Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

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

Flexural beam fatigue strength evaluation of crushed brick as a

supplementary material in cement stabilized recycled concrete
aggregates
Mahdi M. Disfani a,⇑, Arul Arulrajah a, Hamed Haghighi a, Alireza Mohammadinia a, Suksun Horpibulsuk b
a
Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia
b
Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand & CSI Distinguished Geotechnical Engineering Fellow, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia

h i g h l i g h t s

 Crushed brick was cement stabilized with recycled concrete aggregate.

 Evaluation of the fatigue life and fatigue modulus of cement stabilized brick blends.
 Flexural beam, Repeated Load Triaxial, unconfined compression and other tests.
 Cement stabilized blends with crushed brick comply with pavement requirements..

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

Article history: In recent years, efforts have been made by various researchers to explore the sustainable use of Construc-
Received 19 March 2014 tion and Demolition (C&D) materials as a construction material in civil engineering applications. Recycled
Received in revised form 10 June 2014 crushed brick is a commonly found material from demolition activities and works to date on this material
Accepted 3 July 2014
in pavement applications have been limited to its usage in unbound pavement layers. This research was
Available online 26 July 2014
undertaken to evaluate the performance of crushed brick as a supplementary material in cement stabi-
lized recycled concrete aggregates. An extensive suite of tests were undertaken on the crushed brick and
Keywords:
recycled concrete aggregate blends stabilized with 3% cement. The laboratory evaluation comprised pH,
Recycled concrete aggregate
Crushed brick
plasticity index, foreign materials content, particle size distribution, linear shrinkage, California Bearing
Cement stabilization Ratio, modified Proctor compaction, Repeated Load Triaxial test, Unconfined Compressive Strength Test
Repeated Load Triaxial and Flexural Beam Tests. The cement stabilized blends with up to 50% crushed brick content and 3%
Fatigue strength cement were found to have physical properties, which comply with the local state road authority require-
ments. The results of Repeated Load Triaxial tests indicated the Recycled Crushed Aggregate/Crushed
Brick (RCA/CB) blends performed well with 50% Crushed Brick (CB) content just on the border line for
bound pavement material. Unconfined Compression Strengths met the minimum requirement for 7 days
of curing for all blends, while the 28 day strength of the blends also improved significantly. The results of
the flexural beam tests were noted to be consistent with past works with cement stabilized quarry pro-
duced crushed rock products. The modulus of rupture and flexural modulus for all the cement-stabilized
blends were found to be consistent with the previous works, which indicate that these blends are suitable
for applications such as cement-stabilized pavement subbases. The fatigue life was also within the range
that has been previously reported for quarry materials. The cement-stabilized blends with crushed brick
as a supplementary material with up to 50% brick content and 3% cement were found to have physical
and strength properties, which would comply with road authority requirements.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Traditional quarry materials for construction are becoming
scarce in many developed and developing countries. In recent
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mmiridisfani@swin.edu.au (M.M. Disfani).
years, there has been strong environmental move to reduce the
expansion of quarries, as our major cities continue to grow, as well
as to explore the sustainable use of Construction and Demolition
(C&D) materials in construction applications. Significant inroads
have been made in recent years in researching the use of C&D
materials as a valuable resource in applications such as pavement
base/subbase layers, embankments, footpath and other civil

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.07.007
0950-0618/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
668 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676
engineering infrastructure applications. The reuse of these recycled
materials in civil engineering infrastructure applications will result
in a low carbon solution, considering that recycled materials have
significant carbon savings, compared with virgin quarried materi-
als. C&D materials are increasingly being used in pavement appli-
cations, particularly as a base/subbase material. C&D materials that
have been evaluated and successfully implemented in recent years
in roads, footpath and pipe-bedding applications include recycled
concrete aggregate [1,2], Crushed Brick [2,3], Reclaimed Asphalt
Pavement [4–7], waste rock [8,9] and waste glass [10–13].
In Australia alone, approximately 8.7 million tons of recycled
concrete aggregate (RCA) and 1.3 million tons of Crushed Brick
(CB) are stockpiled annually [14]. Cement stabilization is a popular
option in lightly stabilized pavement bases/subbases in metropol-
itan roads in major cities worldwide. Approximately 50,000 km of
road network is located in metropolitan Melbourne, in the state of
Victoria, Australia in which the pavement bases/subbases have
been cement stabilized. Traditionally in the past, only high quality
cement-stabilized crushed rock has been used for cement-stabi-
lized pavement bases/subbases in Melbourne.
While research has been undertaken in recent years particularly
with cement-stabilized reclaimed asphalt pavement in pavements
[4], the usage of supplementary materials such as CB in combina-
tion with other recycled aggregates has not been studied. Arulrajah
et al. [3] reported that recycled CB performs satisfactorily only at
low moisture levels and suggested blending recycled brick with
binders or other durable recycled materials to enhance its perfor-
mance in base/subbase applications.
Aside from determination of elastic modulus of cement-stabi-
lized materials, the fatigue properties of cement-stabilized materi-
als are also of importance. Fatigue damage leads to a reduction in
modulus of the cement-stabilized layers, thus affecting pavement
response [15]. Potential methods that can be used for determining
the modulus of cement-stabilized materials include the flexural
beam, direct tension, indirect tensile, longitudinal vibration and
the direct compression tests [16]. The longitudinal vibration and
the direct compression tests have also been attempted but were
found to be unsuitable for determining the fatigue properties of
cement-stabilized materials [17].
The indirect tensile test and the flexural beam test have been
used in past studies [18–21]. However, due to the lack of estab-
lished test protocols in Australia and other countries to determine
the modulus and fatigue properties of cement-stabilized materials,
the flexural beam test is the preferred method for evaluation of
cement-stabilized granular materials. It was also recognized as a
proper design parameter for Australian environment by Austroads
[22]. The flexural beam test is a practical test method for the deter-
mination of strength, modulus and fatigue life of cement-stabilized
materials. The number of load cycles to reduce flexural modulus to
half of the initial modulus is an accepted definition for fatigue life
of laboratory samples [17]. Flexural beam specimens typically rup-
ture shortly after the number of cycles to attain half the initial
modulus is reached. The initial modulus can subsequently be
defined as the mean modulus for the first 50 cycles of applied load
during the fatigue test. The initial strain is also considered as the
mean strain during the first 50 load cycles applied during the fati-
gue test [17].
The prime objective of this research is to evaluate the perfor-
mance of CB as a supplementary material with RCA in lightly
cement-stabilized pavement base/subbase applications. The devel-
opment of a laboratory evaluation procedure for these recycled
products as a pavement base/sub-base material would result in
an increased level of confidence within industry as to their likely
in-service performance and appropriate application as well as
result in a higher uptake of recycled materials in urban areas
where cement-stabilized subbase pavements are commonly used.
2. Materials and methods
Samples of recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) and crushed brick (CB) were
obtained from a recycling site in the state of Victoria. RCA and CB used in this study
typically comprise graded aggregates up to 20 mm in size. Laboratory tests were
undertaken on prepared samples of cement-stabilized RCA blended with various
contents of CB (RCA/CB). 3% General Portland (GP) cement was used in the
cement-stabilized RCA/CB blends (i.e. 3 g GP cement was added to 100 g of dry
RCA and CB blend). The engineering properties of the cement-stabilized RCA/CB
blends investigated were: 100% RCA (100RCA), 85% RCA blended with 15% CB
(85RCA/15CB), 70% RCA blended with 30% CB (70RCA/30CB) and 50% RCA blended
with 50% CB (50RCA/50CB). All the blending percentages are based on dry mass of
each material.
The laboratory evaluation was conducted to determine the engineering proper-
ties of blends included pH, plasticity index, foreign materials content, particle size
distribution, linear shrinkage, California Bearing Ratio (CBR), modified Proctor
compaction, Repeated Load Triaxial (RLT) test, Unconfined Compressive Strength
(UCS) Test and Flexural Beam Tests.
pH tests were undertaken in accordance with Australian protocols [23]. Both
samples consisted of material passing 2.36 mm sieve. Plastic limit, liquid limit
and plasticity index tests were undertaken in accordance with Australian standard
[24]. Linear shrinkage of RCA and CB were undertaken according to Australian stan-
dard test method [25]. To determine the percentage by mass of foreign material in
the fraction of RCA retained on a 4.75 mm sieve, visual categorization was carried
out according to Victorian state road authority specification [26]. In this method
the foreign material (glass, plastic, wood pieces, ceramic etc.) is carefully separated
manually from a specified dry mass of RCA and then the ratio between mass of for-
eign material and mass of initial specimen is reported as foreign material content.
Particle size distribution tests were performed with standard sieves with the
aperture sizes of 19 mm, 13.2 mm, 9.5 mm, 6.7 mm, 4.75 mm, 2.36 mm, 1.18 mm,
600 lm, 425 lm, 300 lm, 150 lm and 75 lm [27]. A hydrometer was used to
determine the particle size distribution for particles finer than the 75 lm sieve [28].
Modified Proctor compaction tests were undertaken to determine the maxi-
mum dry density and optimum moisture content [29]. Soaked CBR tests were per-
formed with samples prepared at their optimum points (Optimum Moisture
Content, OMC, Maximum Dry Density, MDD) using modified Proctor compactive
effort and tested upon completion of four days soaking condition [30]. Due to high
strength of the cement-stabilized blend samples, the CBR test was carried out using
a high capacity 250kN universal testing machine.
UCS tests were conducted with samples using split molds to ensure the speci-
mens were not disturbed during removal and parallel end faces were maintained
[29,31,32]. UCS specimens were compacted in five layers of pre-determined mass
using a Proctor compaction machine and a one-piece split mold (modified compac-
tion as per AS1141.51). A portion of the remaining material was dried in an oven for
the determination of moisture content, MC of the sample at the time of compaction.
Three specimens of each blend were kept in a fog chamber for a curing period of
7 days. Additionally, four specimens of each blend were kept in a fog chamber for
a curing period of 28 days. All samples were subjected to 4 h of immersing in water
prior to the UCS test according to Australian Standard test method for UCS [32].
RLT tests were undertaken in accordance with the Australian test protocol [33].
The samples were compacted in a 105 mm diameter mold with the height of
200 mm in 8 layers. Four specimens were prepared for RLT testing with dynamic
compaction method [29]. The automatic (mechanical) compaction apparatus,
which permits a continuous and even compaction mode, was used to produce uni-
form specimens to specified density and moisture content. All the specimens were
compacted to the target density of 100% MDD and target moisture content of 100%
OMC. The specimens were then air dried back to the target moisture of 70% of the
OMC. After reaching the target moisture content, specimens were wrapped and left
for additional 24 h to assure moisture uniformity within test specimen. The previ-
ous experience of authors in RLT testing of C&D material shows that for these coarse
aggregates a period of 24 h is more than adequate to ensure uniform moisture dis-
tribution in the specimen [3,8]. The moisture contents at different parts of the spec-
imen were measured and found to be similar. The RLT testing procedure consists of
a permanent strain test followed by a resilient modulus test. The permanent defor-
mation determination characterizes the vertical permanent strain with multiple
loading stages (at different stress conditions) to enable quantification of the effects
of vertical stress on permanent strain in a single test. For the cement-stabilized
RCA/CB blends, a constant 50 kPa confining stress, and three different loading
stages (at specified deviator stresses of 350 kPa, 450 kPa and 550 kPa) were used,
each loading stage involved 10,000 repetitions. A trapezoidal repeated deviator
stress with a total period of 3 s with rise and fall times of up to 0.3 s and load pulse
width of 1 s was used. The resilient modulus determination characterizes the verti-
cal resilient strain response over sixty five stress conditions using combinations of
applied dynamic vertical and static lateral stresses in the ranges of 100–500 kPa and
20–150 kPa, respectively. Each stress condition involved 200 load repetitions. The
stresses and stress ratios are increased in small increments to avoid early failure,
which is probable to occur at high stress ratios. Table 1 summarizes the target (at
compaction) and actual (after testing) sample degree of compaction and moisture
content values for each specimen for the RLT tests. Generally, it was possible to
prepare the specimens within the tolerance of 0.9% for density ratio using the
 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676 669

Table 1
RLT specimen conditions for cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

Blend OMC % MDD t/m3 Target MC, Actual MC– after RLT Target degree Actual degree
(% of OMC) test (% of OMC) of compaction (%) of compaction (%)
100RCA 11.7 2.039 70 56 100 99.7
85RCA/15CB 11.7 2.007 70 56 100 99.1
70RCA/30CB 11.7 1.991 70 79 100 99.9
50RCA/50CB 12.0 1.996 70 70 100 100

dynamic compaction method targeted at 100% OMC. However, it was difficult to
obtain the target moisture contents using the dry-back method. This inaccuracy
in the dry-back method for demolition wastes was also observed in previous studies
by the authors, and is an accepted feature of RLT testing.
Flexural beam testing consisted of 3 stages of testing to determine the flexural
strength, flexural modulus and fatigue life of the cement-stabilized materials. Four
pairs of beams in total, one for each blend, were prepared for flexural strength, flex-
ural modulus and fatigue life determination [17,34]. Flexural beam tests were per-
formed on rectangular samples with the dimensions of 400 mm long  100 mm
wide  100 mm high. A rectangular mold with internal dimensions of 400 mm
long  320 mm wide  145 mm high was used to compact the slabs. The com-
pacted slabs were left in the closed mold and covered with a wet cloth and lid to
minimize moisture loss and stored at 23 °C for a minimum of 2 days before being
removed from the mold and cured in a fog room at an external laboratory facility.
Each slab was subsequently cut into two beams after a minimum curing period of
14 days to ensure that the slab was strong enough to be cut. All the beams were
cured in a fog room for a total of 28 days.
Fatigue testing was conducted in a controlled stress mode. The first beam from
the same slab (Beam A) was used to determine the peak load required to break the
beam using the Modulus of Rupture test method [34]. On completion of the mod-
ulus of rupture test on the first beam of each blend, the second beam from the same
slab (Beam B) was used for modulus testing. 40% of the peak load from the previous
test was applied on this second paired beam from the same slab with a haversine
pulse of 1 Hz comprising 250 ms for loading and 750 ms for resting for 100 cycles.
This load was selected to be low enough so as not to damage the sample but high
enough to produce sufficient displacement at the middle of the beam in order to
accurately estimate the tensile strain and consequently resilient (flexural in this
case) modulus. In the next stage, beam B was subsequently used for fatigue testing.
The load was increased to 70% of the peak load with an increased frequency of 2 Hz
comprising 250 ms for loading and 250 ms for resting. By definition, the number of
cycles to achieve half the initial modulus is termed as fatigue life. The number of
load cycles to half initial modulus which is defined as fatigue life is usually very
close to the number of load cycles to ultimate failure of the samples for the flexural
beam fatigue test [35]. The fatigue life is highly sensitive to the applied load; i.e., the
lesser the applied load, the greater the fatigue life. Therefore, some samples may fail
after a few hundred cycles while some other samples may last for several thousand
cycles.
3. Results and discussion
The pH value for the blends ranges from 11.3 to 12.0, which
indicates that the RCA/CB blends are alkaline by nature. As the clay
content in all the blends was low, the plastic limit and liquid limit
could not be obtained as Atterberg limit is directly related to clay
mineralogy. Thus, the RCA/CB blends are classified as non-plastic
and possess insignificant linear shrinkage.
The foreign material content in RCA was 3.56%, including 2.62%
CB and 0.94% asphalt. The CB samples were visually assessed to
contain up to 70% brick component, with the balance proportions
comprising predominantly of RCA and other foreign materials.
The particle size distributions of RCA/CB blends as determined
from sieve analysis and hydrometer tests along with coefficients
of uniformity and curvature are shown in Fig. 1. The particle size
of CB is slightly larger than that of RCA. As such, when these two
materials are blended, the particle size distribution curves of the
blends are eventually the same. The grading limits of all blends,
except 100% CB, were found to be within the local road authority
specified limit for pavement subbase materials. The RCA/CB blends,
which classified as well graded gravel (GW), were found to comply
with the acceptable gradation envelope for pavement base/
subbase materials
Fig. 2 presents the compaction curves showing optimum mois-
ture content (OMC) and maximum dry density (MDD) of the
RCA/CB blends with 3% GP cement binder. The OMC and MDD
values were found to be consistent for the blends, with only minor
variations. This is because the specific gravities and particle size
distribution (Fig. 1) of CB and RCA, which typically control the
compaction curve, are essentially the same.

100

100RCA
90
RCC-Fine
85RCA/15CB
80
70RCA/30CB

70 50RCA/50CB
100CB
60 100CB-Fine
Passing (%)

Base/Subbase Lower Limit

50 Base/Subbase Upper Limit

40

30

20

10

0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Sieve Size (mm)

Fig. 1. Particle size distribution curves of the cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.
670 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676

2.05 8
28 curing days
100 RCA 100RCA
7 curing days
2.03 85RCA/15CB 7
70RCA/30CB
Minimum road authority requirement for 7 days cured
cement stabilized samples
2.01 50RCA/50CB 6
Dry Density, Mg/m3

Average UCS values, MPa

85RCA/15CB

1.99 5
50RCA/50CB

1.97 4
70RCA/30CB

1.95 3

1.93 2

1.91 1
8.5 9.5 10.5 11.5 12.5 13.5 14.5
Moisture Content, %
0
Fig. 2. Compaction curves of cement stabilized RCA/CB blends. 100RCA 85RCA/15CB 70RCA/30CB 50RCA/50CB

Fig. 3a. UCS results of cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

Table 2 and Fig. 3a summarize the UCS results for all the
cement-stabilized RCA/CB blends. For 7 day curing period, the
mean UCS value obtained was between 4 and 4.63 MPa for the
cement-stabilized RCA/CB blends. The cement-stabilized RCA
blends were therefore found to meet the minimum 7 day mean
UCS value of 4 MPa specified in the local road authority specifica-
tion [36]. The 28 day curing period was found to lead to an increase
in the mean UCS value for all the blends. This is consistent with
expectations that a longer curing period in a fog chamber would
result in a higher mean UCS value of cement-stabilized materials
[37–39]. Although only the 7 day curing period of UCS value is
specified by the local road authority specification [36], the 28 day
curing period tests were undertaken as an extra measure to deter-
mine the strength of the cement stabilized RCA/CB blends under
increased curing period. The strength values of samples with
7 days of curing are almost the same for RCA/CB blends. The
stress–strain behavior of selected samples during the UCS test
are also included in Fig. 3b. These samples demonstrated strength
close to 28 day mean strength as reported in Table 2. The axial
strain which was determined by using the initial height was
3.38% for 100RCA which declined to 2.04 for 85RCA/15CB. The
other two samples of 70RCA/30CB and 50RCA/50CB experienced
the axial strain of 2.5% and 2.8% respectively. Similar to the UCS,
the soaked CBR values of cement-stabilized RCA/CB blends are
practically the same, varying between 370 and 505 kPa as shown
in Fig. 4. The high CBR values of cement-stabilized RCA/CB blends
are due to the increase in cementation bond caused by the addition

Table 2
UCS results of cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

Blend Sample ID Curing days Strength, MPa MC (% of OMC) Dry density (% of MDD)
Individual Mean StdDeva
100RCA 100RCA-28-1 28 6.0 5.35 0.47 92.8 97.1
100RCA-28-2 4.9 97.7 95.4
100RCA-28-3 5.6 96 97.6
100RCA-28-4 4.9 100 96.1
100RCA-7-5 7 3.8 4.0 0.17 100.2 96.1
100RCA-7-6 4.2 103.1 96.0
100RCA-7-7 4.0 98.7 96.1
85RCA/15CB 85RCA-28-1 28 6.0 7.02 0.76 92.3 97.8
85RCA-28-2 6.6 94.3 95.8
85RCA-28-3 7.9 97.1 98.0
85RCA-28-4 7.6 95.7 97.7
85RCA-7-5 7 3.8 4.0 0.29 101.5 97.6
85RCA-7-6 3.6 100.6 97.7
85RCA-7-7 4.3 101.8 98.2
70RCA/30CB 70RCA-28-1 28 4.6 5.6 0.63 96.4 97.0
70RCA-28-2 5.8 95.7 97.1
70RCA-28-3 6.3 94.5 99.1
70RCA-28-4 5.9 95.4 98.1
70RCA-7-5 7 4.8 4.63 0.17 93.2 98.9
70RCA-7-6 4.7 95.7 99.8
70RCA-7-7 4.4 98.3 98.3
50RCA/50CB 50RCA-28-1 28 5.6 5.2 0.54 89.1 98.7
50RCA-28-2 5.8 93.0 98.5
50RCA-28-3 4.5 94.8 97.6
50RCA-28-4 4.8 95.9 98.2
50RCA-7-5 7 4.6 4.2 0.28 96.2 98.2
50RCA-7-6 4 99.9 97.9
50RCA-7-7 4 97.1 97.8
a
Std Dev: Standard Deviation (how much each individual value differs from the average value).
 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676 671

8 method proposed by Vuong and Arnold [42] for assessing the per-
formance of materials from RLT tests, the behavior of the materials
7 can be defined as stable, as the blends are seen to exhibit constant
permanent strain rate and resilient modulus.
6 Fig. 6 presents the resilient modulus versus stress stage of the
cement-stabilized RCA/CB blends. The resilient modulus of all
Axial Stress, MPa

5
4
3
2
1
0
0 1
Axial Strain, %
Fig. 3b. Stress–strain behavior of selected 28 days UCS samples.
of 3% GP cement. The UCS and CBR values of a stabilized material at
particular cement content are generally controlled by particle size
and intact strength of unstabilized material. The fine particle needs
more cement volume per contact material grains for the same
cement content, hence the strength of stabilized materials is low
for finer particles [38–40]. Arulrajah et al. (2014) reported that
CBR values of RCA and CB are essentially the same, which are
118–160 for RCA and is 123–138 for CB. Due to similar particle size
distribution and CBR (intact strength of unstabilized materials), the
UCS values of stabilized RCA/CB blends are almost the same for
different RCA/CB ratios.
Fig. 5 presents the permanent deformation and resilient strain
results of the cement stabilized RCA/CB blends. There is an increas-
ing trend for permanent deformation with the increase of CB
replacement. The resilient strain increases sharply with increasing
deviator stress, while the permanent strain insignificantly changes
with loading cycles for a particular deviator stress. This response is
different from the unstabilized material in which permanent strain
increases with increasing loading cycles [41]. In other words, the
stabilized materials have higher durability than the unstabilized
material. Similarly, the resilient (elastic) strain increases as CB con-
tent increases. However, the permanent strain is almost constant
with number of cycles after the first deviator stress. Based on the
RCA/CB blends increases with increasing stress stage, which is typ-
ical for various pavement materials. In general, increasing the CB
50RCA/50CB replacement ratio causes a reduction of resilient modulus of
70RCA/30CB
85RCA/15CB
cement-stabilized RCA blends. The permanent strain and resilient
100RCA modulus indicate the durability of the pavement materials, which
is typically governed by Los Angeles (LA) Abrasion of the unstabi-
lized material. It was reported that the LA abrasion of the RCA is
higher than the CB (Arulrajah et al., 2014). It is 28 and 36 for RCA
and CB, respectively. Consequently, the permanent strain increases
and resilient modulus decreases with increasing CB content even
2 3 4 though the UCS and CBR of the stabilized RCA/CB blends remain
almost constant as seen from Figs. 3a, b and 4. In other words, the
UCS and CBR are not the only controlling parameters for cyclic
(long-term) response specially permanent strain and resilient
strain which in return affect resilient modulus. Table 3 summarizes
the permanent strain and resilient modulus test results of cement
stabilized RCA/CB blends. Typical quarry aggregates would exhibit
resilient modulus values of between 225 and 400 MPa at 70% of
the OMC based on the computation of resilient modulus from the
permanent deformation testing phase [41]. The RCA/CB blends are
found to perform within the ranges expected of bound quarry sub-
base materials, with 50RCA/50CB on the borderline.
Fig. 7 shows the resilient modulus of different RCA/CB blends
against the maximum axial stress (deviator stress) for three differ-
ent confining pressures of 20, 30 and 40 kPa. The increase of con-
fining pressure resulted in a fractional increase of resilient
modulus in 100RCA and 70RCA/30CB blends. However such a trend
can only be partially established for 85RCA/15CB and 50RCA/50CB
blends. Fatigue life of pavement materials is said to be the number
of cycles needed for 50% reduction in stiffness compared to the ini-
tial stiffness. Austroads assumes this to be 1 million cycles for sat-
isfactory performance. Further investigations with a wider range of
blends and confining pressure levels is required to confidently
establish the trend for all the blends of RCA and CB.
Fig. 8 shows various stages of the four point beam fatigue test
and the modulus of rupture of each blend is presented in Table 4.
The modulus of rupture tends to decrease with CB content due to

Recycled concrete aggregate content (%)

100 90 80 70 60 50 40
600

575

550

525

500
achieved CBR range

475
CBR (%)

450

425

400

375

350

325

300
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Crushed brick content (%)

Fig. 4. CBR results of cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

672 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676

2.5 2000

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

deviator stress: 350 kPa deviator stress: 450 kPa deviator stress: 550 kPa 1800
confining pressure: 50 kPa confining pressure: 50 kPa confining pressure: 50 kPa

2 1600

1400

Resilient Strain (microstrain)

Permanent Strain, %

1.5 1200

Permanent Strain 1000

Resilient Strain

1 800
100RCA
85RCA/15CB
70RCA/30CB 600
50RCA/50CB

0.5 400

200

0 0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Loading Cycles

Fig. 5. RLT Permanent deformation results of cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

lower durability of the materials as evident from the UCS and CBR drastically dropped leading to the sample failure. Table 5 summa-
tests presented earlier in Figs. 3a, b and 4. The modulus of rupture rizes the results of flexural modulus and flexural fatigue beam
is identical for 100RCA and 85RCA/15CB, indicating that a small CB tests. As evident, the fatigue life for 100RCA was 130 cycles while
content has only minimal effect on this modulus. 70RCA/30CB has it was 29401 cycles for 50RCA/50CB. This variation in cycles could
a smaller modulus of rupture than 50RCA/30CB. The peak load was be due to the fact that 80% of peak load was applied on 100RCA
similarly identical for 100RCA and 85RCA/15CB as well as for while 70% of peak load was applied on 50RCA/50CB. To obtain a
70RCA/30CB and 50RCA/30CB. According to these results, the wider spectrum of fatigue life versus the applied load for each
increase in CB content in the cement-stabilized RCA blends results blend, it is recommended to undertake testing on additional beams
in a corresponding decrease in the peak load and modulus of rupture. to determine true fatigue life characteristics as this is highly sensi-
Fig. 9 shows an example of 4 point beam fatigue test results of a tive to load variations. A shift factor of about one third of the initial
selected 85RCA sample. At the very early stage of the test, the aver- flexural modulus may give a rough estimation of field design mod-
age resilient modulus of first 50 cycles was 10505.14 MPa which ulus [43]. Assuming a shift factor of one third of flexural modulus, a
was considered as the initial modulus. By repeating the application minimum design modulus is 3700 MPa for the cement-stabilized
of the 70% of the peak load, the resilient modulus gradually RCA/CB blends.
declined until it reached the 50% of the initial figure at 6597 cycles. The results of the flexural beam tests were compared with pre-
From this point, the declining rate of the resilient modulus vious works on cement-stabilized local base materials, including

600 1200
100RCA 85RCA/15CB 70RCA/30CB

50RCA/50CB Confining Stress Deviator Stress

500 1000

400 800
Resilient Modulus, MPa

Applied Stress, kPa

300 600

200 400

100 200

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Stress Stage Number

Fig. 6. RLT Resilient modulus values of cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676 673

Table 3
Results of permanent strain testing and resilient modulus for cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

Blend Actual dry density (% of MDD) Actual moisture content (% of OMC) Permanent strain at the end of each stage Resilient modulus range (MPa)
(microstrain)
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
100RCA 99.7 56 1180 1340 1500 324.5–498.3
85RCA/15CB 99.1 56 940 950 1230 231.1–447.9
70RCA/30CB 99.9 79 1450 1450 1550 272.5–435.6
50RCA/50CB 100 70 2570 2640 2820 201.3–375.7

500

σc = 20 kPa 100RCA
480
σc = 30 kPa

460 σc = 40 kPa
Resilient Modulus, MR (MPa)

440 85RCA/15CB

420

70RCA/30CB
400

380
50RCA/50CB

360

340

320
250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
Max. Axial Stress (kPa)

Fig. 7. RLT Resilient modulus versus maximum axial stress for selected confining pressures.

1 2
3 4

Fig. 8. Different Stages of four point beam fatigue test.

hornfel and siltstone [17]. The modulus of rupture and flexural are suitable for cement-stabilized subbases. The fatigue life was
modulus for all the cement-stabilized blends were found to be con- also within the range that has been previously reported [17],
sistent with the previous works, which indicates that these blends though additional testing would appropriately determine the true
674 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676

Table 4
Modulus of rupture results of cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

Specimen 100RCA 85RCA/15CB 70RCA/30CB 50RCA/30CB

Width (mm) 100.9 101.5 100.23 100.6
Height (mm) 101.66 101.4 101.08 100.7
Moisture content (%of OMC) 99.1 96.5 106 100.3
Dry density, (% of MDD) 96.5 96.5 96 95.4
Peak load (kN) 4.29 4.28 3.6 3.7
Modulus of rupture (MPa) 1.23 1.23 0.88 1.09
Tensile strain at 95% of peak load (microstrain) 94.22 93.08 57.85 87.48

12000 1.4
100RCA
85RCA/15CB
10000 1.2 70RCA/30CB
50RCA/50CB
Resilient Modulus, Mpa

Modulus of Rupture (MPa)

8000 1

6000 0.8

0.6
4000

0.4
2000
half initial modulus line
0.2
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Cycles 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Fig. 9. Four point beam fatigue test results of 85RCA blend. Unconfined Compressive Strength (MPa)

Fig. 10. Modulus of rupture and unconfined compressive strength of RCA/CB

fatigue life as just one test per blend would not determine this suf-
ficiently. Since limited data is available on the in-service and labo-
ratory [17] fatigue life of cemented materials used in Australia
[22], broader range of tests on wider range of materials need to
be carried out in order to establish an acceptable flexural fatigue
life for Australian pavement materials.
As UCS testing is much simpler and well-known than flexural
beam testing, a relationship between the two tests can facilitate
the estimation of the flexural strength of cement-stabilized mate-
rials using the UCS data. It was suggested that flexural tensile
strength of cement-stabilized materials is about one-third of the
UCS for low-strength materials and about one-fifth of the UCS for
high-strength materials [44]. Kersten [45] suggested an approxi-
mately linear relationship for various cement contents at all curing
periods for hardened cement-stabilized soils and showed a nearly
linear relationship at all cement contents and at all curing times.
blends.
The flexural strength was approximately 20 percent of the com-
pressive strength. Mandal [46] suggested a non-linear model
between flexural strength and UCS for stabilized materials which
is similar to findings of Kersten [45] for lower strength materials
however this model predicts lower flexural strength values as the
UCS value grows. Fig. 10 shows the established relationship
between modulus of rupture (or flexural tensile strength) and
UCS by department of transport, South Africa [44], Kersten [45]
and Mandal [46] along with the results of this study for different
RCA/CB blends. As evident, the results are reasonably in agreement
with the discussed models. Values reported in Fig. 10 from this
study are the average value for at least 4 different tests on each
blend.

Table 5
Four point flexural beam fatigue test results of cement stabilized RCA/CB blends.

Specimen 100RCA 85RCA/15CB 70RCA/30CB 50RCA/50CB

Width (mm) 100.62 102.3 101.05 101.1
Height (mm) 101.68 100.3 100.6 100.6
Moisture content (% of OMC) 100.8 97.4 107 103.5
Dry density (% of MDD) 95.5 96.2 96.1 95.4
Flexural modulus test
Applied load (% of peak load) 40 40 40 40
Mean flexural modulus; cycles 50–100 (MPa) 11463.25 11846.20 11351.33 11780.75
Tensile stress for modulus test (kPa) 494.15 496.79 420.26 432.91
Flexural beam fatigue test
Applied load (% of peak load) 80 70 70 70
Tensile stress for fatigue test; mean of first 50 (kPa) 978.28 872.18 737.711 758.21
Tensile strain; mean of first 50 (microstrain) 102.05 83.06 78.26 70.95
Initial modulus; first 50 (MPa) 9601.05 10505.14 9435.30 10700
Stress ratio 0.79 0.70 0.84 0.69
Strain ratio 1.08 0.89 1.35 0.81
Cycles to half initial modulus 130 6597 396 29401
 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676
4. Conclusions
The results of RLT test were used to ascertain the performance
of cement-stabilized RCA/CB blends under simulated traffic load-
ing conditions. Based on the results, 100RCA demonstrated the
highest resilient modulus range and 50RCA/50CB demonstrated
the lowest resilient modulus range. All blends were found to
perform within the ranges expected of bound quarry subbase
materials with 50RCA/50CB on the borderline.
Mean UCS values met the minimum requirement of 4 MPa for
minimum of 7 days of curing for all blends. 20% and 24% increase
in strength was observed for 28 days cured samples of 70RCA/
30CB and 50RCA/50CB respectively compared to the 7 days cured
samples, while the average 28-day strength of 85RCA/15CB sam-
ples improved significantly from 4 to 7.02 MPa (by almost 75%).
The notable increase in strength after 28 days of curing compared
to just 7 days of curing is as expected. The achieved mean UCS val-
ues, particularly after 7 days of curing were slightly lower than
anticipated. The water/cement ratio in the prepared UCS samples
were commonly around 4.0 or above, whereas industry practice
is to target a maximum water/cement ratio of 3.5 as this provides
certainty that the achieved UCS values will comfortably achieve
the specification limits.
The modulus of rupture (or flexural tensile strength) varied
from 0.88 MPa to 1.23 MPa while the flexural modulus ranged
from 11351.33 MPa to 11846.20 MPa. Assuming a shift factor of
0.3, the design modulus was estimated based on the flexural mod-
ulus, which ranged from 3405.39 MPa to 3553.86 MPa. The modu-
lus of rupture and flexural modulus for all the cement-stabilized
blends were found to be consistent with the previous works, which
indicates that these blends are suitable for cement-stabilized
subbases.
The range of flexural fatigue life was between 130 and 29401
cycles. The wide range of fatigue life is due to the fact that flexural
fatigue test is highly sensitive to the applied load. The results of the
flexural beam tests were noted to be consistent with past works
with cement-stabilized quarry produced crushed rock products.
The cement-stabilized RCA/CB blends with up to 50% CB content
and 3% GP cement were found to have physical and strength prop-
erties, which comply with the road authority requirements for
pavement base/subbase applications.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported under Sustainability Victoria
(Contract No. 7303), Australian Research Council’s Linkage Projects
(LP120100107) and Australian Research Council’s Linkage Infra-
structure, Equipment and Facilities (LE110100052) funding
schemes. The 5th author acknowledges the support from the
Suranaree University of Technology and the Thailand Research
Fund under the TRF Senior Research Scholar program Grant No.
RTA5680002.
References
[1] Poon CS, Chan D. Feasible use of recycled concrete aggregates and crushed clay
brick as unbound road sub-base. Constr Build Mater 2006;20:578–85.
[2] Azam A, Cameron D. Geotechnical properties of blends of recycled clay
masonry and recycled concrete aggregates in unbound pavement construction.
J Mater Civ Eng 2013;25(6):788–98.
[3] Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Bo MW, Sivakugan N. Geotechnical characteristics
of recycled crushed brick blends for pavement sub-base applications. Can
Geotech J 2012;49(7):796–811.
[4] Puppala AJ, Hoyos LR, Potturi AK. Resilient moduli response of moderately
cement-treated reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates. J Mater Civ Eng ASCE
2011;23(7):990–8.
[5] Taha R, Al-Harthy A, Al-Shamsi K, Al-Zubeidi M. Cement stabilization of
reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregate for road bases and subbases. J Mater Civ
Eng 2002;14(3):239–45.
675
[6] Hoyos LR, Puppala AJ, Ordonez CA. Characterization of cement fiber-treated
reclaimed asphalt pavement aggregates: preliminary investigation. J Mater Civ
Eng ASCE 2011;23(7):977–89.
[7] Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Disfani MM. Reclaimed asphalt pavement and
recycled concrete aggregate blends in pavement subbases: laboratory and field
evaluation. J Mater Civ Eng 2014;26(2):349–57.
[8] Arulrajah A, Ali YMM, Piratheepan J, Bo MW. Geotechnical properties of waste
excavation rock in pavement sub-base applications. J Mater Civ Eng ASCE
2012;24(7):924–32.
[9] Akbulut H, Gurer C. Use of aggregates produced from marble quarry waste in
asphalt pavements. J Build Environ 2007;42:1921–30.
[10] Grubb DG, Gallagher PM, Wartman J, Liu Y, III MC. Laboratory evaluation of
crushed glass-dredged material blends. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE
2006;132(5):562–76.
[11] Wartman J, Grubb DG, Nasim ASM. Select engineering characteristics of
crushed glass. J Mater Civ Eng 2004;16(6):526–39.
[12] Arulrajah A, Ali M, Disfani M, Piratheepan J, Bo M. Geotechnical performance of
recycled glass-waste rock blends in footpath bases. J Mater Civ Eng
2013;25(5):653–61.
[13] Disfani MM, Arulrajah A, Bo MW, Hankour R. Recycled crushed glass in road
work applications. Waste Manage 2011;31(11):2341–51.
[14] Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Disfani M, Bo M. Geotechnical and geoenvironmental
properties of recycled construction and demolition materials in pavement
subbase applications. J Mater Civ Eng 2013;25(8):1077–88.
[15] Yeo R, Vuong B, Alderson A. Contract report-towards national test methods for
stiffness and fatigue characterisation of stabilised materials. ARRB Transport
Research, RC2028-002. 2002. p. 23.
[16] Austroads. Pavement design: a guide to the structural design of road
pavements. vol (loose leaf). Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Austroads;
Standards Australia; 2004. p. 1.
[17] Yeo R. The development and evaluation of protocols for the laboratory
characterisation of cemented materials. Austroads, 2008. p. 89.
[18] Andrews RC, Brimble RM. Mechanistic characterisation of cementitiously
stabilised pavement materials. Adelaide, South Australia, Australia: Transport
SA. Materials Technology Section, 1998. p. 1.
[19] Bullen F. The resilient moduli of cement treated materials. Road Trans Res
1994;3(2):94–104.
[20] Litwinowicz A, Brandon A. Dynamic flexure testing for prediction of cement -
treated pavement life. In: Australian Road Research Board Ltd (ARRB)
Conference, 17th, 1994, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. Vermont South,
Victoria, Australia: Australian Road Research Board Ltd (ARRB); 1994. p. 229–47.
[21] Otte E. A structural design procedure for cement treated layers in
pavements. Faculty of Engineering, University of Pretoria; 1978.
[22] Jameson G. Guide to pavement technology – Part 2: pavement structural
design: Austroads Incorporated, 2008.
[23] Standards Australia, Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes Method
431: Soil chemical tests – Determination of the pH value of a soil –
Electrometric method, AS 1298.4.3.1, 1997.
[24] Standards Australia, Method of testing soils for engineering purposes, Method
311: Soil classification tests-Determination of the liquid limit of a soil-Four
point Casagrande method, AS 1289.3.1.1-2009, 2009.
[25] Standards Australia, Method of testing soils for engineering purposes, Method
341: Soil classification tests-Determination of the linear shrinkage of a soil-
Standard method, AS 1289.3.4.1-2008, 2009.
[26] VicRoads, Manual of Testing: Foreign Materials in Crushed Concrete, RC
372.04, 2008.
[27] Standards Australia, Methods for sampling and testing aggregates, Method
111: Particle size distribution-Sieving method, AS 1141.11.1-2009, 2009.
[28] Standards Australia, Method of testing soils for engineering purposes, Method
363: Soil classification tests – Determination of the particle size distribution of
a soil – Standard method of fine analysis using a hydrometer, AS 1289.3.6.3-
2003, 2003.
[29] Standards Australia, Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes, Method
521: Soil compaction and density tests-Determination of the dry density/
moisture content relation of a soil using modified compactive effort, AS
1289.5.2.1-2003, 2003.
[30] Standards Australia, Methods of testing soils for engineering purposes, Method
611: Soil strength and consolidation tests – Determination of the California
Bearing Ratio of a soil – Standard laboratory method for a remoulded
specimen, AS 1289.6.1.1-1998, 1998.
[31] Standards Australia, Method of testing soils for engineering purposes, Method
121: Sampling and preparation of soils-Disturbed samples-Standard method,
AS 1289.1.2.1-1998, 1998.
[32] Standards Australia, Methods for preparation and testing of stabilized
materials, Method 4: Unconfined compressive strength of compacted
materials, AS 5101.4 - 2008, 2008.
[33] Austroads, Commentary to AG:PT/T053 – determination of permanent
deformation and resilient modulus characteristics of unbound granular
materials under drained conditions, 2007.
[34] Standards Australia, Methods of testing concrete, Method 11: Determination
of the modulus of rupture, AS 1012.11 – 2000, 2000.
[35] Yeo R. Construction report for cemented test pavements – influence of vertical
loading on the performance of unbound and cemented
materials. Sydney: Austroads; 2008. p. 96.
[36] VicRoads, Cementitious treated crushed concrete for pavement subbase,
Section 821, 2011.
676 M.M. Disfani et al. / Construction and Building Materials 68 (2014) 667–676
[37] Horpibulsuk S, Katkan W, Sirilerdwattana W, Rachan R. Strength development
in cement stabilized low plasticity and coarse grained soils: laboratory and
field study. Soils Found 2006;46(3):351–66.
[38] Horpibulsuk S, Rachan R, Chinkulkijniwat A, Raksachon Y, Suddeepong A.
Analysis of strength development in cement-stabilized silty clay from
microstructural considerations. Constr Build Mater 2010;24(10):2011–21.
[39] Miura N, Horpibulsuk S, Nagaraj TS. Engineering behavior of cement stabilized
clay at high water content. Soils Found 2001;41(5):33–45.
[40] Horpibulsuk S, Miura N, Nagaraj TS. Assessment of strength development in
cement-admixed high water content clays with Abrams’ law as a basis.
Geotechnique 2003;53(4):439–44.
[41] Arulrajah A, Piratheepan J, Disfani M, Bo M. Resilient moduli response of
recycled construction and demolition materials in pavement subbase
applications. J Mater Civ Eng 2013;25(12):1920–8.
[42] Vuong B, Arnold G. Predicting in-service performance of alternative pavement
materials for New Zealand conditions. Wellington, NZ: Land Transport New
Zealand; 2006. p. 180.
[43] Choummanivong L, Yeo R, Lourensz S. Laboratory assessment of cemented
materials. arrb; 2006. p. 68.
[44] Department of Transport. Cementitious Stabilizers in Road Construction South
Africa. In: Technical recomendations for highways, editor. Pretoria, Republic of
South Africa: Department of Transport; 1985.
[45] Kersten MS. Soil stabilization with Portland cement. Washington, DC: National
Academy of Sciences National Research Council; 1961.
[46] Mandal T. Fatigue behavior and modulus growth of cementitiously stabilized
pavement layers. University Of Wisconsin-Madison; 2012.