Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Recycled Aggregate in Pavement Construction: Review of Literatures

To cite this article: A. Busari et al 2019 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1378 022026

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 223.186.24.239 on 13/08/2021 at 11:47

International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

Recycled Aggregate in Pavement Construction: Review of

Literatures
A. BUSARI1*, E. Adeyanju1b, T. Loto2, D. Ademola1
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Covenant University, Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria.
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Covenant University, Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria
*Corresponding Author: [email protected]

Abstract-
The built environment consumes a lot of energy and material. A
huge demand of about 40 billion tonnes of aggregates is demanded
for construction purpose. The cost of material accounts for more
than 60% of the total project cost. However, 10% of construction
material end up as demolition wastes yearly. Aggregate is a
beneficial building component in construction. There is much need
to develop ways to ensure it is utilized properly as construction and
demolition waste contribute a large percent to landfills. This review
of literature examined the generation of construction and demolition
waste generated in developed countries, waste characterization, and
utilization in pavement construction. Additionally, environmental,
economic and social benefits of the reuse of this waste was
espoused. The result of the review revealed that The initial
construction material quality, scale of the project, contract and
construction mode used affect the amount and quality of CDW.
CDW are bulky and not suitable for composting and incineration.
Ultimately, the utilization of this waste would reduce the amount of
raw material used in construction leading to conservation. Also,
there would be reduction in the energy cost associated with mining
(quarrying), extraction and transportation of natural aggregates in
track with the conservation of natural resources and the construction
of cost-effective pavements.

Key words: Construction and demolition waste, Recycled

aggregates, Pavements, strength properties.

1. Introduction
Built environment expand every day. The continuous expansion and reconstruction of the built
environment lead to a huge consumption of energy and generation of wastes. The continuous
expansion require huge amounts of construction materials [1]. In the EU, construction industry
utilizes 40% of the total energy consumption. Furthermore, it generates 30% of the total CO2
emission [2]. Astoundingly, it has been estimated that up to 10% of the construction materials
become construction wastes. There are various factors responsible for this waste generation. They
include over-ordering or over estimation, design and/or construction changes, damages and loss.
These wastes have been estimated to amount to 20 to 30% of the total building weight. To renovate
or rebuild, demolition takes place.
In UK, 120 million tonnes of CDW are generated annually. Whereas in the USA, about 140 to 534
million tonnes of CDW are produced annually [3][4]. Japan generates more than 77 million tonnes

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

of CDW annually [5]. Globally, about 3 billion tonnes of CDW are generated annually. [6]
estimated that 7000 million tonnes of CDW have being acuminated in China, over the years.
Conversely, over 300 million tonnes are generated annually in China. The contribution of CDW
to the total solid waste varies from country to country.
Gloomily, most of these wastes are usually open dumped in most developing posing serious
environmental problems. Hence, this review of literatures examined the amount of construction
and demolition waste generated in some selected countries. Additionally, waste characterization,
recycling, utilization, environmental impact, economic and social benefits of the reuse of this
waste was assessed in track with sustainable development goals.
Different statistics have stated that the construction and demolition wastes (CDW) account for a
huge amount of the total solid waste as depicted in Fig 1 and 2 [7]. CDW account for 25% of the
solid waste generated in India and Europe [8]. In England, CDW account for 32%, whereas in
Hong Kong, it represents about 40 % of the total waste generated. The impact of this waste stream
is observed in the amount disposed in the landfill. Statistics from Europe showed that up to 75%
of the CDW are landfilled [7].
Data of developing countries CDW generation are scare with few countries have reliable data. It
can be approximated that CDW in Tanzania and South Africa about 8 million tonnes [9][10].
Researchers in developing countries are aware of the challenges associated with CDW. Mostly
lack of data, policy and waste management in developing countries. They rely on developed
countries' data for their studies.

Construction and Water

demolition
6% 2% 4% Purification
5% Mining and quarrying and
9%
disinfection
14% Energy
32% Industrial 25% Production
12%
13% 14%
29% Commercial
21% 14% Construction
and
Household Demolition

Dredged materials Mining and

Quarrying

Fig 1: waste generation UK adopted from [7] Fig 2: waste Composition OECD regions.

CDW consist of various materials such as PVC pipe, aluminium siding, asphalt, brick, concrete,
lumber, woody debris and wallboard. Construction wastes are sourced from different categories:
design, procurement, handling of materials, operation, residual and other sources. Demolition
wastes are from complete or selective demolition. The waste quality and quantity differ from site
to site. The initial construction material quality, scale of the project, contract and construction
mode used affect the amount and quality of CDW. As shown in Fig 3. high rise building accounts

2
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

for most of the CDW [11]. Demolition wastes are easier to recycle as there is relative homogeneity
of the materials. The large amount of metals, concrete and brick can be collected readily as sorting
is easier. Some products, such as pipes and woods can be sold on the spot.

8% Tunnels and infrastructure

11%
33% Government projects

Low rise buildings

13%
Commercial projects

Touristic hostels and industrial

16% projects
19%
High rise building

Fig 3: cumulative percentages of projects generating construction waste in Egypt adopted from
[11]
2. Reuse of construction and demolition waste
The reuse of this waste is necessary. Improper disposal of CDW creates an ugly site and cause
environmental issues [12]. Consequently, it leads to economic losses, and contamination of the
groundwater through leaching [11]. In addition, CDW are bulky and not suitable for composting
and incineration. Furthermore, the utilization of this waste would reduce the amount of raw
material used in construction leading to conservation. Also, there would be reduction in the energy
cost associated with mining (quarrying), extraction and transportation of natural aggregates [13].
Furthermore, there are other economic benefits attached to successful recycling [14]. This
prompted developed countries to reuse CDW in various sector including road construction.
Consequently, the rate of reuse is increasing in developed countries.
It has being established that several tonnes of materials are needed for road construction.
Aggregate in asphalt pavement commonly used in developing countries comprises of up to 95%
natural aggregates. The total amount needed for a project depends on the road’s subgrade and
expected traffic loading and the projects size. From the golden rule of waste management,
reduction is first. For weak subgrade (< 10% CBR), stabilization using waste can be done [15][16].
This would significantly reduce pavement thickness and the amount of materials needed for
construction. Next is the application of reuse. Several research have scientifically proven that
recycled aggregate can be used in pavement construction. This provides economic, environmental
and social benefits.
Reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP), recycled concrete aggregate (RCA) and recycled aggregate
(RC) from CDW can be used in pavement interlayers (sub-base and base) [8]. Likewise, powdered
RCA, RC and bricks can be used as asphalt filler. Looking as the waste characterization from
various countries as illustrated in Table 1 and 2, and Fig 4, Excavated soil, concrete and Brick are
predominant. They will be generally referred to recycled aggregate in this review.
Table 1: constituents of Waste that Arise from CDW in India adopted from [1]

3
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

Constituent Quantity generated in Million Tonnes

Sand and gravel 4.20 to 5.14
Brick 3.60 to 4.40
Concrete 2.40 to 3.67
Metals 0.60 to 0.73
Wood 0.25 to 0.30
Others 0.10 to 0.15

Table 2: estimated Range of Wastes by Material Type from the Egyptian Construction Sites
adopted from [11]
Material Average %
Wood/lumber 11.5
Excavated soils 36

Steel 8
Concrete 7

Mortar 10

Bricks 9
Concrete blocks 10

Plastics 4

Ceramics 9.5
Chemicals 2.5

Minerals 2.5

Prefabricated units 5

Mixed waste 25
Marble/Granite 2

Cables, ducting and pipes 17.5

Corner bead 1

Glass 0.5
HVAC insulation 4

4
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

Landfilled Reused

16
14
12
Percentage (%)

10
8
6
4
2
0
Brick Concrete Cement Tile Glass Plastic Paper Metal Wood
Type of waste

Fig 4: waste profile and management from Thailand construction project [17]
2.1 Aggregate demand
According to the annual review by European aggregates association, 2.6 to 3.2 billion tonnes of
aggregates are produced annually [18]. This indicate that recycled aggregate accounts for only 8%.
Consequently, demolition waste accounts for 40% of the recycled aggregate. Conversely, [19]
reported that globally 40 billion tonnes of aggregates are produced annually. China produces 38%
of the total global production followed by India at 13 and the rest of Asia accounting for 12% as
illustrated in Fig 5. [18] highlighted that for every 1 km of roadway, 30,000 tonnes of aggregate is
needed.
2% 1% 1%
4%
4%
China
6% India
37% Other Asia
6% Africa
EU
8%
USA
C&S America
8% Oceania
11% 12% Middle East
Russia/CIS
Canada
Mexico

Fig 5. global aggregate production.

2.2 Recycled aggregate for pavement construction

Suitable excavated soil that is not problematic soil can be reused. For the production of the RC
without impurity in the required gradation, a production plant has to be used. This can either be
stationary or mobile. However, both consist of the same setup which includes separation, crushing,

5
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

separation and removal of ferrous elements, screening, decontamination and removal of impurities
as shown in Fig 7 [20]. Mobile can help reduce transportation cost [19]. Stationary provides a
known point where RC can be purchased by all and sundry.

Fig 6: typical RC processing plant [3].

The suitability of any aggregate for pavement interlayer is based on certain characteristics. They
include the gradation, angularity, soundness and solubility [21]. Typically, recycled aggregates
have lower relative densities as well as high water absorption of about 2 to 10% [22] [23]. This is
due to the presence of mortar surrounding the aggregate and masonry. Also, the presence of micro
cracks due to second crushing, collision, and sliding during processing affects these aggregates.
Furthermore, RC have lower crush values and adhesion levels [24]. Also, RC have lower Los
Angeles coefficient, Optimum moisture content (OMC) and Maximum dry density (MDD). RC
(RAC) possesses lower flakiness index. The shear strength of RC and natural aggregate (NA) are
not significantly different. However, RC are more susceptible to particle crushing, which is
subjective to the vertical pressure and number of loading cycle [25].
Different countries have designed various specification and guidelines for the use of RC in
pavement structure. These specifications differ from each other considerably. Different standards
use traffic load, field trial, experience, material purity or material properties to classify RC.
Specification include VicRoads, Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI),
Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (IPWEA), New South Wales (NSW), Roads and
Traffic Authority (RTA), NSW, and Main Roads West- ern Australia (MRWA), Dutch
specification, Finland specification [26]. A lot of work needs to be done to provide a detail
workable specifications as most are limited. For example, some specification such as Finland and
DTEI specification do not account for CBR. Developing countries have not written and public
their own specification. [27] argued that even without a clear specification, the use of RC is viable
and cost effective.
[28] evaluate the use of various types of CDW. The study compared the RAC, crushed brick (CB),
RAP, waste excavation rock (WR), fine recycled glass (FRG) and medium recycled glass (MRG).
The investigation examined various tests such as gradation, Los Angeles Abrasion, unconfined
compression, California Bearing Ratio (CBR), direct shear and consolidated drained triaxial tests.
The test indicated that WR, FRG and MRG had high resistance, which are required as an interlayer
material. Apart from RAP, other had LA abrasion values less than 40. In term of durability in

6
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

soaked conditions, RCA, CB and WR, had high CBR values higher than 80 and 100. The study
recommended the use of RAP, FRG and MRG for subbase and base layer.
[23] investigated the possibility of mixing different recycled aggregate. The study revealed that
recycled aggregates are not always homogenous. They consist of various type of material. RAC
might consist of ceramic materials, or bricks. Therefore, a study to examine the effects of various
wastes was designed. The use of different processing systems was observed. The results showed
that out of the 23 materials tested, 14 met the Spanish regulation of Los Angeles coefficient less
than 40. Also, others only failed narrowly. The study also showed that RC had high CBR values.
The study encourages the use of RA with less than 25% masonry for subbase application.
Furthermore, [29] investigation reported that there is no significant variation in compressive
strength, flexural strength and split tensile strength of concrete made with RC and NA. However,
it stated that there was increase in water absorption as well as reduced modulus of elasticity and
resistivity. The author concluded that concrete mixtures needed for pavement construction can use
RC but long field performance test should be carried out.
[30] also examined the impact of RC (RCA) on asphalt concrete. The investigation revealed that
resilient modulus of asphalt containing RC reduced as binder was added. The values obtained with
RC were lower than the control. However, the results are still within the acceptable limits
prescribed by the Austroads pavement research Group. Stripping potential is higher with RC.
There are significant variations in strength under moisture conditions. The study recommended a
more comprehensive research into various samples or content of RCA as it is viable.
A review by [31] mentioned that several works had been done by [32-35] through laboratory test.
The authors concluded that RC is suitable for pavement interlayer. Ranging from CBR tests,
permanent deformation properties, resilient response, degree of compaction, gradation, shear
resistance and stability, examined by several researcher from various countries, they all
recommended the use of RC in pavement construction. However, the review mentioned that
soundness test for recycled materials would not be accurate. It was revealed that cement mortar
would adhere to the aggregate which would increase the loss in soundness test.
[22] carried out a field trial to test the performance of recycled aggregate to natural aggregates.
The study showed that the use of recycled aggregate during construction would demand more
water for compaction. However, the result from the dynamic monitoring test showed that the
recycled aggregate was better. It concluded that a combination of concrete waste (75%), asphalt
(20%) and ceramic material (5%), would provide a satisfactory load-bearing capacity similar to
what a natural aggregate would provide. Some reports have stated that recycled aggregate provides
more volume than conversional aggregates for the same weight [8].
The ability of RC to provide the required characteristics necessary for it suitability in pavement
construction has being well researched. Depending on the specification for sub-base and base
course, different research works have mentioned that it satisfies various specifications and
requirements. However, more research into the stress state and permanent strains of RC should be
done as asserted by [36]. The durability as well as the aggregate characteristics as regards
shrinkage and self-cementing should be examined. Different studies have mentioned that the
higher alkali content in RC should be examined. More studies into RC gradation especially fine
grains should be done less than 1.18 mm. Also, effects of different pozzolans on RC concrete
should be explored.
The next step would be more field trials especially in developing countries. When RC do not meet
the specification, stabilization can be carried out to improve the properties of the RC [37], [38].
However, attention must be placed on the resilient modulus due to effects of hydration process.

7
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

In any typical asphalt pavement, 4-5% of the structure is bitumen. This bitumen portion can be re-
laid every 10 to 20 years depending on it performance. The removal is done with a milling
machine, then sorted and batched afterward. RAP can be used as the asphalt layer again as part of
the asphalt mixture. Asphalt can be recycled 100% [8][3].
Wastes such as Fly ash FA, Waste lime, Cement kiln dust (CKD), have been explored as fillers for
asphalt mixture. Studies have shown that the inclusion of these and fine RC would have negative
impact on asphalt mixture instead improving its engineering characteristics. They are effective and
economical [39]–[42]. [43] utilized recycled fine aggregates powder as a filler in asphalt mixture.
The study revealed that properties such as water sensitivity, high-temperature properties and
fatigue resistance were improved on. Conversely, the low temperature performance decreased.
The research of [6] compared the performance of recycled brick powder and limestone stone filler
as asphalt filler. The brick powder was obtained by drying washed brick at 80OC for 10 hours.
After which the brick was grounded using a jaw crusher and ball mill for 15 minutes. The study
carried out water sensitivity tests, indirect tensile tests, static and dynamic creep tests and fatigue
tests. The tests were carried out in accordance to AASHTO T-283, AASHTO TP31 and AASHTO
T-321 respectively. Draindown test according to AASHTO T-305 was performed. The material
compared had similar properties. However, the recycled brick powder had higher specific surface
area and absorption. The study observed that the asphalt with recycled brick filler had better
indirect tensile modulus, decreased permanent deformation at 60OC as well as improved fatigue
life and water sensitive. More research needs to be carried out, as recycled brick powder would
varies from place to place.
For recycled aggregate to be used in asphalt mixes, the moisture content must be low. An increase
in the moisture content by 1% would require 10% more fuel per tonne. Consequently, several
reports have stated that the reduction of the aggregate moisture content by 2%, would save 8.7
kWh and 2.02 kg CO2 per ton [3]. There it has to be stored which would increase the cost of
operation.
[17] reported that 3,553 kwh per year can be saved if all waste CDW generated were recycled in
Thailand. Approximately, about 106 million euros can be saved annually which is a new stream
of income for both individual and country. Conversely, [22] reported that recycled aggregates are
far more expensive than natural aggregates as illustrated in Fig 8.

8
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

6
5.51
5
Cost (€/t)

4
3.69
3 2.84
2.35 2.17
2
1.47 Fig 7:
1 recycled aggregate
0.32
0 0 0 Natrual aggregate
Cleaning

Extraction with

loading and
Mechanical

Total
treatment

hauling
explosives

Manufacturing costs of Aggregate

2.3 Environmental and Economic Impact of CDW
The environmental and economic impact of various disposal methods of CDW were evaluated
using dynamic model [44]. The study revealed that recycling was the best method. Theoretically,
recycling 20% of CDW would reduce the cost of L.E. 112,636.8 billion ($16,161.35 billion) over
a 20 year period. It concluded by reinforcing the facts that recycling helps to conserve raw
materials and landfills space, reduce GHG emission and costs to mitigate pollution.
[19] stated that recycling of aggregates requires about 4.0 kg CO2 per tonne, which is 22 to 46%
lower than the convention aggregate. The utilization of 50% RC during in road construction would
reduce the embodied energy and GHG emission of material component by 23% [45]. The use of
RC helps to reduce GHG emission by 65% while saving 58% non-renewable energy consumption
[46]. This was also observed by [47] as shown in Table 4.

Table 3: comparative evaluation of CO2 emissions and the embodied energy of recycled
aggregate vs. quarried virgin aggregate [47].
Comparative CO2 Comparative embodied energy Total energy
emissions per per kilometre in roadway impact
kilometre in road base construction (Gj/kilometre)
construction
(tons/kilometre) Embodied Operational
(approximately) energy energy
(Gj/kilometre) (Gj/kilometre)
Recycled 24 165 186 351
road base
(100%)

9
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

Quarried 72 762 191 953

road base
(100%)

[48] observed that the use of 50% RCA or RC by volume in the concrete mixture on a 3-lane
highways with concrete shoulders would save $2.26 per tonnes of RC (RCA). For the entire
project, $5,517 saving without landfilling saving included. The utilization of 100% RCA base
course would save $22,658. In addition, the use of RC at 50% in concrete mixture would save
$28,172. Factoring the landfilling saving of about $279,280, the total saving is about $307,452 for
a 3-lane mile long project. The drawback observed the utilization of the two-stage mixing
developed by [49] which increase mixing time from 120 seconds to about 270seconds.
This is every important for developing where lots of new construction or reconstruction would be
carried out. The cost of materials alone account for about 60% of the total project cost [50]. The
utilization of RC would significantly reduce road infrastructural construction as road transportation
is an essential component of national growth [51-54].

3. Conclusion
A huge amount of Natural aggregates of about 40 billion tonnes is extracted annually to meet the
global demand necessary to support the expansion of the built environment. Different studies have
proven that recycled aggregate can be used to minimize the huge extraction. Consequently, it helps
to address landfill space usage, reduce GHG emissions, and create new economic benefits. Waste
sorting at source, lack of data, policy development and enforcement coupled with poor waste
management with little or no landfill management makes the use of CDW difficult in developing
countries. From the review it can be concluded that:
i. Recycled aggregates are not always homogenous.
ii. Resilient modulus of asphalt containing recycled aggregates reduced as binder was added.
iii. Recycled aggregates is suitable for pavement interlayer ranging from CBR tests, permanent
deformation properties, resilient response, degree of compaction, gradation, shear
resistance and stability.
iv. It concluded that a combination of concrete waste (75%), asphalt (20%) and ceramic
material (5%), would provide a satisfactory load-bearing capacity similar to what a natural
aggregate would provide.
v. Recycled aggregate provides more volume than conversional aggregates for the same
weight.
vi. For recycled aggregate to be used in asphalt mixes, the moisture content must be low.
4. Recommendation
It is recommended that CDW are bulky and not suitable for composting and incineration and hence
the re-use of this waste should be enforced. This will reduce the energy cost associated with
mining, extraction and transportation of natural aggregates.
5. Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to Covenant University for the opportunity for the sponsorship.

Reference
[1] Ponnada, M. R. & K. P. (2016) Construction and Demolition Waste Management – A
Review. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Technol., 84, 19–46.

10
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

[2] Pusks, A., Corbu, O., Szilgyi, H., and Moga, L. M. (2014) Construction waste disposal
practices: The recycling and recovery of waste. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ., 191, 1313–
1321.
[3] Martinho, F. C. G. (2018) Feasibility Assessment of the Use of Recycled Aggregates for
Asphalt Mixtures.
[4] USEPA. (2016) Advancing sustainable materials management: 2014 fact sheet, United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Land and Emergency Management,
Washington, DC 20460.
[5] UNEP. (2015) Global Waste Management Outlook, International Environmental
Technology Centre, Osaka, Japan.
[6] Chen, M., Lin, J., Wu, S., and Liu, C. (2011). Utilization of recycled brick powder as
alternative filler in asphalt mixture Constr. Build. Mater., 25(4), 1532–1536.
[7] Osmani, M., (2011) Construction waste..
[8] Waste and Report, “Construction and demolition waste status report.”
[9] Sabai, S. M. M., Lichtenberg, J. J., Egmond, E. L. C., Florea, M. V. M., and. Brouwers, H.
J.(2013). Construction and Demolition Waste Characteristics in Tanzania.
[10] Bester, J., Kruger, D., and Miller, B. (2017). South African construction and demolition
waste procedure and its sourced material effects on concrete MATEC Web Conf., 02008,
1–9.
[11] Geometry R. and Analysis G. (2007), Sustainable industrial design and waste
management: Cradle-to-cradle for sustainable development. California 92101-4495.
[12] Yang, H., Xia, J., Thompson J. R., and Flower, R. J. (2017). Urban construction and
demolition waste and landfill failure in Shenzhen, China Waste Manag, 63, 393–396.
[13] Nunes, M. C. M. (1996) ASSESSMENT OF SECONDARY MATERIALS FOR

 
 
ICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS.
16, 87–96.
[14] Huang, Y., Bird, R. N., and Heidrich O. (2007). A review of the use of recycled solid
waste materials in asphalt pavements Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 52(1), 58–73.
[15] Adebanji, O., Ayobami, B., and Emmanuel, A. (2018) Pavement interlayer material
improvement using industrial waste: Review of literatures Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 9(6),
1114–1122.
[16] Adeyanju, E. A. and Okeke, C. A. (2019). Clay soil stabilization using cement kiln dust,
1st International Conference on Sustainable Infrastructural Development, 1–10.
[17] Sciences Construction Waste Management in Newly Industrialized Countries. 12–24.
[18] UEPG. (2016). A sustainable industry for a sustainable Europe.
[19] Tam V. W. Y., Soomro M., and Evangelista A. C. J. (2018) A review of recycled
aggregate in concrete applications (2000–2017) Constr. Build. Mater., 172. 272–292,.
[20] Pellegrino C. and Faleschini F., (2016). Sustainability and the Concrete Industry,”.
[21] Ebrahim Abu El-Maaty Behiry A. (2013). Utilization of cement treated recycled concrete
aggregates as base or subbase layer in Egypt. Ain Shams Eng. J. 4(4). 661–673.
[22] Herrador, R., Pérez, P., Garach, L., and Ordóñez J. (2011). Use of Recycled Construction
and Demolition Waste Aggregate for Road Course Surfacing. J. Transp. Eng., 138(2)
182–190.
[23] Barbudo, A., Agrela, F., Ayuso, J., Jiménez J. R., and Poon, C. S. (2012). Statistical
analysis of recycled aggregates derived from different sources for sub-base applications.
Constr. Build. Mater. 28(1) 129–138.

11
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

[24] Zhang, Z., Shen, B., Ren, H., Wang, J., Li, S., and Liu, H. (2017). The Variability and
Evaluation Method of Recycled Concrete Aggregate Properties. 2017.
[25] Sivakumar, V., McKinley, J. D., and Ferguson, D. (2004). Reuse of construction waste:
performance under repeated loading. ICE—Geotech. Eng. 157. 91–96.
[26] Gabr, A. and. Cameron, D. A. (2011) Comparison of Specifications for Recycled Concrete
Aggregate for Pavement Construction.
[27] Bennert T., Papp W. J., Maher A., and Gucunski N. (2007). Utilization of Construction
and Demolition Debris Under Traffic-Type Loading in Base and Subbase Applications.
Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board. 1714(1), 33–39.
[28] Arulrajah, A., Disfani, M. M., Horpibulsuk, S., Suksiripattanapong, C., and Prongmanee
N. (2014). Physical properties and shear strength responses of recycled construction and
demolition materials in unbound pavement base/subbase applications. Constr. Build.
Mater. 58. 245–257.
[29] Surya, M., VVL K. R., and Lakshmy, P. (2013). Recycled Aggregate Concrete for
Transportation Infrastructure,” Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 104. 1158–1167.
[30] Paranavithana, S. and Mohajerani, A. (2006). Effects of recycled concrete aggregates on
properties of asphalt concrete. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 48(1). 1–12.
[31] Vieira C. S. and Pereira P. M. (2015). Use of recycled construction and demolition
materials in geotechnical applications: A review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 103. 192–204.
[32] Park T. (2003). Application of construction and building debris as base and subbase
materials in rigid pavement. J. Transp. Eng. 129. 558–563.
[33] Nataatmadja A. and Tan Y. (2001) Resilient response of recycled concrete road
aggregates. J. Transp. Eng. 127, 450–453.
[34] Chini A., Kuo S., Armaghani J., and Duxbury J. (2001) Test of recycled concrete
aggregate in accelerated test track. J. Transp. Eng. 127. 486–492.
[35] Herrador R., Pérez P., Garach L., and Ordó˜nez J. (2011). Use of recycled construction
and demolition waste aggregate for road course surfacing. J. Transp. Eng. 138. 182–190.
[36] Neves J., Freire A. C., Roque A. J., Martins I.,. Antunes M. L, and Faria G. (2013).
Utilization of recycled materials in unbound granular layers validated by experimental test
sections, in Ninth International Conference on the Bearing Capacity of Roads, Railways
and Airfields, Trondheim, Norway.
[37] Mohammadinia A., Arulrajah A., Sanjayan J., and Disfani S., M., Bo, M., Darmawan.
(2014). Laboratory evaluation of the use of cement-treated construction and demolition
materials in pavement base and subbase applications. J. Mater. Civ. Eng.
[38] Disfani M. M., Arulrajah A., Haghighi H., and Mohammadinia S., A., Horpibulsuk.
(2014). Flexural beam fatigue strength evaluation of crushed brick as a supplementary
material in cement stabilized recycled concrete aggregates. Constr. Build. Mater. 68. 667–
676.
[39] SD H., HM P., and SK R., (2008). A study on engineering characteristics of asphalt
concrete using filler with recycled waste lime. Waste Manag. 28(1). 191–9.
[40] HY A. and AM. O. (2006).Effect of using waste cement dust as mineral filler on the
mechanical properties of hot mix asphalt. Ass Univ Bull Env. Res. 9(11).
[41] S. T. (2008). Mechanical evaluation of asphalt–aggregate mixtures prepared with fly ash
as a filler replacement. Can J Civ. Eng, 35(1), 27–40.
[42] FG P., M. A, and M. R., (2010) Potential of fire extinguisher powder as a filler in
bituminous mixes. J Hazard Mater. 173(6). 5–13.

12
International Conference on Engineering for Sustainable World IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1378 (2019) 022026 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1378/2/022026

[43] Chen, M., Lin, J., and Wu, S. (2011). Potential of recycled fine aggregates powder as filler
in asphalt mixture. Constr. Build. Mater. 25(10). 3909–3914.
[44] Marzouk, M. and Azab, S. (2014) Environmental and economic impact assessment of
construction and demolition waste disposal using system dynamics. Resour. Conserv.
Recycl. 82. 41–49.
[45] ARRB Group (2010) Sustainable Aggregates-C02 Emission Factor Study.
[46] Hossain, M. U., Poon, C. S., Lo, I. M. C., and Cheng, J.C.P. (2016). Comparative
environmental evaluation of aggregate production from recycled waste materials and
virgin sources by LCA. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 109.67–77.
[47] Mcrobert J. R. (2008). Recycled aggregates – environmental considerations.
[48] Verian, K. P., Whiting, N., Olek J., Jain, J., and Snyder, M. (2013) Using Recycled
Concrete as Aggregate in Concrete Pavements to Reduce Materials Cost.
[49] Tam V. W. Y., Gao X. F., and Tam C. M. (2005) Microstructural analysis of recycled
aggregate concrete produced from two-stage mixing approach Cem. Concr. Res. 35(6).
1195–1203.
[50] Wahab, A. B. and Lawal, A. F. (2011). An evaluation of waste control measures in
construction industry in Nigeria. 5. 246–254.
[51] Busari Ayobami, Oluwajana Seun, Ede Anthony, Joshua Opeyemi, Adeyanju Emmanuel (2018).
Spatio-temporal commuting pattern of university environment: Gender perspective. WIT
CONFERENCE: Sustainable development and Planning 2018. Sienna, Spain (September 4th to 6th,
2018).
[52] Busari, A., Osuolale, O., Omole, D., Ojo, A., Jayeola, B. (2016) Trip Behaviour of University
Enviroment: Inter-Relationship Between Trip Distance and Trip Mode Choice In South-Western
Nigeria.
[53] Busari, A., Joshua, O., Oyedepo, J., Olawuyi O., K. Daramola. (2018). University commuting trip
pattern: Temporal assessment. WIT CONFERENCE: Sustainable development and Planning 2018.
Sienna, Spain (September 4th to 6th, 2018).
[54] Busari, A.A., Owolabi, A., Modupe, A. (2015). Modeling the effect of income and car
ownership on recreational trip in Akure, Nigeria. International Journal of Scientific
Engineering and Technology. 4(3). 228-230

13