JOMO KENYATTA UNIVERSITY OF

AGRICULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY

Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering

ECE 2505: FINAL YEAR PROJECT REPORT

TITLE:
DETERMINING EFFECT OF SISAL FIBRE REINFORCEMENT IN STRUCTURAL
CONCRETE INCORPORATING RECYCLED CONCRETE AGGREGATE AS THE
COARSE AGGREGATE

BY:
MOSES AWUOR
REG. NO: E25-0894/05

SUPERVISED BY: Eng. MUSIOMI

This project report is submitted in partial fulfillment for the award of a Bachelor of Science degree
in Civil Engineering of Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology.

DECEMBER 2010

DECLARATION
I, Awuor Moses, do declare that this report is my original work and to the best of my knowledge, it
has not been submitted for any degree award in any University or Institution.

Signed_______________

Date ____________

CERTIFICATION
I have read this report and approve it for examination.

Signed_______________

Date_____________

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
My fervent thanks go to my supervisor Eng Musiomi who assisted me tirelessly, Civil Engineering
staff members and my colleagues who guided and assisted me throughout my studies and in
accomplishing this research work. Special thanks to all staff at the structural laboratory, in
particular Mr. Kamamia, Mr. Ayugi and Mr. Obadiah. In addition, I would like to thank my family
and friends who stood by my side throughout my studies.

iii

ABSTRACT
The inclusion of fibre reinforcement in concrete, mortar and cement paste can enhance many of the
engineering properties of the basic materials, such as fracture toughness, flexural strength and
resistance to fatigue, impact, thermal shock and spalling. Investigations have been carried out in
many countries on various mechanical properties, physical performance and durability of cement
based matrices reinforced with naturally occurring fibres including sisal, coconut, jute, bamboo
and wood fibres. These fibres have always been considered promising as reinforcement of cement
based matrices because of their availability, low cost and low consumption of energy. In this
review, the general properties of the composites are described in relation to fibre content, length,
strength and stiffness. The production of sisal fibres as compared with synthetic fibres or even
with mineral asbestos fibres needs much less energy in addition to the ecological, social and
economical benefits.
World over there is an increased availability of demolished concrete from construction and
demolition waste that can be used to produce recycled concrete aggregate (RCA). Using the waste
concrete as RCA conserves virgin aggregate, reduces the impact on landfills, decreases energy
consumption and can provide cost savings; all in concurrence with principles of sustainable
development. The conventional class 20 concrete contains cement, river sand and natural
aggregate in the ratio of 1:2:4 respectively. In this research, the natural aggregate was totally
replaced with recycled concrete aggregate and the optimum amount (by mass) of sisal fibre
determined, using an optimal length of 35mm.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ......................................................................................................................................................................... ii
CERTIFICATION ...................................................................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................................................................................................................... iii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................................................ iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................................. viii
LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................................ ix
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Topic Background ................................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Study Justification ................................................................................................................................................................... 2
1.4 Objectives ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3
CHAPTER TWO .......................................................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................................................................ 4
2.1 Physical and Mechanical Properties of Composites ................................................................................................................ 6
2.2 Sisal Fibre Production Technology.......................................................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Construction and Demolition Waste ........................................................................................................................................ 6
2.4 Concrete Recycling.................................................................................................................................................................. 7
2.5 Merits of Using RCA ............................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.6 Barriers to Using RCA ............................................................................................................................................................ 8
2.7 Properties of RCA ................................................................................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................................................... 12
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 13
3.1 Material Sampling and Preparation ....................................................................................................................................... 13
3.1.1 Cement ................................................................................................................................................................................ 13
3.1.2 River Sand .......................................................................................................................................................................... 13
3.1.3 Recycled Concrete Aggregates ............................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
3.1.4 Sisal Fibres ......................................................................................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Gradation Test/ Sieve Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 14
3.3 Density Tests ......................................................................................................................................................................... 14
3.4 Moisture Absorption .............................................................................................................................................................. 14
3.5 Mix Design ............................................................................................................................................................................ 14
3.6 Compacting Factor Test (Workability) .................................................................................................................................. 15
3.7 Strength Tests ........................................................................................................................................................................ 15
3.7.1 Compressive Strength ......................................................................................................................................................... 15
3.7.2 Tensile Strength .................................................................................................................................................................. 15
CHAPTER FOUR ....................................................................................................................................................... 16

4.0 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 15

4.1 Sieve Analysis. ........................................................................................................................................................ 16
4.2 Specific Gravity and Water Absorption. .................................................................................................................... 17
4.3 Slump Test. ............................................................................................................................................................................ 18
4.4 Compressive Strength Test. ................................................................................................................................................... 19
4.4.1 Strength Development ........................................................................................................................................................ 20
4.5 Density of Concrete ................................................................................................................................................................. 2
4.6 Flexural Strength. .................................................................................................................................................................. 22
CHAPTER FIVE ........................................................................................................................................................ 25
5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................. 25
5.1 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................................... 25
5.2 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................................. 25
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 26

vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1- Results for aggregate tests (Kasai, 1994) ...11
Table 2.2- Requirements for RCA and NCA ..11
Table 4.1- Specific gravity & Water absorption tests on aggregate.17
Table 4.2- Slump test results.18
Table 4.3- Compressive strength test results....................................18
Table 4.4- Measured density of concrete at 28 days.21
Table 4.5- Flexural strength test results at 28 days...23
Table 5.1- Fine aggregate sieve analysis results...28
Table 5.2- RCA sieve analysis results..28
Table 5.3- Specific gravity & Water absorption results, fine aggregate..29
Table 5.4- Specific gravity & Water absorption results, RCA.30
Table 5.5- Concrete mix design31
Table 5.6- Mixing proportions, 0% sisal fibre..33
Table 5.7- Mixing proportions, 0.2% sisal fibre...33
Table 5.8- Mixing proportions, 0.5% sisal fibre...33
Table 5.9- Mixing proportions, 1% sisal fibre..33
Table 5.10-Raw compressive strength test results34
Table 5.11- Raw flexural strength test results......34

vii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1- Recycled Concrete Aggregates ..12
Figure 2.2- Natural Coarse Aggregates 12
Figure 2.3- The sisal plant (a), leaf (b) and leaf cross-section (c).12
Figure 4.1- Fine aggregate sieve analysis results...16
Figure 4.2- RCA sieve analysis results...17
Figure 4.3- Slump vs sisal fibre content.18
Figure 4.4- Compressive strength, 7days19
Figure 4.5- Compressive strength, 28days..20
Figure 4.6- Strength development21
Figure 4.7- Measured density of concrete at 28 days..22
Figure 4.8- Flexural strength test results at 28 days.23
Figure 4.9- Beam flexure testing..24

viii

LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A- SIEVE ANALYSIS..28
APPENDIX B- SPECIFIC GRAVITY & WATER ABSORPTION, FINE AGGREGATE29
APPENDIX C- SPECIFIC GRAVITY & WATER ABSORPTION, RCA..30
APPENDIX D- MIX DESIGN31
APPENDIX E- MIXING PROPORTIONS.33
APPENDIX F- COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS..34
APPENDIX G- FLEXURE TEST RESULTS..34

ix

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

AASHTO American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials
BS British Standards
C&DW Construction and Demolition Waste
CSI Cement Sustainability Initiative
DN- Daily Nation
ITZ Interfacial Transition Zone
JKUAT Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology
NCA Natural Coarse Aggregate
NEMA National Environmental Management Authority
NRMCA National Ready Mixed Concrete Association
PCC Portland Cement Concrete
RCA Recycled Concrete Aggregate
SSD Saturated and Surface Dry
TxDOT Texas Department of Transportation UK United Kingdom US United States of
America
BRU-Building Research Unit
OPC Ordinary Portland Cement

CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Topic Background
Cement composites reinforced with unidirectional aligned sisal fibres present a tension hardening
with multiple cracking behaviour. The multiple cracking behaviour achieved by this composite is
governed by interfacial bond characteristics between fibre and matrix. Naaman and Najm (1991)
states that there are four main factors that influence the bond adhesion: physical and chemical
adhesion; mechanical component of bond such as deformed, crimped and hooked end fibres; fibreto-fibre interlock, and friction.
Peled and Bentur (2003) investigated the pull-out behaviour of straight and crimped polyethylene
yarns. They found that increasing the crimp density enhances the mechanical anchoring and the
equivalent adhesion bond strength increases from 1 to 1.84 Mpa (10 mm embedded length). The
bond properties of carbon in cementitious matrices were investigated by Katz et al. (1995). Carbon
fibres with diameters of 10 and 46 m were tested. Different matrices were used and the mean
bond strength for 10 and 46 m ranged from 0.52 to 1.29 Mpa and 0.39 to 3.02 Mpa, respectively.
Sisal fibres are naturally modified by nature presenting different mechanical components of bond.
Sisal is a flexible fibre that presents irregular cross-section area. The sisal fibres can be divided
into 3 types of bond mechanical components: horse-shoe shape these represents the majority of
the fibres that can be found in the sisal plant leaf and present small areas; arch shape present
larger areas and are found in a less content than the horse-shoe shape; and twisted arch shape a
result of the fibre extraction process. The sisal fibres are extracted from its leaf by a mechanical
process called decortication. In this process, sometimes, the arch shape fibres can brake and twist
resulting in the third type shape. Besides the different shape the sisal fibres also present a
corrugated surface that may be beneficial to the fibre-matrix adhesion.
Apart from the fibre, any construction activity requires several materials such as concrete, steel,
brick, stone, glass, clay, mud, wood, and so on. However, the cement concrete remains the main
construction material used in construction industries. For its suitability and adaptability with
respect to the changing environment, the concrete must be such that it can conserve resources,
protect the environment, economize and lead to proper utilization of energy. To achieve this, major
emphasis must be laid on the use of wastes and byproducts in cement and concrete used for new
constructions. When concrete structures are demolished or renovated, the rubble is most
commonly used as landfills.
The selection of aggregates used in concrete is important since it makes up approximately 60% to
75% of the total volume of concrete. Aggregates should consist of particles with adequate strength
and resistance to exposure conditions and should not contain materials that will cause a chemical
1

reaction with the paste that may lead to deterioration of the concrete. Recycled concrete aggregate
is defined as recycled aggregate principally comprising crushed concrete (BS 8500-1:2002).
Conventional concrete aggregate consists of sand (fine aggregate) and various sizes and shapes of
gravel or stones. However, there is a growing interest in substituting alternative aggregate
materials, largely as a potential use for recycled materials. This has been precipitated by a decline
in good quality aggregate available for construction while on the other hand there is an increase in
demolition waste. This is especially being felt in developed countries. Worldwide, approximately
eight to eleven billion tones of aggregate (sand, gravel, and crushed rock) are being used for
concrete production every year. With the rapid development expected in Kenya as the country
seeks to become a middle income country, there is going to be increased pressure on the natural
mined aggregate in the country. Conversely, the amount of demolished concrete is likely to
increase. This will be from demolition of structures that lie on public land earmarked for
infrastructural development projects like roads. In addition, some buildings may be deemed
obsolete and may need to be demolished. Other sources of waste concrete that can be used to
produce RCA include waste from concrete testing laboratories, production waste at a pre-cast
production facility, waste from construction and demolition, returned concrete which is fresh (wet)
from ready-mix trucks and areas undergoing reconstruction following war or natural calamities.
This research therefore intends to utilize the promising properties of sisal fibre to improve the
physical properties of structural concrete by reinforcement incorporating RCA as coarse aggregate.

1.2 Problem Statement

The need for environment friendly sources of construction materials cannot be overemphasized.
Recycled concrete aggregate, one such material, is seen to be usable as a substitute for
conventional natural coarse aggregate in concrete. This research therefore intends to utilize the
promising properties of sisal fibre to improve the physical properties of structural concrete by
reinforcement incorporating RCA as coarse aggregate.

1.3 Study Justification

Although there is a critical shortage of natural aggregate, there is an increasing amount of
demolished concrete. The environmental impact of waste concrete is significant as is the
environmental impact of mining conventional aggregate. Not only is there the environmental
impact of transporting the waste concrete away from the site but the waste concrete also fills up
valuable space in landfills. There is a huge potential to reuse this material as a source of new
aggregate. Recycling concrete, from deteriorated concrete structures, would reduce the negative
2

impact on the environment and increase sustainability of aggregate resources. There are both
environmental and economic benefits to using recycled concrete aggregate. Using RCA conserves
virgin aggregate, reduces the impact on landfills and decreases energy consumption. It is estimated
that using RCA can save up to $11 per 1000 kg ($10 per ton) of aggregate. (American Concrete
Pavement Association, 1993).
The readily availability of sisal in the developing countries further justifies the appropriateness of
this study.

1.4 Objectives
(a)General Objective
To evaluate structural performance of sisal fibre reinforcement in concrete incorporating recycled
concrete aggregate as course aggregate.
(b)Specific Objectives
1) To determine the physical material properties of sisal fibre reinforced concrete with
recycled concrete coarse aggregates.
2) To carry out mix design of concrete utilizing sisal fibre reinforcement and recycled
concrete aggregate as course aggregate.
3)

To establish the optimum amount by mass and size by length of the sisal fibres utilizing
sisal fibre reinforcement and recycled concrete aggregate.

CHAPTER TWO
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
Fibres have been used to toughen bricks and pottery since the very beginning of civilization, but
only in the last twenty five years have the principles of fibre reinforcement of brittle matrices
began to be scientifically understood. Initially, it was suggested that the cracking strain of brittle
matrices, such as cement paste mortar and concrete, could be significantly increased by using
closely spaced fibres (Romauldi & Batson, 1963). The experimental studies showed that the stress
at which a brittle matrix will crack can be slightly increased by using high modulus fibres but, in
general, the cracking strain of the matrix remains unaltered. Considerable modification in the
behavior of the material was observed once the matrix has been cracked. The fibres bridge across
the cracks and so provide post-cracking ductility. Although the strain at cracking does not increase
due to fibre reinforcement, the tensile strain at rupture does, resulting in a tough material with high
resistance to impact loading (Bentur & Mindess, 1990).
Fibres can be added to cement based matrices as primary or secondary reinforcement. Fibres work
as primary reinforcement in thin products in which conventional reinforcing bars cannot be used.
In these applications, the fibres act to increase both the strength and the toughness of the
composite. In components such as slabs and pavements, fibres are added to control cracking
induced by humidity or temperature variations and in these applications they work as secondary
reinforcement (Toldo Filho, 1997).
In cement based composites the two major roles played by the fibres are to improve the toughness
and the post-cracking performance of the matrices. There is also some changes created to the precracking behavior of the hardened matrix, which help to define the composite action. Fibre content
(% by volume), ratio of fibre modulus, Ef , to the matrix modulus, Em, and the
ratio of fibre strength, sf , to the matrix strength, sm, all influence the performance of the
composite before and after cracking (England & Toldo Filho, 1997; Toldo Filho, 1999). In a
well designed composite the fibres can serve two functions in the post-cracking zone (Bentur &
Mindess, 1990): (i) to increase the strength of the composite over that of the matrix by providing a
means of transferring stresses and loads across the cracks and (ii) to increase the toughness of the
composite by providing energy absorbing mechanisms related to the debonding and pull-out
processes of the fibres bridging the cracks.

2.1 Physical and Mechanical Properties of the Composites

Joseph et al. (1999) reported that sisal is one of strongest vegetable fibres and several studies have
been reported in the literature based on its use as reinforcement in cement matrices (BRS, 1970;
4

Nilsson, 1975; Zonsveld, 1975; Mukherjee & Satyanarayana, 1984; Gram, 1983; Aziz et al.,
1984). Studies of sisal fibre reinforced concrete were started in Sweden in 1971 by Nilsson (1975).
Cut fibres with a length of 10- 30 mm were cast into beams and an improvement in the tensile
strength in bending was observed for fibre reinforced specimens. It was found that toughness
increased markedly when continuous fibre were used. In 1977 the Building Research Unit (BRU)
in Dar es Salaam started collaboration on the development of roof sheets on natural fibre
reinforced concrete with the Swedish Cement and Concrete Research Institute (Cappelen, 1978;
BRU, 1978; Mwamila, 1979, 1987; Mawenya & Mwamila, 1979). Test sheets were manufactured
for durability experiments. A special roof sheet profile was developed and several buildings in Dar
es Salaam have been provided with sisal fibre reinforced concrete roofs. The use of sisal fibre as
reinforcement in cement paste and concrete have been reported by Swift and Smith (1978; 1979a).
Their results on the flexural static strength and toughness of beams made of cement based matrices
reinforced indicated that remarkably high strengths can be achieved using suitable mixing and
casting techniques with optimum fibre volume fraction. They also found that impact resistance
can be improved by the addition of sisal fibres. Several application of this material was suggested
for low-cost housing and they produced corrugated sheets of 2140 x 690 x 7 mm in different ways
to optimize the processing technique. Guimares (1984, 1987) has studied the influence of fibre
length and volume fraction, matrix proportioning and casting processes on the flexural strength,
water absorption and specific gravity of the sisal fibre-cement composites. An increase in the
flexural strength and better crack distribution was achieved by the incorporation of sisal fibres in
the cement matrices. They have studied the influence of casting pressure on the flexural properties
of the composites and it was found that 2.2 Mpa was the optional value. Morrissey & Coutts
(1985) have studied interfacial bonding between sisal fibres and cement matrices. To determine the
critical length of embedment, fibre lengths ranging from 10 to 60 mm were considered. It was
observed that in cement composites the critical length of embedment for sisal fibre was
approximately 30 mm. Mwamila (1985) has studied the behavior of sisal twines as main
reinforcement in concrete beams. The flexural performance was investigated under static, repeated
and sustained loading. An attempt to improve the beams performance was made by the use of short
sisal fibre to supplement the twines reinforcement. He concluded that the concrete beams
reinforced with twines presented poor cracking behavior, developing wide cracks and suffering
significant strength losses upon each crack occurrence. The residual and permanent deformations
and crack widths under repeated and sustained loads were also very significant. The use of short
sisal fibres to supplement the twines improved tensile toughness and, through bond enhancement
and stress redistribution, improved the tensile stiffen effect of the composite matrix. As a result the
cracks formed were smaller, their propagation slow and the troughs in the strength-deflection
5

curve removed. Further, the deformations under repeated and sustained load were significantly
reduced. Filho (1997) have studied both the short-term and long-term behavior of sisal fibre
reinforced mortar composites. The experimental work involved extensive laboratory testing to
study the influence of volume fraction, fibre length, fibre arrangement and matrix composition on
the mechanical properties of the composite. The workability of the fresh mix was shown to be
closely related to the volume fraction and fibre aspect ratio. An increase in fibre volume fraction
and fibre length reduced the workability of the mix. It was established that, for volume fractions
smaller than 3% and fibre length smaller than 50 mm, the mixes could be manually compacted or
vibrated without balling.

2.2 Sisal Fibre Production Technology

The production technologies available include (Bentur & Mindess, 1990): combining fibres with
matrix in a pan mixer as if the fibres were an extra ingredient in the common method of producing
a cementitious mix; simultaneously spraying fibres and cement slurry onto the forming surface to
produce thin products fibre-reinforced concrete; dispersal of fibres in a cement slurry which is then
dewatered to produce thin products; hand-laying fibres, in the form of mats or fabrics, in moulds,
impregnating them with a cement slurry and then vibrating or compressing the mix to produce a
dense material with high fibre content; and impregnating continuous fibre mats and fabrics with a
cement slurry by passing them through a cement bath in a continuous process.

2.3 Construction and Demolition Waste

Worldwide, approximately eight to eleven billion tonnes of aggregate (sand, gravel, and crushed
rock) is being used for concrete production every year (Tarun, and Moriconi, 2005). Although
there is a critical shortage of virgin aggregate, the availability of demolished concrete for use as
RCA is increasing (Smith et al, 2008). Precise data on demolition waste is mostly available for
developing countries. According to the Cement Sustainability Initiative (CSI) report (2009, p. 3),
about 1.3 billion tonnes of waste are generated in Europe each year, of which about 40%, or 510
million tonnes, is construction and demolition waste (C&DW).The US produces about 325 million
tonnes of C&DW, and Japan about 77 million tonnes. Given that China and India are now
producing and using over 50% of the worlds concrete, their waste generation will also be
significant as development continues. In Kenya, there has been a government effort to reclaim land
that was grabbed by developers. In 2006, the government demolished about 60 structures at
Mlolongo to pave way for the expansion on Mombasa road. (East African Standard, 01 December
2006). The Daily Nation of 14th April 2009 reported that the government in conjunction with the
National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) intended to demolish structures
6

encroaching in Kenyas wetlands and river banks. It is imperative to note that the environmental
impact of this waste concrete is significant. Not only is there the environmental impact of
transporting the waste concrete away from the site but the waste concrete also fills up valuable
space in landfills. There is a huge potential to reuse this material as source of new aggregate
(Bairagi et al, 1990).

2.4 Concrete Recycling

Concrete recycling is a well established industry in many countries and most concrete can be
crushed and reused as aggregate. Existing technology for recycling by means of mechanical
crushing is readily available and relatively inexpensive. It can be done in both developed and
developing countries. With further research and development, the scope of applications for
recycled aggregate can be increased. However, even with existing technology, considerable
increases in recovery rates can be achieved in some countries with greater public acceptance of
recycled aggregate and reduction of misconceptions or ignorance about its possibilities for use
(CSI report, 2009) The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has been using recycled
concrete aggregate in Portland cement concrete highways for the past ten years. TxDOT has
learned that using RCA provides engineering, economic and environmental benefits. (US
department of transportation, 2004). Concrete recycling is becoming a popular way to deal with
demolition waste as indicated by the CSI report. Recycled aggregate accounts for 6% to 8% of
aggregate use in Europe. The greatest users are the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Belgium,
Switzerland and Germany. It was estimated in 2000 that ~5% of aggregate in the US was recycled
aggregate. (CSI, 2009).

2.5 Merits of Using Recycled Aggregate

Several benefits can be accrued from use of recycled aggregates as has been shown in previous
research. Prime among them are the environmental benefits. (Torben et al, 1984) & (Oikonomou et
al, 2003) noted that recycling concrete, from deteriorated concrete structures, would reduce the
negative impact on the environment and increase sustainability of aggregate resources .Federal
Highway Administration, 2004) reported that using the waste concrete as RCA conserves virgin
aggregate, reduces the impact on landfills, decreases energy consumption and can provide cost
savings. Since recycled material can be used within the same metropolitan area, this can lead to a
decrease in energy consumption from hauling and producing aggregate, and can help improve air
quality through reduced transportation source emissions. They further noted that recycling of
aggregate was emerging as a viable option to solve the problem of dwindling virgin aggregate

supplies. The same report also found that reuse of construction debris reduces unsightly stockpiles
of concrete rubble and animal infestation of stockpiles.
There are economic benefits of using RCA as there are environmental. Smith& Tighe, (2008)
affirm that there are both environmental and economic benefits to using recycled concrete
aggregate .Using RCA, creates cost savings in the transportation of aggregate and waste products,
and in waste disposal (Federal Highway Administration, 2004). It is estimated that using RCA can
save up to $11 per 1000 kg ($10 per ton) of aggregate, (American Concrete Pavement Association,
1993). CSI (2004, p17) summarizes the economic benefits of recycling aggregate thus; in an urban
environment concrete debris is hauled to a crushing site that is generally closer to the center of the
urban area than the virgin aggregate quarry. Industry comments were that the RCA stockpile is
usually closer to the job sites in an urban environment, thus less haul distance and less fuel burnt in
delivery. Production of virgin aggregate can use more fuel to crush due to larger initial size of rock
needing to be crushed to desired grade. Conversely, transportation costs may sometimes increase
when using recycled aggregate as it may not always be feasible to process aggregate on-site.
Another economic benefit is the recovery of steel from the recycling process (US Department of
Transportation, 2004).

2.6 Barriers to Using RCA

There are several barriers to overcome in order for RCA to become widely accepted. Initially,
there is a high investment cost to purchase concrete crushers. In addition, maintenance costs of
concrete crushers are also significant (Rashwan et al, 1997). Another barrier relates to the excess
amount of fine RCA created during the crushing process. This excess fine aggregate requires
disposal or an alternate use. Depending on the source and type of RCA, the absorption, strength,
and impurities vary. This can mean that it is unusable or that it might adversely impact the
concrete. There is a lack of knowledge on how RCA affects concrete durability since most studies
focus only on the properties of RCA concrete (Olorunsogo et al 2002). The other barrier is
lack of Specification and Guidelines. According to Kawano (n.d), there is no specification or any
guideline when using recycled concrete aggregate in the constructions. In many cases, the strength
characteristic will not meet the requirement when using recycled concrete aggregate.Therefore,
more testing should be considered when using recycled concrete aggregate.

2.7 Properties of Recycled Concrete Aggregates

Since at least three quarters of concrete is occupied by aggregate, its quality is of considerable
importance. The properties of aggregate greatly affect the durability and structural performance of
concrete (Neville, 1981). (Dulaijan et al, 2002) found that the mechanical properties, namely
8

compressive strength, split tensile strength, and elastic modulus of concrete specimens prepared
with different aggregates differed. Hence there is need to understand the properties of RCA as
aggregate and their effect on the subsequent concrete.
Absorption of recycled aggregates is considerably large amount, particularly, values of fine
aggregates shows approximately ten times that of river sand (Kikuchi et al, 1994). In general, the
RCA must be handled as a lightweight aggregate, which has higher water absorption. It is
important to maintain the aggregate in a moist saturated surface dry (SSD) condition to assure the
PCC mix water as designed is maintained so as to produce uniform plastic properties at constant
w/c ratio. Lightweight aggregate piles should be constantly sprayed with a garden sprinkler to
assure saturation (SSD) prior to batching. Maintaining a consistent and uniform SSD condition is
also a key to achieving a workable mix. Concrete made using RCA should need approximately 5%
more water than similar PCC with natural coarse stone (US Department of Transportation, 2004).
(Merelet et al, 1994) obtained concrete mixes by pre-humidifying the recycled concrete aggregates
using 30% of mixing water and by immersing them in water for 24 hours in order to saturate them.
The w/c ratio of these two mixes was 0.7. They found that their workability was greater than
concrete with a similar composition but on whose aggregates had not been moistened. The size of
RCA used in concrete can greatly affect the concrete performance. Fine RCA contains many
impurities and results in strength loss in the concrete. (Smith et al, 2008). Natural sand is used as
fine aggregate since it provides a greater strength than fine RCA (Poon et al, 2004). (Smith et al
2008) noted that since the concrete that the RCA was crushed from contained a maximum
aggregate size of 19 mm, this was the maximum size of the RCA that would be used in their
research. Any RCA over 19 mm would contain excess interfacial transition zones that would
negatively impact the strength of the concrete. (Poon et al 2004) confirm that RCA has a higher
interfacial transition zone (ITZ) due to its higher absorption and porosity. In order to minimize
negative effects on concrete performance from coarse RCA, it is important to limit the amount of
interfacial transition zones that are present in the RCA (Poon et al 2004).
Dulaijan et al, (2002) found that the mechanical properties, namely compressive strength, split
tensile strength, and elastic modulus, of concrete specimens prepared with different aggregate
quality differed. It is therefore expected that RCA containing concrete will not have the same exact
properties non-RCA containing concrete. Wainwright et al (1994) performed tests on the recycled
aggregate obtained from two laboratory sources concretes made of different strengths and found
that there was no clear relationship between the strength of the source concrete and the strength of
the RCA concrete. The majority of their work was concentrated on the mechanical or engineering
properties of the concrete and it has been shown that good quality concrete can be produced using
the recycled concrete to replace the coarse fraction of the natural aggregates. When the recycled
9

fines is used in combination with the recycled coarse there is often a reduction in the quality of the
resulting concrete due largely to the highly porous nature of this fine fraction. However the
properties of hardened concrete made with recycled coarse aggregates are inferior to those of a
control mix made with all natural materials. The situation is made worse when the natural fines are
replaced by recycled fines. Kikuchi et al, (1994) differ with (Wainwright et al, 1994). They assert
that the compressive strength, tensile strength, flexural strength and drying shrinkage of recycled
concrete are influenced directly by compressive strength of original concrete, however, it can be
considered that there is no effect of original concrete in case of compressive strength of new
concrete below 400kgf/cm2 (39.84N/mm2). Research has shown how various concrete properties
vary with inclusion of RCA in the mix. Since each source of RCA is unique based on its mix
design and environment, the test results and performance of RCA containing concrete can vary
greatly (Smith et al, 2008). It is generally accepted that concrete durability is reduced as the
amount of RCA is increased. RCA containing mixes are stiffer and lose workability faster than
mixes using virgin aggregates (Salem et al, 2003). Rashwan et al, (1997) corroborate that RCA
mixes have a decreased slump compared to virgin mixes with the same w/c ratio. The air content
in RCA containing mixes is higher than virgin mixes (Salem et al, 2003& Katz et al, 2003). Some
RCA containing mixes have a decreased compressive and flexural strength (Katz et al, 2003,
Shayan et al, and Xu, 2003 & Abou-Zeid et al ,2005), while others show an increased compressive
and flexural strength. Poon et al, (2002), Salem et al, (2003) & Katz et al, (2003) found that the
Modulus of Elasticity decreases with the use of RCA. Hansen et al, (1985), Ajdukiewicz et al,
(2002) & Tavakoli et al, (1996) further found that concrete containing RCA has a greater amount
of dry shrinkage than virgin aggregate concrete. Kikuchi et al, (1994, p. 34) summarize the
qualities of RCA thus;
i.

Fineness Modulus: Fineness modulus of recycled coarse aggregates showed the similar value
as crushed stone by adjusting the particle distribution. For fine aggregate, considerable
differences are observed between recycled aggregates and river sand.

ii.

Specific gravity: For the range of specific gravity in dry condition of recycled aggregates,
coarse aggregates are from 2.32 to 2.35, fine aggregates are from 2.01 to 2.08, and these values
are smaller by about 10% compared with the crushed stone and river sand.

iii.

Absorption: Absorption of recycled aggregate is considerably large amount, particularly

values of fine aggregates showed ten times that of river sand.

Kasai (1994) summarized the physical test results of the recycled aggregate in the table below.

10

Table 2.1 - Results for aggregate tests (Kasai, 1994)

Specific Gravity (dry) Water

Absorption Finess Modulus

%
Course Aggregate

Fine Aggregate

Range

2.09-2.5

1.75-10.07

6.64-7.72

Mean

2.30

5.79

6.85

Range

1.98-2.20

4.79-13.20

2.86-3.99

Mean

2.07

9.73

3.29

He noted that recycled coarse aggregates comprise original coarse aggregates with attached mortar
and mortar rubbles. The quality of the recycled aggregates is affected by the mix proportion of the
original concrete, crushing process, grading control and the amount of impurities. Test results
show substantial scatter. These may be attributed to mortar component of the original concrete. An
agreeable quality may be obtained with a degree of substitution by recycled aggregate less than
30%. (Kasai, 1994) BS 8500-2-2002 has requirements for use of RCA as in the table below.
Table 2.2 - Requirements for Coarse RCA and NCA
Requirement
Type
Aggregate

of Max.

Max. fines

Max.

masonry

weight

content

material

light Max.
asphalt

Max.
material
glass,
metals

Mass

Mass

Mass fraction Mass

fraction %

fraction %

other Max. acid

e.g. soluble
plastic, sulphate
SO3

Mass fraction % Mass

fraction

fraction %

%
RCA

5.0

5.0

0.5

5.0

1.0

1.0

NCA

100

10

(a) Where the material to be used is obtained by crushing hardened concrete of known composition
that has not been contaminated by use, the only requirements are those for grading and maximum
fines.
( b) Material with a density less than 1000 kg/m3.

11

fig 2.1- Natural course aggregate

fig 2.2- Recycled concrete aggregate

The above figures (2.1 and 2.2) illustrate the difference between natural coarse aggregate and the
recycled course aggregate while the below one (fig. 2.3) shows the sisal plant, its leaf and leaf
cross-section showing different fibre types. The sisal plant leaf is a functionally graded composite
structure which is reinforced by three types of fibers: structural, arch, and xylem fibers. The first
occurs in the periphery of the leaf providing resistance to tensile loads. The others present
secondary reinforcement, occurring in the middle of the leaf, as well as, a path for nutrients.

Fig. 2.3- The sisal plant (a), leaf (b) and leaf cross-section showing different fiber types (c)

12

CHAPTER THREE
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Experimental study design was employed and the main research method was laboratory research.
The sisal fibres used were obtained from Kano Plains, about 15Km east of Kisumu town. There is
plenty of sisal plants in this area with fibres attaining considerable lengths which was a
requirement during this study. Samples of concrete mixes containing RCA as the course aggregate
were made and subjected to the appropriate tests in the departments Materials and structural
Laboratory. The main highlights of the methodology begun by collection and crushing of waste
concrete to obtain recycled concrete aggregate, then grading of aggregates according to BS 882
and determination of the specific gravity of the aggregates (natural fine and RCA). The water
absorption for the aggregates was also determined; then a mix design was carried out and slump
tests afterwards to determine workability. Finally, the strength properties of the cured concrete
specimen were established.

3.1 Material Sampling and Preparation

3.1.1 Cement
Ordinary portland cement satisfying BS12:1991 and KS-18-1: 2000 of average strength
32.5N/mm2 was used. Cement not being a variable item in the experiments was obtained from the
laboratory.

3.1.2 River Sand

River sand obtained from Machakos was used. Sieving was carried out to remove excess fines.
Also not a variable element in the experiments, hence one source was maintained.

3.1.3 Recycled Concrete Aggregates

RCA was obtained mainly from demolished structures along Thika Road as a result of the ongoing
reconstruction and expansion of the highway. Additional RCA was obtained from the crushed
waste concrete at the structures workshop. Absorption of RCA is considerably large amount
(Kikuchi et al 1994). Therefore RCA was handled as lightweight aggregates which have higher
water absorption. The RCA was maintained in a moist saturated surface dry (SSD) condition prior
to batching by constantly spraying with a garden sprinkler.

13

3.1.4 Sisal Fibres

The sisal fibres to be used was obtained from Kano Plains, about 15Km east of Kisumu town.
There is plenty of sisal plants in his place with fibres attaining considerable lengths which was a
requirement during this study. The sisal fibres are extracted from its leaf by a mechanical process
called decortication. The production technologies available include (Bentur & Mindess, 1990):
combining fibres with matrix in a pan mixer as if the fibres were an extra ingredient in the
common method of producing a cementitious mix; simultaneously spraying fibres and cement
slurry onto the forming surface to produce thin products; fibre-reinforced concrete; dispersal of
fibres in a cement slurry which is then dewatered to produce thin products; hand-laying fibres, in
the form of mats or fabrics, in moulds, impregnating them with a cement slurry and then vibrating
or compressing the mix to produce a dense material with high fibre content; and impregnating
continuous fibre mats and fabrics with a cement slurry by passing them through a cement bath in a
continuous process. The first production technology was used. Other fibre properties assumed as
the instruments to measure them are not in the laboratory includes mean density, elastic modulus
and tensile strength of 0.9g/cm3, 19Gpa, and 500Mpa respectively. Diameter ranged from 0.005 to
0.5mm.
3.2 Gradation Test/ Sieve Analysis
This is the process of dividing a sample of aggregates into fractions of same particle size in order
to determine the size distribution of the aggregates. A sample of air dried aggregate was graded
according to BS 812: Part 1: 1975, by shaking a nest of stacked sieves, with the largest sieve at the
top for specified time so that the material retained on each sieve represents the fraction coarser
than the sieve in question but finer than the sieve above.
3.3 Density Tests
According to ASTM C 127-93, specific gravity is the ratio of mass of a unit volume of material to
the mass of the same volume of water at the stated temperature. The tests was carried out as per BS
812: Part 107.

3.4 Moisture Absorption

The porosity, permeability and absorption of aggregates influence the bond between it and the
cement paste, the resistance of concrete to freezing and thawing, chemical stability and specific
gravity. Moisture absorption was determined as per BS 812: Part 107: (Draft).

3.5 Mix Design

A conventional mix of cement, river sand and RCA in the ratio of 1:2:4 respectively and water
cement ratio of 0.55 was prepared. Maximum size of RCA used was 20mm. Excess fines in RCA
14

was removed by sieving through 4.76mm sieve to conform to requirements of BS 8500-2-2002

Table 2.4: RCA will be sprinkled with water before casting to achieve saturated surface dry
condition before casting.
The production technology applied was that of combining fibres with matrix in a pan mixer as if
the fibres were an extra ingredient in the common method of producing a cementitious mix. Four
mixes of varying amount of sisal fibre was prepared, then an optimum amount selected. An
optimum fibre length of 35mm was chosen, considering good workability the mix had as compared
to higher lengths.

3.6 Compacting Factor Test (Workability)

The test was done on each of the batches according to BS1881: Part 103: 1993 to establish the
amount of work necessary to produce full compaction.

3.7 Strength Tests

3.7.1 Compressive Strength

The test was carried out on the 150mm cubes at the Materials & structural laboratory according to
BS 1881: Part 116: 1983.

3.7.2 Tensile Strength

The test was done on 150 X 150 X 500mm beams at the laboratory according to BS 1881: Part
118: 1983.

15

CHAPTER 4
4.0 RESULTS
The data collected was analyzed and the processed data is presented in this chapter as follows.

4.1 Sieve Analysis

From the sieve analysis, the fine aggregate fitted into zone 2 grading according to Bs 882 1992.
The fine aggregate grading, upper and lower limits bounds are shown on fig 8. For the RCA, the
grading done fitted into the 5 20 mm size bracket for crushed aggregates according to table 3 of
BS 882 1992. BS 8500-2-2002 requires that the maximum fines content in RCA be not more than
5% by mass fraction. Previous research has shown that the fines have a detrimental effect on the
quality of concrete. Fine RCA contains many impurities and results in strength loss in the concrete
(Smith et al, 2008). Excess fines also increase the surface area for water absorption increasing the
water absorption characteristics of the mix. There was therefore need to sieve the RCA obtained by
crushing to reduce the amount of fines.

120

80

60

40

Cummulative % Passing

100

natural fine aggregate grading

upper limit
lower limit

20

0
0.1

10

Log of Sieve Sizes

Fig 4.1- Natural Fine Aggregate, sieve analysis

16

120

80

60

40

Cummulative % passing

100

upper limit
lower limit
RCA grading

20

0
1

10

100

Log of Sieve Sizes

Fig 4.2 Recycled concrete aggregate, sieve analysis

4.2 Specific Gravity and Water Absorption

Table 4.1 - Results of Specific Gravity & Water Absorption Tests on Aggregates

Recycled concrete aggregate

Natural fine aggregate

Specific Gravity (Absolute

Dry) g/cm3
2.23
2.67

Water Absorption (% of dry

mass)
5.92
0.48

From Table 4.1 above, we can deduce that RCAs water absorption is almost three times higher
than that for natural coarse aggregate, (1.99, Karara P, 2009 ). This can be attributed to the mortar
attached to the original Natural Coarse Aggregate when concrete is crushed to produce recycled
aggregates. This observation justifies the sprinkling with water of RCA before casting to achieve
SSD conditions. This pretreatment is necessary to maintain the mix design water in the mix;
otherwise this would be absorbed by the RCA resulting in a stiffer and unworkable mix.

17

4.3 Slump Test

Table 4.2 - Slump Test Results

Sisal fibre content

0.00%

Slump(mm)

27.3

Workability
0.20%
25.7

0.50%

1.00%

18.9

13.3

The graph below (Fig 4.1) indicates that there was a reduction in slump with increase in the
amount of fibre reinforcement. This was due to absorption by the attached mortar on the RCA
which looses moisture relatively fast following saturation and surface drying, and absorption by
the fibre.

30

25

slump(mm)

20

15

10

0
0%

0.20%

0.50%
fibre content

Fig 4.3-slump versus sisal fibre content

18

1%

4.4 Compressive Strength

Table 4.3 - Compressive Strength Results

Curing age (days)

7

28

Sisal fibre
content
0.00%

14.2

21.5

0.02%

14.9

22.4

0.50%

15.2

22.9

1.00%

14.4

21.6

The graph below graphs (fig4.2&4.3) shows that compressive strength increased gradually with
increase in the fibre reinforcement up to 0.5%, then declines. The decline is attributed to the fact
that the composite started to form balls thus proper mixing could not be attained. The control mix
achieved compressive strength of 14.2N/mm2 and 21.5N/mm2 on the seventh and twenty eighth
days respectively, compared to 15.2N/mm2 and 22.9N/mm2 for the 0.5% fibre reinforcement.

15.4
15.2

strength(N/mm2)

15
14.8
14.6
14.4
14.2
14
13.8
13.6
0.00%

0.02%

0.50%
fibre content

Fig 4.2-7 days compressive strength

19

1.00%

23.5

23

strength(N/mm2)

22.5

22

21.5

21

20.5
0.00%

0.02%

0.50%

1.00%

fibre content
Fig 4.3-28 days compressive strength

4.4.1 Strength Development

From the graph below, it seems that the trend for strength development is roughly the same for all
the mixes. The control mix achieved 66.04% of its 28 day strength at 7 days. The 0.2%, 0.5% and
1% mixes achieved 67.34%, 65.99%, and 63.82% respectively. It was noted that 0.2%
reinforcement achieved the highest strength at 7 days.

20

120%

100%

80%

60%

7 day strength
28 day strength

40%

20%

0%
0%

0.20%

0.50%

1%

Fig 4.4- Strength development

4.5 Density of Concrete

Table 4.4 - measured density of concrete
Measured Density (kg/m3)
Curing (age)
Sisal fibre
content
0%
0.2%
0.5%
1.0%

7
2450.37
2376.30
2311.11
2254.81

28
2507.85
2419.85
2377.93
2323.41

As can be seen in fig 4.5 below, comparison of the densities of the concrete mixes at 28 days
showed a decreasing trend as the fibre reinforcement is increased. This is due to the comparatively
21

low density of the sisal fibre, and the fact that it swells upon water absorption during the curing
time. The densities achieved were 2507.85 kg/m3, 2419.85/m3, 2377.93/m3, and 2323.41kg/m3 for
0%, 0.2%, 0.5%, and 1% fibre reinforcement respectively.

2550
2500

Density (kg/m3)

2450
2400
2350
2300
2250
2200
0%

0.20%

0.50%

1.00%

fibre content

Fig 4.5- Measured densities at 28 days

4.6 Flexural Strength

During the flexural strength test, all the specimens failed within the middle third of the beam. The
flexural strength of the specimen was thus computed using the formula;
=
Where:
R = modulus of rupture, kPa
P = maximum applied load indicated by the testing machine, N
l = span length, mm
b = average width of specimen (mm)
d = average depth of specimen (mm)
22

The values obtained are as tabulated below:

Table 4.5 - Flexural strength at 28 days

Sisal fibre content

Flexural strength
(KPa)

0%
3.55

0.5%
3.70

1.0%
3.65

Below is a graphical representation of the flexural strengths for the various mixes that were tested
at 28 days (Fig 4.6). It shows that flexural strength increased gradually with increase in the fibre
reinforcement up to 0.5%, then declines. The decline is attributed to the fact that the composite
started to form balls thus proper mixing could not be attained. The control mix achieved flexural
strength of 3.55N/mm2 while 0.5% and 1.0% reinforcements attained 3.703N/mm2 and
3.653N/mm2 respectively.

3.75

flexural strength (N/mm2)

3.7

3.65

3.6

3.55

3.5

3.45
0%

0.50%
fibre content

Fig 4.6- Flexural strength at 28 days

23

1.00%

Fig 4.7 Beam flexure Testing

24

CHAPTER 5
5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusion
This study provides evidence that supports the following conclusions.

1. The strength properties of concrete mix containing recycled concrete aggregate as the
course aggregate can be successfully improved by using sisal fibre reinforcement.
2. Among the mixes prepared, 0.5% sisal fibre reinforcement had the highest strength.
3. Workability of the concrete reduces as the length of the fibre and percentage fibre
reinforcement increases.
4. Higher strength can be achieved using suitable mixing and casting techniques with
optimum fibre volume fraction and critical length.

5.2 Recommendations
1. This research only concentrated on a single production technology, thus combining fibres
with matrix in a pan mixer as if the fibres were an extra gradient in the common method of
producing cementitious mix. Investigation into other production technologies is
recommended.
2. The research also concentrated on the effect of fibre reinforcement in a class 20 concrete
mix. Other mix designs should be investigated.
3. Investigations into durability performance of sisal fibre reinforced cement based
composites is recommended to counter possible fibre mineralisation by calcium hydroxide.

25

REFERENCES
Amorel, and J.L. Gallias 1994, Practical Guidelines for the Reuse of Recycled Aggregates in
Concrete in France and Spain.
Bs 8500-1 2002 Concrete Made with Recycled Materials for Sustainable Concrete Construction.
Bentur, A.; Mindess, S.1990, Fibre reinforced cementitious composites, Elsevier Applied Science,
U.K.
Cappelen, P. 1978, Roof sheets made of sisal reinforced concrete. Building Research Unit,
Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development. Working Report, WR 14, p. 1-7.
England, G.L.; Toldo Filho, R.D. 1997, Natural fibre reinforced concrete. In: Asia-Pacific
specialty conference on fibre reinforced concrete, Singapore.
Ghavami, K.; Toldo Filho, R.D. Mechanical properties of composites reinforced with sisal fibre.
First international conference on composite engineering, New Orleans, August, p. 721-722, 1994.
Gram, H.E. 1983, Durability of natural fibres in concrete. Swedish Cement and Concrete Research
Institute.
Guimares, S. S. Experimental mixing and moulding with vegetable fibre reinforced cement
composites.
J.D Merelet and P. Pimienta 1994, Mechanical and Physiochemical Propeties of Concrete
produced with Coarse and Fine Recycled Concrete Aggregates.
James T. Smith and Susan L. Tighe 2008, Coarse Recycled Aggregate Concrete Pavements
Design, Instrumentation, and Performance.
Joseph, K.;Toledo Filho, R. D.; James, B.; Thomas, S.; Carvalho, L.H. 1999, The use of sisal fibre
as reinforcements in polymer in composites, Brazilian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental
Engineering.
M. Kikuchi and Y. Yasunaga 1994,The Total Evaluation of Recycled Aggregate and Recycled
Concrete.
Mehta, P. Kumar. 2001, Reducing the Environmental Impact of Concrete.
Naik, Tarun R., and Moriconi, G. 2005, Environmental-Friendly Durable.
National Ready Mix Concrete Association, CIP 16, 2000.
P.J. Wainwright, A Trevorrow, Y.Yu and Y.Wang 1994, Modifying the Performance of Concrete
made with Coarse and Fine Recycled Concrete Aggregate.
Romauldi, J.P.; Batson, G.B. 1963, Mechanics of crack arrest in concrete. Journal of the
Engineering Mechanics Division, Proceedings of the ASCE, v. 89.
S.U. Al-Dulaijan, M. Maslehuddin, M.M. Al-Zahrani, A.M. Sharif, S.H. Alidi, and M.H. AlMehthel 2002, Effect of Aggregate Quality on the Properties of Concrete.

26

Swift, D.G.; Smith, R.S.L. 1978, Sisal fibre reinforcement of cement paste and concrete. In:
Materials of construction for developing countries. Bangkok.
Tarr, Scott M., and Farny, James A. 2008, Concrete Floors on Ground.
Toldo Filho, R.D. 1997, Natural fibre reinforced mortar composites: Experimental
characterisation, Rio de Janeiro: Ph.D. Thesis.
US Department of Transportation 2004, Transportation Applications of Recycled Concrete
Aggregate.
Winston F.K. Fong, Jaime S.K. Yeung, and C.S. Poon 2003, Hong Kong, Experience of Using
Recycled Aggregates from Construction and Demolition Materials in Ready Mix Concrete.

27

APPENDIX
APPENDIX A -SIEVE ANALYSIS
Natural Fine aggregate & Recycled Coarse Aggregate Sieve Analysis Results
Table 5.1 Fine Aggregate

Sieve size
mm

Sieve Analysis

Wt retained
g

5.0
13.5
2.0
31.5
1.2
402.0
0.6
610.5
0.3
356.5
0.2
50.0
0.15
48.0
Sample weight = 1532g

Wt passing
g

% retained

1498.5
1467.0
1065.0
454.5
98.0
48.0
0.0

0.89
2.08
26.59
40.38
23.58
3.31
3.13

Cumulative
%
retained
0.89
2.97
29.57
69.96
93.55
96.87
100.0

Cumulative
%
passing
99.11
97.03
70.43
30.04
6.45
3.13
0.0

Table 5.2 Recycled Course Aggregate Sieve Analysis

Sieve size
mm

Wt retained
g

40
0
30
0
20
841
15
366
10
1062.5
5
503.5
2.36
40
<2.36
10
Sample weight = 2823g

Wt passing
g

% retained

2823
2823
1982
1616
553.5
50
10
0

0
0
29.7
12.9
37.7
17.8

1.55
0.44

28

Cumulative
%
retained
0
0
29.7
42.6
80.3
98.1
99.65
100

Cumulative
%
passing
100
100
70.3
57.4
19.7
1.9
0.35
0

APPENDIX B - SPECIFIC GRAVITY & WATER ABSORPTION, FINE AGGREGATE

Table 5.3 - Specific Gravity & Water Absorption, fine aggregates

SPECIFIC GRAVITY & WATER ABSORPTION

NATURAL FINE AGGREGATE

B

Average

Weight of jar + sample +

water (A)

1706

1734.5

1720.25

1417

1417

1417

460

505.5

482.75

475.5

503.5

489.5

2.68

2.68

2.68

2.69

2.69

2.69

2.71

2.71

2.71

0.55

0.4

0.48

Weight of jar +water (B)

Weight of saturated surface
dry sample ( C )
Weight of oven dried
sample (D)
Specific Gravity on an oven
dried basis =
Specific Gravity on a
saturated and surface dry
basis =
Apparent specific gravity
Water absorption (% of dry
mass) =

29

APPENDIX C SPECIFIC GRAVITY & WATER ABSORPTION, RCA

Table 5.4 - Specific Gravity & Water Absorption, RCA

SPECIFIC GRAVITY & WATER ABSORPTION TEST

RECYCLED CONCRETE AGGREGATE
A
B
Average
398
398
398
Weight of wire Basket (g)
A

1698

1755

1726.5

1300

1357

1328.5

2269.5

2319.5

2294.5

2135.5

2182

2158.75

2.34

2.41

2.38

2.20

2.27

2.24

5.9

5.93

5.92

Weight of wire Basket +

aggregate, B
Weight of Aggregate in
water Ww = A+B
Weight of saturated surface
dry sample (Ws)
Weight of oven dried
sample (Wd)
Specific Gravity on
saturated surface dry basis =
Absolute Specific gravity
Water Absoprtion (% of dry
weight)

30

APPENDIX D MIX DESIGN

Table 5.5 - Concrete Mix Design

Reference

Calculations
Unrestricted Design
Slump required

15-30

Maximum aggregate size

20mm

Maximum free water/cement ratio

0.55

Minimum cement content

290Kg/m3

Compressive strength

20N/mm2
@ 28 days

Stage 1
BS 5328

k (5% defective) =

Fig 3

s=

C1

M =ks

C2

fm =fc+M

Table 2

Strength of mix with free w/c ratio of 0.5

8N/mm2
13.12
33N/mm2

Cement

OPC

Aggregate type

crushed

Age

28 days

Strength
Fig 4

1.64

49N/mm2

Max free w/c ratio

Adopt the max w/c ratio of 0.48

31

0.48

Reference

Calculations
Stage 2

Table 3

Free water content

Max aggregate size

20mm

Aggregate type

crushed

Slump

15-30

Approximate free water content

190kg/m3

Stage 3
C3

Cement content =

395.83Kg/m3

Stage 4
Total aggregate content
Relative density of combined aggregate
on SSD (assumed for crushed)
fig 5

Density of concrete

C4

Total aggregate content =D-C-W

2.7
2430Kg/m3
1844.17Kg/m3

D= density of wet concrete

C= cement content
W= free water content
Stage 5
Fine and course aggregate content
Fig 6

Grading curve (fine agg.)- second graph, aggregate size 20mm

Proportion of fine aggregate

C5

Fine aggregate required

32%
590.13Kg/m2

Course aggregate(RCA)= total agg fine agg 1254.04Kg/m2

32

APPENDIX E MIXING PROPORTIONS

Table 5.6 - Mix proportions, 0% sisal fibre

Quantities

Cement (Kg)

Water (Kg)

Fine aggregate
(Kg)

Per m3

395.83

190

590.13

Course
Sisal fibre
aggregate (Kg) (Kg)
RCA
1254.04
0.00

Table 5.7 - Mix proportions, 0.2% sisal fibre

Quantities

Cement (Kg)

Water (Kg)

Fine aggregate
(Kg)

Per m3

395.83

190

590.13

Course
Sisal fibre
aggregate (Kg) (Kg)
RCA
1254.04
4.86

Table 5.8 - Mix proportions, 0.5% sisal fibre

Quantities

Cement (Kg)

Water (Kg)

Fine aggregate
(Kg)

Per m3

395.83

190

590.13

Course
Sisal fibre
aggregate (Kg) (Kg)
RCA
1254.04
12.15

Table 5.9 - Mix proportions, 1% sisal fibre

Quantities

Cement (Kg)

Water (Kg)

Fine aggregate
(Kg)

Per m3

395.83

190

590.13

33

Course
Sisal fibre
aggregate (Kg) (Kg)
RCA
1254.04
24.30

APPENDIX F COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST RESULTS

Table 5.10 - Raw compressive Strength results

Casting

Slump

Testing

Sisal fibre

date

(mm)

date

content

Cube dimension (mm)

age

labels

(days)

4.10.10

27.3

4.10.10

22.7

4.10.10

0.2%

4.10.10

18.9

4.10.10

0.5%

4.10.10

13.3

4.10.10

1%

4.10.10

27.3

1.11.10

0%

28

4.10.10

22.7

1.11.10

0.2%

28

4.10.10

18.9

4.10.10

13.3

4.10.10

1.11.10

1.11.10

0%

0.5%

1%

28
28

length

width

Volume

Weight

Density

Reading

Strength

Average

Average

(m3)

(Kg)

(Kg/m3)

(tonnes)

(N/mm2)

Density

strength

height

S0-7-1
S0-7-2
S0-7-3

151
150
149

150
150
150

149
150
151

0.003
0.003
0.003

8.21
8.30
8.40

2432.6
2459.3
2488.9

25.3
31.4
32.5

11.24
13.96
14.44

S2-7-1
S2-7-2
S2-7-3
S5-7-1
S5-7-2
S5-7-3
S10-7-1
S10-7-2
S10-7-3
S0-7-1
S0-8-2
S0-8-3
S2-8-1
S2-8-2
S2-8-3
S5-8-1
S5-8-2
S5-8-3
S10-8-1
S10-8-2
S10-8-3

152
150
150
150
148
150
150
150
152
150
151
151
150
150
148

148
150
151
150
150
152
150
150
148
150
150
149
151
150
150

150
150
149
150
152
148
150
150
150
150
149
150
149
150
148

0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003
0.003

8.06
8.00
8.00
7.40
8.00
8.00
7.61
7.61
7.61
8.46
8.46
8.46
8.17
8.16
8.17

2388.1
2370.4
2370.4
2192.6
2370.4
2370.4
2354.8
2354.8
2354.8
2507.9
2507.7
2508.1
2421.9
2418.1
2419.7

32.9
34.2
20.6
34.1
34.4
25.9
26.8
31.8
33.0
51.3
38.5
45.0
38.0
52.4
48.4

14.62
15.20
9.19
15.16
15.29
11.51
19.91
14.13
14.67
22.80
17.09
20.02
16.90
23.30
21.50

152
151
151

148
148
150

150
151
149

0.003
0.003
0.003

8.00
8.03
8.06

2369.1
2377.9
2386.7

33.7
51.5
51.5

150
149
152

150
150
148

150
151
150

0.003
0.003
0.003

7.84
7.84
7.84

2322.2
2324.4
2323.6

46.8
50.2
49.0

2450.4

14.2

2376.3

14.9

2311.1

15.2

2354.8

14.4

2507.9

21.5

2419.9

22.4

14.99
22.90
22.90

2377.9

22.9

20.80
22.30
21.78

2323.4

21.6

APPENDIX G FLEXURE TEST RESULTS

Table 5.11 - Raw flexural Strength results

Casting

Testing

date

date

Age

Sisal fibre

labels

content

Reading

modulus of

Average

(tonnes)

rupture

flexural
strength (Kpa)

4.10.10

4.10.10

4.10.10

1.11.10

1.11.10

1.11.10

28

28

28

0%

0.5%

1%

B0-8-1
B0-8-2
B0-8-3
B5-8-1
B5-8-2
B5-8-3
B10-8-1
B10-8-2
B10-8-3

Support span=425mm
XXXX ignore data due to large deviation

34

0.7
2.7
2.9
3.1
1.1
2.8
2.8
2.9
1.0

0.9
3.4
3.7
3.9
1.4
3.5
3.5
3.8
1.2

3.55

3.70

3.65