{"title":"Performance of recycled concrete aggregates developed through integrated thermomechanical treatment process","authors":"Bhartesh, Gyani Jail Singh","doi":"10.1617/s11527-024-02431-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study determines how untreated recycled concrete aggregates (URA), thermally treated recycled concrete aggregates (TRA), and recycled concrete aggregates developed through an integrated thermomechanical treatment process (T<sub>m</sub>RA) perform in concrete relative to each other. A concrete composed of 100% recycled aggregates (RCA) with Portland pozzolana cement has been successfully developed in the present study. The compressive strength, split tensile strength, flexural strength, fracture energy, and modulus of elasticity of T<sub>m</sub>RC is observed higher than URC by 18.62%, 8.20%, 40.72%, 24.18%, and 54.99%, and those TRC by 7.54%, 28.57%, 29.78%, 24.12%, and 34.35%, respectively. The split tensile strength, flexural strength, fracture energy, and modulus of elasticity of these concretes are strongly correlated with their compressive strength. T<sub>m</sub>RC material properties match NAC, standard requirements, and reported values closely. URC and TRC chloride-ion penetrations are around 3.51- and 2.42-times greater than T<sub>m</sub>RC. Among these concretes, only T<sub>m</sub>RC meets corrosion protection requirements like NAC. The abrasion resistance of T<sub>m</sub>RC is observed 52.03% greater than URC and 43.07% greater than that of TRC. T<sub>m</sub>RC has substantially lower sorptivity compared to URC and TRC and is close to NAC. T<sub>m</sub>RC has around 32.65% and 16.67% less weight loss in drying than URC and TRC, respectively. URC and TRC have around 1.99- and 1.82-times less abrasion resistance than T<sub>m</sub>RC. An optimal reduced adhered-mortar volume, the minimized porosity and microcracks, dense and uniform surface texture, strengthened interfacial transition zones leads the performance of T<sub>m</sub>RA superior to URA and TRA, and close to or superior to parent aggregates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":691,"journal":{"name":"Materials and Structures","volume":"57 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Materials and Structures","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1617/s11527-024-02431-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CONSTRUCTION & BUILDING TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study determines how untreated recycled concrete aggregates (URA), thermally treated recycled concrete aggregates (TRA), and recycled concrete aggregates developed through an integrated thermomechanical treatment process (TmRA) perform in concrete relative to each other. A concrete composed of 100% recycled aggregates (RCA) with Portland pozzolana cement has been successfully developed in the present study. The compressive strength, split tensile strength, flexural strength, fracture energy, and modulus of elasticity of TmRC is observed higher than URC by 18.62%, 8.20%, 40.72%, 24.18%, and 54.99%, and those TRC by 7.54%, 28.57%, 29.78%, 24.12%, and 34.35%, respectively. The split tensile strength, flexural strength, fracture energy, and modulus of elasticity of these concretes are strongly correlated with their compressive strength. TmRC material properties match NAC, standard requirements, and reported values closely. URC and TRC chloride-ion penetrations are around 3.51- and 2.42-times greater than TmRC. Among these concretes, only TmRC meets corrosion protection requirements like NAC. The abrasion resistance of TmRC is observed 52.03% greater than URC and 43.07% greater than that of TRC. TmRC has substantially lower sorptivity compared to URC and TRC and is close to NAC. TmRC has around 32.65% and 16.67% less weight loss in drying than URC and TRC, respectively. URC and TRC have around 1.99- and 1.82-times less abrasion resistance than TmRC. An optimal reduced adhered-mortar volume, the minimized porosity and microcracks, dense and uniform surface texture, strengthened interfacial transition zones leads the performance of TmRA superior to URA and TRA, and close to or superior to parent aggregates.
期刊介绍：
Materials and Structures, the flagship publication of the International Union of Laboratories and Experts in Construction Materials, Systems and Structures (RILEM), provides a unique international and interdisciplinary forum for new research findings on the performance of construction materials. A leader in cutting-edge research, the journal is dedicated to the publication of high quality papers examining the fundamental properties of building materials, their characterization and processing techniques, modeling, standardization of test methods, and the application of research results in building and civil engineering. Materials and Structures also publishes comprehensive reports prepared by the RILEM’s technical committees.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
