You are on page 1of 10

Point of View

Strength and durability studies of self compacting rubberised concrete


N. Ganesan, Bharati Raj. J and A.P. Shashikala

This paper describes the development of Self Compacting


Rubberised Concrete (SCRC) using the advantages of
both Self Compacting Concrete (SCC) and Rubberised
Concrete. The development presents an opportunity
for the utilisation of waste tyres. It deals with SCRC
with and without steel fibres and provides a correlation
between compressive strength and the various durability
parameters.

Introduction

Discarded vehicle tyres are one of the important solid


waste challenges needing more useful applications than
just becoming a material for landfilling. Due to the rapid
depletion of available sites for waste disposal, many
countries discourage the disposal of waste tyre rubber
in landfills and encourage the construction sector to
use these waste materials in concrete in place of fine or
coarse aggregate.1
The production of shredded or ground tyre rubber is
now well developed, making the reuse of this material
in concrete practicable.2 Developing such construction
materials could have both environmental and economic
advantages. However, concrete with scrap tyre
aggregates must satisfy the minimum requirements
of strength and durability. The idea of developing
Self Compacting Concrete (SCC) incorporating rubber

aggregates is a novel approach to combine the advantages


of both SCC and rubberised concrete. To attain the
required self-compacting properties, the new material
Self Compacting Rubberised Concrete (SCRC), requires
a slightly higher super plasticiser than conventional SCC
at the same water/powder ratios.3 Even though this
technology has the potential for obtaining an interesting
mechanical behaviour, few studies have been carried
out on Self Compacting Rubberised Concrete.4-7 Past
investigations suggest that the partial replacement of
coarse or fine aggregate of concrete with waste tyre can
improve properties such as abrasion resistance, shock
absorption, vibration absorption and ductility.8-10 The
use of steel fibres in SCC improves the engineering
properties such as ductility, post crack resistance and
energy absorption capacity.11, 12 However, no attempts
have been made so far to evaluate the effect of addition
of steel fibres to SCRC.
This paper reports the strength and durability
characteristics of self compacting rubberised concretes
with and without steel fibres for specimens of 30
to 50MPa. The durability properties were also
investigated. Tests were performed for permeability,
water absorption, sorptivity and chloride diffusion
and resistance to marine and acid attacks. Regression
equations correlating the various durability indices and
compressive strength are proposed.

SEPTEMBER 2012 The Indian Concrete Journal

15

Point of View
The mix design was based on the method proposed by
Nan et. al. It gives an indication of the target strength at
28 day. Figure 1 shows the flowchart used for obtaining
30, 40 and 50 MPa concrete. 16 The water powder
ratio (w/p) was varied to obtain the strengths. The
mixes were checked for self compactability following
EFNARC acceptance criteria.17 A naphthalene based
superplasticiser and calcium sulphate dihydrate
viscosity modifying admixture (VMA) were added to
obtain the required workability.

Development of SCRC and SFRSCRC

Experimental programme
Materials
The materials used in this study were:
1. Ordinary Portland cement conforming to IS
12269:198713
2. Flyash with a consistency of 45% obtained from
Neyveli Lignite Power Plant and conforming to
Type F as per ASTM C618 14
3. R i v e r s a n d p a s s i n g t h r o u g h 4 . 7 5 m m
IS sieve conforming to grading zone II of
IS 383:1970 and having specific gravity of 2.54.15
4. Coarse aggregate with a maximum size of
12mm.

16

The Indian Concrete Journal SEPTEMBER 2012

Fine rubber was obtained by shredding the worn out


tyres and sieving the product gave particles of 4.75
mm (Figure 2(a)). The specific gravity of fine rubber
was 1.14. Figure3 shows the gradation curves of both
fine aggregates and fine rubber. In Self Compacting
Rubberised Concrete (SCRC), the addition of fine rubber
was 15% by volume replacing the fine aggregates.
The addition of crimped steel fibres 0.5% by volume
(diameter 0.45mm, length 30 mm and aspect ratio
66) gave the Steel Fibre Reinforced Self Compacting
Rubberised Concrete (SFRSCRC) (Figure2(b)).
When the fine rubber replaced the fine aggregate, the
mix became less workable. So the superplasticiser
dosage was increased to meet the acceptance criteria
of SCC. The viscosity modifying admixture was also
added (0.01% of water content) to avoid segregation.
Poly Vinyl Alcohol (PVA) was added to compensate
for the strength loss due to the addition of rubber. PVA
undergoes polymerisation in the presence of water and
roughens the surface of the rubber aggregate bringing
about a better interfacial bond between the matrix and

Point of View
rubber particles.18 Table1 gives the details of the mix.
The self compactability of the mixes was checked by the
Flow test, V-funnel test and L-Box test. The compressive
strength of the various mixes including SCC, SCRC and
SFRSCRC was tested using 150mm cube specimens.
Table 2 gives the fresh state properties and compressive
strength.

Durability tests
The durability properties such as water permeability,
chloride ion permeability, water absorption, abrasion
resistance, sorptivity, and resistance to seawater attack
and acid attack were investigated. Six specimens were
cast for each mix and the average value was used for
the analysis. The durability test details are discussed
below.

Table 1. Mix design


Designation

Target Cement, Fly ash,


Fine
Coarse
Rubber,
strength, kg/m3
kg/m3 aggregate, aggregate, kg/m3
MPa
kg/m3
kg/m3

SCC 1
SCRC 1

161

887.00

710

Super
plasticizer,
% of
powder
content

VMA,
kg/m3

PVA,
kg/m3

w/p Water,
kg/m3

1.00

0.49

209.00

267

161

753.95

710

133.05

1.26

0.134

5.029

0.50

214.00

SFRSCRC 1

267

161

753.95

710

133.05

39.250

1.31

0.134

5.029

0.50

214.00

SCC 2

339

130

887.00

710

1.30

0.44

205.00

339

130

753.95

710

133.05

1.39

0.542

4.849

0.44

206.36

SFRSCRC 2

339

130

753.95

710

133.05

39.250

1.43

0.542

4.849

0.44

206.36

SCC 3

410

112

887.00

710

1.60

0.37

193.00

410

112

753.95

710

133.05

1.66

0.533

4.661

0.38

198.36

410

112

753.95

710

133.05

39.250

1.74

0.533

4.661

0.38

198.36

SCRC 2

SCRC 3
SFRSCRC 3

30

267

Steel
fibres,
kg/m3

40

50

Table 2. Properties of fresh and hardened concrete


Designation

Slump flow, mm

V-Funnel
time(s)

L-Box value, mm

Compressive strength, MPa


7-days

28-days

90-days

SCC 1

700

0.8

18.36

30.10

39.04

SCRC 1

700

0.82

15.54

25.48

33.48

SFRSCRC 1

700

10

0.86

18.22

29.88

35.26

SCC 2

700

10

0.84

28.87

47.33

54.52

SCRC 2

700

11

0.85

24.76

40.59

44.44

SFRSCRC 2

700

11

0.87

25.94

42.52

48.74

SCC 3

700

11

0.86

32.26

52.89

61.63

SCRC 3

700

11

0.89

25.04

41.05

50.82

SFRSCRC 3

700

12

0.9

29.42

48.22

56.81

SEPTEMBER 2012 The Indian Concrete Journal

17

Point of View
Water permeability
The water permeability test was performed following
IS 3085:1965.19 Figure 4 shows the test setup including
the cylindrical specimens (150 mm diameter and height)
centred in the cell, with the lower end resting on the
support. The annular space between the specimen and
the cell was carefully filled with a molten mixture of
bee wax and rosin. The cell assembly was connected
to a reservoir and a pressure of 12 kg/cm2 was applied
for a period of 100 hours. The total quantity of water
permeation was noted. The coefficient of permeability
was calculated as follows:
,

......(1)

where K is the coefficient of permeability in cm/sec,


Q is ml of water percolating over the entire period, T is
the time in seconds over which Q is measured, A is the
area of specimen in cm2 and H/L is the ratio of pressure
head to the thickness of specimen.
Figure 5 shows the coefficient of permeability within
the range of 1 x 10-10 to 7 x 10-10 cm/sec, far less than the
limit for normal strength concrete suggested by other
researchers.20 The specimens became more impermeable
with increasing compressive strength. The coefficient of
permeability for SCRC was found to be 57% lower than
that of SCC apparently because the rubber particles act
as a barrier for the passage of water. When steel fibres
were included, the permeability was only 34% of the

18

The Indian Concrete Journal SEPTEMBER 2012

SCCs permeability. This may be due to the crimped


fibres entrapping air during mixing. These results show
that SCRC was two times more impermeable than the
conventional SCC.

Chloride ion penetration


The vulnerability of rubber composites to chloride
ion penetration from seawater and other chloride
environment was tested following ASTM C1202.21
A water saturated 100 mm diameter, 50 mm thick
concrete specimen was subjected to a 60 V DC for 6
hours. One end of the specimen was maintained in 3%
NaCl solution and the other in 0.3 M NaOH solution.
Figure 6 shows the stainless steel electrodes used in the
experiment. The current flow through the specimen was

Point of View

noted at regular intervals for 6 hours to determine the


total charge passed.
The chloride ion permeability ranged between 300 to
400 Coulombs indicating a dense microstructure.21 From
Figure7, it can be seen that the charge passed reduced
as the concrete strength increased. The reduction was by
10% in the case of SCRC specimens due to the insulating
property of rubber. SFRSCRC specimens showed a 7%
higher affinity to current compared to SCRC specimens.
This increase was attributed to the conducting nature
of steel fibres.

Water absorption
The water absorption test was carried out following IS
1237:1959 on 100 mm cube specimens to determine the
porosity of specimens containing rubber aggregates.22
Figure 8 shows the results on SCC, SCRC and SFRSCRC.
The water absorption of all the mixes was well below the
permissible value of 10%. As the compressive strength
increased, the mixes showed a decreasing capacity
for water absorption. The water absorption of SCRC
was 50% of that of conventional SCC. The presence of

rubber particles which do not absorb water could be


responsible for this result. The 5% higher absorption
in SFRSCRC over SCRC may be attributed to the steel
fibres entrapping air during mixing.

Abrasion resistance
Prism specimens ( 70.7 x 70.7 x 25 mm ) weighed to the
accuracy of 0.1 gm were tested following IS 1237:1959
to find the resistance to abrasion.22 The grinding path
of the abrasion testing machine was evenly strewn with
20 gms of an abrasive powder. The specimen was fixed
with the test surface facing down. A 30 kg weight at the
centre loaded the specimen. The grinding disc rotated
at a rate of 30 rpm. After every 22 revolutions, the disc
was stopped, the abraded powder was removed and
fresh 20-gms abrasive powder was applied each time.
After 110 revolutions, the specimen was turned about
its vertical axis by 90o and test was continued until 220
revolutions were completed. After testing, the specimens

SEPTEMBER 2012 The Indian Concrete Journal

19

Point of View

were weighed again and the average loss in thickness


was calculated.
Figure 10 shows the specimens loss in thickness. The
values are within the code limit of 2 mm. As expected,
the abrasion resistance increased with increasing
compressive strength. Abrasion of SCRC was less by 20%
compared to that of SCC. Steel fibre addition reduced
it by 6%.

Sorptivity
Sorptivity is a measure of the capillary force exerted
by the pore structure causing fluids to be drawn into
the body of the material. It is calculated as the rate of
capillary rise in a concrete prism placed in 2 to 5 mm
deep water.23,24 For one-dimensional flow, the relation
between absorption and sorptivity is given by, i = S t0.5
where, i is the cumulative water absorption per unit
area of inflow surface, S is the sorptivity and t is the
elapsed time. The test was conducted in the laboratory

20

The Indian Concrete Journal SEPTEMBER 2012

on 100 mm diameter and 50 mm thick specimens


preconditioned to a certain moisture level by drying in
an oven at 50oC for 7 days. After cooling, the sides of
the concrete samples were sealed and the initial weight
was taken. The samples were then kept in a tray so that
2 to 5 mm depth was immersed in water as shown in
Figure 11. At selected intervals of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 12, 16,
20 and 25 minutes; the sample was removed and was
weighed after blotting off excess water. The gain in mass
per unit area over the density of water (gain in mass/unit
area/density of water) versus the square root of time
was plotted (not shown). The slope of the best fitting
line was reported as the sorptivity.
Figure 12 shows that the sorptivity of SCRC and
SFRSCRC were higher than that of SCC, which indicates
that the rubberised composites have a higher initial
water absorption. This may be due to the following
reason. In the case of SCRC, the rubber particles finer
than fine aggregate act as micro fillers and fill most of
the pores in the core portion of concrete. However, it
may be noted that the interfacial shear between the
rubber particles and the rest of the matrix is less. This

Point of View
Table 3. Composition of marine water
Composition

Concentration, g/lit

Sodium chloride

24.53

Magnesium chloride

5.2

Sodium sulphate

4.09

Calcium chloride

1.16

Potassium chloride

0.695

leads to a relatively porous concrete in the outer shell


of the specimen when compared to the core portion
as mentioned earlier. Since sorptivity measures the
capillary flow over a very small depth of 2 to 5mm which
invariably lies in the outer shell, rubberised concrete
shows higher values of sorptivity in comparison to SCC.
The sorptivity values of all the specimens were in the
permissible range of 0.09 mm/min0.5and 0.17mm/min0.5
meant for normal concrete.25 The sorptivity decreased
with increasing compressive strength.

Resistance to seawater and acidic solution


The effect of seawater and acidic solutions on the
durability of SCC with rubber aggregates was investigated
by testing 100 mm cube specimens for loss in mass and
reduction in compressive strength. Table 3 gives the
composition of seawater prepared in the laboratory as
per ASTM D1141.26 For determining the resistance to
acid, the cubes were immersed in a 3% sulphuric acid
(H2SO4) solution for 90-days.
Figure 13 indicates that the loss in mass was lesser than
the loss in compressive strength. The reduction in mass
was 2% for 50 MPa SCC while SCRC and SFRSCRC
specimens having the same strength showed negligible
reduction in mass (less than 1%). This may be due to

the replacement of fine aggregates by rubber which


is less reactive in chloride environment. When fibres
were added to SCRC, the mass loss increased by 12%
compared to SCRC without fibres. This could be the
consequence of the chemical affinity of steel fibres to
chloride environment. The loss in mass and the reduction
in compressive strength in acid solution were 8% and
25% respectively for SCRC. The corresponding losses
in SFRSCRC were 10% and 30% owing to the corrosive
nature of steel fibres in acidic environment. This may
be the reason why the fibres in contact with aggressive
solution showed signs of corrosion by turning brown.
The loss in mass and the reduction in compressive
strength under acid medium shown in Figure 14 were
also observed under chloride medium. However, the
specimens were more vulnerable in acidic medium.
Figure 15 shows the physical appearance of the cubes
after 90 days immersion in marine and sulphuric acid
solution. The acid medium fully eroded the cover
exposing the aggregates (Figure 15 b). In contrast, the
specimen was more or less intact in chloride medium.
(Figure 15 a).

SEPTEMBER 2012 The Indian Concrete Journal

21

Point of View
Statistical evaluation of the results
Attempts made to correlate the water permeability,
absorption and sorptivity characteristics of the
composites with the chloride ion penetration values
show that the permeability, absorption and sorptivity
characteristics increase linearly with increase in chloride
ion penetration (Figures 16 18).
A general equation relating the durability indices with
the compressive strength for SCC, SCRC and SFRSCRC
was obtained, equation (2). 27

......(2)

where, DI is the durability index, fck is the compressive


strength and a and b are the regression coefficients.

22

The Indian Concrete Journal SEPTEMBER 2012

Figure 19 shows a typical correlation curve for chloride


ion permeability. Similar curves were obtained for all the
other durability indices. The corresponding regression
coefficients are given in Table 4. The authors hope that
these correlation equations would be useful in designing
self compacting rubberised concrete mixes.

Conclusions

The strength and durability characteristics of self


compacting rubberised concrete with and without
the addition of fibres was investigated. The reduction
in compressive strength due to the incorporation of
scrap rubber in SCC could be compensated to some
extent by the addition of steel fibres. All the evaluated
durability characteristics were found to be within the
limits prescribed by the codes for normal concrete.
However, when compared to SCC, SCRC satisfies all
the durability requirements better than SCC, except for
the sorptivity index. The rubberised concrete with fibres

Point of View
Table 4. Regression coefficients for durability indices
Durability Index
Coefficient of water
permeability,
cm/sec

Chloride ion
permeability

Regression
coefficients
a
b

Abrasion resistance

Marine
attack
Loss in
Compressive
strength, %

Loss in
mass, %

Loss in
Compressive
strength, %

2. Mark Tran, A good year at the rubber plant The Guardian, UK, 24 January
2007 guardian.co.uk

0.82

0.83

0.85

739.88

666.77

859.2

0.018

0.192

0.233

0.84

0.72

0.93

6. Mehmet G., Erhan G., Permeability properties of self-compacting rubberized


concretes, Construction and Building Materials 25, 33193326, 2011.

3527.8

50.95

516.16

2.131

1.188

1.765

7. Najim K.B., Hall M.R., A review of the fresh/hardened properties and applications
for plain- (PRC) and self-compacting rubberised concrete (SCRC), Construction
and Building Materials 24, 20432051, 2010.

R2

0.80

0.74

0.88

232.33

28.467

265.19

1.751

1.279

1.895

0.92

0.75

0.97

0.1559

0.3452

0.1428

0.132

0.267

0.089

0.84

0.92

0.92

3334.6

12869

174.63

1.771

2.643

1.817

R2

0.78

0.84

0.97

288.09

273.01

204.4

0.628

0.803

0.596

0.98

0.98

0.99

20.268

28.279

15.774

0.138

0.366

0.099

0.94

0.62

0.99

19. ______ Indian Standard Specification for cement mortar and concrete permeability
apparatus, IS 3085:2002, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

62.119

115.53

302.8

20. Mehta, P.K. and Monteiro, P.J.M., Concrete microstructure, properties, and
materials, Indian Concrete Institute, June 1997. p. 548

0.209

0.387

0.744

0.64

0.91

0.78

21. ASTM C1202-10, Standard Test Method for electrical indication of concretes ability
to resist chloride ion penetration.

Acid
attack

0.0006
4.024

Loss in
mass,
%

2.00E-06 1.00E-06

SFRSCRC

2.513

Sorptivity
mm/min0.5

SCRC

2.292

Water absorption,
%

SCC

References

1. El-Gammal, A.,Abdel-Gawad A. K.,El-Sherbini Y., Shalaby A., Compressive


strength of concrete utilizing waste tire rubber, Journal of Emerging Trends In
Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 1 (1): 96-99.

3. Bignozzi M.C., Sandrolini F., Tyre rubber waste recycling in self-compacting


concrete, Cement and Concrete Research 36, 735739, 2006.
4. Erhan Gneyisi, Fresh properties of self-compacting rubberized concrete
incorporated with y ash, Materials and Structures, 43, 10371048, 2010.
5. Topu, . B., Bilir T., Experimental investigation of some fresh and hardened
properties of rubberized self-compacting concrete, Materials and Design 30,
3056-3065, 2009.

8. Topu . B., Nuri A., Analysis of rubberized concrete as a composite material,


Cement and Concrete Research, 27 (8), 1135-1139, 1997.
9. Raghavan, D., Huynh H., Ferraris C.F., Workability, mechanical properties and
chemical stability of a recycled tyre rubber-filled cementitious composite. J. Mater.
Sci., 33: 1745-1752, 1998.
10. Bignozzi M.C., Saccani A., SandroliniF., New polymer mortars containing
polymeric wastes. Part 1. Microstructure and mechanical properties, Composites
Part A, 31: 97-107, 2000.
11. Grunewald S., Walraven J.C., Parameter-study on the influence of steel fibres
and coarse aggregate content on the fresh properties of self-compacting concrete,
Cement and Concrete Research 31,17931798, 2001.
12. Corinaldesi V., Moriconi G., Durable fiber reinforced self-compacting concrete,
Cement and Concrete Research 34, 249254, July 2004.
13. ______Indian Standard Specification for 53 grade ordinary Portland cement, IS
12269 : 1987, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
14. ASTM C618 - 08a, Standard Specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined
natural pozzolan for use in concrete
15. ______ Indian Standard Specification for coarse and fine aggregates from natural
sources for concrete, IS 383:1970 (R2002), Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.
16. Nan, S., Kung-Chung, H., His-Wen, C., A simple mix design method for selfcompacting concrete, Cement and Concrete Research 31,17991807, 2001.
17. European Federation of Producers and Contractors of Specialist Products
for Structures (EFNARC), Specifications and Guidelines for Self Compacting
Concrete, February 2002. www.efnarc.org
18. Xi, Y., Li,Y., Xie, Z., Lee, J., Utilization of solid wastes (waste glass and rubber
particles) as aggregates in concrete, International Workshop on Sustainable
Development and Concrete Technology, Beijing, China, May 2021, 2004,
45-52.

22. ______ Indian Standard Specification for cement concrete flooring tiles, IS 1237:1959
(R2001), Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
23. Neville A M: Properties of concrete, Pearson Education (Singapore), Edition
4, 2005, p.844

was seen to have the best resistance against abrasion.


The effect of fibres on the other durability indices was
not significant in the rubberised concrete specimens.
These results suggest that Self Compacting Rubberised
Concrete may be a useful cementitious composite with
better durability characteristics than conventional Self
Compacting Concrete.

24. ASTM C 1585, Test methods for measurement of rate of absorption of water by
hydraulic cement concretes, 2004, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Pennsylvania, USA
25. Neville.A.M and Brooks.J.J., Concrete Technology, Pearson Education, India,
4th Edition, 1987.
26. ASTM D1141 - 98(2008) Standard Practice for the preparation of substitute
ocean water
27. Omar.S., Walid.A, Shamsad,A., Mohammed, M., Correlation between compressive
strength and certain durability indices of plain and blended cement concretes,
Cement and Concrete Composites, 31, 672-676, 2009.

SEPTEMBER 2012 The Indian Concrete Journal

23

Point of View
Dr. N. Ganesan holds an M.E and Ph.D degree
from I.I.Sc, Bangalore. He is currently the Dean
(Planning and Development) and Professor of
Civil Engineering at the National Institute of
Technology, Calicut, India. His research interests
include reinforced concrete, ferrocement, fibre
reinforced concrete, self compacting concrete,
sustainable concrete, forensic engineering and rehabilitation
of RCC structures. He is a fellow of The Institution of
Engineers, India and International Ferrocement Information
Centre consultant. Apart from being a visiting professor at
the Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok and King Khalid
University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, his overseas visits
include University of Dundee, Scotland, Queens University,
Belfast, National University of Singapore, University of
Stuttgart, Germany, & University of Michigan, USA.

Ms. Bharati Raj. J holds a B.Tech from


Kerala University and an M.Tech in Structural
Engineering from NIT Calicut. She is a Research
Scholar at National Institute of Technology,
Calicut, India. Her research interests include
sustainable concrete using waste materials,
rubberized concrete, fibre reinforced concrete
and self compacting concrete.
Dr. A.P. Shashikala holds a B.Tech from Calicut
University, an M.Sc (Engg) from REC Calicut
and a Ph.D from IIT Madras. She is a Professor
of Civil Engineering at National Institute of
Technology, Calicut, India. She has around 29
years of teaching and research experience and
2 years of industrial experience. Her research
interests include seismic resistant structures and offshore
structures, development of sustainable concrete using waste
materials and rubberized concrete.

What is your opinion?


Do you wish to share your thoughts/views regarding the
prevalent construction practices in the construction industry
with our readers?
If yes, The Indian Concrete Journal gives a chance to
the engineering fraternity to express their views in its
columns.
These shall be reviewed by a panel of experts. Your views could
be limited to about 2000 words supplemented with good
photographs and neat line drawings. Send them across by e-mail
to editor@icjonline.com.

24

The Indian Concrete Journal SEPTEMBER 2012

You might also like