Recycled Aggregates for Concrete Applications

C.S. Poon*, S. Azhar and S.C. Kou

Department of Civil and Structural Engineering

The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong
*Email : cecspoon@polyu.edu.hk

Introduction

According to the Environmental Protection Department, a daily average of about 37,690

tonnes of construction & demolition (C&D) waste was generated in 2000 which was 4
times as much as that of municipal solid waste. Of this total amount, 7,480 tonnes (20%)
was disposed of at landfills while the other (80%) was reused/disposed of at public filling
areas as a reclamation material [1].

Currently in Hong Kong, inert C&D materials (e.g. sand, bricks and concrete) suitable for
reclamation and land formation works would be reused (disposed of) at the public filling
areas. The non-inert portion (e.g. plastics, wood and paper) would be disposed of at
municipal solid waste landfills. The strategy aims at reusing the C&D materials and
minimizing the amount requiring landfill disposal so that the life span of the landfills in
Hong Kong can be extended. However, in recent years, public concerns and objections
have often delayed, reduced the scale or stopped the implementation of planned
reclamation projects particularly for those within the Victoria Harbour. Approved
reclamation projects will only provide outlets for inert C&D materials until mid-2002
Also, the landfills in Hong Kong will be exhausted if the present trend of waste
generation continues. For a sustainable infrastructure development strategy, Hong Kong
can no longer rely on reclamation sites and landfills to accept most of the C&D waste. In
fact the Hong Kong SAR government has already set up a construction and demolition
waste sorting and recycling facility in Tuen Mun in July 2002.[2] The aim is to produce
different grades/categories of recycled aggregates that can be used in a wide range of
engineering projects in Hong Kong.

The idea of C&D waste recycling or using recycled aggregates in construction is not new
and has been practiced in a number of overseas countries. In Europe and North America,
the concept of construction waste recycling has gained wide attention. Taxation, waste
disposal cost, companies’ environmental image, and legal requirements are factors that
are continuously driving the recycling concept [3]. The Netherlands is the leading
country in reusing C&D waste. Hendriks reported that 60% of the construction waste has
been recycled and reused in the Netherlands during 1996-1998 [4]. In Denmark, 20% of
total aggregate demand was fulfilled by the recycled aggregates during 1998-99. In the
United States, there is a well-developed and thriving industry on recycling C&D
materials and currently sharing 20%-30% of the local market [5].
In Asia, only Japan is practicing the recycling concept. Uchikawa and Hanehera
estimated that twelve million tonnes of rubble has been reused in Japan every year in
concrete for rigid pavements and this amount is estimated to become double by the end of
2000 [6].

Specifications for the Use of Recycled Aggregates

Recycled aggregates have long been used in the construction industry, however, due to
the lack of suitable specifications, their use is being limited to the low grade applications.
Undoubtedly, suitable quality recycled aggregates may be used successfully in higher
grade applications such as structural concrete. Recent international advances in the
drafting of specifications now provides good guidance on the quality control of recycled
aggregates and their use in higher grade applications. This section presents an overview
of the British, RILEM and Japanese specifications and the current specifications in Hong
Kong about the use of recycled aggregates in construction.

British Specifications

In the UK, aggregates for concrete are normally specified by BS882 “Specifications for
aggregates from natural sources for concrete”. Although good general guidance on
recycled aggregates is given in BS6543 [7], this standard is rarely quoted in contract
documents. The highways specification (1991), however, permits the use of crushed
concrete for pavement construction if it complies with the “quality and grading
requirements of BS882” [8].

The Building Research Establishment (BRE) has published guidelines on the use of
recycled aggregates to bridge the gap between the current UK practice and specifications
[9]. An extract of these guidelines is as follows:

Classification of Recycled Aggregates (RCA)

The classification of recycled aggregates is based on the relative proportions of concrete
to brick masonry. Three classes are defined in BRE Digest 433 [9] which are summarized
in Table 1.

When recycled aggregates are blended with natural aggregates, the blending proportions
should be stated. Natural aggregates of good quality normally enhance the properties of
recycled aggregates. However, the BRE guidelines does not recommend any blending
proportions and leave it to the discretion of the engineer/authority.

Table 1 Classes of Recycled Aggregate [9]

Class Origin Brick content Strength (by Relative

by weight 10% fines Quality
test)
RCA (I) Brickwork 0 – 100% 70 kN Lowest
RCA (II) Concrete 0 – 10% > 100 kN Highest
RCA (III) Concrete and brick 0 – 50% 70 kN Moderate

2
Impurities

Recommended limits on potentially deleterious components are given in Table 2.

Table 2 Maximum Recommended Levels of Impurity (by weight) [9]

Use in concrete as Use in road Hardcore, fill or

coarse aggregate construction granular material
Asphalt and tar Included in limit for 10% in RCA (I) 10%
other foreign material 5% in RCA (II)
10% in RCA (III)
Wood 1% in RCA (I) Sub-base: 1% 2%
0.5% in RCA (II) Capping layer: 2%
2.5% in RCA (III)
Glass Included in limit for Contents above 5% Contents above 5%
other foreign material to be documented to be documented
Other foreign material (e.g. 5% in RCA (I) 1% 1%
metals, plastic, clay) 1% in RCA (II)
5% in RCA (III)
Sulfates Concrete and CBM: 1% acid-soluble SO3

Use of Coarse Recycled Concrete Aggregates (RCA) in Concrete

Recycled aggregates of classes RCA(I), (II) or (III) complying with the quality and
grading requirements of BS 882 “Specifications for aggregates from natural sources for
concrete” may be used in concrete. Aggregates not complying with the grading
requirements in BS 882 may still be used in compliance with BS 5328 “Concrete 1990-
97”, if trial mixes indicate that concrete of suitable quality can be produced [9].

Use of Fine Recycled Concrete Aggregates (RCA) in Concrete

RCA passing 5 mm sieve is not recommended for general use in concrete because it
usually has an adverse effect on water demand and may contain increased levels of
contamination. In specific circumstances where there is a high degree of control (e.g.
fines from reclaimed product at a precast concrete works), 10% replacement of natural
sand can be made without adverse effect on the product.. Fine RCA may also be useful
for large scale grouting operations (eg old tunnels and mine workings) [9].

Recommended Maximum Grade of Concrete

RCA (I): dry density < 2000 kg/m3 C20
RCA (I): dry density > 2000 kg/m3 C35
RCA (II): dry density < 2000 kg/m3 C50
20% RCA(III) + 80% natural aggregate no limit

RILEM Specifications

RILEM, the international union of testing and research laboratories for materials and
structures, has been actively working to harmonize current European approaches to the

3
specifications of concrete which contains recycled aggregates. This has been in the hands
of RILEM technical committees, TC121 “Demolition and reuse of concrete and
masonry”; and CEN/TC 154 “Ad hoc group on recycled aggregates”.

In 1998, RILEM released its latest specifications about the use of recycled aggregates in
concrete [10]. These specifications classify different categories for the recycled coarse
aggregates and indicate the field of application for concrete containing these recycled
aggregate classes in terms of acceptable environmental exposure classes and strength
classes for concrete in accordance with Eurocode 2, “Design of Concrete Structures”.
These specifications are summarized in the following sections.

Classification of Recycled Aggregates

Recycled aggregates are classified into the following three categories [10].

Type I: aggregates which are implicitly understood to originate primarily from masonry
rubble.

Type II: aggregates which are implicitly understood to originate primarily from concrete
rubble.

Type III: aggregates which are implicitly understood to consist of a blend of recycled
aggregates (maximum 20%) and natural aggregates (mandatory minimum 80%). The
maximum content of Type I aggregates in the blend is intended to be 10% (i.e. 50/50
masonry/concrete mixtures may be used for blending with natural aggregate).

Quick visual inspection of recycled aggregates production is normally sufficient to assign

it to “Type I”, “Type II”, or a mixed material suitable for use in “Type III”. In case of
dispute, however, the classification is done through limits on particle density and to a
lesser extent on other limiting factors (Table 3).

The water absorption test is not used to classify aggregates. However, for the purpose of
guidance only the following values would be indicative of the various types of materials
[10].

Type I Type II Type III Test Method

Maximum water absorption value (wt. %) 20 10 3 PrEN 1097-6

Table 3 Classification of Recycled Aggregates [28]

Mandatory requirements Type I Type II Type III Test method

3
Minimum dry particle density (kg/m ) 1500 2000 2400 prEN 1097-6
3
Maximum wt. % with SSD<2200 kg/m -- 10 10
3
Maximum wt. % with SSD<1800 kg/m 10 1 1 prEN 1744-1
3
Maximum wt. % with SSD<1000 kg/m 1 0.5 0.5

4
 Maximum wt. % of foreign materials Test by visual
(metals, glass, soft material, tar, crushed 5 1 1 separation as in
asphalt etc.) prEN 933-7
Max. content of metals (% m/m) 1 1 1 Visual
Max. content of organic material (% m/m) 1 0.5 0.5 NEN 5933
Max. content of filler (<0.063 mm)
3 2 2 prEN 933-1
(% m/m)
Max. content of sand (<4 mm) (% m/m) 5 5 5 prEN 933-1
Max. content of sulfate (% m/m) 1 1 1 BS 812: part 118

The recycled aggregates must not contain any material or any other substances which
retard the setting of the concrete by more than 15% compared with the setting of the
identical composition with traditional aggregates, or which are detrimental to the concrete.

Maximum Allowable Strength Class

The maximum allowable strength class for recycled aggregates is shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Maximum Allowable Strength for Concrete with Recycled Aggregates [10]

Type I Type II Type III

*
Grade of concrete C16/20 C50/60 No limit
* The strength may be increased to C30/37 subject to the condition that the SSD density of the RCA exceeds 2000 kg/m3.

Field of Application
Recycled coarse aggregates, complying with the above-mentioned specifications can be
used in plain and reinforced concrete provided they satisfy all other durability
requirements specified in RILEM and CEN codes. The use of the recycled fine is not
allowed [10].

Japanese Specifications

The Ministry of Construction (MOC) of Japan published a tentative standard on the

recycled aggregate and recycled aggregate concrete used for the civil engineering
construction in 1994 [11].

In the Japanese specifications, the recycled aggregates are classified according to the
amount of water absorption. A high absorption indicates a high attached mortar content,
which generally produces low strength concrete with inferior durability, deformation and
shrinkage properties. Accordingly, the maximum allowable design strength and the
members and portions to which such concrete may be applied are limited by the quality
of recycled aggregates. This classification is summarized in Table 5 and possible
applications of such concrete for public works are shown in Table 6.

Table 5 Proposed Classification/Quality Standard for

5
 Recycled Aggregate for Concrete for Public Works (1994) [12]

Recycled Coarse Aggregate Recycled Fine Aggregate

Item
Type I Type II Type III Type I Type II
Absorption
3 or less 3 or less 5 or less 7 or less 5 or less 10 or less
(%)
Sulfate 40 or less 12 or less
Soundness 12 or less -- 10 or less --
(%) 40 or less1
1. where freezing and thawing resistance is not required.

Table 6 Type of Recycled Aggregate Concrete and

Suggested Uses in Public Works (1994) [12]

Recycled
Strength
Aggregate Applications Coarse Aggregate Fine Aggregate
(MPa)
Concrete
I Reinforced or plain concrete, Recycled coarse Normal aggregate 18 –21
low structures of bridges, aggregate 1st class
tunnel lining, retaining walls
etc.
II Plain concrete, masonry Recycled coarse Normal aggregate 16 –18
units, gutters, gravity type aggregate 2nd class or recycled 1st class
retaining walls etc.
III Subslab concrete, back Recycled coarse Recycled fine < 16
filling concrete, leveling aggregate 3rd class aggregate 2nd class
concrete

In 1997, the Japanese Ministry of Construction revised its specifications about the
applications of recycled aggregates to extend their scope in concrete for building works
[11]. These specifications are summarized in Tables 7-8.

Table 7 Proposed Classification/Quality Standard of

Recycled Aggregate for Concrete for Buildings (1997) [11]

Recycled Coarse Aggregate Recycled Fine Aggregate

Item
Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 1 Type II
Absorption
3 or less 3 to 5 5 to 7 5 or less 5 to 10
(%)
1. Grading, under 75µ particles and content of injurious impurities are also stipulated.

Table 8 Proposed Types of Recycled Aggregate Concrete

6
 and Suggested Uses in Building (1997) [11]

Suggested
Conc. Coarse
Fine aggregate design strength Suggested uses
Type aggregate
(MPa)*
Recld. Coarse Ordinary reinforced concrete
A Normal fine 18 or more
Type 1 buildings
Concrete attached to ground;
Recld. Coarse
B Normal fine 18 or more foundation, cast-in-place concrete
Type II
piles, concrete slabs on steel decks
Foundation slabs, earthen floor
Recld. Coarse Recld. Fine
C 18 or more slabs, subslab concrete, back filing
Type II Type I
concrete, leveling concrete, etc.
Recld. Coarse Recld. Fine Subslab concrete, backfiling
D 18 or more
Type III Type II concrete, leveling concrete etc.
* should be confirmed by laboratory trial tests.

However, in spite of the introduction of these standards, the Japanese construction

industry has made slow progress about the use of recycled aggregates in concrete
production because of the following factors [12]:

• There is a limit in the quality of recycled products which cannot meet the quality
requirements underlying the demands.
• Only 2 or 3 recycled aggregate plants for concrete are available in Japan though
there are more than 250 plants for road base aggregates.
• There is little experience to build structures of 2 to 3 stories though there is a
tentative standard of the recycled aggregates specified by the Ministry of
Construction of Japan.
• The quality of recycled products, especially durability of final products, is not
trusted by purchasers.

Hong Kong Specifications

Until 2001, the General Specifications (GS) for Civil Engineering Works (Hong Kong
Government, 1992 edition) generally prohibits the use of recycled inert C&D materials
except its use as fill material in reclamation and earth filing projects. But the 2001
revision of the GS in the form of Corrigendum No. 1/2001 allows the use of recycled
aggregates for use in earthworks, drainage and marine works. The Work Bureau
Technical Circular 12/2002 further promulgated Particular Specifications to facilitate the
use of recycled aggregates in concrete production, and construction of road sub-base in
public work projects in Hong Kong.

For concrete work, WBTC 12/2002 [13] stipulates the following Particular
Specifications for the use of recycled aggregates in concrete :

a) Prescribed mix concrete with up to 100% recycled coarse aggregates

7
 b) Designed mix concrete with up to 20% recycled coarse aggregates

The quality requirements of the recycled aggregates are :

Table 9 Quality Requirements of Recycled Aggregates [13]

Mandatory Requirements Limits Testing Method

Minimum dry particle 2000 BS 812: Part 2
density (kg/m3)
Max. water absorption 10 % BS 812; Part 2
Max. content of wood and 0.5 % Manual sorting in
other material less dense than accordance with
water BRE Digest 433
Max. content of other foreign 1%
materials (e.g. metals,
plastics, clay lumps, asphalt
and tar, glass etc)
Max. fines 4% BS 812: Section 103.1
Max. content of sand 5% BS 812: Section 103.1
(<4mm) (% m/m)
Max content of sulphate 1% BS 812: Part 118
(%m/m)
Flakiness index 40 % BS 812: Section 105.1
10% fines test 100 kN BS 812: Part 111
Grading Table 3 of BS 882:1992
Maximum Chloride content Table 7 of BS 882 – 0.05%
by mass of chloride ion of
combined aggregate

Furthermore, the Particular Specifications require that the recycled aggregates have to be
thoroughly wetted before being used.

Properties of Concrete Made With Recycled Aggregates

The properties of concrete made with recycled aggregates may differ from concrete with
only natural aggregates due to the high water absorption and low density of recycled
aggregates. However, the property variation within concrete with up to 20% by weight
recycled concrete aggregate or upto 10% by weight recycled masonry aggregate are
negligible [14]. Absorption, aggregate crushing value, and soundness are the prime
factors which control recycled aggregate properties [15].

Mix Design

In principle, the mix design of recycled aggregate concrete is not different from that of
conventional concrete and the same design procedures can be used. In practice, slight

8
modifications are required. O’Mahony concluded that for the DOE mix design, the
following modifications would be necessary [16].

When designing a concrete mix using recycled aggregate of variable quality, a higher
standard deviation should be employed in order to determine a target mean strength on
the basis of a required characteristic strength.
When coarse recycled aggregate is used with natural sand, it may be assumed at the
design stage that the free water/cement ratio required for a certain compressive strength
will be the same for recycled aggregate concrete as for conventional concrete. If trial
mixes show that the compressive strength is lower than required, an adjustment of the
water/cement ratio should be made.
For a recycled aggregate mix to achieve the same slump, the free water content will need
to be approximately 10 litres/m3 higher than for conventional concrete.
If the free water content of a recycled aggregate concrete is increased, the cement content
will also need to be higher to maintain the same water/cement ratio.
Trail mixes should be made to obtain the required workability and the most suitable
water/cement ratio.

Water Demand

Recycled aggregates particularly recycled masonry aggregates, typically have a higher

porosity than natural aggregates. Because of this, concrete with recycled aggregates
absorbs a higher amount of moisture than ordinary concrete. Also the angularity of the
crushed material contributes to a high water requirement. However, by pre-wetting the
aggregate, or by partly saturating the aggregate in the concrete mixer prior to the addition
of cement, the recycled aggregate concrete will result with properties similar to those of
ordinary concrete mixes, prepared with a comparable water/cement ratio [14].

Workability

As a rule, the workability of concrete with a high level of aggregate replacement is less.
This is especially so, if also the fraction 0-4 mm is replaced. Adding water may increase
workability, but will have adverse influence on the strength and the durability of the
resulting concrete. Generally, the addition of some more superplasticizer will be
sufficient. A common alternative is to increase both water and cement, thereby keeping
the water/cement ratio constant [14].

Shrinkage, Creep and Modulus of Elasticity

The relatively high water demand of recycled aggregates will have their impact on
shrinkage. However, due to the moisture absorption in the recycled masonry aggregates,
concrete made with this aggregate may even display less shrinkage in the initial stages of
hydration. In case of total replacement of natural aggregates by recycled masonry
aggregates, ultimate shrinkage may on average be about 40% higher. Concrete with

9
recycled masonry aggregates also presents an increased creep (15-40%) and a decreased
modulus of elasticity (10-30%) [14].

Compressive Strength

A full replacement of the coarse and fine aggregate fraction in concrete by the 0-40 mm
recycled aggregates generally lowers the compressive strength by about 20%. If only the
fraction larger than 4 mm is being applied, the decrease in strength may be limited to
about 10% [14].

The recycled aggregate concrete can provide strength equivalent to a corresponding

concrete with natural aggregates, provided the cement content is increased, typically by
7.2% for 40 MPa concrete. The compressive strength of the recycled concrete
incorporating brick as aggregate is not reduced until an incorporation of 40% or more
[17].

Researches in the University of Dundee indicated that with upto 30% coarse or 20% fine
recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) content, the effect on concrete compressive strength
is negligible. However, a further increase in percentage will result in reduced strength. A
means of achieving strength equivalent to corresponding natural aggregate concrete was
to change the water/cement ratio of the concrete mix with high levels of RCA content
[18].

The compressive strength of recycled aggregate concrete is also effected by the quality of
recycled aggregates. Low quality recycled aggregate consists of crushed concrete, asphalt,
brick and other deleterious material adversely affects the compressive strength of the
recycled aggregate concrete. However, research project in UK indicated that concrete of a
characteristic strength of 45 MPa with a slump in the range of 150-175 mm could be
produced in the laboratory by replacing 60% of the natural coarse aggregate by mixed
recycled aggregate collected from a demolition contract [19].

Tensile Strength

The tensile splitting strength is only marginally less compared to concrete with natural
aggregates. However, when recycled masonry aggregates are used, the bending tensile
strength of the concrete can be reduced to 50-60% of that in ordinary concrete [14].

Bond Strength

The bond strength between steel and recycled aggregate concrete is found to be
equivalent to that of conventional concrete both under static and fatigue loading, where
coarse recycled aggregates were used with natural sand. However, when both fine and
coarse recycled aggregates were used, cracks appeared at 15% lower flexural load then
when conventional aggregates were used, and the ultimate flexural strength of reinforced
concrete was 30% lower due to bond failure. Shear strength followed a similar pattern
[20].

10
PolyU’s Preliminary Laboratory Test Results and Trial Plant Production

An extensive laboratory investigation exercise is being carried out at the Department of

Civil and Structural Engineering of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University to study

•
Influence of moisture conditions of recycled aggregates on properties of concrete
•
Feasible use of recycled aggregates for precast concrete and concrete products
•
Long term behaviour of concrete produced (e.g. durability, creep and drying
shrinkage).
• Use of mineral and other additives to enhance strength and durability.
Some of the preliminary test results are presented here :

Table 10. Effect of Recycled Aggregate Content on Compressive Strength

of Concrete Mixes (design strength 35 MPa)

Mix Aggregate Binder (%) Compressive Strength (MPa)

(%)
Notation Natural Recycled Cement Fly 1 Days 4 days 7 days 28 days
ash
RO 100 0 100 0 13.9 31.3 36.9 48.6
R20 80 20 100 0 12.8 27.4 35.5 45.6
R50 50 50 100 0 12.7 27.7 34.1 44.1
R80 20 80 100 0 12.1 27.1 33.4 43.7
R100 0 100 100 0 11.5 26.7 32.3 42.8

Table 10 confirms that the compressive of concrete decreases with the increase in
percentage replacement of virgin aggregate by recycled aggregates (about 10% at 100%
replacement). But the 28th day compressive strength value of all the mixes still meet the
design strength.

Fig. 1 shows that while the strength of the AD mixes almost maintained unchanged as the
percentage of recycled aggregate increased, the strength of the OD mixes increased, but
the strength of the SSD mixes decreased. As a result, the OD mix showed a higher
compressive strength than the SSD mix at all tested ages when all the virgin aggregates
(crushed granite) was replaced by the recycled aggregate. It seems that for the concrete
mixtures prepared with the incorporation of recycled aggregates, the air-dried aggregate
concretes exhibited the highest compressive strength. The SSD recycled aggregates
seemed to impose the largest negative effect on the concrete strength, which might be
attributed to “bleeding” of excess water in the pre-wetted aggregates in the fresh concrete.

11
Fig. 1. Effect of Moisture Conditions of Aggregates and Recycled Aggregate Content on
Compressive Strength of Concrete Mixes [21]

60

Compressive strength (MPa))))

50

40

30
AD
20 OD
28 days SSD
10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
% Recycled aggregate

(Moisture conditions of aggregates : AD: air dried, OD: oven dried, SSD: saturated Surface dried)

Trial production of precast recycled concrete grade 30 road kerbs

A pilot plant production of precast road kerbs was conducted with 100% of the virgin
aggregates replaced by recycled aggregates. The results are shown in Table 11. The
results demonstrate that it is possible to produce grade 30 precast concrete products with
100% recycled aggregates.

Fig.2 Casting and Testing of Precast Concrete Road Kerbs

Made with Recycled Aggregates

12
 Table 11 Mix Proportions and Test Results of Precast Road Kerbs

Mix Proportion Trial 1 Trial 2

Material Kg/m3 Kg/batch
Kg/batch
Cement 375 45 45
Crushed Stone Fine 744 90 90
(Natural)
10 mm (Recycled) 382 58.5 58.5
20 mm 770 93.6 93.6
(Recycled)
Water 205 24 22
W/C 0.55 0.53 0.49
Compressive Strength (MPa) 7 days 35.43 Nd
Compressive strength (MPa) 28 days 41.92 Nd
Failing Load*
14.39 15.47
(kN) 28 days
Density (Kg/m3) 2349.32 Nd
nd : not determined
Percentage of replacement of coarse aggregates by recycled aggregates : 100%
*Acceptance criteria : Failing load : 13.3 kN (BS7262-1:1994)
Conclusion and recommendation

The reuse of recycled materials derived from construction and demolition waste is
growing all over the world. Many governments are actively promoting policies aimed at
reducing the use of primary resources and increasing reuse and recycling. One of the
most environmentally responsible ways of meeting the challenges of sustainability in
construction is the use of recycled C&D waste in new construction.

Research and experimental works on the use of recycled aggregates have proven that
good quality concrete could also be produced with recycled aggregates. The use of
aggregates produced from recycled C&D waste should be further promoted in Hong
Kong. The following recommendations are suggested :

13
 • Make the existing specifications more liberal, particularly in allowing the use of
100% recycled coarse aggregates in higher grade of concrete (e.g. C30-C35) for
non-structural applications.
• Opportunities should be developed in the precast concrete product industry about
the use of recycled aggregates, as it is easier to ensure quality in such products
due to in-plant production
• Policy may be required to further encourage/mandate the use of recycled
aggregates and precast concrete products produced with recycled aggregates.
• A quality assurance system should be developed to assure the quality of recycled
aggregates and products made with recycled aggregates

Acknowledgement
The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of The Hong Kong Polytechnic
University. The Civil Engineering Department and the Correctional Services Department
of the Hong Kong SAR Government are respectively thanked for providing the recycled
aggregate samples and providing assistance in producing the precast road kerbs.

References
1 Environmental Protection Department 2000, Publication in World Wide Web.
http://www.info.gov.hk/epd/pub/solidwaste/fig0.5.htm.

2. F.K. Fong and H.C.Y. Chan, 2002, “Management of Construction Demolition

Materials and Development of Recycling Facility in Hong Kong”, Seminar
Proceedings, Innovation and Sustainable Development of Civil Engineeering in the
21st Century, Civil Division, The Hong Kong Institution of Engineers.

3. Ng, L.H. 2001. Building Waste Minimization in Hong Kong Construction Industry. M.
Phil Thesis, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon.
4. Hendricks C.F. 1998. “Recycling and Reuse as a Basis for Sustainable Development
in Construction Industry”. In proceedings of Concrete in the Service of Man-kind.
Editors: R.K. Dhir and P.C. Hewlett, E & FN Spon: pp. 67-76.
5. Mehta, P.K. 1999. “Advances in Concrete Technology”. Concrete International, June
issue: pp. 69-76.
6. Uchikawa, H. and Hanehara, S. “Recycling of Concrete Waste”. In proceedings of
“Concrete in the Service of Man-kind”, editors: R.K. Dhir and P.C. Hewlett, E & FN
Spon: pp. 163-172.
7. British Standards Institution. 1985. “BS6543-Guide to the Use of Industrial By-
products and Waste Materials in Building and Civil Engineering”. BSI, London.
8. Department of Transport, Scottish Office, Welsh Office and the Department of the
Environment for Northern Ireland. 1991. “Manual of Contract Documents for
Highway Works-Volume I”. Specifications for Highway Works, HMSO, London.

14
9. Building Research Establishment. 1998. “Digest 433 – Recycled Aggregates”. BRE,
Garston, Watford WD2 7JR.
10. Hendriks, C.F., and Pieterson, H.S. 1998. “Sustainable Raw Materials – Construction
and Demolition Waste”, RILEM Report 22, RILEM Publication Series, F-94235
Cachan Cedex, France.
11. Tomosawa, F. 1998. “The Recycling of Concrete – The Japanese Experience”.
Proceedings of the 4th Canmet/ACI/JCI International Conference on Recent Advances
in Concrete Technology, Tokushima, Japan, pp. 221-237.
12. Kasai, Y. 1998. “Barriers to the Re-use of Construction By-products and the Use of
Recycled Aggregate in Concrete in Japan”. Proceedings of the International
Conference on the Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregates. Edited by: R.K. Dhir, N.A.
Henderson and M.C. Limbachiya, Thomas Telford, UK., pp. 433-444.
13 Works Bureau, 2002, Works Bureau Technical Circular 12/2002, Specifications
Facilitating the Use of Recycled Aggregates, Hong Kong SAR Government.

14. Hendriks, C.F., and Pietersen, H.S. 1998. “Concrete: Durable But also Sustainable”.
Proceedings of the International Conference on the Use of Recycled Concrete
Aggregates. Edited by: R.K. Dhir, N.A. Henderson and M.C. Limbachiya, Thomas
Telford, UK., pp. 1-18.
15. Kikuchi, M.; Dosho, Y.; Narikawa, M.; and Miura, T. 1998. “Application of
Recycled Aggregate Concrete for Structural Concrete, Part-I: Experimental Study on
the Quality of Recycled Aggregate and Recycled Aggregate Concrete”. Proceedings
of the International Conference on the Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregates. Edited
by: R.K. Dhir, N.A. Henderson and M.C. Limbachiya, Thomas Telford, UK., pp. 55-
68.
16. O’Mahony, M.M. 1990. “Recycling of Materials in Civil Engineering”. Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Oxford, UK, pp. 7-1.
17. Barra, M., and Vazquez, E. 1998. “Properties of Concrete with Recycled Aggregates:
Influence of the Properties of Aggregates and Their Interpretation”. Proceedings of
the International Conference on the Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregates. Edited by:
R.K. Dhir, N.A. Henderson and M.C. Limbachiya, Thomas Telford, UK., pp. 19-30.
18. Limbachiya,M.C.; Leelawat, T.; and Dhir, R.K. 1998. “RCA Concrete: A Study of
Properties in the Fresh State, Strength Development and Durability”. Proceedings of
the International Conference on the Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregates. Edited by:
R.K. Dhir, N.A. Henderson and M.C. Limbachiya, Thomas Telford, UK., pp. 227-
238.
19. Knights, J. 1998. “Relative Performance of High Quality Concrete Containing
Recycled Aggregates and Their Use in Construction”. Proceedings of the
International Conference on the Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregates. Edited by:
R.K. Dhir, N.A. Henderson and M.C. Limbachiya, Thomas Telford, UK., pp. 275-
286.

15
20. Hansen, TC. 1992. “Recycling of Demolished Concrete and Masonry”, RIELM
Report No. 6, E&FN Spon, UK, pp. 81.
21. C.S Poon, Z.H. Shui and L. Lam 2002, “Strength of Concrete Prepared with Natural
and Recycled Aggregates at Different Moisture Conditions”, in Anson, Ko and Lam
(ed.) Advances in Building Technology Vol. 2, Elsevier, UK. pp.1407-1414.

16