Sustainable Self-Compacting Concrete with Partial Replacement of Cement with Ceramic Tile Waste Powder and Fine Aggregate with Slag Sand

Abstract

The rapid growth of the construction industry has intensified the consumption of natural resources and raised the carbon footprint of cement manufacturing. To address these environmental concerns, the development of sustainable high-performance concretes has become essential. This study focuses on producing M60 grade Self-Compacting Concrete (SCC) using ceramic tile waste powder (CTWP) as a partial cement replacement and slag sand as an alternative fine aggregate. Ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS) was used as the sole supplementary cementitious material to enhance the strength and durability of the mixes. SCC mixtures were prepared by replacing cement with CTWP at 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20%, and after determining the optimum CTWP percentage, fine aggregate was partially replaced with slag sand at 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40%. Fresh properties like Slump flow, L-Box, V-funnel are also conducted .Hardened properties including compressive, split tensile, and flexural strengths were assessed to determine the effect of CTWP and slag sand replacements on mechanical performance. The results indicated that the incorporation of CTWP and slag sand can effectively produce a sustainable SCC mix without compromising strength, while promoting waste utilization and reducing the dependence on natural river sand and cement. This study demonstrates the potential of ceramic waste and slag sand as eco-friendly materials for high-strength SCC applications.

Introduction

The study investigates eco-friendly M60 Self-Compacting Concrete (SCC) by partially replacing conventional materials with industrial waste. Ceramic Tile Waste Powder (CTWP), rich in silica and alumina, was used as a partial cement replacement (5–20%) for its pozzolanic and filler properties, improving microstructure, strength, and durability. Slag sand, a by-product of steel production, was used to replace natural fine aggregate (10–40%), enhancing bonding, reducing permeability, and conserving natural resources. GGBS was incorporated as a supplementary cementitious material to further improve strength and durability, while a polycarboxylate-based superplasticizer ensured the required flowability of SCC.

Experimental mixes were designed following EFNARC and IS:10262 guidelines. The optimum mix involved 10% CTWP with varying slag sand replacements to evaluate mechanical and fresh properties. Literature confirms that controlled use of ceramic and slag waste improves compressive, tensile, and flexural strength, refines pore structure, and enhances durability, while excessive replacement can reduce compactness and workability. The study demonstrates that integrating waste-derived materials into SCC can produce high-performance concrete with reduced environmental impact.

Conclusion

1) Mix M2 (10% CTWP) showed a 2.25% increase in compressive strength, a 1.68% rise in split tensile strength, and a 5.38% improvement in flexural strength compared to the reference mix. This confirms that controlled CTWP addition strengthens SCC by improving packing. 2) Mix M6 (10% CTWP + 20% slag sand) delivered the best performance among modified mixes with a 3.28% increase in compressive strength, 4.01% increase in split tensile strength, and a 9.97% rise in flexural strength over M0. Enhanced gradation and particle packing contributed to the improvement. 3) Strength improved for 5–10% CTWP, but mixes with 15–20% CTWP (M3, M4) showed declines in compressive strength by 1.82–4.15%, tensile strength drops of 1.47–6.75%, and flexural strength reductions of 0.96–4.41%, indicating reduced reactivity at higher ceramic content. 4) Slag sand replacements of 10–20% enhanced all mechanical properties, with M5 and M6 showing compressive strength gains of 2.55–3.28%, tensile strength increases of 3.16–4.01%, and flexural strength improvements of 6.91–9.97%. Beyond 30%, strength reductions occurred due to higher voids and reduced cohesiveness. 5) The best renewable mix (M6) exceeded the strength of control SCC in all categories—compressive (+3.28%), tensile (+4.01%), and flexural (+9.97%)—demonstrating that waste materials can successfully replace traditional constituents in SCC. 6) Workability remained within EFNARC limits for all mixes; however, mixes with 10% CTWP and 10–20% slag sand provided the best balance of flowability and viscosity.

References

[1] Assaggaf, M. A., Al-Fakih, A., & Al-Waeli, M. “Durability and mechanical behaviour of mortar incorporating ceramic polishing sludge,” International Journal of Civil Engineering Research, 2025. [2] Joshi, S. P., Singh, R., & Patel, D. “Strength and durability performance of ceramic tile waste aggregates in concrete,” Construction Materials Journal, 2025. [3] Murali, K., Prakash, R., & Jeyaprakash, P. “Use of ceramic waste powder as a supplementary cementitious material,” Materials Today: Proceedings, 2025. [4] Li, Z., Huang, H., & Wu, P. “Mechanical properties of mortar using recycled fine ceramic aggregates,” Journal of Building Materials, 2025. [5] Li, Z., Feng, S., & Wang, C. “Utilization of household ceramic waste as cement and sand replacement in concrete,” Engineering Structures, 2025. [6] Al-Fakih, A., Assaggaf, M., & Rahman, N. “Evaluation of ceramic polishing sludge as a cement replacement in mortar,” International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 2025. [7] Wei, Y., Ouyang, J., & Chen, H. “Performance of steel-slag–ore-slag binder concretes with recycled aggregates,” Construction and Building Materials, 2025. [8] Li, X., Zhang, L., & Zhou, J. “Creep behaviour of steel-tube columns filled with steel-slag aggregate concrete,” Engineering Structures, 2025. [9] Azhagarsamy, S., Gopal, N., & Srinivasan, R. “Mechanical behaviour of concrete with steel slag fine aggregate,” International Journal of Concrete Technology, 2025. [10] Al-Shugaa, M., Al-Fakih, A., & Assaggaf, M. “Pozzolanic reactivity of ceramic polishing sludge blended cement,” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2024. [11] Fu, Q., & Lee, K. “A review on construction materials incorporating ceramic tile waste,” Journal of Cleaner Production, 2024. [12] Zheng, Y., & Deng, X. “Geopolymer concrete incorporating recycled aggregates and steel slag: mechanical and fracture performance,” Construction and Building Materials, 2024. [13] Tanash, N., Ibrahim, T., & Al-Raba’a, A. “Ceramic tile waste as cement and aggregate replacement in sustainable concrete,” Cogent Engineering, 2023. [14] Chang, J., Wu, H., & Zhang, Y. “Strength prediction of ceramic waste powder concrete using machine learning models,” Materials Today: Proceedings, 2023. [15] Meena, R. V., Patel, R., & Rathore, R. “Self-compacting concrete using waste ceramic tile fine aggregate,” International Journal of Structural Engineering, 2023. [16] Mohit, P., Kumar, V., & Sharma, N. “Ternary blended concretes using ceramic waste powder and limestone powder,” Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 2023. [17] Jain, A., Singh, R., & Chawla, S. “Use of ceramic ETP sludge as a supplementary cementitious material,” Materials Today: Proceedings, 2022. [18] Meena, R. V., Joshi, P., & Kumar, R. “Mechanical and durability behaviour of SCC with waste ceramic tiles,” International Research Journal of Engineering, 2022.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 N. Aparna, P. Eswanth. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.