INVESTIGATIONS ON CONCRETE

WITH STONE CRUSHER DUST AS

FINE AGGREGATE

M. Jeevanesh
I Sem. M.Tech (Structural Engineering)
Dept of Civil Engineering
NITK, Surathkal
1 INTRODUCTION

o Stone crusher dust, which is available

abundantly from crusher units at a low
cost in many areas, provides a viable
alternative for river sand in concrete.
o Investigations on the use of stone crusher
dust in concrete as an alternative to river
sand are presented in this paper.
o The tests conducted pertain to concrete
with river sand of strength 28.1 MPa.
o Tests on the strengths of concrete, and on the
flexural behaviour of RC beams under two-point
loading were conducted.
o Failure loads and cracking patterns of the beams
with sand and with crusher dust as fine
aggregates were compared.
o The investigations indicate that stone crusher
dust has a good potential as fine aggregate in
concrete construction.
o Crusher does not only reduces the cost of
construction buts also helps reduce the impact
on the environment by consuming the material
generally considered as as waste product with
few applications.
Availability of material:
• Crusher dust from quarries and from
crusher units.

2 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME

• Standard concrete cubes (150 mm), cylinders

(150x300 mm), prisms (100x100x500 mm) as
well as beams (120x150x1350 mm) were tested.
2.1 Properties of Various Materials tested

Table1 Properties of fine aggregates

Fine aggregate
Property River sand Crusher
dust
Bulk density,kg/m3 1157.00 660.00

Specific gravity 2.27 2.6

Fineness modulus 2.74 2.71

Free surface moisture 0.10 percent 0.60 percent

Water absorption 1.0 percent 0.9 percent

Table2 Properties of the coarse aggregate
Properties Value
Maximum normal sizes, mm 20
Bulk density, kg/m3
Loose state 1450
Compacted state 1530
Specific gravity 2.78
Fineness modulus 6.85
Voids, percent
Loose state 41
Compacted state 47
Free surface moisture, percent 0.6
water absorption, percent 0.5
2.1.1 Physical properties

• The physical properties of the fine and coarse

aggregates used are indicated in Tables1 and 2

• Ordinary portland cement (OPC) Grade 53 cement

(strength of standard mortar cubes = 55.6 MPa with 28
percent normal consistency) conforming to IS 12 269 :
1987 was used in the test specimen
Table3 Concrete mix proportions

Mixture
Material
A B
(1 : 1.4 : 3.5 ) ( 1 : 1.6 : 3.5 )
Cement. Kg/m3 360.0 360.0
River sand. Kg/m3 504.0 -
Coarse aggregate. 1 260.0 1 260.0
Kg/m3
Water cement ratio 0.54 0.53
Slump mm 28 25
Compaction factor 0.92 0.87
Table4 Compressive Strength of 150 mm Cubes (average of 3
cubes)
Fine Compressive strength, Percentage increase
Mix aggregate N/mm2
3day 7day 28day 3day 7day 28day

A Sand 15.0 18.9 28.1 - - -

B Crusher 18.8 23.0 32.8 25.3 21.7 16.8
dust

Table5 Split tensile strength of 150 x 300 mm cylinders (average of 3

prisms)
Mix Fine aggregate Tensile strength Percentage increase

7 day 28 day 7 day 28 day

A Sand 2.27 2.72 - -
B Crusher dust 2.76 2.9 21.6 6.6
Table6 Flexural tensile strength of 100 x 100 x 500 prisms
(average of 3 prisms)

Tensile strength Percentage

Mix Fine aggregate N/mm2 increase
7 day 28 day 7 day 28 day

A Sand 2.85 3.7 - -

B Crusher dust 3.72 4.45 30.5 20.3

3 VARIOUS TESTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1 Tests on Plain Concrete
Standard cubes, prisms and cylinders were tested for
compressive and tensile strength properties. The
specimens were tested after 3,7 and 28 days of curing
and the mean strength values of three specimen were
compared .
• The results of the tests on 150 mm-cubes are indicated
in Table 4. the 28-day compressive strength was 28.1
MPa for Mix A (concrete with river sand) and 32.8 MPa
for Mix B (concrete with stone crusher dust); the strength
of Mix B was about 17 percent higher than that of Mix A,
the 3 and7 days strengths have shown similar trends.

• Table5 indicates the results of split tensile strength tests

on 150 x 300 mm cylinders. Mix A showed a 28-day
mean value of 2.72 MPa, while Mix B developed a mean
strength of 2.90 MPa, an increase of about 7 percent.

• The flexural strength test results on 100 x 100 x 500 mm

prisms (modulus of rupture) are shown in Table6. the
flexural strength of Mix A was found to be 3.70 MPa,
while that of Mix B was 4.45 MPa at 28-days, an
increase of about 20 percent.
3.2 Test on RC Beams

The beams cast with sand as fine aggregate were

designated SU 1, SU 2 and SU 3 (SU series) while those
with crusher dust as fine aggregate were designated
CDU 1, CDU 2 and CDU 3 (CDU series). The concrete
was compacted using a 25 mm needle vibrator; moulds
were removed after 24 hours, and the specimens cured
for 28 days before testing
Table7 Beam deflections at 60.0 KN load
Deflection, mm
Sl no Beam
1/3 span Mean Mid-span Mean
value value
1 Su1 12.99 14.62
2 Su2 9.72 11.3
3 Su3 12.12 11.61 14.05 13.32
4 Cdu1 13.6 14.28
5 Cdu2 10.10 11.16
6 Cdu3 9.45 11.05 10.4 11.95
3.3 Strains
• Mean values of the strains measured at one-third span
and mid span sections are indicated in Figs 5 (a) and (b),
respectively. The beams with crusher dust developed
smaller strains generally, the difference up to a load of
30.0 kN was about 20 percent. However, the strains in
the beams with crusher dust increased suddenly at load
beyond 50.0 kN at one-third span sections, possibly due
to crushing of the concrete at the loaded section fig 5(a)

3.4 Crack Widths

the beams with crusher dust generally indicated fewer
cracks of smaller width than the beams with river sand.
Table9 Maximum and average crack widths of the test beams

SL NO BEAM CRACK WIDTH, MM

MAX MEAN
1 Su1 1.5 0.17
2 Su2 1.55 0.29
3 Su3 2.05 0.52
4 Cdu1 2.01 0.24
5 Cdu2 1.55 0.25
6 cdu3 0.5 0.15

The maximum and mean widths of cracks for the beams of SU series
worked out to be 1.70 mm and 0.33 mm, respectively. The corresponding
values for the beams of CDU series were 1.38 mm and 0.21 mm. It can be
noted that the beams with crusher dust developed cracks of smaller widths
as well as fewer in number of cracks.
Table10 Cost of M20 grade concrete mixes
Fine Quantity Rate per Cost
Mix Aggregate Description m3
m3 Rs. Rs.

A River sand Cement 0.266 3720.00 989.52

Sand 0.436 883.00 384.99
Coarse agg. 0.868 442.00 383.66
total 1758.17
B Crusher dust Cement 0.266 3720 989.52
Crusher dust 0.347 113 39.21
Coarse agg. 0.868 442 383.66
total 1412.39
4 CONCLUSIONS

• It can be seen that stone crusher dust as fine aggregate

has in general no detrimental effect on the strength and
performance of concrete when designed correctly.

• The concrete cubes with crusher dust developed about

17 percent higher strength in compression, 7 percent
more split tensile strength and 20 percent more flexural
strength (modulus of rupture) than the concrete
cubes/beams with river sand as fine aggregate. The
differences in strengths are possibly due to the sharp
edges of stone dust providing stronger bond with cement
compared to the rounded shape of river sand.
• Similarly, the RC beams with crusher dust sustained
about 6 percent more load under two point loading, and
developed smaller deflections and smaller strains than
the beams with river sand. The cracks were also fewer,
and the crack widths were smaller. The better
performance of the beams with stone dust may be due to
the higher strength of concrete.

• Based on the test results presented, it can be concluded

that crusher stone dust can be adopted in concrete
structures.
REFERENCES

• MISHRA, V. N Use of stone dust from crushers in

cement-sand mortars. The Indian Concrete journal,
August 1984, Vol 58, Nos 58,No,pp.219-223.

• BABU, K. K. RADHAKRISHNA,R. and NAMBIAR, E.K.K.

Compressive strength and Construction review,
September 1997, vol 10,No 9,pp 25-29.

• SAHU, A.K.,KUMAR, SUNIL and SACHAN, A.K.Crushed

stone waste as fine aggregate for concrete, The Indian
concrete Journal, January 2003, Vol 77,N0 1, pp.845-
847.
THANK YOU