International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment (2017) 6, 191–206

H O S T E D BY
Gulf Organisation for Research and Development

International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment

ScienceDirect
www.sciencedirect.com

Original Article/Research

Hardened properties of self-compacting concrete with different

crumb rubber size and content
Nahla Naji Hilal
Dams and Water Resources Engineering Department, College of Engineering, University of Anbar, Ramadi, Anbar, Iraq

Received 20 October 2016; accepted 18 March 2017

Abstract

This paper aims at investigating the effect of crumb rubber size and content on hardened characteristics of self-compacting concrete.
To this end, different self-compacting concrete mixtures were designed at constant water-to-binder ratio of 0.35 and 520 kg/m3 of binder
content. The class F fly ash was replaced with cement as 30% by weight. Six designated crumb rubber contents of 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%,
and 25% and three different sized crumb rubbers (No. 18, No. 5, and mixed crumb rubber) were considered as experimental parameters.
According to the obtained results, the use of crumb rubber had a negative effect on the hardened properties of self-compacting concretes
and the significant improvement was achieved with addition of all tire wastes types, for ductility.
Ó 2017 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Crumb rubber content; Crumb rubber size; Hardened property; Self-compacting concrete; Waste tire

1. Introduction geneity during the processes of transportation, placing,

Self-compacting concrete (SCC) is known as a revolu-
tion in concrete placement. Since SCC flows under its
own weight, there is no need for any external vibration
to compact concrete. SCC, as a highly workable concrete,
was first introduced in the late 1980s in Japan
(Nagamoto and Ozawa, 1997). This was capable of flowing
under its weight through restricted sections with no segre-
gation and bleeding. This material needs to have a rela-
tively low yield value in order to guarantee a high flow
capability and a moderate viscosity to resist segregation
and bleeding. In addition, SCC should keep up its homo-
E-mail address: nahla_naji2007@yahoo.com
Peer review under responsibility of The Gulf Organisation for Research
and Development.
and curing in order to guarantee long term durability
and adequate structural performance. If SCC is developed
successfully, an appropriate balance between stability and
deformability can be ensured. In literature, there are some
guidelines for mixture proportioning of SCC, including (i)
to reduce volume ratio of aggregate to cementitious mate-
rial (Nagamoto and Ozawa, 1997; Khayat and Ghezal,
1999); (ii) to increase paste volume and water-cement ratio
(w/c); (iii) to control carefully the maximum coarse aggre-
gate particle size and total volume; and (iv) to make use of
different viscosity enhancing admixtures (VEA)
(Nagamoto and Ozawa, 1997).
The changes of strength, usefulness and vibrant attri-
butes of rubberized concretes with respect to magnitude
and quantity of the rubber types and rubber scraps have
been explored by many studies in last two decades

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2017.03.001
2212-6090/Ó 2017 The Gulf Organisation for Research and Development. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
192 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206
(Petersson et al., 1996). The rubberized concrete is found to
be a perfect material for the structural members exposed to
rapid effects and for which preferred toughness or deforma-
bility holds greater significance than strength, like road
foundations, jersey barriers and bridge barriers. Specifi-
cally, rubberized concrete has dynamic attributes to mini-
mize the vibration and to absorb the impact energy more
helpfully than the conventional concrete.
It has been asserted by Guneyisi et al. (2004) that the
rubber content decreases the strength of concretes that
include silica fume, crumb rubber and tire chips. It has
been stated by these authors that a 40 MPa concrete can
be produced by substituting a volume of 15% of aggregates
with rubber waste.
Crumb rubber from scrap tires (2–6 mm) were employed
by Najim and Hall (2012) as a partial substitute for Fine
Aggregate (FA), Coarse Aggregate (CA) and mixed Fine
and Coarse Aggregate (FCA) in self compacting concrete
at weighted proportions of 5%, 10% and 15%. It has been
asserted by these authors that the compressive strength
decreases in the same manner as that shown for Plain Rub-
berised Concrete (PRC).
To substitute both fine and rough aggregates with exact
amounts of 10% and 20% according to weight,
Sukontasukkul and Chaikaew (2006) use crumb rubber
concrete in three different categories: (1) No. 6, (2) No.
20 and (3) Combined No. 6 + 20. The results obtained
showed that the plain concrete block had greater flexural
strength compared to crumb rubber concrete blocks.
The tensile strength of concretes with silica fume, crumb
rubber and tire chips was examined by Guneyisi et al.
(2004). In accordance with the rubber content, the tensile
strength was reduced but the presence of silica fume gives
it a higher filler effect to add to its benefits. The reduction
in the tensile strength is not affected as much as compressive
strength reduction is by the addition of rubber content. Even
at similar compressive strengths, the NVC has greater tensile
strength than the SCC and SCRC Najim and Hall (2012).
The reason behind this is the dense microstructure in SCC
mixes that causes greater brittleness and lesser splitting
strength.
It was obviously seen that the increment in the elastic
modulus was more diminutive as contrasted with that in
the compressive and splitting tensile strengths Guneyisi
et al. (2004). By and large, the plain and the rubberized
concretes displayed an increment in the modulus of up to
15% relying upon the measure of silica fume utilized.
Notwithstanding, for the same w/cm proportion and the
content of rubber, all mixtures accomplished just about
comparable results.
Zheng et al. (2008a,b) specified that the crumb rubber
(80% < 262 mm) has a lesser affect in the elasticity modulus
compared to the crushed rubber (15–40 mm). It is indicated
by Gideon (2012) that at 15% Crumb Rubber substitution,
the concrete with Crumb Rubber has modulus of elasticity
which is 11% higher than that of the control concrete.
When contrasting the two concretes and silica smoulder,
however, the Crumb Rubber adjusted concrete has an elas-
ticity modulus which is 34% less contrasted with the con-
trol which additionally holds silica fume that has been
indicated to build compressive strength and it likewise
builds the modulus of elasticity. By and large, the elasticity
modulus rises as the strength rises.
Najim and Hall (2012) made a study on plain rubberized
concrete (PRC) and they found that rubber total substitu-
tion diminished the Crack mouth open uprooting (mm)
(CMOD) at a given stacking level bringing about more
excellent flexural durability values, no doubt, because of
vitality retention by the rubber. Najim and Hall (2013)
found that, after 0.1 mm avoidance, the specimens with
(mortar precoated rubber total) (SCRC3) and bond glue
(concrete glue precoated rubber total (SCRC2) P-T/C
demonstrated unrivalled execution with relevance to fur-
ther diminishing the Crack mouth open dislodging
(CMOD) at a given burden. This likewise happened, yet
to a lesser degree, with NaOH pre-treatment and water
washing. Such conduct could be ascribed to the capacity
of the covered rubber to ingest more vitality by holding
crack proliferation inside the concrete body, e.g. by length-
ening crack ways and anxiety unwinding.
Seleem et al. (2008) specified that the fracture durability
for either self compaction or typical vibrated concrete
diminished with expanding crack–depth proportion, and
the Self compacting concrete recorded higher impervious-
ness to crack spread contrasted with ordinary vibrated con-
crete independent of the kind of coarse total. Hamid
Eskandari et al. (2012) report self compacting concrete
(SCC) is more bendable than elite concrete (HPC). Conse-
quently, it could be utilized in any event for vast size struc-
tures. Furthermore the qualities of trademark length of
SCC (lch) are to be more when contrasted with the HPC,
NC and high strength concrete. It may be presumed that
the SCC is more flexible in contrast to the HPC.
The strength of the bond of the self-compacting concrete
as reported by Helincks et al. (2013) after studying large
bar diameters is equally high as the bond strength of the
traditional vibrated concrete. The bond strength of SCC
with smaller bar diameters is somewhat greater and, with
the smaller diameters takes place the greatest variation.
The bond strength is decreased owing to Portland cement
substitution with dolomite powder as suggested by
Kamal et al. (2012). The mechanical interaction was inter-
fered with as the chemical adhesion characteristic was bet-
tered. The bond strength was mainly due to the resistance
by friction and silica fume or fly ash addition which effec-
tively, with the increase of dolomite powder content, pre-
vents extended degradation of the bond strength.
The effect of rubber types and rubber content on
mechanical properties of concrete is studied by Aslani
(2016) He reports the following conclusions:

The proposed compressive stress–strain relationship is
simple and reliable for modeling the compressive behav-
ior of RC. Moreover, using these relationships in the
 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206 193

finite element method (FEM) is more simple and (30% of total binder content by weight) was introduced
suitable. in the mixture. The hardened properties of SCCs were

The proposed relationships for the compressive, tensile investigated in terms of the compressive strength, splitting
and flexural strengths, elasticity modulus, and peak tensile strength, flexural, modulus of elasticity, fracture
strain of RC with different content of WTR are in good energy and bond strength. Totally 16 self-compacting rub-
reasonable agreement with the experimental results. berized concrete (SCRC) mixtures were designed and tested
Also, the relationships for previously noted mechanical at 90 days.
properties are proposed that can calculate these proper-
ties related to the CR, TC, and CR + CT contents. 2. Experimental study

The proposed relationships for compressive strength of
RC with CR, TC, and CR + CT contents at 7 and 2.1. Materials
28 days of age and with two different w/c ratio ranges
(0.40–0.50, and 0.50–0.60) are covered. Also, the pro- 2.1.1. Cement and fly ash
posed relationships for modulus of elasticity for three Ordinary Portland cement (CEM I 42.5R) with specific
RC mixtures at 28 days of age and with two different gravity of 3.15 g/cm3 and Blaine fineness of 326 m2/kg
w/c ratio ranges (i.e., 0.40–0.50 and 0.50–0.70) are was utilized in this study. Class F fly ash (FA) according
covered. to ASTM C 618 (ASTM, 2000) with a specific gravity of

These relationships are proposed for tensile strength, 2.25 g/cm3 and Blaine fineness of 379 m2/kg was utilized
flexural strength, and peak strain of RC with CR, TC, in the manufacturing of the SCCs. Physical properties
and CR + CT contents at 28 days of age. and chemical compositions of the cement and fly ash are
presented in Table 1.
Aslani and Nejadi (2012) studied bond strength model
based on the experimental results from eight recent investi-
gations of SCC and CC. In addition, the proposed model, 2.1.2. Aggregates
code provisions, and empirical equations and experimental The coarse aggregate was river gravel with a nominal
results from recent studies on the bond strength of SCC maximum size of 16 mm and the fine aggregate, a mixture
and CC are compared. The comparison is based on the of natural river sand and crushed limestone, was used with
measured bond between reinforcing steel and concrete uti- a maximum size of 4 mm. River sand, crushed sand, and
lizing the pullout test on the embedded bars at various river gravel had specific gravities of 2.65, 2.43, and 2.71,
heights in the mock-up structural elements to assess the respectively. The particle size gradation obtained through
top bar effect on single bars in small prismatic specimens the sieve analysis of the fine and coarse aggregates is given
by conducting beam tests. The investigated varying param- in Fig. 4.
eters on bond strength are the: steel bar diameter, concrete
compressive strength, concrete type, curing age of the con- 2.1.3. Crumb rubber
crete, and height of the embedded bar along. The experi- The No. 18 crumb rubber (No. 18 CR) and No. 5 crumb
mental results showed the ultimate and mean bond rubber (No. 5 CR) are two different sizes of crumb rubbers.
strengths are greater in SCC than in CC, For the top cast The No. 18 CR is a fine material passing from 1-mm sieve
bars, the local bond strength for SCC is greater than that whereas the No. 5 CR is a material retaining on 1-mm sieve
for CC and the bond strength of SCC is as high as the bond and passing from 4-mm sieve. Moreover, the No. 18 CR
strength for CC when large bar diameters are studied. For and No. 5 CR were mixed to obtain a new fine material
smaller bar diameters, the bond strength of SCC is slightly with a gradation close to that of the sand. A crumb rubber
higher, with the largest difference occurring for the smallest (CR) of which gradation is very close to that of the sand
bar diameters. was achieved by mixing 40% of No. 18 CR and 60% of
This study covers the effect of crumb rubber content and Table 1
size on the hardened properties of SCC. Therefore, three Physical properties and chemical compositions of Portland cement and fly
different sized crumb rubbers (No. 18, No. 5, and mixed ash.
crumb rubbers) and their mixtures were replaced with the Analysis Report (%) Cement Fly ash
natural sand at five different contents of 5%, 10%, 15%, CaO 62.58 4.24
20%, and 25% as a volume. The No. 18 crumb rubber is SiO2 20.25 56.2
a fine material passing from 1-mm sieve whereas the No. Al2O3 5.31 20.17
5 crumb rubber is a fine material retaining on 1-mm sieve Fe2O3 4.04 6.69
MgO 2.82 1.92
and passing from 4-mm sieve. Moreover, No. 18 and No.
SO3 2.73 0.49
5 crumb rubbers are mixed to achieve a new fine material K2O 0.92 1.89
with a gradation close to that of the natural sand. The con- Na2O 0.22 0.58
stant water-to-binder (w/b) ratio of 0.35 and binder con- Loss on ignition 3.02 1.78
tent of 520 kg/m3 were designated to produce SCCs. To Specific gravity 3.15 2.25
Blaine fineness (m2/kg) 326 287
improve the workability of SCCs, the Class F fly ash
194 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206

No. 5 CR. The specific gravity of No. 18 CR and No. 5 CR
is 0.50 and 0.67, respectively. The particle size distribution
for the No. 18 CR, No. 5 CR, and Mixed CR is also pre-
sented in Fig. 1. Additionally, the photographs of No. 18
CR and No. 5 CR are illustrated in Fig. 2.
2.1.4. Superplasticizer
A Polycarboxylic ether type of superplasticizer (SP),
which acts by steric hindrance effect (Collepardi, 2005),
with specific gravity of 1.07, was employed to achieve the
desired workability in all concrete mixtures.

No.18 Crumb rubber No.5 Crumb rubber Mixed crumb rubber

100

90

80

70
Percent passing

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.1 1 10
Sieve size, mm

(a)
Mixed crumb rubber Fine aggregate Coarse aggregate
100

90

80

70
Percent passing

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.1 1 10 100
Sieve size, mm

(b)
Fig. 1. Sieve analysis of (a) No. 18, No. 5 and mixed crumb rubbers, and (b) mixed crumb rubber, fine and coarse aggregates.
 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206
Fig. 2. The photographic views of No. 18 and No. 5 crumb rubbers.
2.1.5. Steel bar
Reinforcing ribbed steel bars having 16 mm diameter
and minimum yield strength of 420 MPa were utilized for
preparing the reinforced concrete specimens to be used
for testing the bonding strength.
2.2. Mixture design
SCRC mixtures were designed having a constant w/b
ratio of 0.35 and a total binder content of 520 kg/m3.
The class F fly ash was used as 30% of the total binder con-
tent as weight in all mixtures. The fine and coarse aggre-
gates were replaced with different graded crumb rubbers
(No. 18, No. 5, and mixed crumb rubber) respectively, at
five designated contents of 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, and 25%
by volume. Totally 16 different SCRC mixtures were
designed regarding to above variables. The detailed mix
proportions for SCRCs are presented in Table 2.
3. Concrete casting
To achieve the same homogeneity and uniformity in all
SCRC mixtures, the batching and mixing procedure pro-
195
posed by Khayat et al. (2000) was followed since the mix-
ing sequence and duration are very vital in the self-
compacting concrete production. According to this mixing
procedure, the crumb rubber, fine and coarse aggregates in
a power-driven revolving pan mixer were mixed homoge-
neously for 30 s, and then about half of the mixing water
was added into the mixer and the mixing was continued
for one more minute. After that, the crumb rubber and
aggregates were left to absorb the water in the mixer for
1 min. Thereafter, the cement and fly ash was added to
the mixture for mixing another minute. Finally, the SP with
remaining water was poured into the mixer, and the con-
crete was mixed for 3 min and then left for a 2 min rest.
At the end, to complete the production, the concrete was
mixed for additional 2 min. Three 150-mm cubes were
taken to measure the compressive strength, three
100  200 mm cylinders were taken to measure the splitting
tensile strength, Three 100  100  500-mm prisms were
taken to measure the net flexural and fracture energy;
and two 150  300 mm cylinders were taken to measure
the modulus of elasticity. Moreover three 150-mm cubes
were taken to measure the bond strength of self-
compacting rubberized concretes. Following the concrete
196 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206

Table 2
Mix proportions for self-compacting rubberized concrete (kg/m3).
Mix ID Water-to-binder Cement Fly ash Water SP Coarse aggregate Fine aggregate No. 18 Crumb No. 5 Crumb
ratio (w/b) rubber rubber
Natural sand Crushed sand
Control 0.35 364 156 182 3.4 819.4 573.6 245.8 0.0 0.0
5 CR18 0.35 364 156 182 3.6 819.1 544.9 233.5 7.9 0.0
10 CR18 0.35 364 156 182 3.9 818.7 516.2 221.2 15.9 0.0
15 CR18 0.35 364 156 182 4.2 818.4 487.5 208.9 23.8 0.0
20 CR18 0.35 364 156 182 4.4 818.1 458.9 196.7 31.8 0.0
25 CR18 0.35 364 156 182 4.7 817.8 430.2 184.4 39.7 0.0
5 CR5 0.35 364 156 182 3.6 819.1 544.9 233.5 0.0 10.6
10 CR5 0.35 364 156 182 3.9 818.7 516.2 221.2 0.0 21.3
15 CR5 0.35 364 156 182 4.2 818.4 487.5 208.9 0.0 31.9
20 CR5 0.35 364 156 182 4.4 818.1 458.9 196.7 0.0 42.6
25 CR5 0.35 364 156 182 4.7 817.8 430.2 184.4 0.0 53.2
5 MCR 0.35 364 156 182 3.6 819.1 544.9 233.5 3.7 5.6
10 MCR 0.35 364 156 182 3.9 818.7 516.2 221.2 7.5 11.2
15 MCR 0.35 364 156 182 4.2 818.4 487.5 208.9 11.2 16.9
20 MCR 0.35 364 156 182 4.4 818.1 458.9 196.7 15.0 22.5
25 MCR 0.35 364 156 182 4.7 817.8 430.2 184.4 18.7 28.1

casting, specimens were wrapped with plastic sheet and left
in the casting room for 24 h at 20 ± 2 °C and then they
were demolded and tested after a 90-day water curing
period.
3.1. Test procedure
Compression test of self-compacting rubberized con-
crete sample was conducted using ASTM C39 (Khayat
et al., 2000) and the obtained results were presented as
the average of three samples.
Using ASTM C496, splitting test of self-compacting
rubberized concrete sample was conducted (ASTM, 2012)
and the test results were given as the average of three sam-
ples. And splitting tensile strength of cylindrical concrete
specimens was computed using the following equation.
2P
f st ¼
phU
where P, h, and U are the maximum load, length and diam-
eter of the cylinder specimen, respectively.
Static modulus of elasticity (E) was determined through
testing the cylinders with a dimension of U150  300 mm
using ASTM C469/C469M-10, 2010 (ASTM, 2011). The
results obtained for static modulus of the self-compacting
rubberized concrete were presented as the average of two
samples.
The notched beams were applied to the calculation of
the net flexural strength (fflex) using Eq. (2) with the
assumption that there is not any notch sensitivity, where
Pmax signifies the ultimate load.
3PmaxS
f flex ¼
2BðW  aÞ2
To determine the fracture energy (Gf), a test was carried
out with considering the recommendations given by the
RILEM 50-FMC Technical Committee (RILEM, 1985;
ASTM, 2010).
For the test of fracture energy, beams with
100  100 mm in cross-section and 500 mm in length were
prepared. The notch to the specimens’ depth ratio (a/D)
was 0.4 and the notch opening was obtained by decreasing
the effective cross section to 60  100 mm through sawing
to accommodate large aggregates in higher abundance,
and distance between the supports was 400 mm. For each
specimen, load versus deflection at the mid-span (d) curve
was found and the area under the load versus displacement
at mid-span (Wo) was employed to determine the fracture
energy that was computed using Eq. (3) given by RILEM
50-FMC Technical Committee (RILEM, 1985).
Wo þ Mg us
GF ¼ ds ð3Þ
Bðw  aÞ
ð1Þ where B, W, a, S, U, m, ds, and g are the width, depth,
notch depth, span, length, mass, specified deflection of
the beam .
The brittleness of materials in terms of characteristic
length (lch) can be determined using the following equation
(Hillerborg, 1985).
EGF
lch ¼ ð4Þ
f st2
where E, fst, and GF stand for the static modulus of elas-
ticity, splitting tensile strength, and fracture energy, respec-
tively. In the present study, the direct tensile strength was
replaced with the splitting tensile strength.
The concrete’s bonding strength (s), was determined
using the RILEM RC6 (RILEM, 1985). The bonding
strength was computed using Eq. (5):
F
ð2Þ s¼ ð5Þ
pLd
 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206 197

where F denotes the tensile load at failure (N), L and d sig- resulted in the highest splitting tensile strength, and the
nify the embedment length (mm) and the diameter (mm) of increase of rubber content led to a systematic reduction
the reinforcing steel bar, respectively. In this study, 150- of splitting tensile strength. The splitting tensile strength
mm cubic specimen and 16-mm steel bar were used; there- decreased by 18.47%, 23.86%, and 21.44% for the concretes
fore, L and d were set to 150 and 16 mm, (see Fig. 3) that were produced with No. 18, No. 5, and mixed crumb
respectively. For the purpose of loading, universal testing rubber, respectively, at proportions of 5%, whereas the
machine with the capacity of 600 KN was employed decrease in the splitting tensile strength at proportions of
through installing specially-modified test apparatus to it 25% was 80%, 94.64% and 92.92%. As shown by the
(see Fig. 4). obtained results, SCC produced by No. 18 crumb rubber
resulted in the highest splitting tensile strength; while those
4. Results and discussion produced by No. 5 crumb rubber resulted in the lowest
splitting tensile strength. Additionally, it was found that
4.1. Compressive strength the negative impacts of the coarse rubber particles on the
properties were more than that of the fine particles (Eldin
The strength refers to a measure of the stress that is and Senouci, 1993; Segre and Joekes, 2000). Generally,
needed for fracturing a material and determined by the cal- the whole concretes have low tensile strength (10% of
culation of the maximum stress (fc0 ) that the specimen car- compressive strength) and strain capacity (Neville, 1995).
ries after being subjected to uni-axial compressive force The tensile strength, however, is of a great importance to
(RILEM, 1996). airfield slabs, highway design, as well as in cases where
Fig. 5 presents the 90-day compressive strength of the crack resistance and shear strength are priority. These
mixtures. In this study, the compressive strength values shortcomings are exacerbated by the addition of the crumb
obtained during 90 days ranging from 39.28 MPa to rubber to SCC (see Fig. 6) where a general tendency exists
72.44 MPa were achieved. The control mixture showed toward the reduction of the tensile strength, which may be
the highest compressive strength result; and as the rubber attributed to the same reasons that affect the compressive
content increased, the compressive strength systematically
decreased. Compared to the natural aggregate, the crumb
rubber is a soft material. If crumb rubber is used in con-
crete production, the compressive strength and the adhe-
sion between rubber particles and surrounding cement
paste are decreased .As a result, in the literature, there
are some recommendations for applying surface treatment
of rubber particles in order to enhance its adhesion to the
cement paste (Eldin and Senouci, 1993). The lowest com-
pressive strength resulted from the self-compacting con-
cretes produced with No. 5 crumb rubber; whereas, the
highest strength resulted from those produced with No.
18 crumb rubber. It has been shown that the coarse rubber
particles have more negative effects on the properties com-
pared to fine particles (Eldin and Senouci, 1993; Dong
et al., 2013). The strength decrease with an increasing rub-
ber content is attributable to two reasons: (1) cracks started
rapidly near the rubber particles in the mix, which quicken
the failure of the rubber–cement matrix as the rubber par-
ticles are much softer than the adjacent cement paste on
loading; and (2) rubber particles function as voids in the
concrete matrix because of the absence of adhesion
between the rubber particles and the paste (Aslani, 2016).

4.2. Splitting tensile strength

Splitting tensile strength values that are calculated from

cylindrical specimens by means of Eq. (1) are displayed in
Table 3. The variation in splitting tensile strength noted
during 90 days for all SCRC associated with the content
and size of crumb rubber is presented in Fig. 6. In this
study, the splitting tensile strength values were obtained,
ranging from 2.24 MPa to 4.36 MPa. The control mixture Fig. 3. Details of the bond strength test specimen.
198 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206
strength. Many factors are effective on the relationship
between splitting and compressive tensile strength, includ-
ing aggregate type and particle size distribution, and curing
age (Mehta and Monteiro, 2006) and powder and admix-
ture content and type. Aslani (2016) shows that the
decrease in the tensile strength with the rubber content
was lower than that in the compressive strength.
4.3. Static modulus of elasticity
The test results of static modulus of elasticity are dis-
played in Fig. 7 as a function of rubber and tire chip size
and contents in the present study the Moduli of elasticity
values, ranging from 30.98 GPa to 50.71 GPa, were
obtained. The highest modulus of elasticity was obtained
from the control mixture, and the increase of rubber con-
tent led to systematical reduction of modulus of elasticity.
The decrease in the modulus of elasticity of rubberized con-
crete occurred for a number of reasons, including the inclu-
sion of the waste tire rubber aggregate, acted similar to
voids in the matrix, which was due to a weak bond between
the concrete matrix and waste tire rubber aggregate. If the
void content of concrete increases, the strength will
Fig. 4. Photographic view of the pullout test set up during testing the
specimen.
decrease. The second reason is that waste tire rubber aggre-
gate acts as weak inclusions in the hardened cement mass,
hence producing high internal stress perpendicular to the
direction of the applied load. The third reason is that the
strength of the Portland cement concrete depends mainly
on the coarse aggregate, size, hardness, and density. The
aggregates are replaced partially with rubber; for this rea-
son, the decrease in strength is only natural. The last reason
is that the failure of the sample is also due to the waste tire
that is more elastically-deformable compared to the matrix.
After loading the samples, the cracks form first at the soft-
est areas. The rubber’s inclusion site is where these sites
emerge (Mehta and Monteiro, 2006). As shown by the
graphs presented in Fig. 7, the static elastic modulus was
reduced when rubber size and content increased in a fash-
ion comparable to that observed in both splitting and com-
pressive tensile strengths. The results showed that SCC
produced with No. 18 crumb rubber resulted in the highest
static elastic modulus.
According to Rocha-Rangel (2011), the modulus of elas-
ticity of SCC was expanded with rubber (4–10 mm) waste
substance. In addition, they warned the risk of serious iso-
lation with a high elastic waste concentration at the highest
point of the samples, which could lead to a need for a fit-
ting blend between a consistency executor and air-
entraining operator in order to keep up a strategic distance
from isolation. The modulus of elasticity was also affected
by the particle size and amount of rubber as compressive
strength according to Aslani (2016).
4.4. Net flexural strength
The net flexural strength values, which were evaluated
using Eq. (2) from the notched prismatic specimens (see
Fig. 8a) subjected to the three-point bending test (see
Fig. 8b), are displayed in Table 3. The variation in the
net flexural strength of SCRC associated with crumb rub-
ber content and size is displayed in Fig. 9. The highest
value was the net flexural strength of control mix
5.6 MPa. The SCC produced with No. 5 crumb rubber
resulted in the lowest net flexural strength, whereas those
produced with No. 18 crumb rubber resulted in the highest
net flexural strength. As shown by the obtained results, the
control mix had greater net flexural strength in comparison
with other mixture containing No. 5, No. 18, and mixed
crumb rubber. Table 3 clearly shows that the increase of
the No. 18 crumb rubber from 5% to 25% resulted in reduc-
ing the flexural strength up to 70% and, simultaneously, the
mixture containing No. 5 crumb rubber from 5% to 25%
resulted in the reduction of the flexural strength up to
80%, whereas the decreasing the flexural strength with
mixed crumb rubber (MCR) up to 78%. The decrease of
fflex can be related to the same failure mechanism for split-
ting tensile strength, since this is a ‘theoretical’ measure for
the highest tensile stress reached on the bottom fiber of a
test beam. It is assumed that fflex is a ‘theoretical’ measure-
ment since this is computed according to the elastic beam
 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206 199

No. 18 crumb rubber No.5 crumb rubber Mixed crumb rubber

75

70

Compressive strength, fc (MPa)

65

60

55

50

45

40

35
0 5 10 15 20 25
Rubber content (%)

Fig. 5. Variation of 90-day compressive strength with respect to crumb rubber size and content.

Table 3
Results of hardened properties for SCRC.
Mix ID fc MPa fst MPa EGPa fflex MPa GF N/m lch N/m s MPa
Control 72.44 4.36 50.71 5.6 155.8 415.612 14.6
No. 18 CR5 67.95 3.68 48.68 4.92 143.5 515.830 13.61
No. 18 R10 64.09 3.51 46.34 4.63 140.7 529.219 12.85
No. 18 CR15 60.62 3.32 44.51 4.47 135.1 545.552 10.62
No. 18 R20 57.51 3.12 40.27 3.57 121.5 502.630 9.18
No. 18 R25 49.82 2.42 34.14 3.25 115.2 671.560 8.55
No. 5 CR5 44.88 3.52 45.76 4.76 137.6 508.181 11.22
No. 5 CR10 59.49 3.34 41.43 4.42 133.9 497.281 10.25
No. 5 CR15 53.96 3.17 37.61 4.22 125.8 470.831 9.43
No. 5 CR20 45.62 2.81 35.83 3.34 117.6 533.631 8.37
No. 5 CR25 39.28 2.24 30.98 3.06 110.2 680.404 7.8
MCR5 72.44 3.59 46.52 4.83 138.8 501.009 11.66
MCR10 65.14 3.47 43.25 4.52 135.5 486.705 10.99
MCR15 61.51 3.22 42.13 4.31 126.9 515.633 10.1
MCR20 56.93 2.86 37.92 3.46 118.4 548.893 8.61
MCR25 49.12 2.26 32.71 3.13 112.1 717.908 7.97

theory that assumes the stress–strain relationship is linear,
thus the tensile stress in the beam is supposed to be propor-
tional to the distance from the neutral axes (Najim and
Hall, 2012). In addition crack may initiate before the appli-
cation of the maximum load. It is because micro cracks are
formed once the pre-peak zone is reached, and they are
propagated after this stage (Huang et al., 2004). In other
words, the crumb rubber aggregate might work to delay
the micro crack formation because of a kind of stress relax-
ation. As a result, the incorporation of crumb rubber par-
ticles can lead to measurable improvements to pre-micro
crack strain capacity (Toutanji, 1996).
The literature (Toutanji, 1996) shows that the tensile
strength of concrete with chipped rubber replacement for
aggregates is significantly lower than that of concrete that
contains powdered rubber. First, a reduction from 30%
to 60% occurs for a replacement level of 5–10%, as for
the latter case, the reduction is 15–30%. This behavior
might be related to the low adhesion between the cement
and the chipped rubber.
Previous study (Aslani, 2016) shows that the flexural
strength decreased with the increase of the rubber content
in a fashion similar to that observed in the compressive
strength. However, it was observed that the initial rate of
strength reduction was steeper than that of the compressive
strength. This is because of the weak bond between cement
paste and rubber particles.
4.5. Fracture energy
Fracture energy (GF) values evaluated with Eq. (3) from
notched beams (Fig. 8a), which are subjected to three-point
200 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206

No. 18 crumb rubber No.5 crumb rubber Mixed crumb rubber

5.0

4.5
Splitting tensile strength, fst (MPa)

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Rubber content (%)

Fig. 6. Variation of 90-day splitting tensile strength with respect to crumb rubber size and content.

No. 18 crumb rubber No.5 crumb rubber Mixed crumb rubber

55

50
Modulus of elasticity, E (GPa)

45

40

35

30

25
0 5 10 15 20 25
Rubber content (%)

Fig. 7. Variation of 90-day Modulus of elasticity with respect to crumb rubber size and content.

bending test (see Fig. 8b), are shown in Table 3. The vari- GF values at 5% of No. 18CR, No. 5CR, and MCR; there-
ations of fracture energy associated with crumb rubber size fore, in both ultimate load and GF, the best improvement
and content are presented in Fig. 9. In the present study, was obtained from No. 18 crumb rubber.
GF values ranging from 110.21 N/m to 155.8 N/m were As shown in Figs. 11–13, the maximum displacement is
obtained. The control mixture resulted in the highest GF, corresponding to the maximum load for the control mix
and it was observed that with an increase in the rubber con- and this gradually decreases based on the size and amount
tent, the GF systematically decreased. Additionally, the of tire chip and crumb rubber, respectively.
highest was obtained by replacing fine aggregate with 5% Fig. 11 shows that the concrete with 15% No. 18 CR has
No. 18CR replacement, whereas the lowest was obtained higher area under the load versus displacements curve;
by replacing fine aggregate with 25% No. 5CR replace- whereas the concrete with 25% No. 18 CR has lower area
ment. As shown in Fig. 10, a reduction occurred in all under the load.
 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206 201

Fig. 8. Photographic view of: (a) notched beam and (b) subjected to three-point bending test.

As can be seen in Fig. 12, the concrete with 5% No. 5
CR has higher area under the load versus displacements
curve, whereas the concrete with 15% No. 5 CR has lower
area under the load. As shown in Fig. 13, the concrete with
20% Mixed CR has higher area under the load versus dis-
placement curve, on the other hand, the concrete with 25%
Mixed CR has lower area under the load.
4.6. Characteristic length
Using Eq. (4), the concretes’ characteristic length, which
is the measure of brittleness, was evaluated (the results are
presented in Table 3). Normally, in a typical concrete, (lch)
is about 200–500 mm (Karihaloo, 1995; Petersson, 1980)
and for SCC, (lch) it is 580–740 mm for notched beams
202 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206

No. 18 crumb rubber No.5 crumb rubber Mixed crumb rubber

6.0

5.5
Net flexural strength, fflex (MPa)

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Rubber content (%)

Fig. 9. Net flexural tensile strength with respect to crumb rubber size and content.

Fig. 10. Fracture energy with respect to crumb rubber size and content.

and it ranges from 540 to 640 mm for un-notched beams.
Additionally, it can be observed that (lch) decreases when
the compressive strength and notch depth ratio increase.
The variations occurring in the characteristic length of
SCRCS associated with crumb rubber size and content
are presented in Fig. 14. As shown in Table 3, the control
mix has a lower characteristic length compared to other
mixtures; this is because of possessing higher compressive
strength, which makes the concrete more brittle. The mixed
crumb rubber (MCR) at 25% replacement enhances the
characteristic length (lch) by 72%, as compared to the con-
trol mix. The use of crumb rubber enhanced the character-
istic length of concrete. The characteristic length increased
with an increase in the crumb volume fraction. With the
increase of the No. 18 crumb rubber volume fraction from
5% to 25%, the characteristic length increased by 24%,
27%, 31%, 21%, and 61%, respectively. As shown by the
obtained results, the improvement of characteristic length
of the concrete with 25% mixed crumb rubber was more
than that of the concrete with crumb rubber (No. 18, No.
5). This is due to better grading of the combined rubber.
4.7. Bond strength
The axial force was transferred from reinforcing steel
bar to the surrounding concrete by the development of tan-
 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206 203

Fig. 11. Typical loads displacement curves of No. 18 CR with respect to control mix.

Fig. 12. Typical load displacement curves of No. 5 CR with respect to control mix.

gential stress components along the contact surface. The
stress that acts parallel to the bar along the interface is
known as bond stress (Hadi, 2008).
Eq. (5) was used to evaluate the bond strength values
from cubic specimen, including the U16-reinforcement bar
that was subjected to tensile load. The obtained results
are displayed in Table 3. The control mixture resulted
in the highest bond strength, and with the increase of
the rubber content, the bond strength was systematically
decreased, whereas, the lowest bond strength values were
measured on the 25% No. 5 CR mixture on the 90th day.
This was because there was a low adhesion between rub-
ber particles and surrounding cement paste. The 90-day
bond strength of the mixtures presented in Fig. 15 indi-
cates that the bond strength decreases with an increase
in the crumb rubber size and content. The increase of
No. 18 crumb rubber from 5% to 25% led to the decrease
of the bond strength by 7%, 13%, 37%, 48%, and 70%,
respectively. On the other hand, these rates for the No.
5 crumb rubber from 5% to 25% showed the decrease
of the bond strength by 30%, 42%, 54%, 74%, and
87%, respectively.
204 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206

Fig. 13. Typical load displacement curves of MCR with respect to control mix.

Fig. 14. Characteristic length with respect to crumb rubber size and content.

According to Emiroğlu et al. (2008). The decrease in the 5. Conclusions

bond strength is due to poor bonding characteristic around
cement paste and rubber tires. Many micro-cracks exist
close to the ITZ in the rubberized concrete. Therefore, sev-
eral studies have suggested the treatment for rubber in
order to improve the bonding between the rubber and the
cement paste. As shown by the obtained results, the bond
strength of concrete with mixed crumb rubber MCR is
developed more than the concrete with crumb rubber
(No. 18, No. 5).
Based on the results obtained from the experimental
program presented above, the following conclusions can
be drawn:

In total 16 SCRC mixtures were designed and produced
by the replacing natural aggregate with rubber at six dif-
ferent replacement levels of 0%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%,
and 25%.
 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206
Fig. 15. Bond strength with respect to crumb rubber size and content.

The compressive strength of self-compacting rubberized
concrete having more than 30 MPa could be produced
easily. The strength results indicated that the utilization
of crumb rubber in self-compacting concrete manufac-
turing resulted in systematical decreasing of the com-
pressive strength. Moreover, the coarse crumb rubber
utilization decreased the compressive strength of self-
compacting concrete more than the using of fine crumb
rubber. It was found that the best replacement type was
the MCR, which offered the best results as it was a com-
patible replacement for sand and gravel.

The highest splitting tensile strength result was obtained
from control mixture, and the systematical decreasing of
splitting tensile strength was observed as rubber content
increased. The results indicated that the self-compacting
concretes produced with No. 18 crumb rubber gave the
highest splitting tensile strength, those produced with
No. 5 crumb rubber gave the lowest splitting tensile
strength.

The static elastic modulus decreased with the increasing
rubber size and content in a fashion similar to that
observed in both compressive and splitting tensile
strengths.

The net flexural strength of control mix is the highest
value. While the self-compacting concretes produced
with No. 5 crumb rubber gave the lowest net flexural
strength, those produced with No. 18 crumb rubber
gave the highest net flexural strength. The results
obtained showed that the control mix had greater net
flexural strength compared to other mixture containing
(No. 18, No. 5, and MCR).

The highest fracture energy (GF) result was obtained
from control mixture, and the systematical decreasing
of fracture energy (GF) was observed as rubber content
increased. The highest fracture energy value was
obtained when the natural fine aggregate was replaced
205
with 5% No. 18 crumb rubber, while the lowest value
was achieved when the natural fine aggregate was
replaced with 25% No. 5 crumb rubber. The most effi-
cient results for utilization of crumb rubber were
obtained in the fracture energy.

The characteristic length, which is a measure of ductility
of the concrete, was increased significantly by increasing
the crumb rubber volume fraction. While the significant
improvement was achieved with addition of all tire
wastes types, the best value for ductility was obtained
with 25% mixed crumb rubber.

The maximum displacement corresponds to the maxi-
mum load, the highest maximum load for the control
mix and decreases gradually according to the amount
and size of crumb rubber respectively.

Decreasing of bond strength was observed with increas-
ing the crumb rubber size and content. Moreover the
development of bond strength of concrete with mixed
crumb rubber (MCR) is more than development in con-
crete with crumb rubber (No. 18, and No. 5).
References
Aslani, Farhad, 2016. Mechanical Properties of Waste Tire Rubber
Concrete Mechanical Properties of Waste Tire Rubber Concrete. J.
Mater. Civ. Eng. 28 (3), 04015152.
Aslani, Farhad, Nejadi, Shami, 2012. Bond Behavior of Reinforcement in
Conventional and Self-Compacting Concrete. Adv. Struct. Eng. 15
(12).
ASTM C 618-08. Standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or
calcined natural pozzolan for use as a mineral admixture in concrete,
Annual Book of ASTM Standard, 2000. No. 04.02.
ASTM C469/C469M10. American Society for Testing and Materials.
2010. Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and
Poisson’s Ratio of Concrete in Compression. Annual Book of ASTM
Standard, vol. 04.02, 5 pages.
ASTM C496. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2011 Standard
Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete
206 N.N. Hilal / International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017) 191–206
Specimens. Annual Book of ASTM Standard. Philadelphia. vol. 04–
02, 5 pages.
ASTM C39/C39M-12, 2012. Standard Test Method for Compressive
Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens Annual Book of ASTM
Standard, Philadelphia, vol. 04–02, 7 pages.
Collepardi M. Chemical admixtures today. In: Proceedings of second
international symposium on concrete technology for sustainable
February – development with Emphasis on Infrastructure, Hyderabad,
India, 27 February–3 March, 2005. p. 527–41.
Dong, Q., Huang, B., Xiang, Sh.u., 2013. Rubber modified concrete
improved by chemically active coating and silane coupling agent.
Construct. Build. Mater. 48, 116–123.
Eldin, N.N., Senouci, A.B., 1993. Rubber tyre particles as concrete
aggregate. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 5, 478–496.
Emiroğlu, Halidun, M. Yildiz, S., 2007. An investigation on ITZ
microstructure of the concrete containing waste vehicle tire. In: 8th
International Fracture Conference, 7–9 November, Istanbul/Turkey.
Gideon, Momanyi Siringi, 2012. Properties of concrete with tire derived
aggregate and crumb rubber as a lightweight substitute for mineral
aggregates in the concrete mix. The University of Texas at Arlington.
Guneyisi, E., Gesoglu, M., Ozturan, T., 2004. Properties of rubberized
concretes containing silica fume. J Cem Concr Res 34, 2309–2317.
Hadi, M.N.S., 2008. Bond of high strength concrete with high strength
reinforcing steel. Open Civ. J. 2, 143–147.
Hamid Eskandari, Muralidhara, S., Raghu Prasad, B.K., Venkatarama,
B.V., 2012. Fracture properties of self compacting concrete for
notched and un-notched beams. Glob. J. Res. Eng. Civil Struct.
Eng. 12 (1).
Helincks, Peter, Boel, Veerle, De Corte, Wouter, De Schutter, Geert,
Desnerck, Pieter, 2013. Structural behaviour of powder-type self-
compacting concrete: Bond performance and shear capacity. Eng.
Struct. 48, 121–132.
Hillerborg, A., 1985. Theoretical basis of method to determine fracture
energy GF of concrete. Mater. Struct. 18, 291296.
Huang, B., Li, G., Pang, Su-Seng, Eggers, J., 2004. Investigation into
waste tire rubber-filled concrete. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 16, 187–194.
Kamal, M.M., Safan, M.A., Al, M.A., 2012. Experimental evaluation of
steel-concrete bond strength in low-cost self-compacting concrete.
Concrete Res. Lett. 3 (2).
Karihaloo, B., 1995. Fracture mechanics and structural concrete’.
Longman Scientific and Technical, UK.
Khayat, K.H., Ghezal, A., 1999. Utility of Statistical models in Propor-
tioning Self-Compacting Concrete, Proceedings, RILEMInternational
symposium on Self-Compacting Concrete, Stockholm. pp. 345–359.
Khayat, K.H., Bickley, J., Lessard, M., 2000. Performance of self-
consolidating concrete for casting basement and foundation walls.
ACI Mater J 97 (3), 374–380.
Mehta, K.P., Monteiro, P.J.M., 2006. Concrete: Microstructure, Proper-
ties, and Materials. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Nagamoto, N., Ozawa, K., 1997. Mixture properties of Self-Compacting,
High-Performance Concrete. In: Proceedings, Third CANMET/ACI
International Conferences on Design and Materials and Recent
Advances in Concrete Technology, SP-172. V. M. Malhotra, American
Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich, pp. 623–637.
Najim, K.B., Hall, M.R., 2012. Mechanical and dynamic properties of
self-compacting crumb rubber modified concrete. Construct. Build.
Mater. 27, 522–524.
Najim, Khalid B., Hall, Matthew Robert, 2013. Crumb rubber aggregate
coatings/pretreatments and their effects on interfacial bonding, air
entrapment and fracture toughness in self-compacting rubberized
concrete (SCRC). Mater. Struct. 46, ISSN 1359–5997.
Neville, A.M., 1995. Properties of Concrete. Longman Group, London.
Petersson, P., 1980. Fracture energy of concrete: practical performance
and experimental results. Cem Con Res 10 (1), 91–101.
Petersson, O., Billberg, P., Van, B.K., 1996. A model for self-compacting
concrete. In: Proceedings of Production Methods and Workability of
Concrete. E & FN Span, London, pp. 483–492.
RILEM 50-FMC, 1985. Committee of fracture mechanics of concrete.
Determination of fracture energy of mortar and concrete by means of
three-point bend tests on notched beams. Mater. Struct. 18 (106), 285–
290.
RILEM RC6, 1996. Recommendations for the testing and use of
constructions materials bond test for reinforcement steel. 2. Pull-out
test, 3 pages.
Rocha-Rangel, Enrique, 2011. Fracture toughness determinations by
means of indentation fracture. Universidad Politécnica de Victoria,
México.
Segre, N., Joekes, I., 2000. Use of tire rubber particles as addition to
cement paste. Cem. Concr. Res. 30, 1421–1425.
Seleem, M.H., Sallam, H.E.M. Attwa, A.T. Heiza K.M. Shaheen, Y.B.,
2008. Fracture toughness of self compacting concrete MESOME-
CHANICS-2008 HBRC, Giza, Egypt, Jan 28 – Feb. 1, 2008.
Sukontasukkul, Piti, Chaikaew, Chalermphol, 2006. Properties of con-
crete pedestrian block mixed with crumb rubber. Construction and
Building Materials 20, 450–457.
Toutanji, H.A., 1996. Use of rubber tire particles in concrete to replace
mineral aggregates. Cem. Concr. Compos. 18, 135–139.
Zheng, L., Huo, S., Yuan, Y., 2008a. Experimental investigation on
dynamic properties of rubberized concrete. Construct. Build. Mater.
22, 939–947.
Zheng, L., Huo, X., Yuan, Y., 2008b. Strength, modulus of elasticity, and
brittleness index of rubberized concrete. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 20, 692–
699.