Professional Documents
Culture Documents
h i g h l i g h t s
PET aggregate concrete has better workability compare to natural aggregate concrete.
Reduction of density is achievable with PET coarse aggregate in concrete.
Relatively high compressive strength is attainable with PET aggregate concrete.
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: This study investigates the effect of plastic as an alternative coarse aggregate on various fresh and harden
Received 23 February 2015 properties of concrete. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET), a thermoplastic polymer, is considered as an
Received in revised form 22 August 2016 alternative aggregate and replaced with natural coarse aggregate, such as brick chips. The PET aggregate
Accepted 28 August 2016
is obtained by shredding, melting and crushing the collected waste PET bottles. The primary focus of the
Available online 3 September 2016
work is to observe compressive strength and unit weight of PET aggregate concrete (PAC) along with their
workability in comparison with the natural aggregate concrete (NAC). With the increase in PET replace-
Keywords:
ment ratio and w/c ratio lower unit weights and compressive strengths are observed for PAC compare to
Polyethylene terephthalate
Coarse aggregate
NAC. Compressive strength for 20% PET replaced PAC at 0.42 w/c ratio is 30.3 MPa which is only 9% less
Compressive strength than the NAC. However, PAC has significantly high workability as 1.8 cm slump value is observed for 20%
Unit weight PET replaced PAC at 0.42 w/c ratio. Therefore, PET replaced concrete with low w/c ratio and high
Workability workability can be used for structural concrete member.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.08.128
0950-0618/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.J. Islam et al. / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 946–951 947
Table 1 Table 2
Chemical composition of PCC. Material properties of aggregates.
managing these large amounts of plastic wastes becomes a major All of these studies concluded that the increase in volume
concern for the environment. As such, it has become a significant replacement of PET aggregates showed a declining trend in the
issue of minimizing and/or reusing these waste products in various compressive strength of the concrete regardless the consistency
applications. of the water-cement ratio. The major advantage of using waste
Application of waste PET bottles as various forms of filler mate- PET bottles as aggregates is the reduction of the self-weight of
rials in concrete have been explored, thus creating the opportuni- the concrete because of its low unit weight.
ties for reusing these waste materials in concrete. Researches have This study will examine the physical and mechanical properties
been conducted for using recycled PET as a binder in concrete, also of concrete with melted waste PET bottles as coarse aggregates.
known as polyester concrete or polymer concrete [9]. The polymer The novelty of this study is to use modified melted waste PET
concrete showed better resistance in compression and flexure aggregates instead of using untreated waste materials. As such,
compared to Portland cement concrete [10,11]. Fiber reinforced this research will attempt to suggest an option that not only stands
concrete with PET fibers from waste PET bottles has better control to improve or maintain the characteristics of the resulting concrete
on the plastic shrinkage cracking in concrete [12,13], as well as but also provides a reusing option for the waste PET bottles.
increases the resistance to durability properties, such as rapid
freeze-thaw and salt or sodium sulphate environment [14]. Plastic 2. Materials
shrinkage cracking is the dominant cause for reducing perfor-
mance in cement-based composites [15–17]. 2.1. Portland composite cement
Other options have been developed and adopted in reusing
waste PET bottles as aggregates in mortars and concrete compos- Portland composite cement (PCC) is the most commonly used
ites [18,19]. The majority of these studies related to reusing waste cementitious material for the concrete in Bangladesh, and hence,
PET bottles as a partial and/or full replacement of fine aggregate it has been used in the concrete mix design. It has a density of
(sand) in both mortar and concrete [1,20–29]. Vaverka [30] used 3.15 kg/m3 and 28 days compressive strength of 42.9 MPa. Chemi-
both high density polyethylene (HDPE) and PET in preparing cal analysis of the PCC was performed according to the ASTM C114
mortar having different sand (5–20% of the total sand volume) [34] standard test method and the percentage (weight basis) of
replacement ratio. major components are shown in Table 1.
On the other hand, very few studies have been incorporated
waste PET bottles as a partial replacement of coarse aggregate in 2.2. Sand
concrete mixtures [29,31,32]. Besides waste PET, other plastic
wastes such as HDPE, PE and PS have been used as aggregates in Natural river sand was used as fine aggregate (FA) in the con-
preparing various concrete composites [33]. crete mix. The sand was first washed to remove the dirt in it and
100 100
PCA
Brick CA
ASTM-Upper Limit
Cumulative Percent Passing (%)
Cumulative Percent Passing (%)
80 80 ASTM-Lower Limit
60 60
40 40
20 FA 20
ASTM-Upper Limit
ASTM-Lower Limit
0 0
0.1 1 10 1 10 100
Sieve Size (mm) Sieve Size (mm)
(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Grading size distribution of aggregates along with ASTM limits for (a) fine aggregate and (b) coarse aggregates.
948 M.J. Islam et al. / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 946–951
Table 3
Mix design for 1 m3 of concrete.
Mixture Designationy Cement (kg/m3) Water (kg/m3) Fine aggregate (kg/m3) Brick coarse aggregate (kg/m3) PET coarse aggregate (kg/m3) W/C
NAC WC42P0 461.5 193.8 534.2 1024.0 0.0 0.42
20% PAC WC42P2 461.5 193.8 534.2 819.2 138.9 0.42
30% PAC WC42P3 461.5 193.8 534.2 716.8 208.3 0.42
40% PAC WC42P4 461.5 193.8 534.2 614.4 277.8 0.42
50% PAC WC42P5 461.5 193.8 534.2 512.0 347.2 0.42
NAC WC48P0 449.0 215.5 519.8 996.4 0.0 0.48
20% PAC WC48P2 449.0 215.5 519.8 797.1 135.1 0.48
30% PAC WC48P3 449.0 215.5 519.8 697.5 202.7 0.48
40% PAC WC48P4 449.0 215.5 519.8 597.8 270.3 0.48
50% PAC WC48P5 449.0 215.5 519.8 498.2 337.8 0.48
NAC WC57P0 431.6 246.0 499.6 957.7 0.0 0.57
20% PAC WC57P2 431.6 246.0 499.6 766.2 129.9 0.57
30% PAC WC57P3 431.6 246.0 499.6 670.4 194.8 0.57
40% PAC WC57P4 431.6 246.0 499.6 574.6 259.8 0.57
50% PAC WC57P5 431.6 246.0 499.6 478.8 324.7 0.57
y
WC42P0 = water-cement ratio 0.42, PCA replacement 0%; WC42P20 = water-cement ratio 0.42, PCA replacement 20%; WC42P30 = water-cement ratio 0.42, PCA replacement
30%; WC42P40 = PCA water-cement ratio 0.42, replacement 40%; WC42P50 = PCA water-cement ratio 0.42, replacement 50%; WC48P0 = water-cement ratio 0.48, PCA
replacement 0%; WC48P20 = water-cement ratio 0.48, PCA replacement 20%; WC48P30 = water-cement ratio 0.48, PCA replacement 30%; WC48P40 = PCA water-cement ratio
0.48, replacement 40%; WC48P50 = PCA water-cement ratio 0.48, replacement 50%.; WC57P0 = water-cement ratio 0.57, PCA replacement 0%; WC57P20 = water-cement ratio
0.57, PCA replacement 20%; WC57P30 = water-cement ratio 0.57, PCA replacement 30%; WC57P40 = PCA water-cement ratio 0.57, replacement 40%; WC57P50 = PCA water-
cement ratio 0.57, replacement 50%.
M.J. Islam et al. / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 946–951 949
20 36
Concrete Type
50% PAC
40% PAC
16 30% PAC 32
20% PAC Concrete Type
20% PAC
NAC
8 24
4 20
0 16
0.4 0.44 0.48 0.52 0.56 0.6 0.4 0.44 0.48 0.52 0.56 0.6
W/C Ratio W/C Ratio
Fig. 3. Slump values for various concrete type. Fig. 5. Variation in compressive strength of concrete with w/c ratio.
water content and eliminate the use of water reducing agents. Thus
30% PAC it will help to achieve permissible compressive strength.
20% PAC
NAC
5.2. Density
Fig. 4. Variation of density with w/c ratio for various concrete. 5.3. Compressive strength
40% PAC thereby ensure better bonding. Moreover, restricting the PCA
30% PAC
substitution by 20% would ensure comparable compressive
12 20% PAC
NAC strength compared to the NAC.
References
8
[1] M. Frigione, Recycling of PET bottles as fine aggregate in concrete, Waste
Manage. 30 (6) (2010) 1101–1106.
[2] Plastic recycling information sheet, UK. Waste Online, 2006.
[3] A. Adrados, I. de Marco, B.M. Caballero, A. López, M.F. Laresgoiti, A. Torres,
Pyrolysis of plastic packaging waste: a comparison of plastic residuals from
4 material recovery facilities with simulated plastic waste, Waste Manage. 32 (5)
(2012) 826–832.
[4] EPA, Plastics, Environmental Protection Agency, 2010.
[5] S.B. Kim, N.H. Yi, H.Y. Kim, J-H.J. Kim, Y-C. Song, Material and structural
performance evaluation of recycled PET fiber reinforced concrete, Cem. Concr.
Compos. 32 (3) (2010) 232–240.
[6] P. Panyakapo, M. Panyakapo, Reuse of thermosetting plastic waste for
0
lightweight concrete, Waste Manage. 28 (9) (2008) 1581–1588.
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 [7] R. Siddique, J. Khatib, I. Kaur, Use of recycled plastic in concrete: a review,
W/C Ratio Waste Manage. 28 (10) (2008) 1835–1852.
[8] P.M. Subramanian, Plastics recycling and waste management in the US, Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 28 (3–4) (2000) 253–263.
Fig. 6. Variation in compressive strength/density of concrete with w/c ratio.
[9] B.-W. Jo, S.-K. Park, J.-C. Park, Mechanical properties of polymer concrete made
with recycled PET and recycled concrete aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 22
(12) (2008) 2281–2291.
[10] K.S. Rebeiz, Time-temperature properties of polymer concrete using recycled
Along with the bleeding water, the smooth surface of the PCA PET, Cement Concr. Compos. 17 (2) (1995) 119–124.
also contributes to the low compressive strength of PAC. Rough [11] K. Rebeiz, S. Serhal, D. Fowler, Shear strength of reinforced polyester concrete
aggregate surface of brick chips develop strong bondage between using recycled PET, J. Struct. Eng. 121 (9) (1995) 1370–1375.
[12] T. Ochi, S. Okubo, K. Fukui, Development of recycled PET fiber and its
the aggregates and the cement paste but smooth surface of PCA application as concrete-reinforcing fiber, Cem. Concr. Compos. 29 (6) (2007)
is unable to develop strong bond results in a lower compressive 448–455.
strength than NAC. The failure pattern of the PAC cylinders con- [13] D.A. Silva, A.M. Betioli, P.J.P. Gleize, H.R. Roman, L.A. Gómeza, J.L.D. Ribeiro,
Degradation of recycled PET fibers in Portland cement-based materials, Cem.
firms the weak bondage between the PCA and cement paste. All
Concr. Res. 35 (9) (2005) 1741–1746.
the PAC cylinders in the experiment showed mortar failure cracks [14] J.-P. Won, C.-I. Jang, S.-W. Lee, S.-J. Lee, H.-Y. Kim, Long-term performance of
around the PCA. recycled PET fibre-reinforced cement composites, Constr. Build. Mater. 24 (5)
(2010) 660–665.
Fig. 6 demonstrates the variation of compressive strength/den-
[15] P.N. Balaguru, S.P. Shah, Fiber-Reinforced Cement Composites, McGraw-Hill,
sity ratio with the w/c ratio. For higher w/c ratios NAC showed a 1992.
significant increase in compressive strength/density ratio compare [16] A. Bentur, S. Mindess, Fibre Reinforced Cementitious Composites, second ed.,
to PAC. However, for w/c ratio of 0.42 this variation is insignificant CRC Press, 2006.
[17] J.-H.J. Kim, C.-G. Park, S.-W. Lee, S.-W. Lee, J.-P. Won, Effects of the geometry of
especially for PAC with 20% PCA. Furthermore, 28 days compres- recycled PET fiber reinforcement on shrinkage cracking of cement-based
sive strength for 20% PCA replaced concrete was 30.3 MPa compare composites, Composites Part B 39 (3) (2008) 442–450.
to 33.4 MPa for NAC when w/c ratio was 0.42. This leads to the con- [18] V.T. Breslin, U. Senturk, C.C. Berndt, Long-term engineering properties of
recycled plastic lumber used in pier construction, Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 23
clusion that small amount of PCA replaced concrete with low w/c (4) (1998) 243–258.
ratio can produce concrete similar to the traditional concrete with [19] K. Flaga, Advances in materials applied in civil engineering, J. Mater. Process.
natural aggregates. Technol. 106 (1–3) (2000) 173–183.
[20] O.Y. Marzouk, R.M. Dheilly, M. Queneudec, Valorization of post-consumer
waste plastic in cementitious concrete composites, Waste Manage. 27 (2)
6. Conclusions (2007) 310–318.
[21] Y.W. Choi, D.J. Moon, Y.J. Kim, M. Lachemi, Characteristics of mortar and
concrete containing fine aggregate manufactured from recycled waste
The use of 20%, 30%, 40% and 50% PCA replaced concrete mix- polyethylene terephthalate bottles, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (8) (2009) 2829–
ture results in following conclusions: 2835.
[22] S. Akçaözoğlu, C.D. Atisß, K. Akçaözoğlu, An investigation on the use of shredded
waste PET bottles as aggregate in lightweight concrete, Waste Manage. 30 (2)
- PAC offered much better workability than the regular concrete (2010) 285–290.
aggregate while using same w/c ratio. This provides the oppor- [23] K. Hannawi, S. Kamali-Bernard, W. Prince, Physical and mechanical properties
tunity to work with low w/c ratio and get the desired concrete of mortars containing PET and PC waste aggregates, Waste Manage. 30 (11)
(2010) 2312–2320.
strength. [24] J.M.L. Reis, E.P. Carneiro, Evaluation of PET waste aggregates in polymer
- A 4–10% reduction in density was achieved with the PAC com- mortars, Constr. Build. Mater. 27 (1) (2012) 107–111.
pare to the NAC. Although it could not be classified as a light- [25] S.-J. Liu, Recycled Plastics as Fillers in Polymer Cement Concrete Composites,
New Jersey Institute Technology, New Jersey, 1988.
weight concrete still it provides a substantial advantage over [26] C. Albano, N. Camacho, M. Hernández, A. Matheus, A. Gutiérrez, Influence of
the NAC by reducing the self-weight of the structure. content and particle size of waste pet bottles on concrete behavior at different
- High strength concrete is achievable with the PCA, especially for w/c ratios, Waste Manage. 29 (10) (2009) 2707–2716.
[27] Y.-W. Choi, D.-J. Moon, J.-S. Chung, S.-K. Cho, Effects of waste PET bottles
concrete with low w/c ratio and small amount of PCA replace-
aggregate on the properties of concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 35 (4) (2005) 776–
ment. With 20% PCA replaced concrete at w/c ratio of 0.42, 781.
30.3 MPa compressive strength was achieved. Since PAC has a [28] Z.Z. Ismail, E.A. Al-Hashmi, Use of waste plastic in concrete mixture as
high workability incorporating low w/c ratio in concrete mix aggregate replacement, Waste Manage. 28 (11) (2008) 2041–2047.
[29] R.V. Silva, J. de Brito, N. Saikia, Influence of curing conditions on the durability-
design is not big issue, and thus, PAC can be adopted for struc- related performance of concrete made with selected plastic waste aggregates,
tural concrete with confidence. Cem. Concr. Compos. 35 (1) (2013) 23–31.
M.J. Islam et al. / Construction and Building Materials 125 (2016) 946–951 951
[30] J.V. Vaverka, An Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Composites Utilizing Recycled [35] ASTM C 128-01, Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific
Polyethylene Terephthalate Thermoplastic, University of Northern Iowa, 1991. Gravity), and Absorption of Fine Aggregate, ASTM International, West
[31] A. Ghaly, M. Gill, Compression and deformation performance of concrete Conshohocken, PA, 2001. www.astm.org.
containing postconsumer plastics, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 16 (4) (2004) 289–296. [36] ASTM C 136-01, Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse
[32] N. Saikia, J. de Brito, Mechanical properties and abrasion behaviour of concrete Aggregates, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2001. www.astm.
containing shredded PET bottle waste as a partial substitution of natural org.
aggregate, Constr. Build. Mater. 52 (2014) 236–244. [37] ASTM C 127-01, Standard Test Method for Density, Relative Density (Specific
[33] T.R. Naik, S.S. Singh, C.O. Huber, B.S. Brodersen, Use of post-consumer waste Gravity), and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate, ASTM International, West
plastics in cement-based composites, Cem. Concr. Res. 26 (10) (1996) 1489– Conshohocken, PA, 2001. www.astm.org.
1492. [38] ACI 211.1-91, Standard Practice of Selecting Proportions for Normal, Heavy-
[34] ASTM C 114-04, Standard Test Methods for Chemical Analysis of Hydraulic weight, and Mass Concrete, ACI Manual of Concrete Practice, Part 1: Materials
Cement, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2004. www.astm.org. and General Properties of Concrete, Detroit, Michigan, 1994