4.6 Article

The Assessment of Possibility of Using Sanitary Ceramic Waste as Concrete Aggregate-Determination of the Basic Material Characteristics

Journal

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
Volume 8, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app8071205

Keywords

sanitary ceramic; concrete; recycled aggregate

Funding

  1. Narodowe Centrum Badan i Rozwoju, Poland [DOB-BIO7/08/01/2015]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article presents the possibilities of using soft clay pottery waste as concrete aggregate. There is shown a new approach of complete exchange natural aggregate in concrete with recycled aggregate, i.e., crushed ceramic of two fractions 0-4 and 4-8 mm. Basic characteristics of aggregate were evaluated, i.e., phase composition and crush strength. Drawing on past experiences, two concrete mixes were designed that were based on Portland cement 32.5 R used for ordinary concrete and aluminous Gorkal 70, which is characterized by high initial strength and the fact that Al2O3 is the binding factor. The prepared concrete samples were subjected to maintenance for the next 28 days, and then tests started. A series of tests were performed on the properties of concrete obtained, including a compressive strength and bending strength, an abrasion resistance, frost resistance, water absorption, depth of penetration of water under pressure, and bulk density of concrete. The research confirmed assumptions that it is possible to completely replace the natural aggregate with aggregate made of soft clay pottery waste. Both designed concretes showed high compressive and bending strength, as well as low absorbability and abrasiveness. It was also found that soaking in water, as well as its duration, adversely affects the strength properties of the designed concretes. Regarding concrete based on Portland cement, it was also demonstrated that the concrete has a high frost resistance and resistance to penetration of water under pressure.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available