Title:
Investigating the feasibility of using reclaimed and remediated fly ashes as Class F fly ash alternatives
Author(s):
Raissa Ferron, Ryan Kalina, Saif Al-Shmaisani, Maria Juenger
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
320
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
33.1-33.14
Keywords:
supplementary cementitious materials; coal combustion residuals, reclaimed fly ash, remediated fly ash, compressive strength, durability, alkali-silica reaction
DOI:
10.14359/51701071
Date:
8/1/2017
Abstract:
Supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) are a staple in modern day concrete. In the US, Class F fly ash is a preferred SCM due to its wide availability, low cost and beneficial
effects on concrete’s mechanical properties, heat of hydration, durability performance, economics, and environmental performance. However, the quantity and quality of Class F fly
ash is declining across many regions of the US. This paper presents the results of ongoing research that is being conducted to determine whether alternative ashes, specifically previously rejected coal combustion residuals and reclaimed coal combustion residuals, can be used to replace Class F fly ash in portland cement mixtures. The effects of these potential
alternative binder materials on compressive strength and alkali-silica resistance are presented, as well as a discussion on the underlying mechanisms responsible for differences in the fly ash performance. The results indicate that beneficial effects of using reclaimed and remediated ashes on compressive strength are more pronounced at later time frames than at
earlier time periods. Additionally, improvements in alkali-silica resistance can occur when suitable alternative ashes are used as cement replacements.
Related References:
1. United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). "Fly Ash." Retrieved February 14, 2017 from https://www3.epa.gov/warm/pdfs/Fly_Ash.pdf.
2. ARTBA Transportation Development Foundation. (2011). "The Economic Impacts ofProhibiting Coal Fly Ash Use in Transportation Infrastructure Construction ", fromhttp://db78bc60e308ad8dc7c2-6f6534a35fc09b927eb00e4333a7f4cf.r47.cf2.rackcdn.com/uploaded/s/0e927411_study2011flyash.pdf
3. ASTM International (2012). ASTM C618-12a: Standard Specification for Coal FlyAsh and Raw or Calcined Natural Pozzolan for Use in Concrete. West Conshohocken,PA.
4. Texas Department of Transportation. (2014). "Standard Specifications forConstruction and Maintenance of Highways, Streets, and Bridges." fromhttp://www.txdot.gov/business/resources/txdot-specifications.html
5. Cheerarot, R. and C. Jaturapitakkul (2004). "A study of disposed fly ash from landfillto replace Portland cement." Waste Management 24(7): 701-709.
6. ASTM International (2012). ASTM C150/C150M-12 Standard Specification forPortland Cement. West Conshohocken, PA.
7. Seraj, S., Cano, R., Liu, S., Whitney, D., Fowler, D., Ferron, R., Zhu, J., and M.Juenger. (2014). Evaluating the performance of alternative supplementary cementingmaterial in concrete,” Report No. FHWA/TA-14/0-6717-1.
8. Seraj, S., Cano, R., Ferron, R., and M. Juenger. (2015). Calcined shale as low costsupplementary cementitious material. Proceedings of Calcined Clays for SustainableConcrete. Lausanne, Switzerland, Springer: 531–547.
9. ASTM International (2013). ASTM C311: Standard Test Method for Sampling andTesting Fly Ash or Natural Pozzolans for Use in Portland-Cement Concrete. WestConshohocken, PA.
10. ASTM International (2015). ASTM C430: Standard Test Method for Fineness ofHydraulic Cement by the 45-µm (No. 325) Sieve. West Conshohocken, PA.
11. ASTM International (2016). ASTM C151: Standard Test Method for AutoclaveExpansion of Hydraulic Cement. West Conshohocken, PA.
12. ASTM International (2016). ASTM C109: Standard Test Method for CompressiveStrength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2-in. or [50-mm] Cube Specimens).West Conshohocken, PA.
13. ASTM International (2013). ASTM C1567: Standard Test Method for Determiningthe Potential Alkali-Silica Reactivity of Combinations of Cementitious Materials andAggregate (Accelerated Mortar-Bar Method). West Conshohocken, PA.
14. Oey, T., A. Kumar, et al. (2013). "The Filler Effect: The Influence of Filler Contentand Surface Area on Cementitious Reaction Rates." Journal of the American CeramicSociety 96(6): 1978-1990.
15. Lothenbach, B., K. Scrivener, et al. (2011). "Supplementary cementitious materials."Cement and Concrete Research 41(12): 1244-1256.