Comparative Study on the Utilization of Calcined Clay,Reclaimed Fly Ash,and Slag as Supplementary Cementitious Materials

Abstract

Supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) are key for the durability of transportation infrastructure. Fly ash (FA), the most used SCM in the U.S.A., is becoming scarce, creating issues for state departments of transportation. To address the FA shortage, reclaimed FA products are becoming available; however, this is only a temporary solution. A promising long-term solution is the use of calcined clay (CC) either in the form of limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) or LC3-like systems, known as LC2, where Portland limestone cement (PLC) is simply blended with CC. This study examines the particle size, chemical composition, reactivity, strength activity, and effects on workability of two CCs (CC-1 and CC-2) from U.S. sources, and compares these to reclaimed FA and slag cement (SC). CC-1 was chosen for further studies in mortars because of its commercial availability in powder form. Mortar specimens with six binder systems (LC3, LC2-30% CC, LC2-50% CC, PLC, PLC-30% FA, and PLC-50% SC) and two water-to-binder ratios (0.4 and 0.45) were produced and systematically compared. Early- and long-term strength development, heat of hydration, bound water, calcium hydroxide content, and environmental impacts were evaluated. Results suggest that LC2 and LC3 systems are promising alternatives to alleviate the FA shortage, particularly because of their comparable or superior performance in key parameters such as strength development and environmental impact compared to the PLC system.

Keywords

limestone calcined clay cement reactivity strength activity index compressive strength isothermal calorimetry life cycle assessment

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Liu

J. C.

Hossain

M. U.

Xuan

Ali

H. A.

S. T.

Mechanical and Durability Performance of Sustainable Concretes Containing Conventional and Emerging Supplementary Cementitious Materials. Developments in the Built Environment, Vol. 15, 2023, p. 100197. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.DIBE.2023.100197

Ndahirwa

Zmamou

Lenormand

Leblanc

The Role of Supplementary Cementitious Materials in Hydration, Durability and Shrinkage of Cement-Based Materials, Their Environmental and Economic Benefits: A Review. Cleaner Materials, Vol. 5, 2022, p. 100123. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLEMA.2022.100123

American Coal Ash Association. Production & Use Reports. https://acaa-usa.org/publications/production-use-reports/. Accessed September 26, 2022.

Slag Cement Association. Slag Cement Shipping. https://www.slagcement.org/resources/shipments.aspx. Accessed September 26, 2022.

Diaz-Loya

Juenger

Seraj

Minkara

Extending Supplementary Cementitious Material Resources: Reclaimed and Remediated Fly Ash and Natural Pozzolans. Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 101, 2019, pp. 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONCOMP.2017.06.011

AASHTO. AASHTO Subcommittee on Materials (SOM) 2016 Fly Ash Task Force Report. AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2016.

Subedi

Arce

G. A.

Hassan

M. M.

Huang

Radovic

Hossain

Evaluation of Alternative Sources of Supplementary Cementitious Materials for Concrete Materials. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2022. 2676(6): 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981221074373

Sun

Zunino

Scrivener

Hydration and Phase Assemblage of Limestone Calcined Clay Cements (LC3) with Clinker Content below 50%. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 177, 2024, p. 107417. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONRES.2023.107417

Federal Highway Administration. FHWA-HRT-24-057: Evaluating and Implementing CC-I-L Cement for the Next Generation of Concrete Bridge Construction. Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C., 2024.

10.

Scrivener

K. L.

John

V. M.

Gartner

E. M.

Eco-Efficient Cements: Potential Economically Viable Solutions for a Low-CO2 Cement-Based Materials Industry. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 114, 2018, pp. 2–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONRES.2018.03.015

11.

Ijaz

W. M.

ur Rehman

Ijaz

Junaid

M. F.

Global Insights into Micro-Macro Mechanisms and Environmental Implications of Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3) for Sustainable Construction Applications. Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 907, 2024, p. 167794. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2023.167794

12.

Ruan

Jamil

Gautam

B. P.

Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Sustainable Cementitious Materials with Ultra-High Substitution Level of Calcined Clay and Limestone Powder. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 314, 2022, p. 125416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125416

13.

Dixit

Pang

S. D.

Performance of Mortar Incorporating Calcined Marine Clays with Varying Kaolinite Content. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 282, 2021, p. 124513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124513

14.

Shi

Ferreiro

Lothenbach

Geiker

M. R.

Kunther

Kaufmann

Herfort

Skibsted

Sulfate Resistance of Calcined Clay – Limestone – Portland Cements. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 116, 2019, pp. 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONRES.2018.11.003

15.

Sharma

Bishnoi

Martirena

Scrivener

Limestone Calcined Clay Cement and Concrete: A State-of-the-Art Review. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 149, 2021, p. 106564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2021.106564

16.

Dhandapani

Santhanam

Assessment of Pore Structure Evolution in the Limestone Calcined Clay Cementitious System and Its Implications for Performance. Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 84, 2017, pp. 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CEMCONCOMP.2017.08.012

17.

ASTM International. ASTM C778-21: Standard Specification for Standard Sand. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2021.

18.

ASTM International. ASTM C1879-20: Standard Test Methods for Measuring the Reactivity of Supplementary Cementitious Materials by Isothermal Calorimetry and Bound Water Measurements. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020.

19.

ASTM International. ASTM C311/C311M-24: Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Coal Ash or Natural Pozzolans for Use in Concrete. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2024.

20.

Kalina

R. D.

Al-Shmaisani

Ferron

R. D.

Juenger

M. C. G.

False Positives in ASTM C618 Speci Cations for Natural Pozzolans Compressive Strength Testing. ACI Standards, Vol. 116, 2019, pp. 165–173.

21.

ASTM International. ASTM C 305-20: Standard Practice for Mechanical Mixing of Hydraulic Cement Pastes and Mortars of Plastic Consistency. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020.

22.

ASTM International. ASTM C1437-20: Standard Test Method for Flow of Hydraulic Cement Mortar. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2020.

23.

ASTM International. ASTM C109/109M-21: Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2-in. or Cube Specimens). ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2021.

24.

ASTM International. ASTM C1872-18e2: Standard Test Method for Thermogravimetric Analysis of Hydraulic Cement. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2018.

25.

Jain

Pradhan

Effect of Cement Type on Hydration, Microstructure and Thermo-Gravimetric Behaviour of Chloride Admixed Self-Compacting Concrete. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 212, 2019, pp. 304–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.04.001

26.

Bhatty

J. I.

Hydration versus Strength in a Portland Cement Developed from Domestic Mineral Wastes - a Comparative Study. Thermochimica Acta, Vol. 106, No. C, 1986, pp. 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-6031(86)85120-6

27.

Santos

Almeida

Silvestre

J. D.

Faria

Life Cycle Assessment of Mortars: A Review on Technical Potential and Drawbacks. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 288, 2021, p. 123069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123069

28.

International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14040:2006 Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Principles and Framework. ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.

29.

Baker

Gupta

Hrach

Fly Ash Reclamation and Beneficiation Using a Triboelectric Belt Separator. Woca 2019, St. Louis, MI, 2019.

30.

Titan Cement Company. Environmental Product Declaration: Titan RCC Roanoke Cement. Titan Cement Company, Roanoke, VA, 2023.

31.

Hafez

Kurda

Cheung

W. M.

Nagaratnam

Comparative Life Cycle Assessment between Imported and Recovered Fly Ash for Blended Cement Concrete in the UK. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 244, 2020, p. 118722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118722

32.

Slag Cement Association. An Industry Average Environmental Product Declaration for Slag Cement. Slag Cement Association, Farmington Hills, MI, 2021.

33.

ecoinvent Association. ecoinvent Database, Version 3.4. ecoinvent Association, Zurich, Switzerland, 2017.

34.

European Federation of Concrete Admixture Associations (EFCA). EFCA Environmental Declarations for Admixtures. European Federation of Concrete Admixture Associations, Brussels, Belguim, 2021.

35.

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). U.S. Life Cycle Inventory Database. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, 2024.

36.

National Ready Mixed Concrete Association. NRMCA Regional Benchmark Report: April 2020. National Ready Mixed Concrete Association, Alexandria, VA, 2020.

37.

Zhang

Chen

Çopuroğlu

The Effect of Slag Chemistry on the Reactivity of Synthetic and Commercial Slags. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 335, 2022, p. 127493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127493

38.

Ramanathan

Tuen

Suraneni

Influence of Supplementary Cementitious Material and Filler Fineness on Their Reactivity in Model Systems and Cementitious Pastes. Materials and Structures/Materiaux et Constructions, Vol. 55, No. 5, 2022, pp. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-022-01980-2

39.

Benkeser

Hernandez

Lolli

Kurtis

Influence of Calcined Clay Morphology on Flow in Blended Cementitious Systems. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 160, 2022, p. 106927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2022.106927

40.

Avet

Scrivener

Investigation of the Calcined Kaolinite Content on the Hydration of Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3). Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 107, 2018, pp. 124–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2018.02.016

41.

Kadri

E. H.

Kenai

Ezziane

Siddique

De Schutter

Influence of Metakaolin and Silica Fume on the Heat of Hydration and Compressive Strength Development of Mortar. Applied Clay Science, Vol. 53, No. 4, 2011, pp. 704–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLAY.2011.06.008

42.

Zunino

Scrivener

The Reaction between Metakaolin and Limestone and Its Effect in Porosity Refinement and Mechanical Properties. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 140, 2021, p. 106307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2020.106307

43.

Lin

R. S.

Wang

X. Y.

Strengthening the Performance of Limestone-Calcined Clay Cement (LC3) Using Nano Silica. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 340, 2022, p. 127723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127723

44.

Ahmed

Chemical Reactions in Pozzolanic Concrete. Modern Approaches on Material Science, Vol. 1, No. 4, 2019, pp. 128–133. https://doi.org/10.32474/mams.2019.01.000120

45.

Lee

J. M.

Yang

H. J.

Jang

I. Y.

Kim

S. K.

Jung

D. H.

Comparison of Calcium Aluminate Cements on Hydration and Strength Development at Different Initial Curing Regimes. Case Studies in Construction Materials, Vol. 17, 2022, p. e01596. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CSCM.2022.E01596

46.

Norrarat

Tangchirapat

Songpiriyakij

Jaturapitakkul

Evaluation of Strengths from Cement Hydration and Slag Reaction of Mortars Containing High Volume of Ground River Sand and GGBF Slag. Advances in Civil Engineering, Vol. 2019, 2019, p. 4892015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4892015

47.

H. L.

Mishra

D. K.

Leung

C. K.

Compressive Strength and Environmental Impact of Sustainable Blended Cement with High-Dosage Limestone and Calcined Clay (LC2). Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 278, 2021, p. 123616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123616

48.

Berodier

Scrivener

Understanding the Filler Effect on the Nucleation and Growth of C-S-H. Journal of the American Ceramic Society, Vol. 97, No. 12, 2014, pp. 3764–3773.

49.

Bentz

D. P.

Peltz

M. A.

Winpigler

Early-Age Properties of Cement-Based Materials. II: Influence of Water-to-Cement Ratio. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, Vol. 21, No. 9, 2010, pp. 512–517. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2009)21

50.

Zunino

Scrivener

The Influence of the Filler Effect on the Sulfate Requirement of Blended Cements. Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 126, 2019, p. 105918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.105918

51.

Khare

H. S.

Burris

D. L.

A Quantitative Method for Measuring Nanocomposite Dispersion. Polymer, Vol. 51, No. 3, 2010, pp. 719–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2009.12.031

52.

Hay

Celik

Effects of Water-to-Binder Ratios (w/b) and Superplasticizer on Physicochemical, Microstructural, and Mechanical Evolution of Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3). Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 391, 2023, p. 131529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131529

53.

Hay

Celik

Performance Enhancement and Characterization of Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3) Produced with Low-Reactivity Kaolinitic Clay. Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 392, 2023, p. 131831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131831

54.

Kim

Olek

Effects of Sample Preparation and Interpretation of Thermogravimetric Curves on Calcium Hydroxide in Hydrated Pastes and Mortars. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2012. 2290: 10–18. https://doi.org/10.3141/2290-02

55.

Hetherington

A. C.

Borrion

A. L.

Griffiths

O. G.

McManus

M. C.

Use of LCA as a Development Tool within Early Research: Challenges and Issues across Different Sectors. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2014, pp. 130–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-013-0627-8

56.

Martinez

D. M.

Horvath

Monteiro

P. J. M.

Comparative Environmental Assessment of Limestone Calcined Clay Cements and Typical Blended Cements. Environmental Research Communications, Vol. 5, No. 5, 2023, p. 055002. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/acccd8

57.

Arruda Junior

E. S.

de Sales Braga

N. T.

Barata

M. S.

Life Cycle Assessment to Produce LC³ Cements with Kaolinitic Waste from the Amazon Region, Brazil. Case Studies in Construction Materials, Vol. 18, 2023, p. e01729. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CSCM.2022.E01729

58.

Gettu

Patel

Rathi

Prakasan

Basavaraj

A. S.

Palaniappan

Maity

Influence of Supplementary Cementitious Materials on the Sustainability Parameters of Cements and Concretes in the Indian Context. Materials and Structures/Materiaux et Constructions, Vol. 52, No. 1, 2019, pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-019-1321-5

59.

Portland Cement Association. Environmental Product Declaration: Blended Hydraulic Cements. Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL, 2023.