See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/227078554

“Recycled Aggregate Concrete as Structural Material”

Article  in  Materials and Structures · January 2007

DOI: 10.1617/s11527-006-9161-5

CITATIONS READS

213 10,357

3 authors:

Miren Etxeberria A. R. Mari

Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
48 PUBLICATIONS   2,305 CITATIONS    142 PUBLICATIONS   3,087 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

E. Vázquez
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
64 PUBLICATIONS   2,506 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Mechanical model for the shear strength of RC and PC members (shear in beams and punching shear in slabs) View project

Performance-based design of partially prestressed concrete structures View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Miren Etxeberria on 30 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541
DOI 10.1617/s11527-006-9161-5
O R I G I N A L A RT I C L E
Recycled aggregate concrete as structural material
M. Etxeberria Æ A. R. Marı́ Æ E. Vázquez
Received: 13 July 2005 / Accepted: 15 March 2006 / Published online: 13 July 2006

RILEM 2006
Abstract The use of recycled aggregates in con-
crete opens a whole new range of possibilities in
the reuse of materials in the building industry. The
utilisation of recycled aggregates is a good solu-
tion to the problem of an excess of waste material,
provided that the desired final product quality is
reached. The studies on the use of recycled
aggregates have been going on for 50 years. In
fact, none of the results showed that recycled
aggregates are unsuitable for structural use.
However, some hypothetical problems related to
durability aspects resulted in recycled aggregates
being employed practically only as base filler for
road construction. This paper focuses on the pos-
sibility of the use of recycled aggregate concrete as
a structural material. For that purpose an experi-
mental study of the shear behaviour and strength
of beams made with recycled aggregate concrete
was studied. Twelve beam specimens with the
same compression strength, four concrete mix-
tures using different percentages of recycled
coarse aggregates (0%, 25%, 50% and 100%) and
three different transverse reinforcement arrange-
ments were cast and tested up to failure. Analyt-
ical predictions of the experimental results were
carried out using a numerical model based on the
M. Etxeberria (&) Æ A. R. Marı́ Æ E. Vázquez
Department of Construction Engineering, School of
Civil Engineering, Universitat Politécnica de
Catalunya (UPC), 08034 Barcelona, Spain
e-mail: miren.etxeberria@upc.edu
modified compression field theory and simplified
models such as those proposed by Cladera & Mari,
the Canadian standard CSA and the Eurocode-2.
The results obtained indicate that a substitution of
less than 25% of coarse aggregate, scarcely affects
the shear capacity of RC beams, provided that all
measures related to dosage and durability aspects
have been adopted.
Keywords Recycled aggregates Æ Recycled
aggregate concrete Æ Structural behaviour Æ
Shear strength
1 Introduction
The amount of construction and demolition waste
(CDW) has increased considerably over the last
few years. The recycling and the reuse of this
material is necessary, considering the impact that
the use of natural resources and non use of CDW
is causing. This would not happen if the use of
recycled material were possible.
The largest CDW obtained is concrete [1, 2],
and it is the most used construction material
nowadays. The studies with respect to the appli-
cability of recycled concrete aggregates (RCA)
are extended around the world. Most research has
focused basically on the mechanical properties of
recycled aggregate concrete as a test element, and
its real application is in road construction. How-
530
ever, much less effort has been made to study the
structural behaviour of elements made with RCA
[3–5] coming from crushed waste concrete.
In the study presented herein, a number of full
scale tests were carried out over reinforced con-
crete beams made with recycled aggregate con-
crete in order to study the influence of the
percentage of recycled aggregate used on their
structural behaviour at service load levels and up
to failure. The beams were tested under shear
load conditions since the parameters and mecha-
nisms affecting shear strength such as aggregate
interlock, bond or concrete tensile strength, are
much more affected by the concrete performance
than flexural strength. The beams were produced
using 0%, 25%, 50% and 100% of recycled coarse
aggregates and had the same concrete compres-
sive strength and three different transverse rein-
forcement arrangements. Recycled fine
aggregates were not used due to its absorption
capacity, which can produce large shrinkage and
permeable cement paste.
2 Experimental program
The recycled aggregates employed to produce the
structural concrete were taken from a waste-
recycling area. The origins of the concretes were
unknown, therefore, the composition was evi-
dently heterogeneous. A raw coarse aggregate
(granite) and sand (crushed limestone) were used
in different concrete mixes.
The characteristics of the aggregates were
established in order to study their possible appli-
cation in concrete production. After analysis, the
dosage procedure was carried out. Four types of
concrete were produced: concrete without recycled
aggregate, called control concrete (HC), concrete
with 25% of recycled coarse aggregates (HR25),
with 50% of recycled coarse aggregates (HR50)
and with 100% of recycled coarse aggregates
(HR100). Different dosages were used to get the
same compression strength in all concrete types.
2.1 Aggregate properties
Due to the variability in the composition of
recycled aggregates, it is essential to carefully
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541
study their properties. The tested properties
included in this research were grading, composi-
tion, physical and mechanical properties. The
procedures and test methods were in accordance
with EN specifications.
The grading of recycled and conventional
aggregates was suitable for concrete production.
The grading of recycled coarse aggregate, which
was produced crushing the waste concrete, was
similar to the raw aggregates’ grading. The shape
index of recycled aggregates and conventional
aggregates was 0.28 and 0.25, respectively. The
better shape of the recycled aggregates facilitated
their use for concrete production.
The quantity of aggregates and aggregates with
adhered mortar was higher than 90%, as shown in
Fig. 1.
The saturated surface dry (ssd) density of the
recycled coarse aggregate due to the presence of
adhered mortar was lower than that of conven-
tional aggregates. However, the largest difference
existed in the water absorption capacity because
of the high absorption capacity of the adhered
mortar, as illustrated in Table 1. The Los Angeles
abrasion of recycled coarse and conventional was
33.5% and 19.8%, respectively. The largest
abrasion happened in adhered mortar.
2.2 Recycled aggregate concrete
The Different percentages of recycled coarse
aggregates were used for the production of the
four concretes, all of which had the same com-
pressive strength. The concretes were produced in
an automatic mixing machine, and the recycled
coarse aggregates were used in a humid condition
in order to control the effective w/c ratio and
workability of the recycled aggregate concrete.
Fig. 1 Recycled coarse aggregate composition
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541 531

Table 1 Physical properties of conventional and recycled
aggregates
Test EN 1097-6:2000 Conventional Recycled
coarse coarse
aggregates aggregates
3
Densityssd (kg/dm ) 2.67 2.43
Absorption (%) 0.88 4.44
Portland cement CEM I 52.5R was used in all
concretes. Cylindrical 15 · 30 cm test specimens
and beam elements were produced with the four
concretes. The compressive strength, tensile
strength and modulus elasticity of all concrete
types were determined according to the EN
specifications. Cylinders and beam specimens
were in the same curing condition until the day of
testing. They were cured during the first 2 weeks
and afterwards they were maintained in a dry
condition.
The mix proportions and mechanical proper-
ties of the four concretes are described in Table 2.
HR25 achieved the same mechanical properties
as that of the conventional concrete employing
the same quantity of cement (300 kg of cement/
m3 of concrete) and the equal effective w/c ratio
(w/c = 0.55). HR50 needed a lower effective w/c
ratio (w/c = 0.52) and a 6% more cement and
HR100 needed an effective w/c ratio of 0.50 and
8.3% more cement than the conventional con-
crete to achieve the same compression strength.
2.3 Description of structural shear tests
2.3.1 Geometry of beam specimens
The 12 beams had rectangular cross section of
200 mm width and 350 mm depth, a total length
of 3.05 m and were simply-supported with a span
length of 2.60 m. The beams were subjected to a
symmetric two point load system, with a shear
span/depth ratio a/d equal to 3.3, as indicated in
Fig. 2.
Three different zones can be considered in the
beams: North and South sides (referred to as N and
S, respectively in Fig. 2), between the supports and
the point loads, subjected to constant shear force.
The North side is the one with the lowest web
reinforcement, in which failure takes place, Central
side (referred to as C, in Fig. 2), between the two
point loads, subjected to zero shear force.
2.3.2 Shear reinforcement
Three transverse reinforcement arrangements
were considered, as illustrated in Fig. 3:
– Type V1: Beams without transverse reinforce-
ment. One beam of each type of concrete,
called HC-1, HR25-1, HR50-1 and HR100-1
were tested.
– Type V2: Beams with 6 mm diameter stirrups
spaced 130 mm, having an amount of trans-
verse reinforcement (435 mm2/ml) clearly

Table 2 Mix proportions and mechanical properties of HC, HR25, HR50 and HR100
HC HR25 HR50 HR100

Cement 300 300 318 325

Water 165 165 165 162
Effective w/c ratio 0.55 0.55 0.52 0.50
Aggregate 0/4 mm 765 765 739 683
Aggregates 4/10 mm 333 250 172 –
R-Aggregates 4/10 mm – 73 151 426
Aggregates 10/16 mm 295 221 147 –
R-Aggregates 10/16 mm – 65 129 306
Aggregates 16/25 mm 579 434 289 –
R-Aggregates 16/25 mm – 129 257 391
Superplasticizer, % 1.4 1.66 1.90 1.90
Compr. strength (MPa) 42 42 41 40
Tensile strength (MPa) 2.7 3 3.2 3.2
Mod. of elasticity (GPa) 33.7 33.2 31.8 27
532
Fig. 2 Two point loads
test set-up
Fig. 3 Arrangements for
the three types of
reinforcements
higher than the minimum amount required to
avoid brittle failure after concrete cracking.
One beam of this type of concrete, called HC-2,
HR25-2, HR50-2 and HR100-2 were tested.
– Type V3: Minimum reinforcement required by
the Spanish Concrete Code EHE, according to
the following expression:
X Aa
fyd
 0; 02
fcd
bo ð1Þ
sena
where Aa is the area of web reinforcement per
unit length, inclined an angle a with respect to the
longitudinal axis of the beam, fya;d is the design
yield strength of the transverse reinforcement
inclined a, not higher than 400 MPa, and fcd is the
concrete design compression strength. In order to
obtain this amount of steel, 6 mm diameter stir-
rups were placed spaced 170 mm. One beam of
this type of concrete, called HC-3, HR25-3,
HR50-3 and HR100-3.
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541
The reinforcement amount on the south side
was established by changing the diameter of stir-
rups from 6 to 8 mm to ensure that shear failure
did not take place in that zone. The web rein-
forcement distributions are shown in Table 3. In
all cases the steel grade was B-500 S, with
fyk = 500 N/mm2.
2.4 Test set-up and instrumentation
In order to measure strains and to determine the
load-deflection curve, gauges and magnetostric-
tive transducers were used, respectively. The
gauges were bonded to stirrups and longitudinal
bars placed within the failure area, see Fig. 3. The
magnetostrictive transducers used to measure the
displacement were located under the loading
points (T5 and T6) and near the supports point
(north: T2 and T1, south: T3 and T4), see Fig. 4.
The data acquisition system utilized was the
HP-34970 A with 40 analogical inputs. While
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541
Table 3 Reinforcement
Web reinforcement
distribution in beam
specimens Type V1
Type V2
Type V3
Longitudinal reinforcement 2 F 32 +
magnetostrictive transducers were connected
directly the strain gauges were first connected to a
control module. The software for the data col-
lection was Data Logger. The load cell was con-
nected to a steel beam (H300), which distributed
the load at two points, each one being located
30 cm from the centre of the concrete beam. A
150 mm wide and 28 mm thick neoprene was
placed under a spherical bearing. Figure 5 shows
the actual test configuration. A thin pad of a very
low friction material was placed between the pin
bearing and the beam, enabling the beams to
move horizontally.
The tests were carried out under displacement
control using a closed-loop hydraulic compression
machine with a loading capacity of 4,500 kN. The
loading rate was slightly varied for each type of
beam, in accordance with the amount of trans-
versal reinforcement used. The approximate
duration of each test was of 65 min.
3 Test results
A large amount of data was collected during the
experimental investigation. Table 4 summarises
the results of the 12 tests on the beam specimens,
providing the main characteristics of each beam
specimen, the failure shear strength (Vfail), and
the value of shear when inclined cracking takes
Fig. 4 Transducer position according to rosette scheme
533
North side (failure) South side
0 F 8/100 mm
F 6/130 mm F 8/130 mm
F 6/170 mm F 8/170 mm
1F 16
place (Vcr). In the following, different aspects of
the structural behaviour are analysed, such as
failure mode, differences between beams with
and without stirrups and influence of the amount
of recycled coarse aggregate on the structural
response.
3.1 Failure modes
In beam specimens without stirrups initial flexural
cracks appeared, arriving to mid height of the
beam with an inclination of 45 degrees approxi-
mately. After increasing the applied load a single
inclined crack appeared connecting the point of
application of the load to the tip of the main
previous crack, and the beam failed suddenly. In
contrast, beams containing stirrups presented a
more ductile response. After the formation of the
first shear crack, stirrups started working and
further shear cracks developed. At failure, the
compressed top part of the beam crushed under
the combination of compression and shear stres-
ses. No large differences between the behaviour
of beams produced from different types of con-
crete were observed.
The typical failure mode of beams V1, V2 and
V3 are illustrated in Fig. 6.
3.2 Beam specimens without web
reinforcement (Type V1)
All these beams had the same concrete com-
pression strength but had different amount of
recycled aggregate. The values of average shear
stress (Vu/bd) at failure were, 1.62, 1.68, 1.37 and
1.36 MPa for beams HC1, HR25-1, HR50-1 and
HR100-1, respectively. In Fig. 7 the shear force–
displacement of each beam is plotted.
The failure in HC-1 and HR25-1 occurred by a
splitting crack, without failure of the concrete at
534 Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541

3.3 Beam specimens with stirrups (Types V2

and V3)

3.3.1 Influence of the amount of recycled

aggregate

The minimum amount of web reinforcement

Fig. 5 Test configuration
the compression zone. However, in HR50-1 and
HR100-1 the failure occurred by a splitting crack
and crushing of the concrete at the compression
top part under the combination of compression
and shear stresses.
The ratio between the shear strength of each
beam specimen to the shear strength of the beam
made with conventional concrete (HC-1) is shown
in Fig. 8. No decrease of shear strength was de-
tected for 25% of recycled aggregate. However, a
serious decrease of strength was produced when
50% and 100% of recycled aggregates were used.
The strain of the longitudinal web reinforce-
ment in the failure side of the beam specimens
made with conventional concrete (HC) was sim-
ilar to that of the beam specimens employing
recycled aggregates. Figure 9 shows load–strain
curve.
Table 4 Summary of experimental results. Details of beam specimens on failure side
Beam fc MPa fsp Shear reinforcemnet
MPa
Stirrup/space mm
required by the Spanish Concrete Code (EHE)
was used in the V3 beam specimens using different
concrete mix for each beam: HC-3, HR25-3,
HR50-3 and HR100-3.
The shear strength–displacement curve is plot-
ted in Fig. 10 for all V3 type beams. Practically no
differences are observed amongst beams made
with different percentages of recycled aggregate,
except that the shear strength decreases slightly
when the percentage of aggregate increases.
However, this reduction of shear strength is only a
10%, as shown in Fig. 11.
The cracking load for beam specimens with
recycled aggregates was lower than that of refer-
ence beams (HC), however, the failure load was
very similar for all beams of that group.
Table 5 shows the failure, yielding and crack-
ing shear forces for beams V3, having the mini-
mum amount of transverse reinforcement. The
value of the yielding shear force corresponds to
that existing when the second stirrup crossing the
crack yielded.
Beam type specimens V2 (HC-2, HR25-2,
HR50-2 and HR100-2) were reinforced with
approximately 50% more reinforcement than
beams V3. Cracking, yielding and ultimate shear
obtained are shown in Table 6.
Longitudinal reinforcement Vfail kN Vcr (kN)
Aprox.
qw MPa Longitudinal reinforcement q1

HC-1 41.91 2.64 – 0 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.92 100.5 96

HC-2 41.91 2.64 ˘ 6/130 1.180 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.97 213 108
HC-3 41.91 2.64 ˘ 6/170 0.903 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.97 177 98
HR25-1 42.38 3.13 – 0 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.92 104 85
HR25-2 42.38 3.13 ˘ 6/130 1.180 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.97 186.5 86
HR25-3 42.38 3.13 ˘ 6/170 0.903 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.97 169 100.5
HR50-1 41.34 3.22 – 0 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.92 89 82
HR50-2 41.34 3.22 ˘ 6/130 1.180 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.97 220 92.5
HR50-3 41.34 3.22 ˘ 6/170 0.903 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.97 176 93.5
HR100-1 39.75 3.28 – 0 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.92 84 80
HR100-2 39.75 3.28 ˘ 6/130 1.180 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.97 189.5 86
HR100-3 39.75 3.28 ˘ 6/170 0.903 2˘ 32+1˘ 16 2.97 163 90
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541 535

Fig. 6 Failure of the

three different
reinforcement
arrangements. (a) Beam
type V1, (b) Beam type
V3 and (c) Beam type V2

Figure 12 illustrates the shear strength–dis- aggregate is increased) for all beams, except for
placement curve of beams V2. The observed the beam having a 25% of recycled aggregate,
behaviour of the beams was as expected (small which showed the lower yielding and ultimate
reduction of strength as the percentage of recycled shear forces of all the V2 beams.

Fig. 7 Load-deflection
response for type V1
beams

Fig. 8 Influence of the

recycled aggregate
percentage in shear
strength
536 Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541

For HR50-2 and HR100-2 beam specimens the

Fig. 9 Strain of longitudinal bar in three types of concrete
Figure 13 compares the ratio of the shear
strength of beams made with recycled aggregate
concrete to that made with conventional concrete.
In the case of beam specimen HR25-2, the ulti-
mate shear force was 13% lower than that of
conventional concrete, as was the yield load.
Fig. 10 Shear strength–
displacement of V3 beam
specimens with different
percentages of recycled
aggregate concrete
diagonal cracking load was lower than that in
conventional concrete (HC-2) as it occurred in
HR50-3 and HR100-3. However, the ratio be-
tween the failure and cracking loads Vfail/Vcr was
higher in HR50-3, HR50-2, HR100-3 and HR100-2
beam specimens than in the conventional concrete
beams (HC-3 and HC-2). This is probably due to
the fact that in concrete types with high percentage
of recycled aggregates, the aggregate interlock was
higher than in conventional concrete, increasing
the effect of the shear-friction mechanism.
3.3.2 Influence of the amount of shear
reinforcement
Figure 14 shows the shear strength versus the
amount of transverse reinforcement for each group
of beams having the same amount of recycled
aggregate. It can be seen that practically a linear
relationship exists in all cases, with very similar

Fig. 11 Beams type V3.

Influence of the recycled
aggregate percentage in
shear strength
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541 537

Table 5 Failure, yielding and cracking shear in beams V3 with minimum amount of transverse reinforcement
Beam Collapse side (north side / 6) /8
Vfail (kN) Vy (kN) V*cr (kN) Vy/Vcr Vfail/Vcr V*cr (kN)

HC-3 177 157.5 98 1.60 1.81 108.5

HR25-3 169 140.5 100.5 1.40 1.68 97
HR50-3 176 163.5 93.5 1.74 1.88 86.5
HR100-3 163 152.5 90 1.69 1.81 85

Table 6 Failure, yielding and cracking shear V2

Beam Collapse side (north side / 6) /8
Vfail (kN) Vy (kN) V*cr (kN) Vy/Vcr Vfail/Vcr V*cr (kN)

HC-2 213 Error 108 Error 1.86 Error

HR25-2 186.5 146 86 1.70 2.16 100
HR50-2 220 176 92.5 1.90 2.38 83
HR100-2 189.5 165 86 1.92 2.20 86

slopes, showing similar effectiveness of the stirrups
except for beams HR25, for which it is smaller.
Probably it was due to the fact that concrete
HR25 was the only that used recycled aggregate
(the 11.1% of the volume of the concrete was
recycled aggregate, which is the weakest part of
the concrete) without increasing the effective
water/cement ratio or the cement amount with
respect of the conventional concrete.
4 Comparison of experimental results with
theoretical and codes predictions
Experimental results are compared with predic-
tions made with different approaches, in order to
check their validity for determining the shear
strength of recycled aggregate concrete.
Predictions were carried out by means of the
Eurocode-2 final draft 2003 [6], Response-2000
[7] a computer programs based on the modified
compression field theory (MCFT) [8], the Cana-
dian Standard CSA A23.3-04 [8] and the simpli-
fied method proposed by Cladera and Marı́
[9, 10]. The main characteristics of these methods
are illustrated in Table 7, with the nomenclatures
defined in Table 8.
The influence on the shear strength of the
amount of recycled aggregate is shown in Table 8,
while the influence of the amount of shear rein-
forcement is shown in Table 9. The results are
summarised as:

Fig. 12 Shear strength–

displacement of V2 beam
specimens with different
percentages of recycled
aggregates in concrete
538
Fig. 13 Influence of the
recycled aggregate
percentage in shear
strength for beams type
V2
• The EuroCode-2 is unconservative for beams
without transverse reinforcement using 50%
and 100% of coarse recycled aggregate. How-
ever, EC-2 offers good correlation for beams
with 0% and 25% of coarse recycled aggregate.
In contrast, EC-2 is somewhat conservative
regarding beams with shear reinforcement. It is
probably due to the fact that for beams with
transverse reinforcement EC2 does not con-
sider the concrete contribution Vcd
• The CSA (2004), based on the MCFT, only
provided an unconservative value for beams
without transverse reinforcement employing
100% of coarse recycled aggregates. In con-
trast, they correlate with the empirical results
better than the other codes’ correlations with
respect to beam specimens with web rein-
forcement.
• The predicted shear strength failure by the
computer program Response-2000, also based
on the MCFT, correlate satisfactorily for
Fig. 14 Influence of
different amount of
transversal reinforcement
in all kinds of concrete
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541
conventional concrete with or without web
reinforcement, and for recycled aggregate
concrete with web reinforcement. However,
the mentioned program is not conservative
with respect to beams without reinforcement
employing 50% and 100% of coarse recycled
aggregate.
• The simplified method proposed by Cladera
and Marı́ (March 2003), presented a good
correlation for conventional concrete and
concrete with 25% of coarse recycled aggre-
gate, however, it is not conservative with re-
spect to concrete with 50% and 100% of
coarse recycled aggregate.
5 Conclusions
In this paper, the results of an experimental
campaign carried out to study the possibilities of
the use of concrete made with RCA as a struc-
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541 539

Table 7 Summary of code provisions and simplified shear design methods

Code
1 3 1
2002 Final draft of the EC-2 Without stirrups VRd;c ¼ 0:18 kð100q1 fc Þ3 bw d  0:035k2 fc2 bw d
qffiffiffiffiffiffi
A1
k ¼ 1 þ 200d  2:0q1 ¼ bw d  0:02

With stirrups VRd;s ¼ Assw zfywd coth

Do not consider concrete contribution 1 £ coth £ 2.5
pffiffiffiffi
CSA A23.3. Without stirrups Vc ¼ b fc0 bw dv
0:40
b ¼ ð1þ1500n
1300
x Þ ð1000þsze Þ

35
sze ¼ sz 15þa g
nx ¼ MfE=ds Av þV
s
f

h = 29+7000nx
With stirrups Vf=Vc+Vs
pffiffiffiffi A 
Vc ¼ b fc0 bw dv Vs ¼ v
s fy dv coth
0:40 1300
b¼ ð1þ1500nx Þ
ð1000þsze Þ

s = 300 mm (al least minimum stirrups)

þVf
nx ¼ M2f=dEvs A s
h ¼ 29 þ 7000nx
Cladera & Marı́ method Without stirrups Vc = [0.225n (100q1)1/2f0.2
c ]Æ bw d
qffiffiffiffiffiffi  
A fc
n ¼ 1 þ 200sx q1 ¼ bw d  0:02 1 þ 100
1

With stirrups Vf = Vc+Vs Vc =[0.17n(100qs)1 /2 f0.2 1/3

c s ]Æ bw d
qffiffiffiffiffiffi
Asl
n ¼ 1 þ 200sx  2:75qs ¼ bw d  0:04

s ¼ bVw dd v  3 MPa
Vs ¼ dv Assw fywd cot h
h ¼ 20 þ 15ex þ 45 fsc  45
ex ¼ 0:5 MdE=ds Av þV
sl
d

1000  1

Table 8 Nomenclature strength, and different amounts of transverse

ag maximum aggreagte size of coarse aggregate reinforcement have been tested to shear failure.
A1 area of the longitudinal reinforcement From the observed experimental behaviour and
Aw area of the shear reinforcement from the comparisons with analytical predictions
bw web width
made, the following conclusions can be drawn:
d effective depth
dv mechanical depth taken to be 0.9Æd 1. The effect of the use of recycled aggregate on
fc concrete compression strength
fywd design yielding strength of the shear reinforcement
the beams’ shear strength depends on the
s spacing of the stirrups percentage of coarse aggregate substituted,
sx vertical distance between distributed longitudinal specially for beams without transverse rein-
reinforcement forcement. For low percentages of substitu-
Vfail failure shear strength of the actual test
ex longitudinal strain in the web
tion (less than 25%) it can be said that this
q1 amount of longitudinal reinforcement influence is practically negligible.
qw amount of shear reinforcement (MPa) 2. For beams without shear reinforcement, the
h angle of the compression struts use of recycled coarse aggregate reduced the
cracking load. This happened even though
tural material have been presented. Twelve the compressive concrete strength was
beams made with different amounts of RCA, maintained the same for all beams by
maintaining the same concrete compressive increasing the amount of cement or reducing
540 Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541

Table 9 Summary of analytical predictions for beams with different concrete types
Beam Vfail (kN) Vpredicted Vtest/Vpredicted
EC CSA RESP CLAD EC CSA RESP CLAD

HC-1 100.5 87.84 87.1 98.6 90.8 1.14 1.15 1.02 1.11
HC-2 213.0 195.2 167.5 194.5 203.0 1.09 1.27 1.10 1.05
HC-3 177.0 149.3 150.1 164.8 176.0 1.19 1.18 1.07 1.01
Average HC 1.14 1.20 1.06 1.05
HR25-1 104.0 88.17 87.3 106.0 90.9 1.18 1.19 0.98 1.14
HR25-2 186.5 195.2 168.0 195.2 204.2 0.96 1.11 0.96 0.91
HR25-3 169.0 149.3 150.2 165.3 176.4 1.13 1.13 1.02 0.96
Average HR25 1.09 1.14 0.99 1.01
HR50-1 89.0 91.8 89.4 109.5 95.0 0.97 1.00 0.81 0.94
HR50-2 220.0 195.2 169.8 196.5 209.0 1.13 1.30 1.12 1.05
HR50-3 176.0 149.3 152.3 166.2 181.3 1.18 1.16 1.06 0.97
Average HR50 1.09 1.15 1.00 0.99
HR100-1 84.0 86.3 85.6 108.0 89.8 0.97 0.98 0.78 0.94
HR100-2 189.5 195.2 166.2 192.0 202.0 0.97 1.14 0.99 0.94
HR100-3 163.0 149.3 148.5 162.2 174.5 1.09 1.10 1.00 0.93
Average HR100 1.04 1.20 1.04 0.99
Average 1.08 1.14 0.99 1.00
SD 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.08
COV 8.4 8.15 10.5 7.64

the effective water/cement ratio if necessary.
This was probably due to the fact that
cracking occurs at the weakest point that is
the adhered mortar on the recycled concrete
aggregate.
3. For beam specimens with web reinforcement,
the influence of the amount of RCA in the
ultimate shear is very small. Beam specimens
with web reinforcement and concrete with
50% and 100% of coarse recycled aggregate
achieved approximately the ultimate shear
load of conventional concrete. Only in the
case of beams made with 25% of recycled
aggregates, in which the required concrete
compressive strength was reached without
changing the amount of cement or the effec-
tive water/cement ratio a 13% decrease in the
shear strength was observed. These results
suggest that the use of recycled concrete
aggregate must be accompanied by a modifi-
cation of the dosage (increase of cement
amount and decrease of W/C ratio) in order to
avoid a decrease on the shear strength.
4. In general, Code provisions for shear design
overestimate the shear strength of beams
made with high amounts (more than 50%) of
RCA. However, they offer good correlation
for beams made with small amounts (25% or
less) of RCA.
5. The theoretical methods checked in this study
provide good results for all beams made with
conventional concrete. For beams with recy-
cled aggregate concrete, program Response
2000, based on the MCFT, provides good
results for beams with stirrups and for beams
without stirrups with a percentage up to 25%
of RCA. The method proposed by Cladera
and Mari was unconservative for beams with
more than 25% of recycled concrete aggre-
gates.
6. Aggregate interlock and bond between con-
crete and the reinforcement are mechanisms
that look to work correctly in reinforced
concrete beams made with RCA, even for
high percentages of substitution of coarse
aggregate.
7. As a general conclusion, it can be said that
concrete made with up to 25% of RCA is
suitable for structural use, provided that all
measures related to dosage, compressive
strength and durability aspects have been
adopted. In that case, the current code pro-
visions for shear design result adequate for
their use to design RC structures with RCA.
Materials and Structures (2007) 40:529–541
Nevertheless, more research is needed at the
structural level, in order to study the struc-
tural behaviour at service (short and long
term deflections, cracks opening, micro-
cracking due to compressive stresses), and at
ultimate conditions (bond and anchorage,
punching, fatigue) among others.
Acknowledgements The work presented in this paper is
part of the Doctoral Thesis developed by the first author,
who obtained a pre-doctoral scholarship from the Gov-
ernment of Catalonia, Spain. The authors also want to
thank Environmental Research Program of the Technical
University of Catalonia for the financial support provided.
Special thanks is given to Dr. M. Barra, who helped to
design the concrete mixes at the Construction Materials
Laboratory of UPC.
References
1. Symonds (1999) European Commission. Construction
and demolition waste management practices, and their
economics impacts. Report to DGXI, European
Commission
2. Hendriks ChF, Pietersen HS, Fraay AFA (2000) Recy-
cling of building and demolition waste. An Integrated
approach, Proceedings of the International Symposium
on ‘Sustainable Construction: Use of Recycled Concrete
Aggregate’, London, UK, pp 419–431
View publication stats
541
3. Roberto dos Santos J, Branco F, de Brito J (2004)
Mechanical properties of concrete with coarse recycled
aggregates. Structural Engineering International 3/2004,
213–215
4. González B, Martı́nez F (2004) Shear strength of
concrete with recycled aggregates. International RI-
LEM Conference on the ‘Use of Recycled Materials in
Buildings and Structures’, Barcelona, Spain, 8–11
November 2004
5. Sogo M et al. (2004) Shear behaviour of reinforced
recycled concrete beams. International RILEM Con-
ference on the ‘Use of recycled Materials in Buildings
and Structures’, Barcelona, Spain, 8–11 November
2004,
6. European Committee for Standardization. ‘Eurocode
2: Design of Concrete Structures. Part 1: General rules
and rules for buildings’. Final Draft, July 2002, p 226
7. Vecchio FJ, Collins MP (1986) The modified com-
pression field theory for reinforced concrete elements
subjected to shear. ACI Struct J 86(2):219–231
8. Canadian Standard Association. Design of concrete
structures CSA A23.3–2004
9. Cladera A, Marı́ AR (2004) Shear design procedure
for reinforced normal and high-strength concrete
beams using artificial neural network. Part I: beams
without stirrups. Eng Struct 26:917–926
10. Cladera A, Marı́ AR (2004) Shear design procedure
for reinforced normal and high-strength concrete
beams using artificial neural network. Part II: beams
with stirrups’. Eng Struct 26:927–936