ABSTRACT

As all known, concrete is a versatile engineering composite material made with

cement, aggregates and admixtures. Due to the day by day innovations and developments in
construction field, the global consumption of natural aggregates is very high and at the same
time production of solid wastes from the demolitions of constructions is also very high. And
also there is a scarcity of natural aggregates because of extensive use of concrete. Because of
these reasons the reuse of demolished constructional wastes came into the picture to reduce
the solid waste and to reduce the scarcity of natural aggregates.
Waste tiles was selected from the demolitions of construction and a brief study on the
suitability of these waste crushed tiles as a replacement to the natural basic aggregates in
concrete work has been carried out. Tile powder is used as a replacement to the fine
aggregate, and crushed wasted tiles are used as a replacement to the coarse aggregates.
Replacement was done in coarse and fine aggregates individually and as well both fine and
coarse aggregates was done at a time in single mix. These waste crushed tiles were replaced
in place of basic aggregates by 10% and 20% without changing the mix design.
M30 grade of concrete was designed to prepare the conventional mix. Without
changing the mix design total 8 types of mixes were prepared by replacing the fine and coarse
aggregates at different percentages of tile powder and crushed tiles. Variations in the
workability for these different mixes were studied and observed that, increase in the
percentage of replacement of tiles powder in the concrete mix leads to the increase in the
workability of the concrete mix. Tile powder in the concrete mix is behaving like admixtures,
which are used to produce RMC mix.
Compressive strength test is also carried out to analyze the compressive strength
variation of different concrete mixes with different percentages of waste crushed tiles and
tiles powder. Total 81 cubes were casted. Compressive strength test is carried out for all 81
cubes after 7, 28 and 56 days curing period. From the compressive strength test results,
observed that the compressive strength is increasing for all mixes at 10% and 20% of
replacement after 28 days curing period. And also observed that the optimum percentage of
replace for coarse aggregate by the waste crushed tiles is 10%. Compressive strength is
obtained maximum for the mix having 20% of tiles powder. For the combinations, maximum
compressive strength obtained for the mix having 10% of crushed tiles in place of coarse
aggregate and 20% of tile powder in place of fine aggregate.

i
 LIST OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT …………………………………………………………………i
ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………………...... ii
LIST OF CONTENTS …………….. ………………………………………………………iii
LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………………………….v
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS ……………………………………………………………….vi
LIST OF CHARTS AND GRAPHS ……………………………………………………….vii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………..1
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REIVIEW……………………………………………….3
CHAPTER 3 MATERIALS AND THEIR PROPERTIES ……...……………………6
3.1 Cement …………………………………………………………...…….6
3.1.1 Fineness of cement ……………………………………………6
3.1.2 Consistency of cement ………………………………………...7
3.1.3 Initial and final setting time …………………………………...8
3.1.4 Specific gravity of cement …………………………………….9
3.1.5 Test results on cement ………………………………………... 9
3.2 Coarse aggregate ………………………………………………………...10
3.2.1 Specific gravity of coarse aggregate …………………………..10
3.2.2 Impact Test …………………………………………………… 10
3.2.3 Water absorption of coarse aggregate …………………………11
3.2.4 Test results of coarse aggregate ………………………………. 12
3.3 Fine aggregate …………………………………………………….......…12
3.3.1 Specific gravity of fine aggregate ……………………………. 13
3.3.2 Zone distribution of sand ………………………………………13
3.3.3 Water absorption of fine aggregate ……………………………14
3.3.4 Test results of fine aggregate …………………………………. 14
3.4 Replacing Materials …………………………………………………….. 14
3.4.1 Replacement to coarse aggregate …………………………… 14
3.4.2 Replacement to fine aggregate ……………………………… 15
3.4.3 Tests on replacing materials ………………………………….. 15
3.4.5 Test results of replacing materials ……………………………. 15

ii
CHAPTER 4 MIX DESIGN………………………………………………………………. 16
4.1 Design procedure ……………………………………………………….. 16
4.2 Design calculations …………………………………………………… 20
CHAPTER 5 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM…………………………………………22
5.1 Types of mixes prepared ……………………………………………… 22
5.2 No. of specimens prepared …………………………………………… 22
5.3 Preparation of specimens ……………………………………………….. 23
5.4 Tests conducted on cubes ………….…………………………………. 24
CHAPTER 6 WORKABILITY…………………………………………………………... 25
6.1 Slump test ………………………………………………………………. 25
6.1.1 Procedure ……………………………………………………... 25
6.1.2 Slump test results …………………………………………… 25
6.2 Graphs and discussion ………………………………………………….. 26
CHAPTER 7 COMPRESSIVE STRENGHT TEST RESULTS…………..…………… 27
7.1 Compressive strength test………………………………………………. 28
7.2 Compressive strength test results ……………………………………..... 29
7.3 Graphs and discussion ……………………………………………….…. 29
7.3.1 Strength comparison for all mixes ……………………………. 29
7.3.2 Strength variation when F.A and C.A are replaced individually30
7.3.3 Strength variation for different mixes ………………………... 31
CHAPTER 8 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………..……… 32
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………..……… 33

iii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Compressive strength results when plastic material used ………………………… 2

Table 2.1, 2.2, 2.3: Details of mix designations and their test results …………………3, 4, 5

Table 3.1 Consistency of a cement test observations ……………………………………… 7

Table 3.2 Properties of Cement …………………………………………………………….. 9

Table 3.3 Properties of coarse aggregates ………………………………………………… 12

Table 3.4 Sieve analysis of fine aggregates test observation table ………………………… 14

Table 3.5 Properties of fine aggregates …………………………………………………… 14

Table 3.6 Properties of replacing materials ………………………………………………… 15

Table 4.1 Assumed Standard Deviation ……………………………………………………. 17

Table 4.2 Maximum Water- Cement ratio for different exposure conditions ……………… 17

Table 4.3 Table for selection of water content …………………………………………… 18

Table 4.4 Minimum Cement Contents for different exposure Conditions …………………. 18

Table 4.5 Volume of coarse aggregates per unit volume of total aggregates …………….... 19

Table 5.1 Material percentages for different mixes ……………………………………… 22

Table 5.2 Specimens details for each mix ………………………………………………….. 23

Table 6.1 Slump values for different mixes ……………………………………………… 26

Table 7.1 Compressive strength test results ……………………………………………… 28

iv
 LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS

Picture 3.1 Cement (OPC 53 grade) …………………………………………………………. 6

Picture 3.2 90 micron sieve ………………………………………………………………….. 7

Picture 3.3 Vicat apparatus ………………………………………………………………… 8

Picture 3.3.1 Needle for I.S time …………………………………………………………….. 8

Picture 3.3.2 Needle for F.S time ……………………………………………………………. 8

Picture 3.4 Coarse aggregate ……………………………………………………………….. 10

Picture 3.5 Impact test apparatus …………………………………………………………… 11

Picture 3.6 Sand …………………………………………………………………………….. 12

Picture 3.7 Sieve shaker ……………………………………………………………………. 13

Picture 3.8 Manual crushing of waste tiles …………….……………………………………15

Picture 3.9 Crusher used …………………………………………………………………….15

Picture 3.10 Material separated after crushing …………………………………………… 15

Picture 5.1 Horizontal pan mixer used for mixing …………………………………………. 23

Picture 5.2 Weighed material ready for mixing ……………………………………………. 23

Picture 5.4 Moulds …………………………………………………………………………. 24

Picture 5.5 Vibrator used for compaction ………………………………………………… 24

Picture 5.6 Curing of concrete specimens …………………………………………………24

Picture 5.7 Cubes after completion of curing period ……………………………………….. 24

Picture 6.1 Slump test apparatus …………………………………………………………… 25

Picture 7.1 Universal testing machine ……………………………………………………. 27

Picture 7.2 Placing of specimen in UTM ………………………………………………… 27

Picture 7.3 Specimen while in application of load …………………………………………. 27

v
 LIST OF CHARTS AND GRAPHS

Chart 6.1 Shows slump variation for different mixes …………………………………….... 26

Chart 7.1 Shows Compressive strength variation for different mixes …………………… 29

Graph 7.1: 7 days Compressive strengths vs %ge of replacement of F.A and C.A ……… 30

Graph 7.2: 28 days Compressive strengths vs %ge of replacement of F.A and C.A ………. 30

Graph 7.3: Compressive strength vs %ge of replacement tiles and tile powder …… 31

vi