The Effect of Calcination Time upon the Slaking Properties of Quicklime

  • Dorn Carran
  • John Hughes
  • Alick Leslie
  • Craig Kennedy
Conference paper
Part of the RILEM Bookseries book series (RILEM, volume 7)


An experiment was conducted to determine how the slaking characteristics of quicklime produced from the calcination of selected limestones relates to calcination time. The experiment also permitted the determination of the optimum calcination time by determining when each limestone was under or over burnt (as indicated by minimum water reactivity values). Four limestones, three from Scotland Dornie, Parkmore, Trearne and one from England- Ham Hill, were calcined at 900°C for a range of times between 2 and 5 h. The limestones used include both granoblastic metamorphic and bioclastic-micritic limestones with variable silicate contents. The resulting quicklimes were tested for reactivity by recording temperature rise and rate of temperature rise during slaking. Sieve analysis of the residue after slaking was performed on some samples. The Dornie limestone was the most reactive with an optimum calcination time of 4 h, Ham Hill was the second most reactive with an optimum calcination time of 3.5 h, Trearne followed at 4 h and the least reactive was the Parkmore sample with an optimum calcination time of 4.5 h. Dornie, Ham Hill and Trearne limestones underwent complete calcination with a weight loss greater than 40%. The experiment showed that the determination of the optimum calcination time through the examination of water reactivity was possible.


Percentage Weight Loss Calcination Time High Maximum Temperature Dewar Vessel Average Bulk Density 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Mike Lawrence (Univ. of Bath) is thanked for sending samples of Ham Hill stone. Jan Válek and anonymous reviewers are thanked for their positive comments.


  1. 1.
    Hogewoning, S.: The relation between limestone properties and quicklime reactivity. In: 11th ILA Congress 16th–19th May, Prague (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boynton, R.S.: Chemistry and Technology of Lime and Limestone, 2nd edn, p. 578. Wiley Interscience/Wiley, New York/Chichester/Brisbane/Toronto (1980)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oates, J.A.H.: Lime and Limestone: Chemistry and Technology, Production and Uses, p. 455. Wiley, Weinheim/New York/Chichester/Brisbane/Singapore/Toronto (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Turkdogan, E.T.: Physical Chemistry of High Temperature Technology. Academic, New York/London/Toronto/Sydney/San Francisco (1980)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moropoulou, A., Bakolas, A., Aggelakopoulou, E.: The effects of limestone characteristics and calcination temperature on the reactivity of the quicklime. Cem. Concr. Res. 31, 633–639 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Prave, A.R., et al.: A composite C-isotope profile for the Neoproterozoic Dalradian Supergroup in Scotland and Ireland. J. Geol. Soc. 166(5), 845–857 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Robertson, T., Simpson, J.B., Anderson, J.G.C.: The Limestones of Scotland, vol. XXXV, p. 221. HMSO – Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, Edinburgh (1976)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holmes, S.: Evaluation of Limestone and Building Limes in Scotland. Historic Scotland Research Report, p. 140. Research and Education Division, Historic Scotland, Edinburgh (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grout, A., Smith, C.G.: Limestone and dolomite resources. Scottish Highlands and Southern Uplands Mineral Portfolio: Technical Report WF/89/5. In: British Geological Survey Mineral Resources Series. BGS, Edinburgh (1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Muir, A., Hardie, H.G.M.: The limestones of Scotland. Chemical Analyses and Petrography. Special Reports on the Mineral Resources of Great Britain The Limestones of Scotland, vol. XXXVII, p. 156. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office Department of Scientific and Industrial Research Geological Survey of Great Britain, Edinburgh (1956)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Trewin, N.H.: The Geology of Scotland, 4th edn. The Geological Society of London, Bath (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pickard, N.A.H.: Depositional controls on lower carboniferous microbial buildups, Eastern Midland Valley of Scotland. Sedimentology 39(6), 1081–1100 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Geological-Society: British Regional Geology Survey for Bristol and Gloucester Area, 2nd edn. The Geological Society, London (1975)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lawrence, R.M.H.: A Study of Carbonation in Non-Hydraulic Lime Mortars. University of Bath, Bath (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    British Standards Institute: BS EN 459-2: 2001 Building Lime: Test Methods, British Standards Institute (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    ASTM: ASTM C110-10 Standard Test Methods for Physical Testing of Quicklime, Hydrated Lime, and Limestone (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Beruto, D.T., et al.: A consecutive decomposition-sintering dilatometer method to study the effect of limestone impurities on lime microstructure and its water reactivity. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 30, 1277–1286 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cunningham, W.A.: Fundamentals of lime burning. Ind. Eng. Chem. 43(3), 635–638 (1951)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gallala, W., et al.: Factors influencing the reactivity of quicklime. Constr. Mater. 161, 25–30 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Afridi, S.K., et al.: Experimental study of calcination-carbonation process for the production of precipitated calcium carbonate. J. Chem. Soc. Pak. 30(4), 559–562 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© RILEM 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dorn Carran
    • 1
  • John Hughes
    • 1
  • Alick Leslie
    • 2
  • Craig Kennedy
    • 3
  1. 1.School of EngineeringUniversity of the West of ScotlandPaisleyScotland, UK
  2. 2.British Geological SurveyEdinburghScotland, UK
  3. 3.Historic ScotlandEdinburghScotland, UK

Personalised recommendations