Properties of Concrete Mixes with Waste Glass - غزةlibrary.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/95870.pdf · Properties of Concrete Mixes with Waste Glass ... Ahmad Alkurd and Mr. Tahseen Shehada

1

زةـــغــالمية بــة اإلسـعــــامــالج

The Islamic University of Gaza

ياــــــــات العلــــادة الدراســــعم High Studies Deanery

ةـــــــــــندســــــة الهـــــــــــــكليـ Faculty of Engineering

ةـــــة المدنيـــدســـــم الهنـــــقس Civil Engineering Department

تأهيلو تصميم برنامج آتــالمنش Design and Rehabilitation of Structures

Properties of Concrete Mixes with Waste Glass

Submitted by:

Abdullah A. Siam

(2007/634)

Supervised by:

Dr. Mamoun Al-Qedra

Dr. Mohammed Arafa

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the

Degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering

Rehabilitation and Design of Structures

1432هـ - 2011م

B-1

ABSTRACT

The quantities of waste glass in Gaza Strip have been increasing significantly without being

recycled increasing the risk to public health due to the scarcity of land area. This growing

problem of waste glass in the Gaza Strip can be alleviated if new disposal options other than

landfill can be found. The main goal is to investigate the possibility to improve the

compressive strength over a range of glass percentages. Waste glass is the least expensive of

all the concrete constituents and is much less expensive than natural aggregates and sand,

thus the idea is to replace as much of the natural aggregates and sand as possible to save

money and to reduce the amount of disposable wastes, as well, but care has to be taken in

order not to weaken the concrete by adding too much glass.

Therefore, samples of the most common waste glass materials in Gaza Strip were collected

and crushed to be included in concrete as a partial occupant in the concrete mix replacing fine

and coarse aggregates, and then a standard series of: 72 slump tests, 144 mass density tests,

144 compressive strength tests, 18 pull-out tests, 18 flexural tests, and 18 splitting tensile

tests were conducted.

The output results obtained from this laboratory program showed reliable data points and

promising further research horizons. For concrete mixed with coarse waste glass as a partial

occupant instead of coarse aggregates, the optimum value of coarse waste glass to be used

within the concrete mix with a water-cement ratio of 0.4 was determined as about 0.265, and

the corresponding expected 28-days hardened concrete compressive strength was about 385

kg/cm2 compared with 300 kg/cm

2. For concrete mixed with fine waste glass as a partial

occupant instead of fine aggregates, the optimum value of fine waste glass to be used within

the concrete mix with a water-cement ratio of 0.4 was estimated as almost 0.195, and the

corresponding expected 28-days hardened concrete compressive strength was almost 400

kg/cm2.

Finally, for concrete mixes containing the optimal portion of coarse or fine waste glass, it was

concluded that there was negligible effects on the poll-out strength, considerable

enhancement of the flexural strength, and slight reduction of the splitting tensile strength of

the mix.

B-2

البحث ةصالخ إن كميات زجاج النفايات في قطاع غزة في از دياد مستمر دون إعادة تصنيع مما يزيد من مخاطر ىا عمى الصحة العامة نظرا لندرة مساحة األر اضي. ويمكن التغمب عمى ىذه المشكمة المتنامية من زجاج النفايات في قطاع غزة

إذا كان من الممكن العثور عمى خيارات جديدة عدا المجوء لمكبات النفايات. واليدف الرئيسي ىو إلى التحقق من إمكانية إدراج زجاج النفايات ضمن مكونات الخرسانة بنسب معينة ألن زجاج النفايات ىو األقل كمفة من جميع

المكونات األخرى، وبالتالي فإن الفكرة ىي إحاللو بدل قدر من الركام والرمال الطبيعية قدر اإلمكان لتوفير المال والحد من كمية النفايات الواجب التخمص منيا.

لذلك ، تم جمع عينات من مواد زجاج النفايات األكثر شيوعا في قطاع غزة وسحقيا بأحجام مختمفة ليتم تضمينيا في الخرسانة، ثم تم إجراء سمسمة من االختبارات القياسية: 72 فحص ىبوط، 144 فحص الكثافة، 144 فحص

قوة الضغط، 18 فحص سحب حديد التسميح، 18 فحص اإلنثناء، و 18 فحص االنفصام.

وأظيرت النتائج التي تم الحصول عمييا من الخرسانة المحتوية عمى زجاج النفايات الخشن بوصفو المكون الجزئي البديل عن الركام الخشن )الحصمة(، فإن النسبة المثمى من زجاج النفايات الخشن داخل الخرسانة مع

نسبة الماء لإلسمنت 0.4 تم تحديدىا بحوالي 0.265 و كانت قوة كسر الخرسانة بعد 28 يوما من صبيا نحو .2كجم/سم 300مقارنة بقوة كسر 2جم/سمك 385

في حين أظيرت النتائج التي تم الحصول عمييا من الخرسانة المحتوية عمى زجاج النفايات الناعم بوصفو

المكون الجزئي البديل عن الركام الناعم )الرمل(، فإن النسبة المثمى من زجاج النفايات الناعم داخل الخرسانة مع نسبة الماء لإلسمنت 0.4 تم تحديدىا بحوالي 0.195 و كانت قوة كسر الخرسانة بعد 28 يوما من صبيا نحو

400 كجم/سم2.

وأخيرا، لمخرسانة المحتوية عمى النسب المثمى من الزجاج الخشن أو الناعم: لم يالحظ تأثير ممموس عمى قوة سحب حديد التسميح، ولوحظ تحسن ممموس في قوة مقاومة االنثناء، وسجل انخفاض طفيف عمى قوة مقاومة

االنفصام.

B-3

DEDICATION

This research study is humbly dedicated to my beloved family:

my parents, my wife, my son, Abdulaziz, and my daughter, Raghad

B-4

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author would like to express his deepest gratitude and appreciation to Dr. Mamoun

Alqedra and Dr. Mohamed Arafa, for their unconditional guidance, patience, and

encouragement throughout the phases of this research study.

In addition, the author would like to extend his sincere gratitude and appreciation to Eng.

Ahmad Alkurd and Mr. Tahseen Shehada within the staff of the soil and materials testing

laboratory at the Islamic University in Gaza for their outstanding efforts during the

experimental phase of this research study.

B-5

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................ 1

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ...................................................................................

............................................................................................................ 2

1.3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES .....................................................................................

............................................................................................................ 3

1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLGY .......................................................................... 4

1.5 THESIS LAYOUT.............................................................................................. 4

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................

............................................................................................................ 5

2.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 5

2.2 CONCRETE COMPOSITE MATERIALS ........................................................ 5

2.2.1 Water ........................................................................................................... 6

2.2.2 Cement ......................................................................................................... 7

2.2.3 Aggregates ................................................................................................... 7

2.3 WASTE GLASS ................................................................................................. 8

2.4 PREVIOUS STUDIES...................................................................................... 11

2.5 CONCLDING REMARKS ..................................................................................... 19

CHAPTER THREE: EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM .................................................. 02

3.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 02

3.2 PROPERTIES OF AGGREGATES ................................................................. 01

3.3 WASTE GLASS ............................................................................................... 04

3.4 TESTING PROGRAM ..................................................................................... 08

3.4.1 Pull Out Strength ....................................................................................... 08

3.4.2 Flextural Stength ....................................................................................... 09

3.4.3 Splitting Strength ....................................................................................... 09

3.5 CONCRETE JOB MIXES ................................................................................ 09

CHAPTER FOUR: LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS AND DATA ANALYSES

.......................................................................................................... 43

4.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 34

4.2 TESTING PROGRAM RESULTS ................................................................... 34

4.3 EFFECT OF REPLACING WASTE GLASS ON CONCRETE DENSITY .... 38

4.3.1 CORSE Waste Glass ................................................................................ 38

4.3.2 FINE Waste Glass ..................................................................................... 40

4.4 EFFECT OF REPLACING WASTE GLASS ON CONCRETE

WORKABILITY .............................................................................. 41


4.4.2 FINE Waste Glass ..................................................................................... 41

4.5 EFFECT OF REPLACING WASTE GLASS ON CONCRETE

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH ......................................................... 44


4.5.2 FINE Waste Glass ..................................................................................... 47

4.6 OPTIMAL WASTE GLASS CONTENT IN CONCRETE MIXES ................. 48

4.7 EFFECT OF WASTE GLASS ON PULL OUT STRENGTH .......................... 50


4.7.2 FINE Waste Glass ..................................................................................... 55

B-6

4.8 EFFECT OF WASTE GLASS ON FLEXURAL STRENGTH ........................ 55


4.8.2 FINE Waste Glass ..................................................................................... 57

4.9 EFFECT OF WASTE GLASS ON SPLITTING STRENGTH ......................... 57


4.9.2 FINE Waste Glass ..................................................................................... 60

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................ 20

5.1 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 60

5.2 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................. 60


5.2.2 FINE Waste Glass ..................................................................................... 63

5.3 FUTURE STUDY ............................................................................................ 64

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 25

APPENDIX A .......................................................................................................... 67

B-7

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1: Sample of the natural coarse aggregate for concrete mix ............................ 21

Figure 3.2: Samples of the natural medium and fine aggregate for concrete mix. ......... 21

Figure 3.3: Grain size distribution curve of coarse aggregates ....................................... 23

Figure 3.4: Grain size distribution curve of fine aggregates ........................................... 04

Figure 3.5: Waste glass materials as collected before crushing and sieving .................. 05

Figure 3.6: Crushing of waste glass to coarse and fine sizes ......................................... 25

Figure 3.7: Grain size distribution of coarse waste glass................................................ 06

Figure 3.8: Grain size distribution of fine waste glass.................................................... 07

Figure 4.1: Concrete density of coarse waste glass in the mix ....................................... 39

Figure 4.2: Concrete density vs. water cement ratio ....................................................... 39

Figure 4.3: Relation of concrete density with fine W.G percentage of several w/c raio 40

Figure 4.4: Concrete mass density vs. water cement ratio. ............................................. 41

Figure 4.5: Slump test results vs. portion of coarse waste glass in the fresh mix .......... 40

Figure 4.6: Slump test results vs. water cement ratio ..................................................... 40

Figure 4.7 Slump test results vs. portion of fine waste glass in the fresh mix ................ 43

Figure 4.8: Slump test results vs. water cement ratio ..................................................... 43

Figure 4.9: Typical testing cube after fauilure for determining concrete compressive

strength ...................................................................................................... 44

Figure 4.10: 7-Days concrete compressive strength vs. portion of coarse waste glass in

the mix ....................................................................................................... 45

Figure 4.11: 28-Days concrete compressive strength vs. portion of coarse waste glass in

the mix ....................................................................................................... 46

Figure 4.12: Concrete compressive strength vs. portion of coarse waste glass in mix ... 46

Figure 4.13: 7-Days concrete compressive strength vs. portion of fine waste glass in the

mix ............................................................................................................. 47

Figure 4.14: 28-Days concrete compressive strength vs. portion of fine waste glass in

the mix ....................................................................................................... 48

Figure 4.15: Concrete compressive strength vs. portion of fine waste glass in the mix . 49

Figure 4.16: Preparation of pull-out testing specimens .................................................. 52

Figure 4.17: Hardened poll-out testing specimens ......................................................... 53

Figure 4.18: Poll-out testing apparatus and procedure ................................................... 53

Figure 4.19: Illustration of poll-out testing specimen after failure ................................. 54

Figure 4.20: Flexural strength testing apparatus ............................................................. 56

Figure 4.21: Illustration of flexural strength testing specimen after failure ................... 56

Figure 4.22: Hardened splitting strength testing specimens ........................................... 58

Figure 4.23: Splitting strength-testing apparatus ............................................................ 59

Figure 4.24: Illustration of splitting strength-testing specimens after failure ................. 59

B-8

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Approximate compositions and the corresponding uses of various common

forms of glass ................................................................................................... 9

Table 3.1: Summary of sieve analysis data for coarse aggregates .................................. 22

Table 3.2: Summary of sieve analysis data for fine aggregates ...................................... 23

Table 3.3: Summary of sieve analysis data for coarse waste glass. ................................ 26

Table 3.4: Summary of sieve analysis data for fine waste glass ..................................... 27

Table 3.5: Experimental testing program of concrete with coarse waste glass .............. 30

Table 3.6: Experimental testing program of concrete with fine waste glass .................. 30

Table 3.7: Specific Gravities of Concrete Mix Raw Components for B 300 ................. 31

Table 3.8: Concrete Job Mix for B 300 with w/c = 0.4 and Waste Glass = zero ........... 31

Table 3.9: Concrete Job Mix for B 300 with w/c = 0.5 and Waste Glass = zero ........... 32

Table 3.10: Concrete Job Mix for B 300 with w/c = 0.6 and Waste Glass = zero ......... 32

Table 4.1: Mass density and workability values with several coarse waste glass content

........................................................................................................................ 35

Table 4.2: Compressive strength of concrete with several coarse waste glass content...36

Table 4.3: Mass density and workability values with several fine waste glass content . 37

Table 4.4: Compressive strength of concrete with several fine waste glass content ..... 38

Table 4.5: Summary of the 7-days comprehensive strengths for concrete mix with

different portions of coarse waste glass and a water-cement ratio of 0.4 ...... 49


different portions of coarse waste glass and a water-cement ratio of 0.4 ...... 50


different portions of fine waste glass and a water-cement ratio of 0.4 .......... 50


different portions of fine waste glass and a water-cement ratio of 0.4 .......... 51

Table 4.9: Summary of the pull-out strength results with coarse waste glass content ... 54

Table 4.10: Summary of the pull-out strength results with fine waste glass content ..... 55

Table 4.11: Summary of the flexural strength results with coarse waste glass content.. 57

Table 4.12: Summary of the flexural strength results with fine waste glass content...... 58

Table 4.13: Summary of the splitting strength results with coarse waste glass content 60

Table 4.14: Summary of the splitting strength results with fine waste glass content .... 61

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Solid wastes are substances and masses resulted by the various human activities that have to

be dumped. Solid waste materials usually include industrial waste, medical waste, and

domestic waste. In particular, construction waste is the output result of construction and

destruction, rehabilitation, repair, removal of existing structures, and installations. This waste

is composed of sand, stone, gravel, tiles, ceramic, marble, glass, aluminum, wood, plastic,

paper, paints, plumbing pipes, electric parts and asbestos, and other materials.

One of the main environmental concerns regarding the landfills in the Gaza Strip area is the

very limited area available in both their current and future count number and their individual

capacity and efficiency of usage. This concern was considerably increased and extremely

highlighted especially after the comprehensive aggression on Gaza Strip in December 2008

that lasted for 23 days and resulted in numerous masses of industrial and constructional

wastes. [1]

The quantities of waste glass in the Gaza Strip have been increasing significantly without

being recycled increasing the risk to public health due to the scarcity of land area. This

growing problem of waste glass in the Gaza Strip can be alleviated if new disposal options

other than landfill can be found. [2]

It was estimated during the year 2005 by Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) that

the total average daily solid waste produced in the Gaza Strip is 1,006 ton/day. Waste

production was 0.7-1.0 kg/c/d, waste density at collection points was 0.4 kg/l, and growing at

an estimated rate of 4.0% per year. In 2008, the PCBS revealed from the data analysis that the

paper and cartons were ranked first among the separated solid waste components, with 22.2%

of the economic and domestic establishments in the Palestinian Territory, followed by

medical waste, including sharp, radioactive, and infected wastes with 21.7%, and Glass and

Metal with 17.9% [2].

2

Solid waste in Gaza Strip mainly consists of household wastes, building debris, agricultural

wastes, industrial wastes, medical wastes, workshops wastes, and other waste materials. Out

of the solid waste, it is estimated that 79.81%, of the household solid waste consist of organic

material, sand 7.21%, plastic and rubber 5.02%, cloth 1,9%, Glass 0.85%, Metals 2.22% and

Carton 2.02% [2].

1.2 Problem Statement

Many studies have been emerging worldwide highlighting the reuse of waste glass in

construction technology, such as [3-9]. The idea is that the glass can be used as an aggregate

in the concrete mix by replacing some of the natural aggregates such as gravel and sand.

Thus, the possible benefits are as follows: less glass is thrown away saving landfill space, the

use of fewer natural aggregates (which are the components of concrete) saving our natural

resources and less labor is used by not shipping raw materials from distant places to where

glass is available saving time and money. The unfavorable properties of concrete include a

relatively weak tensile strength as compared to it compressive strength and the ability to form

cracks in unpredictable areas.

Along with steel bars as internal reinforcement, the cracks can be controlled to some degree,

and unlike other building materials like steel and plastic, concrete is not a uniform material

due to the fact that it contains a ratio of gravel and sand, thus failure mode or location of the

failure is unpredictable. In general, clear, green or brown bottles including juice, soft drink

and sauce bottles, glass jars and other containers are among the sources of waste glass

materials in many areas all over the world.

In the Gaza Strip the main component of waste glass is clear pure glass originating from

reconstruction and rehabilitation processes. Other types of waste glass such as ceramic plates,

light globes, mirrors, medical or laboratory glass, and grocery glasses are not within the

concern of this research study, and the clear spread glass is used as a waste glass material.

There has been an increasing significant interest in the development of concrete mixes with

waste glass, besides, recycling waste glass as an aggregate is effective for environmental

3

conservation and economical advantage. Therefore, samples of the most common waste glass

materials in the Gaza Strip were collected and crushed to be included in concrete as a partial

occupant in the concrete mix replacing fine and coarse aggregates, and a basic experimental

study on the physical and mechanical properties of concrete containing waste glass was

carried out [2].

1.3 Aim and Objectives

This research focuses on studying the effect of waste glass on the properties of concrete

mixtures as a partial replacement of fine aggregates, and coarse aggregates. The successful

use of waste glass will aid in reducing the environmental and health problems related to the

disposal of waste glass and the scarcity of land area needed for disposal.

Within the scope of this study, the main goal is to investigate the possibility to improve the

compressive strength over a range of glass percentages. Waste glass is the least expensive of

all concrete constituents and is much less expensive than natural aggregates and sand, thus

the idea is to replace as much of the natural aggregates and sand as possible to save money

and to reduce the amount of disposable wastes, as well, but care has to be taken in order not

to weaken the concrete by adding too much glass.

The main objective of this research is to study the effect of waste glass on the properties of

concrete mixes as a partial replacement of fine aggregate and coarse aggregate. This objective

can be achieved through the following objectives:

Identify the effects of adding waste glass on the fresh properties of concrete mixes

such as workability by slump measures.

Study the influence of waste glass on hardened properties of concrete mixes such as:

density and compressive strength, pull out strength, flexural strength and splitting

resistance.

Determine the optimum waste glass content to be added as a partial replacement of

fine aggregate and coarse aggregate.

4

1.4 Research Methodology

The following tasks are to be carried out in order to achieve the research objectives:

Collecting the required information and documents related to the waste glass .

Visiting the Gaza City Glaziers to obtain related information and collect samples.

Undertaking a comprehensive literature review on relevant subjects focused on the

usage of waste glass in construction field.

Developing an adequate experimental program to study the use of waste glass in

concrete mixtures as explained in section 3.1.

Analyzing the experimental output test results to draw conclusions.

1.5 Thesis Layout

Following this introduction, Chapter 2 presents a general literature overview for studying the

use of waste glass materials as fine and coarse aggregates in engineering practice. These

research studies highlighted the properties of the waste glass itself and the behavior of

concrete mixes contacting different portions of waste glass.

Chapter 3 demonstrates the employed descriptive variables in the experimental testing

program considering the properties of fresh and hardened concrete. These descriptive

variables start with the different raw components of concrete, then the sieve analyses, the

concrete job mix, the test results for fresh concrete, the density and the compressive strength

of hardened concrete mixes. This chapter ends with a detailed list of the different portions of

fine and coarse waste glass used in the concrete mixes.

Chapter 4 aims to clarify the essentials of concrete compressive strength analysis and the

methodology followed to highlight the usefulness of considering waste glass materials as a

main component within the concrete mix. Proper treatment of uncertainties within the data

analysis process required understanding the sources of errors for the targeted end point.

Finally, a comprehensive summary of this research study, its major conclusions, and

recommendations for future areas of study are presented in Chapter 5.

5

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

Glass is one of the oldest man-made materials. It is produced in many forms such as

packaging or container glass, flat glass, and bulb glass, all of which have a limited life in their

manufactured forms and therefore need to be recycled so as to be reusable in order to avoid

environmental problems that would be created if they were to be stockpiled or sent to

landfills. The construction industry has shown great gains in the recycling of industrial by-

products and waste, including waste glass materials.

Quantities of waste glass have been rising rapidly during the recent decades due to the high

increase in industrialization and the considerable improvement in the standards of living, but

unfortunately, the majority of these waste quantities are not being recycled but rather

abandoned causing certain serious problems such as the waste of natural resources and

environmental pollution [2].

Recycling of this waste by converting it to aggregate components could save landfill space

and also reduce the demand for extraction of natural raw material for construction activities.

Herein is a quick review for some of the previous research studies concerned with the waste

glass as an aggregate material, but from different points of view and perspectives.

2.2 Concrete Composite Materials

This section summarizes the properties of all the components used in the various concrete

mixes. Concrete is a structural material that contains some simple elements but when mixed

with water would form a rock like material. Concrete mix is comprised of coarse aggregates

usually gravel, fine aggregates usually sand, cement, water, and any necessary additives.

Concrete possesses many favorable properties as a structural material, among which are its

high compressive strength and its property as a fire-resistant element to a considerable extent.

6

The unfavorable properties include a relatively weak tensile strength as compared to its

compressive strength and the ability to form cracks in unpredictable areas. With steel bars as

internal reinforcement, the cracks can be controlled to some degree. Unlike other building

materials such as steel and plastic, concrete is not a uniform material due to the fact that it

contains a ratio of gravel and sand, thus failure mode or location of the failure is

unpredictable.

Due the nature of concrete, concrete has an ability to have its recipe changed or altered to

meet situational needs. Thus, if a job calls for high strength, lightweight or weather resistant

concrete, its recipe is available or a custom one can be devised. Concrete has three main

components when it's freshly mixed and they are water, cement and aggregates. Water is

needed to begin the hydration process for the concrete and after four weeks of curing until

full potential strength of the concrete can be achieved [10].

2.2.1 Water

Water is one of the most important elements in concrete production. Water is needed to begin

the hydration process by reacting with the cement to produce concrete. There has to be a

sufficient amount of water available so that the reaction can take its full course but if too

much water is added, this will in fact decrease the strength of the concrete. The water-cement

ratio is an important concept because other than the recipe for the concrete mix, the amount

of water used would also determine its finial strength [18].

In more details, if too little water were added, there would not be enough water available to

finish the reaction, thus some of the cement would harden and bond with other dry cement

shorting the hydration process. On the other hand, if too much water were added then while

the cement is undergoing hydration the cement would be in a slurry solution, and the

probability of cement bonding with aggregates would decrease. And as a result, when the

hydration process is completed, the cement content would still be in a slurry solution and

with no strength.

The type of water that can be used to mix concrete must be potable which is essentially has

neither noticeable taste nor odor. Basically, water containing less than 2000 ppm of total

7

dissolved solids can be used. Thus the type of water that was used to mix concrete throughout

the testing program was normal tap water with attention paid for not including impurities.

2.2.2 Cement

There are currently more than eight types of cement that are used under specific conditions.

Cement is a very important part of the concrete because it is the cement, which gives the

concrete its strengths. Because of the importance of cement, the ASTM has set guide lines to

follow for the make-up of cement. For experimental program of this research study, normal

Portland Cements Type I was used.

Water is the element that is used to begin the hydration reaction where cement reacts with the

water to produce a rock like substance. The reaction is also exothermic, where heat is

released in the chemical reactions. This is an important fact because in very large structure

like concrete dams, the heat released can pose a potential problem.

When the chemical reaction has reached the end, the initial cement past is transformed into a

substance, which has tremendous strength. But using too much cement in concrete is

expensive, and thus aggregates would take the place of cement without reducing its strength

and reduce the cost. In the engineering practice in Palestine, the dominating range of water-

cement ratios in the concrete mix process is between 0.4 up to 0.6. For this research, three

different categories for water-cement ratios were used during testing phase: 0.4, 0.5, and 0.6.

2.2.3 Aggregates

Aggregates are broken down into two main categories, which are coarse and fine aggregates.

Coarse aggregates in general are larger than 2 mm in diameter and fine aggregates are

defined to be smaller than 2 mm. Aggregates that are used in concrete have to pass the

standards set in ASTM. The economics part of concrete is to use as little cement as possible

and still obtain the required strength. Thus, when concrete is formed, the coarse aggregates

with its large volume would make up a large portion of the concrete. The fine aggregates

would fill in the voids created form the coarse aggregate and reduce the amount of cement

required.

8

If only coarse aggregates are used then there would be voids between the particles and the

voids created would be filled with cement paste. Thus fine aggregates are used to fill those

voids. In essence, the goal is to produce a concrete mixture that has the least amount of void

spaces thus using less cement paste to fill the voids between the particles. When fresh

aggregates are used to mix concrete, the aggregates themselves also contain some moisture

either from water condensing on the particles or the aggregates was washed in some way with

water. Accordingly, there are four distinct states that the aggregates can be in [14].

Oven dry aggregates would absorb water to fill its own internal voids and in doing so would

reduce the water cement ratio. If this occurs, then the hydration process is not permitted to

continue and the strength of the concrete mix would be reduced by a considerable amount.

Air dry aggregates would absorb some water but not to an extraneous degree like the oven

dry aggregates. The surface would appear dry and thus some water is absorbed and reduces

the water cement ratio. Thus the strength of the concrete is reduced by a small amount.

Saturated dry surface aggregates have their internal voids fill with water and thus cannot

absorb any more water. These aggregates would keep the water cement ratio constant and the

concrete would retain its full strength.

Aggregates have their internal voids and surface area saturated with water. Instead of

absorbing water, the aggregates would add water to the mixture and in doing so; the water

cement ratio is increased, decreasing the strength of the concrete. For this research the water

content for the aggregates was prepared under the saturated surface dried (SSD) condition in

order to avoid any possible over or under estimation of water content due to moisture

absorption by the mixed aggregates, and also to guarantee the true efficiency of the different

water-cement ratios used for preparing the concrete mix.

2.3 Waste Glass

Theoretically, glass is a fully recyclable material; it can be recycled without any loss of

quality. There are many examples of successful recycling of waste glass: as a cullet in glass

production, as raw material for the production of abrasives, in sand-blasting, as a pozzolanic

additive, in road beds, pavement and parking lots, as raw materials to produce glass pellets or

9

beads used in reflective paint for highways, to produce fiberglass, and as fractionators for

lighting matches and firing ammunition [10]. Waste glass can also be produced from empty

glass bottles and pots, and come in several distinct colors containing common liquids and

other substances. This waste glass is usually crushed into small pieces that resemble the sizes

of gravels and sands. Therefore - as an alternative - there is a potential to partially replace the

concrete mix aggregate with waste glass due to the lack of natural recourses in Gaza Strip.

In its original form, glass comes as a balanced combination from three main raw natural

materials: sand, silica, and limestone, in addition to a certain percentage of recycled waste

glass utilized in the manufacturing process. The glass recycling process produces a crushed

glass product called "cullet", which is often mixed with virgin glass materials to produce new

end products. Table 2.1 lists some of approximate compositions and the corresponding uses

of various common forms of glass. [11]

Table 2.1: Approximate compositions and the corresponding uses of various common forms of glass

Type of Glass Composition (by weight) Usages

Soda-Lime-Silica 73% Silica – 14% Soda – 9% Lime

– 3.7% Magnesia – 0.3% Alumina Glass Widows – Bottles – Jars

Boro-Silicate 81% Silica – 12% Boron Oxide –

4% Soda – 3% Alumina

Pyrex Cookware –

Laboratory Glassware

Lead (Crystal) 57% Silica – 31% Lead Oxide –

12% Potassium Oxide Lead Crystal Tableware

Alumino-Silicate 64.5% Silica – 24.5% Alumina –

10.5% Magnesia – 0.5% Soda

Fiberglass Insulation –

Halogen Bulbs

Despite the fact that glass materials can be recycled forever and the same glass can be

recycled so many times over to produce various products, but, in order to keep producing the

best end product the recycled materials must be of a high quality. Therefore, continuous

10

residual amounts of waste glass resulting from construction deteriorations, domestic and

medical disposals, and industrial output junk materials are still cumulating and hence need to

be land filled or reused in concrete mixes as a partial substitute for coarse aggregates and/or

fine aggregates. [12]

Technically, glasses are usually manufactured in the form of tubes, rods, hollow vessels and a

variety of special shapes, as well as flat glass and granulate for use mainly in chemistry,

laboratory technology, pharmaceuticals, optoelectronics, various domestic uses, and

household appliance technology. For the purposes of classification, the multitude of technical

glasses can be roughly arranged in four main groups, according to their oxide composition (in

weight percent).

Borosilicate glasses is the first main category with the presence of substantial amounts of

silica (SiO2) and boric oxide (B2O3 > 8%) as glass network formers. The amount of boric

oxide affects the glass properties in a particular way. Apart from the highly resistant varieties

(B2O3 ≤ 13%) there are others that – due to the different way in which the boric oxide is

incorporated into the structural network – have only low chemical resistance (B2O3 > 15%).

Secondly, the Alkaline-earth aluminosilicate glasses are free of alkali oxides and contain 15 –

25% Al2O3, 52 – 60% SiO2, and about 15% alkaline earths. Very high transformation

temperatures and softening points are typical features. Main fields of application are glass

bulbs for halogen lamps, display glasses, high-temperature thermometers, thermally and

electrically highly loadable film resistors and combustion tubes.

Alkali-lead silicate glasses are the third main category and such glasses typically contain over

10% lead oxide (PbO). Lead glasses containing 20–30% PbO, 54–58% SiO2 and about 14%

alkalis are highly insulating and therefore of great importance in electrical engineering. They

are used in lamp stems and lead oxide is also of great importance as an X-ray protective

component (radiation shielding glass and cathode ray tube components).

The last category is the oldest glass type and nominally the Alkali alkaline-earth silicate

glasses (soda-lime glasses). It comprises flat glasses (window glass) and container glasses,

which are produced in large batches. Such glasses contain about 15% alkali (usually Na2O),

13 – 16% alkaline earths (CaO+MgO), 0–2% Al2O3 and about 71% SiO2. Variants of the

11

basic composition can also contain significant amounts of BaO with reduced alkali and

alkaline-earth content [13].

2.4 Previous Studies

Meyer et al. [4] discussed the various steps that need to be taken by recyclers to collect the

glass, separate it from the other materials, clean it and crush it to obtain the appropriate

grading to meet the specifications for specific applications as aggregate in concrete, either in

commodity products, with the only objective being to utilize as much glass as possible, or in

value-added products that make full use of the physical and esthetic properties of color-sorted

crushed glass.

The potential applications are basically limitless, and it is expected that commercial

production of specialty glass concrete products will have a major impact on the economics of

glass recycling throughout the United States.

Zainab and Enas [7] investigated the properties of concretes containing waste glass as fine

aggregate. The strength properties and the alkali silica reaction (ASR) expansion were

analyzed in terms of waste glass content. An overall quantity of 80 kg of crushed waste glass

was partially replacing sand at 10%, 15%, and 20% within a 900 kg of concrete mixes. The

results proved 80% pozzolanic strength activity given by waste glass after 28 days.

The flexural strength and compressive strength of specimens with 20% waste glass content

were 10.99% and 4.23%, respectively, higher than the ordinary control specimen results at 28

days. The mortar bar tests showed that the fine crushed waste glass helped reduce expansion

of concrete by 66% as compared with the ordinary control mix.

Topçu and Canbaz [5] considered waste glass as coarse aggregates in the concrete mix. The

effects of waste glass on workability and strength of the concrete with fresh and hardened

concrete tests were analyzed. As a result of the study conducted, waste glass was determined

not to have a significant effect upon the workability of the concrete and only slightly in the

reduction of its strength.

12

Waste glass cannot be used as aggregate without taking into account its ASR properties. As

for cost analysis, it was determined to lower the cost of concrete productions. This study

considered the fact that waste glass could be used in the concrete as coarse aggregates

without the need for a high cost or rigorous energy.

Topçu et al. [6] stated in their study that the use of waste glass or glass cullet (GC) as

concrete aggregate is becoming more widespread each day because of the increase in

resource efficiency. Recycling of wastes is very important for sustainable development.

When glass is used as aggregate in concrete or mortar, expansions and internal stresses occur

due to an ASR. Furthermore, rapid loss in durability is generally observed due to extreme

crack formation and an increase in permeability.

It is necessary to use some kind of chemical or mineral admixture to reduce crack formation.

In their study, mortar bars were produced by using three different colors of glass in four

different quantities as fine aggregate by weight, and the effects of these glass aggregates on

ASR were investigated, corresponding to ASTM C-1260. Additionally, in order to reduce the

expansions of mortars, 10% and 20% fly ash (FA) as mineral admixture and 1% and 2%

Li2CO3 as chemical admixture were incorporated by weight in the cement and their effects on

expansion are examined. It was observed that among white (WG), green (GG) and brown

glass (BG) aggregates, WG aggregate causes the greatest expansion.

In addition, it was recorded that concrete mix expansion increases with an increase in amount

of glass. According to the test results, it was seen that over 20% FA and 2% Li2CO3

replacements are required to produce mortars which have expansion values below the 0.2%

critical value when exposed to ASR. However, usages of these admixtures reduce expansions

occurring because of ASR.

Kou and Poon [8] investigated the effects of recycled glass cullet on fresh and hardened

properties of self-compacting concrete. Recycled glass was used to replace river sand (in

proportions of 10%, 20% and 30%), and 10 mm granite (5%, 10% and 15%) in making the

self-compacting concrete mixes.

The experimental results showed that the slump flow, blocking ratio, air content of the

recycled glass self-compacting concrete mixes increased with increasing recycled glass

13

content. The results revealed that the compressive strength, tensile splitting strength and static

modulus of elasticity of the recycled glass self-compacting concrete mixes were decreased

with an increase in recycled glass aggregate content. Moreover, the drying shrinkage of the

recycled glass self-compacting concrete mixes decreased when the recycled glass content

increased.

Saccani and Bignozzi [9] studied the ASR expanding behavior of different types of glass

which was derived from cullet with different chemical composition. The glass reactivity was

determined in different alkaline solutions based on sodium and/or calcium hydroxide to

simulate concrete environment. The expansion of mortar containing different amounts of the

investigated glass as fine aggregate has been carried out in different conditions.

An attempt to link the behavior to the solubility and chemical reactivity of the glass was

proposed along with the hereafter conclusions. The main conclusions from their experimental

research study carried out can be as follows: i) glass chemical composition strongly

influences the expansion behavior of mortar samples containing cullet as aggregate.

In view of glass recycle broadening, expanding compositions should be determined and

selective procedures introduced for the treatment of post-consumer glass; ii) the investigated

experimental conditions highlight that the lead-silicate glass (CR) always leads to critical

expanding conditions for the relevant mortar samples; iii) a direct correlation between glass

solubility and mortar expansion has been underlined and a buffering effect of Ca2+ towards

glass solubility has been confirmed.

The solubility process involves homogeneous network dissolution in the CR glass, whereas

detaching layers are formed in all the other glass types. The solubility of boro–silicate glass

(BS-A) is strongly influenced by the presence of Fe, Ba and Ti oxides; and iv) ASR gel

compositions, as determined by the energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS), depend on

chemical composition of the original glass used as aggregate. The electrical charge and

dimension of the ions in the gel are important parameters in determining its characteristics,

such as the swelling capacity.

Federico and Chidiac [14] investigated the incorporation of waste bottle glass into concrete

mixes as a supplementary cementing material and concluded that the pozzolanic properties of

14

waste glass as an ASR are related to particle size and percent addition. In addition, lithium

additives control ASR expansion; however, the mechanism of this control has yet to be

defined.

Idir et al. [15] stated that the demand for recycled glass has considerably decreased in recent

years, particularly for mixed glass. Glass is cheaper to store than to recycle, as conditioners

require expenses for the recycling process. In order to provide a sustainable solution to glass

storage, a potential and incentive way would be to reuse this type of glass in concretes.

Depending on the size of the glass particles used in concrete, two antagonistic behaviors can

be observed: alkali–silica reaction, which involves negative effects, and pozzolanic reaction,

improving the properties of concrete. Their work dealt with the use of fine particles of glass

and glass aggregates in mortars, either separately or combined.

Two parameters based on standardized tests were studied: pozzolanic assessment by

mechanical tests on mortar samples and alkali-reactive aggregate characteristics and fines

inhibitor evaluations by monitoring of dimensional changes. It is shown that there is no need

to use glass in the form of fines since no swelling due to alkali–silica reaction is recorded

when the diameter of the glass grains is less than 1 mm.

Fine glass powders having specific surface areas within the range from (180 to 540) m2/kg

reduced the expansions of mortars subjected to ASR, especially when glass aggregates of

diameters larger than 1 mm are used. This study aimed to evaluate the preventive role of

pozzolanic glass fines in counteracting the deleterious effect of alkali-reactive glass

aggregates. It has been shown that in his study that the use of both types of glass particles is

pertinent.

The main results were: i) only glass classes of more than 1 mm gave expansions related to

ASR; ii) the use of glass fines led to the reduction of mortar expansion due to coarse

particles; moreover, fines increased the compressive strength of mortars; and iii) no excessive

crushing of glass fines was needed since the quantity of fines was the main parameter

controlling the reduction of expansion due to coarse glass aggregates. It is thus preferable to

use 40% of class C5 (D50 of 120 µm) rather than 20% of class C8 (D50 of 8 µm).

15

Caijun and Keren [16] reviewed the three possible uses of waste glasses in production of

cement and concrete, where their results can be summarized as follows: Firstly, the use of

waste glasses as concrete aggregates has a slight negative effect on the workability, strength

and freezing-thawing resistance of cement concrete. However, the main concern is expansion

and cracking of the concrete containing glass aggregates. It needs to control the pH of the

system below 12 in order to prevent potential corrosion of glass aggregates and expansion of

the concrete, which may be achieved by the replacement of Portland cement with pozzolanic

materials such as fly ash, silica fume and meta-kaolin,

Secondly, waste glasses cans be used as raw materials for cement production as siliceous

sources. However, it will increase the liquid content in the clinker, results in the formation of

some Na-compounds and increase in the alkali content in the cement. The effect will be

dependent on the amount of waste glass used. If the percentage of waste glass used in the raw

materials is low, the effects can be very minimal.

Finally, ground glass powders exhibit very good pozzolanic reactivity and can be used as

cement replacement. As expected, its pozzolanic reactivity increases as its finesses increase.

Alkalis in the glass powder can cause alkali-aggregate reaction and expansion if aggregates

are alkali-reactive. Results from ASTM C-1260 testing indicate that the alkali–aggregate

reaction expansion decreases as glass replacement increases, and will be under the deleterious

limit if the glass replacement is 50% or more. The combined use of other supplementary

cementing materials such as coal fly ash, ground blast furnace slag and meta-kaolin can also

decrease the expansion from alkali–aggregate reaction. Lithium salt can be a very effective

additive to prevent the alkali–aggregate reaction expansion of concrete containing glass

powders.

Wang [17] studied the recycling of discarded liquid crystal display (LCD) glass into concrete

(LCDGC) when replacing a portion of the usual river sand by sand prepared from discarded

LCD glass. Three different mix designs were regulated by the ACI method and categorized as

(fc28 = 21, 28, and 35 MPa) with 0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, and 80% LCD glass sand replacements

investigated; their engineering properties were determined. Test results revealed that, when

compared to the design slump of 15 cm, the 20% glass sand concrete for the three different

mix designs kept good slump and slump flow.

16

In addition, a slump loss ranging from 7 to 11 cm was observed for specimens with 60% and

80% glass sand replacement for the design strengths of 28 and 35 MPa. The compressive

strengths of the concrete with glass sand replacement were higher than the design strengths.

Moreover, the durability of the concrete with 20% glass sand replacement was better than

that of the control group.

Surface resistivity for specimens with different amounts of LCD glass sand replacement was

also higher than that in the control group for mid to long curing ages. The sulfate attack in

concrete with different amounts of glass sand replacement caused less weight loss than in the

control group. Moderate chloride ion penetration was observed for glass sand concrete.

Furthermore, the measured ultrasonic pulse velocities for LCD glass sand concrete specimens

were higher than 4100 m/s, which qualified these specimens as good concrete. OM and SEM

indicate that the dense C–S–H gel hydrate was produced at the interface between the glass

sand and cement paste. The test results indicate that the addition of 20% LCD glass sand to

concrete satisfies the slump requirements and improves the strength and durability of

concrete. This suggests that LCD glass sand can potentially be used as a recycled material in

concrete applications.

Palmquist [18] made use of glass, in crushed or cullet form, as another type of recycled

material, as an aggregate in concrete. This recycled material has been studied in concrete

masonry blocks, and tests on concrete with glass aggregate, including workability,

permeability, and shear strength, have been performed to determine the suitability of the

material in construction. Glass aggregates in comparison to natural aggregates are stiff with

high elastic moduli, but the smooth flat surfaces of the crushed glass cause the bond between

the glass and the cement paste to be poor. As a result, the compressive strength of the

concrete with glass aggregate is lower than the concrete with natural aggregate.

Another factor, which lowers compressive strength and causes excessive lateral expansion, is

the strong reaction between alkali cement and the reactive silica in glass. However, the elastic

modulus of concrete with glass aggregate is higher than the concrete with natural aggregate

due to the high elastic modulus of the glass aggregate as compared to the modulus of the

natural aggregate.

17

Davorin [19] experimental study highlighted the issue of constructing and recycling

lightweight concrete (LWC) with aggregates containing expanded glass. The characteristics

of recycling LWC such as density, compressive strength, and thermal conductivity are

investigated, and compared with normal existing concrete from lightweight aggregates.

The results indicated that it is possible to recycle LWC construction waste, and the described

method showed great possibilities for increasing the use of construction waste materials from

LWC containing expanded glass, in order to benefit from better use of the available capacity

from existing construction waste.

The engineering characteristics of density, compressive strength and thermal conductivity

from the new recycled material were compared with normal existing concrete from

lightweight aggregates, such as changes in dependency on the type and parts of waste as well

as its new binding components. Thus, a new recycled material has been created with new

characteristics of density, compressive strength and thermal conductivity, which is conform

to the compressive strength class and rules on heat protection and energy efficiency use in

buildings.

Laboratory density, compressive strength, and thermal conductivity tests results showed that

LWC can be produced by the use of waste LWC with aggregates containing expanded glass.

However, the use of waste LWC with aggregates containing expanded glass seems to be

necessary for the production of cheaper and environmentally friendly LWC [19].

In the research of Lee et al. [20], waste glass and stone fragments from stone slab processing

are recycled as raw materials for making artificial stone slabs using vibratory compaction in a

vacuum environment. Waste glass powder (40%) and fine granite aggregates (60%) are

mixed with unsaturated polymer resins (8%) as binder.

Under compaction pressure of 14.7 MPa, vibration frequency of 33.3 Hz and vacuum

condition at 50 mm Hg, artificial stone slabs with high compressive strength of 148.8 MPa,

water absorption below 0.02%, density of 2.445, and flexural strength of 51.1 MPa are

obtained after 2 min compaction. The artificial stone slabs fabricated in this study prove to be

superior to natural construction slabs in terms of strength and water absorption.

18

Park [21] et al. reported that the quantities of waste glass have been on the rise in recent years

due to an increase in industrialization and the rapid improvement in the standard of living.

Unfortunately, the majority of waste glass is not being recycled but rather abandoned, and is

therefore the cause of certain serious problems such as the waste of natural resources and

environmental pollution.

For these reasons, this study has been conducted through basic experimental research in order

to analyze the possibilities of recycling waste glasses (crushed waste glasses from Korea such

as amber, emerald green, flint, and mixed glass) as fine aggregates for concrete. Test results

of fresh concrete show that both slump and compacting factors are decreased due to angular

grain shape and that air content is increased due to the involvement of numerous small-sized

particles that are found in waste glasses.

In addition the compressive, tensile and flexural strengths of concrete have been shown to

decrease when the content of waste glass is increased. In conclusion, the results of this study

indicate that emerald green waste glass when used below 30% in mixing concrete is practical

along with usage of 10% SBR latex. In addition, the content of waste glasses below 30% is

practical along with usage of a pertinent admixture that is necessary to obtain workability and

air content.

Hong [22] et al. investigated and stated that the increasing awareness of glass recycling

speeds up inspections on the use of waste glass with different forms in various fields. One of

its significant contributions is to the construction field where the waste glass was reused for

value-added concrete production. Literature survey indicates that the use of waste glass as

aggregates in concrete was first reported over 50 years ago.

The concomitant ASR by using glass in concrete and its unique aesthetic properties have

been investigated since then. However, no complete solution to ASR has been found and the

application of glass in architectural concrete still needs improving.

Laboratory experiments were conducted in the University of Sheffield to further explore the

use of waste glass as coarse and fine aggregates for both ASR alleviation as well as the

decorative purpose in concrete. Their research presented mainly the latter aspect, in which

study, both fresh and hardened properties of architectural concrete were tested.

19

Results demonstrated that the use of waste glass as aggregate facilitates the development of

concrete towards a high architectural level besides its high performances, thereafter, the

increasing market in industry.

2.5 Concluding Remarks

The previous studies showed that lot of efforts have been done for investigating the effect of

using waste glass materials as a component in the concrete mix, but all of them are trying to

conform the situation and the relevant specifications in their local areas. This research aims to

implement a similar task but with applying the available locally used materials.

20

CHAPTER THREE

EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

3.1 Introduction

The experimental program for this research study is primarily concerned with investigating

the potential usefulness of using waste glass in the concrete mixes. Currently, the waste glass

generated in Gaza Strip is treated like any other solid waste material and thrown away into

the dump areas. Waste glass usually is produced from empty glass containers and different

construction and reconstruction remains and waste materials. The waste glass is to be crushed

into small pieces that resemble the size of gravel and sand. Then the crushed glass is mixed

into fresh concrete and then observing the effect of recycled crushed glass on the compressive

properties of concrete.

The idea is that the glass can be used as an aggregate in the concrete mix by replacing some

of the natural aggregates such as gravel and sand. Thus, the possible benefits are as follows:

less glass is thrown away saving landfill space, besides the use of fewer natural aggregates as

main components of concrete mixes would save time and money. The experimental program

of the current research was carried out to explore the effect of using crushed waste glass as an

aggregate component in the fresh concrete mixes on the compressive properties of hardened

concrete following the testing procedure specifications from The American Standard of

Testing Materials (ASTM).

All materials used in this study are locally available. Portland cement is to be used in this

investigation with the fine aggregate as desert originated natural sand of 4.75 mm maximum

particle diameter, with 20%, 40%, and 60% of fine crushed waste glass as a partial

replacement for fine aggregate. In addition to the natural crushed stone aggregate with a

maximum size of 20 mm, coarse crushed waste glass is to be used in this work as a portion of

20%, 40%, and 60% for the coarse aggregates. The concrete mixes are to be cured for 7 days

and 28 days testing.

21

3.2 Properties of Aggregates

Figures 3.1 and 3.2 show samples of various types of coarse and fine natural aggregates that

were used for composing the concrete mixes throughout the experimental testing program for

this research study.

Figure 3.1: Sample of the natural coarse aggregate for concrete mix

Figure 3.2: Samples of the natural medium and fine aggregate for concrete mix

22

Sieve analyses of representative samples for the naturally originated aggregates to be used in

the concrete mix are governed by the ASTM standards and the sieves used were the standard

U.S. sieves. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 present results of the sieve analysis of the two samples of

coarse and fine aggregates, respectively, and the grain size distribution curves for the two

tests are also shown in Figures 3.3 and 3.4, respectively. The aggregate materials showed S-

shaped curves indicating well graded materials.

Table 3.1: Summary of sieve analysis data for coarse aggregates.

Sieve Size

Mm

% Passing

Coarse Medium Fine

76 100 100 100

50 100 100 100

37.5 100 100 100

25 97.6 100 100

19 29.1 99.3 100

12.5 0.6 88.2 100

9.5 0.5 17.2 98.8

4.75 0.5 2.1 11.5

2.36 0.5 1.7 1.1

1.18 0.5 1.6 1.1

0.6 0.5 1.6 1.1

0.3 0.5 1.6 1.1

0.15 0.5 1.6 1.1

0.075 0.5 1.6 1.1

23

Figure 3.3: Grain size distribution curve of coarse aggregates

Table 3.2: Summary of sieve analysis data for fine aggregates.

Sieve Size

Mm % Passing

Sieve Size

Mm % Passing

76 100 4.75 100

50 100 2.36 100

37.5 100 1.18 99

25 100 0.6 92

19 100 0.3 51

12.5 100 0.15 8

9.5 100 0.075 3

24

Figure 3.4: Grain size distribution curve of fine aggregates

3.3 Waste Glass

The waste glass materials used throughout this experimental study were gathered from the

disposals of reconstruction and building demolishing projects in Gaza Strip. These materials

were primarily originated from pure and clear glass windows. The whole quantity was

cleaned out of the dirt materials and impurities, and then crushed in crushing machines into

different particles sizes, as illustrated in Figures 3.5 and 3.6.

Then the same standard procedure was then applied to conduct another sieve analysis

representative samples of waste glass and according to the ASTM specifications, the samples

were grouped under coarse and fine sized glass, and the results of sieving the two samples are

listed in Tables 3.3 and 3.4, and the grain size distribution curves for the two tests are shown

in Figures 3.7 and 3.8, respectively. Waste glass materials showed S-shaped curves indicating

well graded materials.

The sieve analyses revealed that most of the coarse waste glass material was within the range

between 1 mm to 7 mm in particle size diameter with a fairly good gradation pattern, and the

25

Figure 3.5: Waste glass materials as collected before crushing and sieving

Figure 3.6: Crushing of waste glass to coarse and fine sizes

26

nominal maximum particle size diameter was 9.5 mm. While for fine waste glass materials,

the analyses showed that most of the coarse waste glass material was within the range

between 0.2 mm to 2.5 mm in particle size diameter with a very good gradation pattern, and

the nominal maximum particle size diameter was 4.75 mm.

Table 3.3: Summary of sieve analysis data for coarse waste glass

Sieve Size

Mm % Passing

Sieve Size

Mm % Passing

76 100 4.75 72

50 100 2.36 30

37.5 100 1.18 12

25 100 0.6 5

19 100 0.3 2

12.5 99 0.15 1

9.5 95 0.075 0

Figure 3.7: Grain size distribution of coarse waste glass

27

Table 3.4: Summary of sieve analysis data for fine waste glass

Sieve Size

Mm % Passing

Sieve Size

mm % Passing

76 100 4.75 97

50 100 2.36 80

37.5 100 1.18 49

25 100 0.6 30

19 100 0.3 15

12.5 100 0.15 5

9.5 100 0.075 2

Figure 3.8: Grain size distribution of fine waste glass

28

3.4 Testing Program

For the testing program, a series of 144 standard compressive tests were conducted with

variable controlling factors: water-cement ratio, coarse waste glass content, and fine waste

glass content. The reference testing samples for comparison purposes were the B300 Portland

Cement Type I mix with no waste glass content, and all the tests were done for 7-days

compressive strength and 28-days compressive strength accompanied by a slump flow test for

each case sample. Tables 3.5 and 3.6 summarize the entire testing plan conducted within this

research, and note that each group in this list comprises of 3 samples for conducting the

compressive strength and the slump tests.

The main idea behind subdividing each testing group into 3 samples is to ensure the optimum

level of credibility for the output data points, and to create a real margin of excluding

extremely odd data points so as to reach a higher level of representative data base for the

analysis phase. Some of the test results were rejected for being highly abnormal, and the tests

were repeated for these samples under the categorized parameters.

A total number of 198 testing data points was used after controlling the compiled testing

cases from data quality and completeness points of views, Reasons lying for filtering out

some of the data points were as: i) samples with improper treating and/or testing procedures,

and ii) tests with very abnormal outcomes.

Then, the testing program will continue but with focusing only on the two mixes with optimal

output results. An extra series of 54 tests will be conducted for determining the pull out

strength, the flexural strength, and the splitting resistance for the two optimal concrete mixes.

3.4.1 Pull-out strength

This test method follows the ASTM C-900-06 procedure and covers the determination of the

pullout strength of hardened concrete by measuring the force required to pull an embedded 12

mm diameter corrugated steel bar inserted into fresh concrete mix specimen. This test method

does not provide statistical procedures to estimate other strength properties.

29

3.4.2 Flexural strength

The flexural test measures the force required to bend a beam under three point loading

conditions. The data is often used to select materials for parts that will support loads without

flexing. Flexural modulus is used as an indication of a material’s stiffness when flexed. This

test method follows the ASTM D-790 procedure where the 10×10×50 cm3 hardened concrete

specimen lies on two 40 cm apart supporting spans and the load is applied to the center by the

loading nose producing three points bending at a specified rate till failure.

3.4.3 Splitting strength

The splitting tensile strength test is used in the design of structural concrete members to

evaluate the shear resistance provided by concrete and to determine the development length

of the steel reinforcement. This test method follows the ASTM C-496 procedure where the

cylindrical hardened concrete specimens with 15 cm diameter and 30 cm length are loaded

longitudinally till failure.

3.5 Concrete Job Mixes

Throughout the laboratory program of this research, the standard B300 concrete mix was

used as a reference for testing the glass-free concrete mixes, and then for determining the

various job mixes listed in Table 3.5 and Table 3.6 with varying the contents of coarse and

fine waste glass, respectively. Table 3.7 lists the specific gravities of all the raw components

of the concrete mixes for this testing program. This is an important starting step for

determining the mass of fine and coarse waste glass to be included in the concrete mix

according to the assigned portion of waste glass for each testing trial.

Then Tables 3.8, 3.9, and 3.10 respectively summarize the mix properties of the standard B-

300 concrete job mix without any waste glass content for three various water/cement ratios.

These ratios are meant to cover the most widely applicable in the engineering practice in

Gaza Strip, which is from 0.4 up to 0.6. It should be mentioned that these job mixes were as

per the approved standards and specifications of ASTM C136 and ASTM C 33-03.

30

Table 3.5: Experimental testing program of concrete with coarse waste glass

Group # w/c Coarse

Waste Glass

GC4-0

0.4

0.0

GC4-2 0.2

GC4-4 0.4

GC4-6 0.6

GC5-0

0.5

0.0

GC5-2 0.2

GC5-4 0.4

GC5-6 0.6

GC6-0

0.6

0.0

GC6-2 0.2

GC6-4 0.4

GC6-6 0.6

Table 3.6: Experimental testing program of concrete with fine waste glass

Group # w/c Fine Waste

Glass

GF4-0

0.4

0.0

GF4-2 0.2

GF4-4 0.4

GF4-6 0.6

GF5-0

0.5

0.0

GF5-2 0.2

GF5-4 0.4

GF5-6 0.6

GF6-0

0.6

0.0

GF6-2 0.2

GF6-4 0.4

GF6-6 0.6

31

Table 3.7: Specific Gravities of Concrete Mix Raw Components for B 300

Component GS

Cement 3.15

Coarse Aggregate 2.67

Medium Aggregate 2.62

Fine Aggregate 2.63

Waste Glass 2.50

Sand 2.62

Water 1.00

Additives 1.20

Air Content 0.00

Table 3.8: Concrete Job Mix for B 300 with w/c = 0.4 and Waste Glass = zero

Component Size

Condition Weight Volume

Remarks Mm kg/m

3 m

3

Cement Type I Dry 320.00 0.1016 Turkish Type I

Coarse Agg. 25 SSD 640.00 0.2397 Crushed

Limestone

Med. Agg. 20 SSD 250.00 0.0954 Crushed

Limestone

Fine Agg. 10 SSD 360.00 0.1369 Crushed

Limestone

W. Glass 10 to 25 SSD 0.00 0.0000 Crushed W.

Glass

Sand 0.1 to 0.6 SSD 650.00 0.2481 Gaza Dune Sand

Water Tap Liquid 128.00 0.1280 Factory Water

Additives Super Flow Liquid 1.70 0.0014 Super Flow 3

Air Content Air Air 0.00 0.0150 Air

Total 2349.70 0.9661

32


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3


Coarse Agg. 25 SSD 640.00 0.2397 Crushed Limestone

Med. Agg. 20 SSD 250.00 0.0954 Crushed Limestone

Fine Agg. 10 SSD 360.00 0.1369 Crushed Limestone

W. Glass 10 to 25 SSD 0.00 0.0000 Crushed W. Glass





Total 2381.70 0.9981


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2413.70 0.9357

33

After that in Appendix A, Tables A.1 through A.9 show various mix combinations for the

same concrete mix but with several coarse waste glass contents for the previously assigned

water/cement ratios. For each waste glass portion, the idea was to replace the stated portion

as part of the coarse aggregates in the concrete mix, with maintaining the total volume of the

coarse aggregates and the coarse waste glass in the mix as a constant amount.

Finally and also in Appendix A, Tables A.10 through A.18 show various mix combinations

for the same concrete mix but this time with several fine waste glass contents, and also for the

previously assigned water/cement ratios. For each fine glass portion, the stated portion was

replaced as part of the fine aggregates in the concrete mix, but with maintaining the total

volume of the fine aggregates including the fine waste glass in the mix as a constant amount.

34

CHAPTER 4

LABORATORY TESTING RESULTS AND DATA ANALYSES

4.1 Introduction

This main aim of this chapter is to obtain the fresh concrete workability and the hardened

concrete compressive strength as the essentials for the analyses following the methodology

targeting to highlight the usefulness of considering waste glass materials as a main

component within the concrete mix. Proper treatment of uncertainties within the data analysis

process required understanding the sources of errors for determining the final output results.

It is worthy to mention that for the sake of simplicity, some of the variables that may actually

influence the hardened concrete compressive strength such as: various combinations of both

coarse and fine waste glass within the concrete mix, the effect of different admixtures on

concrete mixes containing waste glass, and the effect of waste glass material type and

properties on the engineering properties of concrete, etc. are not considered within the scope

of this research study, since those excluded variables may act as sources of errors for the

resulting predictions and recommendations.

4.2 Testing program results

According to the experimental testing program set previously, the final output results for 24

different sample groups regarding slump values for fresh concrete and mass densities for

hardened concrete are listed in Tables 4.1 and 4.3.

Moreover, the final output results for all the sample groups are listed in Tables 4.2 and 4.4

with 7-days compressive strengths for hardened concrete and 28-days compressive strengths

for hardened concrete outcome results for each testing group. The following sections will

analysis comprehensively all obtained results.

35

Table 4.1: Mass densities and workability values of concrete with several coarse waste glass contents

Group # Density

(kg/m3)

Slump (cm)

GC4-0 2387 1.0

GC4-2 2380 1.0

GC4-4 2365 1.0

GC4-6 2296 0.5

GC5-0 2387 9.5

GC5-2 2367 6.5

GC5-4 2312 5.0

GC5-6 2269 2.0

GC6-0 2395 23.5

GC6-2 2381 22.0

GC6-4 2353 18.5

GC6-6 2233 15.0

36

Table 4.2: Compressive strength of concrete with several coarse waste glass contents

Group #

Compressive Strength (kg/cm2)

7 - Days 28 – Days

GC4-0 273 321

GC4-2 315 382

GC4-4 305 370

GC4-6 208 280

GC5-0 257 323

GC5-2 262 338

GC5-4 218 311

GC5-6 210 260

GC6-0 255 320

GC6-2 208 278

GC6-4 209 260

GC6-6 177 228

37

Table 4.3: Mass densities and workability values of concrete with several fine waste glass contents

Group # Density

(kg/m3)

Slump (cm)

GF4-0 2387 1.0

GF4-2 2365 1.0

GF4-4 2340 0.5

GF4-6 2260 0.5

GF5-0 2387 9.5

GF5-2 2330 9.0

GF5-4 2322 8.0

GF5-6 2304 3.0

GF6-0 2395 24.0

GF6-2 2383 23.5

GF6-4 2352 22.0

GF6-6 2314 21.0

38

Table 4.4: Compressive strength of concrete with several fine waste glass contents

Group #

Compressive Strength (kg/cm2)

7 - Days 28 - Days

GF4-0 273 321

GF4-2 301 399

GF4-4 241 319

GF4-6 190 304

GF5-0 257 323

GF5-2 241 318

GF5-4 233 302

GF5-6 228 300

GF6-0 255 320

GF6-2 205 275

GF6-4 212 265

GF6-6 193 232

4.3 Effect of replacing waste glass on concrete density

4.3.1 Coarse waste glass

Figures 4.1 and 4.2 illustrate the effect of coarse waste glass content into the concrete mix on

the mass density of the hardened concrete for different water cements ratios. As a general

outcome, it can be easily noticed that concrete mass density was inversely affected by the

increase of water cement ratio. More specifically, for the concrete with water cement ratio of

0.6, the concrete mass density decreased when the portion of coarse waste glass exceeded 0.4.

39

Figure 4.1: Concrete density of coarse waste glass in the mix

2000

2100

2200

2300

2400

2500

0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65

Water Cement Ratio

De

ns

ity

(k

g/m

3)

C. W. Glass = 0% C. W. Glass = 20% C. W. Glass = 40% "C. W. Glass = 60%"

Figure 4.2: Concrete density vs. water cement ratio

40

Figure 4.2 reveals that there is very small reduction in concrete density at 0.2 coarse waste

glasses. This reduction in density is slightly increased at 0.4 and 0.6 content. The reduction in

density reached 3.4% and 6.7% at 0.5 and 0.6 w/c ratios. Therefore it can be concluded that

and at the tested w/c ratio, the effect of using waste glass on the mass density of concrete mix

is considered as marginal.

The relation between mix density and w/c ratio at 0%, 20%, 40% and 60% coarse waste glass

is presented in Figure 4.2. This figure shows that at 0.4, 0.5 and 0.6 w/c ratio replacing the

coarse aggregate by up to 40% of coarse waste glass does not affect the density of the mix

significantly.

4.3.2 Fine waste glass

Figures 4.3 and 4.4 demonstrate the effect of fine waste glass content into the concrete mix

on the mass density of the hardened concrete for different water cements ratios. As it can be

easily noticed, the concrete mass density was inversely affected by the increase of water

cement ratio. More specifically, for the concrete with water cement ratio of 0.4, the concrete

mass density was adversely affected when the portion of fine waste glass exceeded 0.4.

Figure 4.3: Relation of concrete density with coarse waste glass percentage of several w/c ratio

41

2000

2100

2200

2300

2400

2500

0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65

Water Cement Ratio

De

ns

ity

(k

g/m

3)

F. W. Glass = 0% F. W. Glass = 20% F. W. Glass = 40% F. W. Glass = 60%

Figure 4.4: Concrete mass density vs. water cement ratio

4.4 Effect of replacing waste glass on concrete workability


Figures 4.5 and 4.6 illustrate the effect of coarse waste glass content respectively into the

concrete mix on the workability of the fresh concrete mix expressed as the slump flow rate

for different water-cement ratios. The data interpretation was done on two different bases: the

waste glass content; and the mixing water cement ratio.


The effect of fine waste glass content into the concrete mix on the workability of the fresh

concrete mix expressed as the slump flow rate for different water-cement ratios, as shown in

Figures 4.7 and 4.8. The data interpretation was done on two different bases: the waste glass

content, and the mixing water cement ratio. As it can be seen, the fresh concrete workability

is inversely affected by the increase of water-cement ratio.

42

Figure 4.5: Slump test results vs. portion of coarse waste glass in the fresh mix

0

5

10

15

20

25

0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65

Water Cement Ratio

Slu

mp

(c

m)

C. W. Glass = 0% C. W. Glass = 20% C. W. Glass = 40% "C. W. Glass = 60%"

Figure 4.6: Slump test results vs. water cement ratio

43

Figure 4.7: Slump test results vs. portion of fine waste glass in the fresh mix

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65

Water Cement Ratio

Slu

mp

(c

m)

F. W. Glass = 0% F. W. Glass = 20% F. W. Glass = 40% F. W. Glass = 60%

Figure 4.8: Slump test results vs. water cement ratio

44

4.5 Effect of replacing waste glass on concrete compressive strength

Figure 4.9 shows a typical hardened concrete sample after failure under the compressive

loading test, which indicate that the failure mode is similar normal concrete failure.

Figure 4.9: Typical testing cube after failure for determining concrete compressive strength


Figure 4.10 illustrates the effect of coarse waste glass content into the concrete mix on the 7-

days compressive strength of the hardened concrete for different water-cement ratios. It was

observed that 7-days compressive strength is fairly improved at 0.4 w/c ratio with a portion of

0.3 coarse waste glass content, However 0.5 and 0.6 other than that, the concrete strength was

adversely affected by using waste glass materials within the concrete mix with a reduction of

concrete compressive strength.

45

Figure 4.10: 7-Days concrete compressive strength vs. portion of coarse waste glass in the mix

Figure 4.11 illustrates the effect of waste glass contents into the concrete mix on the 28-days

compressive strength of concrete at different water-cement ratios. Resembling the behavior

obtain for the 7-days compressive strength, it is clear that the hardened concrete 28-days

compressive strength is fairly improved when using a water-cement ratio 0.4 at a content

from zero up to 0.3 coarse waste glass. Other than that, the concrete strength was negatively

affected by using waste glass materials within the mix for water cement ratio of 0.5 and 0.6.

Finally, for comparison purposes, Figure 4.12combines the effect of different coarse waste

glass contents into the concrete mix on both the 7-days and 28-days compressive strengths of

the hardened concrete for different water-cement ratios. The age effect was as expected to

enhance the level of concrete compressive strength for both cases of using waste glass

materials within the mix.

46

Figure 4.11: 28-Days concrete compressive strength vs. portion of coarse waste glass in the mix

Figure 4.12: Concrete compressive strength vs. portion of coarse waste glass in the mix

100

200

300

400

500

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Coarse Waste Glass Portion

Co

mp

res

siv

e S

tre

ng

th

(kg

/cm

2)

w/c = 0.4 - 28 Days w/c = 0.5 - 28 Days w/c = 0.6 - 28 Days


47


Figure 4.13 shows the effect of fine waste glass content into the concrete mix on the 7-days

compressive strength of the hardened concrete for different water-cement ratios. The output

results interpretation was achieved on two different bases: the waste glass content; and the

mixing water cement ratio. It was observed that the hardened concrete 7-days compressive

strength is fairly improved at w/c ratio with a portion of 0.2 fine waste glass content. Other

than that, the concrete strength was adversely affected by using waste glass materials within

the concrete mix.

Figure 4.13: 7-Days concrete compressive strength vs. portion of fine waste glass in the mix

The effect of waste glass contents into the concrete mix on the 28-days compressive strength

of concrete at different water-cement ratios, as shown in Figure 4.14. Resembling the

behavior obtain for the 7-days compressive strength, it is clear that the hardened concrete 28-

days compressive strength is fairly improved when using a water-cement ratio 0.4 at a portion

of 0.2 fine waste glass content. Other than that, the concrete strength was negatively affected

by using waste glass materials within the mix.

48

Figure 4.14: 28-Days Concrete compressive strength vs. portion of fine waste glass in the mix

Finally, for comparison purposes, Figure 4.15 combines the effect of different fine waste

glass contents into the concrete mix on both the 7-days and 28-days compressive strengths of

the hardened concrete for different water-cement ratios. The age effect was as expected to

enhance the level of concrete compressive strength for both cases of using waste glass

materials within the mix.

4.6 Optimal waste glass contents in concrete mixes

The main goal of this research is to introduce the waste glass materials into the concrete mix

for economic and environmental benefits, but with the improvement of the concrete

compressive strength, or at least without losing the expected level of standard concrete mixes.

From the above mentioned output results and the corresponding illustrative figures, analyses

using regression techniques and differentiation methods were performed focusing on the

concrete mix samples with a water-cement ratio of 0.4.

49

Figure 4.15: Concrete compressive strength vs. portion of fine waste glass in the mix

Table 4.5 summarizes the testing outcomes for the 7-days category for coarse waste glass,

while Table 4.6 summarizes the testing outcomes for the 28-days category for coarse waste

glass, respectively.

Table 4.5: Summary of the 7-days comprehensive strengths for concrete mix with different portions of

coarse waste glass and a water-cement ratio of 0.4

Group # Coarse Waste Glass 7-Days Compressive

Strength (kg/cm2)

1 0.0 273

2 0.2 315

3 0.4 305

4 0.6 208

100

200

300

400

500

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Fine Waste Glass Portion

Co

mp

res

siv

e S

tre

ng

th

(kg

/cm

2)



50


coarse waste glass and a water-cement ratio of 0.4

Group # Coarse Waste Glass 28-Days Compressive

Strength (kg/cm2)

1 0.0 321

2 0.2 382

3 0.4 370

4 0.6 280

On the other hand, Table 4.7 summarizes the testing outcomes for the 7-days category for

fine waste glass, while Table 4.8 summarizes the testing outcomes for the 28-days category

for fine waste glass, respectively.

In engineering practice, the 7-days concrete compressive strength are considered as a

preliminary indication for the expected final compressive strength of the concrete mix that

would withstand the different actual loading conditions. Since the general behaviors, for the

7-days and 28-days compressive strengths and for both coarse and fine waste glass materials,

are compatible to a considerable extent, then the analytical process will be emphasized on the

final strength results, that are the 28-days compressive strength results.


fine waste glass and a water-cement ratio of 0.4

Group # Fine Waste Glass 7-Days Compressive

Strength (kg/cm2)

13 0.0 273

14 0.2 301

15 0.4 241

16 0.6 190

51


fine waste glass and a water-cement ratio of 0.4

Group # Fine Waste Glass 28-Days Compressive

Strength (kg/cm2)

13 0.0 321

14 0.2 399

15 0.4 319

16 0.6 304

For concrete mixed with coarse waste glass as a partial occupant instead of coarse aggregates,

and by referring to the data listed in Table 4.6, mathematical nonlinear regression and some

numerical analysis methods were employed to conclude that the optimum value of coarse

waste glass to be used within the concrete mix with a water-cement ratio of 0.4 was

determined as about 0.265, and the corresponding expected 28-days hardened concrete

compressive strength was about 385 kg/cm2.

On the other hand, for concrete mixed with fine waste glass as a partial occupant instead of

fine aggregates, and by referring to the data listed in Table 4.8, the same mathematical

analytical procedure was followed to conclude that the optimum value of fine waste glass to

be used within the concrete mix with a water-cement ratio of 0.4 was estimated as almost

0.195, and the corresponding expected 28-days hardened concrete compressive strength was

almost 400 kg/cm2.

The obtained optimum waste glass concrete proportion were used to implement the second

phase of the testing program comprises testing waste glass concrete mix for pullout strength

splitting strength, and flexural strength. The next sections focus only on the mixes with the

two optimum value of waste and fine waste glass to be used, that were determine and

discussed in the previous section. The behavior of these two optimal mixes is to be more

highlighted by conducting pull-out tests, flexural tests, and splitting tests on three different

groups of B-300 hardened concrete mix with a water-cement ratio of 0.4: free of waste glass

content, coarse waste glass content of 0.265, and fine waste glass content of 0.195.

52

4.7 Effect of waste glass on pull out strength

This test method follows the ASTM C-900-06 procedure and covers the determination of the

pullout strength of hardened concrete by measuring the force required to pull an embedded 12

mm diameter corrugated steel bar inserted into fresh concrete mix specimen, as illustrated in

Figures 4.16 through 4.20. This test method does not provide statistical procedures to

estimate other strength properties.


The test was conducted on 12 different samples, and the final output results are listed in

Table 4.9. From the testing results, it can be concluded that the use of optimal coarse waste

glass content in the concrete mix did not show significant effects on the pull-out strength.

Figure 4.16: Preparation of pull-out testing specimens

53

Figure 4.17: Hardened pull-out testing specimens

Figure 4.18: Pull-out testing apparatus and procedure

54

Figure 4.19: Illustration of pull-out testing specimen after failure

Table 4.9: Summary of the pull-out strength results with coarse waste glass content

Group # Sample #

Pull-out Strength (kN)

7 - Days 28 - Days

G4-0

1 40.3 54.0

2 38.3 56.8

3 40.8 55.1

Average 39.8 55.3

GC4-0.265

1 39.3 54.7

2 34.4 54.4

3 38.2 52.9

Average 37.3 54.0

55



Table 4.10. From the testing results, it can be concluded that the use of optimal fine waste

glass content in the concrete mix did not show significant effects on the pull-out strength.

Table 4.10: Summary of the pull-out strength results with fine waste glass content

Group # Sample #

Pull-out Strength (kN)

7 - Days 28 - Days

G4-0

1 40.3 54.0

2 38.3 56.8

3 40.8 55.1

Average 39.8 55.3

GF4-0.195

1 37.2 55.4

2 35.3 56.8

3 33.1 57.6

Average 35.2 56.6

4.8 Effect of waste glass on flexural strength

The flexural test measures the force required to bend a beam under three point loading

conditions. The data is often used to select materials for parts that will support loads without

flexing. Flexural modulus is used as an indication of a material’s stiffness when flexed. This

test method follows the ASTM D-790 procedure where the 10×10×50 cm hardened concrete

specimen lies on two 40 cm apart supporting spans and the load is applied to the center by the

loading nose producing three points bending at a specified rate till failure, as illustrated in

Figures 4.20 and 4.21.

56

Figure 4.20: Flexural strength testing apparatus

Figure 4.21: Illustration of flexural strength testing specimen after failure

57




glass content in the concrete enhanced the flexural strength considerably.

Table 4.11: Summary of the flexural strength results with coarse waste glass content

Group # Sample #

Flexural Strength (kN/m2)

7 - Days 28 - Days

G4-0

1 1088.4 1418.8

2 1034.4 1461.9

3 1101.9 1447.7

Average 1074.9 1442.8

GC4-0.265

1 1747.0 1820.9

2 1529.1 1830.8

3 1698.2 1800.5

Average 1658.1 1817.4




glass content in the concrete mix also enhanced the flexural strength considerably.

4.9 Effect of waste glass on splitting strength

The splitting tensile strength test is used in the design of structural concrete members to

evaluate the shear resistance provided by concrete and to determine the development length

58

of the steel reinforcement. This test method follows the ASTM C-496 procedure where the

cylindrical hardened concrete specimens with 15 cm diameter and 30 cm length are loaded

longitudinally till failure, as illustrated in Figures 4.22 through Figure 4.24.

Table 4.12: Summary of the flexural strength results with fine waste glass content

Group # Sample #

Flexural Strength (kN/m2)

7 - Days 28 – Days

G4-0

1 1088.4 1418.8

2 1034.4 1461.9

3 1101.9 1447.7

Average 1074.9 1442.8

GF4-0.195

1 1588.4 1888.3

2 1545.0 1846.6

3 1594.0 1821.1

Average 1575.8 1852.0

Figure 4.22: Hardened splitting strength testing specimens

59

Figure 4.23: Splitting strength testing apparatus

Figure 4.24: Illustration of splitting strength testing specimens after failure

60




glass content in the concrete mix reduced the splitting tensile strength of the mix slightly.

Table 4.13: Summary of the splitting strength results with coarse waste glass content

Group # Sample #

Splitting Strength (kN/m2)

7 - Days 28 - Days

G4-0

1 2941.1 3953.3

2 3138.0 3790.6

3 2867.5 3821.7

Average 2982.2 3855.2

GC4-0.265

1 2901.6 3411.7

2 3170.6 3732.1

3 2840.8 3299.5

Average 2971.0 3481.1




glass content in the concrete mix reduced the splitting tensile strength of the mix slightly.

61

Table 4.14: Summary of the splitting strength results with fine waste glass content

Group # Sample #

Splitting Strength (kN/m2)

7 - Days 28 - Days

G4-0

1 2941.1 3953.3

2 3138.0 3790.6

3 2867.5 3821.7

Average 2982.2 3855.2

GF4-0.195

1 2726.3 3309.2

2 2629.9 3184.7

3 3057.0 3255.5

Average 2804.4 3249.8

62

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1 Summary

The primary objective of this research was to study the effect of waste glass content on the

properties of concrete mixes when added as a partial replacement of fine aggregate and

coarse aggregate. This objective was achieved through the following:

1) Identifying the effects of adding waste glass on the fresh properties of concrete mixes,

2) Studying the influence of waste glass on the hardened concrete properties.

3) Determining the optimum waste glass content to be included within the concrete mix

as a partial replacement of fine aggregate and coarse aggregate.

4) Focusing on the concrete mixes with optimal waste glass contents by testing their pull

out strength, flexural strength, and splitting resistance.

These targets were reached by conducting a standard series of: slump, mass density,

compressive strength, pull out strength, flexural strength and splitting resistance tests. The

output results obtained from this laboratory program showed reliable data points and

promising further research horizons.

5.2 Conclusions

The following conclusions can be highlighted from the output of this research and can be

summarized as follows:


As a general outcome, it was noticed that the concrete mass density was decreased by

the increase of water cement ratio. More specifically, for the concrete with water

cement ratio of 0.6, the concrete mass density decreased when the portion of coarse

waste glass exceeded 0.4.

63

The output results revealed that using coarse waste glass within the concrete mix lead

to a considerable reduction in the mix workability for water cement ratios 0.5 and 0.6.

Also, it was noticed that the coarse waste glass content almost did not affect the

workability of the concrete mix at water cement ratio of 0.4.

For concrete mixed with coarse waste glass as a partial occupant instead of coarse

aggregates, some numerical analysis methods were employed to conclude that the

optimum value of coarse waste glass to be used within the concrete mix with a water-

cement ratio of 0.4 was determined as about 0.265, and the corresponding expected

28-days hardened concrete compressive strength was about 385 kg/cm2.

For concrete mixes containing the optimal portion of coarse waste glass content, it

was concluded that there was negligible effects on the pull-out strength, considerable

enhancement of the flexural strength, and slight reduction of the splitting tensile

strength of the mix.


It was concluded that the concrete mass density was inversely affected by the increase

of water cement ratio. In more specific manner, for the concrete with water cement

ratio of 0.4, the concrete mass density was adversely affected when the portion of

coarse waste glass exceeded 0.4.

The output results revealed that using fine waste glass within the concrete mix lead to

a comparatively slight reduction in the mix workability for water cement ratios 0.5

and 0.6. Also, it was noticed that the coarse waste glass content almost did not affect

the workability of the concrete mix at water cement ratio of 0.4.

For concrete mixed with fine waste glass as a partial occupant instead of fine

aggregates, the same mathematical analytical procedure was followed to conclude that

the optimum value of fine waste glass to be used within the concrete mix with a

water-cement ratio of 0.4 was estimated as almost 0.195, and the corresponding

expected 28-days hardened concrete compressive strength was almost 400 kg/cm2.

64

For concrete mixes containing the optimal portion of fine waste glass, it was

concluded that there was negligible effects on the pull-out strength, considerable

enhancement of the flexural strength, and slight reduction of the splitting tensile

strength of the mix.

5.3 Future study

It is recommended for future studies for extending this research to a wider perspective in

order to be able to consider more parameters and different combinations of parameters

governing the effect on the behavior and engineering properties of fresh and hardened

concrete containing different types and sizes of waste glass materials. This new research

project is aiming to examine the results of this study, considering this phase as a threshold for

exploring the facts in a more powerful and accurate manner.

65

REFERENCES

[1] Work Team, “Pollution caused by solid waste, rubble, and construction debris is a serious

threat to the sea and the shore of the Gaza Strip”, Ocha, 2009.

[2] Husni Al-Najar, “Solid waste management in the Gaza Strip Case Study” Ministry of

Health, Gaza, 2005.

[3] Shayan, A. and Xu, A., “Value-added utilization of waste glass in concrete”, Vermont

South, Victoria, 3133, Australia, 11 July 2003.

[4] Meyer, C., Egosi, N., and Andela, C., “Concrete with Waste Glass as Aggregate”

International Symposium Concrete Technology Unit of ASCE and University of Dundee,

March 19-20, 2001.

[5] Topçu, I. and Canbaz, M., “Properties of concrete containing waste glass”, Cement and

Concrete Research Journal, Vol. 34, pp. 267 – 274, 2004.

[6] Topçu, I, Boğa, A., and Bilir, T., “Alkali-silica reactions of mortars produced by using

waste glass as fine aggregate and admixtures such as fly ash and Li2CO3”, Waste

Management, Vol. 28, pp. 878 – 884, June 2007.

[7] Ismail, Z. and Al-Hashmi, E., “Recycling of waste glass as a partial replacement for fine

aggregate in concrete”, Journal of Waste Management, Vol. 29, pp. 655-659, 2009.

[8] Kou, S. and Poon, C., “Properties of self-compacting concrete prepared with recycled

glass aggregate”, Cement and Concrete Composites Journal, Vol. 31, pp. 107 – 113, 2009.

[9] Saccani, A. and Bignozzi, M., “ASR expansion behavior of recycled glass fine aggregates

in concrete” Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 40, pp. 531 – 536, 2010.

[10] Shi, C. and Zheng, K., “A review on the use of waste glasses in the production of cement

and concrete”, Resources, Conservation, and Recycling, Vol. 52, pp. 234-247, 2007.

[11] "Explaining the physics of everyday life", www.howeverythingworks.org , Dec., 2010.

[12] Schott Group, “Physical and Technical Properties of Glasses”, Technical Report, Mainz –

Germany, October 2007.

http://www.howeverythingworks.org/

66

[13] CSIRO Manufacturing and Infrastructure Technology, www.cmit.csiro.au , Dec., 2010.

[14] Federico, L. and Chidiac, S., “Waste glass as a supplementary cementitious material in

concrete: Critical review of treatment methods” Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 31,

pp. 606–610, 13 February 2009.

[15] Idir, R., Cyr, M., and Tagnit-Hamou, A., “Use of fine glass as ASR inhibitor in glass-

aggregate mortars” Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 24, pp. 1309–1312, July

2010.

[16] Caijun, S. and Keren, Z., A., “A review on the use of waste glasses in the production of

cement and concrete” The Journal of Resources, Conservation, and Recycling, Vol. 52,

pp. 234–247, May 2007.

[17] Her-Yung Wang, “A study on the effects of LCD glass sand on the properties of

concrete”, Waste Management, Vol. 29, pp. 335–341, May 2008.

[18] Shane Palmquist, “Compressive behavior of concrete with recycled aggregates”, Ph.D.

Thesis, TUFTS University, May 2003.

[19] Kralj Davorin, “Experimental study of recycling lightweight concrete with aggregates

containing expanded glass”, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 87, pp.

267-273, March 2009.

[20] Lee, M., Ko, C., Chang, F., Lo, L., Lin, J., Shan, M., and Lee, J., “Artificial stone slab

production using waste glass, stone fragments, and vacuum vibratory compaction”,

Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 30, pp. 583-587, April 2008.

[21] Park, S., , Lee, B., and Kim, J., “Studies on mechanical properties of concrete containing

waste glass aggregate”, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 34, pp. 2181-2189, February

2004.

[22] Hong, L., Huiying, B., and Ewan, A., “Use of waste glass as aggregate in concrete”, 7th

UK CARE Annual General Meeting, UK Chinese Association of Resources and

Environment, Greenwich, 15 September 2007.

http://www.cmit.csiro.au/

67

Appendix A

68

Table A.1: Concrete Job Mix for B 300 with w/c = 0.4 and Waste Glass = 0.2 - Coarse

Concrete Mix Design B 300

w/c 0.4

Coarse Waste Glass 0.2 ← Coarse Aggregate

Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2337.48 0.9661

69



w/c 0.4


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2325.67 0.9661

70



w/c 0.4


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2311.80 0.9661

71



w/c 0.5


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2369.48 0.9981

72



w/c 0.5


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2357.67 0.9981

73



w/c 0.5


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2343.80 0.9981

74



w/c 0.6


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2401.48 1.0301

75



w/c 0.6


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2389.67 1.0301

76



w/c 0.6


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2375.80 1.0301

77

Table A.10: Concrete Job Mix for B 300 with w/c = 0.4 and Waste Glass = 0.2 - Fine


w/c 0.4

Fine Waste Glass 0.2 ← Fine Sand

Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3





FW. Glass 0.1 to 0.6 SSD 124.45 0.0496 Crushed W. Glass





Total 2344.17 0.9661

78



w/c 0.4


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2338.61 0.9661

79



w/c 0.4


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2333.05 0.9661

80



w/c 0.5


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2408.17 1.0301

81



w/c 0.5


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2370.61 0.9981

82



w/c 0.5


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2365.05 0.9981

83



w/c 0.6


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2408.17 1.0301

84



w/c 0.6


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2402.61 1.0301

85



w/c 0.6


Component Size


Remarks mm kg/m

3 m

3










Total 2397.05 1.0301

Documents

Properties of Concrete Mixes with Waste Glass - غزةlibrary.iugaza.edu.ps/thesis/95870.pdf · Properties of Concrete Mixes with Waste Glass ... Ahmad Alkurd and Mr. Tahseen Shehada