Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /conbui ldmat

Use of crumb rubber to improve thermal and sound properties of pre-castconcrete panel

Piti Sukontasukkul *

Department of Civil Engineering, King Mongkut University’s of Technology-North Bangkok, 1518 Pibulsongkram Road, Bangsue, Bangkok, Thailand

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Received 4 January 2008Received in revised form 13 May 2008Accepted 13 May 2008Available online 7 July 2008

Keywords:Concrete panelCrumb rubberSound and thermal properties

0950-0618/$ - see front matter � 2008 Elsevier Ltd. Adoi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2008.05.021

* Tel.: +66 2 913 2500x8621 25; fax: +66 2 587 43E-mail address: piti@kmutnb.ac.th

In this study, the thermal and sound properties of crumb rubber concrete panel were investigated. Thecrumb rubber from used tires, produced in a local recycling plant, was used to replace fine aggregateat ratios of 10%, 20% and 30%. Properties such as thermal conductivity, thermal resistivity, heat transfer,conductance value, sound absorption at different frequency and noise reduction were investigated.Results indicated that crumb rubber concrete panel was not only lighter but had higher sound absorptionand lower heat transfer properties than the conventional concrete panel.

� 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and objective

Global warming is a phenomenon with wide reaching conse-quences. Reducing fossil fuel usage and recycling materials areonly two ways we can reduce the devastating effects of Globalwarming. In our industry, residential homebuilding, recent re-search confirms using materials with high insulating propertiescan greatly reduce energy consumption and as such, Global warm-ing. Houses designed with a mind to both the inhabitants and theenvironment will not only provide higher quality of living for theinhabitants but has the potential to reduce energy use and helpstem the devastating effects of Global warming.

Since their introduction in Thailand several years ago, pre-castwall systems have been embraced by the home building commu-nity for their efficient installations and cost effectiveness. Severalpre-cast systems are employed but the most common is still plainconcrete, in spite of its biggest drawbacks – excessive weight(�2400–2500 kg/m3). The typical concrete wall panel with a thick-ness of 100 mm weighs approximately 240–250 kg/m2 – about 40%heavier than clay brick wall (180 kg/m2). And due to the high den-sity, concrete, has lower insulation properties than a simple claybrick wall.

The objective of this study is to introduce crumb rubber, in var-ious proportions, as an aggregate into concrete pre-cast panel andcompare any changes in these properties to our standard pre-castconcrete. The minimum standards which the crumb rubber panelsmust meet are: maximum weight (less than 2000 kg/m3), able to

ll rights reserved.

37.

support a minimum load of 17 MPa (Thailand Industrial Standard,TIS) and whether or not they exhibit any improved thermal prop-erties (with the value of k less than 0.303–0.476 W/m K, based onTIS standard). The benefits of utilizing crumb rubber into pre-castconcrete are that it is a simple process, low energy utilizations, ableto manufacture in situ and pre-cast into a variety of shapes andsizes, besides being environmentally friendly by recycling wastedtires.

1.1. Properties of concrete mixed with crumb rubber

Extensive studies [1–14] have been carried out over the yearson the material properties of crumb rubber concrete. Informationon the mechanical properties of crumb rubber concrete in termsof compressive, tensile, and flexural strengths are quite well-known. According to our previous studies [13,14], the strength ofconcrete mixed with crumb rubber is quite low (as compared toplain concrete) and tend to decrease with increasing rubber con-tent. As shown in Fig. 1, at the replacing rate of 10%, both compres-sive and flexural strengths were found to decrease by 35% and 28%,respectively. At 20%, the strength of crumb rubber was decreasedto only about 22–28% of that of plain concrete.

With its poor strength, the crumb rubber concrete does notseem to find a use in structural applications. On the contrary, withlower density, it seems that the best way to use crumb rubber con-crete might be as an insulator. However, information on the perfor-mance of crumb rubber concrete on thermal and sound propertiesis limited. Therefore, in this study, both thermal and sound proper-ties of crumb rubber concrete panel are investigated in details, spe-cifically, thermal conductivity factors, thermal resistance with heat

0 10 20 30 40

Control

10 %

20 %

Compressive Strength (MPa)

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0

Control

10 %

20 %

Flexural Strength (MPa)

Fig. 1. (a) Compressive strength and (b) flexural strength of crumb rubber concrete.

P. Sukontasukkul / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092 1085

transfer, conductance value, sound absorption at different frequen-cies and noise reduction. The performance of the crumb rubber

Fig. 2. Piling yard of aband

concrete compared with normal concrete in terms of overall heatresistivity is also presented.

1.2. Manufacturing crumb rubber

Although, the least expensive and causing the least environ-mental damage are deposing old tires on empty land, this createsother problems such as: fire hazards and insect or animal habita-tion (Fig. 2). During the last 20 years, several research projects havebeen carried out in an attempt to reuse the abandoned tires bygrinding them into small particles (rubber crumb) for use in as-phalt, sealants, and rubber sheets or in cementitious materials likeconcrete.

The manufacturing process of rubber crumb being carried out atthe rubber reclaiming plant in Thailand consists of three steps. Thefirst step is sorting and selecting only those parts which have beenmanufacture red without radial steel components which areunsuitable for the grinding process the follows. The second stepis the grinding process. Rubber pieces are fed into the cuttingwheel repeatedly until the desired particle size has been achieved.The third and final step is sorting the crumb rubbers by particlesize.

2. Experimental procedure

2.1. Materials

Materials used in this study consist of Portland cement type I, 3/8” coarse aggregate, river sand (Table 1), crumb rubber (Fig. 3),water and super plasticizer Type F (13 cc/1 kg of cement). Thecrumb rubber, obtained from the recycle plant in Thailand, is pro-duced by grinding recycled vehicle tires into small particles. Twosizes of the crumb rubber are used: No. 6 (passing ASTM sieveNo. 6) and No. 26 (passing ASTM sieve No. 26), their propertiesare given in Tables 1 and 2. The gradations [15] of the crumb rub-ber are quite uniform and in the similar range to that of fine aggre-gate (Fig. 4).

oned tires in Thailand.

Table 1Properties of crumb rubber and aggregates

Categories Crumb rubber Coarseaggregate

Fineaggregate

No.6

No.26

No.6+20

Average bulk specificgravity

0.96 0.62 0.77 2.68 2.43

Average bulk specificgravity (SSD)

0.97 0.62 0.78 2.69 2.47

Average apparent specificgravity

0.97 0.62 0.78 2.70 2.55

Average absorption (%) 0.92 1.05 0.95 0.25 2.04Finess modulus 4.93 2.83 3.77 – 2.9

Fig. 3. Crumb rubber (a) No. 6 and (b) No. 26.

Table 2Composition of rubber crumb

No. Composition

1 Natural rubber 23.1%2 Synthetic rubber 17.9%3 Carbon black 28.0%4 Steel 14.5%5 Fabric, fillers, accelerators, antiozonants, etc. 16.5%6 Ash content (%) 5.1%

Data provided by reclaiming plant.

0102030405060708090

100

0.1110Diameter (mm)

Pass

ing

Perc

enta

ge b

y W

eigh

t

Fine AggregateNo.6No.6+26No.26

Fig. 4. Gradation of fine aggregate and crumb rubber.

1086 P. Sukontasukkul / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092

The mix proportion for the control specimen (no crumb rubber)was set at 1.00:0.47:1.64:1.55 (cement:water:fine aggregate:coarseaggregate). In the case of lightweight concrete, crumb rubber No. 6,No. 26 and combined No. 6+26 were used to replace fine aggregatesat 10%, 20% and 30% by weight (Table 3).

2.2. Casting and testing the specimen

In the casting process, the concrete was dry-mixed using panmixer for about 5 minutes, then adding water and mixed for fur-

ther 5 min, and finally cast and compacted into 1000 � 1000 mmpanels. Three tests were carried out (1) density and voids (ASTMC642-97) [16], (2) steady-state heat flux measurement and ther-mal transmission properties (ASTM C177) [17] and (3) acousticsdetermination of sound absorption coefficient and impedance inimpedance tube (ISO 10534-1:1996) [18]. About 3–5 specimenswere tested for experiment (1) and (2). For experiment (3), abouteight specimens were tested. Samples were cut and cored fromthe cast panel according to the required size of each test. Detailsof each test are described briefly below:

� Density and voids (ASTM C642-97): the specimens are weighedunder four different conditions: oven-dried, saturated afterimmersion, saturated after boiling and immersed under water.Then, the obtained weights are used to calculate the densityand permeable voids based formulas given in the standard.

� Steady-state heat flux measurement and thermal transmissionproperties (ASTM C177): the two concrete specimens in formof square shape (300 � 300 � 25.4 mm) are setup betweenthe heat source (hot plate) and two cold surface assemblies(Fig. 5). The test begins by increasing the temperature of thehot plate and at the same time measuring the temperaturechange of both hot and cold surface assemblies. Continue heat-ing up until the temperature entered the steady-state heat flux.

� Acoustics determination of sound absorption coefficient andimpedance in impedance tube (ISO 10534-1:1996) [21]: two dif-ferent sizes of specimens in form of dish: dia-290 � 500 mm anddia-990 � 500 mm were used at two different frequency ranges:high-frequency (2000 and 4000 Hz) and low frequency (125,250, 500 and 1000 Hz). Measurements were carried out accord-ing to the standing wave method in which a loud speaker sets upa sound field in a tube terminated by the sample. When thestanding waves were produced in the tube, the ratio between

Table 3Details and assigned designations

Designation w/c Ratio Weight per m3

Crumb rubber Cement (kg) Coarse agg. (kg) Fine agg. (kg) Water (kg)

No. 6 No. 26

PC 0.47 0.0 0.00 478.7 741.5 783.8 225.06CR10 0.47 78.4 0.00 478.7 741.5 705.5 225.06CR20 0.47 156.8 0.00 478.7 741.5 627.1 225.06CR30 0.47 235.2 0.00 478.7 741.5 548.7 225.0626CR10 0.47 39.2 39.2 478.7 741.5 705.5 225.0626CR20 0.47 78.4 78.4 478.7 741.5 627.1 225.0626CR30 0.47 117.6 117.6 478.7 741.5 548.7 225.026CR10 0.47 0.00 78.4 478.7 741.5 705.5 225.026CR20 0.47 0.00 156.8 478.7 741.5 627.1 225.026CR30 0.47 0.00 235.2 478.7 741.5 548.7 225.0

Fig. 5. Steady-state heat flux measurement and thermal transmission properties (ASTM C177).

P. Sukontasukkul / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092 1087

the maximum and minimum sound pressure were measured.The absorption coefficient of the sample for zero degree incidentsound wave was then calculated from the measured data(Fig. 6).

3. Experimental results

3.1. Density, absorption and voids

The test results show (Table 3, Figs. 7 and 8) that the bulk den-sity of concrete mixed with crumb rubber was found to decrease

gradually with the rubber content compared to normal concrete(Fig. 7). The average bulk density of CR concrete was in the rangeof 1800–2100 kg/m3, while the bulk density of normal concretewas about 2530 kg/m3. Since the specific gravity of crumb rubberwas less than that of fine aggregate, and by replacing portions ofthe fine aggregate with crumb rubber, the concrete densitydecreased.

In the case of the permeable void (Fig. 8), unlike other light-weight aggregated concrete, adding crumb rubber seemed to lowerthe void content slightly. In general, the porosity of the conven-tional lightweight concrete is high because of the use of porousaggregates or the existing of air bubbles in cement paste. However,

Fig. 6. Acoustics determination of sound absorption coefficient and impedance inimpedance tube (ISO 10534-1:1996).

1500

1700

1900

2100

2300

2500

2700

0% 10% 20% 30%

% Crumb Rubber

Uni

t Wei

ght (

kg/c

u.m

)

No. 6No. 26No. 6+26

Fig. 7. Bulk density.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0% 10% 20% 30%

% Crumb Rubber

% P

erm

eabl

e Vo

idNo. 6No. 26No. 6+26

Fig. 8. Permeable voids percentage.

Table 4Bulk density and porosity

Concrete type Bulk density Porosity

Average SD Average SD

PC 2530.0 21.0 9.35 0.106CR10 2170.0 46.0 8.48 0.206CR20 2110.0 18.0 6.50 0.226CR30 2030.0 28.2 6.38 0.1226CR10 2090.0 47.7 6.79 0.0726CR20 1970.0 22.9 5.90 0.2826CR30 1820.0 35.0 5.81 0.13626CR10 2100.0 39.7 7.91 0.22626CR20 1930.0 30.4 7.02 0.11626CR30 1900.0 47.7 6.09 0.10

Table 5Average thermal conductivity of crumb rubber concrete

Concrete type k (W/m K) SD

PC 0.531 0.0116CR10 0.443 0.0156CR20 0.295 0.0136CR30 0.241 0.00426CR10 0.290 0.01126CR20 0.275 0.00726CR30 0.267 0.010626CR10 0.313 0.009626CR20 0.304 0.009626CR30 0.296 0.010

1088 P. Sukontasukkul / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092

when using crumb rubber, the permeable void was found to de-crease slightly with the rubber content. This could be becausethe crumb rubber is not a porous material. Therefore, with propermixing and compacting, the concrete should have lower voidcontent.

3.2. Thermal properties

3.2.1. Thermal conductivityThe thermal conductivity (k) is defined as quantity of heat

transmitted through a unit thickness in a direction normal to a sur-

face of unit area due to a unit temperature gradient under steadystate conditions. Results from the test (Table 5, Fig. 9), when com-paring with plain concrete (at 0.531 W/m K), the k-values of crumbrubber concrete were lower by about 20–50% and in the range of0.241–0.443 W/m K. Theoretically, the thermal conductivity is pro-portional inversely to the density of the material. Since crumb rub-ber concrete is lower in density, it should be expected to exhibit alower value of k.

However, when compared with commercialized autoclaved aer-ated concrete panels (AACP) which have densities ranged from 400to 800 kg/m3 and k-values ranged from 0.08 to 0.19 W/m K [19],

0.443

0.295

0.241

0.29 0.275 0.2670.313 0.304 0.296

Plain concrete, k = 0.531 W/m.k

TIS Requirement at 0.476 W/m.k

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

6CR

10

6CR

20

6CR

30

26C

R10

26C

R20

26C

R30

626C

R10

626C

R20

626C

R30

Crumb Rubber Concrete

k (W

/m.K

)

Fig. 9. Thermal conductivity of crumb rubber concrete compared with conventional concrete and autoclaved aerated concrete.

Table 6Rate of heat transfer and heat resistivity

Type Heat transfer (W/h) Heat resistivity (m2/KW)

PC 1514 0.19

6CR10 1263 0.236CR20 841 0.346CR30 687 0.41

26CR10 827 0.3426CR20 784 0.3626CR30 761 0.37

626CR10 893 0.32626CR20 867 0.33626CR30 844 0.34

P. Sukontasukkul / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092 1089

the k-values of crumb rubber concrete panels were found to behigher. This come in no surprise because AACP is much lighterand has a density about half that of crumb rubber concrete.

Thailand Industrial Standard (TIS) specifies that the conven-tional lightweight concrete should have a limited k-value in therange of 0.303–0.476 W/m K. The k-values of crumb rubber con-crete obtained from this study were found to be less than or withinthe allowable range of those specified by TIS (Fig. 10).

3.2.2. Heat transfer rate and heat resistivityThe rate of heat transfer per unit time (hour) and heat resistivity

can be calculated using the following equations [20,21]:

q ¼ kAdTt

ð1Þ

r ¼ tk

ð2Þ

where q = heat transferred per unit time (W/h), r = heat resistivity(m2/KW), A = heat transfer area (m2, ft2), k = thermal conductivity(W/m K or W/m �C, Btu/(h �F ft2/ft)), dT = temperature differenceacross the material (K or �C, �F), t = material thickness (m, ft).

Using the value of k from the test and assuming that the tem-perature difference between night and day = 285.15� (K) (12 �C),the area = 1 � 1 m2 and the thickness = 0.10 m, the heat transferand resistivity of both plain and CR concrete panels can be calcu-lated as shown in Table 6.

As you can see in Table 4, all crumb rubber concrete exhibited alower heat transfer rate and a higher heat resistivity than plainconcrete. The rates of which depended on the crumb rubber size& the proportion of crumb rubber in the mix. With respect to size,the rate of heat transfer was found to decrease as the crumb rubberdecreased. With respect to content, concrete with the large sizedcrumb rubber (No. 6) gave the highest value of heat transfer rate,and those that have small sized crumb rubber (No. 26) showedsmaller values. As for the effect of rubber content, the rate of heattransfer was found to decrease with the increasing rubber content.Comparing the same size, the smallest value are found at 30%, andincreased gradually at the rubber content of 20% and 10%,respectively.

3.3. Sound absorption

The ability of material to absorb sound can be measured usingthe sound absorption coefficient (a). In this study, the soundabsorption of the CR concrete was measured under two differ-ent ranges of frequency: (1) low-mid-frequency (125, 250and 500 Hz) and (2) high-frequency (1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz).

The ability to absorb sound at both frequency ranges of bothplain and CR concrete are given in Fig. 10a–f and Table 7. Appar-ently, the CR lightweight concrete seemed to have superior soundabsorption properties to that of plain concrete, although our resultswere inconclusive at the lower frequency range. As seen in Fig. 10,at the low frequency ranges of 125 and 250 Hz, both plain and CRconcrete exhibited similar a-values. However, at the mid-fre-quency (500 Hz), the CR concrete began to show slightly highera-values. At the frequency higher than 1000 Hz, the ability to ab-sorb sound at this range of all CR lightweight concrete was foundto be much better than that of plain concrete. This indicated thatCR concrete is a better sound absorber at the high-frequency rangethan plain concrete.

In addition, results also being compared with autoclaved aer-ated concrete (AAC) which a-values was reported to be [19]62.0%, 42.0%, 63.0%, 64.0%, 60.0%, and 66.0% for frequencies of125, 250, 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 Hz, respectively (Fig. 10). Thesound absorption of crumb rubber concrete was found to be poorerthan that of AAC at every frequency. This is due to much lower

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Frequency (Hz)

So

un

d A

bso

rpti

on

(%

)

Aerated Concrete PC 6CR10

(a) 6CR10

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Frequency (Hz)

So

un

d A

bso

rpti

on

(%

)

Aerated Concrete PC 6CR20

(b) 6CR20

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Frequency (Hz)

So

un

d A

bso

rpti

on

(%

)

Aerated Concrete PC 26CR10

(c) 26CR10

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Frequency (Hz)

So

un

d A

bso

rpti

on

(%

)

Aerated Concrete PC 26CR20

(d) 26CR20

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Frequency (Hz)

So

un

d A

bso

rpti

on

(%

)

Aerated Concrete PC 626CR10

(e) 626CR10

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 1000 2000 3000 4000

Frequency (Hz)

So

un

d A

bso

rpti

on

(%

)

Aerated Concrete PC 626CR20

(f) 626CR20

Fig. 10. Sound absorption coefficient of crumb rubber concrete panel.

1090 P. Sukontasukkul / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092

densities of the AAC which are about 400–800 kg/m3 comparingwith the CRC which are between 1800 and 2100 kg/m3.

However, indicating the sound properties of materials usingthe a-values at different frequency ranges would be complex asit involved calculations over several frequencies. To solve thisproblem, the ability of material to absorb sound can be indicatedusing one single value so called the noise reduction coefficient

(NRC). The NRC can be calculated using the following equation[22]:

NRC ¼ ða250 þ a500 þ a1000 þ a2000Þ=4

Results from the calculation shown in Fig. 11 clearly indicatedthat CR concrete has superior sound resistance properties thanplain concrete, on average 36% better.

12.94

18.12 18.19

15.88

18.25

16.25

18.94

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

NR

C (%

)

PC 6CR10 6CR20 26CR10 26CR20 626CR10 626CR20

Fig. 11. Noise reduction coefficient.

Table 7Average sound absorption coefficient

Concretetype

Frequency(Hz)

125 250 500 1000 2000 4000

a(%)

SD Uncertainty a(%)

SD Uncertainty a(%)

SD Uncertainty a(%)

SD Uncertainty a(%)

SD Uncertainty a(%)

SD Uncertainty

PC 23.0 1.4 1.7 11.5 0.7 2.1 6.8 1.1 2.1 24.5 0.7 3.2 9.1 0.1 2.0 20.1 0.1 1.86CR10 23.0 2.8 1.8 12.0 1.4 2.1 12.1 0.1 2.1 31.5 4.9 2.7 17.0 1.4 2.3 25.0 1.4 2.46CR20 23.5 0.7 1.8 11.3 0.4 2.2 9.5 0.7 2.0 37.0 2.8 3.0 15.1 0.1 1.8 24.0 1.4 1.826CR10 24.5 0.7 1.9 11.0 0.7 2.1 10.0 1.4 2.1 26.5 0.7 3.1 16.0 1.4 1.7 27.5 0.7 2.026CR20 24.5 0.7 1.8 11.3 0.4 2.3 9.3 1.8 2.1 29.0 1.4 2.2 23.5 2.1 2.1 27.1 0.1 1.9626CR10 25.1 0.1 1.8 11.5 0.7 2.0 9.5 0.7 2.0 29.0 1.4 2.9 15.1 0.1 1.9 24.8 1.1 1.9626CR20 25.5 0.7 1.8 12.2 0.2 2.1 13.5 0.7 2.5 30.1 0.1 3.0 20.3 0.4 1.8 30.0 5.7 2.1

Note: measurement was carried out in the following condition: temperature: 23.0 ± 2.0 �C; pressure: 1013 ± 15 hPa; relative humidity: 50.0 ± 15.0%. Uncertainty of mea-surement: the uncertainty stated in the table is the expanded uncertainty obtained by multiplying the standard uncertainty by the coverage factor, k = 2. It has beendetermined in accordance with EA publication EA-4/02 ‘‘Expression of the Uncertainty of Measurement in Calibration” and ‘‘Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty inMeasurement”. The obtained values lie within the assigned range of value with a probability of 95%.

P. Sukontasukkul / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092 1091

4. Conclusions

1. By replacing conventional fine aggregate with crumb rubber at10–30%, the unit-weight of concrete can be reduced from 14%up to 28% depending on the type and the content of the crumbrubber.

2. The CR concrete exhibits superior thermal and sound propertiesthan plain concrete as measured by the decrease in thermalconductivity coefficient (k) and the increase in sound absorp-tion coefficient (a) and noise reduction coefficient (NRC).

3. Crumb rubber concrete is able to satisfy both requirementsfrom TIS in terms of unit-weight (less than 2000 kg/m3) and val-ues of k (less than allowable ranges of 0.303–0.476 W/m K).

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Thailand Research Fund-Master Research Grants (TRF-MAG) for financially support thisstudy and also Union Pattanakit Co., Ltd., for providing crumbrubber.

References

[1] Blackwell MC, Pierce CE. Potential ofscrap tire rubber as lightweight aggregatein flowable fill. J Waste Manage 2002;23(9):197–208.

[2] Chesner WH, Collins RJ, MacKay MH. Users guidelines for waste and by-product materials in pavement construction, Report No. FHWA-RD-97-148.Commack: Chesner Engineering, PC; April 1998.

[3] Eldin N, Senouci A. Measurement and prediction of the strength of rubberizedconcrete. Cement Concr Compos 1994;19:287–98.

[4] Eldin N, Senouci A. Rubber-tire particles as concrete aggregate. ASCE: J MaterCivil Eng 1993;5(4):478–96.

[5] Fattuhi N, Clark L. Cement based materials containing shredded scrap trucktyre rubber. Construct Build Mater 1996;10(4):229–36.

[6] Goulias DG, Ali AH. Evaluation of rubber-filled concrete and correlationbetween destructive and nondestructive testing results. J Cement Concr Aggr1998;20(1):140–444.

[7] Huynh H, Raghavan D, Ferraris C. Rubber particles from recycled tires incementitious composite materials, NISTIR 5850 R; May 1996.

[8] Khatib ZK, Bayomy FM. Rubber portland cement concrete. J Mater Civil Eng1999;11(3):206–13.

[9] Maupin GW, Payne CW. Final report evaluation of asphalt-rubber stressabsorbing membranes, VTRC98-R11. Virginia Transportation Research Council;September 1997.

[10] Morris G R, McDonald CH. Asphalt-rubber stress absorbing membranes fieldperformance. Transport Res Rec 1976;595:99–108.

1092 P. Sukontasukkul / Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009) 1084–1092

[11] Rostami H, Lepore J, Silverstraim T, Zandi I. Use of recycled rubber tires inconcrete. In: Proc Int Conf Concrete 2000, University of Dundee, UK; 1996. p.391–9.

[12] Topcu I. The properties of rubberized concrete. Cement Concr Res1995;25:304–10.

[13] Sukontasukkul P, Wiwatpattanapong S. Moderate lightweight concrete mixedwith crumb rubber. In: The 1st annual concrete conference, Rayong, Thailand;October 2005, p. CON1-6 (in Thai language).

[14] Sukontasukkul P, Chaikaew C. Properties of concrete pedestrian block mixedwith crumb rubber. J Construct Build Mater (JCBM) 2006;20(7):450–7.

[15] ASTM DESIGNATION: C 136-96a, Test method for sieve analysis of fine andcoarse aggregates.

[16] ASTM DESIGNATION: C 642-97, Test method for density, absorption, and voidsin hardened concrete.

[17] ASTM DESIGNATION: C 177-97, Test method for steady-state heat fluxmeasurements and thermal transmission properties by means of the guarded-hot-plate apparatus.

[18] ISO DESIGNATION: 10534-1, Test method for acoustics-determination ofsound absorption coefficient and impedance in impedance tubes. Part 1:Method using standing wave ratio.

[19] Test results on thermal properties of Super-Block� aerated autoclavedconcrete block. Super-Block Co. Ltd.; 2002.

[20] Callister William. Materials science and engineering – an introduction. JohnWiley & Sons Inc.; 2003.

[21] Halliday David, Resnick Robert, Walker Jearl. Fundamentals of physics. 5thed. NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc.; 1997.

[22] Thuman A, Miller RM. Foundation of noise control engineering. Georgia: FairMart Inc.; 1986.