Experimental study reveals enhanced mechanical strength in manufactured sand concrete with two percent PET granules, indicating a viable recycling alternative to river sand.
Food and beverage packaging frequently uses polyethylene terephthalate (PET), and most of these products wind up in landfills. The primary problem with plastic waste is that it can harm the environment and is not biodegradable. Toxic gasses like dioxins, which can be detrimental to human health, can be released during incineration as a treatment approach. Recycling PET and using it in the building sector is one possible way to address this issue. The building industry is in dire need of inexpensive materials that strengthen concrete structures. This experiment aims to determine whether waste PET bottles may be used to partially substitute fine aggregate in concrete, hence reducing the concrete’s self-weight. A control mix was prepared and compared to concrete that contained 1%, 2%, and 3% PET bottle particles as fine aggregate. After seven and twenty-eight days, the cube, cylinder, and beam specimens were cast, cured, and their strength was assessed. Test findings for flexural strength, split tensile strength, and compression were contrasted with control samples. Compression, split tensile, and flexural strength increased by 2% of PET granules. The increasing need for fine aggregate can be satisfied by using PET bottle granule substitutes. The quantity of river sand needed for concrete is decreased when PET fine aggregates and manufactured sand (M-sand) are used in place of traditional river sand and plastic granules have also been shown to be more economical.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Selvarajan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: