| Literature DB >> 31212785 |
Changyong Li1,2, Fei Wang3,4, Xiangsheng Deng5,6, Yizhuo Li7,8, Shunbo Zhao9,10.
Abstract
In this paper, a new recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) was produced with composite coarse aggregate and fine recycled aggregate. The composite coarse aggregate was mixed into continuous gradation by large particle natural aggregate with small particle recycled aggregate. To explore the time-dependent developments of the compressive strength and splitting tensile strength of this new RAC, 320 groups of cubic specimens were tested at different curing ages from 3 days to 360 days to measure the compressive and splitting tensile strengths. The amount of large particle natural aggregate varied from zero to 70% in mass of the total coarse aggregate. The water/cement ratio was taken as 0.60, 0.49, 0.41 and 0.36 to represent four strength grades of the RAC at about C20, C30, C40 and C50. Based on the tested results, the curves of the compressive and tensile strengths of the RAC that changed with curing age are plotted, which clearly exhibit that the amount of large particle natural aggregate had a rational range in different strength grades of the RAC which had better aging strength. When the RAC was no larger than C30 with a water/cement ratio of 0.60 and 0.49, the amount of large particle natural aggregate should be no more than 30%; when the RAC was no less than C40 with a water/cement ratio of 0.41 and 0.36, the amount of large particle natural aggregate should be no less than 50%. Along with the general prediction of the strength development of all the tested RAC, the optimal predictive formulas are proposed for the strength development of RAC with a rational amount of natural aggregate. Meanwhile, the strength developments of RAC with a rational amount of natural aggregate are assessed by the time-dependent models proposed by the ACI Committee 209 and CEB-FIP MC 2010.Entities:
Keywords: compressive strength; development prediction; fine recycled aggregate; large particle natural aggregate; recycled aggregate concrete (RAC); small particle recycled aggregate; splitting tensile strength
Year: 2019 PMID: 31212785 PMCID: PMC6631863 DOI: 10.3390/ma12121891
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Physical and mechanical properties of coarse aggregates.
| Coarse Aggregate | RA-N0 | RA-N30 | RA-N50 | RA-N70 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural aggregate (%) | 0 | 30 | 50 | 70 |
| Apparent density (kg/m3) | 2634.1 | 2691.5 | 2732.8 | 2735.1 |
| Bulk density (kg/m3) | 1345.8 | 1410.1 | 1463.2 | 1469.7 |
| Close-compacted density (kg/m3) | 1452.3 | 1512.4 | 1600.2 | 1612.9 |
| Moisture content (%) | 3.2 | 2.1 | 1.7 | 0.9 |
| Water absorption of 24 h (%) | 5.1 | 4.7 | 3.2 | 1.9 |
| Crushed index (%) | 14.7 | 14.1 | 13.5 | 13.2 |
| Silt content (%) | 0.42 | 0.29 | 0.21 | 0.19 |
Figure 1Grading curves of the aggregates used.
Figure 2Relative water absorption of aggregates within 1 h.
Physical and mechanical properties of fine recycled aggregate.
| Properties | Values |
|---|---|
| Fineness modulus | 3.5 |
| Apparent density (kg/m3) | 2395.7 |
| Bulk density (kg/m3) | 1330 |
| Close-compacted density (kg/m3) | 1470 |
| Moisture content (%) | 5.70 |
| Water absorption of 24 h (%) | 9.45 |
| Crush index (%) | 9.35 |
Physical and mechanical properties of cement.
| Grade | Density (kg/m3) | Water Requirement of Standard Consistency (%) | Setting Time (min) | Compressive Strength (MPa) | Flexural Strength (MPa) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | Final | 3 days | 28 days | 3 days | 28 days | |||
| 42.5 | 3071 | 26.9 | 168 | 269 | 28.9 | 45.2 | 4.00 | 5.30 |
| 52.5 | 3132 | 29.2 | 142 | 238 | 37.1 | 57.9 | 6.45 | 8.64 |
Mix proportion of recycled aggregate concrete (RAC).
| Mix | Natural Aggregate (%) | Cement (kg/m3) | Water (kg/m3) | Fine RA (kg/m3) | Coarse Aggregate (kg/m3) | Additional Water (kg/m3) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural | Recycled | |||||||
| RAC-N0A | 0.6 | 0 | 332 | 200 | 651 | 0 | 1157 | 54.9 |
| RAC-N30A | 0.6 | 30 | 332 | 200 | 734 | 304 | 710 | 55.6 |
| RAC-N50A | 0.6 | 50 | 332 | 200 | 736 | 508 | 508 | 50.4 |
| RAC-N70A | 0.6 | 70 | 332 | 200 | 737 | 712 | 305 | 45.3 |
| RAC-N0B | 0.49 | 0 | 409 | 200 | 626 | 0 | 1114 | 52.8 |
| RAC-N30B | 0.49 | 30 | 409 | 200 | 708 | 293 | 684 | 53.6 |
| RAC-N50B | 0.49 | 50 | 409 | 200 | 709 | 490 | 490 | 51.1 |
| RAC-N70B | 0.49 | 70 | 409 | 200 | 711 | 687 | 294 | 43.6 |
| RAC-N0C | 0.41 | 0 | 435 | 180 | 608 | 0 | 1119 | 53.1 |
| RAC-N30C | 0.41 | 30 | 435 | 180 | 688 | 310 | 722 | 53.6 |
| RAC-N50C | 0.41 | 50 | 435 | 180 | 689 | 517 | 517 | 48.3 |
| RAC-N70C | 0.41 | 70 | 435 | 180 | 691 | 691 | 311 | 43.6 |
| RAC-N0D | 0.36 | 0 | 503 | 180 | 612 | 0 | 1089 | 51.2 |
| RAC-N30D | 0.36 | 30 | 503 | 180 | 697 | 288 | 674 | 52.8 |
| RAC-N50D | 0.36 | 50 | 503 | 180 | 698 | 482 | 482 | 47.9 |
| RAC-N70D | 0.36 | 70 | 503 | 180 | 700 | 676 | 290 | 42.9 |
Details of test and curing age.
| Trial No. | Groups | Designed Curing Age |
|---|---|---|
| A, B, C, D | 4 × (4 × 10) for compressive strength | 3, 7, 28, 60, 90, 150, 180, 240, 300, 360 |
Figure 3Slump of fresh RAC.
Figure 4Changes of compressive strength of the RAC with curing age. (a) w/c = 0.60; (b) w/c = 0.49; (c) w/c = 0.41; (d) w/c = 0.36.
Compressive strength ratio of the RAC with/without natural aggregate.
| RAC | 30A/0A | 50A/0A | 70A/0A | 30B/0B | 50B/0B | 70B/0B | 30C/0C | 50C/0C | 70C/0C | 30D/0D | 50D/0D | 70D/0D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| Mean ratio | 1.063 | 0.949 | 0.954 | 1.036 | 0.945 | 0.944 | 1.044 | 1.129 | 1.158 | 1.014 | 1.119 | 1.146 |
| Variation coefficient | 0.044 | 0.035 | 0.037 | 0.042 | 0.030 | 0.055 | 0.036 | 0.031 | 0.044 | 0.025 | 0.034 | 0.031 |
Figure 5Changes of splitting tensile strength of the RAC with curing time. (a) w/c = 0.60; (b) w/c = 0.49; (c) w/c = 0.41; (d) w/c = 0.36.
Splitting tensile strength ratio of RAC with/without natural aggregate.
| RAC | 30A/0A | 50A/0A | 70A/0A | 30B/0B | 50B/0B | 70B/0B | 30C/0C | 50C/0C | 70C/0C | 30D/0D | 50D/0D | 70D/0D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| Mean ratio | 0.998 | 0.979 | 1.010 | 0.993 | 1.008 | 1.017 | 1.007 | 1.111 | 1.112 | 1.029 | 1.094 | 1.125 |
| Variation coefficient | 0.029 | 0.046 | 0.031 | 0.017 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 0.016 | 0.029 | 0.031 | 0.018 | 0.034 | 0.034 |
Figure 6Analysis of the tested data about compressive strength. (a) w/c = 0.60; (b) w/c = 0.49; (c) w/c = 0.41; (d) w/c = 0.36.
Statistical results of tested data.
| RAC trials | A | B | C | D |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.068 | 0.071 | 0.074 | 0.076 |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.954 | 0.952 | 0.838 | 0.830 |
| Standard error | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
Figure 7Relation of coefficient k with w/c.
Figure 8Comparison of calculated values and tested values by Equations (4), (5) and (6). (a) w/c = 0.60; (b) w/c = 0.49; (c) w/c = 0.41; (d) w/c = 0.36.
General statistical result of the ratios of tested to calculated values.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Number | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Mean ratio | 1.02 | 1.07 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 1.01 | 1.04 | 0.94 | 0.95 |
| Variation coefficient | 2.01% | 3.32% | 4.52% | 3.91% | 5.24% | 2.05% | 4.21% | 1.89% |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.991 | 0.987 | 0.972 | 0.981 | 0.982 | 0.991 | 0.985 | 0.993 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Number | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Mean ratio | 0.88 | 0.90 | 1.02 | 1.06 | 0.90 | 0.91 | 1.02 | 1.08 |
| Variation coefficient | 5.02% | 7.24% | 4.60% | 5.83% | 5.69% | 6.14% | 5.21% | 4.47% |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.985 | 0.971 | 0.992 | 0.981 | 0.961 | 0.963 | 0.981 | 0.985 |
Separate statistical result of the ratios of tested to calculated values.
| RAC-N | 0A | 30A | 0B | 30B | 50C | 70C | 50D | 70D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Mean ratio | 0.98 | 1.02 | 0.97 | 1.01 | 0.97 | 1.01 | 0.98 | 1.02 |
| Variation coefficient | 4.21% | 3.72% | 4.94% | 3.11% | 3.51% | 6.18% | 4.66% | 5.62% |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.941 | 0.961 | 0.972 | 0.985 | 0.992 | 0.972 | 0.979 | 0.982 |
Figure 9Unified fitness of splitting tensile strength fst.t with compressive strength fcu.t.
Figure 10Fitness of splitting tensile strength fst.t with compressive strength fcu.t: (a) N0A, N30A, N0B and N30B; (b) N50C, N70C, N50D and N70D.
Figure 11Comparison of test data to curves of equations. (a) w/c = 0.60; (b) w/c = 0.49; (c) w/c = 0.41; (d) w/c = 0.36.
Statistical results of the general prediction of the splitting tensile strength of RAC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Number | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Mean ratio | 1.08 | 1.06 | 1.05 | 1.06 | 1.0 | 1.02 | 1.01 | 0.99 |
| Variation coefficient | 9.17% | 10.38% | 6.79% | 9.72% | 7.87% | 3.16% | 8.43% | 4.89% |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.989 | 0.978 | 0.975 | 0.978 | 0.975 | 0.978 | 0.924 | 0.966 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Number | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Mean ratio | 0.89 | 0.92 | 1.02 | 1.04 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 1.05 | 1.06 |
| Variation coefficient | 3.81% | 4.87% | 9.31% | 8.34% | 5.06% | 5.55% | 5.71% | 6.21% |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.942 | 0.944 | 0.959 | 0.951 | 0.893 | 0.933 | 0.954 | 0.933 |
Statistical results of the accurate prediction of the splitting tensile strength of RAC.
| RAC-N | 0A | 30A | 0B | 30B | 50C | 70C | 50D | 70D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Mean ratio | 1.04 | 1.02 | 0.96 | 0.98 | 0.96 | 1.03 | 0.97 | 1.02 |
| Variation coefficient | 8.35% | 9.41% | 6.89% | 3.69% | 8.79% | 9.19% | 9.33% | 7.21% |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.921 | 0.935 | 0.951 | 0.974 | 0.961 | 0.955 | 0.947 | 0.940 |
Figure 12Assessment of compressive strength by time-dependent models of ACI and CEB-FIP.
Figure 13Assessment of the tensile strength by time-dependent models of ACI and CEB-FIP.