粉煤灰作为整体水泥替代品的价值化循环经济战略(抗性和反应性评估)

IF 2.1 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENGINEERING, CHEMICAL
Luisa F. Morales, Katherine Herrera, Julián E. López, Roberto Aguado, Juan F. Saldarriaga
{"title":"粉煤灰作为整体水泥替代品的价值化循环经济战略(抗性和反应性评估)","authors":"Luisa F. Morales,&nbsp;Katherine Herrera,&nbsp;Julián E. López,&nbsp;Roberto Aguado,&nbsp;Juan F. Saldarriaga","doi":"10.1002/ep.14319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Fly ash is currently a problem in different companies, mainly in thermoelectric plants, which must follow a production and consumption model that involves reusing, renewing, and recycling, thus contributing to the circular economy. This work aims to evaluate the reactivity and compressive strength of different types of ashes in concrete monoliths. For this purpose, sugarcane bagasse (SCBA), bituminous coal (BC), and untreated hazardous waste (RUD) were evaluated as replacements for cement. Monoliths and mortars have been manufactured in different mixtures, taken to a curing room, and their compressive strength and reactivity have been determined at different times (up to 28 days for the monoliths and up to 90 for the mortars), mainly in order to check the formation of calcium silicate hydrate (CSH) gels. In the monolith tests, the best performances have been with SCBA and BC, which have been used for the manufacture of the mortars. On day 56, the behavior of the replacement of 30% fly ash (15% BC:15% SCBA) presents a type H mortar behavior, with better results than the control. By day 90, all replacements had the same resistance as M mortars and even higher resistances than the control. This demonstrates the feasibility of its use in the production of Portland cement for the manufacture of low-performance inputs. This implies the possible reduction of impacts, both in waste disposal sites and in emissions caused by the construction industry, thus contributing to the circular economy.</p>","PeriodicalId":11701,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy","volume":"43 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Circular economy strategy for the valorization of fly ash as a substitute for cement in monoliths (resistance and reactivity evaluation)\",\"authors\":\"Luisa F. Morales,&nbsp;Katherine Herrera,&nbsp;Julián E. López,&nbsp;Roberto Aguado,&nbsp;Juan F. Saldarriaga\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ep.14319\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Fly ash is currently a problem in different companies, mainly in thermoelectric plants, which must follow a production and consumption model that involves reusing, renewing, and recycling, thus contributing to the circular economy. This work aims to evaluate the reactivity and compressive strength of different types of ashes in concrete monoliths. For this purpose, sugarcane bagasse (SCBA), bituminous coal (BC), and untreated hazardous waste (RUD) were evaluated as replacements for cement. Monoliths and mortars have been manufactured in different mixtures, taken to a curing room, and their compressive strength and reactivity have been determined at different times (up to 28 days for the monoliths and up to 90 for the mortars), mainly in order to check the formation of calcium silicate hydrate (CSH) gels. In the monolith tests, the best performances have been with SCBA and BC, which have been used for the manufacture of the mortars. On day 56, the behavior of the replacement of 30% fly ash (15% BC:15% SCBA) presents a type H mortar behavior, with better results than the control. By day 90, all replacements had the same resistance as M mortars and even higher resistances than the control. This demonstrates the feasibility of its use in the production of Portland cement for the manufacture of low-performance inputs. This implies the possible reduction of impacts, both in waste disposal sites and in emissions caused by the construction industry, thus contributing to the circular economy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11701,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy\",\"volume\":\"43 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ep.14319\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, CHEMICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ep.14319","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CHEMICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

粉煤灰目前是不同公司(主要是热电厂)面临的一个问题,这些公司必须遵循一种生产和消费模式,包括再利用、更新和回收,从而为循环经济做出贡献。这项工作旨在评估不同类型灰烬在混凝土整体中的反应性和抗压强度。为此,对甘蔗渣(SCBA)、烟煤(BC)和未经处理的危险废物(RUD)作为水泥替代品进行了评估。用不同的混合物制造了单块石材和砂浆,并将其送入固化室,在不同时间(单块石材最长 28 天,砂浆最长 90 天)测定其抗压强度和反应性,主要是为了检查硅酸钙水合物(CSH)凝胶的形成情况。在单体测试中,用于制造砂浆的 SCBA 和 BC 表现最好。第 56 天,30% 粉煤灰(15% BC:15% SCBA)替代物的表现为 H 型砂浆表现,效果优于对照组。到第 90 天,所有替代物的抗性都与 M 型砂浆相同,甚至比对照组的抗性更高。这表明将其用于生产波特兰水泥以制造低性能投入品是可行的。这意味着有可能减少废物处理场和建筑业排放的影响,从而为循环经济做出贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Circular economy strategy for the valorization of fly ash as a substitute for cement in monoliths (resistance and reactivity evaluation)

Fly ash is currently a problem in different companies, mainly in thermoelectric plants, which must follow a production and consumption model that involves reusing, renewing, and recycling, thus contributing to the circular economy. This work aims to evaluate the reactivity and compressive strength of different types of ashes in concrete monoliths. For this purpose, sugarcane bagasse (SCBA), bituminous coal (BC), and untreated hazardous waste (RUD) were evaluated as replacements for cement. Monoliths and mortars have been manufactured in different mixtures, taken to a curing room, and their compressive strength and reactivity have been determined at different times (up to 28 days for the monoliths and up to 90 for the mortars), mainly in order to check the formation of calcium silicate hydrate (CSH) gels. In the monolith tests, the best performances have been with SCBA and BC, which have been used for the manufacture of the mortars. On day 56, the behavior of the replacement of 30% fly ash (15% BC:15% SCBA) presents a type H mortar behavior, with better results than the control. By day 90, all replacements had the same resistance as M mortars and even higher resistances than the control. This demonstrates the feasibility of its use in the production of Portland cement for the manufacture of low-performance inputs. This implies the possible reduction of impacts, both in waste disposal sites and in emissions caused by the construction industry, thus contributing to the circular economy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy
Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy 环境科学-工程:化工
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.60%
发文量
231
审稿时长
4.3 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Progress , a quarterly publication of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, reports on critical issues like remediation and treatment of solid or aqueous wastes, air pollution, sustainability, and sustainable energy. Each issue helps chemical engineers (and those in related fields) stay on top of technological advances in all areas associated with the environment through feature articles, updates, book and software reviews, and editorials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信