| Literature DB >> 33272000 |
Tereza Pavlů1,2, Kristina Fořtová2, Jakub Řepka1,2, Diana Mariaková1,2, Jiří Pazderka1.
Abstract
The use of recycled masonry aggregate for concrete is mostly limited by the worse properties in comparison with natural aggregate. For these reasons it is necessary to find ways to improve the quality of recycled masonry aggregate concrete and make it more durable. One possibility is utilization of crystalline admixture which was verified in this study by laboratory measurements of key material properties and durability. The positive influence of mineral admixture was proved for freeze-thaw resistance. The positive impact to carbonation resistance was not unambiguous. In conclusion, the laboratory evaluation shows how to improve the durability of recycled masonry aggregate concrete, however, it is necessary to investigate more about this topic.Entities:
Keywords: crystalline admixture; durability of concrete; recycled masonry aggregate concrete
Year: 2020 PMID: 33272000 PMCID: PMC7730824 DOI: 10.3390/ma13235486
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Recycled masonry aggregate (RMA 1).
Figure 2Sieving curves for natural aggregate, recycled masonry aggregate with limits defined in the standard [77] used in concrete mixtures.
Physical properties of particular fractions of used aggregates.
| Types of Recycled Aggregate | Grading (mm) | Content of Finest Particles | Oven-Dried Particle Density | Water Absorption Capacity (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| f (%) | ρRD (kg/m3) | σ | WA24 (%) | σ | ||
| Natural aggregate | 0–4 | 2.0 | 2570 | 81 | 1.0 | 0.0 |
| 4–8 | 0.1 | 2530 | 12 | 1.7 | 0.3 | |
| 8–16 | 0.2 | 2540 | 12 | 1.9 | 0.2 | |
| Recycled masonry aggregate 1 | 0–4 | 2.9 | 2340 | 108 | 3.7 | 0.6 |
| 4–8 | 0.4 | 1920 | 62 | 12.4 | 0.7 | |
| 8–16 | 0.7 | 2130 | 72 | 7.8 | 0.5 | |
| Recycled masonry aggregate 2 | 0–4 | 1.3 | 1950 | 166 | 13.3 | 2.1 |
| 4–8 | 0.4 | 2050 | 41 | 10.6 | 0.4 | |
| 8–16 | 0.3 | 1990 | 33 | 10.6 | 1.1 | |
Concrete mix proportion, per cubic meter.
| Designation | NAC 1 C0 | RMAC 1 C0 | RMAC 1 C1 | RMAC 1 C3 | NAC 2 C0 | RMAC 2 C0 | RMAC 2 C1 | RMAC 2 C3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cement (kg/m) | 260 | 260 | 260 | 260 | 260 | 260 | 260 | 260 |
| Water (kg/m3) | 169 | 219 | 219 | 219 | 169 | 284 | 284 | 284 |
| Sand (kg/m3) | 710 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 710 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| NA 4/8 (kg/m3) | 520 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 520 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| NA 8/16 (kg/m3) | 609 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 609 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| RMA 0/4 (kg/m3) | 0 | 807 | 807 | 807 | 0 | 949 | 949 | 949 |
| RMA 4/8 (kg/m3) | 0 | 54 | 54 | 54 | 0 | 32 | 32 | 32 |
| RMA 8/16 (kg/m3) | 0 | 653 | 653 | 653 | 0 | 500 | 500 | 500 |
| Crystalline admixture (kg/m3) | 0 | 0 | 5 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 10 |
| w/c eff (-) | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.65 | 0.65 |
| w/c (-) | 0.65 | 1.09 | 1.09 | 1.09 | 0.65 | 0.84 | 0.84 | 0.84 |
Average values of results of physical properties of concrete, including standard deviation.
| Recycled Concrete Mixture | Dry Density | Water Absorption by Immersion | Capillary Water Absorption | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Designation | (kg/m3) | σ | (%) | σ | (kg/m2) | σ |
| NAC 1 C0 | 2240 | 21 | 5.3 | 0.1 | 6.45 (1) | 0.68 |
| RMAC 1 C0 | 1726 | 22 | 17.3 | 0.7 | 24.31 (1) | 2.08 |
| RMAC 1 C1 | 1765 | 65 | 17.0 | 1.0 | 18.19 (1) | 1.59 |
| RMAC 1 C3 | 1755 | 26 | 16.6 | 0.3 | 17.05 (1) | 1.18 |
| NAC 2 C0 | 2141 | 32 | 5.5 | 0.2 | 0.93 (2) | 0.25 |
| RMAC 2 C0 | 1708 | 21 | 17.0 | 0.8 | 4.45 (2) | 0.69 |
| RMAC 2 C1 | 1673 | 20 | 18.1 | 0.3 | 4.74 (2) | 0.61 |
| RMAC 2 C3 | 1659 | 7 | 18.3 | 0.4 | 5.03 (2) | 0.11 |
(1) Weight stabilization after 120 h; (2) Weight stabilization after 72 h.
Figure 3Comparison and progression of capillary water absorption of NAC and RMAC.
Average values of results of mechanical properties of concrete, including standard deviation.
| Recycled Concrete Mixture | Compressive Strength | Flexural Strength | Static Modulus of Elasticity | Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 28 Days | 60 Days | |||||||||
| Designation | (MPa) | σ | (MPa) | σ | (MPa) | σ | (GPa) | σ | (GPa) | σ |
| NAC 1 C0 | 34.0 | 0.7 | 38.2 | 0.4 | 6.6 | 0.4 | 38.2 | 4.8 | 34.8 | 4.1 |
| RMAC 1 C0 | 20.9 | 0.5 | 23.1 | 1.5 | 4.2 | 0.2 | 15.9 | 1.7 | 21.4 | 1.1 |
| RMAC 1 C1 | 24.7 | 0.4 | 25.3 | 0.9 | 4.7 | 0.3 | 15.9 | 0.2 | 21.2 | 1.0 |
| RMAC 1 C3 | 24.2 | 0.3 | 26.5 | 0.3 | 4.7 | 0.1 | 15.2 | 0.5 | 19.9 | 2.4 |
| NAC 2 C0 | - | - | 35.3 | 1.4 | 6.7 (1) | 0.7 | 33.8 (1) | 0.4 | 39.1 | 5.1 |
| RMAC 2 C0 | - | - | 18.2 | 0.4 | 4.1 (1) | 0.2 | 16.9 (1) | 0.7 | 22.0 | 1.4 |
| RMAC 2 C1 | - | - | 18.2 | 0.7 | 3.4 (1) | 0.0 | 15.4 (1) | 0.1 | 21.9 | 1.5 |
| RMAC 2 C3 | - | - | 16.2 | 0.6 | 3.4 (1) | 0.1 | 15.9 (1) | 0.4 | 18.9 | 1.0 |
(1) Examined in 60 days.
Figure 4Comparison of compressive strength of NAC and RMAC at age 28 and 60 days.
Dynamic modulus of elasticity measured by ultrasonic method and frost resistance coefficient determined from the dynamic modulus of elasticity after freezing and thawing cycles.
| Recycled Concrete Mixture | Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity (GPa) + Frost Resistance Coefficient (-) | Freeze-Thaw Resistance | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Designation | 0 cycles | 25 Cycles | 50 Cycles | 75 Cycles | 100 Cycles | Cycles | ||||
| NAC 1 C0 | 34.8 | 32.8 | 0.94 | 26.7 | 0.77 | 24.7 | 0.71 | 16.5 | 0.48 | 50 |
| RMAC 1 C0 | 21.4 | 14.9 | 0.70 | 12.8 | 0.59 | 8.2 | 0.38 | 6.8 | 0.32 | 0 |
| RMAC 1 C1 | 21.2 | 22.3 | 1.05 | 22.1 | 1.04 | 22.0 | 1.04 | 21.4 | 1.01 | 100 |
| RMAC 1 C3 | 19.9 | 20.1 | 1.01 | 17.4 | 0.87 | 15.6 | 0.78 | 14.2 | 0.71 | 75 |
| NAC 2 C0 | 39.1 | 15.7 | 0.40 | 6.2 | 0.16 | - | - | - | - | 0 |
| RMAC 2 C0 | 22.0 | 15.0 | 0.68 | 13.5 | 0.61 | 13.8 | 0.63 | 12.6 | 0.57 | 0 |
| RMAC 2 C1 | 21.9 | 16.4 | 0.75 | 14.8 | 0.68 | 16.5 | 0.75 | 17.4 | 0.79 | 100 |
| RMAC 2 C3 | 18.9 | 15.0 | 0.79 | 14.5 | 0.77 | 17.0 | 0.90 | 17.1 | 0.90 | 100 |
Figure 5Frost resistance coefficient determined from the dynamic modulus of elasticity.
Flexural strength and frost resistance coefficient determined from flexural strength after freezing and thawing cycles.
| Recycled Concrete Mixture | Flexural Strength | Frost Resistance Coefficient | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (MPa) | σ | (-) | |||
| Designation | 0 | 100 | 0 | 100 | |
| NAC 1 C0 | 6.6 | 2.4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.36 |
| RMAC 1 C0 | 4.2 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 2.5 | 0.42 |
| RMAC 1 C1 | 4.7 | 4.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.93 |
| RMAC 1 C3 | 4.7 | 2.5 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 0.52 |
| NAC 2 C0 | 6.7 | 1.5 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.23 |
| RMAC 2 C0 | 4.1 | 2.6 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.63 |
| RMAC 2 C1 | 3.4 | 2.8 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.81 |
| RMAC 2 C3 | 3.4 | 3.0 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.89 |
Figure 6Flexural strength for 28 days (before freezing), after 100 freeze-thaw cycles and frost resistance coefficient determined from flexural strength.
Figure 7The comparison of the frost resistance coefficients evaluated from dynamic modulus of elasticity and flexural strength.
Figure 8Carbonation depth of NAC and RMAC.
Flexural strength, dynamic modulus of elasticity and carbonation depth after 28 days in laboratory incubator with air circulation with CO2 atmosphere.
| Recycled Concrete Mixture | Flexural Strength | Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity | Indicator of Increase of Carbonation Depth Compared to NAC | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No Exposition to CO2 | Exposition to CO2 | No Exposition to CO2 | Exposition to CO2 | ||||||
| Designation | (MPa) | σ | (MPa) | σ | (GPa) | σ | (GPa) | σ | (mm) |
| NAC 1 C0 | 6.6 | 0.4 | 6.4 | 0.6 | 34.8 | 4.1 | 30.5 | 0.7 | 1.00 |
| RMAC 1 C0 | 4.2 | 0.2 | 3.9 | 0.1 | 21.4 | 1.1 | 15.7 | 0.8 | 2.54 |
| RMAC 1 C1 | 4.7 | 0.3 | 4.0 | 0.2 | 21.2 | 1.0 | 15.8 | 0.9 | 1.70 |
| RMAC 1 C3 | 4.7 | 0.1 | 4.1 | 0.2 | 19.9 | 2.4 | 17.5 | 0.9 | 1.74 |
| NAC 2 C0 | 6.7 | 0.7 | 7.4 | 0.4 | 39.1 | 5.1 | 29.4 | 4.2 | 1.00 |
| RMAC 2 C0 | 4.1 | 0.2 | 3.6 | 0.3 | 22.0 | 1.4 | 17.2 | 1.0 | 2.28 |
| RMAC 2 C1 | 3.4 | 0.0 | 3.4 | 0.2 | 21.9 | 1.5 | 15.9 | 0.9 | 2.23 |
| RMAC 2 C3 | 3.4 | 0.1 | 3.4 | 0.1 | 18.9 | 1.0 | 15.5 | 1.4 | 2.09 |
Figure 9Carbonation resistance—the indicator increases of measured carbonation depth compared to NAC and correlation of dynamic modulus of elasticity of NAC and RMAC samples no exposed to CO2 and exposed to CO2.