Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Mechanical properties and constitutive equations of concrete containing

a low volume of tire rubber particles
Li Lijuan , Ruan Shenghua, Zeng Lan
School of Civil and Transportation Engineering, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China

h i g h l i g h t s
 Rubber concrete with 5 different rubber contents and particle sizes was tested.
 The inuence of rubber on mechanical properties of concrete was investigated.
 The improved constitutive model for low rubber content concrete was presented.
 The constitutive model gives the inuence of rubber and concrete strength.

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 12 March 2014
Received in revised form 24 June 2014
Accepted 23 July 2014
Available online 24 August 2014
Keywords:
Concrete containing low amounts of tire
rubber
Uniaxial compression
Rubber content
Rubber particle size
Mechanical properties
Constitutive model

a b s t r a c t
Uniaxial compressive tests were conducted for a low-volume tire rubber concrete (RC) with different rubber volume content levels and particle sizes (ve of each). The inuence of rubber content and particle
size on the mechanical properties of RC was investigated, including axial compressive strength, elastic
modulus, peak strain, ultimate strain, appearance of visible cracks and failure pattern of specimens.
The mechanical analysis of test results was conducted based on uniaxial compressive stressstrain
curves. Uniaxial compressive constitutive models of low-volume rubber concrete were established that
included axial compressive strength, peak strain and constitutive parameters a and b. There was obvious
regularity between constitutive parameters a and b, rubber content and rubber particle size. Moreover,
the physical meanings of constitutive parameters a and b were given, and the established constitutive
models were evaluated by tests. The test results demonstrate that the constitutive models have not only
good predicting ability and high accuracy but also nice applicability within the limit of 50 kg/m3 rubber
content. The constitutive models were then improved by introducing the sand rate reduction factor k to
reect the inuence of rubber additives. The improved constitutive models are able to predict the performance of concrete with low amounts of rubber.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
With the rapid development of the global transportation industry, rubber has become an inseparable and integral part of our
lives. The amount of rubber consumed annually has been growing
steadily. Its high elasticity, low density, long life, light weight and
low cost are factors behind such phenomenal growth. Rubber
materials have been used in automotive, industry application, daily
living equipments, building waterproof, sealing system and other
uses. With such large and varying applications, rubber contributes
to an ever increasing volume in the solid waste stream. The worlds
annual consumption of rubber materials has increased greatly in
the past decade. An increasing number of discarded rubber
especially automobile tires have led to so-called black pollution,
Corresponding author.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.07.105
0950-0618/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

which troubles both developed and developing countries [1]. Reusing rubber is preferable to recycling as it consumes lesser amounts
of energy and resources. Meanwhile reusing can reduce amounts of
municipal solid waste going to landll. Rubber recycling has to be
taken into consideration in any rubber waste management program. An effective approach is required in an attempt to manage
such large quantities of a diverse, contaminated mixture of rubber
in an energy efcient and environmentally benign manner.
The green development theme of the Chinese twelfth ve-year
plan requires development of green buildings and new building
materials in the construction industry. The Chinese building evaluation standard of green buildings seeks to protect the environment,
reduce pollution and make efcient use of renewable materials and
resources. The main work focuses on recycling of solid waste,
including waste rubber. Recycled rubber can be used in asphaltic
concrete mixes [2] or as a ll material in road contraction [3].

292

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

The advantage of adding recycled rubber to the asphalt includes

increased skid resistance under icy conditions, improved exibility
and crack resistance, and reduced trafc noise. Many researchers
have reported the use of scrap of rubber/tire in cement motor
and concrete [4]. As the most consumed construction building
material, concrete has simultaneously high strength and brittleness. Nevertheless, the brittleness of concrete hinders its wide
application. Thus, research into reducing brittleness of concrete
has become an important area of current concrete research. One
of the most economical methods is adding rubber materials to concrete and being used as a building material. Research reported that
rubber can improve some mechanical properties of concrete such
as brittleness resistance property [5]. Furthermore, rubber concrete shows promise for reducing environmental pollution caused
by discarded rubber and saving natural resources, both of which
have great economical and social benets.
The effects of recycled and waste rubber on fresh and hardened
concrete include bulk density, air content, slump, compressive
strength, splitting tensile strength, modulus of elasticity, impact
resistance, permeability, brittleness and abrasion resistance. Studies have shown that rubber with large particle sizes (diameter of
216 mm) greatly weakened the mechanical properties of concrete
[6]. However, rubber with smaller particle sizes can improve the
brittleness of concrete [7]. Moreover, rubber content also had a
signicant effect on the mechanical properties of concrete [8,9].
Concrete with high rubber content has higher toughness but lower
strength, so this concrete is mainly used in roads and bridges at
present [10,11]. The application of concrete with high rubber volume to building structures is restricted as it reduces the strength
of concrete greatly. Nevertheless, concrete with low rubber content
(less than 10%) has a good balance between strength and toughness
but also meets the structural requirements for material properties.
Therefore, studies of structural applications of concrete with low
rubber content have drawn much attention in recent years, and a
series of research outcomes have been obtained [1214]. However,
the present research work on concrete with low volume of solid
waste rubber is mainly focused on strength, brittleness and impact
resistance. Determination of the mechanical performance and
design parameters of materials is critical to determining whether
rubber concrete can be used as structural materials, and the constitutive relationship of rubber concrete is most important in its structural design. Based on the research progress of the constitutive
relationship of rubber concrete [1517] and experimental research
on the performance of concrete with low rubber content under uniaxial pressure, this paper presents a constitutive model of low-volume rubber concrete subjected to uniaxial compression that can be
used to predict the stressstrain relationship of rubber concrete and
promote the application of rubber concrete in structural design.
2. Test of mechanical properties
2.1. Test materials
Ordinary Portland cement (P.O42.5R), tap water and the water-reducing agent
(QL-5 non-air entrained naphthalene super-plasticizer), was used in the tests. The
coarse aggregate is granite stone with particle diameter of 510 mm, bulk density
of 1456 kg/m3 and continuous gradation and high quality without soft particles.
The ne aggregate is ordinary river sand with bulk density of 2636 kg/m3, apparent
density of 1539 kg/m3, neness modulus of 2.53 and continuous gradation of area 2
in middle sand. Rubber particle sizes, as shown in Fig. 1, include 0.173 mm,
0.221 mm, 0.381 mm, 0.535 mm, 0.864 mm, 2 mm and 4 mm [18]. The rubber density is 1060 kg/m3. Superhard gypsum with dry compressive strength of 800 kg/cm2
was used to level both ends of the specimens.
2.2. Test mixture design
According to the constant volume rule, sand was replaced with rubber particles
by the inner mixing method. The rubber contents were 2%, 4%, 6%, 7%, 8%, 10% and
12% of the mass of cement. The amounts of cement, water, aggregate and water

reducer were kept invariable. The mixture design of reference normal concrete
(NC), rubber concrete (RC) and rubber concrete for verication (JRC) is given in
Table 1.
2.3. Test method
A total of 25 groups of rubber concrete specimens, including 5 different rubber
particle sizes and 5 different rubber contents for each size, and 2 groups of reference
concrete specimens were designed in this experiment. Each group contains 3 specimens. The total number of specimens was 81, including 78 prisms and 3 cubes.
Additionally, 2 groups of rubber concrete specimens for checking were designed,
with 2 different rubber contents and particle sizes, for a total of 6 prisms. The size
of the prism specimens was 150  150  300 mm, and the size of the cube specimens was 150  150  150 mm. Specimens were immersed in clean tap water for
28 d for curing and molded 24 h later. Plaster was then used to level both contact
surfaces of the specimen for loading when the concrete was dry. A MATEST
5000kN electro-hydraulic servo testing machine was used as the loading test
device, and a displacement sensor with precision of 0.001 mm was used to measure
displacement. The loading process was controlled by displacement with a loading
speed of 0.18 mm/min.

3. Mechanical properties and analysis

3.1. Stressstrain relationship
Uniaxial compressive tests were conducted according to Chinese standard [19] for reference normal concrete and rubber concrete specimens (150  150  150 mm cube specimens) with
different rubber contents and particle sizes, and the corresponding
stressstrain curves shown in Fig. 2 were obtained.
According to the stressstrain curves of rubber concrete under
uniaxial compression, rubber content has a signicant effect on
the material properties of concrete. Rubber reduces the strength
of concrete but improves its deformation properties.
3.2. Axial compressive strength
The relationships between compressive strength of rubber concrete (frc) and both rubber content and rubber particle size are
shown in Fig. 3. The addition of rubber weakens the axial compressive strength of concrete. The biggest strength drop ratio is 41.8%,
occurring for specimen RC-10%-0.173. The smallest strength drop
ratio is 8.7%, occurring for specimen RC-2%-4.
As shown in Fig. 3, the axial compressive strength of rubber
concrete decreases with increasing rubber content and decreases
with decreasing rubber particle size. The degree of strength reduction is greater for larger rubber particle size (2 mm or 4 mm) than
for smaller rubber particle size (0.173 mm, 0.221 mm or
0.525 mm). The effect of rubber particle size on axial compression
strength of rubber concrete is enhanced by increasing the amount
of rubber. When rubber content is 2%, axial compression strength
and rubber particle size have an approximately linear relationship.
However, the axial compression strength of rubber concrete
decreases nonlinearly with increasing rubber particle size when
rubber content is greater than 2%.
Under the same rubber content and particle size conditions,
experimental axial compressive strength of rubber concrete
decreases more than that reported in other references, as recorded
in Table 2, which indicates that the rubber additive method has a
pronounced inuence on the axial compressive strength of rubber
concrete. With the same sand ratio, the use of an inner additive has
a stronger effect on the compression strength of rubber concrete
than use of an external additive.
Based on the strength of normal concrete, a regular connection
of uniaxial compressive strength of rubber concrete with rubber
content and particle size can be obtained [20]. Through the methodology of multivariate nonlinear regression analysis, the relationship of uniaxial compressive strength of low-content rubber
concrete with normal concrete strength, sand rate reduction factor

293

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

(a) 4 mm

(b) 2 mm

(c) 0.864 mm

(d) 0.535 mm

(e) 0.381 mm

(f) 0.221 mm

(g) 0.173 mm
Fig. 1. Recycled rubber particle sizes.

Table 1
Mixture design of concrete.
Specimen

Water:cement ratio

NC
RC-2%-n
RC-4%-n
RC-6%-n
RC-8%-n
RC-10%-n
JRC-7%-0.864
JRC-12%-0.381

0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49
0.49

Materials (kg/m3)
Rubber (%)

Cement

Water

Coarse aggregate

Sand

Water reducer

0
8.49 (2%)
16.97 (4%)
25.46 (6%)
33.95 (8%)
42.44 (10%)
29.71 (7%)
50.92 (12%)

424
424
424
424
424
424
424
424

209
209
209
209
209
209
209
209

1105
1105
1105
1105
1105
1105
1105
1105

661
640
619
598
577
556
587
535

2.46
2.46
2.46
2.46
2.46
2.46
2.46
2.46

Note: NC refers to normal concrete as a reference; RC-m-n refers to rubber concrete; JRC-m-N refers to rubber concrete for checking; m represents the percentage (m%) of
rubber content relative to the mass of cement; n represents the rubber particle size, including 0.173 mm, 0.221 mm, 0.535 mm, 2 mm and 4 mm. N is the rubber particle size
in mm.

(that is, the ratio of the sand ratio before and after the addition of
rubber), rubber content and particle size can be calculated by Eq.
(1):
3:2634

f rc

0:0734p0:4947 k
f p  exp
d  0:0737

!
d

where p refers to rubber content as a percentage; d is the rubber

particle size (unit: mm); k is the sand rate reduction factor; frc is
the axial compressive strength of rubber concrete and fp is the axial
compressive strength of normal concrete (units: MPa). The calculation value from Eq. (1) agreed well with the experimental results
(R2 = 0.954).

The effects of the method of rubber addition on the uniaxial

compressive strength of rubber concrete can be explained for the
reasons below:
(1) Because the strength and stiffness of rubber are much lower
than those of sand, rubber weakens the strength and stiffness of the original bearing load system formed by natural
aggregate, which has a negative inuence on concrete
strength and stiffness. As the particle size of rubber greatly
differs from that of sand, the method of inner addition will
result in changing the original aggregate gradation and thus
leading to a non-continuous aggregate gradation with sand
and stone. On the contrary, the method of external addition
not only has no negative effect on the original continuous

294

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

45

45

0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

40
35

35
30

Stress /MPa

Stress /MPa

30
25
20
15

25
20
15

10

10

0
0.000

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

40

0
0.000

0.006

0.001

0.002

45

30

35
30

25
20
15

20
15
10

0.003

0.006

25

10

0.002

0.005

0.004

0.005

0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

40

Stress /MPa

Stress /MPa

35

0.001

0.004

45

0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

40

0
0.000

0.003

Strain

Strain

0
0.000

0.006

0.001

0.002

Strain

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain

45
45

35

Stress /MPa

30

35

Stress /MPa

40

25
20
15

30
25
20
15

10

10

0
0.000

0
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

40
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain

(e) 4 mm

0
0.000

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain

(f) 2%

Fig. 2. Uniaxial compressive stressstrain curves of RC with different rubber contents and sizes.

aggregate gradation but also benets the original bearing

load system by lling voids among sand and stone. Rubber
addition results in a change of the optimal sand ratio of reference concrete, and the compressive strength of rubber
concrete decreases greatly.
(2) Rubber particles ll the voids in concrete and protects
against the formation and extension of initial internal
cracks in concrete. However, because of its lower strength,
rubber exerts a negative effect on concrete strength. If rubber content is lower, such as less than 8%, the axial compression strength of rubber concrete declines slightly.
However, when rubber content is above a certain level,

such as 8%, the axial compression strength of rubber concrete decreases greatly. Moreover, rubber with small particles has a greater effect on concrete strength than rubber
with larger particles.
(3) Due to its nonpolarity and hydrophobicity, rubber is a solid
air-entraining agent. The amount of entraining air increases
with increased rubber content and decreased particle size.
Rubber with smaller particle size has a greater specic surface area, so its ability to adsorb gas is enhanced, as shown
in Fig. 4. Higher rubber content and smaller particle size lead
to decreased compressive strength in rubber concrete, as
illustrated in Fig. 5.

295

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

45

45

Stress /MPa

35
30
25
20
15

35

25
20
15
10

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0
0.000

0.006

0.002

0.003

Strain

(g) 4%

(h) 6%

0.004

0.005

0.006

45

0
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

35
30

35

25
20

30
25
20

15

15

10

10

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

40

Stress /MPa

40

0
0.000

0.001

Strain

45

Stress /MPa

30

10

0
0.000

0
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

40

Stress /MPa

0
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

40

0.006

0
0.000

Strain

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain

(i) 8%

(j) 10%
Fig. 2 (continued)

(4) The axial compressive strength of rubber concrete is somewhat determined by the ability of interfacial adhesion
between aggregate and cement matrix. Nevertheless, rubber
between the cement matrix and coarse aggregate expands
their interfacial transition zone and also poorly adheres
cement; thus, the ability for concrete interfacial adhesion
is weakened, which leads to decreased concrete strength.
(5) As shown in Fig. 6, rubber particles easily rise to the surface
in concrete, which can cause internal stress concentration
because of their uneven distribution. Weak interfaces and
defects arise in concrete as a side effect of rubber particles,
along which internal cracks extend. As shown in Fig. 7, stresses more easily concentrate when cracks extend along the
weak interfaces and defects with smaller rubber particle
sizes.
(6) Because rubber particles have the properties of air entraining, low strength and low stiffness, stress concentration
may be easily precipitated, which reduces the internal interface bond with concrete and causes tensile failure of the
cement matrix.
3.3. Elastic modulus
The safety of a structure is not only related to the strength of
materials but also affected by its stiffness. As a result, elastic modulus is another criterion to judge the ability of low-content rubber
concrete to be used as a structural material. Although it causes
decreased compressive strength and elastic modulus in concrete,

mixing rubber can prevent the stiffness of structures from being

too large on the premise of structural safety by low rubber content,
which is propitious to the seismic safety of structures as well. With
the same concrete strength, the elastic modulus of rubber concrete
is lower than that of normal concrete [21,22], meaning rubber can
truly reduce the brittleness of structures.
The 150  150  300 mm prism specimens were used for testing elastic modulus according to Chinese standard [19]. In this test,
the elastic modulus of specimen RC-10%-0.173 was the lowest,
with a fall of 41.9%. The elastic modulus of rubber concrete with
rubber content less than 6% declined by a maximum of 36.5%.
The decrease in the elastic modulus of rubber concrete (Ed) was
greater than that of the axial compressive strength (Fd), and the
ratio of Ed/Fd decreased as rubber content increased, as shown in
Fig. 8. For the same rubber content and particle size, the uctuation
of elastic modulus of rubber concrete is affected by the method of
rubber addition. The decrease in the elastic modulus of rubber concrete is relatively mild in this paper, as shown in Table 3. The elastic modulus of rubber concrete is larger for the external additive
method than for the inner additive method, which is consistent
with previous results [23,24].
The elastic modulus of rubber concrete E0 decreases with
decreased rubber particle sizes and increased rubber contents, as
shown in Fig. 9. It can be seen from Fig. 9(a), the elastic modulus
of rubber concrete decreases with the increased rubber contents.
The tread is clear, but the degree is lighter for rubber contents
more than 2% and then it is much light for rubber contents more
than 8% except the 2 mm particle size one. For the same rubber

296

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

Axial compressive strength f rc/MPa

45
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

40

35

30

25

20

Fig. 5. Internal structure of RC.

10

Rubber content p/%

(a) Compressive strength with different rubber contents

Axial compressive strengthe f rc/MPa

45

2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

40

35
Fig. 6. Rubber particles rising to the RC surface.

30

25

20

4mm

2mm

0.535mm

0.221mm

0.173mm

Rubber particle size d

(b) Compressive strength with different rubber particle sizes

Fig. 3. Compressive strength of RC with different rubber contents and particle sizes.

content, the elastic modulus of rubber concrete decreases with

decreased rubber sizes. It can be seen from Fig. 9(b), rubber size
signicantly inuences the elastic modulus of rubber concrete.

For rubber sizes less than 4 mm, the elastic modulus of rubber concrete decreases greatly with the decreased rubber sizes, and elastic
modulus behaves linearly with rubber particle size. However, for
rubber sizes more than 4 mm, the elastic modulus of rubber concrete reduces slightly with the decreased rubber sizes.
According to the mathematical model of three-phase composite
distribution elements for rubber concrete proposed by Topcu and
Avcular [25], the elastic modulus of rubber concrete can be qualitatively analyzed by Eqs. (2)(4).

 
1 2V a aa1
2
  ;
Ec Em
a
1
1  V a a2

where a

Ea
Em

Table 2
Decrease in compressive strength of RC under different experimental conditions.
Experiment

Rubber content
(kg/m3) (%)

Rubber particle
size (mm)

Decrease in
compressive strength
(%)

Method of calculating
rubber content

Rubber additive method

Feng et al.
[16]

53.1 (10%)
53.1 (10%)

0.198
4.00

27.00
13.90

Based on the mass of

cement

External addition. Invariant sand ratio

Liu and Pan

[17]

36.0 (1.5%)
36.0 (1.5%)

0.198
4.00

44.10
17.60

Based on the volume of

coarse aggregate

Inner addition. Replacing coarse aggregate by the same

volume. Invariant sand ratio

This article

42.4 (10%)
34.0 (8%)

0.173
4.00

41.80
21.80

Based on the mass of

cement

Inner addition. Replacing sand by the same volume.

Variant sand ratio

(a) 4 mm

(b) 2 mm

(c) 0.535 mm

(d) 0.221 mm

Fig. 4. Surface stomata of RC with 10% rubber content.

(e) 0.173 mm

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

1.6

As the elastic modulus of rubber aggregate composite Ear is

smaller than that of the reference normal concrete Ea, the value
of b is relatively larger, and a is smaller. The volume ratio of aggregate Var and that of rubber aggregate composite Va are nearly the
same, so the value of Ecr is smaller than Ec.
According to Eqs. (6) and (7), for the same rubber content and
particle size, the value of Va is larger by the method of external
addition of rubber than the method of inner addition. The values
of Ear and a are relatively small by the method of external addition
of rubber. The value of Var varies little for both additive methods, so
the value of Ecr by the method of external addition of rubber is
smaller than that for inner addition.
For rubber concrete formed by the method of inner addition of
rubber, the values of Va, Vr and Var remain the same regardless of
sand ratio, but the value of Ea for constant sand ratio is smaller
than that for variable sand ratio. As a result, the values of Ear and
factor a are smaller as well. Analogously, the value of Ecr with constant sand ratio should be greater than the value of Ec with variable
sand ratio when the method of inner addition is used.

1.4

3.4. Peak strain

1.2

The experimental results of peak strain erc for concrete with different rubber content are illustrated in Fig. 10. In this test, the maximum and minimum peak strains of rubber concrete were 119%
and 88% of those of the reference concrete, respectively. When rubber content was below 8%, rubber particle with a particle size of
0.173 mm improved the peak strain of concrete, but when rubber
content was 6% or more, rubber particle (except for that with
0.173 mm particle size) has a negative inuence on the peak strain
of concrete. However, when rubber content is less than 6%, the
result was different. The peak strain of specimen RC-4%-0.221
and RC-8%-0.535 was similar to that of reference normal concrete.
As a result, rubber content of 8% could be regarded as the critical
content level for some rubber particle size at which rubber begins
to have a different effect on the peak strain of concrete. However,
the inuence of rubber particle size was not as clearly dened.
From Ref. [22], rubber was able to promote the peak strain of
concrete. For the same concrete strength, the peak strain of rubber
concrete was 1.5 times that of normal concrete. But this is not
always the case. In test of this article, the peak strain of rubber concrete may even lower than concrete without rubber, as shown in
Fig. 10 and Table 4. It can be seen from Fig. 10, the peak strain of
rubber concrete is sometimes lower than that of concrete without
rubber. For the best case rubber concrete (rubber sizes 0.173 mm),
the peak strain of rubber concrete (rubber contents 8%) was much
higher than that of concrete without rubber. That is to say, rubber
is really able to promote the peak strain of concrete, and rubber
can improve the capability of concrete to adapt to deformation
then improve the toughness of concrete, but only if the contents
and sizes of rubber particles are appropriate.
Based on the comparison in Table 4, the method of external
addition of rubber more strongly impacts the peak strain of
reference concrete, but the method of inner addition makes no

Fig. 7. Internal cracking in RC.

2.2
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

2.0

Ratio of Ed / fd

1.8

1.0
0.8

10

Rubber content p/%

Fig. 8. Ratio of Ed/Fd for RC.

Ecr Em

Ear

1 2V ar aa1
2
  ;
a
1
1  V ar a2

where a

Ear
Em

Ea Er
Er V a Ea V r

In these equations, Va, Vr, Vm and Var refer to the volume ratios of
aggregate, rubber particles, cement matrix and rubber aggregate
composite, respectively; Ea, Er, Em, Ear, Ec and Ecr correspondingly
represent the elastic modulus of aggregate, rubber particles,
cement matrix, rubber aggregate composite, concrete and rubber
concrete.
3
If b aa1
1  a2
, Eqs. (5)(7) can be transformed from Eqs.
2
(2)(4).


Ec Em 1

3
1=bV a  1


Ecr Em 1

Ear

297

3
1=bV ar  1

Ea
V a EEar V r

5

6

or Ear V a
Ea

1
VErr

Table 3
Decrease of elastic modulus in RC under different experiments.
Experiment

Rubber content
(kg/m3) (%)

Rubber particle
size (mm)

Decrease of elastic
modulus (%)

Method of calculating
rubber content

Rubber additive method

Feng et al.
[16]

27.0 (5%)

0.198
4.00

41.0
34.50

Based on the mass of

cement

External addition. Invariant sand ratio

Liu and Pan

[17]

36.0 (1.5%)

0.198
4.00

42.3
4.60

Based on the volume of

coarse aggregate

Inner addition. Replacing coarse aggregate by the same

volume. Invariant sand ratio.

This article

42.4 (10%)
34.0 (8%)

0.173
4.00

41.9
28.40

Based on the mass of

cement

Inner addition. Replacing sand by the same volume.

Variant sand ratio.

298

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

2.3

4.0

0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

3.8
3.6
3.4

0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

2.2
2.1

Peak strain

Elastic modulus E0 104 /MPa

4.2

3.2
3.0
2.8
2.6

2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7

2.4
2.2

1.6
0

10

Rubber content p /%

2.3
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

3.6

10

2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

2.2
2.1

3.4
2.0

3.2

Peak strain

Elastic modulus E010 /MPa

4.2

3.8

(a) Relationship between peak strain and rubber content

(a) Elastic modulus with different rubber contents

4.0

Rubber content p/

3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2

1.9
1.8
1.7

4mm

2mm

0.535mm

0.212mm

0.173mm

1.6

Rubber particle size d

4mm

2mm

0.535mm

0.221mm

0.173mm

Rubber particle size d

(b) Elastic modulus with different rubber particle sizes

Fig. 9. Elastic modulus of RC with different rubber contents and particle sizes.

(b) Relationship between peak strain and rubber particle size

Fig. 10. Peak strain of RC with different rubber contents and particle sizes.

difference. Furthermore, there is a critical value of rubber content

that expresses the effective inuence of rubber on the peak strain
of concrete. The peak strain of rubber concrete has different relationships with rubber content and particle size for different rubber
addition methods.
Although the peak strength of concrete under uniaxial compression is not obviously related to concrete strength, there is in fact a
close relationship. By nonlinear regression, the relationship
between peak strain of low-content rubber concrete and its uniaxial compressive strength is given as Eq. (8):

erc 938:0584 158:1626 f rc  106

where erc is the peak strain of rubber concrete and frc is the strength
of rubber concrete under axial compression (units of MPa).
Peak strain is closely related to concrete strength. The effect of
rubber on the peak strain of concrete is determined by strength
and deformation. For identical rubber contents and particle sizes,
rubber has the same promoting action on the capability of deformation for concrete; however, the different approaches of rubber
addition have different inuences on the force-bearing structural
frame of concrete, thus resulting in different interaction effects
on the peak strain of rubber concrete. For external rubber addition,
the action of rubber on the deformation of concrete exceeds the
action of rubber on the strength of concrete, so rubber is able to
improve the peak strain of concrete.
3.5. Ultimate strain
In fracture analysis of structural concrete composites, the ultimate strain of concrete under uniaxial compression is regarded

as the failure strain; in other words, concrete loses its bearing

capability if concrete deformation is larger than ultimate strain
under uniaxial compression. As a result, the ultimate strain under
uniaxial compression is one of the most important parameters for
concrete with rubber as a structural material. Rubber addition is
able to improve the ultimate strain of concrete by 1.071.46 times.
The ultimate strain of rubber concrete can still increase by 734%
even if the rubber content is within 6%. The results are shown in
Fig. 11.
From Fig. 11, the ultimate strain of rubber concrete increases
with rubber content. The rubber concrete ultimate strain for particle sizes of 4 mm and 0.221 mm uctuated slightly with rubber
content, so these two rubber particle sizes have less effect on the
ultimate strain of rubber concrete than do other sizes. Generally,
the ultimate strain of rubber concrete increases with decreasing
rubber particle size; however, rubber concrete with a particle size
of 0.221 mm is an exception. For particle sizes of 4 mm and
0.221 mm, the inuence of rubber on ultimate strain of concrete
is not obvious. Rubber with particle size of 0.173 mm has the
greatest enhancement on ultimate strain of concrete, especially
for rubber content of 8%.
The ultimate strain of RC is higher for larger rubber content and
smaller particle size, which indicates that rubber particles help to
improve the deformation capability, reduce the brittle fracture of
concrete and postpone the process of concrete damage.
Rubber particles are mainly scattered around the weak interface
of rubber concrete, where the interior fractural cracks will denitely extend through. However, rubber particles are regarded as

299

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

Table 4
Comparison of peak strain of RC from different experiments.
Experiment

Change of peak strain for RC

Method of calculating
rubber content

Rubber addition method

Feng et al.
[16]
Liu and Pan
[17]
This article

Rubber increases peak strain. Peak strain increases with rubber

content and particle size
Rubber reduces peak stain. Peak strain decreases with increasing
rubber content and particle size
The inuence law of rubber on peak strain is not obvious

Based on the mass of

cement
Based on the volume of
coarse aggregate
Based on the mass of
cement

External addition. Invariant sand ratio

Inner addition. Replacing coarse aggregate by the same
volume. Invariant sand ratio
Inner addition. Replacing sand by the same volume.
Variant sand ratio

3.6. Visible cracks

5.8

0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

5.6

10

5.0

Ultimate strain

5.2

-3

5.4

4.8
4.6
4.4
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.6

10

Rubber content p /%

Rubber helps inhibit the generation and development of microcracks in concrete [26] and delays the appearance of macroscopic
cracks. As shown in Fig. 12, the crack stress of RC in the descending
section of the stressstrain curve decreases (crack stress fc is
described as the ratio of crack stress and peak stress). The decrease
of crack stress for RC-10%-0.173 is the greatest (17.7%), while RC2%-0.173 has the smallest crack stress (1.7%). The crack stress of
rubber concrete decreases with increased rubber content. Rubber
with smaller particles has a more clearly decreasing trend of crack
stress; the crack stress decreases more dramatically for smaller
particle sizes. The crack stress caused by particle size changes more
acutely for larger rubber contents.
The inhibition of rubber from creating visible cracks in concrete
is also reected in the increase of crack strain (crack strain ec is the

(a) Ultimate strain for different rubber contents

5.8

0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

0.90

Crack stress fc

10

5.0

Ultimate strain

-3

5.4
5.2

0.95

2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

5.6

4.8
4.6
4.4
4.2

0.85

0.80

4.0
3.8
3.6

4mm

2mm

0.535mm

0.221mm

0.173mm

0.75

Rubber particle size d

10

Rubber content p /%

(b) Ultimate strain for different rubber particle sizes

springs connecting to the failure interface that prevents cracks

from departing the weak interface. As a result, cracks are
restrained from emergence and development, and the fracture of
concrete is alleviated to some degree.
Higher rubber content results in more rubber in the interior
interface; hence, the capability of crack prevention and plastic
deformation is higher. Small rubber particles are not only distributed on the interface between aggregate and cement matrix but
also scattered on the interface within the cement matrix, which
help to provide deformation ability and prevent crack formation.
In contrast, larger rubber particles exist mainly in the interface
between aggregates and cement matrix and have almost no inuence on the deformation of cement matrix, which easily leads to
the concentration of plastic strain in concrete. Generally speaking,
rubber with small particles more favorably improves the ductility
of concrete than rubber with large particles.

0.95

2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

0.90

Crack stress fc

Fig. 11. Ultimate strain of RC with different rubber contents and particle sizes.

0.85

0.80

0.75

4mm

2mm

0.535mm

0.221mm

0.173mm

--

Rubber particle size d

Fig. 12. Crack stresses of RC with different rubber contents and particle sizes.

300

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

ratio of crack strain to peak strain) in the corresponding descending section of the stressstrain curve, as shown in Fig. 13. The crack
strain of RC-10%-0.173 is the largest, 55.9% of normal concrete, and
the minimum value is that of RC-2%-4, 8.9%. The former is 6.3 times
the latter one, so both rubber content and particle size affect the
crack strain of rubber concrete comprehensively. The crack strain
of rubber concrete increases with increased rubber content; the
increasing trend of crack strain is more obvious for smaller rubber
particles. The crack strain of concrete increases with decreased
rubber particle size; nevertheless, there is an exception for concrete with rubber content greater than 2%, whose crack strain
drops suddenly when rubber particle size is 0.221 mm.
Rubber signicantly prevents and delays the appearance of visible cracks in concrete, and the effectiveness of its role increases
with increased rubber content and decreased particle size. Smaller
rubber particles have more effects than larger ones in improving
the crack resistance capability of concrete.
Macroscopic cracks in concrete are developed gradually from
microcracks on the weak surface of interior concrete and cement
matrix. Rubber particles in the mixture prevent these microcracks
from extending and developing, so the appearance of macroscopic
cracks is delayed.
Rubber particles are mainly distributed in the interface between
aggregate and cement matrix and prevent interfacial fracture
cracks from stretching. Small rubber particles can enter the cement
matrix and reduce both the probability of crack production and the
speed of crack development, which in turn helps to hinder

microcracks from joining and linking; thus, the process of microcracks developing into macroscopic cracks is greatly deterred.
3.7. Failure pattern
By inhibiting the production and development of cracks in concrete, rubber enhances the capability of concrete deformation and
improves its fracture brittleness [27,28]. The difference in the failure patterns of rubber concrete and normal concrete under uniaxial compression is shown in Figs. 14 and 15. The rubber contents
are 10%, 8%, 6%, 4$ and 2%, from left to right, in Fig. 15.
For concrete under uniaxial compression, exfoliation and splitting fractures occurred, with wide cracks along the diagonal direction of the specimen. Relative slip caused by diagonal shear failure
on the interface leads to a change in the specimens shape, which
belongs to the typical brittle slant shear failure.
The width, length and number of cracks decline with increased
rubber content and decreased particle size, and crack direction
approaches vertical. The cracks are distributed more evenly and
are more scattered rather than being relatively concentrated. The
intersection of extended cracks developed into independent extension. The integrity of specimens after failure is high, and no exfoliation or distortion occurs. The fracture ductility of rubber concrete
can be fully observed, and the columns are subjected to compressive rupture.
4. Constitutive models under uniaxial compression
4.1. Establishment of constitutive mathematical models

1.9
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

1.8

Crack strain c

1.7

The constitutive curve of concrete with low rubber volume

under uniaxial compression resembles that of normal concrete in
its geometric features. The design code of concrete structures in
China (GB50010-2002) [29] is used in this paper, and Appendix C
of this code gives the mathematical models of stress and strain,
shown in Eqs. (9) and (10):

1.6
1.5

y a0 a1 x a2 x2 a3 x3

1.4
1.3

1.2
1.1
0

10

12

Rubber content p/%

1.9
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

1.8

Crack strain c

1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
0

4mm

2mm

0.535mm 0.212mm 0.173mm

--

Rubber particle size d

Fig. 13. Crack strains of RC with different rubber contents and particle sizes.

x
b0 b1 x b2 x2

x 6 1

x P 1

9
10

where y = r/frc; r is the stress under uniaxial compression; frc is the

peak stress of rubber concrete under uniaxial compression; x = e/erc;
e is the strain under uniaxial compression; and erc is the peak strain
of rubber concrete under uniaxial compression.
The stressstrain curve of concrete with low rubber content
under uniaxial compression has common geometric features with
that of normal concrete, which can be given mathematically as follows [26,27]:
(1) x = 0, y = 0.
(2) 0 6 x < 1, d2y/dx2 < 0, which means the slope of the curve in
an ascending segment decreases monotonously without an
inection point.
(3) x = 1, y = 1, dy/dx = 0, which is the unique maximum of the
curve.
(4) When d2y/dx2 = 0, xi > 1, where there is an inection point xi
on the descending segment called a point of contraexure.
(5) When d3y/dx3 = 0, x > xj, where there is an inection point xj
on the descending segment called a point of contraexure.
(6) x ? 1, y ? 0, dy/dx ? 0, where the descending curve
extends into innity with a convergence of parallel to the
abscissa.
(7) x P 0, 0 < y 6 1 for the entire curve.

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

301

Fig. 14. Failure patterns of NC.

The ascending segment of the constitutive equation for rubber

concrete under uniaxial compression is shown in Eq. (11), where
a is a constitutive parameter in the ascending segment of the
curve:

y ax 3  2ax2 a  2x3

x 6 1

11

The descending segment of the constitutive equation for rubber

concrete under uniaxial compression is shown in Eq. (12), where b
is a constitutive parameter in the descending segment of the curve:

x
bx  12 x

x P 1

12

4.2. Regulation and signicance of constitutive parameters

Experimental results show that both rubber content and particle size have evident and regular effects on the mechanical properties of rubber concrete under uniaxial compression. The uniaxial
compressive constitutive parameters of concrete with low rubber
content are closely related to three parameters, the constitutive
parameter of normal concrete, rubber content and rubber size.
Based on the test results of 25 concrete specimens under uniaxial
compression, the constitutive parameters corresponding to different rubber contents and particle sizes are obtained by the least
squares method and are shown in Table 5.
The relationships among the constitutive parameter a in the
ascending section, constitutive parameter b in the descending section, rubber content and particle size are shown in Fig. 16. The
average value of residual mean square deviation v2 of a in the
ascending section is 1.895  104, with R2 of 0.998. The average
value of residual mean square deviation v2 of b in the ascending
section is 5.181  104, and the average value of R2 is 0.984. From
the values of v2 and R2, the curve ts the experimental results well,
which indicates that the constitutive model is rational and scientic, and parameters are relatively accurate.
The value of constitutive parameter a of RC is larger than A of
normal concrete in the ascending section of the curve under uniaxial compression. The value of a increases with increased rubber
content and decreased rubber particle size. On the contrary, the
value of b is smaller than B. The value of b decreases with increased
rubber content and decreased rubber particle size.
From Eq. (11), the following can be obtained when x = 0:



dy
dr=f rc 
dr=dejx0 E0


dx x0 de=erc x0
f rc =erc
Erc

13


where E0 ddre x0 (N/mm2) is the initial tangent elastic modulus of
rubber concrete and (N/mm2) is the peak secant elastic modulus
of rubber concrete.
In Eq. (13), a = E0/Erc indicates that the ductility of rubber concrete is higher if the difference between E0 and Erc is larger with
a bigger a. Fig. 17(a) also indicates that parameter a increases with
dy/dx. The ductility of rubber concrete is higher if the difference
between the pre-peak tangent elastic modulus and peak secant
elastic modulus is larger.
Fig. 17 illustrates the inuence of constitutive parameters a and
b on constitutive curves. Fig. 17(b) and Eq. (6) indicate that y has a
constant value of y = 1 if b equals zero, and the material is regarded
as an ideal plastic material. On the contrary, if b tends to innity,
y = 0 and the material is considered a completely brittle material.
As a result, the value of b ranges from zero to innity. The value
of b reects the ductility of rubber concrete. Larger values of b
result in more ductile rubber concrete.
From Figs. 16 and 17 and Table 5, if the value of a is bigger and
that of b is smaller, rubber concrete with lower strength has better
deformation capability, material ductility and fracture brittleness,
and vice versa. The constitutive parameters a and b reect the
mechanical performance of rubber concrete and can be considered
performance indices for RC.
4.3. Mathematical expressions of constitutive parameters
From multivariate nonlinear regression of the data in Table 5,
the mathematical expressions of rubber concrete constitutive
parameter a under uniaxial compression on the ascending branch
and constitutive parameter b on the descending branch are shown
in Eqs. (14) and (15) (see Table 6):



0:006p1:0169 d
a A  exp 0:0107 ln d
d  0:1287

14



0:283p0:3322 d
b B  exp 0:0617 ln d 
d 0:0018

15

where p is rubber content (%) and d is rubber particle size (mm).

According to Appendix C from the Chinese design code of
concrete structures (GB50010-2002) [29], the constitutive parameters A and B for natural concrete with density of 22002400 kg/
m3 and strength grade of C20C80 under uniaxial compression
on the ascending branch can be calculated from Eqs. (16) and
(17):

302

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

4.4. Establishment of constitutive models

Based on the above Eqs. (1)(8), (11), (12), (14)(17), the constitutive models of concrete with low rubber content under uniaxial
compression are given as Eqs. (18)(23):

"

r f rc a 

e
e
3  2a 
erc
erc

2


a  2

e
erc

3 #
;

e 6 erc

(a) 4 mm

r f rc 

18

e=erc
b  e=erc  12 e=erc

e P erc



0:006p1:0169 d
a 2:4  0:0125f p  exp 0:0107 ln d
d  0:1287

19

20

0:785

b 0:157f p
 0:905


0:283p0:3322 d
 exp 0:0617 ln d 
d 0:0018

(b) 2 mm

3:2634

f rc f p  exp


0:0734p0:4947 k
d  0:0737

!
d

q

erc 938:0584 158:1626 f rc  106

21

22

23

where frc (MPa) is the uniaxial compressive strength of rubber concrete; erc is the peak strain of rubber concrete; fp (MPa) is the uniaxial compressive strength of normal concrete; d (mm) is the
rubber particle size; p (%) is the rubber content; and k is the sand
rate reduction factor, that is, the ratio of the sand rates before and
after rubber mixture.

(c) 0.535 mm

5. Application and development of uniaxial compression

constitutive models
The constitutive models for concrete with low rubber content
under uniaxial compression established in this paper agree quite
well with the experimental results. The models are applied to the
experimental data of check concrete groups to verify their rationality and applicability. The experimental results are contrasted with
the theoretical ones to improve the constitutive models and allow
further study.

(d) 0.221 mm

5.1. Analysis of constitutive models

(e) 0.173 mm
Fig. 15. Failure patterns of RC with different rubber contents and particle sizes.

A 2:4  0:0125f p
0:795

B 0:157f p

 0:905

16
17

where fp is the axial compressive strength of natural concrete.

The theoretical calculated values of constitutive parameters a
and b via Eqs. (14) and (15) are contrasted to the corresponding
experimental results in Fig. 6. The analytical results and effectiveness of multivariate nonlinear regression are described in Table 7.
As shown in Table 7, the constitutive parameter models from
Eqs. (14) and (15) more accurately reect the change rule of constitutive parameters, with some exceptions. In general, the models
agree quite well with the experimental results.

The two check groups of rubber concrete, one with rubber content of 7% and particle size of 0.864 mm, and the other with rubber
content of 12% and particle size of 0.381 mm, were tested, and
their stressstrain curves under uniaxial compression are shown
in Fig. 18.
According to the experimental data of mechanical properties of
rubber concrete in check groups and the constitutive models established from Eqs. (18)(23), the theoretical constitutive curves of
rubber concrete under uniaxial compression in check groups can
be obtained, as well as theoretical values for axial compressive
strength, peak strain and constitutive parameters. The theoretical
curves, theoretical indices and experimental results are analyzed
comparatively (Fig. 19 and Table 8).
As shown in Table 8, the theoretical values of axial compressive
strength, peak strain and constitutive parameters calculated by the
constitutive model established above are consistent with experimental values, with a minimum deviation of 0.7% and a maximum
of 7.4%. In Fig. 19, the theoretical constitutive curves matched well

303

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

Table 5
Axial compressive strength, peak strain, elastic modulus, sand ratio reduction factor and constitutive parameters a and b of RC.
Specimen

Axial compressive strength

(MPa)

Peak strain /103

Elastic modulus (GPa)

Sand ratio
reduction factor k

Constitutive
parameter a

Constitutive
parameter b

NC
RC-2%-0.173
RC-4%-0.173
RC-6%-0.173
RC-8%-0.173
RC-10%-0.173
RC-2%-0.221
RC-4%-0.221
RC-6%-0.221
RC-8%-0.221
RC-10%-0.221
RC-2%-0.535
RC-4%-0.535
RC-6%-0.535
RC-8%-0.535
RC-10%-0.535
RC-2%-2
RC-4%-2
RC-6%-2
RC-8%-2
RC-10%-2
RC-2%-4
RC-4%-4
RC-6%-4
RC-8%-4
RC-10%-4

43.66
35.97
32.81
30.34
28.66
25.42
37.16
34.34
31.29
26.98
25.86
38.17
36.08
34.97
32.27
29.57
39.09
35.31
34.03
33.55
30.70
39.88
36.35
35.80
34.12
32.68

1.89
2.04
2.02
2.06
2.25
1.91
1.99
1.89
1.92
1.77
1.83
1.94
2.02
1.90
1.89
1.87
1.95
1.83
1.88
1.86
1.80
1.99
1.94
2.01
1.67
1.78

40.8
29.7
28.6
25.9
24.2
23.7
29.9
29.5
27.7
25.6
25.1
30.9
30.6
28.7
27.9
27.0
32.5
31.5
31.0
31.1
27.8
33.5
31.9
31.3
31.0
29.2

1.00
0.98
0.96
0.94
0.92
0.89
0.98
0.96
0.94
0.92
0.89
0.98
0.96
0.94
0.92
0.89
0.98
0.96
0.94
0.92
0.89
0.98
0.96
0.94
0.92
0.89

1.889
1.902
2.093
2.166
2.222
2.026
1.921
1.978
2.038
2.077
2.188
1.840
1.907
1.777
1.923
2.050
1.919
1.835
1.970
2.082
1.954
1.932
1.936
1.959
1.867
2.034

2.143
1.335
1.230
1.164
1.188
0.949
1.424
1.408
1.416
1.263
1.292
1.383
1.355
1.332
1.255
1.056
1.466
1.386
0.996
1.292
1.113
1.692
1.504
1.439
1.145
1.208

Notes: NC represents reference normal concrete. RC-m-n is rubber concrete, where m denotes the rubber content m%, and n is rubber particle sizes in mm.

with the experimental ones, especially for RC with rubber content

of 7%. Generally speaking, the constitutive model for concrete with
low rubber content under uniaxial compression is reliable and has
strong predicting performance.
When rubber content is within 50 kg/m3, the constitutive
model for concrete with low rubber volume under uniaxial compression given in this paper is both rational and practical.

stressstrain curve of RC under uniaxial compression, the constitutive model is expressed as Eqs. (24) and (25):

5.2. Improvement of constitutive models

where r is the uniaxial stress of RC; frc is the peak stress of RC under
uniaxial compression; e is the uniaxial strain of RC; erc is the peak
strain of RC under uniaxial compression; a is the improved constitutive parameter in the ascending section; and b is the improved
constitutive parameter in the descending section.
Based on the experimental curves, constitutive parameters,
axial compressive strength and peak strain for different concrete
strengths, rubber contents, rubber particle sizes and rubber mixture methods are obtained. By multivariate nonlinear regression,
the uniaxial compressive strength of rubber concrete, peak strain
and constitutive parameters a and b are obtained as Eqs. (26)(29):

5.2.1. Establishment of improved constitutive model

The effects of different rubber mixture methods, rubber contents and concrete strength are not fully considered in the above
constitutive models for rubber concrete under uniaxial compression. However, these three factors exert a certain inuence on
the applicability, accuracy and predictive ability of the constitutive
model, so the presented constitutive model is improved as follows.
(1) The method of rubber mixture, which is reected by different sand ratios, has an effect on the mechanical performance
of rubber concrete and can be measured by sand rate reduction factor k.
(2) As the rubber content above is a relative percentage value,
the absolute value of rubber is considered in the new constitutive equation.
(3) Although the performance of RC changes with concrete
strength, only one type of concrete is considered in this
study. Different grades of concrete strength are taken into
consideration to establish a constitutive model applied to
RC with both high and low RC strengths.
The improved constitutive model for rubber concrete under
uniaxial compression is also based on the sectional constitutive
whole curve from the code for design of concrete structures in
China [29]. Based on the seven geometrical features of the

r
f rc

r f rc

e
e
3  2a
erc
erc

2

e=erc
be=erc  12 e=erc


a  2

e
erc

3

x 6 1

24

x P 1

25

a 2:4  0:0125f p  k2:195  1  0:0027qd0:1136

0:785

b 0:157f p

26

 0:905

 exp 0:1633 ln q

0:22293k

1:8171011

q0:0434 d0:9924

d  0:0817
27
0:908

2:212

f rc f p  exp 0:0222 ln d 

0:0054k
q1:088 d
d  0:0175

0:934

erc

0:3365q0:3931 d
ep  exp 0:31088 ln q 
d 0:0441

!
28

!
29

304

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

2.4

2.4

0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

2.2

2.3

Constitutive parameter a

Constitutive parameter a

2.3

2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

2.1

2.0

1.9

2.2

2.1

2.0

1.9

1.8
0

10

1.8

12

4mm

2.4

0.535mm 0.221mm 0.173mm

--

2.4
0.173mm
0.221mm
0.535mm
2mm
4mm

2.0

2%
4%
6%
8%
10%

2.2

Constitutive parameter b

2.2

Constitutive parameter a

2mm

Rubber particle size d

Rubber content p/%

1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0

2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0

0.8

0.8
0

10

12

4mm

Rubber content p/%

2mm

0.535mm 0.221mm 0.173mm

--

Rubber paritcle size d

Fig. 16. Relationships of constitutive parameters of RC with different rubber contents and particle sizes.

1.0

1.0

b=0

a=3.0

0.8

0.8
a=2.222

b=0.949
0.6

0.6

0.4

a=1.889

b=1.504

0.4

a=1.5

0.2

0.2

b=2.143
b

0.0
0.0

0.0
0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Fig. 17. Inuences of constitutive parameters on constitutive curves.

where frc (MPa) is the uniaxial compressive strength of rubber concrete; erc is the peak strain of rubber concrete; q (kg/m3) is the absolute value of rubber content; d (mm) is the rubber particle size; and
k is the sand rate reduction factor, that is, the ratio of the sand rates
before and after rubber mixture.

Eqs. (24)(29) are the improved constitutive models for RC

under uniaxial compression. The theoretical values of constitutive
parameters, axial compressive strength and peak strain are compared with experimental results in Table 9. The improved constitutive models can almost reect the change regulation of those four

305

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

Table 6
Theoretical and experimental values of a and b.
Specimen

Parameter a

RC-2%-0.173
RC-4%-0.173
RC-6%-0.173
RC-8%-0.173
RC-10%-0.173
RC-2%-0.221
RC-4%-0.221
RC-6%-0.221
RC-8%-0.221
RC-10%-0.221
RC-2%-0.535
RC-4%-0.535
RC-6%-0.535
RC-8%-0.535
RC-10%-0.535
RC-2%-2
RC-4%-2
RC-6%-2
RC-8%-2
RC-10%-2
RC-2%-4
RC-4%-4
RC-6%-4
RC-8%-4
RC-10%-4

Parameter b

Experimental value

Theoretical value

Deviation (%)

Experimental value

Theoretical value

Deviation (%)

1.902
2.093
2.166
2.222
2.026
1.921
1.978
2.038
2.077
2.188
1.840
1.907
1.777
1.923
2.050
1.919
1.835
1.970
2.082
1.954
1.932
1.936
1.959
1.867
2.034

1.927
1.919
1.920
1.920
1.926
1.920
1.908
1.914
1.910
1.947
1.906
1.912
1.915
1.919
1.906
1.907
1.907
1.912
1.910
1.910
1.904
1.909
1.912
1.910
1.913

2.2
2.5
1.1
1.3
16.8
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.8
1.4
3.6
1.6
10.9
4.2
0.6
0.5
6.5
0.5
3.6
4.1
0.5
1.6
1.7
8.1
0.5

1.335
1.230
1.164
1.188
0.949
1.424
1.408
1.416
1.263
1.292
1.383
1.355
1.332
1.255
1.056
1.466
1.386
0.996
1.292
1.113
1.692
1.504
1.439
1.145
1.208

1.397
1.286
1.214
1.159
1.115
1.408
1.294
1.219
1.163
1.118
1.462
1.338
1.257
1.196
1.147
1.572
1.435
1.346
1.279
1.226
1.638
1.495
1.402
1.332
1.276

4.6
4.6
4.3
2.4
17.5
1.1
8.1
13.9
7.9
13.5
5.7
1.2
5.6
4.7
8.7
7.2
3.5
35.2
1.0
10.1
3.2
0.6
2.6
16.3
5.6

Notes: RC-m-n is rubber concrete, where m denotes the rubber content m%; and n is rubber particle sizes in mm.

Table 7
Comparative analysis of constitutive parameters.
Constitutive
parameter

Fitting
degree,
R2

Residual
mean
square
deviation,

Average
deviation
(%)

45
Minimum
deviation
(%)

Maximum
deviation
(%)

35

a
b

0.853
0.818

0.002
0.006

3.0
7.6

0.3
0.6

Stress /MPa

16.8
35.2

45

25
20
15

35

Stress /MPa

30

10

Content:7%/Particle size:0.864mm
Content:12%/Particle size:0.381mm

40

Theoretical curve
Experimental value

40

0
0.000

30

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain

25
20

45

15

40

10

35

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain
Fig. 18. Stressstrain curves of RC in check groups.

parameters. Overall, the improved constitutive models agree well

with the experimental results.
5.2.2. Application of improved constitutive model
To verify the improved constitutive models of RC under uniaxial
compression, the constitutive models are applied to the experimental data from the check groups, and these experimental results
are compared with literature and theoretical results.

Stress /MPa

5
0
0.000

Theoretical curve
Experimental value

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.000

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain

Fig. 19. Theoretical and experimental constitutive curves of check groups.

306

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

Table 8
Theoretical and experimental values for check groups.
Specimen

Axial compressive strength, frc

Peak strain, erc

Constitutive parameter, a

Constitutive parameter, b

JRC-7%-0.864
Theoretical value
Experimental value
Deviation

33.53 (MPa)
35.11 (MPa)
4.5%

1.875 (103)
1.79 (103)
4.7%

1.985
1.848
7.4%

1.253
1.272
1.5%

JRC-12%-0.381
Theoretical value
Experimental value
Deviation

27.12 (MPa)
26.81 (MPa)
1.2%

1.757 (103)
1.77 (103)
0.7%

2.094
2.074
1.0%

1.093
1.164
6.1%

Notes: Specimen JRC-m-N refers to RC in check groups, where m denotes the rubber content m% and N is rubber particle size in mm.

Table 9
Regression analysis of a, b, frc and erc.
Analyzed index

Fitting degree, R2

Residual mean square deviation, v2

Average deviation (%)

Minimum deviation (%)

Maximum deviation (%)

0.946
0.89
0.988
0.882

0.008
0.106
5.803
4.54  108

4.8
10.3
7.0
5.8

0.1
0.4
0.2
0.4

25.3
55.2
43.0
47.4

b
frc

erc

45
40

Theoretical curve
Experimental value

Stress /MPa

35
30
25
20
15
10

[17] consisted of one with rubber content of 216 kg/m3 and particle size of 2 mm and another with rubber content of 48 kg/m3 and
particle size of 2.5 mm. Substituting the values of axial compressive strength of concrete, sand rate reduction coefcient, rubber
content and particle size for the four check groups into the
improved constitutive model in this article, values of axial compressive strength of rubber concrete, peak strain and constitutive
parameters are obtained, and the results are shown in Fig. 20
and Table 10.
In Table 10 and Fig. 20, both theoretical and experiment results
of axial compressive strength, peak strain and constitutive

5
0
0.000

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain

Table 10
Comparison between theoretical and experimental values for check groups.
Specimen

Theoretical curve
Experimental value

40
35

Stress /MPa

Constitutive
parameter, a

Constitutive
parameter, b

erc

45

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.000

Axial compressive Peak

strength, frc
strain,

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

Strain

Fig. 20. Comparison between theoretical and experimental constitutive curves.

Two RC check groups, one with rubber content of 29.71 kg/m3

and particle size of 0.864 mm and the other with rubber content
of 50.92 kg/m3 and particle size of 0.381 mm, were designed and
tested in this paper. The two RC check groups from the literature

JRC-29.71-0.864 (This article)

Theoretical
33.42 (MPa)
value
Experimental 35.11 (MPa)
value
Deviation
4.8%

1.939
2.051
(103)
1.848
1.79
(103)
8.3%
11.0%

1.232

JRC-50.92-0.381 (This article)

Theoretical
23.38 (MPa)
value
Experimental 26.81 (MPa)
value
Deviation
12.8%

2.17
1.794
(103)
2.074
1.77
(103)
1.4%
4.6%

1.128

JRC-216-2 [17]
Theoretical
5.89 (MPa)
value
Experimental 5.4 (MPa)
value
Deviation
9.1%

0.977
0.998
(103)
1.109
1.025
(103)
2.6%
11.9%

JRC-48-2.5 [17]
Theoretical
24.78 (MPa)
value
Experimental 22.8 (MPa)
value
Deviation
8.7%

1.85
1.759
(103)
1.837
1.453
(103)
21.1%
0.7%

1.272
3.1%

1.164
3.1%

Notes: Specimen JRC-m-N refers to rubber concrete in check groups, where m is

rubber content in kilogram per cubic meter and N is rubber particle size in mm.

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

Table 11
Results using both original and modied constitutive models.
Specimen

Original constitutive
Modied constitutive
model Eqs. (18)(23) (%) model Eqs. (24)(29) (%)

JRC-29.71-0.864 (This article)

Deviation of frc
4.5
Deviation of erc
4.7
Deviation of a
7.4
Deviation of b
1.5

4.8
8.3
11.0
3.1

JRC-50.92-0.381 (This article)

1.2
Deviation of frc
Deviation of erc
0.7
Deviation of a
1.0
Deviation of b
6.1

12.8
1.4
4.6
3.1

JRC-216-2
Deviation
Deviation
Deviation

[17]
of frc
of erc
of a

404.8
27.4
101.8

9.1
2.6
11.9

JRC-48-2.5 [17]
Deviation of frc
Deviation of erc
Deviation of a

34.1
16.1
16.5

8.7
21.1
0.7

Notes: Specimen JRC-m-N refers to rubber concrete in check groups, where m is

rubber content in kilogram per cubic meter and N is rubber particle size in mm.

parameters coincide with each other in general, with a minimum

deviation of 0.7% and maximum of 21.1%. The deviation of axial
compressive strength ranges from 4.8% to 12.8%, while the peak
strain ranges from 1.4% to 8.3%, with the exception of JRC-48-2.5
(21.1%). The third deviation of constitutive parameters is only
0.7%  4.6%, although the deviation of JRC-216-2 and JRC-29.710.864 is 11.9%. The modied constitutive models have promising
application for forecasting the mechanical performance of rubber
content.
The results of different constitutive models presented in this
paper for RC with low rubber content in the check groups under
uniaxial compression is listed in Table 11. The former prediction
has a deviation of 10.1% on average, while the improved one has
an average deviation of 7.4%. In other words, the modied constitutive models have wider applications and favorable prediction
ability, as well as higher prediction accuracy and more stable
effectiveness.
6. Conclusions
The increase in the awareness of reusing waste rubber and
mechanical-related issues has led to substantial progress in the
utilization of rubber in concrete. This paper has presented the
effects of rubber on properties of concrete. A modied constitutive
model was presented to facilitate the use of design of rubber concrete structures, which can be summarized and concluded as:
(1) Rubber weakens the axial compressive strength of concrete.
The axial compressive strength and elastic modulus of RC
decreases with increased rubber content and decreases rubber particle size.
(2) The compressive strength and elastic modulus of RC reduced
more greatly for the method of inner addition than that of
external addition. For the same sand ratio, the method of
rubber addition has little effect on compressive strength
and elastic modulus of RC.
(3) Rubber mixture can improve the deformability of concrete
so that the ultimate strain of normal concrete increases.
The ultimate strain of RC increases as rubber content
enlarges and particle size dwindles.

307

(4) The effect of rubber on the peak strain of concrete depends

on the combined action of concrete strength and deformation, which is restricted by rubber content, particle size
and the method of rubber addition. The peak strain of RC
can be improved by the method of external addition.
Although the trend of peak strain for rubber concrete with
regard to rubber contents and rubber particle sizes is not
obvious.
(5) With increased rubber content and decreased rubber particle size, the crack stress of RC goes down gradually, but
the crack strain increases steadily, the width, length and
number of cracks decrease, and their distribution disperses
evenly. When the cracks extend to a near-vertical direction,
the RC failure pattern is changed from diagonal shear failure
to columnar compression failure. When the rubber content
is less than 8%, rubber concrete can be used as a structural
material for the design of seismic structures.
(6) With increased rubber content and decreased rubber particle size, the constitutive parameter a in the ascending
branch increases, but the constitutive parameter b declines.
If the value of a is larger and b is smaller and the strength
grade is lower, the deformation ability of rubber concrete
will be higher as the material ductility improves.
(7) The constitutive models for concrete with low rubber content under uniaxial compression are rationalized in this
paper. For the same rubber addition conditions, the constitutive models presented in this article have good prediction
abilities with high accuracy and efcacy. However, if the
additive method is different but the rubber content is less
than 50 kg/m3, these constitutive models for RC under uniaxial compression are still feasible, with good usability and
applicability. The improved constitutive models for RC under
uniaxial compression, including sand rate reduction factor k,
rubber content q, rubber particle size d and concrete
strength fp, have wide application and good predictive
ability.

Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 51278132) and the Foundation of
Guangdong Provincial Department of Transport (Project No.
2012-02-008, 2013-04-006). These foundations are greatly
appreciated.
References
[1] Brown KM, Cummings R, Morzek JR, Terrebonne P. Scrap tire disposal: three
principles for policy of choice. J Nat Resour 2001;41(1):922.
[2] McQuillen JL, Takallou HB, Hicks RG, Esch D. Economic analysis of rubber
modied asphalt mixes. J Transp Eng-ASCE 1998;114(3):25977.
[3] Eldin NN, Senouci AB. Use of scrap tires in road construction. J Constr Eng
Manage-ASCE 1992;118(3):56176.
[4] Siddique R, Naik TR. Properties of concrete containing scrap tire rubber an
overview. Waste Manage 2004;24(6):5639.
[5] Liu F, Chen GX, Li LJ, Dynamic behavior of crumb rubber concrete subjected to
repeated impacts. In: The 2013 World Congress on Advances in Structural
Engineering and Mechanics, 812 September 2013. Jeju, Korea, pp. 24232434.
[6] Segre N, Joekes I. Use of tire rubber particles as addition to cement paste. Cem
Concr Res 2000;30:14215.
[7] Grinys A, Sivilevicius H, Pupeikis D, Ivanauskas E. Fracture of concrete
containing crumb rubber. J Civ Eng Manage 2013;19(3):44755.
[8] Li LJ, Xie WF, Liu F, Guo YC, Deng J. Fire performance of high strength concrete
reinforced with recycled rubber particles. Mag Concr Res 2011;63(3):18795.
[9] Li LJ, Chen ZZ, Xie WF, Liu F. Experimental study of recycled rubber lled high
strength concrete. Mag Concr Res 2009;61(7):54956.
[10] Khaloo AR, Dehestani M, Rahmatabadi P. Mechanical properties of concrete
containing a high volume of tire-rubber particles. Waste Manage
2008;28(12):247282.

308

L. Li et al. / Construction and Building Materials 70 (2014) 291308

[11] Chiu C. Use of ground tire rubber in asphalt pavements: eld trial and
evaluation in Taiwan. Resour, Conserv Recycl 2008;52(3):52232.
[12] Hernndez-Olivares F, Barluenga G, Parga-Landa B, Bollati M, Witoszek B.
Fatigue behaviour of recycled tyre rubber-lled concrete and its implications
in the design of rigid pavements. Constr Build Mater 2007;21(10):191827.
[13] Liu F, Zheng WH, Li LJ, Feng WX, Ning GF. Mechanical and fatigue performance
of rubber concrete. Constr Build Mater 2013;47:7119.
[14] Shen WG, Shan L, Zhang T, Ma HK, Cai Z, Shi H. Investigation on polymerrubber
aggregate modied porous concrete. Constr Build Mater 2013;38:66774.
[15] Liu F, Chen GX, Li LJ, Guo YC. Study of impact performance of rubber reinforced
concrete. Constr Build Mater 2012;36:60416.
[16] Feng WX, Wei YD, Li LJ, Liu F, Chen YQ. Experimental study on constitutive
equation of high strength crumb rubber concrete to uniaxial compression.
New Build Mater 2010;2(2):125 [in Chinese].
[17] Liu F, Pan DP. Study of constitutive equation and performance of rubber lled
concrete. Adv Sci Lett 2011;4(3):11227.
[18] Ganjian E, Khorami M, Maghsoudi AA. Scrap-tyre-rubber replacement for
aggregate and ller in concrete. Constr Build Mater 2009;23(5):182836.
[19] Standard for test method of mechanical properties on ordinary concrete, GB/
T50081-2002 [in Chinese].
[20] Hernandez-Olivares F, Barluenga G, Bollati M, Witoszek B. Static and dynamic
behavior of recycled tyre rubber-lled concrete. Cem Concr Res 2002;32(10):
158796.

[21] Ling T. Prediction of density and compressive strength for rubberized concrete
blocks. Constr Build Mater 2011;25(11):43036.
[22] Son KS, Hajirasouliha I, Pilakoutas K. Strength and deformability of waste tyre
rubber-lled
reinforced
concrete
columns.
Constr
Build
Mater
2011;25:21826.
[23] Zhou M, Yang XM, Song K. Experimental study of elastic modulus of crumb
rubber plastic concrete. Adv Mater Res 2010;150151:117683.
[24] Yang LH, Zhu H, Li YR. Theoretical analysis of the effect of crumb rubber on the
sectional ductility of reinforced concrete beam. J Basic Sci Eng
2010;18(6):9339 [in Chinese].
[25] Topcu LB, Avcular N. Analysis of rubberized concrete as a composite material.
Cem Concr Res 1997;27(8):11359.
[26] Taha MMR, El-Dieb AS, Abd El-Wahab MA, Abdel-Hameed ME. Mechanical,
fracture, and microstructural investigations of rubber concrete. J Mater Civ Eng
2008;20(10):6409.
[27] Skripkiunas G, Grinys A, Miskinis K. Damping properties of concrete with
rubber waste additives. Mater Sci/Medziagotyra 2009;15(3):26672.
[28] Zheng L, Huo XS, Yuan Y. Strength, modulus of elasticity, and brittleness index
of rubberized concrete. J Mater Civ Eng 2008;20(11):6929.
[29] Code for design of concrete structure, GB50010-2002 [in Chinese].