See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257389333

Durability of mortar using waste glass powder

as cement replacement

Article in Construction and Building Materials · November 2012

DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.027

CITATIONS READS

53 1,179

2 authors:

Ana Mafalda Matos Joana Sousa coutinho

University of Porto University of Porto
23 PUBLICATIONS 88 CITATIONS 41 PUBLICATIONS 282 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Ultra high performance fiber reiforced concrete View project

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Ana Mafalda Matos
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 21 November 2016
 Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Durability of mortar using waste glass powder as cement replacement

Ana Mafalda Matos a,⇑, Joana Sousa-Coutinho a,b
a
LABEST FEUP, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Portugal
b
FEUP, Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto, Portugal

h i g h l i g h t s

" Glass powder is thoroughly analysed as a partial cement replacement material in mortar.
" Testing is carried out far beyond the usual mechanical testing and ASR by most authors.
" Chloride ingress, carbonation, sulphate attack and sorptivity are also considered for durability assessment.
" SEM demonstrated effect of fine glass particles well encapsulated into a dense matrix.
" This holistic study confirms that glass powder contributes to sustainability in construction.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: It is well known that Portland cement production is an energy-intensive industry, being responsible for
Received 21 August 2011 about 5% of the global anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions worldwide. An important contribution to
Received in revised form 28 March 2012 sustainability of concrete and cement industries consists of using pozzolanic additions, especially if
Accepted 25 April 2012
obtained from waste such as waste glass.
Crushed waste glass was ground (WGP) and used in mortar as a partial cement replacement (0%, 10%
and 20%) material to ascertain applicability in concrete.
Keywords:
An extensive experimental program was carried out including pozzolanic activity, setting time, sound-
Waste
Glass powder
ness, specific gravity, chemical analyses, laser particle size distribution, X-ray diffraction and scanning
Mortar electron microscopy (SEM) on WGP and resistance to alkali silica reaction (ASR), chloride ion penetration
Addition resistance, absorption by capillarity, accelerated carbonation and external sulphate resistance on mortar
Durability containing WGP.
Pozzolanic activity Glass particles well encapsulated into dense and mature gel observed by SEM, may help explaining
enhanced durability results and thus confirming that waste glass powder can further contribute to sus-
tainability in construction.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction While cement production in its beginnings only focused on or-

Concrete is the most commonly used construction material in
the world and it is the second most consumed product on the
planet after water [1].
Today’s annual global cement production has reached 2.8 bil-
lion tons, and is expected to increase to some 4 billion tons per
year. At the same time, the cement industry is facing challenges
such as cost increases in energy supply, requirements to reduce
CO2 emissions and the supply of raw materials in sufficient quali-
ties and amounts [2]. It is estimated that about 0.9–1.0 tons of CO2
are produced for a ton of clinker depending on the type of fuels
used [3].
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Rua do Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto,
Portugal. Tel.: +351 225081936; fax: +351 225081441.
E-mail address: anamatos@fe.up.pt (A.M. Matos).
dinary Portland cement, later cements with several main constitu-
ents were produced by replacing parts of the clinker content by
supplementary cementitious materials [3].
Ecological or environmental benefits of alternative supplemen-
tary materials include (1) the diversion of non-recycled waste from
landfills for useful applications, (2) the reduction in the negative
effects of producing cement powder, namely the consumption of
non-renewable natural resources, (3) the reduction in the use of
energy for cement production and (4) the corresponding emission
of greenhouse gasses [4].
Solid industrial by-products, such as siliceous and aluminous
materials, as well as some natural pozzolanic materials are increas-
ingly being used in the cement and concrete industry. The incorpo-
ration of these materials in concrete has been giving encouraging
results regarding the mechanical and durability properties of con-
crete [5].

0950-0618/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.027
206 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215
Despite the existence of large amounts of industrial waste such
as blast furnace slag, fly ash, silica fume, slag and agricultural res-
idues such as rice husk ash, which have been used for many years
in large amount as raw materials and components in the cement
industry, there are still many other industrial wastes not used
yet [7], such as waste glass. In fact a few studies have successfully
investigated the potential use of finely ground waste glass as a poz-
zolanic material focusing on strength development and alkali-silica
reactivity [9–18,20–23].
Glass is the result of the merger of several inorganic mineral
raw materials, which after undergoing a process of controlled cool-
ing becomes a hard, homogeneous, stable, inert, amorphous and
isotropic material [8]. Based on the major composition, glass can
be classified into several categories but soda-lime glass is the most
widely used to manufacture containers, float and sheet glass and
therefore composing over 80% by weight of waste glass [9].
With the exception of Al2O3 and CaO, the percentages of the
main constituents of different types of glass are similar [4,6]. For
soda lime glass the typical glass composition is approximately
70% of silica, 13–17% Na2O and 10% CaO [9].
In fact, glass can be considered a pozzolanic-cementitious mate-
rial according to the chemical requirements in ASTM C 618 [33] if
the alkali content is disregarded.
Alkalis can cause alkali-aggregate reaction and expansion if
aggregates are alkali-reactive. Therefore high alkali content of glass
is a typical concern for its use in concrete but studies have shown
that finely ground glass does not contribute to ASR [15,20,21]. The
pozzolanic properties of glass are first notable at particle sizes be-
low approximately 300 lm. Below 100 lm, glass can have a pozzo-
lanic reactivity which is greater than that of fly ash at low percent
cement replacement levels and after 90 days of curing [5]. In fact,
according to Shi and Zheng [9], ground glass powders exhibit very
good pozzolanic reactivity and can be used as cement replacement.
As expected its pozzolanic activity increases as fineness increases
[9]. The combined use of other supplementary cementing materials
such as coal fly ash, ground blast furnace slag and metakaolin can
also decrease the expansion from ASR. Lithium salt can be also very
effective to prevent ASR expansion of concrete containing glass
powders [10]. In any case compressive strength is often lower
when waste glass powder is used as cement replacement, espe-
cially at early ages [15,18,20].
Fig. 1. Particle size distribution of cement and WGP.
The environmental and economic benefits from the reuse of
recycled waste glass in cement and concrete production can also
be very significant depending on the end uses and production scale
[9].
Therefore the present work besides the usual strength and ASR
testing encompasses a wider range of analysis of effect of waste
glass powder, including pozzolanic activity, setting time, sound-
ness, specific gravity, chemical analyses, laser particle size distri-
bution, X ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy (SEM),
chloride ion penetration resistance, absorption by capillarity,
accelerated carbonation and external sulphate attack. This holistic
study corroborates that glass powder as a partial replacement
material is a waste material that contributes to sustainability in
construction.
2. Experimental program
2.1. Materials
Typical commercial Type I 42.5R Portland cement was used and commercial sil-
ica fume (SF) was employed as a reference pozzolanic material. Waste glass was ob-
tained from a recycling glass industry in Portugal where waste glass such as car
windscreens is crushed and sold to the bottle industry. Fine waste glass from this
industry was ground during 48 h in a ball mill in the laboratory (WGP). Fig. 1 shows
particle size distribution of cement and WGP. X-ray diffraction on WGP showed that
no substantial crystalline phases were detected. Soundness and setting time tests
(NP EN 196-3 [36]) were carried out on pastes with 100% CEM I 42.5R (CTL) and
on paste with 10% (WGP10) and with 20% (WGP20) cement replacement with
WGP. Pozzolanicity test was carried out following NP EN 196-5 [37] on a sample
with 90% of cement and 10% of WGP. Chemical composition and physical character-
istics of WGP and cement are given in Table 1. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)
was carried out on CEM I 42.5R, silica fume and WGP samples shown in Fig 2.
2.2. Mortar production and workability
Four mortar types were prepared following the procedure described in NP EN
196-1 [35] a control mix with 100% cement (CTL), mixes with 10% (WGP10) and
20% (WGP20) of waste glass powder as cement replacement and a mix with 10% ce-
ment replacement with silica fume (SF). CEN Reference sand for mortar production
and super plasticizer (SP) SikaVisocrete 3000 complying with NP EN 2 [41] were
used.
Mortar workability (measured according to ASTM C 109/90 [31] and ASTM C230
[32]) increased with cement replacement with WGP, but SF mortar showed a signif-
icant workability decrease so super plasticizer was added. Mix proportions and
workability results are shown in Table 2.
 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215 207

Table 1 calculation of the chloride diffusion coefficient (Dns) from an accelerated test. An
Chemical and physical characteristics of cement and glass. external electrical potential is applied axially across the specimen and forces the
chloride ions outside to migrate into the specimen. After a certain test duration,
CEM I 45.2R WGP Silica fume the specimen is axially split and a silver nitrate solution is sprayed on to one of
Chemical composition (% mass) the freshly split sections. The chloride penetration depth can then be measured
LOI 2.61 0.92 from the visible white silver chloride precipitation, after which the chloride migra-
Insoluble residue 1.33 tion coefficient can be calculated from this penetration depth as follows:
SiO2 20.36 70 >99 pffiffiffiffiffi
RTL xd  a xd
Al2O3 5.1 1.2 Dns ¼ : ð3Þ
ZFU t
Fe2O3 3.12 0.65
CaO 62.72 8.7 rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
MgO 1.81 3.7 RTL
a¼2 e ð4Þ
Na2O 16 ZFU
K2O 0.35  
Na2O eq 17 2C d
e ¼ erf 1 1  ð5Þ
SO3 3.44 <0.05 C0
Cl 0012 <0005
where Dns is the apparent diffusion coefficient obtained in a non-steady state migra-
Free lime 1.62
tion test (cm2/s), R the gas constant R = 8.314 J/(mol K), T the absolute temperature
Pozzolanic activity Positive Positive
(K), L the thickness of specimen (cm), Z the ion valence, F the Faraday constant,
Physical properties F = 9.648  104 J (V mol.), U the effective voltage applied (V), xd the depth of chloride
Specific gravity (g/cm3) 3.16 2.68 2.20 penetration measured by using a colorimetric method (cm), t the time of test dura-
Soundness (mm) 0 0 0 tion (s), a the laboratory constant, e = 0.764 if external chloride concentration of
Initial setting time 0.5 M. Cd the concentration of free chloride at which the colour changes when using
WGP10/WGP20 2 h, 20 m/2 h, 15 m the colorimetric method to measure the chloride penetration depth (kg Cl/m3 solu-
CTL 2 h, 30 m tion) and C0 is the concentration of free chloride in the external solution.
Final setting time Results can be seen in Fig. 7.
WGP10/WGP20 3 h, 25 m/3 h, 25 m
CTL 3 h, 25 m 2.6. Absorption by capillarity

Several test specimens were produced. After demoulding the following day, test
specimens were cured in water at 20 °C in a fog room until testing.
2.3. Strength
Flexural and compressive strength testing was undertaken at 7, 28, 90 and
180 days (and 562 days for CTL and WGP10) following the standard procedure in
NP EN 196-1 [35]. Results are presented in Fig. 3. The pozzolanic effect of glass pow-
der may be assessed with the Activity Index (AI) (Fig. 4) which is the ratio between
strength of WGP containing mortar and strength of equivalent control mortar at the
same age.
2.4. Alkali silica reaction (ASR)
The potential risk of alkali-silica reaction in concrete was monitored in accor-
dance with the accelerated mortar bar test following ASTM 1567 [34], where two
mortar prisms with 25  25  250 mm were used for each mortar type.
In this test method, higher temperature (80 °C) and increased alkalinity (1 N
NaOH) accelerates the reaction. ASTM C 1567 method is not intended to capture
the effect of increased alkalis from glass powder; rather it is used in this study to
understand the expansion characteristics of plain and modified mortar. In fact this
test method can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of supplementary cementing
materials in reducing the expansion due to ASR [17].
Two slight modifications were performed when following the procedure in
ASTM. Instead of 1:2.25:0.47 cement:aggregate:water ratio required in ASTM, the
ratio used was 1:3:0.5 which is considered in NP EN 196-1 [35]. ASTM C 1567 also
requires particle size distribution of (reactive) aggregates shown in Table 3, but the
particle size distribution used was the one considered in NP EN 196-1 CEN sand,
which was found to be reactive. ASTM C 1567 was followed for the remaining pro-
cedure, so immediately after casting, the moulds were covered and demoulded 24 h
later. Then they were preconditioned for a further 24 h in water maintained at
80 °C. The lengths of these mortar bars after immersion in hot water, measured
along the 4 faces of each specimen, were then taken as the initial readings (L0).
The mortar bars were subsequently transferred to 1 N NaOH solution maintained
at 80 °C and periodically measured for 14 days.
Therefore the actual length (Lx) of each specimen, on day x is taken as
P4
i¼1 Li
Lx ¼
4 16  16  160 mm. Test specimens were immersed in calcium hydroxide solution
The expansion of each specimen at day x is given by
Lx  L0
e¼  100%
250
Expansion with time is shown in Fig. 5 as well as final expansion in Fig. 6.
Absorption by capillarity testing was undertaken on two months old cast test
specimens, approximately 50 mm diameter by 100 mm length generally following
standard procedure RILEM TC 116-PCD [45]. The samples were put to dry in a ven-
tilated heater at 40 °C until constant mass. For the test itself, test specimens were
placed moulded face downwards, in a shallow water bath. Water level was adjusted
automatically so that the formwork face was dipped to a depth of approximately
3 mm. During the test, water was drawn into the core by capillary forces and
weighed at time intervals up to 4.5 h from the start of the test [45].
The absorption of water into concrete under capillary action is dependent on
the square-root of time and may be modelled [24] by the following equation:
A ¼ A0 þ St 0;5 ð6Þ
2
where A (mg/mm ) is the water absorption by unit area of concrete surface since the
moment the core was dipped in water, S is the sorptivity of the material, t is the
elapsed time and A0 (mg/mm2) is the water absorbed initially by pores in contact
with water. The above equation was found to provide a very good fit to the data with
correlation coefficients of over 0.96 (Fig. 8). The average sorptivity value of each
mortar type is shown in Fig. 9.
2.7. Carbonation
Resistance to carbonation was assessed in accordance with the procedure de-
scribed RILEM CPC-18 [44] where test specimens were exposed to 5 ± 0.1% carbon
dioxide, relative humidity (RH) of 60 ± 5% and temperature of 23 ± 3 °C, in an accel-
erated carbonation chamber.
Carbonation depth was evaluated on three test specimens for each mortar type,
water cured at 20 °C followed by 2 and 4 months in the chamber. After splitting the
specimens, the surface was cleaned and sprayed with a phenolphthalein pH indica-
tor. In the noncarbonated part of the specimen, where the mortar was still highly
alkaline, a purple-red colour was obtained. In the carbonated part of the specimen
where the alkalinity of mortar is reduced, no coloration occurred. Each value corre-
sponds to the mean of twelve measurements taken around the four sides of the
freshly split and sprayed surface of each test specimen. Results can be seen in Fig. 10.
2.8. External sulphate attack
Resistance to external sulphate attack was evaluated according to the Portu-
guese standard E-462 [42], on six (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6) mortar prisms of
ð1Þ
during 28 days, measured along the 4 side faces of each specimen and taken as ini-
tial readings (L0). Test specimens 2, 4 and 6 were transferred to a sodium sulphate
ð2Þ solution and the others were maintained in calcium hydroxide saturated solution.
Readings were taken throughout 26 weeks and sulphate solution was renewed
every 2 weeks. The actual length increase of each specimen on day x is taken as:

Lx  L0
2.5. Chloride ion diffusion ExpCaðOHÞ2 ðxÞ ¼ ð7Þ
1600
The resistance to chloride permeability was evaluated by the CTH Rapid Method
according NT Build 492 [44] which is a non-steady state migration method based on Lx  L0
ExpSO4 Na2 ðxÞ ¼ ð8Þ
a theoretical relationship between diffusion and migration which enables the 1600
208 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215

CEM I 42.5 R 200 times enlarged CEM I 42.5 R 1000 times enlarged CEM I 42.5 R 5000 times enlarged

GP 500 times enlarged GP 2000 times enlarged GP 5000 times enlarged

SF 10000 times enlarged SF 20000 times enlarged SF 40000 times enlarged

Fig. 2. Scanning electron microscopy on powder samples.

Table 2 2.9. Scanning electron microscopy

Mixture proportions and workability of mortar.
SEM was also carried out on samples CTL and WGP10 mortar samples cured in
Materials/mortar CTL SF WGP10 WGP20 water at 20 °C for 562 days, as shown in Fig. 12, for 2500, 5000, 10,000 and 20,000
CEM I 42.5R (g) 450 405 405 360 magnification in order to investigate changes in the cement hydrated micro
SF (g) 0 45 0 0 structure.
WGP (g) 0 0 45 90
Sand (g) 1350 1350 1350 1350
Water (ml) 225 225 225 225 3. Discussion
SP/C ratio (%) 0 0.34 0 0
W/binder ratio 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.1. Chemical and physical properties of WGP
Workability (mm) 200 198 204 206

Liu compared composition of soda lime glass in general to fly

ash, stating that the SiO2 and (Na2O + K2O) contents are much
higher in glass and (SiO3 + Al2O3 + Fe2O3) is similar [6]. Chemical
The expansion for each mortar is taken as:
composition of WGP is in accordance with those values and with
Expð1Þ þ Expð3Þ þ Expð5Þ
ExpCaðOHÞ2 ¼ ð9Þ results by other authors using soda lime glass waste in mortar
3
and concrete [14–18].
Expð2Þ þ Expð4Þ þ Expð6Þ Considering that no specific European standard covers material
ExpSO4 Na2 ¼ ð10Þ
3 such as WGP and that it is mainly composed of silica, WGP proper-
The expansion due to sulphate is: ties were compared in Table 4, to requirements for silica fume (NP
EN 13263-1 [38]), also for fly ash (NP EN 450-1 [39]) and slag (NP
ExpansionðxÞ ¼ ExpSO4 Na2 ðxÞ  ExpCaðOHkÞ2 ðxÞ ð11Þ
EN 15617-1 [40]). As can be observed glass powder is basically in
Expansion during 26 weeks is shown in Fig. 11. accordance with these requirements, except for Na2O content
 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215 209

Fig. 3. Compressive and flexural strength.

Fig. 4. Activity index at 28 and 90 days.

with WGP, respectively, compared to control paste. Final setting

time was similar for all types of mortar.
Table 3
Required grading requirements in ASTM C 1567 and grading for CEN sand used.
Total CaO was determined but, as free CaO was unknown,
soundness testing was carried out with results well under standard
Grading requirements ASTM C 1567 CEN sand
limits, as can be seen in Table 1.
Retained on sieve size Mass (%) Retained on sieve size Mass (%) SEM observations (Fig. 2) indicate that WGP particles seem
2.36 mm (No. 8) 10 2,00 mm 0 more angular, denser and more prismatically shaped compared
1.18 mm (No. 16) 25 1.60 mm 7 to cement and naturally much larger than spherical silica fume
0.60 mm (No. 30) 25 1.00 mm 26 particles. Fineness obtained through laser particle size distribution,
0.30 mm (No. 50) 25 0.50 mm 34
is similar for WGP and cement (Fig. 2).
0.15 mm (No. 100) 15 0.16 mm 20

3.2. Strength and activity index

(17%), far above the limit (5%) imposed in the standard for fly ash.
This corroborates Shao et al [12] who observed general accordance
with ASTM C 618 [33] but not meeting the optional requirement
for the alkali content, causing concern due to potential ASR.
Initial setting time (Table 1) was marginally shorter for WGP10
(10 and 20 min) for paste with 10% and 20% cement replacement
Mechanical and durability related properties for WGP were
compared to those of CTL and SF mortar for the present study as
well as to results by other authors.
Strength for WGP mortar was lower than control at 7 and 28
days, decreasing with replacement dosage but at 90 days generally
210 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215

Fig. 5. Expansion vs. time due to ASR.

Fig. 6. Final expansion of mortar after 14 days in 1 N NaOH.

attaining CTL although under SF levels. WGP20 gained significant
strength between 28 and 90 days showing pozzolanic reaction tak-
ing place in this period. Idir et al [26] for fine glass with particle size
range under 41 lm and mean particle size of 7.8 lm obtained sim-
ilar results concluding that the general trend is for replacement of
cement by glass to lead to a decrease in compressive strength [26].
Strength activity indexes obtained were higher than 90% at 90
days of curing for 10% and 20% replacement by fine glass powder,
confirming results obtained by Jin et al [25]. Shao et al [12], used
higher replacement (30%) by fine glass powder (<38 lm) in con-
crete and obtained concrete strength activity indexes higher than
90% at 90 days. Shi et al, for 25% replacement and coarser material
(<100 lm) obtained strength activity values around 74% at 28 days,
with which the results of the present study for 20% replacement
seem to be in accordance.
3.3. Alkali silica reaction
Results obtained for ASR expansion respecting control mortar
indicated potential deleterious expansion according to ASTM
1567 (higher than 0.10% after 14 days in NaOH). Results for both
SF and WGP were effective in reducing ASR expansion. Increasing
glass powder content led to lower expansion despite the high alkali
content. Frederico and Chidiac [4] reported results on ASR expan-
sion relating to particle size of glass and cement replacement dos-
age including work by Jin et al [25] and Shao et al [12] with which
present results are in accordance.
ASR results in the present study also confirm findings by Sch-
warz et al [20] where expansion for 10% and 20% replacement with
glass powder was slightly higher, presumably due to use of coarser
glass particles. Sacanni and Bizigoni [21], where fine aggregate was
also replaced by glass particles, obtained ASR expansion similar to
values in the present study.
Therefore ASR testing confirmed that glass powder assisted in
hindering expansion compared to control specimens, confirming
conclusions by other authors [20–22].
The possible explanations for this phenomenon according to
Taha and Nounu [22] is that available reactive silica in glass pow-
der as an amorphous material will dissolve very quickly during the
pozzolanic reaction and react with other chemicals to form the
mineral phases of concrete. Therefore, the dissolved reactive silica
of glass powder will be accommodated in the crystals of concrete
 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215 211

Fig. 7. Chloride diffusion coefficient for each mortar type.

Fig. 8. Linear regression for absorption by capillarity during 4 h 30 min on test cores.

minerals and not available for the ASR which occurs in later stages.
With the presence of other chemicals the dissolved reactive silica
of glass powder will not be able to form ASR gel during the pozzo-
lanic reaction, or even a gel having a swelling property likewise the
ASR gel. Otherwise, if there was any chance to form ASR gel during
the pozzolanic reaction from the reactive silica of glass powder one
can envisage that any existing ASR expansion would be noticeable.
If any ASR could occur during the pozzolanic reaction stage, the
produced expansion would vanish and accommodate within the
plasticity of fresh concrete. On the other hand, in the first 4 weeks
of the pozzolanic reaction and hydration process, most of the alka-
lis would have been consumed in order to catalyse the pozzolanic
reaction and act as chemical activators to compensate for the lower
calcium content in the glass powder. Therefore, in later age, there
would not be enough free alkali to interact with the reactive silica
in the pore solution of the concrete to induce ASR, as illustrated in
Fig. 13.
Additions with low CaO content act as ASR inhibitors, whereas
those with more than 10% CaO content act as ASR promoters [27]
and therefore WGP proved once again to inhibit ASR.
3.4. Chloride diffusion, absorption by capillarity, carbonation and
sulphate attack
CTH rapid method results show that using WGP as a partial ce-
ment replacement drastically enhances resistance to chloride pen-
etration compared to control mortar specially for 20% replacement
dosage (on average, CTL Dns is about double compared to WGP20)
and even compared to 10% SF mortar. Samples of silica fume and
WGP10 have very similar diffusion coefficients. Results obtained
in the present study, confirm values by other authors [16,19,20],
where performance of glass powder mortar is better than control
mortar regarding chloride penetration. Only Jain and Neithalath
212 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215

Fig. 9. Sorptivity of each mortar type.

Fig. 10. Carbonation depth results after 2 months curing followed by 4 months in the chamber.

[13] carried out the NT Build 492 [43] test as in the present study
and obtained similar improvement to WGP 20 at 56 days.
Absorption by capillarity and sorptivity proved to be similar for
WGP and CTL mortar and a little lower for SF mortar. This situation
may be explained by similar fineness of both WGP and cement (see
Fig. 9). Much finer SF particles physically fill capillary pores reduc-
ing capillary absorption. Other authors, such as Taha and Nounu
[23] also showed similar results for concrete with cement replace-
ment materials, but following BS 1881.
Carbonation depth for all blended cement mixtures was greater
than for the Portland cement mixture. It was found that carbon-
ation increased along with the increase in WGP content, which is
consistent with the trend observed in concrete for various pozzola-
nic materials and probably due to CH reduction. WGP10 carbon-
ated almost half of SF10 mortar, albeit pore refinement due to
silica fume. This may be explained by higher SF reactivity and thus
further CH reduction, compared to WGP. When WGP replacement
is doubled, carbonation depth is similar to SF. Although a less reac-
tive material, higher WGP replacement and less cement in the mix-
ture, both contribute to CH reduction levelling out intense CH
reduction in SF mortar.
Sulphate expansion at 26 weeks should be under 0.10% accord-
ing to the Portuguese standard E-462 and therefore Portland ce-
ment used is not sulphate resistant. Blended Portland cement
with 10% replacement with WGP showed an impressive resistance
to sulphate attack, far higher than SF marginally within the limit of
0.10%. The pozzolanic activity of WGP and SF binds portlandite
(CH) released in the hydration of calcium silicates (C3S and C2S),
so CH is no longer available for reaction with sulphates, in
accordance with [28,29]. This prevents the formation of gypsum.
 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215 213

Fig. 11. Expansion during 26 weeks due to sulphate.

CTL 562 days 2500 times enlarged CTL 562 days 5000 times enlarged CTL 562 days 10000 times enlarged CT L 562 days 20000 times enlarged

WGP10 562 days 2500 times enlarged WGP10 562 days 5000 times enlarged WGP10 562 days 10000 times enlarged WGP 562 days 20000 times enlarged

Fig. 12. SEM on 562 days old mortar.

Pozzolanic reaction produces a secondary C–S–H that also de-
creases the capillary porosity of mortar and enhances significantly
the paste–aggregate interface [28].
3.5. Scanning electron microscopy
Regarding SEM observations, glass particles seem to be thor-
oughly encapsulated and dispersed into to the hydrated products
of a dense and mature gel with needle shaped ettringite crystals
(see WGP10 10,000 and 20,000 times enlarged, Fig. 12). CH layered
crystals were observed in the CTL mortar (see CTL 5000 times en-
larged, Fig. 12) and CSH gel filling the hydrated structure. CSH gel
in WGP10 was found to contain more calcium as well as more alka-
lis compared to CTL mortar. These findings are in accordance with
Sobolev et al [30] who suggested that the main difference between
glass containing mortar and reference Portland cement is related to
the decrease in size and the amount of CH, caused by consumption
of CH as a result of the pozzolanic reaction involving glass grains.
More alkalis found in the gel of WGP10 compared to CTL also con-
firm findings by Shayan and Xu [17] who proposed that the pozzo-
lanic reaction of glass powder with cement causes the binding of
alkalis in the paste, making it unavailable for ASR [17] and therefore
in accordance with the mechanism proposed by Taha and Nounu
[22] explaining lower expansion due ASR when glass is used.
214 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215

Table 4
Requirements in standards.

European Standards
Fly ash (NP EN 450-1) Silica fume Slag (NP EN 15167-1) GP Remarks
(NP EN
13263-1)
Chemical requirements Cl 60.10% 60.3% 60.10% <0005 OK
SO4 63.0% 62.0% 62.5% – OK
SO3 – – 62.0% <0.05
Free CaO 62.5% 61.0% 8.70% Only the total content of CaO
is known but soundness is OK
Reactive CaO 610% –
SiO2 P25% P85% 70% OK
SiO2 + Al2O3 + Fe2O3 P70% 71.82% OK
CaO + MgO + SiO2 P67.0% OK
NaO2eq 65.0% 17% KO, but OK in ASR testing
LOI Class A 6 5% 64.0% 63.0% 0.92%
Class B 2–7% OK
Class C 4–9%
Pozzolanicity – – Positive OK
Physical requirements Activity index P75% at 28 days P100% at P45% at 7 days and P75% KO Almost OK for 28 days, and ok
28 days old at days for 90 days
P85% at 90 days
Start setting time 6120 min plus start time of 62 times the start time of OK
the paste-setting reference the paste-setting reference
Soundness 610 mm 610 mm OK

Higher resistance to chloride penetration was obtained for WGP

Fig. 13. Model illustrates the consumption of alkali in the pozzolanic reaction in the
first 4 weeks [22].
containing mortar, increasing with dosage replacement;
Sorptivity of glass mixes was equivalent to control due to the
effect of similar particle size distribution;
Carbonation depth for all blended cement mixtures was greater
than for the Portland cement mixture, increasing with replace-
ment dosage in the trend for pozzolanic materials;
WGP10 mortar showed a remarkable resistance to sulphate
attack, far higher than SF;
SEM observations may help explaining these findings as glass
particles seem to be completely encapsulated and dispersed
into dense and matured gel.
Although soda lime glass presents a high alkali content, use of
ground waste glass as cement replacement in mortar, improved
resistance to ASR and chloride penetration with replacement
dosage and greatly improved sulfate resistance without com-
promising strength. Therefore this waste material can success-
fully enhance durability and further contribute to sustainability
in construction

4. Conclusions 5. Future developments

This study aimed to evaluate use of glass powder in cement Future research comprising use of glass powder is underway,
based materials. An experimental study on the mechanical and including use in self-compacting concrete, taking advantage of in-
durability properties of mortar containing waste glass powder as creased workability provided by this waste material.
cement replacement provided the following results:

In terms of physical and chemical characteristics, glass can be Acknowledgement

considered a pozzolanic-cementitious material according to
requirements in ASTM C 618 [33] as well as in European stan-
dards [38–40], if the alkali content is disregarded;
Attractive strength activity indexes were obtained at 90 days of
curing in WGP containing mortar, with significant increase
between 28 and 90 days which means pozzolanic activity
occurred;
In spite of high alkali content in WGP, ASR expansion was dras-
tically reduced. The explanation of this phenomenon can be
referred to the consumption of the alkali in the structure of
the C–S–H gel during the pozzolanic reaction which occurs ear-
lier than ASR, therefore not leaving enough alkali to induce ASR;
The authors would like to thank Mr. Oliveira from the glass
industry, LEMC, LABEST and to FCT under Project PTDC/ECM/
098117/2008.
References
[1] Mehta PK. Greening of the concrete industry for sustainable development.
Concr Int 2002;24:23–8.
[2] Schneider M, Romer M, Tschudin M, Bolio H. Sustainable cement production –
present and future. Cem Concr Res 2011;43:642–50.
[3] Ali MB, Saidur R, Hossain MS. A review on emission analysis in cement
industries. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:2252–61.
 A.M. Matos, J. Sousa-Coutinho / Construction and Building Materials 36 (2012) 205–215
[4] Frederico LM, Chidiac SE. Waste glass as a supplementary cementitious
material in concrete – critical review of treatment methods. Cem Concr
Compos 2009;31:606–10.
[5] Papadakis VG, Tsimas S. Supplementary cementing materials in concrete Part
I: efficiency and design. Cem Concr Res 2002;32:1525–32.
[6] Miao Liu. Incorporing ground glass in self-compacting concrete. Constr Build
Mater 2011;25:919–25.
[7] Uchikawa Horishi, Hanehara Shunsuke. Recycling of waste as an alternative
raw material and fuel in cement manufacturuing. In: Waste materials used in
concrete manufacturing. Noyes publications: United States of America; 1997.
p. 430–551.
[8] Ortiz SA, O Vidro e as Embalagens de Vidro. Campinas, Brasil: CETEA/ITAL;
1996.
[9] Shi Caijun, Zheng Keren. A review on the use of waste glasses in the production
of cement and concrete. Resour Conserv Recycl 2007;52:234–47.
[10] Byars EA, Morales-Hernandez B, Zhu HY. Waste glass as concrete aggregate
and pozzolan. Waste glass as concrete aggregate and pozzolan: laboratory and
industrial projects. Concr Soc 2004;38(1):41–4.
[11] Archibald JF, DeGagneı DO, Lausch P, De Souza EM. Ground waste glass as a
pozzolanic consolidation agent for mine backfill. CIM Bull 1995;88(80–7):20.
[12] Shao Y, Lefort T, Moras S, Rodriguez D. Studies on concrete containing ground
waste glasses. Cem Concr Res 2000;30:91–100.
[13] Dyer TD, Dhir RK. Chemical reactions of glass cullet used as cement
component. J Mater Civ Eng 2001;13(6):412–7.
[14] Shayan A, Xu A. Value-added utilisation of waste glass in concrete. Cem Concr
Res 2004;34:81–9.
[15] Shi C, Wu Y, Shao Y, Riefler C. Alkali-aggregate reaction of concrete containing
ground glass powder. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on
AAR in, concrete; 2004. p. 789–95.
[16] Shi C, Wu Y, Riefler C, Wang H. Characteristics and pozzolanic reactivity of
glass powders. Cem Concr Res 2005;35:987–93.
[17] Shayan A, Xu A. Performance of powder as pozzolanic materials in concrete: a
filed trail on concrete slabs. Cem Concr Res 2006;36:457–68.
[18] Nathan Schwarz, Narayanan Neithalat. Influence of a fine glass powder on
cement hydration: comparison to fly ash and modeling the degree of
hydration. Cem Concr Compos 2008;30:486–96.
[19] Jain Jitendra A, Neithalath Narayanan. Chloride transport in fly ash and glass
powder modified concretes – influence of test methods on microstructure.
Cement Concr Compos 2010;32:148–56.
[20] Nathan Schwarz, Hieu Cam, Narayanan Neithalath. Influence of a fine glass
powder on the durability characteristics of concrete and its comparison to fly
ash. Cem Concr Compos 2008;30:486–96.
[21] Saccani Andrea, Bignozzi Maria Chiara. ASR expansion behavior of recycled
glass fine aggregates in concrete. Cem Concr Res 2010;40:531–6.
[22] Taha Bashar, Nounu Ghassan. Using lithium nitrate and pozzolanic glass
powder in concrete as ASR suppressors. Cem Concr Compos 2008;30:497–505.
[23] Taha Bashar, Nounu Ghassan. Properties of concrete contain mixed colour
waste recycled glass as sand and cement replacement. Constr Build Mater
2008;22:713–20.
[24] Hall C. Water sorptivity of mortar and concretes – a review. Mag Concr Res
1989;41(147):51–61.
215
[25] Jin W, Meyer C, Baxter S. Glascrete – concrete with glass aggregate. ACI Mater J
2000;97(2):208–13.
[26] Idir Rachida, Cyr Martin, Tagnit-Hamou Arezki. Pozzolanic properties of fine
and coarse color-mixed glass cullet. Cem Concr Compos 2011;33:19–29.
[27] Ichikawa Tsuneki. Alkali–silica reaction, pessimum effects and pozzolanic
effect. Cem Concr Res 2009;39:716–26.
[28] Sahmaran M, Kasap O, Duru K, Yaman IO. Effects of mix composition and
water–cement ratio on the sulfate resistance of blended cements. Cem Concr
Compos 2007;29:159–67.
[29] Ayea Thidar, Oguchi Chiaki T. Resistance of plain and blended cement mortar
exposed to severe sulfate attacks. Constr Build Mater 2011;25:2988–96.
[30] Sobolev Konstantin, Türker Pelin, Soboleva Svetlana, Iscioglu Gunsel.
Utilization of waste glass in ECO-cement: strength properties and
microstructural observations. Waste Manage (Oxford) 2007;27:971–6.
[31] ASTM C109/C109M-11a standard test method for compressive strength of
hydraulic cement mortars (using 2 in. or [50 mm] cube specimens). West
Conshohocken; 2011.
[32] ASTM. ASTM C230/C230M-08 standard specification for flow table for use in
tests of hydraulic cement. Philadelphia; 2008.
[33] ASTM. ASTM C618-12 standard specification for coal fly ash and raw or
calcined natural pozzolan for use in concrete. Philadelphia; 2012.
[34] ASTM. ASTM C1567-11 standard test method for determining the potential
alkali silica reactivity of combinations of cementitious materials and aggregate
(accelerated mortar bar method). United States: ASTM International; 2011.
[35] IPQ. EN 196-1. Methods of testing cement – Part 1: determination of strength.
Lisbon: IPQ; 2006.
[36] IPQ. EN 196-3. Methods of testing cement – Part 3: Determination of setting
time and soundness. Lisbon; 2005.
[37] IPQ. EN 196-5. Methods of testing cement – Part 5: Pozzolanicity test for
pozzolanic cements. Lisbon; 2011.
[38] IPQ. EN 13263-1. Silica fume for concrete – Part 1: Definitions, requirements
and conformity criteria. Lisbon; 2009.
[39] IPQ. EN 450-1. Fly ash for concrete – Part1: Definition, specifications and
conformity criteria Lisbon; 2006.
[40] IPQ. EN 15167-1. Ground granulated blast furnace slag for use in concrete,
mortar and grout – Part 1: Definitions, specifications and conformity criteria.
Lisbon; 2008.
[41] IPQ. EN 934-2: Admixtures for concrete, mortar and grout. Concrete
admixtures – Part 2: Definitions, requirements, conformity, marking and
labelling. Lisbon; 2009.
[42] LNEC. E-462: Resistência dos cimentos ao ataque por sulfatos. Resistance of
cements to sulphate attack. Lisbon; 2004.
[43] Nordtest method – NT build 492 concrete, mortar and cement-based repair
materials: chloride migration coefficient from non-steady-state migration
experiments. Finland; 1999.
[44] RILEM. RILEM CPC-18 measurement of hardened concrete carbonation depth.
Mater Struct No. 102; 1984.
[45] RILEM. RILEM TC 116-PCD – Permeability of concrete as a criterion of its
durability. Recommendations. Mater Struct/Materiaux et Constr; April de
2009. p. 174–179.