ARUNAI COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING THIRUVANNAMALAI

INNOVATIVE BUILDING MATERIAL (Glass particles as a concrete material)

Presented by E.Naveen Kumar M.Anand

INTRODUCTION
The passage of federal and state recycling regulations in the United States, the closing of more than half of the nations landfills in the last ten years, and environmental concerns have raised among local governments a recycling consciousness that led to the development of nearly ten thousand municipal programs to collect recyclables. Just as there are numerous approaches for collecting recyclables, there are many approaches to planning and designing material processing facilities. These facilities, which number nearly 500 in the United States, are typically referred to as Material Recovery Facilities (MRF). Serving a large region or city, they share the common objective to sort and process the mixture of recyclables into separate products, which are marketable to the manufacturing industry as alternate raw materials competing with traditional virgin or natural materials. It is the design goal of each MRF to effectively recover the maximum amount of recyclables from the incoming stream. A significant portion of the mixed-color container glass set out by the participating households is received broken. Glass breaks during the loading onto collection trucks, during transport, unloading at the MRF, and during processing. Although this breakage is unintentional, it is also inevitable due to the characteristics of glass. As much as 75% of the total glass may be broken, and at most MRFs the breakage percentage is typically 50%. Due to size and contamination, color sorting of this material into glass cullet suitable for glass bottle manufacturing can be costly. Therefore, MRFs are often forced to landfill this material as residue, unless alternative approaches are found .Container glass represents about 65 to 70% of the total commingled container stream (i.e. inclusive of plastics and metals). There is consequently a significant amount of potential residue if the broken glass cannot be recovered as a marketable product. The solution is to develop an alternate product that could be marketed even if not color-sorted. A simple automatic mixed broken glass beneficiation system was developed by RRT in the early 90sto size, clean and sells the contaminated broken glass material as a construction aggregate product. While this material does not have a strong market value, it does contribute to over all plant performance by reducing residue disposal costs .Many recycling operations realize that they gain little - or even have a loss of income by processing glass. Closed-loop recycling, the process of collecting, sorting, transporting, beneficiating, and manufacturing glass back into bottles, is the most common form of glass recycling and has costs embedded in each step of the process. The growth and evolution of recycling in the United States and in many other parts of the world has resulted in a number of different methods for the collection and sorting of. As the glass manufacturing industry consolidates and the number of glass beneficiators decreases, the cost of transportation increases, and the prices traditionally paid by the beneficiators decrease. Clearly,

closed-loop glass recycling under such conditions is a break-even business at bestand often results in financial losses for every bottle that is picked.

ABSTRACT:
The properties of concretes containing various waste E-glass particle contents were investigated in this study. Waste E-glass particles were obtained from electronic grade glass yarn scrap by grinding to small particle size. The size distribution of cylindrical glass particle was from 38 to 300 m and about 40% of E-glass particle was less than 150 m. The E-glass mainly consists of SiO2, Al2O3, CaO and MgO, and is indicated as amorphous by X-ray diffraction (XRD) technique. Compressive strength and resistance of sulfate attack and chloride ion penetration were significantly improved by utilizing proper amount of waste E-glass in concrete. The compressive strength of specimen with 40 wt.% E-glass content was 17%, 27% and 43% higher than that of control specimen at age of 28, 91 and 365 days, respectively. E-glass can be used in concrete as cementitious material as well as inert filler, which depending upon the particle size, and the dividing size appears to be 75 m. The workability decreased as the glass content increased due to reduction of fineness modulus, and the addition of high-range water reducers was needed to obtain a uniform mix. Little difference was observed in ASR testing results between control and E-glass specimens. Based on the properties of hardened concrete, optimum E-glass content was found to be 4050 wt.%

Chemical components in GLASS:

Silicon di oxide (72%) Sodium oxide (14%) Calcium oxide (9%) Aluminum oxide (2%) Magnesium oxide (2.2%)

Procedure for prepare and testing the concrete:

Glass particles to make a powder Mix the glass powder with concrete materials Curing Testing for strength and sulphate resistance Results

Glass particles to make a powder:

Initially glass particles broken into powder form by using CONE CRUSHER Machine With the help of 600 microns sieve plates to sieve the crushed material Collecting the passing material used in this proposal

Mixing glass particles:

Here we are introducing glass particles mixed with cement How much quantity which requires a glass particles mixed with respective material (i.e..,) 20% to 40% Prepare the concrete cubes around 150mm After the setting time remove the cube mould

Curing:
Place the concrete cubes in curing tanks around 30 to 90 days Two types of methods First method - sodium chloride Second method sulphate salt Place the concrete cubes in curing tanks around 30 to 90 days Two types of methods

 First method - sodium chloride Second method sulphate salt

Various tests:
1. Compressive strength 2. Sulphate salt resistance capacity 3. Sodium chloride resistance capacity

Test results: Compressive strength:

- Using this proposal which shows the enhancement result such as 6% to 24% when compare to earlier existing system

Chloride resistance capacity:

This concrete contains some incorporated features such as CSH GEL This CSH GEL which increases the chloride resistance capacity when compare to earlier existing system

Sulphate resistance capacity:

This concrete contains some incorporated features such as CSH GEL This CSH GEL which increases the sulphate resistance capacity when compare to earlier existing system

Conclusion:
Using this technique have got some improvement when compare to earlier technology,