e ects of petrochemical wastes incinerator ash powder...

Scientia Iranica A (2017) 24(3), 1017{1026

Sharif University of TechnologyScientia Iranica

Transactions A: Civil Engineeringwww.scientiairanica.com

Research Note

E�ects of petrochemical wastes incinerator ash powderinstead of Portland cement on the properties ofconcrete

D. Mosto�nejada, S. Noorpourb;�, M. Noorpourc, R. Karbati Aslc,V. Sadeghi Balkanlouc and A. Karbati Asld

a. Department of Civil Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran.b. Department of Civil Engineering, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.c. Young Researchers and Elite Club, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.d. Department of Project Management, Payame Noor University, Iran.

Received 17 June 2015; received in revised form 7 February 2016; accepted 25 April 2016

KEYWORDSConcrete;Incinerator ash;Compressive strength;Splitting-tensilestrength;Flexural strengths;Elastic modulus.

Abstract. Petrochemical wastes incinerator ash is generated from industries in which theland�ll is the last step for their owing. This research was performed for waste managementof ash and its possible large-scale utilization in making concrete. An experimentalinvestigation carried out to evaluate the mechanical properties of concrete mixtures in whichPortland cement type II was partially replaced with Petrochemical Complex IncineratorAsh Powder (PCIAP). The cement was replaced with various amounts of PCIAP, i.e. 5%,10%, 15%, 20%, and 25%. Tests were performed on the properties of fresh concrete as wellas hardened concrete. Compressive, splitting tensile and exural strengths, and modulusof elasticity were determined in 7, 28, and 90 days. Test results indicated that by usingPCIAP as partial replacement of cement, stabilization, solidi�cation, and neutralizationtreatment processes for the industrial wastes management were carried out, and the testresults of the mixture M-2 (5% PCIAP) indicated that it can be used to make concretewhich is lighter than normal concrete and heavier than structural lightweight aggregateconcrete.© 2017 Sharif University of Technology. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Some products of petrochemical industries include rawplastics. Di�erent units of these industries generatewastes with high toxic compounds. Some petrochemi-cal industries use incineration system to optimize theirwastes since it reduces the volume of waste tremen-

*. Corresponding author. Tel/Fax:: +98 41 32808794;E-mail addresses: dmosto�@cc.iut.ac.ir (D. Mosto�nejad);[email protected] (S. Noorpour);[email protected] (M. Noorpour);[email protected] (R. Karbati Asl);[email protected] (V. Sadeghi Balkanlou);[email protected] (A. Karbati Asl)

dously and destroys the toxic compounds of wastes.Petrochemical Complex Incinerator Ash (PCIA) isobtained after incineration of petrochemical wastes.PCIA is ground to ease its reaction with Portlandcement and is termed as Petrochemical Complex Incin-erator Ash Powder (PCIAP). It has inherent perniciouse�ects, which is why it disposes in land�lls. Sincecement production causes environmental costs suchas use of natural resources, air pollution, and energyconsumption, research on the possible use of PCIAP asa cement substitution seems bene�cial and necessary.Most common methods of waste management includeneutralization, Stabilization, and Solidi�cation (S/S).Neutralization is a method that a reactor, such as

1018 D. Mosto�nejad et al./Scientia Iranica, Transactions A: Civil Engineering 24 (2017) 1017{1026

cement, Pozzolan, lime, improved clay, organic thermoset, thermo plastic, organic polymer, and silicate,decreases toxic properties of contaminants and immo-bilizes the contaminants [1]. Solidi�cation is a methodthat sticks a polluted media with a reagent, changescontaminants' physical properties, and constitutes asolid substance. Also, stabilization is a method thatdecreases the mobility of contaminants with a chemicalreaction [2]. Partial substitution of PCIAP for cementin concrete results in its neutralization and S/S as well.

Over the past few years, utilization of bottomash or incinerator ash as partial substitution of ag-gregates [3], as an aggregate substitution in asphaltmixes [4,5], as a substitute for cement [6,7], as asubstitution for natural aggregates in structural gradeconcrete [8,9], as an aggregate replacement in highwayand roads construction [10,11], and as a soil stabilizingagent [12] has been the subject of several investigations.S/S is an e�ective technology to treat hazardous wastesaccording to United States Environmental ProtectionAgency [13] in low-level radioactive waste [14] in varietyof industrial wastes [14] and in contaminants thatinclude metals [15].

Juric et al. [7] reported that bottom ash can beused as a substitution forcement in concrete for thesake of SiO2 and CaO inclusion. Forteza et al. [16]concluded that engineering properties of bottom ashare like natural aggregates, and they can be used inroad construction. Cement is a common binder in S/Stechnology and cement solidi�cation is mainly usedfor inorganic contaminants [15]. Also, wastes trapwithin gel structure and calcium hydroxide trap inpores [17]. Pecqueur et al. [18] indicated that the useof Municipal Solid Waste Incinerator (MSWI) bottomash as embankments in road construction may causepavement cracking and expansion due to chemicalreaction, but it is solvable with Portland cement upto 70%.

Ferraris et al. [19] reported that vitri�ed bottomashes can be used as �ller instead of cement up to20% and as a substitute for natural aggregate up to75% vol. Kikuchi [20] demonstrated that MunicipalSolid Waste Incinerator Ash (MSWIA) can partiallybe replaced with the cement as raw materials up to50%. Saikia et al. [21] indicated that raw munici-pal solid waste incineration y ash-based clinkers aremore reactive than the washed Municipal Solid Waste(MSW) ash based clinkers. Use of incinerator y ashas substitution of cement in concrete was studied byTaha et al. [6]. They indicated that concretes made byincinerator y ash achieved low compressive strengthat the ages of 3 to 6 months; however, the specimensattained higher compressive strength after six monthsdue to increasing pozzolanic reaction with the passageof time. S/S is recognized as the best demonstratedavailable technology in treating hazardous wastes [22].

Pan et al. [23] indicated that cement production canbe a feasible substitution for MSWIA management anddoes not have any impact on the compressive strengthof the clinker. Other researchers reported that lowamounts of bottom ash can be used in kilns as a rawmaterial since it includes chloride [24,25]. Use of MSWI y ash as a raw material in sintering sulphoaluminatecement clinker was studied by Shi et al. [26]. Theyreported that although sulphoaluminate cement havehigher compressive strength in early ages, it improvessmoothly at later ages. It is also proved that concreteincorporating Fly Ash (FA) exhibits either similaror enhanced performance in comparison to Portlandcement [6].

Utilization of MSWI ash in concrete [27] and incement and mortar [28] was also reviewed. Municipalsolid waste incineration y ash was examined fordi�erent applications in concrete [29,30]. Kula etal. [31] reported that y ash and coal bottom ashcan be used as a high volume cement replacementin the production of concrete. MSWI ash or bottomash was used for di�erent applications; for instance,as raw materials for clinker production [32] and forcement production [20,21,23,33], as aggregates in non-structural concrete [34], as controlled low-strengthmaterials in trench construction [35] and in the pro-duction of polymer concrete [36], as aggregates inroad construction and in concrete [16,37,38], as inthe form of glass-like as natural aggregates in mortarand concrete [19], in tile production [39], and in glassceramic products [40].

Fly ash and other waste materials have beenreported recently which are considered as one of re-markable materials that have shown a good potentialin enhancing the strength and thermal properties ofcementitious materials. However, the e�ects of PCIAPon the performance and properties of cement-basedmaterials have been neglected in previous researchstudies. This research investigates the possibility ofusing PCIAP as cement substitution in concrete totreat it with methods of S/S and neutralization, as thismaterial has substantial economic and environmentalbene�ts. To reach this goal, engineering properties ofthe concrete mixtures made with PCIAP are tested.This study also attempts to answer the question ofwhether or not PCIAP creates drawbacks as well asadvantages in concrete.

2. Experimental program

2.1. MaterialsPortland cement type II was used according to ASTMC150 [41]. Physical properties and also chemicalcompositions of cement are given in Tables 1 and 2,respectively [42]. PCIA was obtained by the burningof petrochemical wastes. The physical properties and

D. Mosto�nejad et al./Scientia Iranica, Transactions A: Civil Engineering 24 (2017) 1017{1026 1019

Table 1. Physical properties of Portland cement [42].

Physical test Resultsobtained

ASTM C150(type II cement)

Air content of mortar, volume (%) 5.54 12 max

Fineness: speci�c surface (air permeability test) (m2/kg) 281 280 min

Autoclave expansion (%) 0.4 0.80 max

Vicat time of setting (min)

Initial 128 45 min

Final 235 375 max

Compressive strength (MPa)

1 days 14.5 |

3 days 20.3 10.3 min

7 days 29.2 17.2 min

28 days 41 |

Speci�c gravity 3.39 |

Table 2. Chemical compositions of Portland cement [42].

Constituent Resultsobtained

ASTM C150(type II cement)

SiO2 (%) 21.10 20.0 minAl2O3 (%) 4.79 6.0 maxFe2O3 (%) 3.80 6.0 maxCaO (%) 63.09 |MgO (%) 3.00 6.0 maxSO3 (%) 1.93 3.0 maxNa2O (%) 0.20 |K2O (%) 0.81 |LOI (%) 1.24 3 maxIR (%) 0.63 0.75 maxC3S (%) 48.32 |C2S (%) 24.05 |C3A, (%) 6.27 8 maxC4AF (%) 11.58 |Free CaO (%) 1.22 |

chemical compositions of PCIAP are given in Ta-bles 3 and 4, respectively [42]. Natural sand was usedas a �ne aggregate (regular sand) with a maximum sizeof 4.8 mm and was tested to satisfy the requirements ofASTM C33 [43]. Coarse aggregates with the maximumsize of 25 mm were used in this research. Aggregateproperties are shown in Table 5 [42].

Table 4. Chemical composition of PCIAP [42].

PCIAP Value(%)

PCIAP Value(ppm)

PCIAP Value(ppm)

SiO2 18.25 Cl 772 Zr 71Al2O3 5.43 Ba 150 Y 4Fe2O3 27.95 Sr 299 Rb 22CaO 16.21 Cu 80 Co 1Na2O 1.28 Zn 1543 As 61K2O 0.89 Pb 35 U 1MgO 1.37 Ni 110 Th 2TiO2 0.546 Cr 175 Mo 46MnO 0.079 V 57 Ga 6P2O5 9.444 Ce 4 Nb 3SO3 2.765 La 1L.O.I 15.19 W 3

2.2. Mixture proportionsAccording to ACI Standard Speci�cations 211.1 [44],mixture proportions of control specimen withoutPCIAP were designed to achieve a 28-day cube com-pressive strength of 36.5 MPa. Also, �ve mixtureswere prepared with di�erent amounts of PCIAP.The percentage of PCIAP was varied between 5 and25% by weight of the cement. The water to binderratio (w/b) was kept constant at 0.5 for all mixtures.Detailed mix proportions of the concretes are given in

Table 3. Physical properties of PCIAP [42].

Property PCIAP Portland cementtype II

Speci�c gravity (gr/cm3) 2.63 3.39Fineness: speci�c surface (air permeability test) (m2/kg) 288 281


Table 5. Physical properties of coarse aggregates and regular sand [42].

Property Coarse aggregate(25 mm)

Regular sand(�ne aggregate)

ASTMC33

Speci�c gravity 2.7 2.6 |Unit weight (kg/m3) 1670 1760 |Absorption (%) 0.5 0.7 |Fineness modulus | 2.4 2.3-3.1Clay lumps and friable particles (%) | 0.4 3 maxMaterials �ner than 75 �m (%) | 0.8 3 maxTotal moisture content (%) 1 5 |

Table 6. Mixture proportions of concrete mixtures containing PCIAP [42].

Mixture no. M-1 M-2 M-3 M-4 M-5 M-6

Cement (kg/m3) 362 343.9 325.8 307.7 289.6 271.5PWIAP (%) 0 5 10 15 20 25PWIAP (kg/m3) 0 18.1 36.2 54.3 72.4 90.5Water (kg/m3) 181 181 181 181 181 181W/C 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5Sand (4.8 mm) (kg/m3) 705 705 705 705 705 705Coarse aggregate (25 mm) (kg/m3) 1197 11.97 11.97 1197 1197 1197

Table 6. Concrete mixes were prepared in power-drivenrevolving-type drum mixers with a capacity of 0.25 m3.

2.3. Preparation and casting of test specimensFresh concrete was cast into 150�150�150 mm cubesfor compressive strength test, 150� 300 mm cylindersfor splitting-tensile strength and modulus of elasticitytests, and 101:4� 101:4� 508 mm prismatic molds for exural strength test. The specimens were compactedusing a tamping rod to exclude the air bubbles from theconcrete. In order to minimize the moisture loss, thesamples were covered. Subsequently, the test sampleswere placed in the casting room with a temperatureof 23�C. Eventually, the specimens were demolded 24hours after casting and cured in water at 23�3�C untilthey were tested.

2.4. Test procedureSlump test was performed according to the ASTMStandard Speci�cations C143 [45]. Hardened spec-imens were tested at 7-, 28-, and 90-day ages inaccordance with the ASTM Standard Speci�cationsC39, C642, C496, C469, and C293 [46-50].

3. Results and discussions

3.1. Slump testThe slump test results of the fresh concrete used todetermine the e�ects of the PCIAP on the consistencyare given in Figure 1. According to Figure 1, the slumpvalue of the fresh concrete for concrete mixtures withPCIAP was higher than control mixture. Concrete

Figure 1. The e�ect of the PCIAP on the slumpbehavior.

mixtures with PCIAP had an increase of slump valuein comparison with control mixture (see Figure 2). Itis perceived that the PCIAP increases the slump valueof the fresh concrete and the uidity. This is probablydue to Fe2O3 content present in PCIAP or due to thedecrease of binder value in concrete, in which increasingthe uidity of the fresh concrete is e�ective.

3.2. Compressive strengthCompressive strength of concrete mixtures made withand without PCIAP was measured at age of 7, 28,and 90 days of curing. The results are shown inFigure 3 [42]. According to Figure 3, compressivestrength of concrete mixtures with PCIAP was lower


Figure 2. A comparison of slump value variation.

Figure 3. Compressive strength in relation to PCIAPand curing age [42].

than control mixture (without PCIAP). It could bedue to the presence of Fe2O3 in PCIAP, but com-pressive strength of concrete mixtures increased withage. In Figure 4, at 28 days, percentage decreasein compressive strength of concrete mixtures madewith PCIAP was more than that of control mixture.According to Figure 4, with the age of 28 to 90 days,percentage increase in compressive strength of concretemixtures made with PCIAP was more than that ofcontrol mixture except mixture M-2, which is certainlyby virtue of increasing the pozzolanic reaction withtime. Taha et al. [6] indicated similar results, asthey reported that concretes made with incinerator yash achieved low compressive strength at ages of 3 to6 months, but it achieved high compressive strengthlater than 6 months due to an increase in pozzolanicreaction with time. According to ACI classi�cations

Figure 4. Multiple comparisons of compressive strengthvariation.

[51], structural lightweight aggregate concrete (LWAC)is concrete in which its air-dry unit weight at 28 days isusually in the range of 1440 to 1900 kg/m3, and it has aminimum compressive cylindrical strength of 17.2 MPaat 28 days. According to UNESCO [52], compressivestrength of cylindrical specimen was converted to cubespecimen. At 28-day age, compressive cubic strengthof mixture M-2 was 24.5 MPa, higher than the ACI213R-87 [51] allowable limits [42].

3.3. Splitting-tensile strengthThe splitting-tensile strength of concrete mixtures wasdetermined at 7, 28, and 90 days of curing. Theresults are shown in Figure 5. Splitting tensile strengthof concrete mixtures increased with age. As can beseen in Figure 6, at 28-day age, concrete mixtureswith PCIAP had a decrease of splitting-tensile strengthin comparison with control mixture. At 90-day age,all concrete mixtures had an increase of splitting-tensile strength in comparison with 28-day strength(see Figure 6). At 90-day age, there was a marginalincrease in splitting-tensile strength of mixture M-2 incomparison with control mixture. Also, there was a

Figure 5. Splitting-tensiling strength in relation toPCIAP and curing age.


Figure 6. Multiple comparisons of splitting-tensilingstrength variation.

slight increase in splitting-tensile strength of mixtureM-4 in comparison with mixture M-3 at 28 and 90days. According to the results, 5% PCIAP replacementcan be considered as the optimum percentage of thePCIAP. The mixtures containing more than 5% PCIAPhad splitting-tensile strength lower than the controlmixture.

3.4. Flexural strengthFlexural strength of concrete mixtures made with andwithout PCIAP was determined at ages of 7, 28,and 90 days. The exural strength test results ofconcrete mixtures are shown in Figure 7. At 28-dayage, concrete mixtures with PCIAP had a decrease of exural strength in comparison with control mixture.As can be clearly seen from Figure 7, it is evidentthat exural strength of samples increased with theage. There is a decrease in exural strength of concretemixtures by fostering the content of PCIAP at 28-dayage in comparison with control mixture (see Figure 8),such as compressive and splitting tensile strengths. At90-day age, all concrete mixtures had an increase of exural strength in comparison with 28-day strength

Figure 7. Flexural strength in relation to PCIAP andcuring age.

Figure 8. Multiple comparisons of exural strengthvariation.

(see Figure 8). At 7, 28, and 90 days, there was amarginal increase in exural strength of mixture M-5 in comparison with mixture M-4. At 28 and 90days, exural strength of concrete mixtures decreasedwith the increase in PCIAP content in comparison withmixture M-1, such as compressive strength.

3.5. Modulus of elasticityThe modulus of elasticity was determined according toASTM C469 [49]. This test method covered determi-nation of chord modulus of elasticity (Young's). Themodulus of elasticity (E) was calculated according tothe equation suggested by ASTM C469. The formulaappears in Eq. (1):

E = (S2 � S1)=("2 � 0:000050); (1)

where E is chord modulus of elasticity in psi, S2 isstress corresponding to 40% of ultimate load in psi,S1 is stress corresponding to longitudinal strain, "1,of 50 millionths, psi, and "2 is longitudinal strainproduced by stress, S2. Modulus of elasticity ofconcrete mixtures was determined at 7, 28, and 90 days,and the results are plotted in Figure 9. At 28-day age,

Figure 9. Modulus of elasticity in relation to PCIAPcontent and curing.


Figure 10. A comparison of modulus of elasticityvariation.

concrete mixtures incorporating PCIAP demonstratedan increase in modulus of elasticity compared with thecontrol mixture (see Figure 10). It is also evident thatmodulus of elasticity of all mixtures increased with theage. At 7, 28, and 90 days, modulus of elasticityof concrete mixtures increased with the increase ofPCIAP content in comparison with control mixture.In this study, the 10% PCIAP replacement can beconsidered as the optimum percentage of the PCIAP.

3.6. Water absorptionThe water absorption test was performed for eachconcrete mixture at of 7-, 28-, and 90-day age. Fromeach mixture, three cubical samples were weighed andsubmerged for an hour, then taken out from the waterand weighed again. Later, the samples were kept dryfor two days. Again, the samples were weighed andsubmerged for a day, after which they were takenout and the weights of the samples were measured.The water absorption values of the samples with andwithout the PCIAP are provided in Figure 11. At

Figure 11. E�ect of PCIAP content on water absorption.

28-day age, there was an increase in water absorptionof concrete mixtures with the inclusion of PCIAP aspartial replacement of Portland cement type II (seeFigure 11). Also, at 7 and 90 days, there weresimilar results such as those at 28 days. Also, waterabsorption of concrete mixtures also increased with age.These may be explained as the consumption of PCIAPincreases the void in the concrete. This investigationindicated an enhancement in water absorption of con-crete mixtures made with PCIAP.

3.7. Unit weightThe unit weight test results of concrete mixtures areshown in Figure 12. At 28-day age, there was adecrease in unit weight of concretes mixtures withthe inclusion of PCIAP as partial replacement ofPortland cement type II (Figure 12). At 28-dayage, unit weight of concrete mixtures decreased withthe increase in PCIAP content in comparison withcontrol mixture (see Figure 13). This could be dueto the lower speci�c gravity of the PCIAP in compari-son with Portland cement type II. This investigation

Figure 12. Unit weight versus PCIAP content.

Figure 13. A comparison of unit weight variation.


indicated that concrete mixtures made with PCIAPwere lighter than control mixture. According toACI 213R-87 [51], structural LWAC has a maximumair-dry unit weight of 1900 kg/m3 at 28 days (seeFigure 12). Unit weights of concrete mixture withthe inclusion of PCIAP were higher than the ACIcode allowable limits, but were lower than normalconcrete.

4. Conclusions

The following conclusions can be drawn based on thepresent investigation:

1. Compressive strength, exural strength, and unitweight of concrete mixtures decreased with theincrease in PCIAP contents in comparison withcontrol mixture;

2. In splitting-tensile strength, the 5% amount ofreplacement of PCIAP could be the optimum per-centage of the PCIAP. The mixtures containingmore than 5% PCIAP had splitting-tensile strengthlower than the control mixture;

3. By modulus of elasticity assessment, it can beconcluded that 10% replacement of PCIAP is theoptimum percentage;

4. Water absorption, uidity, and slump value of thefresh concrete were boosted in PCIAP-containingmixtures;

5. The test results proved that 5% PCIAP can be usedas cement substitution in concrete which was lighterthan normal concrete and heavier than structuralLWAC. Also, the compressive strength was higherthan ACI 213R-87 estimated compressive strengthvalue for 28-day age;

6. Using PCIAP as cement substitution in concreteresulted in the process of S/S and neutralization toeliminate the adverse environmental impacts;

7. It can be inferred from the results that concretemixture containing 5% PCIAP has many bene�ts,such as reduction in contaminations of cementproduction, dead loads, energy consumption; thereduction occurs using the natural resources forcement production and costs elimination of treat-ment, burial, and transportation of PCIAP.

References

1. Abduli, M.A., Abbasi, M., Nasrabadi, T., Hoveidi, H.and Razmkhah, N. \Solid waste management in Tabrizpetrochemical complex", Iran. J. Environ. Health. Sci.Eng., 3(3), pp. 185-192 (2006).

2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency \Technologyperformance review: Selecting and using solidi�-cation/stabilization treatment for site remediation",

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Document No.EPA/600/R-09/148, Cincinnati, Ohio (2009).

3. Poon, C.S., Kou, S.C. and Lam, L. \Use of recycledaggregates in molded concrete bricks and blocks",Constr. Build. Mater., 16(5), pp. 281-289 (2002).

4. Amaya, P.J. \Boiler slag and bottom ash in asphaltconcrete", Proc., 12th Int. Symposium on Coal Com-bustion By-Products (CCB) Management and Use,American Coal Ash Association, 1, Alexandria, Vir-ginia (1997).

5. Ksaihati, K. and Stephen, J., Utilization of BottomAsh in Asphalt Mixes, Department of Civil and Ar-chitectural Engineering, Laramie, WY: University ofWyoming, pp. 82071-83295 (1999).

6. Taha, R.A., Delwar, M., Ali, G., Al-Harthy, A. andAl-Oraimi, S. \Use of municipal solid waste incineratorash in Portland cement concrete", Proc., 4th Int. Sym-posium on Environmental Geo-Technology and GlobalSustainable Development, 1, Boston, M.A., pp. 441-500 (2000).

7. Juric, B., Hanzic, L., Ilic, R. and Samec, N. \Utiliza-tion of municipal solid waste bottom ash and recycledaggregate in concrete", Waste Manag., 26(12), pp.1436-1442 (2006).

8. Rivard-Lentz, D.J., Sweeney, L.R. and Demars, K. \In-cinerator bottom ash as a soil substitute: physical andchemical behavior", Proceedings of the Symposium onTesting Soil Mixed with Waste or Recycled Materials,ASTM STP 1275, pp. 246-262 (1997).

9. Ghafoori, N. and Bucholc, J. \Properties of bottomash-based composite", Proceedings of the Session onUtilization of Industrial Byproducts for ConstructionMaterials, American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 52-65 (1993).

10. Gress, D., Zhang, X., Tarr, S., Pazienza, I. andEighmy, T. \Physical and environmental propertiesof asphalt amended bottom ash", Trans. Res. Record1345, Transportation Research Board, Washington,DC: NRC, pp. 10-18 (1992).

11. Dewey, G.R., Movrich, M.L. and Cousino, M.T.\Municipal waste combustor ash as an aggregatesubstitute in bituminous mixtures", Proceedings ofthe Symposium on Recovery and E�ective Reuse ofDiscarded Materials and by-Products for Constructionof Highway Facilities, Federal Highway Administrationand Environmental Protection Agency, Denver, CO,USA (1993).

12. Ferguson, G. \Use of self-cementing y ashes as a soilstabilizing agent", Proceedings of the ASCE AnnualConvention and Exposition, ISBN 0-87262-968-4, Dal-las, TX, pp. 1-14 (1993).

13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, \Stabiliza-tion/solidi�cation of CERCLA and RCRA wastes",U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Document No.EPA/625/6-89/022, Cincinnati, Ohio (1989).

14. Pojasek, R.B., Toxic and Hazardous Waste Disposal,Processes for Stabilization/Solidi�cation, Michigan,U.S.: Ann Arbor Science Publishers Inc (1979).


15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Applica-tions Analysis Report Soliditech, Inc. Solidi�ca-tion/Stabilization Process, U.S. Environmental Pro-tection Agency, Document No. EPA/540/A5-89/005,Cincinnati, Ohio (1990).

16. Forteza, R., Far, M., Segui, C. and Cerda, V. \Char-acterization of bottom ash in municipal solid wasteincinerators for its use in road base", Waste Manag.,24(9), pp. 899-909 (2004).

17. Chan, Y.M. \Waste management and treatment inan automobile brake manufacturing facility", M. TechThesis, Kuala Lumpur, University Malaya, pp. 51-56,77- 92 (1999).

18. Pecqueur, G., Crignon, C. and Que0ne0e, B. \Be-haviour of cement-treated MSWI bottom ash", WasteManage., 21(3), pp. 229-233 (2001).

19. Ferraris, M., Salvo, M., Ventrella, A., Buzzi, L.and Veglia, M. \Use of vitri�ed MSWI bottom ashesfor concrete production", Waste Manage., 29(3), pp.1041-1047 (2009).

20. Kikuchi, R. \Recycling of municipal solid waste forcement production: Pilot-scale test for transformingincineration ash of solid waste into cement clinker",Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 31(2), pp. 137-147 (2001).

21. Saikia, N., Kato, S. and Kojima, T. \Production ofcement clinkers from municipal solid waste incineration(MSWI) y ash", Waste Manag., 27(9), pp. 1178-1189(2007).

22. Biyani, R.K., Agamuthu, P. and Mahalingam, R.Polyester Resin Microencapsulation in Hazardous andRadioactive Waste Treatment Technologies Handbook,New York: CRC Press (2001).

23. Pan, J.R., Huang, C., Kuo, J.J. and Lin, S.H. \Recy-cling MSWI bottom and y ash as raw materials forPortland cement", Waste. Manag., 28(7), pp. 1113-1118 (2008).

24. Chen, C.H. and Chiou, I.J. \Distribution of chlorideion in MSWI bottom ash and de-chlorination per-formance", J. Hazard. Mater., 148(1-2), pp. 346-352(2007).

25. Krammart, P. and Tangtermsirikul, S. \A study oncement made by partially replacing cement raw materi-als with municipal solid waste ash and calcium carbidewaste", Sci. Asia, 29, pp. 77-84 (2003).

26. Shi, H.S., Deng, K., Yuan, F. and Wu, K. \Prepara-tion of the saving-energy sulfoaluminate cement usingMSWI y ash", J. Hazard. Mater., 169(1-3), pp. 551-555 (2009).

27. Siddique, R. \Use of municipal solid waste ash inconcrete", Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 55(2), pp. 83-91(2010).

28. Siddique, R. \Utilization of municipal solid waste(MSW) ash in cement and mortar", Resour. Conserv.Recycl., 54(12), pp. 1037-1047 (2010).

29. McCarthy, M.J. and Dhir, R.K. \Development of highvolume y ash cements for use in concrete construc-tion", Fuel., 84(11), pp. 1423-1432 (2005).

30. Aubert, J.E., Husson, B. and Vaquier, A. \Use ofmunicipal solid waste incineration y ash in concrete",Cem. Concr. Res., 34(6), pp. 957-963 (2004).

31. Kula, I., Olgun, A., Sevinc, V. and Erdogan, Y. \Aninvestigation on the use of tincal ore waste, y ash,and coal bottom ash as Portland cement replacementmaterials", Cem. Concr. Res., 32(2), pp. 227-232(2002).

32. Uchikawa, H. and Obana, H. \Ecocement-Frontier ofrecycling of urban composite waste", World Cem.,26(11), pp. 33-36 (1995).

33. Shih, P.H., Chang, J.E. and Chiang, L.C. \Replace-ment of raw mix in cement production by municipalsolid waste incineration ash", Cem. Concr., 33(11),pp. 1831-1836 (2003).

34. Gines, O., Chimenos, J.M., Vizcarro, A., Formosa, J.and Rosell, J.R. \Combined use of MSWI bottom ashand y ash as aggregate in concrete formulation: Envi-ronmental and mechanical considerations", J. Hazard.Mater., 169(1-3), pp. 643-650 (2009).

35. Lin, Y.C., Yen, J.H., Lateef, S.K., Hong, P.K.A.and Lin, C.F. \Characteristics of residual organicsin municipal solid waste incinerator bottom ash", J.Hazard. Mater., 182(1-3), pp. 337-345 (2010).

36. Rebeiz, K.S. and Mielich, K.L. \Construction use ofmunicipal-solid-waste ash", J. Energy. Eng., 121(1),pp. 2-13 (1995).

37. Pera, J., Coutaz, L., Ambroise, J. and Chababet, M.\Use of incinerator bottom ash in concrete", Cem.Concr. Res., 27(1), pp. 1-5 (1997).

38. Alkemade, M.M.C., Eymael, M.M.Th., Mulder, E. andWijs, W. \How to prevent expansion of MSWI bottomash in road construction", Stud. Environ. Sci., 60, pp.863-876 (1994).

39. Appendino, P., Ferraris, M., Matekovits, I. and Salvo,M. \Production of glass-ceramic bodies from the bot-tom ashes of municipal solid waste incinerators", J.Eur. Ceram. Soc., 24(5), pp. 803-810 (2004).

40. Cheng, T.W., Huang, M.Z., Tzeng, C.C., Cheng, K.B.and Ueng, T.H. \Production of coloured glass-ceramicsfrom incinerator ash using thermal plasma technol-ogy", Chemosphere, 68(10), pp. 1937-1945 (2007).

41. ASTM C150-85a, Annual book of ASTM Standards\Standard speci�cation for Portland cement", Ameri-can Society for Testing and Materials, 04.02, Philadel-phia, pp. 114-119 (1986).

42. Noorpour, M., Mousavi, A., Noorpour, S., KarbatiAsl, R. and Karbati Asl, A. \E�ect of petrochemicalcomplex incinerator ash on the compressive strengthof concrete against sulfate and chloride attack", Eur.J. Sci. Res., 114(1), pp. 99-113 (2013).

43. ASTM C33-86, Annual Book of ASTM Standards,Standard Speci�cation for Concrete Aggregates, Amer-ican Society for Testing and Materials, 04.02, Philadel-phia, pp. 11-19 (1986).


44. American Concrete Institute (ACI), \Standard prac-tice for selecting proportions for normal, heavyweight,and mass concrete", Report ACI 211.1 (2002).

45. ASTM C143-78, Annual Book of ASTM Standards,Standard Test for Slump of Portland Cement Concrete,American Society for Testing and Materials, 04.02,Philadelphia, pp. 109-111 (1986).

46. ASTM C39-86, Annual Book of ASTM Standards,Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength ofCylindrical Concrete Specimens, American Society forTesting and Materials, 04.02, Philadelphia, pp. 24-29(1986).

47. ASTM C642-82, Annual Book of ASTM Standards,Standard Test Method for Speci�c Gravity, Absorption,and Voids in Hardened Concrete, American Society forTesting and Materials, 04.02, Philadelphia, pp. 403-405(1986).

48. ASTM C469-83, Annual book of ASTM Standards,Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elastic-ity and Poisons Ratio of Concrete in Compression,American Society for Testing and Materials, 04.02,Philadelphia, pp. 305-309 (1986).

49. ASTM C496-85, Annual Book of ASTM Standards,Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength ofCylindrical Concrete Specimens, American Society forTesting and Materials, 04.02, Philadelphia, pp. 337-342 (1986).

50. ASTM C293-79, Annual Book of ASTM Standards,Standard Test Method for Flexural Strength of Con-crete (Using Simple Beam with Center-Point Loading),American Society for Testing and Materials, 04.02,Philadelphia, pp. 209-211 (1986).

51. Guide for Structural Lightweight Aggregate Concrete.ACI 213R-87 (Reapproved 1999), ACI Committee 213,American Concrete Institute (1999).

52. An International Manual Handbook Written by com-mittee of experts commissioned by UNESCO. ISBN0-408-70175-7 (1999).

Biographies

Davood Mosto�nejad is a distinguished Professorat the Department of Civil Engineering in IsfahanUniversity of Technology (IUT), Isfahan, Iran. Hereceived his BSc and MSc degrees from Tehran Uni-versity and Isfahan University of Technology in 1985and 1987, respectively; moreover, he received his PhDdegree from Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, in1997. His research interests include application of FRPcomposites in concrete and masonry structures, repairand rehabilitation of damaged RC structures, concretetechnology and biological treatment of concrete, andductility of RC joints and structures.

Samad Noorpour is a Researcher at the Departmentof Civil Engineering in Islamic Azad University (IAU),Tabriz Branch, Iran. He received his BSc from IAU,Tabriz Branch, Iran. His research interests includewaste management, concrete technology, building ma-terials, cement, and binders.

Mojtaba Noorpour is an active member of YoungResearchers and Elite Club (YREC), Islamic AzadUniversity (IAU), Tabriz Branch, Iran. He receivedhis MSc in protective structures from Malek AshtarUniversity of Technology (MUT), Tehran, Iran, andBSc in Civil Engineering from IAU, Tabriz Branch,Iran. He got scholarship for MSc as a brilliant studentat MUT. He has eleven patents and several papers thathave been published in or submitted to refereed jour-nals. He was a leader of a research project at YREC.Also, he was the top researcher student of the provincein 2010 and First-Place among top graduates of CivilEngineering in BSc section, 2011. He is interested indoing a research about replacement materials insteadof cement in concrete, waste management, binders,investigation of microstructural, mechanical properties,and chemical resistance of concrete samples made withwaste, investigation of geopolymer concretes made withwaste and materials, such as y ash, silica fume, slag,zeolite, and etc., and �ber-reinforced concrete andshotcrete.

Reza Karbati Asl is a Master of Science studentat Department of Civil Engineering in University ofTabriz (UT), Tabriz, Iran. He received his BSc in CivilEngineering from IAU, Tabriz Branch, Iran. He is amember of Young Researchers and Elite Club (YREC)of IAU, Tabriz Branch, Iran. His Research interestsinclude waste management, concrete technology, build-ing materials, environmental engineering, and watertreatment.

Vahid Sadeghi Balkanlou is a Lecturer at CivilEngineering Department in Islamic Azad University(IAU), East Azerbaijan, Iran. He received his MSc inStructures, and BSc in Civil Engineering from IAU,Tabriz Branch, Iran. He is a member of YoungResearchers and Elite Club of IAU, Tabriz Branch,Iran. His Research interests include structures controlwith dampers, viscous dampers, concrete technology,and seismic analyses & design of structures.

Ali Karbati Asl received his BSc in Project Man-agement in Payame Noor University, I.R. of Iran. Hisresearch interests include waste management, concretetechnology, and project management.

e ects of petrochemical wastes incinerator ash powder...

Documents