Rubberized concrete A green structural material with enhanced

Prévia do material em texto

Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Construction and Building Materials
journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /conbui ldmat
Rubberized concrete: A green structural material with enhanced
energy-dissipation capability
James Xue a,⇑, Masanobu Shinozuka b
a University High School, 4771 Campus Drive, Irvine, CA 92612, USA
b Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA
h i g h l i g h t s
" Dynamic and static performance of rubberized concrete specimens was investigated.
" Adding rubber crumb into concrete mixture increases the damping ratio by 62%.
" Adding rubber crumb can reduce the seismic force on concrete structures.
" Silica fume can improve bonding between rubber crumb and cement paste.
" The study leads to potential applications of rubberized concrete as structural material.
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 10 August 2012
Received in revised form 21 December 2012
Accepted 7 January 2013
Available online 27 February 2013
Keywords:
Rubberized concrete
Structure material
Energy dissipation
Dynamic performance
Compression strength
0950-0618/$ - see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd. A
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.005
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: 20 Tesoro,
Tel.: +1 9495545535; fax: +1 9493879088.
E-mail addresses: jamesxue100@gmail.com (J. Xue),
a b s t r a c t
This study presents rubberized concrete composite as a new structural material aiming for an enhanced
energy dissipation capability and thus improved seismic performance by mixing recycled rubber crumb
with concrete. While rubberized concrete is not new, this study represents the first investigation on
damping and dynamic (including seismic) behaviors of rubberized concrete for its potential application
as structural material. Small-scale column models were fabricated using rubberized concrete with differ-
ent proportions of rubber crumb to evaluate the structural dynamic performance, including free vibration
tests to identify damping ratios and seismic shaking table tests to investigate the structural responses to
earthquake ground motion. Meanwhile, rubberized concrete cylinders were tested to evaluate compres-
sive strength and modulus of elasticity. It was observed that the damping coefficient of the rubberized
concrete increased by 62% compared with normal concrete and, as a result, the seismic response accel-
eration of the structure decreased by 27%. However the concrete suffered from reduction in compressive
strength as rubber crumb was added. It was found that adding silica fume to rubberized concrete
improved the bonding between the rubber and cement and thus the concrete strength. Overall, this study
demonstrated the potential of using the environmentally-friendly rubberized concrete as structural
material to enhance dynamic performance and reduce seismic response of concrete structures.
� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Meanwhile, used tires are disposed at a rate of 1.1 tires per per-
Ever since the ancient Romans revolutionized its use, concrete
has served as a construction material for civil infrastructure for
more than two millennia. The introduction of steel reinforcement
in the late 19 century significantly increased the tensile strength
of concrete, but reinforced concrete structures are still vulnerable
to severe earthquakes that release significant kinetic energy over
a short period of time. A more energy-dissipative concrete is highly
desired.
ll rights reserved.
Irvine, CA 92618, USA
shino@uci.edu (M. Shinozuka).
son per year, amounting to more than 303 million tires per year in
the US. In 2009, about 594 thousand tons of scrapped tires were
reportedly disposed in landfills. Although scrapped tire manage-
ment programs started in many states, there were still 128 million
tires remain stockpiled throughout the US [1]. These stockpiles
present the threat of uncontrolled fires and other environmental
hazards. Because of the rapid depletion of available sites for waste
disposal, scrapping of waste tires in landfills becomes extremely
dangerous. Over the years, disposal of waste tires has become
one of the most serious environmental issues.
To alleviate this problem, new green materials are being devel-
oped using recycled tire rubber, with one example being rubber-
ized concrete, in which rubber crumb replace some of the
aggregates in concrete. Rubberized concrete has become an emerg-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.005
mailto:jamesxue100@gmail.com
mailto:shino@uci.edu
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.01.005
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09500618
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat
J. Xue, M. Shinozuka / Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204 197
ing research topic in recent years. So far, most of the studies have
focused on the evaluation of mechanical properties of rubberized
concrete mixture [e.g., 2–6]. It was demonstrated that addition of
recycled rubber crumb could increase the deformability and ductil-
ity of the concrete. At the same time, concerns about reduction in
compressive strength of rubberized concrete have been raised
[7,8], which is attributed to the poor bonding between the rubber
particles and the cement paste [9]. There are many areas in civil
engineering where the rubberized concrete may find its niche
applications, in which the material strength is not crucial such as
road traffic barriers.
Different from previous work, this study investigates the poten-
tial use of rubberized concrete as structural material, focusing on
the evaluation of damping and dynamic behavior of the rubberized
concrete, and aiming at increase in energy dissipation without sac-
rificing load-bearing strength of concrete. More energy dissipation
would improve seismic safety of concrete structures such as
bridges and buildings. Numerous efforts have been made to im-
prove seismic performance of structures by increasing energy dis-
sipation. For example, mechanical dampers have been installed to
bridges and buildings for seismic retrofit, but high maintenance
costs and long-term reliability issues prevent their wide applica-
tions. A more desirable approach is to develop structural materials
with higher damping than the conventional concrete, which would
enable cost-effective design, construction, and maintenance. Rub-
berized concrete has shown higher damping than normal concrete
in viscoelastic regime when 3.5–5% of aggregates were replaced by
rubber crumb [10].
In this study, rubberized concrete column specimens were fab-
ricated by replacing coarse aggregates with scrapped tire rubber
crumb at different volumetric ratios, and their dynamic properties
including damping ratio and seismic response were experimentally
investigated through free vibration and shaking table tests. On the
(b)(a)
Fig. 1. Material samples for rubberized concrete with silica fume. (a)
Table 1
Concrete mixing ratios.
Concrete
mixture
Rubber
volume
ratio (%)
Density
(kg/m3)
Composition in mass fraction
Aggregate/
cement
Sand/
cement
Water/
cement
Silica
fume/
cement
Normal
concrete
(NC)
0 2475 2.916 1.624 0.5 –
Rubberized
concrete
(RC)
5 2374 2.770 1.543 0.5 –
10 2273 2.622 1.463 0.5 –
15 2171 2.478 1.380 0.5 –
20 2069 2.330 1.299 0.5 –
Rubberized
concrete
with silica
fume (RCSF)
5 2372 2.968 1.654 0.5 0.07
10 2270 2.809 1.568 0.5 0.07
15 2168 2.655 1.479 0.5 0.07
20 2067 2.496 1.392 0.5 0.07
other hand, the compressive strength and modulus of elasticity
were evaluated through compression tests of standard concrete
cylinders with different rubber replacement ratios. The effective-
ness of adding silica fume, a fine grain with a high surface-to-
volume ratio, for improving the compressive strength was studied
by comparing the results from specimens with and without the
silica fume. The mechanism of strength loss in the rubberized
concrete was also investigated.
2. Rubberizedconcrete specimens
Two types of concrete specimens were prepared and fabricated; one is small-
scale concrete columns, each with a lumped mass, for the free vibration and seismic
shaking table tests, and the other is cylindrical specimens for the compression tests.
Each type included normal concrete and rubberized concrete specimens with differ-
ent rubber crumb ratios. Some of rubberized concrete cylinders were added with
silica fume.
2.1. Materials
All the rubberized concrete column specimens were fabricated using the same
mixture formula, except for some coarse aggregate (gravel) being replaced by recy-
cled rubber crumb. The amount of fine aggregate (sand) and cement, together with
the water-to-cement ratio, and admixture remained unchanged. Type 1 Portland
cement was used in all the specimens. Gravel of 12 mm maximum size was used
as coarse aggregate. River sand with 2 mm maximum size and 2.5% moisture con-
tent was employed. Rubber crumb recycled from used tires (reRubber Inc.) partially
replaced the coarse aggregate. The rubber crumb has a maximum size of 6 mm and
was added to the concrete mixture at different volume replacement ratios from 5%
to 20%. In developing rubberized silica fume concrete mixture, silica fume was used
in partial replacement of cement. The silica fume (BASF Corp.) was fine particles
approximately one hundredth the sizes of average cement particles, and have a
large surface area of 20,000 m2/kg. It is expected that the silica fume coat the rubber
crumb by free water in the concrete. This function, known as particle packing, re-
fines the micro structure of concrete, creates a much denser pore structure, and
compensates for the reduced strength due to the rubber crumb. The material prop-
erties of the mixture proportions of the normal concrete (NC), rubberized concrete
(RC) and rubberized concrete with silica fume (RCSF) are tabulated in Table 1.
Samples of rubber crumb and silica fume are shown in Fig. 1.
2.2. Specimens
Two types of specimens were prepared for the experiments, including 6 col-
umns and 27 cylinders. The concrete column specimens representing a small-scale
model of a column with a lumped mass, as shown in Fig. 2, were specially designed
for free vibration and shaking table tests. The specimen consists of three parts: a
lumped mass on top (12 cm wide, 12 cm long and 19 cm high), a column in middle
(4 cm wide, 4 cm long and 50 cm high), and a foundation at bottom (14 cm wide,
14 cm long and 4 cm high). The foundation was wrapped with glass fiber reinforced
polymer composites to improve the strength.
The design of the columns aimed at simulating bridges and buildings with a
natural frequency in the range of 3–6 Hz, which coincides with earthquakes’ usual
dominant frequency range. Therefore, these structures are more vulnerable to seis-
mic damage. A total of three NC and three RC column specimens were fabricated.
For the rubberized specimens, 6 mm rubber crumb were mixed with aggregate,
sand and cement to replace aggregate 15% in volume used in the normal concrete
specimens. The normal concrete specimen weighed 10.69 kg, while the rubberized
Rubber crumb (Re-Rubber, Inc.); and (b) silica fume (BASF Corp.).
Fig. 2. Concrete column specimen.
Fig. 3. Six column specimens under curing.
Fig. 4. Cylindrical concrete specimen and strain gauges.
Fig. 5. Cylinders for compressive strength test.
198 J. Xue, M. Shinozuka / Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204
concrete weighed 9.75 kg. The first natural frequency of the rubberized concrete
specimen was measured at 5.65 Hz (to be shown later), which was within the tar-
geted range.
While pouring the concrete mixture (based on the proportion ratios shown in
Table 1) into the molds made with Styrofoam and glue, two No. 1, 1/8 in.
(0.32 cm) diameter, steel reinforcement bars were placed in each of the column
specimens. After the mixture settled firmly, the specimens cured for 7 days at room
temperature as illustrated in Fig. 3.
Twenty-seven standard cylinder specimens were fabricated according to the
ASTM C39/C39M test method [11]. As shown in Fig. 4, each cylinder is 10.2 cm in
diameter and 20.3 cm high. Besides the three normal concrete specimens, 12 rub-
berized concrete specimens were fabricated at 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% volume
replacement ratios of the coarse aggregate. The 12 rubberized concrete with silica
fume employed the same volume replacement ratio as the rubberized concrete,
but added silica fume to replace 7% of the cement, as shown in Table 1. For each
replacement ratio, three specimens were prepared in order to determine the aver-
age compressive strength. All the cylindrical specimens were cured for 28 days at
room temperature before they were set up for the tests. Some of the cylinders
are shown in Fig. 5.
Fig. 6. Free vibration test setup.
3. Free vibration tests
In order to investigate the energy dissipation capability of the
rubberized concrete in comparison with the normal concrete, free
vibration tests were carried out on each of the six concrete column
Time history 
Power spectrum distribution 
Fig. 7. Free vibration decay time history and PSD for the NC column #3.
J. Xue, M. Shinozuka / Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204 199
specimens, from which damping ratio was extracted. As shown in
Fig. 6, an accelerometer was glued on the lumped mass of the col-
umn top. A hammer was employed to apply an impact load to the
mass, inducing free vibration, which was recorded by the acceler-
ometer. In the experiments, the free vibration tests were repeated
five times and their results averaged for each of the six specimens.
Because of the energy dissipation capability of concrete, the free
vibration eventually decays in magnitude towards zero. Free vibra-
tion time histories recorded from the multiple tests on the NC col-
umn #3 and the RC column #3 are plotted in Figs. 7 and 8.
Meanwhile, power spectrum density (PSD) was computed from
the first three tests and plotted in the same figures. Due to the dif-
ference in the hammer impact intensities, the three PSD curves
show different magnitudes, but the peak frequencies are almost
identical. From the PSD plots, it was found that the rubberized con-
crete column has a lower natural frequency (5.65 Hz in average),
compared with the normal concrete column (7.85 Hz in average).
This was due to the decrease in the modulus of elasticity of the
rubberized concrete (to be discussed in Section 5).
Damping ratios were evaluated from the recorded free vibration
time histories. The higher the damping ratio, the more the energy
dissipation capability of the column has. Modeling the damping as
viscous damping, the free vibration follows an exponential decay.
The damping ratio can then be computed from the logarithmic dec-
rement as follows:
f ¼ 1
2np
� ln A0
An
� �
ð1Þ
where A0 is an initial amplitude of the acceleration and An is the
amplitude after n cycles of oscillation.
Table 2 lists the damping ratios for the five tests of all column
specimens. The average damping ratio based on the five tests for
each of the column specimens is plotted in Fig. 9. The rubberized
concrete columns exhibit higher damping ratios than the normal
concrete columns. The average damping ratio increased from
4.75% of the normal concrete columns to 7.70% of the rubberized
ones, representing a 62% increase. This implies that the rubberized
concrete columns are more capable of dissipating kinetic energy.
It is also noticed that the damping ratios of the three normal
concrete columns are consistent, but the damping ratios of the rub-
berized concrete columns vary from 5.9% to 8.3%. The scattered
damping ratios are probably due to the heterogeneity in mixing
the rubber crumb with concrete. As a matter of fact, it was found
difficult to uniformly dispersing the rubber crumb into concrete
mixture, when preparing the test specimens. This topic deserves
more future research.
4. Seismic shaking table tests
For the seismic shaking table tests,the base of the concrete col-
umn specimen was fixed on a seismic shaking table using four sets
of nuts and bolts. One accelerometer was glued on the shaking ta-
ble and another on the lumped mass at the top of the concrete col-
umn, as shown in Fig. 10.
Each of the six concrete columns was tested by exciting the
shaking table with a prescribed seismic ground motion and mea-
Time history 
Power spectrum distribution (PSD) 
Fig. 8. Free vibration decay time history and PSD for the RC column #3.
Table 2
Measured damping ratios (%) from free vibration tests.
Concrete
specimens
NC
column
#1
NC
column
#2
NC
column
#3
RC
column
#1
RC
column
#2
RC
column
#3
Test 1 5.2 4.5 4.0 7.5 7.3 7.9
Test 2 4.4 5.0 5.0 8.0 5.9 8.1
Test 3 5.1 4.0 5.4 8.3 6.2 8.3
Test 4 4.7 4.9 4.5 7.9 7.5 8.3
Test 5 4.6 5.1 4.9 8.3 7.9 8.0
Average 4.8 4.7 4.8 8.0 7.0 8.1
Fig. 9. Comparison of average damping ratios (%).
200 J. Xue, M. Shinozuka / Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204
suring the seismic response by the accelerometer on the column
mass. The ground motion was a modified 1940 El Centro earth-
quake in which the original digitized data sampling rate of
100 Hz was taken as 200 Hz and, as a result, the frequency of the
ground motion was doubled. The motivation for this modification
was to shift the earthquake dominant frequency to a higher range
closer to the natural frequencies of the specimens (5.65 Hz for the
rubberized concrete and 7.85 Hz for the normal concrete), in order
to effectively excite the specimens. At the same time, the ampli-
tude of the ground motion was also scaled up to 1.0 g, in order
to examine the effectiveness of the rubberized concrete during a
damaging earthquake event.
After the tests were completed, all the concrete columns were
examined carefully. Cracks appeared in all 6 columns, but rela-
tively fewer cracks were observed in the rubberized concrete col-
umns. Fig. 11 shows major cracks marked in black on the NC
column #1 after the seismic shaking table test.
The seismic ground motion and response acceleration recorded
by the accelerometers on the shaking table and the column mass
are plotted as a function of time. Fig. 12 depicts the results from
the NC column #3 and the RC column #3, in which the peak accel-
erations were identified and marked in a circle. The peak response
accelerations of all six columns are plotted in Fig. 13.
For the same seismic ground motion with a peak acceleration of
1.0 g, the rubberized concrete columns demonstrated smaller re-
sponse accelerations (1.4–1.5 g) than the normal concrete columns
(1.7–1.9 g). On average, adding rubber crumb into concrete re-
duced seismic response acceleration by approximately 27%. The
smaller response acceleration implies a less seismic force applied
to the rubberized concrete column, since the force is proportional
to the acceleration.
Fig. 10. Seismic shaking table test setup.
Fig. 11. Damaged NC column #1 after shaking test.
J. Xue, M. Shinozuka / Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204 201
It is noted that the natural frequency 5.65 Hz of the rubberized
column is different from that for the normal concrete column
(7.85 Hz). The reduction in the natural frequency is consistent with
the decrease in dynamic modulus of elasticity of the rubberized
concrete. Therefore, the difference in their seismic responses are
due to the differences in both the damping and natural frequencies.
However, the rubberized concrete columns (e.g., 8.1% damping for
the RC column #3) would have a lower response than the normal
concrete columns (e.g., 4.8% damping for the NC column #3), even
if the two specimens were compared at identical natural frequency
(e.g., 5.65 Hz or 7.85 Hz). This is demonstrated in the response
spectrum of the input ground motion in Fig. 14.
1 For interpretation of color in Fig. 17, the reader is referred to the web version o
this article.
5. Compression tests
Compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of the rubber-
ized concrete with or without silica fume were tested on a hydrau-
lic universal testing machine according to ASTM C469 [12]. To
evaluate the modulus of elasticity, both longitudinal and trans-
verse strain gauges were attached to the cylindrical specimens,
as shown in Fig. 4. Load conditions and strains in both directions
were measured every 0.1 s until the testing specimen failed. The
experimental setup is shown in Fig. 15.
The densities of each set of cylindrical specimens were mea-
sured before the compressive strength tests. Owing to low specific
gravity of rubber crumb, densities of rubberized concrete de-
creased with the increase in the percentage of rubber crumb con-
tent. The effect of rubber content on the densities of concrete is
tabulated in Table 1, where the average density decreased from
2475 kg/m3 of the normal concrete set to 2374, 2273, 2171, and
2069 kg/m3 at the rubber replacement ratio of 5%, 10%, 15% and
20% respectively. For the rubberized silica fume concrete
specimens, only 7% of cement was replaced by the silica fume,
and there was little change in densities for the respective rubber
crumb content set.
A test result is based on the average of three identical cylindri-
cal specimens tested in each specimen set. For each specimen, a
stress and strain diagram was plotted. A typical stress–strain dia-
gram for the rubberized concrete specimen with 15% replacement
ratio is depicted in Fig. 16. Summarizing results from all the spec-
imen sets, Fig. 17 shows the compressive strengths at different
rubber replacement ratios with 0% representing the normal con-
crete specimen set. The red1 and blue line denotes the results of
the rubberized concrete with and without silica fume. The com-
pressive strength of the rubberized concrete decreased, as the
amount of the rubber crumb increased. The average compressive
strength of the normal concrete cylinders at 28 days was
38.13 MPa. The average strength of the rubberized concrete cylin-
ders at the replacement ratios of 10% and 20% decreased to
27.13 MPa and 20.33 MPa, representing 28.84% and 46.68% reduc-
tion respectively. The decrease in the compressive strength was
more profound in the specimens with 5–15% replacement ratios.
From the results of the rubberized silica fume concrete specimens,
it is observed that at all the replacement ratios, adding silica fume
increased the compressive strength consistently by 3–7 MPa. The
strength of the rubberized silica fume concrete specimens at the
replacement ratios of 10% and 20% decreased to 32.88 MPa and
23.35 MPa, representing 13.77% and 38.76% reduction from the
normal concrete respectively.
The moduli of elasticity were tested and calculated based on the
standards in ASTM C469 [12]. Fig. 18 plots the test results for the
normal concrete and the rubberized concrete cylinders with and
without silica fume. Compared to the average modulus of elasticity
of 33.20 GPa for the normal concrete cylinders, the modulus for the
rubberized concrete cylinders was 25.23 GPa at 10%, and 19.97 GPa
at 20% replacement ratio, while the modulus for the rubberized sil-
ica fume concrete cylinders was 29.45 GPa at 10% and 21.47 GPa at
20% of the replacement ratio. In both rubberized cases with and
without silica fume, the modulus is lower than that of the normal
concrete, but the silica fume increased the modulus of elasticity.
Furthermore, the decrease in the modulus of elasticity of the rub-
berized concrete was consistent with the reduction in the natural
frequency of rubberized concrete columns as observed in the free
vibration tests.
f
(a)
(b)
Fig. 12. Comparison of seismic response of the NC column and the RC column #3. (a) Seismic ground motion and response of the NC column #3. (b) Seismic ground motion
and response of the RC column #3.
Fig. 13. Comparison of peak seismic response accelerations (unit: g).
Fig. 14. Seismic response spectrums at damping ratios 4.8% and 8.1%.
202 J. Xue, M. Shinozuka / Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204
The decreasein the compressive strength is attributed to a
number of possible reasons: (1) replacement of coarse aggregate
with rubber crumb resulted in quantity reduction of the high-
strength load-carrying element of concrete; and (2) the bonding
between the rubber and cement paste was not as good as the bond-
ing between the coarse aggregate and cement paste. This is
because rubber crumb is a weak hydrophilic aggregate. According
to Sanfilippo et al. [13], deposition of nano-particles in the surface
of rubber crumb to form nano-porous thin film could enhance the
adhesion between cement paste and aggregates. Use of silica fume
Fig. 15. Compressive strength test setup.
Fig. 16. Stress–strain diagram for rubberized concrete cylinder with 15%
replacement ratio.
Fig. 17. Compressive strength for rubberized concrete with or without silica fume.
Fig. 18. Modulus of elasticity for rubberized concrete with or without silica fume.
J. Xue, M. Shinozuka / Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204 203
can improve the hydration and crystallization around the rubber
crumb. The sub-micron structure of silica fume can act as seeding
for the nucleation of calcium silica hydrate to homogenize the mi-
cro structure in the vicinity of the rubber particles. As a result, the
silica fumes can improve the bonding between rubber crumb and
concrete paste. In this study, a better bonding between the rubber
crumbs and cement paste was reflected at the improvement of the
compressive strength of the rubberized silica fume concrete. This
study clearly suggests the need for future research on the bonding
mechanism in order to further improve the bonding and enhance
the strength of rubberized concrete so that it can be successfully
used as structural material.
6. Conclusions
This study focused on experimental investigation of dynamic as
well as static performance of rubberized concrete specimens, in
which recycled rubber tire crumb was used to partially replace
coarse aggregate. Free vibration and seismic shaking table tests
were conducted on reinforced concrete column specimens with a
15% rubber replacement ratio. Separated tests on the compressive
strength and modulus of elasticity were performed on standard
cylindrical specimens with various rubber replacement ratios from
5% to 20%. The following conclusions can be drawn from this study:
1. Based on the free vibration tests, the average damping ratio
of the rubberized concrete columns was 7.70%. By contrast,
the average damping ratio of the normal concrete columns
is only 4.75%. Adding rubber crumb into concrete increases
the damping ratio by 62%.
2. The results of the seismic shaking table tests showed that
the peak response acceleration of the rubberized concrete
columns was, on average, 27% less than those of the normal
concrete columns. This demonstrates that adding rubber
crumb can reduce the seismic force on concrete structures
due to the increased damping.
3. The rubberized concrete suffered reduction in the compres-
sive strength. The rubberized concrete with 20% replace-
ment ratio dropped as high as 46.68% in the compressive
strength. This was due to the partial replacement of the
high-strength aggregates with the rubber crumb and the
poor bonding between the rubber and the cement.
4. Adding silica fume to the cement paste can improve bond-
ing between rubber crumb and cement paste, which was
reflected in the increase in compressive strength of the rub-
berized silica fume concrete cylinders.
5. The addition of rubber crumb decreased the modulus of
elasticity of concrete. This was consistent with the natural
frequency reduction observed from the free vibration tests
of the rubberized concrete columns.
While rubberized concrete itself is not new, this study repre-
sents the first investigation on energy dissipation capability and
204 J. Xue, M. Shinozuka / Construction and Building Materials 42 (2013) 196–204
dynamic (including seismic) behaviors of rubberized concrete for
its potential application as structural material. Overall, this study
demonstrated the potential of using rubberized concrete for
improving seismic performance by taking advantage of its
enhanced energy dissipation capability. Silica fume can partially
compensate for the loss of compressive strength in the rubberized
concrete. Future research is needed to study the rubber-concrete
bonding mechanism in order to further improve the bonding and
increase the strength of the rubberized concrete. If successfully
developed, the rubberized concrete will open up new areas of
applications as load-bearing structural material. For example, such
material can be used to build new or retrofit existing columns of
bridges and buildings to address their vulnerability to seismic
damage.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank reRubber Inc. for providing
recycled rubber crumb.
References
[1] Rubber manufacturers association, scrap tire markets in the United States,
2009 ed. Washington, DC.
[2] Eldin NN, Senouci AB. Rubber-tire particles as concrete aggregate. J Mater Civ
Eng 1993;5(4):478–97.
[3] Topcu IB, Avcular N. Collision behavior of rubberized concrete. Cem Concr Res
1997;27(12):1893–8.
[4] Zheng L, Huo XS, Yuan Y. Strength, modulus of elasticity, and brittleness index
of rubberized concrete. ASCE J Mater Civ Eng 2008;20(11):692–9.
[5] Fattuhi NI, Clark LA. Cement-based materials containing shredded scrap truck
tire rubber. Constr Build Mater 1996;10(4):229–36.
[6] Li GQ, Stubblefield MA, Gregory G, Eggers J, Abadie C, Huang BS. Development
of waste tire modified concrete. Cem Concr Res 2004;34(12):2283–9.
[7] Aiello MA, Leuzzi F. Waste tire rubberized concrete: properties at fresh and
hardened state. Waste Manage 2010;20:1696–704.
[8] Lin TC. Prediction of density and compressive strength for rubberized concrete.
Constr Build Mater 2011;25:4303–5.
[9] Emiroglu M, Kelestemur MH, Yildiz S. An investigation of ITZ microstructure of
the concrete containing waste vehicle tire. In: Proceedings of 8th international
fracture conference, Turkey: Istanbul; 2007.
[10] Hernandez-Olivaresa F, Barluenga G, Bollatib M, Witoszek B. Static and
dynamic behaviors of recycled tire rubber-filled concrete. Cem Concr Res
2002;32(10):1587–96.
[11] ASTM, Standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete
specimens. C39/C39M, West Conshohocken, PA; 2002.
[12] ASTM, Standard test method for static modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio
of concrete in compression. C469, West Conshohocken, PA; 2002.
[13] Sanfilippo JM, Munoz JF, Tejedor MI, Anderson MA, Cramer SM.
Nanotechnology to manipulate the aggregate–cement paste bond – impacts
on mortar performance. Transport Res Rec, J Transport Res Board
2010;2142:934–42.
	Rubberized concrete: A green structural material with enhanced energy-dissipation capability
	1 Introduction
	2 Rubberized concrete specimens
	2.1 Materials
	2.2 Specimens
	3 Free vibration tests
	4 Seismic shaking table tests
	5 Compression tests
	6 Conclusions
	Acknowledgement
	References