Accepted Manuscript

Feasibility study of waste Poly Ethylene Terephthalate (PET) particles as aggregate

replacement for acid erosion of sustainable structural normal and lightweight concrete

Iman M. Nikbin, Saman Rahimi R, Hamed Allahyari, Farhad Fallah

PII: S0959-6526(16)30061-0
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.143
Reference: JCLP 6850

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 12 May 2015

Revised Date: 26 February 2016
Accepted Date: 27 February 2016

Please cite this article as: Nikbin IM, Rahimi R S, Allahyari H, Fallah F, Feasibility study of waste Poly
Ethylene Terephthalate (PET) particles as aggregate replacement for acid erosion of sustainable
structural normal and lightweight concrete, Journal of Cleaner Production (2016), doi: 10.1016/
j.jclepro.2016.02.143.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Feasibility study of waste Poly Ethylene Terephthalate (PET) particles as

2 aggregate replacement for acid erosion of sustainable structural normal and
3 lightweight concrete
4
5 Iman M. Nikbin

PT
6 Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University Rasht Branch, Iran

7 E-mail address: Nikbin@iaurasht.ac.ir

RI
8
9 Saman Rahimi R*

SC
10 Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University Rasht Branch, Iran

11 E-mail address: saman.r.r.ac@gmail.com

U
12
AN
13 Hamed Allahyari

14 Department of Civil Engineering, Babol University of Technology, Iran

15 E-mail address: allahyari.h@gmail.com

M

16
17 Farhad Fallah
D

18 Faculty of Civil Engineering, Science and Research Branch Islamic Azad University of Sirjan, Sirjan, Iran
TE

19 E-mail address: farhad.fallah.ac@gmail.com

20
21
EP

22 *Corresponding author.

23 E-mail address: saman.r.r.ac@gmail.com

C

24
AC

25

26

27

28

29

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

30 Abstract

31 Using PET as a raw material to produce bottles or containers is very common that after usage leads to a

32 challenging environment protection issue. A large amount of consumed PET become waste and require

33 vast areas of land for storage since several tons of that cannot be fully recycled at once. Concerning this

PT
34 issue, there is a potential to recycle wastes such as waste PET to produce concrete and to prevent the

RI
35 direct contact of plastics with the environment due to a longer service life of concrete. In this study, the

36 resistance of normal PET concrete (NPC) and lightweight PET concrete (LWPC) against sulfuric acid

SC
37 erosion was investigated. Percentages of 5, 10 and 15 of waste PET particles substitute for fine natural

38 aggregate in both NPC and LWPC mixtures. After curing and then immersing specimens in 5% sulfuric

U
39 acid solution, in intervals of 15, 30 and 60 days, crushing load, mass measuring, and ultrasonic wave
AN
40 velocity tests were conducted on them. According to the results, not only LWPC did erode less than NPC,

41 but also their crushing load reduction, mass loss, and ultrasonic wave velocity reduction rate was lower
M

42 than the NPC specimens. Furthermore, the lightweight concrete without PET (LWC) showed a lesser

43 reduction rate, compared to normal concrete (NC). Reusing waste PET in concrete consumes large
D

44 amounts of it, which compensates for its disposal issues, protects natural resources, decreases the dead
TE

45 load of buildings due to its low unit weight, and in this study led to improving acid resistance of both

46 types of concrete.
EP

47 Keywords: Waste Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET); Waste management; Sulfuric acid attack;

48 environmental concrete; Lightweight concrete

C
AC

49

50

51

52

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

53

54 1. Introduction

55 PET is one of the widespread used plastics in the packaging industry due to its lightweight and

PT
56 easiness of handling and storage (Rahmani et al., 2013). Since the beverage consumption increased,

57 producing PET bottles increased particularly in the USA, Canada, and Western Europe (Choi et al., 2005;

RI
58 Reis and Carneiro, 2012). In some Asian countries such as China, India, and Korea, a rise in the

59 production of PET has dramatically become an environmental menace (Choi et al., 2002; Kim et al.,

SC
60 2010).

61 During the last few decades, the generation, recycling, composting, and disposal of solid wastes have

62
U
altered fundamentally. Total solid waste generation according to last reports was 251 million tons in the
AN
63 USA (U S Environmental Protection, 2010) and 10.37 million tons in Iran (Nabizadeh et al., 2008). Yet,

64 84% of the waste is buried, and only 6% is recycled, and 10% is composed in Iran (Nabizadeh et al.,
M

65 2008). In the case of the USA, these values are 53.8%, 34.5%, and 11.7% in terms of burying, recycling,
D

66 and composting (U S Environmental Protection, 2010). Figure 1 shows the breakdown of solid wastes

67 generated, by material. According to the figure, the total amount of waste plastic generated in the USA
TE

68 was 12.7% and in Iran was 8%. According to NOPCOR (NAPCOR (National Association for PET

69 Container), 2014), the total weight of PET bottles and jars available in the USA for recycling in 2014 was
EP

70 2.65 million tons and the total amount, by weight, of postconsumer PET bottles collected for recycling
C

71 was 0.82 million tons, so the recycling rate of PET was 31%, including both whole bottles and dirty

72 flakes. Moreover, the utilisation rate of PET (the amount of clean flakes produced from post-consumer
AC

73 bottles plus clean flakes exported, to total bottles available for recycling) was 21.6%. PET can be

74 recovered and recycled again and again by thorough washing and re-melting for use in new PET products,

75 or by chemically breaking down the PET into its constituent raw materials, which are then purified and

76 converted into new PET. PET can be recycled into new PET containers, carpet, clothing, protective

77 packaging, industrial strapping, automotive parts, construction materials, even the felt for tennis balls, and

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

78 tennis ball canisters (“Recycling | PETRA: Information on the Use, Benefits & Safety of PET Plastic.,”

79 2016). Any PET that is unsuitable for recycling because it is too dirty or contaminated (the difference

80 between recycling rate and utilisation rate) to be properly cleaned can be safely and efficiently burned as

81 an energy source.

PT
82 Although it is possible to benefit from the produced heat during incineration, the combustion of some

RI
83 kinds of wastes like PET may produce poisonous gasses. In addition, there are active campaigns against

84 waste incineration, causing air pollution and consequent acid rain, and Greenpeace actively acted on these

SC
85 problems (Frigione, 2010). On the other side, the decline of wastes greatly benefits the natural

86 environment with certain economic advantages since waste materials stand for a big loss of resources that

U
87 could be recovered, recycled or appointed to other uses (Frigione, 2010; Sadrmomtazi et al., 2015;
AN
88 Sharma and Bansal, 2015).

89 Furthermore, the concrete industry is one of the largest consumers of natural resources. It is estimated that
M

90 the worldwide consumption of concrete is almost 10 thousand million tons per a year. If one assumes that

91 concrete is 70% aggregates and uses 300 kg/m3 of cement then nearly 1.2 thousand million tons of cement
D

92 and 7.5 thousand million tons of aggregates are consumed annually by the industry (Bogas et al., 2015).
TE

93 In this sense, the sustainability criteria are emphasised and applied to concrete due to their most
EP

94 widely usage in building materials and some factors, such as versatility, ease of raw materials

95 obtainment, low cost, ease of fabrication, high mechanical strength, impermeability to water, and
C

96 high durability (Güneyisi et al., 2004; Khaloo et al., 2008; Sadrmomtazi et al., 2015).
AC

97 Therefore, using PET particles instead of a proportion of aggregate can improve some characteristics of

98 concrete due to their satisfactory abrasion behaviour (Janfeshan Araghi et al., 2015), high toughness

99 (Rahmani et al., 2013), low thermal conductivity (Fraternali et al., 2011), high ductility (Janfeshan Araghi

100 et al., 2015), and high heat capacity (“Plastics, Polymers & Resins | DuPont USA,” 2016).

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

101 Utilising waste materials in concrete is of particular interest due to the fact that the usable lifespan of

102 concrete is far greater than its non-usable life span. Moreover, the lifespan of usable plastics is much

103 lower than their waste service life on the earth. Therefore, the inclusion of waste products in concrete can

104 be used to safely dispose of them (Sharma and Bansal, 2015).

PT
105 In recent decades, many pieces of research have been conducted on using different types of waste

RI
106 materials in concrete. Table 1 lists some of these researches that replaced different constituents of

107 concrete with various types of waste materials (Sharma and Bansal, 2015).

SC
108 Researchers indicated that mortars made of PET could be utilised in aggressive environments due to their

109 low water absorption. In addition, it could provide high erosion resistant concrete (Ge et al., 2013). Some

110

U
researchers, Won et al. and Singh et al. (Singh et al., 2004; Won et al., 2010), illustrated that using PET in
AN
111 concrete leads to increase in ductility and decrease in plastic shrinkage cracks, which improves concrete

112 durability. Moreover, Akçaözog˘lu et al. (Akçaözoğlu et al., 2010) indicated that utilising PET in concrete
M

113 contributes to improvement in permeability and resistance to carbonation and leads to decrease in weight,

114 which provides worthy advantages in structures designing. Even then, it could suffer from some minor
D

115 disadvantages, a decrease in compressive and tensile strength (Albano et al., 2009; Choi et al., 2009).
TE

116 One of the most crucial problems in the design and construction of structural elements is the considerable
EP

117 amount of weight of dead-load. Structural lightweight concrete has been used successfully for structural

118 purposes for many years. This type of concrete has a lower density compared to normal weight concrete
C

119 and differs from normal weight concrete by using lightweight aggregates. The main application of
AC

120 structural lightweight concrete is to decrease the dead load and consequently reduce the dynamic loads of

121 concrete structures such as high-rise buildings, long-span bridges and marine structures, allowing the

122 structural designer to reduce the areas of sectional members, and the construction cost can be saved when

123 applied to structures (Bogas et al., 2015).

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

124 In recent decades, the durability of concrete has been standing out in structures designing. Although

125 considrable worthy progress in recognising of erosion processes has achieved, there have been limits on

126 how these processes influence on final characteristics of concrete.

127 The main issue about the durability of concrete structures is to face acidic environments, which affects

PT
128 performance, lifetime, and cost of vital infrastructures maintaining. Previous studies have shown that

RI
129 existent acids in underground water, chemical sewage or acids produced by oxidation of sulfur

130 compounds in backfills could attack concrete substructures (Alani and Faramarzi, 2014; Hobbs and

SC
131 Taylor, 2000). Additionally, many concrete structures, especially in industrial areas, are affected by

132 erosion resulted by acid rain (Fan et al., 2010). Spoiling sewages leads to several problems, including

U
133 pollution of soils and underground water, reduction of ability in wastewater transfer and excessive ground
AN
134 settlement cave-in (Chang et al., 2005). Furthermore, providing high-quality sewage infrastructures needs

135 too much expenditure on high-quality concrete. For example, only in the US, the costs of controlling and
M

136 maintaining in Germany is even more than investing in new wastewater infrastructures. Moreover, costs

137 of sewer controlling and maintening caused by biogenic sulfuric acid attack have estimated about 100
D

138 thousand million US dollars (O’Connell et al., 2012). In 1945, Parker (Parker, 1945) associated this
TE

139 subject with chemical-microbial interaction in sewage and mentioned that effects of sulfuric acid on

140 concrete are more destructive than sulfate attack. Because in this situation, there are dissolution effects
EP

141 resulted by hydrogen ions besides of sulfate ions attack. Sulfuric acid reacts with existent calcium

142 hydroxide (CH) in concrete and produces gypsum, and then gypsum formation leads to approximately
C

143 double volume expansion of concrete. Even now, some researchers have mentioned this reaction plays a
AC

144 secondary part in erosion procedure. The reactions between gypsum and calcium aluminate hydrate

145 (C3A) and formation of ettringite cause more destruction due to their greater expansion in volume than

146 initial compounds (Monteny et al., 2001). These compounds cause inner pressure to increase, which leads

147 to the formation of cracks (Monteny et al., 2001). While the erosion is continuing, the cracked surface

148 becomes white and soft, and the eroded concrete loses its mechanical strength. Gradually, with increasing

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

149 the number of cracks, the concrete begins spalling and finally ruins (Lee et al., 2008; Schmidt et al., 2009;

150 Skalny et al., 2003). The findings of conducted studies are not scientifically used in typical constructions

151 yet. On the other side, the erosion of water and wastewater infrastructures has been one of the most

152 problems during recent decades. However, there are many attitudes about a proper design of structures

PT
153 against aggressive environment during their service life (Neville, 2004; Wells and Melchers, 2015;

154 Yamanaka, 2002). Some of these studies, on the one hand, illustrate improvements in concrete properties

RI
155 by utilising various admixtures and innovative materials compounds and at last introduce a modern

SC
156 concrete; on the other hand, prevent growing sulfuric acid producing bacteria (Bassuoni and Nehdi,

157 2007). So far many pieces of research were conducted on effects of cement type, water to cement ratio

U
158 (W/C), admixtures and types of aggregates on the improvement in normal concrete and mortar resistance

159 to sulfuric acid attack (Bassuoni and Nehdi, 2007; Chang et al., 2005; Lotfy et al., 2016; Roy et al., 2001;
AN
160 Thomas and Gupta, 2016; Yuan et al., 2015).
M

161 Due to insufficient studies about the deterioration of PET concrete exposed to sulfuric acid, in this

162 research effects of various percentages of PET particles on LWPC and NPC exposed to sulfuric acid
D

163 investigated and compared.

TE

164
EP

165 2. Experimental program

166 2.1 Materials and mix proportions

C

167 In order to make concrete specimens, an amount of natural fine aggregate, normal-weight coarse
AC

168 aggregate (gravel), and light expanded clay aggregate (LECA) produced in Leca factory (Saveh, Iran)

169 with 740 kg/m3 of dry compacted density were mixed. Table.2 shows the characteristics of aggregates.

170 The sieve analysis conducted for aggregates was based on ASTM standard (ASTM C33 / C33M, 2013;

171 ASTM C330 / C330M - 14 Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete,

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

172 2014), and the results are given in Table 3. The cement utilised in this study is Portland cement type II,

173 produced in Mazandaran Cement Factory (Neka, Iran).

174 The PET particles, rinsed and grinded by means of industrial machines, were provided from waste dirty

175 PET bottles and utilised as fine aggregate in concrete. The PET particles used in this study had the

PT
176 maximum size of 7mm (as shown in Figure 2) and the estimated unit weight of 464 Kg/m3 with a specific

gravity of 1.11 gr/cm3. Moreover, their flexural modulus of elasticity, tensile modulus of elasticity and

RI
177

178 maximum tensile strength were 2.5 GPa, 2.9 GPa and 60 MPa. Table 3 shows the sieve analysis results.

SC
179 The percentages of concrete components and concrete mixtures (ACI Committee 211, 1991) are given in

180 Table 4. First, a half of the sands and gravel and total of LECA were mixed. Afterwards, the PET

181

U
particles were added to the mixture and properly mixed with the existing materials, and then 20% of the
AN
182 existing water was added to saturate the aggregates. After that, remained cement and sand were added

183 into the mixture, and finally, the remained water was poured. Moreover, by increasing in the proportion of
M

184 PET particles, the mix time increased. All the physical and mechanical characteristics of specimens

185 containing 5, 10 and 15 volumetric percent of substituted PET were compared with control specimens
D

186 (NC and LWC). In the case of NPC and LWPC, the numbers 5, 10, and 15 stand for the percentage of
TE

187 PET particles. Therefore, LWPC5 is LWPC with 5% PET substitution.

EP

188

189 2.2 The process

C

190 There is not a strict method to measure the resistance of concrete in acidic environments, but ASTM C267
AC

191 (“ASTM C267 - 01(2012) Standard Test Methods for Chemical Resistance of Mortars, Grouts, and

192 Monolithic Surfacings and Polymer Concretes,” 2012) presented general guidelines for mortars or grouts

193 and polymer concretes. All the samples were cured at 20 °C and 95% RH for 28 days. Afterwards, three

194 samples of each mixture were tested in order to compare the results and give an exact definition of

195 analysis about the specimens in the sulfuric acid solution. The remained samples were divided into two

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

196 equal groups, one of them was kept in curing container and the other one was transferred to 5% sulfuric

197 acid solution (PH≈1) to simulate sewage environments in laboratory accelerated test. Three specimens of

198 each mixture immersed in sulfuric acid solution and three specimens cured in water were extracted after

199 15, 30, and 60 days and rinsed three times with tap water, and after putting them at room temperature for

PT
200 30 minutes, their dimensions were measured and crushing load test, mass change measuring, and

201 ultrasonic wave velocity test were conducted. The mass variation of specimens in the form of a

RI
202 percentage of their initial mass used as an indicator to evaluate the deterioration of concrete subjected to

SC
203 the sulfuric acid solution. Equation 1 presents the cumulative mass loss (MLj) for each specimen.

204

U
M j − Mi)
205 ML j = ( ) ×100 (1)
Mi
AN
206 Where:
M

207 Mj = the mass of specimen at time j (kg).

208 Mi = the primary mass of specimen before exposure to sulfuric acid (kg).
D

209
TE

210 The mass variation is a simple and traditional measuring factor in acidic attack test and can depend on the

211 size of specimens and cement type. In addition, it could be significantly under the effect of the behaviour
EP

212 of reactions products and decomposition of cement paste on specimens. Therefore, in this paper crushing

213 load bearing capacity for cubic specimens in the size of 10×10×10 cm was considered as an effective
C

214 measure of concrete resistance to sulfuric acid attack. Measuring the dimensions of specimens was
AC

215 accompanied by many problems after the acidic attack because the dimensions could become irregular

216 with exposed aggregate. In order to eliminate these problems, the load bearing capacity of specimens was

217 applied as a factor to mention the maximum load recorded within the compressive test (Chang et al.,

218 2005). The compressive load, before and after the acidic attack is called crushing load and this measuring

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

219 method is called crushing load test (Chang et al., 2005). To estimate the decrease in the crushing load

220 value compared to reference value before subjecting to sulfuric acid, Equation 2 was employed.

221

fc j − fc28
∆fc j = ( ) × 100 (2)

PT
222
fc28

223

RI
224 Where:

fcj = the crushing load of specimen at time j (kg).

SC
225

226 fc28 = the primary crushing of specimen after a 28-day curing (kg).

U
227

228 To measure ultrasonic wave velocity (“ASTM C597 - 09 Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity
AN
229 Through Concrete,” 2009), an ultrasonic non-destructive electronic machine (PUNDIT MODEL

230 PC1,012) was used which its accuracy was 0.1 µs. A transducer with the vibration frequency of 52 kHz
M

231 and accuracy of ±1% for travel time and ±2% for distance was also utilised. Nine measurements were
D

232 performed for three cubic specimens of each design in various ages, and the minimum time among them
TE

233 was recorded.

234
EP

235 3. Results and discussions

236 Fan et al. (Fan et al., 2010) presented Equation 3 to estimate the crushing load of concrete specimens
C

237 exposed to sulfuric acid.

AC

f cr , j
238 Dcc = (3)
f cn , j

239 Where:

240 Dcc = relative strength deterioration ratio of crushing load for deteriorated concrete specimen.

241 fcr,j = the axial crushing load of concrete exposed to the acid solution during j days.

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

242 fcn,j = the axial crushing load of control specimens cured in the water during j days.

243

244 As shown in Figure 3, increasing in immersion time in the sulfuric acid solution causes Dcc ratio to

245 decrease in both types of concrete, although Dcc variations versus time are decreased by increasing the

PT
246 percentage of PET particles. In the other words, by increasing PET particles, less crushing load reduction

247 for specimens attacked by sulfuric acid is seen. The least values among them are associated with

RI
248 LWPC15 and NPC15, illustrating positive effects of substituting PET particles on the concrete resistance

SC
249 to erosion.

250 After plotting the difference between the crushing load of immersed specimens and their initial crushing

U
251 load, after a 28-day curing, versus their immersion time in Figure 4, it can be expressed that relative
AN
252 changes in crushing loads begin decreasing from primary ages. The specimens containing 15 percent of

253 PET indicated lower reduction than the other ones (after 60 days immersion), especially in regard to
M

254 LWPC. This lower reduction can be attributed to their higher ability to retain their healthy core and

255 integrity against acid attack. The crushing load reduction rate for specimens consisted of 5%, 10% and
D

256 15% of PET particles was reduced after approximately halftime of immersion.
TE

257 Figure 5 represents the relation between ultrasonic wave velocity and immersion time of specimens in the

258 sulfuric acid. According to this figure, ultrasonic wave velocity related to specimens containing PET
EP

259 particles was lower than control specimens at initial ages. By passing time of immersing, the ultrasonic

260 wave velocity of all specimens began reducing, and after nearly 20 days reached each other. For control
C

261 specimens, the reduction of ultrasonic wave velocity tended to continue, but specimens containing PET
AC

262 particles almost got a constant value. By increasing immersion time, erosion products are produced in

263 concrete, and due to higher porosity and lower integrity of concrete after exposure, ultrasonic wave

264 velocity reduces. The ultrasonic velocity of specimens containing 15% of PET particles was less than the

265 other ones in both types of concrete. This is because of higher capacity of concrete containing more PET

266 particles to resist the internal pressure caused by expansion of cement paste during the reaction to the

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

267 sulfuric acid. This resistance could be related to more porosity of PET concrete as accommodation for

268 reaction products and the flexibility of PET particles. Therefore, it might be expressed that specimens

269 containing more PET particles have higher ultrasonic wave velocity after 60-days immersion, indicating

270 their higher resistance to sulfuric acid attack.

PT
271 Figure 6 plots mass of immersed specimens versus immersion time. As observed, specimens containing

RI
272 PET particles had less mass compared with control specimens at initial ages. After a 60-day immersion,

273 the specimens containing more PET particles retained more mass in terms of NPC and LWPC, which

SC
274 indicates their higher resistance to sulfuric acid attack. It should be noted that lower mass of concretes

275 containing more PET particles during initial days is due to the lower unit weight of PET particles

U
276 compared to normal aggregates.
AN
277 Figure 7 represents the mass loss of specimens containing various percentages of PET particles attacked

278 by sulfuric acid. LWPC showed less mass reduction than NPC specimens. However, LWC indicated more
M

279 mass loss compared to NPC10 and NPC15. Concerning this figure, by increasing the PET percentage in

280 both types of concretes, the resistance to sulfuric acid increased, and the LWPC15 as well as NPC15 had
D

281 the highest resistance in each type.

TE

282 The relation between 28-day crushing load of specimens and their mass loss after immersing in sulfuric
EP

283 acid solution is shown in Figure 8. The graph is divided into four quarters that the intersection of them is

284 a point with values of the 28-day crushing load and the 60-day mass loss of control specimen attacked by
C

285 sulfuric acid.

AC

286 -Points on the up and left quarter of graph have higher crushing load and lower mass loss than control

287 concrete (OBP).

288 -Points on the down and left quarter of graph have lower crushing load and mass loss than control

289 concrete (OD).

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

290 -Points on the up and right quarter of graph have higher crushing load and mass loss than control concrete

291 (OD).

292 -Points on the down and right quarter of graph have lower crushing load and higher mass loss (OWP).

PT
293 Hewayde et al. (Hewayde et al., 2007) mentioned that the factors of compressive strength improvement

294 necessarily do not contribute to enhancing the concrete resistance to sulfuric acid attack. According to

RI
295 designer’s goal, a concrete with high durability and medium strength could be produced to use in some

296 circumstances. As shown in Figure 8, the points resulted by crushing load and mass loss tests on two

SC
297 types of LWPC and NPC containing various percentages of PET particles are located on the down and

298 left quarter of graph (OD). In the other words, by increasing the percentage of PET particles, the mass

299

U
loss and crushing load of specimens affected by sulfuric acid was decreased, while the resistance to
AN
300 erosion increased, especially regarding LWPC. It is important to note that crushing load could be

301 increased by adding supplementary cementitious materials in order to use the advantages of these types of
M

302 concrete. In the other words, if the goal of design is to increase concrete durability and have the least

303 structural strength, adding PET particles could be more effective.

D
TE

304 Figure 9 shows the relation between the mass loss of specimens and the loss of their crushing load during

305 a 60-day immersion in sulfuric acid solution. It is observed that both crushing load and mass were
EP

306 decreased, and the analysis of regression coefficients, shown in these graphs, illustrate a linear equation

307 for specimens containing various percentages of PET particles.

C

308 Regarding the best-fit line for specimens, the higher coefficients of the equations, the higher decrease for
AC

309 crushing loads in comparison to mass loss. It is observed that the regression coefficient is increased by

310 substituting PET particles in both types of concretes, which shows a lesser mass loss for specimens

311 containing more PET particles within a specific range of crushing load. Although LWC and LWPC5 have

312 a lesser coefficient compared to NC and NPC5, this coefficient is higher for LWPC10 and LWPC15.

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

313 In this study, specimens containing 15% of PET particles had the highest equation coefficient in the case

314 of both types of concretes, and LWPC15 had the highest coefficient compared to all specimens. As a

315 consequence, the specimens containing higher percentage of PET particles have higher durability,

316 especially in the case of LWPC.

PT
317 As seen in Figure 10, the crushing load variation of LWPC is obviously lower than NPC in all

RI
318 percentages of PET substitution, and this variation is higher at the end of 60-days immersion. Not only

319 LWPC specimens did erode less than NPC specimens, but also their crushing loads reduction rates were

SC
320 lower than the NPC specimens. Moreover, LWC showed less crushing load reduction than NC.

321 Figure 11 shows ultrasonic wave velocity variation versus the time of immersion in sulfuric acid. From

322

U
the initial days of immersion, LWPC specimens had marked variations compared to NPC specimens, and
AN
323 LWPC15 had the highest one. In addition, LWC had lower ultrasonic velocity variation compared to both

324 NC and NPC.

M

325 As seen in Figure 12, substituting PET particles in both types of concrete led to a decrease in the mass
D

326 change of specimens. Furthermore, LWPC specimens had less mass change than NPC specimens and
TE

327 showed higher resistance to sulfuric acid. Both LWPC and NPC showed lower mass change compared

328 with NC due to the positive effect of substituting PET particles on the concrete resistance to sulfuric acid,
EP

329 especially in the case of LWPC.

330
C

331 4. Conclusions and future perspectives

AC

332 PET waste reflects a serious environmental issue that is in urgent need of being addressed by the

333 scientific community. Experiments were conducted to investigate the feasibility of PET in NPC

334 and LWPC as a partial substitution for natural fine aggregate and present an interesting approach

335 for recycling of this type of waste material in the civil engineering area. In this study, the influence

336 of sulfuric acid attack on the two types of NPC and LWPC consisted of various percentages of PET

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

337 particles (5, 10, and 15) as a substitute for aggregate was investigated by using crushing load, mass

338 measuring, and ultrasonic wave velocity tests.

339 The results are listed below:

PT
340 - According to the mass measuring test, specimens containing more percentage of PET particles had a

341 lesser mass loss. It could be concluded the specimens consisted of 15% of PET particles had better

RI
342 resistance to sulfuric acid in two types of concrete and the least mass loss in LWPC15 occurred.

SC
343 - The LWPC specimens had less mass change compared to the NPC specimens, which shows more

344 resistance of LWPC specimens to sulfuric acid attack than the NPC specimens. Both NPC and LWPC

U
345 also showed lower mass change than the NC specimens. This matter mentions positive effects of adding

346 PET particles in concrete against acid erosion, especially in the case of LWPC.
AN
347 - Regarding the crushing load test, the crushing load changes were decreased by substituting more PET
M

348 particles in both NPC and LWPC. Additionally, samples included higher percentage of PET particles,

349 more retain their load-bearing capacity against sulfuric acid attack. This retention was more for LWPC
D

350 specimens, especially in the case of LWPC15.

TE

351 - The crushing load of LWPC specimens was obviously lower than NPC specimens in all percentages of

352 PET substitution. Moreover, not only LWPC specimens did erode less than NPC specimens, but also their
EP

353 crushing load reduction rate was lower than the NPC specimens. Furthermore, the LWC specimens

354 showed less crushing load reduction than NC.

C
AC

355 - Regarding ultrasonic wave velocity test, the loss of ultrasonic wave velocity of specimens containing

356 more percentages of PET particles decreased. It might be due to the higher capacity of concrete

357 containing PET particles to resist the internal pressure caused by expansion of cement paste and retain

358 more integrity during the reaction to sulfuric acid, which could be related to its more porosity as

359 accommodation for reaction products and the flexibility of PET particles. This reduction was the lowest

360 about LWPC15 specimens.

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

361 - From the initial days of immersion, the LWPC specimens indicated lower values of ultrasonic wave

362 velocity loss compared to the NPC specimens, and this value were the lowest for LWPC15. In addition,

363 the LWC specimens had lower ultrasonic wave velocity reduction than both NC and NPC.

364 - In the case of crushing load and mass measuring variations results, the coefficient of equation in the

PT
365 relation between mass and crushing load variations increased by substituting more PET particles in both

RI
366 LWPC and NPC specimens. Increas in the coefficient of the equation shows the changes in mass is lower

367 than crushing load. Although LWC and LWPC5 had lower coefficient than NC and NPC5, this

SC
368 coefficient was higher for LWPC10 and LWPC15. In this study, specimens consisted of 15% of PET

369 particles had the highest equation coefficient for both LWPC and NPC. LWPC15 had the highest

U
370 coefficient compared to all specimens, which shows the specimens containing higher percentage of PET
AN
371 particles have higher durability against erosion, especially in the case of LWPC.

372 - Clearly, substituting PET particles for fine aggregate into the concrete contributes to higher durability
M

373 against sulfuric acid attack. Although substituting PET for fine aggregate leads to a decrease in some

374 mechanical properties, it can be utilised for encapsulating waste materials and producing ecologically safe
D

375 concrete. The outcomes of the present work illustrate quite encouraging results and open a new approach
TE

376 to recycle PET wastes in concrete leading to produce a high-quality concrete for using in certain civil

377 engineering applications. Nonetheless, future studies such as evaluation of acid resistance of concrete
EP

378 containing waste PET along with other waste plastics, feasibility study of resistant concrete containing

379 PET and pozzolanic materials against acid attack, and investigating the resistance of other types of
C

380 concrete such as self-compacting concrete against sulfuric acid attack, should clarify which treatments
AC

381 can optimise concrete performance with the lowest environmental impact.

382

383
384

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

385

386

387

PT
388

389

RI
390

SC
391 References

U
392 ACI Committee 211, 1991. ACI 211.1-91: Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions for Normal,
AN
393 Heavyweight, and Mass Concrete (Reapproved 2009).

394 www.concrete.org/store/productdetail.aspx?ItemID=211191 (accessed 10.29.15).

M

395 Akçaözoğlu, S., Atiş, C.D., Akçaözoğlu, K., 2010. An investigation on the use of shredded waste PET

396 bottles as aggregate in lightweight concrete. Waste Manag. 30, 285–90.

D

397 doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2009.09.033
TE

398 Alani, A.M., Faramarzi, A., 2014. An evolutionary approach to modelling concrete degradation due to

399 sulphuric acid attack. Appl. Soft Comput. J. 24, 985–993. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2014.08.044
EP

400 Albano, C., Camacho, N., Hernández, M., Matheus, A., Gutiérrez, A., 2009. Influence of content and
C

401 particle size of waste pet bottles on concrete behavior at different w/c ratios. Waste Manag. 29,
AC

402 2707–16. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2009.05.007

403 ASTM C267 - 01(2012) Standard Test Methods for Chemical Resistance of Mortars, Grouts, and

404 Monolithic Surfacings and Polymer Concretes , 2012. www.astm.org/Standards/C267.htm

405 (accessed 10.29.15).

406 ASTM C33 / C33M, 2013. ASTM C33 / C33M - 13 Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates.

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

407 ASTM C330 / C330M - 14 Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete,

408 2014.

409 ASTM C597 - 09 Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity Through Concrete , 2009.

410 www.astm.org/Standards/C597.htm (accessed 10.29.15).

PT
411 Bassuoni, M.T., Nehdi, M.L., 2007. Resistance of self-consolidating concrete to sulfuric acid attack with

RI
412 consecutive pH reduction. Cem. Concr. Res. 37, 1070–1084. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.04.014

SC
413 Bogas, J.A., de Brito, J., Figueiredo, J.M., 2015. Mechanical characterization of concrete produced with

414 recycled lightweight expanded clay aggregate concrete. J. Clean. Prod. 89, 187–195.

U
415 doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.015 AN
416 Chang, Z.-T., Song, X.-J., Munn, R., Marosszeky, M., 2005. Using limestone aggregates and different

417 cements for enhancing resistance of concrete to sulphuric acid attack. Cem. Concr. Res. 35, 1486–
M

418 1494. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2005.03.006

419 Choi, Y.W., Chung, J.S., Moon, D.J., Shin, H.C., Hwang, Y.T., 2002. An experimental study on the
D

420 properties of lightweight aggregate concrete using waste PET bottles. Proc. Korea Concr. Inst 14,
TE

421 211–216.
EP

422 Choi, Y.-W., Moon, D.-J., Chung, J.-S., Cho, S.-K., 2005. Effects of waste PET bottles aggregate on the

423 properties of concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 35, 776–781. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.05.014

C

424 Choi, Y.W., Moon, D.J., Kim, Y.J., Lachemi, M., 2009. Characteristics of mortar and concrete containing
AC

425 fine aggregate manufactured from recycled waste polyethylene terephthalate bottles. Constr. Build.

426 Mater. 23, 2829–2835. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.02.036

427 Fan, Y.F., Hu, Z.Q., Zhang, Y.Z., Liu, J.L., 2010. Deterioration of compressive property of concrete

428 under simulated acid rain environment. Constr. Build. Mater. 24, 1975–1983.

429 doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.04.002

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

430 Fraternali, F., Ciancia, V., Chechile, R., Rizzano, G., Feo, L., Incarnato, L., 2011. Experimental study of

431 the thermo-mechanical properties of recycled PET fiber-reinforced concrete. Compos. Struct. 93,

432 2368–2374. doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.03.025

433 Frigione, M., 2010. Recycling of PET bottles as fine aggregate in concrete. Waste Manag. 30, 1101–6.

PT
434 doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2010.01.030

RI
435 Ge, Z., Sun, R., Zhang, K., Gao, Z., Li, P., 2013. Physical and mechanical properties of mortar using

436 waste Polyethylene Terephthalate bottles. Constr. Build. Mater. 44, 81–86.

SC
437 doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.02.073

U
438 Güneyisi, E., Gesoğlu, M., Özturan, T., 2004. Properties of rubberized concretes containing silica fume.

439 Cem. Concr. Res. 34, 2309–2317. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.04.005

AN
440 Hewayde, E., Nehdi, M.L., Allouche, E., Nakhla, G., 2007. Using concrete admixtures for sulphuric acid
M

441 resistance. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. - Constr. Mater.

442 Hobbs, D.., Taylor, M.., 2000. Nature of the thaumasite sulfate attack mechanism in field concrete. Cem.
D

443 Concr. Res. 30, 529–533. doi:10.1016/S0008-8846(99)00255-0

TE

444 Janfeshan Araghi, H., Nikbin, I.M., Rahimi Reskati, S., Rahmani, E., Allahyari, H., 2015. An
EP

445 experimental investigation on the erosion resistance of concrete containing various PET particles

446 percentages against sulfuric acid attack. Constr. Build. Mater. 77, 461–471.
C

447 doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.12.037
AC

448 Khaloo, A.R., Dehestani, M., Rahmatabadi, P., 2008. Mechanical properties of concrete containing a high

449 volume of tire-rubber particles. Waste Manag. 28, 2472–82. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2008.01.015

450 Kim, S.B., Yi, N.H., Kim, H.Y., Kim, J.-H.J., Song, Y.-C., 2010. Material and structural performance

451 evaluation of recycled PET fiber reinforced concrete. Cem. Concr. Compos. 32, 232–240.

452 doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2009.11.002

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

453 Lee, S.T., Hooton, R.D., Jung, H.-S., Park, D.-H., Choi, C.S., 2008. Effect of limestone filler on the

454 deterioration of mortars and pastes exposed to sulfate solutions at ambient temperature. Cem. Concr.

455 Res. 38, 68–76. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.08.003

456 Lotfy, A., Hossain, K.M.A., Lachemi, M., 2016. Durability properties of lightweight self-consolidating

PT
457 concrete developed with three types of aggregates. Constr. Build. Mater. 106, 43–54.

RI
458 doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.12.118

459 Monteny, J., De Belie, N., Vincke, E., Verstraete, W., Taerwe, L., 2001. Chemical and microbiological

SC
460 tests to simulate sulfuric acid corrosion of polymer-modified concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 31, 1359–

461 1365. doi:10.1016/S0008-8846(01)00565-8

462
U
Nabizadeh, R., Heidari, M., Hassanvand, M.S., 2008. Archive of SID. Iran. J. Heal. Environ. 1, 9–18.
AN
463 NAPCOR (National Association for PET Container), 2014. Report on Postconsumer PET Container
M

464 Recycling Activity in 2014 13.

465 Neville, A., 2004. The confused world of sulfate attack on concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 34, 1275–1296.
D

466 doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.04.004
TE

467 O’Connell, M., McNally, C., Richardson, M.G., 2012. Performance of concrete incorporating GGBS in
EP

468 aggressive wastewater environments. Constr. Build. Mater. 27, 368–374.

469 doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.07.036
C

470 Parker, C., 1945. THE CORROSION OF CONCRETE. Aust. J. Exp. Biol. Med. Sci. 23, 91–98.
AC

471 doi:10.1038/icb.1945.14

472 Plastics, Polymers & Resins | DuPont USA , 2016. www.dupont.com/products-and-services/plastics-

473 polymers-resins.html (accessed 1.26.16).

474 Rahmani, E., Dehestani, M., Beygi, M.H.A., Allahyari, H., Nikbin, I.M., 2013. On the mechanical

475 properties of concrete containing waste PET particles. Constr. Build. Mater. 47, 1302–1308.

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

476 doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.06.041

477 Recycling | PETRA: Information on the Use, Benefits & Safety of PET Plastic. , 2016.

478 www.petresin.org/recycling.asp (accessed 1.1.16).

PT
479 Reis, J.M.L., Carneiro, E.P., 2012. Evaluation of PET waste aggregates in polymer mortars. Constr.

480 Build. Mater. 27, 107–111. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.020

RI
481 Roy, D.., Arjunan, P., Silsbee, M.., 2001. Effect of silica fume, metakaolin, and low-calcium fly ash on

SC
482 chemical resistance of concrete. Cem. Concr. Res. 31, 1809–1813. doi:10.1016/S0008-

483 8846(01)00548-8

U
484 Sadrmomtazi, A., Dolati-Milehsara, S., Lotfi-Omran, O., Sadeghi-Nik, A., 2015. The combined effects of
AN
485 waste Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) particles and pozzolanic materials on the properties of self-

486 compacting concrete. J. Clean. Prod. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.107

M

487 Schmidt, T., Lothenbach, B., Romer, M., Neuenschwander, J., Scrivener, K., 2009. Physical and

488 microstructural aspects of sulfate attack on ordinary and limestone blended Portland cements. Cem.
D

489 Concr. Res. 39, 1111–1121. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.08.005

TE

490 Sharma, R., Bansal, P.P., 2015. Use of Different Forms of Waste Plastic in Concrete – A Review. J.
EP

491 Clean. Prod. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.042

492 Singh, S., Shukla, A., Brown, R., 2004. Pullout behavior of polypropylene fibers from cementitious
C

493 matrix. Cem. Concr. Res. 34, 1919–1925. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.02.014

AC

494 Skalny, J., Marchand, J., Odler, I., 2003. Sulfat Attack on Conrete.

495 Thomas, B.S., Gupta, R.C., 2016. A comprehensive review on the applications of waste tire rubber in

496 cement concrete. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 54, 1323–1333. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.092

497 U S Environmental Protection, 2010. Municipal Solid Waste Generation , Recycling , and Disposal in the

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

498 United States : Facts and Figures for 2010 1–12. doi:EPA-530-F-14-001

499 Wells, T., Melchers, R.E., 2015. Modelling concrete deterioration in sewers using theory and field

500 observations. Cem. Concr. Res. 77, 82–96. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.07.003

PT
501 Won, J.-P., Jang, C.-I., Lee, S.-W., Lee, S.-J., Kim, H.-Y., 2010. Long-term performance of recycled PET

502 fibre-reinforced cement composites. Constr. Build. Mater. 24, 660–665.

RI
503 doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2009.11.003

SC
504 Yamanaka, T., 2002. Corrosion by bacteria of concrete in sewerage systems and inhibitory effects of

505 formates on their growth. Water Res. 36, 2636–2642. doi:10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00473-0

U
506 Yuan, H., Dangla, P., Chatellier, P., Chaussadent, T., 2015. Degradation modeling of concrete submitted
AN
507 to biogenic acid attack. Cem. Concr. Res. 70, 29–38. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.01.002

508
M

509
D
TE
C EP
AC

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Tables Caption.

Table 1. The utilization of waste plastic in concrete (Sharma et al., 2016).

Table 2. The characteristics of the fine (sand) and course (gravel) aggregates.

Table 3. Sieve analysis for aggregates. (a) Sand, (b) Gravel, (c) LECA, (d) PET particles

PT
Table 4. Concrete mixture proportion.

RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Tables.

Table 1. The utilization of waste plastic in concrete (Sharma et al., 2016)

Author Form of Waste Plastic Used Use in Concrete

PT
Grinded PET particles with a maximum size of 7mm,
Replaced Natural aggregate with PET
Araghi et al., 2015 estimated unit weight was 464 kg/m3 and specific gravity of
particles by 5%, 10%, and 15%.
PET particles was 1.11 g/ cm3
3 distinct types of plastic particles used shredded fine flaky 5%, 10% and 15% replaced natural
Saikia and Brito,
plastic particles (PF), Shredded coarse flaky plastic particles aggregate with each type (PF, PF, PC)

RI
2014
(PC), heat treated pellet-shaped spherical/cylindrical (PP) of plastic particles
Rahmani et al., Replaced sand with PET particles by
Grinded PET particles with a maximum size of 7mm
2013 5%, 10% and 15%
Used as plastic fibers in concrete.

SC
Bhogayata et al., Metalized polythene waste bags with an average size of 1
Added 0.5, 1.0, or 1.5 % of the volume
2013 mm x 2 mm.
of concrete
Replaced the fine aggregates in the
Ramadevi and
PET bottles used as fiber concrete with 1, 2, 4, and 6% of the
Manju, 2013
PET bottle fibers

U
Addition of polyethylene fibers at
Non-recyclable plastic waste used as a macro fiber of 60
Bhogayata et al., different proportions (from 0.3%, 0.6%,
mm × 3 mm and shredded fiber (size considered as very
AN
2012 and 0.9% to 1.2% of the volume of
fine random palettes)
concrete)
Added fiber from 0 to 6% in the
Malagavei, 2011 HDPE used as fiber
concrete mix
Addition of fiber with the 0.5% volume
Prahallada and
M

Plastic fiber obtained from cutting waste plastic pots fraction based on distinct aspect ratios
parkash, 2013
of 30, 50, 70, 90, and 110
Suganthy et al., Sand replaced with 25, 50, 75, or 100%
Pulverized plastic used in the form of granules of 1 mm size
2013 of plastic granules
D

Used in three dissimilar forms: PET used in circular fiber

with a width of 5 mm, as strips with two overlapping half Added at 1% of the weight of concrete
Foti, 2013
bottles, and as a strip with four overlapping layers Recycled in all three forms
TE

PET aggregates
Saikia and Brito, Replaced natural aggregates with the
Recycled PET aggregates
2013 plastic aggregate at 5, 10, and 15%
Replacement of 0, 5, 10, 15 percent
Rai et al., 2012 Plastic flakes as a fine aggregate
sand
EP

Three different sizes were used, 0.5, 1.5,

and 3 mm. For each size, three different
Cordoba et al.,
Recycled PET flakes concentrations of PET particles were
2013
considered, 1.0, 2.5, and 5.0 % by
volume
C

Raghatate et al., Addition of plastics from 0 to 1% in the

Small pieces of plastic bags
2012 concrete matrix
AC

Fraternali et al., Addition of fiber by volume with 1%

Recycled PET and virgin polypropylene
2011 for both types
Ismail and Al- Replaced sand with 5% or 10%
Granulated plastic waste
Hashmi, 2010 Granulated plastics and 0 to 50% iron
Four different groups with PET to
Depolymerized through glycolysis to produce the
glycol ratios of (1:1, 2:1). Each group
Mahdi et al., 2010 unsaturated polyester resin used as a binding agent to
includes a distinct dibasic acid, initiator
produced polymer mortar and polymer concrete
and promoter
Added fiber for hand mixing with a
Plastic pallet as a fine aggregate (introduced a distinct
volume content of fiber 0.76 %. The
Ochi et al., 2007 method by which monofilament used a raw material for the
concrete mixer-volumetric fiber
PET fiber and mixed at a fiber content as high as 3%)
contents were 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 %
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
Table 2. The characteristics of the fine (sand) and course (gravel) aggregates.

Aggregate Gravel Sand

U
Specific gravity (g/cm3) 2.51 2.75
Unit weight (kg/m3) 1,581.3 1,728.9
AN
Moisture content (%) 0.2 0.4
Moisture of saturated surface dry (%) 0.5 0.7
Fines modulus (FM) - 2.82
Sand equivalent value (SE) (%) - 80
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 3. Sieve analysis for aggregates

(a) Sand, (b) Gravel, (c) LECA, (d) PET particles

a)
Percentage passing
Sieve size (mm) ASTM limits (%)
throw the sieve (%)

PT
4.75 100 100
2.63 81.98 80-100
1.18 63.66 50-85
0.60 45.15 25-60

RI
0.30 23.31 9-30
0.15 4.12 2-10

SC
b)
Percentage passing
Sieve size (mm) ASTM limits (%)
throw the sieve (%)

U
19 100 90-100
12.5 63.92 45-70
AN
9.5 21 20-45
4.75 0.55 0-9
2.36 0.27 0-5
M

c)
Percentage passing
D

Sieve size (mm) ASTM limits (%)

throw the sieve (%)
12.5 100 100
TE

9.5 83.3 80-100

4.75 19.15 5-40
2.63 4.95 0-20
1.19 2.12 0-10
EP

d)
C

Percentage remaining on the

Sieve size (mm)
sieve (%)
AC

7 0
4.75 12.5
2.36 67.5
1.18 15
0.600 2.5
0.300 1.5
0.150 1
<0.150 0
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 4. Concrete mixture proportion.

Content (kg/m3), w/c = 0.54

PT
Component 0 % PET %5 PET %10 PET %15 PET

NC LWC NPC LWPC NPC LWPC NPC LWPC

RI
Cement 379.63 427.1 379.63 427.1 379.63 427.1 379.63 427.1

Water 210.15 210 210.15 210 210.15 210 210.15 210

SC
Gravel 976.05 342 976.05 342 976.05 342 976.05 342

Sand 745.88 706.1 708.59 670.8 671.29 635.5 634 600.2

U
LECA - 203 - 203 - 203 - 203

PET - 14.25 28.5 42.75

AN
- 10.03 20.06 30.1
Super
- 0.815 - 0.815 - 0.815 - 0.815
plasticizer
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Figures Caption.
- Figure 1 Total solid waste generation (by material); a) USA, b) IRAN

- Figure 2 Type of PET particles.

- Figure 3 Deterioration ratio of crushing load: a) LWC and LWPC, b) NC and NPC.

- Figure 4 Relative changes of crushing loads after immersion in 5% sulfuric acid solution: a) LWC

and LWPC, b) NC and NPC.

PT
- Figure 5 Ultrasonic wave velocity of specimens versus immersion time in 5% sulfuric acid

RI
solution: a) LWC and LWPC, b) NC and NPC.

- Figure 6 Mass of specimens attacked by 5% sulfuric acid solution: a) LWC and LWPC, b) NC

SC
and NPC.

- Figure 7 Mass changes of specimens attacked by 5% sulfuric acid solution: a) LWC and LWPC,

U
b) NC and NPC.
AN
- Figure 8 Relation between mass loss and 28-day crushing load: OBP, overall better performance;

OWP, overall worse performance; and OD, object dependent.

M

- Figure 9 Relations between mass loss of concrete specimens and loss of their crushing load

during 60 days of immersion in 5% sulfuric acid solution: a) NC and LWC, b) NPC5 and
D

LWPC5, c) NPC10 and LWPC10, c) NPC15 and LWPC15.

TE

- Figure 10 Comparative relation between crushing load changes versus acid immersion time.

- Figure 11 Comparative relation between ultrasonic wave velocity changes versus acid immersion
EP

time.

- Figure 12 Comparative relation between mass changes of specimens versus acid immersion time.
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Figures.

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M

Figure 1 Total solid waste generation (by material); a) USA, b) IRAN

D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE

Figure 2 Type of PET particles.

EP
C
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 3 Deterioration ratio of crushing load: a) LWC and LWPC, b) NC and NPC.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 4 Relative changes of crushing loads after immersion in 5% sulfuric acid solution: a) LWC and
LWPC, b) NC and NPC.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 5 Ultrasonic wave velocity of specimens versus immersion time in 5% sulfuric acid solution: a)
LWC and LWPC, b) NC and NPC.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 6 Mass of specimens attacked by 5% sulfuric acid solution: a) LWC and LWPC, b) NC and NPC.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP

Figure 7 Mass changes of specimens attacked by 5% sulfuric acid solution: a) LWC and LWPC, b) NC
AC

and NPC.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
Figure 8 Relation between mass loss and 28-day crushing load: OBP, overall better performance; OWP,
overall worse performance; and OD, object dependent.
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 9 Relations between mass loss of concrete specimens and loss of their crushing load during 60
days of immersion in 5% sulfuric acid solution: a) NC and LWC, b) NPC5 and LWPC5, c) NPC10 and
LWPC10, c) NPC15 and LWPC15.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP

Figure 10 Comparative relation between crushing load changes versus acid immersion time.
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

Figure 11 Comparative relation between ultrasonic wave velocity changes versus acid immersion time.
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

Figure 12 Comparative relation between mass changes of specimens versus acid immersion time.
TE
C EP
AC