Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 1054–1058

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Properties of the mechanical in controlled low-strength rubber

lightweight aggregate concrete (CLSRLC)
Li-Jeng Hunag, Her-Yung Wang ⇑, Yu-Wu Wu
Department of Civil Engineering, National Kaohsiung University of Applied Sciences, 807, Taiwan, ROC

h i g h l i g h t s

 The results showed that the slump in the controlled low-strength rubber lightweight aggregate concrete (CLSRLC) containing different amounts of
rubber was more than 190 mm.
 The compressive strength, drop-weight value and ultrasonic pulse velocity decreased as the rubber particle replacement percentages increased.
 The lowest shrinkage in CLSRC was achieved at a rubber particle replacement percentage of 20%.
 The electrical resistivity was less than 10 kX-cm at an age of 91 days.
 Sulfate resistance increases with increasing rubber particle replacement percentage.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study, waste rubber tire powder and reservoir silt lightweight aggregate were added to controlled
Received 18 July 2015 low-strength material (CLSM) to produce a renewable building material. The results showed that the
Received in revised form 18 February 2016 slump in the controlled low-strength rubber lightweight aggregate concrete (CLSRLC) containing differ-
Accepted 5 March 2016
ent amounts of rubber was more than 190 mm. The compressive strength and drop-weight value
Available online 11 March 2016
decreased with rubber particle replacement percentages up to 20%, but the design strength requirement
(>0.7 MPa) was still met. The lowest shrinkage in CLSRC was achieved at a rubber particle replacement
Keywords:
percentage of 20%. The electrical resistivity was less than 10 kX-cm at an age of 91 days. The ultrasonic
Controlled low-strength rubber lightweight
aggregate concrete (CLSRLC)
pulse velocity decreased as the rubber particle replacement percentage increased. Sulfate resistance
Tire rubber particles increases with increasing rubber particle replacement percentage. The research results showed that rub-
Reservoir silt lightweight aggregate ber particle replacement percentages in the range of 10–20% are feasible in engineering practice. These
Compressive strength special engineering materials can meet special requirements in Taiwan while contributing to the reduced
Mechanical properties consumption of natural resources and reduced damage to the natural environment, thus helping meet
goals for waste recycling, energy savings, carbon reduction and safe and sustainable reuse of materials.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction aggregate particles are lower in density, lower in strength and

The Controlled Low Strength Materials (CLSM) are mixed in
industrial by-products and applied to backfill underground lines
[1]. As a country with a tropical climate, Taiwan often receives
heavy rainfall brought by typhoons in summer, which leads to deb-
ris flow accumulation and excessive silt in reservoirs. To prolong
the lives of reservoirs effectively, the silt is made into lightweight
aggregate and used in concrete, and this concrete has excellent
engineering properties [2–6].
Lightweight aggregate is different from normal-weight aggre-
gate; it has several unique properties. In particular, lightweight
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wangho@kuas.edu.tw (H.-Y. Wang).
higher in water absorption rate than normal-weight concrete. Con-
crete using lightweight aggregates is different from concrete using
normal-weight aggregates in terms of mechanical performance,
engineering properties and durability [7]. The use of lightweight-
aggregate concrete in structures has yielded good results and pro-
vided many advantages, such as high strength for the same weight
ratio, good tensile strain, low thermal conductivity, and improved
noise and heat insulation properties, due to the internal pores of
the lightweight aggregate [8,9]. However, because of the internal
pores, the moisture in cement paste can be absorbed more easily
by lightweight aggregate than by normal-weight aggregate. As a
result, lightweight-aggregate concrete has poorer workability and
lower strength than concrete made with normal-weight aggregate.
The impact of seismic forces on a structure is proportional to its

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.016
0950-0618/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 L.-J. Hunag et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 1054–1058 1055

structural weight. Lightweight aggregates are often used to reduce 2.2. Test variables and mix proportion
the weight of structures and thereby reduce the damage caused to
The concrete mixes used in this study were designed for coarse aggregate with a
structures by earthquakes [10]. 1.5-inch maximum aggregate size, fixed water-to-binder (W/B) ratio, and a mini-
The natural environment faces serious threats from global mum cement content of 400 kg/m3. Waste tires were processed into rubber parti-
industrialization. The willful disposal of industrial wastes has cles with a maximum size passing the #4 sieve. The five groups of concretes,
caused serious damage to the natural environment. Due to the with different rubber particle replacement percentages (i.e., 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%,
and 40%) are listed in Table 4. Lightweight aggregates were used in place of coarse
highly developed automobile industry and the popularization of
aggregates (207 kg/m3), using the volume approach to prepare controlled low-
transportation vehicles, the production of tires has been increasing strength rubber concrete (CLSRC) and controlled low-strength rubber lightweight
rapidly. The total number of registered motor vehicles in Taiwan aggregate concrete (CLSRLC). AF and water were added in the amounts required
reached 221.7 million by the end of March 2012. As a result, there to obtain tube flow values that met the requirements of various tests of fresh con-
are many waste tires in existence. In the past five years, the annual crete properties, and concrete cylindrical specimens sized /10  20 cm were cre-
ated. At ages of 1, 7, 28, 56 and 91 days, mechanical properties tests were
amount of waste tire recycling has amounted to more than 100,000 conducted on the specimens.
metric tons [11,12]. The willful disposal of waste tires may create a
hotbed for vector mosquitoes and other pests, posing a risk to pub- 2.3. Testing items
lic health. Burning waste tires may pose a risk of environmental
damage due to the dioxin generated from the combustion. Hence, The tests of fresh properties conducted included slump tests (ASTM C143) [33].
the effects of disposing of waste tires on the environment are sig- The cylindrical concrete specimens cast, sized w10 cm  20 cm, were used in tests
of compressive strength (ASTM C39) [34], ultrasonic pulse velocity (ASTM C597)
nificant [13–15].
[35], length change (ASTM C157) [36], surface resistivity (ASTM C876) [37], sulfate
Using waste rubber in conjunction with Portland cement has attack (ASTM C1012) [38], permeability (CNS 3763) [39] and water absorption (CNS
many advantages, including a lower unit weight, increased ductil- 13295) [40].
ity, higher shock resistance, better extensibility, good shock
absorption Problem, higher noise and heat insulation coefficients
3. Results and analysis
and improved fire resistance [16–20]. When used in high-
strength structural concrete slabs, waste rubber can improve fire
3.1. Slump
resistance [21] and improve resistance to the permeation of chlo-
ride ions, thereby improving freeze-thaw resistance [22]. Adding
As shown in Fig. 1 shows, the slump of the CLSRC increases as
rubber powder to concrete may considerably reduce the compres-
the rubber particle replacement percentage increases. At a rubber
sive strength of the concrete, so concrete containing rubber pow-
particle replacement percentage of 20%, the slump (221 mm) of
der is more vulnerable to changes in temperature than
CLSRC is 10 mm lower than that of the control group concrete.
conventional concrete because in concrete containing rubber pow-
However, the slump of the CLSRLC (270 mm) is 20 mm higher at
der, the modulus of elasticity decreases with increasing tempera-
the same rubber particle replacement percentage. For increasing
ture. Hence, in practical applications, concrete containing rubber
levels of lightweight aggregate replacement, the slump of CLSRC
powder is suggested for use in non-primary structures, such as
is 22 mm higher on average than that of CLSRLC, suggesting that
partition walls, sidewalks, crash barriers, and paving, in which high
using an appropriate amount of lightweight aggregate in place of
concrete strength is not required [23–25].
natural aggregate can effectively improve slump.
A controlled low-strength material is a self-compacting con-
crete with a lower strength than conventional concrete. However,
3.2. Compressive strength
as a composite material mixed with high-strength soil and low-
strength bonding materials, it has better load-bearing capabilities
Fig. 2 show that the compressive strength of concrete decreases
than traditional backfill soil [26]. The engineering properties of
as the rubber particle replacement percentage increases. The com-
CLSM vary substantially with the constructional materials. There-
pressive strength of the 1-day-age CLSRC group concrete with 20%
fore, the construction is safer and more efficient only if the
replacement is approximately 0.3 MPa lower than the compressive
effects of materials on CLSM are mastered [27,28]. CLSM can be
strength of the control group concrete at the same age. At 30%
made from any industrial byproducts, such as fly ash, foundry
replacement, the compressive strength of the CLSRLC group con-
sand, waste tires, cement kiln dust, and flue gas desulfurization
crete is 0.1 MPa lower. At 40% replacement, the compressive
materials, to reduce accumulation of these byproducts in landfills
strengths are not significantly different, possibly because the CLSM
[29,30]. Steel furnace slag (SFS) is an industrial by-product that is
enters the aggregate-particle separation stage, which results in a
not commonly utilized in bound applications because of its
decrease in compressive strength.
potential to contain high contents of free calcium and magne-
sium oxides, which expand when hydrated [31]. In this study,
reservoir silt was used to make light aggregates and replace the 3.3. Ultrasonic pulse velocity
sand component in concrete with waste tire material to produce
a CLSM that is expected to provide significant benefits to the Fig. 3 shows that the ultrasonic pulse velocity of concrete
environment. increases as the rubber particle replacement percentage decreases
and the age increases. For the CLSRLC group, 20% replacement
2. Experimental plan
decreases the pulse velocity at 28 days by 506–2548 m/s, com-
pared with 3054 m/s for the control group. For the CLSLRC group,
2.1. Test materials 20% replacement decreases the pulse velocity at 28 days by 364–
2423 m/s, compared to 2787 m/s for the control group. At more
Cement used in this study meets the ASTM C150 standard [32] for Type I Port-
than 30% replacement, the pulse velocity decreases markedly as
land cement standard in terms of properties. Fly ash was taken from Xingda Ther-
mal Power Plant of Tai Power, and reservoir silt lightweight aggregate was the W/B increases.
purchased from Sune Aggregate Co., Ltd in Taiwan. Rubber particles, passing the
#4 sieve (maximum size 4.75 mm) were prepared with water jet technology. The 3.4. Shrinkage
accelerating agent (AF) was obtained from Suntech Co., Ltd. The physical and chem-
ical properties of the cement and fly ash are shown in Tables 1. The physical prop-
erties of the rubber particles and particle size distribution curve are shown in Tables Fig. 4 shows that the drying shrinkage of the concretes in both
2 and 3. the CLSRC group and the CLSRLC group is less than 0.025% and that
1056 L.-J. Hunag et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 1054–1058

Table 1
Chemical components of cement and fly ash. (unit: %)

Items SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO MgO SO3 K2O Na2O TiO2 LoI Fineness (m3/kg) Proportion (m2/m2)
Cement t (C) 20.74 4.65 3.1 62.85 3.43 2.36 – – – 2.11 343 3.14
Fly ash (F) 48.27 38.23 4.58 2.84 – – 1.16 0.2 1.42 5.38 275 2.15

Table 2
Particle size distribution curve.

Mesh (mm) screen size 4.75 (#4) 2.36 (#8) 1.18 (#16) 0.59 (#30) 0.297 (#50) 0.149 (#100) 0.075 (#200) Pan
Fine aggregate (%) 100 99 58 33 12 4 1 0
Mesh (mm) screen size 75 (3in) 37.5 (3/2in) 25 (1in) 19 (3/4in) 12.5 (1/2in) 9.5 (3/8in) 4.75 (#4) Pan
Coarse aggregate (%) 100 100 100 99 87 65 4 0

Table 3 Rubber content (%)

Physical properties of aggregate and rubber. 0 10 20 30 40
Items Coarse Fine Lightweight Rubber 7

Compressive Strength (MPa)

aggregate aggregate aggregate
(CA) (FA) (LWA) (R) 6

Dmax (mm) 9.5 – 12.5 4.8 5

Specific gravity 2.6 2.7 1.4 1
Unit weight 1545 1878 901 – 4
(kg/m3)
Water 1.2 2 4.6 10 – 3
absorption (%) (30 mins) (24 hrs)
FM. – 3.1 6.7 – 2

1
Table 4 CLSRC CLSRLC
0
Mixture proportions of CLSRC and CLSRLC. Unit: kg/m3. 1 10 100 1 10 100
NO. (%) C F R FA CA LWA W Age (D)
CLSRC 0 170 20 0 1176 400 0 285
Fig. 2. Compressive strength of CLSRC and CLSRLC.
10 49 1058
20 97 941
30 146 823
40 194 705 Age (D) 1 7 28 56 90
CLSRLC 0 170 20 0 1176 0 207 285
3200
10 49 1058 CLSRC CLSRLC
3000
20 97 941
30 146 823 2800
40 194 705 2600
2400
) W/B = 1.5; Accelerating agent = 9 kg/m3.
2200
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40

Fig. 3. Ultrasonic pulse velocity of CLSRC and CLSRLC.

ment percentages in excess of 20%, the 28-day drying shrinkage

Fig. 1. Slump of CLSRC and CLSRLC.
the replacement of normal-weight aggregate with lightweight
aggregate does not influence the shrinkage of concrete. The drying
shrinkage of concrete does, however, increase as the rubber parti-
cle replacement percentage increases. At rubber particle replace-
of the concretes in the CLSRC group are markedly increased, com-
pared with the concretes in the control group. At 40% replacement,
the drying shrinkage of the concretes in the CLSRC and CLSRLC
groups are 0.024% and 0.022%, respectively, with increases of
0.021% and 0.019%, respectively, compared to the concretes in
the control group. In other words, the drying shrinkage is almost
doubled at a rubber particle rubber replacement percentage of 40%.
3.5. Electrical resistance
Fig. 5 shows that the electrical resistance of concrete for various
rubber particle replacement percentages is less than 10 kX-cm at
the age of 90 days. The electrical resistance of concretes in the
 L.-J. Hunag et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 1054–1058 1057

Age (D) 1 7 28 56 90 Cycles of test

0.025
CLSRC CLSRLC 6
0.020 5

Weight lose (%)

0.015 4

3
0.010
2
0.005
1
0.000 CLSRC CLSRLC
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
Rubber content (%)
Fig. 4. Shrinkage of CLSRC and CLSRLC
Fig. 6. Sulfate resistance of CLSRC and CLSRLC

Age (D) 1 7 28 56 90
CLSRC CLSRLC

0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
Fig. 7. Permeable ratio and absorptions rate of CLSRC and CLSRLC.

Fig. 5. Electrical resistance of CLSRC and CLSRLC

the rubber particle replacement percentage, up to 30%. The perme-

CLSRC group is 4.2–5.0 kX-cm, and the electrical resistance of con-
cretes in the CLSRLC group is 4.2–5.2 kX-cm. The replacement of
normal-weight aggregate by lightweight aggregate has no signifi-
cant effect on electrical resistivity. The concrete surface resistivity
at an age of 56 days decreases as the rubber particle replacement
percentage increases. At an age of 90 days and a rubber particle
replacement percentage of 40%, the electrical resistance (8.6 kX-
cm) is 0.6 kX-cm lower than that of the control group (9.2 kX-
cm), and it is much lower than that required for normal concrete
(20 kX-cm). Because the rubber particle replacement percentage
increases the water-binder ratio, CLSM has an excess of pores dur-
ing hydration that influence the development of durability
indirectly.
3.6. Sulfate resistance
Fig. 6 shows that the sulfate resistance increases with the rub-
ber particle replacement percentage. The weight loss percentage to
the fifth cycle of the CLSRC group with 0% replacement is 5.7%,
while the weight loss percentage is 4.3% with 40% replacement.
The sulfate resistance of CLSRLC may be controlled by the use of
lightweight aggregate. The sulfate resistance is increased by 0.6%
as rubber of the replacement increases from 0% to 40%.
3.7. Permeability ratio
Fig. 7 shows that the permeability ratios of the concretes in the
CLSRC group and the CLSRLC group are 1.3–1.8% and 0.5–2.5%,
respectively. The permeability ratio of each group increases with
ability ratio decreases dramatically when the rubber particle
replacement exceeds 30%. When the rubber particle replacement
percentage is 40%, moisture begins to leak away due to an excess
of pores, so the permeability ratio cannot be measured correctly.
3.8. Absorption rate
Fig. 7 shows that the absorption rate of the CLSRC group is 2.86%
higher, on average, than that of the CLSRLC group. The absorption
rates of the CLSRC group with different rubber particle replace-
ment percentages are 12.1–14.5%, and those of the CLSRLC group
are 13.7–18.8%. The results show that absorption rate increases
with the rubber particle replacement percentage. Rubber particles
accumulate irregularly formed continuous and discontinuous
pores that guide water molecules to the lightweight aggregate
interface, so they greatly increase the absorption rate.
4. Conclusions
1. The slump of CLSRC and CLSRLC increases with increasing rub-
ber particle replacement percentage.
2. The compressive strength of concrete decreases as the rubber
particle replacement percentage increases. At an age of 1 day,
with 20% replacement for CLSRC and CLSRLC, the compressive
strength still meets the strength requirement of 0.7 MPa.
3. Shrinkage increases with the rubber particle replacement per-
centage and with age, but is still below the specified limit of
0.025%. The pulse velocity of the CLSRC group at different ages
decreases by 100–300 m/s.
1058 L.-J. Hunag et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 1054–1058
4. Sulfate resistance increases with the rubber particle replace-
ment percentage. The average weight loss of the CLSRC group
with 0–30% replacement is 5.7%. The weight loss decreases to
4.3% at 40% replacement. Because CLSRLC group uses porous
lightweight aggregate, erosion due to sulfate attack is mostly
influenced by the distribution of the lightweight aggregate.
5. The effects of the rubber particle replacement percentage and
high porosity on electrical resistance are inconsistent, but for
the various mixes studied, the electrical resistance is lower than
10 kX-cm.
6. The permeability ratios of the concrete in the CLSRC group and
the CLSRLC group are 1.3–1.8% and 0.5–2.5%, respectively. At a
rubber particle replacement percentage of 40%, moisture begins
to leak out because of the excess of pores, so the permeability
ratio cannot be measured correctly.
7. The absorption rate increases with the rubber particle replace-
ment percentage. The average absorption rates of the concretes
in the CLSRC group with different replacement percentages are
approximately 3% higher than those of the concretes in the
CLSRLC group.
References
[1] H.Y. Wang, K.W. Chen, A study of the engineering properties of CLSM with a
new type of slag, Constr. Build. Mater. 102 (2016) 422–427.
[2] H.Y. Wang, R.Y. Lin, C.C. Shih, Influence of high temperature high pressure
curing on compressive strength and elasticity modulus of lightweight
aggregate concrete, in: The Third National Lightweight Aggregate Concrete
Symposium, 2007, pp. 67–82.
[3] P.K. Wang, J.Y. Lin, C.P. Yang, T.M. Cheng, Island Habitants—Taiwan
Environment Survey Report, Rhythms Monthly, Tzu Chi Culture and
Communication Foundation, 2007, pp. 114–117.
[4] H.Y. Wang, Study on durability of densified high-performance lightweight
aggregate concrete, J. Comput. Concr. 4 (6) (2008) 499–510.
[5] H.Y. Wang, K.C. Tsai, Engineering properties of lightweight aggregate concrete
made from dredged silt, J. Cem. Concr. Compos. 28 (2006) 481–485.
[6] H.Y. Wang, Y.N. Sheen, M.F. Hung, Performance characteristics of dredged silt
and high-performance lightweight aggregate concrete, J. Comput. Concr. 7 (1)
(2010) 53–62.
[7] Shan Lee Ming, Numerical Analysis of the Nonlinear Behavior of the Bridge
Rubber Bearing Device Master’s thesis, National Central University
Department of Civil Engineering, 2005.
[8] S. Demirdag, I. Ugur, S. Sarac, The effects of cement fly ash ratios on the
volcanic slag aggregate lightweight concrete masonry units, Constr. Build.
Mater. 22 (2008) 1730–1735.
[9] M. Mouli, H. Khelafi, Investigation of properties of low-strength lightweight
concrete for thermal insulation, Build. Environ. 42 (2005) 584–590.
[10] Lia Guoqiang, Garrick Gregory, Eggers John, Christopher Abadie, Michael A.
Stubblefield, Su-Seng Pang, Waste tire fiber modified concrete, in: Composites
35 (Part B) (2004) 305–312.
[11] F. Hernández-Olivares, M. Barluenga, G. Bollati, B. Witoszek, Static and
dynamic behavior of recycled tire rubber-filled concrete, in: Cem. Concr. Res.
32 (2002) 1587–1596.
[12] A.R. Khaloo, M. Dehestani, P. Rahmatabadi, Mechanical properties of concrete
containing a high volume of tire-rubber particles, Waste Manage. 28 (12)
(2008) 2472–2482.
[13] Rafat Siddique, Tarun Naik, P. Rahmatabadi, Mechanical properties of concrete
containing a high volume of tire-rubbk R, properties of concrete containing
scrap tire rubber – an overview, Waste Manage. 24 (2004) 563–569.
[14] A.M. Ghaly, J.D. Cahill, Correlation of strength, rubber content, and water to
cement ratio in rubberized concrete, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 32 (6) (2005) 1075–1081.
[15] Eshmaiel Ganjian, Morteza Khorami, Ali Akbar Maghsoudi, Scrap-tyre-rubber
replacement for aggregate and filler in concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 23
(2009) 1828–1836.
[16] Jason.Y. Wu, Mufan Tsai, Feasibility study of a soil-based rubberized CLSM,
Waste Manage. 29 (2009) 636–642.
[17] K.E. Kaloush, G.B. Way, H. Zhu, Properties of crumb rubber concrete, J. Transp.
Res. Board 2005 (1914) 8–14.
[18] P. Sukontasukkul, C. Chaikaew, Properties of concrete pedestrian block mixed
with crumb rubber, Constr. Build. Mater. 20 (7) (2007) 450–457.
[19] T.C. Ling, H.M. Nor, M.R. Hainin, Properties of concrete paving blocks
incorporating crumb rubber and SBR latex, Road Mater. Pave. Des. 10 (1)
(2009) 213–222.
[20] Arin Yilmaz, Nurhayat Degirmenci, Possibility of using waste tire rubber and
fly ash with Portland cement as construction materials, Waste Manage. 29
(2009) 1541–1546.
[21] N. Oikonomou, S. Mavridou, Improvement of chloride ion penetration
resistance in cement mortars modified with rubber from worn automobile
tires, Cement Concr. Compos. 31 (2009) 403–407.
[22] Anh Cuong Ho, Anaclet Turatsinze, Rashid Hameed, Duc Chinh Vu, Effects of
rubber aggregates from grinded used tyres on the concrete resistance to
cracking, J. Cleaner Prod. 23 (2012) 209–215.
[23] K.B. Najim, M.R. Hall, A review of the fresh/hardened properties and
applications of plain-(PRC) and self-compacting rubberized concrete (SCRC),
Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (11) (2010) 2043–2045.
[24] B. Topcu, T. Bilir, Experimental investigation of some fresh and hardened
properties of rubberized self-compacting concrete, Mater. Des. 30 (8) (2009)
3056–3065.
[25] Zheng Rui Bin, Technical Overview and History of CLSM, Taiwan Concrete
Institute – Concrete Technology, vol. 8, no. 4, 2009, pp. 64–74.
[26] Rafat Siddique, Utilization of waste materials and by-products in producing
controlled low-strength materials, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 54 (2009) 1–8.
[27] W.T. Kuo, S.M. Lin, Application of rapid detection technology to investigate the
expandable behavior of recycled materials with different aggregate sizes in
concrete Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung University of Applied Sciences,
2014.
[28] W.T. Kuo, B.Y. Syu, High temperature catalytic technology to explore the
behavior of steel slag mortar expansion Master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung
University of Applied Sciences, 2013.
[29] T.R. Naik, R.N. Kraus, B.W. Ramme, Yoon-Moon Chun, Rakesh Kumar, High-
carbon fly ash in manufacturing conductive CLSM and concrete, J. Mater. Civ.
Eng. ASCE18 (6) (2006) 743–746.
[30] M.C. Nataraja, Y. Nalanda, Performance of industrial by-products in controlled
low-strength materials (CLSM), Waste Manage. 28 (2008) 1168–1181.
[31] A.S. Brand, J.R. Roesler, Steel furnace slag aggregate expansion and hardened
concrete properties, Cement Concr. Compos. 60 (2015) 1–9.
[32] ASTM C150, Standard Specification for Portland Cement, USA, ASTM
International.
[33] ASTM C143, Standard Test Method for Slump of Hydraulic-Cement Concrete,
USA, ASTM International.
[34] ASTMC39, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical
Concrete Specimens, USA, ASTM International.
[35] ASTM C597, Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity Through Concrete, USA,
ASTM International.
[36] ASTM C157, Standard Test Method for Length Change of Hardened Hydraulic-
Cement Mortar and Concrete, USA, ASTM International.
[37] ASTM C876, Standard Test Method for Corrosion Potentials of Uncoated
Reinforcing Steel in Concrete, USA, ASTM International.
[38] ASTM C1012, Standard Test Method for Length Change of Hydraulic-Cement
Mortars Exposed to a Sulfate Solution, USA, ASTM International.
[39] CNS 3763, Waterproof agent of cement for concrete construction, CNS Online
Service.
[40] CNS 13295, Compressed concrete paving units, CNS Online Service.