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

net/publication/309340528

Reuse of recycled glass in mortar manufacturing

Article  in  European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering · October 2016

DOI: 10.1080/19648189.2016.1246695

CITATIONS READS

12 842

3 authors:

Valeria Corinaldesi Alessandro Nardinocchi

Università Politecnica delle Marche Università Politecnica delle Marche
113 PUBLICATIONS   2,170 CITATIONS    16 PUBLICATIONS   112 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jacopo Donnini
Università Politecnica delle Marche
31 PUBLICATIONS   228 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Green Binder Materials for Civil Engineering and Architecture Applications View project

PROPERTIES of ECO-SUSTAINABLE GREEN BINDER CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL MODIFIED NANOMATERIALS THEMED ISSUE View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Valeria Corinaldesi on 25 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering

ISSN: 1964-8189 (Print) 2116-7214 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tece20

Reuse of recycled glass in mortar manufacturing

Valeria Corinaldesi, Alessandro Nardinocchi & Jacopo Donnini

To cite this article: Valeria Corinaldesi, Alessandro Nardinocchi & Jacopo Donnini (2016):
Reuse of recycled glass in mortar manufacturing, European Journal of Environmental and Civil
Engineering, DOI: 10.1080/19648189.2016.1246695

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2016.1246695

Published online: 20 Oct 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tece20

Download by: [Valeria Corinaldesi] Date: 21 October 2016, At: 23:14

European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering, 2016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19648189.2016.1246695

Reuse of recycled glass in mortar manufacturing

Valeria Corinaldesi* , Alessandro Nardinocchi and Jacopo Donnini

Faculty of Engineering, Department of Materials, Environmental Sciences and Urban Planning

(SIMAU), Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy

This work is aimed at studying the possibility of reusing waste glass from crushed
containers as aggregate for preparing mortars. At present, this kind of reuse is still
not common due to the risk of alkali–silica reaction (ASR) between alkalis of the
cement and silica of the waste glass. This expansive reaction can cause great prob-
lems of cracking and, consequently, it can be extremely deleterious for the mortar
durability. The influence of both size and colour of recycled glass coming from
crushed containers on the durability of mortars is studied. The attention is focused
on both mechanical behaviour, investigated by means of bending and compression
tests, as well as durability, studied by means of accelerated tests for evaluating the
tendency to expand under alkaline environment due to ASR. Several mortars are pre-
pared by replacing at different rate the quartz sand with coarse glass cullet of differ-
ent colours: clear (i.e. uncoloured), green and amber. Then, pulverised clear glass is
added to the mortar mixtures, also in the presence of class F fly ash. Results obtained
show that by using both green and amber glass cullet the mortars are stable, as well
as by using powder glass, which also shows a significant pozzolanic effect. On the
other hand, considerable expansion due to ASR is detected by using clear glass
cullet.
Keywords: alkali–silica reaction; durability; glass powder; pozzolanic effect; recycled
glass; waste glass

1. Introduction
Post-consumer waste glass represents one of the major components of the solid waste
stream. Today, discarded waste glass has become a substantial burden on the landfills
throughout the world. In fact, the practice of recycling glass containers is growing in
many countries. Unfortunately, a significant portion of the collected glass is not actually
recycled into new glass, mainly due to the prohibitive shipping costs from collection
points to recast facilities. In addition, in Italy, the majority of domestic container glass
production is in clear and amber colours, which makes recycling of the imported green
containers challenging and costly. In fact, in Italy, the whole domestic container produc-
tion is about 1,500,000 tonnes per year, of which 63% is clear, 23% is amber and 13%
is green, but varies significantly geographically and seasonally. Similar problems have
been reported in the rest of Europe, United States, Australia and the Middle East (Jin,
Meyer, & Baxter, 2000; Maraghechi, Shafaatian, Fischer, & Rajabipour, 2011; Shayan
& Xu, 2004; Taha & Nounu, 2009). Large quantities of the post-consumer glass are cur-
rently landfilled or stockpiled in hopes that future technologies would allow a profitable
use of this material (Maraghechi et al., 2011).

*Corresponding author. Email: v.corinaldesi@univpm.it

© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

2 V. Corinaldesi et al.

Concrete construction provides a significant market potential for waste glass recy-
cling. Extensive studies have been carried out to utilise crushed recycled glass as partial
replacement of aggregates into conventional concrete and mortar (Ismail & AL-Hashmi,
2009; Limbachiya, 2009; Park, Lee, & Kim, 2004; Topçu & Canbaz, 2004).
The use of recycled glass in concrete as cement or aggregate replacement can be
environmentally and sometimes economically advantageous as it converts large quanti-
ties of waste materials to value-added products and reduces the need for transportation
by offering a local material resource. In particular, the feasibility of using recycled glass
as sand in concrete has been explored by many authors; and it was determined that con-
cretes with desirable strength and workability can be produced by proper mixture pro-
portioning and the use of water reducing admixtures. The major technical obstacle,
however, is the deleterious alkali–silica reaction (ASR). In fact, the amorphous silicate
structure of glass dissolves in the alkaline pore solution of concrete and forms an
alkali–silica gel, which in the presence of water, swells and cracks the concrete
(Johnson, 1974; Schmidt & Saia, 1963).
Previous research (Ali & Al-Tersawy, 2012; Du & Tan, 2013; Jin et al., 2000; Liu,
2011; Nassar & Soroushian, 2012; Taha & Nounu, 2008) has focused on relating the
severity of ASR expansions to the size, content and colour of glass aggregates. In par-
ticular, it was found that expansions and cracking generally decrease by reducing the
particle size of glass (Jin et al., 2000). In terms of the influence of glass colour on ASR
expansion, some literature reported that green glass showed the lowest ASR expansion
compared with brown and clear glass, due to the presence of Cr2O3 (Jin et al., 2000;
Park et al., 2004; Topçu, Boga, & Bilir, 2008). However, Ozkan and Yuksel (2008)
observed very small difference among green, brown and clear glasses in ASR reactivity.
On the other hand, Dhir, Dyer, and Tang (2009) reported that green glass showed the
highest ASR expansion while clear glass showed the lowest.
The practice of reusing in concrete post-consumer bottles coming from municipal
solid waste (MSW) is more and more spread worldwide, and it concerns also post-
consumer blown bottles made of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (Corinaldesi,
Donnini, & Nardinocchi, 2015; Corinaldesi, Nardinocchi, & Donnini, 2014; Frigione,
2010). Another way to recycle MSW in concrete production is to reuse MSW bottom
ash coming from municipal solid waste incineration plants (Bertolini, Carsana, Cassago,
Quadrio Curzio, & Collepardi, 2004; Cioffi, Colangelo, Montagnaro, & Santoro, 2011;
Colangelo, Cioffi, Montagnaro, & Santoro, 2012).

2. Research significance
This work aims at evaluating the influence of both size and colour of recycled glass
coming from post-consumer domestic containers on the durability of recycled glass mor-
tars. The attention is focused on both mechanical behaviour, studied by means of bend-
ing and compression tests, and durability, investigated by means of accelerated tests for
evaluating the tendency to expand under alkaline environment due to ASR.
With this purpose, several mortars are prepared by replacing at different rate (either
50% or 100% by weight) the quartz sand with coarse (particle size up to 8 mm) glass
cullet of different colours: clear (i.e. uncoloured), green and amber.
Then, very fine glass powder (particle size under 0.300 mm) is added to the mortar
mixtures, by replacing 50% by weight of quartz sand. In the presence of glass powder,
also a class F fly ash is used at a dosage of 150 kg/m3 by replacing the same amount of
either cement or sand.
 European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering 3

The effectiveness of fly ash addition besides to glass powder is evaluated bearing in

mind the experimental results found by some authors (Kırgız, 2014, 2015a, 2015b,
2015c, 2015d; Kou & Poon, 2009; Shi, Wu, Riefler, & Wang, 2005), showing that ASR
expansion is significantly reduced by the use of fly ash. Fly ash is able to react with
alkali faster than aggregate particles, due to its high specific surface area, thus allowing
to prevent ARS reaction (Carsana, Frassoni, & Bertolini, 2014; Wang, 2015).

3. Experimental procedure
3.1. Materials
As binder, commercial portland-limestone-blended cement type CEM II/B-LL 32.5R is
used, according to the European Standards EN-197/1 (2000) ‘Cement – Part 1: Compo-
sition, specifications and conformity criteria for common cements’. Its specific gravity is
3.050 g/cm3. Also a low-calcium fly ash (ASTM C 618 Class F) produced by a thermal
generating station is used. Its specific gravity is 2.25 g/cm3. Chemical composition as
well as Blaine fineness values of both cement and fly ash are reported in Table 1.
As aggregate for mortars, either quartz sand (not susceptible to ASR) or recycled
glass are used. Four different fractions of waste glass are prepared at all: three of them
are obtained by crushing containers made of either clear (uncoloured) or green or amber
glass by means of a jaw crusher for 60 min, then sieved in order to collect only the
fraction passing 8 mm sieve. They show the same grain size distribution (see ‘glass cul-
let’ in Figure 1), but different colour. Their chemical compositions are reported in
Table 2.
Then, a fourth fraction is produced by finely ground clear glass cullet by means of a
jaw crusher before, and then refined by means of a rotating ball mill. Finally, this frac-
tion (represented as ‘glass powder’ in Figure 1) is sieved in order to collect only the
fraction passing .300 mm sieve.
The particle size distributions of quartz, sand and recycled glass fractions, are deter-
mined according to EN 933-1 (1997) ‘Tests for geometrical properties of aggregates –
determination of particle size distribution – sieving method’; the curves obtained are
shown in Figure 1.

3.2. Mortar mixture proportions

Ten different mortars are prepared, their mixture proportions are shown in Table 3. The
cement to sand ratio is 1:3 (by mass) and the cement content is maintained equal to

Table 1. Chemical composition and Blaine fineness of binders.

Composition (% by mass) Cement CEM II/B-LL 32.5R Fly ash ASTM class F
Silica (SiO2) 22.6 56.8
Calcium oxide (CaO) 61.9 2.2
Alumina (Al2O3) 4.8 28.2
Iron oxide (Fe2O3) 4.8 5.3
Magnesium oxide (MgO) 1.1 5.2
Sodium oxide (Na2O) 0.1 0.4
Potassium oxide (K2O) .5 1.3
Sulphur trioxide (SO3) 2.4 0.7
Blaine fineness (m2/g) 0.36 0.39
4 V. Corinaldesi et al.

Figure 1. Grain size distributions of quartz sand, glass cullet and powder.

Table 2. Chemical composition of coloured glass cullet.

Composition Uncoloured glass cullet Amber glass cullet Green glass cullet
(% by mass) (ClearGC) (AmberGC) (GreenGC)
Silica (SiO2) 71.2 70.2 70.4
Calcium oxide (CaO) 10.7 10.3 10.1
Alumina (Al2O3) 1.8 1.9 1.8
Iron oxide (Fe2O3) – 0.4 0.5
Magnesium oxide 2.5 2.6 2.8
(MgO)
Sodium oxide (Na2O) 13.4 13.2 12.9
Potassium oxide 0.5 0.6 0.4
(K2O)
Sulphur trioxide – 1.3 0.2
(SO3)
Chromium III oxide – 0.1 0.3
(Cr2O3)
CaO/(SiO2 + Na2O) 0.126 0.123 0.121

450 kg/m3 for all the mixtures with the only exception of a mix (GP-50%+FAc), in
which cement is partially replaced by 150 kg/m3 of fly ash and reduced to 300 kg/m3.
The water content of each mortar is set to achieve the same consistence (125 ± 10 mm),
evaluated according to EN 1015-3 (1999) ‘Methods of test for mortar for masonry.
Determination of consistence of fresh mortar (by flow table)’. Several combination of
quartz sand and recycled glass are tried. Firstly, a reference mixture (REF) is prepared
by only using quartz sand; then in three mixtures, quartz sand is partially replaced (50%
by weight) by glass cullet of different colours, alternatively uncoloured (mix ClearGC-
50%), green (mix GreenGC-50%) and amber (mix AmberGC-50%). Further three
mixtures are prepared by fully replacing sand with glass cullet of different colours:
uncoloured (mix ClearGC-100%), green (mix GreenGC-100%) and amber (mix
AmberGC-100%).
 European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering 5

Table 3. Mortars mixture proportions (g).

Glass cullet Glass powder Fly ash Water/
Cement Sand (GC) (GP) (FA) Water Binder
REF 450 1350 – – – 270 0.60
ClearGC-50% 450 675 675 – – 252 0.56
GreenGC-50% 450 675 675 – – 253 0.56
AmberGC-50% 450 675 675 – – 254 0.56
ClearGC-100% 450 – 1350 – – 210 0.47
GreenGC-100% 450 – 1350 – – 203 0.45
AmberGC- 450 – 1350 – – 225 0.50
100%
GP-50% 450 675 – 675 – 434 0.96
GP-50%+FAc 300 675 – 675 150 434 0.96
GP-50%+FAs 450 500 – 675 150 447 0.74

Finally, glass powder (GP) is added to the mortar mixtures, by replacing 50% by
weight of quartz sand (mix GP-50%). Two other mixtures are prepared in the presence
of glass powder, in which class F fly ash is used at a dosage of 150 kg/m3 by replacing
either cement (mix GP-50%+FAc) or sand (mix GP-50%+FAs).

3.3. Mechanical characterisation

Prismatic specimens (40 × 40 × 160 mm) are manufactured, cast and wet cured at 20 °C
up to 180 days. The compressive and flexural strengths are evaluated after 3, 28 and
180 days according to EN 1015-11 (1999) ‘Methods of test for mortar for masonry.
Determination of flexural and compressive strength of hardened mortar’.

3.4. ASR evaluation

The ASR expansion is determined by accelerated mortar bar tests according to ASTM
C 1260 (2007) ‘Standard test method for potential alkali reactivity of aggregates (mor-
tar-bar method). American Society of Testing and Materials’. For each mixture, three
70 × 70 × 280 mm mortar bars are prepared. Mortar specimens are cured for 1 day at
25 °C and 100% R.H., then submitted to accelerated curing at 80 °C in a 1 N NaOH
solution. This procedure closely resembles that suggested by ASTM C 1260 standard.
Mortar stability is determined by means of a mechanical comparator (0.001 mm accu-
racy) on samples cooled at room temperature, as prescribed by ASTM C 1260 (80 °C).
The initial lengths of the mortar bars are firstly recorded before they are immersed
into 1 N NaOH solution. The expanded lengths are subsequently measured after 2, 4, 7,
14, 21, 28, 35 and 42 days.

3.5. Microscope observation of sample

Samples are taken from all the specimens maintained for 42 days in 1 N NaOH solu-
tion, in order to observe the likely presence of ASR products at the interface between
glass particles and the surrounding cement paste. These samples are observed by means
of both optical macroscope and scanning electron microscope (SEM); also, energy dis-
persive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy is carried out in some cases, for detecting the
element composition of the observed products.
6 V. Corinaldesi et al.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Mechanical characterisation
In Figure 2, the results obtained from compression tests are reported. The only mixture
showing a mechanical performance comparable to that of the reference mixture is that
prepared by using 50% clear glass replacing sand, while at the dosage of 100%, this
clear cullet produced the lowest value of compressive strength after 180 days. The rea-
son of this loss of resistance could be the presence of widespread cracking in the speci-
mens made of 100% clear waste glass, which is detected by visual inspection.
Concerning the mixtures with green cullet, a certain difference between 50 and
100% replacement is detected again, but in this case is less evident than in clear cullet
mixtures, and evidence of cracking is not detected in any case. On the other hand, in
the case of amber cullet, almost the same behaviour in compression is found for both
50% and 100% substitution.
Concerning the addition of glass powder, a great pozzolanic effect is detected in
every case, with a 180-day compressive strength at least 80% higher than the related
28-day compressive strength. In particular, this increase between 28 and 180 days is
even equal to about 120% in the case of glass powder used together with fly ash replac-
ing cement. The final values of compressive strength is close to that reached by the ref-
erence mixture, but the water to cement ratio adopted is 60–65% higher in order to
reach the same fresh mortar workability (due to the greater water absorption of glass
powder with respect to quartz sand). Therefore, if used together with a water-reducing
admixture, powder glass could be extremely effective in improving mechanical perfor-
mance of mortar, as also outlined in a previous work (Corinaldesi, Gnappi, Moriconi, &
Montenero, 2005).
In Figure 3, the results obtained from bending tests are reported. The only mixture
showing a mechanical performance comparable to that of the reference mixture is again

Figure 2. Compressive strength vs. curing time.

 European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering 7

Figure 3. Flexural strength vs. curing time.

that prepared by using 50% clear glass replacing sand, while at the dosage of 100%,
this clear cullet produced the lowest value of flexural strength after 180 days. In general,
all the mixtures prepared with 100% glass cullet, independently of the colour, show
lower bending resistance than those prepared with 50% replacement. The reason could
lie in the grain size distribution of aggregate particles, which is close to that optimised
according to the suggestions of Bolomey (1947), only if 50% sand is replaced by glass
cullet (see Figure 1), while is too poor of fine particles if only glass cullet is used.
Bending test results confirm the pozzolanic effect of glass powder addition, with a 180-
day compressive strength growing of about 10, 22 and 50% with respect to that at 28-
day, for the mixtures GP-50%, GP-50%+FAs and GP-50%+FAc, respectively.

4.2. Accelerated mortar bar test

The average value of three mortar bar specimens for each mixture is reported as ASR
expansion in Figure 4. According to ASTM C 1260, 14th-day expansion, which is lar-
ger than 0.2%, is considered potentially deleterious for concrete structures, while less
than 0.1% is innocuous. Results obtained showed that after 14 days all the mortars had
ASR expansion lower than 0.1%, so they resulted durable according to ASTM C 1260.
However, after 14 days of curing mixtures containing clear glass cullet show significant
expansion of 0.3 and 0.7% for the mixtures ‘ClearGC-50%’ and ‘ClearGC-100%’,
respectively. On the contrary, all the other mortars show expansion lower than 0.1% up
to 42 days.
These measurements are accompanied by visual inspection of tested specimens, and
those prepared with clear cullet appear widespread cracked at the end of accelerated
mortar bar test (see Figure 5), while all the others are sound.
The reason for cracking appearance in the 100% clear glass specimens is attributable
to its chemical composition. Also, the specimens made with 50% clear glass show
8 V. Corinaldesi et al.

Figure 4. Expansions vs. time of exposure to 1 N solution of NaOH at 80 °C.

Figure 5. Pictures of a specimen with 100% uncoloured glass cullet.

cracking even if at a lower extent. Moreover, specimens prepared with clear glass cullet
show some typical signs of pop-out (see Figure 5), that is the expulsion of a portion of
mortar due to the expansion of the underlying reactive glass particle. This evidence is
confirmed by means of optical macroscope and scanning electron microscope observa-
tions (see Figure 6).
The clear glass cullet appears covered by a thin layer of white gel (see Figure 6(a)),
this layer is analysed by means of energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (see
Figure 6(c)), and it is found the presence of sodium (Na+), besides to silicon (Si4−) and
calcium (Ca2+), typical of ASR gel of soda-lime glass.
Some other researchers (Jin et al., 2000; Park et al., 2004) pointed out that green
colour glass would be the least reactive in ASR due to its high content of Cr2O3,
 European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering 9

Figure 6. Observations of a mortar specimen made of uncoloured cullet by optical macroscope

(A), and SEM (B–D).

which is added for greenish colour. Du and Tan (2013) clearly observed this effect,
by comparing the results of green and clear glass sand mortars. However, in spite of
the lesser content of Cr2O3, in (Du & Tan, 2013) brown glass sand mortar also exhib-
ited similarly small ASR expansion as green glass sand mortar, as in the present
work. Dhir et al. (2009) have attributed the different alkali resistance of coloured glasses
to the manufacturing process more than to the chemical content, which differs
only slightly. Shi (2009) reviewed the ASR expansion in glass concrete and proposed
that the mechanism of expansion of concrete caused ASR expansion. According to
Shi (2009), Na+ and Ca2+ are firstly dissolved from glass, when the OH− in pore
solution attacks the glass surface, then the silicate network depolymerises. Finally, the
reaction occurs to form ASR gel of C–N–S–H, as shown in Equation (1).
 
Ca2þ þ Naþ þ SiOðOHÞ3 ! C  N  S  H (1)
The swelling capacity of the ASR gel depends on its chemical composition, espe-
cially on the ratio of CaO/(SiO2 + Na2O). It is hypothesised that in the ASR gel of
soda-lime glass the content of calcium is relatively higher than in other types of glass
or natural sand. Therefore, the non-swelling ASR gel in recycled glass mortar would
lead to a lower expansion. The same conclusion is also made by Saccani and
Bignozzi (2010). In this case, the values of this ratio are quite similar for the three
differently coloured cullet (see Table 2), but only the clear type showed significant
ASR expansion.
10 V. Corinaldesi et al.

5. Conclusions
Based on the results of this experimental investigation, the following conclusions can be
drawn:

• The use of clear glass cullet replacing sand at 50% by weight permits to obtain
good mechanical performance, but the ASR expansion remains under the threshold
value of .1% only up to 21 days of exposure to 1 N NaOH solution.
• The use of clear glass cullet fully (100%) replacing sand produces very low
mechanical strengths both in compression and in bending tests and very high ASR
expansion, which reached the value of .7% after 42 days of exposure to 1 N
NaOH solution (this expansion, and the consequent mortar cracking, are confirmed
by both visual and SEM observations).
• Therefore, concerning clear glass cullet with grain size up to 8 mm, no more than
50% replacement ratio is recommended on the basis of the experimental results
obtained, and, even if the requirement prescribed by ASTM C 1260 is satisfied, a
dosage even lower should be used for durability assurance.
• The use of green and amber glass cullet, whichever the percentage of replacement,
slightly compromises the mechanical performance of mortars, in particular flexural
strength is lowered when 100% replacement is made, due to the bad grain size
distribution of the glass cullet used (which is improved if combined with 50%
quartz sand).
• However, no evidence of ASR expansion is detected in any case when either
amber or green coloured glass are used.
• The use of glass powder proves to be very effective in terms of mechanical
strength at long ages, thanks to strong pozzolanic effect (180-day compressive
strength is at least 80% higher than 28-day compressive strength).
• No evidence of ASR expansion is detected when powder glass (with particle size
up to .300 mm) is added to the mortar mixture, independently on the presence of
fly ash.
• The use of fly ash by replacing sand do not influence neither the mechanical per-
formance of mortars nor its dimensional stability under ASR, while if used by
replacing cement a significant strength loss is detected especially at early ages.
• Further studies should be carried out in order to optimise the promising use of
glass powder: in fact, this powder if properly added together with a water-reduc-
ing admixture, for compensating its huge request of water, can significantly
improve mortar mechanical performance, and if used together with clean glass cul-
let could reduce its ASR expansion.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

ORCID
Valeria Corinaldesi http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9372-5032
 European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering 11

References
Ali, E. E., & Al-Tersawy, S. H. (2012). Recycled glass as a partial replacement for fine aggregate
in self compacting concrete. Construction and Building Materials, 35, 785–791. doi:10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2012.04.117
Bertolini, L., Carsana, M., Cassago, D., Quadrio Curzio, A., & Collepardi, M. (2004). MSWI
ashes as mineral additions in concrete. Cement and Concrete Research, 34, 1899–1906.
doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.02.001
Bolomey, J. (1947). Revue Matèr Constr Trav Publ [Journal of Construction Materials and Public
Works]. Edition C.
Carsana, M., Frassoni, M., & Bertolini, L. (2014). Comparison of ground waste glass with other
supplementary cementitious materials. Cement and Concrete Composites, 45, 39–45.
doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2013.09.005
Cioffi, R., Colangelo, F., Montagnaro, F., & Santoro, L. (2011). Manufacture of artificial aggregate
using MSWI bottom ash. Waste Management, 31, 281–288. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2010.05.
020
Colangelo, F., Cioffi, R., Montagnaro, F., & Santoro, L. (2012). Soluble salt removal from MSWI
fly ash and its stabilization for safer disposal and recovery as road basement material. Waste
Management, 32, 1179–1185. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.12.013
Corinaldesi, V., Donnini, J., & Nardinocchi, A. (2015). Lightweight plasters containing plastic
waste for sustainable and energy-efficient building. Construction and Building Materials, 94,
337–345. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.07.069
Corinaldesi, V., Gnappi, G., Moriconi, G., & Montenero, A. (2005). Reuse of ground waste glass
as aggregate for mortars. Waste Management, 25, 197–201. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2004.
12.009
Corinaldesi, V., Nardinocchi, A., & Donnini, J. (2014). Lightweight aggregate mortars for sustain-
able and energy-efficient building. Advanced Materials Research, 980, 142–146. doi:10.4028/
www.scientific.net/AMR.980.142
Dhir, R. K., Dyer, T. D., & Tang, M. C. (2009). Alkali–silica reaction in concrete containing
glass. Materials and Structures, 42, 1451–1462. doi:10.1617/s11527-008-9465-8
Du, H., & Tan, K. H. (2013). Use of waste glass as sand in mortar: Part II – Alkali–silica reaction
and mitigation methods. Cement Concrete Composites, 35, 118–126. doi:10.1016/j.cemcon-
comp.2012.08.029
Frigione, M. (2010). Recycling of PET bottles as fine aggregate in concrete. Waste Management,
30, 1101–1106. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2010.01.030
Ismail, Z. Z., & AL-Hashmi, E.A. (2009). Recycling of waste glass as a partial replacement for
fine aggregate in concrete. Waste Management, 29, 655–659. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2008.08.
012
Jin, W., Meyer, C., & Baxter, S. (2000). Glascrete – Concrete with glass aggregate. ACI Materials
Journal, 97, 208–213.
Johnson, C. D. (1974). Waste glass as coarse aggregate for concrete. Journal of Testing and Eval-
uation, 2, 344–350. doi:10.1520/JTE10117J
Kırgız, M. S. (2014). Advances in physical properties of C class fly ash–cement systems blended
nanographite (Part 1). ZKG International, 67, 42–48.
Kırgız, M. S. (2015a). Advance treatment by nanographite for Portland pulverized fly ash cement
(the class F) systems. Composites Part B: Engineering, 82, 59–71. doi:10.1016/j.compos-
itesb.2015.08.003
Kırgız, M. S. (2015b). Supernatant nanographite solution for advance treatment of C class fly ash-
cement systems (Part 2). ZKG International, 68, 42–47.
Kırgız, M. S. (2015c). Supernatant nanographite solution for advance treatment of C class fly ash-
cement systems (Part 1). ZKG International, 4, 56–65.
Kırgız, M. S. (2015d). Advances in physical properties of C class fly ash–cement systems blended
nanographite (Part 2). ZKG International, 68, 60–67.
Kou, S. C., & Poon, C. S. (2009). Properties of self-compacting concrete prepared with recycled
glass aggregate. Cement Concrete Composites, 31, 107–113. doi:10.1016/j.cemcon-
comp.2008.12.002
Limbachiya, M. C. (2009). Bulk engineering and durability properties of washed glass sand con-
crete. Construction and Building Materials, 23, 1078–1083. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.
2008.05.022
 12 V. Corinaldesi et al.

Liu, M. (2011). Incorporating ground glass in self-compacting concrete. Construction and Building
Materials, 25, 919–925. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.06.092
Maraghechi, H., Shafaatian, S. M. H., Fischer, G., & Rajabipour, F. (2011). The role of residual
cracks on alkali silica reactivity of recycled glass aggregates. Cement and Concrete Compos-
ites, 34, 41–47. doi:10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2011.07.004
Nassar, R. U. D., & Soroushian, P. (2012). Strength and durability of recycled aggregate concrete
containing milled glass as partial replacement for cement. Construction and Building Materi-
als, 29, 368–377. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.061
Ozkan, O., & Yuksel, I. (2008). Studies on mortars containing waste bottle glass and industrial
by-products. Construction and Building Materials, 22, 1288–1298. doi:10.1016/j.conbuild-
mat.2007.01.015
Park, S. B., Lee, B. C., & Kim, J. H. (2004). Studies on mechanical properties of concrete con-
taining waste glass aggregate. Cement and Concrete Research, 34, 2181–2189. doi:10.1016/
j.cemconres.2004.02.006
Saccani, A., & Bignozzi, M. C. (2010). ASR expansion behavior of recycled glass fine aggregates
in concrete. Cement and Concrete Research, 40, 531–536. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.
09.003
Schmidt, A., & Saia, W. H. F. (1963). Alkali aggregate reaction tests on glass used for exposed
aggregate wall panel work. ACI Materials Journal, 60, 1235–1236.
Shayan, A., & Xu, A. M. (2004). Value-added utilisation of waste glass in concrete. Cement Con-
crete Research, 34, 81–89. doi:10.1016/S0008-8846(03)00251-5
Shi, C. (2009). Corrosion of glasses and expansion mechanism of concrete containing waste
glasses as aggregates. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 21, 529–534. doi:10.1061/
(ASCE)0899-1561(2009)21:10(529)
Shi, C., Wu, Y., Riefler, C., & Wang, H. (2005). Characteristics and pozzolanic reactivity of glass
powders. Cement and Concrete Research, 35, 987–993. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.05.015
Taha, B., & Nounu, G. (2008). Properties of concrete contains mixed colour waste recycled glass
as sand and cement replacement. Construction and Building Materials, 22, 713–720.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.01.019
Taha, B., & Nounu, G. (2009). Utilizing waste recycled glass as sand/cement replacement in con-
crete. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 21, 709–721. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561
(2009)21:12(709)
Topçu, I. B., Boga, A. R., & Bilir, T. (2008). Alkali–silica reactions of mortars produced by using
waste glass as fine aggregate and admixtures such as fly ash and Li2CO3. Waste Management,
28, 878–884. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2007.04.005
Topçu, I. B., & Canbaz, M. (2004). Properties of concrete containing waste glass. Cement and
Concrete Research, 34, 267–274. doi:10.1016/j.cemconres.2003.07.003
Wang, S. (2015). Cofired biomass fly ashes in mortar: Reduction of alkali silica reaction (ASR)
expansion, pore solution chemistry and the effects on compressive strength. Construction and
Building Materials, 82, 123–132. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.02.021

View publication stats