Contents lists available at

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage:

Mechanical properties and corrosion resistance of concrete modified

with granite dust
⇑
Abd Elmoaty Mohamed Abd Elmoaty
Structural Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Egypt

highlights

● Granite dust of 5.0%, 7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% as cement replacement and additional were used.
● Effect of granite dust on mechanical properties, corrosion resistance and hydration products were studied.
● An improvement on concrete mechanical properties at 5.0% granite dust as cement replacement.
● No change in hydration products, microstructure and degree of hydration due to using granite dust is observed.

articleinfo
abstract
Article history:
Received 29 January 2013 Granite dust is a waste material produced during cutting and polishing process of granite products.
Received in revised form 6 April 2013 This research work presents an experimental investigation on physical, mechanical properties and
Accepted 4 May 2013 reinforce- ment corrosion resistance of concrete modified with granite dust. The cement pastes modified
Available online 12 June 2013 with gran- ite dust were examined using TGA, X-ray and SEM. Granite dust cement replacement or
addition of 5.0%, 7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% were used. The test results showed an improvement on
Keywords: concrete compressive strength at 5.0% granite dust as cement replacement and improvement on
Granite dust compressive strength at most levels of granite dust as cement addition. The tensile strength test results
Mechanical properties are confirmed the test results of concrete compressive strength. Also, the use of 5.0% granite dust
Corrosion resistance increased the corrosion cracking time and no significant reduction in cracking time was observed at
Hydration granite dust contents greater than 5.0%. Insignificant changes in hydration products, microstructure and
degree of hydration due to using granite dust were observed. Finally, a reduction in water cement ratio
around 0.03 was enough to cancel the reduction in concrete compressive strength as a result of granite
dust up to 15.0% as cement replacement.
© 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction ⇑ Tel.: +20 34355004.

E-mail address: [email protected]
The growth in industrial productions led to more resulting
wastes. These wastes in most cases have environmental hazards.
The transportation of these wastes to wastes collecting centers al-
ways cost a lot of money. A lot of wastes have been successfully
added to concrete to minimize their hazards.
Variety of waste materials including tire rubbers, blast furnace
slag, silica fume, fly ash and lime stone have been used in concrete
production. These wastes have beneficial effect on concrete prop-
erties. These benefits include mechanical and durability aspects [1–
6].
Marble and granite grains and dust are considered waste mate-
rials during production of marble and granite products. These
wastes are produced during preparation and polishing processes.
These processes produce a large amount of waste materials.
 Marble grains either fine or coarse particles are used before in the effect of using 20–50% of granite dust on compressive strength
pavement production applications [7]. Marble and granite are and tensile strength of concrete at different ages. The experimental
used as coarse aggregate and fine aggregate to produce concrete test results showed that the use of granite dust at these levels
mixes with different grades [8–11]. Effect of marble dust on reduces significantly the concrete compressive strength and had
properties of conventional concrete and self compacting little negative effects on concrete tensile strength [16]. The effect of
concrete were stud- ied [12–15]. There is a lack of information using granite dust on producing concrete bricks was also studied
about the effect of using granite dust on concrete production by Hamza et al. Hamza et al. stud- ied the effect of using 10–40% of
compared with marble dust. Abukersh and Fairfield studied the granite slurry on compressive strength of concrete bricks. The test
effect of using granite as a par- tial cement replacement on results showed that the use of granite dust had a positive effect
mechanical properties of concrete. Abukersh and Fairfield studied and the optimum granite con- tent was 10%.

0950-0618/$ - see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.05.054
74 A.E.M. Abd Elmoaty / Construction and Building Materials 47 (2013) 743–752

Egypt is considered one of the most famous countries in pro- Table 1

ducing marble and granite products. The large amount of granite Chemical analysis of cement and granite dust.
and marble raw materials were found in many places in Egypt.
Constituent percent by weight Cement Granite dust
Some of raw materials were imported from other countries and
prepared in Egypt. The production rates of granite and marble Silicon dioxide 20.10 85.5
Aluminum oxide 5.50 2.10
products are increased with the time increase.
Ferric oxide 3.42 0.40
Most of marble and granite production factories lie in one or Calcium oxide 61.10 4.90
two centers in Egypt. This makes the possibility of collecting these Magnesium oxide 4.03 2.50
wastes easy. As a results of hazards of the resulting wastes, Egyp- Sulfur trioxide 2.57 1.80
tian governments suggested funds to researchers to solve the Loss on ignition 2.75 1.10
resulting problems from large amount of wastes. The average
weight of granite dust is about 30.0% from the original weight dur-
ing cutting and preparing processes according to the information 3.2. Test parameters
from producer. These wastes cause a main problem facing the
owners of these factories so they support any project to minimize The experimental program is divided into three sections. Section 1 is physical
these problems. and mechanical properties of concrete modified with granite dust where Section 2
is the corrosion resistance of concrete with granite dust and finally effect of the
presence of granite dust on hydration of cement paste, Section 3. The main consid-
ered parameters throughout the program are the effect of using granite dust as ce-
2. Research significance ment replacement and cement additional. The percentages of cement replacement
and cement addition are 0.0%, 5.0%, 7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% while the cement con-
The main objectives of this paper are utilizing of the granite tents of control mix is 400 kg/m 3. It should be pointed out that concrete mixes
incorporated 400 kg/m 3 cement and 0.45 w/c ratio represent a typical mix for
dust wastes to produce granite dust blended cement or study the
rein- forced concrete elements in constructions in Egypt. The dose of chemical
effect of using granite dust on concrete properties. The experimen- admixture is 1.0% by weight of cement. This dose achieved concrete slump of 160
tal work includes three phases. These phases are mechanical prop- ± 20 mm for all concrete mixes. The mix proportions of used mixes are tabulated
erties of mortar and concrete, reinforcement corrosion resistance in Table 2.
of concrete modified with granite dust and finally cement paste
properties.
3.3. Testing

3.3.1. Physical and mechanical properties

3.Experimental work
The considered tests throughout Section 1 are setting time of cement paste,
expansion of cement paste, mortar compressive strength, concrete compressive
3.1. Materials strength, splitting tensile strength, and concrete porosity. Setting time of cement
paste, expansion of cement paste and compressive strength of mortar were carried
Ordinary Portland cement (ASTM Type I) was used throughout the program. out according to ESS 2421. Concrete compressive strength was carried out using
This cement type is classified in Egyptian standard as CEM I 42.5N. Natural sili- 150 mm cubes according to BS 1881: part 3, whereas splitting tensile strength
ceous sand with fineness modulus of 2.4 was used. Pink lime stone with was carried out using cylinders of 75 mm diameter and 150 mm length according
9.5 mm maximum aggregate size was used. Commercially available granite dust to ASTM C 496. The porosity of concrete specimens was determined using
from factories of granite preparation was used throughout the research work. 150 mm cube according to ASTM C 642. The ages of testing were 7, 14, 28 and
Granite dust was collected and delivered in wet state. Granite dust was dried in 56 days for concrete compressive strength and splitting tensile strength, whereas
oven before using in order to control the mixing water content. The specific grav- porosity was determined at 28 days. Each test result throughout this research is
ity of used granite dust was 2.50. Granite dust was totally passed on sieve No. 200 the average of three specimens.
(mesh size 0.075 mm). Granite dust will be part of the filler fraction. The grading All the previous specimens were prepared by mechanical mixing, then casted
of used granite dust is given in Fig. 1. Chemical composition of used cement and in rigged steel molds. The specimens were demolded after 24 h. After demolding,
granite dust are given in Table 1. High range water reducing admixture Type F con- crete specimens were water cured up to the age of testing.
according to ASTM C 494 was used. The doses of chemical admixture were deter-
mined by trial to achieve 160 ± 20 mm slump. The used steel reinforcement bars
were 10 mm smooth bars with grade 240/350 according to Egyptian specification 3.3.2. Corrosion resistance
ESS No. 262/2006. Accelerated corrosion cell test was used. The used specimens for accelerated
corrosion test were cylinders of 75 m150 mm with steel bars of 10 mm diameter
and 200 mm length placed at the middle of the specimens. After being demolded,
100 the specimens were water cured for 28 days then they were immersed in
corrosion cell. The electrolyte in this cell was 5.0% by weight of NaCl solution. A
90 constant volt of 35.0 DC was applied between the anode (steel reinforcement) and
the cathode (copper plate) for the majority of this research work. The current
80 intensity was re- corded with the time up to 240 h working. The time of the initial
visible crack and weight loss in steel reinforcement were measured. Fig. 2 shows
70
%ge Finer by Weight

the used corrosion cell.

There are two methods to evaluate the performance of corrosion resistance of
60 concrete specimens modified with granite dust. These methods are time of crack
appearance and weight loss.
50 The theoretical weight of corroded steel rebar Mt can be calculated from the
area under the curve of corrosion current versus time using Faraday’s equation as
40 follows [17]:
Mm
30 Mt ¼ R Tdt ; ð1Þ
Zm
20 F
where Mt is the theoretical mass loss of corroded steel rebar in grams, M is the fer-
R
10 rous atomic weight = 55.86 g/mole, T dt is the electric charge (area under current–
time relation) in Amp sec, Z is the ionic charge per ferrous atom = 2, and F is the Far-
0 aday’s constant = 96,485.3 Coulomb/mole of ferrous.
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
3.3.3. TGA and X-ray diffraction
Diameter, mm Thermogravimetric analysis test (TGA) was conducted mainly to study the ef-
fect of the presence of granite dust on degree of hydration of cement which is a
Fig. 1. The grading of used granite dust. function of calcium hydroxide content.
Table 2
Mix proportions of used mixes.

Mix no. Granite dust content Mix proportion (kg/m3)

Cement Granite Water Sand Coarse aggregate Unit weight

1 Control 400 0 180 881 881 2342
2 5.0% Replacement 380 20 180 878 878 2336
3 7.5% Replacement 370 30 180 876 876 2332
4 10.0% Replacement 360 40 180 874 874 2328
5 15.0% Replacement 340 60 180 871 871 2322
6 5.0% Additional 400 20 180 869 869 2338
7 7.5% Additional 400 30 180 864 864 2338
8 10.0% Additional 400 40 180 858 858 2336
9 15.0% Additional 400 60 180 846 846 2332

Fig. 2. Configuration of accelerated corrosion cell.

Determination of calcium hydroxide content depends on the magnitude of the

drop in the TGA curve between 400 and 600 °C. Calcium hydroxide content (CH) 3 Da ys 7Days
can be calculated using the following equation [18]:
Compressive Strength (MPa)

45.0
CH% ¼ WL m ðMCH =M w Þ ð2Þ
40.0
where WL is the weight loss occurring between 400 and 600 °C, MCH is molecular 35.0
weight of calcium hydroxide and Mw is molecular weight of water in grams. 30.0
The X- ray diffraction analysis, XRD, was mainly carried out to study the 25.0
effect of using granite dust on cement hydration product. The TGA and XRD 20.0
were carried on cement paste specimens with 7.5% and 15.0% granite dust as a
15.0
cement replace- ment using 0.45 w/c ratio.
10.0
5.0
4. Test results and discussions 0.0
0 5 7.5 10 15
4.1. Section 1: physical and mechanical properties % of cement replacement
Fig. 3. Compressive strength of mortar modified with granite dust as cement
replacement.
4.1.1. Setting time of cement paste, expansion of cement paste
and compressive strength of mortar
This section focuses on the behavior of cement when it was strength, whereas the mortar compressive strength decreases at
modified with granite dust (granite dust blended cement). Table 3 15.0% granite dust as cement replacement compared with that of
shows the effect of granite dust replacement level on initial and fi- control mix. The optimum granite dust cement replacement level
nal setting time of cement paste. From this table it is clear that the is 7.5% at 7.0 days.
use of granite has not significant obvious change in the initial and
final setting time of cement modified with granite dust compared
4.1.2. Concrete compressive strength
with control cement paste. Also, no noticeable effect is observed as
Fig. 4 shows the effect of granite as cement replacement on
a result of using granite dust on the expansion of cement paste as
con- crete compressive strength after 7, 14, 28 and 56 days. From
given in Table 3. The effect of using granite dust as cement replace-
this figure, it is clear that the use of 5.0% granite dust as cement
ment on mortar compressive strength at 3 and 7 days is presented
replacement enhances slightly the concrete compressive
in Fig. 3. From this figure, at 7.0 days, the use of granite dust as ce-
strength compared with control mix. This enhancement is
ment replacement up to 10.0% enhances the mortar compressive
8.2% after 56 days of water curing. The use of granite dust of
content more than 5.0% cement replacement has a negative
Table 3 effect on concrete compressive strength at all tested ages
Setting time and expansion of cement paste test results. compared with control mix. The reduction in cube concrete
compressive strength after 56 days is 5.5%, 11.5% and 8.2% for
Granite dust cement 0.0 5.0 7.5 10.0 15.0
replacement (%) concrete mixes with 7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust as
Setting time (h) Initial 210 210 196 195 195 cement replacement. The enhance- ment on concrete
Final 300 293 296 295 290 compressive strength at 5.0% granite dust as ce- ment
Expansion (mm) 1.31 1.05 1.05 1.41 1.30 replacement may be due to the filling effect as a result of using
high fineness granite dust. On the other hand, the reduction
 7 Days 14 Days 28 Days 56 Days 7 Da ys 14 Da ys 28 Da ys 56 Da ys
Compressive strength (MPa)

55.0 5.5

Tensile strength (MPa)

50.0 5.0
45.0 4.5
40.0 4.0

35.0 3.5
3.0
30.0
2.5
25.0
0 5 7.5 10 15 2.0
20.0 0 5 7.5 10 15
% of granite
% of granite
Fig. 6. Tensile strength of concrete modified with granite dust as cement
Fig. 4. Compressive strength of concrete modified with granite dust as cement
replacement.
replacement.

in concrete compressive strength as a result of using 7.5% granite

dust and more as cement replacement may be due to the reduction 7 Da ys 14 Da ys 28 Da ys 56 Da ys
in cement content. Also, the present test results show that the
5.5
reduction in concrete compressive strength decreases with the in-

Tensile strength (MPa)

5.0
crease of curing time. As an example, at 15.0% granite dust as ce-
ment replacement, the reduction in concrete compressive 4.5
strength is 18.08%, 20.6%, 14.4% and 8.2% at 7, 14, 28 and 56 days. 4.0
It is important to mention that the maximum reduction in concrete 3.5
compressive strength is about 10.0% at the age of 56 days so, gran- 3.0
ite dust can be used as cement replacement or to produce blended 2.5
cement taken into the consideration this reduction. This reduction 2.0
in concrete compressive strength can be minimized or declined 0 5 7.5 10 15
using lower w/c ratio. % of granite
The effect of using granite dust as cement addition on cube con- Fig. 7. Tensile strength of concrete modified with granite dust as cement
crete compressive strength is shown in Fig. 5. From this figure, the additional.

use of granite dust as cement addition up to 10.0% increases con-

crete compressive strength compared with control mix. As an
modified with replacement levels greater than 5.0% are less than
example, the increase in 56 days concrete compressive strength
control mix. This trend is the same at different ages of curing.
is 1.0%, 11.9%, 12.2% and 4.6% for concrete mixes modified with
The maximum reduction in concrete tensile strength is not greater
5.0%, 7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust as cement addition com-
than 8.0% as a result of using 15.0% granite dust as cement replace-
pared with control mix. The optimum granite dust content is about
ment. These test results agree with the compressive strength test
10.0%. This improvement in concrete compressive strength may be
results of concrete modified with granite dust as cement
due to the filling effect of very fine used granite dust. Also, it can be
replacement.
seen that the enhancement in concrete compressive strength in-
Fig. 7 shows the effect of using granite dust as cement addition
creases with time. As and example, the increase in concrete com-
on concrete tensile strength at different ages. From this figure, it
pressive strength is 4.0%, 7.2% and 12.0% at 14, 28 and 56 days
can be seen that the use of granite dust as cement addition has a
respectively for concrete mix modified with 10.0% granite dust as
positive effect on concrete tensile strength. The optimum percent-
cement addition compared with control mix.
age of granite dust is 10.0% cement addition. The increase in con-
crete tensile strength is 4.6% for concrete modified with 10.0%
4.1.3. Concrete tensile strength
granite dust as cement addition. This trend agrees with compres-
The effect of using granite dust as cement replacement is pre-
sive strength test results. These results are generally agreed with
sented in Fig. 6. From this figure, the use of 5.0% granite dust as
those found by Abukersh and Fairfield [19].
ce- ment replacement enhances slightly the concrete tensile
Relation between concrete compressive strength (Fc) and con-
strength compared with control mix. Concrete tensile strength
crete tensile strength (Ft) for concrete modified with granite dust
of mixes
as cement replacement and cement addition is given in Fig. 8. From
this figure, it is clear that the concrete tensile strength is about 8–
11% from concrete compressive strength. Also, it is clear that the
7 Days 14 Days 28 Days 56 Days
value of Ft/Fc is granite dust content independent.
Compressive strength (MPa)

55.0
50.0 4.1.4. Concrete porosity
45.0 The effect of using dust as cement replacement and cement
40.0 addition on concrete porosity is shown in Fig. 9. From this figure,
35.0 the use of granite dust up to 7.5% by weight of cement has a neg-
30.0 ligible effect on concrete porosity either granite dust is used as ce-
25.0 ment replacement or cement addition. A little improvement on
20.0 concrete porosity is observed at 5.0% granite dust. Also, generally,
0 5 7.5 10 15 the use of granite dust as cement addition is slightly better than as
% of granite cement replacement. The use of 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust have
negative effect on concrete porosity. The increase in concrete
Fig. 5. Compressive strength of concrete modified with granite dust as cement
addition.
 12.0
Control 5.0 % Replacement 7.5 % Replacement
11.0 10.0 % Replacement 15.0 % Replacement
200
10.0

Current Intensity (mA)

175
% of ft/fc

9.0 150
8.0 125
100
7.0
75
6.0
50
5.0 25
2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5
0
% of granite 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time (Hrs)
Fig. 8. Relation between concrete tensile strength and concrete compressive (a) Granite dust as cement replacement
strength.
Control 5.0 % Addition 7.5 % Addition
10.0 % Addition 15.0 % Addition
200
175

Current Intensity (mA)

16.0
15.0 150
14.0
125
Porosity (%)

13.0
12.0 100
11.0
75
10.0
9.0 50
8.0 0 5 7.5 10 15
25
7.0 % of granite content
6.0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Addition
Time (Hrs)
(b) Granite dust as cement additional
Fig. 9. Concrete porosity after 28 days of concrete modified with granite dust.
Fig. 10. Current intensity – time relation for concrete modified with granite dust.

porosity at 15.0% granite dust is 15.0% and 14.2% for concrete mod-
ified with granite dust as cement replacement and cement addition
respectively. Addition Replacement

200.0
Cracking time (Hours)

4.2. Section 2: corrosion resistance of concrete modified with 180.0

granite dust 160.0
140.0
4.2.1. Current intensity – time relation 120.0
The measured current intensity – time relations for concrete 100.0
with and without granite dust are given in Fig. 10. Current 80.0
inten- sity increases with the time increase due to corrosion of 60.0
steel rein- forcement. From these relations, at the same time, the 40.0 0 5 7.5 10 15
increase of granite dust increases the measured current intensity % of granite content
compared with control mix. At the beginning of curves, up to
around 120 h,
Fig. 11. Cracking time of concrete modified with granite dust.
the test results of concrete modified with 5.0% and 7.5% granite
dust either as cement replacement or cement addition are close.
This means the use of granite dust up to 7.5% has insignificant ef- addition does not yield a significant hazard in the term of cracking
fect on corrosion resistance of concrete modified with granite dust. time.
This may be due to the similar porosity and similar flow resistance
to ions.
4.2.3. Weight loss after 240 h of working time
Figs. 12 and 13 show the steel weight loss due to corrosion as
4.2.2. Cracking time a result of accelerating test at 30.0 V for steel bars imbedded in
The time of first crack appearance for different concrete mixes is con- crete modified with granite dust compared with control
shown in Fig. 11. The figure indicates that there is an improvement mix after 240 h. The experimental steel weight loss and
on cracking time is observed at 5.0% granite dust as cement addi- theoretical weight loss are presented in these figures. The test
tion and as cement replacement. This improvement is 26.5% and results of concrete mixes modified with granite dust as cement
18.4% for concrete mixes modified with granite dust as cement replacement show the increase in steel weight loss. The increase
addition and as cement replacement respectively. Also, the reduc- in steel weight loss increases with the increase of granite dust
tion in cracking time for granite dust contents more than 5.0% is level as cement replace- ment. The increase in experimental steel
insignificant. The maximum reduction in cracking time at 15.0% weight loss is 24.5%, 34.0%, 55.3% and 92.6% for concrete mixes
granite dust is about 4.4% compared with control mix. This behav- with 5.0%, 7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust content. The use
ior is considered satisfied because the use of granite dust to pro- of granite dust as cement addition does not yield a significant
duce blended cement (as cement replacement) or as cement increase in experimental steel weight loss up to 10.0% granite
dust. The increase in experimental
 Experimental Theoretical
and long test duration are recommended to give more reliable test
results. This topic is considered as a research need.
20.0
Steel weight loss (grams)

18.0
16.0
14.0 4.3. Section 3: TGA, DTA, XRD and SEM analysis
12.0
10.0 Typical plots of TGA/DTA curves for the cement paste samples
8.0 with 0%, 7.5% and 15.0% granite dust as cement replacement are
6.0
4.0 shown in Fig. 15. From DTA curves it can be seen that each curve
2.0 consist of three zones. Zone 1 between 100 and 300 °C which is
0.0 attributed to dehydration of C–S–H and ettringite. Zone two from
0 5 7.5 10 15 450 to 510 °C is attributed to the dehydration of calcium hydrox-
% of granite content ide. An endotherm around 700 °C indicates the decarbonation of
Fig. 12. Steel weight loss of concrete modified with granite dust as cement calcium carbonate in the hydrated compound. In all samples
replacement.
either cement paste or modified cement paste with granite dust
the calcium hydroxide peak is at 470–485 °C which indicate no
change in phase chemistry for different mixes. However the var-
Experimental Theoretical iation of calcium hydroxide content between control mix and
20.0 granite modified mixes is insignificant. The Calcium hydroxide
Steel weight loss (grams)

18.0
16.0 content from TGA test result is about 15.0% for control mix and
14.0 12.0% for samples with granite dust with 7.5% and 15.0% granite
12.0 dust.
10.0 Fig. 16 shows the X-ray diffraction patterns for cement paste
8.0
6.0 samples with 0%, 7.5% and 15.0% granite dust as cement replace-
4.0 ment. The results of X-ray diffraction analysis are in agreement
2.0 with the thermal analysis where there is no significant difference
0.0 in hydration products between control mix and modified mixes
0 5 7.5 10 15
with granite dust. The more clear observation is the high percent-
% of granite content age of quartz in granite dust modified cement pastes. This
Fig. 13. Steel weight loss of concrete modified with granite dust as cement founding may be due to the high silica content of used granite dust.
addition. SEM analysis presented in Fig. 17 shows that no significant changes
be- tween cement pastes with and without granite dust. Also, it is
clear that the ettringite needles are more observed in granite dust
steel weight loss as a result of using 5.0%, 7.5%, 10.0% and mod- ified cement pastes. This may be due to good dispersion of
15.0% is 0.0%, 16.0%, 9.6% and 85.1% compared with control cement particles around granite dust particles. This may increase
mix. The test re- sults of theoretical steel weight loss agree with the rate of reaction which accelerate the presence of ettringite at
the trend of exper- imental steel weight loss. The relation the age of testing.
between experimental and theoretical steel weight loss is shown
in Fig. 14. From this figure, the experimental steel weight loss is
about 95.0% from the theoret- ical steel weight loss at level of 5. General discussion on the application of granite
30.0 V and 5.0% sodium chloride in accelerating corrosion test. dust on concrete production
The previous behavior of steel weight loss indicates that
there is a negative effect of using granite dust as cement It is important in the end of this research work to give some rec-
replacement in the term of steel weight loss. This behavior is ommendations on the use of granite dust on concrete production
contrary to the test results of initial crack and concrete tensile either as cement addition or cement replacement. The present
strength. This irregular trend may be due to the acceleration study shows two important conclusions. The first one, the use of
corrosion test at high level of voltage or due the short time of granite dust as an addition up to 15.0% by weight of cement has
test duration (240 h). So, unaccel- erated corrosion test or po- sitive effects generally on the concrete properties. The second
corrosion test under low level of voltage con- clusion, the use of 5.0% granite dust as cement replacement
enhances generally the concrete properties where the contents of
7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust has negative effects on concrete
properties. Granite dust can be used successfully up to 15.0% by
weight of cement as cement addition safely if the purpose is the
20
disposing of this waste material safely. This may be reducing the
Experimental weight loss (gm)

18 y = 0.9451x cost of this material disposal.

16 R2 = 0.8822
Granite dust can be used to produce granite dust blended
14 cement, as cement replacement, using 5.0% granite dust. This con-
12 tent, 5.0%, enhances concrete properties of granite dust modified
10 concrete. Using granite dust blended cement with 7.5%, 10.0% and
8 15.0% as mentioned before reduces the strengths of resulting con-
6 crete mixes such as 28 days concrete compressive strength. A
4 modification of concrete mix proportions such as reducing water
2 cement ratio is needed for granite dust blended concrete mixes to
0 increase concrete compressive strength to be equal to that of un-
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 blended cement concrete. The required reduction in water ce-
Theoretical weight loss (gm) ment ratio can be estimated using the design chart of British
method of concrete design mix, BS 882 as shown in Fig. 18. In this
Fig. 14. Relation between experimental and theoretical steel weight loss of
concrete modified with granite dust.
Fig. 15. TGA test results for control mix, 7.5% and 15.0% granite dust as cement replacement.
 Fig. 16. XRD test results for control mix, 7.5% and 15.0% granite dust as cement replacement.

method, a base point is plotted in the design chart for different in Fig. 16. The 28 days concrete compressive strength, 46 MPa,
granite dust contents, at 0.45 w/c ratio and corresponding 28 days for unblended cement concrete is required. The resulting water
concrete compressive strength, and then parallel curve to existing cement ratio for 7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust is 0.44, 0.43
curves is also plotted. This generated curve can be used to esti- and 0.42 respectively. This means reduction in water cement ratio
mate the required w/c ratio to achieve any required concrete about 0.01, 0.02 and 0.03 is enough to cancel the reduction in
compressive strength. Three parallel curves for 7.5%, 10.0% and concrete compressive strength due to the use of 7.5%, 10.0% and
15.0% granite dust as cement replacement are plotted as shown 15.0% granite dust as cement replacement.
 90.0

80.0

70.0

Compressive strength (MPa)

60.0

7.5 % granite dust

50.0

10.0 % granite dust

40.0

30.0 15.0 % granite dust

20.0

10.0

0.0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Water/cement ratio

Fig. 18. Design chart for British mix design method of concrete.

in 56 days concrete compressive strength is 1.0%, 11.9%,

12.2% and 4.6% for concrete mixes modified with 5.0%,
7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust as cement addition.
3. The use of 5.0% granite dust as cement replacement
enhances slightly the concrete tensile strength compared
with control mix and concrete tensile strength of mixes
modified with granite dust replacement levels more than
5.0% are less than control mix. The maximum reduction in
concrete tensile strength is not greater than 8.0% as a result
of using 15.0% granite dust as cement replacement.
4. The use of granite dust as cement addition has a positive
effect on concrete tensile strength. The optimum percentage
of granite dust is 10.0% cement addition.
5. For concrete modified with granite dust, the concrete tensile
strength is about 8–11% from concrete compressive
strength. Also, it is clear that the value of concrete tensile
strength to concrete compressive strength is granite dust
content independent.
6. Granite dust up to 7.5% by weight of cement has a negligible
effect on concrete porosity either granite dust is used as
cement replacement or cement addition and some improve-
ment on concrete porosity is observed at 5.0% granite dust.
Fig. 17. SEM test results for control mix, 7.5% and 15.0% granite dust as cement
replacement.
7. The use of 5.0% granite dust as cement addition or cement
replacement increases the time of corrosion cracking time
by 26.5% and 18.4%. Also, no significant reduction in
cracking time is observed at granite dust contents more
6. Conclusions than 5.0%.
8. Concrete mixes modified with granite dust as cement
Based on this experimental study, the following conclusions can replacement show an increase in steel weight loss where
be drawn: the increase in experimental steel weight loss is 24.5%,
34.0%, 55.3% and 92.6% for concrete mixes with 5.0%, 7.5%,
1. The use of granite dust of content more than 5.0% cement 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust content.
replacement has a negative effect on concrete compressive 9. The use of granite dust as cement addition has insignificant
strength where the reduction in cube concrete compressive increase in experimental steel weight loss up to 10.0% gran-
strength after 56 days is 5.5%, 11.5% and 8.2% for concrete ite dust.
mixes with 7.5%, 10.0% and 15.0% granite dust as cement 10. There is no change in phase chemistry for cement paste
replacement. modified with granite dust compared with control cement
2. The use of granite dust as cement addition up to 10.0% paste where the variation of calcium hydroxide content
increases concrete compressive strength where the increase between control mix and granite modified mixes is
insignificant.
 11. There is no significant difference in hydration products form Donza H, Cabrera O, Irassar EF. High-strength concrete with different fine aggregate. Cem Concr
Res 2002;32(11):1755–61.
X-ray diffraction analysis between control mix and modified [9] Balaji Rao K, Bhaskar Desai V, Jagan Mohan D. Probabilistic analysis of Mode II
mixes with granite dust and this behavior also confirmed by fracture of concrete with crushed granite stone fine aggregate replacing sand. Constr
SEM analysis. Build Mater 2012;27(1):319–30.
[10] Binici H, Shah T, Aksogan O, Kaplan H. Durability of concrete made with
12. A reduction in water cement ratio around 0.03 is enough granite and marble as recycle aggregates. J Mater Process Technol 2008;208(1–
to cancel the reduction in concrete compressive strength 3):299–308.
as a result of using granite dust up to 15.0% as cement [11] Pacheco-Torgal F, Castro-Gomes JP. Influence of physical and geometrical
properties of granite and limestone aggregates on the durability of a C20/25
replacement. strength class concrete. Constr Build Material 2006;20(10):1079–88.
[12] Corinaldesi V, Moriconi G, Naik TR. Characterization of marble powder for its use in
mortar and concrete. Constr Build Mater 2010;24(1):113–7.
[13] Yillmaz AH, Guru M, Dayi M, Tekin L. Utilization of waste marble dust as an additive
References in cement production. Mater Des 2010;31(8):4039–42.
[14] Ergun A. Effects of the usage of diatomite and waste marble powder as
[1] Bhanja S, Sengupta B. Investigations on the compressive strength of silica fume partial replacement of cement on the mechanical properties of concrete. Constr
concrete using statistical methods. Cem Concr Res 2002;32(9):1391–4. Build Mater 2011;25(2):806–12.
[2] Corinaldesi V, Moriconi G. Recycling of rubble from building demolition for low- [15] Ho DWS, Sheinn AMM, Ng CC, Tam CT. The use of quarry dust for SCC
shrinkage concretes. Waste Manag 2010;30(4):655–9. applications. Cem Concr Res 2002;32(4):505–11.
[3] Pacheco-Torgal F, Ding Y, Jalali S. Properties and durability of concrete [16] Topcu LB, Bilir T, Uygunoglu T. Effect of waste marble dust content as filler on
containing polymeric wastes (tire rubber and polyethylene terephthalate bottles): properties of self-compacting concrete. Constr Build Mater 2009;23(5):1947–53.
An overview. Constr Build Mater 2012;30:714–24. [17] ACI 222R. Protection of metals in concrete against corrosion; 2009.
[4] Li G, Zhao X. Properties of concrete incorporating fly ash and ground [18] Knapen E, Van Gemert D. Cement hydration and microstructure formation in the
granulated blast-furnace slag. Cem Concr Compos 2003;25(3):293–9. presence of water-soluble polymers. Cem Concr Res 2009;39:6–13.
[5] Siddique R. Performance characteristics of high-volume class F fly ash concrete. [19] Abukersh SA, Fairfield CA. Recycled aggregate concrete produced with red granite
Cem Concr Res 2004;34(3):487–93. dust as a partial cement replacement. Constr Build Mater 2011;25(10):4088–94.
[6] Ghrici M, Kenai S, Said-Mansour M. Mechanical properties and durability of mortar
and concrete containing natural pozzolana and limestone blended cements. Cem
Concr Compos 2007;29(7):542–9.
[7] Akbulut H, Gurer C. Use of aggregates produced from marble quarry waste in asphalt
pavements. Build Environ 2007;42(5):1921–30.

[8]