Professional Documents
Culture Documents
By
GICHURU ROSE HANNAH WANJA
Bsc. CIVIL ENGINEERING
FIFTH YEAR
E25-0113/04
PROJECT SUPERVISOR
MR.KARIMI
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the award of Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering
i
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
DECLARATION
I Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja 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 (Author) Date
CERTIFICATION
I have read this report and approve it for my examination.
Signed (Supervisor) Date ..
MR. KARIMI
ii
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who have helped me complete my project successfully by
providing the technical information and ideas and in providing the materials I required. I apologize to anyone not
included and any errors on my part.
I would like to thank my supervisor Mr. Karimi for his guidance throughout the project. His comments and ideas
throughout the project period have helped make the project a success. Particular thanks to Mr. Kamami and
Mr.Karugu, who have selflessly extended help in the laboratory experiments.
I would also like to thank Car and General Retread for providing me with crumb rubber in adequate quantity.
Special thanks to my Mum and Dad (Mr. and Mrs. Gichuru) and friends Marylnn and Nabil for their support and
encouragement throughout the project. I am also grateful to the help extended by my classmates throughout my
course of Civil Engineering here in Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology. They have helped me
be the person I am today.
iii
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 3
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ 4
CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................. 5
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 5
1.1Background ............................................................................................................................ 5
1.2 Problem Justification ............................................................................................................. 6
1.3 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................ 6
1.4 Objectives. ............................................................................................................................. 6
1.5 Research Hypothesis ............................................................................................................. 6
1.6Limitation of the Study .......................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................................ 7
2.0LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER THREE ...................................................................................................................... 11
3.0RESEARCH METHODOLOGY............................................................................................. 11
3.1Collection and sampling of material .................................................................................... 11
3.2 Grading of materials for concrete production ..................................................................... 11
3.3Determination of specific gravity and water absorption of aggregates ................................ 13
3.4 Determination of mix design. .............................................................................................. 14
3.5Slump test ............................................................................................................................. 14
3.6Compressive Strength Test according to BS 1881-116:1983 .............................................. 14
3.7 Indirect Tensile Test according to BS1881-117:1983 ........................................................ 15
3.8Flexural Strength Test according to BS1881 ....................................................................... 16
CHAPTER FOUR ......................................................................................................................... 17
1
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
2
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
LIST OF TABLES
3
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Sieves during sieve analysis ............................................................................................................................................ 12
Figure 2: Graph of Sieve Analysis of coarse aggregate .................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 3: Graph of sieve analysis of rubber .................................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 4: Graph of sieve analysis of fine aggregate ........................................................................................................................ 21
Figure 5: Bar chart of 7 day compressive strength .......................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 6: Bar chart of 28 day compressive strength ........................................................................................................................ 25
Figure 7: Bar chart of density of 150mm cubes at 28 days ............................................................................................................. 26
Figure 8: Bar chart of slump ........................................................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 9: Bar chart of Indirect Tensile Strength ............................................................................................................................. 28
Figure 10: Bar chart of density of 100 by 100 mm cylinders .......................................................................................................... 29
Figure 11: Bar chart of Flexural Strength at 28 days ...................................................................................................................... 30
Figure 12: Line graph of water cement ratio ................................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 13: Multiple line graph of Deflection against Load ............................................................................................................. 33
Figure 14: Multiple line graph of Stress against Strain ................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 15: 25% Replacement Rubberised concrete ........................................................................................................................ 38
Figure 16: 15% Replacement Rubberized Concrete ....................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 17: Cylinder specimens 15% and 25% replacement ............................................................................................................ 39
Figure 18: Cube specimen 15% replacement under compression ................................................................................................... 39
Figure 19: Cylinder specimen 25% replacement under tension ...................................................................................................... 40
Figure 20: Cylinder specimen failed in tension............................................................................................................................... 40
Figure 21: 25% replacement beam specimen ready for flexural test ............................................................................................... 41
Figure 22: Placing the strain gauges to determine strain and deflection ......................................................................................... 41
Figure 23: Failure of rubberized concrete ....................................................................................................................................... 42
Figure 24: Charts used for calculating mix design .......................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 25: Charts used in calculating mix design ........................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 26: Charts used in calculating mix design ........................................................................................................................... 45
4
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1Background
The research will focus on the use of waste tyres as partial replacement for fine aggregates in concrete. It will
investigate engineering properties of concrete containing rubber aggregate and the potential of rubberized concrete
in various civil engineering applications.
The economy of Kenya is continuing to grow and urbanization is on the increase. This means the quantity of waste
tyres will be on the rise. The waste tyres will come from the construction industry and the consumer industry. Hence
significant emphasis will be placed on the use of these recycled products if not already. For Portland cement
concrete, rubber from granulated tires may be used as an elastic aggregate modifying the brittle failure of concrete
and increasing its ability to absorb higher amounts of energy before failure. The use of fine graded rubber as partial
replacement of fine aggregates may produce a ductile behavior with large deformations prior to full disintegration of
concrete and affect to a lesser degree the strength loss.
Research is currently ongoing to evaluate the effects of incorporating crumb rubber, very fine tire rubber particles,
into Portland cement concrete. The objective of the study has been to evaluate the effects of rubber aggregate on
Portland cement concrete (PCC) properties. Initially, the rubber content replacing fine aggregates into the concrete
mix was investigated by examining the concrete failure characteristics and the amount of energy absorbed during
testing. The destructive testing results of the rubber-filled concrete were then coupled with nondestructive testing
(NDT) evaluation. The scope of this effort was first to use a well-accepted NDT method for evaluating this specific
PCC type, and second, to correlate strength and static elastic modulus to parameters evaluated from the dynamic
NDT testing. These relationships may be used for estimating concrete strength and static elastic modulus from NDT
results. Nondestructive testing techniques are relatively simple and quick to perform and provide the advantage of
using the same samples again and again. NDT techniques are also of particular value in quality control testing.
Several advantageous properties can be realized with the rubberized concrete. The inclusion of the rubber into the
concrete mixture provides for a finished concrete composite having a lower density. This decrease in the density of
the concrete is further enhanced by the inclusion of the fly ash component. The resulting concrete composite is thus
lighter and would increase the live load capacity of the rubberized included concrete (RIC). The RIC also provides a
more ductile composite than conventional concrete. The RIC can also be utilized as a composite for noise barrier
applications and also in applications requiring improved heat insulation, vibration dampening, toughness, and
impact resistance.
5
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
hopes to
come up with a potential solution to management of waste tyres by using it as an additive to concrete to improve
some of its properties.
1.4 Objectives.
Main objective.
To use waste tyres in the form of crumb rubber as partial replacement for fine aggregates in concrete.
Specific objectives
To study the material (concrete constituents and crumb rubber) characteristics.
To determine the appropriate mix design.
To study the failure characteristics of Rubberized Concrete.
6
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
CHAPTER TWO
2.0LITERATURE REVIEW
One of the major environmental challenges facing municipalities around the world is the disposal of worn
out auto-mobile tyres. To address this global problem, several studies have been conducted to examine various
applications of recycled tyre rubber (fine crumb rubber). Emphasis has been placed on the use of recycled tyre
rubber in Portland cement concrete. Preliminary studies show that workable rubberized Portland cement concrete
(rubcrete) mixtures can be made provided that appropriate percentages of tire rubber are used in such mixtures.
Achievements in this area have been examined with special focus on engineering properties of rubcrete. These
include: workability, compressive strength, split-tensile strength, flexural strength, elastic modulus, Poissons ratio,
toughness. The practice of disposing of scrap tyres in landfills is becoming unacceptable because of the rapid
depletion of available sites for waste disposal. Moreover, tyres can even rise from the gravefloating upward
through a sea of trash to break through landfill coverssometimes with explosive force (Tantala et al. 1996).
Not much attention has been given to the use of rubber from scrap tyres in Portland cement concrete (PCC)
mixtures, particularly for highway applications. However, large benefits can result from the use of worn-out tire
rubber in PCC mixtures, especially in circumstances where properties like lower density, increased toughness and
ductility are desired. The use of recycled tyre rubber in PCC mixtures would not only make good use of an
otherwise waste material and help alleviate disposal problems, but can also improve certain properties of concrete
for particular design applications. It would also address the growing public concern about the need to preserve
natural resources (such as aggregates) used in the production of concrete that are depleting rapidly due to excessive
quarrying.
Unit Weight
Due to the low specific gravity of rubber, the unit weight of rubcrete mixtures decreases as the percentage of rubber
increases. In addition, the increase in rubber content increases the air content, which in turn further reduces the unit
weight (Fedroff 1995). However, the decrease is almost negligible for rubber contents lower than 10 to 20% of the
7
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
8
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
9
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
10
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
CHAPTER THREE
3.0RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Assessment of material properties (of cement, of coarse aggregate, of fine aggregate, and of crumb rubber)
by carrying out the following activities: sampling, sieve analysis, specific gravity and water absorption
tests.
Determination of appropriate mix design.
Carrying out laboratory tests
Compressive test using a 150 by 150 by 150mm cube mould as per BS 1881
Flexural test using 150 by 150 by 500mm beam
Indirect tensile test using concrete cylinders of 100mm diameter by 200mm height as per BS 1881
11
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Objective
Grading was carried out to determine the particle size distribution of aggregates by sieving.
Apparatus
i.
ii.
Test sieves
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
Sieve sizes
Coarse aggregates: 50mm, 37.5mm, 20mm, 14mm, 10mm, 5mm and 2.36mm.
Fine aggregates: 10mm, 5mm, 2.36mm, 1.18mm, 0.6mm, 0.3mm and 0.15mm
12
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
A balance
ii.
A drying oven
iii.
A pycometer bottle
iv.
Sample containers
v.
Stirring rod
Procedure.
A sample of aggregates less than 5mm was used. The sample was thoroughly washed to remove all
material finer than 0.075mm.The washed sample was placed in a tray and water added until the sample was
completely immersed. The sample was left immersed for 24hours. After 24 hours the water was drained by
decantation through a 0.075mm sieve .The sample was then exposed to a gentle current of warm air to evaporate
surface moisture. The saturated and surface dry sample was weighed. Some of the wet sample was placed in a tray
and dried in the oven at temperature of 104-105C for 24hours, then cooled and weighed. The empty pycometer was
then weighed. The weight of pycometer+sample was taken. The pycometer containing a sample was filled with
water until no air was entrapped then weighed. The pycometer was then emptied of its contents, filled with water
then weighed.
13
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
3.5Slump test
Apparatus
(i) Mould
(ii) Tamping rod
Procedure
The slump test was carried out in accordance with BS1881-102. The mould was filled in three equal layers and each
layer tamped 25 times with a tamping rod before the consecutive layers were placed and the reading taken(initial
reading).Surplus concrete above the top edge of the mould was struck off with the tamping rod. The cone was then
lifted vertically and the reading taken(final reading). The value of the slump was obtained by getting the difference
between the final reading and the initial reading.
14
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Procedure
Using the appropriate proportions of water, cement, sand, coarse aggregate and rubber aggregates from the worked
out mix design the mix was prepared in the mixing trough. The control mix and the rubberized concrete mix were
prepared. The mix was placed in the moulds in layers using the trowel and each layer compacted with the vibrator.
When the moulds had been filled the top layer was struck off to come up with a well finished surface. The
specimens were stored in a moist atmosphere for 24 hours and the removed from the moulds and stored in a curing
sink for 28 days. After 28 days the specimens were removed from their wet storage and tested using the compression
testing machine. The compressive strength was obtained by calculations using the formula
fc=F/Ac
fc is the compressive strength in N/mm
F is the maximum load at failure in Newtons
Ac is the cross sectional area of the specimen on which the compressive force acts, calculated from the
designated size of the specimen.
15
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Procedure
Using the appropriate proportions of cement, fine aggregate, coarse aggregate and rubber the control mix and the
rubberized concrete mix was prepared in the mixing trough. The mix was placed in the beam moulds in layers and
each layer compacted well using a vibrator before another layer was added. The moulds were filled and the surface
leveled until a smooth surface was obtained. The moulds were stored under moist conditions for 24 hours and then
the specimens were removed from the moulds and placed in a curing sink for 28 days until strength testing. After 28
days the specimens were removed from the curing sink and flexural test was carried out using the Avery Universal
Machine. The load was applied through two rollers at the third points of the span until the specimen broke. Using
standard beam formulae, the failure stress was calculated from the beam dimensions and the failure load.
M= W*l/b*d
16
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 DATA RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Specific Gravity and Water Absorption of Ordinary Sand and Rubber
Ordinary Sand
Rubber
Sample A
Sample B
Weight of jar+sample+water...A
1706
1384
Weight of jar+water.B
1417
1406
460
64.5
457.5
62.5
2.68
0.727
2.69
0.746
...........................
D/C-(A-B)
D/D-(A-B)
2.71
0.74
100(C-D)/D
0.55
3.2
17
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
420
417
1015
1020
595
603
Ws
983.5
1003
Wd
963
984
2.53
2.51
2.36
2.46
2.1
1.9
18
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Sieve sizes
Wt. retained
Wt. passing
(mm)
(g)
(g)
% retained
Cumulative %
Cumulative %
retained
passing
50
5399.5
0.00
0.00
100.00
38.1
5399.5
0.00
0.00
100.00
20
1184
4215.5
21.93
21.93
78.07
15
984
3231.5
18.22
40.15
59.85
10
1698
1533.5
31.45
71.60
28.40
636.5
897.0
11.79
83.39
16.61
2.36
42
855.0
0.78
84.17
15.83
<2.36
855
0.0
15.83
100.00
0.00
19
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Weight retained(g)
Weight passing(g)
% retained
9.5
767.5
4.75
767.5
100
2.38
132
635.5
17.2
82.8
1.2
198.5
437
31.2
68.8
0.6
172.5
264.5
39.5
60.5
0.3
132.5
132
50.09
49.91
0.149
132
total
767.5
20
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
% passing
Sieve sizes
Wt. retained
Wt. passing
(mm)
(g)
(g)
% retained
Cumulative %
Cumulative %
retained
passing
5.0
40.5
1496.00
2.64
2.64
97.36
2.0
47.0
1449.00
3.06
5.69
94.31
1.2
210.0
1239.00
13.67
19.36
80.64
0.6
419.5
819.50
27.30
46.66
53.34
0.3
537.0
282.50
34.95
81.61
18.39
0.2
215.5
67.00
14.03
95.64
4.36
0.1
67.0
0.00
4.36
100.00
0.00
21
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
MIX DESIGN.
Target mean strength
20N/mm2 at
28days
Proportion defective
10%
Standard deviation
Margin
8 N/mm2
(k=1.96)
1.96*8
16 N/mm2
Specified
Target mean strength
20+16
Cement type
specified OPC
Aggregate: coarse
crushed
Aggregate: fine
uncrushed
Table 2,Fig 4
Slump
36N/mm2
0.58
10-30
Maximum aggregate
Free water content
Cement content
20mm
Table 3
190kg/m3
C3
1900.58
330kg/m3
specified
.kg/m3
specified
290kg/m3
2.7assumed
Concrete density
2400kg/m3
2400-330-190
%passing
1880kg/m3
600um sieve
54%
Fig 6
46%
1880*0.46
860
1880*860
1020
Quantities
Cement(kg)
Water
Fine aggregate
Coarse aggregate
10mm 20mm
22
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
N/B
330
1.1
190
0.64
860
2.9
23
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
340
680
1.15
3.0
Percentage replacement
0%
15%
35*10 / 150 = 16
18*10 / 150 = 8
4
7*10 / 150 = 3
25%
24
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Percentage replacement
0%
15%
25%
25
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Mass
Mass in kg
Volume
Density
8058
8.058
0.15*0.15*0.15=0.00375
8.058/0.00375=2387.56
7876
7.876
0.15*0.15*0.15=0.00375
7.876/0.00375=2333.63
7298
7.298
0.15*0.15*0.15=0.00375
7.298/0.00375=2162.37
Density (kg/m3)
2387.56
0%
2333.63
15%
2162.37
25%
26
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Slump
Percentage Replacement
13
0%
10
15%
25%
27
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Percentage Replacement %
0%
15%
25%
Percentage replacement
1.273
0%
0.796
15%
0.064
25%
28
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Mass (g)
Mass in kg
Volume
Density
3518
3.518
3.14*(0.05)*0.2=0.0016
3.518/0.0016= 2198.75
3294.5
3.295
3.14*(0.05)*0.2=0.0016
3.295/0.0016= 2059.38
2752.0
2.752
3.14*(0.05)*0.2=0.0016
2.752/0.0016= 1720
Density
Percentage Replacement
2198.75
0%
2059.38
15%
1720
25%
29
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Percentage replacement
0%
15%
25%
Percentage Replacement
3.08
0%
4.0
15%
3.61
25%
30
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Percentage Replacement
0.64
0%
0.74
15%
0.8
25%
31
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
15% Replacement
25% Replacement
Load in
Stressin
Deflection
Strain
Load
Stress
Deflection
Strain
Load
Stress
Deflection
Strain
tonnes
N/mm
in mm
in mm
in
in
in mm
in mm
in
in
in mm
in mm
tonnes
N/mm
tonnes
N/mm
0.11
0.16
0.04
0.8
0.14
0.21
0.03
0.68
0.22
0.33
0.03
0.6
0.25
0.37
0.04
0.33
0.49
0.03
3.4
0.38
0.57
0.03
0.34
0.5
0.04
5.6
0.44
0.65
0.03
4.8
0.48
0.71
0.03
4.2
0.48
0.71
0.04
0.62
0.92
0.03
6.8
0.54
0.8
0.03
0.58
0.86
0.08
9.6
0.75
1.11
0.07
8.2
0.65
0.96
0.06
7.2
0.7
1.04
0.16
12.8
0.91
1.35
0.14
10.9
0.79
1.17
0.12
9.6
0.81
1.2
0.24
18.4
1.05
1.56
0.2
15.6
1.01
1.5
0.18
13.8
0.93
1.38
0.32
22.4
1.21
1.79
0.27
19.04
1.15
1.7
0.24
16.8
1.02
1.51
0.44
28
1.33
1.97
0.37
23.8
1.25
1.85
0.33
21
1.13
1.67
0.52
31.2
1.47
2.18
0.44
26.5
1.37
2.03
0.39
23.4
1.26
1.87
0.64
38.4
1.64
2.43
0.54
32.6
1.52
2.25
0.48
28.8
1.38
2.04
0.68
43.2
1.79
2.65
0.58
36.7
1.65
2.44
0.51
32.4
1.5
2.22
0.8
47.2
1.95
2.89
0.68
40.1
1.79
2.65
0.6
35.4
1.62
2.4
0.84
52
2.11
3.13
0.71
44.2
1.9
2.81
0.63
39
1.85
2.74
0.92
50.4
2.41
3.57
0.78
42.8
2.18
3.23
0.69
37.8
1.94
2.87
51.2
2.52
3.73
0.85
43.5
2.28
3.38
0.75
38.4
2.08
3.08
51.2
2.7
0.85
43.5
2.44
3.61
0.75
38.4
32
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
33
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
34
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 DISCUSSION
Sieve Analysis
The sieving operation was performed by hand with each sieve in turn being shaken until no more than a trace
continues to pass. The shaking was in all directions so that particles could pass through the sieve.
Fine Aggregates
The fine aggregate (sand) was aggregate passing a 5mm BS 410 sieve.
Coarse Aggregate
This was aggregate of sizes between 5mm to 20mm.
Crumb Rubber
The grading of the crumb rubber was similar to that of fine aggregate. It was aggregate passing a 5mm BS 410 sieve.
Specific Gravity
Ordinary Sand-oven dry- was 2.68
-Surface dry-was 2.69
Rubber-oven dry-was 0.727
-Surface dry-was 0.746
Coarse aggregate-surface dry-was an average of 2.32
-Absolute dry specific gravity was an average of 2.41
Water Absorption (% of dry weight)
Ordinary sand was 0.55
Rubber was 3.2
Coarse aggregate was an average of 2
35
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Aesthetics
The appearance of the finished surface of rubberized concrete was similar to that of ordinary concrete. The colour of
rubberized concrete did not differ noticeably from that of ordinary concrete however the higher the percentage of
crumb rubber the darker the colour of rubberized concrete.
Workability
There was a decrease in slump with increase in crumb rubber content. The slump of the control mix was 13mm. The
water content increased with increase in percentage substitution.
Concrete Density
There was a decrease in Concrete density when fine aggregates were replaced with crumb rubber. The density of the
control cube at 28 days was approximately 2388 kg/m. The decrease in density with addition of crumb rubber could
be as a result of the replacement of rigid and bulky aggregate with light weight rubber aggregate.
Flexural strength
At 15% crumb rubber the flexural strength of concrete was higher than that of ordinary concrete. This could be due
to the crumb rubber which acts as a fibre. When a crack appears on the specimen the crumb rubber absorbs the
loading stress and prevents the widening of the crack. This ensures that the specimen takes longer to disintegrate.
However at 25% replacement the flexural strength reduced. Following this trend it can be deduced that
improvements in flexural strength are limited to relatively small rubber aggregate contents.
36
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
CHAPTER 6
6.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 CONCLUSION
On completion of the project several conclusions were inferred.
The resultant rubberized concrete was workable and produced a well finished surface. There was a notable
decrease in density and reduction in slump with increase in crumb rubber content.
The material constituents conformed to the required standards.
There was an increase in the water content with increase in percentage of crumb rubber.
Load deformation characteristics were determined by carrying out Compressive Strength Tests, Tensile
Strength Tests and Flexural Strength Tests. The compressive strength reduced with addition of crumb
rubber. Tensile strength also reduced with addition of crumb rubber. However the flexural strength
increased when 15% of crumb rubber was used but when 25% of crumb rubber was used as a substitute for
fine aggregates the flexural strength reduced. Thus improvement in flexural strength is limited to the
percentage substitution of fine aggregate with crumb rubber.
The reduction in Compressive strength and Tensile strength may limit the use of rubberized concrete in
structural applications that require high strength. However its improved flexibility and reduced brittleness
means it may be used to make pedestrian blocks, roadway medium barriers on roads, in machine rooms as
floors where high strength in concrete may not really be as beneficial as its flexibility and reduced
brittleness.
6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
From the research it is seen that it is possible to produce concrete using crumb rubber as partial replacement for fine
aggregate. For example it is possible to produce concrete blocks with the desired strength characteristics. However
there is room for more research to investigate the feasibility of producing rubberized concrete blocks on a
commercial basis.
From the research carried out it is evident that with addition of crumb rubber the water content varies thus further
research needs to be carried out to develop a suitable mix design to produce concrete of the desired strength
characteristics.
37
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
APPENDIX
38
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
39
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
40
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
Figure 21: 25% replacement beam specimen ready for flexural test
Figure 22: Placing the strain gauges to determine strain and deflection
41
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
42
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
43
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
44
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
45
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja
REFERENCES
British Standard Institution, BS 1881-116:1983, Method for Determination of Compressive Strength of
Concrete Cubes, London
British Standard Institution, BS1881-117:1983, Method for Determination of Tensile Splitting Strength,
London
British Standard Institution, BS1881-118:1983, Method for Determination of Flexural Strength London
A Report by, The University of Strathclyde in Glasgow on The use of recycled rubber tyres in concrete
construction.
Eldin N. And Senouci, A, B.,Rubber Tyre Particles as Concrete Aggregate, Journal of Material in Civil
Engineering, Vol. 5, No.4 pp. 479-496, 1993.
Piti Sulontaskul and Chalermphol Chaikaew, Paper on Concrete Pedestrian Block Containing Crumb
Rubber from Recycled Tyres
Use of waste tyres in concrete retrieved on 16th Jan 2010 from www.google.co.ke
Chaikaew, C., M.Eng Thesis, Study on the Use of Wasted Tyres Particles on Soft Surface Concrete Block,
Department of Civil Engineering King Mongkut Institute of Technology-North Bangkok, 2003.
.
46
By Gichuru Rose Hannah Wanja