4.7 Article

Lightweight concretes based on wheat husk and hemp hurd as bio-aggregates and modified magnesium oxysulfate binder: Microstructure and technological performances

Journal

CONSTRUCTION AND BUILDING MATERIALS
Volume 284, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.122751

Keywords

Lightweight concrete; Wheat husk; Hemp hurd; Modified Magnesium Oxysulfate Cement; Compressive strength

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This research explores the use of modified magnesium oxysulfate cement to manufacture lightweight concretes using wheat husk and hemp hurd as bio-aggregate. Through detailed microstructural studies, the mechanical and thermal properties of different concretes were revealed. The study suggests that the developed lightweight concretes are technologically competitive and have the advantage of high early strength.
Using lightweight building materials from ecological resources reduces the environmental impact of buildings. Most attention has been paid to lime-based agro-concretes, but low binder-aggregate compatibility as well as slow strength gain are drawbacks. The use of magnesia-based binders has the potential to mitigate these problems. Here, a modified magnesium oxysulfate (MOS) cement was used to manufacture lightweight concretes using wheat husk, a highly available and unexploited resource, and hemp hurd as bio-aggregate. A combined microstructural-technological study was performed, filling gaps in existing literature. Through microstructural observations made by X-ray Powder Diffraction, microscopy imaging (optical, electron) and mercury porosimetry, mechanical and thermal properties in the different concretes were elucidated. It will be shown that the developed lightweight concretes are technologically competitive with lime-based ones, having the advantage of possessing high early strength. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available