eﬀect of bio-medical waste on compressive strength of

QUEST RESEARCH JOURNAL, VOL. 18, NO. 1, PP. 29–35, JAN–JUN, 2020 29

Effect of Bio-Medical Waste on Compressive Strength of Concrete Cylinders

Ghulam Mustafa Khanzada 1,*, Bashir Ahmed Memon, Mahboob Oad, M. F. Aijaz Khanzada, Aqib M.LashariDepartment of Civil Engineering, QUEST, Nawabshah.*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate the compressive strength of concrete made with partial replacement of cement withbiomedical waste ash. Biomedical waste was collected from the medical facility centers of Nawabshah city. Afterincineration, it was grinded into fine powder. The cement was then replaced by using ash in the dosage of 1%, 3%,5%, 7% and 9% by weight of the cement. Total 288 standard size cylinders were cast with 1:2:4 mix and 0.45 w/cratio in six batches. In each batch, 48 cylinders were prepared. Equal number of cylinders was cured for 7, 14, 28and 90 days. Out of six batches, one batch of the cylinders was cast with all-conventional aggregates to comparethe results of the proposed specimens. The test results of weight, density and compressive strength show that theoptimum dosage of the biomedical waste ash is 3%. The weight of the proposed concrete specimens was lowerby 2% than that of the conventional concrete specimens. The density was observed in good agreement with thestandard values. The reduction in compressive strength with 3% biomedical waste ash was recorded to be 26.36%.

Keywords—Bio-Medical waste, concrete, cube crushing strength, cement replacement.

F

1 Introduction

Concrete, being most widely used constructionmaterial around the world, consumes cement and

aggregate in large quantum. The production of theseingredients requires running of cement industry andquarrying of the aggregates for more time to meetthe demand. Both of the processes give rise to se-rious environmental issues. On the other hand, thewaste generated from healthcare facilities adds up tothe problems to environment and waste management.Healthcare centers generate bio-medical waste. Thequantum of the waste varies from place to place. Thiswaste needs proper disposal management as it containscertain percentage of hazardous materials. Althoughmany countries have developed laws and regulationsto deal with the waste, but the amount of wastegenerated and the implementation of regulations variesfrom place to place [1]. Most of this waste is non-hazardous and, if properly treated, can be convertedinto a reusable product [2].It is reported by Ahmed et. al. that about 250,000tons of bio-medical waste is generated in Pakistan peryear with varying rate of 0.34 to 8.87 kg/bed/day atdifferent places. Out of this generated waste, about

ISSN: 2523-0379 (Online), ISSN: 1605-8607 (Print)

72% is disposed of in landfills, however, about 28% bio-medical waste is left unattended. Based on the studypublished in [2], the authors also report that about10% of the waste is hazardous and adds up to theenvironmental issues. The focus of the research wasthe public attitude and the awareness regarding thewaste [3].Pakistan is one of the most populous countries of theworld with a higher growth rate. Healthcare centersare generating waste on daily basis, but the dataregarding its management and proper disposal is notavailable even in literature [4]. The scarcity of thelandfills to dump the waste is another issue in a devel-oping country like Pakistan. Therefore, it is normallydumped outside city centers near or at the agriculturallands. This, in turn, gives rise to another issue ofcontamination of the land due to chemicals and toxiccompounds available in the waste. Therefore, it isessential that the disposal should be treated at parnational and international standards [5][6]. Anotherresearch [7] projects the effect of bio-medical waste inPune India and emphasizes the proper management ofthe waste to ensure healthy environment.The waste is incinerated to produce fly ash [8]. Thisfly ash may be used in fresh concrete as partial re-


placement of cement. Although the quantum of thewaste varies from place to place, yet the action willnot only lessen the management issue of bio-medicalwaste but also provide an alternative of material tobe used as partial replacement of cement. The efficacyof plastic waste [9][10], polythene waste [11] and de-molished concrete [12] has been actively studied forfresh concrete by different researchers. Bio-Medicalwaste has also been studied for producing fly ash tobe used in concrete by various techniques [13]. Dosageof fly ash produced from Bio-Medical waste is decidedby considering various factors such as fineness, water-cement ratio, flow-ability, etc. Workability of concreteis an important factor among them. It is reportedin literature that the workability of concrete reducesdue to the induction of the fly ash [14]. Bala et. al.[15] used fly ash produced from bio-medical wastein dosage from 10% - 40% in the increment of 10%.From the test results of 75 model beams, the authorsconcluded that the ash from bio-medical waste is adurable material and has potential for using it in freshconcrete. A similar conclusion is also made by Enliva[16]. The authors also argue that the physical andchemical properties of the waste fall within the rangesspecified by American codes for waste foundry sand.Water absorption of the resulting concrete reduces by25% - 54% for 90-day cured samples.While studying the shape of the bio-medical waste byX-Ray diffraction and electron micrographs, Memonet. al.[17] observed that the texture of the ash parti-cles is highly irregular. The strength of the concretesamples grew for 3-day curing, but was observed tobe smaller for 7- and 28-day cured samples. They alsoobserved that comparable results may be observed ifthe ash is used up to 2% by weight of cement. Consid-ering the scatter in results reported by the literatureand need of alternative of concrete ingredients, thisresearch work aims at investigating the compressivestrength. Therefore, this research work aims at inves-tigating the compressive strength of concrete cylindersmade with partial replacement of cement with fly ashfrom bio-medical waste collected from Nawabshah,Sindh, Pakistan.

2 Material TestingThe bio-medical waste used in this research work wascollected from the healthcare centers of Nawabshah,Sindh, Pakistan. The waste mainly included, plasticbags, syringes, needles, medicine boxes, pathologicalwaste, etc. Plastic contents were separated from thiswaste and washed with clean water. The waste isthen burnt in incineration plant. The waste along with

Fig. 1: Waste after incineration

Fig. 2: Bio-medical waste ash

incinerated material is shown in Figure 1. This mate-rial is then grinded to fine powder (Figure 2). Aftergrinding, the material is sieved to ensure removal ofhumps and fineness of the ash. Six batches of concretecylinders of standard size were prepared using ordinaryPortland cement, crush and hill sand in 1:2:4 mix. 0.45water-cement ratio was used in all batches. In eachbatch, 48 samples were cast. Out of six batches, onebatch of concrete cylinders is cast without bio-medicalwaste and is treated as control specimens. The resultsof these specimens were used to compare the resultsof proposed concrete cylinders. In rest of five batchesof the cylinders, bio-medical waste ash was used inthe dosage of 1%, 3%, 5%, 7% and 9% by weight ofcement respectively. After casting and compacting thesamples in accordance with ASTM provisions, curingwas done for 3-, 7-, 28- and 90-days. The water used forthe purpose was of city water supply with pH value 6.9.Twelve specimens from each batch were used for eachof the curing age. The detail of the cylinders is givenin Table 1. After the elapse of the curing time, thespecimens were taken out of water and left for 24-hoursto air dry (Figure 3). The weight of all the specimenswas then recorded and is given in Table 2-7. The dry


Batch BMW ash(%)

Number of cylinders for curing period of7-Days 14-Days 28-Days 90-Days

B1 0 12 12 12 12B2 1 12 12 12 12B3 3 12 12 12 12B4 5 12 12 12 12B5 7 12 12 12 12B6 9 12 12 12 12

TABLE 1: Details of the cylinders

# Weight (Kg)7-Day 14-Day 28-Day 90-Day

1 13.43 13.07 13.11 13.502 13.51 13.16 13.20 13.493 13.52 13.24 13.40 13.494 13.41 13.30 13.41 13.485 13.51 13.25 13.40 13.4906 13.51 13.16 13.51 13.477 13.52 13.24 13.50 13.468 13.44 13.22 13.40 13.479 13.51 13.22 13.41 13.4910 13.47 13.32 13.42 13.4811 13.50 13.31 13.38 13.4712 13.53 13.09 13.46 13.47

TABLE 2: Weight of cylinders (BMW ash = 0%)


1 13.20 13.05 13.14 13.462 13.12 13.07 13.04 13.493 13.19 13.01 13.20 13.494 13.17 13.08 13.20 13.485 13.15 13.08 13.12 13.466 13.20 13.02 13.08 13.477 13.21 13.24 13.17 13.498 13.14 13.25 13.17 13.489 13.23 13.20 13.15 13.4810 13.20 13.20 13.15 13.4911 13.23 13.09 13.09 13.4912 13.27 13.16 13.11 13.47

TABLE 3: Weight of cylinders (BMW ash=1%)

density of the specimens cured at the age of 28-daysand 90-days was also evaluated and is listed in Table8. The compressive strength of the cylinders was thendetermined by crushing the cylinders in a universaltesting machine (Figure 4) as per the standard provi-sions of ASTM for the purpose. The load was graduallyincreased with increment of 0.5 KN till failure. Table9-14 give details of the compressive strength of all thespecimens.

3 Results & DiscussionThe test results of density of concrete specimens withall percentage replacement of cement with biomedical


1 13.18 13.10 13.14 13.482 13.13 13.21 13.06 13.483 13.24 13.11 13.09 13.494 13.19 13.11 13.07 13.515 13.15 13.20 13.05 13.486 13.20 13.11 13.05 13.477 13.31 13.13 13.07 13.498 13.20 13.13 13.10 13.499 13.20 13.20 13.02 13.5210 13.20 13.20 13.10 13.5111 13.26 13.21 13.10 13.4712 13.24 13.08 13.09 13.48



1 13.21 13.00 13.03 13.512 13.17 13.20 13.05 13.523 13.23 13.28 13.03 13.484 13.18 13.25 13.01 13.495 13.20 13.26 13.01 13.496 13.20 13.25 13.03 13.497 13.20 13.25 13.03 13.478 13.40 13.25 13.10 13.469 13.26 13.14 13.11 13.4810 13.28 13.32 13.02 13.4811 13.20 13.20 13.02 13.4712 13.19 13.17 13.00 13.49



1 13.11 13.08 13.01 13.482 13.21 13.11 13.02 13.473 13.24 13.11 13.04 13.494 13.30 13.05 13.02 13.465 13.30 13.05 13.02 13.516 13.30 13.12 13.03 13.497 13.25 13.11 13.01 13.528 13.24 13.06 13.01 13.519 13.25 13.06 13.01 13.4810 13.25 13.06 13.01 13.4811 13.30 13.11 13.02 13.4912 13.40 13.20 13.02 13.49




1 13.15 13.22 12.99 13.462 13.19 13.04 13.07 13.513 13.32 13.18 13.05 13.514 13.38 13.01 13.01 13.525 13.36 13.01 13.02 13.486 13.36 13.10 13.01 13.477 13.34 13.10 13.01 13.478 13.20 13.10 13.01 13.499 13.40 13.20 13.03 13.4910 13.40 13.02 13.11 13.4811 13.25 13.02 13.12 13.4712 13.30 13.12 13.05 13.47


Fig. 3: Cylindrical specimens

Fig. 4: Compression test

# % BMW Ash Dry Density at Curing age of28-Days 90-Days

1 0 147.19 151.262 1 147.08 151.263 3 146.74 151.264 5 146.07 151.265 7 145.73 151.266 9 146.07 151.26

TABLE 8: Dry Density of batch B1

# Compressive Strength (psi)7-Day 14-Day 28-Day 90-Day

1 2724.55 3261.79 3837.40 4174.262 2751.35 3191.57 3930.50 4130.453 2585.16 3016.02 3590.50 4078.394 2803.64 3222.26 3840.60 4058.975 2656.98 3280.80 3850.70 4122.576 2838.02 3342.56 3941.70 4136.597 2785.60 3398.03 3951.20 4201.548 2809.09 3264.30 3890.70 4132.589 2791.07 3196.41 3860.40 3956.2410 2772.33 3245.47 3910.20 4025.8111 2774.84 3263.06 3880.90 4063.7212 2867.11 3362.92 3960.10 4162.78

TABLE 9: Compressive strength of batch B1


1 1681.64 2013.23 2368.50 3152.422 1759.31 2040.80 2513.30 3056.813 1865.81 2176.78 2591.40 2956.144 1788.57 2055.63 2450.10 3011.215 1697.54 2096.09 2460.20 3105.646 1786.03 2103.55 2480.60 3112.727 1784.07 2176.32 2530.60 3057.418 1812.80 2106.56 2510.80 3022.119 1836.64 2103.37 2540.30 2987.3610 1815.54 2125.38 2560.70 2874.1211 1860.22 2187.51 2601.70 2833.4912 1839.54 2157.65 2540.80 3005.72


waste were found in accordance to the standard valueof the density of conventional concrete. Minor vari-ation with a maximum of 1% (7% biomedical wasteash) and minimum of 0.08% (1% biomedical wasteash) is observed for results of the samples cured for 28-days. Whereas the density of concrete remained sameirrespective of dosage of the biomedical waste for 90-days cured samples. To compare the average weight


1 2009.73 2406.01 2830.60 2913.262 1997.03 2316.55 2852.90 2984.443 2047.25 2388.46 2843.40 2848.124 2051.74 2358.09 2810.60 2941.255 1973.68 2437.06 2860.40 2983.716 2052.50 2417.39 2850.70 3001.427 1995.50 2434.23 2830.50 2865.288 2072.43 2408.27 2870.40 2869.219 2075.37 2376.77 2870.50 2906.1110 2028.38 2374.55 2860.90 2908.7611 2052.26 2413.35 2870.30 2891.2612 2063.83 2420.73 2850.60 2883.65




1 2004.97 2400.32 2823.90 3052.052 1894.41 2197.52 2706.30 3061.363 1976.11 2305.46 2744.60 3057.544 2029.84 2332.92 2780.60 2952.455 1959.95 2420.11 2840.50 3012.586 2023.63 2383.39 2810.60 3045.327 2023.56 2468.46 2870.30 3022.758 2065.21 2399.88 2860.40 2936.599 2017.46 2310.45 2790.40 3012.4510 2027.88 2373.97 2860.20 2955.3111 1995.42 2346.50 2790.80 2941.0712 2056.67 2412.32 2840.70 2968.74



1 1776.35 2126.62 2501.90 2872.022 1739.08 2017.33 2484.40 2550.453 1808.28 2109.66 2511.50 2661.264 1818.28 2089.78 2490.80 2645.275 1732.11 2138.78 2510.30 2631.776 1811.81 2133.91 2516.40 2591.647 1783.93 2176.14 2530.40 2583.108 1827.82 2124.01 2531.60 2605.389 1830.93 2096.83 2532.40 2594.6810 1758.53 2058.65 2480.30 2517.6911 1809.09 2127.39 2530.20 2610.8212 1835.41 2152.81 2535.10 2619.57


of all 12 samples, results are plotted in Figure 5. Thesub-plots from (a) to (d) show the same tendency for7-, 14-, 28- and 90-days. It may be observed from thesefigures that the maximum reduction in the weight upto 2.19% is observed in 7-day cured samples with 1%biomedical waste ash. The reduction in weight for alldosages of biomedical waste for 14-day cured sampleswas less than 1%. For 28-day cured samples, the


1 1802.12 2157.47 2538.20 2810.572 1682.31 1951.48 2403.30 2948.083 1773.79 2069.42 2463.60 3079.114 1781.35 2047.33 2440.20 2863.475 1687.26 2083.40 2445.30 2855.616 1807.49 2128.82 2510.40 2906.437 1713.64 2090.40 2430.70 2854.798 1769.04 2055.72 2450.20 2841.119 1757.40 2012.62 2430.70 2901.3510 1744.78 2042.55 2460.90 2862.4511 1762.62 2072.74 2465.20 2816.4412 1781.11 2089.12 2460.10 2822.66


maximum reduction of 2.73% was observed in sampleswith 7% biomedical waste ash. Whereas, 90-day curedsamples observed minor variation in comparison toconventional concrete samples cured for 90-days. Thecompressive strength of all batches is plotted in Figure6 for comparison. The subplots in this figure show theresults for curing ages similar to figure 5. It may beobserved that the trend of strength in all the specimensfor particular a curing age is almost same, except thepeak values. The average compressive strength of allbatches of the specimens is given in Table 15. Itmay be observed from Figure 6 and Table 15 that theconcrete specimens observed reduction in compressivestrength for all dosages of biomedical waste ash at allcuring ages. The maximum reduction in compressivestrength was recorded to be approximately 37% inthe group of the curing. Since the 28-day curing isconsidered as standard curing, therefore, comparisonof strength of the proposed specimens with the com-pressive strength of conventional concrete cured for 28-days shows that 7-day cured samples had a strengthreduction in the range of 47% - 54%. Whereas, 14-daycured samples had strength reduction in the range of38% - 46%. The strength reduction for 28-day curedsamples of proposed concrete is recorded in the rangeof 26% - 37%. 90-day cured samples showed improve-ment in strength by observing reduction in the rangeof 22% - 25%.From the results of laboratory investigation presentedand discussed in this paper, it is evident that thebiomedical waste ash has a potential to be used asan alternative of cement in fresh concrete to producegreen concrete. Early day curing, i.e. 7-days, resultedin a quick response but it was normalized at 28-day curing. Whereas, stabilization of the reactions ofthe ash with water is recorded at 90-day (elongated)curing. The weight of the specimens due to biomedicalwaste ash showed a fluctuating response. The weightreduced for certain percentages. However, for higherpercentages, least reduction or same weight as thatof conventional concrete specimens is observed. Dueto the induction of the ash, compressive strength isrecorded to be smaller compared to the conventionalconcrete. It is attributed to the bonding strength ofthe ash which is less than that of the cement. But thereduction in strength is about 26% which shows thatash may be used as cement replacement initially in lowload areas.It is further observed that increase in the dosage ofbiomedical waste ash results in strength reduction.The results reveal that 3% dosage of the biomedicalwaste is optimum with decrease in strength equal to26%. Elongated curing time also does not show any


# Batch BMW Ash (%) Average Compressive Strength (psi)7-Days 14-Days 28-Days 90-Days

1 B1 0 2763.31 3253.77 3870.41 4103.662 B2 1 1793.97 2111.90 2512.42 3014.603 B3 3 2034.98 2395.96 2850.15 2916.374 B4 5 2006.26 2362.61 2809.94 3001.525 B5 7 1794.30 2112.66 2512.94 2623.646 B6 9 1755.24 2066.75 2458.23 2880.17

TABLE 15: Average compressive strength for all dosages of biomedical waste ash

remarkable improvement in the strength reduction.

4 ConclusionFrom the laboratory investigation of the green con-crete made by using biomedical waste ash as partialreplacement of cement, it is observed that the wastemay be used in new concrete with optimum dosage of3%. At the mentioned dosage level and the standardcuring period, compressive strength reduction is mini-mum (26%) than other curing ages and dosages of thewaste. Therefore, it is concluded that biomedical wasteash has a good potential to be used in fresh concrete aspartial replacement of cement leading to the reducedmanagement of the waste and alternative material ofcement.

References[1] Ali M., Wang W. P., Chaudhry N. and Geng Y., “Hospital

Waste Management in Developing Countries: A Mini Re-view.” Waste Management and Research, 2017.

[2] Fang L., Han Q. L., Zhang R., Zeng T. T., Liu G. S. andZhou J. H., “Characteristics and Treatment Methods ofMedical Waste Incinerator Fly Ash: A Review”, Processes(MDPI), Vol. 6, No. 173, pp. 72–78, 2018.

[3] Ahmed T., Komal T., Mustafa M. and Anjum S., “HospitalWaste Management Awareness, Attitude and Practices inTwin Cities of Pakistan”, International Journal of Pharm.Bio. Sci., Vol. 6 No. 2, 2015.

[4] Ali M., Wang W. P. and Chaudhry N, “Assessment ofHospital Waste Management in a Major City of Pakistan”,International Journal of Environment and Waste Manage-ment, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 97–104, 2017.

[5] Ali S., Mahmood U., Malik A. U., Aziz F., Roshaan BinNaghman and Ahmed I., “Current Hospital Waste Man-agement Practices in Pakistan: Case Study and CurativeMeasures”, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Vol. 1,No. 3, pp.125–9, 2015.

[6] Azni I., Katayon S., Ratnasamy M., Noor M. M. and JohariM., “Stabilization and Utilization of Hospital Waste asRoad and Asphalt Aggregate”, Journal of Matter CyclesWaste Management, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 33–37, 2005.

[7] Acharya A., Gokhale V. A. and Joshi D., “Impact of Bio-Medical Waste on City Environment: Case Study of PuneIndia”, IOSR Journal of Applied Chemistry, Vol. 6, No. 6,pp. 21–27, 2014.

[8] Tailor J. V. and Shastri P. M., “Review on Concrete fromBio-Medical Waste”, International Journal of Advance En-gineering and Research Development, National Conferenceon Nano Technology, 2017.

[9] Sangal G. S., “Study the Effect of Plastic Waste on Strengthof Concrete”, International Journal of Advance Researchand Development, Vol. 3, No. 7, pp.36–39, 2018.

[10] Karthikeyan M., Balamurali K., Barath K. V., Manoj PS. and Janarthanan R., “Utilization of Waste Plastic inConcrete”, International Research Journal of Engineeringand Technology, Vol. 6, No. 4, 2019.

[11] Kumar A., Srivastava V. and Kumar R., “Effect of WastePolythene on Compressive Strength of Concrete”, Journalof Academia and Industrial Research, Vol. 3, No. 3, p.152,2014.

[12] Oad M., Buller A. H., Memon B. A. and Memon N.A., “Flexural Stress-Strain Behavior of RC Beams madewith Partial Replacement of Coarse Aggregates with CoarseAggregates from Old Concrete”, Engineering, Technology& Applied Science Research, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 3048–3053,2018.

[13] Singh A. K., Srivastav V. and Kumar U., “Bio-MedicalWaste Ash in Concrete: An Experimental Investigation”,International Journal of Innovative Research in Science,Engineering and Technology, Vol. 5, No. 6, 2016.

[14] Kumar U., Srivastava V. and Singh A. K., “Suitability ofBio-medical Waste Ash in Concrete”, International Journalof Engineering and Technical Research, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2016.

[15] Bala S. and Musa H. A., “Flexural Strength of ConcreteBeams using Hospital Waste Ash as Cement Replacement”,International Journal of Scientific and Research Publica-tions, Vol. 7, No. 11, 2017.

[16] Enliwa A. U., “Hospital Ash Waste-Ordinary PortlandCement Concrete”, Science Research, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp.72–78, 2016.

[17] Memon S. A., Shaikh M. A. and Paracha M. A., “Utiliza-tion of Hospital Waste Ash in Concrete”, Mehran UniversityRe-search Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 32,No. 1, 2013.


(a) 7-day curing

(b) 14-day curing

(c) 28-day curing

(d) 90-day curing

Fig. 5: Average weight versus dosage of biomedicalwaste ash

(a) 7-day curing

(b) 14-day curing

(c) 28-day curing

(d) 90-day curing

Fig. 6: Compressive strength of all batches

eﬀect of bio-medical waste on compressive strength of

Documents