4.6 Article

Experimental Study of Self-Compacting Mortar Incorporating Recycled Glass Aggregate

Journal

BUILDINGS
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/buildings8020015

Keywords

recycled glass aggregate; self-compacting concrete; solid waste management; sorptivity; alkali-silica-reaction; self-compacting mortar; strength; flow time; slump flow

Funding

  1. African Union Commission (AUC)
  2. Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) [2017/18 (JKU/ADM/10B)]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This experimental research is focused on the development of self-compacting mortar incorporating recycled glass aggregate (SCM-RGA) as partial substitution of fine aggregate (wt 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and 50%). The fresh and hardened mechanical properties as well as durability of SCM-RGA mixes were investigated. Limestone powder (LP) was used as filler that constitutes 20% of the powder volume to reduce the amount of cement. The SCM-RGA mixtures were designed based on Japanese mix design method. The experimental test results showed that the slump flow of SCM-RGA mixes decreased and V-funnel flow time increased when the content of recycled glass aggregate (RGA) increased. The bulk density, compressive strength, flexural strength, water absorption and sorptivity of SCM-RGA mixes were decreased as RGA content increased. Moreover, the accelerated mortar bar test results showed that the expansion due to alkali-silica reaction (ASR) of SCM-RGA mixes increased as the content of RGA increased although the expansion of all mixes were within acceptable limit and potentially innocuous. In conclusion, up to 30% of RGA can be successfully integrated in SCM mixes that offers comparable strength performance, sorptivity enhancement and without long term detrimental ASR effect, and thus, contributes towards sustainable solid waste management, conservation of natural resources and environmental protection.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available