Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM67075
Volume:
10 |
9 |
Sep 2026
Pages:
1-13
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Civil
Jagannath University, Jaipur, India
Civil
Jagannath University, Jaipur, India
Natural coarse aggregate is the dominant solid constituent of conventional concrete and its extraction creates cumulative land, energy, transport, and ecological burdens. This paper develops a literature-calibrated comparative framework for replacing natural coarse aggregate with recycled concrete aggregate (RCA), crushed brick aggregate, steel slag, processed e-waste plastic, crumb rubber, coconut shell, and sintered fly-ash aggregate (SFA). The contribution is not a claim of a new laboratory campaign; instead, peer-reviewed findings are harmonized into performance envelopes and coupled to a reproducible volumetric mix-design procedure, service-risk screening, life-cycle indicators, and a robust multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). Representative response curves show that mature, graded RCA can preserve structural performance at moderate replacement, aged steel slag can equal or exceed control strength in a favorable band, while low-stiffness polymeric and bio-derived particles primarily create lightweight, impact-tolerant, or non-structural opportunities. The proposed decision score combines strength retention, tensile response, density, absorption, durability risk, embodied impact, cost, supply reliability, and specification readiness. Under a balanced reinforced-concrete scenario, steel slag and RCA rank highest; under lightweight and impact-led scenarios, SFA, coconut shell, and rubber become competitive. The paper provides equations, a test matrix, acceptance gates, and a field specification pathway suitable for Indian practice. The results emphasize that replacement percentage alone is an inadequate design variable: source control, pre-treatment, moisture state, gradation, and application-specific weighting govern successful implementation.
KEYWORDS
1) Replacement must be defined by absolute volume and corrected for actual moisture; otherwise material density and absorption confound the comparison. 2) Quality RCA and stabilized steel slag are the strongest balanced candidates for general reinforced concrete at moderate replacement, subject to source and exposure qualification. 3) Crushed brick, coconut shell, plastic, rubber, and SFA are not inferior in every sense; each occupies a distinct lightweight, thermal, impact, diversion, or local-economy design space. 4) Strength-only optimization is unsafe. Modulus, shrinkage, transport properties, volume stability, fire, leaching, and source variability can govern service performance. 5) The MCDA must follow mandatory safety gates and include uncertainty. Application-specific sensitivity is a design feature, not a weakness. 6) The numerical envelopes and scores in this paper are transparent literature-calibrated scenarios. Project use requires source-specific experiments and production trials.
[1] Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 383:2016, Coarse and Fine Aggregate for Concrete—Specification, 3rd rev., New Delhi, India, 2016 (reviewed 2025). [2] Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 10262:2019, Concrete Mix Proportioning—Guidelines, New Delhi, India, 2019. [3] Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 456:2000, Plain and Reinforced Concrete—Code of Practice, New Delhi, India, 2000. [4] Bureau of Indian Standards, IS 9142 (Part 2):2018, Artificial Lightweight Aggregates for Concrete—Sintered Fly Ash Coarse Aggregate, New Delhi, India, 2018. [5] ASTM International, ASTM C33/C33M, Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. [6] ASTM International, ASTM C127, Standard Test Method for Relative Density and Absorption of Coarse Aggregate, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. [7] ASTM International, ASTM C39/C39M, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. [8] ASTM International, ASTM C496/C496M, Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. [9] ASTM International, ASTM C78/C78M-22, Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Concrete, 2022, doi: 10.1520/C0078_C0078M-22. [10] M. E. Mitwally, A. Elnemr, A. Shash, et al., “Utilization of steel slag as partial replacement for coarse aggregate in concrete,” Innovative Infrastructure Solutions, vol. 9, art. 175, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s41062-024-01464-y.
Publication Date
9/3/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
1
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
9
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...