https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/infrastructure/pavements/pccp/03047/02.cfm

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000888460700107X

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0008884675900897

Please read these papers.

Hi Maryam, I assume you meant waste glass as an aggregate replacement ? otherwise it should be glass powder?

The alkali-silica reaction (ASR) is a reaction between alkali from cement and amorphous silica from the aggregates in concrete. Formation of ASR can result in deterioration of concrete in long-term (10 years or more) if an external moisture source is available to concrete members. Therefore, controlling of ASR is more important for concrete structures such as dams, bridges, concrete pavements and concrete water pipes and tanks, where an external source of moisture is available to the concrete member.

In order to control ASR, there is a consensus between technical peoples that cement should have the total equivalent alkali content of 0.6% (less than 2.8 kg/m3 eq alkali in the mix), or less and concrete aggregates should not be reactive. In some cases where non-reactive aggregates are not available, supplementary cementitious materials SCMs (slag, fly ash and silica fume) can be added to the mix to control ASR.

Alkali content of cement is determined by chemical testing of cement (ASTM C114 in the US, EN197-1 in Europe, and AS 2350.2 in Australia). There are two international test methods available for testing the reactivity of aggregates, ASTM C1260 for mortar and ASTM C1293 for concrete (AS 1141.60.1 and AS 1141.60.2 in Australia).

However, it is critical to consider the ASR tests just measure the reactivity of aggregates and not the performance of your mix.

As you mentioned, you are using glass waste materials as aggregates. Waste glass materials are made of silica and are renowned for being reactive. Therefore, you don’t need to examine the reactivity of your aggregates. Instead, you need to adjust the mix-design to have 30% or more fly ash, or 50% or more slag or 8% or more silica fume. 

In case, you are using glass powder, it can be considered similar to silica fume and it is not expected that the introduced glass powder (silica powder) boosts the ASR in the concrete mix.

Have a look on the following two:

ASTM C1260 - 14: Standard Test Method for Potential Alkali Reactivity of Aggregates (Mortar-Bar Method)

ASTM C1567 - 13: Standard Test Method for Determining the Potential Alkali-Silica Reactivity of Combinations of Cementitious Materials and Aggregate (Accelerated Mortar-Bar Method)

Progress of alkali-silica reaction (ASR) in mortars can be measured by given already accelerated methods (ASTM C1260 and ASTM C1567), but their results do not always well correlate with the results obtained using long-term method, eg. ASTM C227. This can happen when use in mortar supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs).

I would recommend you also RILEM recommendations. Recently they was published in aggregate form: http://www.springer.com/us/book/9789401772518

Dear Rajkamal Kumar, thank you for the great papers and also the great website. They were really helpful.

Dear Mr Mohammadi,

First of all, many thanks for you comprehensive and useful answer.

In my experiment, I am using waste glass powder as cement replacement. I am doing a comparative study of waste glass powder and nano-Silica usage in self-compacting mortar. I also used both nano-Silica and glass powder  in one mix design to investigate the effect of them on properties of the self-compacting mortar. I know that glass contains reactive silica which makes it more vulnerable to alkali-Silica reaction and in this test, I used glass powders to mitigate this reaction.

In the given methods (ASTM C1260 and ASTM C1567), the expansion of mortar due to reactivity of aggregates is investigated. However, I am using glass powders which were passed through sieve #200. So you think that there is no need to investigate the ASR in this case? 

regards,

Dear A. B. M Amrul Kaish,

Thank you for the great reference.

Dear Mr Czapik,

Many thanks for the valuable book.

You are welcome Maryam, It is expected that the distribution of (fine) silica particles such as glass powder in the mix decreases the chance of reaction between alkali in cement and silica in aggregates. Even a better ASR performance for mixes with glass powder is expected, as glass powder can potentially mitigate the ASR reaction with a similar mechanism that fly ash does.

However, having glass powder in the size passing #200 sieve (size of 75 micrometer or less) alters the binder physical characteristics. It is important to know the size and distribution of glass powder you are adding to mix. There will be a substantial difference between adding particles in the size of 1-10 micrometer with particles in the size range of 50-100 micrometer. I suggest you to chart PSD for your glass powder. As you know, cement particles are mostly distributed in the range of 1 to 100 micrometer. Adding glass powder would alter the physical structure and fineness of the binder. Even the introduction of inert materials such as stone powder, limestone or other minor minerals which are not chemically reactive can change properties of the binder. You need to be careful about adding powder with size ranging 50 to 100 micrometer as it may change the workability and setting times of concrete as well as increasing the number of the coarse pore (large size pores >50 micrometer) in the binder matrix which possibly result in higher early age drying shrinkage.

I trust that this will help.

Dear Mr Mohammadi,

I am extremely grateful for your help. I will surely determine the particle-size distribution of the glass powders. Just one more question: Do you think that it is fruitful to run MIP test because of the large capillary pores you mentioned? In addition, I also take SEM photos of my samples at 28 days of curing.

The large capillary pores would appear if coarse fine-size particles ranging 50-100 micrometer added to the system. However, as you haven't generated and compared the PSD charts of the base case (cement) and the alternated binder (the combination of glass powder and cement), the expectation for the change in capillary pore size is not clear at this stage. MIP and other types of permeability testing may need to be considered but not at this stage.

One other factor which is critical for the shrinkage and other properties is the method you are going to introduce the powder. Glass powder has specific gravity similar to Slag in the range of 2.5-2.8 much lower than cement 3.15. Substituting cement with glass power by mass increases the volume of paste in the concrete matrix. An alternative method is by keeping the total paste volume constant.

Analysis of SEM images are useful, but it needs a high level of mineralogy and chemical knowledge.

Good luck with your project.

Many thanks dear James:) 

I agree with Przemysław Czapik