Characterization of demolished concretes with three different strengths for recycling as coarse aggregate

This paper presents a physical characterization for the recycling into new concretes of three comminuted concretes: C16/20 (“ordinary concrete”), C50/60 (“high strength concrete”), and C70/85 (“very high strength concrete”). The top size of the crushed concretes was 19.1 mm and the size range was 4.75 to 19.1 mm. The characterization was carried out with coarse aggregate liberation, to be prepared and concentrated in a gravity concentration process. The density distribution of the coarse aggregate, cement paste, and sand was carried out in different size ranges (4.75/19.1 mm; 4.75/8.0 mm; 8.0/12.5 mm; and 12.5/19.1 mm) for the three concretes studied. The form factor of the samples, as well as the porosity determination of particles in different density ranges, are presented. The obtained results indicate that the coarse aggregate liberation was more intensive for the low resistance concrete (C16/20), but a reasonable coarse aggregate recovery is possible for all concretes

Characterization of Demolished Concretes with Three Different Strengths for Recycling as Coarse Aggregate

This paper presents a physical characterization for the recycling into new concretes of three comminuted concretes: C16/20 (“ordinary concrete”), C50/60 (“high strength concrete”), and C70/85 (“very high strength concrete”). The top size of the crushed concretes was 19.1 mm and the size range was 4.75 to 19.1 mm. The characterization was carried out with coarse aggregate liberation, to be prepared and concentrated in a gravity concentration process. The density distribution of the coarse aggregate, cement paste, and sand was carried out in different size ranges (4.75/19.1 mm; 4.75/8.0 mm; 8.0/12.5 mm; and 12.5/19.1 mm) for the three concretes studied. The form factor of the samples, as well as the porosity determination of particles in different density ranges, are presented. The obtained results indicate that the coarse aggregate liberation was more intensive for the low resistance concrete (C16/20), but a reasonable coarse aggregate recovery is possible for all concretes

Demolished concretes recycling by the use of pneumatic jigs

Sampaio, C.H. et al., Demolished concretes recycling by the use of pneumatic jigs, Waste management and research, 38 (4) pp. 392-399. Copyright © 2020. DOI: 10.1177/0734242X20902835.Large quantities of construction and demolition waste is generated annually around the world. Part of this material is processed in recycling plants. After removing metals, fines and lights, the construction and demolition waste is crushed and sized and can be used as aggregates for low resistance concrete, for road sub-base, city landfill and other low value-added applications. For their use as coarse aggregate in structural concretes, construction and demolition waste must exhibit high densities and regularity of the material. This material usually is presented in demolished concretes. About 20% of the particles from demolished concretes can be used as coarse aggregates substituting part of natural aggregates in structural concretes. This article presents studies of demolished concretes recycling by the use of a pneumatic jig. All jigging tests were carried out with three different concretes produced in three strength classes: C16/20, ordinary concrete; C50/60, high strength concrete; and C70/85, very high strength concrete. Based on density distribution of the three concretes, there are reasonable masses with densities over 2.7¿g¿cm-3, particle density considered appropriate to the used as coarse aggregate for structural concretes. The concretes present different mass recoveries of the denser particles (different liberation). Coarse aggregates can be recovered with reasonable masses by the use of air jigs: About 65% for high strength concretes and about 75% for the low strength concrete. The jigging concentration efficiency depends on the concrete liberation, density and size distribution.The authors would like to thank the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for financial support. We are also very thankful to NORIE (Núcleo Orientado para a Inovação da Edificação), LEME (Laboratório de Ensaios Estruturais) and LEAMET (Laboratório de Estudos Ambientais para Metalurgia), research groups of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, where production and characterization of the concrete samples were carried out.Peer Reviewe