Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Behaviour of cenosphere and pumice powder as partial cement substitute material in the sustainable production of concrete

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Building Pathology and Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Scientific researchers and engineers have been looking into alternative materials that could be used in concrete as a partial cement substitute, to reduce carbon emissions. One such substance that has attention as a potential cement alternative is industrial pozzolanic waste. The present research explores the possibility of using industrial pozzolanic waste products such as cenosphere and pumice powder to partially substitute cement in concrete. By chemical analysis, Cenosphere and Pumice Powder could be utilized as pozzolans conforming to ASTM C 618:2019. The compressive strength, tensile splitting, and flexural strength of concrete mixtures are among the attributes of fresh and hardened concrete that will be evaluated in the study. Additionally, tests for water absorption and durability performance were performed on the specimens in an acidic environment. Cement in the concrete mix was replaced with cenosphere and pumice powder in weight by various amounts of 0, 20% and 30% with a water-to-binder ratio of 0.4. The results demonstrated a rise in compressive strength of up to 12.5% replacement over the age of concrete. In the blended concrete sample with 20% cement replaced with 10% cenosphere and 10% pumice powder compared to the control sample, the splitting strength increased by 6% while the flexural strength increased by 6.1%. Additionally, the concrete ability to absorb water dropped to the 20% replacement level. Based on the results of the present investigation, pozzolanic waste materials such as cenosphere and pumice powder can be utilized to replace cement during the manufacturing of durable concrete under conventional conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mehta PK, Monteiro PJ (2014) Concrete: microstructure, properties, and materials. McGraw Hill Education, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Shah HA, Nehdi ML, Khan MI, Akmal U, Alabduljabbar H, Mohamed A, Sheraz M (2022) Predicting compressive and splitting tensile strengths of silica fume concrete using M5P model tree algorithm. Materials 15(15):5436. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155436

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Yu QL, Spiesz P, Brouwers HJH (2013) Development of cement based lightweight composites Part 1: mix design methodology and hardened properties. Cement Concr Compos 44:17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2013.03.030

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wang R, Meyer C (2012) Performance of cement mortar made with recycled high impact polystyrene. Cement Concr Compos 34(9):975–981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2012.06.014

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen X, Wu S, Zhou J (2013) Influence of porosity on compressive and tensile strength of cement mortar. Constr Build Mater 40:869–874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.11.072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Flores YC, Cordeiro GC, Toledo Filho RD, Tavares LM (2017) Performance of Portland cement pastes containing nanosilica and different types of silica. Constr Build Mater 146:524–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.04.069

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goldman A, Bentur A (1993) The influence of microfillers on enhancement of concrete strength. Cem Concr Res 23:962–972. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(93)90050-J

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kadri E, Aggoun S, De Schutter G, Ezziane K (2010) Combined effect of chemical nature and fineness of mineral powders on Portland cement hydration. Mater Struct 43:665–673. https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-009-9519-6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Blanco F, Garcia P, Mateos P, Ayala J (2000) Characteristics and properties of lightweight concrete manufactured with cenospheres. Cem Concr Res 30:1715–1722. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(00)00357-4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Topçu IB, Uygunoğlu T (2007) Properties of autoclaved lightweight aggregate concrete. Build Environ 42(12):4108–4116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.11.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nedunuri SSA, Sertse SG, Muhammad S (2020) Microstructural study of Portland cement partially replaced with fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag and silica fume as determined by pozzolanic activity. Constr Build Mater 238:117561

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bentz DP, Garboczi EG (1991) Simulation studies of the effects of mineral admixtures on the cement paste aggregate interfacial zone. ACI Mater J 88:518–529

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Demirboğa R, Gul R (2003) The effects of expanded perlite aggregate, silica fume and fly ash on the thermal conductivity of lightweight concrete. Cem Concr Res 33(5):723–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(02)01032-3

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sengul O, Azizi S, Karaosmanoglu F, Tasdemir MA (2011) Effect of expanded perlite on the mechanical properties and thermal conductivity of lightweight concrete. Energy Build 43(2):671–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.11.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim HK, Jeon JH, Lee HK (2012) Workability, and mechanical, acoustic and thermal properties of lightweight aggregate concrete with a high volume of entrained air. Constr Build Mater 29:193–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.08.067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. ASTM C227 97a (2017) Standard test method for potential alkali reactivity of cement-aggregate combinations (Mortar-Bar Method). https://doi.org/10.1520/C0227-97A

  17. ASTM C1260-22 (2022) Standard test method for potential alkali reactivity of aggregates (Mortar-Bar Method). https://doi.org/10.1520/C1260-22

  18. Wang JY, Zhang MH, Li W, Chia KS, Liew RJY (2012) Stability of cenospheres in lightweight cement composites in terms of the alkali–silica reaction. Cem Concr Res 42(5):721–727

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Du H (2019) Properties of ultralightweight cement composites with nanosilica. Constr Build Mater 199:696–704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.11.225

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu X, Zhang M-H, Chia KS, Yan J, Liew JYR (2016) Mechanical properties of ultralightweight cement composite at low temperatures of 0 to 60 °C. Cem Concr Compos 73:289–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2016.05.014

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Sohel KMA, Al Jabri K, Zhang MH, Liew JYR (2018) Flexural fatigue behavior of ultralightweight cement composite and high strength lightweight aggregate concrete. Constr Build Mater 173:90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.03.276

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Nachbaur L et al (2001) Dynamic mode rheology of cement and tricalcium silicate pastes from mixing to setting. Cem Concr Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(00)00464-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. IS 12269 (1987) Specification for 53 grade ordinary Portland cement

  24. Mbugua R, Salim R, Ndambuki J (2016) Effect of Gum Arabic karroo as a water-reducing admixture in concrete. Materials. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma9020080

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. IS 456 (2000) Indian standards methods for practice for plain and reinforced concrete

  26. IS 1199 (1959) Indian standards methods of sampling and analysis of concrete

  27. ASTM C642-21 Standard test method for density, absorption, and voids in hardened concrete

  28. IS 516 (1959) Indian standards method of test for strength of concrete

  29. IS 5816 (1999) Indian standards method of test for splitting tensile strength of concrete

  30. IS 3085 Method of test for permeability of cement mortar and concrete

  31. ASTM C618 Standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or calcined natural pozzolan for use in concrete

  32. Hanif A, Parthasarathy P, Ma H, Fan T, Li Z (2017) Properties improvement of fly ash cenosphere modified cement pastes using nano silica. Cement Concr Compos. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.04.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Barbare N, Shukla A, Bose A (2003) Uptake and loss of water in a cenosphere–concrete composite material. Cem Concr Res 33(10):1681–1686

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Vijayalakshmi R, Naganathan S, Ramanagopal S (2022) Study on the compressive strength and water absorption characteristics of mortar blocks with cenosphere as partial replacement for cement. In: Sustainable Practices and Innovations in Civil Engineering: Select Proceedings of SPICE 2021, Springer, Singapore, pp 251–263

  35. Gaus A, Anwar C (2020) Analysis of the mechanical properties of concrete beams that use pumice as a partial substitution of concrete mixtures. J Phys Conf Ser 1569(4):042037

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kabay N, Tufekci MM, Kizilkanat AB, Oktay D (2015) Properties of concrete with pumice powder and fly ash as cement replacement materials. Constr Build Mater 85:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Huang Z, Padmaja K, Li S, Richard Liew JY (2018) Mechanical properties and microstructure of ultra-lightweight cement composites with fly ash cenospheres after exposure to high temperatures. Constr Build Mater 164:760–774

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kabay N, Miyan N, Özkan H (2021) Utilization of pumice powder and glass microspheres in cement mortar using paste replacement methodology. Constr Build Mater 282:122691

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Senthamarai Kannan K, Andal L, Shanmugasundaram M (2016) An investigation on strength development of cement with cenosphere and silica fume as pozzolanic replacement. Adv Mater Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/9367619

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Vel Tech Rangarajan Dr. Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

    M. Jayadurgalakshmi & S. Kandasamy

Authors
  1. M. Jayadurgalakshmi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Kandasamy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MJ—wrote main manuscript text, prepared figures and tables. SK—reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Jayadurgalakshmi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jayadurgalakshmi, M., Kandasamy, S. Behaviour of cenosphere and pumice powder as partial cement substitute material in the sustainable production of concrete. J Build Rehabil 9, 47 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-024-00397-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-024-00397-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation