One of the most significant ecological and social issues facing all nations today is the issue of waste disposal [1]. Concrete and other building and demolition trash in India are disposed of abroad rather than through professional recycling [2]. Recycling may be done in various ways. Owing to this crucial problem, some building waste materials, such as leftover concrete aggregates, can be recycled several times and used for new projects [3].

Cement, aggregates, water, and admixtures are among the elements used in the production of concrete; aggregates make up the majority of the ingredients. Waste glass has a great deal of potential for use in the concrete building industry. Raw materials, including sand, soda ash, limestone, and rubble, were used to make glass containers [4]. Good-quality sand supplies are running low, particularly in India, as the demand for sand rises in the contemporary developing globe. Consequently, the lack of natural resources like sand will be made up for by sawdust, which is regarded as a waste product [5].

Sawdust and cow dung are waste materials frequently utilized in the concrete technology industry [6]. In general, sawdust can be used as an aggregate in concrete production [7], and it can be used in construction. It İ İ 2 emissions, and it offers a means of reducing environmental byproducts by using it to improve ecosystem sustainability [8]. A by-product of wood-cutting operations like sawing, milling, etc., is sawdust, also known as wood residue. It is made out of tiny wood shavings and is available in different densities, hues, chemical compositions, and particle sizes [9].

Cellulose, lignin, hemicelluloses, and extractives are among its primary constituents [10]. The necessity for this study is further supported by the paucity of studies conducted locally and nationally. Concrete's ability to take on nearly any shape while still fresh is one of its essential characteristics [11]. One of the materials with the greatest potential for recycling and repurposing is waste glass [12].

By replacing the fine aggregate in concrete with ground glass and sawdust, the mechanical behavior of the mixture was assessed; the tensile, elastic, compression, and bending moduli were examined; tensile strength is the highest force a material can sustain before permanently deforming or breaking [13]; bending is a crucial property of materials since it establishes their capacity to withstand loads that tend to bend them; compressive İ İ M M of İ İ İ[14]; The amount of deformation that happens in a material when a force is applied to it is determined by its modulus of elasticity. Deformation decreases with increasing modulus of elasticity [15].

Concrete with 5% SDA replacement provides comparable workability and compressive strength to regular concrete, according to Meko and Ighalo [16]. But it's crucial to recognize that as the proportion of replacement rises, workability falls [16]. According to Alabduljabbar et al. [17], the standard sample's compressive strength was 65.8 MPa after 28 days; the assessed property dropped by 26.1% when substitutes were increased from 0% to 100%. Although the findings are deemed suitable for construction, the initial flexural strength values were 4.2 MPa and did not rise when sawdust was substituted for fine aggregate [17]. The substitution of 5% GWP gives the base concrete strength, according to Folagbade and Olatunji [18], but it has no discernible impact on compressive strength. According to Batool et al. [19], a 10% replacement of fine aggregates is the ideal amount to use. This increases the tensile strength by 14% while decreasing the compressive strength [1], [9].

According to Edem et al. [20], the maximum strength of concrete was attained when 20% of the sand was substituted with iron filings and glass particles. Lastly, the adoption of glass particles in concrete manufacturing will enhance waste management and resource conservation; concrete samples containing glass particles consistently enhance flexural strength at all replacement levels [20], [21].

From the slump experiments, the more glass and crushed brick are added to concrete, the less workable it becomes [22]. As the amount of glass in the hardened concrete rose, the concrete's compressive and tensile strength declined in comparison to the control concrete [22]. According to Rabiu and Damdelen [8], the standard sample's compressive strength increased after 28 days; however, sawdust resulted in noticeably lower strength and no discernible tensile strength [8]. İ fineness modulus of the fine aggregate, which came out at 2.81%, was within the allowed range. It was concluded that the resistances between 230 and 235 kg/cm², which are ideal values in comparison to a design of 210 kg/cm², were attained when 2% and 3% of powdered glass were added to the aggregate [23]. According to Codina [24] kit, the qualities of concrete improve with increasing ground glass substitution. For example, if 10% ground glass is substituted for fine aggregate, the concrete will reach its maximum strength after 28 days [24].

Similar to the previously mentioned properties, this one also showed a decrease in strength; specifically, a 13.72% decrease in strength was noted when 10% ground glass was substituted, a 10.34% reduction was obtained when 20% ground glass was substituted, and the largest decrease, up to 17.20% in comparison to the base sample, was obtained when 30% ground glass was substituted at 28 days of curing. According to his findings [23], flexural and compressive strengths were attained between 230 and 235 kg/cm2 when 2% and 3% of ViM were used as the fine aggregate. The findings demonstrated that when sawdust was substituted for fine aggregate, strength increased by 10% and decreased as the proportion of replacement increased. Resistance increased by 1.68% when 10% substitution was taken into account; decreased by 10.60% when 15% replacement was made; and decreased by 16.91% when 30% substitution of sawdust was made. These results were achieved after 28 days of curing. The results are somewhat at odds with those of Alabduljabbar et al. [17], whose study found that the initial flexural strength values were 4.2 MPa and that the substitution of sawdust for fine aggregate did not increase but rather decreased by 26.1%; however, their findings are still deemed suitable for use in construction.

According to the results, this property also showed negative results; at 28 days of curing, a 10.03% strength drop was observed when 10% ground glass was substituted, a 4.53% decline when 20% ground glass was substituted, and the largest drop, up to 23.02% in comparison to the base sample, occurred when 30% ground glass was substituted. Sawdust was found to boost strength when a 10% substitution was made, and strength decreased as the proportion of substitution rose. When 10% was substituted, strength increased by 6.51%; when 15% was substituted, strength decreased by 12.42%; and when 30% sawdust was substituted, after 28 days of curing, the most notable reduction was achieved, reaching a reduction of up to 15.91% in comparison to the basic sample.

To improve the qualities of traditional concrete, the current study substituted Vm for fine aggregate in the mix at percentages of 10%, 20%, and 30%, respectively. The findings of the experiment led to the deductions that the usage of the designs of f'c=280 kg/cm2, modified samples were made by replacing 10%, 20%, and 30% of the weight of fine aggregate with ground glass, and the usage of the designs of f'c=280 kg/cm2, modified samples were made by replacing 10%, 15%, and 30% of the weight of fine aggregate with sawdust. The analysis showed that the substitution of sawdust in the concrete was more beneficial in all properties. Nevertheless, considering the two materials in question (ground glass and sawdust), the ideal percentage of addition was 20% ground glass and 10% sawdust (CVM20AS10) at 28 days of curing.

ABA: conceptualization, writing-original draft, method, analysis; AOA: conceptualization, method, supervision; FNU: literature, discussions. The authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Not applicable.

This research received no external funding.

The authors appreciate the editor and reviewers for reviewing and publishing of this manuscript.

Not applicable.

Not applicable

The authors declare that there is no competing interest.