4.7 Article

An investigation on recycling potential of sulfur concrete

Journal

JOURNAL OF BUILDING ENGINEERING
Volume 38, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102175

Keywords

Compressive strength; Chemical resistance; Recycled sulfur concrete; Recyclable construction material; Waterless concrete

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sulfur concrete is a recyclable and environmentally friendly material, showing significantly improved performance after the first recasting, but with a drastic decrease in strength and durability after the second recasting.
The rising concerns about the environment and sustainability are leading towards the need of recyclable materials to protect the environment and help in resource conservation. Sulfur concrete (SC) is a unique composite that does not utilize water and energy intensively produced cement. As a substitute to cement, molten sulfur firmly binds aggregates upon hardening. The sulfur concrete is recyclable and can be easily remolded in new applications. Moreover, sulfur is a by-product of the petroleum industry with almost zero carbon footprint. In this study, the mechanical (compressive strength and modulus of rupture) and durability proper ties (water absorption, salt attack-resistance, acid attack-resistance and alkali attack-resistance) of SC were evaluated after recasting without the addition of a new binder. The properties of fresh and recast SC were compared with those of the conventional Portland cement concrete (PCC) and sulfate resisting cement concrete (SRC). The results reveal that both the mechanical and durability properties of SC have significantly improved after the first recycling/recasting. However, there is a drastic decrease in strength and durability performance after the second recasting. Durability and mechanical performance of fresh and first recast SC is noticeably higher compared to PCC and SRC.

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