Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Manufactured crushed sand: packing fraction prediction and influence on mortar rheology

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Materials and Structures Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

River sand is a non-renewable resource that is becoming more and more scarce. For concrete industry, it is important to use alternatives like manufactured crushed sand or recycled sand. This article deals with the effect of manufactured crushed sand variability on the consistency of mortars. Two basic formulations are tested: the first corresponds to the mortar contained in a reference concrete and the second corresponds to the equivalent concrete mortar of the same concrete. For these formulations, the shear yield stress is measured to evaluate the mortars rheology with different crushed sand contents (from 30 to 100% of the total sand content) and origins. Eight crushed sands and three river sands are tested in this study. The loose and dense packing behaviour of reconstituted sands are measured and are linked to physical characteristics of the sand (surface roughness, morphology, and particle size distribution). The shear yield stress of the mortars is then predicted from the computed loose packing using homogenisation model. This work can be seen as a step forward to master the large variability in crushed sand and its effect on mortars consistency and rheology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Habert G, Bouzidi Y, Chen C, Jullien A (2010) Development of a depletion indicator for natural resources used in concrete. Resour Conserv Recycl 54:364–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sankh AC, Biradar PM, Naghathan SJ, Ishwargol MB (2014) Recent trends in replacement of natural sand with different alternatives. In: Proceedings of the international conference on advances in engineering and technology, pp 59–66

  3. Jadhav PA, Kulkarni DK (2013) Effect of replacement of natural sand by manufactured sand on the properties of cement mortar. Int J Civ Struct Eng 3:621

    Google Scholar 

  4. Peduzzi P (2014) Sand, rarer than one thinks. Environ Dev 11:208–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ioannidou D, Meylan G, Sonnemann G, Habert G (2017) Is gravel becoming scarce? Evaluating the local criticality of construction aggregates. Resour Conserv Recycl 126:25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vander Velpen A, Smeets A, Torres A, Matheson AB, Friot D, Franks DM, Cuperus G, Yusuf H, van der Vegt H, Selby I (2022) Sand and sustainability: 10 strategic recommendations to avert a crisis

  7. Théréné F, Keita E, Nael-Redolfi J, Boustingorry P, Bonafous L, Roussel N (2020) Water absorption of recycled aggregates: measurements, influence of temperature and practical consequences. Cem Concr Res 137:106196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Braymand S, François P, Feugeas F, Fond C (2015) Rheological properties of recycled aggregate concrete using superplasticizers. J Civ Eng Archit 9:591–597

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dapena E, Alaejos P, Lobet A, Pérez D (2011) Effect of recycled sand content on characteristics of mortars and concretes. J Mater Civ Eng 23:414–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ly H-B, Pham BT, Dao DV, Le VM, Le LM, Le T-T (2019) Improvement of ANFIS model for prediction of compressive strength of manufactured sand concrete. Appl Sci 9:3841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhang J, Li D, Wang Y (2020) Toward intelligent construction: prediction of mechanical properties of manufactured-sand concrete using tree-based models. J Clean Prod 258:120665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ren Q, Tao Y, Jiao D, Jiang Z, Ye G, De Schutter G (2021) Plastic viscosity of cement mortar with manufactured sand as influenced by geometric features and particle size. Cem Concr Compos 122:104163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ren Q, Tao Y, Jiao D, De Schutter G, Jiang Z (2022) Rheological properties of concrete with manufactured sand: a multi-level prediction. Cem Concr Compos 133:104647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ren Q, Ding L, Dai X, Jiang Z, De Schutter G (2021) Prediction of compressive strength of concrete with manufactured sand by ensemble classification and regression tree method. J Mater Civ Eng 33:04021135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cepuritis R, Jacobsen S, Pedersen B, Mørtsell E (2016) Crushed sand in concrete–effect of particle shape in different fractions and filler properties on rheology. Cem Concr Compos 71:26–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mahaut F, Mokéddem S, Chateau X, Roussel N, Ovarlez G (2008) Effect of coarse particle volume fraction on the yield stress and thixotropy of cementitious materials. Cem Concr Res 38:1276–1285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2008.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mahaut F, Chateau X, Coussot P, Ovarlez G (2008) Yield stress and elastic modulus of suspensions of noncolloidal particles in yield stress fluids. J Rheol 52:287–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tattersall GH, Banfill PFG (1983) The rheology of fresh concrete. Pitman Advanced Publishing Program. https://books.google.fr/books?id=fa1RAAAAMAAJ

  19. Wallevik JE (2003) Rheology of particle suspensions: fresh concrete, mortar and cement paste with various types of lignosulfonates. Fakultet for ingeniørvitenskap og teknologi

  20. De Larrard F, Ferraris CF, Sedran T (1998) Fresh concrete: a Herschel–Bulkley material. Mater Struct 31:494–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hafid H, Ovarlez G, Toussaint F, Jezequel PH, Roussel N (2016) Effect of particle morphological parameters on sand grains packing properties and rheology of model mortars. Cem Concr Res 80:44–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ivanova I, Mechtcherine V (2020) Effects of volume fraction and surface area of aggregates on the static yield stress and structural build-up of fresh concrete. Materials 13:1551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Toutou Z, Roussel N (2006) Multi scale experimental study of concrete rheology: from water scale to gravel scale. Mater Struct 39:189–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Yammine J, Chaouche M, Guerinet M, Moranville M, Roussel N (2008) From ordinary rheology concrete to self compacting concrete: a transition between frictional and hydrodynamic interactions. Cem Concr Res 38:890–896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ahmadah O, Bessaies-Bey H, Yahia A, Roussel N (2022) A new mix design method for low-environmental-impact blended cementitious materials: optimization of the physical characteristics of powders for better rheological and mechanical properties. Cem Concr Compos 128:104437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2022.104437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bessaies-Bey H, Ahmadah O, Yahia A, Roussel N (2021) Effect of morphological characteristics on the viscosity of cementitious materials: optimization of the rheological behavior of ternary cements. ACI Symp Publ. https://doi.org/10.14359/51732770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zuo W, Zhang L, Wei L, Kong X, She W (2022) Effect of packing conditions and materials properties on loose packing fraction of rigid particles: a theoretical and experimental review. J Sustain Cem Based Mater. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650373.2022.2026835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brouwers HJH (2006) Particle-size distribution and packing fraction of geometric random packings. Phys Rev E 74:031309. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.74.031309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hettiarachchi C, Mampearachchi W (2019) Effect of surface texture, size ratio and large particle volume fraction on packing density of binary spherical mixtures. Granul Matter 22:8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Salerno K, Bolintineanu D, Grest G, Lechman J, Plimpton S, Srivastava I, Silbert L (2018) Effect of shape and friction on the packing and flow of granular materials. Phys Rev E. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.98.050901

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. de Larrard F, Sedran T (1994) Optimization of ultra-high-performance concrete by the use of a packing model. Cem Concr Res 24:997–1009. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(94)90022-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. de Larrard F, Lédée V, Sedran T, Brochu F, Ducassou J-B (2003) New test for measuring the compactness of granular fractions on the shock table. Bulletin de Liaison Des Laboratoires Des Ponts et Chaussees 246:101–115

    Google Scholar 

  33. Chateau X, Ovarlez G, Trung KL (2008) Homogenization approach to the behavior of suspensions of noncolloidal particles in yield stress fluids. J Rheol 52:489–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. EN 206-1 (n.d.)

  35. Schwartzentruber A, Catherine C (2000) Method of the concrete equivalent mortar(CEM)—a new tool to design concrete containing admixture. Mater Struct (France) 33:475–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. N. EN 1097-6 (2014) Essais Pour Déterminer les Caractéristiques Mécaniques et Physiques des Granulats—Partie 6: Détermination de la Masse Volumique Réelle et du Coefficient D’absorption d’eau, AFNOR: Paris, France

  37. Yamei H, Lihua W (2017) Effect of particle shape of limestone manufactured sand and natural sand on concrete. Procedia Eng 210:87–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.11.052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Perrot A, Lecompte T, Khelifi H, Brumaud C, Hot J, Roussel N (2012) Yield stress and bleeding of fresh cement pastes. Cem Concr Res 42:937–944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2012.03.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Nerella VN, Beigh MAB, Fataei S, Mechtcherine V (2019) Strain-based approach for measuring structural build-up of cement pastes in the context of digital construction. Cem Concr Res 115:530–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Martinie L, Rossi P, Roussel N (2010) Rheology of fiber reinforced cementitious materials: classification and prediction. Cem Concr Res 40:226–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Perrot A, Lecompte T, Estellé P, Amziane S (2013) Structural build-up of rigid fiber reinforced cement-based materials. Mater Struct 46:1561–1568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Flatt RJ, Bowen P (2007) Yield stress of multimodal powder suspensions: an extension of the YODEL (Yield Stress mODEL). J Am Ceram Soc 90:1038–1044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Flatt RJ, Bowen P (2006) Yodel: a yield stress model for suspensions. J Am Ceram Soc 89:1244–1256

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was partly funded by the ANR (Agence National de la Recherche) within the framework of the Labcom COLORE “Construction with local ressources” ANR-21-LCV3-0008. The authors are grateful to ANR for the financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Univ. Bretagne-Sud, UMR CNRS 6027, IRDL, 56100, Lorient, France

    M. Barry, Y. Jacquet & A. Perrot

  2. Laboratoire CBTP, Groupe Pigeon, 3 Rue Lépine, 35532, Noyal-sur-Vilaine, France

    M. Clément & D. Rangeard

Authors
  1. M. Barry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Clément
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Rangeard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Y. Jacquet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. Perrot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, M.C., A.P., D.R., Y.J.; methodology, A.P, M.C. Y.J.; validation, D.R., A.P.; formal analysis, A.P., M.B.; investigation, M.B..; resources, A.P.; D.R.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P., M.B.; writing—review and editing, A.P., D.R., Y.J, M.C, supervision, Y.J., A.P., D.R.; project administration, A.P., D.R.. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Perrot.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barry, M., Clément, M., Rangeard, D. et al. Manufactured crushed sand: packing fraction prediction and influence on mortar rheology. Mater Struct 56, 139 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-023-02231-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-023-02231-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation