IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i4p1429-d1587345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determining Optimum Coal Bottom Ash/Slag Content for Sustainable Concrete Infrastructure

Author

Listed:
  • Samrawit Menda

    (Department of Civil Engineering, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202, USA)

  • Sandip Poudel

    (Department of Civil Engineering, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202, USA)

  • Joe Useldinger-Hoefs

    (Department of Civil Engineering, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202, USA)

  • Bruce Dockter

    (Department of Civil Engineering, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202, USA)

  • Daba Gedafa

    (Department of Civil Engineering, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202, USA)

Abstract

Concrete usage is increasing rapidly; subsequently, the industry’s carbon footprint is increasing and impacting the environment significantly. Large amounts of fine and coarse aggregate, including cement, are needed to fulfill the increased demand, leading to increased natural aggregate usage. Therefore, finding a fine aggregate replacement in concrete is essential. Coal bottom ash (CBA) and coal boiler slag (CBS), byproducts of coal-burning power plants with pozzolanic properties, can replace fine aggregate in concrete to reduce global natural material depletion, health hazards, and technical and economic problems associated with power plants’ solid waste. This study was conducted to determine the optimum fine aggregate replacement amount of CBA and CBS in concrete while improving concrete performance. The optimum CBA and CBS content is 50%, which reduces fine aggregate usage in a concrete mix by 50% while maintaining equivalent or better concrete strength than the control. The optimum CBA content has a unit weight lower than the control for all mixes tested in this study, which makes the CBA mix lightweight concrete. The optimum CBA concrete has 15%, 43%, and 42% higher compressive strength than the control after 7 days, 28 days, and 56 days of curing, respectively. On the other hand, the optimum CBS concrete has 12%,16%, and 16% increased compressive strength than the control after 7, 28, and 56 days of curing, respectively. The compressive strength of optimum CBA concrete was higher than the optimum CBS, indicating that CBA concrete yields higher compressive strength than CBS, possibly due to the difference in physical properties, water absorption capacity, and bulk density. Nanoclay increased CBA concrete compressive strength at an early stage and increased the optimum content to 80% CBA. Therefore, using CBA and CBS can significantly reduce natural material usage and environmental harm by reducing CBA waste disposal and improving concrete performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Samrawit Menda & Sandip Poudel & Joe Useldinger-Hoefs & Bruce Dockter & Daba Gedafa, 2025. "Determining Optimum Coal Bottom Ash/Slag Content for Sustainable Concrete Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:4:p:1429-:d:1587345
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1429/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1429/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Halan Ganesan & Abhishek Sachdeva & Petros Petrounias & Paraskevi Lampropoulou & Pushpendra Kumar Sharma & Abhinav Kumar, 2023. "Impact of Fine Slag Aggregates on the Final Durability of Coal Bottom Ash to Produce Sustainable Concrete," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-31, March.
    2. Safeer Abbas & Uzair Arshad & Wasim Abbass & Moncef L. Nehdi & Ali Ahmed, 2020. "Recycling Untreated Coal Bottom Ash with Added Value for Mitigating Alkali–Silica Reaction in Concrete: A Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-24, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. T. Sivageerthi & Bathrinath Sankaranarayanan & Syed Mithun Ali & Ali AlArjani & Koppiahraj Karuppiah, 2022. "Modeling Challenges for Improving the Heat Rate Performance in a Thermal Power Plant: Implications for SDGs in Energy Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Stephen Babajide Olabimtan & Mohammad Ali Mosaberpanah, 2023. "The Implementation of a Binary Blend of Waste Glass Powder and Coal Bottom Ash as a Partial Cement Replacement toward More Sustainable Mortar Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-30, May.
    3. Safeer Abbas & Wasim Abbass & Moncef L. Nehdi & Ali Ahmed & Muhammad Yousaf, 2021. "Investigation of Alkali-Silica Reactivity in Sustainable Ultrahigh Performance Concrete," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Farshad Dabbaghi & Maria Rashidi & Moncef L. Nehdi & Hamzeh Sadeghi & Mahmood Karimaei & Haleh Rasekh & Farhad Qaderi, 2021. "Experimental and Informational Modeling Study on Flexural Strength of Eco-Friendly Concrete Incorporating Coal Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-22, July.
    5. Alaa Fahad Mashshay & S. Komeil Hashemi & Hamidreza Tavakoli, 2023. "Post-Fire Mechanical Degradation of Lightweight Concretes and Maintenance Strategies with Steel Fibers and Nano-Silica," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-16, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:4:p:1429-:d:1587345. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.