CE 612 - Advanced Concrete Technology

Assignment II
Infrastructure Engineering and Management
Department of Civil Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati
Guwahati, Assam 781039

Submitted By: Avinash Panda (174104103) Guided By: Dr. Indu Siva Ranjani G
Abi Abraham (174104107)
Michael Samuel
Preetham Raj (174104141)

TOPIC

Review Paper on Bacteria based self healing concrete - Bioconcrete

ABSTRACT crack remediation. Cracks in concrete form

Fracture or cracking of concrete is a typical
marvel without prompt and appropriate
treatment, cracks in solid structures have a
tendency to grow further and in the long run
require exorbitant repairs. Despite the fact
that it is conceivable to diminish the degree
of splitting by accessible present day
innovation, remediation of cracks in concrete
has been the subject of research for a long
time. Cracks and fissures are a typical issue
in building structures, pavements and
historic monuments. New technique in fitting
cracks with environmentally friendly
biological process that is a continuous self-
remediating process is hot topic now a day.
In this study Bacillus Sphaericus that is
abundant in soil has been used to induce
CaCO3. It is therefore vital to understand the
fundamentals of microbial participation in
an open pathway to the reinforcement can
lead to durability problems like corrosion of
the steel rebar’s. Furthermore, cracks can
cause leakage in case of liquid retaining
structures, due to alkali, sulphate and drying
shrinkage in order to overcome this problem,
a variant of smart concrete is rapidly
developing, which is known as “Self-healing
concrete”. The self-healing concrete is one
that senses its crack formation and reacts to
cure itself without human intervention.
INTRODUCTION
One of the major concern to concrete is that
it is vulnerable to the formation of cracks due
to its relatively low tensile strength. Tensile
and compressive forces, freeze-thawing
reactions and shrinkage are the various
mechanisms for crack formation.

Page | 1
The presence of cracks results in the specifically to enhance self-healing
reduction of the strength of concrete and capability.
obstructs the structural integrity and Many systems and techniques have been
durability of material but also makes investigated to heal concrete cracks
concrete particularly vulnerable to a autonomically such as modifying concrete by
deleterious environment. In addition, it can embedding microcapsules or hollow fibres
lead into concrete deterioration and the with a suitable healing agent. Once the crack
corrosion of steel reinforcement. Therefore, occurs the shell of the capsule or the wall of
to improve the strength and durability of the tube ruptures and the healing agent is
concrete once cracks appear, one way is to released and reacts in the region of damage
implement automatic repair it is called self- to produce new compounds which seal the
healing approach (Jiaguang Zhang, et. al, crack and/or bond the crack faces (R.
2017). Alghamri,et. al, 2016).

Broadly, self-healing processes within Self-healing using chemicals: One method

concrete can be divided into two categories: for self-healing which comes under
autogenic and autonomic. autonomic self-healing in concrete is by the
addition of chemicals. Microfibers and
Autogenic self-healing: It is the phenomenon
superabsorbent polymers are some material
where the material heals cracks using its own
solution to restrict crack propagation and
generic components and constituents.
enhance self-healing efficiency.
Ongoing hydration is the main healing
mechanism in young concrete due to its Self-healing using biological methods: Bio-
relatively high content of unhydrated cement mineralization techniques give promising
particles, while formation of calcium results in sealing the micro cracks in
carbonate is the most likely cause of self- concrete. The freshly composed micro-
healing at later ages. For attaining effective cracks can be sealed up by perpetual
autogenous self-healing, water is essential hydration process in concrete. The strength
and the crack widths are restricted to be less of the Bacterial concrete will be more than
than 100 𝜇m and preferably less than 50 𝜇m the normal concrete (Kunamineni Vijay, et.
Autonomic self-healing: It involves the use of al, 2017).
engineered additions that does not
Bio concrete: Bio concrete is a product that
conventionally added into cementitious
will biologically produce limestone to heal
materials. These additions are added
cracks that appear on the surface of concrete
structures. Specially selected types of the

Page | 2
bacteria, along with a calcium-based nutrient
known as calcium lactate, and nitrogen and
phosphorus, are added to the ingredients of
the concrete when it is being mixed. These
self-healing agents can lie dormant within the
concrete for up to 200 years. (Dr Henk
Jonkers,)
Strength and durability of structural concrete
can be increased by a biotechnological
method based on calcite precipitation. Crack
size more than 0.8mm is more difficult to be
repaired however with the use of bacteria
cracks can heal with the calcite precipitation.
The strength of bacterial lightweight mortar
was more than normal lightweight mortar.
This can be used where light weight
structures are required. These light weight
aggregates are good carrier for bacteria,
which increases the healing efficiency and
structural durability (Kunamineni Vijay, et. al,
2017).
MATERIALS & MECHANISM
Materials
a- Bacteria Used in Bio Concrete
Selection of bacteria is done based on its
high resistance against pH, temperature
and lack of water content. Bacteria genus
Bacillus were found to thrive in this high-
alkaline environment and can synthesise
calcium carbonate.
In suspension state, concrete mix is added
with bacteria. Concrete being extremely
alkaline in nature, the bacteria added should
fit in some special norms. The added bacte-
ria should be able to withstand the harsh
environmental conditions of concrete.
Concrete is a dry material and the pH value
of cement and water when mixed is up to 13
which makes it confrontational as most of the
organisms cannot survive in an environment
having pH value higher than 10.
Types of Bacteria: Bacteria naturally occur in
nature in various forms. They are present not
only on the surface but also beneath the
surface of the earth. The various bacteria
that can be used in concrete are:
Anaerobic Bacteria
If anaerobic bacteria like closely related
specie of shewanella are added to concrete,
the compressive strength increases from 25-
30% (Mohanadoss P, et. Al,2015).
Aerobic Bacteria (Soundharya S, et.al,
2014)
The various types of aerobic bacteria that
can be used in concrete are:
 Bacillus pasteurii
 Escherichia coli
 Bacillus subtilis
 Bacillus cohnii
 Bacillus pseudofirmus
 Bacillus halodurans
 Bacillus massiliensis
Page | 3
b- Carrier
1. Perlite:It is a valuable and worldwide-
used material for building materials
industry, which can be
extensively in volcanic rock. The
volume of perlite will expand to 4–20
times its original one when it is
subjected to heating above 870°C.
After this physical transformation, the
expanded perlite (EP) exhibits
excellent characteristics associated
with high porosity and high-water
absorption. Hence, it could
considered as an attractive and ideal
bacteria-carrier material because of
its availability in large geological
reserves and low cost (Jiaguang
Zhang, et. al, 2017).
2. Graphite Nano platelets (GNP): They
are nanoparticles made
graphite. Graphite nanoplatelets
emerged as good carrier compound
for short period healing.
3. Light weight aggregates (LWA): Light
weight aggregate depicted as good
carrier compound for long period
healing. concrete incorporated with
bacteria immobilized with light weight
aggregate, is exhibited significant
enhancement in compressive
strength of concrete.
c- Graded Fine Aggregates
The materials smaller than 4.75 mm size is
called fine aggregates. Natural sand is
generally used as fine aggregate. In this
experimental work replacement of river sand
by quarry waste (fineness modulus of
found crushed sand equal to 3.2) conforming to
grading Zone III of IS – 383 – 1970 was used
as fine aggregates.
d- Graded Coarse Aggregate
Locally available well graded granite
aggregates of normal size greater than 4.75
mm and less than 16mm having fineness
modulus of 2.72 was used as coarse
be aggregates.
e- Water
Potable water has been used for casting
concrete specimens. The water is free from
oils, acids, and alkalis and has a water-
soluble Chloride content of 140 mg/lit. As per
IS 456 – 2000, the permissible limit for
from
chloride is 500 mg/lit for reinforced concrete;
hence the amount of chloride present is very
less than the permissible limit.
f- Cement
Ordinary Portland Cement: The cement is a
binding material. It conforming to IS456-
2000-53 grade. It consists of grinding the raw
materials, mixing them intimately in certain
proportion depending upon their purity and
composition and burning them in a kiln at a
temperature of about 1300 – 1500 degree
centigrade at which temperature, the
material Cinter and partially fuses to form
Page | 4
modular chapped clinker. The clinker is
cooled and ground to a fine powder with
addition of 2 to 3% of gypsum the product
formed by using this procedure Portland
cement. Of all the materials that influence the
behavior of concrete, cement is the most
important constituent, because it is 11 used
to bind sand and aggregate and it resists
atmospheric action. Portland cement is a
general term used to describe hydraulic
cement.
Mechanism
Mechanism of applying the healing agents in
concrete: Direct application
Encapsulation are the two methods by which
bacteria can be applied to the concrete. The
application of healing agent by the direct
method used for finding
concentration of bacteria for
purpose and the optimum concentration was
30x105cfu/ml. In the second
lightweight aggregates are impregnated by
bacteria solution encapsulated in a polymer
coating. As soon as the crack ruptures the
embedded microcapsules, the healing agent
is released into the crack faces by using
capillary movement. Now the healing agent
associates with the embedded catalyst,
activating polymerization and safeguard the
closure of the near-by cracks (Kunamineni
Vijay, et. al, 2017).
Self-Healing Approach: Bacteria act as a
long lasting healing agent
mechanism is called as Microbiologically
Induced Calcium Carbonate Precipitation
(MICP).
Fig.1 Possible self-healing mechanisms for cementitious
materials
The mechanism involves decomposition of
urea by bacteria, with the aid of the bacterial
urease enzyme. Bacteria species gives
urease, that catalyzes urea to carbonate and
ammonium that results in an increase of pH
and
and carbonate concentration in the bacterial
surroundings. These components further
hydrolyze to ammonia (𝑁𝐻 4+) and carbonic
acid 𝐶𝑂32− that leads to the formation of
optimum
calcium carbonate. The process of making
strength
urease for the hydrolysis of urea𝐶𝑂(𝑁𝐻2 )2
method into carbonate (𝐶𝑂32− ) and ammonium
(NH4+) is be as follows:
𝐶𝑂(𝑁𝐻2 )2 + 𝐻2 𝑂 → 𝑁𝐻2 𝐶𝑂𝑂𝐻 + 𝑁𝐻3
𝑁𝐻2 𝐶𝑂𝑂𝐻 + 𝐻2 𝑂 → 𝑁𝐻3 + 𝐻2𝐶𝑂3
𝐻2𝐶𝑂3 ↔ 𝐻𝐶𝑂3− + 𝐻 +
2𝑁𝐻3 + 2𝐻2 𝑂 → 2𝑁𝐻 4+ + 2𝑂𝐻 −
𝐻𝐶𝑂 −3 + 𝐻 + + 2𝑁𝐻 4+ + 2𝑂𝐻 − ↔ 𝐶𝑂32− + 2𝑁𝐻 4+ + 2𝐻2 𝑂
The cell wall of the bacteria is negatively
charged, the bacteria draw cations from the
environment, together with Ca2+, to deposit
on their cell surface. The Ca2+ ions react
with the 𝐶𝑂32− prime to precipitation of
and this
Page | 5
calcium carbonate at the cell surface that governed by following factors (Jonkers HM,
serves as a nucleation site. Fig.2 shows the 2011).
image of calcium carbonates precipitation on
• pH value.
bacterial cell wall.
• Calcium concentration.
𝐶𝑎2+ + Cell → Cell – 𝐶𝑎2+ • DIC (Dissolved Inorganic
2+
Cell –𝐶𝑎 + 𝐶𝑂32− → Cell –CaCO3 Carbon) concentration.
• Nucleation sites.

The main mechanism behind making a self-

healing concrete is that the bacteria should
be able to convert the soluble organic
nutrients into insoluble inorganic calcite
crystals which seals the cracks. The self-
healing agent that is applied to the concrete
consists of two components, bacteria which
Fig.2 Calcium carbonates formation on bacterial cell wall
acts as a catalyst and calcium lactate i.e. the
METHODOLGY mineral precursor which is converted to

The method of using microbes in bacterial calcium carbonate minerals (Henk MJ,et

concrete is known as microbial Induced al,2008).

Calcium Carbonate Precipitation (MICCP) or RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Bio mineralization (Kavia K, et al, 2015). Bio
Effect of bacteria on properties of concrete
mineralization is a biological precipitation in
which organisms create a local micro 1 Hydration kinetics
environment by providing chemical
The addition of bacteria spore powder in
precipitation of mineral phases
concrete either accelerate or retard the
extracellularly. Some usually occurring
setting time of concrete depending on the
metabolic processes including sulfate
calcium source supplied. The nutrients to
reduction, photosynthesis and urea
bacteria are supplied in the form of calcium
hydrolysis end up in giving CaCO3 as there
lactate, calcium nitrate, and calcium formate.
byproduct (Vekariya M, et al, 2013). Various
The addition of calcium lactate can retard the
bacteria can precipitate calcium carbonate in
setting time, calcium formate and calcium
both natural and laboratory conditions.
nitrate can accelerate the setting time of
Calcium carbonate precipitation is mainly
concrete (M. Luo, et. al, 2016).

Page | 6
2 Compressive strength strength (R. Andalib, et.al, 2016). Cement
was replaced with 10% of fly ash and the
The strength of the structural concrete has
inclusions of 10^5cells/ml Sparcious
been improved by a Bio-technological
pasteurii bacteria were included. 20%
method based on calcite precipitation.
enhancement in compressive strength of
Microbial cells attained good nourishment
structural fly ash concrete was observed,
during initial curing period, as the cement
which is due to the deposition of calcium
mortar was permeable. But these cells were
carbonate on cell surfaces of microorganism
adapting to a new atmosphere. Due to the
(N. Chahal, et.al, 2012). The compressive
high PH of cement, there is a possibility for
strength of the bacteria added to silica fume
bacterial cells to grow slowly in the initial
concrete improved due to the precipitation of
period and accustoms to high PH conditions
CaCO3. Microstructure analysis of concrete
in the curing period. During the process of
using XRD, SEM confirmed that calcium
cell growth, calcite precipitates on surface of
carbonate was present in the concrete (N.
the cell and also in the cement mortar matrix,
Chahal, et.al, 2012). The compressive
which may be due to the presence of various
strength of concrete with Sparcina pasteurii
ions in the media. This results in less porosity
accompanied with Bacillus subtilis bacteria
and permeability of the cement mortar. The
(2 X 10^9cells/ml) is 20% more than concrete
flow of nutrients and oxygen to the bacterial
without bacteria as observed for 28 days (F.
cells gets stopped if many of the pores in the
Nosouhian, et.al, 2016). Cement was
matrix are plugged at a time. In due course,
replaced with different fly ash concentrations
the cell either gets dead or turns into
of 10%, 20%, and 40% in mortar, bacterial
endospores. Thus the behaviour of
cell improved mortar compressive strength
increased compressive strength with
by 19%, 14% and 10%, compared to control
microbial cells can be explained (K.
specimens (V. Achal, et.al, 2011). GNP acts
Santhosh, et.al, 2001). By introducing
as a good carrier compound for uniform
Bacillus megaterium bacteria of
distribution of bacteria resulting in maximum
concentration 30 X 10^5 cfu/ml in concrete,
crack healing efficiency. The addition of
precipitation of calcite was higher in higher
Bacillus subtilis bacteria along with GNP, the
grade concrete as compared to the lower
compressive strength of concrete increased
grade concrete so, higher grade concrete
in all ages due to microbial precipitation of
imparts more strength as compared to the
calcium carbonate (W. Khaliq, et.al, 2016).
lower grade concrete. The maximum
The 28 days compressive strength increased
development rate of strength for the highest
when compared to control cement mortar by
grade of 50 MPa concrete is as high 24% in

Page | 7
incorporating the reactive spore powder in Bacillus sp. CT-5 (V. Achal, et.al, 2011).
cement mortar (M. Luo, et.al, 2016). Table1. gives the details of bacteria used,
Deposition of CaCO3 on the cell surfaces bacterial concentration and the values of
and in the pores of cement-sand matrix plugs compressive strength; these may vary
the pores in the mortar and causes depending on the calcium source supplied to
improvement in the compressive strength by the bacteria.

Bacterial
Sl.No. Bacteria used Best results Reference
concentration
Compressive strength 40% more
1 Bacillus sp. CT-5 5x10^7 cells/mm3 V. Achal, et. Al, 2013
than the control concrete
Maximum rate of strength
development was 24% achieved
2 Bacillus megaterium 30 x 10^5 *cfu/ml R. Andalib, et. Al, 2016
in highest grade of concrete 50
Mpa
Improvement of 12% in
compressive strength as
3 Bacillus subtilis compared to controlled concrete 2.8 x 10^8 cells/ml W. Khaliq, et. Al, 2016
specimens with light weight
aggregates
Increase in compressive
strength by 11.8% in bacterial
4 Bacillus aerius 10^5 cells/ml R. Siddique, et. Al, 2016
concrete compared to control
with 10% dosage of RHA
Compressive strength 35% more
5 Sporosarcina pasteurii 10^5 cells/ml N. Chahal, et. Al, 2012
than the control concrete
10% increase in compressive
6 AKKR5 strength as compared to control 10^5 cells/ml R. Siddique, et. Al, 2016
concrete
25% increase in compressive
R. Siddique, et. Al, 2011 &
7 Shewanella Species strength of cement mortar 10^5 cells/ml
P. Ghosh, et. Al, 2005
compared with the control mortar
Table1. Various types of bacteria and their compressive strength results.

*Cfu – Colony forming unit

Some other test results of bio concrete and bacteria15. The results of compressive
conventional concrete showed an eloquent strength of bacterial concrete and
difference. The table and charts given shows conventional concrete are given in Table 2
the clear information regarding compressive and Fig.3 The results of split tensile strength
strength, split tensile strength and flexural of bacterial concrete and conventional
strength of M20 conventional concrete and concrete are given in Table 3 and Fig.4 The
M20 bio concrete using different types of results of flexural strength of bacterial

Page | 8
concrete and conventional concrete are
given in Table 4 and Fig.5. Bacterial Conventional
concrete concrete
S.No Compressive Compressive
strength strength
(N/mm2) (N/mm2)
Name of 7 28 7 28
bacteria days days days days
Bacillus
1 22.18 32.74 20.84 29.99
Subtilis
Bacillus
2 27.09 38.98 20.84 29.99
sphaericus
Fig.3 Comparison between compressive strength of bacterial Table2.Comparison between compressive strength of
concrete and conventional concrete. bacterial concrete and conventional concrete

Bacterial Conventional
concrete concrete
S No Compressive Compressive
strength strength
(N/mm2) (N/mm2)
Name of 7 28 7 28
bacteria days days days days
Bacillus
1 2.36 3.73 1.708 3.26
Subtilis
Bacillus
Fig.4 Comparison between split tensile strength of bacterial
2 sphaericu 2.24 3.35 1.708 3.26
concrete and conventional concrete.
s
Table3.Comparison between split tensile strength of bacterial
concrete and conventional concrete

Bacterial Conventional
concrete concrete
S.No Compressive Compressive
strength strength
(N/mm2) (N/mm2)
Fig.5 Comparison between flexural strength of bacterial Name of 7 28 7 28
concrete and conventional concrete. bacteria days days days days
Bacillus
1 pasteurii 4.6 7.85 3.92 7.06
Table4.Comparison between flexural strength of bacterial
concrete and conventional concrete

3 Water permeability

The penetration of aggressive substances

that are accountable for degradation of

Page | 9
concrete under pressure gradient is et.al, 2016). At 28 days, all control cement
determined by permeability and hence is bag house filter dust concrete specimens
considered to be the fundamental property show high to moderate permeability but
for portraying the durability of concrete. This AKKR5 bacterial (10^5 cells/ml) concrete
depends on the features of pore network of specimens show high to low permeability
cementitious materials quantified by due to pores filled with calcium carbonate (R.
porosity, tortuosity, specific surface, size Siddique, et.al, 2016). The quality of the
distribution, connectivity, and micro cracks. recycled aggregate was improved due to
These parameters are amongst others, microbial precipitation this will reduce water
controlled by the (w/c) ratio, the particle size absorption of recycled aggregate (J. Qiu,
distribution, the age of hardened et.al, 2014).
cementitious materials and the intrusion of
Compressive strength and water absorption
aggressive substances (Q. Tri, et.al, 2013).
results of different bacteria after 28 days of
CaCO3 deposition in concrete resulted in a
curing: shown in Table 4.
decrease of water absorption and
permeability of concrete specimens. Studies
(N. Chahal, et.al, 2012) revealed that
addition of S. Pastteurii bacteria in fly ash
concrete lead to a decrease in porosity and
permeability of concrete. Water absorption
was found to be reduced fourfold with a
concentration of 10^5 cells/ml bacteria in
concrete. In bacterial concrete pores are
filled with calcium carbonate precipitation by
bacteria (N. Chahal, et.al, 2012). Cubes cast
with the addition of Bacillus Megaterium and
its nutrients absorbed more than three times
less water than control specimens due to
microbial calcite deposition (V. Achal, et.al,
2011). The addition of Bacillus Aerius
bacteria causes the reduction in water
absorption and porosity due to calcite
precipitation which in turn increases the
durability of concrete structures (R. Siddique,

Page | 10
 Water
Compressive
absorption
Sl.no Bacteria strength results References
results 28
28 days
days
W.De.muynck et.al (2008)
45-50% less W.De. muynck et.al (2010)
30-35% increase
Bacillus than controlled V.Achal et.al (2011)
1 than controlled
Sphaericus concrete Jagdeesha et.al (2012)
concrete sample
sample Kumar jagdeesha et.al (2013)
M. Manjunath et.al (2014)
Nearly 50%
12-17% Reddy et.al (2013)
less than
Bacillus increase than Y.park et.al ()
2 controlled
subtilis controlled R.pei et.al (2013)
concrete
concrete sample I.I. Muhammad et.al (2014)
sample
46% less than
24.2% increase
Bacillus controlled
3 than controlled Dhamia et.al (2012)
magaterium concrete
concrete sample
sample
Ramachandran et.al (2001)
50-70% less S.S.Bang et.al (2001)
2-4% increase
Bacillus than controlled Ramakrishanan et.al (2005)
4 than controlled
pasteurii concrete De. Muynck et.al (2008)
concrete sample
sample C. Qian et.al (2009)
Y.Park et.al (2010)
Nearly 35%
15% increase less than
5 Bacillus cohnii than controlled controlled Sierra –beltron et.al (2014)
concrete sample concrete
sample
Nearly 40%
10-18%
less than
Baciillus increase than
6 controlled Kumar Jagdeesha et.al (2013)
flexus controlled
concrete
concrete sample
sample
30-40% 50% less than
increase than controlled W.D. Muynck et.al (2010)
7 Bacillus cereus
controlled concrete Maheshwaran et.al (2014)
concrete sample sample
B.Topc et.al (2004)
Y.Park et.al (2010)
80-85% less V.Achal et.al (2011)
18% increase
than controlled Navneet chahal et.al (2012)
8 S. Pasteurii than controlled
concrete Navneet chahal et.al (2012)
concrete sample
sample R.Pei et.al (2013)
R.Chidara et.al (2014)
Pacheco et al.,(2013)
Nearly 50%
25-30 % S.Ghosh et.al (2009)
less than
Shewanella increase than Y.Park et.al (2010)
9 controlled
species controlled V.Achal et.al (2011)
concrete
concrete sample N.R.Iyer et.l (2011)
sample
Table4. Compressive strength and water absorption results of different bacteria after 28 days of curing.

4 Microstructure to harmful substances as that enter the

sample (V. Achal, et.al, 2011). The addition
Calcite precipitation in mortar and concrete
of bacteria into the concrete can improve the
was visualized by SEM analysis. Rod-
microstructure of concrete by mineral
shaped bacteria associated with calcite
precipitation. This has been verified by SEM
crystals were found. Due to this deposition,
(scanning electron microscope), EDS
the impermeability of the concrete is
(Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy) and
improved as this deposition acts as a barrier

Page | 11
XRD (X-ray powder diffraction) analysis. The permeability and acid ingress are decreased
researcher stated that an addition of 30 X (C.C. Hung, et.al, 2016).
10^5cfu/ml concentration of Bacillus
Megaterium bacteria had (38.76%)
maximum weight of calcium compared with
other proportions of bacteria and in absence
of bacteria in concrete (R. Andalib, et.al,
2016). The SEM analysis showed the
different calcite crystals embedded with Fig.5 SEM Images (a) control concrete (b) Bacterial calcite
precipitation in 10% silica fume concrete.
bacteria. It was observed that calcite is
present in the form of calcium carbonate as
the high amounts of calcium were found in
the sample, and this was confirmed by using
EDX and XRD analysis. It can increase the
durability of concrete (M. Luo, et.al). Fig.5
shows the SEM images of control concrete
and bacterial concrete. These images can
conform the calcite crystals in bacterial Fig.6 SEM images of (a) Normal concrete (R0) (b) Bacterial
concrete (N. Chahal, et.al, 2012). The concrete (BR0) (c) 5% of RHA Concrete (R5) (d) Bacterial
concrete with 5% RHA (BR5).
strength of RHA concrete was improved by
the addition of bacteria, due to the deposition CONCLUSION
of calcium carbonate in pores and this was
The significance of this work is to
confirmed by using SEM images. Fig.6
understand, the use of urease producing
shows the SEM images of normal concrete
bacteria isolates, such as Bacillus subtilis,
and bacterial RHA concrete. It could be
bacillus pasteuri species in healing of cracks
clearly seen that in bacterial concrete the
in concrete. This paper has reviewed
voids are filled calcite (R. Siddique, et.al,
different types of bacteria that can be used
2016). The deposition of calcium carbonate
for healing cracks and increase durability of
within the cracks of the test samples was
concrete. This study has also identified that
confirmed by the results obtained using
bacteria has a positive effect on the
microstructures. Thus with the increase of
compressive strength of concrete. The
signal transmission rate of ultrasonic pulse
advantage of using bacteria decreases water
velocity, the water absorption, chloride
penetration and chloride ion permeability.
The present study results recommend that

Page | 12
using the ‘‘microbial concrete” can be an friendly, and eventually leads to
alternative and high quality concrete sealant improvement in the durability of building
which is cost-effective, environmental materials.

REFERENCES

• E. Mostavi, S. Asadi, M.M. Hassan, M. Alansari, Evaluation of self-healing mechanisms in concrete with double-
walled sodium silicate microcapsules, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 27 (12) (2015).
• W. Khaliq, M.B. Ehsan, Crack healing in concrete using various bio influenced self-healing techniques, Constr.
Build. Mater. 102 (2016).
• M. Luo, C. Qian, Influences of bacteria-based self-healing agents on cementitious materials hydration kinetics and
compressive strength, Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016).
• M. Luo, C.X. Qian, R.Y. Li, Factors affecting crack repairing capacity of bacteriabased self-healing concrete, Constr.
Build. Mater. 87 (2015).
• C.C. Hung, Y.F. Su, Medium-term self-healing evaluation of engineered cementitious composites with varying
amounts of fly ash and exposure durations, Constr. Build. Mater. 118 (2016).
• E. Tziviloglou, V. Wiktor, H.M. Jonkers, E. Schlangen, Bacteria-based selfhealing concrete to increase liquid
tightness of cracks, Constr. Build. Mater. 122 (2016).
• W. De Muynck, D. Debrouwer, N. De Belie, W. Verstraete, Bacterial carbonate precipitation improves the durability
of cementitious materials, Cem. Concr.Res. 38 (2008).
• R. Siddique, K. Singh, M. Kunal, V. Corinaldesi Singh, A. Rajor, Properties of bacterial rice husk ash concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 121 (2016).
• Kunamineni Vijay, Meena Murmu, Shirish V. Deo Bacteria based self-healing concrete – A review. Construction and
Building Materials 152 (2017).
• Abhishek Thakur, Akshay Phogat, Khushpreet Singh. Bacterial concrete and effect of different bacteria on the
strength and Water absorption characteristics of Concrete: a review. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology (IJCIET) (2016).
• R. Andalib, M.Z. Abd Majid, Hussin, Optimum concentration of Bacillus megaterium for strengthening structural
concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 118 (2016) .
• J. Wang, J. Dewanckele, V. Cnudde, S. Van Vlierberghe, W. Verstraete, N. De Belie, X-ray computed tomography
proof of bacterial-based self-healing in concrete, Cem. Concr. Compos. 53 (2014).
• J.Y. Wang, D. Snoeck, S. Van Vlierberghe, W. Verstraete, N. De Belie, Application of hydrogel encapsulated
carbonate precipitating bacteria for approaching a realistic self-healing in concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 68 (2014).
• N. Chahal, R. Siddique, A. Rajor, Influence of bacteria on the compressive strength, water absorption and rapid
chloride permeability of fly ash concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 28 (2012) .
• N. Chahal, R. Siddique, A. Rajor, Influence of bacteria on the compressive strength, water absorption and rapid
chloride permeability of concrete incorporating silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 37 (1) (2012).
• W. De Muynck, K. Cox, N. De Belie, W. Verstraete, Bacterial carbonate precipitation as an alternative surface
treatment for concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (5) (2008) .
• R. Siddique, V. Nanda, Kunal, Influence of bacteria on compressive strength and permeation properties of concrete
made with cement baghouse filter dust, Constr. Build. Mater. 106 (2016).
• Q. Tri, N. Maes, G. De Schutter, D. Jacques, G. Ye, Determination of water permeability of cementitious materials
using a controlled constant flow method, Constr. Build. Mater. 47 (2013).

Page | 13
• K. Van Tittelboom, N. De Belie, W. De Muynck, W. Verstraete, Use of bacteria to repair cracks in concrete, Cem.
Concr. Res. 40 (1) (2010) .
• N. Kaur, M.S. Reddy, A. Mukherjee, Improvement in strength properties of ash bricks by bacterial calcite, Ecol. Eng.
39 (2012).
• R. Siddique, N. Kaur, Effect of ureolytic bacteria on concrete properties, Constr. Build. Mater. 25 (10) (2011) .
• J. Wang, K. Van Tittelboom, N. De Belie, W. Verstraete, Use of silica gel or polyurethane immobilized bacteria for
self-healing concrete, Constr. Build.Mater. 26 (1) (2012).
• F. Bravo, D. Silva, N. Boon, W. Verstraete, N. De Belie, Screening of bacteria and concrete compatible protection
materials, vol. 88, 2015.
• J. Qiu, D. Qin, S. Tng, E. Yang, Surface treatment of recycled concrete aggregates through microbial carbonate
precipitation, Constr. Build. Mater. 57 (2014.
• M. Luo, C.X. Qian, Performance of Two Bacteria-Based Additives Used for Self-Healing Concrete, pp. 1–6.
• V. Achal, X. Pan, N. Özyurt, Improved strength and durability of fly ashamended concrete by microbial calcite
precipitation, Ecol. Eng. 37 (4) (2011) .
• N. Zakari et al., Tests and methods of evaluating the self-healing efficiency of concrete: a review, Constr. Build.
Mater. 112 (2016) .
• V. Achal, A. Mukherjee, M.S. Reddy, Microbial Concrete: Way to Enhance the Durability of Building Structures, 23
(2011) .
• M.S. Reddy, Lactose mother liquor as an alternative nutrient source for microbial concrete production by Sporosarcina
pasteurii, 2009.

Page | 14