Received: 6 April 2020 Revised: 11 June 2020 Accepted: 26 June 2020

DOI: 10.1002/stc.2612

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Acoustic emission behavior and damage evaluation of

recycled aggregate concrete under compression

Jinjie Men1,2 | Jiachen Wang1 | Linying Guo1 | Kai Wang1

1
School of Civil Engineering, Xi'an
University of Architecture & Technology,
Xi'an, China
2
Key Lab of Structural Engineering and
Earthquake Resistance, Ministry of
Education (XAUAT), Xi'an, China
Correspondence
Jiachen Wang, School of Civil
Engineering, Xi'an University of
Architecture & Technology, Xi'an 710055,
China.
Email: wjc@xauat.edu.cn
Funding information
Scientific Research Program of Key
Laboratory of Shaanxi Education
Department, Grant/Award Number:
17JS062; National Natural Science
Foundation of China, Grant/Award
Number: 51878542; National Key R&D
Program of China, Grant/Award Number:
2017YFC0703406
Summary
Application of recycled coarse aggregate concrete (RAC) will generate consid-
erable environmental benefits. However, the properties of RAC must be stud-
ied before being adopted in structures. In this research, the failure process and
damage assessment of RAC under compression were investigated by applying
acoustic emission (AE) technology. The variables include loading rates, maxi-
mum coarse aggregate sizes, and water–cement ratios (w/c). Meanwhile, an
innovative approach called stage cumulative proportion (SCP) analysis of AE
result was put forward. Subsequently, the damage of RAC under compression
was evaluated based on the rate process theory. The results demonstrated that
void compaction and original crack expansion occurred first in the test and
then the stable microcracking in interfacial transition zone (ITZ) and unstable
cracking in mortar, and finally, there is the macrocrack expansion followed by
the fracture. It was found that AE counts and energy were mainly produced
before the peak stress was reached. The increase in loading rate caused the AE
counts and energy to increase in stable microcracking of ITZ but decreased in
unstable cracking of mortar. Increasing the w/c would also affect the AE
results in these stages, but the effect was the opposite to the loading rate.
Besides, an increase in coarse aggregate sizes would increase the AE counts
and energy in unstable cracking of mortar and decrease in macrocrack expan-
sion. In addition, a polynomial expression of the relationship between AE
parameters and stress level was established. Then, an evaluation criterion was
proposed based on the expressions and the rate process theory.

KEYWORDS
acoustic emission, AE parameter, damage assessment, failure process, recycled coarse aggregate
concrete

1 | INTRODUCTION

The process of building construction and demolition produces a large amount of concrete waste. There are more than
900 million tons of construction waste being produced annually just in Europe, the United States, and Japan.1 Directly
discarding these construction wastes has a negative impact on the environment and goes against the sustainable devel-
opment. Meanwhile, several countries are currently facing a shortage of natural coarse aggregates due to the excessive

Struct Control Health Monit. 2020;e2612. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/stc © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1 of 21
https://doi.org/10.1002/stc.2612
2 of 21 MEN ET AL.

usage. Therefore, effective application of recycled coarse aggregates in concrete is a significant approach to promote
environmental protection and a sustainable society.
In general, recycled coarse aggregate is obtained by crushing natural aggregate. Natural aggregates in recycled
coarse aggregates account for 65%–70% and old mortar account for 30%–35% of the total volume.2 Recent evidence sug-
gests that recycled coarse aggregate concrete (RAC) has been applied to structural concrete in building engineering3 to
reduce environmental impacts with respect to the exploitation of natural resources.
However, the same as other types of structures, RAC buildings also have capacity degradation problem due to vari-
ous factors such as increased service loading, fatigue, and environmental effects. On the other hand, as is generally
accepted, RAC is different in mechanical properties compared with ordinary concrete, such as compressive strength,4
shear strength,1 and durability.5 These factors have raised the demand for structural health monitoring techniques to
ascertain safety and serviceability of the RAC structures.
As an advanced nondestructive testing technology, acoustic emission (AE) has been widely used in the field of civil
engineering for structural health monitoring. In concrete materials, AE signals propagates elastic waves due to the
release of the energy in the formation and development of microcracks under the internal or external loading. Suitable
sensors are placed on the concrete surface for receiving these elastic waves and analyzed by the AE system. On the basis
of the analysis of signals, AE can provide additional insights into the propagation of cracks among concrete members
long before it is visible and develop better diagnosis for the integrity of structures without any damage.6,7 With the AE
technique, it is also possible to evaluate the status of existing structural components and provide assistance for damage
assessment of the whole structure.8
A typical AE waveform is shown in Figure 1. Previous studies have shown that parameters including energy, hits,
counts, amplitude, and frequency of the AE waveform are useful for identifying the crack characterization in the con-
crete and masonry materials.9–12 The structural reliability can then be effectively evaluated after the crack type is
judged by the AE signals. Furthermore, the AE events13 and amplitude14 have been proved to be effective in determin-
ing the magnitude of the damage during the fracture process. Some researchers also discussed the relationship between
the fracture energy of concrete materials and the energy detected by the AE sensors.15 Consequently, parameter-based
analysis of AE signal has been widely applied not only in health monitoring of modern buildings16 but also in historical
buildings, for example, the Asinelli Tower in Bologna.17 These results mentioned above make it possible to apply the
AE technique as a damage qualification method for concrete structures.
In general, there are two differences between RAC and ordinary concrete, as shown in Figure 2. One is the adhered
mortar, and the other is the old interfacial transition zone (ITZ) between natural aggregate and the adhered mortar.18
Literature studies have shown that the strength of RAC is different from that of ordinary concrete due to the distinct
nature of the two ITZs of RAC, and it also causes changes in the failure process.2
Moreover, the mechanical properties of RAC is also affected by the influence of the crushing degree and the com-
pressive strength of original concrete. Compared with natural aggregates, recycled aggregates have worse homogeneity,
smaller density, and more pores.2 On the other hand, with AE being a nondestructive testing method with high

FIGURE 1 Acoustic emission (AE) parameters in an AE hit

MEN ET AL. 3 of 21

F I G U R E 2 The differences between recycled coarse aggregate

and natural coarse aggregate. Abbreviation: ITZ, interfacial
transition zone

sensitivity, the AE parameters are closely related to the nature of the transferring medium influenced by the material
characteristics.19 Therefore, changes in the properties of the material can also cause variations of the AE behavior.
Nevertheless, it is noted that the previous studies based on AE parameters have been conducted on the ordinary
concrete, but few investigations exist in dealing with RAC members and the damage evaluation of RAC by employing
AE technique. In addition, the previous literature mainly focused on the AE results of the entire process of test, but
rarely analyzed the AE behavior of the specimen at different stages, or discussed the impact of parameter changes in
each stage.
In the present study, uniaxial compressive test and AE test of RAC specimens were carried out at the same time.
Variations of compressive strength and AE parameters (counts and energy) of specimens with different loading rates,
maximum aggregate sizes, and water–cement ratios (w/c) were investigated. On the basis of the AE parameters, an
innovative approach called stage cumulative proportion (SCP) analysis was put forward to discuss the compressive fail-
ure process and AE behavior of RAC with different conditions. Finally, the fourth-order polynomial expressions of
damage factor and cumulative AE parameters are established, and the evaluation criteria for RAC compression damage
are proposed based on the rate process theory. The results of the present investigation establish the potential for AE
monitoring as a nondestructive testing technique in RAC structures.

2 | EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

2.1 | Material characterization

Ordinary Portland cement type I 42.5 was served as the binding agents, and natural river sand was used as fine aggre-
gate in the study. Recycled coarse aggregates were sourced from a local recycling facility, and the strength of the origi-
nal concrete was found to be 30 MPa. Further, the recycled coarse aggregates were washed with high pressure to
eliminate loose mortar and impurities. Then, all the coarse aggregates were screened in the laboratory and divided into
three different-sized ranges including 5–16.5 mm, 5–19.5 mm, and 5–31.5 mm. The purpose of this is to consider the
effect of different coarse aggregate sizes on the AE performance of RAC.

2.2 | Sample preparation

Studies have shown that the loading rate, coarse aggregate size, and water–cement ratio have a greater impact on the
compressive properties of concrete.20,21 Therefore, seven groups of specimens were designed for the three different vari-
ables mentioned above, and there are three specimens for each of the seven groups. The mix proportions and design
variables of different RAC specimens are summarized in Table 1. The loading rate was set to 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mm/min.
The maximum aggregate size varied from 16.5 to 19.5 and 31.5 mm, and the water–cement ratio by mass varied from
0.45 to 0.53 and 0.6, respectively. All the replacement rate of recycled coarse aggregate was set to 100% to eliminate the
influence of natural coarse aggregate on the mechanical properties. The experiment program carried out in this study is
shown in Table 2.
The geometry of specimens was 150 × 150 × 150 mm by following the Standard for Test Method of Mechanical Prop-
erties on Ordinary Concrete (GB/T 50081-2002).22 Concrete mixing was carried out in a horizontal shaft mixer. First,
4 of 21 MEN ET AL.

TABLE 1 The mix proportions and design variables of different RAC specimens

Fine Coarse Tap Max aggregate Loading rate

Group Specimen Cement aggregate aggregate water size (mm) (mm/min)
1 RC1-1, RC1-2, RC1-3 1 1.83 3.71 0.53 31.5 0.3
2 RC2-1, RC2-2, RC2-3 31.5 0.4
3 RC3-1, RC3-2, RC3-3 31.5 0.5
4 RC4-1, RC4-2, RC4-3 1 1.83 3.71 0.53 19.5 0.4
5 RC5-1, RC5-2, RC5-3 16.5 0.4
6 RC6-1, RC6-2, RC6-3 1 1.83 3.71 0.6 31.5 0.4
7 RC7-1, RC7-2, RC7-3 1 1.83 3.71 0.45 31.5 0.4

Abbreviation: RAC, recycled coarse aggregate concrete.

TABLE 2 Experimental program

Series Group Purpose

A 1, 2, 3 Influence of loading rate on AE behavior of specimens
B 2, 4, 5 Influence of maximum aggregate size on AE behavior of specimens
C 2, 6, 7 Influence of water–cement ratio on AE behavior of specimens

Abbreviation: AE, acoustic emission.

add the fine aggregate and cement to the mixer and rotate for 60 s, and then, coarse aggregate was added and rotated
for another 60 s. After that, water was gradually added to the dry mix and further rotated for 180 s to ensure adequate
mixing. Freshly mixed concrete was cast in 150 × 150 × 150-mm cube molds in 15 min and placed on a vibration table
for 15 s to make the concrete more compact. Finally, specimens were covered with a plastic sheet for 24 h to prevent
any water evaporation. All specimens were cured under ambient conditions with a temperature of 20 ± 2
C and relative
humidity of 95% for 28 days prior to testing according to GB/T 50081-2002. All specimens were constructed, cured, and
tested in the Key Laboratory of Structure Engineering and Earthquake Resistance at Xi'an University of Architecture
and Technology. The manufacturing process of RAC specimens is shown in Figure 3.

2.3 | Test setup and AE system

Compressive tests of RAC specimens were carried out on a servo-controlled hydraulic actuator (WAW-60) with a capac-
ity of 600 kN, and experimental data were collected through a data acquisition instrument (TDS-530). Meanwhile, AE
measurement was performed in the uniaxial compressive test. One AE sensor with accepting signals in the 22–220 kHz
and the AE system SAEU2S were used in this study (both provided by Soundwel Technology Co., Ltd). The preamplifier
gain was set to 40 dB as input, and the threshold of 40 dB was assigned to avoid the possibility of background noise.
Vaseline was adopted as a coupling medium, and the AE sensor was fixed firmly on the specimen using tape and glue.
Moreover, the sensor was checked for sensing capacity by performing a pencil lead break test before testing. In this
study, the purpose of using one AE sensor is typical for monitoring the AE parameters in laboratory conditions rather

F I G U R E 3 The production process of recycled coarse aggregate concrete specimens: (a) freshly mixed concrete; (b) vibrating;
(c) demolding; and (d) curing
MEN ET AL. 5 of 21

than for locating the AE source. Strain gauges (BX120-80AA) were attached on both sides of the specimen to measure
strain during compression. The layout of the experiment and monitoring system is shown in Figure 4. In addition, there
was a preloading to ensure the favorable working condition of all instruments.

3 | R E S UL T S A ND D I S CUS S I O NS

3.1 | Failure process

The failure process of RAC specimens is described by taking RC2-2 as an example. At the beginning of the test, there
was no significant change in RAC. As the force increases, vertical cracks were initiated on the surface of the specimen
and perpendicular to the loading surface, and crack expansion is relatively stable. Thereafter, as the loading continues,
the cracks widen and propagate towards the loading surface rapidly. Finally, the specimen was fractured by the coales-
cence and propagation of cracks. The failure process of specimen RC2-2 is depicted in Figure 5.

3.2 | Stage division of the failure process

It is observed that the characteristics of crack propagation of all specimens are similar at the same stress level (σ/σ max),
which indicates that the damage process of RAC specimens can be divided by different stress levels. In the present
study, the failure process of RAC specimens was divided into four stages according to the different phenomena. In Stage

F I G U R E 4 Experimental setup: (a) lay out of the test; (b) scene photograph; (c) front view of specimen; and (d) side view of specimen.
Abbreviation: AE, acoustic emission

FIGURE 5 The failure process of RC2-2

6 of 21 MEN ET AL.

I (0 ≤ σ/σ max < 0.3), the air voids compaction, and expansion of the original microcracks occurred. There is no obvious
phenomenon on the surface of specimens, and this is the “void compaction and original microcrack expansion” stage.
In Stage II (0.3 ≤ σ/σ max < 0.7), new microcracks generated at the ITZ, and some vertical hair cracks appeared on the
surface of the specimen. This is the “stable microcracking of ITZ” stage. In Stage III (0.7 ≤ σ/σ max < 1.0), microcracks
begin to join together and expand into the mortar. At the same time, the surface cracks expand rapidly due to mortar
cracking. This is the “unstable cracking of mortar” stage. In Stage IV (1.0 ≤ σ/σ max), fractures are formed due to the coa-
lescence and propagation of cracks. This is the “macrocrack expansion” stage of RAC specimen. The stage division of
the failure process is shown in Figure 6.

3.3 | Compressive strength

The average compressive strengths of specimens obtained from the test of different groups are summarized in Table 3.
Figure 7 shows the variation of average compressive strength with respect to the different loading rates, maximum
coarse aggregate sizes, and water–cement ratios, respectively.
It can be seen from Figure 7a that the peak compressive strength of the RAC specimens increases with the increases
of loading rate. This phenomenon can be attributed to the cracks propagated through the aggregate directly when
encountering the coarse aggregate as the loading rate increases, resulting in an improvement in the compressive
strength of the RAC specimens.
It is worth noting from Figure 7b that the compressive strength is higher when adopting the maximum coarse aggre-
gate size of 19.5 mm than the counterpart of 16.5 and 31.5 mm. This is because under a given water–cement ratio, the
larger aggregates are better covered due to the decrease of specific surface area and reduced microcracks at the interface

F I G U R E 6 The stage division of failure process. Abbreviation:

ITZ, interfacial transition zone

TABLE 3 The average compressive strength of RAC specimens

Group Specimen Average compressive strength (MPa) SD

1 RC1-1, RC1-2, RC1-3 22.3 1.4
2 RC2-1, RC2-2, RC2-3 25.4 1.5
3 RC3-1, RC3-2, RC3-3 31.4 1.1
4 RC4-1, RC4-2, RC4-3 27.6 1.6
5 RC5-1, RC5-2, RC5-3 24.2 1.0
6 RC6-1, RC6-2, RC6-3 20.1 2.1
7 RC7-1, RC7-2, RC7-3 30.2 1.3

Abbreviation: RAC, recycled coarse aggregate concrete.

MEN ET AL. 7 of 21

F I G U R E 7 Compressive strength with different conditions of recycled coarse aggregate concrete specimens: (a) different loading rates;
(b) different maximum coarse aggregate sizes; and (c) different water–cement ratios

between aggregate and mortar.23 This favorable effect contributed to the compressive strength of RAC specimens. On
the other hand, as the size of the aggregate increases, the presence of microcracks at the ITZ reduces the bond strength
between the aggregate and the mortar.24 This adverse effect reduces the compressive strength of the RAC specimens.
The results show that when the maximum coarse aggregate size increased from 16.5 to 19.5 mm, the favorable effect
plays a leading role. When the aggregate size increases from 19.5 to 31.5 mm, the adverse effects dominate the compres-
sive strength.
Figure 7c indicates that the compressive strength of RAC specimens reduces along with the growth of the water–
cement ratio, because the increase of water–cement ratio causes the enhancement of the free water proportion at the
interface between aggregate and mortar, which induced reduction of the bond strength. Moreover, for RAC with higher
water–cement ratio, the mortar has a relatively low strength due to a higher porosity.25 These lead to a decrease in com-
pressive strength.

3.4 | AE results

AE is the propagation of elastic waves generated by releasing the energy of microcracks in an elastic material. The
change in AE parameters is closely related to the failure of the material and can be applied to characterize the damage
process. In general, parameters as AE counts and energy have been used to assess the performance and quality of mate-
rials.26 In this section, the instantaneous value of the AE counts and energy is analyzed to study the AE behavior during
the compressive test. In the analysis below, Ct and Et are the AE counts and energy generated at time t. Cmax and Emax
are the maximum of AE counts and energy generated during the monitoring process. σ t and σ max are the stress at time
t and the maximum stress in the whole process, respectively. Moreover, all parameters were normalized to the maxi-
mum value in the figure.

3.4.1 | AE counts and energy with different loading rates

Figure 8 shows the instantaneous value of AE counts and energy with different loading rates. As can be seen from the
figure, RAC specimens produce plenty of AE counts and energy at low stress levels, and most of the AE signals were
observed before the peak stress. This is because RAC specimens have many defects such as pores, air voids, and original
cracks even before the test, and the compression of the pores and stable growth of cracks will produce AE signals at the
initial stage. Moreover, it was found that the AE counts and energy were gradually concentrated to the low stress level
along with the increase of loading rate. This implies that the damage of RAC specimens at the initial stage may increase
as the loading rate increases.

3.4.2 | AE counts and energy with different maximum coarse aggregate sizes

The relationship among AE counts, energy, and stress according to time of RC5-1, RC4-1, and RC2-1 is presented in
Figure 9. As can be seen, a large amount of AE counts and energy appeared in the initial stage of loading, which may
8 of 21 MEN ET AL.

F I G U R E 8 The
instantaneous value of acoustic
emission (AE) counts and
energy with different loading
rates: (a) AE counts with
0.3 mm/min; (b) AE energy
with 0.3 mm/min; (c) AE counts
with 0.4 mm/min; (d) AE
energy with 0.4 mm/min; (e) AE
counts with 0.5 mm/min; and
(f) AE energy with 0.5 mm/min

be explained by the propagation of microcracks generated during the production process and compaction of pores of
the material. As Figure 9a,b illustrates, there were many AE signals generated even after the peak stress in RC5-1. How-
ever, in Figure 9c,d, the AE counts and energy were mainly produced before the peak stress in RC4-1, in which the max-
imum size of coarse aggregate was increased to 19.5 mm. As is shown in Figure 9e,f, few AE signals were observed in
the late stage of loading in RC2-1 with the maximum coarse aggregate sizes of 31.5 mm. The results show that the
increase in the size of the coarse aggregate will also lead to more damage before peak stress during the
compressive test.

3.4.3 | AE counts and energy with different water–cement ratios

The results of AE counts and energy belonging to RC7-1, RC2-1, and RC6-1 were plotted versus load as is shown in
Figure 10. Like the results of the instantaneous values of the AE parameters analyzed above, the AE counts and
energy of RAC at different water–cement ratios were mainly concentrated before the peak stress, and AE signals
were rarely observed after that. This can be attributed to the fact that an increase in the water–cement ratio results
in the presence of excessive water molecules at the interface between the aggregate and the mortar, which can
weaken the adhesion of these two materials. At the same time, the water molecules in the mortar will generate
pores, which will reduce the tensile strength of the mortar. These factors cause the AE signals generated mostly
before the peak stress.
MEN ET AL. 9 of 21

F I G U R E 9 The
instantaneous value of acoustic
emission (AE) counts and
energy with different maximum
coarse aggregate sizes: (a) AE
counts with 16.5 mm; (b) AE
energy with 16.5 mm; (c) AE
counts with 19.5 mm; (d) AE
energy with 19.5 mm; (e) AE
counts with 31.5 mm; and
(f) AE energy with 31.5 mm

3.5 | Comparison of AE characteristics with ordinary concrete

To illustrate the effect of using recycled coarse aggregate on the AE characteristics of concrete, NSC-1 with similar
aggregate size and water–cement ratio in the research of Geng et al27were selected and compared with RC4-1 in this
paper. Figure 11a,b shows the instantaneous value of the AE energy and the total AE energy of two different types of
concrete specimens during the loading process, respectively. It can be seen from Figure 11a that the AE energy of NSC-
1 is kept at a relatively low level before it is finally destroyed. In contrast, RC4-1 has a particularly active AE behavior at
a low stress stage. Meanwhile, Figure 11b depicts that the energy released by RC4-1 is 64% more than that released by
NSC-1 during the experiment.
The clearly different behavior observed in the test for ordinary concrete and RAC can be attributed to the presence
of more original micropores and defects and the inferior bond strength of coarse aggregate and mortar in RAC. These
factors lead to more energy release under compression. It also indicates that RAC is damaged seriously in the early and
the middle stages of loading, which is distinct from the ordinary concrete.

4 | T H E SC P M E T H O D

In general, the characteristic of cracks in different stages is closely associated with AE generating behavior under com-
pression. However, the analysis of the instantaneous values of AE parameters is not clear enough to indicate the AE
10 of 21 MEN ET AL.

F I G U R E 1 0 The
instantaneous value of acoustic
emission (AE) counts and
energy with different water–
cement ratios: (a) AE counts
with w/c = 0.45; (b) AE energy
with w/c = 0.45; (c) AE counts
with w/c = 0.53; (d) AE energy
with w/c = 0.53; (e) AE counts
with w/c = 0.60; and (f)
AE energy with w/c = 0.60

F I G U R E 1 1 Comparison of acoustic emission (AE) energy

between recycled coarse aggregate concrete and ordinary concrete:
(a) instantaneous value and (b) total energy
MEN ET AL. 11 of 21

behavior in each stage under different conditions. Consequently, the effect of different conditions on the AE behavior
in each stage cannot be clearly studied. Also, it is unclear which stage contributes the most to the failure of RAC and
whether this contribution is affected by changing conditions.
In this study, a new method called SCP analysis is proposed aiming to investigate the effects of different conditions
on each stage during the failure process by AE parameter-based analysis. The steps of the SCP analysis are as follows:
(a) stage division of the failure process of RAC specimen; (b) establishing the relationship between microstructure
changes and the variation of AE parameters in each stage; (c) analyzing the SCP change of AE parameters under differ-
ent conditions; and (d) determining the influence of different conditions on the microstructure of RAC in each stage.
Compared with instantaneous value analysis, SCP analysis can reduce the impact of accidental factors, such as environ-
mental and man-made noise, on the analysis results. On the other hand, the SCP method can clearly show the change
of the AE parameters in each stage. Meanwhile, combining the AE behavior with the microstructure changes is of great
significance for the analysis of the RAC failure process.
The SCP of AE parameter X (i.e., count, energy, and hit) is defined by Equation 1.

SX ð i Þ
SCPX ðiÞ = ð1Þ
SX ðMAX Þ

In the above equation, SCPX(i) is the SCP of the AE parameter X in stage i. SX(i) is the cumulative value of
X generated in stage i. SX(MAX) is the cumulative value of X generated during the whole test. For example, SCPC(I) and
SCPE(I) are the SCP of the AE “counts” and “energy” in Stage I. SC(I) and SE(I) represent the cumulative AE “counts”
and “energy” generated in Stage I. SC(MAX) and SE(MAX) represent the AE “counts” and “energy” generated during the
whole test. The schematic diagram of SCPX(i) is shown in Figure 12.

4.1 | Relationship between AE behavior and microstructure

The AE behavior is corresponding to different stages of the failure process, and the signals are largely related to the
change of microstructure. In Stage I, the AE signals are generated under low compressive stress due to the development
of existing defects, such as the voids produced during the hardening process and the microcracks between aggregate
and mortar made by crushing process. In Stage II, the AE signal generation can be attributed to the expansion of micro-
cracks at the ITZ due to the lower tensile strength compared with the aggregate and mortar.28 In Stage III, the main
source of AE signals is the cracking of mortar. In Stage IV, AE signals are mainly derived from the increase in length
and width and connection of the cracks.
On the basis of the stage division mentioned earlier as well as the relationship between the AE behavior and the
microstructure changes in different stages of RAC, the influence of different conditions on the microstructure can be
studied by the changes of AE parameters.

FIGURE 12 Schematic diagram of SCPX(i)

12 of 21 MEN ET AL.

4.2 | SCP analysis of the failure process with different conditions

4.2.1 | Loading rate

The SCPC and SCPE in each stage with different loading rates are shown in Figure 13, and details are summarized in
Table 4. It was found in the figure that SCPC and SCPE increased in Stage I and Stage III and decreased in Stage II and
Stage IV as the loading rate increased. This can be attributed to the compression process of the pores and extension of
the original microcracks in ITZ accelerated when the loading rate is high. These lead to an increase in AE signals in
Stage I. In Stage II, with the increase of loading rate, there is less time for the specimen to convert the external energy
into the energy that generates the microcracks, resulting in the reduction of AE counts and energy. In Stage III, with
increasing loading rate, the cracks in the mortar do not expand sufficiently, and some cracks penetrate the aggregate
directly, and the AE signals were improved again. In Stage IV, due to the insufficient development of cracks in
Stage III, the extension path of cracks became shorter as the loading rate increases, resulting in a decline in AE counts
and energy.
The SCPC and SCPE versus stage are depicted in Figure 14a,b. It can be seen from the figure that the trend of SCPC
and SCPE was similar during the whole testing process. Both SCPC and SCPE gradually decreased from Stage I to Stage
IV when the loading rate was 0.3 mm/min. However, when the loading rate was 0.4 and 0.5 mm/min, the SCPC first
reduced by 19.07% and 36.58% in Stage II and then increased by 23.93% and 46.54% in Stage III. The SCPE reduced by
20.27% and 31.14% and then increased by 30.56% and 41.70% in Stage II and Stage III, respectively. The results show
that the increase in loading rate will reduce the contribution of the stable microcracking of ITZ and increase the effect
of unstable cracking of mortar to the failure process of RAC specimen.

4.2.2 | Maximum coarse aggregate size

The SCPC and SCPE in each stage under different maximum aggregate sizes are depicted in Figure 15, and the details
are listed in Table 5. As can be seen from the figure, the SCPC and SCPE raised in Stage I and Stage III. A slight drop
and then a rise were observed in Stage II. After that, there was a decline in Stage IV as the size of the coarse aggregate

FIGURE 13 The SCPC and SCPE in each stage with different loading rates: (a) SCPC and (b) SCPE

TABLE 4 The details of SCPC and SCPE with different loading rates

Stage I Stage II Stage III Stage IV

Loading rate (mm/min) SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE
0.3 0.3508 0.3565 0.3319 0.3266 0.2194 0.1885 0.0979 0.1284
0.4 0.3943 0.4412 0.2686 0.2604 0.2719 0.2461 0.0652 0.0523
0.5 0.4525 0.4883 0.2105 0.2249 0.3215 0.2671 0.0155 0.0197
MEN ET AL. 13 of 21

F I G U R E 1 4 The SCPC and SCPE versus stage curves with

different loading rates: (a) SCPC and (b) SCPE

FIGURE 15 The SCPC and SCPE in each stage with different maximum coarse aggregate sizes: (a) SCPC and (b) SCPE

TABLE 5 The details of SCPC and SCPE with different maximum coarse aggregate sizes

Stage I Stage II Stage III Stage IV

Maximum coarse aggregate
size (mm) SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE
16.5 0.3606 0.3600 0.2721 0.2454 0.1689 0.1078 0.1984 0.2868
19.5 0.3833 0.4128 0.2514 0.2417 0.2466 0.2017 0.1187 0.1438
31.5 0.3943 0.4412 0.2686 0.2604 0.2719 0.2461 0.0652 0.0523

increased. The increase of the SCPC and SCPE in Stage I was because the large-sized aggregate contained more micro-
cracks than the small-sized aggregate, resulting in more AE signals under compression. In Stage II, as is mentioned
before, the favorable effect reduced microcracks at the interface between aggregate and mortar, resulting in a reduction
in AE signals. On the other hand, the adverse effect reduced the bond strength between the aggregate and the mortar
and led to more microcracks. Then, more AE signals were produced. This interaction between favorable and adverse
effects caused fluctuations in the results of Stage II. In Stage III, cracks developed around coarse aggregates as they
expand in the mortar. Larger coarse aggregates would increase the path of crack propagation; thus, more AE signals
were generated. When entering Stage IV, the crack of the specimens with large aggregate size had fully expanded in
Stage III; thus, the SCPC and SCPE decreased.
The SCPC and SCPE during the test under different coarse aggregate sizes are shown in Figure 16. The results show
that compared with Stage I and Stage II, Stage III and Stage IV have more significant changes. In Stage III, the SCPC
14 of 21 MEN ET AL.

F I G U R E 1 6 The SCPC and SCPE versus stages curves with

different maximum coarse aggregate sizes: (a) SCPC and (b) SCPE

with a maximum coarse aggregate size of 19.5 and 31.5 mm increased by 46% and 60.98% compared with the size
of 16.5 mm, whereas the SCPE increased by 87.11% and 128.29%, respectively. Then, there is a decrease of 40.17%
and 67.13% in SCPC, whereas 49.86% and 81.76% in SCPE in Stage IV with the coarse aggregate size increased to
19.5 and 31.5 mm. The result indicated that increasing the size of the aggregate has relatively little effect on the
void compaction, original microcrack expansion, and the stable microcracking of ITZ. However, it will increase
the contribution of the unstable cracking of mortar and reduce the effect of macrocrack expansion to the entire
failure process.

4.2.3 | Water–cement ratio

The SCPC and SCPE during the test with different water–cement ratios are presented in Figure 17, and the details are
listed in Table 6. As is seen in the figure, the SCPC and SCPE raised sharply in Stage I and Stage II and then fell rap-
idly in Stage III and Stage IV as the water–cement ratio increased. In Stage I, the growth of SCPC and SCPE can be
attributed to the increase in the number of free water molecule produced after the hydration reaction as the water–
cement ratio increased. This led to a generation of pores in the mortar. In Stage II, excessive water molecules also
reduced the bond strength between coarse aggregate and mortar, resulting in more microcracks at low stress levels.
These factors have caused an increase in the SCPC and SCPE in Stage I and Stage II. In Stage III and Stage IV, the

FIGURE 17 The SCPC and SCPE in each stage with different water–cement ratios: (a) SCPC and (b) SCPE
MEN ET AL. 15 of 21

TABLE 6 The details of SCPC and SCPE with different water–cement ratios

Stage I Stage II Stage III Stage IV

Water–cement
ratio SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE SCPC SCPE
0.45 0.1293 0.1275 0.1146 0.1202 0.5156 0.4672 0.2405 0.2851
0.53 0.3943 0.4412 0.2686 0.2604 0.2719 0.2461 0.0652 0.0523
0.60 0.5512 0.4958 0.4220 0.4366 0.0169 0.0427 0.0099 0.0249

existence of free water will increase the porosity and weaken the tensile strength of mortar, which will lead to the
decrease of energy released during crack propagation. As a result, SCPC and SCPE decreased. Moreover, the change
in water–cement ratio has a greater impact on SCPC and SCPE at each stage than the change in loading rate and
maximum coarse aggregate size.
The SCPC and SCPE during the test under different water–cement ratios are shown in Figure 18. It can be seen from
the figure that the unstable cracking of mortar has the greatest impact on the final damage when the water–cement
ratio is 0.45. As the water–cement ratio increased, the proportion in Stage I and Stage II increased rapidly. When the
water–cement ratio was 0.53 and 0.6, the SCPC of Stage I was 3.05 times and 4.26 times of the water–cement ratio of
0.45. In terms of SCPE, the number was 3.46 and 3.89. In Stage II, the SCPC was 2.34 times and 3.68 times, and the SCPE
was 2.17 times and 3.63 times compared with the water–cement ratio of 0.45 as the water–cement ratio increased to
0.53 and 0.6. On the other hand, SCPC and SCPE decreased significantly in Stage III and Stage IV as the water–cement
ratio increased. When the water–cement ratio was 0.6, the SCPC and SCPE were less than 10% in both stages. The
results indicate that the void compaction and original microcrack expansion have a significant influence on the final
failure of the RAC specimen as the water–cement ratio increases. In addition, the unstable cracking of mortar and mac-
rocrack expansion contribute little to the final fracture of the specimen. In general, the compressive performance of
RAC is lower than that of ordinary concrete. To achieve the desired material properties, there are many studies having
been carried out to enhance the compressive performance of RAC by means of strengthening the physical properties of
coarse aggregate and mortar.29 On the basis of SCP analysis, the AE behavior of each stage can be analyzed. Therefore,
the mechanical properties of the aggregate or mortar after strengthening can be studied according to the SCP to verify
the effect of strengthening.
On the basis of the analysis of the instantaneous value and SCP analysis of AE parameters during the compression
test of RAC specimens, the results show that the damage of the RAC specimens during the compression process results
in different characteristics of the AE parameters at different stress levels. Accordingly, it is possible to evaluate the dam-
age of RAC specimens based on the AE parameters.

F I G U R E 1 8 The SCPC and SCPE versus stage with different

water–cement ratios: (a) SCPC and (b) SCPE
16 of 21 MEN ET AL.

5 | DAMAGE ASSES SMENT OF RAC SPECIMENS

5.1 | The rate process theory

In general, the crack propagation is closely related to the AE activity during the compression of concrete. Literature
studies have shown that the rate process theory can be used to evaluate the damage to concrete based on the AE param-
eters.30 In the rate process theory, the incremental number of AE events dN from the stress σ to σ + dσ can be expressed
as a probability function shown in Equation 2:

f ðσ Þdσ = dN=N max ð2Þ

where Nmax is the cumulative value of AE events up to stress level σ max.

Equation 2 represents the governing equation of the rate process, which shows that dN/dσ is not only related to the
f(σ) but also to the cumulative value of the AE events up to stress level σ. By integrating Equation 2, we can write
ð1
f ðσ Þdσ = 1 ð3Þ
0

The damage to materials can be evaluated by the following equation.

ðσ
D= f ðσ Þdσ ð4Þ
0

In summary, if the relationship between the cumulative value of the AE events and the stress level is determined,
the damage of the RAC can be evaluated by the AE parameters.

5.2 | Mathematical model of cumulative value of AE parameters and stress level

In this study, assuming that the relationship between the cumulative value of AE events N and stress level σ was

N = sðσ Þ ð5Þ

Equation 6 can be obtained by substituting Equation 5 into Equation 2.

1 dsðσ Þ
f ðσ Þ = × ð6Þ
N max dðσ Þ

Then we obtain the Equation 7 by rewriting Equation 6.

ðσ
1
D= dsðσ Þ ð7Þ
N max 0

If the relationship between AE events and stress level is clarified, the damage of RAC in compressive process can be
evaluated. In this study, specimen RC2-1 was used as an example to illustrate the method of compressive damage evalu-
ation of RAC.
In previous studies, AE events have been proven to be useful for assessing structural damage.31 As is shown in
Figure 19, it was found that the cumulative AE counts and energy also have different performances at different stress
levels basing on the analysis above. Thus, the cumulative AE counts and energy are also considered to be used for dam-
age evaluation to RAC in this study. Correspondingly, P is used instead of N to represent the cumulative value of the
AE parameters.
According to the variation characteristics of the cumulative AE parameters, it was found that the relationship
between cumulative value of AE parameters and stress level can be expressed by a fourth-order polynomial, as is shown
MEN ET AL. 17 of 21

F I G U R E 1 9 The
relationship between the
cumulative value of acoustic
emission (AE) parameters and
stress level: (a) events;
(b) counts; and (c) energy

TABLE 7 Fitting results of AE events, counts, and energy

AE parameter a/104 b/104 c/104 d/104 e/104 R2

Events −0.02936 3.49316 10.3041 −25.9033 15.93531 0.99742
Counts −0.52328 63.42693 65.2254 −224.3073 143.64277 0.99718
Energy −2.19627 264.707 −1.55378 −440.2126 329.62471 0.99591

Abbreviation: AE, acoustic emission.

in Equation 8. The fourth-order polynomial is chosen because it can express the relationship between both sides with
enough accuracy. The parameter fitting results of the formula based on AE events, counts, and energy are listed in
Table 7.

P = a + bσ + cσ 2 + dσ 3 + eσ 4 ð8Þ

where P represents the cumulative value of the AE parameters (events, counts, and energy).
Derived from Equation 8 and substituted into Equation 6, we can write

b + 2cσ + 3dσ 2 + 4eσ 3

f ðσ Þ = ð9Þ
Pmax

where Pmax is the cumulative value of AE parameters (events, counts, and energy) up to stress level σ max.
The damage evolution model of RAC can be obtained by integrating the Equation 9.

bσ + cσ 2 + dσ 3 + eσ 4
D= ð10Þ
Pmax

On the basis of Equations 9 and 10, the function of probability density and damage factor D expressed by cumulative
events, counts, and energy are shown in Equation 11–13 and Equations 14–16, respectively. The curves of probability
density and damage factor are presented in Figure 20a,b. As can be seen from the figure, due to the void compaction
and original microcrack expansion inside the specimens, many AE signals were generated, which caused a rapid
18 of 21 MEN ET AL.

FIGURE 20 The curves of probability density and damage factor: (a) probability density and (b) damage factor

increase in the damage factor in Stage I. Moreover, the damage factor and stress level were close to a linear relationship
in this stage. In Stage II, the AE signals were mainly derived from the stable microcracking of ITZ. In this stage, the
crack was undergoing a stage of steady development and resulting in a decrease in the growth of the damage factor. In
Stage III, the cracks of the RAC began to expand rapidly into the mortar as the stress approached the peak point and
entered the unstable stage of crack propagation and led to the fast growth of the damage factor.
Cumulative events:

f ðσ ÞN = 0:9139 + 5:3917σ −20:3312σ 2 + 16:6766σ 3 ð11Þ

Cumulative counts:

f ðσ ÞC = 1:3916 + 2:8621σ −14:7641σ 2 + 12:6063σ 3 ð12Þ

Cumulative energy:

f ðσ ÞE = 1:7592 −0:0207σ − 8:7765σ 2 + 8:7623σ 3 ð13Þ

Cumulative events:

Dðσ ÞN = 0:9139σ + 2:6959σ 2 −6:7771σ 3 + 4:1691σ 4 ð14Þ

Cumulative counts:

Dðσ ÞC = 1:3916σ + 1:4311σ 2 −4:9214σ 3 + 3:1516σ 4 ð15Þ

Cumulative energy:

Dðσ ÞE = 1:7592σ −0:0103σ 2 −2:9255σ 3 + 2:1906σ 4 ð16Þ

5.3 | Evaluation criteria of compressive damage of RAC

The damage factors based on AE events, counts, and energy at different stress levels are listed in Table 8. To improve
the applicability of the evaluation criteria, the average value of the damage factor D of three different parameters at
MEN ET AL. 19 of 21

TABLE 8 The damage factor based on AE events, counts, and energy at different stress levels

Stress level

AE parameter 0.3 0.7 1.0

AE events 0.37 0.64 1.002
AE counts 0.44 0.74 1.053
AE energy 0.47 0.75 1.014
Average 0.43 0.71 1.023

Abbreviation: AE, acoustic emission.

F I G U R E 2 1 Evaluation criteria for recycled coarse aggregate

concrete under compression

different stress levels was taken. At the same time, considering the field applicability, the evaluation criteria for RAC
components under compression are shown in Figure 21.

6 | C ON C L US I ON S

In this study, the result of the compressive failure of RAC specimens from a laboratory experiment is presented. The
RAC specimens were subject to monotonic load, and the AE technique was applied to monitoring the whole test. Con-
clusions are summarized as follows:

• It was found that an increase in the loading rate or a decrease in the water–cement ratio results in an improvement
in the compressive strength of the RAC specimens. On the other hand, the compressive strength of RAC specimens
increases first and then decreases as the coarse aggregate size becomes larger.
• It was clarified that the AE signals generate mostly before reaching the peak stress with the increase of loading rate,
coarse aggregate size, and water–cement ratio.
• The failure process of RAC specimens can be divided into four stages: the void compaction and original microcrack
expansion (Stage I); the stable microcracking of ITZ (Stage II); the unstable cracking of mortar (Stage III); and the
macrocrack expansion (Stage IV).
• The result SCP analysis implies that the increase of the loading rate will reduce the contribution of the stable micro-
cracking of ITZ and increase the effect of unstable cracking of mortar to the failure process of RAC specimen. The
increase in coarse aggregate size leads to an increase in the contribution of unstable cracking of mortar and reduces
the effect of macrocrack expansion to the entire failure process. The increase of water–cement ratio also causes the
change of AE counts and energy in stable microcracking of ITZ and unstable cracking of mortar, contrary to the
change caused by the loading rate.
• On the basis of the rate process theory, the fourth-order polynomial expressions of damage factor D and cumulative
AE events, counts, and energy are established, respectively. Furthermore, the evaluation criteria for RAC materials
under compression are proposed.

ACK NO WLE DGE MEN TS

This study was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant 2017YFC0703406), the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Grant 51878542), and the Scientific Research Program of Key Laboratory of Shaanxi
Education Department (Grant 17JS062). The authors are grateful for their support.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
We declare that we do not have any commercial or associative interest that represents a conflict of interest in connec-
tion with the work submitted.
20 of 21 MEN ET AL.

ORCID
Jiachen Wang https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3467-7143

R EF E RE N C E S
1. Arezoumandi M, Smith A, Volz JS, Khayat KH. An experimental study on shear strength of reinforced concrete beams with 100%
recycled concrete aggregate. Construct Build Mater. 2014;53:612-620.
2. Poon CS, Shui ZH, Lam L. Effect of microstructure of ITZ on compressive strength of concrete prepared with recycled aggregates. Con-
struct Build Mater. 2004;18(6):461-468.
3. Choi W-C, Yun H-D. Compressive behavior of reinforced concrete columns with recycled aggregate under uniaxial loading. Eng Struct.
2012;41:285-293.
4. Poon CS, Kou SC, Lam L. Use of recycled aggregates in molded concrete bricks and blocks. Construct Build Mater. 2002;16(5):281-289.
5. Kou S-C, Poon C-S, Etxeberria M. Influence of recycled aggregates on long term mechanical properties and pore size distribution of con-
crete. Cement Concr Compos. 2011;33(2):286-291.
6. Abdelrahman M, ElBatanouny MK, Ziehl PH. Acoustic emission based damage assessment method for prestressed concrete structures:
modified index of damage. Eng Struct. 2014;60:258-264.
7. Xu J, Fu Z, Han Q, Lacidogna G, Carpinteri A. Micro-cracking monitoring and fracture evaluation for crumb rubber concrete based on
acoustic emission techniques. Struct Health Monit. 2018;17(4):946-958.
8. Brault A, Hoult Neil A, Greenough T, Trudeau I. Monitoring of beams in an RC building during a load test using distributed sensors.
J Perform Constr Facilities. 2019;33(1):1–11.
9. Farnam Y, Geiker MR, Bentz D, Weiss J. Acoustic emission waveform characterization of crack origin and mode in fractured and ASR
damaged concrete. Cement Concr Compos. 2015;60:135-145.
10. Aggelis DG. Classification of cracking mode in concrete by acoustic emission parameters. Mech Res Comm. 2011;38(3):153-157.
11. Carpinteri A, Grazzini A, Lacidogna G, Manuello A. Durability evaluation of reinforced masonry by fatigue tests and acoustic emission
technique. Struct Control Health Monit. 2014;21(6):950-961.
12. Han Q, Xu J, Carpinteri A, Lacidogna G. Localization of acoustic emission sources in structural health monitoring of masonry bridge.
Struct Control Health Monit. 2015;22(2):314-329.
13. Ohtsu M, Watanabe H. Quantitative damage estimation of concrete by acoustic emission. Construct Build Mater. 2001;15(5):217-224.
14. Colombo Ing S, Main IG, Forde MC. Assessing damage of reinforced concrete beam using “b -value” analysis of acoustic emission sig-
nals. J Mater Civ Eng. 2003;15(3):280-286.
15. Carpinteri A, Lacidogna G, Corrado M, Battista ED. Cracking and crackling in concrete-like materials: a dynamic energy balance. Eng
Fract Mech. 2016;155:130-144.
16. Carpinteri A, Lacidogna G, Niccolini G. Damage analysis of reinforced concrete buildings by the acoustic emission technique. Struct
Control Health Monit. 2011;18(6):660-673.
17. Carpinteri A, Lacidogna G, Manuello A, Niccolini G. A study on the structural stability of the Asinelli tower in Bologna. Struct Control
Health Monit. 2016;23(4):659-667.
18. Shi C, Li Y, Zhang J, Li W, Chong L, Xie Z. Performance enhancement of recycled concrete aggregate—a review. J Clean Prod. 2016;112:
466-472.
19. Prem PR, Murthy AR. Acoustic emission monitoring of reinforced concrete beams subjected to four-point-bending. Appl Acoust. 2017;
117:28-38.
20. Ožbolt J, Rah KK, Meštrovic D. Influence of loading rate on concrete cone failure. Int J Fract. 2006;139(2):239-252.
21. Tumidajski PJ, Gong B. Effect of coarse aggregate size on strength and workability of concrete. Can J Civ Eng. 2006;33(2):206-213.
22. Ministry of Construction of the People’s Republic of China, General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine
of the People’s Republic of China. Standard for Test Method of Mechanical Properties on Ordinary Concrete (GB/T 50081-2002). China
Architecture & Building Press; In. Beijing: 2003.
23. Hu J, Wang K. Effect of coarse aggregate characteristics on concrete rheology. Construct Build Mater. 2011;25(3):1196-1204.
24. Akçaoglu T, Tokyay M, Çelik T. Effect of coarse aggregate size and matrix quality on ITZ and failure behavior of concrete under uniaxial
compression. Cement Concr Compos. 2004;26(6):633-638.
25. Živica V. Effects of the very low water/cement ratio. Construct Build Mater. 2009;23(12):3579-3582.
26. Watanabe T, Nishibata S, Hashimoto C, Ohtsu M. Compressive failure in concrete of recycled aggregate by acoustic emission. Construct
Build Mater. 2007;21(3):470-476.
27. Geng J, Sun Q, Zhang Y, Cao L, Zhang W. Studying the dynamic damage failure of concrete based on acoustic emission. Construct Build
Mater. 2017;149:9-16.
28. Otsuki N, Miyazato SI, Yodsudjai W. Influence of recycled aggregate on interfacial transition zone, strength, chloride penetration and
carbonation of concrete. J Mater Civ Eng. 2003;15(5):443-451.
29. Li G, Zhao X. Properties of concrete incorporating fly ash and ground granulated blast-furnace slag. Cement Concr Compos. 2003;25(3):
293-299.
30. Dai ST, Labuz JF. Damage and failure analysis of brittle materials by acoustic emission. J Mater Civ Eng. 1997;9(4):200-205.
31. Watanabe T, Hosomi M, Yuno K, Hashimoto C. Quality evaluation of shotcrete by acoustic emission. Construct Build Mater. 2010;
24(12):2358-2362.
MEN ET AL. 21 of 21

How to cite this article: Men J, Wang J, Guo L, Wang K. Acoustic emission behavior and damage evaluation of
recycled aggregate concrete under compression. Struct Control Health Monit. 2020;e2612. https://doi.org/10.1002/
stc.2612