Geomechanical Behaviour of Recycled Construction and Demolition Waste Submitted to Accelerated Wear
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.2. Material Degradation with Compaction
2.3. Material Degradation with Wetting-Drying Cycles
2.4. Permeability and Triaxial Compression Procedures
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Influence of Compaction on the PSD
3.2. Influence of Temperature and pH on PSD
3.3. Triaxial Tests
3.4. Hydraulic Conductivity
4. Conclusions
- (a)
- Regarding the influence of the compaction mechanism on particle size distribution, different compactions energies, standard and modified, have no influence on the particle size of the recycled CDW when compared to original CDW. The small discrepancy between the curves may be related only to the heterogeneity of the material;
- (b)
- Temperature and pH showed no significant changes on the particle size distribution after the 10 wetting–drying cycles. All samples maintained the same soil classification, sand with silt (SM);
- (c)
- The effects of the wetting–drying cycles on mechanical properties of the CDW are not relevant. The triaxial tests showed that the stress–strain behaviour was similar for all CDW samples, with a pronounced strength peak and subsequent strain-softening behaviour, with the highest peak and stiffness for the highest confining stress tested. All samples showed an initial compressive behaviour followed by a dilatant one, in accordance with the behaviour described for classical soil material, such as dense sand at low confining stresses. The strength parameters, c′ and ɸ′, were close to the original CDW, except for those of the samples submitted to cycles with different pH, 4 and 11, which presented a reduction in the value of ɸ′, and it is believed that the acid or basic environments wakened the grains; in addition, the mechanical behaviour of the CDW is consistent with that of natural soil, reaching strength parameters values competitive with those obtained from a natural granular material;
- (d)
- The hydraulic conductivity of the material subjected to the cycles of degradation showed values extremely similar to the original CDW, all staying within the same very low hydraulic conductivity classification range, attesting the results found for the particle size distribution.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Wu, H.; Zuo, J.; Zillante, G.; Wang, J.; Duan, H. Environmental impacts of cross-regional mobility of construction and demolition waste: An Australia Study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 174, 105805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halmeman, M.C.R.; de Souza, P.C.; Casarin, A.N. Characterization of construction and demolition waste at the solid waste receiving unit in the municipality of Campo Mourão-PR. Rev. Tecnológica Edição Esp. 2009, 6, 203–209. [Google Scholar]
- Akhtar, A.; Sarmah, A.K. Construction and demolition waste generation and properties of recycled aggregate concrete: A global perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 186, 262–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hidalgo, C.; Carvajal, G.; Muñoz, F. Laboratory Evaluation of Finely Milled Brick Debris as a Soil Stabilizer. Sustainability 2019, 11, 967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jin, R.; Li, B.; Zhou, T.; Wanatowski, D.; Piroozfar, P. An empirical study of perceptions towards construction and demolition waste recycling and reuse in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 126, 86–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vieira, C.S.; Pereira, P.M. Use of recycled construction and demolition materials in geotechnical applications: A review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 103, 192–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Comission. European Commission Directorate-General for Environment, Service Contract on Management of Construction and Demolition Waste SR; Final Report; European Comission: Brussels, Belgium, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Baycan, F. Emergency Planning for Disaster Waste: A Proposal based on the experience of the Marmara Earthquake in Turkey. In Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference and Student Competition on Post-Disaster Reconstruction “Planning for Reconstruction”, Covetry, UK, 22–23 April 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Cristelo, N.; Vieira, C.S.; de Lurdes Lopes, M. Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Assessment of Recycled Construction and Demolition Waste for Road Embankments. Procedia Eng. 2016, 143, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Arulrajah, A.; Piratheepan, J.; Disfani, M.M.; Bo, M.W. Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Properties of Recycled Construction and Demolition Materials in Pavement Subbase Applications. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2013, 25, 1077–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arulrajah, A.; Piratheepan, J.; Bo, M.W.; Sivakugan, N. Geotechnical characteristics of recycled crushed brick blends for pavement sub-base applications. Can. Geotech. J. 2012, 49, 796–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vieira, C.S. Valorization of Fine-Grain Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste in Geosynthetic Reinforced Structures. Waste Biomass Valorization 2018, 11, 1615–1626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ASTM D7928; Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Distribution (Gradation) of Fine-Grained Soils Using the Sedimentation (Hydrometer) Analysis. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2021; pp. 1–25.
- European Standard NP EN 933-11; Tests for Geometrical Properties of Aggregates. Part 11: Classification Test for the Constituints of Coarse Recycled Aggregate. European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2011; pp. 1–44.
- ASTM D2487; Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017; p. 10.
- ASTM D854; Standard Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Soil Solids by Water Pycnometer. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2014; pp. 1–7.
- ASTM D4253; Standard Test Methods for Maximum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils Using a Vibratory Table. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2016; pp. 1–15.
- ASTM D4254; Standard Test Methods for Minimum Index Density and Unit Weight of Soils and Calculation of Relative Density. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2014; pp. 1–7.
- ASTM D698; Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort (12, 400 ft-lbf/ft 3 (600 kN-m/m 3)). ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2021; p. 13.
- ASTM D1557; Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modiefied Effort (56,000 ft-lbf/ft3 (2,700 kN-m/m3)). ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2021; pp. 1–10.
- Santos, A.R.; Veiga, M.D.R.; Silva, A.S.; de Brito, J.; Álvarez, J.I. Evolution of the microstructure of lime based mortars and influence on the mechanical behaviour: The role of the aggregates. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 187, 907–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ASTM D7181; Standard Test Method for Consolidated Drained Triaxial Compression Test for Soils. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2020; pp. 1–12.
- Skempton, A.W. The Pore-Pressure Coefficients A and B. Géotechnique 1954, 4, 143–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- La Rochelle, P.; Leroueil, S.; Trak, B.; Blais-Leroux, L.; Tavenas, F. Observational Approach to Membrane and Area Corrections in Triaxial Tests. In Advanced Triaxial Testing of Soil and Rock; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 1988; pp. 715–717. [Google Scholar]
- BS1377-9; Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes. British Standards Institution: London, UK, 2007.
- Head, K.H.; Epps, R.J. Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing. Environ. Eng. Geosci. 2015, 21, 247–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Da Silva, T.B.; Correia, N.D.S.; Kühn, V.D.O. Effect of compaction energy on grain breakage of CDW, local soil and soil-CDW mixtures. Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 2021, 16, 165–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pereira, P.M.; Vieira, C.S.; Lopes, M.L. Degradation assessment of recycled aggregates from Construction and Demolition Waste through wet-dry cycles. In Proceedings of the XVII ECSMGE-2019 Geotechnical Engineering Foundation of the Future, Reykjavik, Iceland, 1–6 September 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Lambe, T.W.; Whitman, R.V. Soil Mechanics, SI Version; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1979. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, Y.; Liu, S.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, L.; Li, Z. Hydraulic conductivity of gravelly soils with various coarse particle contents subjected to freeze–thaw cycles. J. Hydrol. 2021, 598, 126302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Property | Value |
---|---|
D10 (mm) | 0.02 |
D30 (mm) | 0.26 |
D60 (mm) | 0.91 |
Fines content (%) | 17.5 |
Uniformity Coefficient, CU | 45.5 |
Curvature Coefficient, CC | 3.71 |
Minimum void ratio, emin | 0.30 |
Maximum void ratio, emax | 0.64 |
Particle density, Gs (g/cm3) | 2.47 |
Optimum water content (%) | 11.2 |
ɣdmax (kN/m3) | 19.8 |
Concrete, concrete products, mortar, concrete masonry units, Rc (%) | 41.67 |
Unbound aggregate, natural stone, hydraulically bound aggregate, Ru (%) | 20.42 |
Clay masonry, calcium silicate masonry units, aerated non-floating concrete, Rb (%) | 19.92 |
Bituminous materials, Ra (%) | 1.82 |
Glass, Rg (%) | 2.12 |
Other materials, X * (%) | 14.05 |
Floating particles, FL (cm3/kg) | 4.97 |
Particle Size | Original (%) | After Standard Proctor (%) | After Modified Proctor (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Gravel (>4.75 mm) | 13 | 13 | 16 |
Coarse Sand (2.0 mm to 4.75 mm) | 15 | 14 | 16 |
Medium Sand (0.425 mm to 2.0 mm) | 29 | 35 | 34 |
Fine sand (0.075 mm to 0.425 mm) | 25 | 22 | 21 |
Silt (0.002 mm to 0.075 mm) | 15 | 11 | 8 |
Clay (<0.002 mm) | 3 | 5 | 5 |
Classification (ASTM D2487) | SM | SM | SM |
Particle Size | Original | 51 °C | 71 °C | 91 °C | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(%) | pH Natural (%) | pH 4 (%) | pH Natural (%) | pH 11 (%) | pH Natural (%) | |
Gravel (>4.75 mm) | 13 | 11 | 9 | 12 | 9 | 14 |
Coarse Sand (2.0 to 4.75 mm) | 15 | 11 | 13 | 13 | 11 | 13 |
Medium Sand (0.425 to 2.0 mm) | 29 | 31 | 31 | 35 | 30 | 32 |
Fine sand (0.075 to 0.425 mm) | 25 | 29 | 27 | 25 | 30 | 26 |
Silt (0.002 to 0.075 mm) | 15 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 10 |
Clay (<0.002 mm) | 3 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 5 |
Classification (ASTM D2487) | SM | SM | SM | SM | SM | SM |
Sample ID | qpeak | ɸ′ | c′ | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
25 kPa | 50 kPa | 100 kPa | (°) | (kPa) | |
Original CDW | 100.5 | 175.0 | 302.4 | 34.5 | 10.1 |
51 °C, pH natural | 103.1 | 173.9 | 299.4 | 34.0 | 11.2 |
71 °C, pH 4 | 80.8 | 151.7 | 248.3 | 31.3 | 9.0 |
71 °C, pH natural | 99.6 | 158.6 | 274.1 | 32.8 | 9.8 |
71 °C, pH 11 | 84.2 | 140.0 | 252.3 | 31.7 | 7.7 |
91 °C, pH natural | 74.4 | 145.0 | 258.8 | 33.2 | 4.7 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Secco, M.P.; Bruschi, G.J.; Vieira, C.S.; Cristelo, N. Geomechanical Behaviour of Recycled Construction and Demolition Waste Submitted to Accelerated Wear. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6719. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116719
Secco MP, Bruschi GJ, Vieira CS, Cristelo N. Geomechanical Behaviour of Recycled Construction and Demolition Waste Submitted to Accelerated Wear. Sustainability. 2022; 14(11):6719. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116719
Chicago/Turabian StyleSecco, Marina Paula, Giovani Jordi Bruschi, Castorina S. Vieira, and Nuno Cristelo. 2022. "Geomechanical Behaviour of Recycled Construction and Demolition Waste Submitted to Accelerated Wear" Sustainability 14, no. 11: 6719. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116719
APA StyleSecco, M. P., Bruschi, G. J., Vieira, C. S., & Cristelo, N. (2022). Geomechanical Behaviour of Recycled Construction and Demolition Waste Submitted to Accelerated Wear. Sustainability, 14(11), 6719. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116719