Environmental Science and Pollution Research

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20456-y

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Sulfur concrete made with waste marble and slag powders: 100%

recycled and waterless concrete
Muhammad Faisal Rasheed1 · Abdur Rahim1 · Muhammad Irfan‑ul‑Hassan2 · Babar Ali3 · Nazam Ali4,5

Received: 18 November 2021 / Accepted: 21 April 2022

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2022

Abstract
In this research, the mechanical properties and durability of sulfur concrete with two different waste aggregates were evalu-
ated. The waste aggregates included ground granulated blast-furnace slag and waste marble powder. The properties of sulfur
concrete were also compared with those of the conventional binder concretes (i.e., Portland cement concrete and sulfate-
resistant cement concrete). The durability parameters included measuring water absorption capacity and resistance to different
harsh chemical environments (5% HCl solution, 5 Molar NaOH solution, and 16% NaCl solution). It was found that sulfur
concrete made with slag as aggregate exhibited the maximum strength, i.e., about 2 times higher than that of Portland cement
concrete and sulfate-resistant cement concrete. Sulfur concrete made with slag and marble waste powder showed superior
mechanical performance compared to that made with river sand. Thus, sulfur binder develops more favorable properties
with eco-friendly fillers than it develops with natural sand. In harsh chloride and acidic environment, sulfur concrete with
slag powder exhibited about 90–95% lesser mass loss than Portland cement concrete.

Keywords  Chemical resistance · Durability · Blast-furnace slag · Mechanical strength · Sulfate-resistant concrete · Waste
marble powder

Abbreviations Introduction
SC Sulfur concrete
RS River sand The natural resources are exhausting due to the expansive
WMP Waste marble powder growth in the construction sector, while waste materials
GGBS Ground-granulated blast furnace slag are accumulating in the natural environment because of the
PCC Portland cement concrete endless processing and finishing of raw products. In this
SRC Sulfate-resistant cement concrete scenario, the role of construction cannot be ignored in con-
suming the wastes of different industries. The utilization of
wastes not only reduces landfilling requirements but also
decreases the abiotic depletion potential and carbon footprint
of concrete manufacture (Kurda et al. 2018).

Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues

1
Research Scholar, Department of Transportation Engineering
* Muhammad Faisal Rasheed and Management, University of Engineering & Technology,
maharfaisal29@gmail.com Lahore, Pakistan
Abdur Rahim 2
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,
rahim@uet.edu.pk University of Engineering & Technology, Lahore, Pakistan
Muhammad Irfan‑ul‑Hassan 3
Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering, COMSATS University
irfanulhassan@uet.edu.pk Islamabad, Sahiwal Campus, Islamabad 57000, Pakistan
Babar Ali 4
Research Scholar, Graduate School of Natural Science
babar.ali@cuisahiwal.edu.pk and Technology, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, Japan
Nazam Ali 5
Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering, University
nazam.ali@stu.kanazawa-u.ac.jp of Management and Technology, Lahore 54770, Pakistan

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

The advancement of technology in the petroleum indus-
try and the installation of new oil refineries have caused
the large-scale production of sulfur by-products. Owing to
special physical, chemical, and mechanical characteristics,
sulfur has applications in the fields of agriculture, phar-
maceutics, chemical, and construction industry, and in the
process of rubber vulcanization (Mohammed and Poornima
2018). The oil refineries are now focusing on the effective
and faster consumption of this large amount of sulfur. There
is a need to utilize this by-product for the sustainability of
the environment. Thus, this study focuses on the usage of
sulfur as a binder in the construction industry. The utiliza-
tion of sulfur as a substitute for cement binders can help in
minimizing the abiotic depletion caused by the construction
industry.
Conventional concrete requires water for the hydration of
cement (in order to complete the chemical reactions respon-
sible for strength gain). Thus, upon hydration, cementitious
compounds develop strength and extra water required for
the workability leaves pores inside the matrix of the con-
crete. Despite numerous benefits, cement concrete has issues
such as a high environmental impact and poor resistance to
aggressive environments. Owing to the presence of pores,
concrete is susceptible to moisture intake and deterioration.
The production of cement requires a high temperature, above
1400 °C, and that is why the cement industry is responsible
for about 5% of the global emissions of C ­ O2 (Moon et al.
2016). The physical and mechanical properties of concrete
degrade due to extreme climatic conditions. When placed
in harsh environments, for example, 10% HCl for 2 months,
conventional concrete loses about 20% mass (Vlahovic et al.
2011). The cement concrete develops cracks due to its high
porosity through which gases and aggressive solutions dif-
fuse into the concrete matrix, and the resulting reactions
cause corrosion of steel rebars and spalling of concrete (El
Gamal et al. 2017). Because of these considerations, there is
an essential need to find cheaper, durable, and environment-
friendly alternative binders for the construction industry.
One potential alternative to cement concrete is SC due
to the binding properties of the sulfur polymer. However, in
the construction industry, SC is still rarely used as a material
in comparison to PCC. However, the experience across the
world has shown that SC has significant strength and dura-
bility during exposure to chemicals in comparison to PCC.
There have been significant applications of SC in the USA
and Canada; however, the use in Europe is limited (Vla-
hovic et al. 2011). The utilization of SC on large scales will
be economical as compared to cement concrete, and it can
alleviate environmental problems and problems related to
sulfur storage (Sabour et al. 2019).
Sulfur melts at 120 °C and transfers into a liquid state.
When cooled at 114 °C, it changes from liquid to a mon-
oclinic crystalline form. On further cooling to 98 °C, it
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
changes to an orthorhombic state, which is stable at room
temperature. This polymerization and crystallization helps in
attaining high strength at normal temperatures. The volume
contraction during solidification is about 7% (Dugarte et al.
2019). As sulfur is a thermoplastic material, it has some of
its limitations to be used as a binder. Despite this, there are
several benefits of SC applications which include (1) a high
gain of strength in a short time, (2) resistivity to aggressive
chemicals, (3) waterproof characteristics, and (4) recycling
potential (Ciak and Harasymiuk 2013). It has been argued
that SC can be used in sewage environments due to its dura-
bility; however, it shows less resistance to microbial corro-
sion attacks in sewers (Sabour et al. 2019). SC has higher
compressive strength and higher resistance to water perme-
ability and chemical attack (El Gamal et al. 2017). It is a
suitable for pavements and precast blocks, where the chances
of fire are rare, and it can help in the faster construction of
pavements in the event of an emergency (McBee et al. 1983).
SC achieves 80% of its compressive strength within 24 h
after casting. It is considered as a water repellent concrete
while normal concrete absorbs a high amount of water dur-
ing the same duration (Mohammed and Poornima 2018).
Due to its waterless manufacturing, it is also considered suit-
able for water scarcity areas. Moreover, space researchers
have considered it as a lunar concrete (Omar and Issa 1994;
Grugel and Toutanji 2008) and Mars concrete (Grugel 2008;
Wan et al. 2016) because of the availability of sulfur and
inaccessibility of water on the Moon and Mars. Due to its
exclusive physical-chemical behavior, SC can be used as a
construction material in sewer systems and waste treatment
plants (Shin et al. 2014). Different types of fine aggregates
(natural and recycled) can be used in SC as a sulfur binder
is insoluble in water and has very small porosity; moreover,
SC does not require aggregates to be in saturated dry condi-
tions like those required for PCC (Mohammed and Poornima
2018). It needs small investments, and it can be an adequate
or, in some cases, a better option instead of PCC (Mohamed
and El Gamal 2009). Earlier researchers worked on the
improvement of SC properties using different admixtures,
but there is a lack of information about SC manufactured
with mineral aggregates (Khademi and Sar 2015).
Marble is a commonly used material for centuries. One
ton of processed marble generates about 1 ton of marble
slurry (containing WMP as solid content), out of which
35–45% is water content (Singh et al. 2017). WMP can
replace fine aggregate in cement concrete and SC. When
WMP replaced fine aggregates in concrete, workability
decreased, but compressive strength increased due to the
filler effect of fine MPW particles between coarser parti-
cles of sand and crushed stone (Arel 2016). The replace-
ment of sand with WMP up to 75% results in a 25% and
15% increase in compressive and tensile strength of cement
concrete, respectively. On the other hand, when cement is
Environmental Science and Pollution Research

replaced with WMP up to 20%, it decreases the compressive
strength (Arel 2016). Ghorbani et al. (2018) reported that up
to 20% replacement of cement with WMP does not signifi-
cantly change the compressive strength and water absorption
capacity of concrete. Utilization of WMP with waste granite
powder as a 20% replacement of cement enhanced the cor-
rosion resistance of reinforced concrete (Taji et al. 2019).
Thus, it possesses durability as well as sustainability benefits
in concrete production. High incorporation levels of WMP
as a cement substitution are detrimental to the strength and
durability of concrete (Ghorbani et al. 2021b). Due to its
lower reactivity, high levels of WMP can be valorized as
filling material or replacement of fine aggregate in concrete
manufacture.
GGBS is produced as a by-product in metallurgy, i.e., the
smelting process of steel. The replacement of fine aggregate
up to 50% with GGBS improved the mechanical properties
of PCC (Pawar and Magdum 2018). The addition of GGBS
to normal concrete composites lowers the water absorption,
capillary suction, and permeability while simultaneously
increasing the ultimate compressive strength and durability.
This may be due to both the granulometric characteristics
and reactivity of the GGBS that allow achieving a high den-
sity and low permeability due to the improved packing of
the microparticles of mortar (Condren and Pavía 2007). The
durability and crack resistance of concrete increase with a
rise in the ratio of GGBS in concrete (Shen et al. 2019).
GGBS can be incorporated as a partial replacement of fine
aggregate in concrete, and it is known to produce excellent
mechanical and durability properties (Patra and Mukharjee
2017).
Several researchers have focused on the performance of
SC with natural sand or aggregates. However, there is a gap
in understanding the usage of sustainable mineral aggre-
gates such as GGBS and WMP as the replacement of natural
aggregates to provide a more sustainable design of SC using
waste materials. This study aims at evaluating the perfor-
mance of SC using mineral aggregates (GGBS, WMP) and
RS and its comparison with conventional concrete systems
PCC and SRC based on the results of compressive strength,
flexural strength, and durability tests. This research advances
the knowledge in the direction of cementless and waterless
concrete. Waterless sulfur binder-based concrete is also a
viable option for the construction on Moon and Mars and in
areas where freshwater is scarce (Coastal areas and Islands).
The concept of concrete produced from 100% recycled mate-
rials without using water is put forward in this research.
Materials and methods
Materials
The dried-sulfur powder containing 99% sulfur and 1%
impurities was used as a binder to prepare SC. The melt-
ing point and density of sulfur were 120 °C and 2100 kg/
m3, respectively. Two types of conventional cement i.e.,
ordinary Portland cement and sulfate-resistant cement
conforming to ASTM-C-150 (2018), were used for the
preparation of PCC and SRC mixes, respectively. Portland
type-I cement with the brand name “Bestway Cement”
was used as a binder for the PCC. Sulfate-resistant cement

Fig. 1  Different types of binders

Sulfur

Table 1  Composition of ASTM Binder SiO2 (%) Al2O3 (%) Fe2O3 (%) CaO (%) MgO (%) SO3 (%) LOI (%)
type-I and II cements, GGBS,
and WMP Portland 20.5 5.06 3.25 61.5 2.52 1.57 1.85
cement
(Type-I)
Sulfate resist- 25.5 3.93 4.97 51.6 2.13 1.94 0.92
ing cement
(type-II)
GGBS 31.57 7.6 1.66 43.65 5.27 2.03 –
WMP – – 1.72 97.65 – – –

13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Table 2  Properties of OPC and SRC iron oxide. WMP showed higher intensities for dolomite
Binder Specific Initial set- Final set- Compres- (CaMg(CO3)2) and small intensities of quartz.
gravity ting time ting time sive strength
(min) (min) (MPa) Batching details of concrete mixes
Portland 3.14 37 167 42
cement A total of eleven concrete mixes (two conventional mixes
(type I) and nine SC mixes) were prepared and investigated. The
Sulfate- 3.22 81 243 37.2 first and second mixes (i.e., PCC and SRC) served as control
resisting mixes and were produced using Portland type I cement and
cement
sulfate-resisting type II cement, respectively. The PCC and
(type II)
SRC specimens were manufactured using a binder to aggre-
gate the ratio as 1:2.5 by weight, while the water-cement
ratio was 0.45 for both PCC and SRC. While the remaining
Table 3  Physical properties of WMP, GGBS and RS nine mixes consisted of SC. There were three categories of
Property WMP GGBS RS
SC; each was produced with a different mineral aggregate,
i.e., WMP, GGBS, and RS. The ratio of the sulfur binder
Specific gravity 2.21 2.18 2.44 with each aggregate was varied, i.e., 40, 45, and 50% by
Bulk-density(kg/m3) 1118 1345 1650 weight. The reason for the selection of these percentages
Fineness-modulus 2.03 2.25 2.45 is to find the variation in the properties of SC by changing
the aggregate to binder ratio (WMP, GGBS, and RS). The
composition details and identifications (IDs) of each mixture
(type-II) obtained from “Lucky Cement” was used to are shown below in Table 4.
produce SRC. All three binders have the appearances as
shown in Figure 1. The properties of OPC and SRC are Sample preparations
presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Three different
aggregates/fillers including WMP, GGBS, and RS (locally SC specimens were prepared under the recommendations
known as Chenab sand) in three different ratios were used of ACI 548.2R-93 guidelines (Fontana et al. 1988). The
in this research. The properties of aggregates are given specimens with WMP, GGBS, and RS were prepared with
in Table 3. The size gradations of cement and aggregates 40%, 45%, and 50% sulfur binder by weight of the mix. The
are shown in Figure 2. It can be noticed that particles of casted specimens included cubic specimens (25.4 × 25.4
WMP are finer compared to that of the GGBS. The X-ray × 25.4 mm) and prismatic beam specimens (25.4 mm ×
diffraction (XRD) patterns of GGBS and WMP are illus- 25.4 mm × 127 mm). The casting procedure is summarized
trated in Figure 3. GGBS sample showed higher inten- in Figure 4. First, the calculated amount of aggregates and
sities of minerals containing calcium oxide, silica, and sulfur were heated separately in a convection oven at 140

Fig. 2  Size gradation of Port- 100

land cement (OPC), GGBS,
WMP, and RS

80
Percentage (%)

60

40 OPC
GGBS
20 WMP
RS
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle size (10-6 m)

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research

C2S = Belite (2CaO.SiO2) 5 min. After proper mixing of binder and aggregate, the
C4AF
C3S = Alite (3CaO.SiO2) calculated quantity of water was mixed with concrete for 2
FeO = Wustite (FeO)
C4AF = Ferrite (4CaO.Al2O3.Fe2O3) more min. Subsequently, samples were molded at room tem-
C = Calcite (CaCO3)
perature and kept to set for 1 day. After demolding samples
FeO C2S were placed in the tap water tank for 28 days curing.
C2S, C3S
C
Testing methods
C2S
C3S C3S To analyze the mechanical strength of PCC, SRC, and SC
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 mixes, cubic samples (25.4 × 25.4 × 25.4 mm) were tested
2-theta to examine the compressive strength as per ASTM C109
(2016) and prismatic beams (25.4 × 25.4 × 127 mm) were
(a)
tested for flexural strength as per ASTM C348 (2019). The
D = Dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2)
testing arrangements for compressive strength and flexural
Q = Quartz (SiO2) strength are shown in Figure 5.
D
The durability of SC mixes (with RS, WMP, and GGBS),
PCC, and SRC were measured by placing the specimens
in different harsh conditioning environments, i.e., 5%
hydrochloric acid (HCl) solution (Acidic), 5 molar sodium
hydroxide (NaOH) (basic), and 16% sodium chloride (NaCl)
D
D D Q
Q
(saline) solution at room temperature. The mass loss data
of the specimens was recorded after 3, 7, 14, and 28 days
to evaluate their durability. The specimens placed in differ-
20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
2-theta
ent conditions are shown in Figure 6. For PCC and SRC,
(b) mechanical properties and durability tests were performed
on samples cured for 28 days in tap water.
Fig. 3  XRD analysis results of a GGBS and b WMP samples

Results and discussions
°C for 2 h. After heating, the aggregates and molten sulfur
are well mixed and then poured into preheated molds to cast Mechanical strength
cubic and beam samples. The compaction of SC was carried
out by a vibratory table. Both cubic and beam molds were Compressive strength
demolded after 1 day and kept at room temperature for 3
days to gain maximum strength. The compression testing results of SC mixes (SC-WMP,
Samples of both PCC and SRC were made by hand mix- SC-GGBS, and SC-RS) were compared with PCC and
ing the calculated amounts of binder and dry aggregates for SRC specimens. The results in Figure  7 show that the

­ 3 of
Table 4  Ingredients in 1 m Type of concrete Mixture ID Binding-mate- Water (kg) Aggregate (kg)
each mixture and mixture IDs rial (kg)

Portland cement concrete PCC 450 200 1150

Sulfate resisting cement concrete SRC 450 200 1150
Sulfur concrete (40%) + RS RS-40 720 – 1080
Sulfur concrete (45%) + RS RS-45 810 – 990
Sulfur concrete (50%) + RS RS-50 900 – 900
Sulfur concrete (40%) + WMP WMP-40 720 – 1080
Sulfur concrete (45%) + WMP WMP-45 810 – 990
Sulfur concrete (50%) + WMP WMP-50 900 – 900
Sulfur concrete (40%) + GGBS GGBS-40 720 – 1080
Sulfur concrete (45%) + GGBS GGBS-45 810 – 990
Sulfur concrete (50%) + GGBS GGBS-50 900 – 900

13

Fig. 4  Specimen preparation
summary: a melting of sulfur,
b mixing of fine aggregate and
melted sulfur, c overview of
molds, d demolded sample
(a)
(c)
Fig. 5  Mechanical strength tests
arrangements
Compression test
compressive strength of SC mixes is more than that of the
SRC and PCC. The significant difference in the strength of
SC and conventional mixes is because of the low poros-
ity of SC. The absence of water helps SC to gain a denser
microstructure compared to PCC and SRC. Conventional
binder concrete requires water for hydration necessary in the
development of strength. In conventional concrete mixes, the
water consumed in hydration leaves voids behind as shown
in Figure 8. On the other hand, SC is waterless, and the
binder matrix is entirely composed of a thermoplastic mate-
rial. Another explanation for higher strength SC compared
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
(b)
(d)
Flexural test
to conventional mixes is SC has a higher binder content per
unit volume in the absence of water compared to that of
PCC and SRC. The compressive strength of SRC is almost
the same as that of the PCC. The work of Vlahovic et al.
(2011) also validated the superiority of SC over OPC-based
mixes. The interconnected voids in the OPC mix act as the
weak links for the relief of compressive stress (Mohamed
and El-Gamal 2010), while there is no large connectivity of
voids in SC mixes.
SC shows a rise in compressive strength with the increase
in sulfur content. This can be attributed to an increase in the
Environmental Science and Pollution Research

a) 5% HCl solution b) 5M NaOH solution c) 16% NaCl solution

Fig. 6  Conditioning environments

Fig. 7  Comparison of compres-
60
sive strength
Compressive stregth (MPa)

50

40

30

20

10

0
SRC

GGBS-40

GGBS-45

GGBS-50
RS-40

RS-45

RS-50

WMP-50
WMP-40

WMP-45
PCC

Conventional SC-RS SC-WMP SC_GGBS

concrete

Fig. 8  Matrices of SC and
conventional concrete

Sulfur concrete Convenonal concrete

13

volume of dense binder matrix and a decrease in the number
of interfacial transition zones (ITZs) between binder and
aggregates. As SC gains its strength due to the formation
of continuous polymeric chains, a more continuous matrix
structure is formed when a high binder content is used,
which shows a positive effect on the compressive strength.
Similar is the case with cementitious composites. High
strength and excellent durability properties in the case of
ultra-high performance mixtures are obtained at low water-
binder ratios and using small aggregates (Afroughsabet et al.
2016).
SC mixes with all binder contents and types of mineral
aggregates showed superior compressive strength compared
to conventional concrete systems. Among all aggregates,
SC made with GGBS showed better mechanical proper-
ties, which was followed by SC made with WMP and RS.
SC with GGBS showed 72%, 99%, and 105% higher com-
pressive strength than that of the PCC at sulfur contents of
40%, 45%, and 50%, respectively. Moreover, SC with WMP
showed 56–86% higher strength than that of the PCC.
Among SC mixes, SC-GGBS mixes attained maximum
strength. SC-GGBS mixes attained about 10% more strength
as compared to SC-WMP and about 40% more strength as
compared to SC-RS. The main reason for this high strength
is the presence of iron contents in GGBS. The iron content in
aggregate increases the strength of SC (Rahim et al. 2021).
Furthermore, GGBS and WMP have a wide distribution of
particle sizes, which ensures improved aggregate packing
density. SC-WMP achieved about 25% more strength as
compared to SC-RS. While SC made with GGBS and WMP
showed 34–42% and 22–28% higher compressive strength
than SC made with RS.
The GGBS aggregate particles are angular to develop
stronger bond formation with the binder matrix as shown in
Figure 9. Also, the WMP particles due to their processing
nature have a rough texture and angular shape, this helps
to develop a good bond with sulfur in comparison to round
spherical particles of natural RS. The particles of RS due to
Fig. 9  SEM of a WMP and b
GGBS
(a)
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
their spherical shapes and plain texture do not form a good
bond with binder as compared to WMP and GGBS. Replace-
ment of natural sand with slag also exhibited positive effects
on the properties of conventional cement concrete (Guo et al.
2019). Mohammed and Poornima (2018) also reported that
SC yielded better strength with manufactured sand than with
RS. The manufactured sand has more angularity and bond
strength with the binder phase compared to RS.
Flexural strength
The flexural testing results are shown in Figure 10 also indi-
cate a slightly higher tensile strength of SC mixes compared
to conventional mixes. The increase of sulfur binder con-
tent increases the strength. The flexural strength increase
is significant between 40 and 45% binder content, while
there is a low degree increase in strength as the binder ratio
is increased from 45 to 50%. The amount of excess sulfur
to make the bond with aggregates reduces aggregate to
aggregate interlocking. This increases the brittle nature of
the concrete. The ratio of modulus of rupture and compres-
sive strength of SC is lesser than that of PCC and SRC.
However, the peak flexural loads are significantly higher for
SC compared to those for SRC and PCC. Also, SC mixes
containing WMP and GGBS show higher flexural strength
compared to SC with RS. This is attributed to the particle
shape of the mineral waste particles. The compressive and
flexural strength behavior of SC with varying sulfur binder
and mineral aggregate is similar. As√shown in Figure 11,
a strong good correlation ( fl = 1.14 fcm ) exists between
compressive strength (fcm) and flexural strength (f l).
Water absorption
A water absorption test was performed on 25.4 × 25.4 ×
25.4-mm cubic samples by calculating the change between
dry weight (WD) and wet weights (WS) of samples. For PCC
and SRC, the dry weight of the samples was measured after
(b)
Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Fig. 10  Flexural strength of
10
concrete mixtures

Flexural Strength (MPa)

7.5

2.5

SRC

GGBS-40

GGBS-45

GGBS-50
WMP-40

WMP-50
RS-40

RS-45

RS-50

WMP-45
PCC
Conventional SC-RS SC-WMP SC_GGBS
concrete

Fig. 11  Relationship between
(compressive strength)1/2 and 10
modulus of rupture of SC

9
Modulus of Rupture (fl), MPa

y = 1.1436x
R² = 0.7888
8

5
5.5 6.5 7.5
(Compressive Strength fcm, MPa)1/2

heating at 80 °C for 2 days in a convection oven. While the
weight of hardened SC considered its WD. After assessing
the WD of SC and conventional mixes, the samples were
placed in water for 3 days to record the WS. Eq. (1) was used
to measure the water absorption (WA):
WS − WD
WA (%) = × 100
WD
Figure 12 shows that SC mixes absorbed significantly
lower water as compared to PCC and SRC. The absorption
capacity of SCs was lesser than those of the PCC and
SRC. The reason for this is that the sulfur binder does not
absorb water because of its imperviousness; see Fig. 6. The
insolubility of sulfur in water (Vlahovic et al. 2011) is high
because polymer content ensures water-tightness of SC,
due to the non-existence of water molecules and minor con-
(1) nectivity pores. Thus, SC absorbs less than 1% water of its
weight with all mineral aggregates. PCC and SRC absorbed
more than 8% water due to their significantly higher porosity
than that of the SC (Gulzar et al. 2021).

13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Fig. 12  Water absorption (%) of

each mix 10

Water absorption (%)

8

SRC

RS-40

GGBS-40

GGBS-45

GGBS-50
RS-45

RS-50

WMP-40

WMP-45

WMP-50
PCC
Conventional SC-RS SC-WMP SC_GGBS
concrete

SC mixes with RS (SC-RS) absorbed more water as com-
pared to SC-GGBS and SC-WMP mixes. It might be because
of the poor gradation of particles in RS. While mineral fill-
ers have a good distribution of smaller and larger particles
that increase the packing density of microstructure ensuring
imperviousness (Ghorbani et al. 2021a). The meandering
effect of mixed particle sizes on the connectivity is higher
in the case of GGBS and WMP fillers, while lesser in the
case of natural RS (Kou et al. 2011; Kurda et al. 2019). The
meandering effect on the pore connectivity reduces the water
permeability.
Acidic environment
mass loss in the HCl solution. The SC mixes with all types
of mineral aggregates showed better resistance to acid-abra-
sion as compared to conventional mixes. PCC showed 50%
higher mass loss than SRC. It is because sulfate-resistant
cement has low calcium oxide (CaO) and alumina (­ Al2O3)
as compared to OPC; thus, smaller amount of calcium oxide
enhances the acid durability of SRC concrete. The chemical
reactions happening in PCC are given below (Eqs. (2) and
(3)). The main reason for the mass loss of cement concrete
is the decalcification of free portlandite (Ca(OH)2) inside
the matrix of PCC and SRC. This leads to the formation of
expansive salts and water causing the major degradation of
a conventional concrete system in an acidic medium:

The resistance of SC and conventional concrete mixes to

Ca(OH)2 + 2HCl → CaCl2 + H2 O (2)
acid was measured by noting the change in the initial mass
of samples subjected to acid attack. The loss in mass of each Al2 O3 + 6HCl → 2AlCl3 + 3H2 O (3)
sample was recorded at 3, 7, 14, and 28 days. The results in
Fig. 13 show that PCC and SRC mix experienced a drastic

Fig. 13  Mass loss in 5% HCl

solution 16 Day 3 Day 7 Day 14 Day 28
14
12
% Mass Loss

10
8
6
4
2
0
WMP-50

GGBS-40

GGBS-45
SRC

RS-40

RS-45

RS-50

GGBS-50
WMP-40

WMP-45
PCC

Conventional SC-RS SC-WMP SC_GGBS

concrete

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
However, the resistance of SRC compared to SC mixes
is inferior. SC with RS showed 4.96 to 6.47, SC-WMP
showed 8.59 to 10.54, and SC-GGBS 10.23 to 11.92 times
higher acid attack resistance, respectively, compared to
that of the PCC at the age of 28 days. Acids do not react
with sulfur, but they can cause damage to the integrity of
concrete by reacting with the oxides in the mineral aggre-
gates. Thus, the small change in the mass of SC samples
might be because of the possible reactions between miner-
als and HCl. On the other hand, PCC and SRC are highly
vulnerable to acid attacks because of decalcification (the
process of removing calcium). Ca(OH)2 is produced as a
result of hydration of anhydrous cementitious compounds
in PCC, and it is present inside the binder matrix and
highly reactive with acids that ultimately lead to the pro-
duction of calcium salt ­(CaCl2) and water. The increase in
Fig. 14  OPC, SRC, and SC mix
after acid conditioning
OPC
SC-WMP
the production of calcium salt produces expansion inside
the matrix of concrete, which reduces the strength and
integrity of acid-exposed concrete (Qureshi et al. 2020).
A study by Gulzar et al. (2021) has also shown that SC
has significantly higher acid-attack resistance than PCC
and SRC.
The physical appearance of SC and conventional con-
crete (PCC and SRC) specimens after conditioning in
an acidic environment are shown in Figure 14. GGBS-
SC mixes showed low-strength degradation compared to
SC-WMP and SC-RS mixes. By the observation of spec-
imens, it is noted that GGBS-SC was more impervious
than WMP-SC. This was also indicated by the results of
the water absorption test, i.e., GGBS-SC showed lesser
permeability than WMP-SC and RS-SC mixes. Therefore,
due to imperviousness, there is a slow penetration of HCl
SRC
SC-GGBS
13
 Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Fig. 15  Mass loss of each sam-

ple in base solution

Day 3 Day 7 Day 14 Day 28

120

100

80

% Mass Loss
60

40

20

SRC

RS-40

RS-45

RS-50

GGBS-40

GGBS-45

GGBS-50
WMP-40

WMP-45

WMP-50
PCC
Convenonal SC-RS SC-WMP SC_GGBS
concrete

solution into the concrete, reducing the degradation rate
of SC with GGBS.
Basic environment (alkali‑medium)
The alkali resistance of all mixes was measured in base solu-
tion mediums. The damage done by the base was assessed
by measuring the difference between the initial mass of the
sample and the damaged weight of the sample. The results
of all samples are presented in Fig. 15. PCC and SRC were
very resistant to the base solution. Since the PCC and SRC
concrete has high alkalinity due to the availability of free
Ca(OH)2, the base solution was not dangerous to the durabil-
ity of PCC and SRC. While SC mixes proved to be extremely
vulnerable to base attack except for SC-GGBS. The only
reaction of sulfur with a basic solution to produce sulfide salt
is possible at high temperatures (600 °C) (Yang et al. 2014).
But in this research, SC mixes lost almost entire integ-
rity until 7 days in the base medium at room temperature
(Fig. 16). This is hypothesized to have occurred due to the
loss of the bond between the aggregates and sulfur. Moreo-
ver, sulfur facilitates the movement or diffusion of base solu-
tion inside the SC matrix due to differences in the external
and intrinsic pH levels of the SC. The reaction between the
oxides of aggregates and highly alkaline external solution
­(Na2+ and ­OH–) may have resulted in the rapid deteriora-
tion of SC mixes owing to the formation of new expansive
salts ­(SiO2 +2NaOH + ­H2O → ­Na2SiO3·2H2O) (Drechsler

Fig. 16  OPC, SRC, and SC-

GGBS survived while SC-RS
and SC-WMP mix deteriorated
in base solution after 28 days

13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
and Graham 2005). Alkali solution attacks the silica-oxide
(which is high in the case of WMP, and RS compared to that
in GGBS) in mineral aggregates to produce a water-absor-
bent film over the aggregates. The produced absorbent film
attracts water and grows with time, due to which the bond
between binder and aggregates gets weakened. Ultimately,
the bond between the binder and aggregates is drastically
weakened. Similar findings in the case of SC were observed
by Rahim et al. (2021); the increased porosity and deteriora-
tion of the specimen have occurred from the strong attack
of the base, reducing the durability of SC. SC-GGBS mix
showed high resistivity and proved to be durable in the base
attack. Unlike RS and WMP, GGBS offers great resistance
to alkali-silica reaction (Thunuguntla and Rao 2018), and it
possesses alkalinity similar to cement binder. SC mixes with
RS and WMP showed complete collapse. Hence, SC with
GGBS showed better resistance to base attack.
Salt environment
The concrete structures and elements are often exposed to
saline environments. The damage of salt medium on SC,
PCC, and SRC specimens was measured by the mass loss
after saline conditioning. The results show that the saline
water does not affect the SC specimens; see Figure 17. There
is no direct reaction possible reaction between sulfur and salt
ions (Vlahovic et al. 2011). SC shows 5–7 times lower mass
loss in salt solution than SRC and OPC. The growth of NaCl
crystals around the specimens results in this mass loss (Shin
et al. 2014). A similar finding was observed by Mohammed
and Poornima (2018). The presence of ­Ca2+ and ­OH− ions in
PCC and SRC causes susceptibility to salt attack. These ions
are extremely sensitive to cations and anions (­ Ca2+, ­Na+,
­Mg2+, and ­Cl−) of salts. The possible reactions may result in
the development of crystals of new salts, i.e., C ­ aCl2. It can
start the inner weakening mechanism of salts with PCC and
Fig. 17  Mass loss of each sam-
ple in 16% saline solution 10
9
8
7
% Mass Loss
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
SRC
RS-40
PCC
Conventional
concrete
SRC samples. SC mixes made with RS and waste mineral
aggregates almost showed a similar durability.
Conclusion and recommendation
This research paper presented an evaluation of SC pre-
pared with different mineral aggregates (one natural RS,
and two waste aggregates, i.e., WMP, and GGBS). The
performance of SC was compared with that of the conven-
tional binder mixes, i.e., PCC and SRC. The following are
important findings of this research:
• SC mixes with any type of mineral aggregate showed
more mechanical strength compared to PCC and SRC.
• The mechanical strength of SC increases with the
increase in binder content. SC made with GGBS showed
better strength as compared to SC made with RS and
WMP. With GGBS, SC showed about 72–105% and
65–95% higher compressive strength than PCC and SRC,
respectively.
• Flexural and compressive strengths were similarly influ-
enced by the variation in SC binder content and mineral
aggregate type. Increasing the binder content made SC
brittle.
• SC showed extremely low water absorption than that of
the PCC and SRC. The minimum absorption was shown
by SC made with GGBS. SC-GGBS showed about 15–17
times lower absorption compared to PCC and SRC con-
cretes. The absorption capacity of SC decreased with the
rising binder content for the same type of mineral aggre-
gate.
• SC showed negligible degradation under HCl attack
compared to PCC and SRC. SC made with RS showed
lower durability in the acidic medium than SC made with
Day 3 Day 7 Day 14 Day 28
GGBS-40
GGBS-50
RS-45
RS-50
GGBS-45
WMP-40
WMP-45
WMP-50
SC-RS SC-WMP SC_GGBS
13

GGBS and WMP. SC is 10–12 times more resistant to
acidic attacks than PCC.
• SC with RS and WMP mineral aggregates collapsed
under base solution attack. SC mixes with RS and
WMP mineral aggregates lost their entire strength after
7-days of exposure to NaOH solution. Only SC-GGBS
mixes proved durable and showed high resistivity in
base solution, and GGBS proved best as aggregate for
SC in the base environment
• SC is resistant to salt attacks. It is 5–6 times more
resistant to salt attack than the PCC. SC made with
both GGBS and WMP showed the highest resistance
to salt attack.
Author contribution  MFR: investigation, data curation, software, writ-
ing and editing original draft; AR: conceptualization, supervision, for-
mal analysis, writing, reviewing and methodology; MI: formal analysis,
investigation BA: formal analysis, writing and reviewing, validation
NA: methodology, validation.
Data availability  All data is present in the paper.
Declarations  Grugel RN (2008) Sulfur ‘Concrete’ for Lunar Applications–Envi-
Ethics approval  No ethical approvals were needed in this experimental
study.
Consent to participate  Not applicable.
Consent for publication  Not applicable.
Competing interests  The authors declare no competing interests.
References
Afroughsabet V, Biolzi L, Ozbakkaloglu T (2016) High-performance
fiber-reinforced concrete: a review. J Mater Sci 51:6517–6551
Arel HŞ (2016) Recyclability of waste marble in concrete produc-
tion. J Clean Prod 131:179–188
ASTM C109/C109M-16 (2016) Standard Test Method for Com-
pressive Strength of Hydraulic Cement Mortars (Using 2-in. or
[50-mm] Cube Specimens) Book of Standards Volume: 04.01
Developed by Subcommittee: 27 Pages: 10. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1520/​C0109_​C0109M-​16
ASTM C150 / C150M-18 (2018) Standard specification for Portland
cement. ASTM Int West Conshohocken, West Conshohocken
ASTM C348-19 A (2019) Standard test method for flexural strength
of hydraulic-cement mortars. ASTM Int West Conshohocken,
West Conshohocken
Ciak N, Harasymiuk J (2013) Sulphur concrete’s technology and
its application to the building industry. Tech Sci Warm Maz
Olsztyn:323–331
Condren E, Pavía S (2007) A comparative study of the moisture
transfer properties and durability of PC and GGBS mortars. In:
13
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Russell M, Basheer PAM (eds) In: Int. Conf. Concrete Platform.
Queen’s Univers Belfast, Belfast, pp 469–478
Drechsler M, Graham A (2005) Geopolymers-an innovative materials
technology bringing resource sustainability to construction and
mining industries. In: Proceedings of the IQA Annual Confer-
ence. pp 12–15
Dugarte M, Martinez-Arguelles G, Torres J (2019) Experimental
evaluation of modified sulfur concrete for achieving sustain-
ability in industry applications. Sustainability 11:70
El Gamal MM, El-Dieb AS, Mohamed A-MO, El Sawy KM (2017)
Performance of modified sulfur concrete exposed to actual
sewerage environment with variable temperature, humidity and
gases. J Build Eng 11:1–8
Fontana JJ, Farrell LJ, Alexanderson J, Ball Jr HP, Bartholomew JJ,
Biswas M, Bolton DJ, Carter PD, Chrysogelos Jr J, Clapp TR,
DePuy GW (1988) Guide for Mixing and Placing Sulfur Con-
crete in Construction. Farmington Hills, MI, USA, ACI
Ghorbani S, Taji I, Tavakkolizadeh M et al (2018) Improving cor-
rosion resistance of steel rebars in concrete with marble and
granite waste dust as partial cement replacement. Constr Build
Mater 185:110–119
Ghorbani S, Ghorbani S, Elmi A et al (2021a) Simultaneous effect of
granite waste dust as partial replacement of cement and magnet-
ized water on the properties of concrete exposed to NaCl and
H2SO4 solutions. Constr Build Mater 288:123064. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2021.​123064
Ghorbani S, Mohammadi-Khatami M, Ghorbani S et  al (2021b)
Effect of magnetized water on the fresh, hardened and durabil-
ity properties of mortar mixes with marble waste dust as partial
replacement of cement. Constr Build Mater 267:121049
ronmental Considerations. In: Grugel RN (ed) Marshall Space
Flight Center. Marshall Space Flight Center, Alabama, NASA/
TM—2008–215250
Grugel RN, Toutanji H (2008) Sulfur “concrete” for lunar applica-
tions–sublimation concerns. Adv Sp Res 41:103–112
Gulzar MA, Rahim A, Ali B, Khan AH (2021) An investigation on
recycling potential of sulfur concrete. J Build Eng 38:102175
Guo Y, Xie J, Zhao J, Zuo K (2019) Utilization of unprocessed steel
slag as fine aggregate in normal- and high-strength concrete.
Constr Build Mater 204:41–49. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​conbu​
ildmat.​2019.​01.​178
Khademi AG, Sar HIK (2015) Comparison of sulfur concrete,
cement concrete and cement-sulfur concrete and their proper-
ties and application. Curr World Environ 10:63–68
Kou S, Poon C, Agrela F (2011) Comparisons of natural and recy-
cled aggregate concretes prepared with the addition of different
mineral admixtures. Cem Concr Compos 33:788–795
Kurda R, Silvestre JD, de Brito J (2018) Life cycle assessment of
concrete made with high volume of recycled concrete aggre-
gates and fly ash. Resour Conserv Recycl 139:407–417
Kurda R, de Brito J, Silvestre JD (2019) Water absorption and elec-
trical resistivity of concrete with recycled concrete aggregates
and fly ash. Cem Concr Compos 95:169–182
McBee WC, Sullivan TA, Jong BW (1983) Industrial evaluation of
sulfur concrete in corrosive environments. No. 8786-8789. US
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines
Mohamed A-MO, El Gamal M (2009) Hydro-mechanical behavior of
a newly developed sulfur polymer concrete. Cem Concr Compos
31:186–194
Mohamed AMO, El-Gamal M (2010) Sulfur concrete for the con-
struction industry: a sustainable development approach. J. Ross
Publishing, Lauderdale, FL
Mohammed S, Poornima V (2018) Strength and durability study
of sulphur concrete with replaced fine aggregate. Mater Today
Proc 5:23888–23897
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Moon J, Kalb PD, Milian L, Northrup PA (2016) Characterization
of a sustainable sulfur polymer concrete using activated fillers.
Cem Concr Compos 67:20–29
Omar HA, Issa M (1994) Production of lunar concrete using molten
sulfur. In: Proceedings: 4th Conf. on Space. pp 952–959
Patra RK, Mukharjee BB (2017) Influence of incorporation of granu-
lated blast furnace slag as replacement of fine aggregate on
properties of concrete. J Clean Prod 165:468–476
Pawar LU, Magdum MM (2018) Effect of granulated blast furnace
slag (GBS) sand on strength and durability of concrete. Int J Sci
Technol 5:39–43
Qureshi LA, Ali B, Ali A (2020) Combined effects of supplementary
cementitious materials (silica fume, GGBS, fly ash and rice husk
ash) and steel fiber on the hardened properties of recycled aggre-
gate concrete. Constr Build Mater 263:120636. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.​
1016/j.​conbu​ildmat.​2020.​120636
Rahim A, Gulzar A, Khan A, Rehman Z (2021) Mars in situ resource
utilization and sulfur concrete. Earth Space 2021:1231–1241
Sabour M, Dezvareh G, Bazzazzadeh R (2019) Corrosion prediction
using the weight loss model in the sewer pipes made from sulfur
and cement concretes and Response Surface Methodology (RSM).
Constr Build Mater 199:40–49
Shen D, Liu K, Wen C et al (2019) Early-age cracking resistance of
ground granulated blast furnace slag concrete. Constr Build Mater
222:278–287
Shin M, Kim K, Gwon S-W, Cha S (2014) Durability of sustainable
sulfur concrete with fly ash and recycled aggregate against chemi-
cal and weathering environments. Constr Build Mater 69:167–176
Singh M, Choudhary K, Srivastava A et al (2017) A study on environ-
mental and economic impacts of using waste marble powder in
concrete. J Build Eng 13:87–95
Taji I, Ghorbani S, De Brito J et al (2019) Application of statistical
analysis to evaluate the corrosion resistance of steel rebars embed-
ded in concrete with marble and granite waste dust. J Clean Prod
210:837–846
Thunuguntla CS, Rao TDG (2018) Effect of mix design parameters
on mechanical and durability properties of alkali activated slag
concrete. Constr Build Mater 193:173–188
Vlahovic MM, Martinovic SP, Boljanac TD et al (2011) Durability of
sulfur concrete in various aggressive environments. Constr Build
Mater 25:3926–3934
Wan L, Wendner R, Cusatis G (2016) A novel material for in situ con-
struction on Mars: experiments and numerical simulations. Constr
Build Mater 120:222–231
Yang C, Lv X, Tian X et al (2014) An investigation on the use of
electrolytic manganese residue as filler in sulfur concrete. Constr
Build Mater 73:305–310
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
13