Engineering properties of soda-lime glass powder on Portland cement CEM IV-B-L mortar

Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Fly Ash: From Waste to Cement Manufacturing Resource

“…The results are as follows: HM: 1.8 for CEM III/A, 2.1 for SCB1 and 1.7 for SCB2; SM: 2.5 for CEM III/A, 2.1 for SCB1 and 2.7 for SCB2; AM: 3.1 for CEM III/A, 2.5 for SCB1 and 2.8 for SCB2. The results are within the accepted ranges to obtain cements with optimal properties [ 58 ].…”

Properties of eco-friendly cement mortar designed with grounded lead glass used as supplementary cementitious material

“…[ 31 ] and shows that lead glass is typically amorphous. However, when comparing the obtained spectrum with those of Kamga et al [ 34 ], it is noticed that the lead glass shows characteristic silica peaks in some places, while the soda lime glass spectra have no apparent peaks. This could reflect the fact that, although lead glass is largely amorphous, its production process tends to leave silica minerals remaining or recrystallizing, and therefore these glasses would be a mixture of amorphous and crystalline materials.…”

“…Indeed, the LGP grains mechanically separate the cement grains and cause cracks and pores during drying. Associated with this mechanical phenomenon, the cementitious reactions inherent to the addition of LGP also contribute to the development of pores and microcracks through the Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) [ 34 ]. The mortars developed in this study are therefore also influenced by the addition of glass.…”

“…This shows that the most porous composites have the highest absorption coefficients, as demonstrated by the correlation test. The pozzolanic reaction at the origin of the hardening of the cement produces a hydrophobic gel that fills the pores in the matrix and does not absorb more water [ 50 , 51 ], in contrast to the gels produced by the ASR, which are hydrophilic and create fracturing in the matrix [ 34 ]. The second-generation gel produced by glass [ 8 ], which is slow at a young age and more developed at an older age, is responsible for the overall decrease in porosity and thus water absorption with time.…”

“…It seems clear in this work that RC is more dependent on the filler effect than on the production of CSH, in which case the density would increase as the compressive strength increased. Moreover, since first-generation CSH is denser than second-generation CSH (still called low calcium silicate hydrate [ 34 ]), higher density values at 2 days are the result of first-generation CSH production, while the high pozzolanic activity of the second generation occurs between 7 days and 150 days, and the slightly lower values of the 300-day series indicate less CSH production (1st and 2nd generation), based on the density analysis.

Fig.

…”