Properties of New and Recycled Clay Brick Aggregates

for Use in Concrete

Fouad M. Khalaf1 and Alan S. DeVenny2
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: The testing described in this paper was performed to establish the physical and mechanical properties of new and recycled
crushed clay brick aggregates for use in portland cement concrete 共PCC兲. Various physical and mechanical properties of eight different
types of aggregates were determined and compared with the limits set out in the British Standards for aggregate from natural sources used
in concrete. The results were also compared with granite aggregate that has been proved to be a good natural aggregate for producing
PCC. The results showed that most of the crushed clay-brick aggregates tested can be used in producing PCC for low-level civil
engineering applications and that some kinds of brick aggregate possess good physical and mechanical properties that qualify them for
producing high-quality concrete.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0899-1561共2005兲17:4共456兲
CE Database subject headings: Recycling; Clays; Concrete; Aggregates; Bricks.

Introduction dredging. To promote recycling, British Standard BS 6543 共BSI

Because of the extensive use of aggregate in concrete, many
countries throughout the world have tried to find other sources of
aggregate to use in construction. One of the alternative sources of
aggregate is rubble from demolished buildings 共Trevorrow et al.
1988; Collins and Sherwood 1995; deVries 1993; Hansen 1992;
Tavakoli et al. 1996; Khaloo 1994兲. Recycling and reusing rubble
from demolished buildings is not a new concept, since several
countries have been crushing waste to aggregate for a number of
years; however, the aggregate produced has mainly been limited
to such low-level uses as pipe bedding, site fill, subbase, or as a
capping layer 共Khalaf and DeVenny 2004兲.
In Germany during the reconstruction period immediately after
the Second World War, it was necessary to satisfy an enormous
demand for building materials and to remove the rubble from the
destroyed cities. The quantity of this rubble in German towns was
estimated at about 400 to 600 million cubic meters. Using this
rubble not only reduced site-clearing costs but also fulfilled the
need for building materials.
Similarly, in the United Kingdom, national demand for aggre-
gates has risen steadily since the Second World War 共Council for
the Protection of Rural England 1993兲 because of the urgent need
for houses, as well as the need for a new network of roads. The
consumption of crushed rock and sand in the United Kingdom in
1992 was 240 million tons, obtained mainly by quarrying and
1
Senior Lecturer, School of the Built Environment, Napier Univ., Ed-
inburgh, EH10 5DT, Scotland, U.K. E-mail: f.khalaf@napier.ac.uk
2
Design Engineer, JMP Consultants, 123 Elderslie St., Glasgow,
G3 7AR, Scotland, U.K. E-mail: alan.devenny@jbm.co.uk
Note. Associate Editor: Eyad Masad. Discussion open until January 1,
2006. Separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers. To
extend the closing date by one month, a written request must be filed with
the ASCE Managing Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted
for review and possible publication on March 4, 2003; approved on
October 11, 2004. This paper is part of the Journal of Materials in Civil
Engineering, Vol. 17, No. 4, August 1, 2005. ©ASCE, ISSN 0899-1561/
2005/4-456–464/$25.00.
1985a兲 was published to cover the use of some waste products,
such as pulverized fuel ash. The standard includes no reference to
using demolished construction waste as aggregates in Portland
Cement Concrete 共PCC兲.
In Europe, surveys showed that 25% of the waste is coming
from the demolition of buildings and roads and that 90% of it is
recyclable but that only 30% of this waste is recycled 共RTD
info 2003兲.
The construction and demolition waste industry 共C&DW兲 is
the biggest industry in North America. According to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency 共EPA兲, 215 million tons per
year of municipal solid waste is generated in the United States
from C&DW. This waste is made up primarily of concrete, as-
phalt concrete, wood, gypsum, demolition metals, and asphalt
shingles, which are generated from road construction and high-
way maintenance, building renovation, and demolition of build-
ings and other structures 共Turley 2002兲.
A task force acting for the International Union of Laboratories
and Experts in Construction Materials Systems and Structures
共RILEM 1994兲 classified recycled aggregates for use in PCC into
3 main types:
• Type 1—aggregates that are implicitly understood to originate
primarily from masonry rubble;
• Type 2—aggregates that are implicitly understood to originate
primarily from concrete rubble; and
• Type 3—aggregates that are implicitly understood to consist of
a blend of recycled aggregates and natural aggregates.
Type 3 aggregates also have the following additional require-
ments:
• The minimum content of natural aggregates is at least 80%;
and
• The maximum content of Type 1 aggregates is 10%.
The preceding recommendations were given as guidelines for
writing of European standards to promote the use of secondary
aggregates in construction. The specifications drawn up by the
RILEM 共1994兲 task force also suggest maximum allowable val-
ues for impurities in recycled aggregate 共See Table 1兲. In the
table, Type 1 aggregate is composed of 100% recycled brick,

456 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464

 Table 1. Classification of Recycled Coarse Aggregates for Concrete
关Data from 共RILEM 1994兲兴
Mandatory requirements
Minimum dry particle density 共kg/ m3兲
Maximum water absorption 共%兲
Maximum content of material with SSD
⬍2,200 kg/ m3 共%兲
Maximum content of material with SSD
⬍1,800 kg/ m3 共%兲
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
concrete had a relatively higher strength at later ages. They attrib-
uted this strength to the pozzolanic effect of the finely ground
Type of aggregate portion of the brick aggregate.
According to Hansen 共1992兲, crushed brick must be com-
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3
pletely saturated before use in the manufacture of PCC to prevent
1,500 2,000 2,400 the concrete from being “too thirsty.” The absorption of crushed
20 10 3 brick is estimated to have a value between 22 and 25% by weight
10 10 10 in relation to the material in its dry state.
Khaloo 共1994兲 deemed prewetting of recycled crushed clay
1 1 1 brick aggregate to be unnecessary. He recommended first mixing

the solid constituencies of a mix for one to two minutes, followed

Maximum content of material with SSD 1 0.5 0.5
⬍1,000 kg/ m3 共%兲
Maximum content of foreign materials 共glass, 5 1 1 tion. After adding water, the mix should be left for two minutes to
bitumen, soft materials, etc.兲
Maximum content of metals 共%兲 1 1 1 three minutes. Neville 共1995兲 does not recommend prewetting for
Maximum content of organic material 共%兲 1 0.5 0.5
Maximum content of filler 共⬍0.063 mm兲 共%兲 3 2 2 coated with cement paste that prevent further ingress of water
Maximum content of sand 共⬍4 mm兲 共%兲 5 5 5 necessary for saturation. This practice results in an increase of
Maximum content of sulphate 共%兲 1 1 1 total water/cement 共w/c兲 ratio added to the mix over what would
Note: SSD⫽saturated surface dry condition.
Type 2 is 100% recycled concrete, and Type 3 is a blend of
natural and recycled aggregates.
The economics of recycling are constantly changing because
of government policies. The introduction of a landfill tax and a
levy on quarrying and extracting virgin aggregates in the United
Kingdom has been a big incentive for the recycling industry. Sig-
nificant restrictions on the use of recycled materials by the con-
struction industry include the lack of standards, specifications,
knowledge on properties, durability, and performance on-site.
Clay Brick Aggregate in Portland Cement Concrete
Concrete buildings made with crushed brick have been known
since early Roman times. An early example is the concrete chan-
nel of the Eiffel water supply to Cologne. In this structure, the
binder is a mixture of lime and crushed brick dust or other poz-
zolans of the time 共Czernin 1980; Hansen 1992兲.
Systematic investigations have been carried out on the use of
crushed brick aggregate in PCC, but most of these investigations
were carried out in the 1940s and 1950s and used the type of
bricks available at that time 共Hansen 1992兲. A review on the sub-
ject by Khalaf and DeVenny 共2004兲 indicated that most reports
discussed the type of bricks commonly used at that time. The
review also showed that there was more information about the use
of crushed concrete aggregate in new PCC than about crushed
brick aggregate. Brick aggregate is different from crushed con-
crete aggregate because of differences in the raw materials used
and the manufacturing process of clay bricks. Aggregate produced
by crushing clay bricks is very porous, and problems arise when it
is used in new PCC. However, it should be possible to apply
many of the findings associated with the use of concrete aggre-
gates in producing new PCC to the use of clay brick as an aggre-
gate in concrete.
Zakaria and Cabrera 共1996兲 produced concrete containing
crushed brick as the coarse aggregate. They found that crushed
brick aggregate concrete had a relatively lower strength at early
ages than normal aggregate concrete. The authors attributed this
characteristic to the higher water absorption of crushed brick ag-
gregate compared with gravel, which was used as a control. How-
ever, their investigation also found that crushed brick aggregate
by adding the mixing water. The mixing water should be in-
creased to take into consideration the water needed for absorp-
allow the solids to absorb water before mixing again for another
any aggregate because the aggregate particles can become quickly
occur if full absorption of water by the aggregate were allowed.
It is generally accepted that crushed brick aggregate concretes
can be made with consistencies that vary from very stiff to plastic.
Concretes made with recycled aggregates tend to be harsher and
less workable than mixes containing virgin aggregates.
According to deVries 共1993兲, recycled aggregates are more
angular in shape and have higher water absorption than virgin
aggregates, which demand more water during mixing to produce
concrete. He recommended that recycled aggregates be soaked in
water in a tank before mixing. However, the disadvantage of
soaking is the risk of oversaturation. Oversaturation, in turn can
cause problems in producing homogeneous concrete mixes. The
first of two alternative solutions proposed by deVries was to add
extra water to compensate for absorption by the recycled aggre-
gates; the second was to mix 20% recycled aggregate and 80%
virgin aggregate to avoid workability problems.
Khaloo 共1994兲 used crushed clinker bricks as the coarse ag-
gregate in PCC. He reported only a 7% loss in concrete compres-
sive strength compared with concrete made with natural aggre-
gates. In addition to this decrease in strength, there is a 9.5%
decrease in the unit weight of crushed brick concrete.
Kenai et al. 共2002兲 reported on the performance of PCC made
by using recycled fine and coarse aggregates. The compressive
and flexural strengths of recycled concrete were compared with
those of concrete made with natural aggregates up to 90 days of
age. They compared the properties of aggregates used; and results
for water absorption, water permeability, and shrinkage were
measured. The results indicate that producing good-quality PCC
by using recycled aggregates is possible.
To investigate the use of the crushed clay brick aggregate in
PCC, it was first necessary to investigate the physical and me-
chanical properties of the aggregates themselves, since these
properties affect the properties of fresh and hardened PCC. Tests
were carried out, and results are presented in this paper for the
properties of aggregates that influence the properties of PCC. The
tests are as follows: tests on parent brick, on impurities, on grad-
ing, on strength, on relative density, on water absorption, on po-
rosity, and on shape and surface characteristics. The results were
compared with the limits set out in BS 882 共BSI 1992兲, “Specifi-
cation for Aggregates from Natural Sources for Concrete” and
with the properties of granite aggregate as a control.
Eight different types of crushed aggregates were used in this
investigation. They included five kinds of aggregate from new

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005 / 457

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464

 Table 2. Types of Brick/Aggregate Used in Investigation with Results of Tests on Both Materials
Water
absorption Water
of brick absorption of
units 20 mm lumps
Full-brick Coefficient Half-brick Aggregate Aggregate 共%兲 共%兲
compressive of compressive Coefficient of impact relative Aggregate
Brick/aggregate strength variation strength variation value density porosity 5-hour 24-hour 5-hour 24-hour
type 共N / mm2兲 共%兲 共N / mm2兲 共%兲 共%兲 共SSD兲a 共%兲 boil soak boil soak
Common 39 6.6 43 3.2 31 1.97 25.04 12.9 10.3 14.1 11.5
solid-solid brick
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

5-slot 59 5.8 65 7.3 25 2.22 20.08 10.7 9.5 13.8 12.4

perforated brick
3-slot 68 5.2 79 9.0 19 2.20 17.39 5.8 5.3 7.4 7.4
perforated brick
10-hole 81 3.3 84 7.3 19 2.25 16.75 6.2 4.6 7.4 7.2
perforated brick
Eng B 92 6.6 106 7.8 14 2.41 14.85 6.0 5.2 6.3 6.2
solid-solid wire
cut facing brick
Recycled wash — — — — 24 2.18 14.49 — — 12.7 10.4
aggregate
Recycled — — — — 33 1.94 24.44 — — 19.8 16.2
masonry
aggregate
Granite — — — 9 2.85 6.15 — — 2.63 2.55
aggregate
a
SSD⫽Saturated and surface dry condition.

bricks, a recycled washed aggregate containing predominantly

masonry material, a recycled masonry aggregate, and a proven
natural granite aggregate. The granite aggregate was included in
the experimental program for comparison.

Experimental Program

Brick Used in Investigation

Five types of new clay bricks of 215⫻ 102.5⫻ 65 mm working
sizes with varying compressive strength were crushed to produce
aggregate. Before they were crushed into a coarse aggregate, their
compressive strength was required so that it could be compared
with the mechanical properties of the aggregates produced from
them. To find the compressive strength of each brick type, tests
were carried out in accordance with BS 3921 共BSI 1985b兲 and
ASTM C 67 共ASTM 1989兲. The only alteration made to the pro-
cedure was the number of bricks tested. Instead of testing 10
samples, only 5 were tested. The brick types and compressive
strength results are given in Table 2.
The results in Table 2 indicate that the different bricks used in
this investigation represent a wide range of strength. The reason
for using bricks of different strengths was to study and compare
their mechanical properties with aggregate from natural sources
that is suitable for PCC.
Fig. 1 shows the relationship between the average strength of 5
half-bricks, as tested using the ASTM C67 method, versus the
average strength of 5 full bricks, as tested using the BS 3921 共BSI
1985b兲 method, for all the bricks used in the investigation. The
figure shows that a good linear relationship exists between the
average results of strength produced from testing half-block and Fig. 1. Half-brick compressive strength versus full-brick compressive
full-block samples. strength

458 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464

 The best-fit equation for the relationship shown in Fig. 1 is as
follows:
f hb = 1.09 f fb + 2.19
共1兲
R2 = 0.95
where f hb⫽half-brick compressive strength 共N / mm2兲; and
f fb⫽full-brick compressive strength 共N / mm2兲.
The relationship in Eq. 共1兲 is useful in converting the compres-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
sive strength of half-bricks tested by using the American standard
test method to full-brick compressive strength tested by using the
British standard test method and vice versa. Testing half-bricks is
more convenient because of the lower ultimate load required for
crushing. However, preparing half-brick samples requires more
work, time, and machinery because half bricks are sawed from
full bricks.
Types of Aggregate Used in Investigation
Seven different kinds of crushed brick aggregate and one type of
granite aggregate were used in the investigation. They include the
following:
New Brick Aggregate
The new brick aggregate was produced by breaking down whole
new bricks by smashing them on a metal plate with a hammer.
The large brick pieces were crushed again to smaller sizes and
sieved until the grading of the aggregates complied with the grad-
ing limits set out in BS 882 共BSI 1992兲 and BS 63: Part 1 共BSI
1987兲 for 20-mm single-sized aggregate 共that is, fractions passing
the 20-mm sieve but retained on 14, 10, and 5 mm兲.
Recycled Washed Aggregate
The 20-mm recycled washed aggregate required no preparation,
since it was supplied as a 20-mm single-sized aggregate by the
producer. This aggregate had been screened at the recycling site
to remove impurities, but the material still contained a percentage
of such impurities as timber, metal, glass, paper, rubber, and
mortar.
Recycled Masonry Aggregate
The recycled masonry aggregate was produced by crushing larger
masonry pieces supplied by the manufacturer as a 40 to 60 mm
aggregate. The crushed aggregate contained brick pieces from at
least six different brick types. The only impurities present were
pieces of mortar that had adhered to the bricks before crushing.
When the bricks were crushed in the laboratory to a 20-mm
single-sized aggregate 共that is fractions passing the 20-mm sieve
but retained on 14, 10, and 5 mm兲, most of the mortar was re-
duced to dust and removed when sieved but some of the mortar
still adhered to the aggregate particles.
Granite Aggregate
Natural crushed 20-mm single-sized granite aggregate that previ-
ously had been successfully employed to produce good-quality
PCC was used in the present investigation so that comparisons
could be made with other aggregates.
To obtain representative samples for testing, all aggregates
were riffled in accordance with BS 812: Part 102 共BSI 1989兲. The
samples of aggregate were then tested to determine the type and
amount of impurities, grading, impact value, relative density,
water absorption, and porosity.
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005 / 459
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464
Table 3. Percentages of Impurities Present in Recycled Washed
Aggregate
Percentage by weight
Impurity 共%兲
Paper 0.08
Plastic 0.11
Timber 0.12
Glass 0.45
Asphalt concrete/felt 0.47
Metal 0.76
Ceramic 1.21
Total 3.2
Impurities in Recycled Washed Aggregate
A sample of the recycled washed aggregate was taken, and impu-
rities were removed and weighed so that the percentages of indi-
vidual impurities could be determined. The results of this analysis
are shown in Table 3.
As indicated in Table 3, even after screening to remove metal
and timber with magnets and flotation devices, some of those
materials still remained in the aggregate. A percentage of mortar
was also present, but estimating it was difficult because the mor-
tar was mainly adhered to the brick particles. With the addition of
the mortar, the total percentage of impurities in Table 3 would
probably be around 5%. The types and percentages of impurities
in recycled aggregate are really dependent on the composition of
the construction and demolition debris that has been processed.
The recycled materials sometimes contain a large percentage of
plaster, but in this case no plaster was found; however, the large
percentage of ceramic tile that was present is uncharacteristic of
recycled material. It is evident that a standard is needed for re-
cycled aggregates. The standard should include maximum allow-
able values for named impurities that could be harmful when the
material is used as an aggregate.
Sieve Analysis
A sieve analysis was carried out on all types of aggregate before
their use in the experimental work. The appropriate nest of sieves
used for each analysis was in accordance with BS 410 共BSI 2000兲
and BS 812: Part 103.1 共BSI 1985c兲 for the grading of aggregate.
Table 4 displays the results of the sieve analysis for all the coarse
aggregates used in the investigation. The results of the sieve
analysis for coarse aggregate were then compared with Table 5 to
determine whether the aggregates complied with the grading lim-
its for 20-mm single-sized aggregate from BS 882 共BSI 1992兲.
Table 4 indicates that all the aggregates used have grading
values that place them within the limits for 20-mm single-sized
aggregate from Table 5.
Impact Value Test „IV…
The impact value gives a relative measure of the resistance of an
aggregate to sudden shock or impact. In some aggregates, this
resistance can differ from its resistance to a slowly applied com-
pressive load. The impact value is found by dropping a standard
hammer onto a sample of aggregate and measuring the weight of
the fines resulting from the impact; therefore, the lower the im-
pact value, the tougher and stronger the aggregate.
 Table 4. Sieve Analysis Results for All Coarse Aggregates
Percentage by mass passing British standard sieves for nominal sizes
Sieve size
共mm兲 Common 5-slot 3-slot 10-hole Eng B Recycled washed Recycled masonry Granite
37.5 — — — — — — — 100
20 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 95.0
14 25.9 23.5 18.0 18.0 20 44 22.8 24.4
10 5.6 5.7 3.0 4.0 3.6 12 5.0 2.5
5 1.5 0.6 0.5 1.0 1.7 5 0.5 0.4
2.36 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.4 3 0.2 0.3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The maximum allowable impact values for aggregates recom-
mended for use in concrete, as given in BS 882 共British 1992兲, are
as follows:
• 25% when the aggregate is to be used for heavy-duty concrete
flooring;
• 30% when the aggregate is to be used for pavement wearing
surfaces; and
• 45% when the aggregate is to be used for other concretes.
The impact values were calculated by using the relevant Brit-
ish Standard BS 812: Part 112 共BSI 1990a兲 for the five different
new brick aggregates, the two recycled aggregates, and granite
aggregate. The results for the aggregate impact test are shown in
Table 2.
Apart from Brick Aggregates 1 and 7, the impact test results
show that all other aggregates fall within the suitability limits for
concrete that is to be used for heavy-duty flooring and pavement
wearing surfaces. Table 2 also shows that the recycled aggregates,
in general, are not as strong as the clean crushed-brick aggregates
but this outcome was expected because of the presence of such
impurities as mortar. However, the results show that the recycled
washed aggregate has an impact value of 24%, which qualifies the
aggregate to be used for heavy-duty flooring.
Fig. 2 was plotted to show the relationship between the com-
pressive strength of parent half-brick and the impact value of the
new brick aggregate. The figure shows that as the impact value of
brick aggregate increases, the compressive strength of the parent
brick decreases. therefore, the impact test could be used to esti-
mate the strength of brick units by testing brick lumps crushed
from the parent brick. The results would also be useful in deter-
mining the suitability of recycled brick for use as the aggregate in
new PCC. The best-fit equation for the relationship shown in Fig.
2 is as follows:
f hb = − 3.64共IV兲 + 155.44
共2兲
R2 = 0.93
where IV⫽impact value 共%兲.
Relative Density „RD…
The relative densities of the brick aggregates and the granite ag-
gregate were determined in accordance with BS 812: Part 2 共BSI
1995兲 by using the gas jar method. This method involves the
immersion of an aggregate sample in water for 24 hours in an
airtight vessel. The mass of the vessel containing the water and
aggregate was weighed 共Mass B兲, and the mass of the vessel
containing only water was also recorded 共Mass C兲. After the 24
hours of immersion, the aggregate was removed from the water
and placed on a dry cloth to remove any excess water from the
surface of the aggregate particles. The weight of aggregate was
then recorded 共Mass A兲 in this saturated surface-dry 共SSD兲 con-
dition. The relative density was then calculated by using Eq. 共3兲.
The results of relative density on an SSD basis for the aggregates
used in this investigation are shown in Table 2.
Mass A
Relative density共RD兲 = 共3兲
Mass A − 共Mass B − Mass C兲
The results in Table 2 indicate that, in general, stronger bricks
produced higher values of relative density. In addition, new brick
aggregates and recycled aggregates have a lower relative density

Table 5. Concrete Aggregate: Grading Limits for Coarse Aggregate 关Data from BS 882 共BSI 1992兲兴
Percentage by mass passing British standard sieves for nominal sizes
Graded aggregate Single-sized aggregate
Sieve size
共mm兲 40 to 5 mm 20 to 5 mm 14 to 5 mm 40 mm 20 mm 14 mm 10 mm
50 100 — — 100 — — —
37.5 90–100 100 — 85–100 100 — —
20 35–70 90–100 100 0–25 85–100 100 —
14 — — 90–100 — — 85–100 100
10 10–40 30–60 50–85 0–5 0–25 0–50 85–100
5 0–5 0–10 0–10 — 0–5 0–10 0–25
2.36 — — — — — — 0–5

460 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 2. Half-brick compressive strength versus impact value for new
brick aggregate
than the granite aggregate; therefore, concrete made from crushed
brick aggregate can be used where concrete of low density is
required and where self-weight is a problem. This advantage is a
big one because in concrete construction, self-weight represents a
large proportion of the total load on the structure. Therefore, con-
crete of low self-weight, allows smaller sections to be used, and
the size of foundations can consequently be reduced, representing
a financial saving.
Fig. 3 was plotted to show that a linear relationship exists
between the compressive strength of parent half-brick and the
relative density of the new brick aggregate. The figure shows that
as the relative density of the brick aggregate increases, the com-
pressive strength of the half-brick increases. The relationship is
very useful, since it means that the strength of a brick can be
estimated by determining the relative density of 20 mm crushed
brick aggregate. By taking the impact value and the relative den-
sity of a crushed brick sample together, the strength of the parent
brick can be predicted fairly accurately. By taking the two values
together, determining the suitability of new or recycled brick for
use as the aggregate in new PCC is also possible.
The best-fit equation for the relationship shown in Fig. 3 is as
follows:
Fig. 3. Half-brick compressive strength versus relative density for
new brick aggregate
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005 / 461
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464
Fig. 4. Impact value versus relative density for new brick aggregate
f hb = 141.93共RD兲 − 238.23
共4兲
R2 = 0.89
where RD⫽Relative density 共SSD兲
Fig. 4 shows a relationship between the impact value of brick
aggregate and its relative density. As the relative density in-
creases, the impact value decreases at a linear rate. Tougher brick
aggregates therefore have a higher relative density.
The best-fit equation for the relationship shown in Fig. 4 is as
follows:
IV = − 39.36共RD兲 + 109.14
共5兲
R2 = 0.95
Water Absorption of Brick Units and Aggregates
Full bricks of each brick type were sampled and tested for water
absorption in accordance with BS 3921 共BSI 1985b兲 using the 5 h
boiling method. For purposes of comparison, full bricks of each
brick type were also tested for water absorption by using a 24 h
cold immersion. This process allows the effects of the 5 h boiling
to be quantified. The results for the 5 h boiling and 24 h immer-
sion in cold water for brick units are given in Table 2.
Crushed brick aggregates from each brick type were mixed
and riffled to achieve a representative sample. The 20 mm brick
samples were then tested for water absorption by a new 5 h boil-
ing method suggested by Khalaf and DeVenny 共2002兲. A sample
of 20 mm granite aggregate was also tested so that a comparison
could be made with the brick aggregates.
To measure the effect of boiling on the aggregates, samples of
each brick aggregate type and the granite aggregate were also
tested for water absorption in accordance with BS 812: Part 109
共BSI 1990b兲. This test is commonly used for natural concrete
aggregate and involves immersing a sample in cold water for 24 h
in a sealed container. After oven drying, the water absorption was
calculated as a percentage from the mass of water absorbed di-
vided by the dry mass of the sample. Results for the 5 h boiling
and 24 h immersion in cold water for aggregates are given in
Table 2.
The results in Table 2 show that the 5 h boiling of brick units
gave higher water absorption values than 24 h immersion in cold
water. This result suggests that the concept of boiling the bricks to
expel air is effective. However, a much higher result was obtained
from boiling 20 mm brick aggregates. This result suggests that the
 5 h boiling of brick units was not sufficient to expel all the air.
Because the brick aggregates are much smaller, the air has a
shorter distance and time to escape; whereas in the whole brick
unit, the air at the center has more difficulty escaping. Also, with
brick aggregates instead of whole bricks, there is no need to wipe
the excess water from the brick perforations, which improves the
accuracy of the results.
The results in Table 2 suggest that the 5 h boiling of 20 mm
brick aggregates offers a simple and easy alternative test to the 5
h boiling of 10 full bricks in accordance with BS 3921 共BSI
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1985b兲 or 10 half-bricks in accordance with ASTM C 67 ASTM

共1989兲. The new test does not require a large and expensive boil-
ing tank that uses a lot of electricity while boiling the 10 full or
half-bricks for 5 h. The new test can be performed in the labora-
tory or on-site with a small portable metal container and a metal Fig. 5. Half-brick compressive strength versus porosity for new brick
mesh that lifts the sample from the base of the container to allow aggregate
the water to circulate around the lumps during boiling. The cold
immersion of 20 mm aggregates in water for 24 h also provides
between the compressive strength of the half-bricks and the po-
an accurate estimate of the water absorption of clay bricks. This
rosity of 20 mm lumps broken up from similar new brick units.
test could be used as a works control test, since performing it is
The figure indicates that the more porous brick has a lower com-
easy. Full details about the new test are given in Khalaf and
pressive strength than a brick with a low porosity that has higher
DeVenny 共2002兲.
strength.
The results in Table 2 indicate that the crushed brick aggre-
The best-fit equation for the relationship shown in Fig. 5 is as
gates adsorb more water than the granite aggregate. For that type
follows:
of aggregate to be used in concrete, it would have to be presoaked
or the mixing water would have to be adjusted; otherwise, it f hb = − 5.76共P兲 + 183.97
would absorb a large amount of the mixing water. 共6兲
R2 = 0.92
Porosity of Aggregate „P… where P⫽porosity共%兲.
Porosity is defined as the volume of the pores within a porous Fig. 6 shows a relationship between impact value and porosity
material sample, expressed as a percentage of the total volume of for the new brick aggregates. The figure shows that as the aggre-
the sample. There is no test in British or ASTM standards for gates porosity increases, the impact value of the aggregate also
concrete aggregates to measure the porosity of the material. Simi- increases. The porosity of a crushed brick aggregate can therefore
larly, there is no test in BS 3921 共BSI 1985b兲 clay brick or ASTM be estimated from the aggregate impact value, or vice versa. This
C 67 ASTM 共1989兲 building brick to measure the porosity of clay information is useful because knowing whether an aggregate is
bricks. If clay brick aggregates are to be used in concrete, a more porous is important when considering it for use in PCC.
consistent value for the porosity of the brick material is desirable, The best-fit equation for the relationship shown in Fig. 6 is as
since as the porosity of aggregate can influence how water is follows:
transported through the concrete. The structure of the pores in a IV = 1.67共P兲 − 10.08
composite material like concrete dictates the movement of water 共7兲
through it, thereby affecting the material’s resistance to freezing R2 = 0.98
and thawing and the movement of harmful chemicals contained
within the absorbed water. The degree of porosity of crushed Fig. 7 shows a relationship between relative density and po-
brick aggregates depends on the type of clay used to manufacture rosity for new brick aggregate. The figure indicates that as the
the original brick and the duration and temperature of firing. porosity of crushed brick aggregate increases, the relative density
For the present investigation, the values of porosity for the
various aggregates used were calculated using a new test proce-
dure suggested by Khalaf and DeVenny 共2002兲. This procedure
calculates the porosity for 20 mm brick lumps. As suggested by
Khalaf and DeVenny, this procedure was followed for each of the
brick aggregates and granite aggregate so that a comparison could
be made. The results of the porosity test are given in Table 2.
Table 2 shows that the new method proposed for testing brick
porosity was effective, since results from the water absorption test
for aggregates have backed up the porosity results.
The results in Table 2 for water absorption and porosity of the
new and recycled crushed brick aggregates suggest that the brick
aggregate is far more porous than the granite aggregate. Because
of their higher porosity, brick aggregates used to produce concrete
would have to be presoaked or the mixing water would have to be
increased to compensate for aggregate absorption.
Fig. 5 was plotted to show that a linear relationship exists Fig. 6. Impact value versus porosity for new brick aggregates

462 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005

J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 7. Relative density versus porosity for new brick aggregates
of the aggregate decreases. As the relative density of a brick ag-
gregate decreases, the volume of voids in the material increases,
causing a higher porosity value.
The best-fit equation for the relationship shown in Fig. 7 is as
follows:
RD = − 0.04共P兲 + 2.92
共8兲
R2 = 0.89
Conclusions
This paper presents the results of an investigation to determine
the physical and mechanical properties of new and recycled
crushed clay brick aggregates for use in PCC. Various properties
of eight different types of aggregate were determined and com-
pared. The following conclusions were made from the work pre-
sented in this paper:
1. Even after crushing and screening to remove impurities, re-
cycled aggregates still contain a small percentage of material
that can be detrimental if the aggregate is used to produce
PCC.
2. Apart from aggregates produced from common bricks and
recycled masonry, the impact test results show that all other
aggregates fall within the BS 882 共BSI 1992兲 suitable limits
for concrete that is to be used for heavy-duty flooring and
pavement wearing surfaces.
3. A linear relationship exists between the compressive strength
of the parent bricks and the impact value of aggregates pro-
duced from them. This relationship can be used to estimate
the strength of new brick units and to determine the suitabil-
ity of recycled brick aggregate for use in new PCC.
4. The relative densities of the new and recycled crushed brick
aggregates are considerably less than the density of the gran-
ite aggregate. Using crushed brick aggregate may result in
producing PCC that has a lower weight than concrete made
with such virgin aggregates as granite.
5. The results show that the 5 h boiling on full-size brick units,
as recommended by BS 3921 共BSI 1985b兲 underestimate the
true value of water absorption of clay bricks. This outcome
suggests that boiling for 5 h is not enough to expel the air
from the brick pores.
6. The water absorption of clay bricks can be determined by 5 h
boiling of brick lumps. This process is easier to carry out and
more reliable, since no brick perforations have to be dried.
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005 / 463
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464
This test is more economical than boiling 10 whole bricks
because a smaller water bath is required and less energy is
consumed during the boiling process. The cold immersion of
20 mm lumps in water for 24 h also provides an accurate
estimate of water absorption, and this test could easily be
used as a works control test.
7. The two recycled aggregates have a higher porosity value
than the crushed new brick aggregates and the granite aggre-
gate. These two aggregates will therefore have a higher water
demand when used as the aggregate in PCC.
8. The results indicate that a general relationship exists between
brick compressive strength and porosity. The higher the po-
rosity of brick units, the lower the compressive strength of
the brick unit, and vice versa.
9. When the results of the impact, relative density, and porosity
tests on brick lumps are combined, they provide a good in-
dication of the compressive strength of a new parent brick or
a recycled brick unit. It can be used as an alternative test to
the BS and ASTM standards uniaxial compressive test of 10
full bricks and 5 half-bricks, respectively, that required a
high-capacity crushing machine.
Acknowledgments
The writers wish to express their appreciation and thanks to
David J. Balmer of W. H. Malcolm Ltd., Glasgow for supplying
the materials for this investigation and to Brian Russell, William
Laing, Alan Barber, John Callaghan and Ron Hunter for their
technical support.
References
American Society for Testing and Materials 共ASTM兲. 共1989兲. “Building
brick: Solid masonry units made from clay or shale.” ASTM C62, Pa.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1985a兲. “Guide to use of industrial
by-products and waste materials in building and civil engineering.”
BS 6543, London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1985b兲. “Specification for clay
bricks.” BS 3921, London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1985c兲. “Testing aggregates: Method
for determination of particle size distribution, sieve tests.” BS 812:
Part 103.1, London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1987兲. “Road aggregates: Specifica-
tion for single-sized aggregate for general purposes.” BS 63: Part 1,
London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1989兲. “Testing aggregates: Methods
for sampling.” BS 812: Part 102, London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1990a兲. “Testing aggregates: Method
for determination of aggregate impact value 共AIV兲.” BS 812: Part
112, London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1990b兲. “Testing aggregates: Meth-
ods for determination of moisture content.” BS 812: Part 109,
London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1992兲. “Specification for aggregates
from natural sources for concrete.” BS 882, London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共1995兲. “Testing aggregates: Methods
for determination of density.” BS 812: Part 2, London.
British Standards Institution 共BSI兲. 共2000兲. “Test sieves: Technical re-
quirements and testing. Test sieves of metal wire cloth.” BS 410: Part
1, London.
Collins, R. J., and Sherwood, P. T. 共1995兲. “Use of waste and recycled
 materials as aggregates: Specifications and standards.” Depart. of the
Envir. Report, HMSO, London.
Council for the Protection of Rural England. 共1993兲. “Driven to dig: Road
building and aggregates demand.” Council for the Protection of Rural
England, London.
Czernin, W. 共1980兲. Cement chemistry and physics for engineers, God-
win, London.
deVries, P. 共1993兲. “Concrete re-cycled: crushed concrete as aggregate.”
Conc., 27共3兲, 9–13.
Hansen, T. C. 共1992兲. “Recycling of demolished concrete and masonry.”
RILEM Rep. 6, E&FN Spon, London.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by National Institute of Technology - Agartala on 03/04/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Kenai, S., Debieb, F., and Azzouz, L. 共2002兲. “Mechanical properties and
durability of concrete made with coarse and fine recycled aggregates.”
Proc., 5th Triennial Int. Conf. on Challenges in Conc. Const., Con-
crete Technology Unit of the Univ. of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland,
383–392.
Khalaf, F. M., and DeVenny, A. S. 共2002兲. “New tests for porosity and
water absorption of fired clay bricks.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 14共4兲,
334–337.
Khalaf, F. M., and DeVenny, A. S. 共2004兲. “Recycling of demolished
masonry rubble as coarse aggregate in concrete: review.” J. Mater.
464 / JOURNAL OF MATERIALS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JULY/AUGUST 2005
J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 2005, 17(4): 456-464
Civ. Eng., 16共4兲, 331–340.
Khaloo, A. R. 共1994兲. “Properties of concrete using crushed clinker brick
as coarse aggregate.” ACI Mater. J., 91共2兲, 401–407.
Neville, A. M. 共1995兲. Properties of concrete, Longman’s, London.
RILEM. 共1994兲. “Specifications for concrete with recycled aggregates.”
Task Force 1, Mater. Struct., 27共173兲, 557–559.
RTD info. 共2000兲. “Recycled buildings.” Mag. for European Research,
具http://europa.eu.int典 共Jan. 24, 2003兲.
Tavakoli, M., and Soroushian, P. 共1996兲. “Strengths of recycled aggregate
concrete made using field-demolished concrete as aggregate.” ACI
Mater. J., 93共2兲, 182–190.
Trevorrow, A., Joynes, H., and Wainwright, P. J. 共1988兲. “Recycling of
concrete and demolition waste in the UK.” Proc., 2nd Int. Symp. on
Demolition and Reuse of Concrete and Masonry, 2, Japan, 520–526.
Turley, W. 共2002兲. “C&D materials are recycled at an impressive rate
共now if only America knew about it兲.” Recyclingtoday, ⬍http://
www.recyclingtoday.com⬎ 共Jan. 24, 2003兲.
Zakaria, M., and Cabrera, J. G. 共1996兲. “Performance and durability of
concrete made with demolition waste and artificial fly ash-clay aggre-
gates.” Waste Manage., 16共1–3兲, 151–158.