Skip to main content

Materials Characterization for Fragmentation

  • Chapter
Book cover Adhesion Problems in the Recycling of Concrete

Part of the book series: Nato Conference Series ((MASC,volume 4))

  • 328 Accesses

Abstract

Demolition and fragmentation of concrete is currently being done using several techniques. Concrete has been fragmented using explosives, using hydraulic and pneumatic hammers, using a ball and a crane of using a hydraulic crane with ripping teeth and shovel. Depending on the method used in breaking concrete, concrete is subjected to different rates of straining and different modes of fracture. For the purpose of materials characterization, it may be convenient to differentiate various techniques of demolition according to the strain rate employed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. H. A. Kormeling, A. J. Zielinski and H. W. Reinhardt, “Experiments on Concrete Under Single and Repeated Impact Loading,” Report 5–80–3, Stevin Laboratory, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  2. D. E. Grady and M. E. Kipp, “Continuum Modeling of Explosive Fracture in Oil Shale,” Int. J. of Rock Mech., Minerals, Sci. § Geomech., Vol. 17, 147–157 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. C. H. Heard, “Effect of Large Charges in Experimental Deformation of Yule Marble,” J. of Geol., Vol. 7, No. 2, 163.

    Google Scholar 

  4. D. L. Birkemer, “A Possible Fracture Criterion for Dynamic Tensile Strength of Rock,” Proc. of 12th Symp. on Rock Mech. (Edited by G. B. Clark), 573 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. E. Grady and M. E. Kipp, “The Micromechanics of Impact Fracture of Rock,” Int. J. of Rock Mech., Minerals, Sci, and Geomech., Vol. 16, 293–302 (1979).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. L. B. Freund, “Crack Propagation in an Elastic Solid Subjected to Stress Wave Loading,” J. of Mech., Phys. and Solids, Vol. 21, 47–61 (1973).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. A. Kumar, “Effect of Stress Rate and Temperature on the Strength of Basalt and Granite,” Geophysics, Vol. 33, No. 3, 501–510 (June 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  8. V. K. Der, D. C. Holloway and T. Kobayashi, “Techniques for Dynamic Fracture Toughness Measurements,” Report, Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. W. Dally and W. L. Fourney, “Fracture Control in Construction Blasting,” University of Maryland Report to NSF (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  10. M. Wecharatana and S. P. Shah, “Double Torsion Tests for Studying Slow Crack Growth of Portland Cement Mortar,” Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 10, 833–844 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. G. Velazco, K. Visalvanich and S. P. Shah, “Fracture Behavior and Analysis of Fiber Reinforced Concrete Beams,” Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 10, 41–51 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. K. Visalvanich and S. P. Shah, “Evaluation of Fracture Techniques in Cementitious Composites,” Proc. on Fracture in Concrete, ASCE Annual Convention, Florida (October 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  13. M. Wecharatana and S. P. Shah, “Resistance to Crack Growth in Portland Cement Composites,” Proc. on Fracture in Concrete, ASCE Annual Convention, Florida (October 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  14. S. P. Shah, “Whither Fracture Mechanics in Concrete Design,” Proc. of the Engineering Foundation Conference on Concrete Production and Use, New Hampshire, 175–185 (June 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  15. K. Visalvanich and A. E. Naaman, “Compliance Measured Fracture Toughness of Mortar and Fiber Reinforced Concrete,” to be published in the Proc. of the ASTM Conf. on Fracture Mechanics Methods for Ceramics, Rocks and Concrete, Chicago (June 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  16. W. Suaris, U. Gokoz, O. Youngquist and S.,P.Shah, “Analysis of Inertial Effects in the Instrumented Impact Testing of Fiber Reinforced Concrete,” Progress Report, U. S. Army Research Office (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  17. U. N. Gokoz and A. E. Naaman, “Effect of Strain-Rate on the Pull-Out Behavior of Fibers in Mortar,” Progress Report, submitted to U. S. Army Research Office (Jan. 1981).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1981 Plenum Press, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shah, S.P. (1981). Materials Characterization for Fragmentation. In: Kreijger, P.C. (eds) Adhesion Problems in the Recycling of Concrete. Nato Conference Series, vol 4. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-8312-7_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-8312-7_23

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4615-8314-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-8312-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics