International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 9, Issue 4, April 2018, pp. 951–955, Article ID: IJCIET_09_04_106

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=4
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

EFFECT OF REPLACING NATURAL COARSE

AGGREGATE BY BRICK AGGREGATE ON THE
PROPERTIES OF CONCRETE
S.V. Nhaveen
M. Tech PRIST University, Thanjavur, Tamilnadu

D. Jeyakumar
M. Tech PRIST University, Thanjavur, Tamilnadu

ABSTRACT
This is an experimental investigation on the properties of concrete obtained
replacing stone aggregate (partly or fully) by crushed clay-brick. The target
compressive strength of stone aggregate concrete was 24 MPa. Remaining concretes
were made by replacing the stone aggregate (partly or fully) by equal volume of brick
aggregate while everything else was kept unchanged. The only variable considered in
this study was the volumetric replacement (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%) of stone
aggregate by brick aggregate. The use of brick aggregate as a replacement of stone
aggregate resulted reductions in unit weight, compressive strength, and modulus of
elasticity of concrete by about 14.5%, 33%, and 28% respectively. Different relations
for determination of compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, and modulus of
elasticity of mix-aggregate concrete have been tentatively proposed.
Key words: Standard concrete, Brick Aggregate, Fire Resistance, Water Absorbtion.
Cite this Article: S.V. Nhaveen and D.Jeyakumar, Effect of Replacing Natural Coarse
Aggregate by Brick Aggregate On The Properties of Concrete, International Journal of
Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(4), 2018, pp. 951–955.
http://www.iaeme.com/ijciet/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=9&IType=4

1. INTRODUCTION
Concrete is the most widely used man-made construction material. It is obtained by mixing
cement, water and aggregates (and sometimes admixture) in required proportions. Aggregates
impart higher volume stability and better durability than hydrated cement paste in concrete and
provide around 75 per cent of the body of concrete. The aggregates are usually derived from
natural sources but in regions such as Bangladesh and parts of West Bengal, India where natural
rock deposits are scarce, burnt-clay bricks are used as an alternative source of coarse aggregate.
Here, construction of rigid pavement, small-to medium-span bridges and culverts and buildings
up to six stories high using crushed brick (brick aggregate) concrete is quite common. In

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 951 editor@iaeme.com

 S.V. Nhaveen and D.Jeyakumar

Bangladesh, brick aggregates are easily available and much cheaper than crushed stone
aggregate. Also concrete with compressive strength of around 20 MPa are easily achieved by
using crushed normal strength brick and following the usual practice of concrete-making.
Besides the unit weight of brick aggregate concrete has been reported to be much less than that
of stone aggregate concrete. And the use of brick aggregate instead of stone aggregate in various
components of a building structure can result in a significant reduction of dead load on column
as well as foundation. Hence, the replacement (partly or fully) of stone aggregate by brick
aggregate may yield cost-effectiveness in making concrete.
So far a few numbers of researches on the performance of crushed clay-brick as coarse
aggregate in making concrete has been reported in the literature. And the reports show that the
use of crushed normal strength brick instead of stone aggregate results a reduction in strength
and stiffness of the concrete. However, the use of mixed aggregate (a combination of brick
aggregate and stone aggregate) may improve the strength and stiffness of concrete in
comparison with those of purely brick aggregate concrete. But, so far a very few researches on
the mixed aggregate concrete has been reported in the literature. Therefore, as a part of the
feasibility study on the volumetric replacement (partly or fully) of stone aggregate by brick
aggregate in making concrete, the present study aimed at investigating the properties of mixed
aggregate concrete.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The performance of concrete depends upon a variety of parameters. Curing of concrete is one
such important parameter. The two objectives of curing are to prevent the loss of moisture and
to control the temperature of concrete for a period sufficient to achieve a desired strength level.
As among the various properties of concrete, its compressive strength is considered to be the
most important and is taken as index of overall quality of concrete by many researchers (Neville
2004, Mehta and Monteiro 1999). The factors affecting the desired strength of concrete
pertaining to curing include curing technique, curing period, and environmental conditions in
terms of relative humidity, ambient temperature, and wind velocity. The various techniques of
curing include ponding, sprinkling, wet covering, steam curing and membrane curing. Different
techniques of curing have been found to have different effect on short-term and long-term
properties of concrete. Literature reports different stress-strain relations for concrete cured
using different techniques and hence varied behavior for compressive strength of concrete.
Non-destructive testing techniques like rebound hammer, ultrasonic pulse velocity, penetration
resistance tests of concrete are taken as measures to predict compressive strength of concrete
(Ferreira and Castro 2000 and Pascale et al. 2003). Many literatures report ultrasonic pulse
velocity as a direct measure of compressive strength and use this as a parameter for prediction
of compressive strength based on empirical relations. Researches have been conducted to
predict compressive strength of concrete using modern computational tools like artificial neural
networks. The present chapter deals with a brief review of previous work pertinent to these
concepts.

3. TEST PROGRAM
Preparation and Testing of Specimens
The coarse aggregates were made saturated surface dry condition before mixing with other
ingredients. Whereas the fine aggregates were made oven-dry conditions before mixing. At
first, necessary amounts of aggregates and cement were placed in a drum-mixer and were mixed
for about 2 minutes. Then the required amount of potable water was added gradually into the
mix and the mixing operation was continued for about 2 minutes to produce a uniform mix.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 952 editor@iaeme.com

 Effect of Replacing Natural Coarse Aggregate by Brick Aggregate On The Properties of Concrete

Additional water required for water absorption of fine aggregates was also added into the mix.
The workability of fresh concrete was measured with standard slump cone test immediately
after mixing. The values of slump of fresh concretes for different mixes ranged from 30 mm to
55 mm.
The 150×300 mm cylindrical molds were filled with fresh concrete in three equal layers,
and each layer was rodded 25 times with a standard tamping rod. The prism molds were filled
with fresh concrete mix in three layers, with each layer rodded one stroke for approximately
each 2.0 in2. The top surface of fresh concrete for both the cylinder and prism specimens was
finished off with a trowel. The specimens were demolded after 24 hours of casting. They were
cured by immersing in a curing tank in the lab. The specimens were taken out of water
approximately 24 hours before testing and were kept in the air dry condition in the laboratory.
The concrete cylinders for different test series were tested (using 1000 KN capacity
universal testing machine) for compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, and modulus of
elasticity at the age of 28 days. The prisms were tested under single point loading to determine
the modulus of rupture. The concrete specimens were tested following appropriate ASTM
Standards as per ASTM specifications.

4. EFFECT OF BRICK AGGREGATE TO COARSE AGGREGATE

RATIO ON CONCRETE PROPERTIES
4.1.1. Unit Weight
The bulk unit weights of stone aggregate concrete (M0) and brick aggregate concrete (M100) are
found 2449 Kg/m3 and 2096 Kg/m3 respectively (Table 2). Whereas the unit weight of mixed
aggregate concretes are 2381 Kg/m3, 2326 Kg/m3 and 2237 Kg/m3 for the stone replacement of
25%, 50% and 75% respectively. The unit weight of 100% brick aggregate concrete places that
concrete in between normal weight concrete (2200 – 2600 Kg/m3) and light weight concrete
(300 – 1850 Kg/m3) [11]. Therefore, it may be classified as medium weight concrete.
The variation of concrete's unit weight with the variation of the volume of brick aggregate
to the volume of total coarse aggregate ratio (Vba/Vca) is shown in Fig. 2. From this figure it is
seen that the actual unit weights of mixed aggregate concretes are higher than the corresponding
values obtained from the linear variation from 100% stone aggregate concrete to 100% brick
aggregate concrete. The rate of decrease in unit weight of mixed aggregate concrete is found to
decrease linearly with increase in Vba/Vca ratio. In comparison with the unit weight of 100%
stone aggregate concrete the average amount of decrease in unit weights of concretes with 25%,
50%, 75% and 100% crushed brick as coarse aggregates are 2.8%, 5.0%, 8.6% and 14.4%
respectively.

4.1.2. Compressive Strength

Fig. 3 shows the variation of the cylinder compressive strength of concrete ( f c′ ) with the
variation of Vba/Vca ratio.
A significant amount of strength reduction (33%) is found for 100% brick aggregate
concrete with respect to 100% stone aggregate concrete. This is contrary to what Mansur et. Al.
[2] reported by comparing brick aggregate concrete strength (72 MPa) with that of conventional
concrete (64 MPa) both with a water-cement ratio of 0.30. This may be due to the use of coarse
aggregate obtained from bricks with a quite high compressive strength (153 MPa) in
comparison with that of brick considered in the present study (17.3 MPa).

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 953 editor@iaeme.com

 S.V. Nhaveen and D.Jeyakumar

4.1.3. Tensile Strength

Test values of the modulus of rupture ( f r ) and the splitting tensile strength ( f sp ) are presented
as a function of Vba/Vca ratio and are shown in Fig.4. Like compressive strength, it is seen from
Fig. 4 that a replacement of stone aggregate with brick aggregate results in a decrease in both f
r and f sp values. The decreases in f r and f sp values for 100% replacement of stone aggregate by
brick aggregate are seen to be 18.8% and 35.8% respectively. This decrease in both f r and f sp
is insignificant up to stone replacement of 25% beyond which the rate of this decrease increases
significantly. However, 100% replacement of stone aggregate (i.e. brick aggregate concrete)
results a significant improvement of f r value over that of 75% replaced concrete whereas the f
sp values for these two cases are seen almost the same. The average value of the ratio fsp/fr for
stone aggregate concrete and the mixed aggregate concretes is 0.36 with a standard deviation
of 0.0359. Whereas this ratio is 0.30 for brick aggregate concrete. Hence, from tensile strength
consideration, it may be suggested to replace stone aggregate with Vba/Vca value either from
0.0% to 50% or 100%.

5. TENSILE STRENGTH-COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH RELATION

The modulus of rupture f r and splitting tensile strength f sp obtained in this study are presented,
as the function of concrete compressive strength, in Figs. 6 and 7 respectively. As expected,
both type of tensile strengths increase with an increase in compressive strength fc′ . The
expressions as suggested by researchers [2,3,6] for prediction of the properties of purely brick
aggregate

6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

6.1. Test Results and Discussions
Various test values of concretes considered in this study are shown in Table.

Ratio f
V wc fc′
fr sp Ec
Mix ba
(Kg/
(MPa) (MPa)
V
ca m3) (MPa) (MPa)

M0 0.00 2449 27.25 6.38 2.43 15731

M25 0.25 2381 25.04 6.35 2.24 14924

M50 0.50 2326 24.63 5.59 2.08 13806

M75 0.75 2237 19.89 4.10 1.61 10703

M100 1.00 2096 18.29 5.18 1.56 11289

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 954 editor@iaeme.com

 Effect of Replacing Natural Coarse Aggregate by Brick Aggregate On The Properties of Concrete

7. CONCLUSION
1. Brick Aggregate concrete weights about 14.5% less than that of natural aggregate concrete. The
rate of decrease in unit weight of mixed aggregate concrete decrease with the increase in
Vba/Vca ratio up to 50% beyond which the rate of decrease increase.
2. A 33% reduction in compressive strength of concrete is found due to the use of brick aggregate
instead of stone aggregate by brick aggregate.
3. About 28% reduction in elastic modulus of concrete is found due to the use of brick aggregate
instead of stone aggregate.
4. The reduction in tensile strength of mixed aggregate concrete is found to be less
significant up to 50% replacement of stone aggregate by brick aggregate.

REFERENCE
[1] M. L. Gambhir, Concrete Technology, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited,
New Delhi, India, 1993.
[2] M. A. Mansur, T. H. Wee, and L. S. Cheran, “Crushed Bricks as Coarse Aggregate for
Concrete”, ACI Materials Journal, Vol.96, No.4, pp.478-484, 1999.
[3] M. A. Rashid, T. Hossain, and M. A. Islam, “Higher Strength Concrete Using Crushed Brick
as Coarse Aggregate”, Indian Concrete Journal, Vol. 82, No. 10, pp.18-23, 2008.
[4] F. M. Khalaf, “Using Crushed Clay Brick as Coarse Aggregate in Concrete”, Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, Vol.18, No.4, pp.518-526, 2006.
[5] A. R. Khaloo, “Properties of Concrete Using Crushed Clinker Brick as Coarse Aggregate”,
ACI Materials Journal, Vol.91, No.2, pp.401-407, 1994.
[6] A. A. Akhtaruzzaman, and A. Hasnat, “Properties of Concrete Using Crushed Brick as
Aggregate”, Concrete International, Vol.5, No.2, pp.58-63, 1983.
[7] M. K. Hasan, M. M. U. Khan, and M. S. Uddin, “Properties of Concretes Obtained
Replacing Stone Chips by Brick Aggregates”, B. Sc. Engineering thesis, Department of
Civil Engineering, Dhaka University of Engineering & Technology (DUET), Gazipur,
Bangladesh, September 2007.
[8] S. K. Shill, K. C. Sarkar, and M. A. Islam, “A Comparative Study between the Properties
of Brick Aggregate Concrete with those of Stone Aggregate Concrete”, B. Sc. Engineering
thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Dhaka University of Engineering & Technology
(DUET), Gazipur, Bangladesh, September 2007.
[9] Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions for Normal, heavyweight and Mass Concrete,
Part 1, ACI Committee 211.1-91, ACI Manual of Concrete practice, 1994.
[10] Annual Book of ASTM Standards, American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM),
West Conshohocken, PA, USA, Vol. 04.02, 2001.
[11] David O. NDUKA, Olabosipo I. FABGENLE, Opeyemi JOSHUA, Ayodeji O. OGUNDE,
Ignatius O. Omuh, Comparative Analysis of Concrete Strength Utilizing Quarry-Crushed
and Locally Sourced Coarse Aggregates, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering
and Technology 9(1), 2018, pp. 609–617.
[12] Vaariseenivasan K, Sreenath S and Saravana Raja Mohan K, Properties of Concrete with
Crushed Waste Ceramic Tiles as Coarse Aggregate, International Journal of Civil
Engineering and Technology, 9(4), 2018, pp. 614–619
[13] A. M. Neville, Properties of Concrete, Longman, Malaysia, 4th edition, reprint 1996.
[14] Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318M-08) and Commentary,
ACI Committee 318, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 2008.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 955 editor@iaeme.com