Environmentally Friendly Masonry Mortar Blended with Fly Ash, Corn Cob Ash or Ceramic Waste Powder

Implementing a circular approach through waste valorization in mortar production with environmentally efficient mix design is a viable pathway for relieving the ecological burden of greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion and waste management. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Materials 2023-10, Vol.16 (20), p.6725
Hauptverfasser: Šupić, Slobodan, Malešev, Mirjana, Pantić, Vladan, Lukić, Ivan, Radonjanin, Vlastimir, Ognjanović, Miloš, Broćeta, Gordana
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 20
container_start_page 6725
container_title Materials
container_volume 16
creator Šupić, Slobodan
Malešev, Mirjana
Pantić, Vladan
Lukić, Ivan
Radonjanin, Vlastimir
Ognjanović, Miloš
Broćeta, Gordana
description Implementing a circular approach through waste valorization in mortar production with environmentally efficient mix design is a viable pathway for relieving the ecological burden of greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion and waste management. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the feasibility of using fly ash (FA), corn cob ash (CCA), and ceramic waste powder (CWP) as supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) in cement–lime masonry mortars. As part of an extensive experimental study, twelve mortar mixtures were made: three reference and nine blended, with mixing ratios of 1:1:5, 1:0.7:4.2, and 1:1:4 ((cement + SCM)/lime/sand), by volume. The examined properties include workability, compressive and flexural strengths, dry bulk density, capillary water absorption, adhesive bond strength, and water vapor permeability. The compressive and flexural strengths of tested mortars were notably impaired, with reductions of up to 60%, while the capillary water absorption coefficient rose by 100% compared to the reference values. The adhesive bond strength of some blended mortars exceeded the strength of the reference mortars. Nevertheless, all blended mortars fulfilled the requirements for general-purpose mortars, while the majority met the criteria for structural masonry applications. In addition, a performance-based index and weighting triangle were used for the comparison and ranking of all analyzed mortar mixtures. The findings of this study may herald a novel use of FA, CCA, and CWP as more eco-friendly binding materials in contemporary construction leading to the reduction in the process’s carbon footprint, the improvement in cost efficiency, and the mitigation of the detrimental environmental impact of waste disposal.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/ma16206725
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10608085</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A772098321</galeid><sourcerecordid>A772098321</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-a63da02255a089600169ccd9ebba15d436200cc86fd0dc62ce6c264661504fd93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdUd9PHCEQJk1NNepL_wKSvjRNzw6wy8JTc168aqKxD236SFhgPcwuWNjT-N93Lmf6CxJmmPn4Zj6GkLcMzoTQ8GmyTHKQHW9fkSOmtVww3TSv__IPyWmt94BLCKa4fkMORad024E8Iv1Feowlpymk2Y7jM12XGJJH58bWnAraXGZb6PmI4eDpU5w3dI35Zd18pKtcEh797kZzoatQ7BQd_WHrHOjX_ORDOSEHgx1rOH2xx-T7-uLb6nJxffvlarW8XriGi3lhpfAWOG9bC0pLACa1c16Hvres9Y1AmeCckoMH7yR3QTouGylZC83gtTgmn_e8D9t-Ct6homJH81DiZMuzyTaafzMpbsxdfjQMJChQLTK8f2Eo-ec21NlMsbowjjaFvK2GKyVaqRvGEPruP-h93paE-nYojnSScUSd7VF3dgwmpiFjYYfbB_ylnMIQMb7sOg5aCb6j_bB_4EqutYThd_sMzG7e5s-8xS8yBppP</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2882808612</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Environmentally Friendly Masonry Mortar Blended with Fly Ash, Corn Cob Ash or Ceramic Waste Powder</title><source>Full-Text Journals in Chemistry (Open access)</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Šupić, Slobodan ; Malešev, Mirjana ; Pantić, Vladan ; Lukić, Ivan ; Radonjanin, Vlastimir ; Ognjanović, Miloš ; Broćeta, Gordana</creator><creatorcontrib>Šupić, Slobodan ; Malešev, Mirjana ; Pantić, Vladan ; Lukić, Ivan ; Radonjanin, Vlastimir ; Ognjanović, Miloš ; Broćeta, Gordana</creatorcontrib><description>Implementing a circular approach through waste valorization in mortar production with environmentally efficient mix design is a viable pathway for relieving the ecological burden of greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion and waste management. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the feasibility of using fly ash (FA), corn cob ash (CCA), and ceramic waste powder (CWP) as supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) in cement–lime masonry mortars. As part of an extensive experimental study, twelve mortar mixtures were made: three reference and nine blended, with mixing ratios of 1:1:5, 1:0.7:4.2, and 1:1:4 ((cement + SCM)/lime/sand), by volume. The examined properties include workability, compressive and flexural strengths, dry bulk density, capillary water absorption, adhesive bond strength, and water vapor permeability. The compressive and flexural strengths of tested mortars were notably impaired, with reductions of up to 60%, while the capillary water absorption coefficient rose by 100% compared to the reference values. The adhesive bond strength of some blended mortars exceeded the strength of the reference mortars. Nevertheless, all blended mortars fulfilled the requirements for general-purpose mortars, while the majority met the criteria for structural masonry applications. In addition, a performance-based index and weighting triangle were used for the comparison and ranking of all analyzed mortar mixtures. The findings of this study may herald a novel use of FA, CCA, and CWP as more eco-friendly binding materials in contemporary construction leading to the reduction in the process’s carbon footprint, the improvement in cost efficiency, and the mitigation of the detrimental environmental impact of waste disposal.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1996-1944</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1996-1944</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/ma16206725</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37895706</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel: MDPI AG</publisher><subject>Absorptivity ; Adhesive bonding ; Adhesive strength ; Analysis ; Biomass ; Bonding strength ; Bulk density ; By products ; Carbon ; Cement ; Ceramic powders ; Ceramics ; Compressive strength ; Construction ; Consumption ; Corn ; Ecological footprint ; Emissions ; Environmental impact ; Flexural strength ; Fly ash ; Green market ; Greenhouse gases ; Industrial wastes ; Landfill ; Lime ; Masonry ; Mixing ratio ; Mixtures ; Mortars (material) ; Natural resources ; Permeability ; Raw materials ; Refuse and refuse disposal ; Serbia ; Sustainable development ; Waste disposal ; Waste management ; Water absorption ; Water vapor ; Workability</subject><ispartof>Materials, 2023-10, Vol.16 (20), p.6725</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 MDPI AG</rights><rights>2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2023 by the authors. 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-a63da02255a089600169ccd9ebba15d436200cc86fd0dc62ce6c264661504fd93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-a63da02255a089600169ccd9ebba15d436200cc86fd0dc62ce6c264661504fd93</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3029-9309 ; 0000-0002-9340-5220 ; 0000-0003-1565-822X ; 0000-0003-2889-4416</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10608085/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10608085/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27929,27930,53796,53798</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Šupić, Slobodan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malešev, Mirjana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pantić, Vladan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lukić, Ivan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Radonjanin, Vlastimir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ognjanović, Miloš</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broćeta, Gordana</creatorcontrib><title>Environmentally Friendly Masonry Mortar Blended with Fly Ash, Corn Cob Ash or Ceramic Waste Powder</title><title>Materials</title><description>Implementing a circular approach through waste valorization in mortar production with environmentally efficient mix design is a viable pathway for relieving the ecological burden of greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion and waste management. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the feasibility of using fly ash (FA), corn cob ash (CCA), and ceramic waste powder (CWP) as supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) in cement–lime masonry mortars. As part of an extensive experimental study, twelve mortar mixtures were made: three reference and nine blended, with mixing ratios of 1:1:5, 1:0.7:4.2, and 1:1:4 ((cement + SCM)/lime/sand), by volume. The examined properties include workability, compressive and flexural strengths, dry bulk density, capillary water absorption, adhesive bond strength, and water vapor permeability. The compressive and flexural strengths of tested mortars were notably impaired, with reductions of up to 60%, while the capillary water absorption coefficient rose by 100% compared to the reference values. The adhesive bond strength of some blended mortars exceeded the strength of the reference mortars. Nevertheless, all blended mortars fulfilled the requirements for general-purpose mortars, while the majority met the criteria for structural masonry applications. In addition, a performance-based index and weighting triangle were used for the comparison and ranking of all analyzed mortar mixtures. The findings of this study may herald a novel use of FA, CCA, and CWP as more eco-friendly binding materials in contemporary construction leading to the reduction in the process’s carbon footprint, the improvement in cost efficiency, and the mitigation of the detrimental environmental impact of waste disposal.</description><subject>Absorptivity</subject><subject>Adhesive bonding</subject><subject>Adhesive strength</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Biomass</subject><subject>Bonding strength</subject><subject>Bulk density</subject><subject>By products</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>Cement</subject><subject>Ceramic powders</subject><subject>Ceramics</subject><subject>Compressive strength</subject><subject>Construction</subject><subject>Consumption</subject><subject>Corn</subject><subject>Ecological footprint</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Flexural strength</subject><subject>Fly ash</subject><subject>Green market</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>Industrial wastes</subject><subject>Landfill</subject><subject>Lime</subject><subject>Masonry</subject><subject>Mixing ratio</subject><subject>Mixtures</subject><subject>Mortars (material)</subject><subject>Natural resources</subject><subject>Permeability</subject><subject>Raw materials</subject><subject>Refuse and refuse disposal</subject><subject>Serbia</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><subject>Waste disposal</subject><subject>Waste management</subject><subject>Water absorption</subject><subject>Water vapor</subject><subject>Workability</subject><issn>1996-1944</issn><issn>1996-1944</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpdUd9PHCEQJk1NNepL_wKSvjRNzw6wy8JTc168aqKxD236SFhgPcwuWNjT-N93Lmf6CxJmmPn4Zj6GkLcMzoTQ8GmyTHKQHW9fkSOmtVww3TSv__IPyWmt94BLCKa4fkMORad024E8Iv1Feowlpymk2Y7jM12XGJJH58bWnAraXGZb6PmI4eDpU5w3dI35Zd18pKtcEh797kZzoatQ7BQd_WHrHOjX_ORDOSEHgx1rOH2xx-T7-uLb6nJxffvlarW8XriGi3lhpfAWOG9bC0pLACa1c16Hvres9Y1AmeCckoMH7yR3QTouGylZC83gtTgmn_e8D9t-Ct6homJH81DiZMuzyTaafzMpbsxdfjQMJChQLTK8f2Eo-ec21NlMsbowjjaFvK2GKyVaqRvGEPruP-h93paE-nYojnSScUSd7VF3dgwmpiFjYYfbB_ylnMIQMb7sOg5aCb6j_bB_4EqutYThd_sMzG7e5s-8xS8yBppP</recordid><startdate>20231017</startdate><enddate>20231017</enddate><creator>Šupić, Slobodan</creator><creator>Malešev, Mirjana</creator><creator>Pantić, Vladan</creator><creator>Lukić, Ivan</creator><creator>Radonjanin, Vlastimir</creator><creator>Ognjanović, Miloš</creator><creator>Broćeta, Gordana</creator><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3029-9309</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9340-5220</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1565-822X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2889-4416</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231017</creationdate><title>Environmentally Friendly Masonry Mortar Blended with Fly Ash, Corn Cob Ash or Ceramic Waste Powder</title><author>Šupić, Slobodan ; Malešev, Mirjana ; Pantić, Vladan ; Lukić, Ivan ; Radonjanin, Vlastimir ; Ognjanović, Miloš ; Broćeta, Gordana</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c423t-a63da02255a089600169ccd9ebba15d436200cc86fd0dc62ce6c264661504fd93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Absorptivity</topic><topic>Adhesive bonding</topic><topic>Adhesive strength</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Biomass</topic><topic>Bonding strength</topic><topic>Bulk density</topic><topic>By products</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>Cement</topic><topic>Ceramic powders</topic><topic>Ceramics</topic><topic>Compressive strength</topic><topic>Construction</topic><topic>Consumption</topic><topic>Corn</topic><topic>Ecological footprint</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Flexural strength</topic><topic>Fly ash</topic><topic>Green market</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>Industrial wastes</topic><topic>Landfill</topic><topic>Lime</topic><topic>Masonry</topic><topic>Mixing ratio</topic><topic>Mixtures</topic><topic>Mortars (material)</topic><topic>Natural resources</topic><topic>Permeability</topic><topic>Raw materials</topic><topic>Refuse and refuse disposal</topic><topic>Serbia</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><topic>Waste disposal</topic><topic>Waste management</topic><topic>Water absorption</topic><topic>Water vapor</topic><topic>Workability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Šupić, Slobodan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Malešev, Mirjana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pantić, Vladan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lukić, Ivan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Radonjanin, Vlastimir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ognjanović, Miloš</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broćeta, Gordana</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Materials</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Šupić, Slobodan</au><au>Malešev, Mirjana</au><au>Pantić, Vladan</au><au>Lukić, Ivan</au><au>Radonjanin, Vlastimir</au><au>Ognjanović, Miloš</au><au>Broćeta, Gordana</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Environmentally Friendly Masonry Mortar Blended with Fly Ash, Corn Cob Ash or Ceramic Waste Powder</atitle><jtitle>Materials</jtitle><date>2023-10-17</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>20</issue><spage>6725</spage><pages>6725-</pages><issn>1996-1944</issn><eissn>1996-1944</eissn><abstract>Implementing a circular approach through waste valorization in mortar production with environmentally efficient mix design is a viable pathway for relieving the ecological burden of greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion and waste management. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the feasibility of using fly ash (FA), corn cob ash (CCA), and ceramic waste powder (CWP) as supplementary cementitious materials (SCM) in cement–lime masonry mortars. As part of an extensive experimental study, twelve mortar mixtures were made: three reference and nine blended, with mixing ratios of 1:1:5, 1:0.7:4.2, and 1:1:4 ((cement + SCM)/lime/sand), by volume. The examined properties include workability, compressive and flexural strengths, dry bulk density, capillary water absorption, adhesive bond strength, and water vapor permeability. The compressive and flexural strengths of tested mortars were notably impaired, with reductions of up to 60%, while the capillary water absorption coefficient rose by 100% compared to the reference values. The adhesive bond strength of some blended mortars exceeded the strength of the reference mortars. Nevertheless, all blended mortars fulfilled the requirements for general-purpose mortars, while the majority met the criteria for structural masonry applications. In addition, a performance-based index and weighting triangle were used for the comparison and ranking of all analyzed mortar mixtures. The findings of this study may herald a novel use of FA, CCA, and CWP as more eco-friendly binding materials in contemporary construction leading to the reduction in the process’s carbon footprint, the improvement in cost efficiency, and the mitigation of the detrimental environmental impact of waste disposal.</abstract><cop>Basel</cop><pub>MDPI AG</pub><pmid>37895706</pmid><doi>10.3390/ma16206725</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3029-9309</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9340-5220</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1565-822X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2889-4416</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1996-1944
ispartof Materials, 2023-10, Vol.16 (20), p.6725
issn 1996-1944
1996-1944
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10608085
source Full-Text Journals in Chemistry (Open access); PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; PubMed Central; EZB Electronic Journals Library
subjects Absorptivity
Adhesive bonding
Adhesive strength
Analysis
Biomass
Bonding strength
Bulk density
By products
Carbon
Cement
Ceramic powders
Ceramics
Compressive strength
Construction
Consumption
Corn
Ecological footprint
Emissions
Environmental impact
Flexural strength
Fly ash
Green market
Greenhouse gases
Industrial wastes
Landfill
Lime
Masonry
Mixing ratio
Mixtures
Mortars (material)
Natural resources
Permeability
Raw materials
Refuse and refuse disposal
Serbia
Sustainable development
Waste disposal
Waste management
Water absorption
Water vapor
Workability
title Environmentally Friendly Masonry Mortar Blended with Fly Ash, Corn Cob Ash or Ceramic Waste Powder
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T14%3A59%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Environmentally%20Friendly%20Masonry%20Mortar%20Blended%20with%20Fly%20Ash,%20Corn%20Cob%20Ash%20or%20Ceramic%20Waste%20Powder&rft.jtitle=Materials&rft.au=%C5%A0upi%C4%87,%20Slobodan&rft.date=2023-10-17&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=20&rft.spage=6725&rft.pages=6725-&rft.issn=1996-1944&rft.eissn=1996-1944&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/ma16206725&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA772098321%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2882808612&rft_id=info:pmid/37895706&rft_galeid=A772098321&rfr_iscdi=true