Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Binici (
2007
) observed higher compressive strength in concrete with 40, 50 and
60 % by weight of natural sand replaced by fine ceramic aggregates than in
conventional concrete after 1 year of curing. In the Torkittikul and Chaipanich
(
2010
) study, the 28-day compressive strength of concrete with ceramic earthen-
ware waste aggregates as 50 and 100 % by weight replacement of natural fine
aggregates was respectively 40.0 and 38.5 MPa that compares with 37.0 MPa for
conventional concrete. This increase was attributed to improved interfacial zone
due to the rough surface texture of ceramic aggregates and the presence of hard
crystalline material like mullite in sintered ceramics. However, a slight drop at
100 % replacement level was observed, as the angular nature of ceramic aggre-
gates deteriorated the workability of fresh concrete.
Pacheco-Torgal and Jalali (
2010
) observed higher compressive strength for two
types of concrete with water-saturated white ceramic waste as complete replace-
ment of fine and coarse NA than for conventional concrete (Fig.
4.63
a). Ceramic
aggregates replacing sand (MCS) were more effective than coarse ceramic
aggregates (MCCA) in increasing the compressive strength of concrete after 28-
day of curing. Lopez et al. (
2007
) also observed higher early compressive strength
(up to 28 days) of concrete with ceramic aggregates content in the 10-50 % by
weight range as replacement of natural sand.
Guerra et al. (
2009
) observed similar 28-day compressive strength for concrete
with aggregate from sanitary porcelain waste replacing 3 % by weight of natural
coarse aggregates; however, compressive strength increased with the content of
ceramic aggregates at 5 and 7 % replacement levels but slightly decreased at 9 %
replacement level even though still higher than that of the reference concrete.
Compressive strength also increased with curing time. Senthamarai and Devadas
(
2005
) observed a maximum 3.8 % reduction in 28-day compressive strength of
concrete with coarse white ceramic waste aggregates with various w/c ratios when
compared to concrete with NA (Fig.
4.63
b).
Brito et al. (
2005
) observed lower compressive strength in concrete pavement
blocks prepared by replacing 33, 66 and 100 % by volume of coarse limestone
aggregates by aggregates from ceramic hollow bricks waste due to the lower
density and lower crushing strength of ceramic aggregates than those of the
limestone aggregates. The strength decreased as the content of ceramic aggregates
increased. Topcu and Canbaz (
2007
) reported that using tile waste as replacement
of coarse aggregates could decrease up to 43 % the compressive strength exhibited
by the reference concrete due to the lower crushing strength of tile aggregates than
that of crushed stone as well as the higher pores content in tile aggregates concrete.
Debeib and Kenai (
2008
) observed up to 35 and 30 % reduction in compressive
strength of concrete when coarse and fine NA were, respectively, replaced by
coarse and fine recycled brick aggregates. Compressive strength was further
decreased up to 40 % when both fine and coarse aggregates were replaced by brick
aggregates. Cachim (
2009
) reported the compressive strength of two types of
ceramic brick waste with different physical properties as partial (15 and 30 %)
replacement of natural coarse aggregates in concrete. The author observed that the
incorporation of brick aggregates with higher crushing strength than the natural
