IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS Related content

- Investigation of Usability as Industrial Raw
Investigation of Usability as Aggregate of Different Material of Olivine Occurrences: A Case
Study from Gelendost - Isparta,
Originated Rocks Southwestern Turkey
Oya Cengiz and Mustafa Kurunluolu

- Evalution Model of Website Usability

To cite this article: Ebru Bapinar Tuncay et al 2016 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 44 022002 Hanping Zhang

- Assessing the usability of the NDCDB

checklist with Systematic Usability Scale
(SUS)
N Z A Halim, S A Sulaiman, K Talib et al.
View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 111.93.43.170 on 06/02/2019 at 10:45

World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium (WMESS 2016) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 44 (2016) 022002 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/44/2/022002

Investigation of Usability as Aggregate of Different Originated

Rocks

Ebru Başpınar Tuncay 1, Şemsettin Kılınçarslan 2, Fuzuli Yağmurlu 1

1
Süleyman Demirel University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Geology
Engineering, Isparta, Turkey.
2
Süleyman Demirel University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Civil
Engineering, Isparta, Turkey.

E-mail: ebrubaspinar@sdu.edu.tr

Abstract. The general properties of aggregate can determine the performance and durability of
the concrete. In this study, mineralogical, petrographic, mechanical, physical and chemical
properties of the rock samples of different origin (limestone, recrystallized limestone,
dolomite, sand and gravel, tephra–phonolite, trachybasalt) were determined. Samples were
obtained from different origin rocks units and they have been classified in three different sizes
of aggregate with crushing and screening method. Grading, classification of particle, loose bulk
density, water absorption ratio, flakiness index, coefficient of Los Angeles, resistance to
freeze-loosening and alkali-silica reaction of aggregates and organic matter determination has
been determined. The rocks have been investigated in compliance with the relevant standards.
Trachybasalt and dolomite have higher particle density than other rocks. In addition, strength
and flexural strength of these rocks are higher than other rocks. Tephra–phonolite has the
lowest water absorption rate. At the same time resistance to freeze loosening of Tephra-
phonolite is lower than the other rocks. Resistance to fragmentation and the resistance to wear
of all of rocks are quite high. Sand and gravel, tephra–phonolite and trachybasalt are evaluated
in terms of alkali-silica reaction. Sand and gravel are more reactive than the other aggregates.
Organic matter content of the aggregates is low for the quality of aggregate. Also high
correlation between some properties of aggregates was observed. For example, high correlation
between compressive strength and flexural strength, water absorption and porosity, resistance
to fragmentation and the resistance to ware (Micro-Deval).

1. Introduction
Nowadays, rock and concrete are two of the most widely used building material. Rocks are used as
construction materials in two ways. One of them is decorative architectural and the other one is natural
aggregates which used as raw materials in concrete. Aggregates are granular materials, which are
obtained naturally, artificially or as recycled. It is known that mineralogy and properties of the
aggregate, which derived from naturally formed bed or crushed rock, significantly affect the strength
and stability of concrete. Strength of aggregate has an effect on the strength of concrete, especially in
high-strength one (> 50 MPa). Porosity, grade, size distribution, moisture content, shape, surface
texture, break strength, modulus of elasticity, impurities of aggregates are important for the technology
of concrete. These properties of the aggregate result from mineralogical composition of the host rock
or the features of formation [1], (Table 1).

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium (WMESS 2016) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 44 (2016) 022002 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/44/2/022002

In this study, mineralogical, petrographic, mechanical, physical and chemical properties of the rock
samples of different origin (limestone, recrystallized limestone, dolomite, sand and gravel, tephra–
phonolite, trachybasalt) were determined. The rocks have been investigated in compliance with the
relevant standards. High correlations between some properties of aggregates were observed.

Table 1. Minerals and rocks content of aggregates, based on [2].

Minerals Igneous rocks
Silica Clay Carbonate Granite Volcanic glass
Quartz Illites Calcite Syenite Obsidian
Opal Kaolins Dolomite Diorite Pumice
Chalcedony Chlorites Sulfate Gabbro Tuff
Tridymite Montmorillonites Gypsum Peridotite Scoria
Cristobalite Iron oxide Anhydrite Pegmatite Perlite
Zeolite Magnetite Iron sulfide Felsite Pitchstone
Mica Hematite Pyrite Basalt
Silicates Goethite Marcasite
Feldspar Imenite Pyrrhotite
Ferromagnesian limonite
Hornblende
Augite
Metamorphic rocks Sedimentary rocks
Marble Phyllite Conglomerate Carbonate Claystone,
Quartzite Schist Sandstone Rocks Siltstone,
Slate Gneiss Amphibolite Quartzite Limestone Shale and
Serpentinite Hornfels Greywacke Dolomite Argillic
Arkose Chert

2. Materials and Method

Rocks of different origin are used as aggregates in this study. First of all, chemical analyses of all
rocks (a total of 24 rocks samples) were performed with ICP-MS method in ACME (Canada)
laboratory. Then all the rocks were crushed. These are crushed limestone, crushed recrystallized
limestone, crushed dolomite, crushed tephra-phonolite, crushed trachybasalt, sand and gravel. The test
methods used to determine the properties of aggregates are reported in Table 2.

Table 2. Characteristics and Tests of Aggregate

Test Test
Characteristics Characteristics
methods methods
Simplified Petrographic
[3] Water Absorption
Identification [10]
Specific Gravity [4] Flatness Index
[11]
Compressive Strength [5] Los Angeles Abrasion Resistance
[12]
Flexural Strength [6] Micro-Deval Abrasion Resistance
[13]
Bulk Density [7] Resistance to freezing and thawing
[14]
Alkali-Silica Reaction [8] Organic Matter Content
[15]
Acid Soluble Sulphate [9]

2
World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium (WMESS 2016) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 44 (2016) 022002 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/44/2/022002

3. Results and discussions

The chemical components of rocks are given in Table 3. Carbonate rocks are classified according to
their rate of calcite and dolomite in Table 2 [16]. K1, K2, K3, K4 rocks are sedimentary ones. Tf and
Tb are volcanic rocks (Figure 1). K1 and K2 are called limestone rocks, K4 is called dolomitic
limestone based on [16]. According to the total alkalis (K2O+Na2O wt.%) vs. SiO2 diagram, Tf rock
falls into tephri-phonolite field, while Tb rock falls into trachybasalt field (Figure 1). Rocks and
aggregates properties are given Table 4.

Figure 1. Total alkalis vs. SiO2 diagram for the Tf and Tb rocks [17]

Table 3. The average value of the chemical analysis of rock samples

Chemical
K1 K2 K3 Kçt K4 Do Tf Tb
Composition (%)
SiO2 0.71 0.03 4.10 5.19 0.26 0.73 53.78 48.51
Al2O3 0.25 <0.01 0.88 0.81 0.07 - 18.50 16.85
Fe2O3 0.08 <0.04 0.44 0.54 <0.04 0.20 3.74 7.57
MgO 0.22 0.48 12.77 7.90 19.33 20.48 0.98 5.38
CaO 55.40 56.34 37.51 42.61 33.73 30.97 5.76 10.33
Na2O 0.02 <0.01 0.04 0.05 0.02 - 4.96 3.64
K 2O 0.04 <0.01 0.16 0.33 0.01 - 6.11 3.82
TiO2 0.01 <0.01 0.05 0.06 <0.01 - 0.42 1.04
P 2O 5 0.02 <0.01 0.01 0.04 <0.01 0.05 0.29 0.80
MnO <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.05 <0.01 - 0.1 0.14
Cr2O3 <0.002 <0.002 0.004 - <0.002 - <0.002 0.01
Loss on ignition 43.2 43.1 43.8 41.58 46.2 47.51 4.29 1.23
Total 99.95 99.97 99.75 99.16 99.68 99.94 99.95 99.31
K1: Limestone, K2: Recrystallized limestone, K3: Sand and gravel, K4: Dolomite, Tf: Tephra–phonolite, Tb: Trachybasalt,
Kçt: average chemical composition of limestone [18], Do: average chemical composition of dolomite [18]

Calcite Ratio (%) Dolomite Ratio (%) Description

>% 95 <% 5 Limestone
% 90-95 % 5-10 Magnesium Limestone
% 50-90 % 10-50 Dolomitic limestone
% 10-50 % 50-90 Dolomite limestone
<% 10 >% 90 Dolomite

3
World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium (WMESS 2016) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 44 (2016) 022002 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/44/2/022002

Table 4. Rocks and aggregates properties

Rocks Properties Rocks

Tb K4 K3 K2 K1 Tf
Specific Gravity (gr/cm3) 2.97 2.80 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.62
Dry Unit Weight (kg/m3) 2735 2709 2576 2570 2590 2338
Compressive Strength (MPa) 147.16 135.76 114.47 110.99 118.20 40.83
Flexural Strength (MPa) 16.90 14.84 10.89 10.29 11.31 4.72
Loose Bulk Density Unit (mg/m3) 1.967 1.954 1.389 1.335 1.305 1.102
Water Absorption (%) 0.141 0.205 0.371 0.215 0.298 3.943
Flatness Index (%) 20.31 4.75 5.96 12.85 13.15 23.94
Los Angeles Abrasion Value 11.35 13.65 17.45 20.28 19.25 26.54
Abrasion Resistance of Coarse Aggregates
4.86 7.19 9.74 11.10 10.06 12.96
(Micro-Deval) value
The Resistance to Freezing and Thawing
0.15 015 0.45 0.91 0.42 -
(%)
Sulphate Dissolved ın Acid 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03

Flexural strength of trachybasalt rocks is the highest compared to the other tested rocks (Table 4).
Generally, compressive strength and flexural strength are directly proportional (Figure 2). Density of
trachybasalt aggregate is higher than the other tested rocks. In addition, trachybasalt, dolomite,
recrystallized limestone and limestone rocks are characterized by high strength. However, tephra-
phonolite rock (40.83 MPa) is characterized by the least strength in uniaxial compressive strength
classification [19].

Figure 2. The relationship between compressive strength and flexural strength in rocks

According to the compressive strength and dry unit weight relationship [20], trachybasalt,
dolomite, sand and gravel, recrystallized limestone and limestone rocks are semi-heavy building
materials, while tephra-phonolites rock is a normal building material. Dolomite and trachybasalt have
higher loose bulk density than the other tested rocks because of their high density. The tephra-
phonolites aggregate has the highest value of water absorption (3.943%), while trachybasalt aggregate
has the lowest (0.141%) (see Table 4). Water absorption should be less than 2% for aggregate because
water absorption, shrinkage and strength have an effect on durability [21]. This may be related to
differences in the crushing and screening process. NaOH solution colour changes were observed for
determination of organic matter. The colour of the NaOH solution, which contains limestone

4
World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium (WMESS 2016) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 44 (2016) 022002 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/44/2/022002

aggregates, has become a very slight yellow colour. Yellow is the color change, so it contains a very
small amount of organic material but it is not a problem for using in concrete [15].
Instead for Dolomite, Recrystallized limestone, Sand and gravel, Dolomite, trachybasalt, tephra-
phonolites aggregates weren’t observed colour change in NaOH solution. Based on [8], bars average
length changes were observed after 5, 9, 12 and 15 days. Bars that expand more than 0.20% after 15
days are potentially ASR-reactive. Bars that expand between 0.10% and 0.20% include aggregates that
are known to be potentially harmful in field performance in [8]. The change of length is 0.016% for
tephra-phonolite bars, 0.058% for trachybasalt bars and 0.131% for sand-gravel bars. As a result,
sand- gravel aggregates are potentially ASR-reactive. Mobile sulphate, derived from aggregates,
which can cause harmful effects in the concrete due to increasing sulphate content in concrete. The
acid-soluble sulphate content of the aggregates is lower than 0.2% [9]. Flatness is undesirable more
than 40% in crushed stone. It should be less than 50% for sand gravel [11]. High flatness causes the
low strength and a reduction in workability. After 500 cycles, maximum Los Angeles abrasion must
be less than 30% [22]. According to the criteria in [22], aggregates are highly resistant to
fragmentation in this study. The maximum limit is 18% for the Micro-Deval value which is given by
NCHRP (The National Cooperative Highway Research Program) [23]. Compressive strength and Los
Angeles coefficient are inversely proportional. At the same time Los Angeles coefficient and Micro-
Deval coefficient are directly proportional.

Figure 3. The relationship between a) Los Angeles coefficient and Micro- Deval coefficient, b)
Compressive strength and Los Angeles coefficient

Figure 3 shows a linear relationship between compressive strength and Los Angeles coefficient,
Micro-Deval coefficient and Los Angeles coefficient. In addition, trachybasalt and dolomite are
located in LA15, sand, gravel and limestone is located in LA20, the recrystallized limestone and
tephra-phonolites are located in the LA25 category. The thawing and freezing resistance of
trachybasalt and dolomite aggregates are higher than the others. Besides this, water absorption ratios
are low. Mass loss after freeze thawing of aggregates is <1. Aggregates are extremely durable against
freeze thawing and are located in the F1 category in [24]. Trachybasalt and dolomite are more suitable
for road, airport, runway concrete in areas where wear resistance is important.

Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the Research Fund of Süleyman Demirel University. Project
number: 1806-D-09.

References
[1] P. K. Mehta, P. J. M. Monteiro, “Concrete Microstructure, Properties, and Materials,” Third

5
World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium (WMESS 2016) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 44 (2016) 022002 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/44/2/022002

Edition 659 pages, McGraw-Hill Education, UK., 2005

[2] ASTM C294-05, “Standard Descriptive Nomenclature for Constituents of Concrete
Aggregates,” Annual Book of ASTM Standards, USA., 2005
[3] TS 10088 EN 932-3, “Tests for general properties of aggregates -Part 3: Procedure and
terminology for simplified petrographic description,” Turkish Standard Institute, 1997
[4] TS 699, “Methods of Testing for Natural Building Stones,” Turkish Standard Institute, 2009
[5] TS EN 1926, “Natural stone test methods- Determination of compressive strength,” Turkish
Standard Institute, 2007
[6] TS EN 12372, “Natural stone test methods- Determination of flexural strength under
concentrated load,” Turkish Standard Institute, Turkey, 2013.
[7] TS EN 1097-3, “Tests for mechanical and physical properties of aggregates -Part 3:
Determination of loose bulk density and voids,” Turkish Standard Institute, Turkey, 1999.
[8] ASTM C-1260-07, “Standard test method for potential alkali reactivity of aggregates (mortar-
bar method),” Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Concrete and Mineral Aggregates,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, USA., 2007.
[9] TS EN 1744-1, “Tests for chemical properties of aggregates -Part 1: Chemical analysis,”
Turkish Standard Institute, Turkey, 2011
[10] TS EN 1097-6, “Tests for mechanical and physical properties of aggregates - Part 6:
Determination of particle density and water absorption,” Turkish Standard Institute, 2002
[11] BS 812, Part 105-1, “Testing aggregates, methods for determination of particle shape, Flakiness
index,” British Standards Institution, 1985.
[12] TS EN 1097-2, “Tests for mechanical and physical properties of aggregates - Part 2: Methods
for the determination of resistance to fragmentation,” Turkish Standard Institute, 2010
[13] TS EN 1097-1, “Tests for mechanical and physical properties of aggregates - Part 1:
Determination of the resistance to ware (Micro- Deval),” Turkish Standard Institute, 2002
[14] TS EN 1367-1, “Tests for thermal and weathering properties of aggregates - Part 1:
Determination of resistance to freezing and thawing,” Turkish Standard Institute, 2001
[15] ASTM C 40-97, “Test method for organic ımpurities in fine aggregates for concrete,” Annual
Books of ASTM Standards Designation, C 40-97, 04.01, 22-23, 1998.
[16] R. L. Folk, “Practical Petrographie Classification of Limestones,” A.A.P.G. Bull., 43, 1-38,
1959.
[17] M. J. Le Bas, R. W. Le Maitre, A. Streckeisen and B. Zanettin “A Chemical Classification of
Volcanic Rocks Based on Total Alkali-Silica Diagram,”. J. Petrol. 27, 745–750, 1986.
[18] S. J. Boggs, “Principals of sedimentology and Stratigraphy,” Merill Publ. Co., 1987.
[19] D. U. Deere, R.P. Miller, “Classification and indeks properties of intact rock,” Tech. Report
AFWLTR-65-116, AF Special Weapons Center, Kirkland Air Force Base, New Mexico,
1966
[20] M. Venuat, “Du Beton Mousse au Beton de Polymeres,” Cah., Tech., du Bafiment, No:52, Mai,
Paris, France, 1983
[21] ASTM C 33-81, “Standard specifications for concrete aggregates,” Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, USA., 1986
[22] ASTM C 131-89, “Test Method for Resistance to Degradation of Small-Size Coarse Aggregates
by Abrasion and Impact in the Los Angeles Machine,” Annual Book of ASTM Standards,
USA., 1992
[23] Y. Wu, F. Parker and K. Kandhal, “Aggregate Toughness/Abrasion Resistance and
Durability/Soundness Tests Related to Asphalt Concrete Performance in Pavements,” NCAT
Report 98-4. National Center for Asphalt Technology, Auburn, Alabama, 2004
[24] TS 706 EN 12620+A1, “Aggregates for concrete,” Turkish Standard Institute, 2009