Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Comparative assessment of the physico-mechanical properties of crumb rubber concretes developed with natural and dune sands Cover

Comparative assessment of the physico-mechanical properties of crumb rubber concretes developed with natural and dune sands

By: Amar Mezidi and  Salem Merabti  
Open Access
|Dec 2025

Figures & Tables

FIGURE 1.

FTIR spectrum of crumb rubber
Source: own work.
FTIR spectrum of crumb rubber Source: own work.

FIGURE 2.

Grading curves of the materials used in the study
Source: own work.
Grading curves of the materials used in the study Source: own work.

FIGURE 3.

Apparatus used for modulus of elasticity testing: a – cleaning reagents, b – a strain-gauge bridge (extensometer)
Source: own work.
Apparatus used for modulus of elasticity testing: a – cleaning reagents, b – a strain-gauge bridge (extensometer) Source: own work.

FIGURE 4.

Apparent density versus crumb rubber content for dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) and concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR)
Source: own work.
Apparent density versus crumb rubber content for dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) and concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR) Source: own work.

FIGURE 5.

Compactness versus crumb rubber content for dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) and concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR)
Source: own work.
Compactness versus crumb rubber content for dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) and concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR) Source: own work.

FIGURE 6.

Compressive strength versus curing time for concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR) and dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR)
Source: own work.
Compressive strength versus curing time for concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR) and dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) Source: own work.

FIGURE 7.

Flexural tensile strength ratio relative to the control versus crumb rubber content for dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) and concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR)
Source: own work.
Flexural tensile strength ratio relative to the control versus crumb rubber content for dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) and concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR) Source: own work.

FIGURE 8.

Concrete stress–strain curve: a – ordinary concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR), b – dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR)
Source: own work.
Concrete stress–strain curve: a – ordinary concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR), b – dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) Source: own work.

Physical properties of crumb rubber

PropertyValue
Methylene blue value [g⸱l−1]0.67
Relative compaction [%]68.81
Porosity [%]31.19
Absolute density [g⸱cm−3]0.533
Apparent density [g⸱cm−3]0.367

Composition of dune sand concrete with crumb rubber (SCCR) [kg⸱m−3]

CompositionConcrete variant
SCCR 0%SCCR 1%SCC 2%SCCR 3%SCCR 4%SCCR 5%
Cement350.00350.00350.00350.00350.00350.00
Medaflow SR205.255.255.255.255.255.25
Dune sand1,541.701,526.281,510.861,495.441,480.021,464.60
Crumb rubber015.4230.8446.2661.6877.01
Water241.50241.50241.50241.50241.50241.50

Physical characteristics of natural sand (NS) and dune sand (DS)

Physical characteristicsNSDSGravel (3/8)Gravel (8/15)
Fineness modulus3.081.04
Visual sand equivalent [%]89.4991.52
Methylene blue value [g⸱l−1]0.630.50
Friability [%]39.2021.00
Apparent density [g⸱cm−3]1,452.001,870.001.311.42
Absolute density [g⸱cm−3]2.502.562.502.50
Porosity [%]43.3727.0747.6043.36
Compactness [%]56.6372.9352.4056.64
Los-Angeles degradation of wear [%]34.8921.73
Micro-Deval coefficient [%]38.4018.20
Flattening coefficient [%]26.008.58

Composition of ordinary concrete with crumb rubber (OCCR) [kg⸱m−3]

CompositionConcrete variant
OCCR 0%OCCR 1%OCCR 2%OCCR 3%OCCR 4%OCCR 5%
Cement350.00350.00350.00350.00350.00350.00
Medaflow SR205.255.255.255.255.255.25
Natural sand535.04529.69524.34518.98513.64508.29
Crumb rubber05.3510.7016.0521.4026.75
Gravel (3/8)164.00164.00164.00164.00164.00164.00
Gravel (8/15)1,086.501,086.501,086.501,086.501,086.501,086.50
Water180.45180.45180.45180.45180.45180.45

Chemical composition of cement

ConstituentCaOSiO2Al2O3Fe2O3SO3K2ONa2OMgOCaO free
%6520.71472.720.410.1311.20

Comparison between the different parameters studied

CRApparent density [kg⸱m−3]Compressive strength [MPa]Flexural strength [MPa]
OCCRSCCROCCRSCCROCCRSCCR
02,4532,19042.5022.604.971.56
12,4431,41538.7016.004.221.11
22,4381,34034.5413.203.381.00
32,4321,28027.0010.002.980.92
42,4251,20519.508.151.770.85
52,4191,18015.807.651.560.80
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22630/srees.10786 | Journal eISSN: 2543-7496 | Journal ISSN: 1732-9353
Language: English
Page range: 417 - 435
Submitted on: Sep 4, 2025
|
Accepted on: Nov 17, 2025
|
Published on: Dec 31, 2025
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2025 Amar Mezidi, Salem Merabti, published by Warsaw University of Life Sciences - SGGW Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License.