Original citation: Ling, T.-C., Nor, H.M., Hainin, M.R., Lim, S.-K.

(2010) Long term strength of rubberised concrete paving blocks. Proceedings of the ICE- Construction Materials; 163 (1): 19-26. http://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/article/10.1680/coma.2010.163.1.19

Long term strength of rubberized concrete paving blocks

T. C. Ling*, H. M. Nor, M. R. Hainin, S. K. Lim Abstract The aim of this study was to investigate the long term strength of rubberized concrete paving blocks (RCPB). The effect of three curing conditions on compressive strength was studied. Additional strength tests which included flexural and splitting tensile strength were conducted to determine the strength characteristics and to enhance the understanding of the RCPB properties. Four batches of RCPB that replaced sand volume with crumb rubber at 0%, 10%, 20% and 30% were produced in a commercial plant. The results showed that 10% replacement of crumb rubber did not show any significant change in compressive strength but slightly improved the flexural strength. As the rubber content exceeded 20%, RCPB would cause a great reduction in strength although ductility increases greatly. It was found that the RCPB specimens tested remained intact after failure and did not shatter. Thus, this would be beneficial for trafficked pavement. 1. Introduction In engineering and transportation sector, one of the wastes generated is scrap tyres and this poses serious environmental problem. Recent statistics indicated that there was more than 100% increase in the number of registered vehicle in Malaysia within ten years. Therefore, a huge quantity of waste tyres were abandoned throughout the country annually, which indirectly created several problems: (a) become mosquito breeding places, which posed health risks; (b) occupied extensive space in landfills; (c) fire hazard, which would contaminate the air and soil. In addition, environmental concerns also make it more important to seek and identify useful economic and environmental friendly methods for managing these waste tyres in different applications. It is no longer a new phenomenon to divert discarded waste tyres into useful material in concrete for a long term solution. Furthermore, this effort contributes to reservation of natural materials such as aggregate for concrete production. In addition, the main characteristics of waste tyres are low density, low stiffness and high deformation, which may improve the properties of normal concrete because it is always a challenge for researchers to design and produce hardened concrete with light weight, high strength and high toughness for concrete block pavement application. Various laboratory investigators have shown that the addition of rubber aggregate in wetcast concrete mixture produces a reduction in the mechanical strength of the rubberized concrete.1-13 However, no published data were found in the literature on semi dry-cast rubberized concrete produced at commercial plant facilitated with high pressure and vibration making machine. In addition, most researches investigated the particular curing conditions for initial 28-day, 1-11, 90-day12 and 180-day 13 strength of rubberized concrete. Tautanji discovered that the incorporation of the rubber aggregates in concrete resulted in a reduction of compressive strength of up to 75% and a smaller reduction in flexural strength of up to 35%.1 Kaloush et al. also showed that the rubberized concrete mixtures lowered the compressive strength more than the flexural strength at same mixture ratio.2

Eldin and Senouci reported that there were reductions in strength of up to 85% of the compressive strength and 65% of the tensile strength were observed when the coarse aggregate was fully replaced by rubber aggregate. 3 It was found that the reduction in compressive strength was higher than splitting tensile strength with the increase of rubber aggregate volume content. This early finding was supported by later investigations conducted by some authors. 4,5,12 The present experimental study was therefore designed to investigate the effects of curing conditions on the long term compressive strength, flexural and splitting tensile strength of semi dry-cast concrete paving block (CPB) produced in a commercial plant. By using a machine with high pressure and vibration facilities, the CPB is expected to be a much more consistent product to achieve better dimensional and improved strength. The relationship between compressive strength, flexural and splitting-tensile strength in long term performance was investigated and reported. 2. Methods 2.1. Materials The raw materials used to develop the RCPB and control concrete paving blocks (CCPB) mixes in this study comprised cement, aggregate, coarse sand, fine sand and crumb rubber. Ordinary Portland cement (OPC) was used throughout the study. The physical and mechanical properties of both sand and aggregate are given in Table 1. Crumb rubber is a fine material and is produced by mechanical shredding with the gradation close to that of sand. Two particle sizes of crumb rubber were used: 1 3 mm and 1 5 mm as partial substitute for fine sand and coarse sand in the production of face layer and body layer on CPB, respectively. The unit weight of 1 3 mm and 1 5 mm dense crumb rubber were 596 kg/m3 and 606 kg/m3, respectively.
Table 1. Physical and mechanical properties of sand and aggregate CCPB & 10-RCPB Property Silt content (%) Moisture content (%) Fineness modulus Passing 10mm (%) Passing 5mm (%) Flakiness index Fine sand 5.61 5.22 1.77 Coarse sand 5.71 8.5 3.02 3/8" aggregate 86.15 16.18 17.08 Fine sand 5.61 5.22 1.77 20-RCPB & 30-RCPB Coarse sand 7.62 8.95 2.86 3/8" aggregate 98.18 12.41 22.07

2.2. Sample preparation In this study, all samples were manufactured commercially using a mechanized moulding machine. Two independent mixers were used with different capacity and worked in parallel to ensure facing layer being added for appearance. Table 2 shows the mixing ratio for the components of these RCPB. Initially, aggregate, coarse sand, cement and crumb rubber were mixed in body mix mixer, water was then added to the materials and mixed again until the desired moisture content for these mixtures was obtained. The mixtures were transferred from the pan mixer to a feed hopper and closely controlled by an automatic weighting system. The hopper discharged the correct amount of mixture into steel moulds with internal dimensions of 210 mm length, 105 mm width and 60 mm depth. The mould was filled by the body mix, vibrated and pressed. The face mix was poured into the mould for second layer, and then final compaction and vibration were applied to ensure

First author: tcling611@yahoo.com ; t.ling.1@bham.ac.uk

Page 2

that uniform concrete was produced. The hydraulic ram was released out of the mould onto a moving conveyor belt and was then loaded onto a rack for curing.
Table 2. Mixing ratio Mix symbol CCPB 10-RCPB 20-RCPB 30-RCPB Mix proportion Facing (C:S) 1:2.3 1:2.1 1:1.9 1:1.7 Body (C:A:S) 1:1.8:3.8 1:1.8:3.4 1:1.8:3.0 1:1.8:2.6 Cement content (kg/m3) Facing 617 585 604 574 Body 328 317 274 286 w/c ratio Facing 0.23 0.23 0.29 0.26 Body 0.45 0.43 0.48 0.39 Rubber content (%) Facing 0 8.8 21.6 30.4 Body 0 9.7 19.4 29.0 Demolded fresh density (kg/m3) 2170 2140 2100 2030

2.3. Curing condition All the samples prepared in this study were cured under elevated curing temperature for the first day. The samples on pallets were then removed from the roller-conveyors mounted on the outlet side of the press, and on to a lowerator. All samples were then collected and cured at room temperature for 3, 7, 28, 91,182 and 365 days before being tested. For normal concrete, curing plays an important role for strength development. The properties and performance of concrete are affected under situations where environmental temperatures during concreting and subsequent curing periods are markedly different from those in normal conditions. Thus, three types of curing were adopted in the compressive strength test; mainly (i) air curing, (ii) water curing and (iii) natural weather curing which are described as follows: (i) Natural air curing in laboratory. Average temperature at 30C with 65% relative humidity. (ii) Continuous water curing at 26C. (iii) Tropical climate outside laboratory. Temperature ranged from 26C (rainy day) to 38C (hot day) with humidity ranges from 25% (hot and dry) to 90% (wet). 2.4. Compressive Strength Almost every country actively involved in the manufacturing of CPB specifies compressive strength as the most important property to be achieved.14-17 Therefore in this study the compressive strength was determined using a Universal Testing Machine with a maximum capacity up to 3000 kN. The load was applied to the nominal area of CPB. Prior to the loading test, the CPB was soft capped with two pieces of plywood. The compressive strength of each specimen was calculated according to the Eq. (1) in MA 20.14 The characteristic strength of five paving units based on Eq. (2) is used to determine the reported value. Such a sampling scheme is commonly termed as a variable sampling scheme, as acceptance is based on the variation in property values which are assumed normally distributed.

5 W C = A A + 1.87 H
Where C W H A is compressive strength, MPa is total load at which specimen fail, N is nominal height of paving unit, mm is nominal gross plan area, mm2

(1)

C = C 1.65s k

Where

(2) Ck is the characteristic compressive strength of the lot under test is the average compressive strength of 5 paving units
C

s paving units

C +C +C +C +C 2 3 4 5 = 1 5

is the unbiased standard deviation of 5

2 2 2 2 2 2 C +C +C +C +C 5 C 1 2 3 4 5 4

()

2.5. Splitting tensile strength A splitting tensile strength is established to derive material strength rather than unit strength for CPB according to BS 6717:2001.18 These paving units are tested over the length in order to test as much as material of the CPB as possible. It measures the ability to resist a shear force which is the tension generated for instance, in case of spalling. This results also in a large breaking-surface that can be inspected visually. However, the splitting test has also its limitations. It is very sensitive towards the size of the aggregate, although this can be seen as an advantage as it causes the splitting test to be a better performance-related test. Moreover, it is more thickness dependent than the compressive strength. This limitation can be overcome by using a correction factor, as shown in Eq. (3). In this test, the INSTRON Universal Test Machine with a data acquisition system was used. The loading rate 1.0 mm/min was set for these specimens. The air cured specimens were prepared for testing by recording the average of three separate measurements of the specimens length and thickness. Also required for the splitting tensile tests were two rigid bearers with contact surfaces having a radius of 75 mm, and two plywood bearing strip (measuring 15 mm wide, 4 mm thick and 230 mm long) centred between the platens while the test specimen was centred on top of the plywood strips. Another plywood strip was centred on top of the specimen and the specimen was then loaded. Upon failure, the maximum applied load was recorded to calculate the splitting tensile strength (T) of the specimen according to the following formula: (3) is the braking load, N l is the length of the failure plane, mm t is the thickness of the specimen at the failure plane, mm k is the correction factor for the thickness, calculated form the equation k = 1.3 30(0.18 t/1000)2 The breaking load per unit length of the failure plane, F, in newtons per millimetre (N/mm) was calculated from the following Eq. (4)
0.868 k F T = (l D )

Where

P=

F l

(4)

First author: tcling611@yahoo.com ; t.ling.1@bham.ac.uk

Page 4

2.6. Flexural strength The compressive strength and splitting tensile strength of CPB, when measured as described above, are dependent upon the height of the paving units. Generally, the thinner the paving unit the greater will be the measured strength. Flexural (three-point bending) strength, however, is not affected by paving unit thickness. For this reason, flexural strength is preferred as an index of strength. The test is simpler and consequently cheaper than compression test. Flexural strength could be regarded as a better criterion for wearing and weathering resistance. There is no doubt that a CPB is more prone to break under traffic (fail in bending) than to be crushed (fail under compression). Because in normal practice, the CPB were laid in either 90 or 45 herringbone pattern to provide geometric lock up on four sides, tend to resist the tendency to lift out but consequently to break of the individual block. Therefore it is essential to carry out this test because it seems to be a more suitable quality indicator. Flexural test is when a rectangular CPB is subjected to a transverse force, perpendicular to its longitudinal axis, producing shear and tensile stresses in the CPB. A center line was marked on the top of the specimens, using a black felt-tip marker perpendicular to its length. The CPB was tested under a central line load simply supported over a span of 150 mm.15,18,19 For this test, INSTRON Universal Test Machine was used as in the splitting tensile strength test. A displacement of 0.30 mm/min was set. Each value represents the average of three samples. During the test, while the load was applied to a center point pivot rod to the specimen while being supported by a two support rods until rupture occurs, the deflection and energy absorption were automatically recorded in the data acquisition system, modulus of rupture (MOR) and modulus of elasticity (MOE) were then calculated. The MOR is as shown in Eq. (5) and expressed in MPa: (5) 3 LF
=
2 BD 2

The MOE was calculated using Eq. (6) and expressed in MPa. In these equations L is the span length (mm), F the maximum applied load (N), B the average width of the sample (mm), D its average thickness (mm), and its average length (mm).
E= F 3 l 4 BD L3

(6)

3. Results and discussions 3.1. Compressive strength Figs. 1 - 4 show the change in compressive strength of three curing regimes over time up to 1 year at varied rubber contents. Fig. 1 shows that the rate of gain in strength is rapid up to 28 days of three curing regime. It then slows down with additional curing time. For the 182-day strength, there was an improvement of about 35%, 37% and 47% over the 28-day strength of natural weather, air and water cured, respectively. This behaviour is largely due to the mixtures low water/cement ratio with good quality finish which certainly produces high density (low air voids content) CCPB. However, the CCPB strength under water and natural weather curing slightly dropped at 365 days of age. Fig. 2 shows that the three curing regime obtained a similar strength at each curing days of age. As the curing age increased, the compressive strength of the 10-RCPB also increased. However, 91-day and 365-day compressive strength indicated an opposite trend, which observed strength decreased at 91 days and then increased again at 182 days of curing age. The

relative fluctuations in strength with time may be attributed to inherent variations of these plant 10-RCPB product in the degree of compaction and in the initial accelerated curing and the storage conditions.

Fig. 1. Development of CCPB compressive strength under different curing condition.

Fig. 2. Development of 10-RCPB compressive strength under different curing condition

First author: tcling611@yahoo.com ; t.ling.1@bham.ac.uk

Page 6

Overall, at 3 days of age, all the samples in CCPB and 10-RCPB met the 28-day compressive strength requirement of MA 20 (30 MPa) for 60mm thickness paving block to carry traffic load. The main reason for this could be no or small amount of rubber content in CPB and high compaction casting method in the commercial plant. From Fig. 3a, it can be observed that there was effective adhesion between rubber particles and cement matrix. Therefore, it can be considered that there is no effect upon strength for crumb rubber content less than 10% by sand volume in 10-RCPB.

Fig. 3. Observation of undisturbed facture surface resulting from compression test (a) 10-RCPB and (b) 30-RCPB.

As expected, the compressive strength of RCPB greatly depends on the crumb rubber content. Figs. 4 and 5 indicated that as partial replacement of sand with crumb rubber exceeded 20% by sand volume it resulted in a significant decrease of compressive strength and did not meet the minimum strength requirement even until 365 days of age. This could be attributed to the large amount of rubber content in RCPB. At higher volume content of crumb rubber and high compaction during casting, the stress concentrations of the rubber aggregate (low stiffness) in the RCPB were much higher than the surrounding aggregate particles. After compaction, when the hydraulic ram was released, it resulted in many microcracks (see Fig. 3b) because rubber particles would be dense (high flexibility) and return to actual size causing the rubber particles to bridge the crack surface. Loss of adhesion between the crumb rubber and the surrounding cement paste also occurred. Figs. 4 and 5 show that the rate of gain in strength is fairly rapid up to 7 days for air and natural weather curing RCPB. However, the strength drop at 28 days and then increased again. It is noted that with the increase of curing age from 91 days to 182 days, the strength under air and water curing conditions improved at the same rate. On the other hand, natural weather shows a rapid strength gain from 91 days to 365 days of age by about 1.48 and 1.38 in ratio, for 20-RCPB and 30-RCPB respectively. Comparing the compressive strength of RCPB under three curing conditions at the age of 365 days, natural weather curing gained the highest strength followed by air curing and water curing. In general, the negligible strength difference resulting from the three curing conditions indicated that air, water and natural weather curing did not show any significant effect on the strength development of CCPB and all RCPB samples. However, at 365 days of age, air cured CCPB and 10-RCPB samples gained a the higher strength over natural weather and water cured, while natural weather cured 20-RCPB and 30-RCPB samples gained a higher strength over air cured and water cured.

Fig. 4. Development of 20-RCPB compressive strength under different curing condition.

Fig. 5. Development of 30-RCPB compressive strength under different curing condition

The compression tested samples for CCPB and RCPB after testing are shown in Fig. 6. It can be observed that the RCPB concrete does not exhibit typical compression failure beha-

First author: tcling611@yahoo.com ; t.ling.1@bham.ac.uk

Page 8

vior. The presence of rubber aggregate tends to hold the sample fragments together at failure. This trend becomes more obvious as the rubber content increases.

Fig. 6. Compression tested samples for CCPB and RCPB.

3.2. Splitting tensile strength The results of the splitting tension tests of the CCPB and RCPB are presented in Fig 7. The results show that the splitting tensile strength of the tested CPB samples varied between 0.72 MPa and 5.25 MPa as the rubber content and curing age increased from 0% to 30% and from 1 day to 365 days of age, respectively. It can be observed that the splitting tensile strength decreased with increasing rubber aggregate content in a similar manner to that observed for the compressive strength. However, the drop in splitting tensile strength was lower than that obtained when tested in compression. This can be explained through the softer rubber aggregate and bonding behaviour of the rubberized concrete matrix. This finding agrees with those of previous investigations. The correlation of splitting tensile strength and time was also found to be strong compared to the correlation in compressive strength. CCPB and 10-RCPB show that the rate of gain in splitting tensile strength up to 28 days is rapid and there was considerable strength gain over time. Both 20-RCPB and 30-RCPB had similar rate gain in splitting tensile strength which is slow at early age and then remained relatively constant from 28 to 365 days. Overall, the CCPB showed a slightly higher strength than the 10-RCPB with partial replacement of 10% sand volume with crumb rubber. Both types of CPB exceeded the splitting tensile strength requirement described in BS 6717 at the early age (28 days). A great reduction of splitting tensile strength was observed when rubber content reached 20% of the total sand volume. General average reduction of approximately 53% and 75% of splitting tensile strength for 20-RCPB and 30RCPB were observed, respectively. Therefore RCPB with higher content of crumb rubber failed to meet the requirement for splitting tensile strength. The splitting tension tested samples for CCPB and 30-RCPB are shown in Fig. 8. It can be observed that, as for the compressive strength tests, the RCPB does not exhibit typical compression failure behaviour. The CCPB shows a clean split of the sample into two halves, whereas the rubber aggregate tends to produce a less well defined failure.

Fig. 7. Long-term splitting tensile strength development.

Fig. 8. Splitting tension tested samples for (a) CCPB and (b) 30-RCPB.

3.3. Flexural strength As in the case of compressive and splitting tensile strengths, the relationship between flexural strength and rubber content with respect to the curing age was studied and the results are shown in Fig. 9. The results show that the flexural strength slightly improved approximately 10% for 10-RCPB compared to the 10-CCPB. The improvement in flexural strength is limited to relatively small rubber aggregate contents. This variation is unclear and difficult to ascertain on the basis of the published data. Despite this disparity, the test results suggest that further investigation of the possibility of increased flexural strength is needed. However, the previous investigations indicated the opposite trend, a reduction in flexural strength, even at low rubber contents. The low flexural strength obtained was due to weak bonding between the cement paste and rubber particles.

First author: tcling611@yahoo.com ; t.ling.1@bham.ac.uk

Page 10

At higher volume of sand replaced by crumb rubber, the flexural strength was reduced by 32% and 48% for 20-RCPB and 30-RCPB, respectively. Therefore, the relative flexural strength FR/FC (FR and FC being the flexural strengths of RCPB and CCPB, respectively) is lower than that relative splitting tensile strength. All CPB specimens exceeded the flexural strength requirement prescribed by T-44 specification of 3 MPa from early age,21 except for those made with the 30% replacement of rubber content which only achieved the value from 182 days. As expected, the inclusion of crumb rubber decreased the MOE for the CPB. Generally, CCPB and 10-RCPB mixed with low rubber volume tend to be brittle when MOE value was higher, and RCPB mixed with higher volume of crumb rubber tend to be ductile or flexible when MOE values were lower. In all cases, it was found that the MOE increased as the modulus of rupture (MOR) increased. In Fig. 10, similar ratio of MOE to MOR was obtained for all RCPB samples regardless of the percentage used in the CPB. Therefore it can be explained that the addition of 10% crumb rubber significantly increased the MOR. The fact that existing CPB is much weaker in tension than in compression makes rubberized CPB important and has potential for use in trafficked pavement application instead of sidewalks.

Fig. 9. Long-term flexural strength development.

The flexural strength samples for CCPB and 10-RCPB are shown in Fig. 11. Fig. 11a shows a clear breaking from the tension zone in the middle of the CCPB. However, it is observed that for 10-RCPB, during the three points bending testing, initial cracking from the tension zone were apparent in the lower portion of the block. At the end of the testing, it was found that the block was not fully broken into two halves under the loss of bottom support condition (Fig. 11b). The enhanced toughness by adding rubber aggregate can also be demonstrated by the effort required to fully open the RCPB.

11

Fig. 10. Modulus of elasticity versus modulus of rupture.

Fig. 11. Flexural tested samples for (a) CCPB and (b) 10-RCPB.

3.4. Splitting tension-compression, flexural-compression, and flexural-splitting tension relationship The correlation between splitting tension-compression and flexural-compression in this experiment are shown in Fig. 12. The correlation coefficient (R2) between the splitting tensile and compressive strength was 0.85 while for flexural and compressive strength, the (R2) was 0.92 which was much higher. It was also found that the flexural strength of RCPB decreased with increasing rubber aggregate content in a manner similar to that observed for the compressive strength. However, at higher strength, reduction rate of compressive strength was steeper than that of the flexural and splitting tensile strength.

First author: tcling611@yahoo.com ; t.ling.1@bham.ac.uk

Page 12

Similar to conventional concrete, RCPB specimens tested in bending (flexural strength) demonstrated a higher indirect tensile strength as compared to that obtained by splitting tension test. The results also confirmed that the relationship between tensile and compressive strength depends on the way in which the tensile strength is measured. The average ratio of splitting tensile to compressive strength ranged from 0.106 to 0.102, 0.102 to 0.089, 0.122 to 0.084 and 0.057 to 0.091, for CCPB, 10-RCPB, 20-RCPB and 30RCPB, respectively, as curing age increased from 1 day to 365 days of age. All the RCPB, except for 30-RCPB showed that the ratio continued to decrease with an increase in curing age, which means that compressive strength gain higher strength at the later age than that obtained in splitting tensile strength. This tendency was particularly strong because the corresponding strength was lower when the crumb rubber replacement ratio achieved 30%. The average ratio of bending to compressive strength ranged from 0.127 to 0.137, 0.121 to 0.145, 0.175 to 0.190 and 0.165 to 0.225, for CCPB, 10-RCPB, 20-RCPB and 30-RCPB, respectively, as curing age increased from 1 day to 365 days of age. These results indicated that curing age affects flexural more than compressive strength, leading to an increase in the bending-compression ratio. Additionally, the later-age results confirmed the fact that the ratio of tensile to compressive strength increases as the rubber content in RCPB increases. Since flexural test is found to give higher values for bending strength than splitting tensile test, it is always of interest to establish a relationship between the two parameters. Moreover, engineers and researchers have found the importance of the relationship between splitting tensile and flexural strength. Therefore investigations were conducted to develop a mathematical relationship between both strengths of the CPB in this study. Fig. 13 shows the variation of the bending strength with the splitting tensile strength. The analysis established an equation and is expressed as = 0.90(T) + 1.5 (6)

Fig. 12. Relationship of long-term compressive strength to flexural and splitting tensile strength.

13

Fig. 13. Long-term flexural strength versus splitting tensile strength.

4. Conclusions The semi dry-cast production of RCPB at commercial plants did not pose any difficulties in terms of mixing, casting, and that good quality finish can be achieved. However, increasing the rubber aggregate content from 20% increases the deformability of the mixture resulting in poor quality finish. As expected, the target compressive and splitting tensile strengths were achieved for the control and mixes incorporating low content of rubber aggregate. However, higher replacement of sand with rubber particles, as in 20-RCPB and 30-RCPB, caused a great reduction in strengths which is not steady and is inconsistent with those of previous investigations. The reduction in splitting tensile strength is found lower than that obtained in compression test. The test results were similar to that observed from preceding strength tests, which show that the use of rubber aggregate exceeded 20% in CPB produces a significant reduction in flexural strength. However, if the amount of rubber in the concrete is limited to 10%, an enhancement of flexural strength exists in RCPB which could be favorable for trafficked concrete block pavements. However, 20-RCPB and 30-RCPB can still be produced with potential use at places where high strength of concrete is not as important, such as sidewalks. In all failure strength tests, the RCPB specimens stayed intact (did not shatter) indicating that rubber particles capable to absorb significant plastic energy and withstanding large deformations without full disintegration. This process will continue until the stresses overcome the bond between the cement paste and the rubber aggregates. This behaviour may be beneficial for a pavement structure that requires good impact resistance properties particularly in port application. Because impact loading by stacked containers can result in point loads of up to 23,000 kg (50,000 lb) at each corner which could induce individual block cracking and eventually damage the CPB.

First author: tcling611@yahoo.com ; t.ling.1@bham.ac.uk

Page 14

Comparing the three curing regimes at long term age, air cured samples gain the slightly higher strength over natural weather and water cured samples for CCPB and 10-RCPB, while natural weather cured samples gained higher strength than water and air cured samples for 20-RCPB and 30-RCPB. Nevertheless, high volume of daily production of CPB makes natural weather curing to be more economic and applicable. A good correlation between splitting tension-compression, flexural-compression and flexural-splitting tension are found. A valuable relationship of long term strength would produce benefits for both researchers and pavement designer.

References 1 TOUTANJI H. A. The use of rubber tire particles in concrete to replace mineral aggregates. Cement and Concrete Composites, 1996, 18, No. 2, 135 139. 2 KALOUSH K. E., WAY G. B., and ZHU H. Properties of crumb rubber concrete. Transportation Research Record, 2005, 1914, 8 14. 3 ELDIN N. and SENOUCI A. B. Rubber-tire particles as concrete aggregate. ASCE: J Mater Civil Eng, 1993, 5, No. 4, 478 496. 4 LI G., STUBBLEFIELD M. A., GARRICK G., EGGERS J., ABADIE C. and HUANG B. Development of waste tire modified concrete. Cement and Concrete Research, 2004, 34, No. 12, 2283 2289. 5 HUANG B., LI G., PENG S. S. and EGGERS J. Investigation into waste tire rubberfilled concrete. ASCE: J Mater Civil Eng, 2004, 16, No. 3, 178 194. 6 KHATIB Z. K. and BAYOMY F. M. Rubberized Portland cement concrete. ASCE: J Mater Civil Eng, 1999, 11, No. 3, 206 213. 7 FATTUHI N. I. and CLARK L. A. Cement-based materials containing shredded scrap truck tyre rubber. Construction Building and Materials, 1996, 10, No. 4, 229 236. 8 GHALY A. M. and CAHILL IV. J. D. Correlation of strength, rubber content, and water to cement ratio in rubberized concrete. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 2005, 32, 1075 1081. 9 OLIVARES F. H., BARLUENGA G., BOLLATI M. and WITOSZEK B. Static and dynamic behaviour of recycled tyre rubber-filled concrete. Cement and Concrete Research, 2002, 32, No. 10, 1587 1596. 10 GRANJU J.-L. Mechanical characterisation of cement-based mortar incorporating rubber aggregates from recycled worn tyres. Building and Environment, 2005, 40, No. 2, 221 226. 11 LING T. C. and NOR H. M. Granulated waste tyres in concrete paving block. In Proceedings of Asia-Pacific Structural Engineering and Construction Conference (APSEC 2006). Kuala Lumpur, 2006, pp. E65 70. 12 GUNEYISI E., GESOGLU M. and ZTURAN T. Properties of rubberized concretes containing silica fume. Cement and Concrete Research, 2004, 34, No. 12, 2309 2317. 13 TOPCU I. B. The properties of rubberized concretes. Cement and Concrete Research, 1995, 25, No. 2, 304 310. 14 CONCRETE MASONRY ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIAN. Specification for Concrete Segmental Paving Units. CMAA, Australia, 1996, MA 20. 15 LING T. C. and NOR H. M. Properties of crumb rubber concrete paving blocks with and without facing layer. In Proceedings of National Conference on Civil Engineering (AWAM07). Pulau Langkawi, Malaysia, 2007, pp. 818 823.

15

16 POON C. S. and CHAN D. Paving blocks made with recycled concrete aggregate and crushed clay brick. Construction and Building Materials, 2006, 20, No. 8, 569 577. 17 ERIKA H. and PAULA R. Use of gasification residues in compacted concrete paving blocks. Cement and Concrete Research, 2006, 36, No. 3, 441 448. 18 BRITHISH STANDARD INSTITUTION. Precast Concrete Paving Blocks. BSI, London, 2001, BS 6717: Part 1. 19 MEYER A. The development of concrete paving blocks in Netherlands. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Concrete Block Paving. Newcastle Upon Tyne, U K, 1980, pp. 14 22. 20 CONCRETE MASONRY ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIAN. Concrete segmental pavement: guide to specifying. CMAA, Australia, 1997, T-44.

First author: tcling611@yahoo.com ; t.ling.1@bham.ac.uk

Page 16