Gull, I (2011) Testing of strength of recycled waste concrete and its applicability. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 137(1), pp. 1-5. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper gives results of studies undertaken to assess suitability of construction demolition as coarse aggregate in new concrete production. Three sets of concrete materials considered are fresh concrete (FCM), waste concrete (WCM), and waste concrete strengthened with admixtures (SWCM). Various mixes were prepared for carrying out the research by varying the proportions of cement, sand, and aggregates. All mixes were designed for characteristic strength (fck) of M20. The compressive strength of concretes was tested in laboratory after 3, 7, and 28 days. The specimens used for testing include cubes, cylinders, and flexural beams. The influence of admixtures on the strength of waste concrete was examined. The compressive strengths of FCM, WCM, and SWCM are compared and the results show that there is not much difference in the strengths of FCM and SWCM after 28 days. For this reason, this study recommends the recycling of waste concrete as an aggregate material in the production of new concrete.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | aggregates; compressive strength; concrete; recycling; waste material; workability |
| Index terms: | beam, testing, waste material, compressive strength, laboratory, sand, workability, admixture, aggregate, suitability, recycling |
| Subjects: | research management, environmental science, building materials, material analysis and testing, design methods, structural engineering, professional practice, design criteria, waste management, materials science |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Construction Materials, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here