Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The disposal of leftover concrete and wash water from ready-mix ing 1,240,000,000 gallons of cleaning water. The water
concrete trucks is becoming an increasingly greater environmental that is discharged out of the truck contains fine cement
concern. The first concern is over the amount of waste water that is particles, sand, gravel, and chemical admixtures. This
generated in cleaning these trucks. The second concern is what water is caustic and has a pH high enough to be con-
effect, if any, these materials, which are considered hazardous by the sidered hazardous under the EPA's definition of cor-
EPA, might have when surface bodies of water and ground water rosivity [1]. The obvious environmental concern is the
become contaminated. This research project investigated the poten- effect this water has on the ground water and on all
tial for recycling these waste concrete materials for the production of surface bodies of water that become contaminated.
fresh concrete and mortar. A relatively new stabilizing admixture Concrete waste materials can be toxic to aquatic organ-
was also investigated as an aid in the recycling process. The result- isms and degrade the water for drinking and recreation
ing mortar was tested for compressive strength, sulfate resistance, [21.
workability, and setting time. ADVANCEDCEMENTBASEDMA- There are basically four options for disposing un-
TERIALS1994, 1, 267--274 used concrete and wash water for ready-mix produc-
KEY WORDS: EPA, Plastic concrete, Recycling, Setting ers: at the ready-mix plant yard, at the construction
time, Stabilizing admixtures, Strength, Sulfate resistance, site, at a landfill, or at a reclamation unit. The first two
Wash water, Workability options are becoming limited because of the 1987 revi-
sions to the Clean Water Act. In addition to point
sources of water pollution, these revisions include dif-
fuse sources of water pollution such as storm water
he disposal of w a s h water from concrete runoff from ready-mix plant yards and construction
ready-mix trucks is becoming an increasingly sites. Since October 1, 1992, all ready-mix plant yards
greater problem. In the past, it was possible to and construction sites have been required to obtain a
dispose of leftover concrete and truck wash water in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [6] per-
vacant lots, storm sewers, ready-mix plant yards, or at mit. This includes monitoring storm water that leaves
the construction site. When an empty 10 cubic yard the yard, and installing any necessary control systems
ready-mix truck returns to the batch plant from the that will reduce the level of pollutants in the water. A
construction site, there is still approximately 600 lb. of third way to dispose of the waste materials is to de-
concrete adhering to the inside of the drum and mixing posit them at an authorized landfill or disposal site.
blades. It takes approximately 150 to 300 gallons of However, with the development of environmental reg-
water to wash this concrete out before it hardens inside ulations and the increased demand on landfill, the
the drum [1]. It is estimated that 21,000,000 cubic yards availability of authorized disposal sites has decreased
of concrete are batched each year in Texas, requiring significantly over the last 15 years. Finally, a ready-mix
105,000,000 gallons of cleaning water; this is enough truck can dispose of wash water and leftover concrete
water to furnish the annual needs of a city of 5500 at a wash-out pit, or a mechanical reclaiming unit.
people. On a national level, approximately 247,000,000 These options require a high capital investment and
cubic yards of concrete are produced annually, requir- are expensive and labor intensive to maintain.
Research Significance
Address correspondence to: Ramon L. Carrasquillo, Construction Materials Re-
search Group, The University of Texas, 10100 Burner Road, Building 18B, Austin, It is clear that dwindling options will force concrete
Texas 78758. producers to find alternative ways of disposing of their
© Elsevier Science Inc. Received June 30, 1993
ISSN 1065-7355/94/$7.00 Accepted March 8, 1994
268 Borger et al. Advn Cem Bas Mat
1994;1:267-274
waste materials. One option is to recycle. In the past, time are the only factors that need to be investigated
wash water from reclamation units has been used suc- when using a suspect mix water. More recently, how-
cessfully to produce n e w concrete. There are n e w ever, problems of concrete soundness and durability
chemical additives on the market that can preserve have been investigated. The PCA states that, "Exces-
wash water and returned plastic concrete for several sive impurities in mixing water not only may affect
days prior to being used in the production of new con- setting time and concrete strength, but also may cause
crete. This method has the advantage that all waste efflorescence, staining, corrosion of reinforcement,
concrete and wash water can be reused, whereas rec- volume instability, and reduced durability" [4]. Fi-
lamation units or wash-out pits can return only the nally, workability can also become a concern since the
water. These stabilizing admixtures are expensive, water is carrying a large quantity of fines, including
costing approximately $11 per gallon, not including the cement particles, mineral admixtures, and fine aggre-
cost of computing dosage rates. However, they can gate. Water demand may increase to achieve consis-
prove to be cost effective to concrete producers by re- tent workability among batches of concrete. The work-
using 600 lb. of concrete material per truck per deliv- ability may also be affected by the residual effects of
ery, or when used in areas of the country where any chemical admixtures such as superplasticizers and air
other method of disposal is too expensive. entraining agents that are transferred from one batch
of concrete to another by the use of recycled wash
water. These concerns are further complicated by the
fact that the concentrations of the fines and the chem-
Background Information ical admixtures are not known and can vary depending
Up until the time when stabilizing admixtures were on how much water is used to clean out the ready-mix
introduced, little or no research on the immediate use trucks.
of recycled ready-mix truck wash water or returned Stabilizing admixture systems were introduced in
plastic concrete in the production of fresh concrete had 1988 and are now primarily marketed by Master Build-
been performed. However, if the technology needed ers Technologies under the trademark Delvo, and by
for the use of these recycled materials becomes feasi- Grace Concrete Products under the trademark Recov-
ble, the performance of the resulting concrete will need ery. These systems consist of two phases: stabilization
to be evaluated. and activation. The stabilization phase slows or stops
Much of the past research on the use of mix water in the hydration of the individual cement grains. The sta-
concrete has been focused on what effect various min- bilizing admixture acts like a high-range retarder, and
erals, salts, or other impurities in the water have on the depending on the dosage, can keep concrete from set-
properties and performance of fresh and hardened ting indefinitely. It differs from a conventional re-
concrete. In 1925, Abrams tested 68 different water tarder, however, because it also prevents the hydra-
samples for use as mix water in the production of con- tion of the tricalcium aluminates (C3A), whereas a con-
crete [3]. Over 6000 tests were performed to determine ventional retarder does not. The activation phase
each water sample's effect on strength, time of set, allows the hydration process to proceed normally. The
flow, and soundness of the resulting concrete. Abrams activating admixture acts as an antidote for the stabi-
claimed that the best indication of the quality of the lizing admixture and neutralizes the retarding effect.
mixing water was the 28-day strength of the concrete. Essentially, the activator is an accelerator, and typically
He also reported that mix water is generally acceptable any accelerator can be used as an antidote for the sta-
if it contains fewer than 6000 parts per million (ppm) of bilizer. With the use of the stabilizing and activating
total dissolved solids. Wash water can carry cement admixtures, the dynamics of the cement hydration in
particles and other pieces of aggregate as a fine in sus- concrete can be controlled for any desired period of
pension for several minutes before these settle out. time. Preliminary tests and field studies show that the
The wash water can also carry chemical and mineral physical properties of stabilized/activated concrete,
admixtures that have been dissolved in the water, re- such as strength, freeze-thaw durability, creep, and
suiting in a large amount of total dissolved solids. corrosion resistance, were as good as or better than
Therefore, the use of wash water in the production of those of the control untreated concrete [1].
concrete, especially minutes after it is discharged by The stabilizing admixture, when added to the con-
the ready-mix truck, should be investigated to deter- crete, prevents further hydration of the cement grains
mine if the properties of the concrete are affected. The by forming a protective barrier around the cement
Portland Cement Association (PCA) recommends that grains. The stabilizing admixture also acts as a surface
up to 50,000 p p m of total solids can be tolerated when agent, dispersing the cement grains and preventing
returned wash water is used to make fresh concrete them from flocculating. Other cementitious materials,
[4]. Other research also suggests that strength and set such as fly ash and blast slag, are also prevented from
Advn Cem Bas Mat Use of Recycled Wash Water 269
1994;1:267-274
workability characteristics. Other applications for sta- late wash water from ready-mix trucks, 32 batches of
bilizing admixtures include stabilization of ready-mix controlled wash water were made. Only cement and
truck wash water, same-day stabilization of returned water were used to simulate the wash water. The three
plastic concrete, long-haul applications, truck break- variables considered were cement particle concentra-
downs/traffic jams, reused concrete from p u m p lines, tion, cement type, and wash water age. Table 1 shows
and concrete temperature control. sample combinations of wash water that were made.
The two different water:cement ratios used were de-
termined by what was considered to be representative
w a s h w a t e r discharged from a ready-mix truck;
Experimental Program namely, five parts water to one part cement and ten
parts water to one part cement by weight.
Introduction To prepare the wash water, the cement and water
The main purpose of this project was to find out if the were mixed for 5 minutes, allowed to sit for 3 minutes,
use of recycled wash water and returned plastic con- and then mixed again for 5 minutes. The resulting
crete was feasible in the production of new concrete.
Because there is little or no information available on
the topic being studied, the testing program was per- TABLE 1. Wash water used in preparing mortars
formed in such a w a y as to build on the results of the Cement
previous tests. The investigation [5] s t u d i e d the Type
strength, setting time, workability, and sulfate resis- Mix (ASTM Water:Cement Wash Water
tance of mortars that incorporated recycled wash wa- Designation C150) Ratio (by Wt) Age
ter. These tests made up about one half of the main test SA-02,03 II 5.0 15 min, 24 h
program. The other half of the test program dealt with SA-04,05 II 10.0 15 min, 24 h
stabilizing and activating admixtures and their use in SA-07,08 III 5.0 15 min, 24 h
SA-09,10 III 10.0 15 min, 24 h
controlling the hydration dynamics of a mortar.
270 Borger et al. Advn Cem Bas Mat
1994;1:267-274
wash water was then allowed to sit for 15 minutes, at cement and over 20 oz. of stabilizer did not set, and the
which time it was agitated once more, and half of it test procedure was repeated using lower stabilizer dos-
was used to mix a cement paste and a batch of mortar. ages, namely, 0, 5, 10, 15, and 20 oz./cwt of cement.
The paste was used for set tests using a Vicat needle, A plan to simulate an overnight stabilization of re-
while the mortar was used to make the 3 x 6 inch turned plastic concrete was developed. A 450 lb. ce-
cylinders used for 3, 7, and 28 day strength tests and ment mix that was 2 hours old was chosen to be sta-
the 1 × 1 x 11.25 inch mortar bar prisms used for the bilized overnight or at about 14 hours after initial
sulfate resistance tests. This procedure was repeated batching, and then activated. The following time
for the other half of the wash water after it had been schedule was followed: (1) At 3:00 p.m., the original
allowed to sit for 24 hours. Control pastes and mortars mortar was mixed and then agitated every 15 minutes
made with tap water and ASTM type II and type III for 2 hours. (2) At 5:00 p.m., the stabilizer was added
cements were also prepared as references. For each and the mortar was thoroughly mixed for 5 minutes.
mortar batch, nine cylinder molds were filled accord- (3) At 7:00 a.m. the following morning, the accelerator
ing to ASTM C192-88, and vibrated on a vibrating table was added and fresh mortar was batched on top of the
for 10 seconds. The mortar cylinders were cured by original mortar.
covering with wet burlap and polyethylene for 24 The stabilizer dosage used was 35 oz./cwt of cement.
hours and then transferred to the moist curing room After the stabilizer was added, the mortar was divided
for the remainder of the test period. Also, six mortar into four samples. Each sample was covered and al-
bar molds were filled and cured according to ASTM lowed to sit until the next morning. At that time, each
C1012. This procedure was used to test mortars mixed sample was dosed with 0, 5, 10, or 25 oz./cwt acceler-
with wash water added at 15 minutes and 24 hours ator. These dosages were based on the amount of ce-
after it had been mixed. Another test program, identi- ment in the stabilized mortar only. Fresh mortar, in the
cal to the one outlined above, was used to test mortars amount of 2.5 times by weight of the original mortar,
made with wash water of different ages, namely, 1, 2, was batched on top. A penetration resistance setting
4, 8, 24, and 48 hours, to evaluate the effect of a time test specimen and nine 3 x 6 in. cylinders were
broader range of times of addition on the properties of made from each activated mortar batch. Set times were
the resulting mortars. recorded and plotted as a function of accelerator dos-
age and compared with the control mix set times.
STABILIZATION/ACTIVATIONSIMULATIONS. The second phase Compressive strength of the cylinders was determined
of the testing program dealt with the stabilization and at 3, 7, and 28 days and was compared with the control
activation of mortar. First of all, set charts were devel- mixes. A flow history, or a record of the flow measured
oped to determine dosages of stabilizer required to at various times, was also plotted as a function of time
keep the mortar from setting for a desired period of throughout the stabilization/activation procedure. The
time. Secondly, the stabilization and activation of re- procedure outlined above was repeated for two more
turned plastic concrete was simulated using the dosage 450 lb. cement mortar mixes using activator dosages of
of stabilizer determined from the set charts. 0, 25, 50, and 75 oz./cwt and 0, 50, 100, and 150 oz./cwt
To prepare the set charts, 450 and 650 lb. cement cement, respectively, and for two 650 lb. cement mixes
mortar mixes were produced. Enough mortar was utilizing a stabilizer dosage of 20 oz./cwt and activator
batched to make five setting time test specimens for dosages of O, 5, 10, and 25 oz./cwt and O, 50, 100, and
each of the five dosages of stabilizer used: 0, 10, 20, 30, 150 oz./cwt of cement, respectively. For activator dos-
and 40 oz./cwt of cement. A second batch of mortar ages above 50 oz./cwt, the activator was added as a
was mixed and the procedure outlined above was fol- volume replacement of the mix water to achieve con-
lowed, with the exception that the mortar was allowed sistent workabilities among batches.
to sit for I hour in the mixing drug before being dosed
with the stabilizer. This was again repeated for a third
batch of mortar that was allowed to sit for 2 hours Test Results
before being dosed. To simulate the agitation of a
ready-mix truck drum in the field, these two batches of Mortars Incorporating Recycled Wash Water
mortar were mixed every 15 minutes for I and 2 hours, Typical strength results for mortars utilizing recycled
respectively, before being dosed with the stabilizer. wash water added at 1, 2, 4, 8, 24, and 48 hours are
The set time of each specimen was measured by pen- shown in Figure 1. Typical mortar bar expansions for
etration resistance, as outlined in ASTM C403. The set- these mortars are shown in Figure 2 and typical flows
ting times of each specimen were recorded and plotted for these mortars are shown in Figure 3. Typical setting
as a function of the dosage of the stabilizer and the age times for pastes utilizing recycled wash water added at
of the mortar. The mix specimens containing 650 lb. of 15 minutes and 24 hours are shown in Figure 4.
Advn Cem Bas Mat Use of Recycled Wash Water 271
1994;1:267-274
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
~
110
4000 BB8HR 100
W 3000 [ ] 24 HR 90
5.0 w/c
2000 [ ] 48HR 80
10.0 w/c
t(:00 70
0 60 ...... CONTROL II
3 7 28 50
TEST AGE, DAYS 40
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
FIGURE 1. Compressive strength of type II cement mortars AGE OF WASH WATER, HOURS
made with wash water containing a type II cement at 5.0 w:c
ratio. FIGURE3. Flow for mortars made with a type II wash water.
272 Borger et al. Advn Cem Bas Mat
1994;1:267-274
1411
~ - 120
WI
~ 20
0
CEMENT~fPE - - - ~ II II II II III III III III @
CONC~ITRATICN~I~ a5.0 QS.0 Q10.0 @10,0 @5.0 @5.0 @10.0 10.0
AGE • 15MIN 24HR 10MIN 24HR 15MIN 24HR 15MIN 24HR
WASH WATER
FIGURE 4. Set times of pastes made with wash water added at 15 minutes and 24
hours.
setting times of pastes made with wash water added at was about 120 oz./cwt. This dosage may seem extreme,
24 hours set sooner than the pastes made with wash but the stabilizer manufacturer recommends that dos-
water added at 15 minutes, although the difference ages up to 150 oz./cwt are allowable.
was not significant. In all tests, the strength of the stabilized/activated
mortars equaled or exceeded the strength of the con-
Stabilization~Activation Simulations trol batch, as shown in Figure 7. Even when no acti-
The stabilizing admixture performed as expected. De- vator was used in the mixture, the compressive
pending on the dosage of stabilizer, the mortar could strength was still improved. This indicates that the use
be kept from setting for any desired period of time. of the stabilizer alone, without any activator, can in-
However, above a certain dosage of stabilizing admix- crease the compressive strength. When the activator
ture the mortar would not set at all, as shown in Figure was used, further increases in strength were noted.
5. In general, the mortars that were allowed to sit for a However, these further increases in strength do not
longer period of time before being dosed needed more seem to be dependent on activator dosage rate; higher
stabilizer than the mortars that were dosed immedi- activator dosages did not always result in higher
ately upon batching. This can be explained by the more strength. Finally, there were no adverse effects of high
advanced degree of hydration of the older mortars. dosages of activator on compressive strength.
When activating the mortar, there was a general In all cases, the resulting mortar had a similar flow to
trend that the set times decreased with increased dos- the original mortar, indicating that the workability was
ages of activator, as shown in Figure 6. For the 450 lb. not affected by the stabilization/activation process, as
cement mortar mix, the activator dosage that produced
a mortar with a similar set time as the control mortar
9 ~ INITIALSET
8
160.00 - - " -
T E M P E R A T U R E RANGE 23-27 DEG C AGEOF MORTARAT 7
14000 STABILIZATION
~p, = NO SET FOR DOSAGES ~- I 0 HR {~NITIAL)
g.
A
120.00
100.00
BEYOND THIS POINT ~ ..... ~ ~4)~
" ~1HR(INITIAL)
N'
80.00 L • 2 HR (INITIAL)
3
60.00
2
40.00
1
20.00 TEMPERATUR~RANGE 22-231DEGC I I I I I
0
0.00 i - T , i ---', 20 40 80 80 100 120 140 160
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 ACTIVATOR DO6AGE (OZ/CWT)
D O S A G E OF S T A B I L I Z E R ( o z / c w t cement)
FIGURE 6. Set times of a 450 lb. cement stabilized activated
FIGURE 5. Initial set times for a 450 lb. cement mortar mix. mortar mix.
Advn Cem Bas Mat Use of Recycled Wash Water 273
1994; 1:267-274
90 ~ 50,100,1500Z
ADDED
were required to achieve a setting time similar to
the control mix.
80 I q q I I I I I I
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 5. High dosages of activator up to 150 oz./cwt did
TiME (HR)
not adversely affect the strength.
FIGURE 8. Flow history for a stabilized/activated 450 lb. ce- 6. The final workability of a stabilized/activated
ment mortar mix. mortar was similar to the workability of the orig-
274 Borger et al. Advn Cem Bas Mat
1994;1:267-274