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

net/publication/297657767

Experimental Investigation of the Mechanical and Durability Properties of

Crumb Rubber Concrete

Article  in  Materials · March 2016

DOI: 10.3390/ma9030172

CITATIONS READS

42 739

4 authors, including:

Xianqiang Wang Yubo Jiao

Jilin University Beijing University of Technology
16 PUBLICATIONS   96 CITATIONS    81 PUBLICATIONS   495 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Use of imaging technique and direct tensile test to evaluate moisture damage properties of warm mix asphalt using response surface method View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Yubo Jiao on 25 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 materials
Article
Experimental Investigation of the Mechanical and
Durability Properties of Crumb Rubber Concrete
Hanbing Liu 1 , Xianqiang Wang 1 , Yubo Jiao 1, * and Tao Sha 1,2
1 College of Transportation, Jilin University, Changchun 130025, China; lhb@jlu.edu.cn (H.L.);
wangxq14@mails.jlu.edu.cn (X.W.); taojl14@mails.jlu.edu.cn (T.S.)
2 Emergency Response Center, Highway Administration of Liaoning Province, Shenyang 110000, China
* Correspondence: jiaoyb@jlu.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-136-1079-0678

Academic Editor: Jorge de Brito

Received: 2 February 2016; Accepted: 2 March 2016; Published: 7 March 2016

Abstract: Recycling waste tire rubber by incorporating it into concrete has become the preferred
solution to dispose of waste tires. In this study, the effect of the volume content of crumb rubber and
pretreatment methods on the performances of concrete was evaluated. Firstly, the fine aggregate
and mixture were partly replaced by crumb rubber to produce crumb rubber concrete. Secondly,
the mechanical and durability properties of crumb rubber concrete with different replacement
forms and volume contents had been investigated. Finally, the crumb rubber after pretreatment
by six modifiers was introduced into the concrete mixture. Corresponding tests were conducted to
verify the effectiveness of pretreatment methods as compared to the concrete containing untreated
crumb rubber. It was observed that the mechanical strength of crumb rubber concrete was reduced,
while durability was improved with the increasing of crumb rubber content. 20% replacement of
fine aggregate and 5% replacement of the total mixture exhibited acceptable properties for practical
applications. In addition, the results indicated that the modifiers had a positive impact on the
mechanical and durability properties of crumb rubber concrete. It avoided the disadvantage of crumb
rubber concrete having lower strength and provides a reference for the production of modified crumb
rubber concrete.

Keywords: crumb rubber; rubberized concrete; mechanical properties; durability; modifiers

1. Introduction
The number of waste tires is continually increasing, as a result of the growing use of transport
vehicles [1]. Almost 1000 million waste tires are generated in the world annually. By the year 2030, this
number is expected to reach 1200 million [2]. Disposal of waste tires has become a global problem [3].
In many countries, burying the waste tires is a common disposal method, which shortens the service
life of the burial ground and causes a very serious threat to ecology. Therefore, effectively reusing
waste tires is an urgent and important issue for saving energy and protecting the environment [4,5].
Several methods of recycling waste tires have been proposed, including use as a fuel in cement
kilns and to produce carbon black [3,6]. These are technically feasible, while bringing great economic
waste and environmental pollution. Using recycled rubber as additives to or replacements of
construction materials is a highly preferable option. The initial trial of crumb rubber was used
as a modifier of asphalt [7]. However, the high viscosity and the higher temperature required in
production made it unpractical to be widely used [8]. In order to reuse waste tire rubber effectively,
one of the possible solutions is to incorporate it into cement-based material. Partial replacement of
mineral aggregates in concrete with waste tire rubber could control environmental pollution and save
sandstone resources [9,10].

Materials 2016, 9, 172; doi:10.3390/ma9030172 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2016, 9, 172 2 of 12

Concerning the reuse of waste rubber in concrete, extensive studies had been conducted [11–13].
Two major opposite effects existed when the rubber was introduced into the concrete mixture.
The mechanical strength was reduced, while the durability, toughness, impact resistance, strain
capacity and sound insulation properties were enhanced [14–17]. Due to the compressive and flexural
strengths being two major design criteria in concrete structures, the reduction in the strength of
rubberized concrete limited its application [18,19]. However, the desirable characteristics, including
lower density, higher ductility, better sound insulation and resistance against cracking, made it a valid
option for non-structural concrete with a low strength requirement [20–22].
The properties of crumb rubber concrete were significantly affected by rubber content. Ghaly and
Cahill [11] studied the compressive strength of concrete with different replacement ratios of crumb
rubber by volume (5%, 10% and 15%). Compressive strength decreased with the addition of crumb
rubber. Yung [5] investigated the durability properties of self-compacting concrete containing waste
tire rubber, which indicated that the anti-sulfate corrosion was improved with the increasing of rubber
content from 5% to 20% of the volume ratio. Holme [17] conducted acoustic tests for concrete with
different levels of fine aggregate replacement by crumb rubber (7.5% and 15%). Testing results found
that the sound absorbance property of rubberized concrete performed well with higher proportions
of rubber. Therefore, the investigation of the advantages and disadvantages of replacing mineral
aggregate by crumb rubber is necessary. Additionally, the selected optimal content of crumb rubber in
the concrete mixture will bring excellent performance to crumb rubber concrete.
In order to minimize the loss in strength caused by introducing crumb rubber into concrete, prior
surface treatment of rubber particles by modifiers was utilized [23]. Mohammadi [14] introduced
rubber particles after a water-soaking treatment into the mixture, which significantly enhanced the
mechanical strength of crumb rubber concrete. Raghavan et al. [24] pretreated the rubber particles in
NaOH aqueous solution and obtained a high strength performance. Segre and Joekes [25] adopted
acid etching, plasma and coupling agents as modifiers to pretreat the crumb rubber. Oiknomou [26]
mentioned that the use of SBR latex could minimize the loss in strength compared to the untreated
rubber concrete. These pretreatments for crumb rubber enhanced the adherence between the rubber
and cement paste, reduced the air content and achieved a uniform distribution of rubber particles
in the mixture. However, the comparative analysis and optimization selection of modifiers for the
pretreatment of crumb rubber were limited in existing investigations.
This paper investigates the mechanical and durability properties of concrete containing waste
crumb rubber. The rubberized concrete was produced by replacing the fine aggregate and mixture
with crumb rubber at different volume ratios. Compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, axial
compressive strength, the modulus of elasticity, freezing-thawing resistance and sulfate resistance
were evaluated for concretes with different contents of crumb rubber. In addition, the crumb rubber
was pretreated in six modifiers. Additionally, the effects of modifiers on the properties of crumb rubber
concrete were comparatively analyzed and discussed.

2. Experimental Study

2.1. Materials
Composite Portland cement of Grade 32.5 (normal type) with a specific gravity of 3.12, conforming
to GB 175-2007 [27], was used as the cementitious material. The initial setting time was 180 min, and
the final setting time was 260 min. The compressive strength of cement mortar was 35.9 MPa, which
satisfied the design strength requirement. Natural river sand (medium sand) with a fineness modulus
of 3.0 was adopted as the fine aggregate. Additionally, the particle size distribution is illustrated in
Figure 1. Crushed gravels with a nominal maximum size of 31.5 mm were used as coarse aggregates.
The specific gravity of fine aggregate and coarse aggregate was 2.65 and 2.7, respectively. The water
was potable-grade water in the laboratory.
Materials 2016, 9, 172 3 of 12
Materials 2016, 9, 172  3 of 12 

Materials 2016, 9, 172  100 3 of 12 

Materials 2016, 9, 172  90 3 of 12 
100
80 Crumb rubber

(%) (%)
100
90
70 Fine aggregate
90 Crumb rubber

percentage
80
60 Crumb rubber
80
Fine aggregate

Passing percentage (%)

70
5070 Fine aggregate

percentage
60
40 60
Passing 50
3050
40
2040
30
1030
Passing

20020
101010 1 0.1
00 Sieve size (mm)
 
1010 1 0.10.1
Figure 1. Particle size distribution of fine aggregate and crumb rubber. 
Figure Sieve
of size
Sieve
1. Particle size distribution fine(mm)
(mm)
aggregate and crumb rubber.
   
Crumb  rubber  Fig
Fig ure 1. Particle size distribution of fine aggregate and crumb rubber. 
ure 1. Particle size distribution of fine aggregate and crumb rubber. 
with  the  particle  size  (2–4  mm)  specially  used  to  pave  a  rubber  runway  was 
Crumb rubber with the particle size (2–4 mm) specially used to pave a rubber runway was selected
selected  as  the  replacement  material,  as  shown  in  Figure  2.  The  specific  gravity  was  1.2,  and  the 
Crumb 
as particle 
the replacement
Crumb  rubber  with the 
material, the  particle size 
asalso 
shown size 
in (2–4  mm) 
Figure mm) 
2. The specially 
specific used  to 
to pave 
gravity was a 1.2,
rubber 
andrunway 
the was  size
particle
size rubber  with 
distribution  is  particle 
shown  (2–4 
in  Figure  specially 
1.  used 
Corresponding  pave  a 
studies rubber  runway 
indicated  that was 
the 
selected 
distribution
selected  as as 
is the 
also
the  replacement 
shown
replacement  in material, 
Figure 1.
material,  as  shown 
Corresponding
as  shown  in 
in  Figure  2. 
studies
Figure  2.  The  specific 
indicated
The  gravity 
that
specific  the
gravity was  1.2, 
concrete
was  and 
1.2,  the 
containing
and  the 
concrete  containing  2–4  mm  crumb  rubber  had  superior  properties  [28].  The  geometric 
particle 
2–4particle 
mm crumb size  distribution 
rubber had is also 
also shown 
superior shown  in in  Figure 
Figure  1.  Corresponding  studies  indicated  that  the 
size 
configuration  distribution 
of  crumb  is 
rubber  was properties
an  uneven  [28].
prism, The
1.  geometric
Corresponding 
which  configuration
studies 
could  enhance  of crumb
the indicated 
bonding  rubber
that  the 
between 
concrete  containing  2–4  mm  crumb  rubber  had  superior  properties  [28].  The  geometric 
wasconcrete  containing  2–4  mm  crumb  rubber  had  superior  properties 
an uneven prism, which could enhance the bonding between rubber particles and cement paste.
rubber particles and cement paste. Hardness and elasticity were also better than general rubber.  [28].  The  geometric 
configuration  of  crumb  rubber  was  an  uneven  prism,  which  could  enhance  the  bonding  between 
configuration 
Hardness of  crumb 
and elasticity rubber 
were alsowas  an than
better uneven  prism, 
general which  could  enhance  the  bonding  between 
rubber.
rubber particles and cement paste. Hardness and elasticity were also better than general rubber. 
rubber particles and cement paste. Hardness and elasticity were also better than general rubber. 

(a)  (b)
(a)  (b)
Figure 2. Crumb rubber with a size of 2–4 mm. (a) Crumb rubber; (b) particle size. 
(a)  (b)
Figure 2. Crumb rubber with a size of 2–4 mm. (a) Crumb rubber; (b) particle size. 
Figure 2. Crumb rubber with a size of 2–4 mm. (a) Crumb rubber; (b) particle size.
Modifiers Figure 2. Crumb rubber with a size of 2–4 mm. (a) Crumb rubber; (b) particle size. 
for  the  pretreatment  of  crumb  rubber,  including  emulsion,  ethoxyline  resin, 
Modifiers  for  the  pretreatment  of  crumb  rubber,  including  emulsion,  ethoxyline  resin, 
synthetic  resin,  amino‐acrylate  (contact  glue),  chloroprene  adhesive  and  unsaturated  resins   
Modifiers
synthetic  for theamino‐acrylate 
resin, 
Modifiers 
pretreatment of crumbglue), 
(contact  rubber, including
chloroprene  emulsion,
adhesive  ethoxyline
and  resin,resins 
unsaturated  synthetic
 
(marble  glue),  for 
were the  pretreatment 
commonly  used of in crumb  rubber, 
decoration  and including  emulsion, 
construction  ethoxyline 
engineering.  They resin, 
had 
resin,(marble  glue),  were 
amino-acrylate commonly 
(contact glue), used  in  decoration 
chloroprene adhesive and 
andconstruction 
unsaturated engineering. 
resins (marbleThey  had were
glue),
synthetic  resin,  amino‐acrylate  (contact  glue),  chloroprene  adhesive  and  unsaturated  resins   
satisfactory performance in improving adhesion and enhancing strength. The crumb rubbers after 
satisfactory performance in improving adhesion and enhancing strength. The crumb rubbers after 
commonly used inwere 
decoration and construction engineering. They had satisfactory performance
(marble  glue),  commonly  used  in  decoration 
pretreatment by modifiers are shown in Figure 3.  and  construction  engineering.  They  had in
pretreatment by modifiers are shown in Figure 3. 
improving adhesion and enhancing strength. The crumb rubbers after pretreatment by modifiers are
satisfactory performance in improving adhesion and enhancing strength. The crumb rubbers after 
shown in Figure 3.
pretreatment by modifiers are shown in Figure 3. 

      
(a)(a) (b)
(b) (c) 
(c) 
   
(a) (b) (c) 

Figure 3. Cont.
Materials 2016, 9, 172 4 of 12
Materials 2016, 9, 172  4 of 12 

   
(d) (e) (f) 
Figure  3.  Crumb  rubber  after  pretreatment.  (a)  Emulsion;  (b)  ethoxyline  resin;  (c)  synthetic  resin;   
Figure 3. Crumb rubber after pretreatment. (a) Emulsion; (b) ethoxyline resin; (c) synthetic resin;
(d) amino‐acrylate; (e) chloroprene adhesive; (f) unsaturated resins. 
(d) amino-acrylate; (e) chloroprene adhesive; (f) unsaturated resins.
2.2. Mixture Proportion 
2.2. Mixture Proportion
This study consisted of one plain concrete as the control and 9 crumb rubber concretes. All of 
This study consisted of one plain concrete as the control and 9 crumb rubber concretes. All of
the concretes were designed at a constant water‐cement ratio of 0.42. Crumb rubber was used as the 
thereplacement 
concretes were designed
for  an  at a constant
equal  part  water-cement
of  fine  aggregate  ratio of 0.42.
and  mixture.  Crumb rubber
Considering  was used
the  different  as the
specific 
replacement for an equal part of fine aggregate and mixture. Considering the different specific
gravities  of  crumb  rubber  and  mineral  materials,  the  replacement  with  crumb  rubber  was  gravities
of conducted based on the volume other than weight [29,30]. The replacement levels of crumb rubber 
crumb rubber and mineral materials, the replacement with crumb rubber was conducted based on
thevaried from 5% to 20% by volume for fine aggregate and from 1% to 10% for the concrete mixture. 
volume other than weight [29,30]. The replacement levels of crumb rubber varied from 5% to 20%
byThe final proportions were determined by several trials, as summarized in Table 1. The slumps of 
volume for fine aggregate and from 1% to 10% for the concrete mixture. The final proportions were
the designed mixture varied between 30 and 60 mm, which ensured the workability of concrete. 
determined by several trials, as summarized in Table 1. The slumps of the designed mixture varied
between 30 and 60 mm, which ensured the workability of concrete.
Table 1. Mixture proportions of crumb rubber concrete. 
Table 1. Mixture proportions of crumb rubber concrete.
Weight per Cubic Meter (kg/m3) 
Rubber 
Mix  Fine Coarse  Crumb 
Content (%) 
Rubber Water  Weight per Cubic Meter (kg/m3 )
Cement 
Mix Aggregate  Aggregate  Rubber 
Content (%) Water Cement Fine Aggregate 593 Coarse Aggregate
RC  0  180  430  1197  Crumb Rubber
0 
RC 0 180Fine aggregate is replaced by crumb rubber 
430 593 1197 0
CF1  5  Fine180  430  by crumb
aggregate is replaced 563.4 
rubber 1197  13.4 
CF2 
CF1 5 10  180 180 
430 430 
563.4 533.7  1197 1197  26.8 
13.4
CF3 
CF2 10 15  180 180 
430 430 
533.7 504.1  1197 1197  40.2 
26.8
CF4 
CF3 15 20  180 180 
430 430 
504.1 474.4  1197 1197  56.3 
40.2
CF4 20 180 Mixture is replaced by crumb rubber 
430 474.4 1197 56.3
CM1  1  178.2  425.7 by crumb 587.1 
Mixture is replaced rubber 1185.0  12 
CM2 
CM1 1 3  178.2 174.6 
425.7 417.1 
587.1 575.2  1185.01161.1  36 
12
CM3 
CM2 3 5  174.6 171.0 417.1 408.5 
575.2 563.4  1161.11137.2  60 
36
CM4 
CM3 5 10  171.0 162.0 408.5 387.0 
563.4 533.7  1137.21077.3  120 
60
CM4 10
Note:  RC  represents  162.0 387.0
the  reference  concrete;  CF 533.7
and  CM  represent 1077.3 120 by 
the  concretes  produced 
replacing fine aggregate and mixture with crumb rubber, respectively. 
Note: RC represents the reference concrete; CF and CM represent the concretes produced by replacing fine
aggregate and mixture with crumb rubber, respectively.
2.3. Preparation of Specimens 
2.3. Preparation of Specimens
Concrete specimens were produced as per the JTG E30‐2005 standard [31]. Mixing of the mixture 
Concrete
was  specimens
conducted  were produced
by  a  power‐driven  as per pan 
revolving  the JTG E30-2005
mixer.  standard
In  order  [31].a Mixing
to  achieve  of the mixture
more  homogenous 
was conductedof by
distribution  a power-driven
rubber  revolving
particles  in  the  mixture pan mixer.
with  In order air, 
less  entrapped  to achieve a more homogenous
the  pretreatment  of  crumb 
distribution
rubber  was ofperformed 
rubber particles in the
for  5  min  mixture
before  being with
added less entrapped
into  the  mixer. air, themixing 
The  pretreatment of crumb
procedure  was 
started 
rubber waswith  2  min  of 
performed forpre‐mixing 
5 min before of  being
cement,  aggregates 
added into theand  crumb 
mixer. Therubber. 
mixing Then,  an  additional 
procedure was started 
2 min of mixing were conducted after adding the water. After mixing, the mixture was poured into 
with 2 min of pre-mixing of cement, aggregates and crumb rubber. Then, an additional 2 min of
the molds with three layers. A vibration for five seconds was performed after rodding 25 times for 
mixing were conducted after adding the water. After mixing, the mixture was poured into the molds
each layer. All specimens were removed from the molds after 24 h and cured in the conditions of 
with three layers. A vibration for five seconds was performed after rodding 25 times for each layer.  
All20 ± 3 °C and 95% relative humidity. Prismy specimens (150 mm × 150 mm × 300 mm) were used to test 
specimens were removed from the molds after 24 h and cured in the conditions of 20 ˘ 3 ˝ C
and 95% relative humidity. Prismy specimens (150 mm ˆ 150 mm ˆ 300 mm) were used to test the
Materials 2016, 9, 172 5 of 12

modulus of elasticity and axial compressive strength. Cube specimens (150 mm ˆ 150 mm ˆ 150 mm)
were produced for measuring compressive strength, splitting tensile strength and durability.

2.4. Test Methods

Compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, axial compressive strength and the modulus of
elasticity of hardened concrete were measured as per GB/T 50081-2002 [32]. Compressive strength,
splitting tensile strength and axial compressive strength were performed on a compression testing
machine of a 200-tonne capacity by crushing the specimens cured for 28 days. The modulus of elasticity
was tested in the elastic range for concrete specimens at 28 days. Load was applied gradually with a rate of
0.5–0.8 MPa/s, and the limit load was not larger than 1/3 of the axial compressive strength. The applied
load and corresponding deformation were measured by a pressure meter and a dial indicator.
Concrete specimens of 150 mm in size cured for 90 days were used to test the durability
(freezing-thawing resistance and sulfate resistance) according to GB/T 50082-2009 [33]. The resistance
of concrete against freezing and thawing was assessed by the strength loss rate after twenty-five cycles
of freezing and thawing, as calculated by Equation (1).

f c0 ´ f cn
∆ fc “ ˆ 100 (1)
f c0

where ∆ f c is the strength loss rate of concrete. fcn is the compressive strength of concrete experiencing
twenty-five cycles of freezing and thawing. Additionally, fc0 is the compressive strength of the
control concrete.
In the case of sulfate resistance, the specimens were immersed in sulfate solution. Then, the
waterish specimens were dried at a constant temperature of 80 ˘ 5 ˝ C. The anti-corrosion coefficient of
concrete after fifteen cycles of drying and soaking was calculated as Equation (2).

f cn
Kf “ ˆ 100 (2)
f c0

where K f is the anti-corrosion coefficient; fcn is the compressive strength of the tested concrete after
fifteen cycles of drying and soaking; fc0 is the compressive strength of the control concrete.

3. Results and Discussion

The mechanical properties and durability of concrete were significantly affected by introducing
crumb rubber into concrete. In this paper, the variation of properties in concrete with the changing of
rubber content was investigated. Additionally, the effect of modifiers was evaluated.

3.1. Mechanical Properties

The mechanical properties of crumb rubber concrete were tested and are listed in Table 2.
The compressive strength of crumb rubber concrete cured for 28 days was lower than that of the
control concrete (34.76 MPa). It was also observed that the compressive strength of CF (crumb rubber
replacing fine aggregate) reduced from 34.76 MPa down to 33.41 MPa with increasing rubber content
from 0% to 20%. The minimum compressive strength at the 20% replacement level satisfied the strength
requirement of C30 concrete. When 5% of the total mixture was replaced, the compressive strength had
an acceptable value of 25.38 Mpa. However, a reduction (44%) was observed at the 10% replacement
level. Compared to the replacement of mixture, replacing the fine aggregate with crumb rubber led to
a marginal decline of the compressive strength.
The splitting tensile strength of crumb rubber concrete cured at 28 days was measured, as shown
in Figure 4. It was observed that the splitting tensile strength decreased with the increase in the
volume percentage of crumb rubber. Similar to compressive strength, the reduction in the splitting
tensile strength of CF is lesser compared to the CM (crumb rubber replacing mixture). This was
Materials 2016, 9, 172  6 of 12 

splitting tensile strength was weakened due to the loss of binding material. Moreover, the ratio of 
Materials 2016, 9, 172 6 of 12
the reduction in the splitting tensile strength was lower than the compressive strength, which was 
owed  to  the  rubber  providing  a  better  bridge  between  propagated  cracks  and  limiting  their 
because replacing
development  [34]. mixture withfine 
When  20%  crumb rubber was 
aggregate  reduced the mass
replaced  of the cement.
by  crumb  rubber,  The splitting tensile
the  splitting  tensile 
strength was weakened due to the loss of binding material.
strength decreased by 2.5%, whereas compressive strength decreased by 3.9%.  Moreover, the ratio of the reduction in
the splitting tensile strength was lower than the compressive strength, which was owed to the rubber
providing a better bridgeTable 2. Mechanical properties of crumb rubber concrete. 
between propagated cracks and limiting their development [34]. When 20%
fine aggregate was replaced by crumb rubber, the splitting tensile strength decreased by 2.5%, whereas
Mixture  RC  CF CM 
compressive strength decreased by 3.9%.
Rubber content (%)  0  5  10  15  20  1  3  5  10 
Compressive  2. Mechanical
Table
34.76  34.52  properties of crumb
34.19  33.82  rubber 31.60 
33.41  concrete. 29.99  25.38  19.33 
strength (MPa) 
Splitting tensile 
Mixture   RC 2.32  CF 2.29 
2.35  2.33  2.31  2.15  2.14  CM1.86  1.46 
strength (MPa) 
Rubber content (%) 0 5 10 15 20 1 3 5 10
Axial compressive 
Compressive strength 23.73 
(MPa) 23.41  34.76 22.70 
34.52 34.19
22.34  33.82
21.29 33.41 31.60 21.20 
22.55  29.99 19.96 
25.38 19.33
15.47 
strength (MPa) 
Splitting tensile strength (MPa) 2.35 2.33 2.32 2.31 2.29 2.15 2.14 1.86 1.46
Axial compressive strength (MPa) 23.73 23.41 22.70 22.34 21.29 22.55 21.20 19.96 15.47
Modulus of elasticity 
Modulus 31.75  29.60  31.75 27.88  26.71  26.71
24.73 24.73
29.22 
29.22 21.88 
21.88 17.74  13.42 
(GPa) of elasticity (GPa) 29.60 27.88 17.74 13.42

 
Fig ure 4. Splitting tensile strength test. 
Figure 4. Splitting tensile strength test.

The  reduction  in  axial  compressive  strength  was  similar  to  the  compressive  strength.  It 
The reduction in axial compressive strength was similar to the compressive strength. It decreased
decreased  with  the  increasing  of  the  percentage  content  of  crumb  rubber.  When  the  mixture  was 
with the increasing of the percentage content of crumb rubber. When the mixture was replaced by
replaced  by  crumb  rubber,  the  axial  compressive  strength  significantly  decreased  as  compared  to 
crumb rubber, the axial compressive strength significantly decreased as compared to the concrete with
the  concrete  with  fine  aggregate  replacement.  There  was  a  strong  correlation  between  the  axial 
fine aggregate replacement. There was a strong correlation between the axial compressive strength
compressive strength and the replacement volume of crumb rubber. 
and the replacement volume of crumb rubber.
The  modulus  of  elasticity  represented  the  deformation  capacity  of  concrete.  The  test 
The modulus of elasticity represented the deformation capacity of concrete. The test photograph
photograph  is  shown  in  Figure  5.  It  was  observed  that  the  modulus  of  elasticity  for  rubberized 
is shown in Figure 5. It was observed that the modulus of elasticity for rubberized concrete decreased
concrete decreased with the increase of the replacement level of crumb rubber. In the case of CF, the 
with the increase of the replacement level of crumb rubber. In the case of CF, the modulus of elasticity
modulus  of  elasticity  was reduced  from  31.75  GPa down  to  24.73  GPa  with  the  increasing  rubber 
was reduced from 31.75 GPa down to 24.73 GPa with the increasing rubber replacement level from
replacement level from 0% to 20%. The reduction in the modulus of elasticity was higher when the 
0% to 20%. The reduction in the modulus of elasticity was higher when the mixture was replaced.
mixture  was  replaced.  Rubber  particles  had  a  low  modulus  of  elasticity  with  respect  to  mineral 
Rubber particles had a low modulus of elasticity with respect to mineral aggregate, which resulted in
aggregate, which resulted in the weak resistance to external applied load. Due to this, crumb rubber 
the weak resistance to external applied load. Due to this, crumb rubber concrete exhibited an obvious
concrete exhibited an obvious deformation performance and better toughness. 
deformation performance and better toughness.
There  are  many  reasons  accounting  for  the  lower  strength  of  crumb  rubber  concrete  [14]. 
There are many reasons accounting for the lower strength of crumb rubber concrete [14]. Firstly,
Firstly,  the  adhesion  of  rubber  particles  and  cement  paste  is  weaker  than  the  mineral  aggregate. 
the adhesion of rubber particles and cement paste is weaker than the mineral aggregate. Secondly, the
Secondly, the distribution of rubber particles in the concrete mixture is non‐homogenous, due to the 
distribution of rubber particles in the concrete mixture is non-homogenous, due to the lower specific
lower  specific  gravity  compared  to  other  materials.  Thirdly,  the  hydrophobic  nature  of  rubber 
gravity compared to other materials. Thirdly, the hydrophobic nature of rubber particles takes bubbles
particles  takes  bubbles  into  the  concrete  mixture  and  increases  the  air  content.  Due  to  the  above 
into the concrete mixture and increases the air content. Due to the above reasons, the mechanical
reasons, the mechanical strength is reduced when the crumb rubber is introduced into the concrete. 
strength is reduced when the crumb rubber is introduced into the concrete.
 Materials 2016, 9, 172  7 of 12 

Materials 2016, 9, 172 7 of 12

Materials 2016, 9, 172  7 of 12 

 
Figure 5. Modulus of elasticity test. 
 
3.2. Durability 
Figure 5. Modulus of elasticity test. 
Figure 5. Modulus of elasticity test.
Freezing‐thawing resistance and sulfate resistance are the important aspects of the durability 
of  concrete.  In  this  paper,  the  freezing‐thawing  resistance  and  sulfate  resistance  of  crumb  rubber 
3.2. Durability 
3.2. Durability were  investigated.  Additionally,  the  effect  of  crumb  rubber  content  on  freezing‐thawing 
concrete 
Freezing‐thawing resistance and sulfate resistance are the important aspects of the durability 
resistance and sulfate resistance was analyzed and discussed. 
of  concrete. 
Freezing-thawing In  this  paper,  the and
resistance freezing‐thawing  resistance 
sulfate resistance areand 
the sulfate 
important resistance 
aspects
Crumb rubber concrete cured for 90 days was set in the refrigerator for freezing, as shown in  of  crumb 
of therubber 
durability of
concrete  were  investigated.  Additionally,  the  effect  of  crumb  rubber  content  on  freezing‐thawing 
Figure 6. Additionally, thawing was performed in water of 18–20 °C. The strength of crumb rubber 
concrete. In this paper, the freezing-thawing resistance and sulfate resistance of crumb rubber concrete
resistance and sulfate resistance was analyzed and discussed. 
concrete  after  twenty‐five  cycles  of  freezing‐thawing  was  tested. onThe  strength  loss  ratio  was 
were investigated. Additionally, the effect of crumb rubber content freezing-thawing
Crumb rubber concrete cured for 90 days was set in the refrigerator for freezing, as shown in 
resistance and
calculated based on Equation (1) and is listed in Table 3. It can be seen that the concrete including 
sulfate resistance was analyzed and discussed.
Figure 6. Additionally, thawing was performed in water of 18–20 °C. The strength of crumb rubber 
crumb  rubber  had  good  resistance  against  freezing‐thawing  compared  to  the  reference  concrete. 
Crumb rubber
concrete  after  concrete cured
twenty‐five  forof 90
cycles  days was set in
freezing‐thawing  the
was  refrigerator
tested.  for freezing,
The  strength 
The strength loss ratio of the reference concrete was 5.8%, while the concrete with 20% replacement  loss  ratio aswas 
shown in
Figure 6. Additionally, thawing was performed in water of 18–20 ˝ C. The strength of crumb rubber
calculated based on Equation (1) and is listed in Table 3. It can be seen that the concrete including 
of  fine  aggregate  was  2.7%,  and  concrete  with  10%  replacement  of  the  total  mixture  was  2.0%.   
concretecrumb 
after
The  rubber 
influence  had 
twenty-five
of  good 
mixture resistance 
cyclesreplacement against 
of freezing-thawingfreezing‐thawing 
was  more  was tested.
significant  compared 
than  The to aggregate 
the strength
fine  the  reference 
loss ratio concrete. 
was calculated
replacement.   
The strength loss ratio of the reference concrete was 5.8%, while the concrete with 20% replacement 
In addition, the increasing of rubber content generally improved the freezing‐thawing resistance of 
based on Equation (1) and is listed in Table 3. It can be seen that the concrete including crumb rubber
of  fine  aggregate 
concrete.  However,  was  2.7%, 
when  and 
the  concrete  with 
replacement  10% 
level  replacement 
exceeded  of  the 
a  certain  total (5% 
extent  mixture 
total was  2.0%.    
mixture), 
had goodThe resistance
influence  of against freezing-thawing
mixture  replacement  was  more compared to the
significant  than  reference concrete.
the  fine  aggregate  The strength
replacement.    loss
the improvement of freezing‐thawing resistance was not obvious. 
ratio ofIn addition, the increasing of rubber content generally improved the freezing‐thawing resistance of 
the reference concrete was 5.8%, while the concrete with 20% replacement of fine aggregate
was 2.7%, and concrete
concrete.  However,  with 10%
when  replacement
the  replacement of theexceeded 
level  total mixture wasextent 
a  certain 
Table 3. Durability of crumb rubber concrete.  2.0%. (5% 
The total 
influence of mixture
mixture),   
the improvement of freezing‐thawing resistance was not obvious. 
replacement was more significant than the fine aggregate replacement. In addition, the increasing of
Mixture  RC CF CM 
rubber content generally improved the freezing-thawing
Rubber content (%)  0  5  10  resistance
15  20  of concrete.
1  3  However,
5  when the
10 
Table 3. Durability of crumb rubber concrete. 
replacement Strength loss ratio (%) 
level exceeded a certain extent 5.8  (5%
4.8 total mixture),
3.2  3.1  the improvement
2.7  5.1  4.2  of freezing-thawing
2.1  2.0 
was not Mixture 
resistanceAnti‐corrosion coefficient (%) 
obvious. RC CF
96.1  96.7  97.4  97.7  98.4  96.2  96.9  97.0  97.2 
CM 
Rubber content (%)  0  5  10  15  20  1  3  5  10 
Strength loss ratio (%)  5.8  4.8  3.2  3.1  2.7  5.1  4.2  2.1  2.0 
Anti‐corrosion coefficient (%)  96.1  96.7  97.4  97.7  98.4  96.2  96.9  97.0  97.2 

 
Figure 6. Freezing‐thawing of crumb rubber concrete. 
Figure 6. Freezing-thawing of crumb rubber concrete.
 
The  crumb  rubber  concrete  after  sulfate  corrosion  is  illustrated  in  Figure  7.  And  the 
Fig ure 6. Freezing‐thawing of crumb rubber concrete. 
Table 3. Durability of crumb rubber concrete.
anti‐corrosion coefficient of crumb rubber concrete cured at 90 days is shown in Table 3. There was 

The  crumb  rubber  concrete  after  sulfate  corrosion  is  illustrated  in  Figure  7.  And  the 
Mixture RC CF CM
anti‐corrosion coefficient of crumb rubber concrete cured at 90 days is shown in Table 3. There was 
Rubber content (%) 0 5 10 15 20 1 3 5 10
Strength loss ratio (%) 5.8 4.8 3.2 3.1 2.7 5.1 4.2 2.1 2.0
Anti-corrosion coefficient (%) 96.1 96.7 97.4 97.7 98.4 96.2 96.9 97.0 97.2

The crumb rubber concrete after sulfate corrosion is illustrated in Figure 7. And the anti-corrosion
coefficient of crumb rubber concrete cured at 90 days is shown in Table 3. There was more loss in
Materials 2016, 9, 172  8 of 12 

more  loss  in  compressive  strength  for  concrete  containing  less  crumb  rubber  in  sulfate  corrosion. 
Furthermore, the anti‐corrosion coefficient gradually increased with the increase in the percentage 
Materials 2016, 9, 172 8 of 12
of crumb rubber in concrete. In the case of CF, the maximum anti‐corrosion coefficient (98.4%) was 
recorded  for  the  concrete  with  20%  crumb  rubber,  whereas  the  minimum  value  was  96.1%  for 
compressive
concrete  with strength for concrete
0%  crumb  rubber.  containing less crumb
A  similar  trend  could rubber in sulfate
be  observed  for corrosion. Furthermore,
the  concrete  the
with  mixture 
anti-corrosion coefficient gradually increased with the increase in the percentage
replacement.  However,  exceeding  5%  replacement  of  mixture  by  crumb  rubber  could  not  of crumb rubber in
concrete. In the case of CF, the maximum anti-corrosion coefficient (98.4%) was recorded for the concrete
significantly enhance sulfate resistance. 
with The crumb rubber particles in the rubberized concrete can prevent the formation of cracks and 
20% crumb rubber, whereas the minimum value was 96.1% for concrete with 0% crumb rubber.
A similar trend could be observed for the concrete with mixture replacement. However, exceeding 5%
material separation. This may be the reason for the good performance to resisting freezing‐thawing 
replacement of mixture by crumb rubber could not significantly enhance sulfate resistance.
and sulfate attack for crumb rubber concrete [3,35]. 

 
Figure 7. Sulfate corrosion for crumb rubber concrete. 
Figure 7. Sulfate corrosion for crumb rubber concrete.

3.3. Effect of Modifiers 
The crumb rubber particles in the rubberized concrete can prevent the formation of cracks and
As can be seen from the above study about the mechanical properties and durability of crumb 
material separation. This may be the reason for the good performance to resisting freezing-thawing
rubber  concrete, 
and sulfate attack 5%  replacement 
for crumb rubberof  the  total 
concrete volume  of  mixture  resulted  in  a  high  decrease  of 
[3,35].
strength. From a practical viewpoint, the rubber content should not exceed 5% of the total volume 
3.3.the 
of  Effect of Modifiers
mixture  due  to  the  negative  effect  on  strength.  Therefore,  crumb  rubber  concrete  with  5% 
replacement of total mixture was selected to investigate the effect of modifiers on the properties of 
As can be seen from the above study about the mechanical properties and durability of crumb
rubberized concrete. 
rubber concrete, 5% replacement of the total volume of mixture resulted in a high decrease of strength.
Modified crumb rubber concrete was produced by introducing crumb rubber after pretreatment 
From a practical viewpoint, the rubber content should not exceed 5% of the total volume of the mixture
using  modifiers.  Compressive  strength,  splitting  tensile  strength  and  axial  compressive  strength 
due to the negative effect on strength. Therefore, crumb rubber concrete with 5% replacement of total
were  tested.  Compared  to  the  measured  strength  of  unmodified  crumb  rubber  concrete,  the 
mixture was selected to investigate the effect of modifiers on the properties of rubberized concrete.
percentage was calculated, and corresponding results are listed in Table 4. Moreover, the effect of 
Modified crumb rubber concrete was produced by introducing crumb rubber after pretreatment
six  pretreatment  methods  on  the  mechanical  properties  is  illustrated  in  Figure  8.  As  can  be  seen 
using modifiers. Compressive strength, splitting tensile strength and axial compressive strength were
from Table 4 and Figure 8, the effects of modifiers on the mechanical properties were different from 
tested. Compared to the measured strength of unmodified crumb rubber concrete, the percentage was
each  other.  The  majority  had  a  positive  influence  on  enhancing  the  strength  of  crumb  rubber 
calculated, and corresponding results are listed in Table 4. Moreover, the effect of six pretreatment
concrete.  However,  the  modifier  of  emulsion  reduced  the  compressive  strength  and  axial 
methods on the mechanical properties is illustrated in Figure 8. As can be seen from Table 4 and Figure 8,
compressive  strength  to  79%  and  90%,  respectively.  Unsaturated  resins  decreased  the  splitting 
the effects of modifiers on the mechanical properties were different from each other. The majority
tensile  strength  to  97%.  These  two  modifiers  caused  negative  effects  on  the  improvement  of  the 
had a positive influence on enhancing the strength of crumb rubber concrete. However, the modifier
mechanical  strength  of  crumb  rubber  concrete.  It  had  been  found  that  the  pretreatment  using 
of emulsion reduced the compressive strength and axial compressive strength to 79% and 90%,
synthetic resin significantly increased the strength as compared to other modifiers. The compressive 
respectively. Unsaturated resins decreased the splitting tensile strength to 97%. These two modifiers
strength,  splitting  tensile  strength  and  axial  compressive  strength  of  crumb  rubber  concrete 
caused negative effects on the improvement of the mechanical strength of crumb rubber concrete. It had
prepared  with  pretreated  rubber  using  synthetic  resin  increased  12%,  40%  and  5%,  respectively,   
been found that the pretreatment using synthetic resin significantly increased the strength as compared
as compared to the untreated rubber. Therefore, the modifier of synthetic resin could be accepted to 
to other modifiers. The compressive strength, splitting tensile strength and axial compressive strength
increase the mechanical strength of crumb rubber concrete. 
of crumb rubber concrete prepared with pretreated rubber using synthetic resin increased 12%, 40%
 
and 5%, respectively, as compared   to the untreated rubber. Therefore, the modifier of synthetic resin
could be accepted to increase the mechanical strength of crumb rubber concrete.
Materials 2016, 9, 172  9 of 12 
Materials 2016, 9, 172 9 of 12

Table 4. Mechanical properties of modified crumb rubber concrete. 
Table 4. Mechanical properties of modified crumb rubber concrete.
Mechanical Properties
Modifiers  Compressive  Splitting Tensile 
Mechanical Properties
Axial Compressive 
Modifiers Strength MPa (%)  Strength MPa (%)  Strength MPa (%) 
Compressive Splitting Tensile Axial Compressive
None  25.38(100) 
Strength MPa (%) 1.86 (100) 
Strength MPa (%) 19.96 (100) 
Strength MPa (%)
Emulsion 
None 20.15 (79) 
25.38 (100) 2.12 (114) 
1.86 (100) 17.93 (90) 
19.96 (100)
Ethoxyline resin 
Emulsion 27.44 (108) 
20.15 (79) 2.44 (131) 
2.12 (114) 20.03 (100) 
17.93 (90)
Ethoxyline resin
Synthetic resin  27.44 (108)
28.40 (112)  2.44 (131)
2.61 (140)  20.03 (100)
20.96 (105) 
Synthetic resin 28.40 (112) 2.61 (140) 20.96 (105)
Amino‐acrylate  25.90 (102)  2.30 (124)  20.80 (104) 
Amino-acrylate 25.90 (102) 2.30 (124) 20.80 (104)
Chloroprene adhesive 
Chloroprene adhesive 26.24 (103) 
26.24 (103) 2.26 (122) 
2.26 (122) 20.40 (102) 
20.40 (102)
Unsaturated resins 
Unsaturated resins 26.12 (103) 
26.12 (103) 1.80 (97) 
1.80 (97) 20.07 (101) 
20.07 (101)
Note: 
Note: the  percentage 
the percentage in  brackets 
in brackets is the is  the 
ratio of ratio  of  the value
the measured measured  value 
of modified of  modified 
crumb crumb 
rubber concrete andrubber 
that
of the unmodified crumb rubber concrete.
concrete and that of the unmodified crumb rubber concrete. 

180
Compressive strength Splitting tensile strength
Relative percentage (%)

160
Axial compressive strength
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

Modifier  
Figure 8. Effect of modifiers on mechanical properties. 
Figure 8. Effect of modifiers on mechanical properties.

The effect of pretreatment methods on freezing‐thawing resistance and sulfate resistance was 
The effect of pretreatment methods on freezing-thawing resistance and sulfate resistance was
investigated. Additionally, the testing results are listed in Table 5. Figure 9 reports the difference in 
investigated. Additionally, the testing results are listed in Table 5. Figure 9 reports the difference in the
the  durability  of  crumb  rubber  concrete  modified  by  six  modifiers.  It  was  indicated  that  the 
durability of crumb rubber concrete modified by six modifiers. It was indicated that the anti-corrosion
anti‐corrosion coefficients of crumb rubber concrete modified by six modifiers were all larger than 97%, 
coefficients of crumb rubber concrete modified by six modifiers were all larger than 97%, which
which indicated that the pretreatments for the crumb rubber improved the ability of crumb rubber 
indicated that the pretreatments for the crumb rubber improved the ability of crumb rubber concrete
concrete to resist sulfate corrosion. Ethoxyline resin and chloroprene adhesive enhanced the resistance 
to resist sulfate corrosion. Ethoxyline resin and chloroprene adhesive enhanced the resistance against
against  sulfate  corrosion  more  significantly  with  anti‐corrosion  coefficients  of  99.0%  and  99.2%, 
sulfate corrosion more significantly with anti-corrosion coefficients of 99.0% and 99.2%, respectively.
respectively.  As  for  the  freezing‐thawing  resistance,  the  strength  loss  ratios  of  crumb  rubber 
As for the freezing-thawing resistance, the strength loss ratios of crumb rubber concrete modified
concrete modified by ethoxyline resin and unsaturated resins were larger than 5%, which indicated 
by ethoxyline resin and unsaturated resins were larger than 5%, which indicated that the ability of
that  the  ability  of  resisting  freezing‐thawing  was  not  acceptable.  Synthetic  resin  significantly 
resisting freezing-thawing was not acceptable. Synthetic resin significantly reduced the strength loss
reduced  the  strength  loss  ratio  to  1.2%,  which  obviously  improved  the  performance  of 
ratio to 1.2%, which obviously improved the performance of freezing-thawing resistance. Due to the
freezing‐thawing resistance. Due to the similar effect of pretreatment methods on sulfate resistance, 
similar effect of pretreatment methods on sulfate resistance, the optimal modifier was selected based
the  optimal  modifier  was  selected  based  on  the  improvement  of  the  freezing‐thawing  resistance. 
on the improvement of the freezing-thawing resistance. Therefore, synthetic resin was selected as the
Therefore, synthetic resin was selected as the optimal modifier because of excellent freezing‐thawing 
optimal modifier because of excellent freezing-thawing resistance and acceptable sulfate resistance.
resistance and acceptable sulfate resistance. 
Table 5. Durability of modified crumb rubber concrete.
Table 5. Durability of modified crumb rubber concrete. 
Modifiers
Modifiers Strength Loss Ratio (%)
Strength Loss Ratio (%) Anti-Corrosion Coefficien (%)
Anti‐Corrosion Coefficien (%) 
Emulsion
Emulsion  2.2
2.2  97.3 97.3 
Ethoxyline resin 6.7 99.0
Ethoxyline resin  6.7  99.0 
Synthetic resin 1.2 97.9
Synthetic resin 
Amino-acrylate 1.2 
1.9 98.1 97.9 
Amino‐acrylate 
Chloroprene adhesive 1.9 
3.5 99.2 98.1 
Unsaturated resins
Chloroprene adhesive  6.0
3.5  97.8 99.2 

Unsaturated resins  6.0  97.8 

Materials 2016, 9, 172 10 of 12
Materials 2016, 9, 172  10 of 12 

9 100

Anti-corrosion coefficient (%)

Strength loss ratio (%)

6 98

3 96

0 94

Modifier Modifier
(a)  (b)
Figure  9.  Durability  of  modified  crumb  rubber  concrete.  (a)  Freezing‐thawing  resistance;   
Figure 9. Durability of modified crumb rubber concrete. (a) Freezing-thawing resistance; (b) sulfate resistance.
(b) sulfate resistance. 

Crumb
Crumb  rubber
rubber  concrete
concrete  prepared
prepared with
with modified
modified rubber
rubber had had anan obvious
obvious improvement
improvement  in in 
mechanical properties and durability compared to untreated rubber, which could be the
mechanical properties and durability compared to untreated rubber, which could be the result of better  result of
better bonds between rubber particles and cement paste. Additionally, the treated rubber by modifiers
bonds between rubber particles and cement paste. Additionally, the treated rubber by modifiers could 
could
block block the early
the  early  initiation
initiation  of internal
of  internal  cracks,
cracks,  which
which  enhancedthe 
enhanced  thefreezing‐thawing 
freezing-thawing resistance 
resistance and
and 
sulfate resistance [35]. Comprehensive analysis about the effect of six modifiers on the mechanical
sulfate resistance [35]. Comprehensive analysis about the effect of six modifiers on the mechanical  and
durability properties
and  durability  indicated
properties  that synthetic
indicated  resin wasresin 
that  synthetic  the optimal
was  the modifier
optimal because of its
modifier  advantages
because  of  its 
in improving the mechanical and durability properties of crumb rubber concrete.
advantages in improving the mechanical and durability properties of crumb rubber concrete. 

4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions 
In this paper, crumb rubber concretes with different replacement forms and replacement levels
In this paper, crumb rubber concretes with different replacement forms and replacement levels 
were produced. The effect of the volume content of crumb rubber and pretreatment methods on the
were produced. The effect of the volume content of crumb rubber and pretreatment methods on the 
performances of concrete was investigated. The following conclusions have been obtained.
performances of concrete was investigated. The following conclusions have been obtained. 
(1) Adding crumb rubber into concrete resulted in a significant decrease of the mechanical
(1)  Adding  crumb  rubber  into  concrete  resulted  in  a  significant  decrease  of  the  mechanical 
properties, but increased the durability. The effect caused by replacing the mixture with crumb rubber
properties,  but  increased  the  durability.  The  effect  caused  by  replacing  the  mixture  with  crumb 
was higher than that caused by fine aggregate replacement.
rubber was higher than that caused by fine aggregate replacement. 
(2) Compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, axial compressive strength and the modulus of
(2)  Compressive  strength,  splitting  tensile  strength,  axial  compressive  strength  and  the 
elasticity were reduced with the increasing percentage content of crumb rubber, while freezing-thawing
modulus  of  elasticity  were  reduced  with  the  increasing  percentage  content  of  crumb  rubber,   
resistance and sulfate resistance were improved. A 20% replacement of fine aggregate and a 5%
while freezing‐thawing resistance and sulfate resistance were improved. A 20% replacement of fine 
replacement of the total mixture with crumb rubber met the safety strength requirements of concrete
aggregate  and  a  5%  replacement  of  the  total  mixture  with  crumb  rubber  met  the  safety  strength 
and had excellent durability.
requirements of concrete and had excellent durability. 
(3) The negative effect of crumb rubber on mechanical strength could be minimized and avoided by
(3)  The  negative  effect  of  crumb  rubber  on  mechanical  strength  could  be  minimized  and 
pretreatment of the crumb rubber using modifiers. These pretreatments enhanced the adherence between
avoided  by  pretreatment  of  the  crumb  rubber  using modifiers.  These  pretreatments  enhanced  the 
the rubber and cement paste and achieved the uniform distribution of rubber particles in mixture.
adherence  between  the  rubber  and  cement  paste  and  achieved the  uniform distribution  of  rubber 
(4) Synthetic resin significantly improved the mechanical and durability properties of crumb
particles in mixture. 
rubber concrete as compared to the other modifiers. The compressive strength, splitting tensile
(4)  Synthetic  resin  significantly  improved  the  mechanical  and  durability  properties  of  crumb 
strength and axial compressive strength of crumb rubber concrete prepared with pretreated rubber
rubber  concrete  as  compared  to  the  other  modifiers.  The  compressive  strength,  splitting  tensile 
using synthetic resin increased 12%, 40% and 5%, respectively. Additionally, the strength loss ratio
strength and axial compressive strength of crumb rubber concrete prepared with pretreated rubber 
after 25 cycles of freezing-thawing was reduced to 1.2%.
using synthetic resin increased 12%, 40% and 5%, respectively. Additionally, the strength loss ratio 
after 25 cycles of freezing‐thawing was reduced to 1.2%. 
Acknowledgments: The authors express their appreciation for the financial support of the National Natural
Science Foundation of China under Grants Nos. 51378236, 51408258 and 51578263; the China Postdoctoral Science
Foundation funded projects
Acknowledgments:  (Nos. 2014M560237
The  authors  and
express  their  2015T80305);
appreciation  for the Fundamental
the  Research
financial  support  Funds
of  the  for the Central
National  Natural 
Universities (JCKYQKJC06);
Science  Foundation  andunder 
of  China  Science & Technology
Grants  Development
Nos.  51378236,  Program
51408258  of Jilin Province
and  51578263;  (20140203002SF).
the  China  Postdoctoral 
Science Foundation funded projects (Nos. 2014M560237 and 2015T80305); the Fundamental Research Funds for 
Author Contributions: Hanbing Liu conceived of and designed the experiments. Tao Sha performed the experiments.
Xianqiang Wang
the  Central  analyzed(JCKYQKJC06); 
Universities  the data and wrote
and the paper.& 
Science  Yubo Jiao edited
Technology  and auditedProgram 
Development  the content.
of  Jilin  Province 
(20140203002SF). 
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Author Contributions: Hanbing Liu conceived of and designed the experiments. Tao Sha performed the experiments. 
Xianqiang Wang analyzed the data and wrote the paper. Yubo Jiao edited and audited the content. 

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. 
Materials 2016, 9, 172 11 of 12

References
1. Su, H.; Yang, J.; Ling, T.C.; Ghataora, G.S.; Dirar, S. Properties of concrete prepared with waste tyre rubber
particles of uniform and varying sizes. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 91, 288–296. [CrossRef]
2. Pacheco-Torgal, F.; Ding, Y.; Jalali, S. Properties and durability of concrete containing polymeric wastes
(tyre rubber and polyethylene terephthalate bottles): An overview. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 30, 714–724.
[CrossRef]
3. Thomas, B.S.; Gupta, R.C.; Panicker, V.J. Recycling of waste tire rubber as aggregate in concrete:
Durability-related performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 112, 504–513. [CrossRef]
4. Hernandez-Olivares, F.; Barluenga, G.; Bollati, M.; Witoszek, B. Static and dynamic behavior of recycled tyre
rubber-filled concrete. Cem. Concr. 2002, 32, 1587–1596. [CrossRef]
5. Yung, W.H.; Yung, L.C.; Hua, L.H. A study of the durability properties of waste tire rubber applied to
self-compacting concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 41, 665–672. [CrossRef]
6. Thomas, B.S.; Gupta, R.C. Properties of high strength concrete containing scrap tire rubber. J. Clean. Prod.
2016, 113, 86–92. [CrossRef]
7. Way, G.; Evans, R. Rubberised Bitumen in Road Construction; The Waste & Resources Action Programme:
Banbury, UK, 2006.
8. Mohammadi, I.; Khabbaz, H. Challenges associated with optimisation of blending, mixing and compaction
temperature for asphalt mixture modified with crumb rubber modifier (CRM). Appl. Mech. Mater. 2012,
256–259, 1837–1844. [CrossRef]
9. Flores-Medina, D.; Medina, N.F.; Hernández-Olivares, F. Static mechanical properties of waste rests of recycled
rubber and high quality recycled rubber from crumbed tires used as aggregate in dry consistency concretes.
Mater. Struct. 2014, 47, 185–1193. [CrossRef]
10. Thomas, B.S.; Gupta, R.C. Long term behavior of cement concrete containing discarded tire rubber. J. Clean. Prod.
2015, 102, 78–87. [CrossRef]
11. Ghaly, A.; Cahill, J. Correlation of strength, rubber content, and water to cement ratio in rubberized concrete.
Can. J. Civil Eng. 2005, 32, 1075–1081. [CrossRef]
12. Issa, C.A.; Salem, G. Utilization of recycled crumb rubber as fine aggregates in concrete mix design.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 42, 48–52. [CrossRef]
13. Emira, N.; Bajaba, N. The effect of rubber crumbs addition on some mechanical properties of concrete composites.
Int. J. Mech. Syst. Eng. 2012, 2, 53–58.
14. Mohammadi, I.; Khabbaz, H.; Vessalas, K. In-depth assessment of Crumb Rubber Concrete (CRC) prepared
by water-soaking treatment method for rigid pavements. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 71, 456–471. [CrossRef]
15. Corinaldesi, V.; Mazzoli, A.; Moriconi, G. Mechanical behavior and thermal conductivity of mortars
containing waste rubber particles. Mater. Des. 2011, 32, 1646–1650. [CrossRef]
16. Nguyen, T.H.; Toumi, A.; Turatsinze, A. Mechanical properties of steel fiber reinforced and rubberized
cement-based mortars. Mater. Des. 2010, 31, 641–647. [CrossRef]
17. Holmes, N.; Browne, A.; Montague, C. Acoustic properties of concrete panels with crumb rubber as a fine
aggregate replacement. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 73, 195–204. [CrossRef]
18. Khaloo, A.R.; Dehestani, M.; Rahmatabadi, P. Mechanical properties of concrete containing a high volume of
tire–rubber particles. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 2472–2482. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Ling, T.C.; Nor, H.M.; Hainin, M.R.; Chik, A.A. Laboratory performance of crumb rubber concrete
block pavement. Int. J. Pavement Eng. 2009, 10, 361–374. [CrossRef]
20. Zheng, L.; Huo, X.S.; Yuan, Y. Strength, modulus of elasticity, and brittleness index of rubberized concrete.
J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008, 20, 692–699. [CrossRef]
21. Sukontasukkul, P.; Tiamlom, K. Expansion under water and drying shrinkage of rubberized concrete mixed
with crumb rubber with different size. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 29, 520–526. [CrossRef]
22. Batayneh, M.; Marie, I.; Asi, I. Promoting the use of crumb rubber concrete in developing countries.
J. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 2171–2176. [CrossRef]
23. Benazzouk, A.; Douzane, O.; Langlet, T.; Mezreb, K.; Roucoult, J.M.; Quéneudec, M. Physico-mechanical
properties and water absorption of cement composite containing shredded rubber wastes. Cem. Concr. Compos.
2007, 29, 732–740. [CrossRef]
 Materials 2016, 9, 172 12 of 12

24. Raghavan, D.; Huynh, H.; Ferraris, C. Workability, mechanical properties, and chemical stability of a recycled
tyre rubber filled cementitious composite. J. Mater. Sci. 1998, 33, 1745–1752. [CrossRef]
25. Segre, N.; Joekes, I. Use of tire rubber particles as addition to cement paste. Cem. Concr. Res. 2000, 30,
1421–1425. [CrossRef]
26. Oiknomou, N.; Stefanidou, M.; Mavridou, S. Improvement of the bonding between rubber tire particles and
cement paste in cement products. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the Technical Chamber of Greece,
Alexandroupoli, Greece, 25–27 October 2006; pp. 234–242.
27. National Standard of the People’s Republic of China. Common Portland Cement (GB175-2007); General Administration
of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People's Republic of China (AQSIQ): Beijing,
China, 2008.
28. Gesoğlu, M.; Güneyisi, E.; Khoshnaw, G.; İpek, S. Abrasion and freezing–thawing resistance of pervious
concretes containing waste rubbers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 73, 19–24. [CrossRef]
29. Khorrami, M.; Vafai, A.; Khalilitabas, A.; Desai, C.S.; Ardakani, M. Experimental investigation on mechanical
characteristics and environmental effects on rubber concrete. Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater. 2010, 4, 17–23. [CrossRef]
30. Siddique, R.; Naik, T.R. Properties of concrete containing scrap-tire rubber–an overview. Waste Manag. 2004,
24, 563–569. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
31. National Standard of the People’s Republic of China. Test Methods for Cement and Concrete for Highway
Engineering (JTG E30-2005); Ministry of Transport of the People's Republic of China: Beijing, China, 2006.
32. National Standard of the People’s Republic of China. Standard for test Method of Mechanical Properties on
Ordinary Concrete (GB/T 50081-2002); Ministry of Construction of the People’s Republic of China: Beijing,
China, 2003.
33. National Standard of the People’s Republic of China. Standard for Test Methods of Long-Term Performance and
Durability of Ordinary Concrete (GB/T 50082-2009); Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the
People's Republic of China (MOHURD): Beijing, China, 2010.
34. Gupta, T.; Chaudhary, S.; Sharma, R.K. Assessment of mechanical and durability properties of concrete
containing waste rubber tire as fine aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 73, 562–574. [CrossRef]
35. John, T.; Vernon, R. Mixture proportioning considerations for improved freeze–thaw durability of pervious concrete.
Plan. Sustain. Cold Reg. Proc. 2013. [CrossRef]

© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution
(CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

View publication stats