Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

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

Shear behavior of reinforced concrete beams using treated recycled

concrete aggregate
Hasan Katkhuda a,⇑, Nasim Shatarat b
a
Civil Engineering Department, The Hashemite University, Zarqa, Jordan
b
Civil Engineering Department, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan

h i g h l i g h t s

Surface treatment method is used on recycled coarse aggregate (RCA).

The treatment included pre-soaking in acid and impregnating with sodium metasilicate pentahydrate solution.

Using treated RCA increases the compressive strength of concrete compared with untreated RCA.

The treated RCA beams show an increase on shear strength compared with untreated RCA and control beams.

The treated RCA beams show identical crack propagation pattern compared with untreated RCA and control beams.

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

Article history: The shear behavior of ten full scale reinforced concrete beams that were constructed from natural aggre-
Received 21 April 2016 gate, recycled aggregate and treated recycled aggregate was experimentally and analytically studied. All
Received in revised form 11 July 2016 beams were constructed without stirrups and with 50% and 100% recycled aggregate. The beams were
Accepted 10 August 2016
tested for a shear span-to-depth ratio (a/d) equal to 2.0 and 3.0. The performance of recycled aggregate
Available online 13 August 2016
was improved through enhancement treatment methods. The recycled aggregate was pre-soaked in
hydrochloric acid (HCl) for 24 h to remove adhered mortars attached to original recycled aggregates,
Keywords:
and then they were impregnated with sodium metasilicate pentahydrate solution for one hour to coat
Experimental study
Shear strength
their surfaces. The behavior of the shear-critical beams was studied through reporting the load-
Reinforced concrete beams deflection curves, ultimate load values, and crack propagation during static tests. The experimental shear
Recycled aggregate capacities of the beams were compared with theoretical values from different international codes and
Surface treatment method fracture mechanics approaches. The experimental results showed that in general using treated recycled
aggregate improved slightly the shear capacity of the beams in comparison with natural and untreated
recycled aggregate. Furthermore, the shear strength comparisons showed that the treated recycled
aggregate beams were considered more conservative compared to the natural and untreated recycled
aggregate beams regardless of the shear span-to-depth ratio.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction water pollutions which will result in negative impact on environ-

Concrete is one of the most used materials on earth. The
demand for concrete as a construction material was very high in
the past and will continue to be in future. Concrete uses a signifi-
cant amount of non-renewable materials and resources especially
natural aggregate. Furthermore, the biggest component from
building demolition operations is concrete. The wastes from con-
struction and demolition are increasing to a high level which
causes an increase in landfill areas. This leads to air and ground
⇑ Corresponding author at: P.O. Box 150459, Zarqa 13115, Jordan.
E-mail address: hasan@hu.edu.jo (H. Katkhuda).
ment. In addition, the economy of the countries will be negatively
affected because of millions of dollars that are paid every year to:
(1) remove the concrete wastes from construction and demolition
sites; (2) transport the concrete wastes out of the major cities to
the proposed landfill areas; and (3) perform needed procedures
to bury the concrete wastes. Matias et al. [1] pointed out that the
amount of demolition waste in European Union is approximately
1 ton per capita and the overall amount produced is more than
450 million tons per year. However, this amount of demolition
wastes is increasing to intolerable rates in other parts of the world
such as Middle East due to the ongoing wars at those countries.
Unfortunately, the record on amount of demolition wastes is not

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.034
0950-0618/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
64 H. Katkhuda, N. Shatarat / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71

Table 1
Chemical composition of cement and sodium metasilicate pentahydrate.

Material Chemical composition (%)

SiO2 Al2O3 Fe2O3 CaO Na2O H2O pH Specific gravity (g/cm3)
Cement 21.36 5.57 3.35 62.5 – – – 3.10
Sodium metasilicate pentahydrate 28.5 – – – 28.5 45.5 12.5 0.90

available in those countries and there are no sufficient financial Table 2

resources to get rid of the wastes which are leading to a very neg- Sieve analysis of coarse aggregates.

ative impact on environment, human health, and safety. Aggregate Aggregate passing (%) according to sieve size (mm)
One of the issues that can help the environment and save the 19 12.5 9.5 4.75 2.36
non-renewable natural resources is to use recycled coarse aggre-
Natural coarse 100 69.2 43 0.7 0.2
gate (RCA) in construction. Recycling concrete from structures RCA 100 68.1 41 0.6 0.1
demolition provides a number of advantages: (1) reduce produc-
tion and consumption of non-renewable natural resources such
as natural aggregate; (2) reduce the landfill areas; (3) improve
were identical to conventional concrete beams, while the shear
the environment by minimizing the air and ground water pollu-
strength of RCA beams were 12% lower compared to conventional
tions; and (4) save millions of dollars in the construction industry.
concrete beams. Fathifazl et al. [32] proposed an Equivalent Mortar
Many researchers have conducted in the last year’s studies on
Volume (EMV) method that provides a special mix design to con-
the effect of using RCA in production of concrete [2–9]. The results
struct RCA beams. The results showed that the shear capacity of
of those works reveal that the quality of recycled aggregate is usu-
RCA beams is equivalent to conventional concrete beams. Choi
ally lower than that of natural aggregate due to remaining mortar
et al. [33] studied the shear strength of twenty beams with differ-
particles, surface cracks, and higher water absorption and porosity
ent span-to-depth ratios, longitudinal reinforcement ratios and
of RCA. This will cause negative effects on the mechanical proper-
RCA replacement ratios. They concluded that the shear strength
ties, workability, air content and durability of fresh and hardened
of RCA beams was lower than that of conventional concrete beams
concrete [10–12]. To overcome this issue, several studies were con-
with same span-to-depth ratio and reinforcement ratio. Fonteboa
ducted on improving the performance of RCA through enhance-
et al. [34] studied the effect of adding 8% silica fume on ultimate
ment treatment methods. Shi et al. [11] provided a
shear strength of eight beams with 50% RCA. The results showed
comprehensive literature review for such methods. The authors
that there was no significant difference in deflection and ultimate
divided the treatment methods into: (1) mechanical and heat
shear strength between RCA and conventional concrete beams, but
grinding [13]; (2) pre-soaking in water or acid [14,15]; (3) polymer
the splitting cracks along the tension reinforcements were miti-
emulsion [16,17]; (4) pozzolan slurry [18]; (5) Calcium Carbonate
gated by the addition of silica fume.
bio-deposition [19]; (6) Sodium silicate solution [20]; and (7) Car-
Based on the extensive search in the literature; it is obvious that
bonation [21,22]. Pre-soaking in acid can be considered one of the
there is a great need to study the structural behavior of full scale
most efficient, environmental friendly and feasible methods for
members that are constructed using enhanced treated recycled
improving the mechanical properties and durability of RCA. Tam
aggregate because this area is still an open field of study. The
et al. [23] and Ismail and Ramli [24] reported that the mechanical
objective of this paper is to study experimentally and analytically
properties and water absorption of RCA have improved signifi-
the shear behavior of full scale reinforced concrete beams that
cantly when the cement mortar remains of recycled aggregate
are constructed from normal aggregate, recycled aggregate and
were removed by pre-soaking in acid and impregnating with cal-
treated recycled aggregate. The beams are constructed with 50%
cium metasilicate.
and 100% RCA. The performance of RCA is improved through
Most of the published work in literature investigated the prop-
enhancement treatment methods. The RCA is pre-soaked in
erties of fresh and hardened recycled aggregate concrete in labora-
hydrochloric acid (HCl) for 24 h to remove adhered mortars
tory environment using concrete cubes, cylinders, and prisms.
attached to original RCA aggregates, and then they are impreg-
Mapping laboratory results to real life is an important considera-
nated with sodium metasilicate pentahydrate solution for one hour
tion. Few studies were reported on structural behavior of full scale
to coat their surfaces. The beams are tested for a shear span-to-
structural elements [25–30]. Arezoumandi et al. [31] studied the
depth ratio (a/d) equal to 2.0 and 3.0. The behavior of the shear-
shear strength of twelve full scale beams constructed with 100%
critical beams is studied through reporting the load-deflection
RCA. The load-deflection response and crack pattern of RCA beams
curves, ultimate load values, and crack propagation during static
tests. The experimental shear capacities of the beams are com-
pared with theoretical values from different international codes
and fracture mechanics approaches. According to the best author’s
knowledge, this is the first paper that studies the shear behavior of
full scale reinforced concrete beams that are constructed with trea-
ted RCA.
Although it is expected that this surface treatment process will
take an extra amount of time for large quantities of RCA; this can
be considered reasonable because this process is expected to be
very effective on enhancing the shear capacity of the reinforced
concrete beams compared to untreated RCA beams. The using of
treated RCA in construction will result in positive impact on envi-
ronment and can be considered economically more feasible in
comparison to the amount of money paid for landfilling processes.
Fig. 1. Photo of chunks of concrete after crushing process. A detailed feasibility study for using treatment of RCA is out of
 H. Katkhuda, N. Shatarat / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71 65

scope of this paper. However, a preliminary cost analysis is pro-
vided to show the feasibility of using such method. The average
costs of HCl acid and sodium metasilicate pentahydrate are 125
and 200 $/ton, respectively. One ton of HCl acid could be used to
treat 2 tons of RCA and the acid can be used more than one time
because the absorption is very low. Sodium metasilicate pentahy-
drate is prepared by dissolving 5% weight in distilled water.
Accordingly, one ton of sodium metasilicate pentahydrate can be
used to treat 200 ton of RCA.
process, the recycled aggregates were washed, dried, and sieved
using the standard sieves for coarse aggregates to obtain the
required size. The minimum and maximum sizes for all RCA used
were 5 and 20 mm, respectively. The natural and RCA were graded
separately as shown in Table 2. The gradation of both aggregates is
very similar and within ASTM C33 [35] and BS EN 12620 [36] grad-
ing requirements. This will ensure that the effect of change of gra-
dation on the mechanical properties of concrete mixes is kept
minimum.

2. Materials 2.3. Acid

2.1. Cement
The cement used in all mixes is Portland cement Type 1. The
specific gravity of the cement is 3.10 g/cm3. The chemical compo-
sition of the cement is shown in Table 1.
2.2. Aggregates
The fine aggregate used in this study is natural sand. The aggre-
gates were washed with water to remove any unwanted
substances, and then they were air-dried. The fineness modulus
of fine aggregate was calculated to be 1.74. The natural coarse
aggregate used is crushed limestone. The maximum size for all
natural coarse aggregate used was 20 mm.
The RCA used in this study were obtained by crushing old
specimens of reinforced concrete beams and slabs available in
structural laboratory of the school of engineering. The average
cubic compressive strength of most of concrete members was
25–35 MPa at 28 days, while the age of the specimens ranges from
1 to 3 years. The source of the RCA is 100% concrete. The type of
RCA aggregate was crushed local wadi gravel aggregate. However,
it is worth to mention here that in real life the RCA will be brought
from different construction sites as a demolition wastes. The age,
strength, and source of aggregate used in such demolition wastes
will be mixed and unknown. The crushing process was performed
in two stages: (1) impact crushing using a machine, where the
machine imposed sharp blows on the specimens by rotating steel
bars. The outcome of this stage was large chunks of concrete; (2)
the large chunks were placed in a jaw crusher to be broken down
into smaller particles. Fig. 1 shows a photo for chunks of concrete
to be placed in a jaw crusher. After completing the crushing
When old concrete specimens are crushed, certain amount of
mortar and impurities remains attaching to the surface of recycled
aggregates. This will form a weak and porous layer that will affect
the bonding between RCA and new concrete, and will influence the
properties of aggregate which leads to higher absorption and
decrease in strength of concrete. Therefore, removing the weak
or loose mortar by presoaking the RCA in acid will improve the
quality of recycled aggregate. Tam et al. [23] and Ismail and Ramli
[24] reported that presoaking recycled aggregate with hydrochloric
acid (HCl) improved the mechanical properties of RCA concrete
when they tested number of cubes, cylinders, and prisms for com-
pressive, tensile, and flexural strengths, respectively. In addition,
Ismail and Ramli [15] recommended that the concentration of used
acidic solution should be low and the optimal concentration was
0.5 M. Accordingly, in this study the RCA will be immersed in
hydrochloric acid (HCl) at 0.5 mol (M) concentration.
2.4. Sodium metasilicate pentahydrate
Sodium metasilicate pentahydrate, whose molecular formula is
Na2SiO35H2O, is an alkaline cleaning agent that is widely used in
household and industrial sectors. Its chemical composition is
shown in Table 1. Sodium metasilicate provides both silica and
alkalinity in a molar ratio of 1:1 between silica and sodium oxide,
which makes it suitable for hard surface cleaning. Sodium metasil-
icate pentahydrate granules are white and free-flowing. It has a
specific gravity of 0.9 g/cm3 and characterized of having: (1) high
dissolution rate; (2) high mechanical strength; (3) low dust
content; and (4) negligible insoluble residue. Sodium metasilicate
pentahydrate was used by Spaeth and Tegguer [16] to fill the
RCA porous network without any hydrophobic effects in order to

Table 3
Properties of coarse aggregate.

Property Natural aggregate Untreated RCA Treated RCA

After acid soaking After impregnation with Na2SiO35H2O
Specific gravity (SSD) 2.44 2.36 2.31 2.33
Water absorption (%) 1.76 6.20 5.25 5.06
LA abrasion (%) 35.4 33.9 32.8 32.47
Chloride content (%) 0.0013 0.0015 0.004 –
pH aggregate 10.50 10.35 9.15 –

Table 4
Details of mix proportions.

Mix type Cement (kg/m3) Water (kg/m3) Fine aggregate (kg/m3) Coarse aggregate (kg/m3) Slump (mm)
Natural RCA Treated RCA
Natural-control 320 160 775 985 0 0 72
Untreated 50% RCA 320 160 775 492.5 492.5 0 55
Untreated 100% RCA 320 160 775 0 985 0 34
Treated 50% RCA 320 160 775 492.5 0 492.5 43
Treated 100% RCA 320 160 775 0 0 985 29
66 H. Katkhuda, N. Shatarat / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71
Table 5
Compressive strength relative to natural (control) concrete mix after 28 days of
curing.
Natural- Untreated Untreated Treated 50%
control 50% RCA 100% RCA RCA
1.0 0.89 0.82 0.99
obtain lower water absorption and better fragmentation resis-
tance. Sodium metasilicate pentahydrate is used in this study to
coat the surfaces of RCA to fill the pores and cracks throughout
its physical surface, and it is expected to improve the bond
strength between aggregate and cement matrix because it func-
tions as filler with the product of cement hydration.
3. Experimental program
3.1. Surface treatment of RCA
The performance of RCA will be improved through enhance-
ment treatment methods. This involves adopting two steps as
follows:
Step 1: Soaking recycled aggregate with acid
In this stage the surface treatment involved the following pro-
cedure: (1) the obtained RCA were placed in a container; (2)
hydrochloric acid (HCl) at 0.5 mol (M) concentration was added
until the surface of the aggregates were covered; (3) the RCA were
kept immersed for 24 h; (4) aggregates were washed, drained, and
sieved using the standard sieves for coarse aggregates; and (5) any
removed mortars or particles passed 5 mm sieve were collected
and discarded.
Step 2: Coating with sodium metasilicate pentahydrate
In this stage the RCA soaked in acid are impregnated with
Sodium metasilicate pentahydrate. Cheng and Wang [20] reported
that the optimum concentration for sodium metasilicate used in
their study was 5% with one hour soaking time. Accordingly, the
surface treatment involved the following procedure: (1) the RCA
was completely dried in an oven for 24 h; (2) sodium metasilicate
pentahydrate was prepared by dissolving 5% weight in distilled
water; (3) the dried RCA was added to the solution and soaked
for one hour; and (4) the RCA was dried.
3.2. Measuring properties of coarse aggregate
The properties of natural aggregate, untreated RCA, treated RCA
with acid, and treated RCA with acid and sodium metasilicate
pentahydrate were measured and shown in Table 3. The specific
800 mm
a/d=3.0
a/d=2.0
520 mm
206 mm
2 φ 10
4 φ 18
gravity and absorption were measured using ASTM C127 standards
[37]. The hardness of the aggregates was obtained using ASTM
C131 [38]. The chloride content of the aggregates was chemically
Treated 100% tested using ASTM C1524 [39]. In addition the pH values of the
RCA aggregates were identified.
0.94 The specific gravity of untreated and treated RCA was lower
than natural coarse aggregate, while the water absorption of trea-
ted RCA decreased compared with untreated RCA. The Los Angeles
abrasion value of untreated RCA is lower than natural coarse
aggregate. However, this value is lower for treated RCA after acid
soaking and for treated RCA after impregnation with Sodium
metasilicate pentahydrate. These decreases after treatment can
be contributed to the removal of weak adhered mortars and this
will have a positive effect on enhancing the mechanical strength
of RCA. And as expected, the chloride content of treated RCA
increased compared to natural and untreated RCA but can be con-
sidered acceptable.
3.3. Mix proportions
Five concrete mixes were designed in this research with effec-
tive water-to-cement (w/c) ratio of 0.5 for all mixes to achieve a
target slump range of 30–90 mm and a compressive strength of
28 MPa after 28 days. Table 4 shows mix proportions of natural-
control, untreated RCA and treated RCA. The natural-control mix
is the control mix where it consists of natural coarse aggregate;
i.e. 0% replacement ratio of RCA. The natural coarse aggregate
was replaced by RCA with 50% and 100% by volume to keep
cement, free water and fine aggregates constant in all mixes.
Accordingly, the absolute unit volume for all mixes will not be
altered. The workability of the natural-control mix is better than
that of untreated RCA because RCA have high absorptivity caused
by adhered mortars. Also, the workability of untreated RCA is bet-
ter than that of treated RCA because the particles of sodium
metasilicate pentahydrate absorb more water during mixing.
3.4. Compressive strength of mixes
All concrete mixes in this study were mixed using drum mixer.
For each concrete mix, several 150  300 mm cylinders and
100 mm cubes were casted for testing the compressive strength.
The cylinders and cubes were cured in a water bath in laboratory
at a temperature of 20 °C and then tested at the age of 28 days.
The average of three values was determined as the compressive
strength of each mix. Table 5 shows the ratio of compressive
strength relative to natural-control mix. It can be shown that the
RCA mixes have a lower compressive strength compared to
natural-control mix; the ratios relative to natural-control mix for
untreated 50% RCA and 100% RCA were 0.89 and 0.82, respectively.
These results are similar to most of results reported in the
400 mm 800 mm
960 mm 520 mm
2 φ 10
300 mm
4 φ 18
LVDT
2000 mm
Fig. 2. Beam details and load setup.
 H. Katkhuda, N. Shatarat / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71 67

literature [10,12,15]. While there is a remarkable improvement in 3.7. Test setup

the compressive strength for the mixes of treated 50% and 100%
RCA. Table 5 shows that the ratio relative to natural-control mix
for treated 50% RCA and 100% RCA were 0.99 and 0.94, respectively.
The compressive strengths of treated RCA increased compared to
untreated RCA due to the positive effect of the treatment process.
The acid removed the adhered mortar on recycled aggregate and
the sodium metasilicate pentahydrate filled the pores and cracks.
This enhances the mechanical properties of the recycled aggregate
and the bond between recycled aggregate and the new cement
matrix. These results are similar to many studies available in the
literature [15,23,24]. This shows the novelty of the two steps sur-
face treatment method adopted in this study.
Static tests were carried out using a typical four-point bending
setup. The test setup used force-controlled 400 kN capacity
hydraulic actuator. The beams were supported on a roller and a
pin support 220 mm from each end of the beam. Accordingly, the
span length of the beams was 2000 mm. The distance between
the two point loads was 960 mm for (a/d = 2.0) and 400 mm for
(a/d = 3.0) as shown in Fig. 2. The imposed load was consistently
increased with low rate, i.e. 0.05 kN. The mid-span deflections of
the beams were measured by linear variable differential trans-
former (LVDT) that was placed at the mid-span of the tested

3.5. Details of tested beams (a) 160

R50-2
140
The experimental program of this research includes ten (10) R100-2
beams. All beams were constructed without stirrups. All beams T50-2
120
have a same total length of 2440 mm, same width (b) of 206 mm
and same depth (h) of 300 mm. The longitudinal reinforcement is T100-2
100

Load (kN)
calculated using ACI 318M-14 code [40] to obtain shear failure NC-2
and is equal for all beams. The main lower reinforcement is 4/
80
18 mm and the upper reinforcement is 2/10 mm as shown in
Fig. 2. Few stirrups were placed at the beginning and end of beams 60
out of the clear span for practical reasons in order to hold the lower
and upper reinforcements fixed in place. As mentioned earlier, five 40
concrete mixes were used: (1) natural aggregate-control; (2)
untreated 50% RCA; (3) untreated 100% RCA; (4) treated 50% 20
RCA; and (5) treated 100% RCA. From each mix two beams were
Midspan deflecon (mm)
casted and constructed in order to be tested for a shear span-to- 0
depth ratio (a/d) equal to 2.0 and 3.0. The yield and the ultimate 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
strengths of the longitudinal steel reinforcement were tested to
be Fy = 457 MPa and Fut = 630 MPa, respectively. (b) 120
The codified names of the beams are presented in Table 6. The
names consist of three parts. The first part indicates the type of
the mix: ‘‘N-natural aggregate”; ‘‘R-untreated RCA”; and ‘‘T- 100
treated RCA”, while the second part indicates the ratio of RCA R50-3
replacement: ‘‘C-for the control mix beams, i.e. 0% RCA”; ‘‘50- 80 R100-3
ratio of RCA replacement is 50% by volume”; and ‘‘100-ratio of
Load (kN)

RCA replacement is 100% by volume”. The third part indicates T50-3

the ratio of shear span-to-depth ratio (a/d) the beam was tested 60
T100-3
for: ‘‘2-a/d = 2.0”; and ‘‘3-a/d = 3.0”.
NC-3
40
3.6. Fabrication and curing of tested beams

20
All ten beams were constructed, cured and tested in structural
lab in the school of engineering. After casting, the beams were Midspan deflecon (mm)
covered with wet burlap and plastic sheeting. After 14 days, the 0
form works were removed and the beams were stored in a semi- 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
controlled environment with a room temperature and relative
humidity ranges of 35–50% until were tested at an age of 28 days. Fig. 3. Experimental behavior of beams for: (a) a/d = 2; (b) a/d = 3.

Table 6
Details of the tested beams and test results.

Mix type Beam name a/d fc0 Pmax (kN) Vc exp (kN) mc exp = Vc exp/bd (MPa)
Natural-control NC-2 2.0 28.3 138.67 69.33 1.27
Untreated 50% RCA R50-2 2.0 25.2 117.89 58.94 1.08
Untreated 100% RCA R100-2 2.0 23.2 110.08 55.04 1.0
Treated 50% RCA T50-2 2.0 28.05 145.97 72.98 1.33
Treated 100% RCA T100-2 2.0 26.6 133.59 66.79 1.22
Natural-control NC-3 3.0 28.3 105.02 52.51 0.96
Untreated 50% RCA R50-3 3.0 25.2 98.14 49.07 0.90
Untreated 100% RCA R100-3 3.0 23.2 92.89 46.45 0.85
Treated 50% RCA T50-3 3.0 28.05 110.11 55.06 1.0
Treated 100% RCA T100-3 3.0 26.6 111.22 55.61 1.0
68 H. Katkhuda, N. Shatarat / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71
beams. Measurements for load and deflection were recorded con-
tinuously during tests until failure of the beams. Crack propagation
is monitored from beginning of applying loads until failure of
beams.
4. Test results and discussions
4.1. Ultimate load test
All of the tested beams failed in shear. Table 6 shows the com-
pressive strength (fc0 ), the maximum load at failure (Pmax), shear
force at failure (Vc exp) and the corresponding nominal shear
stress (vc exp = Vc exp/bd) for all specimens, where b and d are
the beam width and effective depth, respectively. The behavior of
ten tested beams is presented in Fig. 3a and b in terms of experi-
mental curves of load applied versus mid-span deflections for
shear span-to-depth ratio of 2.0 and 3.0, respectively.
Table 6 and Fig. 3a show that beam T50-2 sustains the highest
maximum load followed by NC-2, T100-2, R50-2, and R100-2.
Beams R50-2 and R100-2 exhibited 14.98% and 20.60%, respec-
tively, decrease in shear capacity compared with control beam
NC-2. While T50-2 exhibited 5.26% increase in shear capacity and
T100-2 exhibited 3.66% decrease in shear capacity compared with
control beam NC-2. Table 6 and Fig. 3b show the load deflection
Fig. 4. Crack patterns of the tested beams for a/d = 2.
curves for tested beams for shear span-to depth ratio (a/d) = 3.0.
This ratio can be considered as a representative model for dis-
tributed load type that is used in practice. The test results clearly
indicate that beam T50-3 and T100-3 sustain the highest maxi-
mum load followed by NC-3, R50-3, and R100-3. Beams R50-3
and R100-3 exhibited 6.55% and 11.55%, respectively, decrease in
shear capacity compared with control beam NC-3. While T50-3
and T100-3 exhibited 4.85% and 5.9%, respectively, increase in
shear capacity compared with control beam NC-3.
The experimental results showed clearly that using untreated
RCA will decrease the shear capacity compared to the beams con-
structed with natural aggregates regardless of shear span-to depth
ratio. These findings can be considered similar to the results
reported by Arezoumandi et al. [27] and Choi et al. [33]. However,
the experimental results for treated RCA beams showed clearly a
slight increase in the shear capacity compared to the beams con-
structed with natural aggregates. The shear capacity for beams
T50-2, T50-3, and T100-3 increased 5.26%, 4.85%, and 5.90%,
respectively compared with control beams. In addition, the test
results showed that increasing the untreated RCA replacement
ratio from 50% to 100% will decrease the shear capacity of the
beams more than 5%. On the other hand, the shear span-to depth
ratio has a noticeable effect on the decrease in shear capacity of
the untreated and treated RCA beams. For example, when the
untreated RCA beams were tested for a/d = 3.0; the shear capacity
NC-2
R50-2
R100-2
T50-2
T100-2
 H. Katkhuda, N. Shatarat / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71 69

increased more than 9% compared with a/d = 2.0. This can be con- 5. Predictions of shear behavior
sidered encouraging because a/d = 3 is representative model for
distributed load type that is used in practice. 5.1. Comparison with selected international design codes

In this section, the experimental shear force at failure (Vc exp)

4.2. Crack propagation during tests for all beams is compared with the shear provisions of ACI Building
Code ACI 318M-14 [40] and Eurocode 2-05 [41]. The theoretical
Figs. 4 and 5 show the cracking patterns of the tested beams at shear force (Vc theo) using ACI Building Code ACI 318M-14 [41]
failure for a/d = 2.0 and 3.0, respectively. The first flexural cracks is calculated for all beams using the following equation:
were formed at the maximum moment region at the mid-span of  qffiffiffiffi  qffiffiffiffi
0 q 0
the beams. As the applied load increased, new flexural cracks Vc ¼ 0:16 f c þ 17 l b d 6 0:29 f c b d ð1Þ
a=d
began to form and spread out in the area between the load and
supports, and then flexural-shear cracks started to appear and where Vc is the theoretical shear strength of a member that is pro-
became gradually inclined towards the neutral axis of the beams. vided by concrete, ql is the longitudinal reinforcement ratio for
After that, cracks started to develop in the shear region at both beams, f0 c is the compressive strength of concrete, b is section width,
ends of the beams. As the applied force increases, the flexural- d is the beam effective depth and a is the shear span.
shear cracks increased in width and the shear cracks propagate While the theoretical shear force (Vc theo) using Eurocode 2-05
upwards towards the applied load. Accordingly, it can be con- [41] is calculated for all beams using the following equation:
cluded that the tested specimens failed in shear due to major diag-    qffiffiffiffi
 0 1=3 0
Vc ¼ 0:18 k 100 ql f c
3=2
onal shear crack, crushing of the concrete fibers under the load, and bd P 0:035 k fc b d ð2Þ
the local bond failure of bottom reinforcement near the supports.
Monitoring of the crack pattern for all tested beams reveals that where
the crack pattern could be considered identical and the failure rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
mechanism is practically equal. These findings support the effec- 200
k¼1þ 6 2:0 ð3Þ
tiveness of using the untreated and treated RCA. d

NC-3

R50-3

R100-3

T50-3

T100-3

Fig. 5. Crack patterns of the tested beams for a/d = 3.

70 H. Katkhuda, N. Shatarat / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71

  1=3
For the purpose of comparison, all of the safety factors were set 37:41 3d pffiffiffiffiffi 2=3  0 0:35
equal to 1.0 and all the shear forces were calculated without load Vc ¼ 0:15 pffiffiffi ð100 ql Þ1=6 ð1  ql Þ fc bd ð5Þ
d a
factors.
Fig. 6a and b show the ratio of experimental to ACI and Euro Bazant and Yu [44] proposed the following equation based on
codes shear capacity (Vc exp/Vc theo) for a/d = 2 and 3, respec- fracture mechanics:
tively. For a/d = 2, the ratios range from 1.0 to 1.25 for control  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffi
beams, 0.85 to 1.12 for RCA beams and 0.99 to 1.32 for treated Vc ¼
0 0
3:5 f c Do =d b d 6 3:5 f c b d ð6Þ
RCA beams. While for a/d = 3, the ratios range from 0.76 to 1.0
for control beams, 0.72 to 0.99 for RCA beams and 0.8 to 1.09 for
treated RCA beams. The shear provisions of ACI 318M-14 [40] where
underestimated the shear capacity for majority of beams. In con-
trast Eurocode 2-05 [41] overestimated the shear capacity for Do ¼ 7 q2=3
l
majority of beams. The ratios for treated RCA beams are higher
than the control and RCA beams regardless of the a/d ratio, which Fig. 6a and b shows the ratio of experimental shear capacity to
implies that the results of these beams are more conservative. On Zsutty, Gastebled and May, and Bazant and Yu shear capacity
the other hand, the ratio tends to decrease as the a/d ratio approaches (Vc exp/Vc theo) for a/d = 2 and 3, respectively. It is
increases, i.e. the calculated shear strength values are more conser- not the intention of this paper to discuss the basis or merits of
vative as the a/d ratio decreases. This can be attributed to the arch those methods. The intention is to compare the experimental shear
action mechanism that is more obvious at lower a/d ratios. capacity of all tested beams in this study with those fracture
mechanics approaches. Zsutty [42] and Gastebled and May [43]
5.2. Comparison with selected fracture mechanics approaches overestimated the shear capacity for majority of beams, while
Bazant and Yu [44] underestimated the shear capacity for all
Some researchers [42–44] have used fracture mechanics beams. The ratios for treated RCA beams are higher than the con-
approaches to predict the shear strength of reinforced concrete trol and RCA beams regardless of the a/d ratio, which implies that
beams without stirrups. the results of these beams are more conservative. On the other
Zsutty [42] proposed the following equation based on statistical hand, the ratio tends to decrease as the a/d ratio increases, i.e.
analyses: the calculated shear strength values are more conservative as the
 1=3 a/d ratio decreases.
0 d
Vc ¼ 2:21 f c ql bd ð4Þ
a
Gastebled and May [43] proposed an analytical model based on 6. Conclusions
fracture energy in the following equation:
The shear behavior of ten full scale reinforced concrete beams
that were constructed from natural aggregate, recycled aggregate
concrete and treated recycled aggregate concrete were studied
experimentally and analytically. The surface treatment of recycled
(a) 1.8 aggregate was pre-soaking in hydrochloric acid (HCl) for 24 h and
1.6 impregnating with sodium metasilicate pentahydrate solution for
1.4 one hour. The following conclusions are drawn:
Vc exp / Vc theo

1.2
1.0
Using treated RCA will increase the compressive strength
0.8 because the acid will remove the adhered mortar on recycled
aggregate and the sodium metasilicate pentahydrate will fill
0.6
the pores and cracks and enhance the bond between recycled
0.4 aggregate and the new cement matrix.
0.2
Using untreated RCA in beams will decrease the shear capacity
0.0 compared to that constructed with natural aggregates regard-
NC-2 R50-2 R100-2 T50-2 T100-2 less of shear span-to depth ratio. While using treated RCA in
ACI Euro Zsuy Gastebled Bazant beams will increase slightly the shear capacity of the beams.

The crack propagation pattern and load deflection response are
(b) 1.4 identical for beams constructed from natural aggregate,
untreated RCA, and treated RCA.
1.2

The shear strengths of treated RCA beams are considered more
conservative compared to the natural and untreated RCA beams
Vc exp / Vc theo

1.0
regardless of the shear-to-span depth ratio when compared
0.8
with international codes and fracture mechanics approaches.
0.6
0.4
0.2 Acknowledgements
0.0
NC-3 R50-3 R100-3 T50-3 T100-3
The authors would like to thank deanship of scientific research
in Hashemite University for their financial support to perform this
ACI Euro Zsuy Gastebled Bazant
research. Any opinions, conclusions, or recommendations
Fig. 6. (Vc exp/Vc theo) from various international codes and fracture mechanics expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not
approaches for: (a) a/d = 2; (b) a/d = 3. necessarily reflect the views of the sponsor.
 H. Katkhuda, N. Shatarat / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 63–71 71

References [22] B. Zhan, C. Poon, Q. Liu, S. Kou, C. Shi, Experimental study on CO2 curing for
enhancement of recycled aggregate properties, Constr. Build. Mater. 67 (2014)
3–7.
[1] D. Matias, j De Brito, A Rosa, D Pedro, Mechanical properties of concrete
[23] V. Tam, C.M. Tam, K.N. Le, Removal of cement mortar remains from recycled
produced with recycled coarse aggregates – influence of the use of super
aggregate using pre-soaking approaches, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 50 (2007)
plasticizers, Constr. Build. Mater. 44 (2013) 101–109.
82–101.
[2] D. Pedro, J. De Brito, L. Evangelista, Performance of concrete made with
[24] S. Ismail, M. Ramli, Mechanical strength and drying shrinkage properties of
aggregates recycled from precasting industry waste – influence of the crushing
concrete containing treated coarse recycled concrete aggregates, Constr. Build.
process, Mater. Struct. 48 (12) (2015) 3965–3978.
Mater. 68 (2014) 726–739.
[3] D. Pedro, J. De Brito, L. Evangelista, Influence of the use of recycled concrete
[25] J. Xiao, H. Xie, Z. Yang, Shear transfer across a crack in recycled aggregate
aggregates from different sources on structural concrete, Constr. Build. Mater.
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 42 (2012) 700–709.
71 (2014) 141–151.
[26] S.W. Kim, C.Y. Jeong, J.S. Lee, K.H. Kim, Size effect in shear failure of reinforced
[4] A. André, J. De Brito, A. Rosa, D. Pedro, Durability performance of concrete
concrete beams with recycled aggregate, J. Asian Archit. Build. Eng. 12 (2)
incorporating coarse aggregates from marble industry waste, J. Cleaner Prod.
(2013) 323–330.
65 (2014) 389–396.
[27] M. Arezoumandi, A. Smith, J. Volz, K. Khayat, An experimental study on
[5] D.S. Seo, H.B. Choi, Effects of the old cement mortar attached to the recycled
flexural strength of reinforced concrete beams with 100% recycled concrete
aggregate surface on the bond characteristics between aggregate and cement
aggregate, Eng. Struct. 88 (2015) 154–162.
mortar, Constr. Build. Mater. 59 (2014) 72–77.
[28] N. Reis, J. De Brito, J. Correia, M. Arruda, Punching behaviour of concrete slabs
[6] I. Marie, H. Quiasrawi, Closed-loop recycling of recycled concrete aggregates, J.
incorporating coarse recycled concrete aggregates, Eng. Struct. 100 (2015)
Cleaner Prod. 37 (2012) 243–248.
238–248.
[7] E. Koenders, M. Pepe, E. Martinelli, Compressive strength and hydration
[29] S. Schubert, C. Hoffmann, A. Leemann, K. Moser, M. Motavalli, Recycled
processes of concrete with recycled aggregates, Cem. Concr. Res. 56 (2014)
aggregate concrete: experimental shear resistance of slabs without shear
203–212.
reinforcement, Eng. Struct. 41 (2012) 490–497.
[8] M. Bravo, J. De Brito, J. Pontes, L. Evangelista, Durability performance of
[30] C.Y. Li, G.X. Li, W. Shao, Q. Guo, R. Liu, Shear-crack behaviors of reinforced full-
concrete with recycled aggregates from construction and demolition waste
recycled aggregate concrete beams, Appl. Mech. Mater. 438–439 (2013) 794–
plants, Constr. Build. Mater. 77 (2015) 357–369.
799.
[9] S. Yildirim, C. Meyer, S. Herfellner, Effects of internal curing on the strength,
[31] M. Arezoumandi, A. Smith, J. Volz, K. Khayat, An experimental study on shear
drying shrinkage and freeze–thaw resistance of concrete containing recycled
strength of reinforced concrete beams with 100% recycled concrete aggregate,
concrete aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 91 (2015) 288–296.
Constr. Build. Mater. 53 (2014) 612–620.
[10] H. Qasrawi, I. Marie, Towards better understanding of concrete containing
[32] G. Fathifazl, A.G. Razaqpur, O. Isgor, A. Abbasd, B. Fournier, S. Foo, Shear
recycled concrete aggregate, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. (2013) 8, http://dx.doi.org/
capacity evaluation of steel reinforced recycled concrete (RRC) beams, Eng.
10.1155/2013/636034. Article ID 636034.
Struct. 33 (2011) 1025–1033.
[11] C. Shi, Y. Li, J. Zhang, W. Li, L. Chong, Z. Xie, Performance enhancement of
[33] H.B. Choi, C.K. Yi, H.H. Cho, K.I. Kang, Experimental study on the shear strength
recycled concrete aggregate: a review, J. Cleaner Prod. 112 (2016) 466–472.
of recycled aggregate concrete beams, Mag. Concr. Res. 62 (2) (2010) 103–114.
[12] K. Rahal, Mechanical properties of concrete with recycled coarse aggregate,
[34] G. Fonteboa, M. Abella, M. Lage, E. Lopez, Structural shear behaviour of
Build. Environ. 42 (2007) 407–415.
recycled concrete with silica fume, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (11) (2009) 3406–
[13] K. Bru, S. Touz, F. Bourgeois, N. Lippiatt, Y. Menard, Assessment of a
3410.
microwave-assisted recycling process for the recovery of high-quality
[35] ASTM C33-13: Standard specification for concrete aggregates.
aggregates from concrete waste, Int. J. Miner. Process. 126 (2014) 90–98.
[36] BS EN 12620: 2002: Specification for aggregates from natural sources for
[14] A. Katz, Treatments for the improvement of recycled aggregate, J. Mater. Civ.
concrete.
Eng. 16 (6) (2004) 597–603.
[37] ASTM C127-15: Standard test method for relative density (specific gravity)
[15] S. Ismail, M. Ramli, Engineering properties of treated recycled concrete
and absorption of coarse aggregate.
aggregate (RCA) for structural applications, Constr. Build. Mater. 44 (2013)
[38] ASTM C131-14: Standard test method for resistance to degradation of small-
464–476.
Size coarse aggregate by abrasion and impact in the Los Angeles machine.
[16] V. Spaeth, A. Tegguer, Improvement of recycled concrete aggregate properties
[39] ASTM C1524-02A (2010): Standard test method for water-extractable chloride
by polymer treatments, Int. J. Sustainable Built Environ. 2 (2013) 143–152.
in aggregate (Soxhlet Method).
[17] S.C. Kou, C.S. Poon, Properties of concrete prepared with PVA-impregnated
[40] ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI
recycled concrete aggregates, Cem. Concr. Compos. 32 (8) (2010) 649–654.
318M-14) and Commentary (ACI 318RM-14), American Concrete Institute
[18] H. Dilbas, M. Simsek, O. Cakır, An investigation on mechanical and physical
(ACI), Farmington Hills, Michigan, 2014.
properties of recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) with and without silica fume,
[41] European Committee for Standardization. Eurocode No. 2. Design of concrete
Constr. Build. Mater. 61 (2014) 50–59.
structures. Part 1: General rules and rules for buildings, 2005.
[19] A.M. Grabiec, J. Klama, D. Zawal, D. Krupa, Modification of recycled concrete
[42] T. Zsutty, Beam shear strength prediction by analysis of existing data, ACI
aggregate by calcium carbonate biodeposition, Constr. Build. Mater. 34 (2012)
Struct. J. 65 (1968) 943–951.
145–150.
[43] O. Gastebled, L. May, Mechanics model applied to shear failure of reinforced
[20] H.L. Cheng, C.Y. Wang, The influence of sodium silicate on the properties of
concrete beams without stirrups, ACI Struct. J. 98 (2) (2001) 184–190.
recycled aggregate, Gypsum Cem. Build. 2005 (12) (2005) 12–14.
[44] Z. Bazant, Q. Yu, Designing against size effect on shear strength of reinforced
[21] J. Zhang, C. Shi, Y. Li, X. Pan, C. Poon, Z. Xie, Performance enhancement of
concrete beams without stirrups, J. Struct. Eng. 113 (12) (2005) 1877–1885.
recycled concrete aggregates through carbonation, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 27 (11)
(2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001296.