International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2013) 2, 27–40

Gulf Organisation for Research and Development

International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment

ScienceDirect
www.sciencedirect.com

Original article

Physiochemical characterization of coarse aggregates

in Qatar for construction industry
Marwa Al-Ansary a,⇑, Srinath R. Iyengar b
a
Qatar Shell Research and Technology Centre, Department of Sulphur utilisation, Qatar Science and Technology Park, PO Box 3747, Doha, Qatar
b
Texas A&M University at Qatar, Department of Mechanical Engineering, PO Box 23874, Doha, Qatar

Received 25 March 2013; accepted 20 July 2013

Abstract

Due to the sheer volume of construction activities in Qatar, the market of building materials including aggregates is stressed. The
commercially available natural aggregates are either local limestone aggregate or imported limestone as well as gabbro aggregates from
the United Arab Emirates. In addition, recycled concrete aggregates (RCA) are produced since 2009 as a result of the extensive construc-
tion and demolition activities. It is estimated that around 20,000 tons of construction and demolition (C&D) wastes are produced daily in
Qatar; half of which are converted daily to RCA. Imported limestone and gabbro aggregates are widely employed for various construc-
tion activities in Qatar; however the use of local limestone aggregates are limited due to their substantial heterogeneity, uncontrolled
water absorption and abrasion quality. Although, the specification of RCA for concrete applications has recently been introduced
through the revised Qatar construction standards (QCS) in 2010, their commercial use is under experimental evaluation. However,
the properties of the aforementioned virgin and recycled coarse aggregates were hardly ever systematically published. Hence, this study
presents the initial physiochemical characterization and comparison of the virgin aggregate properties, with those of locally available
RCA as a sustainable alternative. The physiochemical properties were bench marked against the stipulated thresholds of QCS (2010)
and other characterization properties.
It was observed that both local limestone and RCA have inferior water absorption and porosity characteristics in comparison to
imported gabbro and limestone aggregates. Previous international standards and studies have demonstrated the successful partial
RCA replacement of imported virgin aggregates in concrete applications; and if implemented, could potentially offer significant economic
and environmental benefits to the State of Qatar.
However, it was recommended to undertake further laboratory studies to assess the mechanical performance and durability of such
replacements prior to practical implementations within the construction industry in Qatar.
Ó 2014 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.
Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Keywords: Construction and demolition (C&D) waste; Limestone aggregates; Gabbro aggregates; Recycled concrete aggregates (RCA); Qatar

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +974 44599863; fax: +974 44599859.

E-mail addresses: m.al-ansary@shell.com (M. Al-Ansary), sri-
nath.iyengar@qatar.tamu.edu (S.R. Iyengar).
Peer-review under responsibility of The Gulf organisation for Research
and Development.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
1. Introduction
Qatar is witnessing a rapid growth in the construction
and building industry sector in the past few years. Massive
quantities of building materials are needed to accommo-
date the wide expansion as well as the rapid speed of the
construction activities. In 2005, the construction and real

2212-6090 Ó 2014 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2013.07.003
28 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40

Fig. 1. C&D waste processing to RCA at Rawdat Rashid site, Qatar.

Table 1 Table 2
Different grading of RCA produced at Rawdat Rashid site. Current approximate market costa of different types of aggregates in Qatar
for Q2–2012.
Grading Possible usage
0–100 mm Storage Aggregate type Approximate cost in USD/ton
0–75 mm Backfilling material Local limestone 3–4
Powder 0–5 mm Filler and fines in asphalt Imported gabbro 20
5–10 mm (also known as 5 mm) Aggregates in asphalt Imported limestone 20
10–15 mm (also known as 10 mm) Aggregates in concrete and asphalt RCA 7–8
15–20 mm (also known as 20 mm) Aggregates in concrete and asphalt a
These rates have been compiled based on personal communications
20–25 mm Aggregates in concrete and asphalt with the various aggregate vendors in Qatar.
5–50 mm Subbase Class A
5–37.5 mm Subbase Class B
5–25 mm Subbase Class C

estate sector in Qatar contributed to 5.7% and 2.3% of the
GDP respectively (Al-Khatib, 2009). The state of Qatar has
recently been awarded the 2022 football world champion-
ship. Related construction and renovation of 12 world class
stadiums as well as massive investment in infrastructure are
planned which include a new international airport, an
international harbor, an integrated rail network and metro
system projects (Qatar 2022, 2011). Moreover, the govern-
ment of Qatar has set aside USD 17 billion for the con-
struction of hotels and other tourism related
infrastructure (Qatar 2022, 2011). Consequently, a vast
amount of building material is needed to accommodate this
rapid industrialization and infrastructure expansion.
Due to this sheer volume of construction activities, the
market of building materials including aggregates is
stressed. The commercially available natural aggregates
are either local limestone aggregate or imported limestone
as well as gabbro aggregates from the United Arab Emir-
ates (UAE). According to the Qatar Customs database
 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40 29

Table 3
Tests and permissible limits for physical and chemical properties of coarse aggregates for concrete as stipulated by QCS (2010).
QCS requirement QCS standard will be based on QCS 2010 Permissible limits
British standards/European American Standards for Testing
Norm. (BSEN) Materials (ASTM)
Grading (dry) BSI (2012b) ASTM (2006a) Standarda
Material finer than 75micronsb BSI (2009a) ASTM (2004b, 2006a) 2% max
Clay lumps and friable particles – ASTM (2010a) 2% max
Lightweight pieces – ASTM (2012a) 0.5% max
Organic impurities – ASTM (2004a) color standard not darker than plate No.3
Water absorption (saturated BSI (2000) ASTM (2012b) 2.0% max
surface dried)
Specific gravity (apparent) BSI (2000) ASTM (2012b) 2.6 min
Shell content BSI (1998b) – 3% max
Particle shape: BSI (2012a) ASTM (2010c)
Flakiness Index 30% max RCC & 40% PCC
Elongation Index 35% max RCC & 45% PCC
Acid soluble chlorides BSI (2006) – 0.03% max for reinforced and mass
concrete
0.01% max for pre-stressed and steam cured
structural concrete
Acid soluble sulfates BSI (2009b) – 0.3% max
Soundness (loss by magnesium – ASTM (2005b) 15% max
sulfate 5 cycles)
Mechanical strength:
10% fines value (dry condition) BSI (1990b) 150kN min
Aggregate Impact value BSI (2010) ASTM (2006b) 25% max
Loss by Los Angeles abrasion BSI (2010) ASTM (2012c) 30% max
Aggregate crushing value BSI (1990a)
Drying shrinkage BSI (2008) 0.075% max
Potential reactivity of aggregates: –
Alkali –silica reaction ASTM (2007b)
Alkali-carbonation reaction ASTM (2005a) Not reactive
Of cement-aggregate ASTM (2010b) 6 month expansion 0.10% max
combination
a
There were no lower and upper permissible limits specified in QCS (2010), therefore QCS (2007) limits were used and are plotted in Fig. 3.
b
Natural, uncrushed/crushed rock, wet sieve analysis.

(2010), the aggregate imports1 in Qatar have increased
from 9.5 million tons in 2006 to 21.5 million tons in 2008.
Geologically, most parts of Qatar are covered by karstified
carbonates, i.e. limestone deposits, of the Mid Eocene
Damman Formation (Al-Ansary et al., 2012). In Qatar,
there is a limitation on the use of local limestone aggregates
due to its substantial heterogeneity thus leading to uncon-
trolled quality, mainly for water absorption and abrasion
values. The reported high water absorption and abrasion
values of local limestone showed inferior performance
when used in Portland and asphalt concrete mixes. Hence,
local limestone aggregates are only used in restricted appli-
cations, such as in some subbase layers of the road. Gabbro
aggregate is geologically an igneous rock, which is chemi-
cally equivalent to basalt. Gabbro is formed when molten
magma is trapped beneath the Earth’s surface and cools
slowly; while, limestone is a sedimentary rock composed
largely of calcium carbonate or calcite (Vernon, 2000).
1
Figures include aggregates such as pebbles, gravel, broken or crushed
stone, of a kind commonly used for concrete aggregates, for road
metalling or for railway or other ballast, shingle and flint, whether or not
heat-treated.
On the other hand, vast amount of construction and
demolition (C&D) wastes are produced as a result of the
extensive construction and demolition activities generally
from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries;
including Qatar. It is estimated that around 120 million
tons per year of waste is produced by GCC countries of
which little is recycled or even managed (Landais, 2008).
This figure is expected to be reaching 350,000 million tons
by 2014. Of the 120 million tons of waste, 55% is C&D
waste, 20% is municipal waste, 18% is industrial waste
and 7% is hazardous waste (Qatar Today News, 2010).
Little data is available on the quantity or scale of the
C&D wastes in Qatar. Nevertheless, C&D wastes have
been generated from various extensive construction activi-
ties undertaken all over the State of Qatar from early 2000
to date, as well as from demolition and renovation works
that are taking place as part of Qatar Vision 2030s develop-
ment and expansion aspiration to transform Qatar into a
developed country. Such wastes typically comprise of a
wide range of materials, such as Portland and asphalt con-
crete debris, bricks, steel scraps, plastics, paper and wood.
In 2007, a landfill for dumping C&D waste in Qatar was
30 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40
Fig. 2. Classification of coarse aggregates used in this study.
constructed in Rawdat Rashid,2 off Abu Samra road with a
surface area of 8 square kilometers. In Mid 2009, Qatar
Construction and Development Company (QCDC) was
awarded the bid for managing the C&D waste from the
Ministry of Municipality and Urban Planning. Many inter-
national municipalities are reusing and recycling the C&D
wastes in various applications. One of these applications is
the recycling of concrete debris into construction aggre-
gates, which are called recycled concrete aggregates or sec-
ondary aggregates.
Recycled concrete aggregates (RCA) have been pro-
duced since 2009 as a result of the extensive C&D activities
in Qatar. It is estimated that around 20,000 tons of C&D
are produced daily (7.3 million tons/year); half of which
are converted daily to RCA. Currently, around 3 million
tons of RCA are commercially processed following the
process summarized in Fig. 1. Table 1 summarizes different
gradings of RCA produced at Rawdat Rashid site and
their potential usage.
The specification of RCA for concrete applications has
recently been introduced through the revised Qatar con-
struction standards (QCS) in (2010) (Section 5: part 2.9
(concrete)). This section stipulated that recycled concrete
2
There are few C&D dumping sites outside the urban expansion circle
at Qatar such as Rawdat Rashid and Dokhan. Rawdat Rashid is
considered the largest dumping site in terms of C&D waste volumes.
should confirm to BS 8500 part 1 and part 2 specifications
(BSI, 2002a, 2002b) or ACI 555R (ACI, 2001). Moreover,
in part 6 (i.e. property requirements) subsection 6.2.3, Port-
land cement concrete, with recycled aggregates was speci-
fied as one of the concrete types to be used in Qatar. It
was stated in QCS (2010) that ‘concrete with recycled
aggregates shall be generally approved once the source of
recycled aggregates is identified and approved by the engi-
neer’. However, the commercial use of RCA in Qatar is
under experimental evaluation. Currently, the approximate
market cost of different types of aggregates in Qatar for
Q2–2012 is presented in Table 2.
2. Methodology
The objective of this paper is to provide an initial phys-
iochemical characterization of the virgin aggregates com-
mercially available and utilized in Qatar’s construction
industry, and to compare them with the locally available
RCA as a sustainable alternative. The physiochemical
properties of studied coarse aggregates were bench marked
against the stipulated thresholds of QCS (2010); apart from
particle size distribution which was compared to QCS
(2007) limits. The requirements and permissible limits of
QCS (2010) are summarized in Table 3. The testing pro-
gram can be classified as requirement property tests in
accordance to Qatar Construction Standards and other
characterization properties tests. Moreover, the micro-
M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40 31

Fig. 3. Type of coarse aggregates used in this study.

32 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40

100

Cumulative percentage passing

Imported Gabbro 10mm
90
Imported Limestone 10mm
80 Local limestone 10mm
70 RCA 10mm
60 Lower limit (QCS, 2007)

50 Upper limit (QCS, 2007)

40
30
20
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Sieve opening in mm

100
Cumulative percentage passing

90
80
70
60
Imported Gabbro 20mm
50
Imported Limestone 20mm
40
Local Limestone 20mm
30 RCA 20mm
20 Lower limit (QCS, 2007)
10 Upper limit (QCS, 2007)
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Sieve opening in mm

Fig. 4. Particle size distribution for 10 and 20 mm aggregates used in this study.

structure characteristics (viz. scanning electron micros- are exported from the United Arab Emirates via local sup-
copy,3 X-ray fluorescence4 and X-ray diffraction5) of the pliers in Qatar i.e. Construction Materials Co. L.L.C.
various types of aggregates were also studied. Scanning (Qatar Quarry Company); while indigenous coarse aggre-
electron microscope was used to study the surface mor- gates (i.e. local limestone) are quarried from Qatar and
phology of the aggregates, the X-ray diffraction was used crushed and graded at Qatar Quarry Company. Only 10
to identify the crystalline phases and the corresponding and 20 mm aggregates’ fractions are studied in this paper,
intensities of various compounds of the aggregates; while as they are the most commonly used fractions in the pro-
the X-ray fluorescence was employed to analyze the major duction of Portland concrete ready mix and precast units.
and trace elements present in the aggregates. Other manufactured aggregates such as Lytag6, which are
The different aggregates studied in this paper, their sizes commercially used in limited scale in Qatar, are not cov-
and sources are summarized in Figs. 2 and 3. In this study, ered in this study.
all imported aggregates (limestone and gabbro aggregates)
3. Experimental results and discussion
3
Scanning electron microscope model Quanta 400 by FEI Company
was used. SEM of samples was employed by firstly being vacuum dried 3.1. Results
and then mounted on an aluminum stub using a strong double-sided
adhesive tape. The microscope accelerating voltage ranged between 2 and
5 kV to compromise between the sample charging and capturing high-
resolution images. A working distance between 9 and 12 mm was used,  Fig. 4 presents particle size distribution for 10 and
whilst the magnifications used ranged from 30 to 6000 times. 20 mm aggregates used in this study and compare them
4
ZSX PrimusII wavelength-dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometer with the upper and lower limits stipulated by QCS
manufactured by Rigaku Corporation was used in this study. Quick (2007).
qualitative analysis is done and automatic peaks identified. The SQX
 Table 4 presents the results of physical and chemical
software provided by Rigaku enabled for more accurate semi-quantitative
analyses of substances including light elements. properties required by QCS (2010). The permissible lim-
5
Theta-Theta type X-Ray Diffractometer model Ultima IV manufac- its as per QCS (2010) as well as the employed testing
tured by Rigaku Corporation fitted with a copper anode diffraction x-ray Standard are also presented in Table 4.
tube operating at 40 kV and 40 mA was used in this study. The Peak
Search and Qualitative Analysis software provided by Rigaku was
employed to identify the peaks of the raw XRD data and subsequently
6
linked with the Joint Commission on Powder Diffraction Standards- Lytag is the major commercial light weight aggregates (LWA)
International Centre for Diffraction Data (JCPDS-ICDD) library card produced in the UK, which is manufactured from the pelletisation of
database (PDF-2 Release 2007). pulverised fuel ash in dishpans (Al-Ansary, 2007).
 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40 33

Table 4
Results of physical and chemical QCS (2010) requirement properties for commercially utilized coarse aggregates in Qatar.
Test/Sample type Virgin aggregates Recycled Permissible Testing standard
aggregates limits as per
QCS 2010
Imported Imported Local limestone RCA
gabbro limestone
20 mm 10 mm 20 mm 10 mm 20 mm 10 mm 20 mm 10 mm
Physical properties
Water absorption (%) 0.45 0.645 0.37 0.46 3.5 1.7 3.3 5.5 2.0% Max BSI (2000)
Clay lumps and 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.49 4.9 8.2 3.4 11.8 2.0% Max ASTM (2010a)
friable particle
Relative density Oven dry 2.86 2.85 2.69 2.68 2.46 2.60 2.49 2.36 – BSI (2000)
SSDa 2.88 2.87 2.70 2.69 2.54 2.64 2.57 2.48 – BSI (2000)
Apparent 2.90 2.90 2.72 2.71 2.69 2.67 2.71 2.70 2.6 Min BSI (2000)
Shell content (%) Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 3.0% Max BSI (1998b)
Light weight pieces (%) Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 0.5% Max ASTM (2012a)
Flakiness index (%) 11.25 16.50 10.00 19.0 10.0 19.0 12.0 19.0 30.0% Max BSI (2012a)
Elongation index (%) 20.25 12.75 19.0 25.0 19.0 24.0 20.0 23.0 35.0% Max BSI (2012a)
Aggregate drying shrinkage 0.027 0.027 0.010 0.010 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.075% Max BSI (2008)
(%)
Mechanical properties
10% fines (Dry) KN 336.0 339.3 340.0 420.0 330.0 400.0 320.0 380.0 150KN Min BSI (1990b)
Aggregate impact value (%) 11.5 12.5 12.0 9.0 12.0 9.0 13.0 10.0 25% Max BSI (2010)
Loss by Los Angeles 10.3 11.8 11.0 15.0 13.0 16.0 14.0 17.0 30% Max BSI (2010)
abrasion (%)
Chemical properties
Injurious organic impurities Lighter than color standard plate No.3 color standard not darker ASTM (2004a)
than plate No.3
Loss by MgSO4 soundness 0.60 0.91 1.30 2.08 1.39 2.26 1.54 2.51 15% Max ASTM (2005b)
(%)
Acid soluble chloride (%) 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.11 0.16 0.03% Max BSI (2006)
Acid soluble sulfate (%) 0.12 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.35 0.30 0.89 1.48 0.30%Max BSI (2009b)
a
SSD = saturated surface dry

Table 5
Results of physical and chemical characterization properties for all studied aggregates.
Test/sample type Virgin aggregates Recycled aggregates Testing standard
Imported gabbro Imported limestone Local limestone RCA
20 mm 10 mm 20 mm 10 mm 20 mm 10 mm 20 mm 10 mm
Physical properties
Median diameter (D50) mm 17.5 7.6 15.5 7.6 12.5 8.2 16.5 7.0 ASTM (2011)
Coefficient of Uniformity (Cu) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.3 1.7 1.3 2.2
Coefficient of Curvature (Cz) 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1
Classification according to USCS Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines
Porosity (%) 1.3 1.9 1.0 1.2 8.6 4.3 8.2 12.9 ASTM (2007a)
Bulk Density (kg/m3) 1658 1594 1472 1563 1442 1490 1305 1344 ASTM (2009)
Inter-aggregate Voids (%) 0.421 0.440 0.452 0.416 0.413 0.427 0.476 0.429 BSI (1998a)
Chemical properties
aggregate pH 9.72 9.76 9.01 9.05 9.18 9.15 9.32 9.37 ASTM (2007c)

 Table 5 presents the results of the other physical and
chemical characterization properties for all studied
aggregates.
 Fig. 5 presents scanning electron micrograph (SEM) of
all studied aggregates at 1000 magnification.
 Fig. 6 presents the X-ray powder diffractograms (XRD)
of imported gabbro aggregates.
 Fig. 7 presents the X-ray powder diffractograms (XRD)
of local and imported limestone aggregates.
 Fig. 8 presents the X-ray powder diffractograms (XRD)
of RCA.
 Table 6 presents the qualitative analysis of studied
aggregates based on XRD investigations. The abbrevia-
tions employed for the major phases detected in XRD
analysis are also presented in Table 6.
 Table 7 presents the semi-quantitative analysis of the
major and minor elements of studied aggregates based
on X-ray fluorescence (XRF) investigations.
34 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40

Aggregate Size 10mm 20mm

Aggregate Type

(a)
Imported Gabbro

(b)
Imported Limestone

(c)
Local Limestone

(d)
RCA

Fig. 5. Scanning electron micrographs of the different studied aggregates at 1000 magnification.

3.2. Discussions bro aggregates). Nevertheless, according to the Unified

 Overall it was observed that all four types of studied
aggregates and their 10 and 20 mm fractions passed
the physical, mechanical and chemical limits of QCS
(2010). However, local limestone and RCA failed to
meet the limits for water absorption, clay lumps and fri-
able particles, and acid soluble sulfate. Additionally,
RCA failed to meet the limits for acid soluble chloride.
 Most of the aggregates complied with (QCS, 2007) upper
and lower limits for particle size distribution (apart from
10 to 20 mm local limestone and 20 mm for imported gab-
Soil Classification System (ASTM, 2011), all aggregates
can be classified as poorly graded gravels.
 Imported gabbro and imported limestone:
– Both aggregates have passed the physical, mechanical
and chemical limits of QCS (2010); such as water
absorption, clay lump specific gravity, shell content,
light weight pieces, flakiness and elongation index,
aggregate drying shrinkage, 10% fine (Dry) KN, aggre-
gate impact value, loss by Los Angeles Abrasion, injuri-
ous organic impurities, loss by MgSO4 soundness, acid
soluble chloride and sulfate percentage.
 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40 35

Fig. 6. X-ray diffractogram of imported gabbro aggregate.

Fig. 7. X-ray diffractograms of local and imported limestone aggregates.

– Both aggregates have the lowest low water absorption as
well as clay lumps and friable material percentages and
meet QCS (2010) specifications.
– Both aggregates have the least value of Los Angeles
Abrasion percentage, which indicates their high
mechanical strength.
– Imported limestone has the lowest porosity of all aggre-
gates which was in the range of 1.0–1.2%.
– From SEM (as per Fig. 5), imported gabbro aggregates
are having a dense sealed surface morphology which
explains their low water absorption and porosity per-
centage. The imported limestone also exhibited a similar
dense microstructure; and thus displayed low absorption
and porosity percentage as well.
– From XRD, imported gabbro aggregates are rich with
magnesium and calcium silicate compounds (as per
Fig. 6). The imported limestone is rich in calcite and
quartz (as per Fig. 7 and Table 6). Dolomite was also
present but in small proportions only.
– From XRF, the surface elemental analysis for the gab-
bro and imported limestone were in agreement with
the qualitative analysis results from XRD (as per
Table 7).
 Local limestone:
– It has the highest water absorption among all nat-
ural aggregates, which are variable and can be
above the stipulated maximum 2% limit by QCS
(2010).
36 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40

Fig. 8. X-ray diffractogram of RCA.

Table 6
Qualitative analysis of studied aggregates based on XRD investigations.
Mineral/phase Notation Chemical formula Relative % composition of sample
Imported gabbro Imported limestone Local limestone RCA
Antigorite a Mg3Si2O5(OH)4 28.54 – – –
Clinopyroxene x Ca(Ti,Mg,Al)(Si,Al)2O6 14.06 – – –
Edenite e NaCa2Mg5AlSi7O22(OH)2 11.24 – – –
Plagioclase p Ca0.63Na0.37(Al1.63Si2.37O8) 28.81 – – –
Fosterite f Mg2SiO4 16.35 – – –
Dolomite d CaMg(CO3)2 – 6.08 55.01 43.74
Calcite c CaCO3 – 45.73 34.15 42.41
Quartz q SiO2 – 48.19 10.77 13.8

Table 7
Semi-quantitative analysis of the major and minor elements of studied aggregates based on XRF investigations.
Element Component Mass %
Imported gabbro Imported limestone Local limestone RCA
Boron B2O3 – – – 4.01
Carbon CO2 8.25 41.6 40.8 41.5
Sodium Na2O 1.32 – 0.176 0.383
Magnesium MgO 13.1 1.03 16.3 15.3
Aluminum Al2O3 13.2 0.799 1.11 1.82
Silicon SiO2 39.4 2.31 11.0 3.64
Phosphorous P2O5 0.0685 0.094 0.0114 0.0108
Sulfur SO3 0.0858 0.253 0.0875 1.57
Chlorine Cl 0.110 0.0131 0.108 0.179
Potassium K2O 0.0558 0.183 0.0219 0.0658
Calcium CaO 12.4 53.6 29.8 31.3
Titanium TiO2 0.810 – – –
Chromium Cr2O3 0.104 – – –
Manganese MnO 0.191 – 0.0315 0.0301
Iron Fe2O3 10.9 0.235 0.343 0.218
Nickel NiO 0.0655 – – –
Strontium SrO 0.0209 0.0356 0.0109 –
Barium BaO – – 0.0972 –

– The clay lumps and friable material percentage was
above the 2% max limit stipulated by QCS (2010).
– 20 mm local limestone has failed to comply with the lim-
its specified by QCS (2010) in terms of the maximum
percentage for acid soluble sulfate; 10 mm local lime-
stone was exactly on the border line with the same
standard.
– The porosity was 4–9% higher than those of other
imported virgin aggregates.
– From SEM (as per Fig. 5), it was observed that the sur-
face morphology is relatively highly porous and dis-
played larger particle sizes which, is in agreement with
the porosity values. From XRD and XRF, local lime-
stone aggregates are rich in magnesium, with high pro-
 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40
portions of dolomite with some presence of silica and
calcite (as per Fig. 7 and Tables 6 and 7). This result
was in agreement with published results from Al-Kuwari
(2008), which confirmed that these aggregates can also
cause alkali-aggregate reactions in concrete.
– All the above results can confirm the durability concerns
with local limestone aggregates which limit its applica-
tion as a building material in Qatar.
 RCA:
– Water absorption for RCA is significantly higher than
those imported aggregates from UAE. This can be
attributed to the high percentage of clay lumps and fri-
able particles present in the RCA.
– RCA is a very heterogeneous material and their quality
is dependent on the quality of the C&D concrete debris.
Both the porosity and water absorption of RCA are
higher than those of the natural aggregates as being con-
firmed with the Portland Cement Association (PCA,
2012).
– RCA has failed to comply with the limits specified by
QCS (2010) in terms of the maximum percentage for
acid soluble chloride and sulfate.
– From XRD (see Fig. 8 and Table 6), it was revealed that
RCA comprised predominantly of calcite and dolomite
with a small proportion of quartz.
– From XRF, (see Table 7) the surface oxide distribution
was more similar to those of local limestone and is in
agreement with the XRD results (as per Table 6)
obtained.
– From SEM (as per Fig. 5), it was revealed that an extre-
mely porous microstructure is one which supports the
observed porosity values.
4. Usage of RCA in other parts of the world
RCA is a very heterogeneous material wherein its qual-
ity is highly dependent on the quality of the C&D debris.
RCA quality is inferior to those of virgin materials, in
terms of water absorption and porosity. Although, the rel-
evant properties of concrete which contain RCA are gener-
ally lower than those of conventional concrete, but are still
sufficient for practical applications in civil engineering. The
concrete produced using RCA can be employed in various
structural applications; even as a high performance con-
crete by adopting proper mix designs and suitable pozzola-
nic additives. This has been confirmed by various studies
which investigated a range of physical, chemical, mechani-
cal and field investigations (Topcu et al., 2004; Poon et al.,
2004; Xiao et al., 2005; Tu et al., 2006; Eguchi et al., 2007;
Fonteboa et al., 2007; Rao et al., 2007; Xiao et al., 2007; Li,
2008, 2009; Cabo et al., 2009).
Both the porosity and water absorption of RCA are
higher than those of the natural aggregates as being con-
firmed with Portland Cement Association (PCA, 2012).
Therefore only partial replacement of 20–30% of virgin
aggregates with RCA can be permitted for Portland cement
37
concrete applications as being confirmed by many pub-
lished researches (Barritt, 2007; PCA, 2012). A research
report launched by the UK WRAP (Waste Resources
and Action Program) showed that using 20% recycled
aggregate blended with natural aggregate has no negative
impact on concrete performance (Barritt, 2007). Also
USA Portland Cement Association (PCA, 2012) confirmed
that replacement up to 30% of natural aggregates with
RCA has no significant effect on the mechanical properties
of concrete. However, replacement of higher percentages
can increase the drying shrinkage without significantly
affecting the strength or the freeze–thaw resistance.
For concrete pavement applications, numerous studies
highlighted that concrete containing up to 50% of RCA
can be successfully employed for pavement construction
(Bekoe et al., 2010; Gress et al., 2009; Smith and Tighe,
2009; Vancura et al., 2009; Smith and Tighe, 2008; Kamel
and Abou-Zeid, 2008; Cuttell et al., 1997). Furthermore,
such RCA-based Portland cement concrete (PCC) pave-
ments have been reported to perform comparably with
the conventional PCC pavements (if not better) not only
in the laboratory studies but also in real-field scenarios.
In addition to the cost savings, utilizing large proportions
of RCA in PCC for pavements was reported to have no
adverse effects on the flexural strength, splitting tensile
strength, the coefficient of thermal expansion, unconfined
compressive strengths and the stiffness modulii of the pave-
ment. Nevertheless, it has been recommended that the
inclusion of reclaimed mortar be minimized (i.e. through
effective separation techniques) and the maximum size of
coarse RCA employed to be 19 mm.
Although, only a few related short-term laboratory
investigations for hot-mix asphalt have been undertaken,
it has been revealed that it is viable produce to asphalt con-
crete using RCA as partial aggregate substitution which
could meet the requirements of Marshall mix-design speci-
fications (Wong et al., 2007; Aljassar et al., 2005). More-
over, it has been reported by many transportation
departments that using 100% coarse recycled aggregates
in concrete, performance similar to those with natural
aggregates have been achieved (Chini et al., 2001).
5. Conclusions and recommendations
Based on the results of the physiochemical characteriza-
tion of coarse aggregates, imported gabbro was found to
meet all the physical, mechanical and chemical limits of
QCS (2010). Hence, it comes as no surprise that imported
gabbro is the main source of coarse aggregates in Qatar,
prevalently used in the construction industry. Furthermore,
the data from this study suggests that the characteristics of
imported limestone are comparable with the gabbro aggre-
gates and if required, can be employed as a compatible
replacement of gabbro aggregates.
Alternatively, this study demonstrates that local lime-
stone and RCA have inferior water absorption and poros-
ity characteristics in comparison to imported lime stone
38 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40
and gabbro aggregates; thereby failing to meet at least four
of QCS (2010) prescribed limits. Hence, local limestone
cannot be recommended directly for construction usage
as virgin aggregates in concrete. However, based on the
results and in accordance to QCS (2007), it can be sug-
gested that the local limestone of size above 25 mm could
be employed as subbase material for pavement
construction.
However, according to prevalent international guide-
lines adopted for concrete mix design, the partial replace-
ment of 20–30% of virgin aggregates by RCA is allowed.
Also, the previous global research on a range of physical,
chemical, mechanical and field studies have confirmed the
successful usage of RCA in concrete and asphalt; such
practices being increasingly widespread in many countries
such as USA, Germany, UK, The Netherlands and
Singapore.
Despite international practices, QCS (2010) specifies
that the concrete with recycled aggregates shall be generally
approved once the source of recycled aggregates is identi-
fied and ratified by the engineer. Since, RCA in Qatar is
known to be a heterogeneous material, the aforesaid rec-
ommendation from QCS (2010) is still pertinent for the
local construction industry and the same is fully supported
by the experimental data in this study.
Currently in Qatar, RCA above 25 mm is only used as a
subbase material while the remaining fractions are still
stock piling in Rawdat Rashid site. Although, some
research endeavors for RCA applications in concrete and
asphalt mixes are underway, there is only very limited com-
mercial use for RCA currently in Qatar. According to the
Qatar Customs database (2010), the aggregate imports of
Qatar were 21.5 million tons in 2008. Hence, based on
the 7.3 million tons/year C&D waste generated, it can be
inferred that up to one third of the natural imported aggre-
gates could potentially be replaced by RCA.
Use of RCA in concrete applications could provide sig-
nificant environmental and economic benefits to the State
of Qatar; especially with its booming construction activi-
ties. The economic advantage can be realized by partially
substituting the relatively expensive imported aggregates
with the cheaper and locally available RCA. Moreover, sig-
nificant environmental impact will be achieved due to
reduction in the demand of virgin aggregates by finding
technically viable use of the rapidly growing local supply
of C&D waste.
However, it is recommended that further laboratory
studies should be undertaken to investigate the partial
RCA replacements of virgin aggregates in concrete (viz.
the mechanical performance and durability) and to assess
the viability of such practical implementations within the
construction industry in Qatar.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the Construction Materials
Co L.L.C. (Qatar Quarry Company) and in particular to
Mr. Stephen Ward and Mr. Salim Kutty; and to Mr. Mus-
tafa Al Omanifrom Qatar Construction and Development
Company (QCDC) for providing access to their site and
sharing their knowledge. Texas A&M University at Qatar
(TAMUQ) is thanked for permitting the use of their testing
facility and Qatar Shell Research and Technology Centre
(QSRTC) for sponsoring this study. The authors would
like to thank Dr. Eyad Masad (TAMUQ), Dr. Mohammed
Yousuf (TAMUQ), Dr. Reginald Kogbara (TAMUQ),
Mr. Sunifar Abobacker (QSRTC), Mr. Willem
Scholten (QSRTC) and Mr. Yousuf Saleh (QSRTC) for
their support and guidance while carrying out this analysis
work.
References
ACI, 2001. Removal and Reuse of Hardened Concrete, ACI 555R–01,
ACI Committee 555. American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,
MI, USA.
Al-Ansary, M., (2007). Stabilisation/Solidification and Pelletisation of
Petroleum Drill Cuttings, PhD thesis. Cambridge University Engi-
neering Department, UK.
Al-Ansary, M., Pöppelreiter, M., Al-Jabry, A., Iyengar, S.R., 2012.
Geological and physiochemical characterisation of construction sands
in Qatar. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 1 (1),
64–84, Elsiever.
Aljassar, A.H., Al-Fadala, K.B., Ali, M.A., 2005. Recycling building
demolition waste in hot-mix asphalt concrete: a case study in Kuwait.
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, Springer-Verlag 7
(2), 112–115.
Al-Khatib, K., 2009. Qatari Construction Industry including Supply, The
7th Conference on the Markets, Trade, Transportation and Handling
of cement in the MENA region (Intercem), January 2009. Doha,
Qatar.
Al-Kuwari, 2008. Deterioration mechanisms of concrete structures and
pavements in Qatar and the Gulf.
ASTM, 2004a. C40-Standard Test Method for Organic Impurities in Fine
Aggregates for Concrete. American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2004b. C117-Standard Test Method for Materials Finer than 75-
ı̀m (No. 200) Sieve in Mineral Aggregates by Washing. American
Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2005a. C586 - Standard Test Method for Potential Alkali
Reactivity of Carbonate Rocks as Concrete Aggregates (Rock Cylin-
der Method). American Society for Testing and Materials, West
Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2005b. C88-Standard Test Method for Soundness of Aggregates
by Use of Sodium Sulfate or Magnesium Sulfate. American Society for
Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2006a. C136 - Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine
and Course Aggregates. American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM (2006b).C131 – Standard Test Method for Resistance to Degra-
dation of Small-Size Coarse Aggregate by Abrasion and Impact in the
Los Angeles Machine, American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2007a. C128 – Standard Test Method for Density, Relative
Density (Specific Gravity), and Absorption of Fine Aggregate.
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken,
PA, USA.
ASTM, 2007b. C289 – Standard Test Method for Potential Alkali Silica
Reactivity of Aggregates (Chemical Method). American Society for
Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2007c. D4972 – Standard Test Method for pH of Soils. American
Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40
ASTM, 2009. C29 – Standard Test Method for Bulk Density (“Unit
Weight”) and Voids in Aggregate. American Society for Testing and
Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2010a. C142 – Standard Test Method for Clay Lumps and Friable
Particles in Aggregates. American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2010b. C227 – Standard Test Method for Potential Alkali
Reactivity of Cement-Aggregate Combinations (Mortar-Bar Method).
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
USA.
ASTM, 2010c. D4791 – Standard Test Method for Flat Particles,
Elongated Particles, or Flat and Elongated Particles in Coarse
Aggregate. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Cons-
hohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2011. D2487 – Standard Practice For Classification of Soils
for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System).
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken,
PA, USA.
ASTM, 2012a. C123 – Standard Test Method for Lightweight Particles in
Aggregate. American Society for Testing and Materials, West Cons-
hohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM, 2012b. C127 – Standard Test Method for Density, Relative
Density(specific Gravity), and Adsorption of Coarse Aggregate.
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken,
PA, USA.
ASTM, 2012c. C535 – Standard Test Method for Resistance to Degra-
dation of Large-Size Coarse Aggregate by Abrasion and Impact in the
Los Angeles Machine. American Society for Testing and Materials,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
Barritt, J., 2007. 20% recycled aggregate in concrete – no problem! Waste
Resources and Action Programme (WRAP).
Bekoe, P.A., Tia, M., Bergin, M.J., 2010. Concrete containing recycled
concrete aggregate for use in concrete pavement, transportation
research record. Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2164,
113–121.
BSI, 1990b. BS EN 812-111: Testing aggregates. Method for Determina-
tion of Ten Per Cent Fines Value. British Standards Institution,
London, UK.
BSI, 1990a. BS EN 812-110: Testing Aggregates. Method for Determina-
tion of Aggregate Crushing Value (ACV). British Standards Institu-
tion, London, UK.
BSI, 1998a. BS EN 1097–3: Tests for Mechanical And Physical Properties
of Aggregates. Determination of Loose Bulk Density and Voids.
British Standards Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 1998b. BS EN933-7: Tests for Geometrical Properties of Aggregates.
Determination of Shell Content. Percentage of Shells In Coarse
Aggregates. British Standards Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2000. BS EN1097-6: Tests For Mechanical And Physical Properties
of Aggregates. Determination of Particle Density and Water Absorp-
tion. British Standards Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2002a. BS EN 8500-1: Concrete. Complementary British Standard to
BS EN 206-1. Method of Specifying And Guidance For The Specifier.
British Standards Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2002b. BS EN 8500-2: Concrete. Complementary British Standard to
BS EN 206-1. Specification for Constituent Materials and Concrete.
British Standards Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2006. BS EN1744-5: Tests For Chemical Properties Of Aggregates.
Determination of Acid Soluble Chloride Salts. British Standards
Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2008. BS EN1367-4: Tests for Thermal and Weathering Properties Of
Aggregates. Determination of Drying Shrinkage. British Standards
Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2009a. BS EN 933–10: Tests For Geometrical Properties Of
Aggregates. Assessment of FINES. GRADING of Filler Aggregates
(air jet sieving). British Standards Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2009b. BS EN1744-1: Tests for Chemical Properties of Aggre-
gates. Chemical Analysis. British Standards Institution, London,
UK.
39
BSI, 2010. BS EN 1097–2: Tests for Mechanical and Physical Properties of
Aggregates. Methods for the Determination of Resistance to Frag-
mentation. British Standards Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2012a. BS EN933-3: Tests for Geometrical Properties of Aggregates.
Determination of particle shape. Flakiness index. British Standards
Institution, London, UK.
BSI, 2012b. BS EN 933–1: Tests for Geometrical Properties of Aggregates.
Determination of Particle Size Distribution. Sieving Method. British
Standards Institution, London, UK.
Cabo, A.D., Lazaro, C., Gayarre, F.L., Lopez, M.A.S., Serna, P.,
Tabares, J.O., 2009. Creep and Shrinkage of Recycled Aggregate
Concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Elsevier 23, 2545–
2553.
Chini, A.R., Kuo, S.-S., Armaghani, J.M., Duxbury, J.P., 2001. Test of
Recycled Concrete Aggregate in Accelerated Test Track. Journal of
Transportation Engineering, ASCE 127 (6), 486–492.
Cuttell, G.D., Snyder, M.B., Vandenbossche, J.M., Wade, M.J., (1997).
Performance of rigid pavements containing recycled concrete aggre-
gates, transportation research record. Journal of the Transportation
Research Board, No. 1574, Transportation Research Board of the
National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp. 89–98.
Eguchi, K., Teranishi, K., Nakagome, A., Kishimoto, H., Shinozaki, K.,
Narikawa, M., 2007. Application of recycled coarse aggregate by
mixture to concrete construction. Construction and Building Materi-
als, Elsevier 21, 1542–1551.
Fonteboa, B.G., Abella, F.M., 2007. Shear Strength of Recycled Concrete
Beams. Construction and Building Materials, Elsevier 21, 887–893.
Gress, D.L., Snyder, M.B., Sturevant, J.R., 2009. Performance of rigid
pavements containing recycled concrete aggregate: update for 2006.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
Research Board, No. 2113, Transportation Research Board of the
National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp. 99–107.
Kamel, A.M.E.A., Abou-Zeid, M.N., 2008. Key Performance and
Economic Considerations for Using Recycled Concrete Aggregate,
Paper Published in The 87th Annual Meeting of The Transportation
Research Board of the National Academies, No. 1703, January 13th–
17th 2008, Washington, D.C., p.15.
Landais, E., 2008. Construction waste needs attention. Gulf News, 23:54
June 22, 2008.
Li, X., 2008. Recycling and reuse of waste concrete in china, part I.
Material behavior of recycled aggregate concrete. Resources, Conser-
vation and Recycling, Elsevier 53, 36–44.
Li, X., 2009. Recycling and Reuse of Waste Concrete in China, Part II.
Structural Behavior of Recycled Aggregate Concrete and Engineering
Applications. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Elsevier 53,
107–112.
PCA, 2012. Portland cement association: http://www.cement.org/tech/
cct_aggregates_recycled.asp.
Poon, C.S., Shui, Z.H., Lam, L., Fok, H., Kou, S.C., 2004. Influence of
moisture states of natural and recycled aggregates on the slump and
compressive strength of concrete. Cement and Concrete Research,
Pergamon 34, 31–36.
Qatar 2022, 2011. Qatar 2022 bidding committee official website, 16
December 2010. http://www.qatar2022bid.com.
Qatar Customs Database, 2010. http://www.qsa.gov.qa/Eng/
LatestPublications.htm.
Qatar Today News, 2010. Middle East Economic Engineering Forum
Waste and Recycling in Qatar. http://www.eng-forum.com/News/
Feb07/090207.htm.
QCS, 2007. The Qatar National Construction Standards. Qatar General
Organization for Standards and Metrology, Qatar.
QCS, 2010. The Qatar National Construction Standards. Qatar General
Organization for Standards and Metrology, Qatar.
Rao, A., Jha, K.N., Misra, S., 2007. Use of aggregates from recycled
construction and demolition waste in concrete. Resources, Conserva-
tion and Recycling, Elsevier 50, 71–81.
Smith, J.T., Tighe, S.L., 2008. Recycled Concrete Aggregate: viable
aggregate source for concrete pavements. Paper Published in The 87th
40 M. Al-Ansary, S.R. Iyengar / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 2 (2013) 27–40
Annual Meeting of The Transportation. Research Board of the
National Academies, No. 1527, January 13th–2008, Washington,
D.C., p.18.
Smith, J.T., Tighe, S.L., 2009. Recycled concrete aggregate coefficient of
thermal expansion – characterization, variability and impacts on
pavement performance, Transportation Research Record. Journal of
the Transportation Research Board, No. 2113, Transportation Research
Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp. 53–61.
Topcu, I.B., Sengel, S., 2004. Properties of concretes produced with waste
concrete aggregate. Cement and Concrete Research, Pergamon 34,
1307–1312.
Tu, Y., Chen, Y.Y., Hwang, C.L., 2006. Properties of HPC with recycled
aggregate. Cement and Concrete Research, Elsevier 36, 943–950.
Vancura, M.E., Khazanovich, L., Tompkins, D.M., 2009. Reappraisal of
Recycled Concrete Aggregate as Coarse Aggregate in Concretes for
Rigid Pavements, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the
Transportation Research Board, No. 3093, Transportation Research
Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp. 149–155.
Vernon, D.R., 2000. Beneath our Feet: The Rocks of Planet Earth,
Cambridge University Press, p.224.
Wong, Y.D., Sun, D.D., Lai, D., 2007. Value-added utilisation of recycled
concrete in hot-mix asphalt. Waste Management, Elsevier 27 (2), 294–
301.
Xiao, J., Li, J., Zhang, C., 2005. Mechanical properties of recycled
aggregate concrete under uniaxial loading. Cement and Concrete
Research, Elsevier 35, 1187–1194.
Xiao, J., Falkner, H., 2007. Bond behavior between recycled aggregate
concrete and steel bars. Construction and Building Materials, Elsevier
21, 395–401.