“THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PULVERIZED WASTE GLASS USED IN HYDROPHOBIC

CONCRETE AS A FINE AGGREGATE ALTERNATIVE”

A Study Presented to:

Senior High School Department
Arellano University
Jose Rizal High School
Malabon City

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements of
RESEARCH PROJECT

Researchers
Leader: PACHEJO, DANIEL E.
Assistant Leader: BANTIGUE, JHAYR
ACIBAR, JAMES MARVIN
FRANCISCO, DOMINIQUE O.
ISRAEL, ANTONIO
GOZON, JADE
MENDEZ, JOHANNS
RESUELLO, MARK LAURRENCE
RESUELLO, MELCHOR
SALUCOP, LLOYD
VENERANDA, JOHNPAUL L.

Research Adviser
MS. LASCANO, MYKA L.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Number
Acknowledgement………………………………………………. i
Abstract…………………………………………………………… ii
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study……………………………….. 1
Statement of the Problem………………………………. 4
Significance of the Study……………………………….. 5
Scope and Delimitation…………………………………. 6
Hypothesis
Definition of Terms....................................................... 7
METHODOLOGY
Research Design………………………………………… 8
Research Instrument……………………………………. 9
Research Paradigm……………………………………... 12
Materials………………………………………………...... 13
Procedures……………………………………………….. 15
Treatment of Data……………………………………….. 21
RESULTS………………………………………………......…...... 24
DISCUSSION
Summary of Findings.................................................... 30
Conclusion.................................................................... 32
Recommendation......................................................... 33
REFERENCE………………………………………………......… 34
APPENDIX A………………………………………………......… 37
APPENDIX B………………………………………………......… 38
APPENDIX C………………………………………………......… 41
APPENDIX D………………………………………………......… 44
APPENDIX E………………………………………………......… 45
APPENDIX F………………………………………………......… 46
APPENDIX G………………………………………………......… 47
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, praise and thanks to God, the Almighty, for showering His

blessings on us throughout our study work, allowing us to successfully complete the

research.

We would like to express our deepest gratitude to the people who participated in

this study, for the time and effort they have given. It would also be impossible to conduct

the study at Arellano University - Jose Rizal Campus without the agreement of our

school's principal, Ms. Ma. Aileen DC. Cruz, and head teacher.

We’d like to convey our heartfelt gratitude to Ms. Myka Lim Lascano, our research

adviser, for allowing our group to conduct research and offering crucial support

throughout the process. Her dynamism, vision, genuineness, and drive have left a

lasting impression on us. We are grateful to her for providing us with the wonderful

opportunity to work on this wonderful research entitled “The Effectiveness of Pulverized

Waste Glass Used in Hydrophobic Concrete as a Fine Aggregate Alternative”, which

also allowed us to conduct comprehensive research and learn about a variety of new

things. This enhanced and broadened our knowledge of the topic. Despite our busy

schedules, we appreciate her wonderful support and advice. Working and studying

under her direction was a privilege and honor. Our group is grateful for everything she

has done for Group 4. We’d like to express our gratitude to her for her friendship and

understanding.

Finally, we'd like to express our gratitude to everyone who has helped us

complete this paper, whether directly or indirectly.

i
 ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to determine whether it would be possible to use

broken glass instead of concrete as a fine aggregate. In particular, the study aimed to

determine whether there is a significant relationship between the quantity of broken

glass and sand in concrete and those materials' compressive strength. The study also

looked at whether the compressive strength of concrete with crushed glass and concrete

with sand as fine particles differed significantly from one another. Five mix proportions

with one sample (28 days curing process) for each proportion were used in the

experimental design. Sand was employed as the fine aggregate in one set and broken

glass in the other. Both of the samples with 0% and 20% waste glass were submitted to

the DPWH-BRS Accredited NPRECISION Testing Center for compressive strength

testing. Results indicated that glass is an environmentally friendly building material.

Glass scraps used in construction will aid in recycling glass waste that cannot be

recycled and must be disposed of in a landfill. According to the data gathered, the

substance can be classified as a pozzolanic material because glass and sand have

chemical compositions that are relatively comparable. The workability, hydrophobicity,

and mechanical properties of the concrete were affected by the addition of glass

aggregate in the range of 5 to 20 weight percent of the fine aggregate.

Keywords: by-product waste, concrete, glass, hydrophobic, recycling

ii
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Concrete is the most commonly used building material in the world (the world’s

production in 2012 amounted to 7 million m3 per year, i.e., three times more than wood

and seven times more than steel per year,)" as cited in Malek et al., from their 2020

study. A concrete is a combination of aggregates (sand and gravel) and paste, which

comprises cement and water. Sand, along with gravel, are frequently utilized in

construction. The building industry needs around six to seven times as much sand and

gravel for the preparation of concrete as there is cement. Mining happens to gather the

contents used in making concrete. This process is a worldwide economic activity that

has three categorized impacts, one is the ecological impacts that consistently results in

the removal of channel substrate, suspension of sediments, and clearance of

vegetation, as well as loss of habitats and species disturbance as cited by Madyise

(2013) from a 2006 study by Stebbins. Additionally, “it has a direct impact through

greenhouse gas emissions” (GreenFacts, 2022). Carbon dioxide is responsible for

around 65% of global warming. A source of carbon dioxide emissions alongside

deforestation and the use of fossil fuels is the concrete manufacturing industry.

Because of its geographical features, the Philippines has the right to have this

opportunity; making mineral extraction a crucial business. As one of the world's

mineral-rich nations, it has the potential to have a big positive impact on the local

economy and local livelihoods. Nevertheless, "mining for minerals remains restricted in

the Philippines due to past environmental impacts, illegal operations and

mismanagement (UK Research and Innovation)." Many nations, like the Philippines,
1
depend on mining to: a.) better their socioeconomic conditions; b.) build industries and

urban infrastructure; but, as more negative effects become apparent, there is a need for

quick environmental control and restoration. And, as an Earth dweller, we have a big

obligation to protect the environment and increased attention to alternative and

sustainable resource usage could significantly lessen environmental effects. Therefore,

there is a need to look for materials as a replacement for the fine aggregate used in

concrete. One of these options is pulverized waste glass.

In relation, landfills have terrible effects on the environment. A landfill is an

artificial structure that is either erected into the ground or on top of it. It is made to be

impenetrable to rain, air, and groundwater but it produces methane (highly flammable)

and leachate (that can contaminate water supplies and the environment). Annually, a

very large amount of waste is produced but can’t be reused because of contamination.

In 2018, landfills received approximately 7.6 million tons (5.2%) of waste glass

according to a 2021 online article by the United States Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA). In the United States, in the landfills, glass that can be recycled is only about 31%,

whilst 5% represents the non-recyclable glass. Furthermore, the Department of

Environment and Natural Resources’ (DENR) 2014 data states that 28% of the waste is

recyclable, including glass. Moreover, waste glass has been used as a "substitute fine

aggregate on properties of mortar (Malek et al., 2020)." However, the researcher found a

lack of study resources about the use of pulverized glass as an alternate content used in

hydrophobic or water repellent concrete, thus the authors conducted this study.

The need for protection of building materials against moisture has always existed

and surface treatments have been used for thousands of years. Hydrophobic concrete is

a type which contains admixtures that decrease the wetting ability of concrete. This
2
concrete is used in underwater construction to lessen the water flow such as in dams,

tunnels, etc. It's used to lessen the possibility of deterioration of underwater

infrastructure.

This research focused on the effectiveness of pulverized waste glass that will be

utilized rather than sand–as the primary fine aggregate used in any concrete. This study

also aims to experiment and observe the mentioned goal. Furthermore, the increasing

price and diminishing reserves of construction sand encourage a need to develop its

sustainable and cost-effective replacement, helping the transition towards a circular

economy (Elsevier Ltd., 2020). Additionally, waste glass is a derivative of natural sand

and could potentially show similar geotechnical behavior. This pulverizing process is

going to be used by the researcher as an economic product to reduce the use of sand

aggregate in making concrete.

The mentioned dilemma above is apparent and observed everywhere.

Undoubtedly, it has a negative impact on the environment, and is occurring globally.

There are tons of glasses like glass bowls, product containers, and bottles scattered

around areas. Though number and number cleaning programs and waste segregation

have been proposed, those programs were implemented but not conceived by the

communities. If people fail to decrease the amount of waste, natural habitats will be

destroyed. As it is, our planet is currently unable to sustain the rate of destruction.

Reusing what we already have will prevent us from running out of resources, which will

severely affect like dominoes in later years. Fortunately, recycling is simple. Because of

this existing problem, the researchers conducted a study on the effectiveness of

pulverized waste glass as a fine aggregate (sand) alternative used in hydrophobic

concrete.
3
Statement of the Problem

This study was conducted to observe and experiment the Effectiveness of

Pulverized Waste Glass Used in Hydrophobic Concrete as a Fine Aggregate Alternative.

This paper sought the answer to these following questions:

1. What kind of engineering or construction-related work do the respondents have

for a living?

2. What glass aggregate wt.% got the best results in terms of:

2.1. Slump Cone Test,

2.2. Contact Angle Measurement, and

2.3. Compressive Strength Test (0% and 20%)?

3. How comparable are the 2 groups based on the standardized tests?

4. How comparable are the two groups on the basis of the respondents on the

hydrophobization of the samples?

4.1. What type of contact angle do the specimens fall into?

4.2. What group possesses more hydrophobic quality?

4.3. What group has the most successful outcome?

4.4. What do the respondents prefer between the specimens that are

experimented (with glass aggregate) and the controlled/commercial brand (sand

aggregate) based on the tests on its effectiveness?

5. What contents influence the effectiveness of pulverized waste glass as a fine

aggregate alternative used in hydrophobic concrete?

4
Significance of the Study

This research aims to provide information from what the authors have observed

from the experimentation assessing “Effectiveness of Pulverized Waste Glass Used in

Hydrophobic Concrete as a Fine Aggregate Alternative” and its influence to the following

beneficiaries. The following will profit from the findings of this research:

The Environment. Considering that recycling is so important for preserving the

environment. This study’s outcome will benefit the improvement of the world due to the

rising demand for reducing trash on Earth and in the Philippines.

The Society. The Philippines is prone to typhoons, tropical cyclones, and such natural

disasters because of its geographical location, which typically results in severe rains and

heavy rains and flooding of large areas. This research will assist them in repairing and

securing their properties against leaks and similar issues.

The Construction Sector. The major goal of this study is to ascertain the impact of low

glass sand content (up to 20% glass) on the composition and mechanical characteristics

of hydrophobic concrete. This will soon answer some questions that this sector might

consider to dive deeper and experiment more; if the product's efficacy is confirmed, it

will be useful for building projects.

The DENR (Department of Environment and Natural Resources). As a department

who pledge to protect the environment, it is their responsibility to conserve, manage,

and develop it and the country’s natural resources. This approach towards sustainable

development will significantly increase the importance placed on environmental

preservation.

5
Future Researchers. The study will help them unveil ideas with utmost importance

regarding the possibility of post-consumer glass as a substitute to the raw materials

used in hydrophobic concrete that many researchers were unable to investigate.

Scope and Delimitation

The coverage of this study is to test the “Effectiveness of Pulverized Waste Glass

Used in Hydrophobic Concrete as a Fine Aggregate Alternative”. The goal of this study

will mainly assess knowledge and information by experimenting with the ratio of

pulverized waste glass and hydrophobic concrete contents. This research's independent

variable is the amount of glass aggregate while the dependent variable is the workability

and mechanical properties of the output. Furthermore, the main variable of this study is

the waste glass that will be available in junk shops. The collected variables will later be

pulverized manually and proportioned into 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% by mass of the total

aggregate used (gravel + glass). A base mix with sand aggregate instead of glass (0%)

was created as a point of comparison. Lastly, the researchers will then test the output's

efficacy by testing its slump cone (fresh mix), hydrophobicity and compressive strength

(hardened samples). However, as with the majority of studies, there are several

limitations to this study.

The researchers delimit the experimentation as the tool in experimenting and

observing the effectiveness of the said variables. Some certain procedures and

equipment of the chosen standards are not met because of limited financial resources.

Additionally, making an output and the effectiveness of the product made will be

observed by the researchers and could later be used by anyone if successfully done. It

6
will also be limited to the duration of the School Year 2022-2023 in Arellano University -

Jose Rizal Campus.

Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis (𝐻𝑜). There is no effectiveness that we will get in using

pulverized waste glass as a hydrophobic concrete aggregate.

Alternative Hypothesis (𝐻𝑎). There is an effectiveness that we will get in using

pulverized waste glass as a hydrophobic concrete aggregate.

Definition of Terms

To provide clarification, the following terms herein were defined using a

dictionary:

● Aggregate. It is defined as a material or structure formed from a loosely

compacted mass of fragments or particles.

● Compressive Strength. The resistance of a material to breaking under

compression.

● Contact Angle. It ranges from 0° to 180°, is a measurement of the relative

amounts of adhesive (liquid to solid) and cohesive (liquid to liquid) forces acting

on a liquid.

● Curing. It is the process of becoming hard or solid by cooling or drying or

crystallization.

● Hydrophobic. It is a property of a substance that repels water. It means lacking

affinity for water, and tending to repel or not to absorb water.

7
 ● Mold. A hollow container used to give shape to molten or hot liquid material (such

as wax or metal) when it cools and hardens.

● Potable. Something that is safe to drink.

● Slump. Mean to fail or decline substantially.

CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the various approaches used in the study regarding "The

Effectiveness of Pulverized Waste Glass Used in Hydrophobic Concrete as a Fine

Aggregate Alternative" to collect and analyze data. Topics covered by the methodology

will include the instrument being used, the research method and design, sampling and

sample size, data types, data gathering method, and data processing. The flow of the

paper and a resolution to the research problems will also be covered.

Research Method and Design

This study will utilize the quantitative research method as its research mode

because it will discuss and include numerical data. Quantitative research, as Williams

exclaimed from their 2021 online blog entitled Why Is Quantitative Research Important?,

“is structured around the scientific method”. Using this particular design the researchers

would be able to achieve the results that they are aiming for in this study with

observation, forming a hypothesis, making a prediction, conducting an experiment and

finally analyzing the results. The researcher used this to; dive deeper into the problem;

base the study on numerical and statistical evidence; collect mostly objective data; and

because the sample size is large, that is in agreement with the study’s goal.
8
 As regards to this, the researchers will employ experimental study as the

research design of the study. An experiment is described as “a test under controlled

conditions that is made to demonstrate a known truth, to examine the validity of a

hypothesis, or to determine the efficacy of something previously untried" in the American

Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. Furthermore, according to Ghani (2015),

experiments are “carried out for the purpose of collecting data to be analyzed and

studied in the laboratory, [in the field or using computer numerical models]” as cited in

Wan Ali & Wan PY (2021). It was also observed by the same author that this research

design allows researchers to use “standard testing methods in accordance with [BS,

ASTM, or other] recognized standards.” These standards are commonly used to test

materials and systems to be used in or related to the research or investigation in

engineering. In this study, the researchers will test the output's efficacy as per the

chosen standards. Particularly, “true-experimental design” will help the authors to

manipulate and control; two of the elements of this research design, as reported by The

Office of Research Industry.

Research Instrument

To collect the needed data on this study, the researchers will be conducting

various experiments as per international standards. The workability of the fresh mixtures

was measured using the slump cone according to IS: 1199-1959. On the other hand,

after 14 days of curing, testing on the hardened hydrophobic concrete's mechanical

properties were conducted utilizing compressive strength in accordance with IS:

516-1959, and contact angle measurement to read hydrophobicity as per ASTM: D5946.

In Figure 1, a schema diagram of experimental methods is displayed.

9
 Figure 1. Schema diagram of tests

Slump Cone Test: The workability of the concrete is measured using a slump

cone. A concrete slump test, which ensures that the water to cement ratio is appropriate,

is one of the ways to evaluate a mix's applicability and quality, per Indian Standard:

1199-1959.

Figure 2. Types of Slumps (Mudavath, 2018)

https://wecivilengineers.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/what-is-slump-its-types-values-for-v

arious-construction-work/.

10
 Contact Angle Test: In accordance with the ASTM D5946 the specimens'

hydrophobicity is determined. The contact angle (θ) between a drop of water and the

treated surface was used to measure the degree of hydrophobicity. Hydrophobic

surfaces are those with contact angles greater than 90°. However, the substance is

regarded as super-hydrophobic if the contact angle has reached or exceeded 150° as

shown in Figure 3. The researchers will also utilize a software called “ImageJ, Drop

Analysis - LB-ADSA (Bixby, 2019),” to measure the contact angle with the documented

image of droplets with each specimen.

Figure 3. Types of Contact Angle (IGL Coatings, 2018)

https://blog.iglcoatings.com/how-liquid-works-with-hydrophobic-hydrophilic-surfaces/

Compressive Strength Test: According to IS: 516 – 1959, compressive strength

was measured using standard samples measuring 150 x 150 x 150 mm. These cube

specimens were cast using concrete of the M25 grade.

Lastly, the researchers will also use two questionnaires for both the Control and

Experimental Group. The questionnaires are utilized by the author of the study to

acquire data from 8 random respondents that are under the engineering and
11
construction field.The questions were orderly arranged from (I.) Profile of the

Respondents to (II.) 5 Dichotomous Questions (see APPENDIX B and C) that will be

answered by the respondents. These questions will tackle the hydrophobicity and the

outcome product of the research. The researchers seeked their teachers and some

licensed engineers to modify the validity and reliability used for this instrument.

Research Paradigm

Figure 4. IV – DV MODEL

Figure 4. The conceptual framework illustrates the paradigm and the process of

the research using the IV – DV MODEL (Independent Variable – Dependent Variable).

The independent variable is the commercial brand without waste glass for the control

group, while the pulverized waste glass is for the experimental group. The dependent

variables are the result of the experiment or testing that each of the group underwent.
12
Materials

The following materials are needed to make glass aggregate-containing

hydrophobic concrete:

Waste Glass Gravel

Cement Bistay Sand

Sahara Cement

Waterproofing Potable Water

Compound

These are the equipment that are needed to make eco-friendly hydrophobic

concrete:

13
 Hammer Sack

150 mm Cube Mold Trowel

Weighing Scale Masking Tape and

Marker

DIY Slump-Cone Curing Container

and Tamping Rod

14
 Compression

Testing Equipment

Safety Equipment used to minimize hazard in making the output:

Face or Eye Shield Face Mask

Cut Resistant

Gloves

Procedures

Step-by-Step Procedure of making and testing the Sustainable Hydrophobic

Concrete

Step 1: Create cube molds that measure 150 millimeters. Mark the molds using

the masking tape and marker to avoid confusion in categorizing the samples.

15
 (a) (b) (c)

Figure 5. (a) Molds made by Mr. Nathaniel Pachejo and (c) marking the molds with a

marker.

Step 2: Put the waste glass inside the sack, double it to ensure safety. Break the

waste glass into shards then pulverize it into tiny fragments using the hammer. Make

sure to wear your Safety Equipment while doing this process.

(a) (b)

Figure 6. Glass crushing procedure.

Step 3: Measure the pulverized waste glass in the weighing scale. Provide 2.8 kg

of weight for the alternative fine aggregate. Around 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% by mass of
16
the aggregate (gravel + glass) was composed of glass. Also, prepare the other materials

with their stated measurement, see Table 1.

(a) (b)

Figure 7. (a) sand for Base Mix (b) gravel.

Step 4: Make each sample (wt.%: 0, 5, 10, 15, 20) by combining the materials

using the specified proportions.

(a) (b)

Figure 8. Mixing procedure (a) mixing process of M1 (b) first trial.

Table 1. Mix Proportions

17
 Mix Cement Water Water- Gravel Sand Glass Glass

Symbol [kg] [kg] proofing Aggre Aggre Aggregate Aggre

Admixture gate gate [wt.% of Total gate

[kg] [kg] [kg] Aggregate] [kg]

Base 4 2 0 0

Mix

M1 5.7 0 5 0.3

M2 2 1.18 0.05 5.4 0 10 0.6

M3 5.1 0 15 0.7

M4 4.8 0 20 1.2

Step 5: Proceed to assess the workability of the fresh mixture of each sample

(wt.%) with slump-cone test.

(a) (b) (c)

18
Figure 9. (a) DIY slump cone (b) slump cone test of M1 (c) slump cone test of the Base

Mix.

Step 6: Put the mixture into the appropriate molds after the slump-cone test. To

get an even, flat finish, tap the molds' exteriors.

Figure 10.

Step 7: After filling up each mold, wait for it to harden. After 24 hours, the

specimens were demoulded and were tested for their contact angle as per ASTM

D5946.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 11. (b) M1, M2, M3, M4 (c) Base Mix.

19
 Step 8: To test the hydrophobicity of the samples, carry out a contact angle test

using a droplet of water.

Figure 12. Contact Angle Test

Step 9: After testing the hydrophobicity, put the samples in the curing container

for the 28-day curing process. For the water poured into the curing container, potable

water is “considered satisfactory for mixing and curing concrete, and other masonry

works (Kuriakose, 2021).”

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 13. (a) Base Mix’s curing container (c) curing M1, M2, M3, and M4.

20
 Step 10: Finally, samples are removed from the container. The 0% and 20% will

be prepared for their compressive strength test after a 28-day curing process. These

cubes were evaluated on a compression testing machine.

(a) (b)

Figure 14.

Treatment of Data

The data gathered were subject to statistical treatment in order to answer the

questions proposed in the study. The following statistical methods are available to the

researchers for analysis of the gathered data:

1. Simple Percentage. The following formula was used to analyze the

respondents' demographic profile variable and other data accumulated using a simple

percentage:

𝐹
𝑃= 𝑁
(100)

Where:

21
 P = Percentage

F = Frequency

N = Total number of respondents

100 = Constant multiplier

2. Weighted Mean. During the actual data collection process, this statistical

tool was used to calculate the weight of the responses in the questionnaires provided by

the respondents. The weighted mean is calculated as follows:

Σ𝐹𝑊
𝑊𝑀 = 𝑁

Where:

WM = Weighted mean

Σ = Summation symbol

F = Frequency for each option

W = Assigned weight

N = Total number of frequencies

The corresponding verbal interpretations for weighted mean are as follows.

Weighted Means Corresponding Remarks

22
 1.51 - 2.00 Yes

1.00 - 1.50 No

3. Compressive Strength Test. The researchers utilized the equation below

to equate the Compression Strength of the samples:

(𝐹𝑚)𝑖 = 𝑃
𝐴

Where:

(Fₘ)i = Compressive Strength of specimen in (MPa)

P = Maximum load in (N)

A = Area of loaded surface in (mm²)

4. Linear Regression Function. This equation is to find the slope and

y-intercept of a line. Specifically, the researchers used this to see the cause-and-effect

relationship of the Dependent and Independent Variable.

𝑦 = 𝑎 + 𝑏𝑥

Where:

y = Dependent Variable

a = Intercept

b = Slope
23
 x = Independent Variable

RESULTS

This chapter presents the interpretation of the study on the (research problem)

quantitative methodology. The content of this chapter are the responses of the

respondents through survey methods and the measurement as per slump cone test,

contact angle measurement, and compressive strength test. Respondents and results

were able to unconsciously cover the set of questions.

Figure 15. Profile of the Respondents (Type of Construction Related Occupation)

Figure 15. To follow the proper procedure we ensure that the respondents must

have an experience in this field. The table shows that 1 out of the 8 respondents

(12.5%) is a civil engineer and the rest (87.5%) are construction workers.

24
 Table 2. Test Values for Control and Experimental Specimens

Mix Slump (mm) Contact Angle (°) Compressive Strength (MPa)

Symbol

Base 12 32.226 29.1

Mix

M1 2 42.326

M2 6 37.097

M3 12 78.292

M4 24 40.869 21.7

Table 2. This table presents the results obtained from the tests for the fresh mix

and hardened samples. With the increasing of glass sand content, the slump cone

increased linearly (see Figure 16). Furthermore, with the addition of 5%, 10%, 15%, and

20% glass aggregate, contact angle increased by 31.3%, 15.1%, 143%, and 26.8%

compared to the reference (see Figure 17). Meanwhile, the compressive strength

decreased for 25.4 % with the addition of 20% pulverized waste glass compared to the

base mix (29.1 MPa).

Figure 16.

25
 Figure 17.

Table 3. Weighted Mean of Survey - Questionnaire

Control Group

No. Question Yes (2) No (1) Yes or No

26
1 Is the contact angle of the

specimens with 0% glass 2 2 Yes

aggregate more than 90°?

2 Does the specimen with no glass

aggregate alternative possess 2 2 Yes

hydrophobic quality?

3 Did the product have a

2 2 Yes
successful outcome?

4 Would you prefer to use the

specimens that are

experimented (5%, 10%, 15%,

0 4 No
20%) than the

controlled/commercial brand

(0%)?

5 Do you think this research can

help/contribute to our 4 0 Yes

community?

Experimental Group

1 Is the contact angle of the

2 2 Yes
specimens with 5%, 10%, 15%.

27
 and 20% glass aggregate more

than 90°?

2 Does the specimen with glass

aggregate alternative possess 4 0 Yes

hydrophobic quality?

3 Did the product have a

4 0 Yes
successful outcome?

4 Would you prefer to use the

specimens that are

experimented (5%, 10%, 15%,

2 2 Yes
20%) than the

controlled/commercial brand

(0%)?

5 Do you think this research can

help/contribute to our 4 0 Yes

community?

Table 3. To show properly the difference and also what the respondents would

prefer either the experimented one's (with glass aggregate) or the controlled/commercial

ones (sand aggregate). The table above shows the result that may cover the questions.

For question number 1, 50% or 4 respondents answered that the contact angle of the

28
specimens with 0% glass aggregate is more than 90° and is the same with the answers

in the experimental group both having an average of yes answers.

For the 2nd question, it shows that out of 4 respondents that answered the

control group survey, 2 or 50% answered (yes) that the specimen possesses

hydrophobic quality and 2 or 50% answered no. On the other hand, for the experimental

group, 4 respondents (100%) answered (yes) that the samples with glass aggregate

possess hydrophobic quality.

The table also illustrated that for the control group, 50% believes that the product

has a successful outcome while in the experimental group 100% (4 respondents)

answered that it has a successful outcome.

Lastly, with the same question, “Would you prefer to use the specimens that are

experimented (5%, 10%, 15%, 20%) than the controlled/commercial brand (0%)?” from

both the control and experimental group questionnaire. Out of 8 respondents, 2 or 25%

answered yes while 6 or 75% answered no.

Table 4.

Control Group Experimental Group

𝑥1 𝑥2

1.5 1.5

1.5 2

1.5 2

29
 1 1.5

2 2

Total: 7.5 Total: 9

M = 7.5/5 = 1.5 M = 9/5 = 1.8

Table 4. The table shows that the average answer that the control group survey -

questionnaire got was more “no” answer or approximately 1.5. On the other side, the

experimental group survey - questionnaire resulted in more “yes” or 1.8.

DISCUSSION

Summary of Findings

The study’s main research findings are summarized in this section. This research

was done to see how well pulverized waste glass worked as an alternative for fine

aggregate in hydrophobic concrete. The following sub-questions were considered in the

study in an effort to address this primary objective:

1. What kind of engineering or construction-related work do the respondents

have for a living?

➢ Most of the respondents that answered are construction workers (87.5%).

2. What glass aggregate wt.% got the best results in terms of:

2.1. Slump Cone Test,

30
 ➢ Based on the results, the sample with 20% of glass aggregate addition got

the best slump for concrete.

2.2. Contact Angle, and

➢ M3 (15%) produced an almost 90° with 78.292° contact angle

measurement.

2.3. Compressive Strength Test (0% and 20%)?

➢ The Base Mix with no glass aggregate addition is stronger than the

experimental group.

3. How comparable are the 2 groups based on the standardized tests?

➢ From the obtained data, the experimental group survey produced more

“yes” responses than the control group.

4. How comparable are the two groups on the basis of the respondents on the

hydrophobization of the samples?

4.1. What type of contact angle do the specimens fall into?

➢ All of the specimens are considered as hydrophilic as per ASTM D5946

because their contact angle did not exceed 90 degrees.

4.2. What group possesses more hydrophobic quality?

➢ From the data collected, the experimental group showed more potential of

showing hydrophobic quality.

4.3. What group has the most successful outcome?

➢ The experimented group, all of the respondents (100%) answered yes,

then the control group with 50% yes answers and 50% no answers.
31
 4.4. What do the respondents prefer between the specimens that are

experimented (with glass aggregate) and the controlled/commercial brand (sand

aggregate) based on the tests on its effectiveness?

➢ 25% of respondents answered “yes” while 6 or 75% answered “no”.

5. What contents influence the effectiveness of pulverized waste glass as a

fine aggregate alternative used in hydrophobic concrete?

➢ This study on the durability of concrete using waste glass showed higher

performance against water as a result from the contact angle test as waste glass was

added. Additionally, the sahara waterproofing cement helps the repellence of water.

Conclusions

The study's objective was to assess whether it would be possible to use a glass

sand aggregate made from post-consumer glass (food, drug, and cosmetic packaging,

primarily bottles) in concrete that is difficult to recycle and is kept in huge quantities in

landfills. Glass sand aggregate made up 5, 10, 15, and 20 wt.% of the mixture was

provided. Based of the experimental investigation's findings, the following significant

conclusions can be made:

● According to this study, glass is a sustainable building material.

● Glass wastes used for construction will help to recycle waste glass that

can’t be reused in the landfill.

● According to the data gathered, the substance can be classified as a

pozzolanic material because glass and sand have chemical compositions that are

relatively comparable.
32
 ● The workability, hydrophobicity, and mechanical properties of the concrete

were affected by the addition of glass aggregate in the range of 5 to 20 weight percent of

the fine aggregate.

Recommendations

The findings of the study suggest that:

● The researchers suggest using machinery for the pulverizing process to

assure the consistency of the glass being pulverized of the glass into sand.

● Additionally, to provide a specific sand grain size of every material used in

the output.

● It is recommended to use proper and accurate materials and follow the

instructions and procedures properly to achieve the expected possible outcome and

use more standardized tests in the workability and mechanical properties of the

samples.

● Other than measuring contact angle, the researchers suggest the future

researcher to measure the interval ratio of water absorption.

● Future researchers can measure the compressive strength of the 5% to

15% wt.% glass aggregate to check the significance difference and slope of it with the

20% sample.

● The researchers also recommend adding more glass aggregate for about

25% to 50%.

● Using waste glass to substitute the ordinary sand in making concrete is

widely used, the researchers recommended future researchers to expand the

33
knowledge from this research paper to get a more interesting outcome and to fully

contribute to our society.

REFERENCE

Al-Kheetan, M. J., Rahman, M. M., & Chamberlain, D. A. (2019). Moisture evaluation of

concrete pavement treated with hydrophobic surface impregnants. International

Journal of Pavement Engineering, 21(14), 1746–1754.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10298436.

Bixby, T. (2019, January 23). SP19 How to measure Contact Angle with Image J [Video].

YouTube. Retrieved March 25, 2023, from https://youtu.be/AAROcG0miC8.

Case Studies of Environmental Impacts of Sand Mining and Gravel Extraction for Urban

Development in Garbone. (2013). [PhD Dissertation]. University of South Africa.

Designer Of. (n.d.). Concrete Slump Test (The Cheap Way). Instructables. Retrieved

March 23, 2023, from

https://www.instructables.com/Concrete-Slump-Test-The-Cheap-Way/.

Experiment. (n.d.). The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language.

Retrieved January 21, 2023, from

https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=experiment.

Ghani, Abdul Naser Abdul. (2014). Experimental Research Methods for Students in Built

Environment and Engineering. MATEC Web of Conferences. 10. 01001.

https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20141001001.

Kuriakose, B. (2021, June 30). Curing of Concrete, Its Need, Purpose, and Methods.

Benny Kuriakose & Associates. Retrieved March 20, 2023, from

34
 https://www.bennykuriakose.com/post/curing-of-concrete-its-need-purpose-and-m

ethods.

Liquids, Man, How Do They Work? (2018, June 21). IGL Coatings. Retrieved March 22,

2023, from

https://blog.iglcoatings.com/how-liquid-works-with-hydrophobic-hydrophilic-surfac

es/.

Malek, M., Łasica, W., Jackowski, M., & Kadela, M. (2020). Effect of Waste Glass

Addition as a Replacement for Fine Aggregate on Properties of Mortar. Materials

(Basel), 13(14), 32708890. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13143189.

Mudavath, K. (2018, April 5). What is Slump & Its Types, Values for Various

Construction Work. We Civil Engineers. Retrieved March 23, 2023, from

https://wecivilengineers.wordpress.com/2018/04/05/what-is-slump-its-types-value

s-for-various-construction-work/.

Romero, P. (2020, September 7). Phl Facing Garbage Crisis; 16.6 Million Metric Tons Of

Waste This Year Can Fill 99 Philippine Arenas. One News Philippines. Retrieved

September 29, 2022, from

https://www.onenews.ph/articles/phl-facing-garbage-crisis-16-6-million-metric-ton

s-of-waste-this-year-can-fill-99-philippine-arenas.

Stalder, A. F., Kulik, G., Sage, D., Barbieri, L., & Hoffmann, P. (2006). A Snake-Based

Approach to Accurate Determination of Both Contact Points and Contact Angles.

Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 286(1–3),

92–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/2006.03.008.

35
Sustainable mineral resources in the Philippines. (2022). UK Research and Innovation.

https://www.ukri.org/what-we-offer/browse-our-areas-of-investment-and-support/s

ustainable-mineral-resources-in-the-philippines/.

The mining of sand, a non-renewable resource. (2014). GreenFacts. Retrieved March

22, 2023, from

https://www.greenfacts.org/en/sand-extraction/sand-extraction-greenfacts-level2.

pdf.

Williams, T. (2021, June 14). Why Is Quantitative Research Important? Grand Canyon

University. Retrieved January 16, 2023, from https://bit.ly/3LOVqDj.

36
 APPENDIX A

Consent Form for Respondents Approved by the Principal

37
 APPENDIX B

Survey - Questionnaire (Control Group)

Arellano University

Jose Rizal Campus

Gov. Pascual Ave., Malabon City

921-27-44

Senior High School Department

“THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PULVERIZED WASTE GLASS USED IN HYDROPHOBIC

CONCRETE AS A FINE AGGREGATE ALTERNATIVE”

(COMMERCIAL BRAND/ HYDROPHOBIC CONCRETE BRAND)

Pursuant to the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (RA. 10173), all personal information

collected through the questionnaire will be used only for the purposes of this research.

Your responses to the instrument will remain private at all times.

Your feedback is extremely valuable to us. We welcome you to participate in this

survey and learn more about the results. It will take about 5-10 minutes to complete this

survey.

A. Profile of the Respondents

Directions: Read and understand the following questions. Write the answer on

the blank.

Name (Optional): _____________________________

Occupation: _________________________________
38
 B. Dichotomous Question

Directions: Read and understand the questions given below and put a check

(✔) on the box if your answer is Yes or No.

Specimens

Types of Contact Angle (ASTM D5946)

1. Is the contact angle of the specimen with 0% glass

aggregate more than 90°?

● Yes

● No

2. Does the specimen with no glass aggregate alternative

possess hydrophobic quality?

● Yes
39
 ● No

3. Did the product have a successful outcome?

● Yes

● No

4. Would you prefer to use the specimens that are experimented (5%,

10%, 15%, 20%) than the controlled/commercial brand (0%)?

● Yes

● No

5. Do you think this research can help/contribute to our community?

● Yes

● No

Thank you!

- The Researchers

Google Form Link:

https://forms.gle/ro3QgQUvCYvU8YCL9

40
 APPENDIX C

Survey - Questionnaire (Experimental Group)

Arellano University

Jose Rizal Campus

Gov. Pascual Ave., Malabon City

921-27-44

Senior High School Department

“THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PULVERIZED WASTE GLASS USED IN HYDROPHOBIC

CONCRETE AS A FINE AGGREGATE ALTERNATIVE”

Pursuant to the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (RA. 10173), all personal information

collected through the questionnaire will be used only for the purposes of this research.

Your responses to the instrument will remain private at all times.

Your feedback is extremely valuable to us. We welcome you to participate in this

survey and learn more about the results. It will take about 5-10 minutes to complete this

survey.

C. Profile of the Respondents

Directions: Read and understand the following questions. Write the answer on

the blank.

Name (Optional): _____________________________

Occupation: _________________________________

D. Dichotomous Question
41
 Directions: Read and understand the questions given below and put a check

(✔) on the box if your answer is Yes or No.

Specimens

Types of Contact Angle (ASTM D5946)

1. Is the contact angle of the specimens with 5%, 10%, 15%. and 20%

glass aggregate more than 90°?

● Yes

● No

2. Does the specimen with glass aggregate alternative possess

hydrophobic quality?

● Yes

42
 ● No

3. Did the product have a successful outcome?

● Yes

● No

4. Would you prefer to use the specimens that are experimented (5%,

10%, 15%, 20%) than the controlled/commercial brand (0%)?

● Yes

● No

6. Do you think this research can help/contribute to our community?

● Yes

● No

Thank you!

- The Researchers

Google Form Link:

https://forms.gle/nzZRrbJU1SUiS6LH8

43
 APPENDIX D

LETTER OF REQUEST TO USE REQUIRED EQUIPMENT FOR COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH TEST

44
 APPENDIX E

CONTACT ANGLE MEASURING WITH IMAGEJ’S DROP ANALYSIS

45
 APPENDIX F

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST OBSERVATIONAL TABLE

46
 APPENDIX G

MATERIAL CALCULATION AND PROPORTIONING

47