/engineering/engres.htm
13. Indian Standard Designation IS 516-1959, “Methods of Test for Strength of
Concrete,” BIS, New Delhi, 2002.
14. ASTM Standard Designation C1202-97, “Standard Test Method for Electrical
Indication of Concrete’s Ability to Resist Chloride Ion Penetration,” ASTM,
Pennsylvania, 2001.
15. ASTM Standard Designation C109-99, “Standard Test Method for Compressive
Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars,” ASTM, Pennsylvania, 2001.

ASTM Standard Designation C143-00, “Standard Test Method for Slump of Hydraulic
Cement Concrete,” ASTM, Pennsylvania, 2001.