The Complete Material is Available. View Abstract or Chapter One Below.

Download this complete Project material titled; Effect Of Crushed Coconut Shell And Polyethylene Terephthalate As Partial Replacement Of Coarse Aggregate In Concrete with abstract, chapters 1-5, references, and questionnaire. Preview Abstract or chapter one below

  • Format: PDF and MS Word (DOC)
  • pages = 65

 3,000

100% Money-Back Guarantee

Do you need help?

Call or Whats-app us: (+234) 08060082010, 08107932631.

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the suitability of crushed coconut shell (CCS) and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) as partial replacement of coarse aggregate in concrete. The PET was crushed mechanically to sizes between 0-10mm while the CCS was crushed manually to sizes between 12.7-19.5mm. Various tests were carried out to ascertain the physical and engineering properties of the aggregates used in this study. Sieve analysis was carried out on all the various aggregates used in this study and it was observed that when combined it gives us an all in aggregate distribution which is ideal for concrete construction. Flakiness and elongation tests were also carried out and it was observed that CCS and PET have a flakiness index of 100% as compared to gravel with a flakiness index of 19.54%. PET had the highest elongation index of 67.35%, gravel with 29.48% and CCS in between with 28.24%. Specific gravity of all the aggregates used in this study was found out with PET, river sand, gravel and CCS having specific gravities of 1.32, 2.64, 2.70 and 1.38 respectively. Aggregate impact and crushing value tests were carried out on the aggregates with PET, gravel and CCS having AIV values of 0.3125%, 26.57% and 3.62% and ACV values of 2.29% and 28% for CCS and gravel respectively. This study was narrowed to 50% replacement of conventional coarse aggregate with varying percentages of CCS and PET from 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, to 50%. Which led to 9 different mixes labelled A to I respectively. Slump test was carried out on the fresh concrete to ascertain its workability while compressive strength and water absorption tests were carried out on the various samples with different percentage replacement of CCS and PET. From the study it was observed that a mix percentage of 50% gravel, 20% CCS and 30% PET (sample F) and 50% gravel, 20% CCS and 30% PET (sample G) of gave us a compressive strength value of 18.4 N/mm2. Also it was observed that with increase in CCS content there was increase in compressive strength for up to 30% CCS and with decrease of percentage of PET from 50% to 20% there was increase in the compressive strength up to 18.4N/mm2. Also, Sample F has a lower water absorption capacity of 3.99 than G which has a water absorption capacity of 4.48 but both fall within the range specified for average absorption. It was can be concluded that samples F and G are viable and sustainable construction alternatives to conventional concrete and can be used in road drainage, gutter, slabs, kerbs, canal linings, blinding, low traffic road pavements, stone pitching, embankment, base for flexible pavements and minor concrete works in general.

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page ……………………………………………………………………………….. ii
Declaration………………………………………………………………………………. iii
Certification………………………………………………………………………………. iv
Dedication…………………………………………………………………………………. v
Acknowledgement ………………………………………………………………………… vi
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………… vii
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………… viii
List of Figures …………………………………………………………………………… xii
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………. xiii
List of Plates ……………………………………………………………………………. xv
List of Appendices ……………………………………………………………………… xvi
Abbreviations ……………………………………………………………………… xvii
CHAPTER ONE …………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.0 Preamble ………………………………………………………………….. 1
1.1 Statement of Problem ………………………………………………………. 3
1.2 Justification ……………………………………………………………….. 3
ix
1.3 Aim and Objectives ………………………………………………………… 4
1.4 Scope and Limitations …………………………………………………… 5
CHAPTER TWO ………………………………………………………………… 6
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW …………………………………………………. 6
2.1 Plastics ……………………………………………………………………… 6
2.1.1 Polyethylene Terephthalate ……………………………………………… 7
2.2 Coconut Shell …………………………………………………………….. 16
CHAPTER THREE ………………………………………………………………. 22
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS ………………………………………… 22
3.1 Materials ………………………………………………………………… 22
3.2 Methods ……………………………………………………………….. 22
3.3 Cement ………………………………………………………………………. 22
3.3.1 Consistency of Cement …………………………………………………….. 23
3.3.2 Initial and Final Setting Time …………………………………………….. 23
3.3.3 Soundness of Cement ……………………………………………………… 23
3.4 Tests on Aggregate …………………………………………………………… 24
3.4.1 Particle size distribution test ………………………………………………… 24
3.4.2 Flakiness/Elongation Test …………………………………………………….. 26
3.4.3 Specific Gravity of Fine and Coarse Aggregate ……………………………. 27
x
3.4.4 Aggregate Crushing Value ……………………………………………………. 28
3.4.5 Aggregate Impact Value ………………………………………………………. 28
3.5 Concrete Mix Design ……………………………………………………………. 29
3.5.1 Preparation of concrete cubes ………………………………………………… 30
3.6 Tests on concrete ………………………………………………………………….. 30
3.6.1 Slump test ……………………………………………………………………….. 31
3.6.2 Density of Concrete ………………………………………………………………. 33
3.6.3 Compressive Strength Test ……………………………………………………… 34
3.6.4 Water Absorption Test ………………………………………………………….. 35
CHAPTER FOUR ……………………………………………………………………….. 36
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ……………………………………………… 36
4.1 Preamble ………………………………………………………………………….. 36
4.2 Tests on Cement …………………………………………………………………. 36
4.3 Tests on Aggregates ……………………………………………………………….. 36
4.3.1 Sieve Analysis …………………………………………………………………… 37
4.4 Flakiness and Elongation Test …………………………………………………….. 39
4.4.1 Flakiness Test ……………………………………………………………………. 39
4.4.2 Elongation Test ………………………………………………………………….. 39
4.5 Specific Gravity Test ……………………………………………………………….. 40
xi
4.6 Aggregate Crushing Value ………………………………………………………… 40
4.7 Aggregate Impact Value ……………………………………………………………. 41
4.8 Tests on Concrete ………………………………………………………………….. 42
4.8.1. Slump Test …………………………………………………………………………. 42
4.8.2 Density of Concrete ……………………………………………………………… 44
4.8.3 Compressive Strength ………………………………………………………….. 46
4.8.4 Water Absorption Test …………………………………………………………. 48
CHAPTER FIVE …………………………………………………………………….. 51
5.1CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS …………………………. 51
5.1Conclusions …………………………………………………………………….. 51
5.2Recommendations ……………………………………………………………… 51
5.3 Contributions to Knowledge …………………………………………………………………. 52
REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………….. 53
APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………………. 58
xii

 

Project Topics

 

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION
1.0 Preamble
Concrete is the prime Civil Engineering construction material. Conventional concrete consists of cement (11%), fine aggregates (26%), coarse aggregates (41%), water (16%) and air (6%) (Al-Kourd and Hammad, 2013). Two billion tons of aggregate are produced each year in the United States and production is expected to increase by more than 2.5 billion tons per year by the year 2020. Similarly the consumption of the primary aggregate was 110 million tonnes in the United Kingdom in the year 1960 and reached nearly 275 million tonnes by 2006 (Reddy, Aruna and Fawaz, 2014). According to Kambli and Mathapati (2014) far more concrete is produced than any other man-made material. According to Muhammad and Muhammad (2015), the estimated usage of concrete worldwide is about 11 billion metric tons every year. Alternative sources of materials are needed for sustainable development.
In view of this, so many waste materials have been used in concrete with different levels of success. These materials are called green materials due to their low energy costs. The resulting concrete is termed green concrete. Such materials include but not limited to: coal ash, rice –husk ash, wood ash, natural pozzolans, silica fume are used to reduce the use of Portland cement in concrete. Also, foundry sand, core butts cupola slag, post-consumer glass, glass reinforced plastic, construction and demolition waste, have been used as replacement for fine and coarse aggregates in concrete (Naik and Moroconi, 2005).
Two of such materials that can be considered and studied for use in concrete are plastic and coconut shell. According to Europe Plastics (2015), Plastics are non-biodegradable,
2
synthetic polymers derived primarily from petro-fossil feedstock and made-up of long chain hydrocarbons with additives and can be moulded into finished products. The world’s annual consumption rate of plastic material has increased from 204 million tons in 2002 to 299 million tons in 2013. Moreover, production and consumption of polymers and plastics will be constantly growing in next year. According to Manish, Vikas, and Agarwal, (2014) in the last 60 years, plastic has become a useful and versatile material with a wide range of applications. Its uses are likely to increase with on-going developments in the plastic industry. In future, plastic could help to address some of the world’s most pressing problems, such as climate change and food shortages.
Polyethylene has been used by various researchers as replacement for fine and coarse aggregate in concrete with encouraging results. Tapkire, Patil and Kumavat, (2014) used recycled plastic aggregate in concrete and noticed a 15% reduction in the weight of the cube was noticed when plastic waste was used. They strongly recommended the use of recycled plastic aggregate in concrete as a viable option for waste disposal. This research and many others show the potential of recycled plastic and polyethylene as conventional aggregate replacement in concrete.
About 54 billion nuts of coconut are produced per annum (Reddy et al., 2014). Indonesia was the highest producer of coconut followed by Philippines and India with an annual production value of 19.5 million metric tonnes, 15.3 million metric tonnes and 10.9 million metric tonnes respectively (FAO, 2010). In Africa, Tanzania is the highest producer of coconut and maintains the 11th position in the world, followed by Ghana and Mozambique producing 0.57 million metric tonnes, 0.32 million metric tonnes, and 0.27 million metric tonnes respectively. According to Uwubanmwen, Okere, Dada and Eseigbe, 2011), Nigeria is the 5th major producer of coconut in Africa. It produced a total of 1.09 million metric tonnes of coconut between 2004 and 2008. Osei (2013) did an
3
experimental assessment on coconut shells as aggregate in concrete. The results of his study showed that concrete produced by replacing 18.5% of the crushed granite by coconut shells can be used in reinforced concrete construction. He concluded that the use of coconut shells as partial replacement for conventional aggregates should be encouraged as an environmental protection and construction cost measure.
This study aims to use polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and crushed coconut shell (CCS) as partial replacement of coarse aggregate in concrete which could increase the number of viable alternatives to conventional concrete.
1.1 Statement of Problem
According to Ayuba, Latifah, Abdullah and Suleiman, (2013) one of the major issues in municipal waste management in the FCT Abuja is the high volume of non-degradable fractions; polyethylene even after 13 years of burial the polyethylene waste are same as the day initially buried. The cost of recycling polyethylene is higher than the cost of producing new polyethylene which makes it non profitable to consider recycling. The manufactures have a high preference for polyethylene as such use it mostly for the packaging of their products, which are in high demand such as drinks, water and other food product. The use of glass bottles which are usually recycled and reused by the manufacturing companies is being phased out. As such currently this has been a source of great concern because of the high volume of polyethylene ending up in the landfill.
The use of polyethylene terephthalate and crushed coconut shell as coarse aggregate in concrete may provide an alternative to conventional concrete. With the increasing use of plastic in our society, and the effects it is having in our environment, alternative methods of disposal is desperately needed in order to reduce the effect of pollution thus having a clean environment. Coconut shell on the other hand is mostly regarded as waste or fuel
4
for fire which is an underutilization of its potential. Its usefulness in the construction industry has been researched and can be further explored. However, concrete produced using polyethylene terephthalate and crushed coconut shell must have the necessary engineering performance characteristics to meet the standard code of practice specifications.
1.2 Justification
According to Muhammad and Muhammad, (2014), recycling has many benefits which include but not limited to conservation and protection of valuable resources and protection of the environment, promotion of a clean and healthy environment, elimination of non-bio-degradable waste, reduction and elimination of landfill spaces, growth of local industries, curtailing of hazardous waste concerns. With increasing exploitation of natural aggregates in developing countries and rising cost of building materials and construction, it is necessary to look for alternative sources of aggregates. Also the method of extraction of these aggregates is a cause for environmental concern. Hence the need for substitute materials which will aid in the reduction of landfill costs, saving in energy, and protecting the environment from possible pollution effect, reduction in cost of production of concrete. This study will make use of polyethylene terephthalate and coconut shell as partial replacement of aggregate in concrete as a viable alternative to produce economic, environmentally friendly concrete.
1.3 Aim and Objectives
The aim of this research is to study the properties of concrete in which the coarse aggregates is partially replaced with waste of polyethylene terephthalate and crushed coconut shell. This overall aim will be achieved by the following specific objectives:
5
1. To determine the workability of fresh concrete of the various mix proportions of coarse aggregate in concrete and compare it with control mix.
2. To carry out density, compressive strength test and water absorption tests on the various concrete cubes.
3. To check the suitability of concrete containing PET and CCS for general construction purposes by comparing it to the standard code of practice and specifications.
1.4 Scope and Limitations
This research is limited to studying the density, compressive strength and water absorption properties of concrete with polyethylene terephthalate and crushed coconut shell as coarse aggregate.
6

GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT»
Do you need help? Talk to us right now: (+234) 08060082010, 08107932631, 08157509410 (Call/WhatsApp). Email: edustoreng@gmail.com