Wood waste as coarse aggregate in the production of concrete
Abstract
An attempt was made in this experimental investigation to recycle wood waste. Concrete-containing wood aggregate in percentages of 0, 15, 20 and 25 in place of crushed stone was developed with a characteristic compressive strength of 25 MPa, with a mix proportion of 1:1.26:2.76 and with water/cement ratio of .45. One hundred and twenty specimens were cast and tested to evaluate the strength and durability properties of concrete. The performance of wood aggregate concrete was compared with control concrete that contained only crushed stone aggregate. The compressive strength of control concrete was 31.40 MPa and that of wood aggregate concrete with 15% replacement level was 32.36 MPa which is 3.06% above the control concrete. Split tensile strength of 15% replaced wood aggregate concrete was 2.25 MPa as against a value of 2.05 MPa for control concrete registering an increase of 9.75%. The flexural strength of control concrete was 2.49 MPa and that of concrete containing 15% wood aggregate was 2.51 MPa which was .80% higher than the control concrete. The weight loss of wood aggregate concrete with 15% replacement level under acid attack was 30.38% greater than the control concrete. Under alkaline attack, the weight loss of wood aggregate concrete with 15% replacement level registered an increase of 9.72% over control concrete. Therefore, wood aggregate can be used in the production of concrete, and the optimum replacement was found to be 15% from all considerations.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Waste wood chips mixed with cement increase the compressive strength of building materials.
“An experiment conducted by Thandavamoorthya revealed that waste wood chips mixed with cement increase the compressive strength of building materials [109,110].”
From Circular Economy of Construction and Demolition Wood Waste—A Theoretical Framework Approach (2022) · cites this paper as [109]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Circular Economy of Construction and Demolition Wood Waste—A Theoretical Framework Approach
Jahan, I., Zhang, G., Bhuiyan, M., & Navaratnam, S. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su141710478 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
- Authors
- Thandavamoorthy, T. S.
- Corresponding author
- Thandavamoorthy, T.S.
- Venue
- European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2015-03-03
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 125-141
- ISSN
- 1964-8189 (ISSN-L)
- 2116-7214
- OpenAlex
- W2016647848
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 1.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Journal of Environmental and Civil engineering (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Materials Engineering and Processing
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Innovative concrete reinforcement materials
- Keywords
- wood waste, coarse aggregate replacement, recycled aggregate, compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, flexural strength, acid attack, alkaline attack, durability, waste recycling
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review