Geopolymer with brick and concrete demolition constructions waste

C. Parra; I. Miñano; M. Calabuig; F. Benito; J. M. Mateo; E. Carrión; C. Ruiz

doi:10.3989/mc.2024.392424

Authors

C. Parra Architecture and Building Technology Department, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2063-4604
I. Miñano Architecture and Building Technology Department, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8863-8759
M. Calabuig Architecture and Building Technology Department, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0622-7229
F. Benito Innovation Department. Urdecon Constructions https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0082-7900
J.M. Mateo Architecture and Building Technology Department, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7948-8059
E. Carrión Architecture and Building Technology Department, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3642-2875
C. Ruiz Innovation Department. Urdecon Constructions https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1600-4914

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2024.392424

Keywords:

Geopolymer, Construction waste, Sustainability

Abstract

The production of building materials impacts non-renewable resources through excessive raw material extraction and fossil resource consumption. This study investigates alternatives to Portland cement concrete by valorizing construction and demolition waste (CDW), including brick and reinforced concrete. The objective is to replace or eliminate clinker using geopolymers while incorporating CDW as recycled aggregates. Sustainable concretes were developed, such as geoconcrete with 0% clinker and 50% recycled aggregate, along with blends containing varying CDW percentages for structural applications. Results indicate that geopolymers with 100% ground granulated blast furnace slag (GBFS) achieve properties comparable to reference concrete. However, mixtures with recycled brick and concrete show lower strength due to low molarity and recycled aggregate usage. Elastic modulus increases with 100% GBFS but decreases by less than 10% with CDW. In beams, breaking moments reduce by up to 30% with 25% CDW, while brick-based mixtures demonstrate higher energy absorption.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Energy Technology Perspectives 2015 – Analysis - IEA. Accessed: Nov. 14, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-technology-perspectives-2015

Van Jaarsveld JSJ, Van Deventer JSJ, Lorenzen L. 1997. The potential use of geopolymeric materials to immobilise toxic metals: Part I. Theory and applications. Miner. Eng. 10(7):659–669.

Mahmoodi O, Siad H, Lachemi M, Dadsetan S, Sahmaran M. 2021. Development of normal and very high strength geopolymer binders based on concrete waste at ambient environment. J. Clean. Prod. 279:123436.

Komnitsas K, Zaharaki D, Vlachou A, Bartzas G, Galetakis M. 2015. Effect of synthesis parameters on the quality of construction and demolition wastes (CDW) geopolymers. Adv. Powder Technol. 26(2):368–376.

Murillo LM, Delvasto S, Gordillo M. 2017. A study of a hybrid binder based on alkali-activated ceramic tile wastes and Portland cement. In: Sustainable and Nonconventional Construction Materials Using Inorganic Bonded Fiber Composites. 2017:291–311.

Bassani M, Tefa L, Russo A, Palmero P. 2019. Alkali-activation of recycled construction and demolition waste aggregate with no added binder. Construct. Build. Mater. 205:398–413.

Tuyan M, Andiç-Çakir Ö, Ramyar K. 2018. Effect of alkali activator concentration and curing condition on strength and microstructure of waste clay brick powder-based geopolymer. Compos. B. 135:242–252.

Rakhimova N, Rakhimov R. 2015. Alkali-activated cements and mortars based on blast furnace slag and red clay brick waste. Materials & Design. 85:324–332.

Krivenko P, Kavalerova E. 2008. Performance of alkali-activated cements-perspective ways for carbon dioxide emissions reduction. In: 3rd International Symposium. Non-traditional Cement & Concrete, Brno University of Technology, Brno, Czech Republic, pp. 389–399.

García-Lodeiro A, Fernández-Jiménez A, Palomo A, Macphee DE. 2010. Effect of calcium additions on N–A–S–H cementitious gels. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 93(7):1934–1940.

Puligilla S, Mondal P. 2013. Role of slag in microstructural development and hardening of fly ash-slag geopolymer. Cement Concr. Res. 43:70–80.

Rakhimova NR, Rakhimov RZ. 2019. Reaction products, structure, and properties of alkali-activated metakaolin cements incorporated with supplementary materials – a review. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 8(1):1522–1531.

Lampris C, et al. 2009. Geopolymerisation of silt generated from construction and demolition waste washing plants. J. Waste Manag. 29(1):368-373.

Huo W, Zhu Z, Chen W, Zhang J, Kang Z, Pu S, Wan Y. 2021. Effect of synthesis parameters on the development of unconfined compressive strength of recycled waste concrete powder-based geopolymers. Construct. Build. Mater. 292:123264.

Panias D, GiannopoulouI P, Perraki T. 2007. Effect of synthesis parameters on the mechanical properties of fly ash-based geopolymers. Colloids Surf, A301(1–3):246–254.

Ahmari S, Zhang L. 2012. Production of eco-friendly bricks from copper mine tailings through geopolymerization. Construct. Build. Mater. 29:323–331.

Vafaei M, Allahverdi A. 2019. Strength development and acid resistance of geopolymer based on waste clay brick powder and phosphorous slag. Struct. Concr. 20(5):1596–1606.

Akduman S, et al. 2021. Experimental investigations on the structural behaviors of reinforced geopolymer beams produced from recycled construction materials. Journal of Building Engineering. 41:102776.

Zheng Y, Xiao Y. 2023. A comparative study on strength, bond-slip performance, and microstructure of geopolymer/ordinary recycled brick aggregate concrete. Construct. Build. Mater. 366:130257.

Asadizadeh M, Hedayat A, Tunstal L, Vega JA, Vera, JW, Taboada M. The impact of slag on the process of geopolymerization and the mechanical performance of mine-tailings-based alkali-activated lightweight aggregates. Construction and Building Materials. 411:134347.

Abdalla JA, Rasheed R. 2022. Behavior of reinforced concrete beams strengthened in flexure using externally bonded aluminum alloy plates. ICSI 2021, Procedia Structural Integrity 37(2022):652–659.

Majid MA, Kadhim AJ, Jawdhari WN, Ali M. 2023. Experimental study on RC beams strengthened in flexure with CFRP-Reinforced UHPC overlays. Eng. Struct. 285:116066.

Dahou Z, Castel A, Noushini A. 2016. Prediction of the steel-concrete bond strength from the compressive strength of Portland cement and geopolymer concretes. Construct. Build. Mater. 119:329–342.

Ronmanazzi V, Leone M, Aiello M, Pecce M. 2022. Bond behavior of geopolymer concrete with steel and GFRP bars. Compos. Struct. 300:116150.

Ahmed H, Jaf D, Yaseen S. 2020. Flexural strength and failure of geopolymer concrete beams reinforced with carbon fibre-reinforced polymer bars. Construct. Build. Mater. 231:117185.

Peng KD, Huang BT, Xu LY, Hu RL, Dai JG. 2022. Flexural strengthening of reinforced concrete beams using geopolymer-bonded small-diameter CFRP bars. Eng. Struct. 256:113992.

Ansari MA, Shariq M, Mahdi F. 2023. Structural behavior of reinforced geopolymer concrete beams – A review. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2023.