buildings

Article
Evaluation of Concrete Strength Made with
Recycled Aggregate
Haitham Al Ajmani 1 , Ferass Suleiman 2 , Ismail Abuzayed 1 and Adil Tamimi 3, *
1 Department of Civil Engineering, American University of Sharjah, P.O. Box 26666, Sharjah, UAE;
b00031824@alumni.aus.edu (H.A.A.); b00054173@alumni.aus.edu (I.A.)
2 Proceq Middle East, Sharjah 8365, UAE; Ferass.Suleiman@proceq.com
3 Civil Engineering, American University of Sharjah, P.O. Box 26666, Sharjah, UAE
* Correspondence: atamimi@aus.edu; Tel.: +00-971-515-2958




Received: 28 January 2019; Accepted: 24 February 2019; Published: 1 March 2019


Abstract: The construction industry consumes enormous quantities of concrete, which subsequently
produces large amount of material waste during production and demolishing. As a result, the colossal
quantity of concrete rubble is disposed in landfills. This paper, therefore, evaluated the feasibility
of reusing waste concrete as recycled aggregate (RA) to produce concrete. The replacement levels
were 20, 50, and 80% RA of normal coarse aggregate. Micro silica (MS) and fly ash (FA) were used
as cementitious replacement material, however, the water-to-binder ratio (w/b) was kept constant
at 0.31. A total of 44 specimens were used to evaluate the fresh and hardened properties. Concrete
with 80% RA showed good workability and mechanical properties. The compressive strength of the
concrete with 80% RA was 60 MPa at 28 days and 77 MPa at 56 days. Rapid chloride penetration test
(RCPT) was also conducted, where the concrete with 80% RA had the lowest permeability.

Keywords: recycled aggregate; fly ash; silica fume; workability; compressive strength; tensile
strength; RCPT

1. Introduction
Concrete is the most commonly used construction material with an estimated worldwide
consumption of 31 billion tons in 2006 alone [1]. Concrete has numerous civil engineering applications,
including roads, bridges, and dams. The main component of concrete is aggregate, which constitutes
of about 75% of the total volume, making it the single most important component in determining the
concrete’s overall properties [2]. Producing concrete requires the procurement of the components,
which modifies the natural resources of the concrete, making it environmentally hazardous [3].
Obtaining the aggregate obligates the disturbance of quarries, resulting in the decrease of scarce
resources. A popular alternative would be the use of recycled aggregate (RA) obtained from waste
concrete debris. In the last few decades, many structures in the Middle East were constructed during
economic growth of the region [4]. However, these structures are being demolished because they have
reached the end of their service life. The main reason for the demolitions is the lack of specification
obedience for the structures at the time of construction. Demolishing the structures results in concrete
rubble that can be further crushed to produce RA. These aggregates can be used in future concrete
mixes, which is advantageous in different aspects. The main advantages of using RA are the alleviation
of the environmental problems and the saving of the aggregate resources [5]. Statistics state that 70%
of Dubai’s 10,000 tons of daily general waste is the result of construction and demolition waste [6].
The environmental benefit of using RA is the preservation of the natural aggregate resources, which
then eliminates procurement processes, such as excavation and crushing, and essentially reduces costs.
Waste concrete produced from demolished old structures will be sent to landfills for disposal. Using this

Buildings 2019, 9, 56; doi:10.3390/buildings9030056 www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2019, 9, 56 2 of 14

concrete as RA will save the cost of transporting and dumping the concrete [7]. Generally, incorporating
RA into the concrete mix reduces the total impact compared to normal concrete production by 1–7% [8].
Recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) has been gaining interest in research and application [9–13].
Many countries have been utilizing RA as means of reducing the waste rubble and controlling the
environmental impact. Estimates by the European Demolition Association dictate that about 200
million tons of concrete waste is produced annually across Europe. Of this quantity, 30% is being
recycled to produce RAC. Some countries, such as Belgium and the Netherlands, recycle up to 90%,
whereas other countries, such as Italy, recycle only 10% of the waste generated [5].
The effects of the RA in newly mixed concrete may vary due to several factors. One such factor
is the source of the RA, in which some may lead to an increase in the concrete’s properties [14]. For
reinforced structures in areas under critical seismic conditions, Gonzalez and Moriconi [15] dictate
that up to 30% RA replacement is adequate to maintain acceptable performance. Even though the
use of RA as aggregate replacement in producing new concrete has been experimentally proven to
have adverse effects on the mechanical and physical properties of the concrete, it can be ameliorated
using mineral additives as a partial cement replacement, such as the incorporation of silica fume and
fly ash (FA) [16,17]. Weakening of the concrete qualities from RA occurs mainly due to heterogeneity
and the presence of impurities, pores, and old mortar in the RA, which will have a lower density
and higher absorption [17,18]. Dilbas et al. [19], who studied the effects of using silica fume with
RA, concluded that compressive strength of 5% and 10% silica fume increases by 3.23% and 12.9%
respectively, compared to RAC with 0% silica fume. The noticeable increase in compressive strength of
the concrete with silica fume replacement is attributed to the filler effect along with the pozzolanic
effect [20]. Golewski [21] evaluated the effects of incorporating FA to produce green concrete. The
optimum average 28-day compressive strength obtained was 48.96 MPa at 20% FA replacement. The
author also concludes that using 20 or 30% FA drastically reduces the compressive strength at an
early age.
High strength concrete (HSC) is a topic that has been gaining interest over the years [22]. The
applications of HSC increased within the last few decades, in which HSC was used in high rise
buildings. Kou and Poon [23] evaluated the mechanical properties of RA made from parent concrete
(PC) that had the 28 days compressive strength ranging between 30–100 MPa. At 28 days, the concrete
made from PC of 80 and 100 MPa had compressive strengths exceeding 65 MPa, which is slightly
larger than natural aggregate concrete (NAC). At 90 days, the compressive strengths for both mixes
reached 75 MPa. The 28 days splitting tensile strengths for all mixes were less than the NAC; however,
they all exceeded NAC after 90 days. The largest compressive strength obtained by Tu et al. [24] was
42 MPa after 91 days at w/b of 0.32. The results dictate that the compressive strength of both natural
and recycled concrete decreases with the increase in w/b. They also emphasized that the impurities, as
well as the residual mortar, are the main reasons that RA has inferior soundness, absorption capacity,
and specific gravity than natural aggregate.
Zaetang et al. [11] evaluated the mechanical properties of previous recycled block aggregate (RBA)
and previous recycled coarse aggregate (RCA). The results of the compressive strength for RBA and
RCA were 17 MPa and 15 MPa, respectively, which were greater than the conventional concrete (CC)
at 13.4 MPa. Both types of recycled concrete did not significantly influence the splitting tensile and
flexural strength. Xuan et al. [9] reported that using 100% carbonated RA improved the bulk electric
conductivity, chloride ion permeability, and gas permeability by 15.1%, 36.4%, and 42.4%, respectively.
However, the chloride ion permeability value was 1.5 times larger than the reference concrete. Kou
and Poon [23] suggested that the poor durability of recycled concrete could be compensated using
FA. They also stated that replacing cement with FA is more economical and environmentally friendly.
Golewski [25] showed that concrete with 20% FA substitution is characterized as having high durability
and low permeability. Seara-Paz et al. [10] studied the work performance of reinforced concrete beams
made with 0, 20, 50, and 100% RCA. They reported that the cracking moment is inversely proportional
to the replacement ratio. Sim and Park [26] reported that for 100% coarse aggregate replacement,
Buildings 2019, 9, 56 3 of 14

the total charges passed are 2100, 950, and 350 coulombs for 0, 15, and 30% FA, respectively. The
authors subsequently concluded that FA greatly reduces the chloride penetration. Golewski [27]
reported that for matured concrete, the microcracks in the Interfacial Transition Zone (ITZ) are minimal
when 20% FA is used.
The purpose of this paper was to design, produce, and evaluate high performance concrete
(HPC) made with RA as a partial coarse aggregate replacement. The RA replacement levels were
20, 50, and 80%, denoted as RA20, RA50, and RA80, respectively. The cementitious materials used
were micro silica (MS) and FA. The fresh and hardened properties measured in this scope include
slump, air content, density, compressive strength, tensile strength, modulus of elasticity, and chloride
ion penetration.

2. Materials and Methods

The scope of this research was to evaluate the fresh, mechanical, and permeability properties of
concrete made with RA and compare the results with conventional high strength concrete (CHSC).
The three mixes conducted in this experimental program, which entailed different RA replacements of
20%, 50%, and 80%, denoted in this paper as RA20, RA50, and RA80, respectively, were compared
to the properties of CHSC. The mixes were designed in accordance to the modified version of the
ACI 211-1 design method. Cementitious materials were also used to enhance the properties of the
concrete. All mixes were unique in that they had different RA replacement levels, as well as different
cementitious materials and quantities used, while maintaining a constant w/b ratio of 0.31. The fresh
properties that were evaluated include: air content, fresh density, and slump flow, in accordance to
ASTM C231-10 [28], ASTM C172-99, and ASTM C143 [29], respectively. The hardened properties
assessed in this paper include compressive strength, tensile strength, modulus of elasticity (E), and
chloride permeability, in accordance to ASTM C109 [30], ASTM C-496 [31], ASTM C469-10 [31], and
ASTM C1202 [32], respectively.
A total of thirty-six cubes with dimensions of 150 × 150 × 150 mm were tested for compressive
strength. Eight cylinders with dimensions of 150 × 300 mm were tested, in which four were used
for the split tensile strength, and four for E. Twelve specimens were also tested for rapid chloride
permeability test (RCPT), with each mix consisting of three samples. The samples were demolded
after 24 h from the time of casting and later underwent water curing within a controlled laboratory
environment with a surrounding temperature of 20 ± 5 ◦ C.

Materials
The materials used in this research include RCA, normal coarse aggregate, Ordinary Portland
Cement (OPC), MS, FA, water, crushed fine aggregate, and Glenium Sky 502 superplasticizer. The RCA
used in this research was obtained locally from the Bee’ah organization in the United Arab Emirates.
Two aggregate groups of the same type were blended and used in this experiment. The groups include
5–10 mm and 10–20 mm aggregate. Several physical properties of the aggregate were determined
including: Sieve analysis, aggregate crushing value, specific gravity, water absorption, Los Angeles
abrasion, in accordance to ASTM C136-01 [33], ASTM C131, ASTM D75-97, ASTM C702-98, and ASTM
C131-96, respectively. Table 1 summarizes the RA properties for the two samples of aggregate with
sizes of 5–10 mm and 10–20 mm. Figure 1 depicts the particle size distribution of the RA. The graph
shows that the aggregate was well-graded and well-distributed. All mixes included OPC with a
specific gravity of 3.14 and MS with a specific gravity of 2.2. Furthermore, the superplasticizer had a
specific gravity is 1.115 and a solid content of 46%. Finally, the FA specific gravity was found to be 2.8.
 Buildings 2019, 9, 56 4 of 14

Table 1. Properties of recycled aggregate (RA).

Recycled Aggregate Sample #1(10–20) mm Sample #2 (5–10) mm

Buildings 2019, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 14
Aggregate Crushing Value 18.88 22.2
Bulk Specific Gravity 2.48 2.56
ApparentApparent Specific Gravity
Specific Gravity 2.78 2.78 2.77 2.77
Water Absorption
Water Absorption 4.2% 4.2% 2.8% 2.8%
Percentage Loss (L.A. Abrasion Value) 70.8 77.2
Percentage Loss (L.A. Abrasion Value) 70.8 77.2

Gradation Curve
120

100
percentage passing

80

60

40

20

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
size (mm)
141
142 Figure 1. Aggregate
Figure 1. Aggregate gradation.
gradation.

143 The
The mix
mix proportions
proportions usedused in
in this
this experiment
experiment areare displayed
displayed inin Table
Table 2.
2. The weight of
The weight of the
the RA
RA
144 changed
changed according to the mix and increased gradually from CHSC to RA80 (80% RA). The w/b ratio
according to the mix and increased gradually from CHSC to RA80 (80% RA). The w/b ratio
145 was
was kept
kept constant
constant atat 0.31
0.31 for
for all
all mixes.
mixes. MSMS and
and FA
FA were
were used
used in
in all
all recycled
recycled concrete
concrete mixes,
mixes, where
where
146 MS
MS was
was kept
kept constant
constant at at 10%.
10%. RA20
RA20 used
used similar
similar MS
MS and
and FA
FA weight,
weight, with
with each
each being
being 10%
10% of
of the
the total
total
147 binders
binders used.
used. RA50 used 25%
RA50 used 25% FA,
FA, whereas
whereas RA80
RA80 used
used 40%
40% FA.
FA. Superplasticizer
Superplasticizer waswas fixed
fixed at
at 1.5%
1.5% by
by
148 volume for all the mixes. The objective of the trials was to optimize the concrete’s fresh and
volume for all the mixes. The objective of the trials was to optimize the concrete’s fresh and hardened hardened
149 properties
properties with
with the
the aid
aid of
of pozzolanic
pozzolanic materials.
materials.

Table 2. Mixtures proportions. CHSC = conventional high strength concrete; w/b = water-to-binder.
150 Table 2. Mixtures proportions. CHSC = conventional high strength concrete; w/b = water-to-binder.
Mixtures CHSC RA20 RA50 RA80
Mixtures CHSC RA20 RA50 RA80
Cement (kg) 432 381.3 312 240
Fly ashCement
(kg) (kg) - 432 48381.3 312
120 240 191
Micro silica (kg) 48 48 48 48
Water Fly
(L) ash (kg) 148 - 149 48 120
153 191 158
w/b
Micro silica (kg) 0.31 48 0.31 48 0.31
48 48 0.31
Recycled coarse aggregate (kg) - 217 542 861
Water (L)
Normal coarse aggregate (kg) 1089 148 870149 153
542 158 215
Fine aggregate (crushed sand) (kg) 685 667 636 571
w/b3 )
Superplasticizer (L/m 21.85 0.31 21.850.31 0.31
21.85 0.31 21.85
Recycled coarse aggregate (kg) - 217 542 861
Normal coarse aggregate (kg) 1089 870 542 215
Fine aggregate (crushed sand) (kg) 685 667 636 571
Superplasticizer (L/m3) 21.85 21.85 21.85 21.85

151 3. Results and Discussions

Buildings 2019, 9, 56 5 of 14

3. Results and Discussions

3.1. Fresh Properties

The fresh concrete properties are displayed in Table 3. The air content values ranged from 1.3 to
1.7% with the lower limit for the CHSC, and it increased with the use of RA. A possible explanation for
the increase in the air content would be the presence of pores in the aggregate, as well as their irregular
shapes. The density of each recycled concrete mix was larger than CHSC, except for RA80. This could
be attributed to the filling of the pores by the cementitious material and calcium silicate hydrate (CSH)
gel from the hydrated cement. In the case of RA80, the excessive pores were not accessible for the
cementitious material and the gel to occupy, thus, leading to vacant pores in the concrete.

Table 3. Fresh concrete properties.

CHSC RA20 RA50 RA80

Air Content (%) 1.3% 1.7% 1.6% 1.6%
Density of Fresh
2356 2408.7 2389.9 2259.5
Concrete (kg/m3 )
Slump (mm) 53.5 54.5 55 53.5

All RA mixes had a higher slump than CHSC, except for RA80. The increase in slump was mainly
due to high initial free water content. The free water was a result of the high-water absorption capacity
of RA. The slumps of all recycled HPC mixes had an average of 54.3 mm, which was an indication
that all the mixes had very good flow ability. The slump slightly increased between CHSC and RA50,
where it was maximized, but then dropped to 53.5 mm for RA80, which is similar to CHSC.

3.2. Compressive Strength

The results for the compressive strength of the concrete specimen at seven, 28, and 56 days
are illustrated in Figure 2. The crushed cubes at seven and 28 days are shown in Figures 3 and 4,
respectively. The results displayed are averages of three cubes for each of the respective mix. At seven
days, the compressive strength for RA20, RA50, and RA80 were found to be 68, 75, and 66% of the
compressive strength of CHSC. The 28-day compressive strength for RA20, RA50, and RA80 were
obtained to be 71, 76, and 73%, respectively, of CHSC. At 56 days, the compressive strength for RA20,
RA50, and RA80 were obtained to be 74, 84, and 85%, respectively, of CHSC. The decrease of the
compressive strength occurred due to the presence of old cement dust on the RA, which contributed to
the debilitation of the aggregate. However, the weakening of the concrete mechanical properties could
be compensated with the utilization of cementitious material. The cementitious materials contributed
to the enhancement of the properties by the pozzolanic reaction. The reaction occurred between the
calcium hydroxide of the hydrated cement and the silicates to produce CSH gel [22,34].
The rate of strength gain for the RA specimen increased with the increase of the curing period,
thus reducing the strength loss for all specimens in comparison to the CHSC. The increase in the rate of
strength gain was mainly due to the delayed reaction of the FA, which is known to develop long term
strength. At seven days, the average compressive strength of RA80 (40% FA) was less than RA20 (15%
FA) and RA50 (25% FA). However, it was manifested later to possess a higher compressive strength
than both averages. All RA curves showed a continuous increase in the compressive strength, whereas
the slope of the CHSC began to stabilize horizontally. Similar to other studies, the compressive strength
of the specimen increased with an increase in the curing period [35]. The results of the compressive
strengths in this experiment were comparable to the CC obtained from earlier studies [14,34]. Gales
et al. [36] achieved concrete compressive strength exceeding 45 MPa at full replacement, however,
the strength decreased significantly when the specimens were exposed to high temperatures. For
long term performance, Kou and Poon [37] achieved a maximum compressive strength of 69 MPa
at high RA replacement and 35% FA. The compressive strength of RAC reduced with the increase
 Buildings 2019, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 14

191 high temperatures.

Buildings 2019,
Buildings 56x FORFor
9, 8,
2019, long
PEER term performance, Kou and Poon [37] achieved a maximum compressive
REVIEW 6 of 614of 14
192 strength of 69 MPa at high RA replacement and 35% FA. The compressive strength of RAC reduced
193
191 with
highthe increase of For
temperatures. RA.long
At 50%
termRA and 25% RA,
performance, Kou the
and28-day
Poon [37] compressive strength was
achieved a maximum obtained to
compressive
192 ofstrength
RA. At 50% 69 RA and 25%RARA, the 28-day and compressive strength was obtained toofbe 48.1reduced
MPa [36].
194 be 48.1 MPa of [36].
MPa at high
Zaetang et al. replacement
[11] reported that 35%
theFA. The
optimum compressive
replacement strength
of previousRAC RCA was at
193 Zaetang
withSim et al.
the and [11]
increase reported that the optimum replacement of previous RCA was at 40%. Sim and
195 40%. Parkof[26]
RA.achieved
At 50% RA and 25%
28-day RA, the 28-day
compressive compressive
strengths of 52 MPa strength
and 50 wasMPa obtained
for 0%toand
194 Park [26] achieved
be 48.1 [36]. 28-day compressive strengths ofthe
52 MPa and 50 MPa for 0%ofand 15% FA, respectively,
196 15% FA, MPa
respectively,Zaetang
withetRCA
al. [11] reported
without thethat optimum
incorporation ofreplacement
recycled fine previous
aggregate. RCAThewas at
authors
195 with RCA without
40%. Sim that the
and regardless incorporation
Park [26] achieved of
28-dayrecycled fine
compressive aggregate. The authors
strengths of 52material,
MPa andconcluded
5028-day that
MPa for regardless
0% and
197 concluded of the curing condition and cementitious the compressive
196 of15%
the FA,
curing conditionwith
respectively, andRCAcementitious material, the 28-day compressive strengths of the RAC
198 strengths of the RAC exceeded 40without
MPa. The the incorporation of recycled
compressive strengths fine aggregate.
exceeded 50 MPaThe at authors
56 days in
197 exceeded
concluded 40thatMPa. The compressive
regardless of the curingstrengths exceeded
conditionrecycled 50 MPa
and cementitious at 56 days
material, in anycompressive
cementitious
199 any cementitious material replacement without fine aggregate [12].the 28-day
Aslani et al. [38] assessed
198
200 material
strengths
the
replacement
mechanical of the RACwithout
effects exceeded
of
recycled
40 MPa.fine
incorporating RAThe aggregate
compressive
into
[12].strengths
self-compacting
Aslani etexceeded
al. [38] assessed
concrete with
the56mechanical
50replacements
MPa at days in 0–
from
199
201 effects of incorporating
any cementitious materialRA into self-compacting
replacement without recycled concrete with replacements
fine aggregate [12]. Aslani from
40% at 10% increment. Their results showed a slight gradual decrease in the compressive strength
0–40%
et al. [38] at 10%
assessed
200 the mechanical
increment. Theireffects
resultsof showed
incorporating RAgradual
a slight into self-compacting
decrease in concrete with replacements
the compressive strength fromwhere 0–the
202 where the control concrete achieved a 28-day compressive strength of 50.39 MPa. On the other hand,
201 40% atconcrete
control 10% increment.
achievedTheir results
a 28-day showed a slight
compressive gradual
strength decrease
of 50.39 MPa. in Onthe
thecompressive
other hand,strength
the lowest
203
202
the lowest 28-day compressive strength achieved was 43.82 MPa at 40% replacement. Kou and Poon
wherecompressive
the control concrete
28-day strengthachieved
achieveda was28-day compressive
43.82 MPa at 40% strength of 50.39Kou
replacement. MPa.andOn Poon
the other
[39] hand,
satisfied
204
203 [39] satisfied the requirements of producing HPC with 28-day compressive strength exceeding 65
the lowest 28-day compressive strength achieved was 43.82 MPa at 40% replacement. Kou andwith
Poonold
the requirements of producing HPC with 28-day compressive strength exceeding 65 MPa
205
204 MPa with
[39]as old
satisfied HPC as RCA.
HPC RCA. the requirements of producing HPC with 28-day compressive strength exceeding 65
205 MPa with old HPC as RCA.
Compressive Strengths vs. Curing Periods
100 Compressive Strengths vs. Curing Periods
100
90
Compressive strength (MPa)

8090
Compressive strength (MPa)

7080
6070
60 CHSC
50 CHSC
50 RA20
40 RA20
40 RA50
30 RA50
30 RA80
20 RA80
20
10
10
0
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Days
Days
206
206
207
207 Figure 2.
Figure 2. Compressive
2. Compressivestrength.
Compressive strength.
strength.

208
208
209 Figure 3. Concrete failure shape after seven days for all specimens.
209 Figure 3. Concrete failure shape after seven days for all specimens.
 Buildings 2019, 9, 56 7 of 14
Buildings 2019, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 14

210
211 Figure 4. Concrete failure shape after 56 days for all specimens.

212 3.3. Concrete Tensile

3.3. Concrete Tensile Strength
Strength
213 The crushed speciemens
The crushed speciemensare areshown
shownininFigureFigure55and andthetheresults
resultsofof the
the splitting
splitting tensile
tensile strength
strength at
214 at 28 days of the 150 × 300 mm cylinders are shown in Figure 6. The splitting
28 days of the 150 x 300 mm cylinders are shown in Figure 6.. The splitting tensile strength of all tensile strength ofRA
all
215 RA concrete
concrete werewere lowerlower
thanthan that
that of of CHSC.
CHSC. The tensile
The tensile strength
strength for RA20,for RA20,
RA50,RA50,
and RA80 and were
RA80found were
216 found to be 74, 90, and 73% of the tensile strength of CHSC. Similar to
to be 74, 90, and 73% of the tensile strength of CHSC. Similar to the compressive strength, the use of the compressive strength,
217 the use of
FA and MSFA wereandnot
MSsufficient
were notto sufficient to fully compensate
fully compensate the adversethe adverse
effects effects
of using RAofonusing RA on the
the mechanical
218 mechanical
properties ofproperties
concrete. of Theconcrete.
use of 10% The MSuse and
of 10% 25% MS FAand 25% RA
at 50% FA at 50% RA replacement
replacement showed a
showed a reduction
219 reduction in the tensile strength. Kou and Poon [37] investigated the tensile
in the tensile strength. Kou and Poon [37] investigated the tensile properties of using RA, FA, and properties of using RA,
220 FA, and different ratios. The results obtained of the 28-day tensile strength
different ratios. The results obtained of the 28-day tensile strength suggested that regardless of the suggested that regardless
221 of
RAtheandRAFAand FA substitutions,
substitutions, the tensile
the tensile strength strength
wouldwould experience
experience a reduction
a reduction in comparison
in comparison to the
222 to
normal weight concrete. Mas et al. [40] also concluded that the splitting tensile strength strength
the normal weight concrete. Mas et al. [40] also concluded that the splitting tensile of concrete of
223 concrete
made with made RAwith RA would
would decreasedecrease in comparison
in comparison to theto the normal
normal weight
weight concretefor
concrete forconcrete
concrete withwith
224 targeted compressive strength above 60 MPa. Lee and Choi [18] came to the
targeted compressive strength above 60 MPa. Lee and Choi [18] came to the conclusion that the tensile conclusion that the tensile
225 strength decreases as
strength decreases asthe
thereplacement
replacementofofRA RAincreases.
increases. The
The ratio
ratio of the
of the splitting
splitting tensile
tensile strength
strength to
to the
226 the compressive
compressive strength
strength of CC,
of the the CC,
RA20, RA20,
RA50, RA50,
and and
RA80 RA80
werewerefound found
to beto4.67%,
be 4.67%,
4.86%, 4.86%,
5.46%, 5.46%,
and
227 and 4.70%, respectively, which implies that the relation between both
4.70%, respectively, which implies that the relation between both parameters of RA and mineral parameters of RA and mineral
228 additives for each
additives for each mix
mix is is closer
closer toto that of the
that of the CC.CC. The
The results
results ofof Çakır
Çakır [41]
[41] dictate
dictate that
that the
the tensile
tensile
229 strength of concrete with 10% MS are 86, 63, 83, and 94% for 25, 50, 75,
strength of concrete with 10% MS are 86, 63, 83, and 94% for 25, 50, 75, and 100% RAC, respectively,and 100% RAC, respectively,
230 with
with respect
respect to to normal
normal concrete.
concrete. Binici
Binici et et al.
al. [42]
[42] reported
reported that
that the
the 28-day
28-day splitting
splitting tensile
tensile strength
strength of of
231 recycled concrete made from marble and granite increases by
recycled concrete made from marble and granite increases by 57 and 52%, respectively.57 and 52%, respectively.
 Buildings 2019, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14

Buildings 2019, 9, 56 8 of 14
Buildings 2019, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 14

232
232
233 Figure 5. Crushed samples with different types of aggregates.
233 Figure5.5. Crushed
Figure samples
Crushed samples with
with different
different typestypes of aggregates.
of aggregates.

Concrete TensileStrength
Concrete Tensile Strength
withwith
Recycled Aggregate
Recycled Aggregate
4.5 4.5
4 4
Tensile Strength (MPa)
Tensile Strength (MPa)

3.5
3.5
3
3 2.5
2.5 2
2 1.5
1.5 1
0.5
1
0
0.5 CHSC RA20 RA50 RA80
0 Concrete Mixtures
234 CHSC RA20 RA50 RA80
Concrete Mixtures
235 Figure 6. Concrete tensile strength.
234
236 3.4. Modulus of Elasticity
Figure 6. Concrete tensile strength.
235 Figure 6. Concrete tensile strength.
237 The modulus of elasticity (E) test showed the stress to strain ratio, as well as the lateral to
3.4. Modulus
238 of Elasticity
longitudinal strain of hardened concrete. The test was conducted in accordance with ASTM C469 and
236 3.4. Modulus of Elasticity
239 The the results at 28 days are displayed in Figure 7. It was clearly shown that the CHSC had the highest
modulus of elasticity (E) test showed the stress to strain ratio, as well as the lateral to
237 240 The result, followed by
modulus the RA20 and
of hardened
elasticity (E)RA80.
test The modulus ofstress
showed E of RA20, RA50, and RA80as were obtained
longitudinal strain of concrete. The test thewas conducted to strain ratio,
in accordance well
with asASTM the lateral
C469 and to
238 241 to be 69, 50, and 56%, respectively, of the modulus of E of CHSC. Rahal [43] stated that the E of RAC
longitudinal strain of hardened concrete. The test was conducted in accordance with ASTM C469 and
the results
242 was lessatthan
28 days
normalareweight
displayed infor
concrete Figure 7.targeted
similar It was clearly
strength.shown thatstated
The author the CHSC
that thehad
trendthe highest
239 the
243 results
result, at 28 days
offollowed
E for RACby didthe
arefollow
notRA20
displayed
and in Figure
any RA80.
7.regardless
The modulus
steady pattern
It wasofclearly
E the
of
shown
of RA20,
targeted
that and
RA50, the[41].
strength
CHSC
RA80 had
were
Dilbas
the highest
obtained
et al. to
240 result,
244 followed
[19] concurred by the
the RA20
previous and RA80.
conclusion The
with modulus
experimental of E of
analysis RA20,
at RA50,
different RA and RA80
replacement
be 69, 50, and 56%, respectively, of the modulus of E of CHSC. Rahal [43] stated that the E of RAC was were
ratios. obtained
241 to bethan
less 69, 50, and 56%,
normal respectively,
weight concrete forof similar
the modulus
targeted of Estrength.
of CHSC. Rahal
The [43]stated
author statedthat
that the
the trend
E of RAC
of E
242 was
for RAC did not follow any steady pattern regardless of the targeted strength [41]. Dilbas the
less than normal weight concrete for similar targeted strength. The author stated that trend
et al. [19]
243 of E for RAC did not follow any steady pattern regardless of the targeted
concurred the previous conclusion with experimental analysis at different RA replacement ratios. strength [41]. Dilbas et al.
244 [19] concurred the previous conclusion with experimental analysis at different
Zhou and Chen [44] experimented on two types of RACs at various replacement levels. For both RA replacement ratios.
RACs, the modulus of E decreased with an increase in the replacement level [42]. The decrease in E
with an increase in RA was due to the weak properties of RA, such as high porosity of old mortar
 Buildings 2019, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 14

245 Buildingsand
Zhou 9, 56 [44] experimented on two types of RACs at various replacement levels. For 9both
2019,Chen of 14

246 RACs, the modulus of E decreased with an increase in the replacement level [42]. The decrease in E
247 with an increase
and cracks in RAetwas
[45]. Gales duereported
al. [36] to the weak properties
that the of RA,concrete
E of recycled such asdid high
notporosity
exhibit of old mortar
a stable trend
248 where the modulus of E decreased at 30% RAC and increased again at pure RAC. Limbachiya et trend
and cracks [45]. Gales et al. [36] reported that the E of recycled concrete did not exhibit a stable al. [1]
249 where
reported thethat
modulus of E decreased
E increased at 30% RAC
with the increase and increased
of targeted strength again
and at pure RAC.
further Limbachiya
increases were noticedet al.
250 [1] reported that E increased with the increase of targeted strength and further
with the incorporation of MS at all strengths. The authors stated that the E was dependent on the increases were noticed
251 with the incorporation
aggregate bulk. Generally, of EMS at all strengths.
experienced Thedecrease
a gradual authors with
statedthethat the Eof
increase wasRA,dependent
where the on the
lowest
252 aggregate
value of E was bulk.observed
Generally, E experienced
at 100% a gradual
RA replacement decrease
for the lowest with the strength
targeted increase with
of RA,MSwhere the
[1]. Binici
253 lowest value of E was observed at 100% RA replacement for the lowest targeted
et al. [42] achieved the values of E to range between 33.6–36.1 GPa, which were comparable with the strength with MS [1].
254 Binici
resultsetofal.
this[42] achieved at
experiment thehigh
values of E toKou
RA ratios. range andbetween
Poon [37]33.6–36.1
concludedGPa,that
which were comparable
E depended vastly on
255 with
the strength of the PC. The 28- and 90-day E decreased with respect to NA, where Ethat
the results of this experiment at high RA ratios. Kou and Poon [37] concluded E depended
for 90 days was
256 vastly
higher on thethat
than strength of theThe
of 28 days. PC.range
The 28- and 90-day
of 28-day E forEthe
decreased
HPC mixes withwas
respect to NA,
between where
31–36 MPa,E which
for 90
257 dayscompatible
was was higherwith thanthe
thatresults
of 28 days.
of thisThe range of 28-day
experiment. Finally,EEfor the HPC
values mixesincreased
rose with was between 31–36
strength of
258 MPa, which
the PC [36]. was compatible with the results of this experiment. Finally, E values rose with increased
259 strength of the PC [36].

Modulus of Elasticity
70
Modulus of Elasticity (GPa)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
CHSC RA20 RA50 RA80
Concrete Mixtures
260
261 Figure 7.
Figure Modulus of
7. Modulus of elasticity.
elasticity.

3.5. Comparison of the Modulus of Elasticity with Other Codes and Papers
262 3.5 Comparison of the Modulus of Elasticity with Other Codes and Papers
The American Concrete Institute (ACI) [46] and the Korean Concrete Institute (KCI) [47] are
263 The American
two common codesConcrete
that are Institute (ACI)
reliable for the[46] and the Korean
construction Concrete
industry. Institute of
The modulus (KCI)
E is[47] are two
dependent
264 common codes that are reliable for the construction industry. The modulus of E is dependent
on the concrete density (ρ) and the compressive strength (f ’c). E indirectly depends on aggregate on the
265 concrete density
type because (𝜌) and theofcompressive
the properties the aggregates strength (f’c). E indirectly
are imbedded depends
in ρ and f ’c. Severalon aggregate
codes type
and papers
266 because the properties of the aggregates are imbedded in 𝜌 and f’c. Several
introduce equations that predict the E of concrete. The ACI and the KCI propose Equation (1) andcodes and papers
267 introduce equations
Equation (2), that predict the E of concrete. The ACI and the KCI propose Equation (1) and
respectively.
268 Equation (2), respectively. E = ρ1.5 0.043 f 0 c,
p
(1)
1.5
E E==ρ𝜌 1.5 0.043√𝑓’𝑐, (1)
p
0.077 3 f 0 c, (2)

where ρ is the concrete density (kg/m3 ) andEf ’c

= (MPa) is the
𝜌1.5 0.077 3 concrete compressive strength. The density
√𝑓’𝑐, (2)
range of concrete is restricted between 1440 to 2560 kg/m3 . Hossain et al. [48] proposed an equation
269 where 𝜌 is the
for E using thesame
concrete density which
parameters, (kg/m3) and f’c
is given as(MPa)
Equationis the (3): concrete compressive strength. The
270 density range of concrete is restricted between 1440 to 2560kg/m3. Hossain et al. [52] proposed an
30 × 10is−given
6 1.5
p
271 E = which
equation for E using the same parameters, ρ asf 0 Equation
c. (3): (3)
−6 1.5
Comparison of the modulus of E valuesE = 30𝑥10
with the𝜌 predicted
√𝑓’𝑐. equations is illustrated in Figure(3)
8,
in which all results are represented as GPa. All the proposed equations follow a similar pattern and
are relatively close. However, all the equations highly underestimate E for the concrete without any
Buildings 2019, 9, 56 10 of 14

RA (CHSC), with the ACI equation being the closest. The actual E gradually decreased with RA
replacement until it reached RA50. All equations accurately predicted E for low replacement (RA20).
However, ACI and KCI overestimated E at RA50. Moreover, E increased at RA80 where the exact
value fell closely between the ACI and KCI equation. The equation proposed by Hossain et al. [48] was
conservative for all the cases. ACI and KCI accurately predicted the modulus of E at various RAs, but
it is recommended to modify the equations with a safety factor to accommodate uncertainties. It also
showed that CHSC was higher than the values predicted, according to the equations of ACI, KCI, and
Hossain et al. [46], by 43.3%, 60.4%, and 96.3%, respectively. The predicted equations were applicable
for CHSC but2019,
Buildings needed
8, x FORto beREVIEW
PEER modified for RA concrete. 10 of 14

Modulus of Elasticity
70
Modulus of elasticity (GPa)

60

50

40 This experiment

30 Eq. (1)

20 Eq. (2)
Eq. (3)
10

0
CHSC RA20 RA50 RA80
Mix
272
273 Figure 8. Comparison
Figure between
8. Comparison between the actualand
the actual and predicted
predicted values
values of theofmodulus
the modulus of elasticity.
of elasticity.

3.6. Rapid Chloride

274 Comparison Permeability
of the modulusTest (RCPT)
of E values with the predicted equations is illustrated in Figure 8,
275 in which all results are represented as GPa. All the proposed equations follow a similar pattern and
276 The electrical current transitory through the specimen would be restrained in milliamps by the
are relatively close. However, all the equations highly underestimate E for the concrete without any
RCPT
277 device.
RA (CHSC), Thewithareatheunder the curve
ACI equation of milliamps
being the closest.versus
The actualtimeE would
graduallybedecreased
used to develop
with RA the total
charges.
278 Moreover, the values attained were then compared to the ASTM C1202.
replacement until it reached RA50. All equations accurately predicted E for low replacement (RA20). The resistance to
279 However,
chloride ACI and
penetration ofKCI overestimated
all mixes E at RA50.after
was measured Moreover,
28 days E increased at RA80 Figure
after casting. where the exact
9 illustrates the
280
28-dayvalue fell closely
chloride between the on
ion penetration ACItheandspecimen.
KCI equation.
It isThe equation
evident thatproposed
the totalbycharges
Hossain passed
et al. [48]
decreased
281 was conservative for all the cases. ACI and KCI accurately predicted the modulus of E at various RAs,
significantly in all mixes involving RA, with respect to the CHSC. The main contribution did not come
282 but it is recommended to modify the equations with a safety factor to accommodate uncertainties. It
from the
283 alsoRA,
showedbut that
the CHSC
cementitious
was higher material
than theused.
valuesThe microstructure
predicted, according toofthethe hydrated
equations cement was
of ACI,
greatly
284 influenced by the pozzolanic reactions that resulted in the formation of CSH
KCI, and Hossain et al. [46], by 43.3%, 60.4%, and 96.3%, respectively. The predicted equations were gel that was caused
by the applicable
285 reaction of forcalcium
CHSC but hydroxide
needed to with the silicates
be modified for RA from the pozzolans [20,49]. The CSH gel and the
concrete.
small particles size of the pozzolans filled the capillary pores and hindered the passage of the ions [24].
286 3.6. Rapid Chloride Permeability Test (RCPT)
Therefore, the RA mixes were more durable than the CHSC. Ann et al. [50] confirmed the benefits of
287
pozzolanicThe electricaltocurrent
materials reduce transitory
chloride through the specimen
penetration. would be restrained
Villagrán-Zaccardi in [51]
et al. milliamps by the that the
mentioned
288 RCPT device. The area under the curve of milliamps versus time would be used to develop the total
contributing factors are the w/b ratio, type, and quantity of the cementitious material. Binici et al. [42]
289 charges. Moreover, the values attained were then compared to the ASTM C1202. The resistance to
reported
290 that the depth of chloride penetration decreases dramatically when RA are used instead of
chloride penetration of all mixes was measured after 28 days after casting. Figure 9 illustrates the 28-
normal
291 aggregate.
day chloride ion The reductiononinthe
penetration thespecimen.
depth wereIt is observed
evident thattothebe total
71 and 63%passed
charges [44]. Kou and Poon [23]
decreased
reported
292 significantly in all mixes involving RA, with respect to the CHSC. The main contribution didHowever,
that the chloride penetration resistance decreases as RA replacement increases. not the
293 come from the RA, but the cementitious material used. The microstructure of
use of FA adequately improved the resistance. The largest chloride penetration resistance observed wasthe hydrated cement
294
at 20%wasRAgreatly
(lowest influenced by the pozzolanic
RA replacement) reactions
and 35% that resulted
FA (largest in the formation
FA resistance) of CSH
at w/b gel that
ratio was[23]. The
of 0.42
295 caused by the reaction of calcium hydroxide with the silicates from the pozzolans [20,49]. The CSH
fine particle size of cementitious materials also densified the pore structure of the concrete, enhancing
296 gel and the small particles size of the pozzolans filled the capillary pores and hindered the passage
the concrete’s
297 of the ionscharacteristics,
[24]. Therefore, the such as increasing
RA mixes were moreits compatibility
durable than the CHSC.andAnn
lowering itsconfirmed
et al. [50] segregation [52].
Leng
298 et
the benefits of pozzolanic materials to reduce chloride penetration. Villagrán-Zaccardi et al. [51] chloride
al. [53] described four reasons on how the cementitious material could improve
penetration
299 mentionedresistance:
that the In that theyfactors
contributing improve thew/b
are the pore sizetype,
ratio, distribution
and quantityof the concrete;
of the the presence
cementitious
300
of CSH material. Binici etchloride
gel absorbs al. [42] reported that the
ions and depththe
blocks of chloride
diffusingpenetration
path; thedecreases
number dramatically
of total when
ions, such as
301 RA are used instead of normal aggregate. The reduction in the depth were observed to be 71 and 63%
302 [44]. Kou and Poon [23] reported that the chloride penetration resistance decreases as RA replacement
303 increases. However, the use of FA adequately improved the resistance. The largest chloride
304 penetration resistance observed was at 20% RA (lowest RA replacement) and 35% FA (largest FA
305 resistance) at w/b ratio of 0.42 [23]. The fine particle size of cementitious materials also densified the
 Buildings 2019, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 14

306 pore structure of the concrete, enhancing the concrete’s characteristics, such as increasing its
307 compatibility
Buildings and lowering its segregation [52]. Leng et al. [53] described four reasons on how
2019, 9, 56 11 ofthe
14
308 cementitious material could improve chloride penetration resistance: In that they improve the pore
309 size distribution of the concrete; the presence of CSH gel absorbs chloride ions and blocks the
310 CA2+ andpath;
diffusing Si4+,thethatnumber
have low diffusing
of total ions,abilities
such as are more
CA2+ andpresent in pozzolans
Si4+, that than OPC;abilities
have low diffusing and in the
are
311 presence of C3A in the pozzolans, which can absorb more chloride ions. Evangelista
more present in pozzolans than OPC; and in the presence of C3A in the pozzolans, which can absorb and Brito [54]
312 suggested
more chloride that ions.
substitution up toand
Evangelista 30%Brito
recycled
[54] fine aggregate
suggested thatissubstitution
feasible for up
durability
to 30% performance.
recycled fine
313 Otsuki et al. [55] reported that the chloride penetration resistance increased
aggregate is feasible for durability performance. Otsuki et al. [55] reported that the chloridewith a decrease in the
314 w/b
penetration resistance increased with a decrease in the w/b ratio. For the same w/b ratio, and
ratio. For the same w/b ratio, the penetration of RAC was slightly inferior to NAC [53]. Sim the
315 Park [26] reported
penetration of RAC that concrete
was slightlybecomes
inferiordenser
to NACas the curing
[53]. Sim period
and Park increases. Therefore,
[26] reported thatthe age of
concrete
316 concrete
becomes isdenser
a major asfactor in determining
the curing the chloride
period increases. penetration
Therefore, resistance,
the age regardless
of concrete of thefactor
is a major amount in
317 of cementitious
determining thematerial.
chloride Final remarks
penetration by the authors
resistance, state that
regardless RAC
of the can achieve
amount adequatematerial.
of cementitious chloride
318 penetration
Final remarks resistance performance.
by the authors TheRAC
state that use ofcan
cementitious materialchloride
achieve adequate can alsopenetration
aid in controlling the
resistance
319 chloride penetration [26].
performance. The use of cementitious material can also aid in controlling the chloride penetration
320 [26].

Total Charges Passed vs. Mixes

2500
Total charges passed (Coulombs)

2000

1500

1000

500

0
CHSC RA20 RA50 RA80

Concrete mixes

321
322 Figure 9. Rapid chloride penetration test (RCPT) results.

323 4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
The aim of this experiment was to optimize the RAC properties using pozzolanic materials at
324 The aim of this experiment was to optimize the RAC properties using pozzolanic materials at
different RA replacement levels. As such, this research has concluded the following:
325 different RA replacement levels. As such, this research has concluded the following:
326 • •RAC RAC is viable
is viable solution
solution to reduce
to reduce waste
waste materials.
materials.
327 • •Concrete
Concretemademade with
with 80%80%RARA showed
showed a high
a high compressive
compressive strength
strength of 60
of 60 MPaMPa at 28
at 28 days
days andand
77
328 77 MPa at
MPa at 56 days. 56 days.
329 • •TheThe workability of concrete made with RAs can be similar to CHSC.
workability of concrete made with RAs can be similar to CHSC.
330 • The pozzolans were highly effective in resisting the chloride ions. It reduced the
• The pozzolans were highly effective in resisting the chloride ions. It reduced the permeability of
331 permeability of the concrete with RA.
the concrete with RA.
332 Author Contributions: Engineers Ferass Suleiman, Haitham Al Ajmani and Ismail Abuzayed started the design
333 Author Contributions:
of recylcled Engineersmixture
aggregate concrete F.S., H.A.A.
usingand I.A. concrete.
waste started theThey
design of recylcled
carried aggregate
out several concrete
mixes mixture
in the lab and
334 using waste
evaluated theconcrete.
fresh andThey carriedconcrete
hardened out several mixes in
properties. thework
The lab and
wasevaluated
supervisedthebyfresh and hardened
Dr. Adil Al Tamimi.concrete
properties. The work was supervised by A.T.
335 Funding: This research received no external funding
Funding: This research received no external funding.
336 Conflict of
Conflicts ofinterest:
Interest:The
Theauthors
authorsdeclare
declareno
noconflict
conflictof
ofinterest.
interest.

337 References
References
338 1.
1. Limbachiya,
Limbachiya, M.;
M.; Seddik Meddah, M.;
Seddik Meddah, M.; Ouchagour,
Ouchagour, Y.
Y.Performance
Performanceof ofportland/silica
portland/silica fume cement concrete
fume cement concrete
339 produced with recycled concrete aggregate. ACI Mater. J. 2012, 109, 91–100.
produced with recycled concrete aggregate. ACI Mater. J. 2012, 109, 91–100.
2. Tamimi, A.K.; Abdalla, J.A.; Sakka, Z.I. Prediction of long term chloride diffusion of concrete in harsh
environment. Constr. Build. Mater. 2008, 22, 829–836. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2019, 9, 56 12 of 14

3. Cabral, A.E.B.; Schalch, V.; Molin, D.C.; Ribeiro, J.L.D. Mechanical properties modeling of recycled aggregate
concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2010, 24, 421–430. [CrossRef]
4. Faridi, A.S.; El-Sayegh, S.M. Significant factors causing delay in the UAE construction industry. Constr.
Manag. Econ. 2006, 24, 1167–1176. [CrossRef]
5. Tabsh, S.W.; Abdelfatah, A.S. Influence of recycled concrete aggregates on strength properties of concrete.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 1163–1167. [CrossRef]
6. Abdelfatah, A.S.; Tabsh, S.W. Review of research on and implementation of recycled concrete aggregate in
the GCC. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2011. [CrossRef]
7. Huda, S.B.; Shahria Alam, M. Mechanical and Freeze-Thaw Durability Properties of Recycled Aggregate
Concrete Made with Recycled Coarse Aggregate. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2015, 27, 04015003. [CrossRef]
8. Huda, S.B.; Islam, M.S.; Slater, E.; Alam, M.S. Green concrete from industrial wastes: A sustainable
construction material. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Concrete Sustainability, Japan
Concrete Institute (JCI), Fib, ACI, and RILEM, Tokyo, Japan, 27–29 May 2013.
9. Xuan, D.; Zhan, B.; Poon, C.S. Durability of recycled aggregate concrete prepared with carbonated recycled
concrete aggregates. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2017, 84, 214–221. [CrossRef]
10. Seara-Paz, S.; González-Fonteboa, B.; Martínez-Abella, F.; Eiras-López, J. Flexural performance of reinforced
concrete beams made with recycled concrete coarse aggregate. Eng. Struct. 2018, 156, 32–45. [CrossRef]
11. Zaetang, Y.; Sata, V.; Wongsa, A.; Chindaprasirt, P. Properties of pervious concrete containing recycled
concrete block aggregate and recycled concrete aggregate. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 111, 15–21. [CrossRef]
12. Li, J.; Xiao, H.; Zhou, Y. Influence of coating recycled aggregate surface with pozzolanic powder on properties
of recycled aggregate concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 1287–1291. [CrossRef]
13. López-Gayarre, F.; Serna, P.; Domingo-Cabo, A.; Serrano-López, M.A.; López-Colina, C. Influence of recycled
aggregate quality and proportioning criteria on recycled concrete properties. Waste Manag. 2009, 29,
3022–3028. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Letelier Gonzalez, V.C.; Moriconi, G. The influence of recycled concrete aggregates on the behavior of
beam-column joints under cyclic loading. Eng. Struct. 2014, 60, 148–154. [CrossRef]
15. Corinaldesi, V.; Moriconi, G. Influence of mineral additions on the performance of 100% recycled aggregate
concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 2869–2876. [CrossRef]
16. Maier, P.L.; Durham, S.A. Beneficial use of recycled materials in concrete mixtures. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012,
29, 428–437. [CrossRef]
17. Debieb, F.; Courard, L.; Kenai, S.; Degeimbre, R. Mechanical and durability properties of concrete using
contaminated recycled aggregates. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2010, 32, 421–426. [CrossRef]
18. Lee, G.C.; Choi, H.B. Study on interfacial transition zone properties of recycled aggregate by micro-hardness
test. Constr. Build. Mater. 2013, 40, 455–460. [CrossRef]
19. Dilbas, H.; Şimşek, M.; Çakir, Ö. An investigation on mechanical and physical properties of recycled
aggregate concrete (RAC) with and without silica fume. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 61, 50–59. [CrossRef]
20. Berndt, M.L. Properties of sustainable concrete containing fly ash, slag and recycled concrete aggregate.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2009, 23, 2606–2613. [CrossRef]
21. Golewski, G.L. Green concrete composite incorporating fly ash with high strength and fracture toughness. J.
Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 218–226. [CrossRef]
22. Aïtcin, P.-C. High-Performance Concrete; E & FN Spon: London, UK, 1998.
23. Kou, S.C.; Poon, C.S. Effect of the quality of parent concrete on the properties of high performance recycled
aggregate concrete. Constr. Build. Mater. 2015, 77, 501–508. [CrossRef]
24. Tu, T.Y.; Chen, Y.Y.; Hwang, C.L. Properties of HPC with recycled aggregates. Cem. Concr. Res. 2006, 36,
943–950. [CrossRef]
25. Golewski, G.L. Evaluation of morphology and size of cracks of the Interfacial Transition Zone (ITZ) in
concrete containing fly ash (FA). J. Hazard. Mater. 2018, 357, 298–304. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. Sim, J.; Park, C. Compressive strength and resistance to chloride ion penetration and carbonation of recycled
aggregate concrete with varying amount of fly ash and fine recycled aggregate. Waste Manag. 2011, 31,
2352–2360. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Golewski, G.L. An assessment of microcracks in the Interfacial Transition Zone of durable concrete
composites with fly ash additives. Compos. Struct. 2018, 200, 515–520. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2019, 9, 56 13 of 14

28. ASTM C231-10. Standard Test Method for Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by the Pressure Method; Astm
C231/C231M-14 1–10; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2010.
29. ASTM C143. Standard Test Method for Slump of Hydraulic-Cement Concrete; Astm C143/C143M 1–4; ASTM
International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2015.
30. ASTM C109/C109M. Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2-in. or [50-mm] Cube
Specimens). Cancer Res. 1972, 32, 2141–2147.
31. ASTM C496/C496M-11. ASTM C496-11 Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical
Concrete Specimens; Annu. B. ASTM Stand. Vol. 04.02 1–5; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA,
USA, 2011.
32. ASTM C1202. Standard Test Method for Electrical Indication of Concrete’s Ability to Resist Chloride; ASTM
International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 1986.
33. ASTM C136-01. Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates 1; ASTM International:
West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2001; pp. 9–13.
34. Xiao, J.; Li, L.; Tam, V.W.Y.; Li, H. The state of the art regarding the long-term properties of recycled aggregate
concrete. Struct. Concr. 2014, 15, 3–12. [CrossRef]
35. Surya, M.; Rao, V.; Lakshmy, P. Mechanical, durability, and time-dependent properties of recycled aggregate
concrete with fly ash. ACI Mater. J. 2015, 112, 653–661. [CrossRef]
36. Gales, J.; Parker, T.; Cree, D.; Green, M. Fire Performance of Sustainable Recycled Concrete Aggregates:
Mechanical Properties at Elevated Temperatures and Current Research Needs. Fire Technol. 2016, 52, 817–845.
[CrossRef]
37. Kou, S.C.; Poon, C.S. Long-term mechanical and durability properties of recycled aggregate concrete prepared
with the incorporation of fly ash. Cem. Concr. Compos. 2013, 37, 12–19. [CrossRef]
38. Aslani, F.; Ma, G.; Yim Wan, D.L.; Muselin, G. Development of high-performance self-compacting concrete
using waste recycled concrete aggregates and rubber granules. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 182, 553–566. [CrossRef]
39. Kou, S.C.; Poon, C.S. Enhancing the durability properties of concrete prepared with coarse recycled aggregate.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 35, 69–76. [CrossRef]
40. Mas, B.; Cladera, A.; Del Olmo, T.; Pitarch, F. Influence of the amount of mixed recycled aggregates on the
properties of concrete for non-structural use. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 27, 612–622. [CrossRef]
41. Çakir, O. Experimental analysis of properties of recycled coarse aggregate (RCA) concrete with mineral
additives. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 68, 17–25. [CrossRef]
42. Binici, H.; Shah, T.; Aksogan, O.; Kaplan, H. Durability of concrete made with granite and marble as recycle
aggregates. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2008, 208, 299–308. [CrossRef]
43. Rahal, K. Mechanical properties of concrete with coarse recycled aggregates. Struct. Eng. Int. J. Int. Assoc.
Bridg. Struct. Eng. 2007, 14, 213–215. [CrossRef]
44. Zhou, C.; Chen, Z. Mechanical properties of recycled concrete made with different types of coarse aggregate.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2017, 134, 497–506. [CrossRef]
45. González-Fonteboa, B.; Martínez-Abella, F. Concretes with aggregates from demolition waste and silica
fume. Materials and mechanical properties. Build. Environ. 2008, 43, 429–437. [CrossRef]
46. American Concrete Institute. ACI Committee 318: Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and
Commentary; ACI Standard: Farmington Hills, MI, USA, 2009.
47. Korean Standard Specification of Concrete, Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs of Korean
Government. 2009. Available online: https://www.kci.or.kr/eng/introduce1.asp (accessed on 12 December
2017).
48. Hossain, K.M.A.; Ahmed, S.; Lachemi, M. Lightweight concrete incorporating pumice based blended
cement and aggregate: Mechanical and durability characteristics. Constr. Build. Mater. 2011, 25, 1186–1195.
[CrossRef]
49. Radonjanin, V.; Malešev, M.; Marinković, S.; Al Malty, A.E.S. Green recycled aggregate concrete. Constr.
Build. Mater. 2013, 47, 1503–1511. [CrossRef]
50. Ann, K.Y.; Moon, H.Y.; Kim, Y.B.; Ryou, J. Durability of recycled aggregate concrete using pozzolanic
materials. Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 993–999. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
51. Villagrán-Zaccardi, Y.A.; Zega, C.J.; Di Maio, Á.A. Chloride Penetration and Binding in Recycled Concrete. J.
Mater. Civ. Eng. 2008, 20, 449–455. [CrossRef]
Buildings 2019, 9, 56 14 of 14

52. Sealey, B.J.; Phillips, P.S.; Hill, G.J. Waste management issues for the UK ready-mixed concrete industry.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2001, 32, 321–331. [CrossRef]
53. Leng, F.; Feng, N.; Lu, X. An experimental study on the properties of resistance to diffusion of chloride ions
of fly ash and blast furnace slag concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 2000, 30, 989–992. [CrossRef]
54. Evangelista, L.; de Brito, J. Durability performance of concrete made with fine recycled concrete aggregates.
Cem. Concr. Compos. 2010, 32, 9–14. [CrossRef]
55. Otsuki, N.; Miyazato, S.; Yodsudjai, W. Influence of Recycled Aggregate on Interfacial Transition Zone,
Strength, Chloride Penetration and Carbonation of Concrete. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2003, 15, 443–451. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).