ssss

© All Rights Reserved

9 visualizações

ssss

© All Rights Reserved

- Clamp On
- Introduction to Taguchi Method
- Taguchi 1
- Excercise Solutions
- Measurement Based Link Level Investigation of IEEE 802.11g Channels
- 6. IJAMSS - Maths- New Adjusted Biased Regression Estimators Based on Signal-To-Noise Ratio
- Types of Concrete Es
- strength and workability of RCA
- Bushong Ch 28 DF Chapter Answers
- Reactive Powder Concrete
- 59133-106571-1-PB
- Philips Fwc85
- Some More Examples on Attainment of COs and PO 21 May 2016
- Sieving Machine
- Digital Communication Matlab Assignment No
- IJEMS 21(4) 451-457.pdf
- Understanding Real World MER
- Process Parameter Optimization for Fab
- Ni Hms 307062
- sdarticle

Você está na página 1de 10

TECHNICAL PAPER

by Mariam Farouk Ghazy and Mohamed Fattouh Abd El Hameed

This study investigated the multi-response optimization of lightweight concrete (LWC) process for an optimal parametric combination to yield favorable compressive strength and density using

the Taguchi approach coupled with gray relational analysis (GRA).

Sixteen experimental runs based on an orthogonal array of Taguchi

method were performed to optimize the process parameters within

the experimental domain. The performance characteristics have

been selected in relation to parameters of LWC: type of lightweight fine aggregate (LWAFA); replacement ratios of LWA (fine

and/or coarse) by volume of normalweight aggregate (NWA); and

percentage of foam agent. Optimal results were verified through

confirmation experiments. It will be helpful to the engineers in

deciding the levels of the LWC parameters for desired performance

characteristics.

Keywords: crushed shale bricks; gray relational analysis; lightweight

concrete; lightweight lime bricks; perlite; polystyrene foam; silica fume.

INTRODUCTION

The first known use of lightweight concrete (LWC) dates

back over 2000 years. There are several LWC structures in

the Mediterranean region, but the three most notable structures were built during the early Roman Empire and include

the Port of Cosa, the Pantheon Dome, and the Coliseum.1

The use of LWC is usually predicated on the reduction of

project cost, improved functionality, or a combination of

both. Estimating the total cost of a project is necessary

when considering LWC because the cost per cubic yard

(cubic meter) is usually higher than a comparable unit of

ordinary concrete.

Recently, with the challenge of the development of

concrete constructions, high-rise buildings, and long-span

concrete, LWC has been a promising modern construction

technology. In comparison with ordinary concrete structures, lighter weights, the ability to reduce the dead load

of structures, reduced footings sizes, smaller dimensions,

higher specific strength, and better thermal insulation can be

obtained by replacing normalweight aggregates (NWA) with

or partially by lightweight aggregate (LWA).2,3 LWA are

broadly classified into two types: natural (pumice, diatomite,

volcanic cinders), and artificial (perlite, clay, sintered fly

ash, expanded shale).

Structural lightweight aggregate concrete (SLWAC) has

been viewed differently since the early 1990s. The technological development of high-performance concrete, the

advances in manufacturing LWA, the new durability and

applicability requirements of concrete and the oil industrys interest in using these materials for offshore rigs

have all contributed to a new generation of SLWAC. This

ACI Materials Journal/May-June 2015

20years.4-9 In the twentieth century, a number of studies had

been done in an effort to evaluate the potential of crushed

brick as concrete aggregate.

A comprehensive experimental study on SLWAC was

carried out involving more than 50 different compositions

of strength classes ranging from LC20/22 to LC60/66 and

density classes from D1.4 to D2.0.5

Sintered fly ash aggregates were used in the LWC as partial

of fine and/or coarse aggregates. The effects on the strength

and elastic properties of concrete mixtures were reported.5-7

Perlite is a siliceous volcanic glass, the volume of which

can expand substantially under the effect of heat. Mixtures

were prepared by partially replacing natural aggregate by

expanded perlite (0 to 100%) and as a result, unit weights

of LWC in fresh state varied between 43.7 and 124.84 lb/ft3

(700 and 2000 kg/m3). The mixture produced using 20%

perlite has a compressive strength of 2544.12 psi (17.3 MPa)

and can be classified as a SLWC.8 High-strength SLWAC

with compressive strength in the range between 4926.47 and

7720.59 psi (33.5-52.5 MPa) and unit weight in the range

between 101.44 and 131.4 lb/ft3 (1625 and 2105 kg/m3) is

produced using perlite as fine aggregate.9

Mixture proportion parameters of expanded polystyrene (EPS) LWAC (ranges from 15% to 25% by volume

of concrete) are analyzed by using Taguchis approach.2

The results show that EPS dosage has the most significant

effect on compressive strength of EPS LWAC, then watercement ratio (w/c), while the content of cement and sand ratio

play a comparatively less important part. The polyurethane

(PUR) foam concrete thermal conductivity and compressive

strength are, respectively, two to seven times and two to 17

times lower than those of the reference mixture.10

The literature revealed that a large number of studies2-10

were carried out related to the LWAC, and these studies are

still being conducted. In the past research, several experimental studies have been done with different compositions

of LWAC to characterize the behavior, quality, and properties

of LWAC. However, there are still gaps in understanding the

properties and behavior of LWAC. One reason is that LWAC

properties can vary depending on the type of LWA and

their replacement used; therefore, any conclusions are only

ACI Materials Journal, V. 112, No. 3, May-June 2015.

MS No. M-2013-358.R2, doi: 10.14359/51687235, received May 10, 2014, and

reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright 2015, American Concrete

Institute. All rights reserved, including the making of copies unless permission is

obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion including authors

closure, if any, will be published ten months from this journals date if the discussion

is received within four months of the papers print publication.

365

research has been conducted using a one-factor-at-a-time

experimental approach. The amount of fluctuations in the

experimental results reveals that process variables involved

in the LWAC process are dynamic in nature and process

responses are significantly related with simultaneous variation of parameters during experiments. Therefore, the design

of experiments (DOE) technique has been applied to make

the process reliable and to study the effects of the process

parameters on different process criteria simultaneously.

In this study, three factors at four levels and one factor

at two levels were chosen as control factors. Normally, the

full-factorial design would require 43 21 = 128 experimental runs. However, the effort and experimental cost

for such a design could be prohibitive and unrealistic. The

Taguchi-based DOE technique has been applied to plan

the present experimentation. Only a few authors have

used the DOE technique in the domain of civil and/or

structural engineering.11,12

The Taguchi method is a systematic and powerful tool

for designing and analyzing the experiments for improving

product quality. For the optimal selection of process parameters, the Taguchi method has been extensively adopted

in manufacturing to improve processes with a single

performance characteristic.2,11-13 However, the traditional

Taguchi method cannot solve multi-response optimization

problem. To overcome this, the Taguchi method coupled

with GRA has a wide area of application in manufacturing

processes.14-16 This approach can solve the multi-response

optimization problem simultaneously. As a result, optimization of the complicated multiple performance characteristics can be converted into the optimization of a single gray

relational grade (GRG). In recent years, GRA has become

a powerful tool to analyze the processes with multiple

performance characteristics.

To the best of the authors knowledge of this work, there is

no published work evaluating the optimization and the effect

of process parameters on the multi-performance characteristics in LWC by using GRA. Hence, it is a good idea to

perform a comprehensive investigation using GRA to optimize the effect of LWC parameters for desired performance

characteristics. Thus, the results can be used by the engineers who are willing to search for an optimal solution of a

LWC process.

Deng17 proposed GRA to fulfill the crucial mathematical criteria for dealing with a poor, incomplete, and uncertain system. In a system that is complex and multi-variety,

the relationship between various factors is unclear. Such

systems often are called gray, implying poor, incomplete,

and uncertain information. Their analysis by classical statistical procedures may not be acceptable or reliable without

large data sets that satisfy certain mathematical criteria. The

gray theory, on the other hand, makes use of relatively small

data sets and does not demand strict compliance to certain

statistical laws, such as simple or linear relationships among

the observables.

In GRA, black represents having no information and white

represents having all information. A gray system has a level

of information between black and white. In other words, in

366

a gray system, some information is known and some information is unknown. In a white system, the relationships

among factors in the system are certain; in a gray system,

the relationships among factors in the system are uncertain.

GRA is an impacting measurement method in gray system

theory that analyzes uncertain relations between one main

factor and all the other factors in a given system. In the case

when experiments are ambiguous or when the experimental

method cannot be carried out exactly, gray analysis helps

to compensate for the shortcomings in statistical regression.

GRA is actually a measurement of the absolute value of the

data difference between sequences, and it could be used to

measure the approximate correlation between sequences.

This study investigated the multi-response optimization

using Taguchi method coupled with GRG to achieve favorable compressive strength and density of LWC simultaneously. Finally, necessary confirmation tests were conducted

to validate the experimental results.

RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE

This study investigated the multi-response optimization using Taguchi method coupled with GRG to achieve

favorable compressive strength and density of LWC simultaneously. It will be helpful to the engineers in deciding

the levels of the LWC parameters for desired performance

characteristics.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

Materials, mixture proportions and experimental plan

MaterialsThe constituent materials used in this study

were locally available materials specified by the following:

1. Cement: Grade 6250 psi (42.5 N) ordinary portland

cement was used in this investigation. Cement is conforms

to the EN 196-1:2005 standard specification.

2. Silica fume: Silica fume of mineral admixtures was

used as 10% addition of cement weight. It had 75,000 cm2/g

specific surface area, as given by the manufacturer.

3. Normalweight aggregates (NWA):

Fine aggregates: Medium well-graded natural siliceous

sand with a fineness modulus of 2.76 was used. Measurements of unit weight and specific weight were 99.88 lb/ft3

(1600 kg/m3) and 2.5, respectively.

Coarse aggregates: Natural well-graded crushed bazalt

with angular particles of a maximum nominal size of

0.492in. (12.5 mm) was used. The surface of the particles

was rougher. Measurements of unit weight and specific

weight were 96.75 lb/ft3 (1550 kg/m3) and 2.55, respectively.

4. Lightweight aggregates (LWA):

Coarse aggregates LWACA: crushed shale bricks (Csh)

was used with 0, 10, 20, and 30% replacement of bazalt by

volume. Csh were crushed to size of approximately 0.492 in.

(12.5 mm) by using crushing hummer and then grinded for

determined by experiments aiming at the percentage passing

as used bazalt, as shown in Fig. 1. Measurements of unit

weight and specific weight were 68.66 lb/ft3 (1100 kg/m3)

and 1.9, respectively.

Fine aggregates LWAFA: four types of LWAFA: 1) polystyrene foam (F); 2) perlite (P); 3) crushed lightweight lime

bricks (aerated concrete) (CL); 4) and mixture of crushed

ACI Materials Journal/May-June 2015

shale bricks and lightweight lime bricks (CSL) were used

with 10, 20, 30, and 40% replacement of natural siliceous

sand by volume. Polystyrene foam panels used in the

building industry were provided by a manufacturer of insulation panels with a diameter of 0.079 to 0.197 in. (2 to 5mm).

Waste crushed shale bricks and lightweight lime bricks from

the manufacturer were crushed to size of approximately

0.2in. (5 mm) by using a crushing machine and mixed with

a percentage of 1:1 by weight. Figure 1 shows the grading

of used fine and coarse aggregates. Measurements of unit

weight were 1.25, 6.87, 41.2, and 68.66 lb/ft3 (20, 110,

660, and 1100 kg/m3), respectively, for F, P, CL, and CSL.

Specific weights were 0.04, 0.66, 1.2, and 1.7, respectively.

Fine and coarse aggregates conformed to the requirements

of ASTM C330.

5. Admixtures:

High-range water-reducing admixture (HRWRA) was

used in all mixtures with different dosages to keep plastic

consistency of concrete that satisfies the requirements of

ASTM C494 Type F. Its dosage ranged from 0.6 to 2.5% by

cement weight, as given by the manufacturer.

Foaming agent admixtures: a liquid admixture (LCr) for

concrete and mortar was used to produce LWC. Recommended dosage (by weight of cement) for classified lightweight concrete is 0.5 to 2.0% and introduces air pores up to

35%, as given by the manufacturer.

Mixture proportionsSixteen different concrete mixtures

were designed by the absolute volume method. Four type of

LWAFA (F, P, CL, and CSL) were used as a partial replacement by volume of natural sand, with ratios of 10, 20, 30,

and 40%; Csh (lightweight coarse aggregates LWACA)

with ratios of 0, 10, 20, and 30% by volume of bazalt (B)

and LCr (foaming agent) with two dosages 1 and 1.5%

by weight of cement. These mixtures were prepared with

842.74:84.27:278.11:16.85 lb/yd3 (500:50:165:10 kg/m3) for

cement, silica fume, water, and HRWRA, respectively, and

(sand + LWAFA)/(B + LWACA) was 0.35/0.65 by weight. The

air entrainment was approximately 10% and 15% by volume

of concrete for LCr 1% and 1.5%, respectively. Table 1 gives

the concrete mixture proportions.

ACI Materials Journal/May-June 2015

mixing water. First, cement, silica fume, and water together

with HRWRA was added and mixed for 3 minutes. Second,

fine aggregate was added and mixed for 3 minutes, then the

coarse aggregate and the LCr admixture were added and

mixed for another 5 minutes. The concrete specimens were

cast in steel molds and compacted on a vibration table. After

demolding at 24 hours, the specimens were cured in water

for 7 days and then kept in a laboratory with a room temperature of approximately 77F (25C) with relative humidity

over 60% until time of testing.

The slump test was used to quantify the workability

of concrete according to the procedure described in

ASTMC143. The unit weight (density) of the freshly mixed

concrete was determined in accordance with ASTM C138.

The lightweight concretes displayed good workability with

minimum water content without any segregation. The addition of HRWRA was very efficient in increasing or keeping

the plastic level of workability. The proposed concrete

proportioning allowed the creation of plastic lightweight

concrete mixtures with measured slumps between 3.94 and

7.87 in. (100 and 200 mm).

A hydraulic testing machine with a total capacity of

450 kip (2000 kN) was used for testing cubes specimens

3.94 x 3.94 x 3.94 in. (100 x 100 x 100 mm) in compression

after 28 days.

Experimental planIn this study, four parameters were

used as control factors. The code and levels of control

factors are shown in Table 2. The experimental plan based

on the Taguchi method was used. The Taguchi method is

an efficient method of design experiments. It is a concise

and fast way of determining the influence of factors of a

process or product. It provides a systematic approach to

optimize designs for performance and quality. Taguchi has

developed a system of tabulated designs (arrays) that allow

for the maximum of main effects to be estimated in an unbiased (orthogonal) manner with a minimum number of runs in

the experiments. However, according to Taguchi, the experiments could be organized into only 16 runs. The orthogonal

array L16 according to Taguchi is shown in Table 3.

367

Bazalt

replacement, % LCr, %

Mixture

no.

Fine aggregate

replacement, %

F, 10

F, 20

Slump,

(5) mm

Cement

Silica

fume

Water

Sand

LWAFA

Bazalt

LWACA

HRWRA

LCr

160

500

50

165

430.1

0.75

887.5

10

10

160

500

50

165

382.3

1.53

798.7

66.1

10

F, 30

20

1.5

160

500

50

165

303.52

2.1

644.2

120

10

7.5

F, 40

30

1.5

160

500

50

165

260.2

2.8

563.6

180

10

7.5

P, 10

30

1.5

160

500

50

165

390.2

11.44

563.6

180

10

7.5

P, 20

20

1.5

160

500

50

165

346.8

22.9

644.2

120

10

7.5

P, 30

10

160

500

50

165

334.5

37.8

798.7

66.1

10

P, 40

160

500

50

165

286.7

50.5

887.5

10

CL, 10

20

160

500

50

165

430.1

22.9

710

132.3

10

10

CL, 20

30

160

500

50

165

382.3

45.9

621.3

198.4

10

11

CL, 30

1.5

160

500

50

165

303.5

62.4

805.2

10

7.5

12

CL, 40

10

1.5

160

500

50

165

260.2

83.3

724.7

60

10

7.5

13

CSL, 10

10

1.5

160

500

50

165

390.2

29.5

724.7

60

10

7.5

14

CSL, 20

1.5

160

500

50

165

346.8

59

805.2

10

7.5

15

CSL, 30

30

160

500

50

165

334.5

97.5

621.3

198.4

10

CSL, 40

20

160

500

50

165

286.7

130

710

132.3

10

16

3

Symbol

A

Control

factors

LWAFA

Taguchi method

Levels

Unit

Type

CL

CSL

Experiment no.

Density,

lb/ft3 (kg/m3)

1.25

(20)

6.87

(110)

41.2

(660)

68.66

(1100)

0.1

0.1

0.2

0.1

0.1

LWAFA

10

20

30

40

0.3

0.2

0.15

Csh*

(LWACA)

10

20

30

0.4

0.3

0.15

Foam agent

(LCr)

0.1

0.3

0.15

1.5

0.2

0.2

0.15

0.3

0.1

0.1

0.4

0.1

CL

0.1

0.2

0.1

10

CL

0.2

0.3

0.1

11

CL

0.3

0.15

12

CL

0.4

0.1

0.15

13

CSL

0.1

0.1

0.15

14

CSL

0.2

0.15

15

CSL

0.3

0.3

0.1

16

CSL

0.4

0.2

0.1

bricks;

*

CSL: crushed shale bricks and lightweight lime bricks (1:1); and Csh: crushed shale

bricks.

square deviation (MSD) is used to calculate the deviation

between the experimental value and the desired value.18 The

MSD of the lower-the-better can be expressed as

MSD =

1 n 2

yi (1)

n i =1

368

MSD =

1 n 1

n i =1 yi2

(2)

experiments, and n is the number of times each experiment

is repeated.

The value of the loss function is further transformed into a

signal-noise ratio (S/N). Here, the terms signal represents

the desirable value (mean) and noise represents the undesirable value (standard deviation). Thus, the S/N represents

ACI Materials Journal/May-June 2015

their S/N

Level

Experiment No.

R1, lb/ft3

R2, psi

65.31

65.80

65.74

65.57

121.7

3676.5

65.80

27.96

65.44

65.55

65.57

65.52

115.5

2647.1

65.34

25.11

65.63

65.47

65.49

113

2573.5

65.15

24.86

65.79

65.35

65.36

110.5

2500

64.96

24.61

Delta

0.47

0.45

0.38

0.05

118.6

2794.1

65.58

25.58

Rank

114.2

3676.5

-65.25

27.96

Contribution

34.81

33.33

28.15

3.70

118.6

4117.6

65.58

28.94

115.5

2794.1

65.34

25.58

121.7

4044.1

65.80

28.79

10

118.6

3970.6

65.58

28.63

Level

11

121.72

3676.5

65.80

27.96

25.63

27.88

27.27

27.06

12

115.5

3382.4

65.34

27.23

27.01

27.32

27.62

26.87

28.15

26.59

27.11

strength, db

13

124.9

4235.3

66.02

29.19

14

124.9

3529.4

66.02

27.60

27.06

26.07

25.86

15

115.5

2500

65.34

24.61

Delta

2.52

1.81

1.76

0.18

16

121.1

3235.3

65.76

26.85

Notes: R1: density; R2: compressive strength; 1 lb/ft3 = 16.02 kg/m3; 1 psi = 0.0068 MPa.

can be expressed as

i = (S/N) = 10log(MSDi)

(3)

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Parametric optimization of single performance

characteristic

The original response values for density and compressive

strength and the corresponding S/N for the experimental

trails in different process parameters are listed in Table 4.

According to the performed experiment design, it is

clearly observed from Table 4 that Experiments No. 4 and

13 are the best process parameters setting for lowest density

and maximum compressive strength, respectively.

In addition to the determination of optimum LWC parameters for each response, the response table from Taguchi

method was used. Because the experimental design is

orthogonal, it is possible to separate out the effect of each

process parameter on the response at different levels. The

procedure is: 1) group the S/N by factor level for each

column in the orthogonal array; and 2) take the mean of

them. For example, the mean of the density for the type of

light aggregate (factor A [type of LWAFA]) at Levels 1, 2, 3,

and 4 can be calculated by averaging experiments 1 to 4, 5

to 8, 9 to 12, and 13 to 16, respectively.

The mean of compressive strength for each level of the

other process parameters can be computed in a similar

manner. The results for both the density and compressive

strength were listed in Tables 5 and 6, respectively. Regardless of the category of the performance characteristics, the

largest S/N corresponds to better performance. Therefore,

ACI Materials Journal/May-June 2015

Rank

Contribution

40.19

28.87

28.07

2.87

the greatest S/N. From Table 5, the optimal process parameter levels for density can be shortly given as for A1B4C4D2.

From Table 6, the optimal factor setting for compressive

strength becomes A3B1C2D1. The pore and rough surface

texture of used CL (A3) crushed lightweight lime aggregate

bricks LWAFA and (B1) 10% replacement by volume with

natural sand is conducive to a good mechanical interlocking

between the CL and the surrounding hydrated cement paste,

which resulted in an increase in compressive strength.

Moreover, (C2) replacement 10% with Csh by volume of

bazalt resulted in the same trend for increase in compressive strength. Due to the lower crushing of Csh compared to

basalt resulted in decrease the compressive strength at high

replacement ratio. Foam agent (LCr with 1% by cement

weight [D1]) introducing air in the form of small bubbles

having a total volume of at least 10%. Therefore, foamed

concrete has low compressive strength at higher dosage

(1.5%). Compressive strengths presented in this study are in

the range from 2500 to 4235.3 lb/ft3 (17to 28.8 MPa), which

conform to the requirements of ACI codes1,19 as structural

lightweight concrete.

The difference between maximum and the minimum value

(delta) of the S/N for the density are listed in Table 5. The

most effective controllable factor was the maximum of these

values. On the other hand, the significance of the role that

every controllable factor plays over the performance characteristic can be obtained by examining these values. The effect

of each control factor can be determined from the value of

delta, based on which Table 5 shows that factor A (type of

LWAFA) has the largest delta and thus has the most significant influence (Rank 1) on the density. Due to the lower

density of different used lightweight aggregates, the fresh

density of the concretes was significantly reduced. From

369

i = 1,2...n; k = 1,2...m

contribution of the control factors affecting the density is A

(34.81%), B (33.33%), C (28.15%), and D (3.7%). Table 6

shows that factor A (type of LWAFA) has the most significant

influence on the compressive strength and its percentage

contribution is 40.19%.

characteristics

The use of the quantity model of GRA establishes the

analytical processing step that includes the following steps14:

Step 1: In the gray relational analysis, a data preprocessing

is first performed to normalize the raw data for analysis.

Normalization is a transformation performed on a single

data input to distribute the data evenly and scale it into an

acceptable range for further analysis. In this study, a linear

normalization of the observed values is performed in the

range between zero and unity, which is also called the gray

relational generating xi(k), is normalized as (0 xi(k) 1)

by the following formula to avoid the effect of adopting

different units and to reduce the variability. The normalized

compressive strength corresponding to the higher-the-better

criterion can be expressed as

xi (k ) =

yi (k ) min yi (k )

(4)

max yi (k ) min yi (k )

expressed as

xi (k ) =

max yi (k ) yi (k )

(5)

max yi (k ) min yi (k )

Step 2: From the normalized matrix a reference sequence

x0(k) is determined as the largest value of normalized value

for each response.

the difference between the normalized entity and reference

sequence (value)

0i (k ) = x0 (k ) xi (k )

(7)

performance characteristics in the i-th experiment can be

calculated to express the relationship between the ideal

(best) and actual normalized experimental results. The gray

relational coefficient is

i ( x0 (k ), xi (k )) =

min + y max

(8)

i (k ) + y max

minyi(k) is the smallest value of yi(k) for the k-th response,

and maxyi(k) is the largest value of yi(k) for the k-th response.

370

the number of responses.

xo(k) is the reference sequence (xo(k) = 1), and xi(k) is the

specific comparison sequence.

in the range 0 1. The LWC process parameters are

equally weighted in this study; therefore, is 0.5.

Step 3: The measure of the relevancy between two

systems or two sequences is defined as the GRG. The GRG

is determined by averaging the gray relational coefficient

corresponding to each performance characteristic. The

overall performance characteristic of the multiple response

process depends on the calculated GRG. The GRG can be

expressed as

i =

1 m

i (k ) (9)

m k =1

number of performance characteristics.

The values of GRG are transformed into S/N. Further

analysis is carried out based on these S/N values. The GRG

is a higher-the-better performance characteristic because

the maximization of the quality characteristic of interest is

sought and can be calculated using Eq. (3). The higher GRG

reveals that the corresponding experimental result is closer

to the ideally normalized value. Tables 7 and 8 show the

above calculated data for each experiment using the L16 OA.

Experiment 7 has the best multiple-performance characteristic among 16 experiments because it has the highest GRG,

as shown in Table 8. The higher the value of the gray relational grade, the closer the corresponding factor combination is, to the optimal. A higher GRG implies better product

quality; therefore, on the basis of the GRG, the factor effect

can be estimated and the optimal level for each controllable

factor can also be determined.

Step 4: Determine the optimal factor and its level combinationThe mean of the GRG for each level of the LWC

parameters is summarized in the response table (Table 9).

Figure 2 shows the main effect plot of GRG. From this

figure, it is observed that the variation of parameter C (Csh

%) has a great influence on GRG, which increases with

parameter C at first, and then it decreases when parameter C

is varied from Level 2 to Level 4. It is observed that parameter C has a critical role on the overall GRG during the LWC

process. It is revealed from the same figure that the factor

A (type of LWAFA) has the same trend of factor C (Csh %).

The critical value of factor A is at Level 3 (A3). However,

ACI Materials Journal/May-June 2015

agent %) in the considered range. From the same figure, it is

obvious that factor B (LWAFA %) has the weakest effect on

GRG. With the help of Fig. 2 and Table 9, the optimal parametric combination (the optimal selected levels are bolded

(normalization)

Reference/comparability sequence

R1

R2

Reference sequence

Experiment No. 1

0.22

0.68

0.65

0.08

0.83

0.04

1.00

0.00

0.43

0.17

0.74

0.68

0.43

0.93

0.65

0.17

CONFIRMATION TESTS

Because the optimal combination of process parameters

is selected from the response tables according to Taguchi

analysis, the confirmation tests are processed. It is a good idea

to plan on running an additional few samples at the optimum

condition. The confirmation tests serve two purposes. First,

they establish the new performance at the improvement

achieved. Second, they allow the experimenter to determine

how close the estimate is to the results observed. The result

expected is considered to be confirmed when the mean of

a number of samples tested at the optimum condition falls

close to it.

The results of confirmation experiment are compared

with the initial conditions of design operating parameters.

It is obvious from Table 8, that Experiment No. 5 has the

lowest GRG value (0.423) compared to the other experiments. Therefore, it can be concluded that Experiment No.5

possesses initial setting parameters. Table 10 shows the

compared results of the optimal and initial design of process

parameters. For the single performance characteristic, the

density of LWC is greatly reduced from 118.6 to 110.5 lb/ft3

(1900 to 1770 kg/m3). Similarly, the effect of improvement

for the compressive strength has anticipated that it is accel-

Compatibility sequence

0.22

0.89

10

0.43

0.85

11

0.22

0.68

12

0.65

0.51

13

0.00

1.00

14

0.00

0.59

15

0.65

0.00

16

0.26

0.42

becomes A3B3C2D2.

The order (rank) of importance of the controllable factors

to the multi-performance characteristics in the LWC process,

in sequence, can be listed as: factors C, A, D, and B which

are Csh %, type of LWAFA, LCr %, and LWAFA %, respectively. From the analysis of Table 9 it was observed that the

percentage contribution of the control factors affecting the

GRG of the LWC is C (49.24%), A (34.43%), D (9.62%),

and B (6.71%).

0i(k)

i(k)

Experiment No.

R1

R2

R1

R2

S/N of i, db

0.78

0.32

0.39

0.61

0.499

6.04

0.35

0.92

0.59

0.35

0.472

6.53

0.17

0.96

0.74

0.34

0.542

5.31

0.33

0.667

3.52

0.47

0.38

0.423

7.48

0.26

0.32

0.66

0.61

0.633

3.98

0.57

0.47

0.88

0.675

3.41

0.35

0.83

0.59

0.38

0.483

6.33

0.78

0.11

0.39

0.82

0.605

4.37

10

0.57

0.15

0.47

0.77

0.618

4.18

11

0.78

0.32

0.39

0.61

0.499

6.04

12

0.35

0.49

0.59

0.50

0.547

5.24

13

1.00

0.00

0.33

1.00

0.667

3.52

14

1.00

0.41

0.33

0.55

0.442

7.08

15

0.35

1.00

0.59

0.33

0.462

6.72

16

0.74

0.58

0.40

0.46

0.434

7.25

371

corresponding improvement in density and compressive

strength were 7.34% and 63.47%, respectively. In the status

of handling the both performance characteristics simultaneously, the results showed that using optimal parameter

setting caused lower density together with higher compressive strength with respect to the initial process parameters.

Consequently, it is clearly shown the the above performance

characteristics in the LWC process are greatly improved

through this study.

The predicted (calculated) S/N (pred) using the optimum

combination of the design parameters can be calculated as

i =1

factors at designated optimum levels; and n is the number of

the main factors that affect the quality characteristics.

Because S/N is related to MSD, and MSD is expressed

in terms of original results, it is possible to convert the

predicted result from a known S/N (pred) to original result

using (S/N) Eq. (3).

Table 10 indicates the comparison of predicted values

with that of actual by using the optimal process conditions

a good agreement between the actual and predicted results

was obtained. Figure 3 shows the percentage contribution of

different LWC process parameters on density, compressive

strength, and GRG.

Figure 3 shows the percentage contribution of different

LWC process parameters on the different responses. It is

confirmed from Fig. 3 that the percentage contribution of

factor A (type of LWAFA), and factor C (Csh %) is maximum

in comparison to other factors when the multiple performance

characteristic is considered, whereas factors B (LWAFA %)

and D (foam agent %) have no significant effect. The figure

also depicts that factors A, B, and C have a high percentage

contribution for both the density and compressive strength,

whereas factor D has lowest percentage contribution for

variation of process performances. It has been found that

factor D has an insignificant effect on LWC process.

pred = m + ( i m ) (10)

i =1

CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, the optimal LWC parameters were determined for multi-performance characteristics (density and

Table 9Response table for S/N of GRG, db

Level

5.35

5.37

6.371

5.603

5.299

5.443

4.676

5.272

4.958

5.353

5.227

6.143

5.584

5.476

Delta

1.185

0.231

1.695

0.331

Rank

Contribution

34.43

6.71

49.24

9.62

Fig. 3Percentage

parameters.

contribution

of

different

LWC

Taguchi method

GRA-based

Taguchi

Experimental value

Predicted value

Optimum combination

of LWC parameters

R1

R2

R1

R2

Errors, %

R1 min

A1B4C4D2

110.5 (1770)

109.9 (1760)

0.565

R2 max

A3B1C2D1

4567.6 (31.06)

4420.6 (30.06)

3.22

R1 and R2 optimum in

the minimax sense

A3B3C2D2

116.7 (1870)

4020.6 (27.34)

118.5 (1897.5)

3873.5 (26.34)

1.47, 3.66

A2B1C4D2

118.6 (1900)

2794.1 (19)

117.5 (1882.5)

3266.2 (22.21)

0.921, 16.89

Notes: R1: density, lb/ft3 (kg/m3); R2: compressive strength, psi (MPa).

372

of combined Taguchi method and GRG has been reported.

Based on the experimental results achieved in the presented

research study, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1. Based on Taguchi analysis, factors A (type of LWAFA), B

(LWAFA %), and C (Csh %) were found to the highest contributing parameters for variation of density and compressive

strength of LWC. However, factor D (foam agent %) shows

a less significant effect.

2. According to the Taguchi method coupled with GRA,

the optimal parametric combination for multi-performance

characteristics such as density and compressive strength is

simultaneously obtained.

3. Multi-performance characteristics was found to be

mostly affected by factors C (Csh %) and A (type of LWAFA),

and the percentage contributions of these two factors were

49.24 and 34.34%, respectively. Parameters B (LWAFA %),

and D (foam agent %) have insignificant effects.

4. Experimentations have been confirmed on the optimal

settings for single response and multi-response and the

errors in experimental values with respect to the predicted

values are within the acceptable range of error.

5. It has been found that the factor D (foam agent %) has

insignificant effect on the LWC process.

6. It can be concluded that the GRA-Taguchi method

is most ideal and suitable for the parametric optimization

of the LWC process when using the multi-performance

characteristics.

AUTHOR BIOS

Mariam Farouk Ghazy is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Engineering in the Department of Structural Engineering at Tanta University,

Tanta, Egypt. Her research interests include concrete technology, fiber-reinforced concrete, inspection and quality control of reinforced concrete, green

and sustainable concrete, and composites.

Mohamed Fattouh Abd El Hameed is a Professor in the Faculty of

Engineering in the Department of Production Engineering and Mechanical Design at Minufiya University, Shibin Al Kawm, Al Minufiya, Egypt.

He received his PhD in production engineering from Dresden University,

Dresden, Germany, in 1981. His research interests include various areas of

design and analysis of experiments.

REFERENCES

Concrete (ACI 213R-03), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,

MI, 2003, 38 pp.

2. Xu, Y.; Jiang, L.; Xu, J.; and Li, Y., Mechanical Properties of

Expanded Polystyrene Lightweight Aggregate Concrete and Brick,

Construction & Building Materials, V. 27, No. 1, 2012, pp. 32-38. doi:

10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.030

3. Fraj, A. B.; Kismi, M.; and Mounanga, P., Valorization of Coarse

Rigid Polyurethane Foam Waste in Lightweight Aggregate Concrete,

Construction & Building Materials, V. 24, No. 6, 2010, pp. 1069-1077. doi:

10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.11.010

4. Gao, J.; Sun, W.; and Morino, K., Mechanical Properties of Steel

Fiber-Reinforced, High-Strength, Lightweight Concrete, Cement and

Concrete Composites, V. 19, No. 4, 1997, pp. 307-313. doi: 10.1016/

S0958-9465(97)00023-1

5. Bogas, J. A., and Gomes, A., Compressive Behavior and Failure

Modes of Structural Lightweight Aggregate Concrete- Characterization and

Strength Prediction, Materials & Design, V. 46, 2013, pp. 832-841. doi:

10.1016/j.matdes.2012.11.004

6. Kayali, O., Fly Ash Lightweight Aggregates in High Performance

Concrete, Construction & Building Materials, V. 22, No. 12, 2008,

pp. 2393-2399. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.09.001

7. Kockal, N. U., and Ozturan, T., Strength and Elastic Properties of

Structural Lightweight Concretes, Materials & Design, V. 32, No. 4, 2011,

pp. 2396-2403. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2010.12.053

8. Sengul, O.; Azizi, S.; Karaosmanoglu, F.; and Tasdemir, M. A., Effect

of Expanded Perlite on the Mechanical Properties and Thermal Conductivity of Lightweight Concrete, Energy and Building, V. 43, No. 2-3, 2011,

pp. 671-676. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.11.008

9. Wadie, R. N., Properties of High Strength Structural Lightweight

Mortar Using Perlite as Partial Replacement of Fine Aggregate, Engineering and Technology Journal, V. 31, No. 2, 2013, pp. 266-276.

10. Mounanga, P.; Gbongbon, W.; Poullain, P.; and Turcry, P., Proportioning and Characterization of Lightweight Concrete Mixtures Made with

Rigid Polyurethane Foam Wastes, Cement and Concrete Composites,

V. 30, No. 9, 2008, pp. 806-814. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2008.06.007

11. Ghazy, M. F., Effect of Using Mortar Interface and Overlays on

Masonry Behavior by Using Taguchi Method, ACI Materials Journal,

V. 109, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2012, pp. 505-516.

12. Ji, T.; Chen, C.; and Zhuang, Y., Evaluation Method for

Cracking Resistant Behavior of Reactive Powder Concrete, Construction & Building Materials, V. 28, No. 1, 2012, pp. 45-49. doi: 10.1016/j.

conbuildmat.2011.08.060

13. Ozbay, E.; Oztas, H.; Baykasoglu, A.; and Ozbebek, H., Investigating Mix Proportions of High Strength Self Compacting Concrete by

Using Taguchi Method, Construction & Building Materials, V. 23, No. 2,

2009, pp. 694-702. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.02.014

14. Tosun, N., Determination of Optimum Parameters for MultiPerformance Characteristics in Drilling by Using Grey Relational Analysis, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, V. 28,

No. 5-6, 2006, pp. 450-455. doi: 10.1007/s00170-004-2386-y

15. Pan, L. K.; Wang, C. C.; Wei, S. L.; and Sher, H. F., Optimizing

Multiple Quality Characteristics Via Taguchi Method-Based Grey

Analysis, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, V. 182, No. 1-3,

2007, pp. 107-116. doi: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.07.015

16. Caydas, V., and Hascalik, A., Use of Grey Relational Analysis

to Determine Optimum Laser Cutting Parameters with Multi Performance Characteristics, Optics & Laser Technology, V. 40, No. 7, 2008,

pp. 987-994. doi: 10.1016/j.optlastec.2008.01.004

17. Deng, J. L., Introduction to Grey System, Journal of Grey System,

V. 1, No. 1, 1989, pp. 1-24.

18. Ross, P. J., Taguchi Technique for Quality Engineering, second

edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996, 329 pp.

19. ACI Committee 211, Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions

for Structural Lightweight Concrete (ACI 211.2-98), American Concrete

Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1998, 18 pp.

373

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without

permission.

- Clamp OnEnviado porJorge Torrez Rojas
- Introduction to Taguchi MethodEnviado porPankaj Singh Baghel
- Taguchi 1Enviado porKp Prakash
- Excercise SolutionsEnviado porwaseemarain
- Measurement Based Link Level Investigation of IEEE 802.11g ChannelsEnviado porAIRCC - IJCNC
- 6. IJAMSS - Maths- New Adjusted Biased Regression Estimators Based on Signal-To-Noise RatioEnviado poriaset123
- Types of Concrete EsEnviado pormoussafour
- strength and workability of RCAEnviado porShepherd Nhanga
- Bushong Ch 28 DF Chapter AnswersEnviado porFarrukh Ali Khan
- Reactive Powder ConcreteEnviado porrishinathnehru
- 59133-106571-1-PBEnviado porErmias Aswessie
- Philips Fwc85Enviado porAdi Enciu
- Some More Examples on Attainment of COs and PO 21 May 2016Enviado porANKESH SHRIVASTAVA
- Sieving MachineEnviado por중중송
- Digital Communication Matlab Assignment NoEnviado porFatima Adly
- IJEMS 21(4) 451-457.pdfEnviado porPtpgStuc
- Understanding Real World MEREnviado porStalin Js Blue
- Process Parameter Optimization for FabEnviado porVijay Thomson
- Ni Hms 307062Enviado porMadhu Midha
- sdarticleEnviado pormpnitj
- Self Compacting Concrete PptEnviado porNaveen Reddy
- Guide for Improving Rf Connection ConsistencyEnviado porjhanesross
- Wcdma SampleEnviado porYukm SUnion
- Slump Test Strength EvaluationEnviado porjohny KKKKD
- C0606050914.pdfEnviado porAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- Projected Capacitive Touch Systems From the Controller Point of ViewEnviado porEnes Selman Ege
- EPMP Optimization GuideEnviado porAleksandar Vidakovic
- 1785_2Enviado porAjit P. Singh
- METHOD FOR THE DETECTION OF MIXED QPSK SIGNALS BASED ON THE CALCULATION OF FOURTH-ORDER CUMULANTSEnviado porsipij
- MATLAB Introduction CommunicationEnviado porelsayed elsherbeny

- Teacher Supervision Support and Its Impact on Professional Development of Teachers in Primary SchoolsEnviado porAnonymous izrFWiQ
- en202-03 finalresearchpaper leezadowezEnviado porapi-317540290
- MAKING THE FIRST ANTIDEPRESSANT AMPHETAMINESEnviado poridownloadbooks3133
- jurnalEnviado porSita
- Excel MuzculverEnviado porThembi Mudongo
- Answer Scheme Exercise Topic 5Enviado porNorlianah Mohd Shah
- Double-blind test of the effects of distant intention on water crystal formationEnviado porpmarcelopontes
- Conflict Management at Ageis BpoEnviado porkharemix
- Brosur RSM Workshop- (2017) (3)Enviado pormhab88
- 4 M's Strategy of BanksEnviado porbharanieswarimba
- Method and Methodology.docxEnviado porAndres Riascos
- documents act 2Enviado porapi-264280897
- Assessment of Accessibility, Availablity and Consumption of Drinking Water InEnviado porABDI RAUFE
- ramp sumEnviado porapi-236109892
- Applications of Fuzzy and Neutrosophic Logic in Solving Multi-criteria Decision Making ProblemsEnviado porMia Amalia
- Project Report on Designing Organizations For Performance ExcellenceEnviado porMinzRahul
- ENC+3254+SyllabusEnviado porrmac_87
- Introduction to BibliometricsEnviado porsaurabh kaushik
- [Andrew Bennett, Jeffrey T. Checkel] Process TracingEnviado porEduardo Paz
- AFEM.Ch20Enviado porKim Novis
- UP Research.pdfEnviado porcrisjava
- texting ruins literacy skills 1Enviado porapi-439261283
- True Position-Use Datums_infoEnviado porErardo Mejia
- Comparative Study on the Behavior of Encased Stone Column and Conventional Stone Column 2007 Soils and FoundationsEnviado porSoumyadeep Sengupta
- Concept House ProceedingEnviado porzbiklot
- Tri Ax Carbon TestEnviado porMatthew Michaud
- WCTE2016 Special RothoblaasEnviado pornaresworo
- Mann Whitney Wilcoxon Tests (Simulation)Enviado porscjofyWFawlroa2r06YFVabfbaj
- 2.Central Tendency and Dispersion (1)Enviado porMohi Sharma
- Debridement SinusEnviado porSalamah