Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (2): 308-313

© Scholarlink Research Institute Journals, 2011 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

jeteas.scholarlinkresearch.org
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (2): 308-313 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

The Effect of Recycled Aggregates on Creep Behavior of Structural

Concrete: Gaza Strip a Case Study
1
Y.S.Ghuraiz; 2M. H. Swellam; 3G. L. K. Garas; 2A. M. Ragab
1
Ph.D student, Engineering Professions Dept, University College of Applied Sciences,
2
Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University
3
Civil Engineering Department, National Research Center. Egypt
.Corresponding Author: G. L. K. Garas
___________________________________________________________________________
Abstract
The huge amounts of demolition debris (DD) in Gaza Strip cause environmental, social and economical
problems. The socio-economic development in Gaza Strip is also threatened by the depletion of natural
aggregates. Such conditions necessitate the use of demolition debris waste (DDW) as aggregates in new
concrete mixes. Concrete cylindrical specimens of 250 kg/cm2 characteristic strength made of DD were tested to
determine the creep behavior of that concrete. The main variables were the type and percent of replacement of
demolition debris aggregates in its saturated surface dry conditions. The study concluded that concrete with
natural sand and RA1 (recycled coarse aggregate from crushed concrete fragments only) provided 32.8% higher
creep strain than that of natural aggregate concrete while concrete with recycled fine aggregate and RA1
provided 79% higher strain than that of natural aggregate concrete. In addition, concrete with recycled fine
aggregates and RA2 (recycled coarse aggregate from all crushed demolition fragments) provided 118% higher
creep strain compared to natural aggregate concrete
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Keywords: recycled aggregates, natural aggregate, demolition waste, structural concrete, creep behavior
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I(TRODUCTIO(
The conservation of natural resources has become a different types and proportions of recycled aggregate
top priority in all production sectors that target are tested simultaneously, in the same conditions.
maximizing production and profit (Martinez- Natural aggregate concrete of almost the same
Echevarria et al., 2008). The construction industry, characteristic strength is used as a base for
faced with this challenge, promotes environmental comparison.
management where proper methods to protect the
environment are adopted (Vivian, 2006). Hence, CHARACTERISTICS OF USED MATERIALS
considerable effort is being put into recycling The physical and chemical properties of concrete
demolition waste, turning it into re-usable products. ingredients namely aggregate and cement are shown
(Sumeda, 2006). In developing countries more uses in tables (1-5). Testing of these materials was carried
have been found for recycled construction and out according to the American Standard of Testing
demolition waste. Investigating volumetric changes Materials (ASTM). Concrete mixes were designed to
of concrete with recycled aggregates is an important develop a characteristic compressive strength of 250
issue to encourage sustainable and durable concrete kg/cm2. All tables and figures in this research present
with recycled aggregates (Leonardo, 2006 and data undertaken from experimental work conducted
Angulo et al., 2009). The creep of concrete is an at the Materials Testing Laboratory of Engineering
important property to be investigated for recycled Syndicate at Gaza Strip as well as at the Building
aggregate structural concrete. Some studies (Rao et Materials Laboratory, Faculty of Engineering - Cairo
al., 2007) and (Ajdukiewicz and Kliszczewicz, 2002) University.
concluded that the test results for creep in normal
laboratory conditions are not so clear and that the Aggregate
creep of recycled aggregate concrete had lower The coarse aggregate used in this research was
values than that of conventional concrete. This result natural aggregate (for comparison) as well as
contradicted (Poon and Chan, 2007) findings, which recycled aggregate, which was crushed concrete
concluded that the creep of recycled aggregate debris (RA1) and crushed demolition debris RA2 (a
concrete tested at one year was higher than that of the mix of concrete, bricks, tiles….etc). The natural
corresponding natural concrete. coarse aggregate used in this study was crushed
limestone. Three sizes are available in Gaza Strip
This study aims to investigate the effect of using and known as Folia (max. size 1"), Adasia (maximum
recycled aggregate from DD on the creep behavior of size 5/8") and Semsemia (max. size 3/8"). The
structural concrete. Various concrete mixes with physical properties of these aggregates are shown in

308
 Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (2): 308-313 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

table (1), where Saturated Surface Dry (SSD) as well

as dry properties are depicted.
Table (1): Physical properties of Natural Coarse
Aggregate
Dry unit SSD unit Dry
Aggregate weight weight Specific *Gs Absorption
Type ɣdry (kg (ɣSSD) Gravity (SSD) (%)
/m3) (kg/m3) (Gs)
Folia (25
1431 1449 2.67 2.72 1.4%
mm)
Adasia 2.6
1499 1537 2.57 2.45
(19mm) 4
Semsemia 2.6
1482 1530 2.52 2.95
(9.5mm) 1
Aggregate 2.6
1491.3 1528.6 2.57 2.56
Mix 3
*Gs: Specific Gravity
Also, the physical properties of recycled coarse Figure (1): Grading of Recycled Aggregate in
aggregates are shown in table (2). Concrete Mix Design
Table (2): Physical Properties of Recycled Coarse Cement
Aggregate The used cement in this study was the Ordinary
Finer Portland Cement (Cem I, R,42.5), which was stored
Unit
Weight Absorption than Crushing in dry place. The physical and mechanical properties
Aggregate Type (Gs) #200 of the used cement are presented in table (4) with
(kg (%) Value(%)
sieve
/m3) their limits according to (ASTM C150, 2004).
(%)
Adasia 2.47 5.6 0.6
RA1 1302 27.9 CO(CRETE MIX DESIG(
Semsemia 2.48 5.9 1.5 The absolute volume method is used in this study to
determine the concrete mix ingredient proportions
Adasia 2.47 according to ACI 211.1. Many mixes with
RA2 1358 6.17 3.8 31.7
Semsemia 2.48 characteristic strength about 250 kg/cm2 were
designed and examined to give a slump that ranged
between 70 mm and 80 mm.
Table (3) summarizes the physical properties of the
used natural sand and recycled fine aggregate while Table (4): Typical Properties of the Used Ordinary
table (5) shows the sieve analysis results for the Portland Cement
different used aggregates as well as the aggregate mix
which was composed of 40% Adasia, 30% Semsemia Standard
Property Standard Test Results
Limits
and 30% fine aggregate.
(ASTM
(ormal
C187 – 24-33% 27%
Table (3): Physical Properties of Natural Sand and Consistency
98)
Fine Recycled Aggregates Initial (ASTM >45 95
Setting C191 –
Fine recycled
Property (atural sand Time 04)
aggregates Final <375 170
(min.) (Vicat
Determined dry unit 3 3 test)
1666 (kg/m ) 1598.2 kg/m
weight (BS 4550
Soundness(mm) <10 1.4
Moisture content 0.5% 1.75% Part 3)
Compressive
Absorption 0.6% 7.9% Strength >12 19.8
(ASTM
((/mm2)- 3days
C109 -02)
Bulk (Gs) 2.635 2.614 Compressive
Strength >19 29.7
Fineness modulus 1.543% 2.01% ((/mm2)- 7days
% passing sieve 0.6
98.5% 91.7%
mm The used aggregate was in SSD condition. The
proportions used in preparing the various mixes are
The grading curve for aggregate mix was developed shown in table (6).
through trials to get a well-graded mix of aggregates
as shown in figure (1).

309
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (2): 308-313 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Table (5): Grading for the Different Used Aggregates

% Passing
Sieve
Sieve (atural (atural Recycled Fine Job Mix
Opening Type (1) (RA1) Type (2) (RA2)
(o. Aggregat sand Aggregate
Size
(mm e Semsem
Adasia Adasia Semsemia
ia
1 1/2" 37.50 100 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100
1" 25.00 100 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
3/4" 19.00 95.7 84.9 100.0 84.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 95.0
1/2" 12.50 63.5 12.0 97.0 3.8 96.7 100.0 100.0 63.9
3/8" 9.50 32.7 0.7 81.5 0.1 84.0 100.0 100.0 54.7
#4 4.75 8.7 0.1 37.5 0.1 39.3 100.0 100.0 41.3
#8 2.360 3.1 0.0 10.8 0.0 10.0 100.0 98.7 33.2
#16 1.18 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 96.5 30.0
#30 0.600 0 0 0 0 0 98.5 91.7 29.6
#50 0.300 0 0 0 0 0 45.9 12.2 --
#100 0.150 0 0 0 0 0 1.2 0 0.4
pan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table (6): The Quantities of Materials Required For seven days. Three cylinders from each type were
Various Mixes used to determine the compressive strength before
Mix Type
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4
starting the test and the fourth specimen of each type
Materials was used in the creep test.
Cement 280 280 280 280
Natural
778 - - -
Apparatus
agg.(3/4") The apparatus used in creep test is a compression
Natural creep frame consists of two parts, one for applying
583 - - -
agg.(1/2")
load and the other for measuring deformation. The
Natural Sand 583 583 - -
first part is a frame with head and base between
RA1 (3/4") - 778 778 - which the concrete cylinders are placed over each
RA1 (1/2") - 583 583 - other. A loading jack is placed over the head and is
used for applying load. The other part is a
RA2 (3/4") - - - 778
mechanical compress-meter with an accuracy of
RA2 (1/2") - - - 583 0.001 mm. Various parts of the apparatus used in
Fine recycled
- - 583 583
creep test are shown in figures (2) and (3).
agg.
Water 140 140 140 140
RA1: Recycled Aggregate from crushed concrete.
RA2: Recycled Aggregate from all crushed
demolition fragments.

MIXI(G PROCEDURES
All batches were mixed in a vertical axis revolving-
drum mixer of capacity about 0.1m3. The mixing
operation of concrete was accomplished for all
samples according to (ASTM C192, 2004).

EXPERIME(TAL PROCEDURES
The creep test was conducted according to (ASTM C
512 – 02, 2004). This test was used to compare creep
potentials of the different four types of concrete in
this study.
Figure (2): Compress-Meter Device
Test specimens For Strain Measuring
Four standard cylinders were cast for each type of
mixes. The specimens were removed from the molds
after 24 hours approximately and stored in water
basin in the laboratory condition until the age of

310
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (2): 308-313 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

elasticity and compressive strength of the various

mixes. The concrete mix of natural aggregates (mix
1) had the highest compressive strength and the least
instantaneous strain, while mix 4 possessed the least
strength and the highest strain. Figure (4) shows the
recorded total strains for the four tested types for 360
days after the age of loading. One can observe that
the total strain for the first mix after 360 days was
1153×10-6, while the instantaneous strain was
300×10-6. Hence, the creep strain for this mix was
853×10-6 after one year (difference between the total
strain at 360 day and the instantaneous strain).
Similarly, the creep strain for mixes 2, 3 and 4 were
1133×10-6, 1527×10-6 and 1860×10-6 respectively.
The recorded strains show that at the end of the first
month, the percentages of creep strain for mixes 1, 2,
Figure (3): Creep of Concrete Apparatus 3 and 4 were 25.8%, 40.6%, 40.3% and 51.7% of its
yearly corresponding value respectively. In addition,
Procedure at the end of six months all types recorded creep
At the age of 28 days, one specimen from each mix strain more than 90% of its yearly value.
was placed in the frame and four compress meters
were attached to the middle of cylinders (one for each
cylinder) as shown in figure (3). The specimens were
loaded at an intensity of not more than 40% of the
compressive strength at the age of loading, so the
applied load was 14 ton. Strain readings were taken
immediately before and after loading, 2 to 6 hrs later,
and then daily for one week. Weekly readings were
recorded until the end of one month and monthly
until the end of one year. The load was measured
before taking each strain reading and it was adjusted
in case the load varied more than 2% from the correct
value.

RESULTS A(D A(ALYSIS

Creep test was conducted on four mixes to figure out
the effect of different recycled aggregates on the
creep behavior of the resulting concrete. The
instantaneous strain results - at the instant of loading
- of the four tested mixes are shown in table (7)
which shows also the corresponding compressive Figure (4): Total Strain of Loaded Specimens for
strength and absorption percent for each type. 360 Days

Table (7): The Instantaneous Strains, Compressive Mix 1 with natural aggregates provided the lowest
Strength and Absorption of Loaded Specimens creep strain due to its highest relative compressive
Equivalent Absorption strength and subsequently highest modulus of
cube (%) elasticity as well as its highest density, its lowest
Mix Instantaneous absorption that may infer least permeability,
compressive
type strain (Mindess et al., 2003). On the other hand, mix 4
strength
(kg/cm2) provided the least strength and highest creep strain.
3.65 The effect of the type of coarse aggregate on creep
1 300×10-6 317
strain can be deduced from the comparison of the
2 320×10-6 309 4.73 creep strain for mixes 1 and 2, where the creep strain
3 340×10 -6
292 6.9 of mix 2 exceeds that of mix 1 by about 32.8%. This
substantial difference is attributed to the replacement
4 373×10 -6
265 6.9 of natural coarse aggregate with recycled coarse
aggregate in mix 2. It is also noticed that the creep
It should be noticed from the table that the strain of mix 3 exceeds that of mix 1 by about 79%.
instantaneous strains differ from one type to another. This great variation is attributed to the replacement of
This is attributed to the difference in modulus of

311
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (2): 308-313 (ISSN: 2141-7016)
both natural coarse aggregate and natural sand with
recycled coarse and recycled fine aggregate in mix 3.
Comparing mix 3 to mix 2, the creep strain of mix 3
exceeds that of mix 2 by about 34.8%. This
significant difference is attributed to the replacement
of natural sand with recycled fine aggregate in mix 3.
Also, the effect of the type of recycled aggregate
(RA1 or RA2) can be deduced through the comparison
between the creep strain of mix 3 and 4, where the
creep strain of mix 4 exceeds that of mix 3 by about
21.8%. Such difference is attributed to the
replacement of RA1 (Recycled Aggregate from
crushed concrete) with RA2 (Recycled Aggregate
from all crushed demolition fragments) in mix 4. The
above observations are attributed to several factors.
The first factor is the increase of concrete
permeability upon the use of recycled aggregates (see
absorption results on tables 1, 2, 3 and 7 ). Hence,
outward viscous flow of capillary water, cement gel,
water and anhydrate calcium silicate from the
resulting concrete is easier and subsequently higher
creep strain is observed. Secondly, the use of
recycled aggregates has resulted in a lower
compressive strength concrete (see table 7) and hence
higher creep strains were observed. Thirdly, it should
be noted that the applied load was the same for all
concrete mixes (due to the availability of one
apparatus) and hence, its percentage of the actual
compressive strength was higher for concrete with
relatively lower grade. This highest percentage has
subsequently led to highest creep strains. Also, the
creep strain of mix 4 with RA2 is higher than that of
RA1 concrete while the compressive strength of RA2
concrete is lower than that of the concrete with RA1.
This may be attributed to the difference in crushing
values between RA2 and RA1 as well as the larger
percentage passing # 200 sieve as indicated in table
(2) (Neville, 1983). The above results agree with
Poon and Chan (2007) results; where the creep of
recycled aggregate concrete was higher than that of
natural aggregate concrete. On the other hand, the
results obtained in this study contradicted Rao et al.,
(2007) results as well as Ajdukiewicz and
Kliszczewicz (2002). The contradiction may be
attributed to the difference in properties of used
materials specially the permeability, absorption,
crushing value, percent of fine materials as well as
the maximum aggregate size of large aggregates
which highly affect the compressive strength and
subsequently the creep strain as highlighted by
(Neville, 1983).
CO(CLUSIO(S
1. The creep strain of structural concrete
increases with the use of these recycled
aggregates from demolition debris.
2. The increase of creep strain ranged between
32.8% and 118% according to the type of
recycled aggregate used in the concrete.
312
3. Replacing the recycled fine aggregate with
natural sand is effective in decreasing the
creep strain, where the specimens with
natural sand recorded lower creep strain by
about 34.8%.
4. The use of debris of concrete (RA1)
provided lower creep strain by about 21.8%
than that of concrete with demolition debris
(RA2).
5. The concrete mix with recycled large
aggregates and natural sand provided higher
creep strain by about 32.8% when compared
to natural aggregate concrete.
6. The concrete mix with RA1 and recycled
fine aggregates provided higher creep strain
by about 79% when compared to natural
aggregate concrete.
7. The concrete mix with RA2 and recycled
fine aggregates provided higher creep strain
by about 118% when compared to natural
aggregate concrete.
REFERE(CES
Ajdukiewicz A., and Alina Kliszczewicz(2002).
Influence of recycled aggregates on mechanical
properties of HS/HPC. Cement & Concrete
Composites. 24. 269–279.
Angulo S. C., Carrijo P. M., Figueiredo A. D.,
Chaves A. P. and John V. M. (2009). On the
classification of mixed construction and demolition
waste aggregate by porosity and its impact on the
mechanical performance of concrete. Materials and
Structures, DOI 10.1617/s11527-009-9508-9.
ASTM C 192/ C 192M-02, (2004). Standard Practice
for Making and Curing Concrete Test Specimens in
the Laboratory. American Society for Testing and
Materials.
ASTM C 512 – 02, (2004). Standard Test Method for
Creep of Concrete in Compression. American Society
for Testing and Materials, 2004.
Leonardo F. R. Miranda, Silvia M. S. Selmo (2006).
CDW recycled aggregates renderings: Part I –
Analysis of the effect of materials finer than 75 µm
on mortar properties. Construction and building
materials, 20: 615-624.
Martinez-Echevarria M. J., Rubio M. C. and
Menedez A. (2008). The reuse of waste from road
resurfacing: cold in-place recycling of bituminous
pavement, an environmentally friendly alternative to
conventional pavement rehabilitation methods. WIT
Transactions on ecology and the environment, Vol.
109, ISSN 1743-3541 (on-line), doi:
10.2495/WM080471.
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (2): 308-313 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Mindess, S., Young, J.F., and Darwin, D. (2003).

Concrete, second edition. Library of Congress
Cataloging-in-Publication Data. ISBN 0-13-064632-
6.

Neville, A., M., (1983). Properties of Concrete. Third

edition, PITMAN books limited, 128 Long Acre,
London WC2E 9AN. ISBN 0 273 01643 1.

Poon Chi-Sun and Dixon Chan (2007). The use of

recycled aggregate in concrete in Hong Kong.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling 50: 293-305.

Rao Akash, Kumar N. Jha and Sudhir Misra (2007).

Use of aggregates from recycled construction and
demolition waste in concrete. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, Volume 50, Issue 1, 71-
81.

Sumeda Paranavithana and Abbas Mohajerani

(2006). Effects of recycled concrete aggregates on
properties of asphalt concrete . Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, Volume 48, Issue 1,
Pages 1-12.

Vivian W.Y. Tam and C.M. Tam (2006). Evaluations

of existing waste recycling methods: A Hong Kong
study. Building and Environment, Volume 41, Issue
12.

313