Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–1333

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

http://d1364-03

n CorrE-m

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

A comprehensive review on the applications of waste tire rubberin cement concrete

Blessen Skariah Thomas n, Ramesh Chandra GuptaDepartment of Civil Engineering, MNIT Jaipur, India

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 28 April 2015Received in revised form31 July 2015Accepted 21 October 2015Available online 11 November 2015

Keywords:Waste managementCement concreteDurabilityMechanical properties

x.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.09221/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

esponding author.ail addresses: chaprathu44@gmail.com (B.S. T

a b s t r a c t

Disposal of waste tire rubber has become a major environmental issue in all parts of the world. Everyyear millions of tires are discarded, thrown away or buried all over the world, representing a very seriousthreat to the ecology. It was estimated that almost 1000 million tires end their service life every year andout of that, more than 50% are discarded to landfills or garbage without any treatment. By the year 2030,there would be 5000 million tires to be discarded on a regular basis. Tire burning, which was the easiestand cheapest method of disposal, causes serious fire hazards. Temperature in that area rises and thepoisonous smoke with uncontrolled emissions of potentially harmful compounds is very dangerous tohumans, animals and plants. The residue powder left after burning pollutes the soil. One of the possiblesolutions for the use of waste tire rubber is to incorporate into cement concrete. This paper presents anoverview of some of the research published regarding the fresh and hardened properties of rubberizedconcrete. Studies show that there is a promising future for the use of waste tire rubber as a partialsubstitute for aggregate in cement concrete. It was noticed from literatures that workable concretemixtures can be made with scrap tire rubber and it is possible to make light weight rubber aggregateconcrete for some special purposes. Rubberized concrete shows high resistance to freeze-thaw, acidattack and chloride ion penetration. Use of silica fume in rubberized concrete enables to achieve highstrength and high resistance to sulfate, acid and chloride environments.

& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13242. Classification of scrap tires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13243. Properties of concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1325

3.1. Fresh concrete properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1325

3.1.1. Workability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13253.1.2. Bulk density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1327

3.2. Hardened concrete properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1327

3.2.1. Compressive strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13273.2.2. Flexural tensile strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13273.2.3. Abrasion resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13283.2.4. Modulus of elasticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13283.2.5. Water absorption, sorptivity and penetration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13283.2.6. Carbonation resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13293.2.7. Shrinkage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13293.2.8. Freeze-thaw resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13303.2.9. Thermal and acoustic properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1330

homas), irarcg@hotmail.com (R.C. Gupta).

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–13331324

3.2.10. Acid and sulfate resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13303.2.11. Chloride penetration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1331

4. Discussions and conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1331References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1332

Fig. 1. Total Municipal Solid Waste Generation in USA (United States Environ-mental Protection Agency, 2010).

1. Introduction

Disposal of waste tire rubber has become a major environ-mental issue in all parts of the world. It was estimated that1.5 billion tires are manufactured in the world per annum [1,2].Every year millions of tires are discarded, thrown away or buriedall over the world, representing a very serious threat to the ecol-ogy. It is estimated that every year almost 1000 million tires endtheir service life and out of that, more than 50% are discarded tolandfills or garbage, without any treatment. By the year 2030, thenumber would reach to 1200 million yearly. Including the stock-piled tires, there would be 5000 million tires to be discarded on aregular basis [3–5]. According to the data produced by the RubberManufacturer's Association [6]; more than 230 million scrap tiresare generated in US every year and about 75 million are stockpiled.If the Indian scenario is considered, it was estimated that the totalnumber of discarded tires would be 112 million per year afterretreading twice [7,8]. The European Association of tires andrubber producers estimate that 3.2 million tonnes of used tireswere discarded in 2009. The recovery ratio was 96%, of which 18%were retreated or reused, 38% were recycled and 40% were usedfor energy production [9].

The discarded tires are disposed in various methods like landfilling, burning, use as fuel, pyrolysis, to produce carbon black etc.Stockpiled tires also present many types of, health, environmentaland economic risks through air, water and soil pollution [10,11,2].The tires store water for a longer period because of its particularshape and impermeable nature providing a breeding habitat formosquitoes and various pests.

Tire burning, which was the easiest and cheapest method ofdisposal, causes serious fire hazards [12–14,10]. Temperature inthat area rises and the poisonous smoke with uncontrolled emis-sions of potentially harmful compounds is very dangerous tohumans, animals and plants. Tires are manufactured from petro-chemical feed stocks such as styrene and butadiene. Burning tiresreleases styrene and several benzene compounds. Butadiene is ahighly carcinogenic four-carbon compound that may be releasedfrom the styrene–butadiene polymer during combustion (bur-ningissues.org). The air pollutants from emits dense black smokewhich impairs visibility and soils the painted surfaces. The toxicgas emissions includes polyaromatic hydro carbons, CO, SO2, NO2

and HCl. The residue powder left after burning pollutes the soil.The disadvantage of pyrolysis is that, about it produces carbonblack powder, which pollutes the atmosphere.

Use of tire rubber as fuel is economically not attractive. Thecarbon black produced from tires is more expensive and is oflower quality when compared with that produced from petroleumproducts. Tire rubber can be used in a variety of civil and non-civilengineering applications such as in geotechnical works, in roadconstruction, in agriculture to seal silos, in onshore and offshorebreakwaters, in retaining walls in harbors and estuaries to bufferthe impact of ships, in artificial reefs to improve fishing, as a fuel incement kilns, incineration for production of electricity, as reefs inmarine environments or as an aggregate in cement-based pro-ducts. Still, millions of tires are being buried, thrown away orburnt all over the world [9,15–17].

For the last some years, construction industry is taking up thechallenge to incorporate sustainability in the production activities

by searching for more environmental friendly raw materials or bythe use of solid waste materials as aggregates in concrete. One ofthe possible solutions for the use of waste tire rubber is to incor-porate into cement concrete, to replace some of the naturalaggregates. This attempt could be environmental friendly as ithelps to dispose the waste tires and prevent environmental pol-lution. It also helps to reduce the carbon dioxide emission by theprevention of tire fires. This process is also economically viable assome of the costly natural aggregates can be saved [3,18–21].

2. Classification of scrap tires

The most preferred method for the recycling of tire rubber is bygrinding it and then to convert it for various applications. Thecrumb rubber used in concrete or asphalt paving mixtures is insizes ranging from 0.0075 mm to 4.75 mm. The steps involved inthe production of crumb rubber include shredding, separation ofsteel and textile, granulation and classification. The tires would becut into larger pieces and then shredded into smaller pieces. Thesteel wires and the textile part would be separated after shred-ding. Mechanical grinding for granulation could be performed atambient temperature, at ambient temperature under wet condi-tion, at high temperature and at cryogenic temperature.

In the grinding at ambient temperature, the waste tire chipswould be grinded in mills or granulators at an ambient tempera-ture. In the case of wet ambient grinding, water is sprayed oncrumb rubber to reduce the temperature. After the wet grindingprocess, the crumb rubber would be dried by eliminating water. Inhigh temperature grinding at about 130 °C, rubber granules of 1–6 mm would be produced. The limitation of high temperaturegrinding is the viscoelastic nature and low heat conductivity ofcrumb rubber. In the cryogenic grinding process, tire rubber wouldbe cooled below its glass transition temperature and then shat-tered by passing through an impact type mill. Ambient grindingand cryogenic grinding are widely used for the granulation of tirerubber [22].

Total Municipal Solid Waste Generation in USA is given inFig. 1; US scrap tire market summary is given in Fig. 2; images oftire rubber aggregates are given in Figs. 3 and 4; US scrap rubber

Fig. 2. US scrap tire market summary [6].

Fig. 3. (a) Ground Rubber. (b) Crushed Rubber (waste tire chips) [43].

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–1333 1325

disposition is given in Table 1; typical materials used in manu-facture of tire is given in Table 2; composition of manufacturedtires by weight is given in Table 3.

Ganjian et al. [23] have classified the discarded tire rubber intochipped, crumb and ground rubber.

(1) Shredded or chipped rubber that replaces coarse aggregates:Tires are shredded in two stages. At the end of the first stage,the rubber pieces would be shredded to 300–430 mm lengthand 100–230 mm width. In the second stage of shredding, thelength would be reduced to 100–150 mm, and then furtherreduced to 13–76 mm and are called as ‘shredded particles’,which can be used to replace coarse aggregates.

(2) Crumb rubber that replaces fine aggregates: It is manu-factured in special mills that grind the tire rubber to granulesof size ranging from 0.425–4.75 mm. Different sizes of rubberparticles could be produced depending on the type of millsand the temperature generated.

(3) Ground rubber that can partially replace cement: The size ofground rubber depends on the equipment used for sizereduction. If the micro-milling process is adopted, the rubberparticles could be made into 0.075–0.475 mm. A two-stageprocess of magnetic separation and screening would beadopted in the process of making ground rubber.

3. Properties of concrete

One of the possible solutions for the use of waste tire rubber isto incorporate into cement concrete, to replace some of the naturalaggregates.

3.1. Fresh concrete properties

3.1.1. WorkabilityFresh concrete is a plastic concrete that can be molded to any

shape. Hundred per cent compaction of fresh concrete is animportant parameter to enable maximum strength for concrete. Ahighly workable concrete can ensure full compaction. Workabilityof concrete is the ease with which concrete can be mixed, handledand compacted. Holmes et al. [24] have observed decrease inworkability with increase in crumb rubber grades and proportions.The reduction could be due to the reduced inter-particle frictionbetween the rubber and other constituents. Dong et al. [25] haveindicated that higher rubber content reduce the workability ofconcrete. Youssf et al. [26] mentioned that the workability ofrubberized concrete can be controlled by using appropriatequantity of super plasticizer (1–3% by weight of cement). Bravoand Brito, [9] explained that the concrete mixes containingmechanically ground tire aggregates have lower slump than the

Fig. 4. Various sizes of crumb rubber (Li et al. [7]).

Table 1US scrap rubber disposition [6].

Sl. No Market or disposition In thousands of tons

1 Tire derived fuel 2120.292 Ground rubber 975.003 Land disposed 327.784 Exported 245.845 Civil engineering application 172.006 Reclamation works 49.177 Electric arc furnace 65.568 Baled tires/market 30.009 Agricultural 7.10

10 Punched/stamped 1.9011 Total generated 3824.2612 Total to market 3666.8513 Amount to market/utilized 95.9%

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–13331326

concrete containing cryogenic ground tire aggregates. This couldbe because of the higher specific surface and roughness of themechanically ground tire aggregates. Su et al. [27] mentioned that,due to the higher water absorption of rubber particles, there was ageneral reduction in the slump of rubberized concrete, regardlessof the particle size of tire rubber. Also a decrease in slump wasobserved as the particle size of rubber was decreased.

Aiello and Leuzzi [28] mentioned that the workability of con-crete (by slump test) was slightly improved by the partial sub-stitution of coarse or fine aggregates with rubber shreds. Thecontrol concrete exhibited a fluid behavior, while the rubberizedconcrete had shown a hyper-fluid behavior. Elchalakani [29]explained that the rubberized concrete having a combination ofrubber powder and crumb rubber, exhibited good workability withrespect to plain concrete when adequate quantity of admixture

Table 2Typical materials used in manufacture of tire [6].

Sl. No Materials

1 Synthetic rubber2 Natural rubber3 Sulfur and sulfur compounds4 Phenolic Resin5 Oil

a. Aromaticb. Naphthenicc. Paraffinic

6 Fabrica. Polyesterb. Nylon

7 Petroleum waxes8 Pigments

a. Zinc oxideb. Titanium dioxide

9 Carbon black10 Fatty acids11 Inert materials12 Steel wires

Table 3Composition of manufactured tires by weight [6].

Composition (wt%) Automobile tire Truck tire

Natural rubber 14 27Synthetic rubber 27 14Carbon black 28 28Steel 14–15 14–15Fabric, filler, accelerators and antiozonants 16–17 16–17

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–1333 1327

was used. Pacheco-Torgal et al. [16] explained that, when rubberchips was partially replaced for coarse aggregate, the slumpincreased with increasing volume of tire aggregates up to 15%substitution and decreased beyond 15%. When crumb rubber wasused to partially replace fine aggregate, the slump decreased up to15% substitution and shower irregular values beyond 15%.

3.1.2. Bulk densityGesoglu et al. [30,31] prepared lighter weight concrete by

adding rubber to concrete. The rubberized pervious concretedensities were lesser by 2–11% when compared to the control mixspecimens. Similar results were observed by Holmes et al. [24].Pelisser et al. [32] explained that the density of concrete withrecycled rubber diminished by 13% when compared with referenceconcrete. When silica fume was added to the rubberized concrete,the reduction was only 9% due to the higher densification of theconcrete structure. Sukontasukkul and Tiamlom, [33] haveobserved decrease in density with increasing amount of crumbrubber. The effect of crumb rubber on density was more pro-nounced when smaller size crumb rubber (passing through 26number sieve) was used. Pacheco-Torgal et al. [16] studied onrubberized concrete with tire chips partially replaced for coarseaggregate, crumb rubber for fine aggregate and a combination oftire chips and crumb rubber for total mineral aggregate. It wasobserved that the density of the concrete with coarse aggregatereplacement had a reduction of 45% that of fine aggregate repla-cement reduced by 34% and the combination gave a reductionof 33%.

3.2. Hardened concrete properties

3.2.1. Compressive strengthGanjian et al. [23] have mentioned the reasons for the decrease

in compressive strength of the rubberized concrete. (a) The

aggregates would be surrounded by the cement paste containingrubber particles. This cement paste would be much softer thanthat without rubber. This results in rapid development of cracksaround the rubber particles while loading and this leads to quickfailure of specimens. (b) There would be lack of proper bondingbetween rubber particles and cement paste, as compared tocement paste and natural aggregates. This can lead to cracks dueto non uniform distribution of applied stresses. (c) The compres-sive strength depends on the physical and mechanical propertiesof the constituent materials. If part of the materials is replaced byrubber, reduction in strength will occur. (d) Due to low specificgravity of rubber and lack of bonding of rubber with other con-crete materials, there is a tendency for the rubber to moveupwards during vibration leading to higher rubber concentrationat the at top layer. Such a non-homogeneous concrete sampleleads to reduced strengths.

Al-Akhras and Smadi [34] studied on the properties of mortarcontaining tire rubber ash. Increase in compressive strength wasobserved when the tire rubber ash was replaced for fine aggre-gates up to 10%. The increase in compressive strength of mortarspecimens at 90 days were 14%, 21%, 29%, and 45% at tire rubberash content of 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, and 10%, respectively. Gesoglu et al.[30,31] have observed negative effect on the compressive strengthof pervious concrete due to the action of tire rubber. The rate ofreduction in compressive strength increased with increase in therubber content. Maximum loss in compressive strength wasobserved in the concrete specimens containing a mixture of crumbrubber and tire chips. Holmes et al. [24] mentioned that the sig-nificant reductions in compressive strength could be avoided if thereplacement of crumb rubber does not exceed 20% of the totalaggregate content.

Ganjian et al. [23] have obtained 10–23% reduction in com-pressive strength when chipped rubber was replaced for aggre-gates and 20–40% reduction when powdered rubber was replacedfor cement. Dong et al. [25] have examined the properties ofconcrete with uncoated rubber and the concrete containing rubbercoated with a silane coupling agent. It was observed that thecompressive strength of concrete with coated rubber increasedsignificantly due to the better chemical bonding and improvedinterface around rubber particles. Onuaguluchi and Panesar [35]have observed significant improvement in the compressive andtensile strength in the mixtures containing coated rubber andsilica fume. Youssf et al. [26] mentioned that the crumb rubber canbe replaced for mineral aggregates up to 3.5% without any sig-nificant effect on the compressive strength. When compared to thenon-treated rubber concrete, the concrete with NaOH treatedrubber increased the compressive strength by 15% at 28 days.

3.2.2. Flexural tensile strengthGanjian et al. [23] have noticed 37% reduction in flexural

strength when tire chips were partially replaced for coarseaggregates and 29% loss when tire powder was partially replacedfor cement. Su et al. [27] observed a reduction of 12.8% in theflexural strength when 20% fine aggregate was substituted withrubber aggregate. Less loss in strength was obtained when the sizeof rubber particles were smaller. This would be due to the fillereffect of small rubber particles that increase the compactness ofconcrete, reduce the stress singularity at internal voids and hencereduce the likelihood of fracture. Aiello and Leuzzi [28] haveobserved larger loss in flexural strength when the coarse aggre-gate rather than fine aggregate was substituted by waste tirerubber particles. Elchalakani [29] explained that the addition ofsilica fume and reduction in water–cement ratio has enhanced theflexural strength of rubberized concrete. As the effect of silicafume enhanced the interfacial transition zone bonding, thereduction in strength of high strength rubberized concrete was

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–13331328

lower than that of the normal strength concrete. Gupta et al. [36]pointed out that the flexural strength of concrete containingrubber ash decreased with increase in the percentage of rubberash, while the flexural strength of modified concrete (containing10% rubber ash and a varying percentage of rubber fibers)increased with the increasing amount of rubber fibers (aspectratio 8–10).

Yilmaz and Degirmenci [37] mentioned that the specimenscontaining tire rubber (in the form of fibers) up to 20% exhibitedhigher flexural strength than the control specimens. The flexuralstrength decreases when the amount of rubber was increasedfrom 20–30%. The control specimens exhibited brittle failure andsplit into two pieces immediately after cracking, while the speci-mens containing rubber fibers showed deformation withoutcomplete disintegration. Ganesan et al. [38] observed increase inflexural strength with the increase in the amount of rubber in selfcompacting concrete. When the amount of rubber was 15% and20%, the strength increased to 15% and 9% respectively whencompared to the control mix concrete. Segre and Joekes [17]examined the flexural strength of concrete with as-received rub-ber and the rubber treated with NaOH. In both cases, the flexuralstrength was higher than the control specimens. Al-Akhras andSmadi [34] studied on the properties of mortar containing tirerubber ash. Increase in flexural strength was observed when thetire rubber ash was replaced for fine aggregates up to 10%. Thecorresponding increases at 28 days of curing were 12%, 27%, 32%,and 43% at tire rubber ash content of 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, and 10%,respectively when compared to the control mix mortar.

3.2.3. Abrasion resistanceThe abrasion resistance of concrete may be defined as its ability

to resist being worn away by rubbing. The concrete which is moreresistant to abrasion can be applied in pavements, floors andconcrete highways, in hydraulic structures such as tunnels anddam spillways, or in other surfaces upon which abrasive forces areapplied between surfaces and moving objects during service [39].Gesoglu et al. [30,31,40] explained that the abrasion resistance ofpervious concrete increased with increasing amount of rubberfrom 0–20%. Fine crumb rubber (passing 1 mm sieve) exhibitedmore resistance to abrasion than tire chips and crumb rubber. Thedepth of wear reduced from 0.91% to 0.17% when the amount offine crumb rubber was increased from 0% to 20%. Thomas et al.[41] observed that the rubberized concrete exhibited betterresistance to abrasion than the control mix. During the abrasiontest, the crumb rubber particles present in the rubberized concreteprojected beyond the smooth surface of the concrete and restric-ted the grinding/rubbing of the concrete surface by acting like abrush (as given in Fig. 6). This minimized the action of abrasivepowder on the surface of concrete and hence the rubberizedconcrete became more resistant to abrasion when compared to thecontrol mix.

Sukontasukkul and Chaikaew [42] mentioned that the crumbrubber blocks exhibited less abrasion resistance than the controlmix specimens. The concrete blocks containing a mixture of dif-ferent sizes of crumb rubber performed better than those withsingle size rubber aggregates. Gupta et al. [36] pointed out that thedepth of wear increases with increasing percentages of rubber ashin concrete, while it decreases with increasing percentages ofrubber fiber in the modified concrete. Even in the most adverseconditions (water–cement ratio 0.55 and replacement of 25%) thedepth of wear was below the permissible limits as per BIS-1237.Zhang and Li [43] studied on the abrasion resistance of concrete inwhich silica fumes and crumb rubber were taken as the additives.It was reported that the addition of crumb rubber reduced thecompressive strength but increased the abrasion resistance of theconcrete. The addition of silica fume enhanced both compressive

strength and abrasion resistance of rubberized concrete. Concretewith silica fumes had a better abrasion resistance than controlconcrete and the rubberized concrete had better resistance toabrasion when compared to the silica fume concrete. The abrasionresistance of rubberized concrete increased with the increase ofrubber content.

3.2.4. Modulus of elasticityGesoglu et al. [30,31,40] have observed that the variation in

modulus of elasticity and compressive strength are similar. Addi-tion of rubber to pervious concrete significantly decreased themodulus of elasticity since the compressive strength was reduced.Increasing the amount of rubber resulted in a significant reductionin the static elastic moduli due to the decrease in the pasteamount. Ganjian et al. [23] have obtained 17–25% reduction inmodulus of elasticity in case of 5–10% aggregate replacement withchipped rubber and the corresponding reduction for powderedrubber was 18–36%.

Dong et al. [25] have examined the properties of concrete withuncoated rubber and the concrete containing rubber coated with asilane coupling agent. It was observed that the moduli of rubber-ized concrete were less than control concrete. As the rubber con-tent was increased, modulus was decreasing. Due to the strongerchemical bonding developed by coating, the moduli of concretewith coated rubber were higher than those with uncoated rubber.Pelisser et al. [32] observed that the concrete with rubber has lessrigidity when compared to control concrete. The average reductionin elastic modulus of rubberized concrete was 49%, which wassmaller when compared with the compressive strength loss.

3.2.5. Water absorption, sorptivity and penetrationGanjian et al. [23] have mentioned that the water absorption of

concrete mixtures increased when tire chips was replaced forcoarse aggregates whereas, the water absorption decreased whenrubber powder was partially replaced for cement. Oikonomou andMavridou [15] explained that the addition of rubber (Granulatedtire rubber substituted for sand in different weight percentages)decreases the water absorption by immersion under vacuum ofthe matrix. Onuaguluchi and Panesar [35] have observed increasein porosity and water absorption as the crumb rubber wasincreased in concrete. Addition of silica fumes have helped toreduce the porosity and water absorption of the concrete samples.Bravo and Brito [9] explained that the water absorption byimmersion increased with increase in replacement ratio and withincrease in size of rubber. Sukontasukkul and Tiamlom [33] pre-pared concrete with two different sizes of crumb rubber (that passthrough 6 number sieve and that pass through 26 number sieve).Concrete with rubber passing through 6 number sieve exhibitedmore water absorption than control concrete. As the rubber par-ticles are non-polar in nature, they can trap air bubbles at particlesurfaces. This makes the interface between cement and aggregatemore porous and highly absorptive. In the concrete mixes con-taining rubber powder passing 26 number sieve, the waterabsorption was less than the control mix. The small size rubberparticles might have acted as fillers to arrest the capillary pores inconcrete. The size of air bubbles around the rubber powder wasvery small and caused less effect on the overall absorption.

Azevedo et al. [3] studied on the properties of high perfor-mance rubberized concrete in which crumb rubber partiallyreplaced fine aggregates. The capillary water absorption increasedwith the increase in rubber content. The water absorption reducedwhen cement was partially replaced with flyash and metakaolin.Mohammed et al. [10] mentioned that the substitution of 10%cement with silica fumes leaves excess amount of un-reacted silicafume inside the matrix. This can fill the air voids inside themicrostructure of rubberized concrete and helps to decrease the

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–1333 1329

water absorption due to its micro filling ability. Segre and Joekes[17] explained that the addition of rubber particles to concretelowered the amount of water absorbed, since the rubber particlesdo not absorb water. Gesoglu and Guneyisi [40] pointed out thatthe sorptivity increased with increasing amount of rubber in selfcompacting concrete. The use of flyash at 40% replacement leveland at a testing age of 90 days, there was gradual reduction in thesorptivity coefficients. An average reduction of about 20% in thesorptivity index was observed due to the refined pore structureattributed to the long term pozzolanic effect of the fly ash.

One of the characteristics that influence the durability of con-crete is its permeability to the ingress of water and other poten-tially deleterious substances. Gesoglu et al. [30,31] pointed outthat the water permeability was more for the concrete specimenscontaining bigger rubber particles. The small rubber particles fillthe pores among natural aggregates and this reduced the perme-ability. Su et al. [27] observed that the concrete became morecompact when a combination of different sizes of rubber (wellgraded rubber aggregates) was used. The finer rubber particles canfill the voids formed by the larger ones. So, the number of conduitsthrough which the water can transport would be reduced. Thomaset al. [41] observed that all the mixes with w/c 0.4, 0.45 and0.5 exhibited low to medium permeability, while the entire mixesof M60 grade (w/c 0.3) concrete exhibited low permeability [23].Measurement of Depth of Water Penetration is given in Fig. 5.

3.2.6. Carbonation resistanceBravo and Brito [9] explained that the depth of carbonation

increased with the replacement ratio of natural aggregates withtire aggregates. The increase in carbonation may be due to thehigher water content needed to maintain the workability of rub-berized concrete and the higher void volume between tireaggregate and cement paste. 56% increase in the carbonationdepth was observed when 15% coarse aggregates were replacedwith chipped tire rubber. Gupta et al. [36] explained that the depthof carbonation increased with the increase in exposure to CO2. Asthe water–cement ratio was reduced for the concrete containingrubber ash, the carbonation resistance has improved. The depth ofcarbonation in all cases was less than the minimum cover requiredfor any Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC) members. As per BIS456, the minimum concrete cover for any type of RCC membershould not be less than 15 mm (Fig. 6).

Thomas et al. [44] noticed that the depth of carbonation of themixes with 2.5–12.5% crumb rubber were less than or equal to thatof control mix concrete. Gradual decreasing trend in the depth ofcarbonation was noticed up to 10% substitution with crumb

Fig. 5. Measurement of depth

rubber. Beyond 10%, there was gradual increase in the depth ofcarbonation up to 20% substitution with crumb rubber. Reductionin the depth of carbonation was observed up to 12.5% of crumbrubber. This can be attributed to the improved pore structure atreduced water–cement ratios. The fine aggregates and thereplaced crumb rubber were almost the same size (Zone II) andthese closely packed rubber particles along with the naturalaggregates in the concrete may prevent the entry of carbondioxide gas in to the concrete. The rubber powder might haveprovided a filler effect in the concrete to reduce the depth ofcarbonation. Increase in the depth of carbonation beyond 10%crumb rubber would be due to the lack of internal packing in theconcrete specimens.

3.2.7. ShrinkageRaghvan et al. [20] studied on the shrinkage properties of

rubberized mortars incorporating two different types of tire rub-ber: (i) granules about 2 mm in diameter and (ii) two types ofrubber shreds (5.5 mm�1.2 mm and 10.8 mm�1.8 mm). It wasobserved that the use of rubber shreds was effective in allowingmultiple cracking to occur over the width of the specimen com-pared with a single crack in the mortar without rubber shreds. Inspite of multiple cracking, the total crack area in the case ofrubber-filled mortar, have decreased with an increase in the rub-ber mass fraction. The propagation of cracks was arrested severaltimes by the rubber shreds, which provided sufficient restraint toprevent the shorter cracks from propagating.

Bravo and Brito [9] explained that the shrinkage of concreteincreases with increase in the amount of tire rubber. The variationwas smaller when coarse aggregate was replaced with chippedrubber. The shrinkage in control concrete and rubberized concretewas more intense in the first 15 days of curing and has decreasedby degrees by the end of 90 days. Yung et al. [45] mentioned thatthe change in length in the concrete specimens containing 5%rubber powder was 35% higher than the control group and that ofthe specimen containing 20% rubber powder was 95% higher thanthe control group.

Sukontasukkul and Tiamlom [33] noticed that the shrinkage ofrubberized concrete depends on the content as well as the size ofthe rubber used. The concrete specimen with rubber powder(passing 26 sieve) exhibited more shrinkage than those withcrumb rubber (passing 6 sieve). This can be because of the flakyparticle size of the rubber particle that allows them to act like aspring. Elchalakani [29] noticed that the free drying shrinkages fornormal and high strength concrete were less than the design valueof 850 microstrains. At the end of 28 days, the shrinkage of normal

of water penetration [41].

Fig. 6. Surface of the control mix (0% rubber) and rubberized concrete after Abrasion test [41].

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–13331330

strength concrete was more than that of the high strength con-crete. The combined effect of reducing the water–cement ratio andadding silica fume in high strength concrete mix reduced the 28days shrinkage by about 50%.

3.2.8. Freeze-thaw resistanceGesoglu et al. [30,31] have observed that there was no clear

distinction between the performance of plain and rubberizedpervious concrete up to 240 cycles as the mass loss was less than3.5%. After 300 cycles, the plain concrete lost more mass than therubberized concrete. Increasing the rubber content has enhancedthe freezing-thawing resistance of pervious concrete up to 180cycles. Best results for the freeze-thaw were observed when theaggregates were replaced with fine crumb rubber. Raghavan et al.[20] have used 0.6% crumb rubber by weight in concrete. Thecontrol concrete samples failed before the completion of thefreeze-thaw test program whereas the rubberized concrete sam-ples showed minimum surface scaling or internal damage. Theweight loss of rubberized concrete was at minimum throughoutthe duration of the freeze-thaw test, while there was severeweight loss in case of concrete without rubber.

Zhu et al. [46] mentioned that the size of crumb rubber hasobvious influence on the freeze-thaw resistance of rubberizedconcrete. The resistance increases with increasing the fineness ofrubber when the size of crumb rubber was less than 60 mesh. Theresistance reduces with increasing the fineness of crumb rubber,when the size of rubber exceeds 60 mesh. Al-Akhras and Smadi[34] studied on the properties of mortar containing tire rubberash. The control mortar showed very little durability to freezingand thawing. The relative dynamic modulus of elasticity reachedonly 55% at 50 cycles of freezing and thawing with durabilityfactor at 9%. Specimens with 5% rubber ash for fine aggregatesexhibited 55% dynamic modulus at 150 cycles with durabilityfactor of 28%. The specimens with 10% rubber ash reached 60%dynamic modulus at 225 cycles with durability factor of 45%. Thus,the filling ability of tire rubber ash in mortar made it more durableto freezing and thawing when compared to the control mix mortarspecimens.

3.2.9. Thermal and acoustic propertiesWhen concrete is exposed to temperature around 300 °C, the

free water in capillary pores, the water in C–S–H gel andsulphoaluminates evaporates. It causes shrinkage in concrete. TheC–S–H gel decomposes at a temperature above 400 °C. The Ca

(OH)2 transforms to anhydrate lime at a temperature of around530 °C. Thus, the high temperature leads to cracking and reductionin compressive strength of concrete [47]. It was mentioned byTopcu and Bilir [47] that the control specimens exhibited highestcompressive strength after exposure to a temperature of 400 °Cand 800 °C. As the rubber particles burns in high temperature andleaves voids in the concrete structure, the loss in compressivestrength increased with increase in the amount of tire rubber inconcrete. Loss in weight of specimens showed the similar trend ofthe results for compressive strength. Mohammed et al. [10] men-tioned that the combination of 10% silica fume and flyash as areplacement of cement content leads to the reduction in thermalconductivity of rubberized concrete. This can be due to the lowerthermal conductivity of silica fume and flyash when compared tocement.

Sound absorption is defined, as the incident sound that strikesa material and is not reflected back. Crumb rubber concrete hasbetter sound absorption characteristics when compared to theconventional concrete. The noise reduction coefficient increases asthe amount of crumb rubber increases. The use of silica fume inrubberized concrete reduces the sound absorption properties dueto the micro filling abilities [10]. Holmes et al., [24] studied on thesound absorption properties of rubberized concrete. Theyexplained that the crumb rubber concrete was found to be moreeffective than plain concrete in absorbing sound in low, normaland high temperature environments. Better absorption coefficientswere observed at crumb rubber 2–6 mm and 10–19 mm, used for15% substitution of fine aggregates. Crumb rubber concreteexhibited better performance as an insulator for high frequencysounds due to the wider surface affected. Pacheco-Torgal et al. [16]explained that the rubberized concrete is an effective absorber ofsound and shaking energy. A large reduction in the ultrasonicmodulus with increasing rubber concentration demonstrates aporous composition for rubberized concrete.

3.2.10. Acid and sulfate resistanceDegradation can take place if the concrete is exposed to

aggressive sulfuric acid environments. It is one of the key dur-ability issues that affect the maintenance costs and life cycle per-formance of all the concrete structures. There can be presence ofsulfuric acid in chemical waste, ground water, etc. In the case ofconcrete structures in industrial zones, there can be possibility ofdeterioration due to acid rains in which sulfuric acid can be one ofthe key components. Sulfuric acid attack is more disastrous than

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–1333 1331

sulfate attack because of the fact that there would be a dissolutioneffect by the hydrogen ions in addition to the attack by sulfate ions[48–50]. Azevedo et al. [3] studied on the acid resistance of HPCwith 10% concentration of sulfuric acid. Increase in the rubbercontent lead to high mass loss degree. The concrete mix with 5%rubber, partial cement replacement with 15% flyash and 15%metakaolin exhibited almost same resistance of the control mix.The mix with 45% flyash and 15% metakaolin showed much higheracid resistance than the control mix.

Thomas et al. [44] studied on the acid resistance of highstrength rubberized concrete. It was observed that the waterabsorption of the acid attacked specimens with crumb rubber wasgreater than that of the control mix. The amount of waterabsorption gradually increased with the increase in the percentageof crumb rubber in concrete. The top layer of the concrete speci-mens with 0% crumb rubber was completely removed (100%) bythe action of sulfuric acid. In the case of the mix with 20% crumbrubber, less than 100% top surface were attacked by acid. Therubber particles and the cementitious layer surrounding the rub-ber particles were unaffected by acid and have projected outwardsby providing extra pockets to arrest the water. So the waterabsorption of rubberized concrete was higher than the control mixconcrete. There was more loss in compressive strength and weightfor the specimens with less amount of rubber. As the amount ofcrumb rubber was increased in concrete, the amount of loss hasgradually decreased. The crumb rubber particles present in therubberized concrete was holding the constituent particles of theconcrete from breaking away by preventing the formation ofcracks and material separation. While in the concrete with nocrumb rubber or less amount of crumb rubber, more cracks weredeveloped and the constituent materials were easily separated.

Sulfates reacts with the hydrate of calcium aluminates to formcalcium sulphoaluminates (the volume will increase approxi-mately 227% of the volume of the original aluminates) and withthe free calcium hydroxides in cement to form calcium sulfate.This reaction leads to the formation of gypsum, ettringite and/orthaumasite and causes detrimental effects like spalling, cracking,softening, expansion loss of strength and other forms of concretedamage. The expansion results in the formation of cracks andsubsequent disruption of concrete. This phenomenon is known asthe sulfate attack. Yung et al. [45] studied the sulfate corrosionresistance of rubberized concrete. Alternate wetting and dryingcycles were adopted for the test. It was observed that there wasmore loss in weight with the increase in exposure period. Theconcrete containing 5% tire rubber that pass through #30 sievehad exhibited the best resistance to sulfate media.

3.2.11. Chloride penetrationOikonomou and Mavridou [15] explained that the chloride ion

penetration decreased as the amount of rubber was increased inmortar. In the mix with 2.5% rubber, the reduction was 14.22%when compared to the control mix and there was a reduction of35.85% for the mix with 15% rubber. When a bitumen emulsionwas used as an additive, the mixture with 12.5% tire rubber hadshown a reduction in chloride ion penetration up to 55.89% whencompared to control mix concrete. Bravo and Brito [9] performedchloride migration test on rubberized concrete. Increase in chlor-ide diffusion coefficient was observed for 5–15 replacement withtire rubber. Increasing the size of rubber aggregate leads to higherchloride diffusion coefficient. Concrete containing tire aggregatesfrom cryogenic technique offered lesser resistance to chloridepenetration than those containing mechanically ground tireaggregates. Increase in curing period lead to decrease in theamount of chloride penetration. Gupta et al. [36] mentioned thatthe concentration of chloride ions was very low in the

downstream cell for each mix of rubberized concrete. This indi-cates more resistance of concrete to chloride-ion penetration.

Onuaguluchi and Panesar [35] have observed reduced trans-mission of charges when the replacement with crumb rubber was5–10%. Significant reductions in the charges were observed in themixtures containing silica fumes due to the microstructureenhancement. Al-Akhras and Smadi [34] studied on the propertiesof mortar containing tire rubber ash. At the end of 90 days ofcuring, the electrical charge passed through the control concretewas 1875 C (lower resistance to chloride penetration), that passedthrough the specimens containing 5% rubber ash was 520 C andthat passed through the specimens with 10% rubber ash was 350 C.According to ASTM C 1202-97, when the electrical charge passedthrough mortar is below 1000 C, the mortar has high resistance tochloride-ion penetration. So it is clearly understood that the con-crete containing rubber ash was highly resistant to chloride ionpenetration. Gesoglu and Guneyisi [40] have observed a pro-gressive increase in the chloride penetration with the increasingamount of crumb rubber in self compacting rubberized concrete.When fly ash was added to the rubberized concrete, there wassignificant resistance to the chloride ion ingress at 90 days ofcuring. The concrete containing 20%, 40% and 60% flyash exhibitedan average reduction of 67%, 79% and 78% respectively in thechloride ion permeability.

Thomas et al. [44] have observed that the depth of chloridepenetration of the mixes with crumb rubber up to 10% of fineaggregates was lesser than or similar to the values of the controlmix. The mixes with crumb rubber 12.5–20% had shown moredepth of chloride penetration than that of the control mix. Thechloride ion penetration exhibited reduction for the mixes with 0–7.5% crumb rubber. Gradual increase in the depth of chloride ionpenetration was observed for the mixes with 10–20% crumb rub-ber. The reason for the minor reduction in the depth of chloridepenetration from the mixes with 0–7.5% crumb rubber would bedue to the fact that the rubber particles are impervious and doesnot absorb water and simultaneously does not allow the passageof chloride ions. As the percentage of crumb rubber increased, thedepth of chloride penetration decreased. However beyond 7.5%crumb rubber, the chloride penetration increased and it may bedue to the lack of internal packing of the concrete.

4. Discussions and conclusions

4.1. It was clear that workable rubberized concrete mixtures canbe made with scrap tire rubber. If admixtures are used, theworkability similar to the normal concrete could be achievedwithout any increase in the quantity of water. It was clear fromthe literatures that the density of rubberized concretedecreases with increasing amount of rubber. The loss in density would be severe when powdered rubber is used to substitute aggregates. By the addition of tire waste, it is possibleto make light weight aggregate concrete for some specialpurposes.

4.2. Compressive strength would be greatly affected by the use oftire rubber in concrete. Significant reductions in compressivestrength could be avoided if the replacement of crumb rubberdoes not exceed 20% of the total aggregate content. Severe lossin compressive strength could be avoided if the rubber istreated with any coupling agents. If crumb rubber or rubberpowder is used, there would be reduction in flexural strength,while the use of rubber fiber increases the flexural tensilestrength.

4.3. A few researchers have pointed out that the use of tire rubberreduces the abrasion resistance of concrete, while many

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–13331332

researchers mentioned that the abrasion resistance gotimproved by the action of crumb rubber like a brush. Themodulus of elasticity of rubberized concrete was less thancontrol concrete. As the rubber content was increased, mod-ulus was decreasing. In the case of crumb rubber coated by asilane coupling agent, the moduli of concrete with coatedrubber were higher than those with uncoated rubber.

4.4. Water absorption, sorptivity and water penetration showedincrease with the increase in the ratio of tire rubber. Reductionin the water absorption and penetration was observed whensilica fume, flyash or very fine rubber powder was used. Depthof carbonation and shrinkage of rubberized concrete dependson the content as well as the size of the rubber used. In gen-eral, both the properties showed increase with increase in theamount of rubber used.

4.5. The control concrete samples failed before the completion ofthe freeze-thaw test program whereas the rubberized con-crete samples showed high resistance. The weight loss ofrubberized concrete was at minimum throughout the durationof the freeze-thaw test, while there was severe weight loss incase of concrete without rubber. Rubberized concrete is notsuitable for high temperature applications, while it was foundto be more effective than plain concrete in absorbing sound inlow, normal and high temperature environments.

4.6. Rubberized concrete was observed to be more resistant toacid attack. The crumb rubber particles present in the rub-berized concrete was holding the constituent particles of theconcrete from breaking away by preventing the formation ofcracks and material separation. While in the concrete with nocrumb rubber or less amount of crumb rubber, more crackswere developed and the constituent materials were easilyseparated. Most of the researchers have pointed out that theconcrete containing tire rubber was highly resistant to chlor-ide ion penetration. Use of silica fume in rubberized concreteenabled to achieve very high resistance to chloridepenetration.

4.7. As recommendations for future work, a proper study on themicrostructure of rubberized concrete could be performed.Studies on the corrosion behavior of reinforcement steel barsin rubberized concrete could be performed. Strength andDurability properties of high strength and high performancerubberized concrete can be studied. Properties of tire rubberfiber reinforced concrete can be studied in depth.

References

[1] Siddique R, Naik TR. Properties of concrete containing scrap-tire rubber–anoverview. Waste Manag 2004;24(6):563–9.

[2] Weiguo Shen, Lai Shan, Tao Zhang, Hongkun Ma, Zhi Cai, Hua Shi. Investiga-tion on polymer–rubber aggregate modified porous concrete. Constr BuildMater 2013;38:667–74.

[3] Azevedo F, Pacheco-Torgal F, Jesus C, de Aguiar JB, Camões AF. Properties anddurability of HPC with tyre rubber wastes. Constr Build Mater 2012;34:186–91.

[4] Eiras JN, Segovia F, Borrachero MV, Monzó J, Bonilla M, Payá J. Physical andmechanical properties of foamed Portland cement composite containingcrumb rubber from worn tires. Mater Des 2014;59:550–7.

[5] Shu X, Huang B. Recycling of waste tire rubber in asphalt and portland cementconcrete: an overview. Constr Build Mater 2014;67:217–24.

[6] Rubber Manufacturer's Association. USA; 2014.[7] Li L, Ruan S, Zeng L. Mechanical properties and constitutive equations of

concrete containing a low volume of tire rubber particles. Constr Build Mater2014;70:291–308.

[8] Bora Mukul Chandra. Sustainable concrete with scrap tyre aggregate. NBMCW;2010.

[9] Bravo M, de Brito J. Concrete made with used tyre aggregate: durability-related performance. J Clean Prod 2012;25:42–50.

[10] Mohammed BS, Hossain KMA, Swee JTE, Wong G, Abdullahi M. Properties ofcrumb rubber hollow concrete block. J Clean Prod 2012;23:57–67.

[11] Eldin Neil N, Senouci Ahmed B. Measurement and prediction of the strength ofrubberized concrete. Cem Concr Compos 1994;16:28–298.

[12] Benazzouk A, Douzane O, Mezreb K, Quéneudec M. Physico-mechanicalproperties of aerated cement composites containing shredded rubber waste.Cem Concr Compos 2006;28:650–7.

[13] Skariah Thomas Blessen, Damare Alok, Gupta RC. Strength and durabilitycharacteristics of copper tailing concrete. Constr Build Mater 2013;48:894–900.

[14] Gesoglu Mehmet, Guneyisi Erhan. Permeability properties of self-compactingrubberized concretes. Constr Build Mater 2011;25:3319–26.

[15] Oikonomou N, Mavridou S. Improvement of chloride ion penetration resis-tance in cement mortars modified with rubber from worn automobile tires.Cem Concr Compos 2009;31:403–7.

[16] Pacheco-Torgal F, Ding Yining, Jalali Said. Properties and durability of concretecontaining polymeric wastes (tire rubber and polyethylene terephthalatebottles): an overview. Constr Build Mater 2012;30:714–24.

[17] Segre N, Joekes I. Use of tire rubber particles as addition to cement paste. CemConcr Res 2000;30:1421–5.

[18] Najim Khalid B, Hall Matthew R. Mechanical and dynamic properties of self-compacting crumb rubber modified concrete. Constr Build Mater2012;27:521–30.

[19] Kovler K, Roussel N. Properties of fresh and hardened concrete. Cem Concr Res2011;41:775–92.

[20] Raghavan D, Huynh H, Ferraris CF. Workability, mechanical properties, andchemical stability of a recycled tyre rubber-filled cementitious composite. JMater Sci 1998;33:1745–52.

[21] Uygunoglu Tayfun, Topcu Ilker Bekir. The role of scrap rubber particles on thedrying shrinkage and mechanical properties of self-consolidating mortars.Constr Build Mater 2010;24:1141–50.

[22] Karger-Kocsis J, Mészáros L, Bárány T. Ground tyre rubber (GTR) in thermo-plastics, thermosets, and rubbers. J Mater Sci 2013;48:1–38.

[23] Ganjian E, Khorami M, Maghsoudi AA. Scrap-tyre-rubber replacement foraggregate and filler in concrete. Constr Build Mater 2009;23:1828–36.

[24] Holmes N, Browne A, Montague C. Acoustic properties of concrete panels withcrumb rubber as a fine aggregate replacement. Constr Build Mater2014;73:195–204.

[25] Dong Q, Huang B, Shu X. Rubber modified concrete improved by chemicallyactive coating and silane coupling agent. Constr Build Mater 2013;48:116–23.

[26] Youssf O, ElGawady MA, Mills JE, Ma X. An experimental investigation ofcrumb rubber concrete confined by fibre reinforced polymer tubes. ConstrBuild Mater 2014;53:522–32.

[27] Su H, Yang J, Ling TC, Ghataora GS, Dirar S. Properties of concrete preparedwith waste tyre rubber particles of uniform and varying sizes. J Clean Prod2014.

[28] Aiello MA, Leuzzi F. Waste tyre rubberized concrete: Properties at fresh andhardened state. Waste Manag 2010;30:1696–704.

[29] Elchalakani M. High strength rubberized concrete containing silica fume forthe construction of sustainable road side barriers. Structures 2015;1:20–38.

[30] Gesoğlu M, Güneyisi E, Khoshnaw G, İpek S. Investigating properties of per-vious concretes containing waste tire rubbers. Constr Build Mater2014;63:206–13.

[31] Gesoğlu M, Güneyisi E, Khoshnaw G, İpek S. Abrasion and freezing–thawingresistance of pervious concretes containing waste rubbers. Constr Build Mater2014;73:19–24.

[32] Pelisser F, Zavarise N, Longo TA, Bernardin AM. Concrete made with recycledtire rubber: effect of alkaline activation and silica fume addition. J Clean Prod2011;19:757–63.

[33] Sukontasukkul P, Tiamlom K. Expansion under water and drying shrinkage ofrubberized concrete mixed with crumb rubber with different size. ConstrBuild Mater 2012;29:520–6.

[34] Al-Akhras NM, Smadi MM. Properties of tire rubber ash mortar. Cem ConcrCompos 2004;26:821–6.

[35] Onuaguluchi O, Panesar DK. Hardened properties of concrete mixtures con-taining pre-coated crumb rubber and silica fume. J Clean Prod 2014;82:125–31.

[36] Gupta T, Chaudhary S, Sharma RK. Assessment of mechanical and durabilityproperties of concrete containing waste rubber tire as fine aggregate. ConstrBuild Mater 2014;73:562–74.

[37] Yilmaz A, Degirmenci N. Possibility of using waste tire rubber and fly ash withPortland cement as construction materials. Waste Manag 2009;29:1541–6.

[38] Ganesan N, Raj JB, Shashikala AP. Flexural fatigue behavior of self compactingrubberized concrete. Constr Build Mater 2013;44:7–14.

[39] Gencel O, Sabri Gok M, Brostow W. Effect of metallic aggregate and cementcontent on abrasion resistance behaviour of concrete. Mater Res Innov2011;15:116–23.

[40] Gesoğlu M, Güneyisi E. Permeability properties of self-compacting rubberizedconcretes. Constr Build Mater 2011;25:3319–26.

[41] Thomas BS, Gupta RC, Kalla P, Cseteneyi L. Strength, abrasion and permeationcharacteristics of cement concrete containing discarded rubber fine aggre-gates. Constr Build Mater 2014;59:204–12.

B.S. Thomas, R.C. Gupta / Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 54 (2016) 1323–1333 1333

[42] Sukontasukkul P, Chaikaew C. Properties of concrete pedestrian block mixedwith crumb rubber. Constr Build Mater 2006;20:450–7.

[43] Zhang Bo, Li Guangyu. The abrasion-resistance investigation of rubberizedconcrete. J Wuhan Univ Technol.-Mater. Sci. Ed. 2012;27:1144–8.

[44] Thomas BS, Gupta RC, Mehra P, Kumar S. Performance of high strengthrubberized concrete in aggressive environment. Constr Build Mater2015;83:320–6.

[45] Yung WH, Yung LC, Hua LH. A study of the durability properties of waste tirerubber applied to self-compacting concrete. Constr Build Mater 2013;41:665–72.

[46] Zhu X, Miao C, Liu J, Hong J. Influence of crumb rubber on frost resistance ofconcrete and effect mechanism. Procedia Eng 2012;27:206–13.

[47] Topçu İB, Bilir T. Experimental investigation of some fresh and hardened prop-erties of rubberized self-compacting concrete. Mater Des 2009;30:3056–65.

[48] Bassuoni MT, Nehdi ML. Resistance of self-consolidating concrete to sulfuricacid attack with consecutive pH reduction. Cem Concr Res 2007;37:1070–84.

[49] Thomas BS, Gupta RC. Long term behaviour of cement concrete containingdiscarded tire rubber. J Clean Prod 2015;102:78–87.

[50] Thomas BS, Gupta RC, Panicker VJ. Experimental and Modeling studies on highstrength concrete containing waste tire rubber. Sustain Cities Soc. 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2015.07.013.