4.6 Article

Influence of Varied Waste Ceramic Fillers on the Resistance of Concrete to Freeze-Thaw Cycles

Journal

MATERIALS
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14030624

Keywords

composite; concrete; recycling; ceramic waste; freeze– thaw resistance; pore characteristics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study focused on the influence of fillers obtained from crushed waste materials on selected properties of concrete composites. Results showed that concretes modified with coarse and fine fillers exhibited improvements in mechanical properties and freeze-thaw resistance. Automated digital image analysis proved to be an effective tool for assessing concrete freeze-thaw resistance.
Our research focused on the influence of fillers obtained from crushed waste materials on the selected properties of concrete composites. The used waste materials were sourced from the production of ceramic tiles, ceramic pots, and sanitary ceramics. We evaluated concretes modified with the addition of 10% (by mass of cement) of different fillers. The properties, including the air content in the fresh concrete mix, consistency, compressive strength, and freeze-thaw resistance were examined. The evaluation of the freeze-thaw resistance was carried out by testing the concrete with the direct method for 150 cycles of freezing and thawing. The characteristics of the concrete porosity structure were assessed using automated digital image analysis. Concretes modified by coarse and fine fillers were characterized by different improvements in the mechanical properties and resistance to cycles of freezing and thawing. Composites with the addition of coarse fillers did not show any significant changes in comparison to the control concrete. An automated digital image analysis of the pore distribution in concrete proved to be an effective tool for the assessment of the freeze-thaw resistance of the concretes in question.

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