Wood Ash 17

Center for
By-Products
Utilization
USE OF WOOD ASH FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE

AND FLOWABLE CLSM
By Rudolph N. Kraus and Tarun R. Naik
Report No. CBU-2000-31

October 2000
REP-410
Submitted to the University of Wisconsin System, Solid Waste Management and Research Program,
and co-sponsors
Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics

College of Engineering and Applied Science
THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - MILWAUKEE
The University of Wisconsin System
Solid Waste Research Program ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
Cover Sheet For 1999-2000 Funding Requests COVER SHEET
Project Title
Use of Wood Ash for the Production of Structural Concrete and CLSM
Principal Investigator
Name Rudolph N. Kraus, Research Associate and Department Civil Engineering &
Assistant Director UWM-CBU Mechanics
Campus University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Telephone (414) 229-4105
Center for By-Product Utilization
Address 3200 N. Cramer St., P.O. Box 784, Milwaukee, WI 53201 Fax (414) 229-6958
Signature E-mail rudik@uwm.edu
Assistant Investigator
Name Department
Campus Telephone
Address Fax
Signature E-mail
Fiscal Year 1999-2000 Funding Request

$ 29,740.
Signature of Grants Officer Name and Title
Signature of Department Dean Name and Title
Project Summary
The Wisconsin pulp and paper mills generates approximately one million dry tons (or approx. 1.8 million cubic
yards) of wood ash per year. NCASI has estimated that of the total wood ash produced in the U.S., only about 28% is
being utilized. Pulp and paper mills dispose wood ash in landfills at a significant cost plus unknown future liabilities due to
environmental concerns related to such materials in monofills. This proposed project will be primarily oriented toward
initial development of manufacturing technology for use of wood ash in concrete (structural grade concrete, compressive
strength up to 4000 psi) and flowable slurry (controlled low strength materials, CLSM). The objectives of this work is to
develop manufacturing and performance specifications for structural concrete and flowable slurry products for every day
construction use. In order to accomplish this, laboratory investigations will be conducted. The entire work will be
completed in two phases. The first phase (Year 1) will be mainly concerned with optimization of mixture proportions and
development of production technology for the concrete and CLSM through bench-scale testing at UWM-CBU
laboratories. This will require manufacturing, testing per ASTM standards (compressive strength, tensile/flexural
strength, permeability, density, etc.), and evaluation of products under laboratory conditions. The chances of success for
Phase 1 are believed to be very high because CLSM and concrete mixture proportions have been developed by UWM-
CBU in the past for other by-products and sources of coal ash not meeting the specifications of ASTM C 618. Test
results are not available for wood ash use in cement-based materials with the exception of preliminary laboratory work by
UWM-CBU.
Assuming initial bench-scale laboratory success, candidate mixture proportions for each product will be selected
based on performance data that will be obtained for further investigations in Phase 2 (Year 2).The second phase of work
will involve prototype-scale and subsequently full production-scale manufacturing, testing, and evaluation of these best
laboratory mixtures under actual commercial production facilities followed by construction demonstration activities.
FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT
Project Title: USE OF WOOD ASH FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE AND

FLOWABLE CLSM
Principal Investigator: Rudolph N. Kraus

UWM Center for By-Products Utilization
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Other Project Personnel: Tarun R. Naik

UWM Center for By-Products Utilization
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
ABSTRACT
The Wisconsin pulp and paper industry generates approximately one million dry tons (or approx. 1.8
million cubic yards) of wood ash (PPM ash) per year. Disposal of PPM ash in landfills costs
Wisconsin pulp and paper industry significant direct cost plus unknown future liabilities due to
environmental concerns related to such materials in landfills. This project determined the feasibility
of future manufacturing of PPM ash concrete (structural grade concrete, compressive strength of up
to 5,000 psi) and flowable slurry (Controlled Low Strength Materials, CLSM) through an initial
laboratory evaluation.
Five different sources of PPM ash were selected for the project to determine the effects of variability
of PPM ash materials. From the five sources, both concrete and CLSM were manufactured in the
UWM-CBU laboratory. Seven different types of concrete mixtures were manufactured consisting of
three mixtures using up to 35% PPM ash and four mixtures containing a blend of PPM ash and one
of two sources of ASTM Class C coal fly ash, with a maximum coal fly ash content of 35 percent.
Concrete was tested for both rheological and hardened properties. Properties of concrete mixtures
were evaluated as a function of age for compressive strength, splitting tensile strength, and drying
shrinkage. Three different series of CLSM mixtures were manufactured for each source of PPM ash.
Each series of CLSM mixtures were designed for a different long-term compressive strength, less
than 100 psi, 100-500 psi, and 500-1,200 psi. CLSM made with PPM ash were tested for its
rheological characteristics (bleedwater, settlement, shrinkage and cracking, and setting
characteristics). Fresh and hardened CLSM densities were also measured. Compressive strength of
the CLSM was tested up through the age of 91 days. Permeability of the CLSM was also tested at
the age of one and three months. All PPM ashes were evaluated for elemental and leachate
concentrations specified in DNR NR 538. Tests were also conducted to determine elemental
analysis and other standard parameters for the coal ash and cement.
Five sources of PPM ash selected for this project exhibited a wide variation of material properties
(fineness, carbon content, reactivity with cement, etc.). Although each source had different physical
and chemical properties, results of this project indicate that structural grade concrete can be
manufactured with PPM ash as a replacement of cement. Concrete mixtures containing a blend of
PPM ash and ASTM C 618 Class C fly ash performed better than mixtures only containing PPM ash.
CLSM also was manufactured using PPM ash as the primary component. CLSM containing some
of the PPM ash sources exhibited a significant increase in compressive strength between the ages of
14 and 91 days. This should be carefully considered when proportioning fill applications using
CLSM containing similar sources of PPM ash.
Due to the success of this laboratory evaluation, a second phase of work is recommended to pursue
prototype-scale and subsequently full production-scale manufacturing of concrete and CLSM using
actual commercial production facilities. Activities for this Phase 2 work would include testing and
evaluation of mixtures followed by construction demonstration activities.
-ii-
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors express deep sense of gratitude to the UWS/RMDB Solid Waste Recovery Research
Program, Madison, WI; Consolidated Papers, Inc. (Stora Enso North America), Wisconsin Rapids,
WI; National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI), Kalamazoo, MI; Weyerhaeuser
Company, Rothschild, WI and Tacoma, WA; Wisconsin Electric Power Company, Milwaukee, WI;
and Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Green Bay, WI for their financial support and
endorsement of this important, significant, and interesting project. Thanks are also expressed to
Wisconsin Paper Council, Neehah, WI; and New Berlin Redi-Mix, New Berlin, WI for their
endorsement of the project. Special appreciation is expressed to Ms. Eileen Norby, Lori Pennock,
and Bruce Ramme for their interest in this project and monitoring project progress and achievements.
Special thanks are also extended to Parisha Chanodia, Graduate Research Assistance, UWM Center
for By-Products Utilization, for her dedicated and continuous effort. Thanks are extended to Dr.
Shiw S. Singh for his input to this report. Thanks are also due to the UWM Center for By-Products
Utilization laboratory staff, for their contributions in gathering and analysis of test data for this
project.
The Center was established in 1988 with a generous grant from the Dairyland Power Cooperative, La
Crosse, WI; Madison Gas and Electric Company, Madison, WI; National Minerals Corporation, St.
Paul, MN; Northern States Power Company, Eau Claire, WI; Wisconsin Electric Power Company,
Milwaukee, WI; Wisconsin Power and Light Company (Alliant Energy), Madison, WI; and,
Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Green Bay, WI. Their financial support, and support from
the Manitowoc Public Utilities, Manitowoc, WI is gratefully acknowledged.
-iii-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .........................................................................1

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW.....................................................................................................2
2.1 Properties of Wood Ash ................................................................................................2
2.2 Beneficial Uses of Wood Ash .......................................................................................5
2.2.1 Land Application............................................................................................5
2.2.2 Pollution Control............................................................................................6
2.2.3 Construction Materials ...................................................................................6
3.0 OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................................7
4.0 RESEARCH DESIGN .........................................................................................................9
5.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES ..................................................................................11
5.1 Materials ................................................................................................................11
5.1.1 PPM Ash ....................................................................................................11
5.1.2 Fine Aggregate ...........................................................................................11
5.1.3 Coarse Aggregate .......................................................................................11
5.1.4 ASTM C 618 Class C Fly Ash ...................................................................12
5.1.5 Cement .......................................................................................................12
5.2 Elemental Analysis ................................................................................................12
5.3 Mineralogical Analysis ..........................................................................................12
5.4 Mixture Proportions ...............................................................................................13
5.4.1 Concrete Mixtures ........................................................................................13
5.4.2 CLSM Mixtures ...........................................................................................14
5.5 Manufacturing ........................................................................................................14
5.5.1 Concrete Manufacturing ..............................................................................14
5.5.2 CLSM Manufacturing ..................................................................................14
5.6 Specimen Preparation and Testing.........................................................................15
5.6.1 Concrete Testing ..........................................................................................15
5.6.2 CLSM Testing ..............................................................................................15
6.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................................16
6.1 Materials ................................................................................................................16
6.2 Elemental Analysis ................................................................................................17
6.3 Mineralogical Analysis ..........................................................................................17
6.4 Mixture Proportions and Fresh CLSM Properties .................................................18
6.5 Setting and Hardening Characteristics of CLSM Mixtures ...................................19
6.6 Compressive Strength of CLSM Mixtures ............................................................21
-iv-
6.7 Water Permeability of CLSM Mixtures .................................................................22
6.8 Mixture Proportions and Fresh Concrete Properties ..............................................22
6.9 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mixtures .........................................................24
6.10 Tensile Strength of Concrete Mixtures ..................................................................26
6.11 Drying Shrinkage of Concrete Mixtures ................................................................28
6.12 Leachate Characteristics of PPM Ash & CLSM ....................................................29
7.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................30
7.1 Economic Evaluation .............................................................................................30
8.0 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................32
9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................34
10.0 LIST OF REFERENCES ...................................................................................................34
-v-
LIST OF TABLES
Table No./Title Page
Table 1 - Physical Properties of Fine Aggregate and Coarse Aggregate (ASTM C 33) ................37
Table 2 - Gradation of Fine Aggregate and Coarse Aggregate (ASTM C 136).............................38
Table 3 - Analysis for Oxides, SO3, and Loss on Ignition for Cement ..........................................39
Table 4 - Physical Properties of Cement ........................................................................................40
Table 5 - Physical Properties of PPM Ash .....................................................................................41
Table 6 - Physical Properties of Class C Fly Ash ..........................................................................42
Table 7 - Analysis for Oxides, SO3, and Loss on Ignition for PPM Ash .......................................43
Table 8 - Analysis for Oxides, SO3, and Loss on Ignition for Class C Fly Ash ............................44
Table 9 - Elemental Analysis of Cement and Fly Ash ...................................................................45
Table 10 - Mineralogy of PPM Ash ...............................................................................................48
Table 11 - Mineralogy of Cement and Class C Fly Ash ................................................................49
Table 12 - CLSM Series L Mixtures ..............................................................................................50
Table 13 - CLSM Series M Mixtures ............................................................................................51
Table 14 - CLSM Series H Mixtures .............................................................................................52
Table 15 - Bleedwater of Series L CLSM Mixtures ......................................................................53
Table 16 - Bleedwater of Series M CLSM Mixtures .....................................................................54
Table 17 - Bleedwater of Series H CLSM Mixtures ......................................................................55
Table 18 - Settlement of Series L CLSM Mixtures .......................................................................56
Table 19 - Settlement of Series M CLSM Mixtures ......................................................................57
Table 20 - Settlement of Series H CLSM Mixtures .......................................................................58
Table 21 - Compressive of Series L CLSM Mixtures ...................................................................59
Table 22 - Compressive of Series M CLSM Mixtures ..................................................................60
Table 23 - Compressive of Series H CLSM Mixtures ...................................................................61
Table 24 - Permeability of Series L CLSM Mixtures ....................................................................62
Table 25 - Permeability of Series M CLSM Mixtures ...................................................................63
Table 26 - Permeability of Series H CLSM Mixtures....................................................................64
Table 27 - Non Air-Entrained Concrete Mixture Proportions - Control Mixture..........................65
Table 28 - Non Air-Entrained Concrete Mixture Proportions - PPM Ash Source W-1 ................66
Table 33 - Compressive Strength of Non Air-Entrained Concrete Mixtures - Control
Mixture .........................................................................................................................71
Table 34 - Compressive Strength of Non Air-Entrained Concrete Mixtures - PPM Ash Source W-1 72
-vi-
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued)
Table No./Title Page
Table 35 - Compressive Strength of Non Air-Entrained Concrete Mixtures - PPM Ash
Source W-2 .............................................................................................................................73
Source W-3 .............................................................................................................................74
Source W-4 .............................................................................................................................75
Source W-5 .............................................................................................................................76
Table 39 - Splitting Tensile Strength of Non Air-Entrained Concrete Mixtures - Control
Mixture.............................................................................................................................77
Table 40 - Splitting Tensile Strength of Non Air-Entrained Concrete Mixtures - PPM Ash
Source W-1 ............................................................................................................................78
Source W-2 ...................................................................................................................79
Source W-3 ................................................................................................................. 80
Source W-4 ...................................................................................................................81
Source W-5 ...................................................................................................................82
Table 45 - Beneficial Use Methods for By-Products Based Upon Characterization Category,
per NR 538 ............................................................................................................................83
Table 46 - Leachate Analysis of PPM Ash ....................................................................................84
Table 47 - Leachate Standards of DNR NR 538 ............................................................................85
Table 48 - NR 538 Categories of PPM Ash per Leachate Analysis ..............................................86
Table 49 - NR 538 Elemental Analysis for PPM Ash ...................................................................87
Table 50 - Elemental Standards per DNR NR 538 ........................................................................88
Table 51 - NR 538 Categories of PPM Ash per Elemental Analysis.............................................89
Table 52 - Leachate Analysis of CLSM Series M Mixtures ..........................................................90
Table 53 - NR 538 Elemental Analysis Categories of CLSM Series M Mixtures ........................91
Table 54 - NR 538 Categories of CLSM Series M Mixtures per Leachate Analysis ....................92
Table 55 - NR 538 Categories of CLSM Series M Mixtures per Leachate Analysis ....................93
-vii-
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No./Title Page
Fig. 1 - Bleedwater of Series L CLSM Mixtures ...........................................................................94
Fig. 2 - Bleedwater of Series M CLSM Mixtures ..........................................................................95
Fig. 3 - Bleedwater of Series H CLSM Mixtures...........................................................................96
Fig. 4 - Settlement of Series L CLSM Mixtures ............................................................................97
Fig. 5 - Settlement of Series M CLSM Mixtures ...........................................................................98
Fig. 6 - Settlement of Series H CLSM Mixtures............................................................................99
Fig. 7 - Setting Characteristics of Series L CLSM .......................................................................100
Fig. 8 - Setting Characteristics of Series M CLSM .....................................................................101
Fig. 9 - Setting Characteristics of Series H CLSM ......................................................................102
Fig. 10 - Compressive Strength of Series L CLSM Mixtures ......................................................103
Fig. 11 - Compressive Strength of Series M CLSM Mixtures.....................................................104
Fig. 12 - Compressive Strength of Series H CLSM Mixtures .....................................................105
Fig. 13 - Compressive Strength of Concrete, PPM Ash Source W-1 ..........................................106
Fig. 18 - Splitting Tensile Strength of Concrete, PPM Ash Source W-1 ....................................111
Fig. 23 - Drying Shrinkage of Concrete, PPM Ash Source W-1 .................................................116
Fig. 28 - Cost Savings of Concrete Mixtures Using PPM Ash ....................................................121
-viii-
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Wisconsin pulp and paper mills generate approximately one million dry tons (or approx. 1.8 million
cubic yards) of wood ash per year. NCASI has estimated that of the total pulp and paper mill wood
ash (PPM ash) produced in the U.S., only about 28% is being utilized. Disposal of PPM ash in
landfills costs Wisconsin pulp and paper industry significant direct cost plus unknown future
liabilities due to environmental concerns related to such materials in landfills. This project
established the initial manufacturing technology for use of PPM ash generated by pulp and paper
products industry in concrete (structural grade concrete, compressive strength up to 5,000 psi) and
flowable slurry (Controlled Low Strength Materials, CLSM) through an initial laboratory evaluation.
Five series of concrete mixtures were developed for this project. Each of the five series of concrete
mixtures were based upon one of the five sources of PPM ash. Each concrete mixture series
consisted of a total of seven different types of concrete mixtures that were proportioned to include
PPM wood ash. Three mixtures were developed to have a PPM ash content of approximately 15%,
25%, and 35% as a partial replacement of cement. Four additional mixtures were developed using a
blend of PPM ash and ASTM Class C coal fly ash. These four blended ash mixtures consisted of
two mixtures with PPM ash blended with one of two sources of Class C fly ash. The total blended
ash content of the mixtures were approximately 25 and 35 percent.
CLSM is a very fluid cementitious material that flows like a liquid and supports like a solid without
compacting. It is self leveling. It hardens in a defined and predictable manner. ACI 229 defines
CLSM flowable slurry as "cementitious material that is in a flowable state at placement and has
specified compressive strengths of 1200 psi or less at the age of 28 days." A number of names
including flowable fill, unshrinkable fill, manufactured dirt, controlled density fill, flowable mortar,
etc., are being used to describe this material. CLSM is used primarily for non-structural applications.
Its consistency is similar to that of a pancake batter. CLSM can be placed quickly with minimum
labor. It can harden within a few hours of placement.
Three different categories of CLSM mixtures were developed, each with a different compressive
strength level: 50 to 100 psi, 100 to 500 psi, and 500 to 1200 psi at the 28-day age for each ash
source. For excavatable slurry, compressive strength should be in the range of 50 to 100 psi at the
28-day age. In cases where no future excavations or higher strengths are required, CLSM mixtures
can be proportioned with higher amounts of cementitious materials. For uses as permanent fill
material, CLSM mixtures can be proportioned to attain strengths up to 1200 psi at the age of 28 days.
Developing different strength levels for CLSM with PPM ash allow for greater flexibility for
-1-
potential uses of CLSM such as backfill around underground electric transmission cables, water
distribution lines, gas lines, etc.; road sub-base; foundation base materials; etc. A total of five
different mixtures were developed for each strength range of CLSM, one for each different source of
ash.
This project provides a practical solution to disposal problems associated with PPM ash for the pulp
and paper industry in Wisconsin through the development of this technology for commercial
production of concrete and CLSM containing PPM ash. The result of this project should lead to
commercial production of concrete and CLSM products utilizing PPM ash within a very short time
after completion.
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
Typical wood burned for fuel at pulp and paper mills, and the wood products industry may consist of
saw dust, wood chips, bark, saw mill scraps hard chips rejected from pulping, excess screenings such
as sheaves, primary residuals without mixed secondary residuals, etc. Physical and chemical
properties of wood ash are important in determining their beneficial uses. These properties are
influenced by species of trees, tree growing regions and conditions, method and manner of
combustion including temperature, other fuel used with wood fuel, and method of wood ash
collection [1, 2, 3]. Further quality variation in these properties occur when wood is co-fired with
other supplementary fuels such as coal, coke, gas, ash, etc. and the relative quantity of wood verses
such other fuels [3].. This section deals with the information collected on properties and options for
constructive uses for wood ash.
2.1 Properties of Wood Ash
Etiegni and Campbell [2] studied the effects of combustion temperature on yield and chemical
properties of wood ash. For this investigation, lodgepole pine saw dust collected from a saw mill
was combusted in an electric furnace at different temperatures for 6-9 hours or until the ash weight
became constant. The results showed that wood ash yield decreased by 45% when combustion
temperature was increased from 538 to 1093C (1000 to 2000F). The average particle size of the
wood ash was found to be 230 μm. The concentration of potassium, sodium, zinc, and carbonate
decreased while concentrations of other metal ions remained constant or increased with increasing
temperature. The pH of wood ash was found to vary between 9 and 13.5. Etiegni and Campbell [1,
2] obtained X-ray diffraction data to determine the presence of various compounds in dry and wet
ash which was then dried for 24 hours. The major oxides detected in the wood ash were lime (CaO),
-2-
calcite (CaCO3), portlandite (Ca(OH)2) and calcium silicate (Ca2SiO4). The authors reported that
swelling of wood ash occurred due to the possible hydration of silicates and lime present in the ash.
Campbell [4] presented data on major and trace elements of wood ash. The major elements were
calcium (7-33%), potassium (3-4%), magnesium (1-2%), phosphorus (0.3-1.4%), manganese (0.3-1.3%),
and sodium (0.2-0.5%). The trace elements were zinc, boron, copper, molybdenum, and others at
parts per million (ppm) levels. Carbon content in wood ash was found to vary between 4 and 34% by
mass.
Misra et al. [5] investigated elemental and molecular composition of mineral matters in ash from five types of wood and two
types of barks as a function of temperature. The mass loss occurred in the range of 23 to 48% when the combustion
temperature was increased from 500 to 1300C (930 to 2370F). This was probably attributed to decreased elemental mass
concentrations of K, S, B, Na, and Cu resulting from increased temperature.
Steenari and Lindqvist [6] characterized fly ashes derived from co-combustion of wood chips and fossil fuels, and compared
their properties to those obtained from combustion of wood ash alone. In their work, wood fly ash samples were obtained
by co-firing of wood chips with coal, oil, and peat in Swedish utility boilers. The fly ashes derived from the co-combustion
of wood with coal or peat exhibited lower concentrations of calcium, potassium, and chlorine, and higher concentrations of
aluminum ion, and sulfur relative to pure wood ash. The pH of leachates obtained from the co-combustion ashes were
lower compared to pure wood ash. The concentrations of trace metals in these ashes were similar to those observed in pure
wood ashes.
Steenari [7] presented possible chemical reactions involved in hydration of wood ash concrete. Equation 1 describes the
reaction involving CaO and H 0. 2
CaO + H O  Ca(OH)
2 2 (1)
This reaction is rapid and exothermic, and leads to the formation of inter-particle bond. The next reaction occurs due to
exposure to moisture and air as given by Equation 2.
Ca(OH) + H O+ CO (gas)  Ca(OH) (aqueous)+ H CO (aqueous) CaCO +2H O

2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 (2)
Due to lower solubility of CaCO compared to CaO and Ca(OH) , the above hydration process produces a more
3 2
stabilized reaction product. After the carbonation reaction (Equation 2), the third reaction leads to the formation of an
ettringite as described by Equation 3.
Ca Al O + 3CaSO + 32 H O  Ca Al (SO ) (OH) 26H O

3 2 6 4 2 6 2 4 3 12 2 (3)
In the above equation, tricalcium aluminate is used as an example. However, other soluble components can be substituted
for this compounds in the ettringite formation reaction described by Equation (3). This ettringite is stable at pH levels
greater than 10.5 [7]. This product contributes to the strength development of the hydrated wood ash material and restricts
the release of calcium, aluminum, and sulfate.
-3-
Naik [8] determined physical and chemical properties of wood ashes derived from three different
mills. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) was used to determine shape of wood ash particles. The
SEM micrographs showed wood ashes as a heterogeneous mixture of particles of varying sizes which
were generally angular in shape. The wood fly ash consisted of cellular particles, which were
unburned, or partially burned wood or bark particles. The average moisture content values for the
wood ash studied were about 13% for fly ash and 22% for bottom ash. All wood ash samples were first
oven-dried at 99C (210F) and then tested for gradation in accordance with ASTM C 136 using
standard sieve sizes. The average amount of fly ash passing sieve #200 (75 μm) was 50% (ASTM C
117). The average amount of fly ash retained on sieve No. 325 was about 31% for fly ash (ASTM C
430). Test results for unit weight or bulk density (ASTM C 29) exhibited average density values of 490
kg/m3 (30.6 lb/ft3) for fly ash and 827 kg/m3 (51.6 lb/ft3) for bottom ash. Specific gravity (ASTM C 188)
tests showed an average specific gravity value of 2.48 for wood fly ash. Specific gravity (ASTM C 128)
tests for bottom ash showed an average specific gravity value of 1.65. The average saturated surface
dry (SSD) moisture content (ASTM C 128) values were 10.3% for fly ash and 7.5% for bottom ash.
The average activity index ASTM C 311/ C 109 at the age of 28 days for fly ash was about 66% of the
control. The average water requirement (ASTM C 311) for fly ash exhibited a value of 116%.
Autoclave expansion tests for fly ash exhibited a low average expansion value of 0.2 percent.
X-ray fluorescence technique was used to determine chemical composition of wood ash in terms of silicon oxide (SiO ), 2
aluminum oxide (Al O ), iron oxide (Fe O ), calcium oxide (CaO), magnesium oxide (MgO), titanium oxide (TiO ),
2 3 2 3 2
potassium oxide (K O), and sodium oxide (Na O). Loss on ignition (LOI), moisture content, and available alkali (Na O
2 2 2
equivalent) for the pre-dried fly ashes were also determined. In general, all oxides present, except the available alkali (Na O
2
equivalent), were within limits specified for coal fly ash in the ASTM C 618. The average value of available alkali in fly ash
was 4.2 percent. The average loss on ignition (LOI) values was about 23% for fly ash and 10% for bottom ash.
Wood ash samples were analyzed for total chemical make-up by the Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis (INAA).
The test results for wood ash showed several elements having concentrations in excess of 0.1% (1000 ppm) including
aluminum, cadmium, chlorine, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, selenium, sodium, titanium, and zinc. The
mineral analyses for wood ash showed average amorphous material (glassy constituents) of about 67% for fly ash and 66%
for bottom ash. The remaining minerals in crystalline form were nearly the same in both wood fly ash (33%) and wood
bottom ash (34%). Several crystalline phases such as quartz (SiO ), calcite (CaCO ), lime (CaO), portlandite (Ca (OH) ),
2 3 2
tricalcium aluminate (Ca Al 0 ), magnetite (Fe O ), anhydrite (CaSO ), mullite (Al 0 .SiO ), merwinite (Ca Mg(SiO )2), etc.
3 2 6 3 4 4 2 3 2 3 4
were also present in the wood ash studied [8].
2.2 Beneficial Uses of Wood Ash
Approximately 70% of the wood ash generated in the U.S.A. is landfilled; additional 20% is applied on land as soil
supplement [2-14]. The remaining 10% have been used for miscellaneous applications [1-4] including construction
materials, metal recovery, and pollution control. Landfilling is becoming very restrictive due to shrinking landfill space and
strict environmental regulations. The use of wood ash as a soil supplement is also becoming more limited due to the
presence of heavy metals and high alkalinity, as well as reduced availability of land for application. Due to these reasons,
recent attempts are being made to develop high-volume use technologies for wood ash, especially for use as construction
materials [8,12].
-4-
2.2.1 Land Application
Based on the properties of wood ash, it can be used as a source of nutrients for plant growth, and as a liming material and
neutralizing agent for acidic soil. Etiegni [1] reported the use of wood ash as an agricultural soil supplement and liming
material. For that investigation, two types of plants (winter wheat and poplar) were grown in a greenhouse on six different
Idaho soils amended with varying amounts of wood ash. The results indicated substantial increase in the wheat biomass and
in the diameter and height of the poplar at ash concentration of up to 2% (16 tons/acre). Based on the results obtained, the
author indicated that wood ash could be used as a low-grade fertilizer containing potassium and as a liming agent.
Meyers and Kopecky [9] evaluated the effects of landspreading of industrial wood ash on the yield and elemental
composition of forage crops and soil nutrient levels using both greenhouse and field investigations. The use of wood ash
resulted in higher yield compared to those obtained with limed and fertilized control treatments. No adverse effects were
noted at wood ash application rates up to 20 tons/acre.
Nguyen and Pascal [10] measured tree growth responses using two sources of wood ash as a forest soil amendment. Four
different application rates (0, 2, 4, and 8% by mass) were used in their investigation. The tree growth responses were
measured using greenhouse and microcosm approaches. The addition of wood ash affected all the measured growth
responses (height, diameter, and total leaf area) within the tested range. However, 2% application rate was found to be
optimum.
Bramryd and Frashman [11] reported a decrease in acidity and aluminum concentration when wood
ash was applied to the soil having 35-year old pine trees in Sweden. Except Cu, no significant increase
in heavy metal concentrations was found due to the addition of wood ash. However, the concentration
of extractable Mn increased.
Naylor and Schmidt [14] evaluated wood as a fertilizer and liming material. In their study, wood ash
were mixed with two acidic soils at rates of 0, 0.4, 1.8 and 2.4 tons/acre to assess changes in extractable
nutrients and soil pH. Generally, concentrations of extractable P, K, and Ca increased with increasing
ash application rate. The same trend was also noticed for soil pH. The neutralizing capability of the
ash was found to be half of that achieved by using agricultural limestone.
2.2.2 Pollution Control
Wood ash has been used as a replacement of lime or cement kiln dust in the solidification of
hazardous wastes [3]. It has also been used for odor as well as pH control of hazardous and non-
hazardous wastes. In order to control color and odor, wood ash was added to compost. Wood ash
was found to capture several water borne contaminants [3].
2.2.3 Construction Materials
-5-
Very limited amount of work has been done to find applications of wood ash as construction materials,
particularly in cement-based materials. Due to high carbon content in wood ash, its use is limited to
low- and medium-strength materials. In Europe, wood ash has been used as a feedstock in the
manufacture of portland cement [2].
Based on the measured physical, chemical, morphological properties, Naik [8] reported that wood ash
has a substantial potential for use as a pozzolanic mineral admixture and an activator in cement-based
materials. He further indicated that wood ash has significant potential for numerous uses materials
including Controlled Low Strength Materials (CLSM), low- and medium-strength concrete, masonry
products, roller-compacted concrete pavements (RCCP), materials for road base, and blended
cements.
Naik [12] investigated the use of wood ash as a major ingredient in the manufacture of CLSM meeting
ACI 229 requirements. All CLSM mixtures consisted of wood fly ash, water, and cement. A total of
31 CLSM mixtures were proportioned using the three sources of wood fly ash to obtain a range of
compressive strengths from 50 psi to 150 psi at the age of 28 days. Each CLSM mixture was tested for
its fresh/rheological and hardened properties. Fresh CLSM properties included unit weight, amount
of bleedwater, settlement, and setting and hardening characteristics. Hardened CLSM properties
included compressive strength and density. Several CLSM mixtures containing high volumes of wood
fly ash were found to be appropriate for construction applications for backfill of excavations, and/or
for making low- to medium-strength concrete.
Mukherji et al. [13] performed experiments to explore the use of wood ash in ceramic industries.
They reported that wood ash derived from “Neem” (Margosa) tree could be used as a substitute for
CaCO3 in the manufacture of glaze. A series of color strains was also manufactured using the "Neem"
wood ash and other ingredients. These stains were calcined at 1250 C (2280 F). The glazes and
colors developed using this wood ash were tested and evaluated for the desired properties for these
materials [13]. The authors concluded that the glazes and colors developed in their investigation are
suitable for use in both green and bake ware.
Based on the information presented above, it is apparent that not much work has been conducted to
date to find uses of wood ashes that can consume large amounts of ash. Use of wood ash in cement–
based materials should consume large-volume of wood ash. However, more work is needed to
establish high-volume use technologies for wood ash use in the manufacture such of new materials as
CLSM, ready-mixed concrete, RCCP, wet- and dry-cast concrete products, blended cements, etc.
3.0 OBJECTIVES
-6-
Wood ash is generated by saw mills, pulp mills, and the wood products industry, by burning a
combination of wood products, such as bark, twigs, knots, chips, etc. with other fuels such as coal,
coke, oil, and natural gas to generate electricity and/or steam required for their manufacturing
processes. Such wood ashes are also referred in this report as PPM ash. The aim of this project was
to develop manufacturing and performance specifications for structural-grade concrete and CLSM
(flowable slurry) containing wood ash from Wisconsin pulp and paper mills for construction
applications.
The first application that was developed in this project was structural-grade concrete using PPM ash.
The PPM ash used in the concrete was evaluated as a partial replacement of cement. These concrete
mixtures were proportioned to have a compressive strength up to 5,000 psi at the age of 28 days. This
concrete is typically suited for many structural applications such as for home construction, sidewalks,
roadways, highway pavements, parking lots, bridge decks, etc. A second application that was
developed for this project was Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM), or flowable slurry. CLSM is
utilized in the construction industry as a low-cost alternative to compacted sand backfill.
In order to accomplish this, the project was divided into two distinct phases. These phases are
laboratory evaluations (Phase 1) as well as field investigations (Phase 2). The first phase (Year 1) was
concerned with optimization of concrete and CLSM slurry mixture proportions and development of
production technology through bench-scale testing at UWM-CBU laboratories. Phase 1 consisted of
manufacturing, testing, and evaluation of these products under laboratory conditions. Candidate
CLSM and concrete mixture proportions will be selected based on performance data of this laboratory
evaluation for further investigations in Phase 2 (Year 2 and 3). This report describes the activities
associated with the funded Year 1 activities only. CLSM and concrete mixture proportions have been
developed by UWM-CBU in the past for other by-products such as coal fly ash and bottom ash, post-
consumer glass and plastic, used foundry sand, etc. Some coal fly ashes did not meet the requirements
of ASTM C 618. Data for CLSM and/or concrete are not available for wood ash use with the
exception of preliminary laboratory work completed by Naik [12]. The second phase of this project
will involve prototype-scale and subsequently full production-scale manufacturing, testing, and
evaluation of selected laboratory mixtures under actual commercial production facilities, followed by
construction demonstration activities. Specifically, the goals of the first year are to:
(1) obtain laboratory production data for wood ash CLSM slurry and concrete regarding its
physical, chemical, and leaching characteristics;
(2) provide guidelines for mixture proportioning for production of wood ash CLSM and concrete
for ready-mixed concrete manufacturers;
-7-
(3) produce data required for draft specifications for CLSM slurry and concrete to help users for
potential applications and meeting other requirements (e.g., WI-DNR NR 538 standards on
CLSM utilizing industrial by-products); and
(4) provide practical production and construction information to potential users, producers,
engineers, owners, plant operators, government officials, and others, regarding high-volume
wood ash flowable slurry and concrete materials.
The success of this project will lead to increased utilization of PPM ash materials, reducing the
pressure on Wisconsin landfills; and, develop a market for products containing PPM ash which do not
exist currently. This will benefit the industry, the environment, and the citizens of Wisconsin.
4.0 RESEARCH DESIGN
This project consisted of the following four tasks: Task I, Material Selection and Characterization;
Task II, Mixture Proportions; Task III, Testing and Evaluation; and Task IV, Economic Analysis.
Details of the results of each task are described in later sections of this report.
Task I: Material Selection and Characterization
Materials used for this project included normal concrete sand, coarse aggregate, ASTM Type I
cement, ASTM C 618 Type C coal ash, and wood ash. A total of five different sources of wood ash
were selected from Wisconsin-based pulp and paper mills (PPM ash). Selection of these various ash
sources represents a spectrum of ash residues from pulp and paper mill sources. All components of
the CLSM and concrete (wood ash, cement, and aggregate) were tested for their physical, chemical,
and mineralogical properties using ASTM or other applicable test methods. These properties were
used in determining mixture proportions of both CLSM and concrete developed in this project.
Task II: Mixture Proportions
Prior laboratory and field research and development work conducted and reported by UWM-CBU
using other types of by-products formed the basis for the wood ash CLSM and concrete trial mixture
proportions [15]. The variables considered included the type and amount of wood ash as well as
amounts of cement and water. Based on the laboratory and bench-scale data collected from the
previous work conducted at the UWM-CBU concerning the manufacture of concrete using large
quantities of coal ash not meeting ASTM C 618 specifications, it has been established that large-
volume of such by-products can be utilized in the manufacture of portland cement-based CLSM slurry
and concrete [16].
-8-
Based on prior research [16], the optimum wood ash content in concrete was determined depending
upon the performance specified for the structural - quality concrete. Non-air entrained concrete
mixtures containing 15, 25, and 35% PPM ash were evaluated:
Three different strength levels were developed for the flowable CLSM: 50 to 100 psi, 100 to 500 psi,
and 500 to 1200 psi for each ash source. Developing these different strength levels would allow for
greater flexibility for potential uses of CLSM manufactured at UWM-CBU laboratories, such as
backfill around underground utilities including electric transmission cables, water distribution lines, gas
lines, etc., road sub-base, and foundation base materials. The CLSM mixtures were composed of PPM
and coal ashes, cement, and water for both the low-strength and medium-strength materials. The high-
strength CLSM was developed as ash-cement-sand-water mixtures.
Task III: Testing and Evaluations
A test program was developed to arrive at properties necessary for the development of specifications
for materials for production of CLSM slurry and concrete and using PPM and coal ashes. This test
program should generate necessary experimental data for optimizing mixture proportions for
manufacture of each product containing PPM ash.
CLSM made with PPM ash were tested for various properties. The CLSM was monitored for its
rheological and hardened CLSM characteristics for bleedwater, settlement, shrinkage and cracking,
setting characteristics, compressive strength, and water permeability. All PPM ashes were tested for
elemental and leachate analysis following standard TCLP procedures specified in DNR NR 538.
Tests were also conducted to determine elemental analysis and other standard parameters for the
PPM ash materials themselves.
Concrete made with PPM ash was tested rheological, physical, and mechanical properties. Fresh
concrete properties such as air content, workability, unit weight, and temperature were measured.
These non-air entrained concrete mixtures were also evaluated as a function of age for compressive
strength, splitting tensile strength, and drying shrinkage.
Task IV: Economic Evaluation
This task involved a cost-benefit analysis and an overall economic impact for manufacture of new
CLSM and concrete construction products using wood ash. The economic analysis performed as part
of this task's activities was based upon the experience gained in the laboratory phase of the project. It
evaluated economic gain due to recycling versus landfilling of wood ash, recycling/reuse of wood ash in
-9-
CLSM and concrete versus similar material using cement, and it's impact on energy consumption and
air quality.
5.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
5.1 Materials
Materials used in this project consisted of five sources of pulp and paper mill (PPM) ash, cement, fine
and coarse aggregates (concrete sand and crushed stone), and two sources of coal fly ash. Materials
were characterized for chemical and physical properties in accordance with the appropriate ASTM
standards.
5.1.1 PPM Ash
A total of five different sources of pulp and paper mill (PPM) ash were used in this project. Physical
properties of the fly ash were determined in accordance with ASTM C 311. Standard properties of
the PPM ash were determined in accordance with ASTM C 618 requirements for chemical and
physical properties. Chemical properties included oxides, basic chemical elements, and mineralogy.
Physical tests included fineness (ASTM C 430), strength activity index with cement (ASTM C 109),
water requirement (ASTM C 109), autoclave expansion (ASTM C 151), and specific gravity (ASTM C
188).
5.1.2 Fine Aggregate
One source of clean concrete sand was utilized in this investigation for the high-strength (Series H)
CLSM mixtures and in all concrete mixtures. Physical properties of the sand were determined per
ASTM C 33 requirements for the following physical properties: unit weight (ASTM C 29), specific
gravity and absorption (ASTM C 128), fineness (ASTM C 136), material finer than #200 sieve (ASTM
C 117), and organic impurities (ASTM C 40).
5.1.3 Coarse Aggregate
One source of coarse aggregate was utilized in this investigation for the concrete mixtures. The type of
coarse aggregate used was a crushed dolomite with a 3/4" maximum size. Physical properties of the
coarse aggregate was also determined per ASTM C 33 requirements for physical properties (unit
weight (ASTM C 29), specific gravity and absorption (ASTM C 128), fineness (ASTM C 136), material
finer than #200 sieve (ASTM C 117), and organic impurities (ASTM C 40)).
-10-
5.1.4 ASTM C 618 Class C Fly Ash
Two sources of coal fly ash meeting the specifications of ASTM C 618 Class C were used for concrete
mixtures of this project (Wisconsin Electric Power Co., Pleasant Prairie Power Plant, Pleasant Prairie,
WI; and Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Pulliam Power Plant, Green Bay, WI). Physical
properties of the fly ash were determined in accordance with ASTM C 311. Fly ash was characterized
(ASTM C 618) for chemical properties including oxides, basic chemical elements, mineralogical, and
the following physical tests: fineness (ASTM C 430), strength activity index with cement (ASTM C
109), water requirement (ASTM C 109), autoclave expansion (ASTM C 151), and specific gravity
(ASTM C 188).
5.1.5 Cement
Type I cement (Lafarge Cement Co.) and was used throughout this investigation. Its physical and
chemical properties were determined in accordance with applicable ASTM test methods. Cement was
tested per ASTM C 150 requirements for air content (ASTM C 185), fineness (ASTM C 204),
autoclave expansion (ASTM C 151), compressive strength (ASTM C 109), time of setting (ASTM C
191), and specific gravity (ASTM C 188).
5.2 Elemental Analysis
PPM fly ash, coal ash, and cement were analyzed using Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis.
The neutron activation analysis method exposes the sample to neurons, which results in an activation
of many elements. This activation consists of radiation of various elements. For the ash and cement
utilized in this project, gamma ray emissions were detected. Many different elements may be detected
simultaneously based on the gamma ray energies and half-lives.
5.3 Mineralogical Analysis
Two grams of each sample were ground in a power driven mortar and pestle unit for 55 minutes with
ethyl alcohol. The alcohol was then evaporated for mineralogical analysis of the sample. The
diffraction mount used was a specially made back loading holder, in which the sample was poured
against a matte surface disk and secured in place with a second smaller disk mounted into the holder
through an "O" ring seal. The matte surface disk was then removed. The samples were weighed while
loading so that each mount contained the same amount of the sample powder. The sample was
mounted on a diffractometer (a Nicolet I2 automated unit). The parameters used for producing the
scan (diffraction pattern) were optimized for quantitative analysis of the minerals. The file which was
-11-
produced during the scan was graphically converted on a computer screen and plotted. The plot was
searched for crystalline phases present using an automated Hanawalt search, by looking through a list
of expected phases for the sample using first and second strongest lines and by using computer
overlays of the plot using standard phases from the JCPDS file to test each phase. The overlay plot
was generated from the unknown test sample and a standard sample. The presence or absence of the
phase was verified using the standard.
After the phases were tabulated, the diffraction file was converted to run on the "SQ" program, which
uses the phases assigned, calculates a match between the observed pattern and a pattern generated
from the assigned phases. Various parameters were adjusted to obtain this match. The scale factors
assigned to each phase were converted into weight percents of each phase.
A second pattern was run in which ZnO was added in the amount of 50%. In the test samples
containing amorphous material, the percentage of ZnO measured by "SQ" was higher than 50%. The
magnitude of this change was used to calculate the amount of amorphous material in the sample.
5.4 Mixture Proportions
5.4.1 Concrete Mixtures
Concrete mixtures were batched in the laboratory of the UWM Center for By-products Utilization.
Three control mixtures proportioned without PPM ash or Class C fly ash were developed for
comparison purposes for each of the five series of concrete mixtures. The five series of concrete
mixtures were each based upon one of the five sources of PPM ash. Each concrete mixture series
consisted of a total of seven concrete mixtures that were proportioned to include wood ash. Three
mixtures were developed to have a PPM ash content of approximately 15%, 25%, and 35%. PPM ash
was used as a partial replacement of cement of the control mixture. The replacement of fly ash from
the control mixture containing no ash was set at a fly ash addition to cement replacement ratio of
approximately 1.25 by weight. Four additional mixtures were developed using a blend of PPM ash and
ASTM Class C coal fly ash. These four blended ash mixtures consisted of two mixtures each for the
two sources of Class C fly ash. The blended ash content of the mixtures were approximately 25% and
35% with Class C fly ash and PPM ash replaced in equal amounts by weight. The slump of all
concrete mixtures was maintained at four inches (plus or minus one inch). The amount of water
added to the concrete mixtures was varied to achieve the desired slump.
5.4.2 CLSM Mixtures
-12-
All CLSM mixtures were batched in the laboratory of the UWM Center for By-Products Utilization.
A total of three series of CLSM mixtures were developed for each of the five sources of PPM ash.
Each of the three series were developed to obtain a different long-term compressive strength levels at
later ages (28 to 91 days). The three target strength levels developed for the project were 50 to 100 psi
(low-strength), 100 to 500 psi (medium-strength), and 500 to 1200 psi (high-strength). The low-strength
(Series 1) CLSM mixtures consisted of PPM ash, ASTM Type I cement, and water. The medium-
strength (Series 2) CLSM mixtures consisted of PPM ash, an increased amount of ASTM Type I
cement, and water. The high-strength (Series 3) CLSM mixtures consisted of PPM ash, ASTM Type I
cement, sand, and water. These CLSM mixtures were proportioned to maintain a practical value of
flow in the range of approximately 10 inches, plus or minus two inches.
5.5 Manufacturing
5.5.1 Concrete Manufacturing
Concrete ingredients were manually weighed and loaded in a concrete mixer. The CLSM was mixed
in the nine cubic foot capacity mixer at the facilities of the UWM Center for By-products Utilization.
Concrete mixtures were made in accordance with ASTM C 192. Before discharging the concrete
mixture, slump (ASTM C 143) of the mixture was measured and additional water was added as
required to achieve the desired slump of approximately 4 inches. Whenever additional water was
added to obtain the specified fresh concrete characteristics, the concrete mixture was mixed for an
additional three minutes. The concrete was then placed on a moistened pan and additional fresh
concrete tests were performed and test specimens were cast.
5.5.2 CLSM Manufacturing
All CLSM ingredients were manually weighed and loaded in a nine cubic foot capacity rotating drum
concrete mixer. The required amount of the cement together with one-half the specified quantity of
PPM ash or sand was loaded into the mixer and mixed for three minutes. Three-quarters of the
specified water was then added to the mixer and mixed for an additional three minutes. The
remaining PPM ash or sand, and water was added to the mixer and then mixed for five more minutes.
Additional water was added in the mixture as needed for achieving the desired flow, prior to
discharging the CLSM for further testing. Whenever additional water was added to obtain the
specified fresh CLSM characteristics, the CLSM mixture was mixed for an additional five minutes.
The resulting mixture was then discharged into a pan where additional fresh CLSM tests were
performed and test specimens were cast.
5.6 Specimen Preparation and Testing
-13-
5.6.1 Concrete Testing
Fresh concrete properties including slump (ASTM C 143), air content (ASTM C 138), unit weight
(ASTM C 138), and concrete temperature (ASTM C 1064) were measured for each mixture.
Ambient air temperature was also measured and recorded. For each concrete mixture, concrete test
specimens were cast in the laboratory in accordance with ASTM C 192. Concrete test specimens (4x8-
inch cylinders) were cast for compressive strength (ASTM C 39) and splitting tensile strength (ASTM
C 78) and tested at the ages of 3, 7, 14, 28, and 91 days. Test specimens were also cast for measuring
length change of concrete (ASTM C 157). Specimens were cured for one day in their molds in the
laboratory at about 75 ± 5F, then demolded and placed in a standard moist-curing room (100% R.H.
and 73 ± 3 F) until the time of test. Test specimens for length change were cured for one day in the
molds, then removed from the molds and placed in lime saturated water until the age of 28-days.
Specimens were then moved to a controlled humidity room maintained at 50% R.H. and 73 ± 3 F.
5.6.2 CLSM Testing
Fresh CLSM properties such as air content (ASTM D 6023), flow (ASTM D 6103), unit weight
(ASTM D 6023), and setting (ASTM D 6024) were measured. Air temperature was also measured
and recorded. CLSM test specimens were prepared for each mixture, for compressive strength
(ASTM D 4832), water permeability (ASTM D 5084), and setting and hardening tests. Compressive
strength of CLSM was measured at the ages of 3, 7, 14, 28, and 91 days. Permeability was tested at the
ages of 28 and 91 days. The amount of bleedwater and level of the solids (settlement) of CLSM
mixtures were also measured in a 6x12-inch cylinder. All test specimens were cast in accordance with
ASTM D 4832. These specimens were typically cured for one day in their molds in the UWM-CBU
laboratory at about 75 ± 5F. They were then demolded and placed in a standard moist-curing room
maintained at 100% R.H. and 73 ± 3 F temperature until the time of test (ASTM D 4832). Setting
characteristics of the CLSM mixtures were taken from two molds, approximately 12" x 12" x 3" deep.
The CLSM was cast directly into the mold and left uncovered for the entire measurement period.
Measurements were taken in accordance with ASTM D 6024. ASTM D 6024 specifies the suitability
of CLSM to support load as a maximum diameter of impression of 3 inches. This value was
considered to be too high for the cylinders to be safely demolded without damaging the test specimens.
Based upon comparing the setting consistency of the CLSM, as cast in the cylinder molds, a more
reasonable value was considered to be approximately 2-in diameter impression in the mold.
6.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
-14-
6.1 Materials
The fine aggregate was natural sand with a 1/4-inch nominal maximum size and coarse aggregate was a
crushed dolomite aggregate with a maximum size of 3/4-inch. The physical properties and gradation
of fine aggregate and coarse aggregate are given in Table 1 and Table 2. Type I portland cement
conforming to ASTM C 150 requirements was used in this study. The chemical and physical
properties for the portland cement used in this project are shown in Table 3 and Table 4. The cement
met the ASTM C 150 specifications for Type I cement. Five different sources of pulp and paper mill
(PPM) ash were used for the current Phase I study. The physical and chemical properties of the PPM
ash were determined in accordance with ASTM C 311 (Table 5 and 6). The PPM ash used in this
project did not conform to the requirements of ASTM C 618 for coal ash (Class C and F) or volcanic
ash (Type N).
Each source of PPM ash (W-1, W-2, W-3, W-4, and W-5) exhibited different physical properties
(Table 5). Fineness of the PPM ash (% retained on No. 325 sieve) varied from 12% to 90%. Sources
W-1 and W-5 met the ASTM requirement for fineness (34% max.), while sources W-2, W-3, and W-
4 exceeded the ASTM limits. Sources W-2, W-3, and W-4 had 60%, 90%, and 40%, respectively,
retained on the No. 325 sieve. Source W-3 was very coarse with a particle size distribution similar to
coarse sand. Small charcoal pieces were also visible in Source W-2. The strength activity index of the
PPM ash is a comparison of the compressive strength development of 2-inch mortar cubes that have
20% replacement of cement by weight, replaced with PPM ash, with compressive strength of standard
cement mortar. Sources W-1 and W-3 met the strength activity index requirement of ASTM (75%
min. at either 7 or 28 days), while the strength activity index for Source W-5 was slightly less than the
requirement (72% at 7-days, and 67% at 28-days). Sources W-2 and W-4 did not meet the required
Strength Activity Index. Water requirement of all PPM ashes also exceeded the maximum water
requirement for coal ash specified by ASTM (105% of water used for Control Mixture without PPM
ash); however, Sources W-1 and W-3 satisfied the requirement of the volcanic ash (Class N) per
ASTM C 618. The higher water requirement indicated that for concrete and CLSM, more water may
be required to produce the same slump or flow as compared with the control mixture. Unit weight of
four of the PPM ash Sources W-1, W-2, W-4, and W-5 were 34, 25.7, 31.8, and 10.1 lb/ft3,
respectively. These unit weights are significantly less than the unit weight of a typical ASTM Class C or
Class F fly ash (approximately 70-80 lb/ft3). Source W-5 had a unit weight of 85.9 lb/ ft3 which is
greater than a typical coal fly ash. Specific gravity of PPM ash Sources W-1 through W-5 range from
2.26 to 2.60. Specific gravity of wood ash Sources W-1, W-2, W-4, and W-5 were less than that of a
typical coal fly ash (2.26-2.41 versus 2.60 for a typical coal ash meeting ASTM C 618). The low unit
weight and specific gravity of the PPM ashes indicates that adding PPM ash into concrete or CLSM
would lower the unit weight of concrete or CLSM. This may be useful for obtaining lighter weight
CLSM with PPM compared with normal weight (110 lbs/cu.ft.) CLSM.
-15-
The results of the chemical analysis of the PPM ashes are given in Table 6. All PPM ashes do not
meet all the requirements of ASTM C 618, particularly for the amount of carbon (loss on ignition,
LOI). The LOI obtained for the PPM ashes range from 6.7% to 58.1%. These higher LOI ashes (W-
1, W-2, W-4, and W-5) probably will present some difficulties when developing air entrained concrete
mixtures. The higher carbon content tends to reduce the amount of air in the mixture and thus
requires higher dosages of air entraining admixtures. The higher carbon contents of the PPM ashes
should not affect the performance of these ash in CLSM.
Physical and chemical analysis of the two sources of standard coal fly ash are given in Tables 7 and 8.
The results of the tests show that both sources meet the requirements of ASTM C 618.
6.2 Elemental Analysis
The results for the elemental analysis of the cement and PPM ash used in this project are given in
Table 9. As expected, the elemental composition of the cement and PPM ash differed considerably.
The predominate elements contained in the PPM ash (>5000 ppm) were Aluminum, Cadmium,
Calcium, Iron, Magnesium, Manganese, Nickel, Potassium, Sodium (Source W-5 only), and
Titanium. Primary elements in the cement were Aluminum, Calcium, and Iron. The PPM ash had
much higher amounts of Aluminum, Calcium, and Sodium than the cement. The total elemental
composition of the material gives some indication of the variability of the PPM ash materials as well as
potential for leaching.
6.3 Mineralogical Analysis
Major mineral species (crystalline phases) that were found in the PPM ash, cement, and Class C fly ash
samples are shown in Table 10 and 11. The predominate crystalline phases present in the PPM ash
samples were quartz (SiO2) and calcite (CaCO3). Source W-2 also contained a small amount of lime
(CaO). Source W-5 also had anhydrite (CaSO4) and syngenite (K2Ca(SO4)2.H2O). Additional
crystalline phases detected in PPM ash Source W-3 included gypsum (CaSO4 H2O), magnetite (Fe3O4),
microcline (KAlSi3O8), mullite (Al2O3.SiO2), periclase (MgO), and plagioclase (NaCa). The
mineralogical analysis also indicated large amounts of amorphous material present in the PPM ash
sample (46.6% to 94.2%). The calcite, hematite, magnetite, microcline, mullite, plagioclase, and
quartz present in PPM ash are generally not reactive when used in concrete. The cement samples had
predominant phases of dicalcium silicate, tetracalcium aluminoferrite, tricalcium aluminate, and
tricalcium silicate (Table 11).
-16-
Mineralogy of the two sources of Class C fly ash, C1 and C2, were similar. Both sources contained
anhydrite, dicalcium silicate, lime, periclase, and tricalcium aluminate. Both Source C1 and C2
contained large amount of amorphous materials, 70.8 and 84.0 respectively.
6.4 Mixture Proportions and Fresh CLSM Properties
Mixture proportions and rheological properties for the CLSM mixtures containing PPM ash are given
in Tables 12-14. Three series of CLSM mixtures were designed and grouped by compressive strength
levels: Series L mixtures (low-strength, less than 100 psi), Series M mixtures (medium-strength, 100-
500 psi), and Series H mixtures (high-strength, 500-1,200 psi). Mixture proportions and rheological
properties of the low strength CLSM mixtures are given in Table 12. Cement content of the Series L
mixtures was approximately 90 to 160 lb/yd3. Flow of all the Series L mixtures was approximately ten
inches. Unit weight of the mixtures varied between 74.6 to 107.6 lb/ft3. Mixture 3-L (containing PPM
ash Source W-3) had the highest unit weight (107.6 lb/ft3) while Mixture 2-L (PPM ash W-2) exhibited
the lowest unit weight (74.6 lb/ft3). The remaining mixtures had unit weight of approximately 84 lb/ft3.
The unit weight of the mixtures agrees with the physical evaluation of the ash materials. Mixtures
containing ash with the lowest unit weight and specific gravity also produced the lowest CLSM unit
weights.
CLSM mixture proportions and rheological properties for the Series M CLSM mixtures are shown in
Table 13. Similar to the Series L mixtures, unit weight of the mixtures varied in agreement with the
unit weight and specific gravity of the PPM ash material. Approximately the same quantity of water
was required for the Series M mixtures as used for Series L mixtures. This was expected since only
the quantity of cement was increased for these mixtures. Cement contents of the mixtures ranged
from 170 lb/yd3 to 385 lb/yd3.
Mixture proportions of the Series H CLSM mixtures are given in Table 14. The high-strength
mixtures contained fine aggregate (clean concrete sand) to develop the higher CLSM strength. Water
required to obtain the design flow of approximately 10 inches decreased from mixtures that did not
contain sand. Approximately 600-900 lb/yd3 water was required to reach the target flow versus 800-
1200 lb/yd3 for the Series L or Series M mixtures without fine aggregate. Unit weight of the Series H
mixtures were also significantly higher than the lower strength mixtures (104 to 127 lb/ft3 for high-
strength mixtures versus 75 to 110 lb/yd3 for low-strength mixtures). Th increase in unit weight is
attributed to the sand used in the mixture which has a significantly higher unit weight and specific
gravity than the PPM ash.
Bleedwater measurements of the CLSM mixtures are given in Tables 15-17 and Figs. 1-3. Bleedwater
is given as the depth of water present at the top of a 6x12-inch cylinder filled with CLSM. The
-17-
measurements indicate the amount of bleedwater expected per foot of CLSM placed. Also, the
bleedwater gives an indication of the cohesiveness of the CLSM mixture. Minimizing the amount of
bleedwater is desirable to minimize potential leaching of elements. Bleedwater measurements of the
low-strength, Series L, CLSM mixtures show that initially, bleedwater accumulated to a depth of 1/16-
inch to 3/8-inch, but quickly evaporated after 4 to 8 hours (Table 15 and Fig. 1). Table 16 and Fig. 2
show that the bleedwater of the medium-strength, Series M, CLSM mixtures. Bleedwater after one
hour ranged from zero to 1/2-inch in depth. The bleedwater (minus evaporation) continued for
Mixtures 1-M, 4-M, and 5-M. These Mixtures still had 1/8 to 7/16-inch of bleedwater remaining after
24 hours. Bleedwater measurements of the high-strength, Series H, CLSM mixtures also exhibited
bleedwater that remained on the surface of the cylinder after 24 hours (Table 17 and Fig. 3), but only
two of the mixtures, 4-H and 5-H, had any bleedwater after 24 hours.
6.5 Setting and Hardening Characteristics of CLSM Mixtures
The settlement of the CLSM is the measured level of the solids of the CLSM using the top of a 6x12-
inch cylinder as the reference point. The settlement measurements would indicate any potential to
shrink or expand, and possible crack development on the surface upon drying which may lead to the
inflow of water into the CLSM. Settlement measurements of the three series of CLSM mixtures are
shown in Tables 18-20 and Figs. 4-6. Settlement of low-strength CLSM mixtures are given in Table 18
and Fig. 4. Settlement of the low-strength Series L CLSM mixtures show shrinkage of Mixtures 1-L;
and 5-L, while the settlement level of Mixture 4-L remained relatively constant. Two of the mixtures
exhibited expansion, Mixtures 2-L and 3-L. Mixture 3-L showed an expansion of approximately 5/16-
inch which offset the initial settlement of the 3/8-in. of CLSM. A more significant expansion occurred
for Mixture 2-L. Mixture 2-L (PPM ash source W-2) visibly expanded as soon as placed into the
cylinder molds and expanded over one inch in one hour. Precautions must be taken when using
Mixture 2-L due to the significant expansion. Placing this mixture in a confined volume could lead to
internal pressure that would have to be accounted for in the design. However, the expansive
characteristics may be of use when filling a space such as an abandoned tank or pipeline to assure that
no voids remain in the tank. Settlement of the medium-strength CLSM is given in Table 19 and Fig. 5.
The settlement or expansion of the medium-strength Series M CLSM mixtures was lower than the
low-strength, Series L, CLSM except for Mixture 2-M, which had increased expansion. This mixture
used the same source of PPM ash as that used in Mixture 2-L, Source W-2. The increased expansion
of this mixture may indicate a reaction with the cement since the cement content of the 2-M mix was
significantly increased over that used for Mixture 2-L. Settlement of the high-strength CLSM is given
in Table 20 and Fig. 6. These mixtures show settlement of the same general amount except for
Mixture 2-H, Source W-2, which exhibited shrinkage initially and then expansion. This mixture also
has a high cement content, 345 lb/yd3, but sand was introduced into the mixture. The presence of
-18-
sand in the mixture may provide a confining effect for the expansion product since the unit weight of
the CLSM mixture increased over 30 lb/ft3 from that of Mixture 2-L or 2-M.
Setting characteristics of the CLSM mixtures are shown in Figs. 7 - 9. Setting of the CLSM mixtures
was established for two different levels: one for a diameter of two inches, and for one inch. Setting of
the low-strength Series L CLSM mixtures (Fig. 7) ranged from approximately 24 to 96 hours to obtain
a diameter of two inches to approximately 60 to over 240 hours to obtain a diameter of imprint of one
inch. Mixture 5-L exhibited a significant delay in setting from the two-inch to the one inch level by
almost 200 hours. Other mixtures set from the two-inch to one-inch imprint diameter in
approximately 60 hours. The source of PPM ash used for Mixture 5-L (Source W-5) seemed to delay
the final set of the CLSM. Setting characteristics of the medium-strength Series M CLSM mixtures are
given in Fig. 8. As expected, the initial set of the CLSM to obtain a two-inch imprint was less than the
Series L CLSM mixtures, approximately 12 to 60 hours versus 24 to 96 hours. Similar to the Series L
CLSM, the time to reach the one-inch imprint diameter was much longer for the mixture containing
PPM ash Source W-5, Mixture 5-M, than for other medium-strength CLSM mixtures. Medium-
strength Series M CLSM mixtures set to the one-inch diameter in 40-75 hours, except Mixture 5-M,
which set to the same level in over 240 hours. Time of set for the high-strength Series H CLSM (Fig.
9) to the two-inch imprint level was 10 to 20 hours while setting time to reach the one-inch imprint
level was 24 to 40 hours for Mixtures 1-H through 4-H. On the other hand, again, the CLSM mixture
with ash Source W-5 (Mixture 5-H) had the longest setting time to reach the one-inch level, over 72
hours. These setting results indicate that when using PPM ash Source W-5, an accelerator should be
used to control the final setting time to acceptable levels.
6.6 Compressive Strength of CLSM Mixtures
The compressive strength data for the CLSM mixtures are presented in Tables 21-23 and Figs. 10-12.
CLSM Mixtures were designed to achieve three different 28-day compressive strength levels: low-
strength Series L, 100 psi maximum; medium-strength Series M, 100-500 psi; and high strength Series
H, 500-1200 psi. Each CLSM series consisted of five mixtures, one for each source of ash (W-1 thru
W-5). Compressive strength of the low-strength CLSM mixtures are given in Table 21 and Fig. 10.
Compressive strength results through the age of 28 days indicate that the five mixtures achieved the
desired strength level (100 psi maximum). At 28 days, these mixtures had compressive strengths of 35-
90 psi. Mixture 3-L (PPM ash source W-3) and Mixture 5-L (PPM ash source W-5) had a significant
increase in the compressive strength between 23 and 91 days (60 psi to 140 psi and 90 to 120 psi
respectively) which exceeds the desirable maximum strength of 100 psi. This indicates that the amount
of cement used for Mixture 3-L, 90 lb/yd3, and Mixture 5-L, 110 lb/yd3, should be reduced in future
mixtures to maintain long-term compressive strengths below 100 psi.
-19-
Compressive strength results of medium-strength Series M mixtures are given in Table 22 and Fig. 11.
These mixtures were designed to achieve the 28-day compressive strengths of about 100-500 psi.
Compressive strengths of all mixtures at the age of 28 days were in the range of about 100-200 psi.
Compressive strengths of Mixture 2-M at the age of 91 days increased to 765 psi while other mixtures
had compressive strengths of 165 to 390 psi. The increase in Mixture 2-M strength indicates that
continuing pozzolonic as well as cementitious reactions occur in this CLSM when using this source of
PPM ash. This mixture has the same source of ash (W-2) that exhibited expansion in the settlement
tests. The ash source, when used is CLSM, should be carefully evaluated for applications where
setting and long-term strengths gains are of concern.
Compressive strength of the high-strength Series H CLSM mixtures are shown in Table 23 and Fig. 12.
It was desirable that the compressive strengths of these mixtures reach 500-1200 psi at the age of 28
days. All mixtures exhibited a significant increase in compressive strength between the ages of 28 and
91 days. The desirable 28-day strength was achieved at the 91-day age. Mixture 2-H (PPM ash Source
W-2) again showed a significant increase in compressive strength between 28 and 91 days, 230 to 1250
psi. This compressive strength of 1,250 psi exceeded the maximum specified 1,200 psi for CLSM.
This indicates that the amount of cement could be reduced slightly. Similar to the Series L and Series
M mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-2, the long-term increase in compressive strength should
be evaluated and accounted for when designing various applications.
6.7 Water Permeability of CLSM Mixtures
Results for testing of the water permeability of the three series of CLSM mixtures (low-strength Series
L, medium-strength Series M, and high-strength Series H) are given in Tables 24-26. The permeability
of low-strength Series L CLSM slurry mixtures varied from 89x10-5 cm/s at the age of 28 days (Table
24). Permeability values for the age of 91 days are not yet available, however, based upon the results
from the permeability of the Series M and Series H CLSM, permeability of Series L CLSM is
expected to decrease. Permeability of Series M CLSM mixtures are shown in Table 25. Permeability
varied from 51x10-5 cm/s to 0.5x10-5 cm/s at the age of 28 days. Permeability decreased at the age of 91
days due to the increase in strength and improved microstructure of the CLSM matrix. At the age of
91 days, permeability varied from 35x10-5 cm/s to 0.1x10-5 cm/s. Test specimens for 2-M (PPM ash
source W-2) had the highest permeability (most permeable).
Series H CLSM specimens had permeability that varied at the age of 28 days from 12x10-5 cm/s to
0.2x10-5 cm/s and at 91 days from 3.8x10-5 cm/s to 0.1x10-5 cm/s. Similar to the medium strength
CLSM mixtures, permeability of the mixtures decreased as the age of the CLSM increased (and
strength increased).
-20-
6.8 Mixture Proportions and Fresh Concrete Properties
Mixture proportions and rheological properties for the concrete mixtures are given in Table 27-32.
Control mixtures (C-1, C-2, and C-3) developed for the project consisted of three mixtures with three
different cement factors (Table 27). Cement content of the control mixtures ranged from 530 lb/yd3 to
585 lb/yd3. Density of the control mixtures were approximately 149 lb/yd3.
A total of seven different mixtures were developed for each source of fly ash. Three mixtures used
PPM ash as a replacement of cement: approximately 15, 25% and 35%. Four additional mixtures were
developed using a blend of the PPM ash and ASTM Class C fly ash, approximately 25% and 35%
combined PPM ash and Class C ash by weight. Mixture proportions and rheological properties of the
concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-1 are given in Table 28. Three mixtures used PPM
ash as a replacement of cement of 14%, 25%, and 34%, Mixtures 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3 respectively, while
four mixtures used a blend of PPM ash and Class C fly ash, Mixture 1C1-1 and 1C1-2 (25% and 35%
ash content respectively), for Class C ash Source C1, and Mixture 1C2-1 and 1C2-2 (25% and 34% ash
content respectively), for Class C ash Source C2. Unit weight of the mixtures decreased as the amount
of PPM ash was added to the mixture increased, 148 lb/yd3 to 142 lb/ft3. Total cementitious materials
for the mixtures ranged from 595 to 610 lb/yd3.
Mixture proportions and rheological properties of the concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source
W-2 are given in Table 29. Similar to the mixtures for Source W-1, three mixtures used PPM ash as a
replacement of cement of 14%, 24%, and 35%, Mixtures 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3 respectively, while four
mixtures used a blend of PPM ash and Class C fly ash, Mixture 2C1-1 and 2C1-2, 24% and 36% ash
content respectively, for Class C ash Source C1, and Mixture 2C2-1 and 2C2-2, 24% and 36% ash
content respectively, for Class C ash Source C2. Unit weight of the mixtures were lower than for the
mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-1, 139- 145 lb/ft3. Fine aggregate content was reduced more
than for the W-1 concrete mixtures due to the low specific gravity and unit weight of PPM ash Source
W-2. The water to cementitious materials ratio also increased as the amount of W-2 was increased,
0.53 to 0.69. The water was increased to maintain the same range of slump. Ash characterization
results of Source W-2 (Table 8) showed that the water requirement of the ash was 155% of the control,
which would indicate that a higher amount of water is required to produce the same consistency as a
mixture without the W-2 ash.
Concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-3 are given in Table 30. Similar to the other
mixtures, three mixtures used PPM ash as a replacement of cement of 17%, 30%, and 39%, Mixtures
3-1, 3-2, and 3-3 respectively. Four mixtures used a blend of PPM ash W-3 and Class C fly ash,
Mixture 3C1-1 and 3C1-2, 17% and 40% ash content respectively, for Class C ash Source C1, and
Mixture 3C2-1 and 3C2-2, 17% and 40% ash content respectively, for Class C ash source C2. Source
W-3 is coarse (sand consistency) and all of the PPM ash content is not expected to participate as a
cementitious material, but was included in the calculations for cementitious content as a reference.
-21-
Fine aggregate was reduced to account for increasing amount of coarse PPM ash, and coarse aggregate
contents were maintained at a constant level. Unit weight of these mixtures ranged from 147 lb/ft3 to
150 lb/ft3, similar to the control mixtures.
Concrete mixture proportions and rheological properties of the concrete containing PPM ash Source
W-4 are given in Table 31. Three mixtures used PPM ash as a replacement of cement of 13%, 24%,
and 35%, Mixtures 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3 respectively, while four mixtures used a blend of PPM ash and
Class C fly ash, Mixture 4C1-1 and 4C1-2, 23% and 36% ash content respectively, for Class C ash
Source C1, and Mixture 4C2-1 and 4C2-2, 24% and 36% ash content respectively, for Class C ash
Source C2. Water to cementitious materials ratio of the mixtures ranged from 0.52 to 0.59, while
concrete density obtained for the mixtures were 142 lb/ft3 to 148 lb/ft3. The cementitious materials
ratio of the mixtures reduced when using a blend of PPM ash and Class C fly ash, 0.52 - 0.53 due to
increased ash content and slightly reduced water demand.
Mixture proportions and rheological properties of the concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source
W-5 are given in Table 2. Again, three mixtures used PPM ash as a replacement of cement of 12%,
24%, and 36%, Mixtures 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3 respectively, and four mixtures used a blend of PPM ash and
Class C fly ash, Mixture 5C1-1 and 5C1-2, 25% and 35% ash content respectively, for Class C ash
Source C1, and Mixture 5C2-1 and 5C2-2, 25% and 35%, for mixtures containing Class C ash Source
C2. Unit weight of the mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-5 were 142- 148 lb/ft3. Water to
cementitious materials ratio ranged from 0.53 to 0.66, however, water to cementitious materials ratio
for the blend of PPM source W-5 and Class C fly ash was lower 0.53 to 0.56 similar to mixtures with
W-4 ashes.
6.9 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mixtures
The compressive strength data for the concrete mixtures are presented in Tables 33-38 and Figs. 13-
17. Compressive strength of concrete control mixtures are shown in Table 33. The control mixtures
achieved a compressive strength of 3,000 - 3,580 psi at the age of 3 days to 5,100 - 5,500 psi at the age
of 28 days and approximately 5,900 - 6,500 psi at the age of 91 days. The compressive strength was
slightly greater than the 5,000 psi at 28-days originally designed for the control mixtures. They will
serve as a comparison to the performance of the concretes containing PPM ash.
Compressive strength of concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-1 are shown in Table 34
and Fig. 13. For comparison purposes, compressive strength results were compared to the
compressive strength of Control Mixture C-2. Control Mixture C-2 was selected for the comparison
due to the cement content of the control mixture, 585 lb/yd3, which is approximately the same as the
cementitious materials content of W-1 concrete mixtures, which contained an average equivalent
-22-
cement content (taking into account 1.25 factor for cement replacement) of 572 lb/yd3. Compressive
strength of the concrete containing PPM ash Source W-1 was approximately 2,100 psi to 3,300 psi at
the age of three days. The compressive strength at the 28-day age increased to a range of 4,300 psi to
slightly over 6,000 psi. Later age compressive strength (91-days) of the W-1 PPM ash mixtures range
from over 5,200 psi to over 7,800 psi. Compressive strength of mixtures containing 14% PPM ash
(Mixture 1-1), and the mixture containing a 24% blend of PPM ash and Class C fly ash Source C2
(Mixture 1C2-1) exceeded the compressive strength of the Control Mixtures at all test ages.
Compressive strength of Mixtures 1-2 (25% PPM ash), 1C1-1 (24% PPM ash and Class C ash blend),
1C1-2 (blend of 34% PPM ash and Class C ash Source C1), and 1C2-2 (blend of 17% PPM ash and
Class C ash Source C2) initially (at the age of three days) had a lower compressive strength than the
Control Mixture; however, at later ages of 28 or 91 days, compressive strengths of these mixtures
exceeded the Control Mixture. Mixture 1-3, 35% PPM ash had compressive strengths that were lower
than the Control Mixture at all ages; however, compressive strengths achieved for this mixture at the
age of 28 and 91 days, 4290 psi and 5245 psi, respectively, are suitable and for most structural
applications.
Compressive strength of concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-2 are shown in Table 35
and Fig. 14. The compressive strength of these mixtures were compared to the compressive strength
of Control Mixture C-1. Control Mixture C-1 was selected for the comparison due to the cement
content of the Control Mixture, 555 lb/yd3, approximately the same as the equivalent cement content
of the concrete containing W-2 ash, which was 541 lb/yd3. Compressive strength of the concrete
containing PPM ash Source W-2 was 895 psi to 2,300 psi at the age of three days and 1,355 psi to
4,695 psi at the age of 28 days. Later age compressive strength (91-day) of the W-2 PPM ash mixtures
range from 1,755 psi to 5,665 psi. Compressive strength of mixtures containing W-2 PPM ash
decreased as the amount of W-2 was increased. Compressive strength of Mixture 2-1 (14% PPM ash)
was less than the Control Mixture, but achieved a compressive strength of 3,705 psi at the age of 14
days which remained relatively constant through the age of 91 days (3,745 psi at 91 days). Mixtures 2-2
and 2-3 (24% and 35% W-2 PPM ash) did not achieve a minimum design compressive strength of
3,000 psi. However, performance of the concrete mixtures containing the blend of PPM ash and Class
C fly ash were significantly improved, particularly for the mixtures that contained 12% each of W-2
PPM ash and Class C ash (Mixtures 2C1-1 and 2C2-1). The concrete with W-2 PPM ash also
performed better when combined with Class C Source C1 rather than C2. Compressive strength of
concrete blended with Class C Source C1 was higher at all test ages, approximately 500 psi at the age of
3 days to 600-1,200 psi at the age of 91 days for equivalent mixtures.
Compressive strength of concrete mixtures containing source W-3 are shown in Table 36 and Fig. 15.
Source W-3 was a very coarse ash (sand gradation), therefore, when determining an appropriate
comparison for this mixture, only 25% of the total W-3 ash was considered as cementitious material
-23-
for comparison to a Control Mixture. The rest of the 75% W-3 ash was assumed as a filler. The
compressive strength of these mixtures were compared to the compressive strength of Control Mixture
C-3 which had a cement content of 530 lb/yd3, while the average equivalent cement content of the
concrete containing W-3 ash was 534 lb/yd3. Compressive strength of the concrete containing PPM
ash Source W-3 was approximately 3,700 psi to 5,500 psi at the age of 28 days. All concrete
containing W-3 ash achieved compressive strengths that would be suitable for typical concrete
construction. Compressive strengths of concrete containing PPM ash W-3 typically decreased as the
amount of PPM ash increased. The compressive strength of two mixtures containing the blend of
PPM ash with Class C fly ash (3C1-1 and 3C2-1) either met (within 10%) or exceeded the compressive
strength of the Control Mixture at all test ages.
Concrete compressive strength of mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-4 are shown in Table 37
and Fig. 16. Control Mixture C-3 was selected for the comparison due to the cement content of the
Control Mixture, 530 lb/yd3, while the average equivalent cement content of the concrete mixtures
containing W-4 ash was 528 lb/yd3. Compressive strength at the age of three days for mixtures
containing PPM ash Source W-4 were less than the compressive strength of the Control Mixture,
1,500 psi to 2,800 psi, versus 3,600 psi for the Control Mixture. The rate of increase for compressive
strength of mixtures containing PPM ash W-4 were greater than the Control Mixture. All but two of
the W-4 ash mixtures had compressive strengths that exceeded the Control Mixture at the age of 28
days. Similar to most of the other PPM ashes, concrete with PPM ash Source W-4 performed better
when combined with Class C fly ash Source C1 rather than C2.
Concrete compressive strength of mixtures containing PPM ash source W-5 are shown in Table 38
and Fig. 17. Control Mixture C-3 was again selected for the comparison of compressive strength.
Cement content of the Control Mixture was 530 lb/yd3 and the average equivalent cement content of
the concrete mixtures containing W-5 ash was 535 lb/yd3. Compressive strength of mixtures containing
PPM ash Source W-5 were typically less than the compressive strength of the control mixture.
Compressive strength of the PPM ash W-5 mixtures all exceeded 4,000 psi with the exception of one
Mixture 5-3 (36% PPM ash). Concrete mixtures exceeding 4,000 would be suitable for most structural
applications. Mixture 5-3 only obtained the compressive strength of 2,940 psi at 28 days; however, at
the age of 91 days, the compressive strength increased to 3,885 psi. The highest compressive strengths
were achieved using a lower percentage of PPM ash W-5 (12% W-5, Mixture 5-1), or when combining
PPM ash and Class C fly ash (12% and 18% each of PPM ash and Class C fly ash, Mixtures 5C1-1,
5C1-2, 5C2-1, 5C2-2). These mixtures achieved compressive strengths of over 5,800 to 6,900 psi at
the age of 91 days.
6.10 Tensile Strength of Concrete Mixtures
-24-
The splitting tensile strength for the concrete mixtures are presented in Tables 39-44 and Figs. 18-22.
The Control Mixtures (proportioned without PPM ash or Class C fly ash) achieved tensile strength in
the range of 360 to 480 psi at the age of 3 days to 565 - 620 psi at the age of 28 days (Table 39). Long-
term (91-day age) tensile strength of the control mixtures was an average of 685 psi. The splitting
tensile strength of the concrete mixtures containing PPM ashes (Tables 40-44, and Figs. 18-22)
generally followed the same pattern as was described for the concrete compressive strength (Section
6.9). Each series of tensile strength results for the concrete mixtures was compared to the same
control mixture (C-1, C-2, or C-3) described in Section 6.9 for compressive strength. Similar to the
trend for compressive strength of the PPM ash mixtures, tensile strength decreased as the amount of
PPM ash increased in the mixtures. Also, concrete containing PPM and Class C fly ash Source C1
had higher tensile strength than similar mixtures developed with Class C fly ash Source C2. This also
agrees with the compressive strength results for these mixtures. Mixtures containing a blend of PPM
ash and Class C fly ash typically performed better than mixtures using only PPM ash as a replacement
of cement.
Splitting tensile strength of concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-1 are shown in Table 40
and Fig. 18. As described for the compressive strength, tensile strength of the concrete containing
PPM ash Source W-1 were compared to the strength of the Control Mixture C-2. Tensile strength of
the concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-1 was 300-415 psi at the age of three days, then
increased to 580-725 psi at the age of 91 days. Tensile strengths of Control Mixture C-2 were 360 psi
at 3-days, 565 psi at 28-days, and 685 psi at 91-days. Tensile strength of PPM ash W-1 Mixtures 1-1
(14% PPM ash), 1C1-1 (12% PPM ash and 12% Class C fly ash - Source C1), 1C1-2 (17% W-1 ash and
17% Class C fly ash - Source C1), and 1C2-2 (17% W-1 ash and 17% Class C fly ash - Source C2), all
met or exceeded the tensile strength of the control mixture at the test ages of 28 and 91 days. All other
concrete mixtures developed sufficient strength to be used for most structural applications.
Tensile strength of concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-2 are given in Table 41 and Fig.
19. The tensile strength of these mixtures were compared to the tensile strength of Control Mixture C-
1, selected for having approximately the same amount of cementitious materials as the PPM ash
Source W-2 mixtures, 555 lb/yd3. Tensile strength of the concrete containing PPM ash Source W-2
increased from 195-340 psi at the age of three days to 285 psi to 625 psi at the age of 91 days. These
mixtures had lower tensile strengths than Control Mixture (420 psi at three days to 670 psi at the age of
91-days); however, all concrete mixtures with the exception of Mixture 2-3 (35% W-2 ash) achieved
sufficient tensile strength for most structural applications.
Splitting tensile strength of concrete mixtures containing Source W-3 are shown in Table 42 and Fig.
20. The splitting tensile strength of these mixtures were compared to the tensile strength of Control
Mixture C-3, same as used for the compressive strength comparison. Splitting tensile strength of
-25-
Control Mixture C-3 was 480 psi at the age of three days, to 580 psi at 28 days. Tensile strength of the
concrete containing source W-3 was 470 psi to 575 psi at the age of 28 days. Although tensile
strengths were lower than the control mixture, all concrete containing W-3 ash achieved strengths
suitable for typical structural concrete construction.
Concrete splitting tensile strength of mixtures containing PPM ash source W-4 are shown in Table 43
and Fig. 21. Control Mixture C-3 was again selected for comparing the tensile strength due to the
cement content of Control Mixture being approximately the same as the equivalent cement content of
the concrete mixtures containing W-4 ash. Similar to the test results for the compression tests, tensile
strength at the age of three days for mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-4 were less than the
tensile strength of Control Mixture, 215 psi to 370 psi, versus 480 psi for Control Mixture. Similar to
mixtures with other PPM ashes, concrete with PPM ash Source W-4 performed better when
combined with Class C fly ash Source C1 rather than C2.
Concrete splitting tensile strength of mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-5 are shown in Table 44
and Fig. 22. Splitting tensile strength of mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-5 were also less than
the tensile strength of Control Mixture C-3. Tensile strength at the age of 28 days ranged from 355 to
575 psi for the W-5 mixtures while the Control Mixture achieved a strength of 580 psi. These tensile
strengths, although lower than the control, achieved tensile strengths that were suitable for typical
structural concrete construction.
6.11 Drying Shrinkage of Concrete Mixtures
The drying shrinkage (length change) data for the concrete mixtures are presented in Figs. 23-27. The
shrinkage values represent the change in length of concrete test specimens in a controlled 50% R.H.
storage facility after 28 days of curing in lime saturated water. Each series of concrete mixtures are
compared to the Control Mixture without any fly ash or PPM ash. The length change values indicate
that the greatest amount of shrinkage occurred for concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-1
(Fig. 23). These mixtures exhibited shrinkage of the test specimens between 0.4% and 1.6%, while the
change in length of Control Mixture specimens were negligible. Length change of the concrete with
PPM ash Source W-2 (Fig. 24) showed little change in length (less than approximately ±0.2%). Drying
shrinkage of concrete containing PPM ash Source W-3 were negligible (Fig. 25) with the exception of
mixtures containing Class C fly ash Source C1. These mixtures, 3C1-1 and 3C1-2, exhibited a length
change of approximately 0.4% to 1.4%. Drying shrinkage of the concrete mixtures containing PPM
ash source W-4 are shown in Fig. 26. These mixtures showed a long-term length change between zero
and -0.6%; However, again the mixture with Class C fly ash Source C1 had the greatest change in
length, 1.6%. Length change of concrete containing Source W-5 was between zero and 0.4%, except,
-26-
again, Mixture 5C1-1 containing Class C fly ash Source C1 had the greatest change in length, -0.9% of
shrinkage after 14 days of drying, but after additional dying, expanded to +0.2%.
6.12 Leachate Characteristics of PPM ash and CLSM
Chapter NR 538 Standards ("Beneficial Use of Industrial By-Products") of the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources (WI-DNR) were used for determining environmental compliance and potential
uses of the CLSM made with PPM ashes. The ASTM D 3987 water leach tests and EPA SW-846
elemental test methods were performed on the five sources of PPM ash as well as for five medium-
strength CLSM mixtures for comparison, although NR 538 guidelines are established based upon the
characterization of the ash material only.
The WI-DNR NR 538 standards specify the allowable leachate and elemental concentrations when
using industrial by-products in various applications. Based upon these leachate and elemental
concentrations, NR 538 specifies a category to the material, one through five. Category 1 material
would have the least restrictions placed upon its use, while Category 5 having the most restrictions
(Table 45).
WI-DNR NR 538 standards are not directly applicable to PPM ash (wood ash) evaluated as part of this
project. There are specific guidelines established for coal ash materials; however, none specifically for
wood ash materials. However, PPM ashes were characterized as per the NR 538 leachate and
elemental analysis guidelines established for "other" industrial by-products, Table 46.
The results of the leachate characterization per NR 538 for the PPM ash are presented in Table 46.
The WI-DNR requirements for the leachate concentrations for Category 1-4 are shown in Table 47.
The results of the leachate characterization, compared with the NR 538 standards, are presented in
Table 48. The PPM ash met all the requirements of Category 1 with the exception of Aluminum
(Source W-1,W-2, and W-5), Antimony (Source W-1 thru W-5), Arsenic (Source W-1, W-4, and W-
5), Barium (Source W-2 thru W-5), Chromium (Source W-1, W-3, and W-5), Fluoride (Source W-4
and W-5), Lead (Source W-3), Manganese (Source W-4 and W-5), Sulfate (Source W-1, W-4, and
W-5), and Thallium (Source W-1 thru W-5). The concentration for these elements placed the
material in either Category 2 or Category 3, except for the concentration of Aluminum in Source W-2
and Antimony in Source W-4 which met Category 4 requirements.
The results of the elemental characterization of the PPM ash sources are given in Table 49. The WI-
DNR requirements for the elemental concentrations are shown in Table 50. The elemental
concentrations compared with the NR 538 standards, are presented in Table 51. The PPM ash met
all the requirements of Category 1 with the exception of Arsenic, Beryllium, Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene,
-27-
and Total PAHs. NR 538 does not specify a standard value for total PAHs for Category 1 materials;
therefore, the detection of any measurable PAHs automatically places the material in Category 2. The
concentration for the aforementioned elements placed the materials in either Category 2 or Category
3. When the results of the leachate and elemental analysis are combined, PPM ash sources W-1, W-
3, and W-5 would be categorized by WI-DNR NR 538 as a Category 3, while Sources W-2 and W-4
would be categorized by NR 538 as Category 4.
The results of the leachate and elemental characterization per NR 538 for the medium strength CLSM
mixtures (Series M) are presented in Table 52 and Table 53. The results of these characterization
were compared to the WI-DNR standards (Table 47 and 50) and categorized (Table 54 and Table
55). Leachate concentrations of the CLSM Mixtures (Table 54) met all the requirements of Category
1 with the exception of Aluminum (CLSM mixtures 1-M, 4-M, and 5-M), Antimony (CLSM Mixtures
1-M thru 5-M), Arsenic (CLSM Mixture 4-M), Barium (CLSM Mixture 2-M and 3-M), Chromium
(Mixture 1-M, 3-M, 4-M, and 5-M), Iron (Mixture 2-M), Lead (Mixture 1-M thru 5-M), Silver (Mixture
4-M), Sulfate (Mixture 4-M and 5-M), and Thallium (Mixtures 1-M thru 5-M). The concentration for
elements of the CLSM mixtures (Table 55) placed the material in Category 2 and 3 with the exception
of Mixture 1-M (Category 4 for Aluminum), Mixture 2-M (Category 4 for Lead), 3-M (Category 4 for
Lead), and 4-M (Category 4 for Lead). Elemental characterization of the CLSM mixtures met
Category 1 requirements with the exception of Arsenic, Beryllium, Crysene, and Dibenzo (a,h)
anthracene. The concentration of these mixtures met Category 2 requirements with the exception of
the concentration of arsenic in Mixtures 1-M and 4-M which placed the material in Category 3.
When the results of the leachate and elemental analysis are combined, the CLSM mixtures would be
categorized by WI-DNR NR 538 as Category 4, with the exception of CLSM Mixture 5-M, which met
the Category 3 requirements. The results of the NR 538 analysis provides an interesting comparison
between the PPM ash and CLSM. CLSM, under current NR 538 guidelines, would not have to be
characterized per these NR 538 requirements prior to its use.
7.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
7.1 Economic Evaluation
Use of wood ash in concrete materials would provide significant economic benefits to the pulp and
paper industries of Wisconsin and manufacturers of low-cost building materials. Cost of PPM ash to a
concrete producer would vary depending upon transportation cost, cost of storage, additional hardware
needed at the ready-mixed plant, etc. For this study, the market cost of the Class C fly ash was taken as
$40.00 per ton. Cost of PPM ash was estimated at $10.00 per ton (due entirely to transportation).
Disposal cost of PPM ash was estimated at $20.00 per ton. In general, the cost of cement varies
-28-
between $70 and $90 per ton. For this project the market cost of cement was taken as $80 per ton.
Total amount of materials cost savings depends upon the total amount of cement and the amount of
PPM ash used.
Economic analysis for using PPM ash in concrete is shown in Fig. 28. Cost savings to the concrete
producer is dependent upon the source of PPM ash used. Concrete mixtures contained using PPM
ash Source W-1 up to 25% as a replacement of cement. This mixture obtained compressive strengths
that exceeded comparable Control Mixture without PPM ash. It is estimated that over 8 million cubic
yards of ready mixed concrete (using approximately 2.1 million tons of cement) will be produced in
Wisconsin in 2001. Estimating the cost of cement at $80/ton and the cost of the PPM ash at $10/ton,
cost savings to the concrete producer in materials alone is shown in Fig. 28. If 10% of the concrete
produced in Wisconsin uses a PPM ash similar to Source W-1, over 42,000 tons of cement would be
saved (for a PPM ash content of 35%, using a replacement of 1.25 lb of PPM ash for each pound of
cement), at a saving of over $3.3 million dollars while cost of PPM ash to replace the cement would be
approximately $500,000 for a total net savings of over $2.8 million dollars. Since the cost savings
indicated in Fig. 28 reflects the material cost only, an additional cost savings of avoided landfilling of
PPM ash, at a cost over $20/ton, over $1 million dollars. Concrete Mixture 1-3 (35% PPM ash) also
developed sufficient compressive and tensile strengths for structural concrete construction. When
using concrete containing 35% PPM ash, overall cost savings would be over $3.9 million dollars to the
concrete manufacturer, even if only 10% of the concrete in the market used PPM ash at this
replacement rate (Fig. 28).
Other sources of PPM ash used in concrete out-performed the Control Mixture when a blend of
17.5% PPM ash and 17.5% Class C fly ash is used. Cost savings of the materials to the concrete
producer is shown in Fig. 28. If only 10% of the concrete in the Wisconsin market used PPM blended
ash mixtures similar to those developed for this project, a cost savings of over $2.8 million dollars
would be realized by concrete producers in Wisconsin. Mixtures for several other sources also
produced acceptable results for PPM ash contents of 15%, leading to savings of producing concrete of
over $2.0 million dollars.
A compacted fill material, when typically compacted in lifts as required by contract specifications, can
cost about $30 per cu.yd. or more for materials, transportation, placing, compaction, testing, etc.
CLSM can be used as a good-quality structural fill for foundation subbase, floor slab base, road base,
etc. Additionally it can be used for abandoned tunnels, sewers, storage tanks, wells, abandoned utility
vaults, voids under pavements, manholes, etc. In many situations, CLSM can provide cost effective
alternatives to conventional compacted granular backfill or structural fill materials (soil or other
granular materials). The use of CLSM as backfill for utility trenches is one use where the CLSM
material has a very distinct advantage over compacted fill. Stabilizing a trench wall for construction
-29-
workers to enter, in order to hand compact around buried utilities, cost additional dollars per square
foot of the trench wall. This quickly adds significantly to the cost of the project. For CLSM use, this
cost will be zero. Due to lower cost of PPM ash compared with Class C fly ash or sand, the use of
PPM ash as a replacement of fly ash or sand reduces the cost of the CLSM significantly. Additional
saving is also realized by the pulp and paper industry in Wisconsin due to avoided disposal costs.
Therefore, total cost savings are the sum of the material cost savings in manufacturing these products
plus disposal cost savings.
The economical analysis results for CLSM produced with PPM ash are shown in Figure 29. The
economic data are based upon the total amount of CLSM that may be used in the state of Wisconsin,
which is estimated to be 400,000 cu.yd. per year and assuming that only 25% of the CLSM produced
would utilize PPM ash. This is a conservative estimate since other similar geographic areas such as
Harrison County, Ohio, which includes Cincinnati, utilizes about 500,000 cu.yd. of CLSM each year
(1997) and King County, Washington, which includes Seattle, utilizes about 600,000 tons of CLSM
each year (1998). These municipalities mandate the use of CLSM for backfilling excavations, while
the state of Wisconsin currently does not. In Wisconsin, CLSM is a "relatively" new material. In areas
where the advantages of using CLSM have been recognized, usage of CLSM has dramatically
increased. If only 25% of the CLSM produced in Wisconsin utilized PPM ash, the total cost savings
would be approximately $425,000 dollars per year.
8.0 CONCLUSIONS
The five sources of PPM ash selected for this project exhibited a wide variation of material properties
(fineness, carbon content, reactivity with cement, etc.). Although each source had different physical
and chemical properties, results of this project indicate that structural grade concrete can be
manufactured with PPM ash used as a replacement of cement, and that PPM ash can be used as the
primary component of CLSM.
Concrete incorporating PPM ash exhibited decreased compressive and splitting tensile strength as the
amount of PPM ash was increased in the mixture; however, each source of PPM ash produced
concrete that was acceptable for structural concrete and in some cases produced concrete that had
higher strength than a comparable Control Mixture without PPM ash. Concrete mixtures containing a
blend of PPM ash and Class C fly ash also achieved higher compressive and tensile strengths than
comparable mixtures only containing PPM ash. Each source of PPM ash, when used in concrete
mixtures, gained strength at a different rate. Mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-1 performed the
best (obtained the highest concrete compressive and splitting tensile strength), followed by Sources W-
4, W-5, W-3, and W-2.
-30-
The compressive strength results of all the concrete mixtures containing PPM ash Source W-1
compare well with structural standards, and in particular, mixtures exceeding 7,000 psi (Mixtures 1C1-
1, 1C1-2, and 1C2-1) containing the blend of Class C fly ash indicate that the cementitious materials
content could be reduced if compressive strengths of 4,000 to 5,000 psi are required for typical
structural applications. If concrete mixtures are required to have a compressive strength of 7,000 psi,
additional cost must typically be paid over that of standard structural concrete. This additional cost
typically accounts for increased cement content, and/or specialty chemicals added to the concrete. If
concrete with 7,000 psi is developed with significant addition of PPM ash Source W-1, the PPM ash
concrete would have a significant competitive advantage.
CLSM also may be manufactured using PPM ash as the primary component. CLSM of each strength
range, less than 100 psi, 100-500 psi, and 500-1,000 psi can successfully be produced from all five
sources. Some sources of PPM ash, particularly Source W-1, W-2, and W-5 exhibited a significant
increase in compressive strength between the ages of 14 and 91 days. PPM ash Source W-5 exhibited
compressive strength increase of over five times the strength at the age of 28 days and 91 days for the
high-strength Series H mixtures. Ash Source W-2 exhibited expansion and a significant increase in
strength from 28 and 91 days. These properties would not necessarily exclude the use of these ashes
from use in CLSM, but should be accounted for when designing fill applications using CLSM
containing such sources of PPM ash.
Testing of by-product materials is required per WI-DNR NR 538 prior to use in CLSM. Although the
final CLSM product was tested for this project, the WI-DNR specifies the end use of by-products
based upon the characterization of the by-product constituents and not the characterization of the final
product. All five sources of PPM ash were tested in accordance with the requirements of NR 538
Category 2 requirements. Of the five sources of PPM ash tested, two of the sources meet Category 2
requirements, while three met the requirements of Category 3. Typical applications for CLSM would
fall under "Confined Geotechnical Fill" of Table 45. Either NR 538 Category 4 or below is approved
for this type of application. Category 3 materials are also approved for use as an unconfined
geotechnical fill. Therefore, all five sources of PPM ash used for this project are acceptable for use in
typical CLSM backfill applications. Economic figures calculated for this project projected cost savings
to both pulp and paper mills in Wisconsin (PPM ash producers) and CLSM and concrete
manufacturers. These projected savings are significant, even if only 10% of the ready-mixed concrete
industry adopts and uses PPM ash at the levels determined to produce satisfactory results for structural
concrete or CLSM. Consumers may also benefit from these cost savings, lowering the cost of concrete
and, therefore, lowering the cost of concrete construction in Wisconsin.
-31-
9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Due to the success of this laboratory evaluation, Phase 2 work is planned to pursue prototype-scale
and subsequently full production-scale manufacturing of CLSM and concrete using actual commercial
production facilities. Activities for this Phase 2 work would include testing and evaluation of the
mixtures followed by construction demonstration activities. A technology transfer workshop would
also be held in conjunction with the construction demonstration to make participants from the
Wisconsin construction industry aware of the benefits of PPM ash use and to allow manufacturers to
gain experience in working with the CLSM and concrete containing PPM ash.
10.0 LIST OF REFERENCES
(1) Etiegni, L., “Wood Ash Recycling and Land Disposal,” Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Forest
Products, University of Idaho at Moscow, Idaho, USA, June 1990, 174 pages.
(2) Etiegni, L., and Campbell, A. G., “Physical and Chemical Characteristics of Wood Ash,"
Bioresource Technology, Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd., England, UK, Vol. 37, No. 2, 1991,
pp.173-178.
(3) National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI), “Alternative Management of
Pulp and Paper Industry Solid Wastes,” Technical Bulletin No. 655, NCASI, New York, NY,
November 1993, 44 pages.
(4) Campbell, A. G., “Recycling and Disposing of Wood Ash,” TAPPI Journal, TAPPI Press,
Norcross, GA, Vol. 73, No. 9, September 1990, pp.141-143
(5) Mishra, M. K., Ragland, K. W., and Baker, A. J., “Wood Ash Composition as a Function of
Furnace Temperature,” Biomass and Bioenergy, Pergamon Press Ltd., UK, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1993,
pp. 103-116.
(6) Steenari, B. M., and Lindqvist, O., “Co-combustion of Wood with Coal, Oil, or Peat-Fly Ash
Characteristics,” Department of Environmental Inorganic Chemistry, Chalmers University of
Technology, Goteborg, Sweden, Report No. ISSN 0366-8746 OCLC 2399559, Vol. No. 1372,
1998, pp. 1-10.
-32-
(7) Steenari, B. M., “Chemical Properties of BC Ashes,” Report No. ISBN 91-7197-618-3,
Department of Environmental Inorganic Chemistry, Chalmers University of Technology,
Goteborg, Sweden, April 1998, 72 pages.
(8) Naik, T. R., “Tests of Wood Ash as a Potential Source for Construction Materials,” Report No.
CBU-1999-09, Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, University of Wisconsin-
Milwaukee, Milwaukee, August 1999, 61 pages.
(9) Meyers, N. L., and Kopecky, M. J., “Industrial Wood Ash as a Soil Amendment for Crop
Production,” TAPPI Journal, TAPPI Press, Norcross, GA, 1998, pp. 123-130.
(10) Nguyen, P., and Pascal, K. D., “Application of Wood Ash on Forestlands: Ecosystem Responses
and Limitations,” Proceeding of the 1997 Conference on Eastern Hardwoods, Resources,
Technologies, and Markets, Forest Product Society, Madison, WI, April 21-23, 1997, pp. 203.
(11) Bramryd, T. and Frashman, B., “Silvicultural Use of Wood Ashed – Effects on the Nutrient and
Heavy Metal Balance in a Pine (Pinus Sylvestris, L.) Forest Soil,” Water, Air and Soil Pollution
Proceeding of the 1995 5th International Conference on Acidic Deposition: Science and Policy,
Acid Reign ’95, Part 2, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht Netherland, Vol. 85, No. 2, June
26-30, 1995, pp. 1039-1044.
(12) Naik, T. R., “Flowable Slurry incorporating Wood Fly Ash from the Weyerhaeuser
Company,” Report No. CBU-2000-01, Rep-367, UWM Center for By-Products Utilization,
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, January 2000, 37 pages.
(13) Mukherji, S. K., Dan, T. K., and Machhoya, B. B., “Characterization and Utilization of Wood
Ash in the Ceramic Industry,” International Ceramic Review, Verlag Schmid GmbH, Freiburg,
Germany, Vol. 44, No. 1, 1995, pp. 31-33.
(14) Naylor, L. M., and Schmidt, E. J., “Agricultural Use of Wood Ash a Fertilizer and Limiting
Material,” TAPP Journal, TAPPI Press, Norcross, GA, October 1986, pp. 114-119.
(15) Proceedings of the Workshop and Field Demonstration for uses of Flowable Slurry
Containing Coal Ash, Used Foundry Sand and other Recyclable Products, University of
Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Center for By-Products Utilization, Portwashington, WI, August
1999.
(16) Proceedings of the Workshop on the Use of Fly Ash and Other Coal Combustion
Products in Concrete and Construction Materials, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,
Center for By-Products Utilization, Madison, WI, February 2000.
-33-
Rep-410
-34-

Wood Ash 17

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wood Ash 17

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Center for

USE OF WOOD ASH FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE

By Rudolph N. Kraus and Tarun R. Naik

Report No. CBU-2000-31

Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics

Fiscal Year 1999-2000 Funding Request

Signature of Grants Officer Name and Title

Signature of Department Dean Name and Title

FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

Project Title: USE OF WOOD ASH FOR STRUCTURAL CONCRETE AND

Principal Investigator: Rudolph N. Kraus

Other Project Personnel: Tarun R. Naik

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .........................................................................1

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Properties of Wood Ash

Ca(OH) + H O+ CO (gas)  Ca(OH) (aqueous)+ H CO (aqueous) CaCO +2H O

Ca Al O + 3CaSO + 32 H O  Ca Al (SO ) (OH) 26H O

were also present in the wood ash studied [8].

2.2 Beneficial Uses of Wood Ash

2.2.2 Pollution Control

2.2.3 Construction Materials

4.0 RESEARCH DESIGN

Task I: Material Selection and Characterization

Task II: Mixture Proportions

Task III: Testing and Evaluations

Task IV: Economic Evaluation

5.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

5.1.1 PPM Ash

5.1.2 Fine Aggregate

5.1.3 Coarse Aggregate

5.2 Elemental Analysis

5.3 Mineralogical Analysis

5.4 Mixture Proportions

5.4.1 Concrete Mixtures

5.4.2 CLSM Mixtures

5.5.1 Concrete Manufacturing

5.5.2 CLSM Manufacturing

5.6 Specimen Preparation and Testing

5.6.2 CLSM Testing

6.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

6.2 Elemental Analysis

6.3 Mineralogical Analysis

6.4 Mixture Proportions and Fresh CLSM Properties

6.5 Setting and Hardening Characteristics of CLSM Mixtures

6.6 Compressive Strength of CLSM Mixtures

6.7 Water Permeability of CLSM Mixtures

6.9 Compressive Strength of Concrete Mixtures

6.10 Tensile Strength of Concrete Mixtures

6.11 Drying Shrinkage of Concrete Mixtures

6.12 Leachate Characteristics of PPM ash and CLSM

7.0 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

7.1 Economic Evaluation

10.0 LIST OF REFERENCES

You might also like