Construction and Building Materials 64 (2014) 293300

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

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

Mechanical recycling of GFRP waste as short-ber reinforcements

in microconcrete
D. Garca a,, I. Vegas a, I. Cacho b
a
TECNALIA Research & Innovation, Parque Tecnolgico de Bizkaia, Ed. 700, 48160 Derio, Spain
b
GAIKER Technology Centre, Parque Tecnolgico de Bizkaia, Ed. 202, 48170 Zamudio, Spain

h i g h l i g h t s

 Mechanical recycling of the GFRP waste for being used as short reinforcing ber.
 Treatment effects in the properties of the GFRP recycled ber reinforced concrete.
 Analysis of the internal structure of the GFRP recycled ber reinforced concrete.
 Verication of the admissibility of the shrinkage and alkali-aggregate reaction.

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

Article history: The suitability of mechanically recycled glass ber reinforced plastics (rGFRP) from different sources as
Received 11 October 2012 short bers is considered for precast microconcrete components. Shredding and screening processes were
Received in revised form 10 February 2014 successively adjusted to obtain a high-ber content product with ber lengths optimized for at micro-
Accepted 26 February 2014
concrete elements.
Available online 4 May 2014
The physicalmechanical properties of the concrete with rGFRP were characterized by compression
and bending tests as well as shrinkage stability and alkali-aggregate reaction. Furthermore, the interac-
Keywords:
tion between the rGFRP and the cementitious matrix was observed and characterized by scanning elec-
Concrete
FRP
tron microscopy. It was found that when the rGFRP material obtained from an optimized milling process
Fibers was used to prepare the microconcrete specimens (40  40  160 mm3), the exural and compressive
Recycling strength at 28 days increased by 16% and 22%, respectively, in comparison to the control specimens.
Glass 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Resin

1. Introduction GFRP presents optimal behavior in terms of corrosion and wear,

Approximately 90% of Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (FRP) commer-
cialized on a global scale is composed of glass ber and a thermoset
resin (e.g. epoxy or polyester) [1], which means that Glass Fiber
Reinforced Polymers (GFRP) are the most widely used composites
on the market. These bers are used in the construction of hulls
in the shipbuilding industry; components in the aeronautical
industry; coach work in the automobile industry; and envelopes
and facades in buildings with irregular curved forms, in the con-
struction sector, among others. The expansion of wind turbines,
the (50 m long) blades of which are largely manufactured with
GFRP, means that this composite is also a leading material in the
wind energy sector [2].
Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 946 430 850; fax: +34 946 073 349.
E-mail address: david.garcia@tecnalia.com (D. Garca).
as well as acceptable thermal, acoustic, and electrical insulation
properties. Prominent among its disadvantages are its difculty
to be recycled and its poor ame-retardant properties [3].
Thermoset polymers constitute around 70% (by weight) of the
resins used as a matrix in FRP composites. In the case of GFRP,
practically all elements on the market use a thermoset plastic as
a matrix. These polymers present better mechanical properties,
when compared with those of a thermoplastic nature, and greater
resistance to temperature, the penetration of gases, and against
impacts.
Global production of FRP has experienced annual rises of 6%
since 1994. In 2009, a reduction in global production took place
due to the economic crisis, but the upward trend recovered in
2010, when global production rose above 10 million tons. After
the decline in the volume of glass ber reinforced plastics (GRP)
manufactured last year, a return to weak growth is expected for
the European market in 2013 [4].

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.02.068
0950-0618/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
294 D. Garca et al. / Construction and Building Materials 64 (2014) 293300
The recovery of thermoplastic materials on the market place is
practically resolved from a technological point of view. However,
thermoset composites present a three-dimensional intertwined
structure that complicates the recovery of the initial materials
through conventional methods, as the reaction is not reversible.
Unlike thermoplastics, thermoset composites are degraded once
the critical temperature is reached and are unable to return to
the state of the initial (melted) composite. Therefore, at present,
the most frequently used management option for composite GFRP
waste is controlled disposal at the end of its useful life [5].
Various actions are underway to investigate alternatives for the
recycling of composites [6]. Through chemical recycling (pyrolysis
or metanoesis), it is possible to decompose the resins into chains of
simple monomers and even obtain new virgin resins [7]. These
products could be used in the manufacture of polymeric concretes
(prefabricated, cladding, articial stone, etc.), impermeable layers
and even new FRP components. At present, they are considered
embryonic technologies in need of further technological develop-
ment. In fact, it is necessary to validate the extrapolation of the lab-
oratory results on an industrial scale, before these innovative
products may be considered real alternative treatments. Recent
studies [8] have reported on the feasibility of reusing glass ber
waste from the thermolysis of polyester berglass (PFG) to produce
a glassceramic material. Organic matter is separated by thermol-
ysis as oil and gas phases and the remaining glass ber solid phase
is converted into wollastonite and plagioclase based glassceramic
materials with possible building applications.
Moreover, the energetic valuation or exploitation of the energy
contained in these waste products constitutes an alternative, even
though they may present technical limitations due to the condi-
tions of the treatment plants and/or the specic characteristics of
the waste.
Recycling by physico-mechanical means [9] has the objective of
generating alternative raw materials through stages of mechanical
treatment and separation; in other words, shredding, milling,
screening, sieving, agglomeration, densication, and similar pro-
cesses. In accordance with the stages of the physicalmechanical
process and the type of initial material, the recycled products pres-
ent more or less brous morphologies. These materials may be
used as additives, llers or reinforcements in the formulations of
new products [10]. The technologies and equipment associated
with the type of treatment may be shears, hammer mills, vibrating
screens, sieves, air separation systems, cyclones, etc. In the case of
glass-ber reinforced composites, this system of treatment gener-
ates recyclates of low value, such that, on some occasions, the cost
of recycling can exceed the value of the recycled product. In gen-
eral, the product is constituted by a mixture of bers, resins and
llers present in the formulation, which condition their subse-
quent application. This material may be used as a ller in the man-
ufacture of SMC (Sheet Moulding Compound), BMC (Bulk Moulding
Compound), traditional pre-fabricated concrete and polymer con-
crete, acoustic and/or thermal panels, piping, kerbstones, oor
tiles, and similar products. Research in this area should aim to
extract a high percentage of ber concentrate in comparison with
the mixture of llers (resin + ber + ller).
In the case that their reutilization to obtain new thermoset
matrices is not appropriate, the possibility exists of using the inert
granular material for the partial substitution of aggregates in cem-
entious mixtures. A potential market for these types of bers could
be in the prefabrication of non-structural concrete elements. Con-
crete reinforced with commercial ber is used in multiple applica-
tions such as the construction of tunnels, concrete, self-compacting
concrete, lightweight concrete and roof panels [11,12].
The rst investigations of Asokan [12] covered the inuence of
milled GFRP waste on concrete, partially substituting ne aggre-
gates by the composite recyclate at concentrations of 5%, 15%,
30% and 50% by weight. As the concentration of milled GFRP waste
increased, the higher the demand for water was noted and conse-
quently a drop in compressive strength of 21% and 27% for substi-
tutions of 5% and 15%, respectively.
Subsequent research [13] centered on improving the mechani-
cal properties of concrete with GFRP powder waste using
superplastiers. The addition of 2% superplastier to concretes
with 515% of milled GFRP waste considerably reduced the water
cement ratio, yielding an average compressive strength of 1012%,
which was higher than the compressive strength of the reference
concrete (without GFRP waste).
Correia [2] conducted experiments to ascertain the technical
feasibility of incorporating the ne waste generated during the
production of GFRP waste into concrete mixtures. For all substitu-
tion rates of sand by GFRP waste, the concrete compressive
strength exhibited a noticeable loss (19.4% for a 5% substitution).
Tittarelli detected a strong reduction in compressive strength
(up to about 25%) in microconcretes and self-compacting concretes
where GFRP powder was used in partial substitution of either ne
aggregate or ller material [14].
Ogi (2005)conducted a test campaign on compression and
bending of carbon FRP reinforced concrete specimens, to study
the effect of size and content of shredded CFRP pieces. He found
that the addition of shredded CFRP waste of an appropriate size
to concrete improved bending strength and increased fracture
energy.
Additionally, the earlier studies recommended that research
continue into the effect of recycled GFRP on long-term aspects of
durability and potential alkalisilica reactions.
The present investigation explores different routes for GFRP
recyclates that aim to obtain optimized ber concentrate for use
in the preparation of micro-concrete. Likewise, this study analyzes
the inuence of GFRP recyclates on the mechanical properties and
the durability of microconcrete through the analysis of aggregate-
alkali reactivity and shrinkage.
2. Materials
2.1. GFRP offcuts
Samples of offcuts were collected from the production of thermoset composites
reinforced with glass ber from four sources: streamlined fairings on trains, electri-
cal panelboards, hulls for pleasure boats and pultruded GFRP proles. The GFRP off-
cuts were provided by Spanish industries.
2.2. Cement and natural aggregate
Microconcrete mixtures were prepared with cement type CEM I 52.5N. In a rst
phase standard silica sand (CEN) was used. In the nal phases, natural limestone
sand with maximum grain size of 2 mm was used to apply the materials used in
the context.
2.3. Additives
A water reducing admixture, Conplast MR285, and a superplastier Structuro
351 manufactured by Fosroc, were used to improve the workability of various com-
positions, following the recommended compositions and instructions for use.
3. Methodology
3.1. Characterization of the GFRP offcuts
The composition of the offcuts was determined with the follow-
ing technique:
 Organic material percentage by calcination and chemical
attack. Four replicas of each sample were calcinated in a
mufe furnace, in the absence of oxygen, at 550 C for suf-
cient time to eliminate all the organic material (thermoset
 D. Garca et al. / Construction and Building Materials 64 (2014) 293300
resin, decorative nishes), leaving the inorganic material of
the sample remaining in the crucible (ash + glass
ber + llers). The ash from the calcination of the organic
matter may be considered practically insignicant. The
content in organic matter of each sample was calculated
by their differences in weight. Additionally, a second set
of calcinations were performed, in order to subsequently
perform a chemical attack, with chlorohydric acid on the
samples or to wash them in distilled water, depending on
the nature of the inorganic ller, on the resulting inorganic
waste, with the purpose of determining the percentage of
glass ber by weight (standard UNE EN ISO 1172). Infrared
spectroscopy veried the nature of the polymeric matrix of
the four sources of offcuts, as well as their types of inor-
ganic llers.
3.2. Mechanical recyclates
Different technologies were individually tested and evaluated
(shredding, milling, screening) on each of the four available
sources of GFRP composites. The operations of fragmentation and
concentration that were tested had as objective the conditioning
of the material and the adaption of the characteristics for their
joint exploitation (glass ber + polymer) as ller in microconcrete
formulations, in partial substitution of the natural aggregates, in
line with the work of other authors [12]. Following the rst results
where a reduction in the mechanical properties of microconcretes
with GFRP waste powder and glass ber uff was evident, the
milling equipment was adjusted, in an attempt to increase the con-
tent of short glass ber that was recovered, including screening
and rejection of granular and/or dusty content.
A critical ber length exists to increase the strength and rigidity
of the compound material. This critical length lc depends on the
diameter d of the ber, traction strength rf and shear strength of
the bermatrix union sc [15].
rf d
lc
sc
Fibers with l  lc (normally l > 15 lc) were classied as continu-
ous; and bers of a shorter length were classied as discontinuous
or short bers. Matrix deformation was apparent around the dis-
continuous bers of a signicantly shorter length than lc, in such
a way that there was hardly any transference of effort and the
effect of the ber reinforcement was insignicant. Taking this
observation into account, the operations of reduction in size and
screening should attempt to achieve a material that as far as
possible complies with this specication. It is estimated that the
most appropriate length of the glass ber as a reinforcement in
the manufacture of microconcrete uctuates around 6 and 12 mm.
3.3. Compositions and mixtures
A broad test campaign of mixtures was developed and tested at
an early age (7 days), in order to conduct the experimental study of
microconcretes with recycled GFRP bers. The mixtures had an
approximate volume of 1 l. They were prepared in a Controls mixer
in accordance with standard UNE EN 196-1. Percentages of substi-
tution of sand by GFRP recyclate were initially set between 0% and
20% by weight. However, percentages of over 10% were quickly dis-
missed due to the low workability of the resulting microconcretes.
In the rst mixtures, a need for chemical admixtures was appar-
ent to improve workability and reduce the water content of the
mixture. After a general evaluation of the four sources of GFRP
offcuts, attention centerd on the recyclate from train fairings trea-
ted in a hammer mill with 5 mm screen, selecting the fraction
retained by the 5.6 mm sieve opening for the mixtures. The mixing
295
procedure, except for slight variations at the start of the study, was
established as follows:
 Mixture of cement and sand at a low speed (1 min).
 Addition of GFRP recylate and mixture at a low speed
(1 min).
 Incorporation of 70% of the total water and the superplasti-
er, mixed at low speed (1 min).
 Incorporation of remaining water and plastier, mixing at
low speed (1 min).
 Rest after removing with a spatula the bottom and the sides
of the recipient of the mixture (1 min).
 Mixing at a rapid speed for 2 min.
3.4. Characterization of microconcretes
Workability was immediately determined in the fresh state for
all the compositions, using the shaking table and the test proce-
dure contained in EN 1015-3: 2000/A1:2005/A2:2007.
Three prismatic test specimens of 40  40  160 mm3 were
manufactured with each dosage. All specimens were demoul-
ded 24 h after casting and placed in a moist room (20 C).
Physicalmechanical behavior tests (compressive strength and
exural strength at the age of 7 days and shrinkage according to
ASTM C596-09) and durability tests (alkalisilica-reaction (ASR)
according to ASTM C1260-07) were performed on the hardened
microconcrete.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Characteristics of the initial material
Table 1 shows the characteristics of the different samples of
waste composite that constitute the raw material from which the
GFRP recyclate is obtained.
The structure and arrangement of the glass ber was observed
after calcination. The GFRP from electric panelboards yielded a
mat of short, intertwined threads of glass ber with a high content
of calcium carbonate as ller. The GFRP from the train fairing pre-
sented inorganic ller mixed with the glass ber and included a
surface gel coating. The structure of the glass ber is a chopped
strand mat. In the pultruded proles of GFRP, a glass ber structure
of three layers (sandwich type) was observed. The two exterior lay-
ers are chopped strand mats with long bers randomly oriented.
The interior layer is composed of long, thicker bers in a longitudi-
nal alignment in the direction of the prole. The pieces from the
leisure boat hulls had a sandwich structure of ve layers of glass
ber and a surface gel coating. The glass ber was ordered in knit
fabrics in the core layers of the structure and woven mats of short
threads (3040 mm) on the external layers (see Fig. 1).
The morphology of the inorganic waste obtained after the calci-
nation of the samples was analyzed with an 10 binocular magni-
fying glass to obtain greater detail of the glass ber structure. The
images obtained are shown in Fig. 2. Threads of glass ber were
recorded of variable widths between 0.3 and 0.9 mm in the mat
of threads, between 1.5 and 2.0 mm in the bidirectional weave,
and almost 7.0 mm in the case of the unidirectional mat.
4.2. Optimization of the recycling process
The initial objective was the conditioning of the material for its
exploitation with the GRFP recyclate as ller in microconcrete for-
mulations [2,13,14]. As no improvement in the properties of the
microconcretes was obtained, an attempt to recover increased
amounts of short glass ber was made.
296 D. Garca et al. / Construction and Building Materials 64 (2014) 293300

Table 1
Composition and properties of the GFRP sample waste.

Samples Electric panelboard Train fairing Pultruded proles Leisure boat hull
Density (g/cm3) 1.78 1.45 1.96 1.68
Organic matter 33.72% 50.63% 26.24% 68.89%
Inorganic ller 45.23% 18.96% 6.89% 0.61%
Glass ber 21.05% 30.41% 66.87% 30.5%
Glass ber A mat of short intertwined Chopped strand mat Chopped strand mats and unidirectional Knit fabrics and and woven
arrangement threads mat mats
Type of ller Calcium carbonate Aluminium Calcium carbonate No ller
hydroxide

Fig. 1. Shredding and milling processes of the GFRP ber: (a) offcuts of GFRP components, (b) two-shaft shredder, (c) hammer mill and (d) Fluff GFRP.

Fig. 2. Width of the glass bers threads: mat of short bers (left) and bidirectional pattern (right).

As a rst step in the conditioning process, large-scale shredding
of each of the four sources of GFRP waste was performed to reduce
it in size and convert it to suitable compositions for the milling
equipment. To do so, a two-shaft shredder was used. Having com-
pleted the primary shredding, milling of a certain amount of each
of the samples was completed in a specic mill. From a visual
inspection of the resulting samples, it was observed that the milled
material tended to form uff, giving rise to intertwined and
mixed glass bers with part of the polymer.
Discrete bers in the content of the milled material were mea-
sured using a laboratory system that consisted of a magnifying
glass and an image analyzer, with the purpose of establishing a
 D. Garca et al. / Construction and Building Materials 64 (2014) 293300
reference for the length of the bers contained in the milled
material.
In no case was the minimum desirable length of 6 mm reached.
In a general way, it may be said that the maximum ber length
reached 45 mm. Therefore, it may be concluded that this milling
conguration was not appropriate for recycling GFRP waste as
short ber reinforcement in concrete, given that the milling system
tended to reduce the length of the ber excessively.
Another milling technology was tested on a pilot scale, involv-
ing a hammer mill with different screens, in order to achieve
greater ber lengths of the milled material. This mill reduces the
granulometry of a material by impacts against the walls of the
milling chamber. The four sources of GFRP waste were milled by
sieving two different granulometries: 10 and 5 mm. Through this
process, the milled material also tended to form aggregates of glass
ber in the form of glass ber uff. Each one of the resulting
samples of 10 and 5 mm were screened to 1 mm to remove aggre-
gates (llers, short bers and polymers) and to try to concentrate
the ber.
The fraction of concentrated glass ber was considered of inter-
est, while the material sized below 1 mm was rejected for the pres-
ent investigation. After a preliminary assessment of the resulting
products, the screened material with a mesh size of 20 mm was
dismissed, given that in some cases too many large bers were pro-
duced in the form of splinters. This tendency increased in the sam-
ple of GFRP waste from the GFRP pultruded prole.
After a new evaluation of various formulations of microconcrete
incorporating these fractions as ller, it was concluded that the
best results were obtained for composite waste from train fairings.
The formulations of the microconcrete, specimens and nal proto-
types were therefore obtained from that source. Likewise, it was
concluded that the smaller the presence of polymer/composite
particles in the fraction recovered by mechanical treatment, or
the more concentrated the glass ber in that fraction, the better
the performance of the resulting microconcrete.
The optimum route for mechanical processing of the GFRP
waste from train fairings is described below:
 Primary shredding.
 Milling of the shredded material in a hammer mill with a
5 mm screen.
 Sieving of the milled material through a mesh size of
5.6 mm; the fraction retained by the sieve was used, while
the fraction that passed through the sieve was rejected.
These experimental steps for mechanical treatment in the spe-
cic case of the GFRP waste recovered a concentrated glass ber
that represented 18% by weight of the waste. The remaining 82%
Fig. 3. Reduction in microconcrete workability as a function of GFRP content.
297
was rejected for the purposes of the investigation, as it was princi-
pally formed of short bers and thermoset composite/resin waste.
4.3. Design and characterization of microconcrete with optimized ber
4.3.1. Fresh-state properties
Fig. 3 illustrates the behavior of the microconcrete in the fresh
state, in which a reduction in its workability may be observed, as
the content of recycled GFRP is increased, in a similar way to the
use of commercial bers (glass, polypropylene, etc.). On the one
hand, this is because of the irregular geometry of the conglomerate
of bers, splinters, granular ller and dusty waste. On the other,
this material presents a higher specic surface which creates
greater demand for water in the mixture (up to 35% more demand
for water with respect to the reference specimen).
The effect of a high percentage of GFRP waste in microconcrete
may be qualitatively observed in microconcretes that have insuf-
cient water, lack of cohesion, and agglomerates of ber that tend to
become exposed on the free surfaces during the compacting
process.
4.3.2. Mechanical properties
In the rst exploratory tests, a substitution of a percentage of
standard silica sand was made for the product recovered from
GFRP after grinding in a two-shaft shredder. The compositions of
the microconcretes are presented in Table 2.
Fig. 4 illustrates the relative exural and compressive strength
at 7 days of curing of the mixtures prepared with 0%, 5% and 10%
of sand substituted for recycled GFRP. A reduction in strength is
observed as the percentage of GFRP recyclate is increased.
In a second approach, the product recovered from GFRP after
grinding in a two-shaft shredder was separated in two fractions
by screening with a 1 mm opening sieve. The amount of recycled
GFRP was kept a 5% of the SFA. Also chemical admixtures (super-
plastizier and water reducing agent; quantities expressed as
admixture/cement ratio) were added to the microconcrete formu-
lations to reduce the loss of workability. The compositions of these
microconcretes are presented in Table 3.
Normalized compressive strength values of the microconcretes
with the sieved rGFRP are presented in Fig. 5. It can be observed
that the reduction of mechanical properties at 28 days is higher
in the microconcres with the shortest ber fraction. Microconcrete
with bers from GFRP elements of train fairings shows similar
compressive strength.
The optimized mechanical recycling described in Section 4.2
was applied on the material from the train faring. Quarried lime-
stone sand with maximum grain size of 2 mm was used as ne
aggregate in the manufacture of microconcretes. Six prismatic
samples for each dossication were produced, demoulded after
24 h and stored in a climatic chamber at 20 C and 100%RH. The
compositions and average strength values with respective stan-
dard deviations at 28 days are also included in Table 4.
The optimized mechanical process yielded improvements in
mechanical exural and compressive strengths of up to 16% and
22%, respectively, for the microconcrete with 1% of rGFRP in com-
parison with a reference microconcrete. These improvements are
reduced in the microconcretes with 2% of rGFRP. Considering this
trend and the results of preliminary studies, it seems that higher
ber percentages decrease the mechanical properties of microcon-
cretes. A reduction in the workability of the samples with better
mechanical properties was observed due to the greater demand
for water in the mixture by the recycled GFRP ber and the restric-
tions imposed by the bers.
The relation between the workability values, strength and GFRP
ber content obtained through optimized route processing is rep-
resented in Fig. 6.
298 D. Garca et al. / Construction and Building Materials 64 (2014) 293300

Table 2
Compositions of the microconcretes with two-shaft shredder grinded GFRP.

Source of rGFRP Cement (kg/m3) SFA (kg/m3) rGRP w/c ratio

3
(kg/m ) (%)
501 1503 0 0.5
Train fairing 501 1427 75.1 5 0.55
501 1352 150.3 10 0.6
Electric panel board 501 1427 75.1 5 0.55
501 1352 150.3 10 0.6
Pultruded proles 501 1427 75.1 5 0.55
501 1352 150.3 10 0.6
Leisure boat hull 501 1427 75.1 5 0.55
501 1352 150.3 10 0.6

Fig. 5. Normalized exural strength of microconcretes with mechanically recycled

GFRP fractions at 28 days.

200 model manufactured by FEI) was used. The samples were

Fig. 4. Reduction in exural and compressive strength at 7 days in accordance with
the GFRP ber content.
4.3.3. Study of the microstructure
Scanning electron microscopy was used to analyse the micro-
structure of microconcretes that contained GFRP recycled ber.
To do so, an Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope (Quanta
inspected without any covers, at low-vacuum (60 Pa), with a retro-
dispersed electron detector and an accelerating voltage of 20 kV.
Figs. 79 show details of the surface fractures of the microcon-
cretes with commercial polypropylene (PP) and rGFRP.
Fig. 7 shows a detail of the reference microconcrete microstruc-
ture with commercial PP bers. The organic material of the bers is
highlighted in black. It may be seen how the bers have introduced
themselves half-way into the matrix and are evenly dispersed.
Nevertheless, there are important gaps between the bers and
matrix, which diminish their efciency. Gaps may also be observed
where the bers have been extracted in the fracture zone. The
matrix is very compact. A little gel may be observed adhering to
the ber. Mechanical adherence is low (gaps) and there was no
chemical adherence (see Fig. 10).
Fig. 8 shows the microstructure of microconcrete with glass
ber recovered from train fairings in the rst procedure of
mechanical recycling. A bundle of glass bers (in grey) with
remains of resin and places where the matrix does not penetrate
may be observed. The bers present most of their length free from

Table 3
Compositions of the microconcretes with two-shaft shredder grinded and sieved GFRP.

rGRP source Sieving (mm) Cement (kg/m3) SFA (kg/m3) rGRP w/c ratio SuperP./c ratio WRA/c ratio
(kg/m3) (%)
501 1503 0 0 0.5 1.0
Train fairing <1 501 1427 75 5 0.5 1.0 0.8
>1 501 1427 75 5 0.5 1.0 0.8
Electric panel board <1 501 1427 75 5 0.5 1.0 0.8
>1 501 1427 75 5 0.5 1.0 0.8
Pultruded proles <1 501 1427 75 5 0.5 1.0 0.8
>1 501 1427 75 5 0.5 1.0 0.8
Leisure boat hull <1 501 1427 75 5 0.5 1.0 0.8
>1 501 1427 75 5 0.5 1.0 0.8
 D. Garca et al. / Construction and Building Materials 64 (2014) 293300 299

Table 4
Compositions and mechanical properties of the microconcretes with hammer mill grinded and sieved GFRP.

Cement (kg/m3) SFA (kg/m3) rGRP w/c ratio SP/c ratio WRA/c ratio Strength (N/mm2)
3
(kg/m ) (%) Flexural Compressive
361 1703 0 0 0.5 1.0 0.8 8.91 0.23 50.28 1.78
361 1687 17 1 0.5 1.0 0.8 10.32 0.88 61.43 9.75
361 1653 34 2 0.5 1.0 0.8 9.20 0.13 52.68 1.19

Fig. 6. Relation between the workability values, strength and GFRP ber content.

Fig. 8. Microconcrete with glass ber from train fairing after two-shaft shredder
and sieving.

Fig. 7. Reference dosage with commercial polypropylene (without rGFRP).

resin and llers. In addition to the glass bers, organic bers of

greater thickness (in black) may be seen, probably originally from
the matted strands with the function of maintaining their geomet-
ric stability. The bers are seen to be correctly connected to the
inorganic matrix although with remains of the organic matrix.
Fig. 9 shows the microstructure of microconcrete with glass
ber recovered from a train fairing, following the optimized proce-
dure of mechanical recycling. As well as the glass ber, remains of
organic ber (in dark black) may be observed and abundant
remains of resin around the bers. The free bundles of recovered
glass ber are covered by the cement paste and the gaps between
both materials are minimal. Slight signs of oxidation on the surface
of some bers are evident, which would imply chemical adherence
between bers and cement matrix.
The commercial bers of PP develop no chemical adherence to
the cement paste and their mechanical adherence is reduced due
to the gaps that appear between their diameter and the matrix.
Fig. 9. Microconcrete with glass ber from train fairing after hammer mill and
sieving.
This linked to their low traction strength means that they are not
valid for increasing microconcrete bending strength.
It is possible to release some of the glass ber contained in GFRP
waste through mechanical processes, although their length
remains covered in resin in some sections. After milling and
sieving, the product is on the whole composed of glass ber and
remains of polymeric resin. In addition, there are remains of
organic bers (PP), the function of which gives geometric stability
during the weaving process.
The greater part of the bers recovered from GFRP consists of
groupings of various dozens of glass bers connected by resin.
300 D. Garca et al. / Construction and Building Materials 64 (2014) 293300
Fig. 10. Relation between the shrinkage values and strength and ber content.
The cement paste can penetrate between them and surrounds
them adequately without the presence of gaps.
Even though these are E glass bers, no deterioration was
appreciated due to the alkaline environment characteristic of
cement microconcretes. At some points, a slight surface oxidation
of the glass bers may be seen after 28 days, which would origi-
nate a chemical adherence of bers and the inorganic matrix. The
remains of the resin and llers of the GFRP are easily observable
and produce microconcretes with a more heterogeneous and dis-
continuous structure.
4.3.4. Shrinkage
Shortening due to shrinkage of three microconcretes with GFRP
waste from train fairings (substituted percentages of 5% and 10%)
and electrical panelboards (5%) were compared with the standard
microconcrete cement CEM I 52.5N and limestone aggregate
(02 mm) up until 28 days after manufacture, when the shrinkage
appeared to stabilize.
Shortening by shrinkage presents similar patterns for all the
samples. The variations can be caused by the different water
absorption ratios of the recycled GFRP. Neither cracks nor super-
cial damage were evident on any of the specimens at the age of
28 days. Analyzing the results, it was observed that the three com-
positions with the GFRP waste under consideration showed similar
behavior, with even less shrinkage than the reference microcon-
crete, which is a positive result.
4.3.5. Fiberalkali reactivity
Standard glass bers when in contact with cement are altered
by alkali reactions due to the presence of portlandite. Even alkali
resistant bers treated with zirconium oxide present similar degra-
dation phenomenon [16]. Three microconcretes with rGFRP waste
from train fairings (substituted percentages of 5% and 10%) and
electrical panelboards (5%) were compared with a standard cement
microconcrete CEM I 52.5N and natural limestone aggregate
(02 mm). The general picture of the values obtained at 28 days
revealed that the bers from rGFRP did not signicantly affect
the expansion caused by the aggregate-alkali reactivity, very much
below the limits established for aggregate use (0.04%). This is along
the same lines as various other referenced works [17,18], which
conclude that contents of below 20% of recycled glass over total
aggregate weight caused no expansive reaction at all.
5. Conclusions
An experimental campaign has been conducted to determine
the technical viability of incorporating waste offcuts generated
during the production of GFRP in concrete mixtures. From the pres-
ent study, the following conclusions may be reached:
 The selection of methods that involve shredding and
screening are decisive, in order to obtain GFRP recyclate
that may be used in concrete as a short ber. In general, a
recovered ber that includes spherical particles, dust or
splinters of great size negatively affects the mechanical
properties of the microconcrete.
 Optimized mechanical recycling yields improvements in
mechanical compressive and bending strength of up to
22% and 16%, respectively, in comparison with microcon-
crete without bers.
 No negative effects of GFRP ber recyclate are evident in
shrinkage and beralkali reactivity in concrete.
 On the basis of these results, it is worth examining the
incorporation of larger percentages of optimized GFRP
recyclate in the production of microconcrete.
Acknowledgements
The present study was funded by the Basque regional Govern-
ment Under research project COMPOECO (contract number: 7/
12/TK/2009/15) and FIAC (IG-2012/0000254).
References
[1] ACMA (American Composites Manufacturers Association). Market overview
http://www.acmanet.org/the-industry/market-overview. Accessed on October
2013.
[2] Correia JR, Almeida NM, Figueira JR. Recycling of FRP composites: reusing ne
GFRP waste in concrete mixtures. J Cleaner Prod 2011;19:174553.
[3] Mayer RM. Design with reinforced plastics: a guide for engineers and
designers. Ed. Springer; 1993. p. 97111.
[4] Jahn B, Witten E. Composites Market Report 2013. Market developments,
trends, challenges and opportunities. AVK Federation of Reinforced
Composites, 2013.
[5] Martnez E, Jimnez E, Blanco E, Sanz F. LCA sensitivity analysis of a multi-
megawatt wind turbine. Appl Energy 2010;87:2293303.
[6] Pimenta S, Pinho ST. Recycling carbon bre reinforced polymers for structural
applications: technology review and market outlook. Waste Manage (Oxford)
2011;31:37892.
[7] Cunliffe AM, Jones N, Williams PT. Recycling of bre-reinforced polymeric
waste by pyrolysis: thermo-gravimetric and bench-scale investigations. J Anal
Appl Pyrolysis 2003;70:31538.
[8] Lopez FA, Martn MI, Alguacil FJ, Rincn JM, Centenoc TA, Romero M.
Thermolysis of breglass polyester composite and reutilisation of the glass
bre residue to obtain a glassceramic material. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis
2012;93:10411.
[9] Pickering SJ. Recycling technologies for thermoset composite materials-
current status. Compos A 2006;37:120615.
[10] Palmer J, Ghita OR, Savage L, Evans KE. Successful closed-loop recycling of
thermoset composites. Compos A 2009;40:4908.
[11] Ogi K, Shinoda T, Mizui M. Strength in concrete reinforced with recycled CFRP
pieces. Compos A 2005;36:893902.
[12] Asokan P, Osmani M, Price ADF. Assessing the recycling potential of glass bre
reinforced plastic waste in concrete and cement composites. J Cleaner Prod
2009;17:8219.
[13] Asokan P, Osmani M, Price ADF. Improvement of the mechanical properties of
glass bre reinforced plastic waste powder lled concrete. Constr Build Mater
2010;24:44860.
[14] Tittarelli F, Moriconi G. Use of GRP industrial by-products in cement based
composites. Cem Concr Compos 2010;32:21925.
[15] Callister, William D. Introduccin a la Ciencia e Ingeniera de los Materiales. 1
Edicin, Barcelona, Espaa, Editorial Revert, 1997. p. 540.
[16] Nourredine A. Inuence of curing conditions on durability of alkali-resistant
glass bres in cement matrix. Bull Mater Sci 2011;34(4):77583.
[17] Mller U, Rbner K. The microstructure of concrete made with municipal
waste incinerator bottom ash as an aggregate component. Cem Concr Res
2006;36:143443.
[18] Saccani A, Bignozzi MC. ASR expansion behavior of recycled glass ne
aggregates in concrete. Cem Concr Res 2010;40:5316.