Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

An Experimental study on Green Concrete by partial

replacement of construction materials from recycling
applications
1
Pankaj Sapra 2Ankit Kumar
1
Student, M.Tech Structural Engineering , RGGI, Meerut, U.P, India
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering , RGGI, Meerut , U.P, India

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------
Date of Submission: 02-07-2021 Date of Acceptance:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

ABSTRACT: In the present research, most of aggregates, sand , steel, bricks, mud, clay, wood etc..
the concrete materials has been partially or For the adaptability and suitability of the changing.
fully replaced by waste materials or other environment, the concrete shall. be such. that it
products. Cement which contains majority of protects the environment, consere natural resources,
silica content is partially replaced by Glass and economize. energy , does not harms the environment
than by glass & fly ash which undergoes and leads to proper utilization of energy
pozzolanic reaction and helps in increasing
1.1 Project Implementation
strength of concrete. The same is replaced by
waste materials in different proportions i.e • NOMINAL CONCRETE
15%, 30% & 45% and it is found that • SAND REPLACED BY MANUFACTURED
compressive strength of concrete increases SAND
upto certain limit and the extent upto which • CEMENT REPLACED BY GLASS IN 15%,
cement can be replaced. Sand is mostly used 30% & 45%.
from the natural river source and is being • CEMENT REPLACED BY GLASS AND
replaced by manufactured sand which is made FLYASH IN 15%, 30% & 45%.
in industries. The results were compared with • COARSE AGGREGATES REPLACED BY C
concrete made of natural sand and it is & D WASTE/RECYCLED WASTE IN 60%,
concluded that compressive strength of 80% AND 100%.
concrete increases using Manufactured sand
• CEMENT IS 30% REPLACED BY GLASS &
with full replacement of natural sand. Coarse
FLYASH AND COARSE AGGREGATES
aggregates has the highest proportion in
REPLACED BY C & D WASTE IN 40%,
concrete and is being replaced by Construction
55%, & 70% PROPORTION
and Demolition waste/recycled waste either
(PROPORTION TAKEN– BASED ON THE
partially or fully i.e 60%, 80% & 100%..
RESULTS OF ABOVE TEST RESULTS).
Further, from the results , it is concluded that
Cement can be replaced by glass and glass & fly 1.2 PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS
ash (in equal proportion) upto 30% and Coarse 1.2.1 CEMENT
aggregate can be replaced by recycled • Consistency : 32%
aggregate upto 80% . So, further test has been • Fineness : 2
done to check the physical and chemical • Soundness : 1mm
properties of concrete by replacing cement • Specific Gravity : 3.145
with Fly ash & glass and replacing coarse 1.2.2 FINE AGGREGATE
aggregate with recycled aggregate in different • Fineness Modulus: 2.7
proportions. From the results, it is being • Specific Gravity : 2.53
concluded that cement can be replaced by glass • Bulk Density : 1848 Kg/m3
and glass & fly ash and coarse aggregate by • Zone : II
recycled aggregate upto 55%. 1.2.3 COARSE AGGREGATE
• Impact Value : 15%
KEYWORDS: Glass, Flyash, M Sand, Recycled • Crushing Value : 18.16%
aggregate, compressive strength. • Specific Gravity : 2.68
• Water Absorption: 0.5%
1. INTRODUCTION 1.2.4 RECYCLED COARSE AGGREGATE
It is a known fact that, concrete industry is
• Impact Value : 25.5%
major producer of CO2 emission these days. For any
• Crushing Value : 28.2%
construction, major constituents are cement,
• Specific Gravity : 2.49

Volume XIII, Issue VII, July/2021 Page No: 116

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

• Water Absorption: 2.7%

1.2.5
•
M SAND
Fineness Modulus: 2.6
Graph
• Specific Gravity : 2.57 Nominal Concrete
• Bulk Density : 1870 Kg/m3 50
40% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash
2. RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS
Based on the physical and chemical properties of 55% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash
40
the material used, compressive test was 70% RA and 30% Glass 38.77
& Flyash
performed by making cubes of size 150mm
x150mm x150mm . Material replaced and mixed 30 33.9
31.8
by weight of concrete materials. 29.03
The Compressive strength test done is evaluated
as 20
21.32
20.7 20.5
Target 18.98
Average Mean
10
Mix Design 7 Days 28 Days Strength Strength Result
Nominal Concrete 20.7 38.77 36.12 Pass
M sand 23.32 37.175 36.53 Pass 0
15% Glass 21.3 37.55 35.15 Pass 7 Days 28 Days
30% Glass 20.7 32.7 32.5 Pass
Fig-2 Graphical representation for nominal and
45% Glass 16.8 29 27.44 Fail 15%, 30% & 45% glass replaced concrete
15% Glass & Flyash 23.99 29.08 38.01 Pass
30% Glass & Flyash 23.01 33.83 34.68 Pass
45% Glass & Flyash 20.21 30.72 30.98
31.6
Fail Graph
60 % Recycled Aggregate 22.18 37.7 35.91 Pass
80 % Recycled Aggregate 60 Nominal Concrete
20.18 32.8 31.92 Pass
100 % Recycled Aggregate 16.875 29.85 27.9 Fail 40% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash
30 % Glass & Flyash with
55% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash
40% recycled aggregate 21.32 33.9 33.35 Pass 40
30 % Glass & Flyash with 70% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash
38.77
55% recycled aggregate 20.5 31.8 31.75 Pass 33.931.8
30 % Glass & Flyash with 29.03
70% recycled aggregate 18.98 29.03 29.13 Fail 20
Comparison of 7 Days and 28 Days 20.721.3220.518.98
Compressive test results of Green Concrete
with Nominal Concrete
0
7 Days 28 Days
Fig -3 Graphical representation for nominal and
15%, 30% & 45% glass & fly ash replaced concrete

50
Graph
Nominal Concrete
38.77
40% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash
33.9

20.7 21.32

0
7 Days 28 Days
Fig-1 Graphical representation of 7 days and 28
days strength of Nominal and M sand concrete

Volume XIII, Issue VII, July/2021 Page No: 117

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

From the above test results it can be

Graph concluded that
• Compressive strength of M Sand was
Nominal Concrete
found more than that of conventional
50
40% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash nominal concrete.
55% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash • The Cost comparison shows that
40 concrete made of M sand is cheaper than
70% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash Natural sand concrete.
38.77
• Replacing cement with glass upto 15% is
30 33.9
31.8 suitable as glass undergoes pozzolanic
29.03 reaction with the by product.
20 • Compressive strength of concrete when
21.32
20.7 20.5 is cement is replaced by glass upto 30%
18.98
found more than target mean strength
10 required as per standard IS codes.
• 45% replacement of cement with glass
0
can not be used .
7 Days 28 Days • The compressive test results with 15%
replacement shows replacing cement
Fig-4 Graphical representation for nominal and 60%, with glass and fly ash provide greater
80% & 100% recycled aggregate replaced coarse
aggregate
strength as the test results are more
than target mean strength.
• The compressive test results with 30%
Graph replacement shows replacing cement
with glass and fly ash provide greater
Nominal Concrete strength as the test results are more
than target mean strength, 30%
40% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash replaced cement concrete. Thus this mix
45 55% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash design gives satisfactory results for
Compressive test.
70% RA and 30% Glass & Flyash
40 • 45% replacement of cement with glass &
38.77 fly ash can not be used .
35 • 60% replacement of coarse aggregate
33.9 with recycled waste shows good
30 31.8 compressive strength results
29.03 • It can be concluded that the maximum
25 content upto which coarse aggregate can
be replaced by recycled aggregate is
20 21.32 about 80%.
20.7 20.5
18.98 • 100% replacement of coarse aggregate
15 with recycled aggregate can not be used.
• Compressive strength when cement is
10 30% replaced by Glass & fly ash and
coarse aggregate with 40% recycled
5 aggregate found more than target mean
strength. Hence can be used.
0 • Compressive strength when cement is
7 Days 28 Days 30% replaced by Glass & fly ash and
coarse aggregate with 55% recycled
Fig-5 Graphical representation for nominal and
aggregate found more than target mean
with 30% replaced cement with Flyash & glass and strength. Hence can be used
40%, 55% & 70% recycled aggregate replaced coarse • Compressive strength when cement is
aggregate 30% replaced by Glass & fly ash and
coarse aggregate with 70% recycled
aggregate found less than target mean
3. CONCLUSIONS strength. Hence cannot be used

Volume XIII, Issue VII, July/2021 Page No: 118

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (Optional)
I would like to take this opportunity to
thanks Radha govind group of Institutions ,
Meerut, for providing me with such a
educational realm and learning atmosphere.
First and foremost, I would like to
convey our most sincere gratitude to Asst. Prof.
Mr. Ankit Kumar, Department of Civil
Engineering, RGGI Meerut for taking out time
from the hectic schedule and whose
experience/knowledge was invaluable in
formulating the research problems and
methodology.
I am highly indebted to Sh. O.P Sharma ,
Head of Department of Civil Engineering , RGGI
Meerut for his administrative help and all kind of
support from department.I would also like to
acknowledge my colleagues and extend my
thankfulness to the professors of the Department
of Civil Engineering for the concerted knowledge
imparted to me and making me capable enough
to get through the entire process.
I am grateful to the staff and members of the
Building Material and Construction Laboratory
for their relentless/helpful service and
cooperation with me.Last but not the least; I
appreciate family and friends just for being there
and extending the moral support
REFERENCES

1. Kanagamalai , V.Venugopal, V.Sathiyapriya,

“Performance analysis on waste glass powder
and fly ash as (IRJET), Volume: 04 Issue: 09 | Sep
-2017, p-ISSN: 2395-0072
partial replacement for cement in Concrete”,
International Research Journal of Engineering
and Technology

2. AmarjeetRathi, Naveen Hooda, “A Study on

Effect of Fly Ash and Glass Powder on the
Compressive Methods (IJARESM) ,ISSN: 2455-
6211, Volume 4, Issue 7, July- 2016, Impact
Factor: 2.287

3. G. M. Sadiqul Islam et al. /Waste glass powder

as partial replacement of cement for sustainable
concrete practice : International Journal of
Sustainable Built Environment 6 (2017)

4. H. Du and K. H. Tan / Waste Glass Powder as

Cement Replacement in Concrete : Journal of
Advanced Concrete Technology (2014)

Volume XIII, Issue VII, July/2021 Page No: 119