Title:
Impact Resistance and Acoustic Absorption Capacity of Self-Consolidating Rubberized Concrete
Author(s):
Mohamed K. Ismail and Assem A. A. Hassan
Publication:
Materials Journal
Volume:
113
Issue:
6
Appears on pages(s):
725-736
Keywords:
acoustic emission technique; crumb rubber; drop-weight impacts; impact resistance; metakaolin; self-consolidating concrete
DOI:
10.14359/51689359
Date:
11/1/2016
Abstract:
An experimental study was conducted to investigate the effect of using crumb rubber (CR) on improving the impact resistance and acoustic insulation of self-consolidating concrete mixtures. The study particularly aimed to maximize the percentage of CR in self-consolidating rubberized concrete (SCRC) to develop mixtures with high potential use in applications involving high-impact resistance, energy dissipation, and acoustic absorption. Several parameters were investigated—namely, percentage of CR (0 to 50% by volume of sand), type of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) (fly ash, slag, and metakaolin), binder content (500 to 550 kg/m3 [31.215 to 34.335 lb/ft3]), coarse aggregate size (10 to 20 mm [0.39 to 0.79 in.]), and entrained air. Tests included fresh properties, compressive strength, impact loading (drop weight on cylindrical specimens and flexural impact loading on small scale beams), ultrasonic pulse velocity, and acoustic emission measurements. The results indicated that it is possible to develop SCRC mixtures with optimum percentages of CR, which give promising results for concrete having higher energy absorption, acoustic insulation, and reduced self-weight compared to conventional concrete. The impact energy required to initiate the first visible crack and/or ultimate failure crack of the tested cylindrical specimens increased up to a CR replacement of 30%, while the impact energy required to break the tested beams increased up to a CR replacement of 20%. On the other hand, the acoustic absorption capacity of the tested mixtures continued to increase as the CR increased.
Related References:
1. Topçu, I. B., “Assessment of the Brittleness Index of Rubberized Concretes,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 27, No. 2, 1997, pp. 177-183. doi: 10.1016/S0008-8846(96)00199-8
2. Topçu, I. B., “The Properties of Rubberized Concretes,” Cement and Concrete Research, V. 25, No. 2, 1995, pp. 304-310. doi: 10.1016/0008-8846(95)00014-3
3. Najim, K. B., and Hall, M., “Mechanical and Dynamic Properties of Self-Compacting Crumb Rubber Modified Concrete,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 27, No. 1, 2012, pp. 521-530. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.07.013
4. Rahman, M. M.; Usman, M.; and Al-Ghalib, A. A., “Fundamental Properties of Rubber Modified Self-Compacting Concrete (RMSCC),” Construction and Building Materials, V. 36, Nov. 2012, pp. 630-637. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.116
5. Al-Tayeb, M. M.; Abu Bakar, B. H.; Ismail, H.; and Akil, H. M., “Impact Resistance of Concrete with Partial Replacements of Sand and Cement by Waste Rubber,” Polymer-Plastics Technology and Engineering, V. 51, No. 12, 2012, pp. 1230-1236. doi: 10.1080/03602559.2012.696767
6. Khalil, E.; Abd-Elmohsen, M.; and Anwar, A. M., “Impact Resistance of Rubberized Self-Compacting Concrete,” Water Science, V. 29, No. 1, 2015, pp. 45-53. doi: 10.1016/j.wsj.2014.12.002
7. Gupta, T.; Sharma, R. K.; and Chaudhary, S., “Impact Resistance of Concrete Containing Waste Rubber Fiber and Silica Fume,” International Journal of Impact Engineering, V. 83, Sept. 2015, pp. 76-87. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2015.05.002
8. Reda-Taha, M. M.; El-Dieb, A. S.; Abd El-Wahab, M. A.; and Abdel-Hameed, M. E., “Mechanical, Fracture, and Microstructural Investigations of Rubber Concrete,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, V. 20, No. 10, 2008, pp. 640-649. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2008)20:10(640)
9. Su, H.; Yang, J.; Ling, T.-C.; Ghataora, G. S.; and Dirar, S., “Properties of Concrete Prepared with Waste Tyre Rubber Particles of Uniform and Varying Sizes,” Journal of Cleaner Production, V. 91, Mar. 2015, pp. 288-296. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.022
10. Madandoust, R., and Mousavi, S. Y., “Fresh and Hardened Properties of Self-Compacting Concrete Containing Metakaolin,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 35, Oct. 2012, pp. 752-760. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.109
11. Hassan, A. A. A., and Mayo, J. R., “Influence of Mixture Composition on the Properties of SCC Incorporating Metakaolin,” Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 66, No. 20, 2014, pp. 1036-1050. doi: 10.1680/macr.14.00060
12. Koehler, E. P., and Fowler, D. W., “Aggregates in Self-Consolidating Concrete,” Research Report ICAR 108-2F, Aggregates Foundation for Technology, Research and Education, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 2007, 362 pp.
13. MnDOT, “Properties and Mix Designations,” Concrete Manual, Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. Paul, MN, 2003, 10 pp.
14. Benazzouk, A.; Douzane, O.; Langlet, T.; Mezreb, K.; Roucoult, J. M.; and Quéneudec, M., “Physicomechanical Properties and Water Absorption of Cement Composite Containing Shredded Rubber Wastes,” Cement and Concrete Composites, V. 29, No. 10, 2007, pp. 732-740. doi: 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2007.07.001
15. Marar, K., and Eren, O., “Effect of Cement Content and Water/Cement Ratio On Fresh Concrete Properties Without Admixtures,” International Journal of Physical Sciences, V. 6, No. 24, Oct. 2011, pp. 5752-5765.
16. ASTM C618-12, “Standard Specification for Coal Fly Ash and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012, 5 pp.
17. ASTM C494/C494M-13, “Standard Specification for Chemical Admixtures for Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013, 10 pp.
18. ASTM C260/C260M-10, “Standard Specification for Air-Entraining Admixtures for Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2010, 3 pp.
19. Güneyisi, E., “Fresh Properties of Self-Compacting Rubberized Concrete Incorporated with Fly Ash,” Materials and Structures, V. 43, No. 8, 2010, pp. 1037-1048. doi: 10.1617/s11527-009-9564-1
20. EFNARC, “The European Guidelines for Self-Compacting Concrete Specification, Production and Use,” European Federation for Specialist Construction Chemicals and Concrete Systems, English ed., Norfolk, UK, May 2005, pp. 1-63.
21. ASTM C231/C231M-14, “Standard Test Method for Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by the Pressure Method,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014, 9 pp.
22. ASTM C39/C39M, “Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2011, 7 pp.
23. ACI Committee 544, “Measurement of Properties of Fiber Reinforced Concrete (ACI 544.2R-89) (Reapproved 2009),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1989, 11 pp.
24. ASTM C597-09, “Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity through Concrete,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2009, 4 pp.
25. ASTM E1316-14, “Standard Terminology for Nondestructive Examinations,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014, 38 pp.
26. Mistras Group R6I-AST Sensor, Physical Acoustics Corporation, Princeton Junction, NJ, 2005.
27. CSA A23.3-04, “Design of Concrete Structures,” Canadian Standards Association, Rexdale, ON, Canada, 2004, 258 pp.
28. Neville, A. M., Properties of Concrete, fourth edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 1995, 844 pp.
29. Najim, K. B., and Hall, M., “Crumb Rubber Aggregate Coatings/Pre-Treatments and their Effects on Interfacial Bonding, Air Entrapment and Fracture Toughness in Self-Compacting Rubberised Concrete (SCRC),” Materials and Structures, V. 46, No. 12, 2013, pp. 2029-2043. doi: 10.1617/s11527-013-0034-4
30. Emiroglu, M.; Kelestemur, M. H.; and Yildiz, S., “An Investigation on ITZ Microstructure of the Concrete Containing Waste Vehicle Tire,” Proceedings of 8th International Fracture Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 2007, pp. 453-459.
31. Ervin, B. L., “Monitoring Corrosion of Rebar Embedded in Mortar Using Guided Ultrasonic Waves,” PhD dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, 2007, 330 pp.