JSS MAHAVIDYAPEETHA

JSS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

JSS Technical Institutions Campus, Mysuru – 570006

A Dissertation work on
“STUDY ON BOND STRENGTH OF SPECIAL CONCRETE”
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
award of degree of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
INDUSTRIAL STRUCTURES

by

GOUTHAM. I
(USN: 01JCE21PIS004)

Under the Guidance of

Dr. Nagabhushana
Professor

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

September 2023
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the report titled ‘STUDY ON BOND STRENGTH OF

SPECIAL CONCRETE’ is a bonafied work carried out by GOUTHAM. I bearing
USN: 01JCE21PIS004 in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of
Master of Technology (M.Tech.,) in Industrial Structures under JSS Science and
Technology University during the year 2022-2023.

Dr. Nagabhushana Dr. C. Nataraju

Professor Professor and Head
Department of Civil Engineering SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru
SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru

Dr. C. Nataraju
Principal (I/C)
Department of Civil Engineering
SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru

Examiners
Date: 1.
Place: Mysuru
2.
 UNDERTAKING

This is to certify that the dissertation titled ‘STUDY ON BOND STRENGTH OF

SPECIAL CONCRETE’ has been carried out independently by the undersigned
and it has not been submitted elsewhere for the award of Degree.

GOUTHAM. I
USN: 01JCE21PIS004

Date:
Place: Mysuru
 ABSTRACT
Strength incorporating properties in reinforced concrete mainly depends on the bond
strength developed between concrete and steel reinforcement. Bond strength depends
on two materials properties i.e., factors related to concrete and the factors related to the
reinforcement used. Therefore, such an investigation has been carried out in this
research which determines the development of bond strength based on concrete and
steel reinforcement bars. In this project coarse aggregate is replaced by varying
properties of construction and demolition waste in addition with cementitious materials
and this is done for various mixes of structural grade concrete of M15, M20, M25 with
high strength steel. The pull-out test is carries out to determine the bond strength. Fe500
grade steel is used. Reinforcing bars of dia 16mm embedded centrally in the concrete.
This experimental investigation is carried out for compressive strength, tensile strength
and also bond strength. The cubes are casted and cured for a period of 7 and 28 days.
Final outcome is not only to determine bond strength but also to achieve high strength
compared to normal conventional concrete with incorporation of different category of
coarse aggregate.

i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Any effective project completion requires the counsel and direction of well-wishers.
There are many people who contributed to make my time enjoyable as student. If words
are considered as symbol of approval and token of acknowledgment, then the words
play a heralding role of expressing my gratitude. I therefore express my sincere
gratitude to everyone whose advice and support served as a beacon light and crowned
my efforts with success.

First of all, I would like to express my profound gratitude and deep indebtedness to my
guide, Dr. Nagabhushana, Professor of Civil Engineering, for his outstanding
guidance and dedicated support during my dissertation work. His encouragement,
patience, motivation and support have been invaluable throughout my study at JSS
STU, Mysuru. The environment of interactive study created by him helped me learn
better and clarify doubts unhesitantly, none of which went unanswered.

I extend my whole hearted thanks to Dr. C. Nataraju, Principal (I/C), Professor and
Head of Civil Engineering, SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru for providing the right ambience,
required facility and support throughout the course of my post-graduate study.

I also express my deep sense of gratitude to Prof. H. M. Mahendra Kumar, MTech.

Coordinator, Department of Civil Engineering, SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru for his
valuable guidance and help throughout the course.

I also thank our lab technician G. Ranganathan for his support through the whole
process and staying by our side.

I sincerely thank all the faculty and non-teaching staff of Department of Civil
Engineering, SJCE, JSS STU, Mysuru for their valuable support extended throughout
the course.

I thank my friends and family whose patience and support were instrumental in
accomplishing this task.

GOUTHAM. I

ii
 CONTENTS

Abstract i.
Acknowledgement ii.
Contents iii.
List of Figures v.
List of Tables vii.

List of Abbrevations viii.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1-9
1.1 General 1
1.2 3R principle 4
1.3 Benefits of Recycled aggregates concrete 5
1.4 Bond Strength of Concrete 6
1.5 Compressive strength of concrete 8
1.6 Objectives 9
1.7 Methodology 9
1.8 Project structure 9
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 10-16
2.1 General 10
2.2 Literature review 10
CHAPTER 3 EXPERIMENTAL METHODOLOGY 17-31
3.1 General 17
3.2 Materials used 17
3.2.1 Cement 17
3.2.2 Fillers 18
3.2.3 Construction and demolition waste (CDW) 19
3.2.4 Water 20
3.3 Mix Design 21
3.3.1 Concrete mix design of M15 21
3.3.2 Concrete mix design of M20 22
3.3.3 Concrete mix design of M25 24
3.4 Tests on fresh concrete 26
3.4.1 Slump test - workability 27
3.5 Casting 28

iii
 29
3.6 Demoulding
3.7 Curing 29
3.8 Tests on hardened concrete 30
3.8.1 Compressive strength test 30
3.8.2 Pull-out test 30
3.8.2.1 Preparation of specimen 30
3.8.2.2 Testing of Specimen 31
CHAPTER 4 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 32-51
4.1 General 32
4.2 Physical properties of cement 32
4.3 Physical properties of fine and coarse aggregate 33
4.4 Physical properties of construction and demolition waste 33
4.5 Compressive strength test 34
4.5.1 M15 grade concrete compressive strength 35
4.5.2 M20 grade concrete compressive strength 36
4.5.3 M25 grade concrete compressive strength 37
4.5.4 Graphical representation of compressive test results 38
4.6 pull-out test 41
4.6.1 M15 grade concrete pull-out test results. 42
4.6.2 M20 grade concrete pull-out test results. 43
4.6.3 M25 grade concrete pull-out test results. 44
4.6.4 Graphical representation of Pull-out test results 45

4.7 Graphical representation of compressive strength results of 48

different grades

4.8 Graphical representation of pull-out test results of different 50

grades
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS 52-53

6.1 General 52
6.2 Future scope 53
REFFERANCE 54-55

iv
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. No Description Page

No.
1.1 The 3R principle 4

1.2 Recycled aggregate 5

1.3 Bond strength behaviour of concrete 8
3.1 UltraTech super cement 18

3.2 Fine aggregate 18

3.3 Coarse aggregate 19

3.4 Construction and demolition waste (CDW) 19

3.5 Water 20

3.6 Materials kept ready for mixing 20

Slump test
3.7 28
Casted cubes
3.8 28
3.9 Demoulded cubes 29

3.10 Cubes kept for curing 29

3.11 Cubes placed in Compression test machine 30

3.12 Pull-out test assembly 31

4.1 Compressive strength results of M15 grade concrete 38

4.2 Compressive strength results of M20 grade concrete 38

4.3 Compressive strength results of M25 grade concrete 38

4.4 Compressive strength results of M15 grade concrete 39

4.5 Compressive strength results of M20 grade concrete 39

4.6 Compressive strength results of M25 grade concrete 39

4.7 Cubes placed in UTM machine 40

4.8 Cubes after failure 40

v
4.9 Pull-out test results of M15 grade concrete 45
4.10 Pull-out test results of M20 grade concrete 45
4.11 Pull-out test results of M25 grade concrete 45
4.12 Pull-out test results of M15 grade concrete 46

4.13 Pull-out test results of M20 grade concrete 46

4.14 Pull-out test results of M25 grade concrete 46

4.15 Cubes after failure 47
4.16 Splitting failure of the specimen 47
4.17 Average compressive strength results of different grade 48
4.18 Average compressive strength results of different grade 48
4.19 Average Compressive strength results of different mixes 49
4.20 Average Compressive strength results of different mixes 49
4.21 Average Pull-out test results of different mixes 50

4.22 Average Pull-out test results of different mixes 50

4.23 Average Pull-out test results of different mixes 51
4.24 Average Pull-out test results of different mixes 51

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table. No Description Page

no
3.1 Mix proportion of normal conventional concrete 26

3.2 Mix proportion of concrete where coarse aggregate is 26

replaced with CDW
3.3 Slump measurement 27

4.1 Physical properties of PPC 32

4.2 Physical properties of Fine and Coarse aggregate 33

4.3 Physical properties of recycled aggregates 33

4.4 Compressive strength test results of 7 days 35

4.5 Compressive strength test results of 28 days 35

4.6 Compressive strength test results of 7 days 36

4.7 Compressive strength test results of 28 days 36

4.8 Compressive strength test results of 7 days 37

4.9 Compressive strength test results of 28 days 37

4.10 Pull-out test results of 7 days 42

4.11 Pull-out test results of 28 days 42

4.12 Pull-out test results of 7 days 43

4.13 Pull-out test results of 28 days 43

4.14 Pull-out test results of 7 days 44

4.15 Pull-out test results of 28 days 44

vii
 LIST OF ABBREVATIONS

CDW: Construction and demolition waste.

RRR: Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle.

RA: Recycled aggregate.

C and D waste: Construction and demolition waste

PPC: Portland Pozzolana Cement

UTM: Universal testing machine

viii
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
Concrete is considered to be one of the most widely used building materials due to its
wide range of uses, durability, and exceptionally low cost. Conventional concrete,
however, could not have the necessary strength or other needed qualities in some
situations. High-strength concrete, self-compacting concrete, fiber-reinforced concrete,
and lightweight concrete are among the unique concrete formulas designed to meet
these special criteria. The bond strength between the concrete and reinforcing
components, such as steel bars or fibres, is a crucial factor in determining the
performance and dependability of special concrete. The bond strength has a direct effect
on the load transfer mechanism between the reinforcing material and reinforcement,
and it is essential for the structural integrity and overall performance of reinforced
concrete elements. The composition and qualities of the concrete mixture, the surface
treatment of the reinforcement, and the curing conditions all have an impact on the bond
strength of special concrete.

To maximize design and construction methods for a variety of applications, from

buildings and bridges to tunnels and dams, it is crucial to comprehend and measure the
bond strength characteristics. In recent years, research investigations examining the
binding strength of unique concrete have drawn a lot of attention. These researches seek
to identify the variables influencing bond strength, create forecasting models, and
suggest novel strategies to improve bond performance. Improvements in structural
design, construction techniques, and overall longevity of concrete structures can be
made by comprehending the bond strength behaviour of unique concrete. In general,
research into the bond strength of special concrete is essential to developing concrete
technology and improving the performance and safety of reinforced concrete structures.
It is possible to optimize the design and construction processes and create more
dependable and long-lasting concrete infrastructure by developing a deeper
understanding of the bond behaviour.

Construction and demolition waste (CDW) are a large annual production of the
construction sector. Concrete, bricks, tiles, wood, metals, and plastics are just a few of
the elements that are included in CDW and are often thrown away as garbage. The

1
disposal of CDW creates substantial environmental problems, clogs landfills, and
depletes resources. Researchers and engineers have investigated the possibility of using
CDW in place of coarse aggregate in some applications in concrete to address these
difficulties. By incorporating CDW into concrete, the industry can reduce the demand
for natural aggregates, promote sustainable construction practices, and divert waste
from landfills. Numerous studies have examined the performance and viability of using
CDW in place of coarse aggregate in concrete. This study focused on a number of
aspects of CDW concrete, such as its mechanical qualities, durability, and
environmental effect.

The impact of CDW management on concrete bond strength is an essential aspect. The
ability of concrete to bind or interact to other materials, such as reinforced steel bars
(rebar) or existing concrete surfaces, is often referred to as bond strength. CDW in
concrete can have an impact on bond strength in both good and negative ways.

CDW can affect bond strength in concrete:

1. Positive Influence:

a. Recycled Aggregate Use: In fresh concrete mixtures, CDW, in particular crushed

and recycled concrete aggregate, can be utilized in place of natural aggregates. When
properly processed and incorporated, recycled aggregates can improve the bond
strength because they tend to have rougher surfaces than natural aggregates, providing
better mechanical interlock between the aggregates and the cement paste.

b. Increased Surface Roughness: When recycled, the irregular and rough surfaces of
CDW particles can strengthen the bond between reinforced concrete and old concrete
surfaces.

2. Negative Influence:

a. Contaminants and Impurities: CDW may contain contaminants, such as paint

residues, adhesives, or chemical substances, that can interfere with the bond between
concrete components or between concrete and reinforcement. These contaminants may
reduce the concrete's overall performance and weaken the bond strength.

b. Inconsistent Properties: CDW materials can vary widely in terms of composition and
quality, which can result in inconsistencies in the bond strength of concrete. Inadequate

2
processing and quality control when recycling CDW materials can lead to reduced bond
strength.

Managing CDW in a way that maximizes its positive influence on bond strength while
minimizing negative impacts is a key challenge in the construction industry. Careful
processing and quality control of recycled aggregates, as well as proper waste
management practices to minimize contaminants, are essential steps in achieving the
desired bond strength in concrete while promoting sustainability through CDW
recycling.

In conclusion, the bond strength of concrete is significantly influenced by the waste

from construction and demolition. Engineers and construction professionals who want
to maximize bond strength and promote sustainable construction practices must
consider potential contaminants and how to use recycled materials from CDW
effectively.

The results indicate that CDW may be used efficiently as a replacement for coarse
aggregate, due to its strength and durability. Overall, investigating the replacement of
coarse aggregate with CDW in concrete presents an opportunity to address
environmental concerns associated with waste disposal while simultaneously
improving the sustainability of the construction industry. By incorporating CDW into
concrete, engineers and researchers can contribute to the development of greener
construction practices and foster a circular economy in the building sector.

1.2 THE 3R PRINCIPLE

The 3R principle in the context of recycled aggregate is a concept that emphasizes three
key actions or principles related to recycling and sustainable resource management. The
3R principle stands for Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. These principles guide efforts to
minimize waste generation, conserve resources, and promote sustainability in various
industries, including construction.

Here is an explanation of each part of the 3R principle as it relates to recycled aggregate:

1. Reduce: The "Reduce" principle involves efforts to minimize the generation of waste
materials in the first place. In the context of recycled aggregate, this can be achieved
by designing buildings and construction projects in a way that reduces the overall
consumption of construction materials. It includes optimizing designs, minimizing

3
over-ordering of materials, and avoiding unnecessary demolition or removal of existing
structures.

2. Reuse: The "Reuse" principle focuses on using materials and components that have
already been manufactured or extracted without any further processing. In construction,
this can involve salvaging and reusing building materials from existing structures, such
as using reclaimed bricks, lumber, or concrete blocks from demolished buildings.
Reusing materials reduces the demand for new resources and minimizes the
environmental impact associated with manufacturing and transportation.

3. Recycle: The "Recycle" principle involves the processing and reintegration of waste
materials into new products or materials. This is the process of crushing and processing
discarded material such as asphalt or concrete into recycled aggregates that have the
potential to be utilized in building projects instead of natural aggregate. Construction
and demolition waste can be kept out of landfills and recycled into aggregates, reducing
the need for natural resource extraction in the form of mining or quarrying.

The 3R principle is a fundamental framework for promoting sustainability and reducing

the environmental impact of various industries, including construction. It encourages
responsible resource management and waste reduction while supporting the circular
economy, where materials are used efficiently, and waste is minimized. In the case of
recycled aggregates, applying the 3R principle helps conserve natural resources, reduce
waste, and promote a more sustainable construction industry.

Figure 1.1 The 3R principle

4
1.3 BENEFITS OF RECYCLED AGGREGATE CONCRETE

Recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) offers a sustainable alternative for the ongoing
expansion of contemporary infrastructure. It primarily reduces demand for non-
renewable natural aggregate supplies while diverting construction and demolition
debris from the solid waste stream. Numerous studies have shown that RAC can
completely replace the coarse particles used in modern concrete. Utilizing recycled
aggregate is probably a significant step toward building waste management and long-
term sustainability in the concrete industry. Natural aggregate can be substituted with
recycled aggregate (RA), which benefits environmental preservation. Variability in the
qualities of the recycled aggregate is one of the important factors that influence its
utilization. The quality of the materials gathered and produced to recycling plants has
an influence on the recycled aggregate quality. Due to existing recycling plant
boundaries, it is difficult to find ways of producing recycled aggregate at a reasonable
price and quality. Clients have concerns regarding production consistency and
unpredictability in aggregate quality. The current research project's significant goal is
to learn more about the variety of aggregate quality and how they impact the production
of concreting. Certain aggregate physical and mechanical properties, such as as
strength, gradation, acceptance, amount of water in the mixture, specific gravity, shape,
and texture, contribute to the strength and durability of concrete. As a result, each of
these characteristics must be examined prior to employing the aggregate.

Figure 1.2 Recycled aggregate

5
1.4 BOND STRENGTH OF CONCRETE

A strong connection between the steel reinforcing bars and the surrounding concrete is
required for reinforced concrete. The bond manages how stress is transferred between
the steel and the concrete and assures that the steel bars do not slide significantly or at
all when exposed to the concrete. Chemical friction, contact, and mechanical
interlocking between the bar and the surrounding concrete all contribute to bond
resistance. If the bond between the concrete and reinforcement breaks, the structure
could collapse. Studies show that environmental corrosion has significantly reduced the
bonding strength between steel bars and concrete. Concrete's ability to adhere to or
bond with other substances, such as reinforcement bars (rebars), prestressing tendons,
or external bonding agents, is referred to as bond strength. In reinforced concrete
structures, it is a crucial characteristic that directly affects the mechanism by which
loads are transferred from the concrete to the reinforcing materials.

Bond strength of concrete is vital for the structural integrity and performance of
concrete elements, as it affects their capacity to resist external loads, such as tension,
compression, and shear. Effective load transfer is ensured by a solid bond between the
concrete and reinforcement, which also prevents the emergence of cracks, slippage, or
delamination at the interface.

Several factors influence the bond strength of concrete, including:

1. Surface Preparation: The surface of reinforcement should be free from rust, scale,
dirt, and other contaminants to ensure good bonding with the concrete. Proper cleaning
and roughening of the reinforcement surface enhance the bond strength.

2. Concrete Mixture: The composition and the characteristics of the concrete mix, along
with the water-to-cement ratio, aggregate qualities, and the presence or absence of
admixtures, are all factors that influence bond strength. Bond performance may be
improved by employing the proper admixtures and mix proportions.

3. Embedment Length: The length of the embedded reinforcement in concrete

influences bond strength. Wider embedment lengths are frequently associated with
greater binding strength.

6
4. Curing Conditions: Adequate curing of the concrete is essential to achieve optimal
bond strength. Proper moisture and temperature control during the curing period
promote the development of strong bonds.

5. Bonding Agents: External bonding agents or bonding materials, such as epoxy resins,
may be used in some circumstances to increase the strength of the bond between
concrete and existing buildings or repair materials.

Concrete bond strength can often be measured using experimental methods such as
pull-out tests, splitting tests, or bond stress-slip tests. These tests involve applying an
axial or shear force to the embedded reinforcement and measuring the corresponding
bond stress or slip at the interface.

Understanding and ensuring a strong bond between concrete and reinforcement is

crucial for the design and construction of durable and safe concrete structures. It helps
to prevent premature failure, improve load-carrying capacity, and enhance the overall
structural performance. Engineers and researchers continually study and develop
techniques to optimize the bond strength of concrete, leading to advancements in
construction practices and the longevity of concrete infrastructure.

Since concrete is an extremely strong material in compression and reinforcing steel is

a material that is exceptionally strong in tension, their combination of strength as well
as effective bonding are essential for a structure to be strong and functional. The bond
stress that forms between concrete and reinforcing steel during loading symbolizes this
coordinated action. Reinforcing bars receive a portion of the load whenever an extreme
load is applied to concrete via a mechanism that transfers the load from steel to concrete.
The reinforcing bar experiences parallel and perpendicular stress components when a
tensile force is applied to it. Bond stress is the tension parallel to the bar. Shear stress
in the XY plane of concrete presents the radial stress generated perpendicular to the
contact surface. As the load increases due to the concrete crushing on the ribs, the bond
will completely collapse. When the bar is pulled straight out of the concrete, it's able to
create a shear plane along the outer edges of the steel ribs, which can end up in some
form of bond failure. When the reinforcing bars seem to be split and there isn't enough
concrete to cover them, this is what happens. Another specific type of bond failure is
concrete cover splitting failure. This occurs when there isn't enough concrete cover or
enough space between the reinforcing bars.

7
Tensile loads can be passed from the concrete to the reinforcing bar with an appropriate
connection, causing the bar to fail through yielding and finally fracture. The
development length of the bar is the shortest length needed to increase the tension of
the bar from zero to the yield stress.

Figure 1.3: Bond strength behaviour of concrete.

1.5 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF CONCRETE

Compressive strength is one of the most important standards used to evaluate the
strength and durability of concrete. It is a measure of the ability of concrete to hold up
to compressive pressures without breaking. In labs, concrete specimens are routinely
tested under slowly increasing compressive stresses until collapse. This method
determines the compressive strength of concrete.

A wide variety of variables affect the compressive strength of concrete, including the
kind and strength of the cement, aggregates, and water used in the mix, as well as the
curing conditions and mix design criteria. The water-to-cement ratio has a significant
effect on compressive strength since a lower ratio often results in stronger concrete. The
type and grade of the aggregates, the use of admixtures, and the temperature and
duration of the curing process all have an influence on the compressive strength of the
concrete. Compressive strength of concrete is often measured at a number of ages, with
the most common being 7 days, 14 days, and 28 days.

The values of these parameters are presented in megapascals (MPa) and indicate the
maximum load that the concrete specimen can withstand before failure, divided by the
specimen's cross-sectional area.

8
1.6 OBJECTIVES

1. To study interrelation of concrete and reinforcing bar in terms of bond strength by

pull out test.
2. To study the relation of bond strength of concrete with different grades of concrete.
3. To study the comprassion between normal conventional concrete and concrete
replaced with CDW
4. To understand the behaviour of bond strength in tension & its comprassion with the
compressive stress of the concrete.

1.7 METHODOLOGY

In this project, coarse aggregate is substituted by construction and demolition waste

with variable characteristics. This is done for various concrete mix grades such as M15,
M20, and M25 with high strength steel. Fe 500 grade steel is used. Reinforcing bars
with a diameter of 16mm will be embedded in the center of concret cube. The cubes are
cast and cured for seven and twenty-eight days, respectively. These cubes are put to
compression and pull-out tests.

1.8 PROJECT STRUCTURE

There are five chapters in this thesis:

Chapter 1: Introduction on Bond strength of concrete, benefits of recycled aggregates,

compressive strength of concrete, objectives, methodology the project are detailed.
Chapter 2: This chapter briefly describes the literature review.
Chapter 3: In this chapter, the experimental approach used for the study is briefly
described.
Chapter 4: This chapter contains a summary of the experimental findings and
discussions.
Chapter 5: Concluding this chapter, we finalize the presentation of our experimental
outcomes while also outlining potential avenues for future research endeavours.

9
 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1 GENERAL

This chapter reviews journal papers related to bond strength of concrete and utilization
of C and D waste as recycled aggregates in concrete published by various research
members in recent years, as well as some of the main features adopted from the journals
listed below in this work.

2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Krishnakumar S [1] et al, “Bond strength of concrete containing crushed concrete

aggregate (CCA)”: The study looks at how the grade of concrete and the proportion of
crushed concrete aggregate (CCA) replacing coarse aggregate affect the strength of the
concrete and the bond strength between the concrete and rebar. The strength loss from
substituting CCA up to 40% for natural aggregates is minimal, according to experiments
the authors carried out to determine the ideal replacement of aggregate for M30 grade
concrete. Additionally, they assessed the bond strength between CCA and NCA control
concrete as well as the impact of CCA's replacement ratio on that bond strength. The
study discovered that for M25 grade concrete containing CCA, there was little variation
in bond strength compared to that of control concrete.

The paper offers insightful information on the use of recycled concrete aggregate as a
greener substitute for natural aggregates in construction. The study's conclusions can
be used to encourage the use of recycled materials in concrete and lessen the
consumption of new, unprocessed aggregates. The importance of properly bonding steel
and concrete in reinforced constructions as well as the variables affecting the bond
between concrete and reinforcement are also highlighted in the paper.

Mohamad Azim Mohammad Azmi [2] et al, “Utilizing Construction and Demolition
(C&D) Waste as Recycled Aggregates (RA) in Concrete”:

In this project the optimum strength of various sizes of aggregates in concrete was
recorded. According to this study, aggregates measuring 10mm produced the best
results for the split tensile test, compressive strength test, and water absorption test.
Because the highest results for the split tensile test and the compressive strength test
were obtained after a 28-day curing period, the aggregate size of 10mm was chosen as

10
the ideal outcome. When compared to aggregates of larger sizes, the rate of water
absorption was also among the lowest.

The results show that recycled coarse aggregate (RCA) can be a suitable replacement
for natural aggregates in new construction projects, as it exhibits similar physical and
mechanical properties to natural aggregates. The study also concludes that the
incorporation of RCA in concrete mixtures can lead to a reduction in the environmental
impact of construction projects, by reducing the amount of waste sent to landfills and
the consumption of natural resources. Overall, the paper provides valuable insights into
the potential of RCA as a sustainable alternative to natural aggregates in construction
projects, and highlights the importance of incorporating recycled materials in the
construction industry to promote sustainable development.

Yongjae Kim [3] et al, “mechanical properties of recycled aggregate concrete with
deformed steel re-bar”: In this project, recycled aggregate has much better performance
when compared to natural aggregate. The recycled aggregate is first applied to
conventional concrete structures by engineers. Its fundamental characteristics,
however, have not yet been in-depthly examined. The bonding performance of recycled
aggregate should be thoroughly investigated, especially to increase its use in structural
concrete. This study looked at the strength and elastic modulus characteristics in
relation to the recycled aggregate addition ratio. Additionally, the bonding property of
it was investigated using the modified pull-out test. The conclusions that are drawn
from the experimental study here are listed below.

The findings demonstrate that the mechanical properties of RAC, particularly its
compressive and splitting tensile strength, can be enhanced by the addition of deformed
steel rebar. However, the study also found that increasing the percentage of recycled
aggregate in the mixture can lead to a reduction in the mechanical properties of the
concrete. The study concludes that the use of deformed steel rebar can enhance the
properties of RAC, but careful consideration must be given to the percentage of
recycled aggregate used in the mixture to ensure that the desired mechanical properties
are achieved. Overall, the paper provides useful insights into the potential of
incorporating deformed steel rebar in RAC to enhance its mechanical properties, and
highlights the need for careful consideration of the recycled aggregate content in the
mixture to achieve optimal results.

11
Sabina Bonczkova [4] et al, “Bond Strength Between Reinforcing Steel and Different
Types of Concrete”: In this research comparisons of the bond strengths of different
types of concretes - alkali activated, ordinary Portland cement based and hybrid cement-
based concretes - were made in this paper. Despite the fact that alkali activated concrete
(AAC) has a significantly higher compressive strength than ordinary Portland cement
(OPC), no discernible differences were found between their bond strengths. However,
the AAC and OPC tensile splitting strengths were comparable. Due to their lower
compressive and tensile splitting strengths, HCC demonstrated a significantly lower
bond strength. It was not proven that steel and AAC would bond better. The interaction
between AAC and the de-moulding admixture is likely what causes the practical
experience of better adhesion of AAC to steel moulds. The results show that the bond
strength between reinforcing steel and concrete is influenced by several factors,
including the type of concrete, its strength, and the diameter of the steel bar. The study
found that the bond strength was highest for high-strength concrete and lowest for
lightweight concrete. The study also found that increasing the diameter of the steel bar
can lead to a higher bond strength, but the effect was more pronounced in high-strength
concrete than in normal weight concrete. Overall, the paper provides valuable insights
into the factors that influence the bond strength between reinforcing steel and concrete,
and highlights the importance of considering these factors in the design of reinforced
concrete structures. The study findings can be useful for engineers and designers in
selecting the appropriate concrete type and steel bar diameter to achieve the desired
bond strength in reinforced concrete structures.

Prof. Dharmesh K. Bhagat, Jigar P. Parmar, Yati R. Tank, Darpan H. Gadhiya,

Jigar S.Goyani, [5] et, "Experimental Study of Compressive Strength of Recycled

Aggregate Concrete" This study aims to assess how recycled concrete aggregate affects
the strength of conventional concrete. The fundamental engineering properties of
recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) are evaluated and compared to those of normal
aggregate (NA). Like this, various RCA with NA combinations are investigated for the
fundamental properties of concrete, such as workability and compressive strength. By
utilizing the concrete waste that is already on the site, this study seeks to create
affordable, sustainable concrete. The results of compressive strength demonstrate that
the functional requirements of concrete structures are impacted by the application of
RCA up to 40%. Additionally, as the cement mortar paste is adhered to the RCA, the

12
results of the slump test demonstrate a continual decline in the workability of the
concrete mix. The paper highlights the importance of recycling construction and
demolition waste to reduce landfill and conserve natural resources. The authors
conducted various tests to evaluate the basic engineering properties of recycled concrete
aggregate and compared them with normal aggregate. They also studied the effect of
recycled concrete aggregate on the strength and workability of concrete by preparing
different combinations of recycled and normal aggregates. The study concludes that the
use of recycled concrete aggregate in concrete production can provide significant
economic and environmental benefits. The paper is well-written, and the results and
findings are presented clearly. Overall, this paper provides valuable insights into the
use of recycled concrete aggregate and can be useful for researchers and practitioners
in the field of construction and concrete technology.

AnaghaKalpavalli [6] et al, "Use of demolished concrete waste as coarse aggregate in

high strength concrete production": Various experiments on conventional concrete and
concrete that substituted natural coarse aggregates were carried out in this study. By
hand utilizing rammers, the demolished debris was physically reduced to the necessary
size before being properly cleaned to eliminate adhere found in the aggregate.
Afterward, it was submerged in water for 24 hours to lessen concrete's water absorption.
As a result, no more water is needed for mixing. It demonstrates that when compared
to concrete with a lower replacement ratio, concrete with a higher percentage of
recycled aggregates will generate the least amount of strength. However, it is evident
that up to 30% replacement produces superior outcomes. After this replacement, the
strength gained steadily decreases and fails to reach the necessary tensile strength.
Additionally, this suggests that divided tensile strength exhibits the similar pattern. The
authors conducted various tests to evaluate the physical and mechanical properties of
the demolished concrete waste and compared them with normal coarse aggregates.
They also prepared high strength concrete mixtures with different percentages of
demolished concrete waste and evaluated their compressive strength and workability.
The study finds that it is conceivable to produce high strength concrete using coarse
aggregates made from demolished concrete debris, and that doing so can have major
positive effects on the economy and the environment. The paper is well-written, and
the results and findings are presented clearly. Overall, this paper provides valuable

13
insights into the use of demolished concrete waste as a sustainable alternative to normal
coarse aggregates in high strength concrete production.

Anusuri Uma Maheswari [7] et al, " study of partial replacement of natural aggregate
by recycled aggregate on concrete": In this paper, Recycling and reuse of building
wastes have been found to be an appropriate solution to the problems of dumping
hundreds of thousands of tons of debris accompanied with shortage of natural
aggregates. The use of recycled aggregates in concrete prove to be a valuable building
material in technical, environment and economical aspect. Use of RCA in concrete save
the disposal and land filling cost and produce a sustainable concrete for construction.
From the material testing, it can be concluded that, RCA exhibits comparatively less
specific gravity than NA. As the water absorption of RCA was found greater then NA,
because of adhering mortar and cement paste. This need to be compensated during mix
design. On the other hand, RCA is having comparatively same Bulk Density as NA.
But, the impact and crushing value of RCA are comparatively less than NA. The results
showed that the use of up to 30% RCA resulted in a slight decrease in strength compared
to conventional concrete. Beyond 30% replacement, the strength continued to decrease
gradually. The study aims to promote the use of recycled concrete waste as a sustainable
and economical alternative to natural aggregates in concrete production.

M. T. Bashir [8] et al, “Pull-out Behaviour of Conventional Steel Reinforcement in

Normal and High Strength Concrete”

The study analysed the impact of concrete strength on the pull-out behaviour of steel
reinforcement embedded in concrete specimens of different strength grades. Results
showed that the bond strength between steel reinforcement and high-strength concrete
was higher than normal strength concrete. The failure mode of steel reinforcement was
also influenced by concrete strength, with bond failure being the dominant mode in
normal strength concrete and splitting failure being the dominant mode in high-strength
concrete. These findings can help design concrete structures with high-strength
concrete.

The stress-slip relationship between the steel bar and concrete was also examined by
the authors. Both the stress-slip curves for regular concrete and those for high-strength
concrete displayed similar patterns, but the last one had higher peak stresses and steeper
slopes. According to the study's findings, designing concrete structures with high-

14
strength concrete should consider the fact that the pull-out behaviour of steel
reinforcement in high-strength concrete differs from that in normal strength concrete.
Overall, this paper provides valuable insights into the behaviours of steel reinforcement
in concrete structures and highlights the importance of considering the effect of
concrete strength on the pull-out behaviour of steel reinforcement. The findings of this
study can be useful for engineers and researchers working in the field of concrete
structures and can aid in the design of high-strength concrete structures.

G. Appa Rao [9] et al, “Studies on the pull-out strength of ribbed bars in high-strength
concrete”

For unconfined specimens, the maximum bond stress τmax was roughly 50-60% of
what it was for spiral-confined specimens. The lateral confinement significantly
increased the bond strength, and the post-peak curve's extension increased,
demonstrating improved ductility. For specimens contained within spirals, the
maximum bond stress, or max, was higher and displayed noticeably improved ductility.
In the tested range (db = 16mm and 20mm), the effect of bar diameter on the local bond
stress-slip relationship was relatively negligible. As the embedment length increased,
the bond strength also decreased. While it is more or less uniform along shorter lengths
of embedment, the bond stress varies along the longer embedment lengths. The authors
conducted a series of pull-out tests on ribbed bars with different rib configurations
embedded in concrete specimens of varying strength grades, ranging from 60 MPa to
120 MPa. The study aimed to investigate the effect of concrete strength and rib
configuration on the pull-out behaviour of ribbed bars in high-strength concrete.

To assess the strength of the bond between the ribbed bars and the concrete, the authors
analysed the pull-out load-displacement curves and the load-slip curves. The study's
findings demonstrated that as concrete strength increased, so did the ribbed bars' pull-
out strength in high-strength concrete. The study also discovered that the rib
configuration had an impact on bond strength, with deformed ribs offering higher bond
strength than twisted ribs. The stress-slip relationship between the ribbed bar and
concrete was also examined by the authors, who discovered that both normal and high-
strength concrete's stress-slip curves displayed comparable patterns.

However, the curves for high-strength concrete had higher peak stresses and steeper
slopes. Overall, this paper provides valuable insights into the pull-out behaviour of

15
ribbed bars in high-strength concrete and highlights the importance of considering the
effect of concrete strength and rib configuration on the bond strength between the
ribbed bars and the concrete. The findings of this study can be useful for engineers and
researchers working in the field of high-strength concrete structures and can aid in the
design of concrete structures with ribbed bars.

Kareem Helal [10] et al, “Strength and Durability Evaluation of Recycled Aggregate
Concrete”: The research provided in this study assesses how recycled aggregate quality
affects the characteristics of concrete. When samples from an unknown source were
collected and assessed over the course of six months, the evaluation of the combined
physical and mechanical parameters revealed a tolerable fluctuation in attributes.
However, restrictions in packing density, high absorption, and aggregate strength could
be overcome during the proportioning stage in order to meet graduation criteria.
Additionally, concrete made with various combinations of coarse and fine aggregate
without changing the particle size or distribution demonstrated that comparable
compressive, flexural, splitting strength, and elastic modulus could be attained. Due to
the large porosity that is substantiated by an analysis of the microstructure of the
hardened concrete, all mixes with the exception of Mix 1,2,5 did not demonstrate
acceptable performance in the RCPT. High aggregate gradation variability and
contamination levels may be the cause of high concrete porosity and permeability.
Monitoring the long-term effectiveness and volume change (creep and shrinkage) is
also crucial for a more accurate evaluation of concrete made using recycled aggregate.

16
 CHAPTER 3
EXPERIMENTAL METHODOLOGY
3.1 GENERAL

This chapter describes the different experimental methodology used for the different
materials in present investigation, the study investigated the effect of cement usage on
the compressive strength behaviour and bond behaviour of single steel reinforcement
(16mm dia) in different structural grades of concrete (M15, M20, M25) at different ages
(7 days and 28 days) To carry out the study, the following tests were used: compressive
strength test, pull-out test. The pull-out (POT) was used to evaluate the bond strength
between the steel reinforcement and the concrete.

3.2 MATERIALS USED

Materials consideration for the present investigation as follows

• Cement (PPC 53 Grade)

• Fine aggregate (M sand 4.75mm down)
• Coarse aggregate (20mm down 4.75mm retained)
• Construction and demolition waste (20mm down 4.75mm retained)
• Water

3.2.1 Cement:
A binder, or chemical substance that sets, hardens, and adheres to other materials to
bind them together, is what cement is in construction. In most cases, cement is used to
bind sand and gravel (aggregate), not on its own. Mortar for masonry is made from
cement mixed with fine aggregate, and concrete is made from cement mixed with sand
and gravel. Concrete is the most commonly used substance on earth and the second
most-consumed resource after water.

For the present experimental investigation, UltraTech super (PPC 53grade) has been
considered. Cement confirming to the requirements of the IS 8112:1989 cement (PPC
53grade).

17
 Figure 3.1: UltraTech super cement
3.2.2 Filler:

Manufactured sand is an alternative for river sand. Due to fast growing construction
industry, the demand for sand has increased tremendously, causing deficiency of
suitable river sand in most part of the world for the present study, locally available
manufactured sand which is passing 4.75mm and retained 150µm are considered as fine
aggregate. The locally available crushed angular aggregate of 20mm down are chosen
as coarse aggregate. Physical properties of aggregate were found according to the norms
of the Indian standards and used throughout in preparing the required mix proportion
of concrete. Fine aggregate (M sand, 4.75 mm down).

Figure 3.2: Fine aggregate

18
 Figure 3.3: Coarse aggregate

3.2.3 Construction and demolition waste (CDW):

Construction and demolition waste (CDW) refer to the waste generated from
construction, renovation, demolition, and deconstruction activities. It includes a wide
range of materials such as concrete, bricks, wood, metals, plastics, and other building
materials. CDW can be managed through various methods such as recycling, reuse, and
proper disposal. Recycling of CDW is gaining popularity as an environmentally
friendly and cost-effective method of managing waste. Recycling of CDW involves the
recovery of usable materials from waste and their conversion into new products or
materials. This approach helps to conserve natural resources, reduce waste, and
minimize the environmental impact of construction activities.

Figure 3.4: Construction and demolition waste (CDW)

19
3.2.4 Water:

Water is an essential element in the construction industry, used for various purposes
such as mixing concrete, curing concrete, and cleaning equipment. Adequate water
supply is necessary for the successful completion of construction projects. However,
water can also pose a significant challenge in the construction industry, particularly
when it comes to managing and controlling it. Uncontrolled water can cause damage to
structures, lead to safety hazards, and delay project completion for the present study
clean portable water was used to conventional concrete and concrete replaced with
CDW. The varying quality of water is considered as per IS2185 (part 1): 1979

Figure 3.5: Water

Figure 3.6: Materials kept ready for mixing

20
3.3 MIX DESIGN

The mix design procedure for the manufacture of cement concrete cubes provided by
IS 10262-2009 and IS 456-2000 and illustrative example is shown.

The mix design calculated using the IS CODE 10262-2009.

3.3.1 Concrete mix design for M15

• Grade of concrete: M15

• Type of cement: PPC Ultratech cement
• Maximum size of aggregates :20 mm
• Workability :100 mm slump
• Specific gravity of cement: 3.10
• Specific gravity of coarse aggregate :2.61
• Specific gravity of fine aggregate :2.60
• Degree of quality control: Good

1. Target strength:
fck = fck +1.65s = 20.77 N/mm² OR fck = fck +X = 20 N/ mm²

2. Water cement ratio:

From table 5 of IS-456

Maximum water cement ratio = 0.6 from IS 10262-2019

Free water cement ratio for 28 days compressive strength of concrete is 26.6N/ mm².

The PPC 53 grade cement = 30.55 N/ mm².

3. Selection of water content:

Maximum water content 20mm aggregates =186 L for 100 mm slump = 186+6/100
x186 = 197 L

4. Cement content:
Since water cement ratio is 0.6 and water content is 197.2 L

Cement content = 329kg/m³

329 kg/m3 > 320 kg/m3, hence, O.K.

21
5. Aggregate proportion between fine aggregates and coarse aggregate:
For zone II, the 0.62 is the total proportion for w/c 0.5 but we have got 0.6 as w/c
ratio.

• Proportion of coarse aggregate 0.62.

• Proportion of fine aggregate = 0.38.

The approximate volume of air trapped is 1% for 20 mm maximum size of aggregate

6. Mix calculation:
Volume of concrete = 1 m³.

• Volume of cement (mass/specific gravity) *(1/1000) = 0.104 m³.

• Volume of water = 0.192 m².
• Volume of all aggregate = 1-(0.192+0.104) = 0.704m³.
7. Mass of coarse aggregate:
Volume of all aggregate x Volume of coarse aggregate x Specific gravity of coarse
aggregate x 1000 =1092kg.

8. Mass of fine aggregate:

Volume of all aggregate x Volume of fine aggregate x specific gravity of fine
aggregate x 1000 = 725 kg.

9. Mix proportions:
• Cement = 329 kg/m³
• Water = 197 kg/m³
• Fine aggregate = 725 kg
• Coarse aggregate = 1092kg.
• Water / cement ratio = 0.6

3.3.2 Concrete mix design for M20

• Grade of concrete: M20
• Type of cement: PPC Ultratech cement
• Maximum size of aggregates :20 mm
• Workability :100 mm slump
• Specific gravity of cement: 3.10
• Specific gravity of coarse aggregate :2.61

22
• Specific gravity of fine aggregate :2.60
• Degree of quality control: Good

1. Target strength:

fck = fck +1.65s = 26.6 N/mm² OR fck = fck +X = 25.5 N/ mm²

2. Water cement ratio:

From table 5 of IS-456

Maximum water cement ratio = 0.55 from IS 10262-2019
Free water cement ratio for 28 days compressive strength of concrete is 26.6N/ mm².
The PPC 53 grade cement = 0.55
3. Selection of water content:
Maximum water content 20mm aggregates =186 L for 100 mm slump = 186+6/100
*186 = 197 L

4. Cement content:
Since water cement ratio is 0.55 and water content is 197 L

Cement content = 358kg/m³

358 kg/m3 > 320 kg/m3, hence, O.K

5. Aggregate proportion between fine aggregates and coarse aggregate:

For zone II, the 0.62 is the total proportion for w/c 0.5 but we have got 0.55 as w/c
ratio

• Proportion of coarse aggregate 0.62.

• Proportion of fine aggregate = 0.38.

The approximate volume of air trapped is 1% for 20 mm maximum size of aggregate.

6. Mix calculation:

Volume of concrete = 1 m³.

• Volume of cement (mass/specific gravity) x (1/1000) = 0.115 m³.
• Volume of water = 0.197 m².
• Volume of all aggregate=1- (0.197+0.127) = 0.687m³.

23
7. Mass of coarse aggregate:
Volume of all aggregate x Volume of coarse aggregate x Specific gravity of Coarse
Aggregate x 1000 = 1094kg.

8. Mass of fine aggregate:

Volume of all aggregate x Volume of fine aggregate x specific gravity of Fine
aggregate x 1000 = 697 kg.

9. Mix proportions:
• Cement = 358 kg/m³
• Water = 197 kg/m³
• Fine aggregate = 697 kg
• Coarse aggregate = 1094 kg.
• Water / cement ratio = 0.55

3.3.3 Concrete mix design for M25

• Grade of concrete: M25
• Type of cement: PPC Ultratech cement
• Maximum size of aggregates :20 mm
• Workability :100 mm slump
• Specific gravity of cement: 3.10
• Specific gravity of coarse aggregate :2.61
• Specific gravity of fine aggregate :2.60
• Degree of quality control: Good

1. Target strength:

fck = fck +1.65s = 31.6 N/mm² OR fck = fck +X = 25.5 N/ mm²

2. Water cement ratio:

From table 5 of IS-456

Maximum water cement ratio = 0.5 From IS 10262-2019

Free water cement ratio for 28 days compressive strength of concrete is 26.6N/ mm².

The PPC 53 grade cement = 0.5

24
3. Selection of water content:
Maximum water content 20mm aggregates =186 L for 100 mm slump = 186+6/100
x186 = 197 L
4. Cement content:
Since water cement ratio is 0.5 and water content is 197 L

Cement content = 394 kg/m³

5. Aggregate proportion between fine aggregates and coarse aggregate

For zone II, the 0.62 is the total proportion for w/c 0.5 but we have got 0.5 as w/c
ratio.

• Proportion of coarse aggregate 0.62.

• Proportion of fine aggregate = 0.38.

The approximate volume of air trapped is 1% for 20 mm maximum size of aggregate.

6. Mix calculation:

• Volume of concrete = 1 m³.

• Volume of cement (mass/specific gravity) x (1/1000) = 0.125 m³.
• Volume of water = 0.197 m².

Volume of all aggregate=1- (0.197+0.125) = 0.678m³.

7. Mass of coarse aggregate:

Volume of all aggregate x Volume of coarse aggregate x Specific

gravity of CoarseAggregate x 1000 = 1077kg.
8. Mass of fine aggregate:

Volume of all aggregate x Volume of fine aggregate x specific

gravity of Fine aggregate x 1000 = 658 kg.

9. Mix proportions:
• Cement = 394 kg/m³
• Water = 197 kg/m³
• Fine aggregate = 658 kg
• Coarse aggregate = 1077 kg.
• Water / cement ratio = 0.5

25
 Table 3.1: Mix proportion of normal conventional concrete

Mix Water / Cement Fine Coarse Water

cement (kg) aggregate aggregate content
ratio (kg) (kg) (lts)
M15 0.6 329 725 1096 197

M20 0.55 358 697 1094 197

M25 0.5 394 658 1077 197

Table 3.2: Mix proportion of concrete where coarse aggregate is replaced with
CDW

Mix Water Cement Fine Coarse Construction Water

/ (kg) aggregate aggregate and content
cement (kg) (kg) demolition (lts)
ratio waste (kg)
M15 0.6 329 725 1051.58 44.42 197
M20 0.55 358 697 1050.21 43.79 197
M25 0.5 394 658 1018.24 58.76 197

3.4 TESTS ON FRESH CONCRETE

The ease and ability with which a concrete mixture can be mixed, put, compacted, and
finished to obtain the desired shape, finish, and quality is referred to as workability.
Workability is an important feature of concrete because it influences the ease of
building, the quality of the finished product, and the structure's durability. Workability
is the ability of a fresh (plastic) concrete mix to correctly fill the form/mould with the
desired work (vibration) and without affecting the quality of the concrete. Water content
and aggregate (shape and size distribution) influence workability.

Excessive water will cause greater bleeding (surface water) and aggregate segregation
(when the cement and aggregates begin to separate), resulting in worse quality concrete.
The use of an aggregate with an undesirable gradation can result in very harsh mix

26
design with a very low slump, which cannot be readily made more workable by addition
of reasonable amounts of water. There are many tests which are conducted to check the
quality of concrete.

3.4.1 Slump test – workability:

The slump test is a widely used and straightforward method for measuring the
workability of fresh concrete. It is a simple and quick test that provides an indication
of the consistency and flowability of the concrete. Slump test is used to determine the
workability of fresh concrete. Slump test as per IS: 1199-1959 is followed. The
apparatus used for doing slump test are slump cone and a tamping rod. Workability can
be measured by the concrete following the ASTM C 143 or EN 12350-2 test standards.
Slump is normally measured by filling an “Abrams cone” with a sample from a fresh
batch of concrete. The cone is placed with the wide end down onto a level, non-
absorptive surface. It is then filled in three layers of equal volume, with each layer being
tamped with a steel rod in order to consolidate the layer. When the cone is carefully
lifted off, the enclosed material will slump a certain amount due to gravity. The slump
was measured of lifting the cone as shown in photo 3.4. a relatively dry sample will
slump very little, having a slump value of 50 or 100mm.

Table 3.3: Slump measurement

Mix designation Slump value (mm)

M15 89

M20 90

M25 93

27
 Figure 3.7: Slump test

3.5 CASTING:

The constituents were weighted in a separate tray and then the materials were mixed in
a concrete mixer, the general blending time was around 5–7 min, after which the
concrete mix was then compacted, utilizing a vibrating table. The slump test was carried
out to determine its workability and to later compare the effect of the water sample on
the workability of the concrete. Furthermore, the compacting factor test was also
performed to check the workability of the prepared concrete.

To determine the compressive strength and pull-out test, 150x150x150 size cubes were
prepared for each mix design. The specimens were demoulded after 24 hours, cured in
water, and then tested at room temperature at the required time.

Figure 3.8: Casted cubes

28
3.6 DEMOULDING:

The demoulding process for concrete cubes typically involves carefully removing the
moulds from the cured concrete. This can be done by gently tapping or vibrating the
moulds to loosen the concrete and then carefully removing the mould walls. It is
important to be careful during this process to avoid damaging the cubes or affecting
their compressive strength.

Figure 3.9: Demoulded cubes

3.7 CURING

The casted cubes are demoulded after 24hours and then kept in water tank for curing.
During curing, the concrete is kept moist and at a consistent temperature to promote
proper chemical reactions and prevent cracking or other defects. The duration of the
curing process will depend on the specific material being used and the environmental
conditions.

Fig 3.10: Cubes kept for curing

29
3.8 TESTS ON HARDENED CONCRETE

3.8.1 Compressive strength tests:

Out of many tests applied on concrete, this is the utmost important which gives an idea
about all the characteristics of concrete. By this single test it can easily judge that
whether concreting has been done properly or not. Compressive strength of concrete
depends on many factors such as water-cement ratio, cement strength quality of
concrete materials, and quality control during production of concrete etc.

Here for the cement based concrete mix of 0.45 water cement ratio is carried out.
Concrete cubes of 150x150x150mm were tested in compressive testing machine for
compressive strength confirming to IS 516:1959. Concrete cubes were surface dried
and weighed before testing. Testing was done for required age’s average of 3 specimens
is taken to know the characteristic strength of concrete for 7 days and 28days.

Fig 3.11: Cubes placed in Compression test machine.

3.8.2 Pull-out test:

3.8.2.1 Preparation of specimen:
The placing concrete in moulds is controlled variable, the specimens shall be moulded
and cured in accordance with the requirements of the method of making and curing
concrete compression test specimen in laboratory (compaction by hand) the tamping
rod shall be a round, straight steel rod 15mm diameter and approximately 0.6m in
length, having the tamping end rounded to a hemispherical tip, 15mm diameter.
Specified in IS :516-1959.

30
The test specimens shall consist of concrete cubes of size 150x150x150 mm, with a
single reinforcing bar embedded vertically along a central axis in each specimen. The
bar shall insert to total depth for a bottom face of the cube as cast, and shall project
upward from the top face whatever distance is necessary to provide sufficient length of
bar to extend through the cubes and the support of the testing machine and to provide
an adequate length to be gripped for application of load. After the top layer has been
rodded, the surface shall be struck off with a trowel. The cubes were casted with
different mix proportions (M15, M20, M25), with 16mm dia bar.

3.8.2.2 Testing of specimen:

The bond strength test was carried out according to IS 2770-1997 16 mm diameters
steel reinforcing bars was embedded into the concrete cube at centre. All specimens are
tested up to failure of bar matrix interfacial bond. The peak load at failure of bond is
observed. All specimens failed with vertical crack along the embedded length of bar
with cracking sound. Three cubes of each grade were tested for its 7and 28 days using
100-ton capacity Universal Tensile testing machine. After seven days, pull out test was
carried in specimens to determine bond strength and the test setup is shown in fig. 3.11.

Fig 3.12: Pull-out test assembly

31
 CHAPTER 4
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 GENERAL
Present experimental investigation consists of physical properties of materials,
compressive strength test, bond strength test on various grades of concrete. The tests
were carried on concrete specimens with a water-cement ratio of 0.6,0.5,0.55 for
various mix grade. The tests were conducted as per the standard specifications. The
tests results are presented in this chapter and discussed with appropriate graphical
representation.

To know the bond strength behaviour of the reinforced concrete, M15, M20, M25 grade
concrete specimens was casted with the diameter of reinforcements 16mm.

4.2 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF CEMENT

For this experiment, Ultra-tech super (53grade) cement was used, and specific gravity,
normal consistency, and setting time tests were performed in accordance with standard
specifications.

Table 4.1: Physical properties of PPC

Physical properties Test results Reference

Specific gravity 3.15 IS:269-1976

Normal consistency 28.65% IS:269-1958

Setting time IS:269-1976

• Initial setting time 189 Should not be less than 30min

• Final setting time 249 Should not be more than
600min

32
4.3 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF FINE AND COARSE AGGREGATE

For this experiment, locally accessible fine and coarse aggregate was used, and
conventional standards were followed for specific gravity, water absorption, sieve
analysis, and silt content.

Table 4.2: Physical properties of Fine and Coarse aggregate

Physical Fine aggregate Coarse aggregate References

properties
Specific gravity 2.60 2.61 IS 2386(Part III) -
1963
Water absorption 1.2% 0.45% IS 2386(Part III) -
1963
Sieve analysis Zone 11 - (IS 2386(Part I) -
1963)
Aggregate Impact - 20.16% IS383-1970
value
Crushing value 26.56%

4.4 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION

WASTE

Table 4.3: Physical properties of recycled aggregates

Physical properties Recycled aggregate References

Specific gravity 2.39 IS 2386(Part III) - 1963

Water absorption 2.24% IS 2386(Part III) - 1963

Sieve analysis Zone 11 IS 2386(Part I) - 1963

IS 383-1980
Aggregate impact value 26.66% IS 2386 (Part IV) - 1963

Crushing value 28.1%

33
4.5 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST
The compressive strength test was conducted for 150mm x 150mm x150mm size of
cubes in UTM machine for the ages of 7days & 28days. And it was calculated by,

Compressive strength = P/A

Where, P = Ultimate load (N)

A = Cross sectional area of the cube (mm2)

34
4.5.1 M15 grade concrete Compressive strength results.
Table 4.4: Compressive strength test results of 7 days
AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
300 22500 13.33
0 380 22500 16.89 13.78
250 22500 11.11
280 22500 12.44
20 505 22500 22.44 16.96
360 22500 16.00
250 22500 11.11
40 560 22500 24.89 16.30
290 22500 12.89
230 22500 10.22
60 540 22500 24.00 15.56
280 22500 12.44
400 22500 17.78
80 250 22500 11.11 15.26
380 22500 16.89
380 22500 16.89
100 290 22500 12.89 14.81
330 22500 14.67

Table 4.5: Compressive strength test results of 28 days

C/S AVG
% LOAD STRENGTH
AREA STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) (N/mm2)
mm2 (N/mm2)
350 22500 15.56
0 480 22500 21.33 17.93
380 22500 16.89
320 22500 14.22
20 550 22500 24.44 18.22
360 22500 16.00
280 22500 12.44
40 600 22500 26.67 17.78
310 22500 13.78
300 22500 13.33
60 600 22500 26.67 17.48
280 22500 12.44
450 22500 20.00
80 350 22500 15.56 16.74
400 22500 17.78
490 22500 21.78
100 260 22500 11.56 16.59
370 22500 16.44

35
4.2.2 M20 grade concrete compressive strength results.
Table 4.6: Compressive strength test results of 7 days
AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
380 22500 16.89
0 460 22500 20.44 17.04
310 22500 13.78
350 22500 15.56
20 585 22500 26.00 18.15
290 22500 12.89
300 22500 13.33
40 540 22500 24.00 17.78
360 22500 16.00
320 22500 14.22
60 500 22500 22.22 16.74
310 22500 13.78
410 22500 18.22
80 330 22500 14.67 16.15
350 22500 15.56
350 22500 15.56
100 360 22500 16.00 15.41
330 22500 14.67

Table 4.7: Compressive strength test results of 28 days

AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
430 22500 19.11
0 540 22500 24.00 20.15
390 22500 17.33
380 22500 16.89
20 610 22500 27.11 20.44
390 22500 17.33
330 22500 14.67
40 520 22500 23.11 18.37
390 22500 17.33
340 22500 15.11
60 560 22500 24.89 18.22
280 22500 12.44
450 22500 20.00
80 380 22500 16.89 18.07
320 22500 14.22
470 22500 20.89
100 330 22500 14.67 17.48
340 22500 15.11

36
4.2.3 M25 grade concrete compressive strength results.
Table 4.8: Compressive strength test results of 7 days
AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
540 22500 24.00
0 410 22500 18.22 21.78
520 22500 23.11
560 22500 24.89
20 590 22500 26.22 23.41
430 22500 19.11
460 22500 20.44
40 500 22500 22.22 19.56
360 22500 16.00
420 22500 18.67
60 500 22500 22.22 19.41
390 22500 17.33
450 22500 20.00
80 300 22500 13.33 18.22
480 22500 21.33
405 22500 18.00
100 400 22500 17.78 17.70
390 22500 17.33

Table 4.9: Compressive strength test results of 28 days

C/S AVG
% LOAD STRENGTH
AREA STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) (N/mm2)
mm2 (N/MM2)
590 22500 26.22
0 610 22500 27.11 25.63
530 22500 23.56
590 22500 26.22
20 620 22500 27.56 25.93
540 22500 24.00
500 22500 22.22
40 560 22500 24.89 21.93
420 22500 18.67
510 22500 22.67
60 510 22500 22.67 21.33
420 22500 18.67
410 22500 18.22
80 330 22500 14.67 18.96
350 22500 15.56
470 22500 20.89
100 290 22500 12.89 18.22
310 22500 13.78

37
4.2.4 Graphical representation of compressive test results

7days 28days

19

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
18
17
(N/MM2) 16
15
14
13
12
0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.1: Compressive strength results of M15 grade concrete

7days 28days

21
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

20
19
18
(N/MM2)

17
16
15
14
0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.2: Compressive strength results of M20 grade concrete

7days 28days

30
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

25
20
(N/MM2)

15
10
5
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.3: Compressive strength results of M25 grade concrete

38
 7days 28days

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

18.22
17.93

17.78

17.48
16.96

16.74

16.59
16.3
(N/MM2)

15.56

15.26

14.81
13.78

0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.4: Compressive strength results of M15 grade concrete

7days 28days
20.44
20.15
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

18.37

18.22
18.15

18.07
17.78

17.48
(N/MM2)

17.04

16.74

16.15

15.41

0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.5: Compressive strength results of M20 grade concrete

7days 28days
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

25.93
25.63

23.41

21.93
21.78

21.33
19.56

19.41

18.96
18.22

18.22
17.7
(N/MM2)

0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.6: Compressive strength results of M25 grade concrete

39
Figure 4.7 Cubes placed in UTM machine

Figure 4.8 Cubes after failure

40
4.6 PULL-OUT TEST
The pull-out test was conducted for 150mm x 150mm x150mm size of cubes with a
single reinforcing bar embedded vertically along a central axis in each specimen.
Tested in UTM machine for the ages of 7days & 28days. And it was calculated by,

Bond strength = P/πdl

Where,

• P = Applied load (N)

• d = dia of rebar (mm)
• l = embedded length of bar (mm)

41
4.6.1 M15 grade concrete pull-out test results.
Table 4.10: Pull-out test results of 7 days
AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
20.39 6755.52 3.02
0 25.19 6755.52 3.73 3.41
23.45 6755.52 3.47
25.16 6755.52 3.72
20 27.39 6755.52 4.05 4.03
29.14 6755.52 4.31
20.56 6755.52 3.04
40 18.23 6755.52 2.70 3.16
25.23 6755.52 3.73
20.12 6755.52 2.98
60 23.55 6755.52 3.49 2.81
13.26 6755.52 1.96
19.36 6755.52 2.87
80 15.23 6755.52 2.25 2.60
18.15 6755.52 2.69
20.39 6755.52 3.02
100 15.52 6755.52 2.30 2.52
15.23 6755.52 2.25

Table 4.11: Pull-out test results of 28 days

AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
27.32 6755.52 4.04
0 25.07 6755.52 3.71 4.01
28.96 6755.52 4.29
30.18 6755.52 4.47
20 29.66 6755.52 4.39 4.26
26.59 6755.52 3.94
29.86 6755.52 4.42
40 20.19 6755.52 2.99 3.46
20.15 6755.52 2.98
25.69 6755.52 3.80
60 26.55 6755.52 1.90 3.20
26.35 6755.52 3.90
25.89 6755.52 3.83
80 20.39 6755.52 3.02 3.04
15.27 6755.52 2.26
24.33 6755.52 3.60
100 15.39 6755.52 2.28 2.92
19.53 6755.52 2.89

42
4.6.2. M20 grade concrete Pull-out test results.

Table 4.12: Pull-out test results of 7 days

AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
29.59 6755.52 4.38
0 24.39 6755.52 3.61 3.95
26.15 6755.52 3.87
32.25 6755.52 4.77
20 23.59 6755.52 3.49 4.20
29.23 6755.52 4.33
27.34 6755.52 4.05
40 30.21 6755.52 4.47 4.14
26.27 6755.52 3.89
31.18 6755.52 4.62
60 29.38 6755.52 4.35 3.99
20.34 6755.52 3.01
22.93 6755.52 3.39
80 24.25 6755.52 3.59 3.63
26.43 6755.52 3.91
25.54 6755.52 3.78
100 21.23 6755.52 3.14 3.32
20.57 6755.52 3.04

Table 4.13: Pull-out test results of 28 days

AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
29.92 6755.52 4.43
0 26.98 6755.52 3.99 4.14
27.07 6755.52 4.01
30.25 6755.52 4.48
20 29.78 6755.52 4.41 4.39
29.03 6755.52 4.30
29.15 6755.52 4.31
40 30.15 6755.52 4.46 4.18
25.33 6755.52 3.75
28.98 6755.52 4.29
60 29.85 6755.52 4.42 4.05
23.35 6755.52 3.46
27.19 6755.52 4.02
80 28.33 6755.52 4.19 3.79
21.33 6755.52 3.16
27.40 6755.52 4.06
100 20.14 6755.52 2.98 3.39
21.11 6755.52 3.12

43
4.6.3 M25 grade concrete pull-out test results.
Table 4.14: Pull-out test results of 7 days
AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
31.19 6755.52 4.62
0 40.01 6755.52 5.92 5.35
37.2 6755.52 5.51
34.13 6755.52 5.05
20 38.84 6755.52 5.75 5.52
38.92 6755.52 5.76
33.15 6755.52 4.91
40 25.45 6755.52 3.77 4.85
39.65 6755.52 5.87
35.11 6755.52 5.20
60 27.27 6755.52 4.04 4.62
31.28 6755.52 4.63
29.18 6755.52 4.32
80 32.52 6755.52 4.81 4.44
28.34 6755.52 4.20
34.13 6755.52 5.05
100 28.40 6755.52 4.20 4.20
22.54 6755.52 3.34

Table 4.15: Pull-out test results of 28 days

AVG
% LOAD C/S AREA STRENGTH
STRENGTH
REPLACEMENT (KN) mm2 (N/mm2)
(N/mm2)
44.94 6755.52 6.65
0 40.01 6755.52 5.92 6.03
37.25 6755.52 5.51
46.88 6755.52 6.94
20 41.78 6755.52 6.18 6.79
49.03 6755.52 7.26
36.55 6755.52 5.41
40 50.15 6755.52 7.42 6.08
36.59 6755.52 5.42
41.98 6755.52 6.21
60 34.32 6755.52 5.08 5.72
39.65 6755.52 5.87
49.82 6755.52 7.37
80 29.16 6755.52 4.32 5.58
34.19 6755.52 5.06
40.84 6755.52 6.05
100 35.19 6755.52 5.21 5.25
30.28 6755.52 4.48

44
4.6.4 Graphical representation of Pull-out test results

28days 7days

BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

4.5

3.5

2.5

2
0 20 40 60 80 100
% of Replacement

Figure 4.9: Pull-out test results of M15 grade concrete

7days 28days
BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.10: Pull-out test results of M20 grade concrete

7days 28days
BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

7
6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
0 20 40 60 80 100

% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.11: Pull-out test results of M25 grade concrete

45
 7days 28days

4.26
BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

4.03
4.01

3.46
3.41

3.16

3.2

3.04

2.92
2.81

2.52
2.6
0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.12: Pull-out test results of M15 grade concrete

7days 28days
4.39

4.18
BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

4.14

4.14
4.2

4.05
3.99
3.95

3.79
3.63

3.39
3.32

0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.13: Pull-out test results of M20 grade concrete

7days 28days
6.79

6.08
6.03

5.72

5.58
BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

5.52
5.35

5.25
4.85

4.62

4.44

4.2

0 20 40 60 80 100

% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.14: Pull-out test results of M25 grade concrete

46
 Figure 4.15. Cubes after failure

Figure 4.16. Splitting failure of the specimen

47
4.7 Graphical representation of compressive strength results of different grades

7 DAYS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (N/MM2)
M15 M20 M25

26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.17: Average compressive strength results of different grade

28 DAYS
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH (N/MM2)

M15 M20 M25

30

25

20

15

10
0 20 40 60 80 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.18: Average compressive strength results of different grade

48
 7 DAYS
M15 M20 M25

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

23.41
19.56
(N/MM2)

21.78 19.41 18.22 17.7

18.15 17.78
17.04 16.64 16.15 15.41

13.78 16.96 16.3 15.56 15.26 14.81

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.19: Average Compressive strength results of different mixes

28 DAYS
M15 M20 M25
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
(N/MM2)

25.63 25.93
21.93 21.33
18.96 18.22

20.15 20.44 18.37 18.22 18.07 17.48

17.93 18.22 17.78 17.48 16.74 16.59

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.20: Average Compressive strength results of different mixes

49
4.8 Graphical representation of pull-out test results of different grades

7 DAYS
M15 M20 M25

6
BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.21: Average Pull-out test results of different mixes

28 DAYS
M15 M20 M25

6
BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.22: Average Pull-out test results of different mixes

50
 7 DAYS
M15 M20 M25

BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

5.52
5.35 4.85
4.62
4.44
4.2
4.2
3.95 4.14 3.99 3.63 3.32

3.41 4.03 3.16 2.81 2.6 2.52

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.23: Average Pull-out test results of different mixes

28 DAYS
M15 M20 M25
BOND STRENGTH (N/MM2)

6.79
6.03 6.08
5.72 5.58
5.25

4.14 4.39
4.18 4.05 3.79 3.39

4.01 4.26 3.46 3.2 3.04 2.92

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

% OF REPLACEMENT

Figure 4.24: Pull-out test results of different mixes

51
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION
5.1 GENERAL

Recycled aggregate produced these days has much better performance as comparable
to natural aggregate However, its basic characteristics have not been yet thoroughly
investigated. Particularly in order extend the use of the recycled aggregate for the
structural concrete, its bonding performance should be fundamentally explored. This
research examined the compressive strength and bond strength with respect to the
varying percentage of recycled aggregate.

• The specific gravity of recycled aggregates is lower than that of conventional

aggregates. This is because of the attached mortar present on the aggregate surface.
• The water absorption of recycled aggregates is higher than the natural aggregates.
The range may vary based on the type of aggregates and in this case, it is 0.96%
higher. This is also because of the attached mortar present on the aggregate surface
which tends to absorb more water.
• The aggregate crushing and impact values of recycled aggregates are higher than
the natural aggregates. This is because the recycled aggregates have already been
subjected to fatigue once during the previous use.
• The result of sieve analysis shows that the particle grain distribution of the C and D
waste alternative materials lies within Zone-II as per IS: 383-1970.
• Concrete cubes with varying mix proportions were casted. These cast cubes were
subjected to compressive strength testing at both 7 and 28-day intervals.
Remarkably, the concrete cubes containing recycled aggregates displayed higher
compressive strength compared to the cubes that were casted without any
replacement of aggregates.
• As per the IS456-2000, the compressive strength of M15 concrete cube should be
15N/mm2 for 28 days, the compressive strength of M15 concrete for 28days
strength is 18.15N/mm2 it has achieved more than the codal requirement.
• As per the IS456-2000, the compressive strength of M20 concrete cube should be
20N/mm2 for 28 days, the compressive strength of M20 concrete for 28days
strength is 20.44N/mm2 it has achieved more than the codal requirement.

52
• As per the IS456-2000, the compressive strength of M25 concrete cube should be
25N/mm2 for 28 days, the compressive strength of M25 concrete for 28days
strength is 25.93N/mm2 it has achieved more than the codal requirement.
• The compressive strength and bond strength of concrete is directly proportional to
the grade of concrete. Based on the experimental study, it may be concluded that 20
percent replacement of recycled aggregate (RA) with natural aggregate can be
recommend.

5.2 FUTURE SCOPE

• Durability study on these concretes can be investigated.

• Use of additional components along with C and D waste can be added to enhance
the strength can be investigation.

53
 REFERENCES
1. IS 383:1970 code of practice for “Specifications for coarse and fine aggregate from
natural source of concrete” bureau of Indian standards new Delhi.
2. IS: 2386 (part 1) – 1963 code of practice for “methods of test for aggregates for
concrete part 1- particle size and shape”- bureau of Indian standards new Delhi.
3. IS:2386 (part 3) – 1963 code of practice for “methods of test for aggregates for
concrete part 3- specific gravity, density, voids ‘, absorption and bulking”- bureau
of Indian standards new Delhi.
4. IS:2386 (part 4) – 1963 code of practice for “methods of test for aggregates for
concrete part 4- mechanical properties” - bureau of Indian standards new Delhi.
5. IS 1026: 2009 code of practice for “concrete mix proportioning – guideline”- bureau
of Indian standards new Delhi.
6. IS: 456-1970 Design aids for reinforced concrete - bureau of Indian standards new
Delhi.
7. Bilek, V., Bonczková, S., Hurta, J., Pytlík, D., & Mrovec, M. (2017). Bond Strength
Between Reinforcing Steel and Different Types of Concrete. Procedia Engineering,
190, 243–247. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.05.333
8. Shahidan, S., Azmi, M. A. M., Kupusamy, K., Zuki, S. S. M., & Ali, N.
(2017). Utilizing Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste as Recycled
Aggregates (RA) in Concrete. Procedia Engineering, 174, 1028–1035. doi:
10.1016/j.proeng.2017.01.255
9. M Halahla, Mohammad Akhtar, Amin H. Almasri, "Utilization of Demolished
Waste asCoarse Aggregate in Concrete", Civil Engineering Journal (CEJ)

Volume 5, Issue 3, pp: 540-551, March 2019.

10. Mbereyaho Leopold, Ntitanguranwa Jean Paul, Kabano James, Gasingwa Noel,
"Reuse ofConstruction and Demolished Concrete Waste in Producing Strong and
Affordable ConcreteBlocks", Rwanda Journal of Engineering, Science, Technology
and Environment (RJESTE) Volume 1, Issue 1, 2018.
11. Menka, Urmil Yadav, "Use of Demolished Concrete in Construction", International
Journalof Science and Research (IJSR).
12. "Demolished waste as coarse aggregate in concrete." J. Acad. Indus. Res. Vol.1(9)
February 2013.

54
13. "Use of Building Demolished Waste as Course Aggregate in Porous Concrete"
IJRET:International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology.
14. "Use of construction renovation and demolition waste in partial replacement of
coarse aggregate in m20 concrete". IJRET: International Journal of Research in
Engineering and Technology
15. AnaghaKalpavalli [2015], "Use of demolished concrete waste as coarse aggregate
in highstrength concrete production":
16. Mohd Monish [2013], "Demolished waste as coarse aggregate in concrete":
17. Prof. Dharmesh K. Bhagat, Jigar P. Parmar, Yati R. Tank, Darpan H. Gadhiya, Jigar
S.Goyani, [2014],"Experimental Study of Compressive Strength of Recycled
Aggregate Concrete":

55
M.Tech
ORIGINALITY REPORT

18 %
SIMILARITY INDEX
14%
INTERNET SOURCES
7%
PUBLICATIONS
9%
STUDENT PAPERS

PRIMARY SOURCES

1
ia800907.us.archive.org
Internet Source 1%
2
www.engineeringcivil.com
Internet Source 1%
3
Submitted to Engineers Australia
Student Paper 1%
4
"Trends in Civil Engineering and Challenges
for Sustainability", Springer Science and
1%
Business Media LLC, 2021
Publication

5
Submitted to Visvesvaraya Technological
University
1%
Student Paper

6
www.researchgate.net
Internet Source 1%
7
ijcsm.springeropen.com
Internet Source 1%
8
ir.unilag.edu.ng
Internet Source 1%