VTT R 05984 12

VTT-R-05984-12
RESEARCH REPORT
Reuse of recycled aggregates and other

C&D wastes
Authors: Hannele Kuosa
Confidentiality: Public
RESEARCH REPORT VTT-R-05984-12
3 (72)
Preface
This report is a part of the project NeReMa (Advanced Solutions for Recycling
Complex and New Materials, 2010 - 2012). The aim of the project was to analyse
current situation of selected waste value chains as well as the demands of the
current and future operational environment. An analysis of challenges and
development needs in these value chains was made and future development
opportunities identified. This report is a part of the value waste chains analysis
made dealing with recycling and utilisation of construction and demolition (C&D)
waste.
The project was funded by Tekes (Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and
Innovation) a group of companies and participating research institutes. The
research partners and their main duties in the project were:
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland: Coordinator and the project
and main responsibility for the analysis of MSW and C&D value chains
Aalto University School of Science and Technology Lahti Center
(AALTO): Main responsibility for the WEEE, C&I and ELV value Chains
The Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE): Responsible for the analysis
of strategies and legislation, Life cycle analysis (LCA and LCC) and BAT
analysis
Lappeenranta University of Technology (LUT): Responsible for the Waste
to Energy opportunities in the value chains mentioned above.
The Steering Group of the project consisted of the following persons: Antero
Vattulainen, Kuusakoski Oy; Toni Andersson, Ekokem Oy; Tuomo Joutsenoja,
Rudus Oy; Ilkka Kojo, Outotec Oy; Markku Lehtokari, Turun Seudun Jätehuolto;
Marko Mäkikyrö, Ruukki Metals Oy; Pekka Pouttu, Kiertokapula Oy; Arto
Ryhänen, Jätekukko Oy; Jukka Ylijoki, Metso Automation Oy; Asko Vesanto,
Tekes; Jatta Jussila, CLEEN Oy; Eva Häkkä-Rönnholm, VTT; Juha Kaila, Aalto
University; Tuuli Myllymaa, Finnish Environment Institute and Mika
Horttanainen, Lappeenranta University of Technology.
Espoo 5.11.2012
Hannele Kuosa
4 (72)
Executive summary
Introduction
Construction and demolition waste (C&D waste) is increasingly seen as a

valuable source of engineering materials for the construction industry. However
the percentage of use of these materials is not at all at a desired or sustainable
level. There is also far too little knowledge of the technically realistic ways to
reuse C&D waste.
On the other hand in several countries the use of e.g. recycled aggregates (RAs) in
concrete is already at least to some degree common, and this use is also regulated
by national specifications. Many countries have also introduced legislation and
policy measures to encourage the use of recycled aggregates in concrete. The use
of recycled aggregates in earth and road construction is more common, though
also this use could be essentially wider based on the technical and sustainable
benefits it can offer. This report is concentrated on the use of recycled aggregates
in concrete and other cement based materials. The main emphasis is on the ways
to widen the use. Quality of the produced recycled aggregates, as well as specified
ways for the use are important factors deciding the potential for economical,
sustainable and technically acceptable use.
This report also includes some information on the reuse of other C&D waste than
mineral waste for the production of recycled aggregates. Besides the reuse options
of the main non-mineral C&D waste is covered shortly.
Recycled aggregate (RA) types
Recycled aggregate (RA) is aggregate resulting from the processing of inorganic

material previously used in construction. According to the European Standards for
concrete there is a full possibility for the use of RA in concrete. The acceptable
ways for the use must be determined nationally, i.e. according to the national
specifications.
As RA can include all kind of inorganic materials from the C&D waste, i.e.
concrete, concrete masonry units, mortars, aerated concrete and also clay masonry
units (bricks and tiles), it is not as good a material for concrete production as
recycled concrete aggregate (RCA). RCA is made of solely crushed concrete.
Separation of concrete material already during the demolition phase is essential to
make it easier to produce good quality RCA.
RCA (also RA) is typically classified according to the grain size. Typically coarse
RCA (> 4 mm) is much easier to use in concrete production than fine RCA (< 4
mm). This is because after normal concrete crushing and sieving operations the
proportion of good natural aggregates is much higher in the coarce portion than in
the fine portion. After advanced RCA production methods, coarce RCA can
basically consist of solely natural aggregate. Instead fine RCA typically contains
more cement paste which absorbs water and makes the concrete production more
challenging. Cement paste may also include harmful substances for concrete such
5 (72)
as chlorides and sulphates. Especially fine RCA quality is dependent on the C&D
waste quality, as also coarse graded RCA quality if the cement paste content that
is adhered on the aggregate surfaces after the crushing and other processing
operations remains high. By forceful C&D waste sorting and processing it is
possible to produce high quality recycled aggregates for concrete production.
RA classification
For concrete production the classification of RA can be based on the composition

and/or on certain essential properties. In European and also in other national
specifications there are somewhat different ways for this. Guidelines for the use of
RA must be based on the selected classification method. Too elaborate systems
will not enhance the use of recycled aggregates. Especially for the most
undemanding cases there should be straightforward ways to use RA. Anyway
specifications are valuable to increase the use of RA and to assure the demanded
recycled aggregate concrete quality.
Typically there can be for instance limits for RA composition (amount of certain
harmful or unfavourable substances such as chlorides, sulphates, organic
materials, glass, gypsum, plastic, timber, paper and bituminous material),
minimum density and maximum water absorption. The minimum density allowed
for RCA is typically between 2000 to 2200 kg/m3 and the maximum water
absorption values fall between 7 % and 10 %. Composition and properties are
linked together and that is why the limits for both the composition and certain
properties are not always needed. The maximum content allowed for chlorides
and sulfates is usually stated in the normative documents. If no values are
stipulated a reference is normally made to the need to specify a value through a
case-by-case analysis. The maximum authorised content of sulfates varies from
0.8 % to 1.0 % of aggregates (in mass). For chlorides the range of values is much
wider, changing according to the demand level of the use, even within the same
standard. For structural concrete, values between 0.03% to 0.05% are common. It
must be noted, that the end use requirements, which are based also on climatic
exposure classes, must be different in different countries because of different
climatic circumstances, and also because of different national policies and adopted
safety levels.
RA quality control and use in concrete
Quality control methods of RA are essential to provide the use of RA in actual

concrete production. For this there are today among others also standardized
European testing methods, i.e. EN-standards specified for RA testing. An
authorized party should be responsible for controlling RA quality before adopting
these materials.
The normative national specifications define also the allowable use of the
specified RA. This means defining the maximum replacement of natural with
recycled aggregates (mainly only coarse but in some cases also fine recycled
aggregates), conditions of the use conforming with the European Standard EN
206-1 for concrete (e.g. only non-structural concrete, only non-aggressive
environments and/or specified environmental conditions/classes, etc.), and the
highest allowable compressive strength class for each case. In the more
sophisticated specifications it is also possible to assume that there are, in fact,
6 (72)
differences between the performance of conventional concrete and that of the

corresponding recycled aggregate concrete, and that corrective coefficients are
provided that allow concretes with the same strength class to be compared so as to
adjust the design of structural elements in which recycled aggregates are used.
For instance the maximum replacement ratio of natural with coarse RCA can be
20 – 35 % in a structural concrete with 30 MPa compressive strength. In a non-
structural concrete with 15 MPa compressive strength it can be even 100 %. The
replacement ratio can also be 100 % in 40 MPa concrete if the use of this concrete
is in a non-aggressive environment. In relation to the environmental conditions,
all standards generally aim at applications subject only to non-aggressive
conditions, and they are especially careful in terms of chemical attacks. Pre-
stressed concrete is outside the scope of most standards.
RA-concrete in Finland
In Finland there is a national specification on the use of aggregate in concrete: By

43 (Betonin kiviainekset 2008). In this specification the use of recycled aggregate
is allowed but it must be always proven beforehand, that the recycled aggregate is
suitable for the specific intended use. This means unpractical case-by-case studies.
Thus there is a need for a more comprehensive national specification for the use
of RA. Without national instructions the use of recycled aggregates in concrete
will be unsound and very limited also in the future. National specifications should
be based on local climatic conditions, and all the other national circumstances and
laws. The aim should be value-added, economical and sustainable application of
recycled aggregates. Network should be created to share the experience in using
RA. Based on the gained experience, the use of RA and specifications can be
modified.
Challenges and possibilities
High demands for construction materials are one obvious barrier for the reuse of
RA. Especially in Finland the demands for e.g. concrete durability are high.
Anyway there are also possibilities to widen the use of RA. Research is needed to
find out the most practical and economical ways for this. Knowledge is needed
e.g. on the effect of crushing and processing methods on the quality of RA. One
option to widen the use of RA is to find novel and value-added ways to use also
fine RA, and besides also fine filler aggregates (<0,063 mm) and powders created
in the RA production. These fine graded materials could be added in some
concrete types, especially in self compacting concrete (SCC), and possibly also in
some other construction materials to provide certain desired properties. Research
and innovations are needed for this. It may even be possible to create new
commercial products based on certain fractions of demolished concrete.
Novel methods for RA quality enhancement, as well as novel mix design and
mixing approaches, are one way to improve RA and RA-concrete quality. RA
quality can be enhanced by e.g. established thermal or microwave treatment, pre-
soaking treatment and by washing and chloride removal. Thermal treatments
cause a considerable reduction in the amount of cement paste or mortar adhering
to both the fine and the coarse aggregate particles. In concrete mix design and
mixing there are several methods to compensate the possibly unfavourable effects
7 (72)
of recycled aggregates on the concrete properties, e.g. so called equivalent mortar

volume method and two-stage mixing approach.
The use of RA together with other recycled materials in traditional cement based
or innovative new products is one option. The use of RA with fly ash
(FA)/classified FA/micronized FA, silica fume (SF), slag (SLG), other (recycled)
powder/micronized materials, brick powder, glass powder, rock powders and even
e.g. lime production waste is a way to widen the use of demolished concrete. RA
can also be used to produce low strength materials, as filling materials, including
ecological materials also totally without or with a minimum amount of cement.
Material technological possibilities are in all boundless and can also include other
C&D waste reuse.
In a concept, called ‘Closed Cycle Construction’, the processed materials are

being reused at a higher quality level and the quantity of waste that has to be
disposed of is minimised. The aim is to end up with a decontaminated mineral
aggregate fraction that can be reused in concrete and a decontaminated
combustible fraction that can be used as a fuel in the thermal processes. To be
able to close the material cycle for concrete completely, mixed C&D waste
streams will have to be separated and extensively purified. In order to gain enough
quality to reuse the different fractions, high quality raw materials must be
produced from concrete rubble.
Sustainability
The concept of sustainable development includes the judicious use of natural

resources. The use of these non-renewable resources, such as virgin aggregates,
needs to be reduced by recycling C&D waste, processed in such a way that it can
be used to replace virgin coarse or fine aggregate. This replacement reduces
natural resource consumption and allows for reduction in the volume of materials
disposed of in landfills. Recycled aggregate concrete, if satisfactory concrete
properties are achieved, can be an example of sustainable construction materials.
Sustainability goes beyond recycling. The sustainable use of materials in

construction requires consideration of e.g. natural resources and energy resources
as well as function and performance. In achieving performance it is essential that
the properties and characteristics of sustainable materials are properly understood
and they are not used as one-to-one replacement of traditional materials. The use
of recycled materials should be standardised in a flexible way to give engineers
usable ways for sustainable use of these materials. From the sustainability
standpoint it is important to develop more construction materials that incorporate
RA. This is of special importance for fine RA and low-quality coarse RA, which
have limited use in structural concrete. The use of sustainable materials, in
appropriate quantities and appropriate products, will help in reducing the socio-
economic impacts, waste and pollution in the concrete industry.
Other C&D waste reuse, e.g. in cement based materials
Also materials other than mineral C&D waste can be reused. This report includes
limited information on that area. C&D wastes such as gypsum/plasterboard,
mineral wool, expanded polystyrene, polyurethane, lightweight aggregate
8 (72)
concrete, aerated concrete, wood, plastics (mainly PVC), PVC-composites, mixed

plastics, window frames, floorings and glass are shortly reviewed.
Some non-mineral C&D wastes can also be reused in concrete or other cement
based products as grouts, mortars and lightweight products. For instance expanded
polystyrene (EPS) without or with preliminary heat treatment, polyurethane
(PUR) and also PVC can be used in lightweight cement based product. There is
also a possibility to reuse recycled aggregates made of lightweight concretes
(aerated concretes) in cement based products. Economical polymeric treatment of
concrete to increase the durability properties of concrete (PC, polymer concrete) is
possible by using melted recycled plastics. Recycled plastics can also be reused as
fibres in concrete. Application of glass in cement based products can be rewarding
since the high production volume of concrete materials can incorporate large
quantities of recycled glass, and the reuse of glass in cement based products has
been studied widely. In Finland the use of glass in cement based products is
minimal. However the use of micronized glass powders has been studied also in
Finland. Finely ground glass (< 45 µm, even < 10 µm) has pozzolanic properties
contributing to the cement based materials´ strength.
9 (72)
Contents
Preface ........................................................................................................................ 3
Executive summary ..................................................................................................... 4
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 10
2 Use of recycled aggregates/concrete aggregates (RA/RCA) in concrete ............. 11

2.1 General ......................................................................................................... 11
2.2 Effects of RC/RCA on recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) properties ......... 12
2.3 EN-standardisation and national specifications ............................................ 14
2.4 Performance based use - to widen the use of RA ......................................... 22
2.5 Challenges and new possibilities in using RA/RCA ...................................... 24
2.6 Quality enhancement .................................................................................... 28
2.7 Sustainability ................................................................................................. 32
3 RA/RCA with other (recycled) materials ............................................................... 32
4 Closed cycle reuse of C&D waste ........................................................................ 37
5 Recommendations for the use of RA/RCA ........................................................... 40
6 Possibilities and ideas for the reuse of other C&D wastes ................................... 43
6.1 Gypsum/plasterboards .................................................................................. 43
6.2 Mineral wool .................................................................................................. 47
6.3 Expanded polystyrene (EPS) ........................................................................ 49
6.4 Polyurethane (PUR) ...................................................................................... 50
6.5 Lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC) and Aerated concrete ................... 52
6.6 Wood ............................................................................................................ 52
6.7 Plastics (e.g. PVC) ........................................................................................ 53
6.8 Glass (window-, door-, etc.) .......................................................................... 62
7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 64
References ................................................................................................................ 65
10 (72)
1 Introduction
Research has already been done already a long time, more than 30 years, to
exploit the use of recycled materials as construction and demolition waste (C&D
waste) in new construction materials as e.g. in concrete. C&D waste is
increasingly seen as a valuable source of engineering materials for the
construction industry. However the percentage use of these materials is not at a
desired or sustainable level. There is also far too little knowledge of technically
realistic ways to reuse C&D waste. For instance designers do not know what
proportion of recycled aggregate should be specified in different concrete grades.
Besides it is not clear how big the sustainable advantage can be in different cases.
By far the biggest share of natural resource use stems from construction minerals,
i.e. aggregates such as sand, gravel, crushed rock and other bulk materials used by
the construction industry. They represent 40% of the Direct Material Inputs into
the European economy - mineral fuels represent 25%. Aggregates are important:
not only because of their resource intensity, but also because of environmental
impacts (drawn from LCA analysis), economic importance and, finally, because
they are predominantly a domestic natural resource.
In Finland the reuse of C&D waste e.g. in concrete is minimal. However, the use
of recycled aggregate (RA) and recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) in earth
construction is already more common and there are codes of practise and also
processes for the reuse of especially good enough quality RCA. [Rudus 2008, SFS
5884]
Also in e.g. U.S.A, the use of RCA is most common in earth or road
constructions:
o aggregate base course (road base)
o soil stabilization
o pipe bedding
o asphalt pavements
o landscape materials.
The USA Ready Mix concrete market is in its infancy stage with few recyclers
attempting a re-use strategy although confidence is gaining through the Build
Green program in U.S.A. In 2005 California wrote legislation mandating and
accepting the use of recycled concrete into new concrete. Generally, the American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) are national trendsetters. Their
specifications allowing for recycled aggregate use reinforces confidence in
recycled products.
This review deals mainly only technical issues, i.e. the effects of C&D waste, as
RA/RCA, on the technical properties of the products they are used in. The use of
RA/RCA in earth construction is not covered here, though being traditionally the
most feasible way to use it.
More closely this review includes basic information on

11 (72)
 the use of RA and RCA in concrete, i.e. Recycled Aggregate Concrete

(RAC), including information on e.g.:
o EU-standardisation and some national specifications,
o the main technical points and research needs on the use RA/RCA
in concrete,
o ways to widen the use of RA and RCA in concrete,
o how to improve RA/RCA quality,
o other value-added possibilities to reuse RA/RCA,
 the possible ways/ideas and value-added ways to reuse other C&D wastes
as (new ideas are needed in future)
o Gypsum/plasterboard,
o Insulation materials,
o Lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC) and Aerated concrete,
o Wood,
o Expanded polystyrene (EPS),
o Polyurethane (PUR),
o Plastics, e.g. PVC,
o Glass,
 some technical or sustainability based limits or problems in the reuse of
C&D wastes (should be considered closely in the future projects).
2 Use of recycled aggregates/concrete aggregates (RA/RCA)

in concrete
2.1 General
To some extent, the investigation on recycled waste concrete was initiated by
Glushge in Russia 1946 [Xiao et al. 2006]. In the following years, a large amount
of experimental works have been carried out worldwide to investigate the
recycling of waste concrete. Previous studies were mainly engaged in the
processing of demolished concrete, mix-proportion design, mechanical properties,
durability aspects and improvements. Recently, structural performances and
economic aspects of using recycled aggregate concrete are also analyzed.
There is today a lot of information and literature on the use of RA/RCA. Here
only some main conclusions are reviewed shortly. More comprehensive
information analysis with experimental and practical work is needed for the real
use of RA/RCA in actual concrete production. In less demanding and clearly
defined cases, the use of RCA may also be more straightforward – e.g. small
proportion of good quality RCA from a known source. (see References, e.g.:
[Kasai 2004, Ilker & Selim 2004, Levy & Helene 2004, Poon et al. 2004A &
2004B, Nagataki et al. 2004, Topcu & Sengel 2004, Shayan & Xu 2003, Katz
2003, Otzuki et al. 2003, Ajdukiewicz & Kliszczewicz 2002, Dhir and Paine
2004, Dhir et al. 1999, Sagoe-Crentsil et al. 2001, Topcu and Sengel 2004, Xiao et
al. 2006, Paine & Dhir 2010, Fathifazl et al. 2010]).
Concrete made with RCA is no longer merely a research field; it is already a

practical reality and has been used for some years in several countries which lead
the way in these matters [Evangelista & de Brito 2010]. The potential benefits and
drawbacks of using recycled aggregate in new concrete have been extensively
12 (72)
studied. Though it is fully possible to produce relatively good recycled aggregate

concrete (RAC), it is not easy to put the use of RCA into practise. The use of
more inhomogeneous Recycled Aggregates (RA) in concrete production, proved
to be even more challenging. RA can include e.g. more, even 100 %, crushed
brick.
High demands for concrete have been one clear obstacle for the reuse of
RA/RCA. Especially in Finland the demands for concrete durability are high.
There are anyway also possibilities to widen the use of RA/RCA in concrete. The
main point is to find a suitable demolition structure and concrete for a suitable
reuse. Powerful standardisation on the reuse of RA/RCA can help in this, but also
other ways are needed. There are also concretes and products, where RA/RCA can
fully compensate for natural aggregate in a sustainable way. Of course much
research is needed to find out the most practical and economical ways to reuse
RC/RCA in concrete. Knowledge is needed e.g. on the effect of crushing and
processing methods on the quality of RA/RCA and on the properties of concretes
including RA/RCA. There usually is a limit to the amount of RA/RCA in a certain
concrete, but with a low enough amount the effects on e.g. concrete strength
properties can also be in practise none or minimal.
Information (year 2005) on e.g. the research results and information on some
specifications and on the reuse of crushed concrete in concrete can be found in the
Finnish publication “Betonin, betonilietteen ja veden kierrätys betoniteollisuu-
dessa” (2005, in Finnish).
2.2 Effects of RC/RCA on recycled aggregate concrete

(RAC) properties
The effect of recycled aggregate (RC) or recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) on
fresh and hardened concrete properties are in optimal cases low or can also be
positive. Typically the effect of RA is more negative than the effect of RCA. In
general 10 – 20 % of good quality RCA is not a problem for concrete basic
properties.
The effect of RA/RCA is dependent on several factors and must be considered

closely. It is also possible to improve e.g. crushing and processing methods to
enhance RA/RCA quality or to use e.g. additional materials, such as silica fume or
other fine materials, and also novel methods to improve crushed aggregate
quality, especially surface and water absorption properties. (see Chapters 1.4 –
1.6)
Clean graded RCA may contain foreign materials that alter fresh and hardened
concrete performance together with chemical impurities. Fine aggregates are
generally more susceptible to contaminants than the coarse fraction. The typical
effect of contaminants on hardened concrete properties is volume instability.
[Sagoe-Crentsil & Brown 1998]
The main or typical effects of conventional RA/RCA on concrete properties are

[Betonin, betonilietteen ja veden kierrätys betoniteollisuudessa 2005]:
13 (72)
o RC/RCA water absorption is high compared with natural aggregate (5 – 10

times),
o Concrete mix water demand is higher and thus the needed amount of
plasticizer without loosing workability is higher.
o Especially high amount of RA/RCA, > 50 %, may cause problems with
concrete workability and/or loss of workability after mixing.
o Especially the amount of fine RA/RCA (maximum aggregate size less than
2 – 4 mm) must be low enough.
o Moisture content of RA/RCA (oven dry – saturated surface dry) may also
have an effect on transition zone (paste/aggregate) strength and thus also
on concrete strength properties.
o The effect of moisture content of RA/RCA on fresh and hardened concrete
is not similar as the effect of moisture content of natural aggregate.
o It may be difficult to maintain steady RA/RCA moisture content during
concrete production,
o Optimal production procedures will help to deal with RA/RCA moisture
content and so called two-phase-mixing may also be beneficial.
o The effect of RA/RCA on concrete strength is in relation to
o the initial strength of the demolition waste - it is also possible to
obtain recycled concrete with higher compressive strength than the
original one,
o the amount of RA/RCA in concrete, and
o the amount of mortar phase in RA/RCA – processing methods in
RA/RCA production will decide the mortar amount,
o gradation and amount of < 4 mm material in RA/RCA.
o If the amount of good and optimal graded (coarse) RCA is less then 20 -
30 %, the effect on concrete strength can be small.
o The porosity of RCA has been found to reduce in long term (e.g. by 45%
between 28 days and 5 years when for natural aggregate concrete this
reduction is smaller, e.g. 7% [Kou et al. 2011]). This is because RCA can
improve the long-term interfacial properties of the new concrete probably
due to the long term self cementing effects of the old cement mortar and
the interaction of the new cement paste and the old cement mortar.
o Also strength properties have been found to increase for RCA concrete
more than for natural aggregate concrete with long hydration time (see
Figure 1). In particular the splitting tensile strength of RAC concrete may
increase. RCA may improve the microstructure of the interfacial transition
zone (ITZ) and increase the bond strength between the new cement paste
and the old aggregates after continuous hydration. [Kou et al. 2011].
o High strength will be decreased more by RA/RCA than low strength, i.e.
RA/RCA is more suitable for low grade concretes.
o There are ways to increase strength, e.g. by treating RCA by silica slurry -
concretes with 50 – 80 MPa strength has been produced by this way
[Ajdukiewicz & Kliszczewicz 2002, Shauyan & Xu 2003, Poon et al.
2004B].
o Typically RA/RCA will decrease elastic modulus and increase creep and
shrinkage (e.g. 10 – 30 %), but this is very case-specific - high amount of
fine RCA is unfavourable.
o Water absorption is usually increased by RA/RCA, but with small amount
(20 – 30 %) of RC/RCA it can also be smaller because of e.g. optimal
gradation and pozzolanic effect [Levy & Helene 2004. Kasai 2004],
14 (72)
o With the same water-cement ratio (w/c) chloride penetration and

carbonation are normally higher when RA/RCA is introduced.
o Carbonation can also be lower with RCA (< 50 % of all aggregate), if
cement content is increased at the same time – there may also be some
´alkalinity reserve´ with RCA because of the cement paste proportion in
RCA [Otsuki et al. 2003, Levy & Helene 2004].
o It is not possible to produce frost resistant concrete with RCA if it has
been produced by crushing a low frost resistant concrete grade. A low
proportion of mortar in RCA will help but only by using high frost
resistant concrete in the production of RCA has it been possible to produce
frost resistant concrete [Kasai 2004].
Figure 1. Strength increases and porosity reduction in concretes from

28 days to 5 years. CC = Control Concrete, RA-C = Recycled Aggregate Concrete
and RCA-C = Recycled Concrete Aggregate Concrete. [Kou et al. 2011]
2.3 EN-standardisation and national specifications

Information in the Finnish publication “Betonin, betonilietteen ja veden kierrätys
betoniteollisuudessa” (2005, in Finnish) includes some information up to year
2005 on standardisation and specifications on the reuse of RA/RCA in concrete
[Rilem Recommendation 1994, Kasai 2004, BS 8500-1:2002, BS 8500-2:2002].
Some information and specifications are reproduced below.
Updated EN-standardisation and general Finnish specifications on the use of

recycled aggregates in concrete are also reviewed below.
According to [EN 206-1] (Concrete. Specification, performance, production and

conformity) aggregates for concrete are according to [EN 12620 + A1]
(Aggregates for concrete). [EN 12620 + A1] specifies the properties of aggregates
and filler aggregates obtained by processing natural, manufactured or recycled
materials and mixtures of these aggregates for use in concrete.
Recycled aggregate are aggregates resulting from the processing of inorganic

material previously used in construction. [EN 12620 + A1] covers recycled
aggregate with densities between 1500 – 2000 kg/m3 with appropriate caveats and
recycled fine aggregate (4 mm) with appropriate caveats [EN 12620 + A1].
15 (72)
In general, harmful substances are not allowed and all aggregates should be
suitable for the intended use of concrete.
Amendment A1 (2008) [EN 12620 + A1] introduces clauses for recycled

aggregates. The clauses call up new test methods:
 [EN 933-11. 2009]. Tests for geometrical properties of aggregates.
Part 11: Classification test for the constituents of coarse recycled
aggregate and [SFS-EN 933-11/AC] (Corrigendum AC to the standard
EN 933-11 - Modification to Annex A: Additive to the test procedure for
low proportions of floating particles)
 [EN 1744-5. 2006]. Tests for chemical properties of aggregates. Part 5:
Determination of acid soluble chloride salts.
 [EN 1744-6. 2006]. Tests for chemical properties of aggregates. Part 6:
Determination of the influence of recycled aggregate extract on the initial
setting time of cement.
 [EN 1367-4. 2008]. Tests for thermal and weathering properties of
aggregates. Part 4: Determination of drying shrinkage.
In more rare circumstances, it is possible that recycled aggregate can contain

expansive material such as un-slaked lime. Currently it is not possible to give
requirements as no test methods are available [EN 12620 + A1].
For unfamiliar materials from secondary sources, however, the work on

standardisation has only started recently (2008) and more time is needed to define
clearly the origins and characteristics of these materials. In the meantime such
unfamiliar materials when placed on the market as aggregates must comply fully
with EN 12620 and national regulations for dangerous substances (see Annex ZA
of EN 12620) depending upon their intended use. Additional characteristics and
requirements may be specified on a case by case basis depending upon experience
of use of the product, and defined in specific contractual documents.
The proportions of constituent materials in coarse recycled aggregate shall be

determined in accordance with [EN 933-11 & AC] and shall be declared in
relevant categories [EN 12620 + A1]. These categories are presented in Table 1.
The constituents in these categories are:
 Rc = Concrete, concrete products, mortar, Concrete masonry units,
 Ru = Unbound aggregate, natural stone and hydraulically bound
aggregate,
 Rb = Clay masonry units (i.e. bricks and tiles), Calcium silicate masonry
units, Aerated non-floating concrete,
 Ra = Bituminous materials,
 FL = Floating material in volume
 X = Other: Cohesive (i.e. clay and soil), Miscellaneous: metals (ferrous
and non-ferrous), non-floating wood, plastic and rubber, Gypsum plaster
 Rg = Glass
16 (72)
Table 1. Categories for constituents of coarse recycled aggregates [EN 12620 +

A1.
Constituent Content [w. %] Category
≥90 Rc90
≥80 Rc80
Rc ≥70 Rc70
≥50 Rc50
<50 RcDeclared
No requirement RcNR
≥90 Rcu90
≥95 Rcu95
Rc + Ru ≥70 Rcu70
≥50 Rcu50
<50 RcuDeclared
No requirement RcuNR
≤10 Rb10-
≤30 Rb30-
Rb ≤50 Rb50-
>50 RbDeclared
No requirement RbNR
≤1 Ra1-
Ra ≤5 Ra5-
≤10 Ra10-
≤0.5 XRg0.5-
X + Rg ≤1 XRg1-
≤2 XRg2-
3
Content [cm /kg]
a)
≤0.2 FL0.2-
FL ≤2 FL2-
≤5 FL5-
a) The ≤0.2 category is intended only for special applications
requiring high quality surface finish
There are also other standardisation for aggregates:

 EN 13043. Aggregates for bituminous mixtures and surface treatments for
roads, airfields and other trafficked areas.
 EN 13055-1. Lightweight aggregates - Part 1 : Lightweight aggregates for
concrete, mortar and grout.
 prEN 13055-2. Lightweight aggregates - Part 2 : Lightweight aggregates
for unbound and bound applications.
 EN 13139. Aggregates for mortar.
 prEN 13242 .Aggregates for unbound and hydraulically bound materials
for use in civil engineering work and road construction.
 EN 13383-1. Armourstone - Part 1: Specification.
 prEN 13450. Aggregates for railway ballast.
Today there are separate EN-standards for each end use (see above) – concrete,
mortar, asphalt, etc. This is sensible as each end use faces its own particular
challenges and issues. E.g. drying shrinkage of aggregate is important for concrete
but meaningless for asphalt. However each end use also faces some very similar
issues. The committees responsible for aggregate Standards have been working
recently to establish if these differences are necessary, or if a more consistent
approach can be adopted. E.g. it is likely, that coarse/fine split will be
17 (72)
standardised at 4 mm, and many grading requirements will become common to

several end users (today 4 mm only for concrete, and 2 mm for asphalt and
6.3 mm for pipe bedding). Thus the stockpiling and administrative burdens on
aggregate producers will be reduced. Also conformity criteria for aggregate are
under review. More practical standards will result. In the future there will be the
next generation of EN standards for aggregates. [Lay 2009]
In several countries there are already additional specifications for the use of RAC
(RA) in concrete. In these national specifications guidelines and quality assurance
systems for the use of recycled aggregate in concrete are given. In all, there is still
a lot to do, to get RAC efficiently in use. Especially the use of RA is today
limited. Practical guidelines are needed. Too elaborate systems will not enhance
the use of recycled aggregates. Especially for the most undemanding cases there
should be straightforward ways to use RA/RCA in concrete production.
The use of recycled aggregates can consist of two phases:

1. demands for RA classes and
2. guidelines for the use of specified RA classes.
In practice RA class or quality is determined by:

 where the RA mainly comes from (surplus concrete/elements from new
production, bridges - relatively high strength but possibly chlorides, high
strength structures, demolition of normal housing constructions, brick and
tile structures, mixed C&D material,
 how RA has been processed (crushing, sieving, washing, heating, etc.)
If the specification for the use of RA in concrete is based on RA classification, the

use of a specific RA-class should include at least:
 maximum concrete strength class (e.g. ≤C16/20, ≤C40/50),
 allowable application, i.e. exposure classes according to [EN 206-1] and
possible demanded additional testing (frost/ frost-salt resistance, effects on
e.g. air pore structure or shrinkage, alkali-silica-reactivity) and
 maximum proportion in total aggregate (e.g. ≤ 20 %).
A comparative analysis of the existing standards and specifications relating to the

use of recycled aggregates in place of natural (primary) aggregates is presented in
[Gonçalves & Brito 2010]. The countries included in this comparison are Brazil,
Germany, Hong-Kong, Japan, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Portugal, Belgium,
Switzerland, Denmark, Russia and Spain. In addition, the RILEM TC 121-DRG
recommendation [RILEM Recommendation 1994] is included, where two
different philosophies were identified.
The first and more simplistic way of regulating the use of recycled
aggregates in concrete production consists of establishing limits, both in
the incorporation ratio of recycled aggregates and in the use of the
concrete, to ensure that the resulting concrete basically maintains the
properties of conventional concrete.
The second viewpoint assumes that there are, in fact, differences between
the performance of conventional concrete and that of the corresponding
RAC, and that corrective coefficients are provided that allow concretes
with the same strength class to be compared so as to adjust the design of
structural elements in which recycled aggregates are used.
18 (72)
The analysis of the limits stipulated for harmful substances shows that organic
materials are between 0.5 % and 1 %, with the exception of the Brazilian standard
(2%) - the explanation for this is that only non-structural recycled aggregate
concrete is allowed. [Gonçalves & Brito 2010]
The range of materials considered in the different standards varies considerably,

although glass, gypsum, plastics, timber, paper and bituminous material are
normally among those included.
When filler is mentioned, the maximum filler content is smaller the stricter the
requirements of the application for which the aggregates are proposed. Filler can
significantly impair the mechanical properties of concrete, because it tends to
include materials such as clay particles.
The minimum density allowed for RCA is typically between 2000 to 2200 kg/m3.
Water absorption of the recycled aggregates is a function of their density. For

RCA the maximum water absorption values fall between 7% and 10%.
When there is no limitation on the density or the water absorption of the

aggregates it is assumed that the demands made for the aggregate composition are
enough to ensure the quality of the aggregates.
The maximum content allowed for chlorides and sulfates is usually stated in the
normative documents. If no values are stipulated a reference is normally made to
the need to specify a value through a case-by-case analysis.
The maximum authorised content of sulfates varies from 0.8% and 1.0%
of aggregates (in mass).
For chlorides the range of values is much wider, changing according to the
demand level of the use, even within the same standard. For structural
concrete, values between 0.03% and 0.05% are common, usually
associated with RCA because they are the most suitable recycled
aggregates for this type of application. The Brazilian standard allows
much higher amounts of chlorides because it does not envisage the use of
recycled aggregates in structural concrete.
The normative documents define also the allowable use of the specified RA/RCA.
This includes:
the maximum replacement of natural with recycled aggregates (mainly
only coarse but in some cases also fine recycled aggregates),
conditions of the use (conforming with EN 206-1, e.g. only non-structural
concrete, only non-aggressive environments and/or specified
environmental conditions/classes, etc.), and
the highest strength class for each case.
For instance the maximum replacement ratio of natural with coarse RCA can be
20 – 35 % in a 30 MPa structural concrete, and as much as 100% in a 15 MPa
non-structural concrete. The replacement ratio can also be e.g. 100 % in a 40 MPa
concrete if the use is in a non-aggressive environment. In relation to
environmental conditions, all standards generally aim at applications subject only
19 (72)
to non-aggressive conditions, and they are especially careful in terms of chemical

attacks. Pre-stressed concrete is outside the scope of most standards.
Below is assorted information on some selected specifications or draft

specifications for the use of RA/RCA in concrete. [By 43 2008, RILEM
Recommendation. 1994, Kasai 2004, Betonin, betonilietteen ja veden kierrätys
betoniteollisuudessa 2005, Sagoe-Crentsil & Brown 1998, Gonçalves & Brito
2010]
Finland
Concrete production in Finland is according to EN 206-1 (Betoni. Osa 1:

Määrittely, ominaisuudet, valmistus ja vaatimustenmukaisuus) and aggregates are
according to standard EN 12620 (Betonikiviainekset) (see above).
In Finland there is a national specification on the use of aggregate in concrete:

By 43 (Betonin kiviainekset 2008) [By 43 2008]. In this specification the use of
recycled aggregate is allowed. If recycled aggregates are used, it must be proven
beforehand that the recycled aggregate is suitable for the specific intended use.
Relevant preliminary testing is needed. Requirements on RA/RCA can be set
based on the standard [EN 12620 + A1] (Aggregates for concrete).
There is a need for a specification for the use of RA/RCA in Finland. Without this
kind of more or less comprehensive national instructions the use of recycled
aggregates in concrete will be unsound and very limited also in the future.
National specifications should be based on local climatic conditions, and all the
other local circumstances. The aim should be value-added sustainable application
of recycled aggregates. Also the use of RA in wider applications should be studied
and promoted. Considerable attention is required to the control of construction
and demolition waste processing and subsequent sorting, crushing, separation and
grading of aggregates for use in concrete, and possibly also in other materials,
especially cement based materials.
RILEM
RILEM has given RILEM TC 121-DRG recommendation on the use of RA/RCA

already in 1994 [RILEM Recommendation 1994]. This specification classes
different categories of recycled coarse aggregates and indicates the scope of
application for concrete containing these recycled aggregate classes in terms of
acceptable environmental exposure classes and concrete strength classes. There is
no specification for the fine fraction, since recycled sand has to meet the
requirements of natural sand. Recycled coarse aggregates are classed as
 type I – aggregates which are implicitly understood to originate
primarily from masonry rubble,
 type II – aggregates which are implicitly understood to originate
primarily from concrete rubble,
 type III – aggregates which are implicitly understood to consist of a
blend of recycled aggregates and natural aggregates; the composition
shall have at least 80% natural aggregates and up to 10% type I
aggregate.
20 (72)
Japan
In [Kasai 2004] there is information on the Japanese guideline ”TR A006 2000 –
Concrete using recycled aggregate”. The main principle is that the mortar
component will decrease quality and this becomes evident as higher water
absorption when the mortar content is increased.
In [Kasai 2004] a technical regulation “TR A006 (2000) Concrete using recycled
aggregate” is reviewed. Classification is based on the amount of mortar. The
mortar phase increases water absorption. With a higher mortar amount, the quality
of recycled aggregate is lowered. The amount of absorption should be less than
7 % for coarce aggregate and less than 10 % for fine aggregate. This regulation
includes also the methods for quality control.
In Japan the use of recycled aggregate is recommended only for concrete without
frost attack. The amount of RA is determined by each case. It can be 100 % of
coarce aggregate, or 50 % of both coarce and fine aggregate can be recycled.
When the amount of recycled aggregate is less than 30 %, the effects on concrete
strength and other properties are normally considered small [Kasai 2004].
United Kingdom
The use of RCA in the UK (2005) is presented shortly in [Betonin, betonilietteen

ja veden kierrätys betoniteollisuudessa 2005]. Some information is presented also
in Chapter 2.4 below.
In some concretes any amount of RCA is possible in UK. For instance low grade
flooring (small garages) with no reinforcement and some pavement curbs can
include high amounts of RCA. In other allowable cases the amount of RCA is
usually limited to 20 % of total aggregate, though also 30 % has often only minor
effects on especially the critical concrete properties in low exposure classes.
Australia (1998)
The project report [Sagoe-Crentsil & Brown 1998] presents draft guidelines for
specifying commercially produced RCA for pre-mix concrete production based on
product variability trials. A quality assurance systems was also created on the
supply and utilisation of RCA in relation to existing product standards in
Australia.
This outlined technical information only applies to coarse RCA produced from
clean uncontaminated crushed concrete (particle density >2100 kg/m3, including
< 2 % of brick, stony material or other forms of contaminants). Physical
contaminant levels typically less than 2% were achievable under existing
manufacturing practices. The need for assessing chemical contaminant levels was
recommended. Such contaminants have the potential to alter concrete rheology,
setting characteristics and concrete durability.
Class 1 RCA was deemed to be suitable for production of plain unreinforced and
reinforced concrete up to and including 40 MPa concrete, with no mandatory
limits on RCA substitution levels. Extra care must be taken to ensure satisfactory
21 (72)
compliance to acceptance criteria based on standard deviation of compressive

strength test results.
The issue of concrete durability was considered of great concern in respect of

chemical contaminants such as sulphur-based residues that can induce deleterious
expansive reactions as well as impact of chloride contaminants on the corrosion of
embedded steel reinforcement. Medium and long-term field durability tests were
recommended.
Table 2. Properties of Recycled Concrete Aggregates (RCA) [Sagoe-Crentsil &

Brown 1998] (Australia).
RCA Property Class 1 RCA Test method
Particle Density s.s.d(min) 2100 kg/m3 AS 1141. 6
3
Bulk density(min) 1200 kg/m AS 1141.4
Water Absorption (max) 6% AS 1141. 6
Aggregate Crushing Value
30% AS 1141.21
(max)
Total Impurity level(max) 2% -
LOI(max) 5% -
Lost substances in washing
1% -
(max)
Particle size distribution by
AS 1141.11
dry sieving
AS 1141.3.1 -1996: Sampling of aggregates
AS 1141.4 -1996: Bulk density of aggregates
AS 1141.6.2 -1996: Particle density and water absorption of aggregates
AS 1141.11 -1996: Particle size distribution by dry sieving
AS 1141.21 -1997: Aggregate crushing value
AS 2758.1 - 1985 Concrete Aggregates
AS 3600 -1994: Concrete Structures
Switzerland
Swiss documents published in 2006 (Ot 70085 (Objective technique, in French),

Instruction technique. Utilisation de mate´riaux de construction mine´raux
secondaires dans la construction d’abris) create a wide range of applications for
recycled aggregates, with different approaches depending on user demands. This
variety allows a large amount of recycled aggregate utilisation. This permits both
a scenario where a small quantity of recycled aggregates is incorporated (mostly
up to 20%), with no changes in the structural design, and a scenario where a larger
amount of recycled aggregates is incorporated (up to 100%), with the respective
design changes regarding modulus of elasticity, creep and shrinkage. [Gonçalves
& Brito 2010]
22 (72)
2.4 Performance based use - to widen the use of RA

Performance based specifications means fitness for purpose rather that conven-
tional prescriptive specifications.
Introduction – specification in UK (BS 8500-2:2006)
In the UK Recycled Aggregate Concrete (RCA) is specified in BS 8500-2:2006

for use in concrete up to the strength class of C40/50 (minimum characteristic
cube strength 50 MPa) and exposure classes:
o X0 e.g. inside structures with very low air humidity,
o XC1-4 all structures with only carbonation exposure (CO2 in air), both
wet, dry and cyclic wet conditions,
o DC1 structures exposed to airborne chlorides in moderate humidity,
o XF1 vertical concrete surfaces exposed to rain and freezing but with
only moderate water saturation and without deicing agent (salt).
Recycled Aggregate (RA) that does not meet the requirements for RCA may have
a wide range of composition, for example:
 a mixture of 94 % crushed concrete and 6 % crushed brick, and
 100 % crushed brick, are both considered to be RA.
Concerns expressed in the national specification in the UK (BS 8500-2:2006)

mean that it is not possible to permit the use of RA for a given type of concrete
without the need for additional provisions in the specification. With these
restrictions in place, ready-mixed concrete suppliers have informed that it is not
viable to stock RA. This problem is emphasized because RA often contains over
80% of unbound stone, but this may not be used in concrete because of masonry
contents of e.g. 10 % by mass. [Paine & Dhir 2010]
Alternative route – performance based use of recycled aggregate
In [Paine & Dhir 2010] an alternative route for specifying RA for use in concrete
is studied and presented. It overcomes concerns regarding potential variability
through reference to the properties of the aggregate, as opposed to the
composition.
Although the use of crushed concrete (Rc) and/or crushed brick (Rb) in concrete
led usually to lower concrete performance than concrete mixes prepared with
natural aggregates, the loss in performance could be correlated to appropriate
properties of the aggregate:
 LA coefficient – determination of the resistance to fragmentation
[EN 1097-2:1998]
 aggregate water absorption,
 density and
 drying shrinkage.
Consequently, the limits on RA properties in order to produce RA concrete with

similar performance to that of natural aggregate concrete (w/c correction factor
> 0.9) can be given as those shown in the centre data column of Table 3. Of
course, higher or lower relative concrete performance can be given by imposing
more or less strict requirements on w/c ratio correction (for example 0.95 or 0.8,
23 (72)
respectively). The relevant limits for these corrections are also shown in Table 3,
and the three limits given could be proposed as three classes of RA: A, B and C.
This classification of RA should permit a wider use of RAs in higher-value
applications than the current compositional limits in UK and in BS 8500.
Table 3. Recycled aggregate performance requirements in order to achieve

concrete within a given w/c correction factor range of natural gravel concrete.
[Paine & Dhir 2010]
Based on the results in [Paine & Dhir 2010], Table 4 provides a tentative list of
environments in which it can be assumed that these three classes of RA could be
used. For example, it can be suggested that RA meeting class A is suitable for a
range of exposure conditions, including use in concrete exposed to carbonation
(up to XC-4), sulfate conditions (up to D-2) and other aggressive agents. In
addition, it is tentatively suggested that due to the low water absorption value, RA
meeting class A will be suitable for use in the least aggressive chloride (XD and
XS) environments because performance is similar to that of natural aggregate.
Recycled aggregate meeting class B would be suitable for use in fewer exposure
conditions, but could be used in concrete exposed to e.g. carbonation (XC-4).
Recycled aggregate meeting class C has very low requirements and therefore
would only be suitable for use in concrete exposed to e.g. moderate levels of
carbonation (XC-2).
24 (72)
Table 4. Performance-related aggregate requirements for the three proposed

classes of coarse RA and permissible forms of concrete based on exposure
conditions (in UK). [Paine & Dhir 2010]
It was also possible to separate the combinations of aggregate into classes that
would perform to a given requirement if suitable practical considerations were
taken into account, for example slight adjustments to the water-cement ratio, as
recommended elsewhere [Dhir et al. 1999]. This in turn should encourage the
development of sustainable use of all C&D waste. It is recommended that further
works should be done so that e.g. the proposed classification for the RA can be
strengthened for its adoption in practice.
2.5 Challenges and new possibilities in using RA/RCA

Recycled aggregate (RA) is well acknowledged as having a poorer quality due to
its higher porosity resulted from cement mortar remains attaching to its surface
that hampers the recycling rate of concrete waste. The mortar percentage used in
RCA is normally 30% for gravel between 16 and 32 mm and 60% for gravel
between 4 and 8 mm. This means that RCA may contain as much as 40% of
mortar, which would accordingly affect such deformation properties of RCAs as
elasticity, creep, and shrinkage. [Topçu & Şengel 2003]
Many researches have recorded reduction in strength for concrete made with RA.
As a result, the use of RA is mainly confined to low-grade applications. In
research by [Xiao et al. 2006] an experimental database was developed with
regard to the main mechanical properties of RAC. It is based on a large number of
25 (72)
experimental results published worldwide in literature from 1985 to 2004. It was

found that the interrelationships between the mechanical properties of RAC could
be different from those of normal concrete. The found differences are not at all
absolutely any obstacle for the use of RCA, but it means, that the conditions of
recycled aggregate and the mix proportion adopted are complicated and more
knowledge and experience is needed. A single statistical regression analysis was
not considered to be fully sufficient and further studies were recommended.
Although it may be sustainable to use RA, the current legislation and experience,
however, are not sufficient to support and encourage recycling of demolished
concrete waste.
European standardization has made it far easier to specify recycled aggregates.

Also many application issues have been resolved and satisfactory use has been
demonstrated in a variety of concretes. Still the use of recycled aggregate in
concrete is relatively rare. There are three main reasons for that [Lay 2009]:
1. overall economics – direct costs can also be unfavourable
2. chicken-and-egg situation of steady supply of suitable aggregates –
aggregate producers do not want to build up large stock of recycled
aggregate for concrete since there is no market and concrete producers
cannot plan to make recycled aggregate concrete without the security of
large supplies.
3. Other end uses are far more tolerant than concrete of the inevitable
contaminants in RA.
Technical problems may include:

 high content of cement paste/mortar (see Figure 2),
 weak interfacial transition zones between cement paste and aggregate,
 porosity and traverse cracks within demolished concrete,
 high level of sulphate,
 high levels of chlorides,
 impurity,
 poor grading,
 high variations in quality [Tam et al. 2007].
Figure 2. RCA aggregate grains including different proportions of cement

paste/mortar and natural aggregate. Also the properties of these RCA grains are
different (density, water absorption, amounts of impurities as chlorides or
sulphates). [Sánchez de Juan & Gutiérrez 2009]
26 (72)
Fine RCA
Though with coarse RCA even high-strength concrete is nowadays a possible

goal, the fine fraction of RCA is believed to risk the final properties of concrete
because of e.g. high water absorption. Many references quote their detrimental
influence on the most important characteristics of concrete: compressive and
tensile strength; modulus of elasticity; water absorption; shrinkage; carbonation
and chloride penetration. The results of several studies have caused the existing
codes concerning recycled aggregates for concrete production to strongly limit the
use of fine RCA. [Evangelista & de Brito 2010, Evangelista & de Brito 2007]
In [Evangelista & de Brito 2007 & 2010] results on an experimental study are
presented on the use of fine recycled concrete aggregates as partial or global
replacements of natural fine aggregates in the production of structural concrete.
The experimental results indicate that it is possible to produce concrete made with
fine recycled concrete aggregates suitable for structural concrete, considering that:
o < 30% replacement ratios can give good results in favourable cases,
o both tensile splitting and modulus of elasticity are reduced with the
increase of the replacement ratio; however, the values were still
acceptable, especially for reasonable levels of the replacement ratio (30%),
o the abrasion resistance seems to increase with the replacement of fine
natural with fine recycled concrete aggregates,
o considering the acceptable mechanical behaviour and the fact that some
structures are not affected by durability issues (e.g. concrete elements
protected from natural aggressive agents), concrete fine RCA can be a
useful source of material and could potentially replace fine natural
aggregate in some concrete mixes [Evangelista & de Brito 2010].
It should be noted that fine RCA used in [Evangelista & de Brito 2007] was
obtained from concrete mixes especially produced in laboratory, which led to
controlled crushing and sieving of RCA. Also the concrete used to produce the
fine RCA was made with normal hydration speed cement (CEMtype II), that takes
longer to fully hydrate, and therefore affected also compressive strength
development of RCA-concrete it was used in. It is expected that fine RCA
obtained from old field structures would behave differently, i.e. with smaller
effect on strength development. Also RCA obtained from field structures likely
have particles from debris that might reduce their performance. Nevertheless, the
careful extraction of fine RCA from precast concrete elements would avoid such
problems.
RCA powder
Self-compacting concrete (SCC) must show both high fluidity and good
cohesiveness at the same time. Fine powder materials are very useful in SCCs. In
[Corinaldesi & Moriconi 2011 A] several SCC mixes were prepared by using
either powder from recycled concrete or limestone powder, and also different kind
of fibres. In [Corinaldesi & Moriconi 2011 B] either recycled aggregate powder,
limestone powder or fly ash was used.
A powder obtained from the recycling process of old concrete was employed.
This process mainly consists of crushing concrete waste from building demolition
27 (72)
and collecting the material passing through a suitable sieve. In this case 0.150 mm
sieve was used. This recycled concrete powder had a Blaine fineness of 0.73 m2/g
and specific gravity of 2150 kg/m3. Its chemical composition is presented in
Table 5. SEM images of rubble powder and limestone powder are presented in
Figure 3.
On the basis of the rheological tests on cement pastes, the rubble powder proved
to be the most effective mineral addition. All concretes, which were prepared for
manufacturing thin pre-cast elements with fibres, met both the self compaction
requirements while fresh, and the mechanical requirement of 45 MPa when
hardened. Excellent performances were generally obtained, particularly for the
self compacting concretes prepared with powder from recycled concrete and steel
fibres. The use of recycled concrete powder instead of limestone powder seemed
to be promising, particularly in terms of fresh concrete flowability, even if a
higher tendency to shrink was detected when recycled concrete powder was used
with polymeric fibres.
Table 5. Chemical composition and fineness of materials passing the sieve 0.150
mm (sieve ASTM No. 100) [Corinaldesi & Moriconi 2011 A].
Figure 3. SEM images of rubble powder and limestone powder [Corinaldesi &
Moriconi 2011 A].
28 (72)
Contaminating materials (crushed clay brick, crushed ceramic tile, crushed waste
glass, wood chips, etc.)
In Hong Kong, the use of recycled concrete aggregates for preparing concrete
products has been successfully implemented and gaining wider acceptance.
However, the allowable level of contaminating materials (e.g., crushed clay brick,
crushed ceramic tile, crushed waste glass, wood chips, etc.) in the recycled
concrete aggregate, in the current specifications, is very low (<1%) due to
stringent quality control standards that are usually adopted from specifications for
raw materials. This significantly increases the sorting efforts at construction sites
and recycling plants and limits the types of construction waste that can be
considered recyclable. [Poon & Chan 2007]
In [Poon & Chan 2007] it was investigated (Hong Kong Polytechnic University)
how paving plock properties were affected, if they were made with RCA
contaminated by other waste materials. Four types of materials were used as
contaminants: (1) crushed clay brick, (2) crushed tile, (3) crushed waste glass, and
(4) wood chips. These materials were blended together to replace a maximum of
10% of the recycled concrete aggregate in the production of the paving blocks.
The used RCA was obtained from a C&D waste recycling facility in Hong Kong.
Only the recycled fine (<5 mm) aggregate was used (oven-dry density 2093
kg/m3). The results of this study reveal a possible increase in the allowable
contamination level in recycled concrete aggregate in the production of paving
blocks. The requirements for paving blocks are somewhat different in different
countries, but it may be possible to meet the standards by adjusting the aggregate-
cement ratio or with the use of additional cementitious materials such as fly ash in
the mixes. The high water absorption value of the contaminated paving blocks is a
problem for countries where freezing and thawing do occur. Also, more research
efforts are required to determine the influence of the variability of the
contaminations on the properties and durability of the concrete products.
2.6 Quality enhancement

The major effects on the quality of RA is the large amount of cement mortar that
remains on the surface of the aggregate, resulting in higher porosity, water
absorption rates and thus a weaker interfacial zone between new cement mortar
and aggregates, which weakens the strength and mechanical performance of
concrete made from RA. [Tam et al 2007] This can be improved by many
methods, as detailed in the next sub-sections.
Two-stage RAC mixing approach
The effects for the two-stage mixing approach (TSMA) can be attributed to the
porous nature of recycled aggregate, and hence pores and cracks can be
successfully filled up during the pre-mixing process, yielding denser concrete,
improved interfacial zones around recycled aggregate and thus a higher strength in
comparison with concrete using traditional mixing approaches. The two-stage
mixing approach is thus intended to improve recycled aggregate concrete quality
and to lower its strength variability.
29 (72)
In order to improve the quality of RAC, a mixing method: two-stage mixing

approach (TSMA) was developed by [Tam et al. 2005]. It divides the mixing
process into two parts and proportionally splits the required water into two parts
which are added after mixing one part with fine and coarse aggregate and cement;
while the normal mixing approach only puts all the ingredients of concrete
together and mix them directly. Improvement of strength can be achieved up to
21 % for 20% of RA under 28-day curing conditions using TSMA as recorded by
[Tam et al. 2005].
Optimisation of RA substitution is modelled in [Tam et al. 2005]. Around 25–

40% of RA substitution is found to be most favourable in using TSMA. Further,
around 50–70% of RA replacement can also give some improvement although the
enhancements are less significant when compared with that of 25–40%.
Use of additional materials
Quality enhancement with the use of additional materials, e.g. fly ash and silica
fume, is discussed in Chapter 3 below.
Mix design - Equivalent mortar volume (EMV) method
The shear behaviour and strength of concrete beams made with coarse RCA was
studied experimentally in [Fathifazl et al. 2010]. The distinguishing feature of the
beams is the manner in which their concrete mixture is proportioned. A new
method of concrete mixture proportioning is used: Equivalent mortar volume
method (EMV). The results show that the shear performance of reinforced RCA-
concrete beams is comparable, or even superior, to that of beams made entirely
with natural aggregates at both the serviceability and ultimate limit states. The
current Canadian Standards Association, American Concrete Institute and
Eurocode provisions (Eurocode 2) for shear design can be used without any
modification to design recycled concrete aggregate-concrete beams, provided the
new mixture proportioning method is used.
In this new mix design method, the composition of RCA-concrete is made to be

similar to that of a companion conventional concrete, and the resulting RCA-
concrete will have equal or superior short- and long-term mechanical and physical
properties to conventional concrete. This equivalent mortar volume method
(EMV) takes into account the properties and volumetric ratios of the residual
mortar and natural aggregate in RCA. The important feature of the method is that
the residual mortar and natural aggregate components of RCA are treated as part
of the total mortar and total natural aggregate content, respectively, of the RCA-
concrete mix. This means, that total coarse aggregate volume is determined by
adding the fresh or virgin aggregate volume to the volume of the natural aggregate
in RCA. Similarly, its total mortar content is determined by adding the fresh
mortar volume to the residual mortar volume in RCA. [Fathifazl et al. 2010]
Also earlier results by Fathifazl et al. (2009) have shown that using the proposed
EMV-method, unlike the conventional method, yields concrete mixes with
consistent, predictable, and comparable properties to those of similar mixes made
with natural aggregates. [Fathifazl et al. 2009]
30 (72)
Heat treatment
[Larbi et al. 2000] studied the effectiveness of thermal treatment methods to

improve the quality of recycled concrete aggregate. The main conclusion of this
treatment method were:
o Sieved fractions of crushed concrete were subjected to various thermal
treatments at temperatures of either 650°C or 800°C for a period of 0.5 or
1 hour.
o The thermal treatments caused a considerable reduction in the amount of
cement paste or mortar adhering to both the fine and the coarse aggregate
particles.
o The reduction was more pronounced in the case of the samples treated at a
temperature of 800°C than those treated at 650°C.
o The integrity of the aggregate particles was found to a large extent to be
preserved.
o The strength development of mortar and concrete specimens, prepared
with one of the treated samples was slower than that of conventional river-
dredged aggregate but reasonably good.
o Thermal treatment of recycled concrete aggregate at a temperature of
about 800°C can yield good quality aggregates, with properties which are
reasonably comparable to conventionally used river-dredged aggregates.
Microwave decontamination
Microwave heating has been recently considered as an effective method to remove

the contaminated surface layer of concrete elements. The microwave
decontamination method uses the capability of a range of the microwave
frequencies to heat the concrete surface non-uniformly, thereby creating a
localised field of high thermal stresses and pore water pressure resulting in
spalling of the contaminated surface layer. [Akbarnezhad & Ong 2010]
The results in [Akbarnezhad & Ong 2010] confirmed the capability of high-
frequency microwaves to remove the surface layer of a concrete block through
development of localised high thermal stresses. (Figure 4)
Figure 4. Radial compressive stress in a saturated concrete after microwave

heating at 2.45, 10.6 and 18 GHz frequencies for 5, 2 and 1 s respectively (1.1
MW/m2 incident power). [Akbarnezhad & Ong 2010]
31 (72)
Pre-soaking treatmets
Three pre-soaking treatment approaches to reduce the mortar attached to RA were

studied in [Tam et al. 2007] (see Figure 5):
o ReMortar-HCl, hydrochloric acid,
o ReMortar-H2SO4, sulfuric acid, and
o ReMortar-H3PO4, phosphoric acid.
A concentration of about 0.1 mole chosen for the acidic solution can provide a
suitable acidic environment for the aggregate to remove the old cement mortar
and will not lower the aggregate quality. The behaviour of RA could be improved
with reduction in water absorption, without simultaneous exceeding the limits of
chloride and sulphate compositions after the treatment. [Tam et al. 2007]
Soaking in
Soaking Recycled
acidic Watering
with water aggregate
envirionment
Figure 5. Pre-soaking treatment procedures for recycled aggregate. [Tam et al.

2007]
Washing and chloride removal
By washing RA/RCA the impurities, powder and harmful materials on the

aggregate surfaces are washed away. Better bond effect between the aggregate
and the paste will be formed. Especially RCA-concrete flexural strength will be
enhanced. [Chen et al. 2002]
According to [Debieb et al. 2009] recycled aggregates with chloride content are
leached if they are soaked in water (Figure 6). These chlorides are consequently
free chlorides because they can go out from concrete after adequate leaching.
After a good washing or total immersion into water during a minimum of 2
weeks, these aggregates can be reused in concrete and even in reinforced or
prestressed concrete. This is only one result and more information is needed on
the effect of RCA washing on contaminants such as chlorides.
32 (72)
Figure 6. Chlorides content in coarse RA soaked in water for 30 days.
2.7 Sustainability
The concept of sustainable development includes the judicious use of natural
resources. The use of these non-renewable resources, such as virgin aggregates,
needs to be reduced by recycling rubble from demolished buildings, processed in
such a way that it can be used to replace virgin fine and coarse aggregate. This
replacement reduces natural resource consumption and allows for reduction in the
volume of materials disposed of in landfills. Recycled aggregate concrete, if
satisfactory concrete properties are achieved, can be an example of sustainable
construction materials. [Corinaldesi & Moriconi 2009]
Sustainability is not an easy concept and it goes beyond recycling. In recycling

there are many aspects to consider as e.g. energy requirement caused by RA
crushing and delivery of RA.
According to an estimate in UK, if C&D aggregates are transported over 160 km

from their point of processing, then their CO2 burden per tonne is well over twice
a large as that of virgin aggregate delivered an average UK distance. [Turner
2009] But if demolition waste is crushed and used on-site or near by, with no or
minor transport, the situation is clearly different.
In achieving performance it is essential that the properties and characteristics of

sustainable materials are properly understood and they are not used as one-to-one
replacement of traditional materials. The use of recycled materials should be
standardised in a flexible way to give engineers usable ways for sustainable use of
these materials. The use of sustainable materials, in appropriate quantities and
appropriate products, will help in reducing the socio-economic impacts, waste and
pollution in the concrete industry. [Dhir et al. 2006]
3 RA/RCA with other (recycled) materials

From the sustainability viewpoint it is important to develop more construction
materials that incorporate RCA. This is of special importance for fine RCA and
low-quality coarse RCA, which have limited use in structural concrete.
33 (72)
100 % RA with fly ash (FA) or silica fume (SF)
In [Corinaldesi & Moriconi 2009] concrete specimens were manufactured by

completely replacing fine and coarse aggregates with recycled aggregates (RA)
from a rubble recycling plant. Also RA-concrete with fly ash (RA + FA) or silica
fume (RA + SF) were studied. Satisfactory concrete properties were developed
with recycled fine and coarse aggregates with proper selection and proportioning
of the concrete materials.
Concrete waste and lime production waste - no added cement
New construction materials were developed and patented in Brazil, based on

concrete production and demolition wastes mixed with lime production waste.
[Mymrin & Correa 2007] This research provided experimental confirmation of the
potential of new construction material using as raw material concrete production
and demolition wastes mixed in different proportions with lime production waste
(Table 6). All the compositions under study demonstrated good mechanical
properties (compressive strength and water absorption), in line with the
requirements of Brazilian standards. The best mechanical properties were
obtained for the composition containing 40% of lime waste and 60% of concrete
wastes, showing an average strength of 26 MPa after 90 days of hydration. Other
compositions can also be applied for different construction purposes.
The XRD and SEM analyses indicated that the following processes occurred
during the hydration and hardening of the original compositions:
Complete transformation of lime (CaO) and partial transformation of
Portlandite Ca(OH)2 into various carbonates forms, e.g., Calcite, Dolomite
and Ancerite.
Synthesis and enhancement of crystalline structures – Tobermorite,
Afwillite and Calcium hydrosilicates.
Growth of a significant number of new amorphous formations, which were
clearly visible with SEM, especially under high magnification.
The synthesis of these three groups of new formations likely explains the
substantial increase in the strength of the concrete and lime waste composites.
Table 6. Compositions of the mixtures under study. [Mymrin & Correa 2007]
34 (72)
Table 7. Compressive strength of the new materials. [Mymrin & Correa 2007]
Concrete waste (RCA) and fly ash - no added cement
Hansen (1990) has demonstrated that it is possible to produce new concrete from
concrete waste, without requiring new cement, by adding fly ash, with the novel
concrete containing 79 % of concrete waste, 11 % of fly ash and 10 % of water.
The recycled concrete gains strength very slowly probably due to the pozzolanic
reaction between fly ash and calcium hydroxide from the cement paste in the old
concrete. It is suggested that the process may be used to upgrade the quality of
demolished and crushed concrete for fill or road base purposes. [Hansen 1990]
Fine and coarse recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) and slag/fly ash for
Controlled Low-Strength Materials - no added cement
In an experimental study the feasibility of using fine and coarse RCA (Figure 7)
with slag or fly ash to produce Controlled Low-Strength Materials (CLSM) was
studied [Achtemichuk et al. 2009]. CLSMs are construction materials that
consolidate under their own weight making them ideal substitutes for compacted
soil. Unlike soil, CLSMs do not settle once they are hardened. CLSMs can be
used in a variety of applications including backfills, structural fills, pavement
bases, conduit beddings and void fillings.
The main objective in [Achtemichuk et al. 2009] was to produce CLSM using
only recycled and by-product materials without the need to add Portland cement.
In addition to the hydraulic activity of slag and high-calcium fly ash, their
pozzolanic reaction was activated by the alkalis and calcium hydroxide present in
the residual paste of the RCA. Preliminary tests showed mixtures with slag to
have 7-day compressive strengths 70% higher than mixtures with fly ash (Figure
7). Two types of CLSM with slag were investigated in further detail: one with fine
and the other with fine/coarse RCA. The results showed that the developed
CLSMs are suitable for a wide range of applications particularly those requiring
structural support and fast hardening.
35 (72)
A B
Figure 7. A) Grain size distribution of the fine and fine/coarse RCA.
B) Compressive strength of mortars containing fine RCA and slag or fly ash
(SCM = Supplementary cementing materials). [Achtemichuk et al. 2009]
The CLSMs presented were suitable for a variety of applications as summarized

below:
1. Applications for CLSM with fine/coarse RCA:
 Permanent structural fill: the CLSMs with 10% and 20% slag had 28-day
strength of 6.4 and 7.8 MPa, respectively. This makes the materials
suitable for permanent structural fill where relatively high strength is
required. The selection of the slag level (10% or 20%) would depend on
the required strength.
 Road bases: since the mixtures with 10% and 20% slag met the
recommendations for resistance of soil–cement to freezing/thawing and
wetting/drying cycles, both mixtures are suitable for road bases where high
durability against freezing and wetting is required.
 Repairs of road sections: it is often required to complete road repairs
within a short period of time to minimize the impact on traffic. In such
situations, fast hardening time is often required. Mixtures with 10% and
20% slag were found to be ready for load applications after 8 and 5 h,
respectively. This made the mixtures suitable for such repair works where
the CLSM serves as a road base or a temporary road surface.
2. Applications for CLSM with fine RCA:
 Permanent structural fill and road bases: the CLSMs with 20% and 30%
slag were suitable for such applications. It is economically preferable to
consider the mixture with 20% slag. The mixture had a 28-day
compressive strength of 7.2 MPa which was suitable for permanent
structural fills. In addition, this mixture met recommendations for
resistance of soil–cement against freezing/thawing and wetting/drying
which makes it suitable as road base material. However, the mixture may
not be suitable for works that requires short hardening time (≤15 h).
 Beddings for conduits with small spacing: CLSM with 20% slag is
suitable for such applications. The lack of coarse aggregates enhances the
ability of such mixture to move in narrow spaces and between obstacles.
RCA and high fineness fly ash
In [Buranasing et al. 2010] high fineness fly ash was used as a cement
replacement to improve recycled aggregate concrete properties. The mixture
proportions of RA-concretes were first prepared using 100% recycled coarse
aggregate, and then river sand was replaced with recycled fine aggregate at 0, 50,
36 (72)
and 100% by weight of the fine aggregate (river sand plus recycled fine
aggregate). The results indicated that use of 35-50% fly ash (with respect to total
cementitious content) of high fineness could improve slump loss behaviour in
recycled aggregate concretes. Use of high fineness fly ash in RA-concrete could
produce greater compressive strength than that of the recycled aggregate concrete
alone. The results suggest that high fineness fly ash can be used to improve
various properties of recycled aggregate concrete.
RCA and silica fume (SF) – with superplasticizer
Silica fume is a mineral admixture. The use of it in combination with a

superplasticizer is today a usual way to obtain high-strength concretes. Its effects
(the pozzolanic effect and filler) improve all the mechanical properties of the
concrete and particularly its compressive strength. It has been found that
properties of recycled concrete may also be significantly improved by silica fume
together with superplasticizer, For instance González-Fonteboa & Martínez-
Abella (2008) found that the addition of 8% silica fume (% of cement) to mixes
containing recycled aggregates was beneficial in terms of compressive strength.
[Ajdukiewicz & Kliszczewicz 2002, González-Fonteboa & Martínez-Abella
2008]
RA-mortars including recycled masonry and fine recycled aggregates
An alternative use of both masonry rubble and surplus fine recycled material
could be in mortars. The alternative use of undesirable fractions of recycled
aggregate for the production of mortar has the added effect of improving the
quality of the recycled aggregate for the production of concrete.
Experimental results in [Moriconi et al. 2003] showed the feasibility of using

either recycled instead of natural sand or powder obtained by bricks grinding as
partial cement substitution for the production of mortars. Excellent bond strength
was found, in particular when recycled-aggregate mortar and red bricks were
coupled (Figure 8).
37 (72)
Figure 8. Mix design of the mortars and maximum bond strength values.
[Moriconi et al. 2003]
C&D waste brick as pozzolanic material
The investigation in [Lin et al. 2010] showed the pozzolic characteristics of pastes
that contain waste brick from C&D wastes. Waste brick had a pozzolanic strength
activity index of 107 % after 28 days. It can be regarded as a strong pozzolanic
material when used as partial replacement of cement. The compressive strengths
of waste brick blended cement that contained 10% waste brick increased from
71.2 MPa at 28 days to 75.1 MPa at 60 days.
4 Closed cycle reuse of C&D waste

In The Netherlands, C&D waste is already to a large extent being reused,
especially the stony fraction, which is crushed and reused as a road base material.
In order to increase the percentage of reuse of the total C&D waste flow to even
higher levels, a new concept has been developed. In this concept, called ‘Closed
Cycle Construction’, the processed materials are being reused at a higher quality
level and the quantity of waste that has to be disposed of is minimised. [Mulder et
al. 2007]. (Figures 9 and 10)
38 (72)
Figure 9. Schematic presentation of the Closed Cycle Construction concept

[Mulder et al. 2007].
Figure 10. Distinct treatment of four different C&D waste streams. [Mulder et al.
2007]
For concrete and masonry, the new concept implies that the material cycle will be
completely closed, and the original constituents (clay bricks, gravel, sand, cement
stone) are recovered in thermal processes. The mixed C&D waste streams are
separated and decontaminated. For this purpose several dry separation techniques
are being developed.
Concrete rubble treatment
To be able to close the material cycle for concrete completely, high quality raw
materials must be produced from concrete rubble. These raw materials need to
fulfil the criteria that are set for primary raw materials. A thermal process has
been developed for the treatment of concrete rubble (Figure 11). This technology
39 (72)
involves a rotary kiln in which pure concrete rubble is thermally treated at a

temperature of about 700 oC to dehydrate the cement stone. The concrete rubble
pieces disintegrate and the original components are set free. After treatment, only
2% of hardened cement paste remains attached to the sand and gravel grains.
Figure 11. Flow scheme of thermal treatment of concrete rubble. [Mulder et al.
2007]
Investigations on a laboratory scale in which the concrete rubble was treated at

700 oC, showed that from 1 ton of concrete, the following components were
derived:
 450 kg gravel (>4 mm),
 350 kg sand (<4 mm),
 130 kg cement stone (<150 µm) and
 10 kg reinforcement steel can be recovered.
 The remaining 60 kg was originally present as hydration water, and was
emitted as vapour.
The dehydrated cement stone fraction can be used as a substitute for part of the
Portland cement clinker in the cement production process. The cement stone can
be directly fed to the Portland cement mill. This saves energy and raw materials.
Masonry debris
For masonry debris, a new separation technology consists of a three-step process.

In the first step, the large pieces of debris are thermally treated at a temperature of
about 550 oC, to free the majority of the original ceramic bricks. These whole
bricks can be used for restoration purposes or for the construction of old style
buildings. Subsequently, the remaining pieces of brick and mortar are physically
separated. In the third step, the remaining ceramic fraction is crushed and reused
as raw material for the production of new ceramic bricks. (Figure 12)
40 (72)
Figure 12. Process scheme of the treatment and recycling of masonry debris.
[Mulder et al. 2007]
Separation of mixed C&D waste streams
Mixed C&D waste streams will have to be separated and extensively cleaned up,
in order to gain enough quality to reuse the different fractions. In the Closed
Cycle Construction project the aim was to end up with a decontaminated mineral
aggregate fraction that could be reused in concrete and a decontaminated
combustible fraction that could be used as a fuel in the thermal processes. The
challenge in this respect was to find the right combination of an inexpensive bulk
separation technique and one or more automated sorting techniques for the further
clean-up of the pre-concentrated fractions. Several dry density separation
techniques were investigated experimentally, on a pilot scale. All investigated
separators showed variable but satisfactory efficiency (see [Mulder et al. 2007]).
5 Recommendations for the use of RA/RCA

RA/RCA – traditional use
To make the use of recycled aggregates in concrete production possible:

o The price of RA should be at least as competitive as virgin aggregate
o National recommendations and specifications for RA should be provided in
promoting its use including:
o demands for specified RA classes
 based on proportions of constituent materials or on
performance of RA
 to classify different types of RA, the following typical criteria
are used such as density, water absorption, gradation, fine
material content, chloride content, content of organic
materials, LOI (loss on ignition), total impurity content,
aggregate crushing value (LA coefficient), effects on specified
concrete properties (setting time, shrinkage), etc.
o application areas –recommendations, suggestions and/or detailed
guidelines for the use of specified RA classes,
o percentage of RA adoption in different cases (e.g. ≤20 % of total
aggregate), based on
41 (72)
 end product strength (strength class, e.g. ≤C16/20) and

 other mechanical property demands (e.g. shrinkage, modulus
of elasticity)
 demands on durability and service life, i.e. use in different
exposure classes (in EN 206-1 and National Annex)
o possible supplementary demands and needed testing (e.g. alkali-silica
reactivity, effects on air pore structure).
o Research to be able to create a classification system applicable to national
circumstances and relevant demands based on intended and/or limited use of RA.
o Quality control of RA is required since the variety of supply sources causes
variations of quality – if not a known and steady source.
o An authorized party should be responsible for controlling RA quality
before adopting these materials.
o Applicable quality control methods (according to EN standards)
should be defined.
o Applicability of closed cycle use should be studied in potential cases,
o Network should be created to share the experience in using RA (Figure 13).
Based on the gained experience, the use of RA/RCA and specifications can be
modified.
Figure 13. Three requirements facilitating reuse (Kawano, 1995). [Tam et al.
2007]
RA/RCA – novel use, improvements, research
To find novel ways for the use of RA/RCA there should be more research to find:
o new ideas for the use of fine RA/RCA and RA/RCA powders in
concrete or other cement based materials (specific grouts and mortars,
self compacting concrete (SCC), etc.),
o methods for RA/RCA quality enhancement
 different crushing and rubbing methods, sieving methods and
heat-, washing-, pre-soaking-, acid-, microwave- etc.
treatments) [Nagai 2011 A & B], RA/RCA surface
quality/impregnation/etc. methods,
o methods to improve RA/RCA-concrete quality
 novel mix design methods, new mixing methods, use of
additional materials/admixtures,
o use of RA/RCA with other (recycled) materials to produce traditional,
novel or low strength materials, such as filling materials, including
ecological materials without or with minimum amount of cement, use
of RA/RCA with
42 (72)
 fly ash (FA)/classified (FA)/micronized (FA), silica fume

(SF), slag (SLG),
 other (recycled) powder/micronized materials, brick
powder, glass powder, rock powders,
 lime production waste, etc.
Source, demands and application of RA/RCA
In Finland RA/RCA can be used as concrete aggregate, but it must be proved

beforehand, that it is suitable for the specific intended use. In many countries
there are more detailed national specifications on the use of RA/RCA in concrete.
This promotes the use of RA/RCA and makes it possible to produce quality
controlled RA/RCA for wider reuse. When there is more experience on the use of
RA/RCA, it is possible to enhance and evolve both the production and the use of
recycled aggregates. Also, it is then possible to contribute via specifications and
quality control guidelines. Experience will be gathered on how to choose old
concrete structures for intended grade RA/RCA, and how to produce RA/RCA to
get intended quality. In all, real use of RA/RCA will come true, if it is classified
and the use of it is specified.
National prevailing specifications are mainly based on the classification of

recycled aggregate properties (performance based use).
The allowable use of RA/RCA (specified class and amount as % of total

aggregate) is determined based on end use requirements. End use requirements are
specified in the concrete standard EN 206-1, in national Annex and in national
concrete guidelines. At least the following criteria must be considered:
o required strength class (e.g. C25/30, i.e. minimum characteristic cube
strength is 30 MPa) and
o all prevailing exposure classes related to environmental actions (carbonation,
corrosion induced by chlorides, freeze/thaw with and without de-icing agents
and chemical attack) according to EN 206-1 (e.g. XC1 means corrosion
induced by carbonation in dry or permanently wet concrete structures, e.g.
concrete inside buildings with low air humidity) must be known.
It must be noticed that the end use requirements, which are based also on
exposure classes, must be different in different countries because of different
climatic circumstances and also because of different national policies and adopted
safety levels. Also, structural concrete must always meet the demands presented
for concrete in prevailing mandatory standards (for concrete EN 206-1 + national
Annex).
In Table 4 (page 24) a tentative performance-based classification is presented

(minimum LA class, minimum density, maximum water absorption and maximum
concrete drying shrinkage value).
Figure 14 shows a speculative presentation how the use of recycled aggregate in

concrete production is dependent on the quality of the structures for demolition
and on the quality of produced recycled aggregates. Recommendations and
instructions for the use RA must be based on national conditions.
43 (72)
Figure 14. A speculative presentation on the use of recycled aggregate in

concrete production. The quality of structures for demolition and produced
recycled aggregates will decide the possible re-use. Recommendations and rules
for the use of RA/RCA must be based on national conditions.
6 Possibilities and ideas for the reuse of other C&D wastes
6.1 Gypsum/plasterboards
General - landfill and composting
During the three stages of production, construction and demolition, approximately

15 million tons of gypsum waste plasterboard is generated annually in the world.
It is considered a serious problem due to scarcity of land-filling space, increasing
the cost of disposal and increasing environmental regulations. [Ahmed et al. 2011]
Plasterboard recycling is becoming a key source of raw materials for more and
more plasterboard plants. Plasterboard recycling means that waste that would
44 (72)
otherwise be disposed in landfills now is being recycled and turned into a gypsum
powder that the plasterboard manufacturers can use when making new boards.
In landfills, hydrogen sulphide (H2S) gas is produced from plasterboard at

significant and often dangerous levels. This is due to the sulphate reducing
bacteria which thrive in landfills due to the combination of anaerobic conditions,
the presence of organic material (including the paper on plasterboard) and a large
source of sulphate ions (especially from the gypsum in plasterboard). [Brown &
Allock 2008]
A literature review [Brown & Allock 2008] prepared for the Ministry for the
Environment, New Zealand, provides a comprehensive summary of available
information on the viability of composting waste plasterboard generated from
construction sites. Alternative uses for waste plasterboard are also reviewed.
Composting waste plasterboard is assessed to be a viable, low cost option. In the
short term there appears to be no great drawback in developing the composting
option until remanufacturing systems are initiated. Composting waste plasterboard
would be problematic if it is done using an anaerobic process as it would generate
hydrogen sulphide.
Recycling and reuse of gypsum/plasterboards
The main issue for many recyclers is the problem of contamination in loads. Items
such as metal, bricks, glass and plastic can often be found in supposedly
‘plasterboard only´ loads. This can slow down and even prevent the recycling
process for such material. By taking extra steps to keep loads clean, waste
producers can assist recycling. This applies especially to material produced from
the demolition sector. Anyways, it is also possible to recycle demolition
plasterboards. Contaminants like nails, screws, paper, wall coverings etc. are
removed from the gypsum core, which is crushed into a fine gypsum powder. The
recycled gypsum powder makes up 94% of the plasterboard waste recycled and
can substitute virgin gypsum raw materials at the gypsum consuming industries.
[Plasterboard recycling 2011, Gypsum recycling International 2011, Roy Hatfield
Plasterboard Recycling 2011]
Figure 15. Plastedboard recycling. [Gypsum Recycling Ireland Limited 2011]

45 (72)
Traditionally the routes for gypsum recycled from plasterboard waste includes:
use in plasterboard manufacture,
cement manufacture and
agriculture
amongst other smaller niche outlets.
A patented process recycled gypsum is used as a primary ingredient in the

manufacture of moisture/liquid absorbents and also for the manufacture of interior
wall blocks. Other end uses are also being explored. [Roy Hatfield Plasterboard
Recycling 2011]
Under the existing and future legal provisions for recycling and disposal of waste,
the disposal of gypsum-containing waste is made extremely expensive for the
user. For this reason, the European gypsum industry must demonstrate to its
customers viable alternative and cost-saving disposal routes. The German
Confederation of the Gypsum Industry is currently developing for Germany a
concept for the construction of strategically sited recycling facilities for
plasterboard waste. The plasterboard waste processed in these recycling plants
will be returned to the gypsum industry's production cycles. The Confederation is
also drafting quality specifications for acceptance of recycled gypsum. [Hamm et
al. 2007]
Canada - a case study
A case study from Canada presents details of plasterboard recycling in as

undertaken by New West Gypsum Recycling Inc. [Plasterboard Case Study]. The
main product is recycled gypsum for incorporation into new plasterboard.
Feedstock material is waste gypsum and plasterboard from construction and
renovation activities and plasterboard manufacture. The study [Plasterboard Case
Study] (available in www, see References) describes:
the background to the management of gypsum wastes in Canada and the
drivers which promoted their recycling,
the development of New West Gypsum Recycling Inc, and
their current facilities and method of operation in Canada.
New West Gypsum Recycling developed and patented a process that takes both
wet and dry plasterboard waste from:
Construction and renovation sites;
Gypsum moulds from the manufacture of aeroplane parts, ceramic sanitary
ware and prosthetics
Production waste from plasterboard manufacturers.
This material is delivered to the New West Gypsum recycling facilities, where the
recycling process removes contaminants and the facing paper from the
plasterboard to produce a quality recycled gypsum product.
One of the key requirements for use by plasterboard manufacturers is a low paper
content. Once a low enough content could be demonstrated, the local plasterboard
manufacturers became interested in the product. The paper content within the
recycled gypsum powder product was between 0.5% and 1%, which is considered
non-detrimental for re-use in plasterboard manufacturing. (Figure 16).
46 (72)
Figure 16. Plasterboard paper by-product, and final gypsum product.

[Plasterboard Case Study 2011]
The recycled gypsum produced is marketed to plasterboard manufacturers at a

lower price than that of virgin material. On average, the recycled gypsum can
make up 22% of the feedstock for new plasterboard products without detriment to
product quality, although up to 33% of recycled gypsum has been reported as
being successfully integrated into some new plasterboard products. [Plasterboard
Case Study 2011]
UK example protocol
UK Environmental Agency has in partnership with WRAP launched a

consultation on the Quality Protocol for gypsum from waste plasterboard. The
Quality Protocol will help the industry to recycle more of the one million tonnes
of waste plasterboard that is generated in the UK every year. The proposals set out
new criteria to stimulate market development and overcome barriers, enabling
industry to reprocess gypsum for use in a variety of markets, including the
manufacture of new plasterboard and cement, and for agricultural soil treatment.
[Gypsum from waste plasterboard 2011]
There is already a technical report in UK on the production and use of gypsum

from waste plasterboard [Gypsum 2008]. There is also in UK a report entiteld:
Quality Protocol: Recycled gypsum from waste plasterboard. End of waste
criteria for the production and use of recycled gypsum from waste
plasterboard. [Quality Protocol 2010]
This document was developed by the Environment Agency and WRAP (Waste &
Resources Action Programme) in consultation with Defra, WAG, industry and
other regulatory stakeholders. The Quality Protocol is applicable in both England
and Wales. It sets out the end of waste criteria for the production and use of
recycled
gypsum from waste plasterboard. This protocol has also been translated in
Finnish:
”Laatupöytäkirja. Jätekipsilevyistä saadun kierrätettävän kipsin
tuotantoon ja käyttöön sovellettavat kriteerit siitä, milloin jäte lakkaa
olemasta jätettä” [Laatupöytäkirja 2009]
The Quality Protocol has four main purposes:

47 (72)
1. clarifying the point at which waste management controls are no longer

required,
2. providing holders with confidence that the recycled gypsum they purchase
conforms to an approved standard,
3. providing users with confidence that the material is suitable for use in
designated applications, and
4. protecting human health and the environment (including soil).
The Quality Protocol applies to the use of recycled gypsum in the following
market applications:
o as a raw material in the manufacturing of new gypsum-based products, e.g.
plasterboard and coving,
o as a soil treatment agent for agricultural benefit, and
o as a raw material in the manufacture of cement. [Quality Protocol 2010]
The contents of the above two documents [Gypsum 2008, Quality Protocol 2010]
are not reviewed here more closely - they are available on the internet (see
References).
Ground improvement, bassanite powder
Waste and recycled materials are currently used extensively in geotechnical

applications especially in the field of ground improvement. Utilisation of waste
and recycled materials in earthwork projects has many challenges, such as
environmental aspects and durability. Durability is a vital function to evaluate the
use of waste and recycled materials in ground improvement applications. Freeze–
thaw and wet–dry cycles are considered to be one of the most destructive actions.
Also in general, the use of recycled gypsum in ground improvement has a serious
problem, which is related to the solubility of gypsum.
Recycled gypsum, which is derived from gypsum waste plasterboard, is one of the
wastes that has recently been used in Japan for ground improvement in different
projects such as embankments and highways [Ahmed & Ugai 2011].
According to the laboratory testing results in [Ahmed & Ugai 2011] the durability
of stabilized soil improved with the increase of both contents of recycled gypsum
and cement. It was concluded that more than 2.5 % of cement content is adequate
to achieve a degree of rigidity for stabilized soil-gypsum specimens to resist the
effect of freeze–thaw and wet–dry actions, as well to prevent the solubility.
[Ahmed & Ugai 2011]
6.2 Mineral wool

Eurobond has developed a method for recycling mineral wool composite panels.
By segregating the panel into constituent materials (mineral wool and steel), these
can be fully and independently recycled so that new complete panels can be made
and waste diverted from landfill (Figures 17 and 18) [WRAP 2008].
The recycling process accepts mineral wool composite panels from site
demolition or renovation waste, site waste from new build and waste from
manufacturing processes. Scrap steel and mineral wool raw materials are
48 (72)
produced which are suitable for a range of products including, potentially, new
composite panels.
A composite panel can be considered as part of a closed loop recycling process as

both steel and mineral wool can be used to make new product. After processing,
100% of the separated mineral wool and steel facings is re-entered into the
manufacturing process to make virgin products. The quality of the recovered steel
and mineral wool recovered is sufficiently high for re-introduction into the
relevant production processes. There is no need to landfill any element of the
composite panel. [WRAP 2008] Mineral wool can also be produced to blown
mineral wool.
Figure 17. Flow chart illustrating the segregation and recycling process
(Eurobond) [WRAP 2008].
49 (72)
A B
Figure 18. A) Composite panel being fed into a composite panel recycling
machine (Eurobond). B) Separation of mineral wool from steel fraction
(Eurobond) [WRAP 2008].
6.3 Expanded polystyrene (EPS)

Expanded polystyrene foams (EPS) are widely used as construction material and
e.g. packaging material. On the other hand, waste EPS has caused a lot of
environmental pollutions because it cannot decompose in nature.
Clean EPS can be reused in insulating material production.
Lightweight concretes
It has been found that for instance by replacing 10%, 20%, 30% of the coarse
aggregate by solid volume with polystyrene beads, the density of normal
structural concrete reduces from 2455 kg/m3 to 2330, 2210 and 2080 kg/m3,
respectively (Ravindrayah 1999). [Laukaitis et al. 2005]
Recycled polystyrene waste (EPS) as well as blown polystyrene granules can also
be used as the filler for lightweight thermo-insulating foam cement composites. In
a study by Laukaitis et al. (2005) the density of a foam cement composite was 150
–170 kg/m3, while compressive strength was 0.25–0.28 MPa. The highest
composite compressive strength of 0.75 MPa was reached when fine EPS granules
with a density of 275 kg/m3 were used. Thermal conductivity of the composite
depended on its density, the EPS-filler, its sort and amount used. [Laukaitis et al.
2005]
50 (72)
Heat treated EPS
A new recycling process has been developed from the waste EPS foams by using
heat treatment. This technique reduces the volume of waste EPS about 20 times of
the original. Before the heat treatment, the average density, thermal conductivity
and compressive strength of waste EPS foams were 10 kg/m3, 0.0368 W/mK, and
0.12 MPa, respectively. The best result of modification was determined at 130 oC
and 15 min. After the modification, density, thermal conductivity and
compressive strength of waste EPS, increased to 217 kg/m3, 0.0555 W/mK and
8.29 MPa, respectively. This new material, which is obtained after the heat
treatment, is called modified waste EPS (MEPS). MEPS aggregate was used as a
replacement of natural aggregate, at the levels of 0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%
by volume. The density of MEPS is much less than that of natural aggregate;
MEPS concrete becomes a lightweight concrete with a density of about 900 -
1700 kg/m3. The 28 d compressive strengths of MEPS concrete range from
12.6 MPa to 23.3 MPa, which satisfies the strength requirement of semi-structural
lightweight concrete. [Kan & Demirboga 2009A&B].
Recycled EPS for concrete impregnation
Development of materials with high performance have grown in importance.

Currently, the development of these materials should be ecologically sound and
economically viable. The world-wide interest in concrete-polymer composites has
intensified since 1990. In research by [Amianti & Botaro 2009] the main objective
was to apply a polymeric treatment using recycled EPS to reduce the permeability
and increase the durability of concrete, contributing to the preservation of the
surfaces against physical, chemical and biological attacks. The impregnation
sample was prepared by the dissolution of EPS in a mixture of acetone and
cicloexane. It was found that concrete impregnated with recycled EPS, compared
with the process conventional Concrete Impregnated with Polystyrene (CIP), is
simpler, involves little technological resources and consumes less energy. The
results of the efficiency of the impregnation with recycled EPS for water
absorption demonstrated positive effects.
6.4 Polyurethane (PUR)

Manufacturing, working and destruction of rigid polyurethane (PUR) foam panels
used for building wall insulation produce many low density particles and
shavings. These wastes can be recycled in energy production plants or building
composites. The incorporation of such materials into lightweight concrete could
also be an alternative for the value added use of polyurethane foam wastes.
Studies have been made with both fine and coarse recycled PUR-aggregates.
[Mounanga et al. 2008, Fraj et al. 2010] (Figure 19).
51 (72)
Figure 19. PUR foam wastes (left: ‘‘coarse” aggregates, right: ‘‘fine”
aggregates). [Mounanga et al. 2008, Fraj et al. 2010]
These results in [Gadea et al. 2010] confirm that mortar produced with recycled
PUR (Figure 20) is comparable to lightweight mortar made with traditional
materials. It was conclude that it is technically possible to use polymeric foams
from industrial waste materials in the manufacturing of cement-based mortars and
that these could be of use in the building industry. At the same time, these are
environmentally friendly materials that will contribute to sustainable
development.
A B
C
Figure 20. A) Polyurethane foam wastes used, B) basic chemical composition
and C) particle size distribution of sand and PUR foam waste. [Gadea et al. 2010]
52 (72)
6.5 Lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC) and Aerated

concrete
Lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC)
The objective of one part of Brite EuRam III project was to determine if crushed
lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC) can be used as an aggregate in concrete
(recycled LWAC-aggregates) [EuroLightCon 2000].
It is important to see how the recycled LWAC-aggregate is produced, because this

will determine the properties of the material. Because of the relative small
amounts and the fact that it is part of a construction which also contains other
materials it is likely that the recycled LWAC-aggregate will be produced in an
ordinary recycling plant. Because of its low density it will be stockpiled at the
mixed, or brickwork-aggregate stockpile and should be treated as such. [Brite
EuRam III. 2000]
According to the recommendations of RILEM, recycled LWAC-aggregate could

be a type I aggregate (brickwork) and it can be used in concrete with a maximum
cube strength class of C37. When recycled LWAC-aggregate can be considered a
material with the same properties as a mixture of recycled brickwork- and
concrete-aggregate, there should be no problem to use it in concrete mixes with a
low enough strength class and mild exposure condition.
In the laboratory, leaching-tests have been performed on concrete to find if the

recycled LWAC-aggregate could fulfil the requirement with regard to environ-
mental issues. All four concrete mixes tested met the requirements.
Aerated concrete (e.g. Siporex)
Aerated concrete can be crushed and used in earth construction. It can also be
used as other lightweight aggregates. Aerated concrete boards can be reused as
recycled products e.g. in single-family houses.
6.6 Wood
Clean, untreated wood can be used to make e.g.
 engineered particle board,
 re-milled into flooring,
 mulch (cover of soil),
 compost,
 animal bedding and
 fuel.
These re-use options are not discussed here in detail.
For all markets, wood contaminated with lead-based paint or wood preservatives
should be removed and managed according to local regulations. [Construction
Business Owner 2007]
53 (72)
6.7 Plastics (e.g. PVC)

The development of new construction materials using recycled plastics is
important to both the construction and the plastic recycling industries. A wide
review with approximately 60 references about waste and recycled plastics waste
management options is presented in [Siddique et al. 2008].
As part of the Life project "APPRICOD" (Assessing the Potential for Plastic
Recycling in the Construction and Demolition Activities), funded by e.g. the
European Commission, a workshop was held to address issues such as:
How to optimise the selective collection of plastics from C&D waste?
What are the different plastics involved and how can they be recognized?
What are the requirements for plastic recycling, which plastic fractions can
be collected together?
What are the recycling opportunities and constraints?
What costs and benefits are associated with a selective collection system
for plastic C&D waste ? Is it worth it?
What are the opinions and perspectives from the main stakeholders: C&D
sector, Plastic industry, Recyclers, Local and Regional Authorities, etc.?
What conclusions and recommendations can be made for the future ?
What are the legal, technical and financial needs?
How can the plastic C&D waste issue be integrated into a broader
resource-product-waste approach? [Association of Cities and Regions for
Recycling and sustainable Resource management 2011]
Plastics can be separated into two types:

o The first type is thermoplastic, which can be melted for recycling in the
plastic industry. These plastics are
polyethylene, polypropylene, polyamide, polyoxymethylene,
polytetrafluorethylene, and polyethyleneterephthalate.
o The second type is thermosetting plastic. This plastic cannot be melted by
heating because the molecular chains are bonded firmly with meshed
crosslinks. These plastic types are known as
phenolic, melamine, unsaturated polyester, epoxy resin, silicone,
and polyurethane. [Panyakapo & Panyakapo 2007]
An example plastic waste management process is presented in Figure 21.
Recycling of plastics usually requires a suitable segregation technique in which

plastic materials existing in the mixed solid wastes is separated into a homo-
genous plastic waste. Recycling of a homogenous plastic material leads to the
broader applications of the recycled products and also boosts their value.
54 (72)
Figure 21. Plastic waste management process by Rebeiz & Craft (1995) [Siddique
et al. 2008].
55 (72)
PVC
PVC waste quantities are projected to increase significantly in the next years. A
major part of PVC is used for long-life products in the construction sector (e.g.
pipes, window frames, floor coverings) which are still in use. Since the large-scale
consumption of PVC started in the 1970s and taking into account the expected
lifetime of 30 years and more, the ”big push” of PVC waste quantities can be
expected to start around 2010. [Plinke et al. 2000]
It is obvious that all the PVC that is being produced will become waste some day.
The European Association of Plastics Converters (EuPC) has estimated the
amount of PVC waste for the periods between 2010 and 2020. Post-consumer
PVC waste (accounting for 88% of all PVC waste) is expected to increase from
3.6 to 6.4 million t per year across the EU. The existing recycling rate for this
waste is very low, at only 3%. This low percentage reflects the high separation
and processing costs required. Figure 22 shows the sources of PVC post-consumer
waste arising now, and in the future. Building products are the biggest source -
pipes and fittings, window profiles, other profiles and cable insulations are the
most important applications here.
Figure 22. The sources of PVC post-consumer waste. Key: A=Packaging;

B=Building products; C=Furniture; D=Medicine; E=Agriculture; F=Electronics;
G=Automotive; and H=Household and Trade. [Siddique et al. 2008]
In [Sadat-Shojai & Bakhshandeh 2011] a review is presented on the various

aspects of the PVC recycling such as recycling methods of PVC, special problems
about some proposed processes, separation techniques, and recycling of mixed
PVC wastes. In addition, an attempt is made to portray the current status of PVC
recycling, the most recent technologies of recycling, and some recent scientific
research in the field. PVC can be processed into a wide variety of short-life and
also long-life products such as pipes, window frames, cable insulation, floors
coverings, roofing sheets, etc.
It has been often suggested that PVC can be successfully recycled into a variety of
products such as bottles, various pipes, pipe fittings and other profiles with good
appearance and properties. [Sadat-Shojai & Bakhshandeh 2011] Also recycling
rates of PVC have increased steadily in the United States and European countries
since the mid-1980s, as many new recycling programs were developed, for
example Vinyl 2010. [Vinyl 2010]
Simple recycling to produce secondary materials cannot by itself solve the

environmental problems of plastic wastes, because of many types of plastics
56 (72)
cannot simply be separated or processed together. In fact, articles produced with

the mixed recycled material would have poor mechanical properties and few
possibilities of application. Moreover, the existence of markets for recycled PVC
is a key part and it does no good whatsoever to separate and process PVC waste if
they do not find uses in new applications. Currently, the recycling operation of
plastics, of PVC in particular, is increasing especially in the following aspects:
Development of techniques and instrumentation for separation of PVC
from waste stream,
Improvement of current methods and/or development of new methods for
recycling of PVC waste,
Improvement of compatibility of recycled PVC with other polymers and
virgin PVC,
Recycling of mixed PVC waste,
Development of new energy-recovery techniques,
Recycling of post-consumer PVC waste through specific projects,
Improvement of physical and mechanical properties of recycled PVC,
Survey on the effect of multiple recycling.
PVC recycling can be performed by the following main technological processes:

Energy-recovery techniques,
Mechanical recycling and
Chemical recycling.
The comparison of different approaches for disposing of PVC wastes is presented
in Table 8.
Table 8. The comparison of different approaches for disposing of PVC wastes

[Sadat-Shojai & Bakhshandeh 2011].
Recycled PVC from packaging and construction materials is a mixture of different

grades, additives, plasticisers, and some fillers. It never achieves the performance
given when specifically selected grades and additives are formulated together to
meet a well-defined and specific purpose. The market value of recycled PVC will
therefore always be well below that of primary PVC.
Several studies have indicated that instability of PVC results in the worse
performance and lower applicability of the recycled material. A number of
solutions to this problem have been proposed as e.g. blending of the recycled PVC
with virgin PVC and/or with other thermoplastics. For example, it is suggested
that at least 40 % and 20 % virgin PVC must be incorporated into the recycled
PVC pipes and recycled window frames, respectively, to produce a high quality
57 (72)
product. However, in practice even this is not happening to any significant degree
(in Germany) [PVC Plastic: a looming Waste Crisis 2011].
Another obstacle for PVC recycling is that old material can contain relatively high
levels of additives, such as lead and cadmium stabilisers and PCBs, which would
contaminate new products in which those additives have been reduced or
eliminated. For this reason, PVC recycling of cables and old windows may be
restricted in countries where these additives are regulated, banned or restricted. A
prime example is Austria, that does not use post consumer PVC windows re-
granulate because of the lead and cadmium content of old windows. More
additives are likely to be classified as hazardous, such as chlorinated paraffins
(OSPAR) and phthalates (Denmark), and this may further restrict the potential for
PVC recycling in future.
Several strategies by which the PVC pipes can economically be recycled to the
products having defined characteristics have been proposed. The most favoured
approach is to assess the possibility of incorporating the recycled PVC pipes into
the virgin pipe grade PVC powder to make a new pipe product. There are good
results on this closed loop recycling of pipes.
Window frames
PVC plastics are also used in the production of window frames. The term “post-
consumer windows” arises from unplasticised window frames of PVC which were
installed in houses about 20- 40 years ago (in Germany) to replace the older
timberframed windows. Although these products, as the first generation of
unplasticised PVC windows, were not absolutely ideal, PVC windows have still
achieved a substantial percentage in the marketplace because of their durability
and low maintenance requirements. For example, annual installation of PVC
windows in Germany is about 10 000 000 units with a market share of 45%.
Currently, the old unplasticised windows frames are being replaced with up-to-
date products known as second-generation frames. The first-generation windows
could be reprocessed and reused in another or the same product. So far, several
technical facilities for fully automatic and clean recycling of post-consumer
windows have been used. Moreover, up to now many commercial projects have
been conducted on this issue. [Sadat-Shojai & Bakhshandeh 2011]
Floorings (PVC)
PVC flooring and roofing materials are also currently being considered in
recycling schemes.
PVC floorings can change during their service life owing to ageing processes.
This can influence recycling methods, such as mechanical recycling and energy
recovery. For example, Yarahmadi et al. (2003) investigated old PVC flooring
materials obtained from three apartment blocks built in 1964, 1971, and 1974.
They studied how the important properties of PVC floorings change during their
service life owing to the ageing processes, and how these can influence their
suitability as post-consumer products for recycling processes such as mechanical
recycling and energy recovery. Their results showed that PVC floorings can be
mechanically recycled in the form in which they were recovered without addition
of any new plasticizer. [Yarahmadi et al. 2003]
58 (72)
It is also shown that the high alkalinity of moist concrete can lead to the
decomposition of the plasticizer when PVC flooring is glued onto it. However, the
degree of decomposition of plasticizer is very small relative to the mass loss by
evaporation, and consequently should not cause any problems for mechanical
recycling. Nevertheless, decomposition products such as butanol and octanol can
cause indoor environmental problems sometimes designated as “sickbuilding
syndrome”. For this reason, gluing directly onto fresh concrete should be avoided.
Gluing also makes mechanical recycling less favourable owing to troublesome
dismantling, and the high degree of contamination from the glue. [Yarahmadi et
al. 2003]
Some of the floor sheets (for example, for using in interior material for railway
vehicle) were layered by vulcanized surface for instance to improve the
appearance. These floor sheets which turn to a thermosetting resin may be
considered as inappropriate material for recycling. In recent years reusing and
recycling of such floor sheets have also been requested. In this long-term stability
has been found to be a necessary factor for practical applications. [Sadat-Shojai &
Bakhshandeh 2011]
Reuse in concrete and other cement based materials
Research published on the effect of recycled and waste plastic on the fresh and
hardened properties of concrete is also presented widely in [Siddique et al. 2008].
Plastic wastes:
may be used with some effectiveness as a partial replacement of inorganic
aggregates in concrete applications to decrease the dead weight of
structures – lightweight concretes. The main desired properties are low dry
density and at the same time acceptable compressive strength. Competent
and advanced mix designs are needed.
Recycled plastics can also be used as fibres in concrete. These increase
resistance of concrete to impact and shrinkage cracking, and can also
somewhat enhance the impermeability and de-icer salt scaling resistance.
Discrete reinforcement for concrete can be derived from
o shredded mixed plastic,
o milled mixed plastic particles and
o melt-processed plastic fibres.
Thermosetting plastic could be used as a material in the mix proportion of e.g.

lightweight concrete. Specific gravity of thermosetting plastic is about one-half of
the typical fine and coarse aggregates, that are used in light weight concretes. An
application of thermosetting plastic waste in concrete corresponds to a new type
of lightweight concrete. Thermosetting plastic can be ground and processed by
sieve analysis. When using it as a recycled component, the compressive strength
tends to decrease because the bonding between plastic particles and cement paste
is weak. [Panyakapo & Panyakapo 2007]
Compared to cement-based concrete, polymer concrete (PC) is stronger and more

durable. For this reason, polymer concrete is used in many structures such as box
culverts, hazardous waste containers, trench lines, floor drains, and in the repair
and overlay of damaged cement concrete surfaces such as pavement and bridges.
In spite of its advantages, however, polymer concrete is not widely used due to its
59 (72)
relatively high material cost compared to cement-based concrete. Less expensive

resins are an important factor necessary for the wider use of polymer concrete.
Binders used for polymer concrete include epoxy, MMA (Methyl Methacrylate),
and unsaturated polyester, among others. A large stream of recycled PET is
available from recycling applications, and this has made unsaturated polyester
resin a widely used and popular binding agent for polymer concrete. [Jo et al.
2008]
The purpose of a study by Jo et al. (2008) was to solve some of the solid waste
problems posed by plastics and concrete demolition. Mechanical properties of
polymer concrete, in particular, polymer concrete made of unsaturated polyester
resins from recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic waste and recycled
concrete aggregates, were evaluated. The strength and the resistances to acid and
alkali compounds of the polymer concrete were measured by varying the coarse
and fine aggregate ratio and resin content. [Jo et al. 2008]
[Kou et al. 2009] investigated the effect of replacing river sand by recycled PVC
originated from scraped PVC pipes on the fresh and hardened properties of
lightweight aggregate concretes. Their results showed that the as-produced
concrete in which sand is optimally replaced by recycled PVC (15% by volume)
had lower density, higher ductility, lower drying shrinkage, and higher resistance
to chloride ion penetration. However, according to their results, such concretes
also had some negative side effects such as lower workability, lower compressive
strength and lower tensile splitting strength. [Sadat-Shojai & Bakhshandeh 2011]
Rebeiz (1996) investigated the strength properties of un-reinforced and reinforced

polymer concrete using an unsaturated polyester resin based on recycled
polyethyleneterephthalate (PET) plastic waste. The results showed that the resins
based on recycled PET can be used to produce a good quality of precast concrete.
However, it was reported by Naik et al. (1996) that compressive strength
decreased with an increase in the amount of the plastic in concrete, particularly
above 0.5 % plastic addition to total weight of the mixture. Similarly, the results
of Batayneh et al. (2006) showed the deterioration of compressive strength with
an increase in the proportion of plastic content. For the plastic proportion of 20 %
of sand, the compressive strength was reduced up to 70 % compared to that of
normal concrete. Marzouk et al. (2007) also studied the effects of PET waste on
the density and compressive strength of concrete. It was found that the density and
compressive strength decreased when the PET aggregates exceeded 50% by
volume of sand. PET is thermoplastic, which is a valuable material because it can
be recycled by melting. This plastic material is often separately collected for
recycling. However, thermosetting plastic cannot be melted and is thus difficult to
recycle. [Panyakapo & Panyakapo 2007]
PVC composites
PVC applications which contain another material to fulfil their function, but
cannot be separated into pure PVC (so called ´composites´) are only suitable for
such applications where the mixed composition can be tolerated. PVC recycling
operations, covering such products, have also been initiated. [PVC/Sustainability
2011]
60 (72)
Mixed plastics
When homogenous plastics streams are not available, recycling schemes suitable
for mixed plastics, including PVC, may be used. Mixed plastic waste containing
up to 15 percent PVC is not considered to pose technical problems, although the
quality of the recyclate is suitable for a limited number of applications.
PlasticsEurope has studied this subject in depth. The technical report on `The
mechanical recycling of mixed plastics waste', published October 1994, is
available on request. [PVC/Sustainability 2011]
Research projects
There have been many research projects on plastics recycling and reuse. These are
not reviewed here closely. Some scattered information is presented below.
´Vinyl 2010´ is a ten-year voluntary programme on Sustainable Development by

the whole PVC industry. It has a concrete focus as set out in the European PVC
Industry's Voluntary Commitment - a series of targets, projects, initiatives and
research studies primarily concerning environmental protection and resource
management. [Vinyl 2010. 2011]
A follow-up project to research and promote the collection and recycling of

plastic waste from the construction and demolition sector, named ´LIFE
APPRICOD´ (Assessing the Potential of Plastic Recycling in the Construction
and Demolition Activities), was launched in December 2003 and was completed in
2006. It was partly funded by the EU LIFE programme and Vinyl 2010 provided
technical assistance. In 2005, about 20 pilot trials were conducted covering
construction, renovation and demolition activities in four European regions. The
objectives of this project were to optimise the selective collection of plastic
generated in construction and demolition, to disseminate examples of good
recycling practices on a European level and to estimate the costs associated with
selected collection. [Project LIFE APPRICOD 2011]
In Finland
Many problems prevent the development of post consumer PVC waste recycling
in Finland (2006). There is no functioning commercial recyclate market for post
consumer PVC. Several reasons explain this situation:
Experiences in pipe collection scheme and other plastics recycling projects
have not been successful. Transporting and gate fees to other European
PVC-recyclers mean high costs.
PVC is scarcely used for packaging as retailers have recommended their
suppliers to reduce its use as much as possible. So, the proportion of PVC
in household waste is low.
There is no use of plastic windows in Finland because of the competition
of wood (which can be found in abundance).
The electric cords removed from the WEEE before treatment are exported
to China for recycling.
Collection costs are high because the country produces only a small
amount of PVC waste on a large area.
61 (72)
Transport costs (particularly for waste exports) are high for the same
reason as above and because distances to mainland Europe are big.
Sorting, treatment and recycling costs are high compared to those of the
Asian countries.
In conclusion, almost all post consumer PVC waste still goes in Finland to landfill
or is exported to China (2006). [Sevenster 2006]
Suomen Uusiomuovi Oy - or The Finnish Plastics Recycling Ltd. - was founded

to promote recycling of used plastic products in Finland. Optional recycling of
plastic pipes in Finland was started in 2000. The aim is to collect mainly pipes
from constructions sites to avoid dumping in landfill sites. PE-, PP-, PVC- and
PEX-pipes are collected. [Suomen Uusiomuovi Oy 2011]
Assorted plastics can be used for the production of granules for plastic industry.
[L&T Suomessa/Raaka-aineiden toimitukset 2011]
Other countries – examples [Sevenster 2006, Vinyl progress report 2009]
In Sweden the total post consumer PVC recycled (year 2004) was 2 675 tonnes
and the number of recycling companies identified was 3.
The availability of free incineration capacity at a lower gate fee (down to €50/t) in
the Northern countries has pushed waste collecting companies to sort less, and a
considerable fraction of mixed rigid plastics was sent to the Far East (year 2009).
In Germany total post consumer PVC recycled in the country (year 2004) was
17 879 tonnes and the number of recycling companies identified was 29. Post
consumer PVC waste collected through pipe, windows and floor-covering
collection systems (AgPR, Rewindo, etc. ) is recycled either on the own sites of
each system or in a small number of recyclers. Most profiles and windows
collected through Rewindo are recycled in a close-loop. The small proportion of
coloured windows (brown) goes generally to the manufacture of window profiles.
If there is no capacity available at converters level, it is used for pipe manufacture
(internal layer). In Germany, low incineration cost has decreased the sorting of
contaminated fractions (year 2009). More and more, only pre-sorted material is
processed. C-level material was exported to the Far East. Large window recyclers
have kept their market position in Germany (year 2009).
In the UK the total post consumer PVC recycled (year 2004) was 13 783 tonnes
and number of recycling companies identified was 20.
In the Netherlands total post consumer PVC recycled (year 2004) was 19 557
tonnes and number of the recycling companies identified was 6. Large tonnages of
windows and profiles are collected in the Netherlands, but they are recycled in
other countries.
In France, new legislation on construction waste (separation at source) has

increased the supply of mixed rigid post-consumer PVC. However, it is very
difficult to find the recycling companies who accept this contaminated supply.
Consequently, there is an increase in mixed rigid plastics export to the Far East.
62 (72)
6.8 Glass (window-, door-, etc.)

Reuse of flat glass can be e.g.
 as landfill and landscaping material,
 as aggregate or fill material in several products
o concrete, mortars, grouts, asphalt and other products,
 in fibre production,
 in glass wool production,
 in flat glass production,
 in foam glass production for e.g. pavement layer application etc.
[Uusioaines Oy 2011A]
 in container production,
 in paints,
 as abrasive,
 as water filtration media.
Glass has many potentially good properties:

 basically zero water absorption,
 durable,
 excellent hardness,
 can improve flow properties of e.g. concrete mixes,
 high aesthetic potential for numerous novel applications,
 pozzolanic properties (as fine powder). [Meyer et al. 2001]
In cement based materials and cement production
Application of glass in cement based products can be particularly rewarding since

the high production volume of concrete materials can incorporate large quantities
of recycled glass. Reuse of glass in cement based products (concrete, mortars,
grouts) has been studied widely. A lot of research results and literature are
available (not included here).
In Finland the use of glass in cement based products is minimal, but some
research has already been done (e.g. with micronized glass) also in Finland. More
knowledge, experience and applications are needed. [Shi & Zheng 2007]
According to the chemical composition of waste glasses it consists mainly of SiO2

and should be suitable as the raw materials for cement production. The main
concern will be how the alkalis in the glasses will affect the minerals in the
cement clinker and how much alkali will be left in the cement clinker.
In cement based products glass can be used as aggregate or as pozzolanic binding

material. The reuse is sensitive to the grain size of glass particles. Very finely
ground glass (<45 µm, even < 10 µm) has pozzolanic properties contributing to
the concrete strength and can be used as cement replacement.
The major drawback of glass has been that the alkalis in the cement can react with
the silica in the glass. This alkali-silica reaction (ASR) produces a gel which
swells and can cause the concrete to crack. For this reason the concrete industry
has avoided using glass as an aggregate or binding material, particularly as the
ASR reaction may take several years to manifest itself. However, recent work has
63 (72)
demonstrated that the ASR reaction can be avoided by either using a fine sized
glass aggregate, less than 0.5 - 1 mm, or by suppressing the reaction with
admixtures or using a low alkali cement. [Rajabipour et al. 2010]
Foam glass
Production of foam class started in Finland in early 2011 by Uusioaines Oy. Foam
glass is a special product, that can be used:
 in road construction as frost insulation,
 as light weight material/fill,
 as break for capillarity,
 as insulating material (base floors and frost insulation, flat roof insulation).
There are instructions by Uusioaines Oy for flat glass and laminated glass sorting
for recycling (Figure 23) [Uusioaines Oy 2011B]. There can be a small amount
(< 1 cm) silicon or some organic putty beside flat glass. More information can be
found in [Uusioaines Oy 2011C, Suomen Tasolasiyhdistys ry 2011].
Other reuse – grains for new products
Envor Recycling Oy recycles also flat glass in Finland [Envor Recycling Oy

2011] Also construction and demolition waste flat glass and laminated glass are
accepted. Received glass is purified and split into coloured and bright glass. After
that it is crushed into smaller grains based on the re-use demands and delivered
for the re-users (e.g. Saint-Gobain Rakennustuotteet Oy, Pilkington Automotive
Finland Oy, Glaston Oyj, and Tambest Glass Solutions Oy).
Saint-Gobain Rakennustuotteet Oy is the largest user of recycled glass in Finland

(ca. 45000 tn/year, over 1000 trailer trucks). Recycled glass is primarily used by
them in fibre wool production.
64 (72)
Laminated class:
Flat glass:
Figure 23. Instruction for laminated and flat glass sorting [Uusioaines Oy
2011B].
7 Conclusion
The main emphasis in this report is in the use of recycled aggregates/concrete
aggregates (RA/RCA) in concrete.
More research is needed to be able to create a classification system applicable to

national circumstances. A quality control system is also required. Network to
share the experience in using RA will be useful - based on the gained experience,
the use of RA and specifications can be modified.
To find novel, value added and sustainable ways for the use of RA/RCA there
should be more research and innovations. This novel use could include also fine
RA and RA-powders. Methods for RA quality enhancement should also be found,
as well as novel mix design and mixing methods. Use of RA with other materials
to produce traditional, novel or low strength materials, including possibly also
other recycled materials, without or with minimum amount of cement could be a
possibility to widen the use of demolished concrete.
65 (72)
References
Achtemichuk, S., Hubbard, J., Sluce, R. & Shehata, M. H. 2009. The utilization
of recycled concrete aggregate to produce controlled low-strength materials
without using Portland cement. Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. p. 31, 564–
569.
Ahmed, A., Ugai, K. & Kamei, T. 2011. Investigation of recycled gypsum in

conjunction with waste plastic trays for ground improvement. Construction and
Building Materials, Vol. 25, p. 208–217.
Ahmed, A. & Ugai, K. 2011. Environmental effects on durability of soil stabilized

with recycled gypsum. Cold Regions Science and Technology., Vol. 66, Iss. 2–3,
p. 84–92.
Ajdukiewicz, A. & Kliszczewicz, A. 2002. Influence of recycled aggregates on

mechanical properties of HS/HPC. Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 24, p.
269–279.
Akbarnezhad, A. & Ong, K. C. G. 2010. Microwave decontamination of concrete.

Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 62, No. 12, p. 879–885.
Amianti, M. & Botaro, V. R. 2008. Recycling of EPS: A new methodology for

production of concrete impregnated with polystyrene (CIP). Cement & Concrete
Composites, Vol. 30, p. 23–28.
Association of Cities and Regions for Recycling and sustainable Resource

management (ACR+) 2011 < http://www.acrplus.org/conference-
APPRICODEuropeanWorkshop > Visited 15.8.2011.
Betonin, betonilietteen ja veden kierrätys betoniteollisuudessa. 2005.

Betoniyhdistys/Suomen Rakennusmedia Oy, 126 p. (in Finnish)
Bleischwitz, R. & Bahn-Walkowiak, B. 2006. Sustainable Development in the

European aggregates industry: a case for sectoral strategies. Wuppertal Institute
for Climate, Environment and Energy College of Europe. First DRAFT, October
2006, 26 p.
Brown, C. & Allcock, S. 2008. Waste Plasterboard Composting. Literature

Review. Prepared for the Ministry for the Environment, New Zealand, September
2008. < http://www.gib.co.nz/assets/Winstone-Wallboards/Environment/Waste-
Plasterboard-Composting-Review.pdf > Visited 15.8.2011
BS 8500-1:2002. 2002. Concrete - Complementary British standard to BS EN

206-1 - Part 1: Methods of specifying and guidance for the specifier. 44 p.
BS 8500-2:2002. 2002. Concrete - Complementary British standard to BS EN

206-1 - Part 2: Specification for constituent materials and concrete. 33 p.
Buranasing, R., Jaturapitakkul, C. & Tangchirapat, W. 2010. Use of High

Fineness of Fly Ash to Improve Properties of Recycled Aggregate Concrete.
Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 22, Iss. 6, p. 565 – 571.
66 (72)
By 43. 2008. Betonin kiviainekset 2008. Suomen Betoniyhdistys r.y. Concrete

Aggregates 2008, Finnish Concrete Association, in Finnish, 57 p.
Chen H.-Ji, Yen, T. & Chen K.-H. 2003. Use of building rubbles as recycled
aggregates. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 33, p. 125–132.
Construction Business Owner. 2007. Recycling construction materials. An

important part of the construction process. June 2007. <
http://www.constructionbusinessowner.com/topics/compliance/regulations/recycli
ng-construction-materials-an-important-part-of-the-construction-process.html >
Visited 15.8.2011.
Corinaldesi, V. & Moriconi, G. 2009. Influence of mineral additions on the

performance of 100 % recycled aggregate concrete. Construction and Building
Materials, Vol. 23, p. 2869 – 2876.
Corinaldesi, V. & Moriconi, G. 2011 A. Characterization of self-compacting

concretes prepared with different fibers and mineral additions. Cement &
Concrete Composites, Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 33, p. 596–601.
Corinaldesi, V. & Moriconi, G. 2011 B. The role of industrial by-products in self-

compacting concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 25, Iss. 8, p.
3181–3186.
Dhir, R., Dyer, T. & Paine, K. 2006. Appropriate use of sustainable construction
materials. Concrete, p. 20 – 24.
Dhir, R. K. & Paine, K. A. 2007. Performance Related Approach to Use of

Recycled Aggregates. Waste and Resources Action Progamme, Banbury,
Oxfordshire, Technical Report AGG0074. (only as reference)
Dhir, R. K., Limbachiya, M. C. & Leelawat, T. 1999. Suitability of recycled

concrete aggregate for use in BS5328 designated mixes. Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers: Structures and Buildings, Vol. 134, No. 3, p. 257–
274.
EN 12620. 2003. Betonikiviainekset. 49 p.
EN 1367-4. 2008. Tests for thermal and weathering properties of aggregates. Part
4: Determination of drying shrinkage. 18 p.
EN 1744-5. 2007. Tests for chemical properties of aggregates. Part 5:

Determination of acid soluble chloride salts. 12 p.
EN 1744-6. 2007. Tests for chemical properties of aggregates. Part 6:

Determination of the influence of aggregate extract on the initial setting time of
cement. 6 p.
EN 206-1. 2001. Concrete. Specification, performance, production and

conformity, 73 p.
EN 933-11. 2011. Tests for geometrical properties for aggregates. Part 11:
Classification test for the constituents of coarse recycled aggregate.
67 (72)
Envor recycling Oy. 2011. Lasi – uudelleen raaka-aineeksi. <

http://www.envor.fi/DowebEasyCMS/Sivusto/Dokumentit/envor/Esitteet/EnvorR
ecycling_lasi_2011.pdf > Visited 15.8.2011
EuroLightCon. 2000. Recycling lightweight aggregate concrete. Economic Design

and Construction with Light Weight Aggregate Concrete Document BE96-
3942/R26, Brite EuRam III, 23 p.
Evangelista L. & de Brito J. 2010. Durability performance of concrete made with

fine recycled concrete aggregates. Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 32, p. 9–
14.
Evangelista L. & de Brito J. 2007. Mechanical behaviour of concrete made with

fine recycled concrete aggregates. Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 29, p.
397–401.
Fathifazl, G., Abbas, A., Razaqpur, A. Isgor, O. B., Fournier, B. & Foo, S. 2009.
Mixture Proportioning Method for Concrete Made with Coarse Recycled
Concrete Aggregate. J. Mat. in Civ. Engineering. Volume 21, Issue 10, p. 601-
611.
Fathifazl, G., Razaqpur, A. G., Isgor, O. B., Abbas, A., Fournier, B. & Foo, S.
2010. Shear strength of reinforced recycled concrete beams with stirrups.
Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 62, No. 10, p. 685–699.
Fraj, A. B., Kismi, M. & Mounanga, P. 2010. Valorization of coarse rigid

polyurethane foam waste in lightweight aggregate concrete. Construction and
Gadea, J., Rodríguez, A., Campos, P. L., Garabito, J. & Calderón, V. 2010.
Lightweight mortar made with recycled polyurethane foam. Cement & Concrete
Composites , Vol. 32, p. 672–677.
Gonçalves, P. & de Brito, J. 2010. Recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) –

comparative analysis of existing specifications. Magazine of Concrete Research,
Vol. 62, No. 5, p. 339 – 346.
González-Fonteboa, B. & Martínez-Abella, F. 2008. Concretes with aggregates

from demolition waste and silica fume. Materials and mechanical properties.
Building and Environment, Vol. 43, p. 429–437.
Gyproc. Gyproc-levyjen kierrätys. < www.gyproc.fi > Visited 15.8.2011.
Gypsum. 2008A. Technical report on the production and use of gypsum from
waste plasterboard. Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) &
Environment Agency UK 28 p. < http://www.environment-
agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Business/Technical_report_for_gypsum_.pdf .>
Gypsum from waste plasterboard. 2011< http://www.environment-

agency.gov.uk/research/library/consultations/96807.aspx > Visited 15.8.2011.
Gypsum Recycling Ireland Limited. 2011. <

http://www.gypsumrecyclingireland.com/ > Visited 15.8.2011.
68 (72)
Gypsum recycling International. 2011.

http://www.gypsumrecycling.biz/danigip/plasterboard_recycling.php > Visited
15.8.2011.
Hamm, H., Huller, R., & Demmich, J. 2007. Recycling of plasterboard. ZKG
International ,Vol. 60 Iss. 5, p. 68 – 74.
Hansen C. 1990. Recycled concrete aggregate and fly ash produce concrete
without strength Cement. Cement and Concrete Research Vol. 20, No. 3, p. 355–
356.
Ilker, B. T. & Selim, S. 2004. Properties of concretes produced with waste

concrete aggregate. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 34, p. 1307-1312.
Jo, B.-W., Park, S.-K. & Park, J.-C. 2008. Mechanical properties of polymer
concrete made with recycled PET and recycled concrete aggregates. Construction
and Building Materials, Vol. 22, p. 2281–2291.
Kan A. & Demirboga R. 2009A. A new technique of processing for waste-

expanded polystyrene foams as aggregates. Journal of materials processing
technology. Vol. 209, Iss. 6, p. 2994-3000.
Kan A. & Demirboga R. 2009B. A novel material for lightweight concrete

production. Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 31, p. 489–495.
Kasai, Y. 2004. Recent trends in recycling of concrete waste and use of recycled
aggregate concrete in Japan. Julkaisussa: ACI SP-219, Recycling concrete and
other materials for sustainable development, Ed. Liu, T. C. & Meyer, C. p. 11 –
34.
Katz, A. 2003. Properties of concrete made with recycled aggregate from partially
hydrated old concrete. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 33, p. 703-711
Kou, S.-C., Lee G., Poon, C. S. & Lai, W. L. 2009. Properties of lightweight
aggregate concrete prepared with PVC granules derived from scraped PVC pipes.
Waste Manage, Vol. 29, p. 621-628.
Kou, S.-C., Poon, C. S. & Etxeberria, M. 2011. Influence of recycled aggregates

on long term mechanical properties. Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 33, p.
286–291.
Laukaitis, A. Zurauskas, R. & Kerien, J. 2005. The effect of foam polystyrene

granules on cement composite properties. Cement & Concrete Composites Vol.
27, p. 41 – 47.
Larbi, J. A., W. M. M. Heijnen, W. M. M., J, Brouwer, J. P. & E. Mulder, E. 2000.

Preliminary laboratory investigation of thermally treated recycled concrete
aggregate for general use in concrete. Waste Management Series, Vol. 1, p. 129-
139.
69 (72)
Lay, J. 2009. Current technical issues for aggregates. Concrete, July 2009, p. 14 –
16.
Levy, S. M. & Helene, P. 2004. Durability of recycled aggregates concrete: a safe

way to sustainable development. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 34, Iss. 11,
p. 1975–1980.
Lin, K. L., Wu, H. H., Shie, J. L., Hwang C. L. & Cheng, A. 2010. Recycling
waste brick from construction and demolition of buildings as pozzolanic
materials. Waste management & research, Vol. 28, Iss. 7, p. 653-659.
L&T Suomessa/Raaka-aineiden toimitukset. 2011. < http://www.lassila-

tikanoja.fi/fi/PalvelutJaTuotteet/palvelujatuotevalikoima/Ymparistonhuolto/raaka-
aineet/Sivut/Default.aspx > Visited 15.8.2011
Meyer, C., Egosi & Andela, C. 2001. Concrete with waste glass as aggregate.
“Recycling and Re-use of Glass Cullet”, ed. Dhir, Dyer & Limbachiya.
Proceedings of the International Symposium Concrete Technology Unit of ASCE
and University of Dundee, March 19-20, 2001. <
http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/meyer_egosi_paper.pdf > Visited
15.8.2011
Moriconi, G., Corinaldesi, V. & Antonucci R. 2003. Environmentally-friendly

mortars: A way to improve bond between mortar and brick. Materials and
Structures / Matrriaux et Constructions, Vol. 36, p. 702-708.
Mounanga P., Gbongbon W., Poullain P. & Turcry, P. 2008. Proportioning and
characterization of lightweight concrete mixtures made with rigid polyurethane
foam wastes. Cement & Concrete Composites, Vol. 30, p. 806–814.
Mulder, E., Tako P.R. de Jong & Feenstra, L. 2007. Closed Cycle Construction:
An integrated process for the separation and reuse of C&D waste. Waste
Management, Vol. 27, p. 1408–1415.
Mymrin, V. & Correa S. M. 2007. New construction material from concrete

production and demolition wastes and lime production waste. Construction and
Nagai, H. 2011 A. Concrete recycling. Past, Present and Future. Slide series (not
published), 33 p.
Nagai, H. 2011 B. Recycling concrete and gypsum in Japan. Slide series (not
published), 36 p.
Olorunsogo, F. T. & Padayachee. N. 2002. Performance of recycled aggregate

concrete monitored by durability indexes. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol.
32, p. 179 – 185.
Otsuki, N., Miyazato, S. & Yodsudjai, W. 2003. Influence of recycled aggregate

on interfacial transition zone, strength, chloride penetration and carbonation of
concrete. Journal of Materialsi in Civil Engineering, September/October 2003, p.
443 – 451.
70 (72)
Plasterboard Case Study. 2011. International practice in plasterboard recycling:

Canada. The Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP), 10 p. <
http://www.wrap.org.uk/downloads/Case_study_-
_Plasterboard_recycling_in_Canada.991cc7e1.2952.pdf >
Plasterboard recycling. 2011. < http://www.plasterboardrecycling.co.uk/ > Visited

15.8.2011.
Plinke; E., Wenk, E., Wolff, G. Castiglione, D. Palmark, M. 2000. Mechanical

recycling of PVC wastes. Study for DG XI of the European Commission. 142 p.
Poon, C.-S., Chan, D. 2007. Effects of contaminants on the properties of concrete

paving blocks prepared with recycled concrete aggregates. Construction and
Poon, C. S., Shui, Z. H. & Lam, L. 2004 (B). Effect of microstructure of ITZ on
compressive strength of concrete prepared with recycled aggregates. Construction
and Building Materials, Vol. 18, p. 461-468.
Poon, C. S., Shui, Z. H., Lam, L., Fok, H. & Kou, S. C. 2004 (A) Influence of
moisture states of natural and recycled aggregates on the slump and compressive
strength of concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 34, p. 31-36.
Project LIFE APPRICOD. 2011. Plastic waste generated by the construction and
demolition activities. <
http://www20.gencat.cat/portal/site/arc/menuitem.60fb2478680e61fd624a1d25b0
c0e1a0/?vgnextoid=f43cb243f43b6210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnext
channel=f43cb243f43b6210VgnVCM1000008d0c1e0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=default
&newLang=en_GB > Visited 15.8.2011
Progress Report 2010. Reporting on the activities of the year 2009. The European
PVC Industry's Sustainable Development Programme. 44 p.
PVC Plastic: a looming Waste Crisis. 2011 <

http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/pvctoys/reports/loomingproblems.html >
Visited 15.8.2011.
PVC/Sustainability. 2011. < http://www.pvc.org/Sustainability/PVC-recycling-in-

Europe/PVC-recycling-technologies > Visited 15.8.2011.
Quality Protocol. 2010. Recycled gypsum from waste plasterboard. End of waste
criteria for the production and use of recycled gypsum from waste plasterboard.
Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) & Environment Agency UK,
15 p. http://www.environment-
agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Leisure/100119PM_W524GypsumFINAL.pdf
Rajabipour, F., Maraghechi, H. & Fisher, G. 2010. Investigating the Alkali-Silica

Reaction of Recycled Glass Aggregates in Concrete Materials. Journal of
materials in Civil engineering, 2010, p. 1201 – 1208.
RILEM Recommendation. 1994. Specification for concrete with recycled

aggregates. 121-DRG Guidance for demolition and reuse of concrete and
masonry. Materials and Structures, Vol. 27, p. 557 – 559.
71 (72)
Roy Hatfield Plasterboard Recycling. 2011, <

http://www.royhatfield.com/plasterboard-
recycling/information/about_plasterboard_recycling.asp > Visited 15.8.2011.
Rudus Oy. 2008. Betoroc-murskeohje. Käyttöohje rakentamiseen ja

suunnitteluun. 1/2008.
Sadat-Shojai, M. & Bakhshandeh, G.-R. 2011. Recycling of PVC wastes Polymer

Degradation and Stability, Vol. 96, p. 404-415.
Sagoe-Crentsil K. & Brown, T. 1998. Guide for Specification of Recycled

Concrete Aggregates (RCA) for Concrete Production- Final Report. CSIRO,
Building, Construction and Engineering (Australia), 21 p.
Sagoe-Crentsil, K. K., Brown, T. & Taylor, A. H. 2001. Performance of concrete

made with commercially produced coarse recycled concrete aggregate. Cement
and Concrete Research, Vol. 31, Iss. 5, p. 707–712.
Sánchez de Juan, M, Gutiérrez, P. A. 2009. Influence of attached mortar content

on the properties of recycled concrete aggregate. Construction and Building
Materials, Vol. 23, p. 872 – 877.
Sevenster, A. 2006. Contact at AJI-EUROPE: Christian DELAVELLE The

recycling of PVC waste in Europe. (year 2004). Final report. 2006. Study realised
by AJI-EUROPE on behalf of Vinyl 2010.
SFS 5884. 2001. Betonimurskeen maarakennuskäytön laadunhallintajärjestelmä.

Production control of reclaimed concrete for earth construction. 16 p.
SFS-EN 1097-2. 2011. Tests for mechanical and physical properties of

aggregates. Part 2: Methods for the determination of resistance to fragmentation.
34 p.
SFS-Käsikirja 157. 2003. Kiviainesten testaus. 387 p.
Shauyan, A. & Xu, A. 2003. Performance and properties of structural concrete

made with recycled concrete aggregate. ACI Materials Journal, p. 371 – 380.
Shi, C. & Zheng, K. 2007. A review on the use of waste glasses in the production
of cement and concrete. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , Vol. 52, p. 234–
247.
Siddique, R., Khatib, J. & Kaur, J. 2008. Use of recycled plastic in concrete: A
review. Waste Management, Vol. 28, p. 1835–1852.
Suomen Tasolasiyhdistys ry. 2011. < www.tasolasiyhdistys.fi > Visited

15.8.2011.
Suomen Uusiomuovi Oy/Muoviputket kiertoon. 2011. <

http://www.suomenuusiomuovi.fi/fin/muoviputket_kiertoon/ >Visited 15.8.2011.
72 (72)
Tam, W. Y. V, Gao, X. F., Tam, C. M. 2005. Micro-structural analysis of recycled

aggregate concrete produced from two-stage mixing approach. Cement and
Concrete Research, Vol. 35, p. 1195–203.
Tam, W. Y. V, Tam, C. M. Lea, K. N. 2007. Removal of cement mortar remains

from recycled aggregate using pre-soaking approaches. Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, Vol. 50, p. 82 – 101.
Topçu, I. B. & Sengel, S. 2004. Properties of concretes produced with waste

concrete aggregate. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 34, No. 8, p. 1307–
1312.
Uusioaines Oy. 2011A. Foamit. Vaahtolasi. < http://www.uusioaines.com/21 >

Visited 15.8.5011
Uusioaines Oy. 2011B. Laminoidun lasin lajittelu & Tasolasin lajittelu. <
http://kotisivukone.fi/files/uusioainesoy.kotisivukone.com/tasolasinlajitteluohjeet
2011.pdf > Visited 15.8.2011
Uusioaines Oy. 2011C. < www.uusioaines.com > Visited 15.8.2011.
Vinyl 2010. 2011 < http://www.vinyl2010.org/ > Visited 15.8.2011.
WRAP. 2008. Case Study: Mineral Wool/Steel Composite Panel Recycling.

Recycling of Mineral Wool Composite Panels Into New Raw Materials. 12 p.
Xiao, J. Z., Li, J. B. & Zhang, C. 2006. On relationships between the mechanical
properties of recycled aggregate concrete: An overview. Materials and Structures,
Vol. 39, No.7, p. 655–664.
Yarahmadi, N., Jakubowicz, I & Martinsson, L. 2003. PVC floorings as post-

consumer products for mechanical recycling and energy recovery. Polymer
Degradation and Stability, Vol. 79 , p. 439–448.

VTT R 05984 12

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VTT R 05984 12

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

VTT R 05984 12

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VTT-R-05984-12

Reuse of recycled aggregates and other

Construction and demolition waste (C&D waste) is increasingly seen as a

Recycled aggregate (RA) types

Recycled aggregate (RA) is aggregate resulting from the processing of inorganic

For concrete production the classification of RA can be based on the composition

RA quality control and use in concrete

Quality control methods of RA are essential to provide the use of RA in actual

differences between the performance of conventional concrete and that of the

In Finland there is a national specification on the use of aggregate in concrete: By

Challenges and possibilities

of recycled aggregates on the concrete properties, e.g. so called equivalent mortar

In a concept, called ‘Closed Cycle Construction’, the processed materials are

The concept of sustainable development includes the judicious use of natural

Sustainability goes beyond recycling. The sustainable use of materials in

Other C&D waste reuse, e.g. in cement based materials

concrete, aerated concrete, wood, plastics (mainly PVC), PVC-composites, mixed

Executive summary ..................................................................................................... 4

2 Use of recycled aggregates/concrete aggregates (RA/RCA) in concrete ............. 11

4 Closed cycle reuse of C&D waste ........................................................................ 37

5 Recommendations for the use of RA/RCA ........................................................... 40

More closely this review includes basic information on

 the use of RA and RCA in concrete, i.e. Recycled Aggregate Concrete

2 Use of recycled aggregates/concrete aggregates (RA/RCA)

Concrete made with RCA is no longer merely a research field; it is already a

studied. Though it is fully possible to produce relatively good recycled aggregate

2.2 Effects of RC/RCA on recycled aggregate concrete

The effect of RA/RCA is dependent on several factors and must be considered

The main or typical effects of conventional RA/RCA on concrete properties are

o RC/RCA water absorption is high compared with natural aggregate (5 – 10

o With the same water-cement ratio (w/c) chloride penetration and

Figure 1. Strength increases and porosity reduction in concretes from

2.3 EN-standardisation and national specifications

Updated EN-standardisation and general Finnish specifications on the use of

According to [EN 206-1] (Concrete. Specification, performance, production and

Recycled aggregate are aggregates resulting from the processing of inorganic

Amendment A1 (2008) [EN 12620 + A1] introduces clauses for recycled

In more rare circumstances, it is possible that recycled aggregate can contain

For unfamiliar materials from secondary sources, however, the work on

The proportions of constituent materials in coarse recycled aggregate shall be

Table 1. Categories for constituents of coarse recycled aggregates [EN 12620 +

Constituent Content [w. %] Category

There are also other standardisation for aggregates:

standardised at 4 mm, and many grading requirements will become common to

The use of recycled aggregates can consist of two phases:

In practice RA class or quality is determined by:

If the specification for the use of RA in concrete is based on RA classification, the

A comparative analysis of the existing standards and specifications relating to the

The range of materials considered in the different standards varies considerably,

Water absorption of the recycled aggregates is a function of their density. For

When there is no limitation on the density or the water absorption of the

to non-aggressive conditions, and they are especially careful in terms of chemical

Below is assorted information on some selected specifications or draft

Concrete production in Finland is according to EN 206-1 (Betoni. Osa 1:

In Finland there is a national specification on the use of aggregate in concrete:

RILEM has given RILEM TC 121-DRG recommendation on the use of RA/RCA

The use of RCA in the UK (2005) is presented shortly in [Betonin, betonilietteen

compliance to acceptance criteria based on standard deviation of compressive