See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/304252807

A Study on Potential of Recycled Glass as Cementitious Material in Concrete

Thesis · August 2015

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2956.7602

CITATIONS READS

0 567

1 author:

Md Habibur Rahman
Louisiana State University
3 PUBLICATIONS   33 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Md Habibur Rahman on 22 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all the authors are grateful to “Almighty Allah’’ for his blessing to finish this

work successfully.

The author wish to express sincere gratitude and profound indebtedness to the project

supervisor DR. G. M. SADIQUL ISLAM, Associate Professor, Department of Civil

Engineering, Chittagong University of Engineering & Technology, CUET,

Bangladesh, for his continuous encouragement, supervision, contribution and constant

guidance, throughout this project. Without his valuable direction and cordial

assistance, it would have been impossible to carry out this study under a lot of

constraints, time limitation in particular.

The authors would like to take the opportunity to thank Prof. Dr. Md. Rabiul Alam,

Head of the Department of Civil Engineering, CUET, for his best co-operation and

kind help and guidance.

Special thanks goes to CONFIDENCE CEMENT LIMITED, BASF

BANGLADESH LIMITED and CEM READY MIX, Chittagong, Bangladesh, for

providing materials.

Special thanks to all staffs of the laboratory of Civil Department, CUET.

Md. Habibur Rahman & Nayem Kazi

August, 2015

1
 ABSTRACT

Million tons of waste glass is being generated annually in the Bangladesh. A

considerable part of these are disposed as landfills which is unsustainable considering

the environment. Use of milled waste glass in concrete as partial replacement of

cement could be an important step towards development of sustainable

(environmentally friendly, energy-efficient and economical) concrete-based

infrastructure systems. If waste glass milled down to micro-scale particle size, is

expected to undergo pozzolanic reactions with cement hydrates, forming secondary

calcium silicate hydrate (CSH).

Chemical composition of white glass and color glass is determined in this research. To

determine the workability for cement mortar the flow test were conducted. A total of

150 nos. of 50×50×50mm cement mortar cube and 60 nos. of 100×100×100mm

concrete cube were casted for compressive strength test based on different percentage

of glass powder.

The experimental results show, minor variation on flow properties of mortar with the

percentage of cement replaced by glass powder, for the compressive strength the

results show that, in older age the strength of 0%, 10% and 15% cement replacement

is quite similar with a variation of 10%. Therefore up to 15% of cement replacement

is quit profitable considering cost and the environment.

2
 CONTENTS

Page no.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 1

ABSTRACT 2

CONTENTS 3-6

LIST OF TABLES 7-8

LIST OF FIGURES 9-10

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 11-13

1.1 General 11

1.2 Aim and Objective of the study 12

1.3 Scope of the project 13

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 14-22

2.1 General 14

2.2 Pozzolanic materials 14

2.3 Waste glass as pozzolana (composition) 15

2.4 Pozzolanic reactivity of waste glass 17

2.5 Flow test of cement mortar 18

2.6 Concrete 18

2.6.1 Strength of concrete 19

2.6.2 Factors controlling properties of concrete 19

2.6.3 Compressive strength of Concrete 21

2.7 Effect of glass powder in concrete 21

2.8 Challenge in the use of waste glass as pozzolans 22

3
CHAPTER THREE: MATERIALS 25-32

3.1 General 25

3.2 Materials 25

3.2.1 Cement 25

3.2.2 Glass powder 25

3.2.2.1 Specific gravity of glass powder 25

3.2.2 Fineness test of glass powder 26

3.2.3 Super plasticizer 26

3.2.4 Aggregates 27

3.2.4.1 Grading of coarse aggregate 27

3.2.4.2 Dry rodded unit weight of coarse aggregate 28

3.2.4.3 Specific gravity and absorption test of coarse aggregate 29

3.2.4.4 Moisture content of coarse aggregate 30

3.2.4.5 Properties of fine aggregate 30

3.2.4.6 Grading of fine sand (mortar) 30

3.2.4.7 Moisture content of fine aggregate 31

3.2.4.8 Specific gravity and absorption test of fine aggregate. 31

3.2.6 Water 32

CHAPTER FOUR: METHODS 33-43

4.1 General 33

4.2. Variables 34

4.3 Methodology incorporated with cement mortar 35

4.3.1 Chemical composition of white glass and color glass 35

4.3.2 Mix details 35

4
 4.3.3 Fineness test of cement 36

4.3.4 Flow test of cement mortar 36

4.3.4.1 Sand preparation for flow test 37

4.3.4.2 Materials required to perform flow test 37

4.3.5 Curing 38

4.3.6 Compressive strength test 38

4.4 Methodology incorporated with concrete 39

4.4.1 Concrete mix proportion 39

4.4.2 Concrete Mixing 41

4.4.3 Curing of concrete 42

4.4.4 Compressive strength test of concrete 43

CHAPTER FIVE: RESULT AND DISCUSSION 44-60

5.1 General 44

5.2 Chemical composition of Glass Powder 44

5.3 Mortar work 45

5.3.1 Flow test 45

5.3.2 Compressive Strength Test 46

5.3.3 Effect of Admixture on at different age. 51

5.3.4 Summary of Comparison of Compressive strength test

on mortar specimens. 54

5.3.5 Effect of curing age. 55

5.4 Concrete works 56

5.4.1 Compressive Strength Test 56

5.4.2 Effect of curing time. 58

5
5.6 Benefit/Cost Analysis 59

5.7 Environmental consideration 60

CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 62-63

6.1 General 62

6.2 Conclusion 62

6.3 Recommendation for further study 63

REFERENCES 64-68

6
 LISTS OF TABLES

Table No. Title Page No

01 Comparing Chemical composition of pozzolans with OPC 16

02 ASTM C618-12a criteria for SCM and their composition 16

03 Specific gravity of glass powder 26

04 Properties of admixture 27

05 Physical properties of aggregates 27

06 Grading of coarse aggregates 28

07 Dry rodded unit weight of coarse aggregate 28

08 Specific gravity and absorption test of coarse aggregate 29

09 Moisture content of coarse aggregate 30

10 Grading of sand for mortar work as per ASTM C 778-02 31

11 Moisture content of fine aggregate 31

12 Specific Gravity and Absorption Test of Fine Aggregate. 32

13 Details of some mixes and variables 34

14 Material requirement for 1 set

(3 nos. of 2 in. cube as per ASTM C109) 35

15 Sand preparation for flow test 37

16 Mix proportion for 1 fresh concrete 40

17 Material requirement of Concrete for one set

(21 nos. of 4” cube) used in experimental work 41

18 Chemical composition of glass powder 44

19 Result of flow test 46

20 Compressive strength of specimen without admixture 47

7
21 Compressive strength of specimen with admixture 49

22 Compressive strength of Concrete specimen without admixture 56

23 Comparison of price considering cement is replace by milled

glass powder 59

24 Comparison of cost considering cement is replace by milled glass

powder 60

8
 LIST OF FIGURE

Figure No. Title Page No.

01 Empty raw glass bottle 12

02 Milled glass powder 12

03 Work Plan for Experimental work 33

04 Specification notation for and concrete. 34

05 XRF-1800 Sequential X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer 35

06 Mixing and moulding 36

07 Compressive strength test 39

08 Concrete ingredients with glass powder 42

09 Concrete ingredients mixing with glass powder 42

10 Concrete ingredients with uniform dispersion of glass powder 42

11 Slump value test 42

12 Casted specimen 42

13 Set up for compressive strength 43

14 Graphical representation of Flow Test 46

15(a) compressive strength of specimen (without admixture) 48

15(b) compressive strength of specimen (without admixture) 48

16(a) compressive strength of specimen with admixture 50

16(b) compressive strength of specimen with admixture 50

17 Comparison of compressive strength of specimen at 7 day 51

18 Comparison of compressive strength of specimen at 14 day 52

19 Comparison of compressive strength of specimen at 28 day 52

20 Comparison of compressive strength of specimen at 56 day 53

9
21 Comparison of compressive strength of specimen at 90 day 54

22 Strength gained at different ages for without admixture 55

23 Strength gained at different ages for with admixture 56

24(a) compressive strength of Concrete specimen 57

24(b) compressive strength of Concrete specimen 58

25 Strength gained at different ages for Concrete without Admixture 59

10
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

Disposal of waste glass in landfills is costly. The non-biodegradable nature of glass

further complicates the environmental impact of its disposal in landfills. On the other

hand, manufacturing of cement, a key ingredient used for the production of concrete,

is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions. Manufacturing of one ton of cement

results emission of approximately one ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) to the atmosphere.

Cement production also involves emission of moderate quantities of NOx, SOx, and

particulates. The use of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) to offset a

portion of the cement powder in concrete is a promising method for reducing the

environmental impact of the industry. The most influential environmental concerns in

the use of concrete for construction are the production of greenhouse gases during the

manufacturing of cement powder, and the consumption of non-renewable resources as

raw materials.

Several industrial by-products have been used successfully as SCMs, including silica

fume (SF), ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS), and fly ash. These

materials are used to create blended cements which can improve concrete durability,

early and long term strength, workability, and economy (Detwiler et al. 1996). One

material which has potential as a SCM but which has not yet achieved the same

commercial success is waste bottle glass. Glass has a chemical composition and phase

11
which is comparable to traditional SCMs. It is abundant, can be of low economic

value and is often land filled (Byars et al. 2003).

It is realized that mixed-color waste glass offers desired chemical composition and

reactivity for use as a supplementary cementitious material (SCM) for enhancing the

chemical stability, pore system characteristics, moisture resistance and durability of

concrete. Previous efforts to recycle waste glass in concrete have focused on the use

of crushed glass as replacement for aggregate in concrete. These efforts neglected the

reactive nature of glass in concrete, which was slowed down due to the relatively

large (millimetre-scale) size of glass particles (Nassar & Soroushian, 2012). Milling

of glass to micro-meter scale particle size, for accelerating the reactions between glass

and cement hydrates, can bring major energy, environmental and cost benefits when

cement is partially replaced with milled waste glass for production of concrete.

Fig. 1 Empty raw glass bottle Fig. 2 Milled glass powder

1.2 Aim and Objectives of the study

The main objective of this research is to evaluate the Compressive strength of Glass

based on cement mortar and concrete when glass powder is replaced by ordinary

Portland cement (OPC). the individual objectives are listed below:

1) Optimization of the mix design for cement concrete.

2) Evaluate the compressive strength of cement mortar and concrete at different

age.

12
 3) Cost analysis of glass concrete over the Portland cement.

4) To compare the strength of plain concrete & glass concrete.

1.3 Scope of the Project

A. Flow test for cement mortar

In this study the flow test of cement mortar was performed by using

Master Polyheed 8632 to determine the appropiate water to binder ratio.

B. Chemical composition of glass powder

In this study chemical composition of white and color glass is determined

by using XRF-1800 Sequential X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer.

C. Compressive strength test

 Cement replacement:
 Mortar (Plain) : 0%, 10%, 15%, 20% and 25%
 Mortar (With Admixture) : 0%, 10%, 15%, 20% and 25%
 Concrete (Plain) : 0%, 10%, 15%, 20% and 25%
 Nature/ Type of test : Compressive Strength
 Exposure period :
 Mortar (Plain) : 7, 14, 28, 56 and 90 days
 Mortar (With Admixture) : 7, 14, 28, 56 and 90 days
 Concrete (Plain) : 7, 28, 56 and 90 days
 Design Strength: Concrete:- 4000 psi.
 Specimen Size :
 Mortar (Plain) : 50mm× 50mm× 50mm ( total 75 nos.)
 Mortar (With Admixture) : 50mm× 50mm× 50mm ( total 75 nos.)
 Concrete (Plain) : 100mm× 100mm× 100mm ( total 60 nos.)

13
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 General

Concrete is the world’s most versatile, durable, reliable and widely used construction

material. The main component of concrete is the ordinary Portland cement (OPC),

conveniently used as binder in concrete still now. However, the environmental impact

induced during production stage of OPC is a concerning issue now a days. In OPC

production, carbon dioxide is produced by calcination of limestone and combustion of

fossil fuel.

This research aims to explore various factors associated with the use of the milled

waste glass as partial replacement of cement in concrete. In this regard the review of

the merits of using powdered waste glass as a supplementary cementitious

material, replacing a portion of the cement powder used in concrete in order to

improve the environmental impact of the concrete industry by reducing the green-

house gases produced and raw materials consumed in cement production, and by

diverting a waste material from landfills is carried out.

2.2 Pozzolanic materials

A pozzolan is a siliceous or siliceous and aluminous material which, in itself,

possesses little or no cementitious value but in finely divided form and in the presence

of water, react chemically with calcium hydroxide at ordinary temperature to form

14
compounds possessing cementitious properties. The most common pozzolanic

materials are low calcium fly ash (Class F), silica flume, slag etc.

2.3 Waste glass as pozzolana (composition)

The lower reactivity of waste glass compared to cement powder limits its use as

pozzolans in concrete. Overcoming this limitation requires activation methods for

increasing the reactivity of SCMs. A comparison of the methods by Shi and Day

(1993) indicated that the most effective method for developing reactivity in natural

pozzolans was chemical activation, which improved both the initial reaction rate and

the final strength. The reactivity of the treated pozzolanic material was measured in

terms of the compressive strength and total hydration of the material. Comparison

between chemical compositions of various pozzolainc materials are given in Table 1.

With the exception of Al2O3, Na2O and CaO, the percentages of the main constituents

are similar. It is reasonable to expect that success may be achieved by applying

similar treatment to waste glass in order to improve its pozzolanic properties. The

properties which influence the pozzolanic behaviour of waste glass, and most

pozzolans in general, are fineness, chemical composition, and the pore solution

present for reaction. Based on observed compressive strengths, Meyer et al,

(1996) postulated that below 45 µm, glass may become pozzolanic. This size can be

achieved by using a grinding operation with the help of “Ball Mill” which is generally

used in Cement industry to grind cement clinker. The pozzolanic properties of glass

are first notable at particle sizes below approximately 300 µm, and below 100

µm, glass can have a pozzolanic reactivity which is greater than that of fly ash at low

per cent cement replacement levels and after 90 days of curing (Shi et al., 2005).

Being strength as a key factor to evaluate concrete performance, several research

15
shows that, at the higher age recycled glass concrete (15% to 20% of cement

replaced) with milled waste glass powder provide compressive strengths exceeding

that of control concrete (Nassar & Soroushian, 2011). Table 2 gives comparison

between chemical compositions of various pozzolanas in light of ASTM C618-12a. It

has been noted from the literature that the chemical composition of waste glass

conforms that required by ASTM to declare the product as a pozzolana to use in

concrete.

Table 1. Comparing Chemical composition of pozzolans with OPC

adopted from (Shi et al., 2005)
Compound Waste Volcanic Volcanic Slag Silica Fly Ash OPC
Glass Ash Pumice (Warren, Fume (Islam et (Ryou,
(Nassar & (Mostafa, (Warren, 1994) (Binici, al, 2006)
Soroushian, 2005) 1994) 2007) 2011)
2012)
SiO2 68 73.7 65.7 35 90.9 59.2 20.3
Al2O3 7 12.3 16.7 12 1.12 25.6 4.7
Fe2O3 <1 2.2 3.6 1 1.5 2.9 3
CaO 11 1.1 3.3 40 0.7 1.1 61.8
MgO <1 0.2 0.9 - 0.78 0.3 3.3
K2O <1 3.9 3.1 - - 0.9 0.6
Na2O 12 3.6 4.5 0.3 - 0.2 0.2
SO3 - 0.3 0.7 9 0.4 0.3 3.6
LOI - 3.1 2.4 1 3 1.4 -

Table 2. ASTM C618-12a criteria for SCM and their composition (Rahman et al., 2014)

ASTM C 618-12a Requirements Waste Glass Slag Silica Fume Fly Ash

SiO2+Al2O3+Fe2O3, min% 70 68.4 48 93.48 62.04

SO3, max % 4 0.17 9 0.38 4.3

Moisture Content, max % 3 - - - -

LOI, max % 10 - 1 3 2.1

16
2.4 Pozzolanic reactivity of waste glass

The pozzolanic reaction occurs when amorphous silica dissolves into a solution with a

high pH in the presence of calcium. Excess Ca(OH)2 exists in the highly alkaline pore

solution of hydrating cement. If a material provides a readily soluble form of silica

with high surface area, the pozzolanic reaction will take place. The dissolved silica

and Ca(OH)2, along with alkalis and aluminates, will form a reaction product that can

be chemically and structurally similar to C-S-H. The process of hydration is

essentially the formation of minute crystals of calcium and gels from the solution of

cement and water and continues for a long period. The hydration of different

constituent compounds of portland cement is illustrated as follows:

For tricalcium silicate (C3S):

2C3S+6H2O = C3S2.H2O + 3Ca(OH)2 Eq. (1)

For tricalcium silicate (C2S):

2C2S+4H2O = C3S2.H2O + Ca(OH)2 Eq. (2)

With this readily available Ca(OH)2 and SiO2 the following equilibrium was

proposed by researches (Greenberg et al. 1961; Urhan et al. 1987)

SiO2(s) + Ca2+(aq) + 2OH-(aq) = n1CaO·SiO2·n2H2O(s) Eq. (3)

As with C-S-H the product is also variable (n1 and n2). The Ca/Si ranges from 0.75 to

1.75 (Massazza, 1998). It is prudent to identify the factors which influence the

pozzolanic reaction in the system; for example particle size of the pozzolanic

material. The particle size of the pozzolan is one factor which is known to affect its

reactivity and therefore the hydration of the system. A decreased particle size leads to

an increase in surface area. The reactivity of most SCMs can be enhanced through

mechanical treatment, where grinding is used to reduce the particle size of the

material, increasing the surface area available for reaction.

17
2.5 Flow test of cement mortar

The workability of has received very little attention in scientific literature,when

compared to other materials like concrete. Several causes may be at the source of this

lack: is still considered as a low-tech material, with application techniques strongly

rooted in tradition.

2.6 Concrete

Concrete is an artificial stone manufactured from a mixture of binding material and

inert material with water.

Concrete = Binding material + Inert materials + water

Binding-material: Cement, Lime (acts as binder)

Inert-material: Fine aggregates, Coarse aggregates (acts as Filler)

Water: serve various purposes such as wet aggregate surface to develop adhesion,

prepare plastic mixture, impact workability to concrete & accelerate the rate of

hydration of cementing mater.

Concrete is considered as a chemically combined mass where the inert materials acts

as a filler material and the binding materials acts as a binder. The most important

binding materials are cement and lime. The inert materials used in concrete are

termed as aggregates. The aggregates are two types namely

 Fine Aggregate

 Coarse Aggregate.

18
2.6.1 Strength of concrete

Concrete properties must be selected to provide strength, Elastic properties, Fatigue,

Impermeability, Density, Workability, Consistency, Durability for particular

application.

Strength of concrete are mainly four types-

i) Compressive strength

ii) Tensile strength

iii) Flexural strength

iv) Shear strength

Compressive strength refers to the capacity of concrete to resist compression at the

age of 28 days.

2.6.2 Factors controlling properties of concrete

The properties of concrete depend upon the following factor:

a) Grading of the aggregates: The term “grading” indicates the art of

combining varies sizes of the particles composing the aggregate to produce a

dense & an economic concrete using minimum amount of cement per unit

volume for a desired strength. It is essential that the particles should be sharp

& angular.

b) Moisture-contents of the aggregates: Concrete mixes are designed on the

basis of Dry-volume of aggregates. The ratio used are “Real-mix-ratios”. But

in the field the aggregates are generally wet so the moisture content must be

determined & due allowance must be made in their volumetric measurements

in the field. The correct ratios are then termed ”Field-mix-ratio”.

19
c) Water/cement ratio: water-cement ratio is an important factor for concrete

design. There is a certain percentage of water below which the water will not

sufficient to hydrate cement that produces porous & weak concrete and if

more water is used than that required, the concrete will be weak.

d) Proportioning of various ingredients: The objective of proportioning the

ingredients is to obtain a strong & durable concrete to suit all the

requirements.

e) Method of mixing: The mixing should be such that it blends all the materials

of concrete into a uniform mass. Mainly two methods are available-

I. Hand-mixing ( not produce good quality concrete )

II. Machine-mixing ( produce good quality concrete with satisfactory

strength & uniform rapid mixing )

f) Placing & compaction: Concrete must be transported from the place of

mixing to the final placing as quickly as possible by the method which will

prevent segregation of aggregates. It must be in continuous operation & as far

as possible to avoid the necessity of joints.Two methods are available for

compaction-

I. Hand compaction (using steel rod of recommended size)

II. Machine compaction (using mechanical vibrator)

g) Curing of concrete: To keep concrete saturated so that hydration of cement

can take place in suitable environment. Various curing are influenced by

various factors such as temperature, relative humidity, wind speed etc.

h) Type of cement used: Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) and Portland Pozzolana

cement (PPC) differ primarily in their composition ultimately affecting its

applicability. PPC commonly has pozzolan material added to cement (either before

20
 clinkering or added to ground clinker). In terms of utility, long term strength of such

cements are strength gaining with the hydration period extending quite longer than

OPC.

2.6.3 Compressive strength of Concrete

Measurement of Compressive strength of concrete were carried out according to the

standard ASTM C39. For compressive strength testing 4"x4"x4" cube mould were

prepared. The moulds used for the purpose are fabricated with steel seat. It is easy for

assembling and removal of the mould specimen without damage. Moulds are provided

with base plates, having smooth to support. The mould is filled without leakage. In

assembling the moulds for use joints between the section of the mould are applied

with a thin coat mould oil and similar coating of mould oil is applied between the

contact faces of mould and the base plate to ensure that no water escape during filling.

The interior surfaces of the assembled mould shall be thinly coated with mould oil to

prevent adhesion of concrete.

2.7 Effect of Glass Powder in concrete

The use of milled waste glass as partial replacement of cement in recycled aggregate

concrete may results in enhanced durability characteristic such as sorption, chloride

permeability, and freeze–thaw resistance through improvement in pore system

characteristics, filling effect of glass particles, and conversion of CH to C–S–H

available in the concrete pore water. Milling of waste glass to sub-micron particle size

is a key to benefit from its pozzolanic reaction (Rahman et al. 2014). The high surface

area of milled waste glass changes the kinetics of chemical reaction towards beneficial

pozzolanic reaction utilizing the available alkalis before production of a potential

ASR gel. The ASR is an issue to consider carefully and needs further study. In

21
general, considering the similar performance with replaced material glass addition can

reduce significant cost of cement production. In addition, glass replacement can save

the environment by reducing green-house gas and particulate production (Rahman et

al. 2014).

2.8 Challenge in the use of waste glass as pozzolans

Use of waste glass in concrete first focused on aggregate replacement. Phillips

et al. (1972) attempted to introduce waste glass as a partial replacement of the fine

and coarse aggregate in concrete masonry block, the production and use of which is

less conducive to ASR gel production, and which allow early age monitoring. They

observed that the main challenges in utilizing waste glass would be the

removal of contamination, processing, and cost. Johnston et al. (1974) also

considered waste glass as a coarse aggregate, and found that only by using low alkali

cement or high percentages of pozzolans such as fly ash could satisfactory strength

and expansion performance be achieved by one year.

Experimentation with the addition of waste glass in concrete has been closely

related to the study of alkali-silica reactivity, where production of ASR gel in the

presence of reactive aggregates causes damaging expansion in concrete. It is

important to impart only that the mechanism by which a reactive aggregate can form

ASR gel, leading to expansion and ultimately causing damage to concrete, is

dependent on the presence of amorphous silica, which is the major component of

waste glass, the presence of alkali hydroxides in pore solution, and cement

reaction products (Diamond et al. 1989). For most cases, both the local maximum

and minimum expansion occurs at a very small particle size, typically less than 100

µm (Diamond et al. 1974).

22
The use of any supplementary cementing material will depend on its

performance, namely its strength, durability, and volumetric stability over time. In the

case of waste glass, this performance is further challenged by the tendency for ASR to

occur. The controlling process between a beneficial pozzolanic reaction, which

would improve the performance of glass as an SCM, and a damaging ASR is

the production of either a stable or swelling product. Depending on several factors,

including calcium content, particle size, and alkalinity, the dissolved silica will

re-polymerize into expansive gel, hydrate into C-S-H, or a combination of both

(Buchwald et al. 2003). Availability of calcium ions in combination with a relatively

high rate of C-S-H formation will favour the pozzolanic reaction, and over time, any

ASR product will take on the texture of C-S-H. Following the reaction in Eq. (1)

proposed by Urhan et al. (1987) a type of C-S-H is formed. When the reaction of

glass results in ASR gel, the chemical equation is similar, however, sodium,

potassium, or other alkalis may be substituted for calcium as shown by Eq. (4)

(Glasser et al. 1981).

SiO2+ 2Na+(K+) + 2OH-→Na2(K2)SiO3·H2O Eq. (4)

The final product is more likely similar to a precipitate of the composition given in

Eq. (5), existing within a sol/gel matrix of calcium silicate hydrate with a Na2O/SiO2

ratio near 0.19.

0.16Na2O·1.4CaO·SiO2·XH2O Eq. (5)

This system may be the cause of variability in the swelling properties of ASR

products (Helmuth et al. 1993) have suggested that the mechanism which

differentiates between pozzolanic and ASR products could be simply the degree of

aggregation or particle size of the silica source. According to the requirements

of ASTM standards (ASTM C618-12a) for the use of natural pozzolans, Table 2.,

23
glass has the potential to acceptably function as an SCM. However, proper

guidelines must be developed to control the ASR/pozzolanic reaction and influence a

non-destructive, non-swelling product. The form of this product has not been

identified. It may be a pozzolanic form of C-S-H, which has the potential to

contribute additional strength.

24
 CHAPTER THREE

MATERIALS

3.1 General

For this proposed study, materials such as coarse aggregate, fine aggregate, Ordinary

Portland cement (OPC), super plasticizer (Master Polyheed 8632) as a water reducing

agent and glass powder were used.

3.2 Materials

3.2.1 Cement

In this investigates, Ordinary Portland cement (OPC) of strength class 52.5N was

used. ASTM C150 defines Portland Cement as “hydraulic cement (cement that not

only hardness by reacting with water but also forms a water resistant product)

produced by pulverizing clinkers which consist essentially of hydraulic calcium

silicates, usually containing one or more of the forms of calcium sulfate as an inert

ground addition. The percentage of clinker and gypsum in the cement was 95-100%

and 0-5% respectively while the specific gravity of OPC was found to be 3.15.

3.2.2 Glass powder

3.2.2.1 Specific gravity of glass powder

Specific gravity of glass powder’s was conducted according to the ASTM

Designation C 187 (ASTM, 1998). According to this method, obtained the sample and
25
introduced the pycnometer by filling 100 gm. glass powder where the weight of

pycnometer is 149.5 gm. Determined the total weight of the pycnometer, including

the sample, and the water. Carefully removed the glass powder as well as water and

then determined the total weight of the pycnometer filled only with water.

Table 3: Specific gravity of glass powder

Sample 1 Sample 2 Average

Weight of Sample in Air (g)
100 100 100
(A)
Weight of pycnometer filled with Water (g)
646.6 646.5 646.5
(B)
Weight of pycnometer filled with Sample in
713.2 713.4 713.3
Water (g) (C)
Apparent Specific
Gravity 2.99 3.02 3.01

3.2.2.2 Fineness test of glass powder

Fineness test of glass powder’s was conducted according to the ASTM Designation C

430-08 (ASTM, 2008).According to this method,Attached a pan under the sieve to

collect the glass powder passing the sieve. Weighted approximately 200 gm. of glass

powder to the nearest 0.01 g and place it on the sieve. Agitated the sieve by swirling,

planetary and linear movement until no more fine material passes through it.

Removed and weighted the residue and expressed as percentage.From lab work, glass

powder retained on sieve no. 200 is 1.8 gm and percentage of glass powder retained

on sieve no. 200 is 0.9%

3.2.3 Super plasticizer

Master Polyheed 8632 is a versatile, robust and economical water reducing admixture

based on a specially formulated modification of polycarboxylate ether chemistry. The

product has been primarily developed for all types of normal and specialty concrete

classes in the premix , precast and in situ concrete within the target slumps of 80 –

26
120 mm, providing workable and cohesive mixes with less water. Properties of

admixture are given in Table 4.

Table 4: Properties of admixture (BASF, 2015)

Aspect Light Brown liquid

Relative Density 1.08±0.01 at 25 C

pH ≥6

Chloride ion content <0.2%

Expected water reduction, (%) >20

Conforming standards ASTM C-494,EN 934-2,IS 9103

3.2.4 Aggregates

Coarse sand was used as fine aggregate while crushed stone chips conforming to

ASTM C33 was used as coarse aggregate. Both aggregate were obtained from Sylhet.

Physical properties of aggregates are shown in Table 5.

Table 5: Physical properties of coarse aggregates

Property Sand Stone chips

Bulk Specific Gravity (SSD) 2.35 2.67

Absorption Capacity (%) 1.66 1.21

Fineness Modulus (FM) 2.65 -

Dry Rodded Unit Weight

- 1561
(kg/m3)

3.2.4.1 Grading of coarse aggregate

Sieve analysis of coarse aggregate was conducted. Gradation of stone chips used for

experimental work is compared with the recommendation of ASTM C33-03 (ASTM,

2003) in Table 6. The nominal size of coarse aggregate was 20 mm.

27
 Table 6: Grading of coarse aggregates

Cumulative % passing of graded aggregates

Sieve size, mm
Aggregates used for ASTM grading limit (ref.
experiments ASTM C33-03)
25.0 100% 100

19.0 90% 90-100

12.5 40% -

9.5 30% 20-55

4.75 10% 0-10

2.36 5% 0-5

3.2.4.2 Dry rodded unit weight of coarse aggregate

Specification:

Diameter of the Mould: 9"

Height of the Mould: 13.5"

Volume of the Mould: 858.83 in³ (0.014074 m³)

Dry rodded unit weight of coarse aggregate’s was conducted according to the ASTM

Designation C 29-97 (ASTM, 1997).According to this method, filled one-third of the

mould with air dry coarse aggregate, leveled with fingers and rodded 25 times with

16mm diameter tamping rod. Repeated the above with the container two-third full and

then overflowing.Strike off level and weigh the aggregate.And then Dry rodded unit

weight of coarse aggregate is determined after calculation.

Table 7: Dry rodded unit weight of coarse aggregate

Weight of Weight of Volume Volume Dry Rodded Unit Average Dry

Coarse Coarse of the of the Weight Rodded Unit Weight
Aggregate Aggregate Mould Mould
(kg.) (lb.) (m³) (in³) kg/ m³ lb/ in³ kg/ m³ lb/ ft³
21.96 48.31 0.01407 858.83 1561 97.02
22.02 48.44 0.01407 858.83 1564 97.5 1561 97.2
21.91 48.2 0.01407 858.83 1557 97

28
3.2.4.3 Specific gravity and absorption test of coarse aggregate

Specific gravity and absorption test of coarse aggregate’s was conducted according to

the ASTM Designation C 127-01 (ASTM, 2001).According to this method, collected

4200 gm. of the coarse aggregate sample. Dried the test sample in the oven to

constant temperature of 110°C, cooled in air at room temperature for 1 to 3 hours until

the aggregate has cooled to a temperature that is comfortable to handle

(approximately 50°C). Subsequently immersed the aggregate in water at room

temperature for a period of 24h.Removed the test sample from the water and rolled it

in a large absorbent cloth until all visible films of water are removed. Wipped the

larger particles individually. After determining the mass in air, immediately place the

saturated surface dry test sample in the sample container and determined its apparent

mass in water. Removed all entrapped air before determining its mass by shaking the

container carefully while immersed. Dried the test sample in the oven at constant

temperature of 110°C, cooled in air at room temperature 1 to 3 hours, or until the

aggregate has cooled to a temperature that is comfortable to handle (approximately

50°C), and determine the mass.

Table 8: Specific gravity and absorption test of coarse aggregate

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average

Mass of oven-dry test sample in air,
4149.7 4150.3 4150.8 4150.3
g. (A)
Mass of saturated-surface-dry test
4200 4201.3 4200.9 4200.7
sample in air, g (B)
Apparent mass of saturated test
2627.8 2630.4 2629.3 2629.1
sample in water, g. (C)
Bulk Relative
density / Bulk
2.67 2.67 2.67 2.67
specific gravity
(SSD)
Bulk Relative
density / Bulk 2.64 2.64 2.64 2.64
specific gravity
Appar. relative
2.73 2.73 2.73 2.73
density /Appar.

29
specific gravity
Density (OD)
2632.82 2635.38 2634.53 2634.24
(kg/m³)
Density (SSD)
(kg/m³) 2664.74 2667.77 2666.33 2666.27

Apparent density
2719.84 2723.81 2721.28 2721.64
(kg/m³)
Absorption
1.21 1.23 1.21 1.21
Capacity

3.2.4.4 Moisture content of coarse aggregate

Moisture content of coarse aggregate’s was conducted according to the ASTM

Designation C 127-01 (ASTM, 2001). According to this method, collected 4200 gm.

of the coarse aggregate sample from Laboratory and determined the mass in air.

Subsequently immersed the aggregate in water at room temperature for a period of

24h. Dried the test sample in the oven at constant temperature of 110°C, cooled in air

at room temperature 1 to 3 hours, or until the aggregate has cooled to a temperature

that is comfortable to handle (approximately 50°C), and determine the mass.

Table 9: Moisture content of coarse aggregate

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average

Weight of Oven Dry Sample in Air
4161.8 4162.2 4161.1 4161.7
(g) (A)
Weight of F.A. Sample in Air (g)
4200 4200 4200 4200
(B)
Moisture
Content (%) 0.92 0.91 0.93 0.92

3.2.4.5 Properties of fine aggregate

3.2.4.6 Grading of fine sand (mortar)

The fine sand used for the production of was collected from Sylhet region of
Bangladesh and prepared according to graded sand requirements ASTM C 778-02
(ASTM, 2002).

30
 Table 10: Grading of sand for mortar work as per ASTM C 778-02

Sieve No. Sieve opening (mm) % cumulative pass

16 1.19 100
30 0.59 75
50 0.3 25
100 0.15 0

3.2.4.7 Moisture content of fine aggregate

Moisture content of fine aggregate’s was conducted according to the ASTM

Designation C 128 (ASTM, 1993a). According to this method, collected 500 gm. of

the fine aggregate sample from Laboratory and determined the mass in air.

Subsequently immersed the aggregate in water at room temperature for a period of

24h. Dried the test sample in the oven at constant temperature of 110°C, cooled in air

at room temperature 1 to 3 hours and determine the mass.

Table 11: Moisture content of fine aggregate

Sample Sample Sample Average

1 2 3
Weight of Oven Dry Sample in
496.5 496.7 496.6 496.6
Air (g) (A)
Weight of F.A. Sample in Air (g)
500 500 500 500
(B)
Moisture
0.71 0.66 0.68 0.68
Content (%)

3.2.4.8 Specific gravity and absorption test of fine aggregate.

Specific gravity and absorption test of fine aggregate’s was conducted according to

the ASTM Designation C 128 (ASTM, 1993a). According to this method, obtained

500 gm. of fine Aggregate sample in SSD Condition and dried the sample in the

oven at constant temperature of 100 to 110°C. Where weight of pycnometer is 150.5

gm and weight of pan is 51.5 gm. Then allowed to cool and cover with water for

31
about 30 min. Removed excess water from the surface. Immediately introduced the

pycnometer by filling 500 gm. fine aggregate. Determined the total weight of the

pycnometer, including the sample, and the water. Carefully removed the fine

aggregate and dried the sample in the oven at constant temperature of 100 to 110°C

and then Allowed to cool and cover with water for about 30 min after that determined

the mass.

Table 12: Specific Gravity and Absorption Test of Fine Aggregate.

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Average

Weight of Oven Dry Sample
in Air (g) 491.3 491.8 492.4 491.2
(A)
Weight of pycnometer filled
with Water (g) 645.1 645.2 645.2 645.2
(B)
Weight of pycnometer filled
with Sample in Water (g) 932.9 933 933 933
(C)
Bulk Specific Gravity (oven-
2.31 2.32 2.32 2.32
dry)
Apparent Specific Gravity
2.41 2.41 2.41 2.41

Bulk Specific Gravity ( SSD )

2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35

Absorption (%)
1.77 1.67 1.54 1.66

3.2.6 Water

Potable water was used for mixing and curing whose pH is about 6.5-7.5.

32
 CHAPTER FOUR

METHODS

4.1 General

In order to produce cement mortar and concrete, the major work involves mixing the

ingradiants after selecting appropriate mix proportion and methods of mixing. A

typical flow diagram of work is shown in figure:

Materials required
(Milled Glass powder, Fine aggregate, Coarse
aggregates, OPC)

Material
properties

Testing required

OPC
Glass Powder
Coarse aggregate: Fine aggregate:
Bulk Sp. Gr. (SSD) Bulk Sp. Gr. (SSD) Fineness
Specific gravity Fineness
Dry-Rodded Unit Weight Fineness Modulus
Specific gravity
Absorption Capacity Absorption Capacity
Chemical composition
Total Moisture Content Total Moisture Content

Flow Test

Material specification collection

for concrete mix design

Design,casting and curing of

Concrete Cube & Morter
Cube

Testing of Compressive
Testing of Compressive
strength of Concrete
strength of Mortar Cube
Cube

Analysis of data &

preparation of result

Fig. 3 Work Plan for Experimental work

33
4.2 Variables

For cement , the variables considered in this study were:

 1st segment: “C” means cement mortar without Admixture,

“A” means cement mortar with Admixture; and
“B” means cement concrete without Admixture
 2nd segment: Exposure time in days
 3rd segment: glass
 4th segment: % of cement replaced by glass powder

Specimen notation used for mortar and concrete is given in fig.4

Fig.4 Specification notation for mortar and concrete.

Table 13: Details of some mortar mixes and variables

Designation Variables

Exposure time % of cement replaced

(days) by glass powder

C7G0 7 0

C28G10 28 10

A7G0 7 0

A28G10 28 10

34
4.3 Methodology incorporated with cement mortar

4.3.1 Chemical composition of white glass and color glass

There is a simple discription of how to determine chemical composition of white glass

and color glass. The machine used for chemical composition of white glass and color

glass powder is XRF-1800 Sequential X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer.At first 80%

of glass powder was mixed with 20% binder.Then a press unit having pressing force

140 k.Ton pressed the whole mixture For analysis the holding time was 1 minute.

Fig.6 XRF-1800 Sequential X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer

4.3.2 Mix details

The mass ratio of sand to (cement + Glass powder) was fixed at 2.75 according to

ASTM C 109 (ASTM, 2007a) for all batches. A water binder ratio of 0.5 was used

and kept constant for all batches. The mix proportion for the mortar are given in Table

14.

Table 14: Material requirement for 1 set (3 nos. of 2 in. cube as per ASTM C 109)

Specimen
Cement Glass Powder Sand Water
Details
Control Sample #30 206 gm (w/c)=0.485
(0% Glass 300 gm 0 gm #50 413 gm
Powder) #100 206 gm 145.5 ml
10% Glass
270 gm 30 gm Do Do
Powder
15% Glass
255 gm 45 gm Do Do
Powder
20% Glass
240 gm 60 gm Do Do
Powder
25% Glass
225 gm 75 gm Do Do
Powder

35
 Fig.5 Mixing and moulding

4.3.3 Fineness test of cement

Fineness test of cement’s was conducted according to the ASTM Designation C 430-

08 (ASTM, 2008). According to this method, Attached a pan under the sieve to

collect the cement passing the sieve. Weighted approximately 200 g of cement to the

nearest 0.01 g and place it on the sieve. Agitated the sieve by swirling, planetary and

linear movement until no more fine material passes through it. Removed and

weighted the residue and expressed as percentage. From lab work, cement retained on

sieve no. 200 is 1.4 gm and percentage of cement retained on sieve no. 200 is 0.7%

4.3.4 Flow test of cement mortar

In this study the flow test of cement mortar was performed to determine the

appropiate water to binder ratio.The test is carried out for compressive strength test.

The Standard test method for flow of hydraulic-cement mortar, determines how much

a mortar sample flows when it is unconfined and consolidated. Mortar is placed inside

2-in. tall conical brass mould. When the mould is removed, the mortar is vibrated at

1.67 Hz as the flow table rises and drops ½ in., 25 times in 15 seconds. The mortar

changes from a conical shape with a 4-in. base to a “pancake.” Mortar flow is reported

36
as a percentage based on the change in diameter from 4 in. to the final diameter of the

mortar “pancake.”

The procedure followed to conduct the flow test as per ASTM C 1437 (ASTM,

2007b), the mortar sample was properly mixed first then the mould was filled with

mortar in two 1-in. lifts, tamp each lift 20 times.The mortar was striked off flush with

the top of the mould.Then the mould was removed.The table was dropped 25 times in

15 seconds.The diameter of the mortar was measured.The mortar flow as a

percentage of the original base diameter was calculated and reported.

4.3.4.1 Sand preparation for flow test

Table 15 show a comparison between the sand grading required by ASTM C 1437-07

(ASTM, 2007b) and EN 196-1 (2005) for the flow test.

Table 15: Sand grading used for flow test

EN 196-1 ASTM
Opening Cum. Sieve Opening Cum. Percentage In 1350
(mm) Percentage No. (mm) Percentage gm
Retained Retained
#8 2.34 0 0 0
2.0 0
1.6 12
# 16 1.18 30.2 30.2 407.7
1 38
# 30 0.6 65.2 35 472.5
0.5 72
# 50 0.3 83.8 18.6 251.1
0.16 92
# 100 0.15 93 9.2 124.2
0.08 100
# 200 0.075 100 7 94.2

4.3.4.2 Materials required to perform flow test

ASTM Designation: C 1437

Fine Aggregate. : 600 gm

37
Sand:Cement = 3:1

Cement: 200 gm; Water: 100 ml

water to binder Ratio : 0.5

Admixture ( MasterPolyheed 8632) = 0.8% (1.6 ml)

4.3.5 Curing

After casting, the samples kept in mould for 24 hour maintaining appropriate moisture

condition. After 24 hours the specimens were removed from the moulds and

immediately submerged in clean fresh water and cured for different days

4.3.6 Compressive strength test

Compressive strength is the capacity of a material or structure to withstand loads

tending to reduce size. It can be measured by plotting applied force against

deformation in a testing machine. The compressive strength of a material is that value

of uni-axial compressive stress reached when the material fails completely, the

compressive strength is usually obtained experimentally by means of a compressive

test. Three cubes were tasted for each compressive strength data and the average value

of these three was reported. All the compression test were performed by using a

digital machine and reported in MPa unit. By its basic definition the uniaxial stress is

given by:

Eq. (6)

Where, F= Crushing load [N] and A= Area [mm2]

38
 Fig.7 Compressive strength test

4.4 Methodology incorporated with concrete:

4.4.1 Concrete mix proportion

Mix design was conducted as per American Concrete Institute (ACI, 2009). Trial

mixtures were prepared to obtain target strength of 28 MPa (4000 Psi) at 28 days

considering a slump value of 100-125mm. All the aggregetes brought to the saturated

and surface dry (SSD) condition before mixing. Step by step mix design as per

American Concrete Institute (ACI,2009) is given below:

Step 1: Selection of slump value

To make flowing concrete, slump = 100mm

Step 2: Selection of maximum size of coarse aggregate

Maximum size of coarse aggregate =20mm

Step 3: Estimation of mixing water content and air content

Entrapped air content =2%

Mixing water =205 kg per 1 fresh concrete

39
Step 4: Selection of w/c ratio

Considering strength of concrete

Target mean strength = (Design compressive strength + Safety margin)

= (28+8.5) = 36.5MPa

So, for 36.5 MPa, w/c ratio =0.46

Step 5: Estimation of coarse aggregate content

Dry rodded bulk volume of CA = 0.635 per 1 concrete

Dry mass of CA = 0.635 x2345 kg = 991 kg per 1 concrete

SSD mass of CA = 991 (1+1.21/100) = 1003kg

Step 7: Calculation of fine aggregate content

SSD mass fine aggregate = 617 ( 1+1.66/100) =627 kg per 1 concrete

Table 16: Mix proportion for 1 fresh concrete

Water 214 kg

Cement 445 kg

Fine aggregate (SSD) 627 kg

Coarse aggregate (SSD) 1003kg

The detailed concrete mix proportions of constituent materials (SSD condition where

applicable) of the concretes used for the study are presented in Table 17. Cement +

Glass powder and aggregates content kept same for all mixes.

40
 Table 17: Material requirement of concrete for one set (21 nos. of 4″ cube) used in

experimental work

Glass
Specimen Cement Sand C.A. Water
Powder
Details (kg.) (kg.) (kg.) (liter)
(kg.)
19 mm 2.91
12.5 mm 13.49
Control Sample
(0% Glass 11.76 0 16.42 9.5 mm 2.91 5.66
Powder)
4.75 mm 5.55
2.36 mm 1.59
10% Glass
10.584 1.176 Do 26.44 Do
Powder
15% Glass
9.996 1.764 Do Do Do
Powder
20% Glass
9.408 2.352 Do Do Do
Powder
25% Glass
8.82 2.94 Do Do Do
Powder

4.4.2 Concrete Mixing

For every trial mixing a 40 liters volume was considered. Appropriate quantity of

coarse aggregate, fine aggregate and cement were first dry mixed for a period of 2

minutes. Glass powder primarily mixed with cement then added with other

ingredients which was shown in Figure 8. After mixing kept it 3 minutes and the

workability of concrete was determined using slump cone shown in Figure 11. The

concrete was placed in the fabricated mould and tamping is done using a tamping rod.

A smooth steel trowel was used to finish the fresh concrete. When got the slump value

100-125mm, then started casting. Some figure related to the mixing process are

shown below:

41
 Fig 8: Concrete ingredients with Fig 9: Concrete ingredients mixing with

glass powder glass powder

Fig 10: Concrete ingredients with uniform Fig 11: Slump value test

dispersion of glass powder

After mixing prepared sample were placed into the cubic mould. After casting,

specimens are shown in below in Figure 12.

Fig 12: Specimens ready for curing

4.4.3 Curing of concrete

After casting, the samples kept in mould for 24 hour for maintaining appropriate

moisture condition. After 24 hours the specimens were removed from the moulds and

immediately submerged in clean fresh water and cured for different age.

42
4.4.4 Compressive strength test of concrete

After curing, strength test were performed using compression testing machine.

Compressive strength of concrete is defined as the load, which causes the failure of a

standard specimen divided by the area of cross section in uniaxial compression under

a given rate (7kN/sec) of loading. The compressive strength test specimen should be

made on 100mm cubes.

Place the cylinder in the compression testing machine. The green button is pressed to

start the electric motor. When the load is applied gradually, the piston is lifted up

along with the lower plate and thus the specimen application of the load should be

300kN (ASTM C39) per minute and can be controlled by load rate control knob.

Ultimate load is noted for each specimen. The release valve is operated and the piston

is allowed to go down. Ultimate load is noted for each specimen. Experimental set up

for compression test is shown in Figure 13.

Fig 13: Set up for compressive strength test

43
 CHAPTER FIVE

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

5.1 General

At first in this research the chemical composition of white and color glass powder is

obtained and then to determine the workability, flow test of cement mortar was

conducted. To find compressive strength, and concrete cube were made.

In the following section, test results obtained from various experiments conducted as

per experimental program and discussed. Test results are presented both in graphical

and tabular form.

5.2 Chemical composition of Glass Powder

According to Table 2. (SiO2+Al2O3+Fe2O3)’s minimum Requirements is 70% and

from Table 18, it is clear that the summation of SiO2+Al2O3+Fe2O3 is above 70% for

white glass powder and color glass powder. And to declare a product as a pozzolana

according to Table 2. SO3’s maximum limit is 4%, which is also applicable for white

glass powder and color glass powder.So we can predict white glass powder and color

glass powder will show pozzolanic behaviour. Table 18 shows Chemical composition

of glass powder.

Table 18: Chemical composition of glass powder

Compound White Glass Powder Color Glass Powder

SiO2 68.09 68.65

CaO 14.54 12.00

Na2O 12.20 13.32

44
 MgO 1.79 1.84

Al2O3 0.91 1.04

K 2O 0.75 1.04

Fe2O3 0.62 0.89

SO3 0.4335 0.10

BaO 0.1837 0.4

PbO 0.1197 0.27

As2O3 0.1140 --

TiO2 0.1126 0.22

ZrO2 0.0446 0.07

Cr2O3 0.0265 0.0383

MnO 0.0232 0.0474

CuO 0.0073 0.0114

NiO 0.0062 0.0075

Total 100 100

5.3 Mortar work

5.3.1 Flow test

There have a little variation ( to be exact >1%) on flow diameter when the % of

cement is replaced by glass powder. Fig. 14 shows a linear relationship between

percent of cement replacement and flow diameter. So that maintained a constant water

to binder ratio in the preparation of cement mortar. Glass powder is clean material

most probably for that the flow diameter increases when the cement replacement by

glass powder is increased. Table 19 shows Result of flow test, conducted in the

laboratory.

45
 Table 19: Result of flow test

Cement Admixture Flow Flow Flow Flow Average Flow

Replacement (ml) Diameter Diameter Diameter Diameter Diameter
with milled 1 2 3 4
glass. (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
10% 1.6 134 133 133 133 133

15% 1.6 135 134 132 132 133.5

20% 1.6 134 133 134 134 134

135
25% 1.6 135 135 136 134

135.5

135 y = 0.13x + 131.6

R² = 0.9657
134.5

134

133.5

133

132.5
5 10 15 20 25 30

Fig.14 Graphical representation of flow test result

5.3.2 Compressive Strength Test

Fig 15(a) shows the pattern of getting the compressive strength of several mortar

specimen is likely same at the different ages i.e. the pattern of strength when cement

is replaced by certain amount of glass powder at the early stage(Day 7) is same to the

older age(Day 90).when the cement replacement percentage increase the strength

decrease and it is constant over the time i.e. the strength at 0% cement replacement is

higher than 25% cement replacement at different ages and to be exact

29%,24%,12%,11% and 10% strength reduced at 7,14,28,56 and 90 day respectively.

46
But the auspicious thing is, in older age the strength of 0%,10%,15% cement

replacement is quite same with a variation of 3% strength.

The compressive strength test result at different age are given in table 20 and 21.

Table 20: compressive strength of mortar specimen without admixture

Sample Exposure Percent of Avg. Load (kN) Avg. Strength

Name Time (days) Glass (MPa)
Powder
C7G0 7 0 28.82 23.0
C7G10 7 10 25.75 20.6
C7G15 7 15 24.42 19.5
C7G20 7 20 22.91 18.3
C7G25 7 25 20.42 16.3
C14G0 14 0 32.23 25.7
C14G10 14 10 31.74 25.3
C14G15 14 15 30.87 24.6
C14G20 14 20 27.64 22.1
C14G25 14 25 24.68 19.7
C28G0 28 0 42.25 33.8
C28G10 28 10 41.54 33.2
C28G15 28 15 40.91 32.7
C28G20 28 20 39.85 31.8
C28G25 28 25 37.49 29.9
C56G0 56 0 43.45 34.7
C56G10 56 10 42.35 33.8
C56G15 56 15 41.99 33.5
C56G20 56 20 40.38 32.3
C56G25 56 25 38.49 30.7
C90G0 90 0 45.38 36.3
C90G10 90 10 44.68 35.7
C90G15 90 15 42.63 34.1
C90G20 90 20 41.45 33.1
C90G25 90 25 40.46 32.3

47
 40

Compressive Strength in MPa

35

30 Day 7
Day 14
25 Day 28
Day 56
20
Day 90

15
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
% of Cement Replaced

Fig 15(a): Compressive strength of mortar specimen (without admixture)

40
35
30
0% Glass
25
10% Glass
20
15% Glass
15
20% Glass
10
25% Glass
5
0
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days 56 Days 90 Days

Fig 15(b): Compressive strength of mortar specimen (without admixture)

Fig 16(a) shows that, the pattern of getting the compressive strength of several mortar

specimen is not absolutely same as the previous one where the mortar specimen is not

mixed with admixture.at early age like Day 7 and Day 14 the fluctuation of the

strength curve is unpredictable. A severe drop of 22% strength occurs at Day 7 when

the cement replacement reaches 10% to 15% .when the cement replacement

percentage increase the strength decrease and it is not constant over the time i.e. the

48
strength at 0% cement replacement is higher than 25% cement replacement at

different ages and to be exact 35%,25%,21%,20% and 19% strength reduced at

7,14,28,56 and 90 day respectively. But the auspicious thing is, in older age the

strength of 0%,10%,15% cement replacement is quite same with a variation of 10%

strength.

Table 21: compressive strength of mortar specimen with admixture

Sample Exposure Percent of Avg. Load (kN) Avg. Strength

Name Time (days) glass (MPa)
powder
A7G0 7 0 41.38 33.1
A7G10 7 10 36.60 29.2
A7G15 7 15 28.69 22.9
A7G20 7 20 27.52 22.0
A7G25 7 25 26.61 21.2
A14G0 14 0 43.46 34.7
A14G10 14 10 41.06 32.8
A14G15 14 15 40.82 32.6
A14G20 14 20 36.15 28.9
A14G25 14 25 32.61 26.0
A28G0 28 0 47.50 38.0
A28G10 28 10 44.14 35.3
A28G15 28 15 42.91 34.3
A28G20 28 20 40.36 32.2
A28G25 28 25 37.99 30.3
A56G0 56 0 48.97 39.1
A56G10 56 10 44.94 35.9
A56G15 56 15 43.67 34.9
A56G20 56 20 40.98 32.7
A56G25 56 25 38.87 31.1
A90G0 90 0 50.62 40.5
A90G10 90 10 45.42 36.3
A90G15 90 15 44.80 35.8
A90G20 90 20 41.88 33.5
A90G25 90 25 40.73 32.5

49
 45

Compressive Strength in MPa 40

35 Day 7
Day 14
Day 28
30
Day 56
Day 90
25

20
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
% of Cement Replaced

Fig 16(a): Compressive strength of mortar specimen (with admixture).

45

40

35

30
0% Glass
25 10% Glass
15% Glass
20
20% Glass
15 25% Glass

10

0
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days 56 Days 90 Days

Fig 16(b):Compressive strength of mortar specimen (with admixture)

50
5.3.3 Effect of Admixture at different age.

Fig 17 implies, in early age i.e. in 7 day the compressive strength of those mortar

specimen where admixture is used is always high with respect to the mortar specimen

where admixture is not used. But difference of compressive strength of 0% and 10%

cement replacement is atleast 5% greater than 15%,20% and 25% cement

replacement. A severe drop of 22% strength occurs when the cement replacement

reaches 10% to 15% at those mortar specimen where admixture is used.so we can say

that when admixture is added to the mortar then the mortar shows an unpredictable

nature.

35
33
Compressive Strength in MPa

31 Without
29 Admixture
27
With Admixture
25
23
21
19
17
15
0% 10% 20% 30%
% of Cement Replaced

Fig 17: Comparison of compressive strength of mortar specimen at 7 day

Fig 18 shows that, in early age i.e. in 14 day the compressive strength of those mortar

specimen where admixture is used is always high with respect to the specimen where

admixture is not used. But difference of compressive strength of 0%,10%,15%,20%

and 25% cement replacement is generally constant with 25% strength. so we can say

that when admixture is added to the mortar then the mortar shows a predictable

nature.

51
 40

Compressive Strength in MPa

35

30

25
Without Admixture
20
With Admixture

15
0% 10% 20% 30%
% of Cement Replaced

Fig 18: Comparison of compressive strength of mortar specimen at 14 day

Fig 19 implies, in 28 day the compressive strength of those mortar specimen where

admixture is used is always high with respect to the specimen where admixture is not

used. But difference of compressive strength of 0%, 10%,15%,20% and 25% cement

replacement is radially decrease from 11% to 1%. But the fruitful thing is, the strength

of 0%,10%,15% cement replacement is quite same with a variation of 8% strength in

all specimen.so we can say that when admixture is added to the mortar then the

mortar shows a predictable nature.

40
Compressive Strength in MPa

35

30
Without
Admixture
25
With Admixture
20

15
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
% of Cement Replaced

Fig 19: Comparison of compressive strength of mortar specimen at 28 day

52
Fig 20 shows that, In 56 day the compressive strength of those mortar specimen

where admixture is used is always high with respect to the specimen where admixture

is not used. But difference of compressive strength of 0%, 10%,15%,20% and 25%

cement replacement is radially decrease from 11% to 1%. But the fruitful thing is, the

strength of 0%,10%,15% cement replacement is quite same with a variation of 7%

strength in all specimen.so we can say that when admixture is added to the mortar

then the mortar shows a predictable nature.

45
Compressive Strength in MPa

40

35

30
Without
Admixture
25 With Admixture

20

15
0% 10% 20% 30%
% of Cement Replaced

Fig 20: Comparison of compressive strength of mortar specimen at 56 day

Fig 21 implies, in 90 day the compressive strength of those specimen where

admixture is used is always high with respect to the specimen where admixture is not

used. But difference of compressive strength of 0%, 10%,15%,20% and 25% cement

replacement is not radially decreasing. But the strength of 0%,10%,15% cement

replacement is quite same with a variation of 11% strength in all specimen.so we can

say that when admixture is added to the mortar then the mortar shows a predictable

nature.

53
 45

Compressive Strength in MPa

40

35

30
Without
Admixture
25
With
20 Admixture

15
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
% of Cement Replaced

Fig 21: Comparison of compressive strength of mortar specimen at 90 day

5.3.4 Summary of Comparison of Compressive strength test on mortar

specimens.

In summary

 Curing less than 90 day the compressive strength of mortar specimen where

admixture is used is always high with respect to the specimen where

admixture was not used.

 In 7 day difference of compressive strength of 0% and 10% cement

replacement is greater than 15%, 20% and 25% cement replacement.

 A severe drop of strength occurs when the cement replacement reaches 10% to

15% at those specimen where admixture is used and shows an unpredictable

nature.

 In 14 to 90 day difference of compressive strength of 0%, 10%, 15%, 20%

and 25% cement replacement is generally constant

 we can say that when admixture is added to the mortar then the shows a

predictable nature.

54
  The fruitful thing is, at 14 to 90 day the strength of 0%, 10%, 15% cement

replacement is quite same in all mortar specimen.

5.3.5 Effect of curing age.

Fig.22 implies, the rate of strength gained before 28 day is higher than after 28 day.

Elaborately it can be said that, before 28 day the specimen gained most of its ultimate

strength and after 28 day the amount of extra strength gained is negligible. Fig.23

implies, the rate of strength gained throughout the testing days is likely constant. So

that the graph plotted in Fig.23 maintains a similar slope. From above it can be said

that, the slope of the strength curve of those mortar specimen where admixture is not

used is steeper than the specimen where admixture is used. So that, when admixture

is used to the mortar specimen then the strength is gradually increasing and without

admixture, specimen gained most of its ultimate strength before 28 day. Curve pattern

found in those mortar specimen where admixture is not used. There have increase about

13% strength for 25% cement replacement in 14th day to 28th day in those mortar specimen

where admixture is not used.

40
Compressive Strength in MPa

35

30
0% Glass
25 10% Glass
15% Glass
20% Glass
20
25% Glass

15
Day 7 Day 14 Day 28 Day 56 Day 90

Fig 22: Strength gained at different ages for mortar without admixture

55
 45

Compressive Strength in MPa

40

35

30 0% Glass
10% Glass
25
15% Glass
20 20% Glass
25% Glass
15
Day 7 Day 14 Day 28 Day 56 Day 90

Fig 23 Strength gained at different ages for mortar with admixture

5.4 Concrete works

5.4.1 Compressive Strength Test

Fig 24(a) implies, the pattern of getting the compressive strength of several specimen

is likely same at the different ages i.e. the pattern of strength when cement is replaced

by certain amount of glass powder at the early stage (Day 7) is same to the older

age(Day 90).when the cement replacement percentage increase up to 25% then the

strength decrease about 11% and it is constant over the time except 15% cement

replacement at Day 56 and Day 90. But the auspicious thing is, in older age the

strength of 0%,10%,15% cement replacement is quite same with a variation of 7%

strength.

After testing of compressive strength the details result at different age are given in

Table 22 .

Table 22: compressive strength of Concrete specimen without admixture

Sample Exposure Percent of Avg. Load (kN) Avg. Strength

Name Time (days) Glass (MPa)
Powder
B7G0 7 0 348.84 69.7
B7G10 7 10 308.67 61.7
B7G15 7 15 292.60 58.5

56
 B7G20 7 20 270.51 54.1
B7G25 7 25 264.00 52.8
B28G0 14 0 419.13 83.8
B28G10 14 10 413.11 82.6
B28G15 14 15 393.02 78.6
B28G20 14 20 366.91 73.3
B28G25 14 25 360.00 72.0
B56G0 28 0 455.29 91.0
B56G10 28 10 413.11 82.6
B56G15 28 15 420.00 84.0
B56G20 28 20 364.91 72.9
B56G25 28 25 360.00 72.0
B90G0 56 0 457.29 91.4
B90G10 56 10 414.00 82.8
B90G15 56 15 421.00 84.2
B90G20 56 20 364.00 72.8
B90G25 56 25 362.00 72.4

105

95

85
Compressive Strength in MPa

75

65

55
Day 7
45
Day 28
35
Day 56
25
Day 90

15
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
% of Cement Replaced

Fig 24(a): compressive strength of concrete specimen

57
 100

90

80

70

60 0% Glass
10% Glass
50
15% Glass

40 20% Glass
25% Glass
30

20

10

0
7 Days 28 Days 56 Days 90 Days

Fig 24(b): compressive strength of concrete specimen.

5.4.2 Effect of curing time.

From Fig. 25 it can be said that, the slope of the strength curve is not very steep. The

strength difference from early to older age is not very high i.e. Maximum strength

gained in early stage and to be exact 7 day strength is 20% less than 90 day strength.

There have a little variation in strength is about 2% from 10% and 15% cement

replacement. All test data i.e. compressive strength is well above from the design

strength.

58
 105

95

Compressive Strength in MPa 85

75

65 0% Glass
10% Glass
55
15% Glass
45 20% Glass
25% Glass
35
28 Mpa
25

15
Day 7 Day 28 Day 56 Day 90

Fig 25: Strength gained at different ages for concrete without admixture

5.6 Benefit/Cost Analysis

In this research discussed about the cement replacement by glass powder. From the tests

conducted, the decision can be made that up to 15% of glass powder can be used for benefit.

In local market the price of waste glass is approximately 2 tk/kg. In addition, the processing

and grinding may increase the cost up to 2.5 tk/kg. Considering price of a 50-kg cement bag

as 450 tk, replacing 10 and 20% cement by glass powder can reduce its price by 7.22% and

14.44% respectively. Table 23 gives a comparison in cost analysis considering the product

gives same performance as OPC.

Table 23: Comparison of price when cement is replace by milled glass powder

10% glass 15% glass 20% glass

Cement bag of 50 kg
replacement replacement replacement

Price 450 Tk. Price 417.5 Tk. Price 400 Tk. Price 385 Tk.

From Table 23 it can be said that, replacing 15% cement by glass powder can reduce 50 Tk.

Per bag. It can be compared other way that, when strength is the key criterion to determine the

concrete performance then it should not be neglected. In this experiment, around 445 kg.

59
cement (with glass powder) was used for concrete preparation, then 10% (highest) of strength

reduced due to the replacement of cement by glass powder. For maintain the design strength

(without reduction of strength) cement proportion in mix design should revised by increasing

their quantity. Let, 460 kg. cement may enough for the design strength. If cement is replaced

by 15% glass powder then 69 kg. of glass powder required. And after the calculation it can be

determined that, if revised cement proportion (with replacement of glass powder) is used

instead of previous cement proportion (without replacement of glass powder), the cost of

concrete will decrease. Table 24 gives a comparison in cost analysis considering the product,

when cement is replaced by glass powder reduces the cost when glass powder is not used in

concrete.

Table 24: Comparison of cost considering cement is replace by milled glass powder

Quantity (kg.) Price (Tk.)

Binder
Total Price
Quantity
Cement Glass Cement Glass (Tk.)
(kg.)
Powder Powder
445 445 0 4005 0 4005

460 (revised) 391 69 3519 173 3692

Additional information can be found from the Table 24 that, use of 15% glass powder can

reduce production of 1.5 bag cement per 10 bag. So that 150 kg (one-seventh of a ton)

cement can be saved per ton if cement is replaced by glass powder.

5.7 Environmental Consideration

There is now a significant world-wide interest to solve the environmental problems caused by

industrial waste and other materials by including such materials in the manufacture of

concrete. Manufacturing of one ton of cement results emission of approximately one ton of

carbon dioxide (CO2) to the atmosphere. Cement production also involves emission of

moderate quantities of NOx, SOx, and particulates. Waste glass is not bio-degradable and

therefore rational consideration for alternative utilization dictates a diversion of waste glass

60
away from landfill disposal sites. Utilization of waste glass in concrete production not only

provides significant environmental benefits but also enhances performance of the concrete

when used at optimum amounts.

Cattaneo et al. (2008) reported that recycling of each ton of glass saves over one ton of

natural resources, and recycling of every six tons of container glass results in the reduction of

one ton of CO2 emission. The optimum glass content for the compressive strength is 15% for

which compressive strength was comparable with the control specimen and there have a

reduction of strength about 10%. 150 kg (one-fifth of a ton) cement can be saved per ton if

cement is replaced by glass powder. As a result, 15% less carbon dioxide (CO2) will added to

the atmosphere when one ton of cement produced. So that it can be said that, use of every

seven tons of glass powder in concrete results in the reduction of one ton of CO2 emission and

save the environment by reducing green-house gas and particulate production.

The most important criteria to evaluate the performance of concrete is strength. Without

compromising the strength, decision can be made from Table 24 that, 120 kg. (12% of a ton)

cement can be saved per ton if cement is replaced by glass powder. So that, finally 12% less

carbon dioxide (CO2) will added to the atmosphere when one ton of cement produced.

61
 CHAPTER SIX

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

6.1 General

The amount of incorporated waste glass largely influenced properties of the concrete.

This study investigated the feasibility of waste glass inclusion as partial cement

replacement in cementitious systems. Good quality structural concrete can provide

protection against physical and chemical actions. From the analysis of the test results

the following conclusions are made.

6.2 Conclusion

The following conclusions can be drawn from the results obtained from experimental

analysis:

 The chemical composition of white and color glass powder are compareable

to other SCMs.

 The increase in flow diameter with the percentage of cement is replacement

glass powder shows a linear relationship because of the clean property of glass

powder.

 The optimum glass content for the compressive strength is 15%, In that case

the compressive strength was comparable with the control specimen and a

reduction of strength about 10% was found at 90day’s.

 In general, considering the similar performance with replaced material glass

addition can reduce significant cost of cement production.

62
  In addition, use of every seven tons of glass powder in concrete results in the

reduction of one ton of CO2 emission and save the environment by reducing

green-house gas and particulate production.

6.3 Recommendation for future study

Researchers have a huge scope for further development to improve the quality of

glass concrete. From this study following recommendation can be advised:

 Other concrete tests such as Tensile strength, water permeability test, gas permeability

test can be conducted.

 There have a possibility to show a higher strength on 20-25% glass content at higher

age.so that the exposure time can be more then this test’s exposure time for better

result.

63
REFERENCES

1. ASTM International. C 109 (2007a). Standard Test Method for Compressive

Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2-in. or [50-mm] Cube

Specimens). ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USA.

2. ASTM International. C 127 (2001). Standard Test Method for Relative

Density (Specific Gravity) and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate. ASTM

International, West Conshohocken, USA.

3. ASTM International. C 128 (1993a). Standard Test Method for Relative

Density (Specific Gravity) and Absorption of Fine Aggregate. ASTM

International, West Conshohocken, USA.

4. ASTM International. C 1437 (2007b). Standard Test Method for Flow of

Hydraulic Cement Mortar. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USA.

5. ASTM International. C 150 (2007c). Standard Specification for Portland

Cement. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USA.

6. ASTM International. C 187 (1998). Standard Test Method for Amount of

Water Required for Normal Consistency of Hydraulic Cement Paste. ASTM

International, West Conshohocken, USA.

7. ASTM International. C 29 (1997). Standard Test Method for Bulk Density

(Unit Weight) and Voids in Aggregate. ASTM International, West

Conshohocken, USA.

8. ASTM International. C 33 (1993b). Standard Specification for Concrete

Aggregates. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USA.

64
9. ASTM International. C 39 (2005). Standard Test Method for Compressive

Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens. ASTM International, West

Conshohocken, USA.

10. ASTM International. C 430 (2003). Standard Test Method for Fineness of

Hydraulic Cement by the 45-μm (No. 325) Sieve. ASTM International, West

Conshohocken, USA.

11. ASTM International. C 494 (2013). Standard Specification for Chemical

Admixtures for Concrete. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USA.

12. ASTM International. C 618-12a (2012). Specification for coal fly ash and raw

or calcined natural pozzolan for use in concrete. ASTM International, West

Conshohocken, USA.

13. ASTM International. C 778-02 (2002). Standard Specification for Standard

Sand. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USA.

14. Binici, H; Aksogan, O; Cagatay, IH; Tokyay, M and Emsen, E (2007). The

effect of particle size distribution on the properties of blended cements

incorporating GGBFS and natural pozzolan (NP), Powder Technology. No.

177, pp. 140-147

15. Byars, E; Meyer, C and Zhu, HY (2003). Use of waste glass for construction

products: legislative and technical issues. In R. K. Dhir, M. D. Newlands, & J.

E. Halliday (Ed.), Recycling and Reuse of Waste Materials (pp. 827-838),

Thomas Telford Ltd, London, United Kingdom.

16. Cattaneo, JUS (2008). Glass recycling: market outlook. In Resource

Conservation Challenge (RCC) 2008 Workshop. 2008. Arlington, Va, USA.

65
17. Detwiler, R, Bhatty, JI, and Bhattacharja, S (1996). Supplementary cementing

materials for use in blended cements. Skokie, Illinois, U.S.A.: Research and

Development Bulletin Rd112t, Portland Cement Association.

18. Diamond S. and Thaulow, N (1974). A study of expansion due to alkali-silica

reaction as conditioned by the grain size of the reactive aggregate. Cement

and Concrete Research; Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 591-607

19. Glasser, DLS and Kataoka, N (1981). The chemistry of “Alkali-Aggregate”

reaction. Cement and Concrete Research, No. 11, pp. 1-9

20. Greenberg, SA (1961). Reaction between silica and calcium hydroxide

solutions- I. kinetics, In the temperature range 30 to 85. Journal of Physical

Chemistry, Vol. 65, No. 12, pp. 12-16

21. Helmuth, R; Stark, D; Diamond, S and Monranville-Regourd M (1993).

Alkali-silica reactivity, an overview of research, Shrp-C-342. Washington:

National Research Council.

22. Islam, GMS; Islam, MM; Akter, A and Islam MS. (2011). Green construction

materials-Bangladesh perspective, Proceedings of the International

Conference on Mechanical Engineering and Renewable Energy 2011,

(ICMERE2011) 22- 24 December 2011, Chittagong, Bangladesh (ID-063).

23. Jin, W; Meyer, C and Baxter, S. (2000). "Glasscrete"-concrete with glass

aggregate. ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 97, No. 2, pp. 208-213.

24. Johnston CD. (1974). Waste Glass as Coarse Aggregate for Concrete. J Test

Eval; Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 344-350.

25. Massazza, F. (1998). Pozzolana and pozzolanic cements. In P. C. Hewlett

(Ed.), Lea's chemistry of cement and concrete (4th Edition Ed., pp. 471-636).

Oxford: Elsevier.

66
26. Meyer, C; Baxter, S and Jin W. (1996). Potential of waste glass for concrete

masonry blocks. In: Proceedings of the fourth materials engineering

conference. Washington, pp. 666-673

27. Mostafa, NY Brown, PW. (2005). Heat of hydration of high reactive

pozzolans in blended cements: isothermal conduction calorimetry,

Thermochim. Acta, 435, No. 435, pp. 162-167

28. Nassar, RUD and Soroushian, P. (2012). Strength and durability of recycled

aggregate concrete containing milled glass as partial replacement for cement.

Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 29, pp. 368-377

29. Nassar, RUD; Soroushian, P. (2011). Field investigation of concrete

incorporating milled waste glass. Journal of Solid Waste Technology and

Management, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 307-319

30. Rahman, MH; Islam, GMS; and Shames, AA(2015). Potential of recycled

glass as cementitious material in concrete, Proceedings of the 2nd

International Conference on Advances in Civil Engineering 2014 (ICACE-

2014), 26 –28 December, 2014, Chittagong, Bangladesh (ID: SEM-017).

31. Ryou, J; Shah, SP and Konsta-Gdoutos, MS. (2006). Recycling of cement

industry wastes by grinding process, Adv. Appl. Ceram, No. 105, Pp. 274-279

32. Shi, C and Day, RL. (1993). Chemical activation of blended cements made

with lime and natural pozzolans, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 23, No.

6, pp. 1389-1396

33. Shi, C; Wu, Y; Riefler, C and Wang, H. (2005). Characteristics and pozzolanic

reactivity of glass powders. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 35, No. 5,

pp. 987-993

67
 34. Urhan, S. (1987). Alkali silica and pozzolanic reactions in concrete. Part 1:

interpretation of published results and an hypothesis concerning the

mechanism. Cement and Concrete Research; Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 141-152

35. Warren, CJ and Reardon EJ. (1994). The Solubility of Ettringite at 25°C,

Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 24, pp. 1515-1524

68

View publication stats