| Literature DB >> 33801138 |
Francisca Guadalupe Cabrera-Covarrubias1, José Manuel Gómez-Soberón2, Carlos Antonio Rosas-Casarez1, Jorge Luis Almaral-Sánchez1, Jesús Manuel Bernal-Camacho3.
Abstract
The poroEntities:
Keywords: adsorption N2; ceramic wastes; image analysis; open porosity; porosity; recycled aggregates; recycled mortars
Year: 2021 PMID: 33801138 PMCID: PMC8004094 DOI: 10.3390/ma14061543
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Recycled Ceramic Aggregate (CA) and Natural Aggregate (NA) granulometries.
Physical properties of aggregates [29].
| Property | Unit | Recycled Ceramic Aggregate (CA) | Natural |
|---|---|---|---|
| Density (OD) | Kg/cm3 | 1820.9 | 2581.6 |
| Density (SSD) | 2155.4 | 2623.6 | |
| Bulk density (OD) | 1182.0 | 1735.1 | |
| Bulk density (SSD) | 1399.1 | 1860.8 | |
| Void content | % | 35.3 | 32.9 |
| Water absorption coefficient | 18.4 | 1.6 | |
| Particles < 75 μm (sieve No. 200) | 8.2 | 2.9 | |
| Fineness modulus materials | - | 2.8 | 2.4 |
Dosage of the study mortars.
| Materials (g) | Mixtures Used for Mortars | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UM | CRM10 | CRM20 | CRM30 | CRM50 | CRM100 | |
| Cement | 400 | 433 | 381 | 372 | 348 | 323 |
| NA 1 | 800 | 780 | 610 | 521 | 348 | 0 |
| NA 2 | 800 | 780 | 610 | 521 | 348 | 0 |
| CA 1 | 0 | 70 | 122 | 178 | 278 | 517 |
| CA 2 | 0 | 104 | 183 | 268 | 417 | 775 |
| Water | 334 | 390 | 355 | 373 | 397 | 476 |
| w/c | 0.84 | 0.90 | 0.93 | 1.00 | 1.14 | 1.48 |
1 Size passing through sieve No. 30. 2 Size retained on sieve No. 30. NA = Natural Aggregate. CA = Recycled Ceramic Aggregate. UM = Usual Mortar. CRM = Recycled Ceramic Mortars (where 10, 20, 30, 50 y 100, represents the percentage of CA).
Figure 2Gas adsorption test equipment.
Figure 3Recycled Ceramic Mortars (CRM) samples used for SEM analysis: (a) UM, (b) CRM10, (c) CRM20, (d) CRM30, (e) CRM50 and (f) CRM100.
Content of each element in the Recycled Ceramic Mortars (CRM) samples obtained by Energy Dispersive Spectrometer (EDS) analysis.
| Variable | Percentage Amount of the Elements (%) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Si | Ca | Fe | Al | Mg | Na | Cl | N | K | |
| UM | 2.78 | 0.00 | 2.08 | 0.69 | 1.39 | 2.08 | 65.28 | 25.00 | 0.69 |
| CRM10 | 28.04 | 50.15 | 4.59 | 7.47 | 4.80 | 0.18 | 0.38 | 0.00 | 4.39 |
| CRM20 | 2.78 | 0.00 | 2.08 | 0.69 | 1.39 | 2.08 | 65.28 | 25.00 | 0.69 |
| CRM30 | 47.77 | 34.03 | 5.47 | 7.94 | 1.86 | 0.51 | 0.13 | 0.00 | 2.29 |
| CRM50 | 23.10 | 40.82 | 8.36 | 7.95 | 2.30 | 0.00 | 0.81 | 14.55 | 2.11 |
| CRM100 | 3.90 | - | 2.60 | 1.30 | 1.95 | 3.25 | 87.01 | 0.00 | - |
Figure 4Example of image analysis procedure; CRM10 sample. The steps that have a sequence are linked with yellow arrows, and the steps that present a parallel process (i.e., the same, but for each of the different elements), are linked with arrows with yellow stripes. The image is obtained by SEM (A); “Threshold filter” is applied to the original image, and then its histogram is obtained (B); The image corresponding to the Silicon mapping is processed (C); the same for the image of the Magnesium (D) and Aluminum (E) mappings. The threshold filter is applied to the mappings to obtain the image representing the aggregates in the sample (C-1). The image of the element is processed using the “advances morphology” and “basic morphology” commands (C-2,C-3); The same steps are performed in the Magnesium and Aluminum mappings (D-1,D-2,D-3,E-1,E-2,E-3). The “add” operation was applied to the processed images of the elements (images C-3,D-3,E-3); and the image (F) was obtained. The "add" operation is applied again, to incorporate the porosity values of the original image; image (G) [result of (F) + (B)] is obtained. A histogram is obtained to quantify the percentage of aggregate, paste and pores (H).
Mechanical y physical properties of mortars.
| Variable | Physical Properties | Mechanical Properties | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open Porosity (%) | ||||||
| 60 días | 90 días | |||||
| UM | 1.95 | 19.09 | 11.87 | 28.77 | 26,252 | −0.0793 |
| CRM10 | 1.95 | 22.68 | 14.18 | 30.58 | 26,515 | −0.0704 |
| CRM20 | 1.89 | 24.96 | 15.57 | 30.95 | 26,251 | −0.0847 |
| CRM30 | 1.86 | 27.04 | 16.90 | 30.10 | 24,065 | −0.0709 |
| CRM50 | 1.80 | 32.00 | 19.91 | 26.76 | 21,731 | −0.0986 |
| CRM100 | 1.53 | 41.17 | 25.56 | 20.56 | 14,194 | −0.1141 |
Figure 5Adsorption-desorption isotherms of CRMs: (a) the beginning of the adsorption-desorption isotherm curves is shown; specifically, the amount of molecules adsorbed and desorbed at low pressures (blue box a’); (b) the final part of the isotherm curves is shown; specifically, the amount of adsorbed and desorbed molecules at high pressures (green box b’).
Figure 6BET surface area according to the Recycled Ceramic Aggregate (CA) content in the Recycled Ceramic Mortars (RCM).
Figure 7Pore size distribution with respect to cumulative pore volume: (a) adsorption phase; (b) desorption phase.
Porosity measured in pore volume (N2 adsorption and desorption phases).
| Mortar | ||
|---|---|---|
| UM | 0.054321 | 0.054842 |
| CRM10 | 0.048443 | 0.049154 |
| CRM20 | 0.050341 | 0.050890 |
| CRM50 | 0.052853 | 0.053522 |
| CRM100 | 0.099844 | 0.101067 |
Figure 8Pore size distribution according to IUPAC: (a) adsorption phase; (b) desorption phase.
Pore radius categories (N2 adsorption and desorption phases).
| Mortar | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| UM | 103.57 | 0.91 | 14.98 | 33.84 | 70.50 |
| CRM10 | 87.80 | 0.91 | 12.28 | 29.22 | 61.71 |
| CRM20 | 87.74 | 0.92 | 12.52 | 36.31 | 87.74 |
| CRM50 | 91.64 | 0.92 | 12.69 | 37.61 | 63.89 |
| CRM100 | 102.64 | 0.92 | 16.75 | 37.89 | 69.79 |
|
| |||||
| UM | 122.47 | 1.32 | 11.69 | 21.52 | 24.41 |
| CRM10 | 101.48 | 1.32 | 9.14 | 16.88 | 23.61 |
| CRM20 | 91.92 | 0.92 | 9.92 | 21.09 | 24.08 |
| CRM50 | 97.82 | 0.91 | 9.58 | 20.18 | 22.78 |
| CRM100 | 113.23 | 1.63 | 11.52 | 20.32 | 24.26 |
Figure 9Pore radius with respect to pore volume differential: (a) adsorption phase; (b) desorption phase.
Figure 10Correlation between fm, E and density, with respect to r.
Figure 11Correlation between absorption and drying shrinkage with respect to r.
Figure 12Correlation of BET surface area and: (a) fm, E and density; (b) absorption and drying shrinkage.
Figure 13Percentage of total porosity of CRMs by SEM image analysis.
Figure 14Correlation of Porosity by SEM and: (a) fm, E and density; (b) absorption and drying shrinkage.
Figure 15Correlation Open porosity and: (a) fm, E and density; (b) drying shrinkage.
Figure 16Percentages of total porosity obtained by the techniques used.
Figure 17Correlation between open porosity and N2 porosity (desorption phase).