| Literature DB >> 34071522 |
Everton Dos Santos Barreto1, Karina Vaz Stafanato2, Markssuel Teixeira Marvila1, Afonso Rangel Garcez de Azevedo3, Mujahid Ali4, Ronald Matheus Lobo Pereira5, Sérgio Neves Monteiro1,5.
Abstract
Ceramic-based wastes generated from different industrial activities have increasingly been reused as construction material incorporated into concrete. In general, these wastes just replace common concrete aggregates such as sand and gravel. In the present work, waste from clay brick industries composted of kaolinite minerals were for the first time evaluated for their potential to be reused as the pozzolan constituent of a cement for structural concrete. Initial standard testes revealed that the clay ceramic waste (CCW) displays high pozzolanicity. Concrete was then produced with 10 and 20 wt.% of CCW mixed with ordinary Portland cement (OPC) as its pozzolan constituent. Compression strength of these concretes and of pure OPC as a control sample were determined in standard tests after 14 and 28 days of curing. In addition, the corresponding density, water absorption, capillarity and percentage of voids were measured together with the evaluation of microstructural indices by scanning electron microscopy. The initial tests confirmed that the CCW is indeed an effective pozzolanic potential due to a chemical effect by reacting with CH to generate C-S-H. Moreover, the technological results proved that CCW might effectively replace the pozzolan cement constituent for structural concrete.Entities:
Keywords: clay ceramic waste; concrete; microstructure; pozzolan; properties
Year: 2021 PMID: 34071522 PMCID: PMC8197904 DOI: 10.3390/ma14112917
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Clay ceramic waste applied as pozzolan.
| Authors | Waste Characteristics | Properties | Pozzolanicity Test | Percentage Replaced | Conclusions about Mechanical Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kannan et al. (2017) [ | Waste extracted from polishing ceramic glazes containing silica and alumina. | Compressive strength, permeability, X-ray Diffraction (XRD) and Magic Angle Spinning Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (MAS-NMR). | Frattini test | 0, 10, 20, 30, 40% | The compressive strength dropped from 63.8 (0%) to 57.5 (10%), 52.3 (20%), 49 (30%) and 42.6 MPa (40%), concluding that the percentages of 30% and 40% of the waste are harmful to strength. |
| Irassar et al. (2014) [ | Waste extracted from an Argentine ceramic containing quartz, feldspar, anortite and hematite. (51.3% SiO2; 20% Al2O3; 11.5% CaO; 6% Fe2O3; 3.2% K2O) | Calorimetry and XRD. | Frattini test | 8, 16, 24, 32, 40% | They did not evaluate the mechanical strength, only the kinetics of the reactions. |
| Pokorný et al. (2014) [ | Waste extracted from a Spanish ceramic block industry containing gypsum, quartz, microclimate, albite, muscovite and smaller amounts of hematite (37% SiO2; 14.28% Al2O3; 11.14% CaO; 4.77% Fe2O3; 17.9% SO3) | Compressive strength, porosity, density, thermal conductivity. | Unrealized | 0, 8, 16, 24, 32% | The compressive strength values were: 59.4 (0%), 45.7 (10%), 43.9 (16%), 26.6 (24%) and 21.7 MPa (32%). There was a high reduction in strength to 24% and 32% due to the presence of gypsum, eliminating the possibility of using these percentages. |
| Vejmelková et al. (2014) [ | Ground brick waste from the production of thermal insulating blocks (54.97% SiO2; 14.3% Al2O3; 15.2% CaO; 4.8% Fe2O3) | Compressive strength, porosity, density, thermal conductivity. | Unrealized | 0, 10, 20, 40, 60% | The compressive strength values were: 43 (0%), 41.2 (10%), 40.1 (20%), 26.9 (40%) and 24.5 MPa (60%). The percentages of 40% and 60% were discarded due to the high drop in strength. |
| Cheng et al. (2014) [ | Ceramic polishing waste extracted from a Chinese industry composed of quartz and mullite (69.02% SiO2; 16.04% Al2O3; 4.08% MgO; 3.15% Na2O) | Compressive strength and durability tests (acid attack), XRD and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). | Unrealized | 0, 10, 20, 30, 40% | The strength dropped from 45.5 to 44.68 (10%), 41.35 (20%), 33.19 (30%) and 32.97 (40%). An excessive drop is observed for the compositions of 30% and 40%. |
| Cheng et al. (2016) [ | Ceramic polishing waste extracted from a Chinese industry composed of quartz and mullite (69.02% SiO2; 16.04% Al2O3; 4.08% MgO; 3.15% Na2O) | Compressive strength and chloride permeability tests, XRD, SEM and Energy-dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS). | Unrealized | 0, 10, 20, 30, 40% | The strength dropped from 45.5 to 44.68 (10%), 41.35 (20%), 33.19 (30%) and 32.97 (40%). An excessive drop is observed for the compositions of 30% and 40%. |
| Pacheco-Torgal and Jalali (2011) [ | Ceramic waste from burnt bricks composed of quartz and hematite, calcite, cristobaltite and feldspar in smaller quantities. (51.7% SiO2; 18.2% Al2O3; 6.1% Fe2O3; 6.1% CaO) | Compressive strength, porosity, water absorption, oxygen and water permeability, durability in attack by chlorides. | Unrealized | 0 and 20% | The strength results obtained for concrete with 20% were excellent (39.7 MPa) when compared to the reference composition (40.4 MPa). |
| Reiterman et al. (2014) [ | Ceramic waste is not characterized. | Compressive strength, density, acid attack durability. | Unrealized | 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30%. | Strength values: 61 (0%); 64.3 (5%); 62.9 (10%); 59.5 (15%), 58.8 (20%), 51.8 (25%) and 46.2 (30%). A considerable drop in strength is observed to 25% and 30%. |
| Wang (2009) [ | Ceramic waste is not characterized. | Compressive strength, linear shrinkage, heat of hydration, porosity, SEM. | Unrealized | 0, 10, 20, 50%. | Strength values: 55.6 (0%), 49.8 (10%), 46.5 (20%) and 32.5 (50%). There is a high reduction in strength for the composition of 50%. |
Figure 1Clay ceramic waste (CCW).
Chemical composition (%) of the waste (CCW).
| SiO2 | A2O3 | Fe2O3 | K2O | Na2O | TiO2 | P2O5 | CaO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 56.80 | 32.30 | 3.70 | 1.60 | 0.70 | 1.10 | 0.25 | 0.98 |
Figure 2X-ray Diffraction (XRD) pattern of waste CCW sample.
Proportion of materials used in concrete.
| Concrete | Portland Cement | Fine Aggregate | Coarse Aggregate | Clay Ceramic Waste | Water/Cement | Slump Teste (cm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C0% | 1.00 | 1.38 | 2.95 | 0.00 | 0.49 | 70 ± 10 |
| C10% | 0.90 | 1.38 | 2.95 | 0.10 | 0.54 | |
| C20% | 0.80 | 1.38 | 2.95 | 0.20 | 0.61 |
Pozzolanic activity by Luxán (mS/cm).
| Information | Result |
|---|---|
| Initial conductivity | 7.18 |
| Final conductivity | 8.39 |
| Conductivity variation | 1.21 |
| Classification | High pozzolanicity |
Figure 3Compressive strength.
Figure 4Fracture toughness.
Figure 5Results of density.
Figure 6Capillary water absorption.
Figure 7Water absorption and voids index.
Figure 8SEM of the studied concretes: (a) and (b) C0%; (c) and (d) C20%.